Guest guest Posted January 4, 2004 Report Share Posted January 4, 2004 Dear Narasimha Raoji Thanks for your mail.I hope you will be able to explain things based on your understanding. In hindu predictive Astrology Dr.Raman says ''the Arc of 30 degrees forming a zodiacal sign is called Rashi.When a sign is divided into nine equal parts each part becomes a navamsha measuring 3 1/3 degrees.Take Aries and divide it into nine equal parts.The first navamsha is governed by the lord of Aries ,viz Mars:the 2nd by the lord of 2nd viz Venus etc ....and so on ,till last or 9th navamsha which is governed by jupiter,lord of ninth from Aries.Now divide Taurus into nine equal divisions.Now we have left the counting of the navamsha at the 9th from Aries,viz Sagittarius.Therefore the first navamsha of Taurus is governed by the lord of the tenth from aries - namely Saturn......It invariably follows that for Aries Leo and Sagittarius navamsha must be counted from Aries to Sagi''. Now you can kindly read my previous mail to see my understanding of the subject in full. Thus in Rashi chart when you mention about Aries it refers to the full 30 degrees.But in Navamsha when you mention about an Aries this can be an Aries sub division in any Rashi. If you can explain about your transformation theory a bit in detail it would be helpful. Thanks Pradeep vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao" <pvr@c...> wrote: > Namaste all, > > I understand that there was a discussion on aspects in divisional charts recently. I missed the discussion as I did not read quite a few mails. So I don't know who said what. > > However, remember one basic point. > > The zodiac used in various divisional charts is the same. For example, the Aries in rasi chart is not different from the Aries in dasamsa or the Aries in vimsamsa or the Aries in siddhamsa. They are one and the same Aries. The divisional charts are based on various transformations of the zodiac onto itself. However, the output space of all these transformations is again the same zodiac. In fact, rasi chakra (or kshetra chakra as Parasara calls it) is just another transformation, but a simple one. If Jupiter in Aries in kshetra chakra (rasi chakra) has aspect on Leo, there is no reason why Jupiter in Aries in siddhamsa cannot do the same. > > In fact, that is exactly what I was taught by my gurus. Some scholars may opine differently, but the onus is on them to explain why Aries in rasi chart is not the same Aries in siddhamsa and why the same rules do not apply. > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > Narasimha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2004 Report Share Posted January 4, 2004 Namaste Pradeep, It is not "my" transformation theory, but simply what Parasara taught. Please read the chapter on divisional charts in BPHS. You can also read that chapter in my book. If Aries in rasi chart is a sign with "full 30 degrees", Aries in navamsa is also a sign with "full 30 degrees". It is not a different Aries. It is simply that a small part of a sign is mapped (transformed) to this "full 30 degrees". A planet between 0 and 30 deg in Aries is mapped to Aries (a sign with "full 30 degrees") in kshetra/rasi chart. Similarly, a planet between 0 deg and 3.33 deg in Aries is mapped (transformed) to Aries (a sign with "full 30 degrees") in navamsa chart. Each divisional chart comes with a unique mapping/transformation that maps various portions of the zodiac to signs (of "full 30 degrees") in the zodiac. The output space of this transformation/mapping is the same 360 degree zodiac that contains 12 signs of "full 30 degrees". So don't treat Aries in siddhamsa chart any differently from Aries in rasi chart. They are the same. To understand the mapping/transformation used in various divisional charts to map the zodiac back to the zodiac, please refer to BPHS or my book. May Jupiter's light shine on us, Narasimha > Dear Narasimha Raoji> > Thanks for your mail.I hope you will be able to explain things based > on your understanding.> > In hindu predictive Astrology Dr.Raman says ''the Arc of 30 degrees > forming a zodiacal sign is called Rashi.When a sign is divided into > nine equal parts each part becomes a navamsha measuring 3 1/3 > degrees.Take Aries and divide it into nine equal parts.The first > navamsha is governed by the lord of Aries ,viz Mars:the 2nd by the > lord of 2nd viz Venus etc ....and so on ,till last or 9th navamsha > which is governed by jupiter,lord of ninth from Aries.Now divide > Taurus into nine equal divisions.Now we have left the counting of > the navamsha at the 9th from Aries,viz Sagittarius.Therefore the > first navamsha of Taurus is governed by the lord of the tenth from > aries - namely Saturn......It invariably follows that for Aries Leo > and Sagittarius navamsha must be counted from Aries to Sagi''.