Horoscope of Rama

June 7, 2006

Horoscope of Rama

-----------------

In Southern version of the Vatmiki Ramayana there is a sloka that

describes the horoscope of Rama. The sloka is given below –

Tatascha dwadese mase chaitre navamike tithou

Nakshatre aditidaivtye swocha samsteshu panchasu

Graheshu karkate lagne vakpatavinduna saha

Prodyaname jagannatham sarvaloka namaskritam

(Vatmiki Ramayana)

Meaning, 12 months after (the Homa), in the month of Chaitra, in

Navami Thithi and Punarvasu nakshatra, while 5 planets were exalted,

in Cancer lagna Moon was with Mercury, the lord to whom everyone bows

took birth.

There are so many controversies associated with this sloka, let us

list them.

• This sloka mentions Lagna and Cancer sign, which indicates

that normal astrology with 12 signs and 27 Nakshatras was there in

use even at Ramayana period. But in the whole of Vedic and Epic

literature we can not find the mention of 12 Signs or any of there

names such as `Mesha', `Vrishabha' etc, and never the mention of

Lagna as something related to the sign. So how can we believe that

this sloka is authentic?

• There are many (at least four) versions of Vatmiki Ramayana,

out of them only the Southern version (Dakshinatya patam) contains

this sloka. In this condition how can we believe that this sloka is

authentic?

• Sun is exalted means it is in 10 deg Aries. Mo in Punarvasu

means it is between 80 deg 00 min and 93 deg 20 min. If we consider

that Mo is in Cancer then Mo is between 90 deg 00 min and 93 deg 20

min. Tithi is (Mo-Su)/15. Here if Su is in 10 deg Aries and Mo is in

93 deg 20 min then, the difference is 83 deg 20 min.

• i.e. Tithi = (83 deg 20 min)/(15x60) = (5000 min)/(15*60) =

5.5555…. = 6th Tithi, which is Shashti ! How Vatmiki make such a

gross mistake?! Let us think that Su was in the first deg of Aries,

taking the maximum allowable distance for Punarvasu Nakshatra, i.e.

93 deg 20 min, then – Tithi = (93 deg 20 min)/(15x60) = 6.2222222………

= 7th Tithi, which is Saptami ! In essence Punarvasu Nakshatra and

Navami Tithi can not coincide, while Su is in Aries. In this

condition how can we believe that this sloka is authentic?

• The above condition forces us to think that either Su is in

Pisces or that Tithi is not Navami or that Nakshatra is not

Punarvasu. In Pisces Su is not exalted, and the position of Su is not

explicitly mentioned (though indirectly mentioned) in the sloka. So I

take it as a choice. But this not the case with Navami Tithi and

Punarvasu Nakshatra, they are explicitly mentioned in the sloka and

we have no right to change it. So can I assume that Su is in Pisces

and proceed further? To what extend this approach can be accepted?

Another point is that the sloka explicitly mentions the month as

Chaitra, so Su should be in Aries, what can I do about it?

Ok. That is enough. Now let us try to understand what the sloka says.

The sloka gives the following Planetary position –

+--------------+

| | | | |

| Ve | Su | | |

| | | | |

|-----------+-----------------------+-----------|

| | | Mo Me |Mo

| | | |

| | | As Ju |

| | | |

|-----------| Rasi |-----------|

| | | |

| Ma | | |

| | | |

|-----------+-----------------------+-----------|

| | | | |

| | | Sa | |

| | | | |

+--------------+

Tithi = Navami Nakshatra = Punarvasu Month = Chaitra

The position of Ra and Ke is not mentioned, and 5 planets are in

their respective sign of exaltation. But by now we know that it is

an impossible combination.

If Mo is in the first, Navamsa of Cancer, then Mo is in Vargottama.

Shall we take it as equivalent to exaltation? " Vargottame swacha

phalam vidadyal " says Varaha hora. Meaning, if the graha is in

Vargottama the results produced by it would be equivalent to the

graha is exaltation. Ok. Then we consider Mo as one of the five

exalted planets, and place Mo in Pisces. What else can we do?!

