Sign aspects and signs vs houses (A CLARIFICATION)

[Guest guest]

Dear Ramanathan,

 

> I recently bought "JAIMINI'S UPADESA SUTRAS" by Sanjay Rath and am

> currently reading it. I have a fundamental doubt. Signs and Houses - are

> they same under Jaimini system? If Jupiter is posited at 271 degree and the

> Lagna is 267 degrees, how the aspects will be worked out? Whether Jupiter

> will aspect all fixed rasis or by virtue of being in Lagna, he will aspect

> only common signs.

 

When finding sign aspects (popularly and wrongly known as "Jaimini aspects"),

look at the sign occupied by a planet. If Jupiter is in the first degree of

Capricorn (a movable sign), he will aspect all fixed signs except Aquarius. The

fact that he is very close to lagna which is in a common sign is irrelevant.

After all, these aspects are called "sign aspects" (rasi drishti).

 

[CONTROVERSIAL] Not only this, but I will go on to say more. Some people take

Jupiter to be in the 1st house in the example above, but some people like me do

not do that. I consider all house divisions (like Sripathi, Koch etc) to be an

invention and expression of creativity by post-Parasara scholars. Parasara does

not mention it. When deciding graha drishti (planetary aspects, e.g. Mars

aspecting 4th, 7th and 8th), Parasara mentioned taking the exact longitudes into

account, but he DID not mention any fancy house division. Each sign is a house.

If lagna is at 269 deg and Jupiter at 271 deg, still Jupiter is in 2nd house. If

I am in one room in a building and you are in the next room and if we come close

to the 2 sides of the dividing walls, can we say that we are in the same room?

To me, signs are like rooms in a building and their boundaries are very

significant. The zodiac is not a continuous disk of 360 degrees, but it is a set

of 12 rooms (signs). While 259 deg and 261 deg are very close, the same thing

cannot be said about 269 deg and 271 deg - they are separated by a wall (sign

boundary).

 

Stick to Parasara and ignore relatively modern additions. He says: "count houses

starting from the *sign* containing lagna (or hora lagna or ghati lagna)". He

clearly meant that each sign is a house.

 

Of course, this is just my advice and whether one follows it or not is upto one.

As I said, this is controversial. However, there is no controversy regarding

sign aspects (your original question) and follow what I said.

 

> Would any one kindly clarify?

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

 

 

 

------

 

eGroups.com home: sjvc

- Simplifying group communications