Guest guest Posted September 25, 2004 Report Share Posted September 25, 2004 Dear Ron, A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly... VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical to a house counted from itself,naturally...! The editing seems to be at fault... Yours 'ly, lyastro1. GOOD LUCK ! In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page 135 (8th edition) the question is posed: " now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a person? " and under para (b) it states: " Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to the matter signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy the constellation and sub of the significator of the houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). Similarly, for each house we have to note whether the significator of the house , is posited in the constellation and sub of the significator of the houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR SIGN. If any planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with the lords of such houses, the planet offers adverse results by lordship. " Here we see two different starting points quoted. Is this correct? If not is it the Lagna or the particular sign that is the starting point? Another point regarding undesirable houses. I realize that planets can have both desirable and undesirable effects. However, there is reference in 'Handbook on Astrology Part 1 pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 and 11, and undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this mean that we should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords as benefic for the desirable houses and malefic for the undesirable houses? Also if a planet rules both a desirable and undesirable house are there any rules as to which is dominant ie. moolotrikona etc.? One final unrelated question - can someone please tell me the maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another planet, for them to act on behalf of that planet. Thanks Ron Gaunt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 26, 2004 Report Share Posted September 26, 2004 Yogesh, Thanks for your reply Ron Gaunt On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote: >Dear Ron, > A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly... > VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical to >a house counted from itself,naturally...! > The editing seems to be at fault... > Yours 'ly, > lyastro1. > GOOD LUCK ! > > >In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page 135 >(8th >edition) the question is posed: > > " now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a >person? " > >and under para (b) it states: > > " Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to the >matter >signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy the >constellation and sub of the significator of the >houses 6,8 and >12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). Similarly, >for each >house we have to note whether the significator of the >house , is >posited in the constellation and sub of the >significator of the >houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR SIGN. >If any >planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with the >lords of such >houses, the planet offers adverse results by >lordship. " > >Here we see two different starting points quoted. Is >this >correct? If not is it the Lagna or the particular >sign that is >the starting point? > >Another point regarding undesirable houses. I >realize that >planets can have both desirable and undesirable >effects. >However, there is reference in 'Handbook on Astrology >Part 1 >pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 and >11, and >undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this mean >that we >should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords as >benefic for >the desirable houses and malefic for the undesirable >houses? >Also if a planet rules both a desirable and >undesirable house >are there any rules as to which is dominant ie. >moolotrikona >etc.? > >One final unrelated question - can someone please >tell me the >maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another >planet, for >them to act on behalf of that planet. > >Thanks > > >Ron Gaunt > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2004 Report Share Posted September 27, 2004 the same printing error can not be in reader3 page135 (9th Edition), kpreader 5 pg 135 (9th edition), kp reader 3 page 128 (7th edition). What I understand is that for matters dependent on Asc. we should count 6,8,12 from Asc and for matters relating to the particular house we should count from that house. such as for matters of father from 9th house. Mukesh Gupta rongaunt <rongaunt wrote: Yogesh,Thanks for your replyRon GauntOn Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote:>Dear Ron,> A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly...> VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical to>a house counted from itself,naturally...!> The editing seems to be at fault...> Yours 'ly,> lyastro1.> GOOD LUCK !>>>In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page 135>(8th>edition) the question is posed:>>"now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a>person?">>and under para (b) it states:>>"Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to the>matter>signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy the>constellation and sub of the significator of the>houses 6,8 and>12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). Similarly,>for each>house we have to note whether the significator of the>house , is>posited in the constellation and sub of the>significator of the>houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR SIGN.>If any>planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with the>lords of such>houses, the planet offers adverse results by>lordship.">>Here we see two different starting points quoted. Is>this>correct? If not is it the Lagna or the particular>sign that is>the starting point?>>Another point regarding undesirable houses. I>realize that>planets can have both desirable and undesirable>effects.>However, there is reference in 'Handbook on Astrology>Part 1>pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 and>11, and>undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this mean>that we>should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords as>benefic for>the desirable houses and malefic for the undesirable>houses?>Also if a planet rules both a desirable and>undesirable house>are there any rules as to which is dominant ie.>moolotrikona>etc.?>>One final unrelated question - can someone please>tell me the>maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another>planet, for>them to act on behalf of that planet.>>Thanks>>>Ron Gaunt>>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2004 Report Share Posted September 27, 2004 Dear Shri Gupta, The IXth is the ascendant of the Father,Vth the ascendant of a child etc... I do not see ant dichotomy at all... Yours sincerely, lyrastro1 GOOD LUCK ! > the same printing error can not be in reader3 > page135 (9th Edition), kpreader 5 pg 135 (9th > edition), kp reader 3 page 128 (7th edition). > > What I understand is that for matters dependent on > Asc. we should count 6,8,12 from Asc and for matters > relating to the particular house we should count > from that house. such as for matters of father from > 9th house. > > Mukesh Gupta > > > rongaunt <rongaunt wrote: > Yogesh, > > Thanks for your reply > > Ron Gaunt > > > On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote: > > >Dear Ron, > > A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly... > > VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical > to > >a house counted from itself,naturally...! > > The editing seems to be at fault... > > Yours 'ly, > > lyastro1. > > GOOD LUCK ! > > > > > >In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page > 135 > >(8th > >edition) the question is posed: > > > > " now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a > >person? " > > > >and under para (b) it states: > > > > " Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to > the > >matter > >signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy > the > >constellation and sub of the significator of the > >houses 6,8 and > >12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). > Similarly, > >for each > >house we have to note whether the significator of > the > >house , is > >posited in the constellation and sub of the > >significator of the > >houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR > SIGN. > >If any > >planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with the > >lords of such > >houses, the planet offers adverse results by > >lordship. " > > > >Here we see two different starting points quoted. > Is > >this > >correct? If not is it the Lagna or the particular > >sign that is > >the starting point? > > > >Another point regarding undesirable houses. I > >realize that > >planets can have both desirable and undesirable > >effects. > >However, there is reference in 'Handbook on > Astrology > >Part 1 > >pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 > and > >11, and > >undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this > mean > >that we > >should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords > as > >benefic for > >the desirable houses and malefic for the > undesirable > >houses? > >Also if a planet rules both a desirable and > >undesirable house > >are there any rules as to which is dominant ie. > >moolotrikona > >etc.? > > > >One final unrelated question - can someone please > >tell me the > >maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another > >planet, for > >them to act on behalf of that planet. > > > >Thanks > > > > > >Ron Gaunt > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 27, 2004 Report Share Posted September 27, 2004 Dear Shri Lajmi, Kindly read Book "How to Cast and Read your horoscope" by K. Hariharan S/O Shri K.S. Krishnamurti. page 120-121 reads as follows, " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants of 6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to occupy in the above planets constellation or in their subs will produce bad results. (Above evil houses are to be counted from that house which we have to discuss)." The point I was making is that there is no editing/printing error. I am only learning KP for last one year and not an expert as you claim to be. Yours sincerely, Mukesh Gupta Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1 wrote: Dear Shri Gupta, The IXth is the ascendant of theFather,Vth the ascendant of a child etc... I do not see ant dichotomy at all... Yours sincerely, lyrastro1 GOOD LUCK ! > the same printing error can not be in reader3> page135 (9th Edition), kpreader 5 pg 135 (9th> edition), kp reader 3 page 128 (7th edition).> > What I understand is that for matters dependent on> Asc. we should count 6,8,12 from Asc and for matters> relating to the particular house we should count> from that house. such as for matters of father from> 9th house.> > Mukesh Gupta> > > rongaunt <rongaunt wrote:> Yogesh,> > Thanks for your reply> > Ron Gaunt> > > On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote:> > >Dear Ron,> > A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly...> > VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical> to> >a house counted from itself,naturally...!> > The editing seems to be at fault...> > Yours 'ly,> > lyastro1.> > GOOD LUCK !