Panchaga (Tithi, Karana, Vara, Nakshatra, Nityayoga) were so popular

in those days and so we can not assume any error in calculating them.

If Su is in the last quarter of Pi (let us assume, 325 deg 00 min),

then,

Tithi = (360 x 60 + (93 x 60)+20) – (325 x 60) = 8.55555……. = Navami

Tithi. That seems to be ok, since the Navami Tithi and Punarvasu

conditions are satisfied. But the problem is, if Su is in the last

Nakshatra pada of Pisces then Su is also in Vargottama. If we

considered Mo in Vargottama as exalted then we can say that Su in

Vargottama can not be considered as Vargottama. That essentially

means that 4 planets (Ve, Ma, Ju, Sa) are exalted and Su and Mo

should be considered exalted, since they are in Vargottama. Thus we

end up with 6 exalted grahas, contradicting the statement in the

sloka!

I drop it here, for others to ponder. I would assume that this

sloka is not authentic, and is included by some one else into the

southern version of Ramayana, and it is not at all a sloka written by

Vatmiki. And thus assuming the existence of Lagna (thus house system)

and Cancer sign (thus other signs as well), is wrong. Assuming the

existence of normal astrology in Ramayana period solely based on this

sloka is a pit fall which we should avoid.

P.S. Manipulated slokas are one of the greatest hindrances in the

study of literary history of astrology. While being proud of Ancient

Indian heritage we should also be sincere enough to drop the

inconsistent erroneous info as well.

Love,

Sreenadh

June 7, 2006

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Horoscope of Rama

> -----------------

> In Southern version of the Vatmiki Ramayana there is a sloka that

> describes the horoscope of Rama. The sloka is given below –

>

> Tatascha dwadese mase chaitre navamike tithou

> Nakshatre aditidaivtye swocha samsteshu panchasu

> Graheshu karkate lagne vakpatavinduna saha

> Prodyaname jagannatham sarvaloka namaskritam

> (Vatmiki Ramayana)

> Meaning, 12 months after (the Homa), in the month of Chaitra, in

> Navami Thithi and Punarvasu nakshatra, while 5 planets were exalted,

> in Cancer lagna Moon was with Mercury, the lord to whom everyone bows

> took birth.

>

> There are so many controversies associated with this sloka, let us

> list them.

> • This sloka mentions Lagna and Cancer sign, which indicates

> that normal astrology with 12 signs and 27 Nakshatras was there in

> use even at Ramayana period. But in the whole of Vedic and Epic

> literature we can not find the mention of 12 Signs or any of there

> names such as `Mesha', `Vrishabha' etc, and never the mention of

> Lagna as something related to the sign. So how can we believe that

> this sloka is authentic?

> • There are many (at least four) versions of Vatmiki Ramayana,

> out of them only the Southern version (Dakshinatya patam) contains

> this sloka. In this condition how can we believe that this sloka is

> authentic?

> • Sun is exalted means it is in 10 deg Aries. Mo in Punarvasu

> means it is between 80 deg 00 min and 93 deg 20 min. If we consider

> that Mo is in Cancer then Mo is between 90 deg 00 min and 93 deg 20

> min. Tithi is (Mo-Su)/15. Here if Su is in 10 deg Aries and Mo is in

> 93 deg 20 min then, the difference is 83 deg 20 min.

> • i.e. Tithi = (83 deg 20 min)/(15x60) = (5000 min)/(15*60) =

> 5.5555…. = 6th Tithi, which is Shashti ! How Vatmiki make such a

> gross mistake?! Let us think that Su was in the first deg of Aries,

> taking the maximum allowable distance for Punarvasu Nakshatra, i.e.

> 93 deg 20 min, then – Tithi = (93 deg 20 min)/(15x60) = 6.2222222………

> = 7th Tithi, which is Saptami ! In essence Punarvasu Nakshatra and

> Navami Tithi can not coincide, while Su is in Aries. In this

> condition how can we believe that this sloka is authentic?

