Importance of divisional charts

March 5, 2003

Jaya JagannathDear Narasimha,

Tell me one thing, If somebody asks me a prasna on Job, shouldn't I take the

Dasamsa chart for that. I am asking this as you say for Prasna we should use

the Sadvarga scheme. I have read your paper on the divisional dignnities in the

varga chakra book, I just wanted to ask you what is the source of the

information on the use of a specific varga schema for a particular thing, such

as prasna, or individual horoscopy.

Best RegardsSarajit

-

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

vedic astrology

Thursday, March 06, 2003 6:00 AM

[vedic astrology] Importance of divisional charts

Dear Chandrashekhar,

> About your second query, Navamsha is attritubeted strength

> almost equal to lagna. Other divisional charts have fraction of

> that strength. Divisional charts aid in deciding the strength of

> the planets (Shatvarga bala). Thus a fair degree of accuracy

I heard this argument before. But why stop with Shadvarga?

Let us go one step further in the same direction and extend it to Dasavarga. As

per DasaVarga scheme (which is more relevant for natal horoscopy), rasi chart

has a weightage of 3, shashtyamsa (D-60) has a weightage of 5 (more than rasi

chart!) and the other 8 charts have 1.5 each. Shall we go ahead and declare

that one can make predictions just based on D-60 chart and, secondarily, rasi

chart?

See, this logic is not going to work.

If Parasara said that learning should be seen from D-24, D-24 is THE chart for

education. Irrespective of its weightage in varous varga schemes, it has 100%

importance when it comes to learning. Similarly, when it comes to spirituality,

D-20 has 100% weightage and is THE chart.

The weightages in various varga schemes show the overall importances (relative)

of various areas of life. Irrespective of the weightages, the relevant

divisional chart is the most important one when a particular area of life needs

examination.

Shadvarga scheme is more relevant for prasna. Saptavarga scheme is more relevant

in mundane astrology. Dasavarga scheme is important in natal horoscopy.

Shodasavarga scheme is the most important in royal horoscopy. For more, please

see my article in the "Varga" book published by SJC on the occasion of the

Hyderabad workshop on divisional charts.

For understanding the roles of rasi chart and divisional charts, one may also

want to buy the "Achyuta Jyotish Workshop" CD from

http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/workshop

> can be obtained on going through these charts and any

> confusion due to excess of data avoided, specially if

Confusion stems from wrong understanding and not from excess data. The excess

data brings so much clarity.

Maharshi Parasara taught so many divisional charts only because they are important.

> Maha-Antar dasha and Gochar position of planets are

> factored in.This is why many learned astrologers tend to

> consult these charts only.

> Chandrashekhar.

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

March 5, 2003

Dear Sarajit,

The source of the information I gave is Pt. Sanjay Rath.

If shadvarga are important in a prasna, it does not mean you cannot

look at D-10. You still can.

I said shodasa varga is important for royal horoscopes and dasa

varga for normal people. Still, D-40, D-45 etc can be used for

individuals (who are not kings). The point is that the good deeds

and bad deeds done by the ancients of big people are big in

magnitude and the results will be experienced by later generations.

For example, a king may wage an unfair war and the result of the sin

will trouble coming generations. Thus D-45 becomes very important in

the chart of a king. That's why it is present in shodasa varga.

Nevertheless, it is applicable to individuals also. The effect and

role are smaller. That's why it is not included in dasa varga.

Bottomline: You can use all the 16 charts in all cases.

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

> Jaya Jagannath

> Dear Narasimha,

>

> Tell me one thing, If somebody asks me a prasna on Job, shouldn't

I take the Dasamsa chart for that. I am asking this as you say for

Prasna we should use the Sadvarga scheme. I have read your paper on

the divisional dignnities in the varga chakra book, I just wanted to

ask you what is the source of the information on the use of a

specific varga schema for a particular thing, such as prasna, or

individual horoscopy.

>

> Best Regards

> Sarajit

March 5, 2003

As per my understanding which is in the beginner's stage, we look at

the Dasama Chart for career and Navamsa Chart for marriage. We look

at the 7th house for marriage and 10th house for career. What about

the other houses in the divisional charts? What if a house is

afflicted in the Lagna chart but not in the divisional chart? Also,

I also refer to my sister's chart with Jupiter and Sun Vargottama

wrt the Navamsa Chart. But Jupiter is in the Eighth House. Yet, she

has had the best periods of her life in the Jupiter dasas. Would

really appreciate if you can give an insight on this anamoly?

vedic astrology, "pvr108" <pvr@c...> wrote:

> Dear Sarajit,

>

> The source of the information I gave is Pt. Sanjay Rath.

