MahaPurusha Yoga in D10 - Vishwanatham ji

[Guest guest]

Dear Vishwanatham ji

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

Natal chart is the basis for division and not the Kshethra.Kshethra

is just one among the 16 divisions.Remaining vargas are not derived

from Kshethra.As per definition Kshethra spans the full sign,rasing

doubts in you.Also results are given when a planet or lagna is

placed in the first varga viz.Kuja kshethra, Surya kshethra

etc.Here we are not refering to just 30 degrees but both the signs

lorded by Kuja.Similarly Hora spans one half and drekkana one third.

 

There may be many signs which are not having any planet in a chart,

and are we dividing those 30 degrees?Thus natal chart and the

position of planets forms the basis.

 

Also why should we think the natal chart as a division? Is it

logical? Basically divisions are functions of the main.

 

In a horoscope we analyse strengths,nature and results of planets

and lagna.Vargas tell us more about each of these entity in detail.

 

Once we start thinking what is a varga followed by the understanding

that vargas are divisional dispositions of Planets and Lagna , i

beleive most of the doubts will be cleared. Construction of vargas

advised by parashara are also based on the above principles.

 

I know we need to approach with an open mind due to the deep

rooting.

 

Thanks

Pradeep

 

 

 

 

 

In vedic astrology, "vishwanatham"

<vishwanatham@r...> wrote:

>

> Hare Rama Krishna

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> i do not think you are arguing. In the followingi only try to

share

> what has already been discussed or written somewhere. So my word

is

> not final!

>

> You said, Kshetra, Hora etc., is used by Parasara, which is

correct.

> Parasara also said, 16 vargas.

>

> First varga is synonymous with Kshetra i.e. it is from 0 to 30

degree

> (entire span of kshetra!). So, why should it be that the remaining

15

> vargas are derived from the first varga (or kshetra)?

>

> We need to ask ourselves, why he did not tell Maitreya that there

are

> 15 vargas in a kshetra? So, he indeed meant to say 16 Vargas & not

> 15.

>

> Later Parasara called it as 'lagna' (lagna, hora etc.,)and

explained

> what to see from that. Now, it also contains other characterstics,

> hidden,but to bring them out we need to study the respective

> divisional charts. Tools for the analysis (aspects)& Yogas between

> planets are given later on (Is it not a logical order?)

>

>

>

> Between the extrordinary intelligence of the Rishis and the advent

of

> the powerful personal computers, we have passed through a time,

when

> people might have become more and more specialised! You can guess

why!

>

> Is it not possible that the transmission of Knowledge from Brahma

to

> Parasara, would have happened, like the data transfer between

> powerful computers!!

>

>

> Indeed,you are trying to knock out a serious fundamental issue.

>

> If you have more questions, then i will read more BPHS.

>

> Hope this helps.

>

> regards

> viswanadham

>

>

> vedic astrology, Pradeep

> Kumar<vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> > Dear Vishwanatham ji

> >

> > Let me make it clear that my idea is not to argue.Pls consider

this

> as a clarification.

> > You have written- ''Now, digressing a bit, Parasara presented a

> schema, which has 16 vargas. This includes D-1,as we know.

Jaimini

> added a few more divsions, and spoke about seeing yogas in d3 & d9

as

> well''.

> >

> > Could you or learned members kindly refer to any classics where

> Parshara or other sages have mentioned Rashi chart(Natal Chart)

as

> the first division.This will be helpful in learning.

> >

> > My understanding has been - First division is the

Kshethra ,second

> Hora and so on.When a planet or lagna is in Aries or Scorpio we

> commonly call it being placed in Kuja Kshethra(Division -1 or D-

> 1).When a planet or lagna is in the first half of an odd sign we

call

> it being placed in Surya Hora.(Division -2 or D-2).When Rashi is

used

> without any

> > qualification it refers to Sign(Dhanu Rashi, Meena Rashi etc).

> >

> > Kindly take this in a right spirit.I may be wrong.Local

astrologers

> who are having no access to internet and thus unaware of D-1,D-2

> nomenclature,but aware of vargas defined by parashara have

expressed

> the same opinion as above.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Discover all that's new in My

[Guest guest]

Dear Pradeep,

If I may add, Rasi and Kshetra are synonymous, as are Bhavan and many

other words.

Chandrashekhar.

Pradeep Kumar wrote:

Dear Vishwanatham ji

Let me make it clear that my idea is not to argue.Pls consider this as

a clarification.