> • The above condition forces us to think that either Su is in

> Pisces or that Tithi is not Navami or that Nakshatra is not

> Punarvasu. In Pisces Su is not exalted, and the position of Su is not

> explicitly mentioned (though indirectly mentioned) in the sloka. So I

> take it as a choice. But this not the case with Navami Tithi and

> Punarvasu Nakshatra, they are explicitly mentioned in the sloka and

> we have no right to change it. So can I assume that Su is in Pisces

> and proceed further? To what extend this approach can be accepted?

> Another point is that the sloka explicitly mentions the month as

> Chaitra, so Su should be in Aries, what can I do about it?

> Ok. That is enough. Now let us try to understand what the sloka says.

> The sloka gives the following Planetary position –

>

> +--------------+

> | | | | |

> | Ve | Su | | |

> | | | | |

> |-----------+-----------------------+-----------|

> | | | Mo Me |Mo

> | | | |

> | | | As Ju |

> | | | |

> |-----------| Rasi |-----------|

> | | | |

> | Ma | | |

> | | | |

> |-----------+-----------------------+-----------|

> | | | | |

> | | | Sa | |

> | | | | |

> +--------------+

>

> Tithi = Navami Nakshatra = Punarvasu Month = Chaitra

>

> The position of Ra and Ke is not mentioned, and 5 planets are in

> their respective sign of exaltation. But by now we know that it is

> an impossible combination.

> If Mo is in the first, Navamsa of Cancer, then Mo is in Vargottama.

> Shall we take it as equivalent to exaltation? " Vargottame swacha

> phalam vidadyal " says Varaha hora. Meaning, if the graha is in

> Vargottama the results produced by it would be equivalent to the

> graha is exaltation. Ok. Then we consider Mo as one of the five

> exalted planets, and place Mo in Pisces. What else can we do?!

> Panchaga (Tithi, Karana, Vara, Nakshatra, Nityayoga) were so popular

> in those days and so we can not assume any error in calculating them.

> If Su is in the last quarter of Pi (let us assume, 325 deg 00 min),

> then,

> Tithi = (360 x 60 + (93 x 60)+20) – (325 x 60) = 8.55555……. = Navami

> Tithi. That seems to be ok, since the Navami Tithi and Punarvasu

> conditions are satisfied. But the problem is, if Su is in the last

> Nakshatra pada of Pisces then Su is also in Vargottama. If we

> considered Mo in Vargottama as exalted then we can say that Su in

> Vargottama can not be considered as Vargottama. That essentially

> means that 4 planets (Ve, Ma, Ju, Sa) are exalted and Su and Mo

> should be considered exalted, since they are in Vargottama. Thus we

> end up with 6 exalted grahas, contradicting the statement in the

> sloka!

> I drop it here, for others to ponder. I would assume that this

> sloka is not authentic, and is included by some one else into the

> southern version of Ramayana, and it is not at all a sloka written by

> Vatmiki. And thus assuming the existence of Lagna (thus house system)

> and Cancer sign (thus other signs as well), is wrong. Assuming the

> existence of normal astrology in Ramayana period solely based on this

> sloka is a pit fall which we should avoid.

>

> P.S. Manipulated slokas are one of the greatest hindrances in the

> study of literary history of astrology. While being proud of Ancient

> Indian heritage we should also be sincere enough to drop the

> inconsistent erroneous info as well.

>

> Love,

> Sreenadh

Hi Sree,

While it was not over exactly this matter, I do remember quizzing my

guru on where was the reference in classics to each of the 27

nakshatras being equi-sized. And he wrote the following:

[Cite]

" The naksatras do not have any clear boundaries in the sky and for

this reason the yoga tara (certain stars) identifying them have been

earmarked by the seers. The mathematical derivation of span of

nakshatra is an approximation based on division of circle by 27 and

then accomodating a portion for abhijjit - you know all this. Now look

at the motion of the Moon through the zodiac. Its motion is not

uniform and speed is also varying. Further, we are looking at the Moon

which is very close to the earth in the backdrop of the naksatra which

are very far. So, if we consider the spped of the Moon then the span

of the naksatra shall not be the same and some will be longer span

than others. We are also aware that one third of the nakshatra give

the results when the Moon is in it, while another third gives when the

Moon has lest and the last one third give results just before the Moon

arrives in them...

