to chandershekarji ---a doubt

May 21, 2003

Dear Ajoy,

Every astrologer uses a system that suits him so that as near correct a prediction can be offered.

I look at Navamsha to assess the strength that a planet derives from Navamsha.

This is pretty straight forward. You assess strength in the same way that you

do in Rasi chart. Only considerations like ownership of houses and placement of

navamsha are not taken into account. Indications of navamsha override those of

rasi chart. sages ahve said that a planet in exaltation in Navamsha, even if

debilitated in Rasi gives results as if exalted and a debilitated planet in

Navamsha would give results of debilitation even if exalted in Rasi. Similar

results should be taken for placement in Enemy/friends/own/mooltrikona/same as

in rasi (for Vargottama) navamsha for the planet. Similarly strength of sign

depositor of a planet is assessed from his navamsha lord's position in Natal

chart to assess the results due from a planet.

The reason I do not take drishties in navamsha unless specifically indicated in

a yoga, is that aspects in Vedic astrology are from Rasi to Rasi. In Navamsha

chart though we draw a chart similar to Rasi chart the houses do not represent

30 degree rasis but 3 degree 20' 1/9th part of a rasi lorded over by different

planets, within a rasi. This is the reason why you will see rahu and ketu in

same house in navamsha.

So when in Rasi Moon or Sun might be afflicted whereas in Navamsha they might

appear affliction free. This is my logic behind using navamsha and other

D-Charts to assess strength of planets only and not consider aspects within the

charts themselves per se. An example would be when sages enjoin to find out

colour of Jataka from Lord of Navamsha lagna.

Other learned astrologers use aspects within D Charts and they may find it

serves their purpose in ariving at near correct predictions.

So let us say that mine is a method that I find more convinient and near

accuracy for my analysis. It does not mean that other methods should not be

used.

Chandrashekhar.

-

ajoypb

vedic astrology

Wednesday, May 21, 2003 6:21 PM

[vedic astrology] to chandershekarji ---a doubt

dear sir, in ur discusion elsewhere, about d-charts and aspects u made

certain points about which i have a few ? to ask1)ui have observed that a no of

good astrologers use the 9th chart(navamsa) only for the purpose of determining

the state of the planet. i think u too belong to that school. so my ? is how do

u do ita))))in the 9th chart do u look at which house the planet is placed like

1st or 2nd or 3rd etc?b))))or u look at whether the planet is placed in his

house of exaltion or mitra bhava etc?with love and respectajoy

Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system

(http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date:

5/19/03

May 21, 2003

dear chanderskekarji,

thanks , for the reply , i have seen a no of

astrologers follow ur mwthod, thats why i asked. here in kerala

astrologers tend to give more importance to the navamsa.

my next doubt is with respect to BPHS

IN CHAPTER 48(RELaTING TO interpretion of dasas)it is said that the

position of the planet both at the time of bith and the current

positon(ie at the time of commencement of the dasa) is to be given

equal imp, while evaluvating dasa results, but other books(by modern

writers) do not seem to give imp to the latter issue. should bphs be

followed rigidly wrt to this issue?what is ur view?

with love and respect

ajoy

May 22, 2003

Dear Ajoy,

Yes BPHS is right. Current position is important for more acurate

interpretation. Not only the current dasha lord's position at the time of entry

in to the dasha but the Gochar position has to be factored in if you have to

arrive at near correct interpretation.

Chandrashekhar.

-

ajoypb

vedic astrology

Thursday, May 22, 2003 10:26 AM

[vedic astrology] Re: to chandershekarji ---a doubt

dear chanderskekarji, thanks , for the reply , i have seen a

no of astrologers follow ur mwthod, thats why i asked. here in kerala

astrologers tend to give more importance to the navamsa.my next doubt is with

respect to BPHSIN CHAPTER 48(RELaTING TO interpretion of dasas)it is said that

the position of the planet both at the time of bith and the current positon(ie

at the time of commencement of the dasa) is to be given equal imp, while

evaluvating dasa results, but other books(by modern writers) do not seem to

give imp to the latter issue. should bphs be followed rigidly wrt to this

issue?what is ur view?with love and respectajoy

Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system

(http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date:

5/20/03

May 27, 2003

Dear Sanjayji,

I agree with you entirely. As a matter of fact I was telling the same to Ajoy. I

had said that whenever specific mention is made in a shloka (and though I did

not say this specifically, when that is corroborated in other classics as we do

not know howfar correct shlokas have reached print in ancient works.) I use

drishties in D charts, and by implication Rasi drishtis. The example of yoga

where this is applicable has been given by you and is very apt. Another would

be when a Raja yoga is said to be caused when Lagna received aspects of all

planets in exaltation. If Sun is in exaltation Mercury cannot be so. One must

therefore apply his logic that more the exalted planet aspecting the Lagna

better is the Rajayoga. Thank you for your kind words.

With Warm Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

-

Sanjay Rath

vedic astrology

Tuesday, May 27, 2003 10:03 AM

RE: [vedic astrology] to chandershekarji ---a doubt

|brihaspatim varenyam|

Dear Chandrasekharji

There are specific dictums which require that we use drishti in Navamsa as well

as all divisional charts. This proves that drishti is to be considered like D1

chart.

For example, Dictum: "If a planet aspects the lagna, Hora Lagna and Ghatika

Lagna in Rasi, Navamsa or Drekkana, it qualifies as a (Maha) Yogada". It is

obvious that aspects have to be considered in Divisional charts like they are

being done in the rasi chart.

Secondly, there are certain yogas which require ONLY RASI DRISTI.

For example: Dictum: "If Mercury and Saturn aspect each other from odd and even

signs then the native becomes disinterested in sex (another interpretation is

that he becomes a eunuch)". Now, Saturn and Mercury CAN NEVER have graha

grishti on each other if one planet is placed in an odd sign and the other is

in an even sign. So, this is Rasi drishti only. Like this, all the yogas have

to be understood very carefully.

I fully agree with your statement in another mail regarding Ketu in UL that the

verbatim application of the knowledge is uncalled for and an intelligent

application keeping all aspects, status etc should be made. Yes this is the

only way as one has to try to think and understand the message rather than just

applying mechanically. If this were so, then a computer would do the whole thing

and why have astrologers at all. Yes, there is an 'art' side to jyotish as

well...more later

~ om tat sat ~

Yours truly,

Sanjay Rath

---------------------------

H-5, B.J.B Nagar, Bhubaneswar 751014, India

+91-674-2436871 http://srath.com

---------------------------

Chandrashekhar [boxdel (AT) (DOT) co.uk]Sent:

Thursday, May 22, 2003 1:33 AMvedic astrologySubject: Re: