Application of Amsas (Divisions)

[Guest guest]

Dear Bohra ji,

//> That's means to say we should stand rigidly at the same place where our

ancestor was, no any further foreword movement on the name of purity !//

First we have reach where our ancestor stood, currently we are far far behind,

as far as astrology is concerned!

* Do you think that our current astrology is as good as what Parasara and

Mihira knew?

* Do you think that using our current astrology we can beat the nadi

efficiency?

If not, please accept that reality that we are currently far far behind them

at least in case of astrology. We had a castle, the golden period is over, and

now we stands in the desert, among the ruins, without even the shade of a tree.

And you say that we are far better than those who made this system?!!!

What you say applies if and only if we are much ahead of them in our knowledge

and understanding of astrology, otherwise not! In the light of this

understanding your argument does not hold.

//> Once our ancestor was only use " Nakshatra " no any sign systems and house

systems that why we are using this 12 houses and 12 signs of Zodiac ?//

That argument goes in the direction of Vedic astrology.

* As far as we know even the oldest text (i.e. skanda hora) that deals with

Agama nirayana astrolgy mention and uses BOTH Rasi Chakra and Nakshatra Chakra

extensively. So if you are speaking about the Agama sastra we now refer to by

the name Nirayana Astrology, then we don't know about any period in its

development where only Nakshatra chakra was used.

* But it is certainly possible that once upon a time in Nigama astrology (i.e.

Vedic astrology), only Nakshatra chakra was in use. Therefore if someone want to

revive Nigama stastra named Vedic astrology then CERTAINLY he should go back to

the use of ONLY Nakshatra Chakra, adopt and understand the rules to be used in

such a system and DROP using Rasi chakra.

It is the clear, evident and sincere path to take - I trust. Whenever I speak

about Agama Nirayana astrology I used to stick to its rules and tried to

understand this system in its own merit; similarly whenever I speak about Nigama

Vedic Astrology I used to stick to its rules (for e.g. use only Nakshatra

chakra) and tried to understand this system in its own merit. Don't you think

that this is the right approach?

Love and regards,

Sreendh

 

, " Sudan " <msbohra62 wrote:

>

>

> Dear Sreenadhji,

>

> That's means to say we should stand rigidly at the same place where our

ancestor was, no any further foreword movement on the name of purity !

>

> Once our ancestor was only use " Nakshatra " no any sign systems and house

systems that why we are using this 12 houses and 12 signs of Zodiac ?

>

> You are eating the sweets but saying " I like only sugar " !By only sugar can

you get the test of sweets ?

>

> Thanks,

>

> M.S.Bohra

[Guest guest]

Dear Sir,

 

I liked the sense of humour.

 

Being slightly slow ...I always find it worthwhile to cross-check my

understanding after a long discussion.

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

 

Manoj Kumar [mouji99] Monday, October 12, 2009 3:14 PM Subject: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

 

 

 

 

 

This also reminds me of a famous song, incidentally the same song was used by Pilooo Modi to intervene in a heated debate between Vajpayee and Nehru in the Parliament, the song goes like, "Woh afsaana jise anjaam tak lana na ho mumkin, use ek khoobsoorat mod dekar chorna achha, chalo ek baar phir se, ajnabi ban jayen hum dono"

 

best wishes,

 

Mouji--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Chakraborty, PL <CHAKRABORTYP2 (AT) iocl (DOT) co.in> wrote:

Chakraborty, PL <CHAKRABORTYP2 (AT) iocl (DOT) co.in>RE: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)"' '" Monday, October 12, 2009, 3:03 PM

 

Dear Learned Seniors,

 

I have few basic queries about the different Varga systems. It will be

helpful if someone guides me. If you find it too basic...just IGNORE IT.

 

1) Say, a planet posited in a sign get Aries navamsa. Does it mean that

a) The planets original behaviour (based on its position in Rashi chart)

will be modified and it will behave somewhat like it was posited in

Aries

b) The lord of Aries (Mars) will be impacted as it is housing the planet

 

Which one of the above is correct ..a) or b) or both a) & b) ?

 

2) A planet can get Aries navamsa if it is initially posited in any one of

the 9 signs (excluding watery signs). Whather all Aries navamsa does

behave in same way (because the name is same ) ? Or do they differ

in a minor or major way ?

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

 

 

 

 

This Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

[Guest guest]

Dear members,

 

Came thru' an article on Varga etc.. written by Sri Rohini Ranjan-ji.

 

Varga Chakras (Kundalis) inJyotish Classics? by Rohiniranjan November 6, 2005

 

http://www.boloji.com/astro/00344.htm

 

He suggests that Saravali by Kalyan Verma had used Varga charts

and even aspects on amsa.

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

 

 

 

 

 

sreesog [sreesog] Monday, October 12, 2009 4:40 PM Subject: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

Dear Bohra ji, //> That's means to say we should stand rigidly at the same place where our ancestor was, no any further foreword movement on the name of purity !//First we have reach where our ancestor stood, currently we are far far behind, as far as astrology is concerned! * Do you think that our current astrology is as good as what Parasara and Mihira knew?* Do you think that using our current astrology we can beat the nadi efficiency?If not, please accept that reality that we are currently far far behind them at least in case of astrology. We had a castle, the golden period is over, and now we stands in the desert, among the ruins, without even the shade of a tree. And you say that we are far better than those who made this system?!!!What you say applies if and only if we are much ahead of them in our knowledge and understanding of astrology, otherwise not! In the light of this understanding your argument does not hold. //> Once our ancestor was only use "Nakshatra" no any sign systems and house systems that why we are using this 12 houses and 12 signs of Zodiac ?//That argument goes in the direction of Vedic astrology. * As far as we know even the oldest text (i.e. skanda hora) that deals with Agama nirayana astrolgy mention and uses BOTH Rasi Chakra and Nakshatra Chakra extensively. So if you are speaking about the Agama sastra we now refer to by the name Nirayana Astrology, then we don't know about any period in its development where only Nakshatra chakra was used.* But it is certainly possible that once upon a time in Nigama astrology (i.e. Vedic astrology), only Nakshatra chakra was in use. Therefore if someone want to revive Nigama stastra named Vedic astrology then CERTAINLY he should go back to the use of ONLY Nakshatra Chakra, adopt and understand the rules to be used in such a system and DROP using Rasi chakra. It is the clear, evident and sincere path to take - I trust. Whenever I speak about Agama Nirayana astrology I used to stick to its rules and tried to understand this system in its own merit; similarly whenever I speak about Nigama Vedic Astrology I used to stick to its rules (for e.g. use only Nakshatra chakra) and tried to understand this system in its own merit. Don't you think that this is the right approach?Love and regards,Sreendh , "Sudan" <msbohra62 wrote:>> > Dear Sreenadhji,> > That's means to say we should stand rigidly at the same place where our ancestor was, no any further foreword movement on the name of purity !> > Once our ancestor was only use "Nakshatra" no any sign systems and house systems that why we are using this 12 houses and 12 signs of Zodiac ?> > You are eating the sweets but saying "I like only sugar" !By only sugar can you get the test of sweets ?> > Thanks,> > M.S.BohraThis Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

[Guest guest]

Dear Chakraborty ji,

//He suggests that Saravali by Kalyan Verma had used Varga charts

and even aspects on amsa.//

Means even after this elaborate search he couldn't find a single reference -

and final statement he reached is also wrong. Because there is NO REFERENCE

to Varga charts in Saravali. But ofcourse the efforts to misinterpret will

continue - because they fixed the wrong point (Lagnamsaka) as starting point

(and started considering the relative position of other amsakas from there

without having the support of ANY ancient textual reference), and is totally

confused, and nothing is coming correct, and continuously in search of something

that can be misinterpreted to suit their wish - but finds NOTHING! It is

interesting to see this search and effort for wish fulfillment.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, " Chakraborty, PL "

<CHAKRABORTYP2 wrote:

>

> Dear members,

>

> Came thru' an article on Varga etc.. written by Sri Rohini Ranjan-ji.

>

> Varga Chakras (Kundalis) in

> Jyotish Classics?

> by Rohiniranjan<http://www.boloji.com/writers/ranjan.htm>

> November 6, 2005

>

> http://www.boloji.com/astro/00344.htm

>

> He suggests that Saravali by Kalyan Verma had used Varga charts

> and even aspects on amsa.

>

> regards

>

> Chakraborty

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr Kursija ji,I thank you for your kind words and do appreciate your concern. I was not at all disturbed by the difference of opinions and NOT at all because my �favourite teacher� was being contradicted :-). If it looked like that, I am sorry for my poor communication.

I was voicing my concern over three points, if I may summarise with your kind permission:We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without difference of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.

Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and innovation because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text. It is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of ancient knowledge. �

We cannot stand on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment this ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should establish tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.Just sharing some concerns. Learned members may not agree and each one is free to form own opinions.:-)

Thanks and RegardsNeelam

[Guest guest]

Dear Neelam ji,

I agree with you. we create separate chart as navamsha, but Sreenadh use only Rashi chart and see the sign that planet occupy in navamsha. Sh Chandu lal S. Patel read the navamsha chart in the similar manner. In his book navamsha and Nadi astrology chpter 2 page 11, he give a chart as "The native is born in Virgo Ascendant, in the Sun's Hora, in Capricorn Drekkan, in Taurus Navamsha and Jupiters's trimsamsa".The Sun is in the sign of Pisces in conjunction with Venus. So Sun is in Sagittarius navamsha which falls in 4th house of rashi chart so Sun is sukhamshayukta

Venus is Aquarius in navamsha which falls in 6th house of rashi chart so Venus is in shashtamshayukta and so on, We can read the planet in rashi chart with reference with varga amsha as Horamshayukta, Drekkanamshayukta or navamamshayukta etc.

Regards

--- On Sun, 10/11/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Sunday, October 11, 2009, 8:24 PM

 

Dear Manoj ji,I am just trying to understand why Sreenadh ji feels and says that Divisional Charts are absurd and thy do not belong to pure ancient astrology.While we see these charts just as per pure ancient principles too, except that we use a separate chart may be for ease of handling.Sreenadh ji has also used relative house positions and rulerships of amshas, but in the natal chart only. I guess he does not take various amshas from lagna amsha and their house-wise distribution. E.g. mars is in Libra navamsha which is 5H from lagna navamsha of Gemini. We use it as a significant factor saying in navamsha LL Mars is in 5H and will have something to do with 5H. There lies the major difference. But I guess it is an additional perspective and much research has proved its worth beyond doubt. If astrology is logical and planets behave logically, then one can see their working in many

ways.RegardsNeelam

2009/10/11 Manoj Chandran <chandran_manoj

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Neelam Ji,

 

// I also understand that in South the practice is to mark the amshas on the rashi chart itself. But in no way did I ever feel that there was any difference in interpretation. //

 

Not so in Tamil Nadu. All the chennai astrologers my family has been to (and God knows they have been to several) always show the Rashi Chart juxtaposed with the Navamsha Chart. However, NONE of the astrologers I know in South India, take house ruler ship in the Navamsha chart. That is, they DONT consider the Navamsha chart as a separate stand alone chart with its own houses, rulerships etc, but, definitely erect a Navamsha chart, side by side, the Rashi Chart.