Just bear in mind that the span of the naksatra has been made equal

for mathematical purposes whereas in reality it is not so. For example

mathematically I am born in xxxxxxxxx nakshatra but in reality this

can be yyyyyyyy.

Sorry if I have added to the confusion... but from the confusion can a

clear picture emerge. Better still, forget these things for now. "

[End cite]

I haven't forgotten, though, not least because I've not gotten the

final word on it.

Not suggesting that the answer answer lies here but it might just

too... what do you think?

+++

June 7, 2006

Dear Verna ji,

As your guru said:

==>

Better still, forget these things (read the stupidities he said) for

now.

<==

==>

> I do remember quizzing my

> guru on where was the reference in classics to each of the 27

> nakshatras being equi-sized.

<==

It is available in most of the sidhantic texts like " Surya sidhanta " .

As far as the first reference of the sky into 27 divisions and 12

signs are concerned, it is there in the oldest Rishi hora of

astrology as per Arsha school (i.e. Skanda Hora) itself.

The sloka starts like this -

" Satyenotambhitam chakramupanalambe nabhastale

Jyotishamekamadharamastita parivartata.......

.............................................

Prajapatyaschatushpadyasteshu vai saptavimsati

Akhnati tascha sambhooya navabhir navabhiH padaiH

Rasayo nama geeyante tadavahana bhoomayaH

dwadesavadhikerasya prananam sapta vimsatiH "

Meaning, Without any support the wheel which form the base for the

movements of grahas (and all luminaries) are placed. It constantly

rotates (due to the revolution of earth). [The Rasichakra or Zodiac

is mentioned here]. The 27 daughters of Braha (Nakshatras), with

their 4 feets each (A sign is divided into 9 Nakshatra padas) strikes

this wheel. The place where daughters of Brahma, starting with

Aswini, strike in groups with their 9 feets (A sign is divided into 9

Nakshatra padas) is called a Rasi (Sign). There are 12 Signs, and the

lengh of each min (Remember the Degree-min division) is 27 breaths.

[Think why Chandrahari is after the rythem of breath].

Doesn't it all reflect the systematic understanding about Signs,

Nakshatras, 21600 min that forms the total Rasichakra, Knowledge

about Deg-Min division of Rasichakra etc?

Is that not enough? There could be many more. But this is what

comes to mind now.

Skanda hora also says-

" Tasya samstanamascharyamrishaya parimarginaH

Prastita na nivartante sartbhi kalpalekshanaiH "

Meaning, It (This Rasichakra) is wonderful, and the Rishi's who

started in search of it actual shape and infulence, is not reaching a

total conclusion even after a long period (a Kalpa).

So beware you, me and all who are after astrology. It is a really

dangerous subject. )

Love,

Sreenadh

, " vernalagnia "

<vernalagnia wrote:

>

> , " Sreenadh "

> <sreesog@> wrote:

> >

> > Horoscope of Rama

> > -----------------

> > In Southern version of the Vatmiki Ramayana there is a sloka that

> > describes the horoscope of Rama. The sloka is given below –

> >

> > Tatascha dwadese mase chaitre navamike tithou

> > Nakshatre aditidaivtye swocha samsteshu panchasu

> > Graheshu karkate lagne vakpatavinduna saha

> > Prodyaname jagannatham sarvaloka namaskritam

> > (Vatmiki Ramayana)

> > Meaning, 12 months after (the Homa), in the month of Chaitra, in

> > Navami Thithi and Punarvasu nakshatra, while 5 planets were

exalted,

> > in Cancer lagna Moon was with Mercury, the lord to whom everyone

bows

> > took birth.

> >

> > There are so many controversies associated with this sloka, let

us

> > list them.