You have written- ''Now, digressing a bit, Parasara presented a schema,

which has 16 vargas. This includes D-1,as we know. Jaimini added a few

more divsions, and spoke about seeing yogas in d3 & d9 as well''.

Could you or learned members kindly refer to any classics where

Parshara or other sages have mentioned Rashi chart(Natal Chart) as the

first division.This will be helpful in learning.

My understanding has been - First division is the Kshethra ,second Hora

and so on.When a planet or lagna is in Aries or Scorpio we commonly

call it being placed in Kuja Kshethra(Division -1 or D-1).When a planet

or lagna is in the first half of an odd sign we call it being placed in

Surya Hora.(Division -2 or D-2).When Rashi is used without any

qualification it refers to Sign(Dhanu Rashi, Meena Rashi etc).

Kindly take this in a right spirit.I may be wrong.Local astrologers who

are having no access to internet and thus unaware of D-1,D-2

nomenclature,but aware of vargas defined by parashara have expressed

the same opinion as above.

Thanks

Pradeep

 

 

Discover all that’s new in My

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

can say Budha Rashi/Kshethra or Kuja Rashi/Kshethra for the first varga. But

whether we call it as Rashi or kshethra ,the underlying meaning is

important.(What is in a name, that we call by a rose would smell as sweet by

anyother - Shakespear)Results has been given for

1)A planet or lagna placed in Rashi or kshethra of Kuja or other planets.(When

he says Kuja kshethra - it gives similar results, irrespective of whether it is

placed in Scorpio or Aries).2)A planet or lagna placed in Hora of Surya or

Chandra(When he says Surya Hora - it gives similar results irrespective of

whether the concerned Surya hora is derived from Aries or Taurus or Gemini or

cancer or any of the 12 signs).It points to the behaviour of tattwa lorded by a

planet.3)And so on.I never said divide space, not time etc. A chart is a

snapshot of space at a point in time. When we say divide, we are not dividing

anything - rather we are looking the various positions at a point in time. For

example you can say Mr. A is Living in India at the moment, You can also say he

is living in the state of Maharashtra at the moment, You can also say he is

living in the Metro of Mumbai at the moment, You can also say he is living in

Andheri at the moment- all are

true. Similarly you can say my lagna is in the navasmha of cancer,my lagna is in

the drekkana of aries, My lagna is in the Hora of Surya, My lagna is in the

kshethra of Guru etc at a point in time( i.e. our birth time).Here we are

looking at the location of a person/Lagna at a point in time in a

Country/chart. Andheri shows locality closer to the person's situation and

navamsha shows our environments closer to our soul, among the example

considered. When we take shastyamsha it shows further closeness,explaining

higher point in vimshopaka bala. Similar exercise can be done for other

planets. This is what Parashara has advised us and gave us rules to find

amshas. We are thinking of houses because of the institutionalization of Vargas

as full charts.We may start thinking - what is the navasmha of our Lagna,

drekkana of our lagna ,hora of our lagna instead of what is the Lagna in

dashamsha chart. In the second approach we may think dashamsha as

a separate entity, which is not. It is an inherent part of Rashi

chart.Parashara knew that a planet or lagna has specific importance when placed

in different amshas.Thus he said hora is for wealth and drekkana for siblings as

they are more external and panchamsha for intelligence observed at an outerlevel

and sidhamsha for sidhi or finer abilities.House is an attribute of natal chart

as they represent a sign in full in the zodiac and also follows the same order.

But when we say cancer navamsha this can be cancer tattwa not only in cancer

rashi but from scorpio rashi or sag rashi or any of the rashis. This depends on

which rashi our planet or lagna is placed. Thus these are neither full

norfollowing order to be considered as houses.I have tried to explain my

understanding. This can be thought over and can be accepted or rejected.There

has been no attempt to debate for the seek of debate. This is just a honest

attempt within the limitations of my

Budhi. Thank you for your time and patience.ThanksPradeep

Meet the all-new My – Try it today!

[Guest guest]

Dear Vishwanatham ji

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

Rashi or kshethra is a sign and hence the first varga.I think you

are having rashi chakra as the first varga in mind and hence the

confusion.

 

For the same reason 16 vargas are part of the Rashi chakra or natal

chart.How to arrive at the 16 divisions from the natal chart has

been given by parashara in BPHS.(Thus i dont understand why

parashara should say rashi & 15 vargas???)

 

All the divisionals are derived from natal chart.D-1(kshethra or

rashi) is the first varga.These formulas are very clear and evident

and thus one hundred percent.