 

In essence their interpretation method is just like what Sreenadh Ji explained, only they use the visual aid of a separate chart (which is what you are implying I think).

 

Regards,

-Manoj

 

 

 

 

 

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07

Sent: Sun, October 11, 2009 4:02:42 AM Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

Dear Vandana ji,

Thanks for your good words. I am confident that while using the divisional charts we are not deviating from the principles prescribed in the classical texts.I also understand that in South the practice is to mark the amshas on the rashi chart itself. But in no way did I ever feel that there was any difference in interpretation. Many astrologers do not go beyond the Navamsha for divisions. That is a separate matter. Since the advent of Parashari, use of various other divisions have come into practice. We must test and do researc on all available knowledge. Nadi systems are nothing but finer and finest divisions. Astrological research is the most difficult one. The object of experiments, a human being, itself is extremely complex and we work under severe limitations of various kinds. I would digress if I get into that. But we all, as sincere scholars, must try to raise our level of understanding day by day. We must be able to

see the unity in diverse approaches.Raaste juda juda hain, par manzil to ek hai!RegardsNeelam

 

2009/10/11 Vandna Misra <vandana_mishra_ 91 >

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Neelum,

//I am sorry you have to suffer my long mail// NOT AT ALL.so long you enrich us with your precious knowledge we are ready to savour every bit of it. I Congratulate you for your detailed discussion,i hope you might be able to explain sreesandhji what we meant when we talk about divisional chart.i am novice to the forum so he might not found me very convincing but you are too old for the forum to be ignored.instead of obstinate one should be receptive to the new ideas,even when not very convinced.especiall y when we are here more a follower than a preacher. Divisional charts are not our creation afterall.

 

Regards.

Vandana Mishra

--- On Sat, 10/10/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com> wrote:

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com>Re: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) ancient_indian_ astrologySaturday, October 10, 2009, 1:59 PM

 

 

Dear All,I am sorry you all had to suffer my long mail just because Sreenadh ji scoffed at the word CHARTS suffixed to Divisions.:- )I actually feel there is no big difference, except in the way we are able to access the information and draw our own conclusions. Roots and trunk are most important, but without branches, leaves and flowers the tree cannot leave any fruit for posterity.RegardsNeelam

[Guest guest]

Dear Neelam ji,

Thanks --- On Mon, 10/12/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 7:30 PM

 

 

Dear Dr Kursija ji,I thank you for your kind words and do appreciate your concern. I was not at all disturbed by the difference of opinions and NOT at all because my �favourite teacher� was being contradicted :-). If it looked like that, I am sorry for my poor communication.I was voicing my concern over three points, if I may summarise with your kind permission:

 

We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without difference of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.

Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and innovation because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text. It is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of ancient knowledge. �

We cannot stand on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment this ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should establish tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.Just sharing some concerns. Learned members may not agree and each one is free to form own opinions.:-)Thanks and RegardsNeelam

[Guest guest]

Dear Neelam ji, Please permit me to express my stand on the 3 points expressed by you -//> - We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come> from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without difference> of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.// I was expressing my opinion with extra vigor, strongly because - I was thinking that here I would be alone and there would be much opposition from all directions because I am speaking against the opinion of BVR, SR, KNR, and even my usual favorite on Ayanamsa Chandrahari. I wanted to express that I am on solid ground, well supported by data, information, logic, confidance and what not. Please pardon my ignorance - but allow me to stand strongly against the use of D-charts in future as well. My reputation towards that members are always there - but not towards the idea of D-charts. Strong words are against an idea and NOT against people. //> - Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and innovation> because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text. It> is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of> ancient knowledge.// As for me, I see practical demonstration regularly from the scholars of unbroken tradition - when ever I am in Kerala - through the numerous prashnas and chart readings of scholars I attend. So there is no problem of not seeing practical demonstration. Second, as per applying much imagination is concerned - yes, it is forbidden. Applying too much imagination, and deviating from the ancient astro classics is FORBIDDEN in the traditional view. For every ashtamangala prasha or chart reading done while 2 or more astrologers are present, this rule does apply - while I attend any prashna or chart reading, I have NO RIGHT to deviate from textual references and apply my imagination loosely - it IS FORBIDDEN. Even if we use imagination as a secret personal tool, when we express it we are supposed to back it up by pointing out clear references - otherwise the argument would be rejected. Own imagination is NOT a public tool - that can agreed upon by many or something that can make astrology a sastra.//> - We cannot stand still on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment this> ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should establish> tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.// Yes, we should - but only after we are able to reach were the ancient stood - currently we are very far far behind! Till then why not spend our energy on finding the hidden treasures in these ruins and make them shine in the touch stone of our consciousness? That is the actual "re-search" and not creating new theories I think. I am not against someone successfully using D-chart technique in the group as a personal tool. But I feel cheated when they argue that it is there in the ancient classics or that the sages are speaking about D-charts, or that even all there imaginations such as "transit in d-charts" and "aspect in D-charts" are all present in ancient classics! They are simply lying and others following suit! Then I feel challenged, cheated, I smell fraud and non-sincerity and my voice goes up! You cannot blame me for that! Let me repeat - * I am NOT against the use of D-chats if it is used as a newborn personal tool with the acceptance that it is not mentioned in classics. * I am NOT against KP Sub-Sub theories since they are using it as a new invention of Krishnamoorti. But when ever someone tries to place a lie as if it is truth; when ever new ideas are clothed in sheep skin and presented; I get agitated and then the situation is no more peaceful. No - you cannot blame me for that! I am just being sincere to myself. Love and regards,Sreenadh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:>> Dear Dr Kursija ji,> > I thank you for your kind words and do appreciate your concern. I was not at> all disturbed by the difference of opinions and NOT at all because my> 'favourite teacher' was being contradicted :-). If it looked like that, I am> sorry for my poor communication.> > I was voicing my concern over three points, if I may summarise with your> kind permission:> > - We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come> from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without difference> of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.> - Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and innovation> because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text. It> is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of> ancient knowledge.> - We cannot stand still on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment this> ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should establish> tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.> > > Just sharing some concerns. Learned members may not agree and each one is> free to form own opinions.:-)> > Thanks and Regards> Neelam>

[Guest guest]

Dear Kursija ji, You are absolutely right. I have seen someone bringing in C S Patel's name and Santanam's name in favor of D-charts. But as far as I know, both these scholars used Navamsa and other vargas in the way I use only - even though possibly since they were using the north indian chart drawing style they have given the Navamsa as a chakra separately. But I am yet to see any reference to see that these to scholars supported concepts such as - * Counting navamsaka planetary position starting from lagnamsaka * Transit in navamsaka chart * Aspect in navamsaka chart etc. As per my understanding they didn't support these new born concepts. But any way, even if they did it didn't make much difference - because all the above three concepts are unsupported by asto classics of nirayana astrology.Love and regards,Sreenadh , "S.C. Kursija" <sckursija wrote:>> Dear Neelam ji, > I agree with you. we create separate chart as navamsha, but Sreenadh use only Rashi chart and see the sign that planet occupy in navamsha. Sh Chandu lal S. Patel read the navamsha chart in the similar manner. In his book navamsha and Nadi astrology chpter 2 page 11, he give a chart as "The native is born in Virgo Ascendant, in the Sun's Hora, in Capricorn Drekkan, in Taurus Navamsha and Jupiters's trimsamsa".The Sun is in the sign of Pisces in conjunction with Venus. So Sun is in Sagittarius navamsha which falls in 4th house of rashi chart so Sun is sukhamshayukta> > Venus is Aquarius in navamsha which falls in 6th house of rashi chart so Venus is in shashtamshayukta and so on, We can read the planet in rashi chart with reference with varga amsha as Horamshayukta, Drekkanamshayukta or navamamshayukta etc.> Regards

[Guest guest]

Respected utkalji,

If i am not getting you wrong you are discussing his lagna chart and d-24,however i am concerned about vimshamsha d-20 meant for spiritual upliftment.if you find any new angle in his D-20 chart kindly share with us.i shall be obliged.

Thanks,Regards.

 

Vandana Mishra--- On Mon, 10/12/09, utkal.panigrahi <utkal.panigrahi wrote:

utkal.panigrahi <utkal.panigrahi Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 6:03 AM

I think, moon the 10th lord placed in lagna, which is tula in this case, and if such a moon is exalted in D 24, wd say good knowledge of professional domain, good social networking and applause.However, for knowledge of astrology which was not his profession, one should consider jup, Sun and Sat's (5th lord) strength also.Regards,Utkal.

[Guest guest]

Dear Sreenadh ji,//* I am NOT against the use

of D-chats if it is used as a newborn personal tool with the

acceptance that it is not mentioned in classics. * I am NOT against KP Sub-Sub theories since they are using it as a new invention of Krishnamoorti.

But when ever someone tries to place a lie as if it is truth; when ever

new ideas are clothed in sheep skin and presented; I get agitated and

then the situation is no more peaceful. No - you cannot blame me for

that! I am just being sincere to myself. //congrats for your sincere stand.I apreciate/like it wholeheartedly since i strongly believe in self sincerety.I am not taking any stand of my own here.Its just an apreciation for sincerety.Love and regards,gopi. , "sreesog" <sreesog wrote:>> Dear Neelam ji,> Please permit me to express my stand on the 3 points expressed by you> -> //> - We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they> come> > from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without> difference> > of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.//> I was expressing my opinion with extra vigor, strongly because - I> was thinking that here I would be alone and there would be much> opposition from all directions because I am speaking against the opinion> of BVR, SR, KNR, and even my usual favorite on Ayanamsa Chandrahari. I> wanted to express that I am on solid ground, well supported by data,> information, logic, confidance and what not. [] Please pardon my> ignorance - but allow me to stand strongly against the use of D-charts> in future as well. [] [] My reputation towards that members are> always there - but not towards the idea of D-charts. Strong words are> against an idea and NOT against people.> //> - Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and> innovation> > because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any> text. It> > is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical> application of> > ancient knowledge.//> As for me, I see practical demonstration regularly from the scholars> of unbroken tradition - when ever I am in Kerala - through the numerous> prashnas and chart readings of scholars I attend. So there is no problem> of not seeing practical demonstration. Second, as per applying much> imagination is concerned - yes, it is forbidden. Applying too much> imagination, and deviating from the ancient astro classics is FORBIDDEN> in the traditional view. For every ashtamangala prasha or chart reading> done while 2 or more astrologers are present, this rule does apply -> while I attend any prashna or chart reading, I have NO RIGHT to deviate> from textual references and apply my imagination loosely - it IS> FORBIDDEN. Even if we use imagination as a secret personal tool, when we> express it we are supposed to back it up by pointing out clear> references - otherwise the argument would be rejected. Own imagination> is NOT a public tool - that can agreed upon by many or something that> can make astrology a sastra.> //> - We cannot stand still on ancient laurels for long, so we must> augment this> > ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should> establish> > tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.//> Yes, we should - but only after we are able to reach were the ancient> stood - currently we are very far far behind! Till then why not spend> our energy on finding the hidden treasures in these ruins and make them> shine in the touch stone of our consciousness? That is the actual > "re-search" and not creating new theories I think.> I am not against someone successfully using D-chart technique in the> group as a personal tool. But I feel cheated when they argue that it is> there in the ancient classics or that the sages are speaking about> D-charts, or that even all there imaginations such as "transit in> d-charts" and "aspect in D-charts" are all present in ancient classics!> They are simply lying and others following suit! Then I feel challenged,> cheated, I smell fraud and non-sincerity and my voice goes up! You> cannot blame me for that! Let me repeat -> * I am NOT against the use of D-chats if it is used as a newborn > personal tool with the acceptance that it is not mentioned in classics.> * I am NOT against KP Sub-Sub theories since they are using it as a> new invention of Krishnamoorti.> But when ever someone tries to place a lie as if it is truth; when> ever new ideas are clothed in sheep skin and presented; I get agitated> and then the situation is no more peaceful. No - you cannot blame me for> that! I am just being sincere to myself.> Love and regards,> Sreenadh

[Guest guest]

Dear Kursija ji,There is liberal use of reckonings from lagna amshas by CS Patel. Trasits and aspects are also discussed in details.Please check these from his book Navamsha in Astrology. They are all accompanied by quotes.

(pls refer to pp 13-17)22nd Dreshkan is reckoned from lagna Dreshkan. 64th Navamsha from lagna and moon navamsha and is called Sanghatika.There should be no planet in the 55th Navamsha from lagna navamsha at the time of marriage. What we broadly recommend as no planet in 7H.

Certain other places from lagna/moon’s navamsha have been recommended which can be better seen in a chart erected with rising navamsa. These are 36th Nav (square), 72nd Navamsha (called Vainashiskam), 96th Navamsha (Manasam) etc.

Transit of planets on all these points have also been described. In fact, the author recommends the use of 64th navamsha from all planets.Use of terms like Bhavottama ad trikonge/trikonke (pp 20)Transits of planets on Navamshas occupied by various lords are well described with quotes, specially chapter 10.

Aspects in Navamsha (pp 178-180)Last page: please see his explanation on own navamsha and rashi chart and how he’s read it.Then lastly, one important para tells you that all that he says is supported by classics, except the use of ashtakvarga on navamsha.

Hope you’ll find it useful. Please note that this is not to alter your view point, just stating some relevant references for study.RegardsNeelam 

[Guest guest]

Thanks Sreenadh ji. I appreciate your sincerity.:-)Sadly, you lost me on all three points. :-(Let us forget this debate and be with the purpose of this group. RegardsNeelam

2009/10/12 sreesog <sreesog

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Neelam ji,   Please permit me to express my stand on the 3 points expressed by you -//> - We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come

> from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without difference> of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.// I was expressing my opinion with extra vigor, strongly because  -  I was thinking that here I would be alone and there would be much opposition from all directions because I am speaking against the opinion of BVR, SR, KNR, and even my usual favorite on Ayanamsa Chandrahari.  I wanted to express that I am on solid ground, well supported by data, information, logic, confidance and what not.    Please pardon my ignorance - but allow me to stand strongly against the use of D-charts in future as well. My reputation towards that members are always there - but not towards the idea of D-charts.  Strong words are against an idea and NOT against people.

//> - Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and innovation> because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text. It> is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of

> ancient knowledge.//  As for me, I see practical demonstration regularly from the scholars of unbroken tradition - when ever I am in Kerala - through the numerous prashnas and chart readings of scholars I attend. So there is no problem of not seeing practical demonstration.  Second, as per applying much imagination is concerned - yes, it is forbidden. Applying too much imagination, and deviating from the ancient astro classics is FORBIDDEN in the traditional view.  For every ashtamangala prasha or chart reading done while 2 or more astrologers are present, this rule does apply - while I attend any prashna or chart reading, I have NO RIGHT to deviate from textual references and apply my imagination loosely - it IS FORBIDDEN. Even if we use imagination as a secret personal tool, when we express it we are supposed to back it up by pointing out clear references - otherwise the argument would be rejected. Own imagination is NOT a public tool - that can agreed upon by many or something that can make astrology a sastra.

//> - We cannot stand still on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment this> ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should establish> tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.// 

  Yes, we should - but only after we are able to reach were the ancient stood - currently we are very far far behind! Till then why not spend our energy on finding the hidden treasures in these ruins and make them shine in the touch stone of our consciousness?  That is the actual  " re-search " and not creating new theories I think. 

  I am not against someone successfully using D-chart technique in the group as a personal tool. But I feel cheated when they argue that it is there in the ancient classics or that the sages are speaking about D-charts, or that even all there imaginations such as " transit in d-charts " and " aspect in D-charts " are all present in ancient classics! They are simply lying and others following suit! Then I feel challenged, cheated, I smell fraud and non-sincerity  and my voice goes up! You cannot blame me for that! Let me repeat -

  * I am NOT against the use of D-chats if it is used as a newborn  personal tool with the acceptance that it is not mentioned in classics.  * I am NOT against KP Sub-Sub theories since they are using it as a new invention of Krishnamoorti.

   But when ever someone tries to place a lie as if it is truth; when ever new ideas are clothed in sheep skin and presented; I get agitated and then the situation is no more peaceful. No - you cannot blame me for that! I am just being sincere to myself.

Love and regards,Sreenadh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:

>> Dear Dr Kursija ji,> > I thank you for your kind words and do appreciate your concern. I was not at> all disturbed by the difference of opinions and NOT at all because my> 'favourite teacher' was being contradicted :-). If it looked like that, I am

> sorry for my poor communication.> > I was voicing my concern over three points, if I may summarise with your> kind permission:> > - We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come

> from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without difference> of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.> - Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and innovation

> because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text. It> is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of> ancient knowledge.> - We cannot stand still on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment this

> ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should establish> tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.> > > Just sharing some concerns. Learned members may not agree and each one is

> free to form own opinions.:-)> > Thanks and Regards> Neelam>

[Guest guest]

Dear Neelam ji, It is not a sad episode to be forgotten; but instead a very valuable and informative interaction we should be proud of! We should not give it an untimely death here, but should provide longevity to this discussion and continue it - so that the erroneous understanding could be corrected. Ofcourse in an informative exchange both sides gets affected - and when it ends it would be me and you who would stand corrected but many in this group. Let us not forget the valuable questions put forward by you, Shanmukha ji and Utkal ji. Let us not leave those questions unanswered. Let us not forget that 3 messages - one from Shanmukha ji (pointing some Jaimini reference) and one mail from Utkal ji, and one mail from you (providing references to CS Patel ji's book) remains to be discussed - I haven't satisfactorily answered those three mails. When it is done certainly I will stand corrected for certain, may be you will stand corrected, many be many others in the group as well - and the information shared will remain valuable. It is not necessary that any of us may change our path or basic opinion; but certainly better understanding about others perspective and logical foundations will result as an end result. So I humbly request you to continue this exercise so that it would be beneficial to all. Please don't feel offended - at the end, as Bhaskar ji puts it, you are my elder sister. So let us face it. Note: No, at the end it won't be that I am 100% correct - both my views and your views will stand corrected. But for now for argument sake, I stubbornly and egotically say (or I take the stand) that I am 100% correct! Hope you won't mind it, and could see the purpose. Love and hugs, Sreenadh , neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:>> Thanks Sreenadh ji. I appreciate your sincerity.:-)> > Sadly, you lost me on all three points. :-(> Let us forget this debate and be with the purpose of this group.> > Regards> Neelam> > 2009/10/12 sreesog sreesog > >> >> > Dear Neelam ji,> > Please permit me to express my stand on the 3 points expressed by you -> > //> - We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come> > > from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without> > difference> > > of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.//> > I was expressing my opinion with extra vigor, strongly because - I was> > thinking that here I would be alone and there would be much opposition from> > all directions because I am speaking against the opinion of BVR, SR, KNR,> > and even my usual favorite on Ayanamsa Chandrahari. I wanted to express> > that I am on solid ground, well supported by data, information, logic,> > confidance and what not. [image: ] Please pardon my ignorance - but> > allow me to stand strongly against the use of D-charts in future as well. [image:> > ][image: ] My reputation towards that members are always there - but> > not towards the idea of D-charts. Strong words are against an idea and NOT> > against people.> > //> - Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and> > innovation> > > because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text.> > It> > > is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of> > > ancient knowledge.//> > As for me, I see practical demonstration regularly from the scholars of> > unbroken tradition - when ever I am in Kerala - through the numerous> > prashnas and chart readings of scholars I attend. So there is no problem of> > not seeing practical demonstration. Second, as per applying much> > imagination is concerned - yes, it is forbidden. Applying too much> > imagination, and deviating from the ancient astro classics is FORBIDDEN in> > the traditional view. For every ashtamangala prasha or chart reading done> > while 2 or more astrologers are present, this rule does apply - while I> > attend any prashna or chart reading, I have NO RIGHT to deviate from textual> > references and apply my imagination loosely - it IS FORBIDDEN. Even if we> > use imagination as a secret personal tool, when we express it we are> > supposed to back it up by pointing out clear references - otherwise the> > argument would be rejected. Own imagination is NOT a public tool - that can> > agreed upon by many or something that can make astrology a sastra.> > //> - We cannot stand still on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment> > this> > > ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should> > establish> > > tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.//> > Yes, we should - but only after we are able to reach were the ancient> > stood - currently we are very far far behind! Till then why not spend our> > energy on finding the hidden treasures in these ruins and make them shine in> > the touch stone of our consciousness? That is the actual "re-search" and> > not creating new theories I think.> > I am not against someone successfully using D-chart technique in the> > group as a personal tool. But I feel cheated when they argue that it is> > there in the ancient classics or that the sages are speaking about D-charts,> > or that even all there imaginations such as "transit in d-charts" and> > "aspect in D-charts" are all present in ancient classics! They are simply> > lying and others following suit! Then I feel challenged, cheated, I smell> > fraud and non-sincerity and my voice goes up! You cannot blame me for that!> > Let me repeat -> > * I am NOT against the use of D-chats if it is used as a newborn> > personal tool with the acceptance that it is not mentioned in classics.> > * I am NOT against KP Sub-Sub theories since they are using it as a new> > invention of Krishnamoorti.> > But when ever someone tries to place a lie as if it is truth; when ever> > new ideas are clothed in sheep skin and presented; I get agitated and then> > the situation is no more peaceful. No - you cannot blame me for that! I am> > just being sincere to myself.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh

[Guest guest]

Respected moujiji,

your keen interest in ghazal,nazm and classic hindi old song prompt me to make a wild guess your venus must be in 2h,with certain influence of saturn!!!