> >> >> >In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page> 135> >(8th> >edition) the question is posed:> >> >"now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a> >person?"> >> >and under para (b) it states:> >> >"Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to> the> >matter> >signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy> the> >constellation and sub of the significator of the> >houses 6,8 and> >12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). > Similarly,> >for each> >house we have to note whether the significator of> the> >house , is> >posited in the constellation and sub of the> >significator of the> >houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR> SIGN.> >If any> >planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with the> >lords of such> >houses, the planet offers adverse results by> >lordship."> >> >Here we see two different starting points quoted. > Is> >this> >correct? If not is it the Lagna or the particular> >sign that is> >the starting point?> >> >Another point regarding undesirable houses. I> >realize that> >planets can have both desirable and undesirable> >effects.> >However, there is reference in 'Handbook on> Astrology> >Part 1> >pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10> and> >11, and> >undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this> mean> >that we> >should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords> as> >benefic for> >the desirable houses and malefic for the> undesirable> >houses?> >Also if a planet rules both a desirable and> >undesirable house> >are there any rules as to which is dominant ie.> >moolotrikona> >etc.?> >> >One final unrelated question - can someone please> >tell me the> >maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another> >planet, for> >them to act on behalf of that planet.> >> >Thanks> >> >> >Ron Gaunt> >> >> >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2004 Report Share Posted September 28, 2004 Mukesh, I don't have a copy of " how to cast your horoscope " so I cannot check, but I am surprised to see 6, 8, and 12th Lords being quoted as " bad " . The little study I have done so far suggests that Prof. K. saw any particular planet as being both good and bad under different circumstances. One of the problems I encountered on first reading Prof K's. book on Transits (Reader V) is that he explains both the Western and the Hindu systems in detail as though he is advocating each of the systems. Only afterwards does he state that in his opinion they are not correct and then explains the KP position. Are you sure that he is not simply explaining the standard Hindu system in your quotation? Ron Gaunt Ron Gaunt On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:53:36 -0700, you wrote: >Dear Shri Lajmi, > >Kindly read Book " How to Cast and Read your horoscope " by K. Hariharan S/O Shri K.S. Krishnamurti. page 120-121 reads as follows, > " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants of 6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to occupy in the above planets constellation or in their subs will produce bad results. (Above evil houses are to be counted from that house which we have to discuss). " >The point I was making is that there is no editing/printing error. I am only learning KP for last one year and not an expert as you claim to be. >Yours sincerely, >Mukesh Gupta > >Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1 wrote: >Dear Shri Gupta, > The IXth is the ascendant of the >Father,Vth the ascendant of a child etc... > I do not see ant dichotomy at all... > Yours sincerely, > lyrastro1 > GOOD LUCK ! > >> the same printing error can not be in reader3 >> page135 (9th Edition), kpreader 5 pg 135 (9th >> edition), kp reader 3 page 128 (7th edition). >> >> What I understand is that for matters dependent on >> Asc. we should count 6,8,12 from Asc and for matters >> relating to the particular house we should count >> from that house. such as for matters of father from >> 9th house. >> >> Mukesh Gupta >> >> >> rongaunt <rongaunt wrote: >> Yogesh, >> >> Thanks for your reply >> >> Ron Gaunt >> >> >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote: >> >> >Dear Ron, >> > A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly... >> > VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical >> to >> >a house counted from itself,naturally...! >> > The editing seems to be at fault... >> > Yours 'ly, >> > lyastro1. >> > GOOD LUCK ! >> > >> > >> >In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page >> 135 >> >(8th >> >edition) the question is posed: >> > >> > " now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a >> >person? " >> > >> >and under para (b) it states: >> > >> > " Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to >> the >> >matter >> >signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy >> the >> >constellation and sub of the significator of the >> >houses 6,8 and >> >12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). >> Similarly, >> >for each >> >house we have to note whether the significator of >> the >> >house , is >> >posited in the constellation and sub of the >> >significator of the >> >houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR >> SIGN. >> >If any >> >planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with the >> >lords of such >> >houses, the planet offers adverse results by >> >lordship. " >> > >> >Here we see two different starting points quoted. >> Is >> >this >> >correct? If not is it the Lagna or the particular >> >sign that is >> >the starting point? >> > >> >Another point regarding undesirable houses. I >> >realize that >> >planets can have both desirable and undesirable >> >effects. >> >However, there is reference in 'Handbook on >> Astrology >> >Part 1 >> >pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 >> and >> >11, and >> >undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this >> mean >> >that we >> >should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords >> as >> >benefic for >> >the desirable houses and malefic for the >> undesirable >> >houses? >> >Also if a planet rules both a desirable and >> >undesirable house >> >are there any rules as to which is dominant ie. >> >moolotrikona >> >etc.? >> > >> >One final unrelated question - can someone please >> >tell me the >> >maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another >> >planet, for >> >them to act on behalf of that planet. >> > >> >Thanks >> > >> > >> >Ron Gaunt >> > >> > >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2004 Report Share Posted September 28, 2004 Dear Ron, You remind me of an internee,who has recently learnt about the signs and symptoms of some serious diseases,and when some of the symptoms appear to be being experienced by himself,he begins to dread that he himself is suffering from the disease... This a normal phenomenon,with ALL beginners,IN ALL FIELDS...pl. don't be alarmed...remain cool,calm and collected,APPLY K.P., as much as you can...everyday you will get a new insight...! The houses VI,VIII & XII are generally bad,but in a few circumstances they are good....for example VI could signify disease/illness and also Victory over an enemy...It depends entirely,on the context in which you are analysing the horoscope...and so on... VIII means death,but could also mean unearned income,legacy or windfall...depending upon one's destiny...as has been explained already in these columns...Not everybody whose Sublord of III signfies the IInd and XIth gets the First prize in a lottery... Have you thought... WHY this happens ? Experience and reading and applying,and this cycle repeated over and over again will enable you to master K.P. Just by reading a book,once or twice or even ten times will not help...practice helps...analysis...practice...reading...analysis...practise...reading... on a continuous basis,alone will help There is NO INSTANT FORMULA TO MASTER K.P. Yours sincerely, lyrastro1 GOOD LUCK ! Mukesh, I don't have a copy of " how to cast your horoscope " so I cannot check, but I am surprised to see 6, 8, and 12th Lords being quoted as " bad " . The little study I have done so far suggests that Prof. K. saw any particular planet as being both good and bad under different circumstances. One of the problems I encountered on first reading Prof K's. book on Transits (Reader V) is that he explains both the Western and the Hindu systems in detail as though he is advocating each of the systems. Only afterwards does he state that in his opinion they are not correct and then explains the KP position. Are you sure that he is not simply explaining the standard Hindu system in your quotation? Ron Gaunt Ron Gaunt On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:53:36 -0700, you wrote: >Dear Shri Lajmi, > >Kindly read Book " How to Cast and Read your horoscope " by K. Hariharan S/O Shri K.S. Krishnamurti. page 120-121 reads as follows, > " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants of 6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to occupy in the above planets constellation or in their subs will produce bad results. (Above evil houses are to be counted from that house which we have to discuss). " >The point I was making is that there is no editing/printing error. I am only learning KP for last one year and not an expert as you claim to be. >Yours sincerely, >Mukesh Gupta > >Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1 wrote: >Dear Shri Gupta, > The IXth is the ascendant of the >Father,Vth the ascendant of a child etc... > I do not see ant dichotomy at all... > Yours sincerely, > lyrastro1 > GOOD LUCK ! > >> the same printing error can not be in reader3 >> page135 (9th Edition), kpreader 5 pg 135 (9th >> edition), kp reader 3 page 128 (7th edition). >> >> What I understand is that for matters dependent on >> Asc. we should count 6,8,12 from Asc and for matters >> relating to the particular house we should count >> from that house. such as for matters of father from >> 9th house. >> >> Mukesh Gupta >> >> >> rongaunt <rongaunt wrote: >> Yogesh, >> >> Thanks for your reply >> >> Ron Gaunt >> >> >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote: >> >> >Dear Ron, >> > A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly... >> > VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical >> to >> >a house counted from itself,naturally...! >> > The editing seems to be at fault... >> > Yours 'ly, >> > lyastro1. >> > GOOD LUCK ! >> > >> > >> >In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page >> 135 >> >(8th >> >edition) the question is posed: >> > >> > " now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a >> >person? " >> > >> >and under para (b) it states: >> > >> > " Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to >> the >> >matter >> >signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy >> the >> >constellation and sub of the significator of the >> >houses 6,8 and >> >12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). >> Similarly, >> >for each >> >house we have to note whether the significator of >> the >> >house , is >> >posited in the constellation and sub of the >> >significator of the >> >houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR >> SIGN. >> >If any >> >planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with the >> >lords of such >> >houses, the planet offers adverse results by >> >lordship. " >> > >> >Here we see two different starting points quoted. >> Is >> >this >> >correct? If not is it the Lagna or the particular >> >sign that is >> >the starting point? >> > >> >Another