Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Dear friends, Since last 10 years I have never purchased any astrological magazine, primarily due to lack of time, and secondarily due to desire of doing only targetted reading. Today I required some change against Rs.500 Note I was having, and happened to buy one Magazine, and was blessed. For a long time I have been a lone crusader on The Astrology Forums, trying to bring to notice,the importance, in minds of most astrologers that its always good to view and read any chart from the Bhava Chalit too. I have also mantained that many Yogas like Pancha Mahapurusha, Gajakesari do not work in full if not present in Bhava Chalit too. Also have pointed in my analysis that I view aspects from the Raashi chart only. All the above, is confirmed by The Editorial Message in March 2007 issue of "The Astrological Magazine " published by respected Gayatri Dev Vasudev . I wish all the interested readers get an opportunity to read this. Best wishes, Bhaskar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Bhaskar ji, This is interesting, since in the February 2007 issue in Rasi and Bhava, Not Rasi or Bhava the statements indicate differently. For example on page 164: A yoga that is not produced in rasi cannot be said to be produced in bhava. The results of the Yoga can be experienced only if the yoga occurs in the rasi chart [stated in the specific context of gajakeshari yoga]. And on page 165 under the caption of Aspects from Rasi Chart, Gaytri ji wrote: For all practical purposes and this is based on our humble experience ... the aspects are to be taken only according to the Rasi chart...] This was followed by an example using mars and saturn which removes any misunderstanding if still exists. She recommended the use of Rasi NOT Bhava. And yet the stance changed completely as you mentioned, in the March issue! Hmmm... RR , "Bhaskar" <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Dear friends, > > Since last 10 years I have never purchased any astrological > magazine, primarily due to lack of time, and secondarily due > to desire of doing only targetted reading. Today I > required some change against Rs.500 Note I was having, > and happened to buy one Magazine, and was blessed. > > For a long time I have been a lone crusader on The > Astrology Forums, trying to bring to notice,the importance, > in minds of most astrologers that its always good to > view and read any chart from the Bhava Chalit too. > I have also mantained that many Yogas like Pancha Mahapurusha, > Gajakesari do not work in full if not present in Bhava Chalit too. > Also have pointed in my analysis that I view aspects from the > Raashi chart only. > > All the above, is confirmed by The Editorial Message in > March 2007 issue of "The Astrological Magazine " > published by respected Gayatri Dev Vasudev . > I wish all the interested readers get an opportunity to read this. > > Best wishes, > Bhaskar. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Shri RRji, The stance has not been changed. I have not read the February issue. I too have mentioned Raashi and Bhava. A Yoga which is not produced in Rashi cannot be produced in Bhava ,thats right, we are not talking of this, we say that if the Yoga is present in the Raashi chart, but not present in the Bhava ,then not neceessarily would that Yoga fructify. And I also said that aspects have to be viewed from Raashi only. So theres been no change actually if what I have written is mentioned in the February issue too. Bhaskar. , "Rohiniranjan" <jyotish_vani wrote: > > Bhaskar ji, > > This is interesting, since in the February 2007 issue in Rasi and > Bhava, Not Rasi or Bhava the statements indicate differently. For > example on page 164: A yoga that is not produced in rasi cannot be > said to be produced in bhava. The results of the Yoga can be > experienced only if the yoga occurs in the rasi chart [stated in the > specific context of gajakeshari yoga]. > > And on page 165 under the caption of Aspects from Rasi Chart, Gaytri > ji wrote: For all practical purposes and this is based on our humble > experience ... the aspects are to be taken only according to the Rasi > chart...] This was followed by an example using mars and saturn which > removes any misunderstanding if still exists. She recommended the use > of Rasi NOT Bhava. > > And yet the stance changed completely as you mentioned, in the March > issue! Hmmm... > > RR > > > , "Bhaskar" > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > Dear friends, > > > > Since last 10 years I have never purchased any astrological > > magazine, primarily due to lack of time, and secondarily due > > to desire of doing only targetted reading. Today I > > required some change against Rs.500 Note I was having, > > and happened to buy one Magazine, and was blessed. > > > > For a long time I have been a lone crusader on The > > Astrology Forums, trying to bring to notice,the importance, > > in minds of most astrologers that its always good to > > view and read any chart from the Bhava Chalit too. > > I have also mantained that many Yogas like Pancha Mahapurusha, > > Gajakesari do not work in full if not present in Bhava Chalit too. > > Also have pointed in my analysis that I view aspects from the > > Raashi chart only. > > > > All the above, is confirmed by The Editorial Message in > > March 2007 issue of "The Astrological Magazine " > > published by respected Gayatri Dev Vasudev . > > I wish all the interested readers get an opportunity to read this. > > > > Best wishes, > > Bhaskar. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Dear Bhaskar, This is a beautiful example of reality as it unfolds for most of us jyotishis! You have read the part two of the article in A.M. March 2007 which you just happened to acquire after a long time just because you needed change! And I just happened to read part one of that same editorial in the February issue and simply because the issue was gifted to me, and just after my 2006 subscription expired (after nearly 20+ years of non-subscription!)! The right thing to do to resolve this quandary would be for you to read the February issue and for me to read the March issue! Neither of the above may happen, but does this make sense, what I am suggesting? I pray and hope that it does!! RR , "Bhaskar" <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Shri RRji, > > The stance has not been changed. > > I have not read the February issue. > > I too have mentioned Raashi and Bhava. > A Yoga which is not produced in Rashi cannot be produced > in Bhava ,thats right, we are not talking > of this, we say that if the Yoga is present in the Raashi > chart, but not present in the Bhava ,then not neceessarily > would that Yoga fructify. > > And I also said that aspects have to be viewed from > Raashi only. > > So theres been no change actually if what I > have written is mentioned in the February > issue too. > > Bhaskar. > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > Bhaskar ji, > > > > This is interesting, since in the February 2007 issue in Rasi and > > Bhava, Not Rasi or Bhava the statements indicate differently. For > > example on page 164: A yoga that is not produced in rasi cannot be > > said to be produced in bhava. The results of the Yoga can be > > experienced only if the yoga occurs in the rasi chart [stated in > the > > specific context of gajakeshari yoga]. > > > > And on page 165 under the caption of Aspects from Rasi Chart, > Gaytri > > ji wrote: For all practical purposes and this is based on our > humble > > experience ... the aspects are to be taken only according to the > Rasi > > chart...] This was followed by an example using mars and saturn > which > > removes any misunderstanding if still exists. She recommended the > use > > of Rasi NOT Bhava. > > > > And yet the stance changed completely as you mentioned, in the > March > > issue! Hmmm... > > > > RR > > > > > > , "Bhaskar" > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear friends, > > > > > > Since last 10 years I have never purchased any astrological > > > magazine, primarily due to lack of time, and secondarily due > > > to desire of doing only targetted reading. Today I > > > required some change against Rs.500 Note I was having, > > > and happened to buy one Magazine, and was blessed. > > > > > > For a long time I have been a lone crusader on The > > > Astrology Forums, trying to bring to notice,the importance, > > > in minds of most astrologers that its always good to > > > view and read any chart from the Bhava Chalit too. > > > I have also mantained that many Yogas like Pancha Mahapurusha, > > > Gajakesari do not work in full if not present in Bhava Chalit too. > > > Also have pointed in my analysis that I view aspects from the > > > Raashi chart only. > > > > > > All the above, is confirmed by The Editorial Message in > > > March 2007 issue of "The Astrological Magazine " > > > published by respected Gayatri Dev Vasudev . > > > I wish all the interested readers get an opportunity to read this. > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Shri RRji, Sir Who has time to watch the world go by ? We do not have time to even read our families charts properly, then who is going to search for old issue and read ? For me this is no issue(Quandary) at all to spend my energies and time for. I think what You are saying is that in the Februray issue (Monthly magazine) something else is written. So be it then. Kind regards, Bhaskar. , "Rohiniranjan" <jyotish_vani wrote: > > Dear Bhaskar, > > This is a beautiful example of reality as it unfolds for most of us > jyotishis! > > You have read the part two of the article in A.M. March 2007 which > you just happened to acquire after a long time just because you > needed change! > > And I just happened to read part one of that same editorial in the > February issue and simply because the issue was gifted to me, and > just after my 2006 subscription expired (after nearly 20+ years of > non-subscription!)