Regards.

Vandana Mishra--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Manoj Kumar <mouji99 wrote:

Manoj Kumar <mouji99 Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 9:43 AM

 

 

 

 

 

This also reminds me of a famous song, incidentally the same song was used by Pilooo Modi to intervene in a heated debate between Vajpayee and Nehru in the Parliament, the song goes like, "Woh afsaana jise anjaam tak lana na ho mumkin, use ek khoobsoorat mod dekar chorna achha, chalo ek baar phir se, ajnabi ban jayen hum dono"

 

best wishes,

 

Mouji--- On Mon, 10/12/09, Chakraborty, PL <CHAKRABORTYP2@ iocl.co.in> wrote:

Chakraborty, PL <CHAKRABORTYP2@ iocl.co.in>RE: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)"'ancient_indian_ astrology'" <ancient_indian_ astrology>Monday, October 12, 2009, 3:03 PM

 

Dear Learned Seniors,

 

I have few basic queries about the different Varga systems. It will be

helpful if someone guides me. If you find it too basic...just IGNORE IT.

 

1) Say, a planet posited in a sign get Aries navamsa. Does it mean that

a) The planets original behaviour (based on its position in Rashi chart)

will be modified and it will behave somewhat like it was posited in

Aries

b) The lord of Aries (Mars) will be impacted as it is housing the planet

 

Which one of the above is correct ..a) or b) or both a) & b) ?

 

2) A planet can get Aries navamsa if it is initially posited in any one of

the 9 signs (excluding watery signs). Whather all Aries navamsa does

behave in same way (because the name is same ) ? Or do they differ

in a minor or major way ?

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Few words in praise of shri sreenadhji,

it is heartening to note that the futile and fruitless battle of division and divisional chart is over which won you acclaim proving that'' you have already told us more about it than you have heard himself !!!your long long detailed analysis suggested that - you cannot disagree without being disagreeable.

Few words in praise of my darling Neelumji,

The brave front put up by you with your humble and deep conviction towards the subject point out that-'''when we share-that is poetry in the prose of our life.but who bothers,you may be the only bibble some persons read.

Few words in praise of our ancient traditional astrology,

the well of providence is deep,its is the bucket we bring to it that are small.

Few words in my praise,

A person doesnot give the right answers,but poses the right question,my question-Sari Ramayan Khatam Ho Gayi Lekin Yeh Sita Kaun Thi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I Still Wonder the differnce between Divisions And Divisional Chart?

Shall we have another round of ..............

Regards.

Vandana Mishra.--- On Mon, 10/12/09, sreesog <sreesog wrote:

sreesog <sreesog Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 7:02 PM

Dear Neelam ji, It is not a sad episode to be forgotten; but instead a very valuable and informative interaction we should be proud of! We should not give it an untimely death here, but should provide longevity to this discussion and continue it - so that the erroneous understanding could be corrected. Ofcourse in an informative exchange both sides gets affected - and when it ends it would be me and you who would stand corrected but many in this group. Let us not forget the valuable questions put forward by you, Shanmukha ji and Utkal ji. Let us not leave those questions unanswered. Let us not forget that 3 messages - one from Shanmukha ji (pointing some Jaimini reference) and one mail from Utkal ji, and one mail from you (providing references to CS Patel ji's book) remains to be discussed - I haven't satisfactorily answered those three mails.

When it is done certainly I will stand corrected for certain, may be you will stand corrected, many be many others in the group as well - and the information shared will remain valuable. It is not necessary that any of us may change our path or basic opinion; but certainly better understanding about others perspective and logical foundations will result as an end result. So I humbly request you to continue this exercise so that it would be beneficial to all. Please don't feel offended - at the end, as Bhaskar ji puts it, you are my elder sister. So let us face it. Note: No, at the end it won't be that I am 100% correct - both my views and your views will stand corrected. But for now for argument sake, I stubbornly

and egotically say (or I take the stand) that I am 100% correct! Hope you won't mind it, and could see the purpose. Love and hugs, Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ ...> wrote:>> Thanks Sreenadh ji. I appreciate your sincerity.:- )> > Sadly, you lost me on all three points. :-(> Let us forget this debate and be with the purpose of this group.> > Regards> Neelam> > 2009/10/12 sreesog sreesog > >> >> > Dear Neelam ji,> > Please permit me to express my stand

on the 3 points expressed by you -> > //> - We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come> > > from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without> > difference> > > of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.//> > I was expressing my opinion with extra vigor, strongly because - I was> > thinking that here I would be alone and there would be much opposition from> > all directions because I am speaking against the opinion of BVR, SR, KNR,> > and even my usual favorite on Ayanamsa Chandrahari. I wanted to express> > that I am on solid ground, well supported by data, information, logic,> > confidance and what not. [image: ] Please pardon my ignorance - but> > allow me to stand strongly against the use of D-charts in future as well. [image:> > ][image: ] My reputation

towards that members are always there - but> > not towards the idea of D-charts. Strong words are against an idea and NOT> > against people.> > //> - Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and> > innovation> > > because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text.> > It> > > is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of> > > ancient knowledge.//> > As for me, I see practical demonstration regularly from the scholars of> > unbroken tradition - when ever I am in Kerala - through the numerous> > prashnas and chart readings of scholars I attend. So there is no problem of> > not seeing practical demonstration. Second, as per applying much> > imagination is concerned - yes, it is forbidden.. Applying too much> > imagination, and deviating from the

ancient astro classics is FORBIDDEN in> > the traditional view. For every ashtamangala prasha or chart reading done> > while 2 or more astrologers are present, this rule does apply - while I> > attend any prashna or chart reading, I have NO RIGHT to deviate from textual> > references and apply my imagination loosely - it IS FORBIDDEN. Even if we> > use imagination as a secret personal tool, when we express it we are> > supposed to back it up by pointing out clear references - otherwise the> > argument would be rejected. Own imagination is NOT a public tool - that can> > agreed upon by many or something that can make astrology a sastra.> > //> - We cannot stand still on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment> > this> > > ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should> > establish> > > tools to

apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.//> > Yes, we should - but only after we are able to reach were the ancient> > stood - currently we are very far far behind! Till then why not spend our> > energy on finding the hidden treasures in these ruins and make them shine in> > the touch stone of our consciousness? That is the actual "re-search" and> > not creating new theories I think.> > I am not against someone successfully using D-chart technique in the> > group as a personal tool. But I feel cheated when they argue that it is> > there in the ancient classics or that the sages are speaking about D-charts,> > or that even all there imaginations such as "transit in d-charts" and> > "aspect in D-charts" are all present in ancient classics! They are simply> > lying and others following suit! Then I feel challenged, cheated, I smell>

> fraud and non-sincerity and my voice goes up! You cannot blame me for that!> > Let me repeat -> > * I am NOT against the use of D-chats if it is used as a newborn> > personal tool with the acceptance that it is not mentioned in classics.> > * I am NOT against KP Sub-Sub theories since they are using it as a new> > invention of Krishnamoorti.> > But when ever someone tries to place a lie as if it is truth; when ever> > new ideas are clothed in sheep skin and presented; I get agitated and then> > the situation is no more peaceful. No - you cannot blame me for that! I am> > just being sincere to myself.> > Love and regards,> > Sreenadh

[Guest guest]

Dear Vandana ji,

The point is - For success of this conversation (for maximum amount of info to

be get shared)-

* Neelam ji should adhere to her stand point

* Me should adhere to my stand point

* Shanmukha ji should adhere to his stand point

* Many others should stand in support of or against any one of them or provide

more info so that the discussion could get heated up.

The exchange 'should' get challenging, so that we will present more and more

references and logics and 'do our home work' .

Once the heated rounds are over, naturally consensus sets in and even if not

accepted we will start to see the basic foundation behind other's stand point.

Only then should acceptance settle in.

Speeding-up this process (and shortening the heated discussion) will, make us

devoid of the chance to gain more information and references.

//> Few words in praise of my darling Neelumji,

> The brave front put up by you with your humble and deep conviction towards the

subject//

Yes, we all appreciate that - and that itself is one of the great qualities of

neelam ji that makes here special.

//> Few words in praise of our ancient traditional astrology,

> the well of providence is deep,its is the bucket we bring to it that are

small.//

Yes, that applies to every individual in this group - Even if it is neelam ji,

me, shanmukha ji, sunil ji or whom so ever! Individuals are masters (experts) of

certain provinces (for example Shanmukha ji in Jaimini, Nirmal ji in Lal kitab

and so on), but when we interact here light comes from every direction and all

directions start shining! We (people like you, me, utkal ji, bhaskar ji, kursija

ji etc etc) the jack of many things is here to cook this meal, by providing

enough heat and firewood. :=)

//> Few words in my praise,

> A person doesnot give the right answers,but poses the right question,//

Wise questions are the core to better learning. And when we speak about 'right

questions', I cannot but view with awe the individuals in this group such as -

Renu ji, Kannan ji, Gopi ji, Gopu ji, Vijay Goel ji, Chakraborty ji etc. This

list is incomplete, and check the achieves and you will see numerous such

examples. Without right questions there cannot be right answers - asking right

questions is key to getting right answers! True learning is nothing but the

ability to ask right questions and finding answers for the same.

//> I Still Wonder the difference between Divisions And Divisional Chart?//

Ha...Ha..that again is a right question and I hope Neelam ji or someone else

will answer the same.

//> Shall we have another round of ..............//

Yes, we should, in my opinion. Neelam ji - what do you say?

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, Vandna Misra

<vandana_mishra_91 wrote:

>

> Few words in praise of shri sreenadhji,

> it is heartening to note that the futile and fruitless battle of division and

divisional chart is over which won you acclaim proving that'' you have already

told us more about it than you have heard himself !!!your long long

detailed analysis suggested that - you cannot disagree without being

disagreeable.

> Few words in praise of my darling Neelumji,

> The brave front put up by you with your humble and deep conviction towards the

subject point out that-'''when we share-that is poetry in the prose of our

life.but who bothers,you may be the only bibble some persons read.