 

Vishwanatham ji i have no more logic or communication skills to

explain better.I have only explained what Parshara has advised on

how to construct 16 Vargas from natal chart,there has been no

assumption or invention.

 

You can judge, and accpet as well as reject.

 

Thanks a lot

Pradeep

 

 

 

 

 

 

vedic astrology, "vishwanatham"

<vishwanatham@r...> wrote:

>

> Hare Rama Krishna

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> i avoid bringing any names other than Parasara.It is as per

Parasara.

>

> Just three things, to end the discussion.

>

> 1. Parasara called it shodasa vargas and so they are. After flip

> flopping between Rasi & Kshetra, we say they are synonymous. So

the

> same question again, why does Parasara say 16 vargas and not Rasi

&

> 15 vargas there from?

>

> 2. If there is a 'naisargika', naturally flowing chakra then that

is

> of KalaPurusha. The first division is a collection of

Rasis/Kshetras

> so on & so forth. Planets are influencing an arc of 30, 15, 10

etc.,

> degrees, as we divide it further and further (as per Parsara's

> teaching). Another pointer here, as per Parasara the planets/lagna

> are moving signs in the divisionals. why should they be reckoned

wrt

> Lagna in D1 and not in other Dn, unless we are 100% sure that d2

to

> d15 are derived from D1. This point feeds back into point no1.

>

> 3. Drawing of charts is for two purposes, as i understand: Ease of

> use and to study them, they are depicted as 'Yantras'. i clarify

> this, so that they may not be treated as useless.

>

> Yo said one valid point, that the sum of parts is more than the

> whole. You know that it is because of the interaction within the

> parts.

>

> regards

> viswanadham

[Guest guest]

Dear Vishwanatham ji

Thanks for your mail.I was busy and hence not been browsing.

Unfortunately there are no full signs in Vargas.They are just tattwas

lorded by planets.When Hora(D-2) is one half of any sign and Drekkan

(D-3) is one third of any sign, Kshethra or (D-1) should obviously

be, full sign.

Also another point had been raised numerous times in the past.How

will you consider houses in Parashara Hora as all planets will be

either in sun/moon hora or just in one of those?.Why should

the ''divisional Hora chart '' alone be free of any 'yogas' as you

have mentioned?.

Thanks

Pradeep

 

 

vedic astrology, "vishwanatham"

<vishwanatham@r...> wrote:

>

> Hare Rama Krishna

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> i almost missed you reply, reading mails after 3 days gap.

>

> There is no communication gap. In fact we should be asking, if

there

> are bhavas (houses) in the divisional charts? (in D1 to D60).

> Perhaps, there is no issue with drawing charts and also no doubt

> about the nature of signs being same in all the divisionals. The

> real question is should we reckon house placements in the

divisionals

> (because graha drishtis are related to houses; aspect on 7th house

> etc.,).

>

> Then what does D1 show? Physique, as per Parasara.

> 1.We have to take houses from Lagna's sign placement,here, to see

> different parts of physique (of the native)

> or 2. should we reckon Physique from the 'snap shot' we get at the

> time of birth?

>

> Since, we started to discuss yogas, in divisional charts, let us

see

> why yogas should not be reckoned in divisionals also.

>

> Why you think, yogas cannot take place in different areas of life

> (divisionals)? or you think they should happen by conjunction

(being

> in the same sign in the divisionals) only?

>

> Sorry for asking so many questions, my idea is as much to learn as

it

> is to sort it out, if possible.

>

> Thanks & regards

> viswanadham

>

> vedic astrology, "vijayadas_pradeep"

> <vijayadas_pradeep> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Vishwanatham ji

> >

> > Thanks for your reply.

> >

> > Rashi or kshethra is a sign and hence the first varga.I think

you

> > are having rashi chakra as the first varga in mind and hence the

> > confusion.

> >

> > For the same reason 16 vargas are part of the Rashi chakra or

natal

> > chart.How to arrive at the 16 divisions from the natal chart has

> > been given by parashara in BPHS.(Thus i dont understand why

> > parashara should say rashi & 15 vargas???)

> >

> > All the divisionals are derived from natal chart.D-1(kshethra or

> > rashi) is the first varga.These formulas are very clear and

evident

> > and thus one hundred percent.

> >

> > Vishwanatham ji i have no more logic or communication skills to

> > explain better.I have only explained what Parshara has advised

on

> > how to construct 16 Vargas from natal chart,there has been no

> > assumption or invention.

> >

> > You can judge, and accpet as well as reject.

> >

> > Thanks a lot

> > Pradeep