>

> If shadvarga are important in a prasna, it does not mean you

cannot

> look at D-10. You still can.

>

> I said shodasa varga is important for royal horoscopes and dasa

> varga for normal people. Still, D-40, D-45 etc can be used for

> individuals (who are not kings). The point is that the good deeds

> and bad deeds done by the ancients of big people are big in

> magnitude and the results will be experienced by later

generations.

> For example, a king may wage an unfair war and the result of the

sin

> will trouble coming generations. Thus D-45 becomes very important

in

> the chart of a king. That's why it is present in shodasa varga.

> Nevertheless, it is applicable to individuals also. The effect and

> role are smaller. That's why it is not included in dasa varga.

>

> Bottomline: You can use all the 16 charts in all cases.

>

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> Narasimha

>

> > Jaya Jagannath

> > Dear Narasimha,

> >

> > Tell me one thing, If somebody asks me a prasna on Job,

shouldn't

> I take the Dasamsa chart for that. I am asking this as you say for

> Prasna we should use the Sadvarga scheme. I have read your paper

on

> the divisional dignnities in the varga chakra book, I just wanted

to

> ask you what is the source of the information on the use of a

> specific varga schema for a particular thing, such as prasna, or

> individual horoscopy.

> >

> > Best Regards

> > Sarajit

March 6, 2003

Dear Narasimharaoji,

I have merely pointed out why many astrologers prefer to refer to Natal and

Navamsha charts.However coming to your statement that Parashar says that 100%

importance is to begiven to D24 for learning, I do not see any such specific

mention in BPHS.There was no reason for him to mention how Vishopak bala is to

be calculated if this was the case. Again in the chapter on Divisional

Consideration is statement of Parashara" The Bhava, whose Lord is in a benefic

Shodashāńś, flourish. This is how the 16 Vargas are to be

evaluated." to be ignored? Even Parashara mentions opinion of Garga in the same

chapter.Parashar specifically mentions other sources of strengths of grahas at

the end of Vishopaka balas as"Other Sources of Strength. Maitreya, there are

other kinds of sources, as I explain below". All this does not suggest that

Sage Parashara meant that any particular Divisional Chart is "The Chart" for a

particular purpose.

The classifications of Shardvarga for Prashna etc. also is not mentioned in BPHS

which you have stated to be the only astrological text to be considered.Could I

know where is the use of Shadavarga for prashna, Saptavarga for Mundane and

dashvarga for natal is mentioned in BPHS?

Pleas do not misunderstand me, I have highest respect for your knowledge of

astrology. I am just a student of astrology. However I would like to know as to

whether you have any other edition of BPHS which mentions these principles in so

many words and would then like to aquire it.Another doubt that lingers is if

nothing beyond BPHS is to be considered as correct,then how come Jaimini Sutra

principles are being relied upon to arrive at predictions by many astrologers

who swear by only BPHS. Jaimini Sautras do not form part osf BPHS per my

information.

Your kind guidance in the matter would be highly appreciated.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

-

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

vedic astrology

Thursday, March 06, 2003 3:30 AM

[vedic astrology] Importance of divisional charts

Dear Chandrashekhar,

> About your second query, Navamsha is attritubeted strength

> almost equal to lagna. Other divisional charts have fraction of

> that strength. Divisional charts aid in deciding the strength of

> the planets (Shatvarga bala). Thus a fair degree of accuracy

I heard this argument before. But why stop with Shadvarga?

Let us go one step further in the same direction and extend it to Dasavarga. As

per DasaVarga scheme (which is more relevant for natal horoscopy), rasi chart

has a weightage of 3, shashtyamsa (D-60) has a weightage of 5 (more than rasi

chart!) and the other 8 charts have 1.5 each. Shall we go ahead and declare

that one can make predictions just based on D-60 chart and, secondarily, rasi

chart?

See, this logic is not going to work.

If Parasara said that learning should be seen from D-24, D-24 is THE chart for

education. Irrespective of its weightage in varous varga schemes, it has 100%

importance when it comes to learning. Similarly, when it comes to spirituality,

D-20 has 100% weightage and is THE chart.

The weightages in various varga schemes show the overall importances (relative)

of various areas of life. Irrespective of the weightages, the relevant

divisional chart is the most important one when a particular area of life needs

examination.

Shadvarga scheme is more relevant for prasna. Saptavarga scheme is more relevant

in mundane astrology. Dasavarga scheme is important in natal horoscopy.

Shodasavarga scheme is the most important in royal horoscopy. For more, please

see my article in the "Varga" book published by SJC on the occasion of the

Hyderabad workshop on divisional charts.