> Few words in praise of our ancient traditional astrology,

> the well of providence is deep,its is the bucket we bring to it that

are small.

> Few words in my praise,

> A person doesnot give the right answers,but poses the right question,my

question-Sari Ramayan Khatam Ho Gayi Lekin Yeh Sita Kaun Thi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

> I Still Wonder the differnce between Divisions And Divisional Chart?

> Shall we have another round of ..............

> Regards.

> Vandana Mishra.

>

> --- On Mon, 10/12/09, sreesog <sreesog wrote:

>

>

> sreesog <sreesog

> Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

>

> Monday, October 12, 2009, 7:02 PM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> Dear Neelam ji,

>    It is not  a sad episode to be forgotten; but instead a very valuable and

informative interaction we should be proud of!

>   We should not give it an untimely death here, but should provide longevity

to this discussion and continue it - so that the erroneous understanding could

be corrected. Ofcourse in an informative exchange both sides gets affected - and

when it ends it would be me and you who would stand corrected but many in this

group. 

>    Let us not forget the valuable questions put forward by you, Shanmukha ji

and Utkal ji. Let us not leave those questions unanswered.  Let us not forget

that 3 messages - one from Shanmukha ji (pointing some Jaimini reference) and

one mail from Utkal ji, and one mail from you (providing references to CS Patel

ji's book) remains to be discussed - I haven't satisfactorily answered those

three mails.

>    When it is done certainly I will stand corrected for certain, may be you

will stand corrected, many be many others in the group as well - and the

information shared will remain valuable.  It is not necessary that  any of us

may change our path or basic opinion; but certainly better understanding about

others perspective and logical foundations will result as an end result.

>   So I humbly request you to continue this exercise so that it would be

beneficial to all. Please don't feel offended - at the end, as Bhaskar ji puts

it, you are my elder sister. So let us face it.

>   Note: No, at the end it won't be that I am 100% correct - both my views and

your views will stand corrected. But for now for argument sake, I stubbornly and

egotically say (or I take the stand) that I am 100% correct!    Hope you won't

mind it, and could see the purpose.

> Love and hugs,

> Sreenadh

>

> ancient_indian_ astrology, neelam gupta

<neelamgupta07@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > Thanks Sreenadh ji. I appreciate your sincerity.:- )

> >

> > Sadly, you lost me on all three points. :-(

> > Let us forget this debate and be with the purpose of this group.

> >

> > Regards

> > Neelam

[Guest guest]

Dear Vandana ji, Sreenadh ji,Vandana ji, I love your inimitable style. Mars-Rahu joining hands, who can stop you from saying what you must!!We have another mars-rahu in Bhaskar ji who also rejoices us with his kabhi hot kabhi cold, but frank outpourings.

Thanks to you and all others, who are so special ad make this group so special. I join Sreeadh ji in thanking and congratulating everyone and save myself from typing out all names! Please be with us always with your style and charm, and of course knowledge which you carefully hide giving yourself a learner's veil.

Sreenadh ji, //> Shall we have another round of ..............//

Yes, we should, in my opinion. Neelam ji - what do you say? :)//Anytime and all for the love of astrology!! RegardsNeelam2009/10/13 sreesog <sreesog

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Vandana ji,

The point is - For success of this conversation (for maximum amount of info to be get shared)-

* Neelam ji should adhere to her stand point

* Me should adhere to my stand point

* Shanmukha ji should adhere to his stand point

* Many others should stand in support of or against any one of them or provide more info so that the discussion could get heated up.

The exchange 'should' get challenging, so that we will present more and more references and logics and 'do our home work' .

Once the heated rounds are over, naturally consensus sets in and even if not accepted we will start to see the basic foundation behind other's stand point. Only then should acceptance settle in.

Speeding-up this process (and shortening the heated discussion) will, make us devoid of the chance to gain more information and references.

//> Few words in praise of my darling Neelumji,

> The brave front put up by you with your humble and deep conviction towards the subject//

Yes, we all appreciate that - and that itself is one of the great qualities of neelam ji that makes here special.

//> Few words in praise of our ancient traditional astrology,

> the well of providence is deep,its is the bucket we bring to it that are small.//

Yes, that applies to every individual in this group - Even if it is neelam ji, me, shanmukha ji, sunil ji or whom so ever! Individuals are masters (experts) of certain provinces (for example Shanmukha ji in Jaimini, Nirmal ji in Lal kitab and so on), but when we interact here light comes from every direction and all directions start shining! We (people like you, me, utkal ji, bhaskar ji, kursija ji etc etc) the jack of many things is here to cook this meal, by providing enough heat and firewood. :=)

//> Few words in my praise,

> A person doesnot give the right answers,but poses the right question,//

Wise questions are the core to better learning. And when we speak about 'right questions', I cannot but view with awe the individuals in this group such as - Renu ji, Kannan ji, Gopi ji, Gopu ji, Vijay Goel ji, Chakraborty ji etc. This list is incomplete, and check the achieves and you will see numerous such examples. Without right questions there cannot be right answers - asking right questions is key to getting right answers! True learning is nothing but the ability to ask right questions and finding answers for the same.

//> I Still Wonder the difference between Divisions And Divisional Chart?//

Ha...Ha..that again is a right question and I hope Neelam ji or someone else will answer the same.

//> Shall we have another round of ..............//

Yes, we should, in my opinion. Neelam ji - what do you say?

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, Vandna Misra <vandana_mishra_91 wrote:

>

> Few words in praise of shri sreenadhji,

> it is heartening to note that the futile and fruitless battle of division and divisional chart is over which won you acclaim proving that'' you have already told us more about it than you have heard himself !!!your long long detailed analysis suggested that - you cannot disagree without being disagreeable.

> Few words in praise of my darling Neelumji,

> The brave front put up by you with your humble and deep conviction towards the subject point out that-'''when we share-that is poetry in the prose of our life.but who bothers,you may be the only bibble some persons read.

> Few words in praise of our ancient traditional astrology,

> the well of providence is deep,its is the bucket we bring to it that are small.

> Few words in my praise,

> A person doesnot give the right answers,but poses the right question,my question-Sari Ramayan Khatam Ho Gayi Lekin Yeh Sita Kaun Thi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

> I Still Wonder the differnce between Divisions And Divisional Chart?

> Shall we have another round of ..............

> Regards.

> Vandana Mishra.

>

> --- On Mon, 10/12/09, sreesog <sreesog wrote:

>

>

> sreesog <sreesog

> Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

>

> Monday, October 12, 2009, 7:02 PM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> Dear Neelam ji,

>    It is not  a sad episode to be forgotten; but instead a very valuable and informative interaction we should be proud of!

>   We should not give it an untimely death here, but should provide longevity to this discussion and continue it - so that the erroneous understanding could be corrected. Ofcourse in an informative exchange both sides gets affected - and when it ends it would be me and you who would stand corrected but many in this group. 

>    Let us not forget the valuable questions put forward by you, Shanmukha ji and Utkal ji. Let us not leave those questions unanswered.  Let us not forget that 3 messages - one from Shanmukha ji (pointing some Jaimini reference) and one mail from Utkal ji, and one mail from you (providing references to CS Patel ji's book) remains to be discussed - I haven't satisfactorily answered those three mails.

>    When it is done certainly I will stand corrected for certain, may be you will stand corrected, many be many others in the group as well - and the information shared will remain valuable.  It is not necessary that  any of us may change our path or basic opinion; but certainly better understanding about others perspective and logical foundations will result as an end result.

 

>   So I humbly request you to continue this exercise so that it would be beneficial to all. Please don't feel offended - at the end, as Bhaskar ji puts it, you are my elder sister. So let us face it.

>   Note: No, at the end it won't be that I am 100% correct - both my views and your views will stand corrected. But for now for argument sake, I stubbornly and egotically say (or I take the stand) that I am 100% correct!    Hope you won't mind it, and could see the purpose.

 

> Love and hugs,

> Sreenadh

>

> ancient_indian_ astrology, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ ...> wrote:

> >

> > Thanks Sreenadh ji. I appreciate your sincerity.:- )

> >

> > Sadly, you lost me on all three points. :-(

> > Let us forget this debate and be with the purpose of this group.

> >

> > Regards

> > Neelam

[Guest guest]

Dear Learned Seniors,

 

The result of this discussion appears to be....(from an engrs point

of view only) (To be taken on a lighter vein ONLY)

 

Sreenadh-ji is saying :

 

1) Varga Charts are not sanctioned as per codes and standards.

Hence can not be used as a part of standard design practices.

2) There are no precedents or Code cases relating to such practices.

3) The Varga charts are not covered in "recommended good practices"

in the Codes / Standards

4) There are few institutes practising such charts. It appears that they

have 'extrapolated' data to form such practices. However, the basis

of such extrapolation is not established.

 

On the other hand, Neelam-ji and others have slightly different take

 

1) The codes / standards are have not clearly banned such uses

2) There are few code cases which can be interpreted other-wise

and prima facie, appears to support varga charts

3) Irrespective of Codes/standards, few experts are using such charts

frequently and getting good results / additional benefits. These

are Company design practices and may supersede international

codes. (Like Shell Design Practice may supersede ASME codes

where Shell is the designer).

 

There is a request to all. If possible, a Blind chart may please be taken

up by the forum. And both sides may use different approaches to show

what are the additional informations could be gleaned from use of D-9 charts

and whether the additional info is correct or not.

 

This will help many a forum member to understand the discussion that is

going on for few days.

 

regards

 

Chakraborty

 

 

 

/DIV>

 

 

Vandna Misra [vandana_mishra_91] Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9:25 AM Subject: Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

 

 

 

 

 

Few words in praise of shri sreenadhji,

it is heartening to note that the futile and fruitless battle of division and divisional chart is over which won you acclaim proving that'' you have already told us more about it than you have heard himself !!!your long long detailed analysis suggested that - you cannot disagree without being disagreeable.

Few words in praise of my darling Neelumji,

The brave front put up by you with your humble and deep conviction towards the subject point out that-'''when we share-that is poetry in the prose of our life.but who bothers,you may be the only bibble some persons read.

Few words in praise of our ancient traditional astrology,

the well of providence is deep,its is the bucket we bring to it that are small.

Few words in my praise,

A person doesnot give the right answers,but poses the right question,my question-Sari Ramayan Khatam Ho Gayi Lekin Yeh Sita Kaun Thi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I Still Wonder the differnce between Divisions And Divisional Chart?

Shall we have another round of ..............

Regards.