> Now you can kindly read my previous mail to see my understanding of > the subject in full.> > Thus in Rashi chart when you mention about Aries it refers to the > full 30 degrees.But in Navamsha when you mention about an Aries this > can be an Aries sub division in any Rashi.> > If you can explain about your transformation theory a bit in detail > it would be helpful.> > Thanks> Pradeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2004 Report Share Posted January 4, 2004 Dear Narasimha Raoji Regarding the logic behind transformations i have no confusion.Different logic for different div charts.It is fine. I will explain with an example.Once this is cleared it should be fine. In my chart jupiter is at 7 plus degrees in sag in ascendant.Thus this means this is the position of jupiter at the time of my birth in the zodiac.Am i right.In Rashi thus we simply say Jupiter is in Sag (full 30 degree sign) Now if we check Navamsha,Jupiter has gone to Gemini.How? We divide Sag into nine.Each navamsha division is 3.2 degrees.Thus the first 6.4 degrees are represented by Aries and Taurus divisions .Thus a planet in 7th degree in Sag in Rashi has to fall in the third Navamsha ie Gemini.Similarly my lagna which is at 11 deg in Rashi will fall in the 4th division viz Cancer. Now we take 2 degree Capricorn in Rashi.Divide this into nine.For capricorn Rashis first navamsha starts from itself thus from capricorn itself.And hence my 2 degree moon will fall within the first 3.2 degrees or 1st Navamsha within Capricorn.Hence my moon is in Capricorn in rashi as well as navamsha. Similar is the case with any planet.Now by aspect my jupiter should aspect 1st ,5th,7th and 9th from sag.But if we apply aspect in navamsha it will aspect 1st,5th,7th and 9th from Gemini.Which is different from Rashi or original aspect by virtue of its position. I beleive a planet will have only one position in zodiac at a time.Thus the position in zodiac is 7 degrees in Sag for jupiter. I am yet to buy the books from you and Pt.Shri Rath.I am looking forward to buy this. Thanks for your time and patience Pradeep vedic astrology, "Narasimha P.V.R. Rao" <pvr@c...> wrote: > Namaste Pradeep, > > It is not "my" transformation theory, but simply what Parasara taught. > > Please read the chapter on divisional charts in BPHS. You can also read that chapter in my book. > > If Aries in rasi chart is a sign with "full 30 degrees", Aries in navamsa is also a sign with "full 30 degrees". It is not a different Aries. It is simply that a small part of a sign is mapped (transformed) to this "full 30 degrees". > > A planet between 0 and 30 deg in Aries is mapped to Aries (a sign with "full 30 degrees") in kshetra/rasi chart. Similarly, a planet between 0 deg and 3.33 deg in Aries is mapped (transformed) to Aries (a sign with "full 30 degrees") in navamsa chart. Each divisional chart comes with a unique mapping/transformation that maps various portions of the zodiac to signs (of "full 30 degrees") in the zodiac. > > The output space of this transformation/mapping is the same 360 degree zodiac that contains 12 signs of "full 30 degrees". So don't treat Aries in siddhamsa chart any differently from Aries in rasi chart. They are the same. > > To understand the mapping/transformation used in various divisional charts to map the zodiac back to the zodiac, please refer to BPHS or my book. > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > Narasimha > > > Dear Narasimha Raoji > > > > Thanks for your mail.I hope you will be able to explain things based > > on your understanding. > > > > In hindu predictive Astrology Dr.Raman says ''the Arc of 30 degrees > > forming a zodiacal sign is called Rashi.When a sign is divided into > > nine equal parts each part becomes a navamsha measuring 3 1/3 > > degrees.Take Aries and divide it into nine equal parts.The first > > navamsha is governed by the lord of Aries ,viz Mars:the 2nd by the > > lord of 2nd viz Venus etc ....and so on ,till last or 9th navamsha > > which is governed by jupiter,lord of ninth from Aries.Now divide > > Taurus into nine equal divisions.Now we have left the counting of > > the navamsha at the 9th from Aries,viz Sagittarius.Therefore the > > first navamsha of Taurus is governed by the lord of the tenth from > > aries - namely Saturn......It invariably follows that for Aries Leo > > and Sagittarius navamsha must be counted from Aries to Sagi''. > > Now you can kindly read my previous mail to see my understanding of > > the subject