> > • This sloka mentions Lagna and Cancer sign, which indicates

> > that normal astrology with 12 signs and 27 Nakshatras was there

in

> > use even at Ramayana period. But in the whole of Vedic and Epic

> > literature we can not find the mention of 12 Signs or any of

there

> > names such as `Mesha', `Vrishabha' etc, and never the mention of

> > Lagna as something related to the sign. So how can we believe

that

> > this sloka is authentic?

> > • There are many (at least four) versions of Vatmiki Ramayana,

> > out of them only the Southern version (Dakshinatya patam)

contains

> > this sloka. In this condition how can we believe that this sloka

is

> > authentic?

> > • Sun is exalted means it is in 10 deg Aries. Mo in Punarvasu

> > means it is between 80 deg 00 min and 93 deg 20 min. If we

consider

> > that Mo is in Cancer then Mo is between 90 deg 00 min and 93 deg

20

> > min. Tithi is (Mo-Su)/15. Here if Su is in 10 deg Aries and Mo is

in

> > 93 deg 20 min then, the difference is 83 deg 20 min.

> > • i.e. Tithi = (83 deg 20 min)/(15x60) = (5000 min)/(15*60) =

> > 5.5555…. = 6th Tithi, which is Shashti ! How Vatmiki make such a

> > gross mistake?! Let us think that Su was in the first deg of

Aries,

> > taking the maximum allowable distance for Punarvasu Nakshatra,

i.e.

> > 93 deg 20 min, then – Tithi = (93 deg 20 min)/(15x60) =

6.2222222………

> > = 7th Tithi, which is Saptami ! In essence Punarvasu Nakshatra

and

> > Navami Tithi can not coincide, while Su is in Aries. In this

> > condition how can we believe that this sloka is authentic?

> > • The above condition forces us to think that either Su is in

> > Pisces or that Tithi is not Navami or that Nakshatra is not

> > Punarvasu. In Pisces Su is not exalted, and the position of Su is

not

> > explicitly mentioned (though indirectly mentioned) in the sloka.

So I

> > take it as a choice. But this not the case with Navami Tithi and

> > Punarvasu Nakshatra, they are explicitly mentioned in the sloka

and

> > we have no right to change it. So can I assume that Su is in

Pisces

> > and proceed further? To what extend this approach can be

accepted?

> > Another point is that the sloka explicitly mentions the month as

> > Chaitra, so Su should be in Aries, what can I do about it?

> > Ok. That is enough. Now let us try to understand what the sloka

says.

> > The sloka gives the following Planetary position –

> >

> > +--------------+

> > | | | | |

> > | Ve | Su | | |

> > | | | | |

> > |-----------+-----------------------+-----------|

> > | | | Mo Me |Mo

> > | | | |

> > | | | As Ju |

> > | | | |

> > |-----------| Rasi |-----------|

> > | | | |

> > | Ma | | |

> > | | | |

> > |-----------+-----------------------+-----------|

> > | | | | |

> > | | | Sa | |

> > | | | | |

> > +--------------+

> >

> > Tithi = Navami Nakshatra = Punarvasu Month = Chaitra

> >

> > The position of Ra and Ke is not mentioned, and 5 planets are in

> > their respective sign of exaltation. But by now we know that it

is

> > an impossible combination.

> > If Mo is in the first, Navamsa of Cancer, then Mo is in

Vargottama.

> > Shall we take it as equivalent to exaltation? " Vargottame swacha

> > phalam vidadyal " says Varaha hora. Meaning, if the graha is in

> > Vargottama the results produced by it would be equivalent to the

> > graha is exaltation. Ok. Then we consider Mo as one of the five

> > exalted planets, and place Mo in Pisces. What else can we do?!

> > Panchaga (Tithi, Karana, Vara, Nakshatra, Nityayoga) were so

popular

> > in those days and so we can not assume any error in calculating

them.