Vandana Mishra.--- On Mon, 10/12/09, sreesog <sreesog > wrote:

sreesog <sreesog > Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 7:02 PM

Dear Neelam ji, It is not a sad episode to be forgotten; but instead a very valuable and informative interaction we should be proud of! We should not give it an untimely death here, but should provide longevity to this discussion and continue it - so that the erroneous understanding could be corrected. Ofcourse in an informative exchange both sides gets affected - and when it ends it would be me and you who would stand corrected but many in this group. Let us not forget the valuable questions put forward by you, Shanmukha ji and Utkal ji. Let us not leave those questions unanswered. Let us not forget that 3 messages - one from Shanmukha ji (pointing some Jaimini reference) and one mail from Utkal ji, and one mail from you (providing references to CS Patel ji's book) remains to be discussed - I haven't satisfactorily answered those three mails. When it is done certainly I will stand corrected for certain, may be you will stand corrected, many be many others in the group as well - and the information shared will remain valuable. It is not necessary that any of us may change our path or basic opinion; but certainly better understanding about others perspective and logical foundations will result as an end result. So I humbly request you to continue this exercise so that it would be beneficial to all. Please don't feel offended - at the end, as Bhaskar ji puts it, you are my elder sister. So let us face it. Note: No, at the end it won't be that I am 100% correct - both my views and your views will stand corrected. But for now for argument sake, I stubbornly and egotically say (or I take the stand) that I am 100% correct! Hope you won't mind it, and could see the purpose. Love and hugs, Sreenadhancient_indian_ astrology, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ ...> wrote:>> Thanks Sreenadh ji. I appreciate your sincerity.:- )> > Sadly, you lost me on all three points. :-(> Let us forget this debate and be with the purpose of this group.> > Regards> Neelam> > 2009/10/12 sreesog sreesog > >> >> > Dear Neelam ji,> > Please permit me to express my stand on the 3 points expressed by you -> > //> - We must maintain respect for all opinions, especially when they come> > > from reputed and established sources. No subject can grow without> > difference> > > of opinions. Calling them foolish or absurd may not be proper.//> > I was expressing my opinion with extra vigor, strongly because - I was> > thinking that here I would be alone and there would be much opposition from> > all directions because I am speaking against the opinion of BVR, SR, KNR,> > and even my usual favorite on Ayanamsa Chandrahari. I wanted to express> > that I am on solid ground, well supported by data, information, logic,> > confidance and what not. [image: ] Please pardon my ignorance - but> > allow me to stand strongly against the use of D-charts in future as well. [image:> > ][image: ] My reputation towards that members are always there - but> > not towards the idea of D-charts. Strong words are against an idea and NOT> > against people.> > //> - Dictums given in literature may be used with flexibility and> > innovation> > > because there is no practical demonstration of these rules in any text.> > It> > > is not forbidden to apply our imagination and find logical application of> > > ancient knowledge.//> > As for me, I see practical demonstration regularly from the scholars of> > unbroken tradition - when ever I am in Kerala - through the numerous> > prashnas and chart readings of scholars I attend. So there is no problem of> > not seeing practical demonstration. Second, as per applying much> > imagination is concerned - yes, it is forbidden.. Applying too much> > imagination, and deviating from the ancient astro classics is FORBIDDEN in> > the traditional view. For every ashtamangala prasha or chart reading done> > while 2 or more astrologers are present, this rule does apply - while I> > attend any prashna or chart reading, I have NO RIGHT to deviate from textual> > references and apply my imagination loosely - it IS FORBIDDEN. Even if we> > use imagination as a secret personal tool, when we express it we are> > supposed to back it up by pointing out clear references - otherwise the> > argument would be rejected. Own imagination is NOT a public tool - that can> > agreed upon by many or something that can make astrology a sastra.> > //> - We cannot stand still on ancient laurels for long, so we must augment> > this> > > ancient knowledge with new researches. Empirical research should> > establish> > > tools to apply this knowledge to the best of our ability.//> > Yes, we should - but only after we are able to reach were the ancient> > stood - currently we are very far far behind! Till then why not spend our> > energy on finding the hidden treasures in these ruins and make them shine in> > the touch stone of our consciousness? That is the actual "re-search" and> > not creating new theories I think.> > I am not against someone successfully using D-chart technique in the> > group as a personal tool. But I feel cheated when they argue that it is> > there in the ancient classics or that the sages are speaking about D-charts,> > or that even all there imaginations such as "transit in d-charts" and> > "aspect in D-charts" are all present in ancient classics! They are simply> > lying and others following suit! Then I feel challenged, cheated, I smell> > fraud and non-sincerity and my voice goes up! You cannot blame me for that!> > Let me repeat -> > * I am NOT against the use of D-chats if it is used as a newborn> > personal tool with the acceptance that it is not mentioned in classics.> > * I am NOT against KP Sub-Sub theories since they are using it as a new> > invention of Krishnamoorti.> > But when ever someone tries to place a lie as if it is truth; when ever> > new ideas are clothed in sheep skin and presented; I get agitated and then> > the situation is no more peaceful. No - you cannot blame me for that! I am> > just being sincere to myself.> > Love and regards,> > SreenadhThis Message was sent from Indian Oil Messaging Gateway, New Delhi, India. The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.

[Guest guest]

Dear Neelam ji,

Thanks for the post. I have all the books of Sh. Chandulal S patel with me. I have great respect for him and read them to understand the nadi astrology and navamsha.

My submission was only that Sreenad is not wrong Nadi astrology and others also use amsha in rashi chart. We use varga charts separately only for easy understanding the applicability of amsha in the chart, because all members may not have as high IQ as Sreenadh and you. My IQ is not high but still I desire to understand astrolgy in the easy way. So I use separate chart for the varga. Take my chart. The ascendant is Sagittarius 27* 21 minute. It falls in Sagittarius navamsha. So we can say that lagna is lagnamsha yukta. If we draw the separate chart of navamsha with Sagittarius lagna will give the same meaning easy understandable to me who has normal IQ. Take Sun posited in Aries with 8* 16 minutes. Sun is in Gemini navamsha. Gemini is 7th house in rashi chart. So Sun is kalatrayukta. If we draw the navamsha chart with Sagittarius lagna, there will be Gemini in 7th house. Very easy to understand. Where is the controversy?

Both are saying the same thing in different way.

So far as use of strong words for the beacons of astrology in the present time, I can not agree with Sreenadh. We should be polite and have respect for them, though we disagree with them The have done or doing some thing and contributing to astrology. They are trying to regain lost respect and estabilishing astrology on firm footing. I salute them.

Love and regards--- On Mon, 10/12/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07 wrote:

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07Re: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Monday, October 12, 2009, 11:07 PM

 

Dear Kursija ji,There is liberal use of reckonings from lagna amshas by CS Patel. Trasits and aspects are also discussed in details.Please check these from his book Navamsha in Astrology. They are all accompanied by quotes.(pls refer to pp 13-17)22nd Dreshkan is reckoned from lagna Dreshkan. 64th Navamsha from lagna and moon navamsha and is called Sanghatika.There should be no planet in the 55th Navamsha from lagna navamsha at the time of marriage. What we broadly recommend as no planet in 7H.Certain other places from lagna/moon’s navamsha have been recommended which can be better seen in a chart erected with rising navamsa. These are 36th Nav (square), 72nd Navamsha (called Vainashiskam), 96th Navamsha (Manasam) etc.Transit of planets on all these points have also been described. In fact, the author recommends the use of 64th navamsha from all planets.Use of terms like Bhavottama ad

trikonge/trikonke (pp 20)Transits of planets on Navamshas occupied by various lords are well described with quotes, specially chapter 10.Aspects in Navamsha (pp 178-180)Last page: please see his explanation on own navamsha and rashi chart and how he’s read it.Then lastly, one important para tells you that all that he says is supported by classics, except the use of ashtakvarga on navamsha.Hope you’ll find it useful. Please note that this is not to alter your view point, just stating some relevant references for study.RegardsNeelam

[Guest guest]

Sorry for intervention but Neelam ji, this is called Rashi Tulya Navamsha wherein the planets in navamsha are superimposed on the basic birth chart.

 

regards,

 

Mouji--- On Tue, 10/13/09, S.C. Kursija <sckursija wrote:

S.C. Kursija <sckursijaRe: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions) Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 11:54 AM

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Neelam ji,

Thanks for the post. I have all the books of Sh. Chandulal S patel with me. I have great respect for him and read them to understand the nadi astrology and navamsha.

My submission was only that Sreenad is not wrong Nadi astrology and others also use amsha in rashi chart. We use varga charts separately only for easy understanding the applicability of amsha in the chart, because all members may not have as high IQ as Sreenadh and you. My IQ is not high but still I desire to understand astrolgy in the easy way. So I use separate chart for the varga. Take my chart. The ascendant is Sagittarius 27* 21 minute. It falls in Sagittarius navamsha. So we can say that lagna is lagnamsha yukta. If we draw the separate chart of navamsha with Sagittarius lagna will give the same meaning easy understandable to me who has normal IQ. Take Sun posited in Aries with 8* 16 minutes. Sun is in Gemini navamsha. Gemini is 7th house in rashi chart. So Sun is kalatrayukta. If we draw the navamsha chart with Sagittarius lagna, there will be Gemini in 7th house. Very easy to understand. Where is the controversy?

Both are saying the same thing in different way.

So far as use of strong words for the beacons of astrology in the present time, I can not agree with Sreenadh. We should be polite and have respect for them, though we disagree with them The have done or doing some thing and contributing to astrology. They are trying to regain lost respect and estabilishing astrology on firm footing. I salute them.

Love and regards--- On Mon, 10/12/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com> wrote:

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com>Re: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)ancient_indian_ astrologyMonday, October 12, 2009, 11:07 PM

Dear Kursija ji,There is liberal use of reckonings from lagna amshas by CS Patel. Trasits and aspects are also discussed in details.Please check these from his book Navamsha in Astrology. They are all accompanied by quotes.(pls refer to pp 13-17)22nd Dreshkan is reckoned from lagna Dreshkan. 64th Navamsha from lagna and moon navamsha and is called Sanghatika.There should be no planet in the 55th Navamsha from lagna navamsha at the time of marriage. What we broadly recommend as no planet in 7H.Certain other places from lagna/moon’s navamsha have been recommended which can be better seen in a chart erected with rising navamsa. These are 36th Nav (square), 72nd Navamsha (called Vainashiskam) , 96th Navamsha (Manasam) etc.Transit of planets on all these points have also been described. In fact, the author recommends the use of 64th navamsha from all planets.Use of terms like

Bhavottama ad trikonge/trikonke (pp 20)Transits of planets on Navamshas occupied by various lords are well described with quotes, specially chapter 10.Aspects in Navamsha (pp 178-180)Last page: please see his explanation on own navamsha and rashi chart and how he’s read it.Then lastly, one important para tells you that all that he says is supported by classics, except the use of ashtakvarga on navamsha.Hope you’ll find it useful. Please note that this is not to alter your view point, just stating some relevant references for study.RegardsNeelam

[Guest guest]

Thanks Mouji ji. I was afraid to introduce another terminology within a hanging debate. Yes, Rashi Tulya Navamsha and Navamsha Tulya rashi are the two concepts which have been elaborated by Sh Patel with support from quotes from classics and Nadi literature.