in full. > > > > Thus in Rashi chart when you mention about Aries it refers to the > > full 30 degrees.But in Navamsha when you mention about an Aries this > > can be an Aries sub division in any Rashi. > > > > If you can explain about your transformation theory a bit in detail > > it would be helpful. > > > > Thanks > > Pradeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2004 Report Share Posted January 4, 2004 Dear Narasimha, You said " It is not "my" transformation theory, but simply what Parashara taught.Please read the chapter on divisional charts in BPHS. " Could you point out the shloka where Parashara said this and the edition in which the relevant shlokas appear? The edition of BPHS that I have does not have any such specific reference. Regards, Chandrashekhar. Narasimha P.V.R. Rao wrote: > Namaste Pradeep, > > It is not "my" transformation theory, but simply what Parasara taught. > > Please read the chapter on divisional charts in BPHS. You can also > read that chapter in my book. > > If Aries in rasi chart is a sign with "full 30 degrees", Aries in > navamsa is also a sign with "full 30 degrees". It is not a different > Aries. It is simply that a small part of a sign is mapped > (transformed) to this "full 30 degrees". > > A planet between 0 and 30 deg in Aries is mapped to Aries (a sign with > "full 30 degrees") in kshetra/rasi chart. Similarly, a planet between > 0 deg and 3.33 deg in Aries is mapped (transformed) to Aries (a sign > with "full 30 degrees") in navamsa chart. Each divisional chart comes > with a unique mapping/transformation that maps various portions of the > zodiac to signs (of "full 30 degrees") in the zodiac. > > The output space of this transformation/mapping is the same 360 degree > zodiac that contains 12 signs of "full 30 degrees". So don't treat > Aries in siddhamsa chart any differently from Aries in rasi chart. > They are the same. > > To understand the mapping/transformation used in various divisional > charts to map the zodiac back to the zodiac, please refer to BPHS or > my book. > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > Narasimha > > > Dear Narasimha Raoji > > > > Thanks for your mail.I hope you will be able to explain things based > > on your understanding. > > > > In hindu predictive Astrology Dr.Raman says ''the Arc of 30 degrees > > forming a zodiacal sign is called Rashi.When a sign is divided into > > nine equal parts each part becomes a navamsha measuring 3 1/3 > > degrees.Take Aries and divide it into nine equal parts.The first > > navamsha is governed by the lord of Aries ,viz Mars:the 2nd by the > > lord of 2nd viz Venus etc ....and so on ,till last or 9th navamsha > > which is governed by jupiter,lord of ninth from Aries.Now divide > > Taurus into nine equal divisions.Now we have left the counting of > > the navamsha at the 9th from Aries,viz Sagittarius.Therefore the > > first navamsha of Taurus is governed by the lord of the tenth from > > aries - namely Saturn......It invariably follows that for Aries Leo > > and Sagittarius navamsha must be counted from Aries to Sagi''. > > Now you can kindly read my previous mail to see my understanding of > > the subject in full. > > > > Thus in Rashi chart when you mention about Aries it refers to the > > full 30 degrees.But in Navamsha when you mention about an Aries this > > can be an Aries sub division in any Rashi. > > > > If you can explain about your transformation theory a bit in detail > > it would be helpful. > > > > Thanks > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... > > > > > ------ > * Links* > > * > vedic astrology/ > > * > vedic astrology > <vedic astrology?subject=Un> > > * Terms of > Service <>. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2004 Report Share Posted January 4, 2004 Dear Chandrashekhar ji, > Dear Narasimha,> You said> " It is not "my" transformation theory, but simply what Parashara > taught.Please read the chapter on divisional charts in BPHS. "> Could you point out the shloka where Parashara said this and the edition > in which the relevant shlokas appear? The edition of BPHS that I have > does not have any such specific reference.