! > > The right thing to do to resolve this quandary would be for you to > read the February issue and for me to read the March issue! > > Neither of the above may happen, but does this make sense, what I am > suggesting? I pray and hope that it does!! > > RR > > , "Bhaskar" > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > Shri RRji, > > > > The stance has not been changed. > > > > I have not read the February issue. > > > > I too have mentioned Raashi and Bhava. > > A Yoga which is not produced in Rashi cannot be produced > > in Bhava ,thats right, we are not talking > > of this, we say that if the Yoga is present in the Raashi > > chart, but not present in the Bhava ,then not neceessarily > > would that Yoga fructify. > > > > And I also said that aspects have to be viewed from > > Raashi only. > > > > So theres been no change actually if what I > > have written is mentioned in the February > > issue too. > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > Bhaskar ji, > > > > > > This is interesting, since in the February 2007 issue in Rasi and > > > Bhava, Not Rasi or Bhava the statements indicate differently. For > > > example on page 164: A yoga that is not produced in rasi cannot > be > > > said to be produced in bhava. The results of the Yoga can be > > > experienced only if the yoga occurs in the rasi chart [stated in > > the > > > specific context of gajakeshari yoga]. > > > > > > And on page 165 under the caption of Aspects from Rasi Chart, > > Gaytri > > > ji wrote: For all practical purposes and this is based on our > > humble > > > experience ... the aspects are to be taken only according to the > > Rasi > > > chart...] This was followed by an example using mars and saturn > > which > > > removes any misunderstanding if still exists. She recommended the > > use > > > of Rasi NOT Bhava. > > > > > > And yet the stance changed completely as you mentioned, in the > > March > > > issue! Hmmm... > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > , "Bhaskar" > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear friends, > > > > > > > > Since last 10 years I have never purchased any astrological > > > > magazine, primarily due to lack of time, and secondarily due > > > > to desire of doing only targetted reading. Today I > > > > required some change against Rs.500 Note I was having, > > > > and happened to buy one Magazine, and was blessed. > > > > > > > > For a long time I have been a lone crusader on The > > > > Astrology Forums, trying to bring to notice,the importance, > > > > in minds of most astrologers that its always good to > > > > view and read any chart from the Bhava Chalit too. > > > > I have also mantained that many Yogas like Pancha Mahapurusha, > > > > Gajakesari do not work in full if not present in Bhava Chalit > too. > > > > Also have pointed in my analysis that I view aspects from the > > > > Raashi chart only. > > > > > > > > All the above, is confirmed by The Editorial Message in > > > > March 2007 issue of "The Astrological Magazine " > > > > published by respected Gayatri Dev Vasudev . > > > > I wish all the interested readers get an opportunity to read > this. > > > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Bhaskar ji, Typically I would let it pass but I think I should clear the air a bit to avoid man-mutaw and misunderstanding. Firstly, please note that I was not trying to point out any deficiency in your thinking about bhava or rashi or even trying to point out a possible mistake in the general theory about bhava or rashi. However, since you were using the March article as some sort of corroboration that your position was correct, I was just expressing my astonishment at two portions of the same editorial published over two issues giving so different opinions. However, I can see that you were just making that comment in passing and really would rather not be bothered to be disturbed or whatever you write here to be commented upon or responded to, particularly if it does not coincide with your perception of reality. I am fine with that, Peace, RR , "Bhaskar" <bhaskar_jyotish wrote: > > Shri RRji, > > Sir Who has time to watch the world go by ? > We do not have time to even read our families > charts properly, then who is going to search for > old issue and read ? For me this is no > issue(Quandary) at all to spend my energies and > time for. > > I think what You are saying is that in the Februray > issue (Monthly magazine) something else is written. > So be it then. > > Kind regards, > Bhaskar. > > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > Dear Bhaskar, > > > > This is a beautiful example of reality as it unfolds for most of us > > jyotishis! > > > > You have read the part two of the article in A.M. March 2007 which > > you just happened to acquire after a long time just because you > > needed change! > > > > And I just happened to read part one of that same editorial in the > > February issue and simply because the issue was gifted to me, and > > just after my 2006 subscription expired (after nearly 20+ years of > > non-subscription!)