> > If Su is in the last quarter of Pi (let us assume, 325 deg 00

min),

> > then,

> > Tithi = (360 x 60 + (93 x 60)+20) – (325 x 60) = 8.55555……. =

Navami

> > Tithi. That seems to be ok, since the Navami Tithi and Punarvasu

> > conditions are satisfied. But the problem is, if Su is in the

last

> > Nakshatra pada of Pisces then Su is also in Vargottama. If we

> > considered Mo in Vargottama as exalted then we can say that Su in

> > Vargottama can not be considered as Vargottama. That essentially

> > means that 4 planets (Ve, Ma, Ju, Sa) are exalted and Su and Mo

> > should be considered exalted, since they are in Vargottama. Thus

we

> > end up with 6 exalted grahas, contradicting the statement in the

> > sloka!

> > I drop it here, for others to ponder. I would assume that

this

> > sloka is not authentic, and is included by some one else into the

> > southern version of Ramayana, and it is not at all a sloka

written by

> > Vatmiki. And thus assuming the existence of Lagna (thus house

system)

> > and Cancer sign (thus other signs as well), is wrong. Assuming

the

> > existence of normal astrology in Ramayana period solely based on

this

> > sloka is a pit fall which we should avoid.

> >

> > P.S. Manipulated slokas are one of the greatest hindrances in the

> > study of literary history of astrology. While being proud of

Ancient

> > Indian heritage we should also be sincere enough to drop the

> > inconsistent erroneous info as well.

> >

> > Love,

> > Sreenadh

>

> Hi Sree,

>

> While it was not over exactly this matter, I do remember quizzing my

> guru on where was the reference in classics to each of the 27

> nakshatras being equi-sized. And he wrote the following:

>

> [Cite]

>

> " The naksatras do not have any clear boundaries in the sky and for

> this reason the yoga tara (certain stars) identifying them have been

> earmarked by the seers. The mathematical derivation of span of

> nakshatra is an approximation based on division of circle by 27 and

> then accomodating a portion for abhijjit - you know all this. Now

look

> at the motion of the Moon through the zodiac. Its motion is not

> uniform and speed is also varying. Further, we are looking at the

Moon

> which is very close to the earth in the backdrop of the naksatra

which

> are very far. So, if we consider the spped of the Moon then the span

> of the naksatra shall not be the same and some will be longer span

> than others. We are also aware that one third of the nakshatra give

> the results when the Moon is in it, while another third gives when

the

> Moon has lest and the last one third give results just before the

Moon

> arrives in them...

>

> Just bear in mind that the span of the naksatra has been made equal

> for mathematical purposes whereas in reality it is not so. For

example

> mathematically I am born in xxxxxxxxx nakshatra but in reality this

> can be yyyyyyyy.

>

> Sorry if I have added to the confusion... but from the confusion

can a

> clear picture emerge. Better still, forget these things for now. "

>

> [End cite]

>

> I haven't forgotten, though, not least because I've not gotten the

> final word on it.

>

> Not suggesting that the answer answer lies here but it might just

> too... what do you think?

>

> +++

>

June 10, 2006

Dear shreenadh,

this is certainly a prakshipta (an after inclusion) But it is not

really impossible thing .

Here Vakpati means Jupiter and not mercury, though the Vakpati

connotes mercury. Otherwise, this in itself is an obvious

contradiction, as Mercury can not be in cancer with Sun being in

exaltation.

On the other hand, there seems to be a possibility that Sun being in

Aries but not exactly in exaltation for this to happen. think that

over

The sloka I have mentioned in my earlier posts comes in Ayodhya

kanda , whereas the sloka you are talking about might be in Balakanda.

Kishore patnaik

, " Sreenadh "

<sreesog wrote:

>

> Horoscope of Rama

> -----------------

> In Southern version of the Vatmiki Ramayana there is a sloka that

> describes the horoscope of Rama. The sloka is given below –

>

> Tatascha dwadese mase chaitre navamike tithou

> Nakshatre aditidaivtye swocha samsteshu panchasu

> Graheshu karkate lagne vakpatavinduna saha

> Prodyaname jagannatham sarvaloka namaskritam

> (Vatmiki Ramayana)

> Meaning, 12 months after (the Homa), in the month of Chaitra, in

> Navami Thithi and Punarvasu nakshatra, while 5 planets were

exalted,

> in Cancer lagna Moon was with Mercury, the lord to whom everyone

bows

> took birth.