The general indications of the promise seen from the Rashi Tulya Navamsha e.g. if more planets fall in Bhagyamsha, karmamsha, lagamsha etc., native leads a happy and prosperous life.Transit results have to be see from Navamsh Tulya Rashi, e.g., it is a known dictum as also given by Phaldeepika (Chap XVI, Sh 12) and discussed by Sh Patel, when Jupiter in Transit comes to the Navamsha occupied by any bhava lord, or trines to it, good results of that bhava are obtained.

One can see these by marking in the rashi chart itself, or make a separate varga or even do all computations mentally! All depends on individual skills and preferences, I guess.RegardsNeelam

2009/10/13 Manoj Kumar <mouji99

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry for intervention but Neelam ji, this is called Rashi Tulya Navamsha wherein the planets in navamsha are superimposed on the basic birth chart.

 

regards,

 

Mouji--- On Tue, 10/13/09, S.C. Kursija <sckursija wrote:

S.C. Kursija <sckursijaRe: Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

Date: Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 11:54 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Neelam ji,

Thanks for the post. I have all the books of Sh. Chandulal S patel with me. I have great respect for him and read them to understand the nadi astrology and navamsha.

My submission was only that Sreenad is not wrong  Nadi astrology and others also use amsha in rashi chart. We use varga charts separately only for easy understanding the  applicability of amsha in the chart, because all members may not have as high IQ as Sreenadh and you. My IQ is not high but still I desire to understand astrolgy in the easy way. So I use separate chart for the varga. Take my chart. The ascendant is Sagittarius 27* 21 minute. It falls in Sagittarius navamsha. So we can say that lagna is lagnamsha yukta. If we draw the separate chart of navamsha with Sagittarius lagna will give the same meaning easy understandable to me who has normal IQ. Take Sun posited in Aries with 8* 16 minutes. Sun is in Gemini navamsha. Gemini is 7th house in rashi chart. So Sun is kalatrayukta. If we draw the navamsha chart with Sagittarius lagna, there will be Gemini in 7th house. Very easy to understand. Where is the controversy?

Both are saying the same thing in different way.

So far as use of strong words for the beacons of astrology in the present time, I can not agree with Sreenadh. We should be polite and have respect for them, though we disagree with them The have done or doing some thing and contributing to astrology. They are trying to regain lost respect and estabilishing astrology on firm footing. I salute them.

Love and regards--- On Mon, 10/12/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com> wrote:

neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com>Re: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas (Divisions)

ancient_indian_ astrologyMonday, October 12, 2009, 11:07 PM

Dear Kursija ji,There is liberal use of reckonings from lagna amshas by CS Patel. Trasits and aspects are also discussed in details.Please check these from his book Navamsha in Astrology. They are all accompanied by quotes.

(pls refer to pp 13-17)22nd Dreshkan is reckoned from lagna Dreshkan. 64th Navamsha from lagna and moon navamsha and is called Sanghatika.There should be no planet in the 55th Navamsha from lagna navamsha at the time of marriage. What we broadly recommend as no planet in 7H.

Certain other places from lagna/moon’s navamsha have been recommended which can be better seen in a chart erected with rising navamsa. These are 36th Nav (square), 72nd Navamsha (called Vainashiskam) , 96th Navamsha (Manasam) etc.

Transit of planets on all these points have also been described. In fact, the author recommends the use of 64th navamsha from all planets.Use of terms like

Bhavottama ad trikonge/trikonke (pp 20)Transits of planets on Navamshas occupied by various lords are well described with quotes, specially chapter 10.Aspects in Navamsha (pp 178-180)Last page: please see his explanation on own navamsha and rashi chart and how he’s read it.

Then lastly, one important para tells you that all that he says is supported by classics, except the use of ashtakvarga on navamsha.Hope you’ll find it useful. Please note that this is not to alter your view point, just stating some relevant references for study.

RegardsNeelam 

[Guest guest]

Just adding some small cent -

 

Some of my (Nadi) predictions are made through transit of slow moving

planets in Navamsha raashis. But this may not be accepted by all, and

needs another set of audience so never speak about same.

 

regards/Bhaskar.

 

 

, neelam gupta

<neelamgupta07 wrote:

>

> Thanks Mouji ji. I was afraid to introduce another terminology within

a

> hanging debate.

>

> Yes, Rashi Tulya Navamsha and Navamsha Tulya rashi are the two

concepts

> which have been elaborated by Sh Patel with support from quotes from

> classics and Nadi literature.

> The general indications of the promise seen from the Rashi Tulya

Navamsha

> e.g. if more planets fall in Bhagyamsha, karmamsha, lagamsha etc.,

native

> leads a happy and prosperous life.

> Transit results have to be see from Navamsh Tulya Rashi, e.g., it is a

known

> dictum as also given by Phaldeepika (Chap XVI, Sh 12) and discussed by

Sh

> Patel, when Jupiter in Transit comes to the Navamsha occupied by any

bhava

> lord, or trines to it, good results of that bhava are obtained.

>

> One can see these by marking in the rashi chart itself, or make a

separate

> varga or even do all computations mentally! All depends on individual

skills

> and preferences, I guess.

>

> Regards

> Neelam

>

>

>

> 2009/10/13 Manoj Kumar mouji99

>

> >

> >

> > Sorry for intervention but Neelam ji, this is called Rashi Tulya

Navamsha

> > wherein the planets in navamsha are superimposed on the basic birth

chart.

> >

> > regards,

> >

> > Mouji

> >

> > --- On *Tue, 10/13/09, S.C. Kursija sckursija* wrote:

> >

> >

> > S.C. Kursija sckursija

> > Re: Re: Application of Amsas

> > (Divisions)

> >

> > Tuesday, October 13, 2009, 11:54 AM

> >

> >

> > Dear Neelam ji,

> > Thanks for the post. I have all the books of Sh. Chandulal S patel

with me.

> > I have great respect for him and read them to understand the nadi

astrology

> > and navamsha.

> > My submission was only that Sreenad is not wrong Nadi astrology and

others

> > also use amsha in rashi chart. We use varga charts separately only

for easy

> > understanding the applicability of amsha in the chart, because all

members

> > may not have as high IQ as Sreenadh and you. My IQ is not high but

still I

> > desire to understand astrolgy in the easy way. So I use separate

chart for

> > the varga. Take my chart. The ascendant is Sagittarius 27* 21

minute. It

> > falls in Sagittarius navamsha. So we can say that lagna is lagnamsha

yukta.

> > If we draw the separate chart of navamsha with Sagittarius lagna

will give

> > the same meaning easy understandable to me who has normal IQ. Take

Sun

> > posited in Aries with 8* 16 minutes. Sun is in Gemini navamsha.

Gemini is

> > 7th house in rashi chart. So Sun is kalatrayukta. If we draw the

navamsha

> > chart with Sagittarius lagna, there will be Gemini in 7th house.

Very easy

> > to understand. Where is the controversy? Both are saying the same

thing in

> > different way.

> > So far as use of strong words for the beacons of astrology in the

present

> > time, I can not agree with Sreenadh. We should be polite and have

respect

> > for them, though we disagree with them The have done or doing some

thing and

> > contributing to astrology. They are trying to regain lost respect

and

> > estabilishing astrology on firm footing. I salute them.

> > Love and regards

> >

> > --- On *Mon, 10/12/09, neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com>*

wrote:

> >

> >

> > neelam gupta <neelamgupta07@ gmail.com>

> > Re: [ancient_indian_ astrology] Re: Application of Amsas

> > (Divisions)

> > ancient_indian_ astrology

> > Monday, October 12, 2009, 11:07 PM

> >

> >

> >

> > Dear Kursija ji,

> >

> > There is liberal use of reckonings from lagna amshas by CS Patel.

Trasits

> > and aspects are also discussed in details.

> >

> > Please check these from his book Navamsha in Astrology. They are all

> > accompanied by quotes.

> >

> > (pls refer to pp 13-17)

> > 22nd Dreshkan is reckoned from lagna Dreshkan. 64th Navamsha from

lagna and

> > moon navamsha and is called Sanghatika.

> > There should be no planet in the 55th Navamsha from lagna navamsha

at the

> > time of marriage. What we broadly recommend as no planet in 7H.

> > Certain other places from lagna/moon's navamsha have been

recommended which

> > can be better seen in a chart erected with rising navamsa. These are

36th

> > Nav (square), 72nd Navamsha (called Vainashiskam) , 96th Navamsha

(Manasam)

> > etc.

> >

> > Transit of planets on all these points have also been described. In

fact,

> > the author recommends the use of 64th navamsha from all planets.

> >

> > Use of terms like Bhavottama ad trikonge/trikonke (pp 20)

> >

> > Transits of planets on Navamshas occupied by various lords are well

> > described with quotes, specially chapter 10.

> >

> > Aspects in Navamsha (pp 178-180)

> >

> > Last page: please see his explanation on own navamsha and rashi

chart and

> > how he's read it.

> >

> > Then lastly, one important para tells you that all that he says is

> > supported by classics, except the use of ashtakvarga on navamsha.

> >

> > Hope you'll find it useful. Please note that this is not to

alter your view

> > point, just stating some relevant references for study.

> >

> > Regards

> > Neelam

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Neelam ji,

Please permit me to address these points one by one.

//> There is liberal use of reckonings from lagna amshas by CS Patel. Trasits

and aspects are also discussed in details. Please check these from his book

Navamsha in Astrology. They are all accompanied by quotes.//

We will cross check that and his references.

 

Point -1

=========

//> (pls refer to pp 13-17) 22nd Dreshkan is reckoned from lagna Dreshkan. 64th

Navamsha from lagna and moon navamsha and is called Sanghatika. There should be

no planet in the 55th Navamsha from lagna navamsha at the time of marriage. What

we broadly recommend as no planet in 7H. Certain other places from lagna/moon's

navamsha have been recommended which can be better seen in a chart erected with

rising navamsa. These are 36th Nav (square), 72nd Navamsha (called

Vainashiskam), 96th Navamsha (Manasam) etc.///

We are not at all against any of these points. For example - He is speaking

about " Lagna NAVAMSA " and not about Lagna NAVAMSAKA.