! > > > > The right thing to do to resolve this quandary would be for you to > > read the February issue and for me to read the March issue! > > > > Neither of the above may happen, but does this make sense, what I > am > > suggesting? I pray and hope that it does!! > > > > RR > > > > , "Bhaskar" > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > Shri RRji, > > > > > > The stance has not been changed. > > > > > > I have not read the February issue. > > > > > > I too have mentioned Raashi and Bhava. > > > A Yoga which is not produced in Rashi cannot be produced > > > in Bhava ,thats right, we are not talking > > > of this, we say that if the Yoga is present in the Raashi > > > chart, but not present in the Bhava ,then not neceessarily > > > would that Yoga fructify. > > > > > > And I also said that aspects have to be viewed from > > > Raashi only. > > > > > > So theres been no change actually if what I > > > have written is mentioned in the February > > > issue too. > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Bhaskar ji, > > > > > > > > This is interesting, since in the February 2007 issue in Rasi > and > > > > Bhava, Not Rasi or Bhava the statements indicate differently. > For > > > > example on page 164: A yoga that is not produced in rasi cannot > > be > > > > said to be produced in bhava. The results of the Yoga can be > > > > experienced only if the yoga occurs in the rasi chart [stated > in > > > the > > > > specific context of gajakeshari yoga]. > > > > > > > > And on page 165 under the caption of Aspects from Rasi Chart, > > > Gaytri > > > > ji wrote: For all practical purposes and this is based on our > > > humble > > > > experience ... the aspects are to be taken only according to > the > > > Rasi > > > > chart...] This was followed by an example using mars and saturn > > > which > > > > removes any misunderstanding if still exists. She recommended > the > > > use > > > > of Rasi NOT Bhava. > > > > > > > > And yet the stance changed completely as you mentioned, in the > > > March > > > > issue! Hmmm... > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Bhaskar" > > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear friends, > > > > > > > > > > Since last 10 years I have never purchased any astrological > > > > > magazine, primarily due to lack of time, and secondarily due > > > > > to desire of doing only targetted reading. Today I > > > > > required some change against Rs.500 Note I was having, > > > > > and happened to buy one Magazine, and was blessed. > > > > > > > > > > For a long time I have been a lone crusader on The > > > > > Astrology Forums, trying to bring to notice,the importance, > > > > > in minds of most astrologers that its always good to > > > > > view and read any chart from the Bhava Chalit too. > > > > > I have also mantained that many Yogas like Pancha Mahapurusha, > > > > > Gajakesari do not work in full if not present in Bhava Chalit > > too. > > > > > Also have pointed in my analysis that I view aspects from the > > > > > Raashi chart only. > > > > > > > > > > All the above, is confirmed by The Editorial Message in > > > > > March 2007 issue of "The Astrological Magazine " > > > > > published by respected Gayatri Dev Vasudev . > > > > > I wish all the interested readers get an opportunity to read > > this. > > > > > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2007 Report Share Posted February 23, 2007 Shri RRji, //and really would rather not be bothered to be disturbed or whatever you write here to be commented upon or responded to,particularly if it does not coincide with your perception of reality.// Its not that.I would rather not argue with seniors here unless very much compelling, or place lengthy discussions on board to prove my point, because each has his own level of perception and reality, and mines, works for me, so why to impose on You or anyone else. My posting on the Bhava and Raashi matter has always been genuinely for educative purposes to the budding astrologers, who may not have seen this side of the door, just like I had not seen for major part of my astrological career. Therefore all my attempts at this, has been uptil now for general good of these astrologers, and not for any type of persuasion to join my league of approach unnecessarily without weight. Your last post was understood by me, what You wished to convey, it was just my style of writing which may have made you think that theres any mis-understanding. Sir I have no man-mutav at all with you, and mantain my respect for you, and your forthright style of writing which matches mines, on several occassions, with a difference that Your expressions are refined, while mines not. regards, Bhaskar. , "Rohiniranjan" <jyotish_vani wrote: > > Bhaskar ji, > > Typically I would let it pass but I think I should clear the air a > bit to avoid man-mutaw and misunderstanding. > > Firstly, please note that I was not trying to point out any > deficiency in your thinking about bhava or rashi or even trying to > point out a possible mistake in the general theory about bhava or > rashi. However, since you were using the March article as some sort > of corroboration that your position was correct, I was just > expressing my astonishment at two portions of the same editorial > published over two issues giving so different