>

> There are so many controversies associated with this sloka, let us

> list them.

> • This sloka mentions Lagna and Cancer sign, which indicates

> that normal astrology with 12 signs and 27 Nakshatras was there in

> use even at Ramayana period. But in the whole of Vedic and Epic

> literature we can not find the mention of 12 Signs or any of there

> names such as `Mesha', `Vrishabha' etc, and never the mention of

> Lagna as something related to the sign. So how can we believe that

> this sloka is authentic?

> • There are many (at least four) versions of Vatmiki Ramayana,

> out of them only the Southern version (Dakshinatya patam) contains

> this sloka. In this condition how can we believe that this sloka is

> authentic?

> • Sun is exalted means it is in 10 deg Aries. Mo in Punarvasu

> means it is between 80 deg 00 min and 93 deg 20 min. If we consider

> that Mo is in Cancer then Mo is between 90 deg 00 min and 93 deg 20

> min. Tithi is (Mo-Su)/15. Here if Su is in 10 deg Aries and Mo is

in

> 93 deg 20 min then, the difference is 83 deg 20 min.

> • i.e. Tithi = (83 deg 20 min)/(15x60) = (5000 min)/(15*60) =

> 5.5555…. = 6th Tithi, which is Shashti ! How Vatmiki make such a

> gross mistake?! Let us think that Su was in the first deg of Aries,

> taking the maximum allowable distance for Punarvasu Nakshatra, i.e.

> 93 deg 20 min, then – Tithi = (93 deg 20 min)/(15x60) =

6.2222222………

> = 7th Tithi, which is Saptami ! In essence Punarvasu Nakshatra and

> Navami Tithi can not coincide, while Su is in Aries. In this

> condition how can we believe that this sloka is authentic?

> • The above condition forces us to think that either Su is in

> Pisces or that Tithi is not Navami or that Nakshatra is not

> Punarvasu. In Pisces Su is not exalted, and the position of Su is

not

> explicitly mentioned (though indirectly mentioned) in the sloka. So

I

> take it as a choice. But this not the case with Navami Tithi and

> Punarvasu Nakshatra, they are explicitly mentioned in the sloka and

> we have no right to change it. So can I assume that Su is in Pisces

> and proceed further? To what extend this approach can be accepted?

> Another point is that the sloka explicitly mentions the month as

> Chaitra, so Su should be in Aries, what can I do about it?

> Ok. That is enough. Now let us try to understand what the sloka

says.

> The sloka gives the following Planetary position –

>

> +--------------+

> | | | | |

> | Ve | Su | | |

> | | | | |

> |-----------+-----------------------+-----------|

> | | | Mo Me |Mo

> | | | |

> | | | As Ju |

> | | | |

> |-----------| Rasi |-----------|

> | | | |

> | Ma | | |

> | | | |

> |-----------+-----------------------+-----------|

> | | | | |

> | | | Sa | |

> | | | | |

> +--------------+

>

> Tithi = Navami Nakshatra = Punarvasu Month = Chaitra

>

> The position of Ra and Ke is not mentioned, and 5 planets are in

> their respective sign of exaltation. But by now we know that it is

> an impossible combination.

> If Mo is in the first, Navamsa of Cancer, then Mo is in

Vargottama.

> Shall we take it as equivalent to exaltation? " Vargottame swacha

> phalam vidadyal " says Varaha hora. Meaning, if the graha is in

> Vargottama the results produced by it would be equivalent to the

> graha is exaltation. Ok. Then we consider Mo as one of the five

> exalted planets, and place Mo in Pisces. What else can we do?!

> Panchaga (Tithi, Karana, Vara, Nakshatra, Nityayoga) were so

popular

> in those days and so we can not assume any error in calculating

them.

> If Su is in the last quarter of Pi (let us assume, 325 deg 00 min),

> then,

> Tithi = (360 x 60 + (93 x 60)+20) – (325 x 60) = 8.55555……. =