To DakshinamoortyWhy Ketu cannot be atmakaraka?- Query by Ms.Jyothi Lakshmi.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir,

 

 

Shall I share some more thoughts which arose on reading

your mail? The reason that ketu is a Moksha karaka and it is not

significant for mundane gains, as I said seems a bit unsatisfactory.

Now I will say why I feel so. A person when born, is not by default a

jeevanmukta. He is gradually or step by step attaining that state.

And as far as I have understood, Ketu plays a very significant role

in catalysing one to reach that state by creating detachment,

obstacles or whatever it is. In short, Ketu is the planet which

pushes one to that state. Unless there is somebody to guide (be it by

pressurising or in a smooth way), the state is not reached. And till

the state is reached isnt such a catalysing factor essential? And if

Ketu does that job perfectly, why is still excluded?

 

Exclusion of Ketu seems like Ketu doesnt have any significance

in ones life time. Also it seems as if moksha is something separate

from the life,something which cannot be connected to the life.

 

 

Regards,

Jyothi

 

vedic astrology, dakshinamoorthi r

<dakshinastrologer> wrote:

>

> Dear Ms.Jyothi Lakshmi,

>

> Even Rahu cannot become a karaka unless there is a tie

> up between two planets for a karakatwa thereby leaving

> some karakatwa vacant by Jaimini Muni Pramana.

>

> I will quote Adhyaya 1 Pada 1 Sutra 11 for your

> reference:

>

> "Aathmadikah kalaadibhirna bhogah saptaanaam

> ashtaanaamva"

>

> meaning of the seven planets from Sun to Saturn, or

> the eight planets from Sun to Rahu, whichever get the

> highest number of degrees becomes the atmakaraka.

>

> Another point you should note is that Rahu and Ketu

> are deemed to have got higher number of degrees in the

> reverse order ( I mean to say, subtract the longitude

> of Rahu from 30 deg. The resultant is to be taken as

> the degrees attained by Rahu for the purpose of

> determining whether it has got more degrees or not).

> This is my view which was corroborated also by Dr.

> B.V.RAMAN of revered memory (Ofcourse you must be

> aware of that Great Man!).

>

> These are axioms not theorems. (Mathematics students

> will know it. An axiom is a First principle that is

> assumed to be true and that cannot be proved as

> opposed to a theorem for which a logical proof can be

> derived).

>

> Though I appreciate your enthusiasm and research bent

> of mind, kindly differentiate between an axiom and a

> theory while discussing these topics.

>

> Another point is interesting to note. Even in Prasna

> shastra (in ashtamangala prasna) only eight planets

> are included (excluding Ketu) while deriving various

> significations. The savants must have had their own

> reasons for that.

>

> Or, may be as Ketu is a significator for ultimate

> realization and final emancipation and Eternal Wisdom,

> he may not have a portfolio for mundane events. For

> instance, you cannot have an ascetic as a head of a

> charitable trust! (Though you see Godmen managing

> ashrams and other grand things, it is against the

> basic tenet of real ascetism. Lord Dattatreya -

> considered to be the adi guru of ascetism says that

> even the company of 2 persons may lead to unnecessary

> words and strife and deviate one from the real Goal of

> Realization). This is only my humble logic which

> ofcourse may not be correct. The rishis would have

> DEFINITELY had their own higher logics for that.

>

> Blessed be.

>

> Send instant messages to your online friends

http://in.messenger.

>