Sridhar/Ashwin your ? about 1 vs 3 aspects of I vs O planets

[Guest guest]

Sridhar, I am not aware of any classical elaborations of why inner

planets (and lights) have only one full aspect whereas outer planets

have two extra or special aspects in addition to the standard saptam

drishti.

 

However, I always thought that the clear division between the outer and

inner into the two classes was responsible.

 

See the outer planets are not bound by the earth-sun axis whereas the

inner planets are bound within a narrow perimeter of the sun-earth axis.

 

The movement of earth creates the apparent motion of the sun through

the 12 rashis (Jyotish has many such apparents phenomena, including

retrogressions, nodes etc which some people do not pay attention to in

their education as a jyotishi or sometimes in their education as

a "what!").

 

Venting aside (!), note that mercury is always within 28 degrees of

the 'sun' (projected earth!) while venus is within 46 degrees or so of

the sun (caveat: if you see venus in the fourth house from sun,

something is weird!).

 

The smallest or most nearsighted special drishti belongs to saturn, the

3rd drishti. It also has an asymmetrical drishtis as opposed to jupiter

or mars (kendra and trikona) but I digress and I sure do not want to

irritate anyone's pitta here!

 

The third drishti can be as close as 31 degrees but more realistically

is beyond venuses greatest separation from sun, about 45/46 degrees.

 

I always thought that the maximum departure of inner planets from the

sun had to do with why they were not given special drishtis.

 

Venus, actually is pretty close to being the contender for a special

drishti, because realistically, it could have the third drishti in some

cases, for instance if sun was in aries 24 and venus in 5 degrees

gemini (astronomically possible), there would be a loose third drishti

(if saturn were in aries 24, it would be considered to caste a drishti

on gemini, by many astrologers, right?). But, it does not caste that

3rd house drishti. Is that somehow tied to the allegory of Venus,

Shukracharya being one eyed?

 

I do not know for sure, because I only read astrology through books and

many many charts. It was never showered upon me as revealed knowledge ;-

)

 

RR

[Guest guest]

Kindly elaborate more on the Special third of Saturn

rishi

 

 

 

, "Rohiniranjan"

<jyotish_vani wrote:

>

> Sridhar, I am not aware of any classical elaborations of why inner

> planets (and lights) have only one full aspect whereas outer

planets

> have two extra or special aspects in addition to the standard

saptam

> drishti.

>

> However, I always thought that the clear division between the outer

and

> inner into the two classes was responsible.

>

> See the outer planets are not bound by the earth-sun axis whereas

the

> inner planets are bound within a narrow perimeter of the sun-earth

axis.

>

> The movement of earth creates the apparent motion of the sun

through

> the 12 rashis (Jyotish has many such apparents phenomena, including

> retrogressions, nodes etc which some people do not pay attention to

in

> their education as a jyotishi or sometimes in their education as

> a "what!").

>

> Venting aside (!), note that mercury is always within 28 degrees of

> the 'sun' (projected earth!) while venus is within 46 degrees or so

of

> the sun (caveat: if you see venus in the fourth house from sun,

> something is weird!).

>

> The smallest or most nearsighted special drishti belongs to saturn,

the

> 3rd drishti. It also has an asymmetrical drishtis as opposed to

jupiter

> or mars (kendra and trikona) but I digress and I sure do not want

to

> irritate anyone's pitta here!

>

> The third drishti can be as close as 31 degrees but more

realistically

> is beyond venuses greatest separation from sun, about 45/46 degrees.

>

> I always thought that the maximum departure of inner planets from

the

> sun had to do with why they were not given special drishtis.

>

> Venus, actually is pretty close to being the contender for a

special

> drishti, because realistically, it could have the third drishti in

some

> cases, for instance if sun was in aries 24 and venus in 5 degrees

> gemini (astronomically possible), there would be a loose third

drishti

> (if saturn were in aries 24, it would be considered to caste a

drishti

> on gemini, by many astrologers, right?). But, it does not caste

that

> 3rd house drishti. Is that somehow tied to the allegory of Venus,

> Shukracharya being one eyed?

>

> I do not know for sure, because I only read astrology through books

and

> many many charts. It was never showered upon me as revealed

knowledge ;-

> )

>

> RR

>

[Guest guest]

If you read Usha-Shashi's take on the third drishti of shani you may

end up with a different view!

 

I am only steering your attention to it not just because of saturn's

third drishti but because of your demonstrated sense for pattern

recognition and identification!

 

Take it or leave it -- what I have noticed in life is that if you

have a significant vocation/profession in this lifetime and ALSO a

coexistent passion for astrology (any kind, even jyotish!) USE the

skills that you have acquired and apply those to jyotish!

 

JYOTISH is not some separate hallowed ground that was made available

to us?

 

JYOTISH is just an extension to the rest of our earthly experience

that was waiting for US to finish whatever else we were focused on

and then turn to it!

 

Like the childhood sweetheart ...

The person is gone, but the mission remains!

 

Does this makes sense to anyone? Please do not post your reply but

just get going ...!

 

Unconditional Love to all of you --

 

Rohini Devi

 

 

 

 

 

 

, "rishi_2000in"

<rishi_2000in wrote:

>

> Kindly elaborate more on the Special third of Saturn

> rishi

>

>

>

> , "Rohiniranjan"

> <jyotish_vani@> wrote:

> >

> > Sridhar, I am not aware of any classical elaborations of why

inner

> > planets (and lights) have only one full aspect whereas outer

> planets

> > have two extra or special aspects in addition to the standard

> saptam

> > drishti.

> >

> > However, I always thought that the clear division between the

outer

> and

> > inner into the two classes was responsible.

> >

> > See the outer planets are not bound by the earth-sun axis whereas

> the

> > inner planets are bound within a narrow perimeter of the sun-

earth

> axis.

> >

> > The movement of earth creates the apparent motion of the sun

> through

> > the 12 rashis (Jyotish has many such apparents phenomena,

including

> > retrogressions, nodes etc which some people do not pay attention

to

> in

> > their education as a jyotishi or sometimes in their education as

> > a "what!").

> >

> > Venting aside (!), note that mercury is always within 28 degrees

of

> > the 'sun' (projected earth!) while venus is within 46 degrees or

so

> of

> > the sun (caveat: if you see venus in the fourth house from sun,

> > something is weird!).

> >

> > The smallest or most nearsighted special drishti belongs to

saturn,

> the

> > 3rd drishti. It also has an asymmetrical drishtis as opposed to

> jupiter

> > or mars (kendra and trikona) but I digress and I sure do not want

> to

> > irritate anyone's pitta here!

> >

> > The third drishti can be as close as 31 degrees but more

> realistically

> > is beyond venuses greatest separation from sun, about 45/46

degrees.

> >

> > I always thought that the maximum departure of inner planets from

> the

> > sun had to do with why they were not given special drishtis.

> >

> > Venus, actually is pretty close to being the contender for a

> special

> > drishti, because realistically, it could have the third drishti

in

> some

> > cases, for instance if sun was in aries 24 and venus in 5 degrees

> > gemini (astronomically possible), there would be a loose third

> drishti

> > (if saturn were in aries 24, it would be considered to caste a

> drishti

> > on gemini, by many astrologers, right?). But, it does not caste

> that

> > 3rd house drishti. Is that somehow tied to the allegory of Venus,

> > Shukracharya being one eyed?

> >

> > I do not know for sure, because I only read astrology through

books

> and

> > many many charts. It was never showered upon me as revealed

> knowledge ;-

> > )

> >

> > RR

> >

>