Please note that it is all about -

* 22nd Drekkana from Lagana Drekkana - i.e. 1/3rd of Sign within Lagna sign

(and NOT about Drekkana AmsaKA - i.e. The sign on which Drekkana amsa falls)

* 66th Navamsa from Lagna Navamsa i.e. Lagnamsa - i.e. 1/9 of Sign within

Lagna sign (and NOT about LagnamsaKA - i.e. The sign on which the Lagna navamsa

- lagnamsa - falls)

The same is true for all the other Amsas he speak about. This is in tune with

the traditional approach and NOT COUNTING FROM LagnamsaKA is required. What is

under consideration is the divisions of Signs such as Navamsa, Drakkana etc and

NOT the sign on which it falls (or the sign to which the lordship is ascribed

to).

When you consider the sign on which the amsa falls (i.e. when you consider

the AmsaKA instead of Amsa) - you are shifting the starting point (focal point)

itself - and then the derivations are not in tune with and not as guided by the

classics. Hope I have clarified this issue. The sign of which Amsa is part of

and the sign to which its lorship is ascribed to are entirely different. For

example Aries 2nd amsa is part of Aried, but the sign to which its lordship is

ascribed to is Taurus - hope you see the difference. All the references above

given by CSP is to Amsa and NOT to AmsaKA.

 

Point -2

========

//> Transit of planets on all these points have also been described. In fact,

the author recommends the use of 64th navamsha from all planets. Use of terms

like Bhavottama ad trikonge/trikonke (pp 20)//

 

This is well and good and as in tune with the tradition and is " about the

transit of planets in Rasi chart itself " ! What is wrong in it. Let us take an

example.

For an Aries 2nd Navamsa born (Taurus NavamsaKa) native, 64th Navamsa is 2nd

Navamsa of Scorpio (and navamsaKA of of 2nd navamsa of Scorpio is Leo - i.e. 2nd

navamsa of Scorpio falls in Leo). Now the transit a malefic planet through 8th

house, especially through the 64th navamsa from lagnamsa (i.e. through Scorpio

second navamsa) would OBVIOUSLY be dangerous! Because the malefic planet is not

only in his 8th house, but in exactly the sharp 8th house navamsa (64th namamsa)

of the native! This is what CSP is speaking about. Please note that here the

transit is happening in the Rasi chart itself. The point is if the malefic

planet is traversing through 8th house, and there also through the 64th navamsa

it would be deadly. Clear and crisp.

Actually traditional astrology puts forward one more point - even if the

transit of the malefic planet is through Leo in the above example (i.e. through

the 64th NavamsaKA sign) then too some bad results can be predicted - even

though not strong as while the transit is through 64th navamsa - i.e. 8th house.

Thus in this case also CSP is speaking nothing against Traditional astrology;

and nothing about considering transit in navamsaKA chart (D-9 chart) starting

from LagnamsaKA. The above discussion is NOT about transit in Navamaka chart at

all, but about transit in Natal chart (through navamsas).

//> Transits of planets on Navamshas occupied by various lords are well

described with quotes, specially chapter 10.//

This statement is also from the same confusion, clarified above.

 

Point -3

========

//> Aspects in Navamsha (pp 178-180)//

The whole section is a translation of quotes present in Brihat Jataka,

Saravali and Meeraja hora and nothing else. For example let us take the first

sentence from that chapter itself.

" If the Moon is at the time of a person's birth be conjoined in the Navamsa of

Aries or Scorpio and be at the same time aspected by the Sun, he will be

courageous, will punish thieves, will be reputed and will be protector of a

city " .

This is nothing but the elaboration of the first word of the quote " Arakshako

vadharuchi kusalo niyudhe.... " in Brihat Jataka 16th chapter, by considering the

results provided by Meenaraja hora as well.

[i am speaking from memory here, and mistakes, if any, I will correct later]

Here a minor mistake is committed by CSP in not using the word NavamsaKA

instead of the word Navamsa. Here is the quote is about Moon's navamsa falling

in Aries NavamsaKA. It is better to modify the above statement of CSP as follows

for better understanding -

" If the Moon is at the time of a person's birth be conjoined in the NavamsaKA of

Aries or Scorpio and be at the same time (Moon is) aspected by the Sun, he will

be courageous, will punish thieves, will be reputed and will be protector of a

city " .

Here the point to be noted is that - it is Moon who is aspected by Sun and it

is Moon's navamsaKA that is Aries (i.e. Moon Navamsa falls in Aries).

Let us try to understand what it really means (Let us consider Aries only for

better understanding) -

* " Moon at the time of birth is conjoned in the Navamsa of Aries " Meaning,

Moon is placed in some sign, and Moon's Navamsa falls in Aries. " at the same

time aspected by the Sun " Meaning 2 conditions should be met at the same. First,

Moon's NavamsaKa should be Aries, and Second, Sun should aspect Moon. It is

simple and straight. This is the combination.

* " he will be courageous, will punish thieves, will be reputed and will be

protector of a city " . OK - that is the result to be predicted.

Now Moon can have Aries NavamsaKA -

1) If it is placed in the 1st navamsa of Aries

2) If it is placed in the 4th navamsa of Taurus and so on.

Thus in short, here also it is evident that CSP is speaking about the Drishti

of planets in Natal chart only (and NOT in a chart with LagnamsaKA as starting

point). But the extra point is that two conditions are considered in the

classics, out of which one is about Drishti between planets in natal chart, and

the other is about their NavamsaKA in various signs.

Hope I have clarified this confusion.

 

Point -4

========

//> Last page: please see his explanation on own navamsha and rashi chart and

how he's read it.//

Ha..Ha... In the whole book CSP was speaking based on his horoscope itself. But

at the end he also says the following, since the same is NOT supported by any

classics, that - " From research point of view, students may try " (Ref. P.203).

And then he goes on to speak about - and to give an example for - How to read

Divisional chart starting from Lagnamsaka as done by neelam ji and all now a

days. Actually at the end CSP points to two things he couldn't find even a

single reference to -

1) Applying Ashtaka varga to Navamsa

2) Navamsa chart reading (as popular today) starting from LagnamsaKA

In his own words - " The author, during his study of last 50 years has not come

across any authority in classical texts, about applying Ashtakavarga to navamsa

or any other Varga Chart. From research pont of view, students may try " ; Then he

goes on to give the " navamsa chart reading starting from lagnamsaKA " as pointed

out by Neelam ji.

So the point is -

* CSP was a very sincere astrologer, and he won't approve something if he

couldn't find a clear reference to the same. He couldn't find any reference to

BOTH Ashtaka varga to navamsa or to the popular practice of reading navamsa

chart starting from lagnamsaKA and so he moved it to the end of his book - with

a note " From research point of view, students may try " . Ha..Ha.. Clever he is!

Any way the point to be accepted is that - He was not against drawing

Navamsaka planetary placement as a separate chart; but he never read it as an

independent chart. This is the very reason for 2 statements kept him thinking

for 40+ years (Ref. P.1). The statements under question are - " Prayo navamsa

akhilam " [ALMOST all results can be predicted by considering Navamsa alone] and

" Jatakaphalam navamse " [(Almsot all)Horoscope results can be predicted using

Navamsa (alone)]. He was keep thinking how is it possible when Navamsa is just a

depended component of the Rasi chart (and NOT independent)? I will elaborate a

bit more on this later in another mail.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, neelam gupta

<neelamgupta07 wrote:

>

> Dear Kursija ji,

>

> There is liberal use of reckonings from lagna amshas by CS Patel. Trasits

> and aspects are also discussed in details.

>

> Please check these from his book Navamsha in Astrology. They are all

> accompanied by quotes.

>

> (pls refer to pp 13-17)

> 22nd Dreshkan is reckoned from lagna Dreshkan. 64th Navamsha from lagna and

> moon navamsha and is called Sanghatika.

> There should be no planet in the 55th Navamsha from lagna navamsha at the

> time of marriage. What we broadly recommend as no planet in 7H.

> Certain other places from lagna/moon's navamsha have been recommended which

> can be better seen in a chart erected with rising navamsa. These are 36th

> Nav (square), 72nd Navamsha (called Vainashiskam), 96th Navamsha (Manasam)

> etc.

>

> Transit of planets on all these points have also been described. In fact,

> the author recommends the use of 64th navamsha from all planets.

>

> Use of terms like Bhavottama ad trikonge/trikonke (pp 20)

>

> Transits of planets on Navamshas occupied by various lords are well

> described with quotes, specially chapter 10.

>

> Aspects in Navamsha (pp 178-180)

>

> Last page: please see his explanation on own navamsha and rashi chart and

> how he's read it.

>

> Then lastly, one important para tells you that all that he says is supported

> by classics, except the use of ashtakvarga on navamsha.

>

> Hope you'll find it useful. Please note that this is not to alter your view

> point, just stating some relevant references for study.

>

> Regards

> Neelam

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Chakraborty ji,

Well said! You got is all correct.

//> There is a request to all. If possible, a Blind chart may please be taken

up by the forum. And both sides may use different approaches to show what are

the additional informations could be gleaned from use of D-9 charts and whether

the additional info is correct or not.

> This will help many a forum member to understand the discussion that is going

on for few days.//

I agree to this - but would request you to hold it for some time. Let more

info gets poured in, clarity come, let the water get settled and become more

clean, let consensus sets in and then we will conduct an Amsa centric blind

chart reading. If we does it in a hurry, the focus will shift and we will lose a

chance for good amount of information exchange.

Love and regards,

Sreenadh

 

, " Chakraborty, PL "

<CHAKRABORTYP2 wrote:

>

> Dear Learned Seniors,

>

> The result of this discussion appears to be....(from an engrs point

> of view only) (To be taken on a lighter vein ONLY)

>

> Sreenadh-ji is saying :

>

> 1) Varga Charts are not sanctioned as per codes and standards.

> Hence can not be used as a part of standard design practices.

> 2) There are no precedents or Code cases relating to such practices.

> 3) The Varga charts are not covered in " recommended good practices "

> in the Codes / Standards

> 4) There are few institutes practising such charts. It appears that they

> have 'extrapolated' data to form such practices. However, the basis

> of such extrapolation is not established.

>

> On the other hand, Neelam-ji and others have slightly different take

>

> 1) The codes / standards are have not clearly banned such uses

> 2) There are few code cases which can be interpreted other-wise

> and prima facie, appears to support varga charts

> 3) Irrespective of Codes/standards, few experts are using such charts

> frequently and getting good results / additional benefits. These

> are Company design practices and may supersede international

> codes. (Like Shell Design Practice may supersede ASME codes

> where Shell is the designer).

>

> There is a request to all. If possible, a Blind chart may please be taken

> up by the forum. And both sides may use different approaches to show

> what are the additional informations could be gleaned from use of D-9 charts

> and whether the additional info is correct or not.

>

> This will help many a forum member to understand the discussion that is

> going on for few days.

>

> regards

>

> Chakraborty