opinions. > > However, I can see that you were just making that comment in passing > and really would rather not be bothered to be disturbed or whatever > you write here to be commented upon or responded to, particularly if > it does not coincide with your perception of reality. > > I am fine with that, > > Peace, > > RR > > , "Bhaskar" > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > Shri RRji, > > > > Sir Who has time to watch the world go by ? > > We do not have time to even read our families > > charts properly, then who is going to search for > > old issue and read ? For me this is no > > issue(Quandary) at all to spend my energies and > > time for. > > > > I think what You are saying is that in the Februray > > issue (Monthly magazine) something else is written. > > So be it then. > > > > Kind regards, > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Bhaskar, > > > > > > This is a beautiful example of reality as it unfolds for most of > us > > > jyotishis! > > > > > > You have read the part two of the article in A.M. March 2007 > which > > > you just happened to acquire after a long time just because you > > > needed change! > > > > > > And I just happened to read part one of that same editorial in > the > > > February issue and simply because the issue was gifted to me, and > > > just after my 2006 subscription expired (after nearly 20+ years > of > > > non-subscription!)! > > > > > > The right thing to do to resolve this quandary would be for you > to > > > read the February issue and for me to read the March issue! > > > > > > Neither of the above may happen, but does this make sense, what I > > am > > > suggesting? I pray and hope that it does!! > > > > > > RR > > > > > > , "Bhaskar" > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Shri RRji, > > > > > > > > The stance has not been changed. > > > > > > > > I have not read the February issue. > > > > > > > > I too have mentioned Raashi and Bhava. > > > > A Yoga which is not produced in Rashi cannot be produced > > > > in Bhava ,thats right, we are not talking > > > > of this, we say that if the Yoga is present in the Raashi > > > > chart, but not present in the Bhava ,then not neceessarily > > > > would that Yoga fructify. > > > > > > > > And I also said that aspects have to be viewed from > > > > Raashi only. > > > > > > > > So theres been no change actually if what I > > > > have written is mentioned in the February > > > > issue too. > > > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Rohiniranjan" > > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Bhaskar ji, > > > > > > > > > > This is interesting, since in the February 2007 issue in Rasi > > and > > > > > Bhava, Not Rasi or Bhava the statements indicate differently. > > For > > > > > example on page 164: A yoga that is not produced in rasi > cannot > > > be > > > > > said to be produced in bhava. The results of the Yoga can be > > > > > experienced only if the yoga occurs in the rasi chart [stated > > in > > > > the > > > > > specific context of gajakeshari yoga]. > > > > > > > > > > And on page 165 under the caption of Aspects from Rasi Chart, > > > > Gaytri > > > > > ji wrote: For all practical purposes and this is based on our > > > > humble > > > > > experience ... the aspects are to be taken only according to > > the > > > > Rasi > > > > > chart...] This was followed by an example using mars and > saturn > > > > which > > > > > removes any misunderstanding if still exists. She recommended > > the > > > > use > > > > > of Rasi NOT Bhava. > > > > > > > > > > And yet the stance changed completely as you mentioned, in > the > > > > March > > > > > issue! Hmmm... > > > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "Bhaskar" > > > > > <bhaskar_jyotish@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear friends, > > > > > > > > > > > > Since last 10 years I have never purchased any astrological > > > > > > magazine, primarily due to lack of time, and secondarily > due > > > > > > to desire of doing only targetted reading. Today I > > > > > > required some change against Rs.500 Note I was having, > > > > > > and happened to buy one Magazine, and was blessed. > > > > > > > > > > > > For a long time I have been a lone crusader on The > > > > > > Astrology Forums, trying to bring to notice,the importance, > > > > > > in minds of most astrologers that its always good to > > > > > > view and read any chart from the Bhava Chalit too. > > > > > > I have also mantained that many Yogas like Pancha > Mahapurusha, > > > > > > Gajakesari do not work in full if not present in Bhava > Chalit > > > too. > > > > > > Also have pointed in my analysis that I view aspects from > the > > > > > > Raashi chart only. > > > > > > > > > > > > All the above, is confirmed by The Editorial Message in > > > > > > March 2007 issue of "The Astrological Magazine " > > > > > > published by respected Gayatri Dev Vasudev . > > > > > > I wish all the interested readers get an opportunity to > read > > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > Bhaskar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.