For understanding the roles of rasi chart and divisional charts, one may also

want to buy the "Achyuta Jyotish Workshop" CD from

http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/workshop

> can be obtained on going through these charts and any

> confusion due to excess of data avoided, specially if

Confusion stems from wrong understanding and not from excess data. The excess

data brings so much clarity.

Maharshi Parasara taught so many divisional charts only because they are important.

> Maha-Antar dasha and Gochar position of planets are

> factored in.This is why many learned astrologers tend to

> consult these charts only.

> Chandrashekhar.

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

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

shine on us .......

March 7, 2003

Om Sreem Suragurave Brihaspataye Namah

Namaste,

> Dear Narasimharaoji,> I have merely pointed out why many astrologers prefer to

refer to Natal and

> Navamsha charts.However coming to your statement that Parashar says

As I said, I HAD heard this argument before. But there is no logic in the argument.

You said that rasi and navamsa are the most important because they have the

highest strength in vimsopaka bala as per shadvarga. But I pointed out that

shashtyamsa has 5 points, rasi has 3 points and other 8 cfharts have 1.5 each,

in vimsopaka bala as per dasa varga. Shall we say that shashtyamsa (D-60) is

the most important chart and rasi chart is the secondary chart?

You did not answer this vital point. If you try to answer it, you will realize

that there is no logic in your argument.

In order to explain it better, let me use a loose analogy. Suppose I tell the

students at a high school ("college" in Indian terminology) in India - "if you

have questions in math, approach the math lecturer. If you have questions in

physics, approach the physics lecturer. If you have questions in chemistry,

approach the chemistry lecturer. If you have questions in biolopgy, approach

the biolopgy lecturer. If you have questions in English, approach the English

lecturer. If you have questions in Sanskrit, approach the Sanskrit lecturer."

(Analogy: See marriages in D-9, career in D-10, parents in D-12, education in

D-24 etc)

Suppose I continue like this: "If you are an MPC student planning to go into

engineering, math lecturer is the most important one. If you are a BiPC student

planning to go into medicine, biology lecturer is the most important." (Analogy:

In shadvarga scheme, rasi is the most important, navamsa is secondary and others

are tertiary. In dasavarga scheme, shashtyamsa is the most important, rasi is

secondary and others are tertiary.)

Can a student in MPC group conclude from this that he can go to the math teacher

for all questions - questions in math, physics, chemistry, English or Sanskrit?

(Analogy: Seeing education in just rasi and/or navamsa.) For questions in the

respective subjects, the student should go to the respective lecturer, as was

made clear at the beginning. (Analogy: For education, go to D-24, as was made

clear at the beginning.)

The analogy is a bit loose, but it should drive the point home.

> that 100% importance is to begiven to D24 for learning, I do not see any

> such specific mention in BPHS.There was no reason for him to mention

Parasara said "vidyaayaah vedabaahvamse", which means "see education in D-24".

Where did he mention that education should be seen in rasi or in navamsa? Thus,

it can be concluded that D-24 is 100% importabnt when seeing education.

> how Vishopak bala is to be calculated if this was the case.

If I tell an MPC student that math lecturer is the most important lecturer for

him, it doesn't mean math teacher will teach all subjects.

Moreover, try to think of the different varga groups. If rasi and navamsa are to

be used for everything and the vimsopaka bala computation is supposed to reflect

it, then why do they have only 3 and 1.5 points compared to D-60's 5 points in

dasavarga scheme?

I know that you are the first person to present this logic. But this logic is quite unjustified.

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

March 8, 2003

Dear Narasimhaji,

It appears that you have taken my effort to explain why most of astrologers view

natal and Divisional Charts to be a critisim of the system of consulting various

diisional charts to arrive at predictions. I had no intention to annoy you.I

would be the last person to show disrespect to any learned man.

At the same time I believe there is nothing wrong in stating one's opinions in

as polite a manner as possible.There have been 18Acharyas mentioned as the

Pravartaka of Jyotish."Brahma,Acharya,Vashishtha,Atri,Manu,

Paulatsya,Romesh,Marichi,AngiraVyasa,Naarada,Shaunak,Bhrugu,Chyavan,Yavan,Garg,Kashyap,

and Parashar."

Even Parashara mentions about what Garga has said, I had sent you the relevant

portion but you chose not to comment on it. Anyway I am writing this just to

illustrate that even the Pravartaks of Jyotish did not feel threatened if any

other theory was proposed and as a matter of fact tried to learn from it and

inform their own system.This is the logic behind my trying to answer why most

of the Astrologers refer only to Natal and Navamsha charts.