> Regards,> Chandrashekhar. Please read the entire chapter on divisional charts. It gives the details of all the mappings. It defines the kshetra (rasi) chart mapping from longitude to the 12 signs, hora chart mapping from longitude to the 12 signs, drekkana chart mapping from longitude to the 12 signs and so on. These mappings corresponding to all divisional charts map various longitudes to the 12 signs. The 12 signs to which planets in various longitudes are mapped as per various divisions are the same twelve signs. If Aries aspects Leo, Scorpio and Aquarius and planets in Aries aspect Leo, Scorpio and Aquarius in rasi chart, it must be the same in all divisional charts. It goes without saying, because Parasara used the same rasis to define all the divisions. There is no special "navamsa Aries" and "dasamsa Aries" and so on. If a planet is in Aries in navamsa or the planet is in Aries in dasamsa, it is in the same sign in both charts. May Jupiter's light shine on us, Narasimha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 5, 2004 Report Share Posted January 5, 2004 Dear Narasimha, I do not think that Parashara has said so, after going through the chapter in its entirety. Had that been the case, Parashara's distribution of Horas in to Moon and Sun's hora would mean all planets aspect each other (vide Shloka 5 and 6 Chapter 6 "Shodashavaragaadhya"). He has also not told to cast individual charts as he does in case of special ascendants (Ch5 Shloka9) in case of Divisional charts. Again while use of Vargas shlokas 52 and 53 indicate that the signs occupied are to be considered to arrive at the strengths ( and by implication the results) of planets. He does not indicate any change due to planetary aspects, as he does in various other Yogas, not dealing with Varga charts.As a matter of fact he tells in shloka 53 that the yogas are destroyed by the planet being combust,defeated,debilitated weak or by being in bad Avasthas. In case of Avasthas he unambiguously states that the Avasthas change every 6 degrees vide shloka 3 Ch. 45"GrahaavashthaadhyaayaH". Now how can one find out the Avasthas in a divisional chart from D-5 onwards and still be true to Parashara, is the moot question.I know that for argument's sake it could be said that 60th part of a Rasi(1/2 amsha) be proportionately divided and avasthas obtained. But think about the minuscule part of the time it will represent on the back ground of difficulty in correcting of Birth time, and the fact of this argument not holding water would be apparent. The fact that Parashara does not indicate this is and the reason for that would be obvious. Even in case of Ishta and Kashta bala its application and its method to other Vargas is not mentioned. Again, had it been plain transformation of Rasi degrees to Varga divisions, there was no necessity of giving a differential scale of Vimshopaka bala and most of the Vargas would not have been given 1/2 Bala in Vimshopaka scheme. Therefore Parashara indicating any sort of transformation of Rasi in to vargas, does not appear to be logical, is how I look at it. Perhaps I am not able to read beyond what has been explicitly stated by Parashara. Of course I could be wrong and in one of the numerous editions he might have indicated something like that but certainly not in the one used by Santanam. I am sorry if this logic appears to be argumentative, but there was no way I could explain why I think the way I do. Regards, Chandrashekhar. Narasimha P.V.R. Rao wrote: > Dear Chandrashekhar ji, > > > Dear Narasimha, > > You said > > " It is not "my" transformation theory, but simply what Parashara > > taught.Please read the chapter on divisional charts in BPHS. " > > Could you point out the shloka where Parashara said this and the > edition > > in which the relevant shlokas appear? The edition of BPHS that I have > > does not have any such specific reference. > > Regards, > > Chandrashekhar. > > Please read the entire chapter on divisional charts. It gives the > details of all the mappings. It defines the kshetra (rasi) chart > mapping from longitude to the 12 signs, hora chart mapping from > longitude to the 12 signs, drekkana chart mapping from longitude to > the 12 signs and so on. These mappings corresponding to all divisional > charts map various longitudes to the 12 signs. The 12 signs to which > planets in various longitudes are mapped as per various divisions are > the same twelve signs. > > If Aries aspects Leo, Scorpio and Aquarius and planets in Aries aspect > Leo, Scorpio and Aquarius in rasi chart, it must be the same in all > divisional charts. It goes without saying, because Parasara used the > same rasis to define all the divisions. There is no special "navamsa > Aries" and "dasamsa Aries" and so on. If a planet is in Aries in > navamsa or the planet is in Aries in dasamsa, it is in the same sign > in both charts. > > May Jupiter's light shine on us, > Narasimha > > > > > > > > > > ....... May Jupiter's light shine on us ....... > > > > > ------ > * Links* > > * > vedic astrology/ > > * > vedic astrology > <vedic astrology?subject=Un> > > * Terms of > Service <>. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.