However about strengths of various divisional charts as told by Parashara(or

available in the copies printed today), why do you want me to answer about

Dashamsha strengths only and why is it necessary to ignore

hodashvargabala(Vinshopaka) where Lagna,Navamsha and shatiamsa are given

somewhat similar values, (no doubt shatiamsa gets highest) but rest of the

divisional parts are given 1/2 part as value.For ease of reference I give

relevant para below.

When the 16 divisions (Shodash Varg Scheme) are considered together, the

Vimshopak score goes thus: Hora 1, Trimsāńś 1, Dreshkan 1,

Shodashāńś 2, Navāńś 3, Rāśi 3½,

Shashtiāńś 4 and the rest of the nine divisions each a half. The

Vimshopak Bal remains as 20, only when the Grah is in own Bhava Vargas.

Otherwise, the total strength from 20 declines to 18 in Pramudit Vargas, to 15

in Shant Vargas, to 10 in Svasth divisions, to 7 in Duhkhit Vargas and to 5 in

Khal Vargas. (These figures are called Varg Vishwa)

Again , I am not a scholar of Sanskrit, but could "vidyaayaah vedabaahvamse",

not also mean bhava indicated by Navamsha or dwadashamsha occupied by the lord

of the vidyasthana? Devkeralam uses such terminology when it says

Sukhamsha,Bhgyansha.

About interpretation of what is to be seen from Divisional charts (as you

mention other divisions) the following shlokas would probably make it clear as

to how different authorties attribute diferent results to them and which could

be the reason that some astrologers prefer to base their predictions on Lagna

and Navamsha Charts.I am giving some shlokas for your kind consideration:

gehaTsaEOyamudahriNt munyae haerablaCDIlta<

Ôe:ka[aTpdvI— xnSy incy< sÝa<zkai½Ntyet!,

v[¡ êpgu[aNsuxIsutnyan! àayae nva<ze=iol<ÉavadœÖadzkaÖpuvRy #it iÇza<zkaTôI)lm!.

gehaTsaEOyamudahriNt munyae haerablaCDIlta<

Ôe:ka[aTpdvI— xnSy incy< sÝa<zkai½Ntyet!,

v[¡ êpgu[aNsuxIsutnyan! àayae nva<ze=iol<

ÉavadœÖadzkaÖpuvRy #it iÇza<zkaTôI)lm!.

Now campare this with:

l¶e dehSy iv}an< haeraya< sMpdaidkm!, Ôe:ka[e æaÇujm! saEOym!, puÇpaEÇaidkana<

c! icNtn< sÝma<zken nvma<ze klÇa[am!, Öadza<ze twa ipÇaE>.

iÇza<zke irò)lm!, sv¡ ivl¶adip icNtnIym!.

%dyaid;u Éave;u va, vgRivña)l< vIúy< te;a< te;a< zuÉazuÉm!,

pu[R< ivñabl< Sv]eR, imÇe pNcdz àae´<, sme dz àkIitRtm!.

Even Parashara tells maitreya about other sources of strengths of graha and

bhava like planet posited in 7th house from Sun, indicating that the divisional

charts could be only a tool for calculating the strengths of planets and bhavas.

It is interesting to note that Shloka4 of Parashara is" 4-6. Those are called

‘Grahas’, that move through the Nakshatras (or stellar mansions) in the zodiac.

The said zodiac comprises of 27 Nakshatras commencing from Ashvini. The same

area is divided in 12 parts equal to 12 ‘Rāśis’ commencing from Mesh.

The names of the Grahas commence from Sūrya. The Rāśi rising is

known, as ‘Lagn’. Based on Lagn and the Grahas, joining and departing from each

other, the native’s good and bad effects are deducted."

"If I tell an MPC student that math lecturer is the most important lecturer for

him, it doesn't mean math teacher will teach all subjects."

I do not understand the logic of the above analogy as it is in relation to my

query about application of Vishopak bala. I mean if the most important teacher

has knowledge of a single subject, then how does the student pass? For him to

pass there would be diferent subjects all of which he must pass.Can that

teacher be said to be most important?

I once again request you to see the problem from the point of view of those that

are not Triskandha Jyotishis as you, no doubt, are. I am certain you will agree

to my logic of why most astrogers base their predictions on Natal and Navamsha

and do not attempt to read from Divisional charts. Again going back to the

simile of the teacher, is it not beter to be a teacher who can solve problems

of student and get him passed than to be specialist who might find it difficult

to do so?

I trust you take my comments in right spirit and as a genuine attempt to give

answer to the factual problem ,of one who being a student having miniscule

knowledge , which is nothing compared to yours.

With deep respects,

Chandrashekhar.

-

Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

vedic astrology

Saturday, March 08, 2003 9:25 AM

[vedic astrology] Re: Importance of divisional charts