point regarding undesirable houses. I >> >realize that >> >planets can have both desirable and undesirable >> >effects. >> >However, there is reference in 'Handbook on >> Astrology >> >Part 1 >> >pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 >> and >> >11, and >> >undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this >> mean >> >that we >> >should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords >> as >> >benefic for >> >the desirable houses and malefic for the >> undesirable >> >houses? >> >Also if a planet rules both a desirable and >> >undesirable house >> >are there any rules as to which is dominant ie. >> >moolotrikona >> >etc.? >> > >> >One final unrelated question - can someone please >> >tell me the >> >maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another >> >planet, for >> >them to act on behalf of that planet. >> > >> >Thanks >> > >> > >> >Ron Gaunt >> > >> > >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2004 Report Share Posted September 29, 2004 Dear All, >>I am surprised to see 6, 8, and 12th Lords being >>quoted as " bad " . The little study I have done so far suggests >>that Prof. K. saw any particular planet as being both good and >>bad under different circumstances. >>>The houses VI,VIII & XII are generally bad, but >>>in a few circumstances they are good....for example VI >>>could signify disease/illness and also Victory over an >>>enemy...It depends entirely, on the context in which >>>you are analyzing the horoscope...and so on... >>>VIII means death, but could also mean unearned >>>income, legacy or windfall...depending upon one's >>>destiny... 1. They are bad, indeed, because conducive to end of life --- Gurugi KSK says, " However old he may be, would like to live for some more years " . " 6H ---disease; 8H --- incidents; 12H --- danger, death (Moksha). If the sub (of the Lagna) is a malefic i.e. lords of 6, 8 and 12, life is short. ---- Houses 1, 8 and 3 are judged for longevity. The 12H to 1,8 & 3 are 12, 7 and 2 death-inflicting houses; 2 & 7H are called Maraka and 12 Moksha (death). The Bhadhaka houses are the worst malefics for death. " --- KP Reader III, Fourth Edition, 1984, Part Two, p.6, 8-10, 12-13--- The 8H and the 8th from that, i.e., the 3H are called " houses of longevity " . 2. In the traditional Hindu astrology, these three misery- producing 6,8 & 12 houses are considered the evil houses of suffering or " Dusthana " representing the things in life that most people generally fear, like illness, loss and death---- also anxieties, enemies, lawsuits, injuries, surgeries, scandals etc ------Any planet associated with one of these houses in any way is harmed or empowered to cause destruction. Houses aspected by the lord of one of these dusthanas are spoiled. ----- Of course, in KP constellation and sub are more important and decisive than the planet itself. 3. In my KP observation of three level death-related dasas of 40 notable horoscopes ---- Nostradamus (d. 1556), Napoleon (d. 1821) ---- - B V Raman (d. 1998), JFK JR (d. 1995) --- frequency of 6H with any of three dasa level is 35/40 --- 75%, 8H connection is 62% --- 12H involvement is 70% in any level of dasa, ----- of course Maraka (2 or 7H) at top with 90% and Badhaka 72% ------ In 34 divorce cases of 20 notable horoscopes ------ Napoleon, Einstein ---- E. Taylor, John Kerry --- 6H connection with any of three dasa levels is 50% and 12H influence is 56%. >>>Another point regarding undesirable houses. I >>>realize that planets can have both desirable and undesirable >> >effects. However, there is reference in 'Handbook on Astrology > >>>Part 1 >> pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 and >>>11, and undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this mean that we >>>should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords as benefic for >>>the desirable houses and malefic for the undesirable houses? 4. Desirable or undesirable --- depends on the native --- which he or she considers, as desirable results, agreeable to him. Certain beneficial results to the native are disadvantageous to his or her relatives ----- 2H (promotion, money) for the native may be death of wife, --- 10H (promotion) is maraka for parents and also serious illness of the child--- beneficial 4 & 5 houses are detrimental for the children ----- 2 & 7 may be desirable at younger age for money and love, but undesirable for maraka at older age --etc----, houses of loss --- 4,5,7,8,9 and 12 are useful for foreign travel, matters of house & car, education and parents --- etc ---- 5. The above two groups of houses are mentioned in ---- (i) KP Reader III, Part 2, p. 41-42 -- 1,2,3,6,10 and 11--- as " gain, victory, etc. " and 4,5,7,8,9 and 12 -- " loss, disappointment " --- (ii) Sri K. HARIHARAN: HOW TO JUDGE LONGEVITY? , Third Edition, 1997, p. 4 --- as " beneficial (advantage) " and ---- " malefic (disadvantage) " ---- (iii) but not used " desirable or undesirable " --- (iii) the most important thing is to grasp the combination of houses of gain in three levels of dasa --- of course, in terms of constellation lord and sub lord. >>>Here we see two different starting points quoted. >>>Is this correct? >>>A printer's devil?, 6. Even though it is not a practice to count for matters of relatives from the lagna of the native, let me try to find a way to dispel the controversial topic of discussion simply by understanding the logic behind the issue. ---- Suppose " that particular sign " was a printing or editing error in place of " Lagna " in the para " (b) Lord of the second house ----- by lordship. The above is the general principle " (It is important to note " the general principle. " tw) in - (i) KP Reader III, Fourth Edition, 1984, p. 128, and (ii) Reader V, Fourth Edition, 1983, p. 128. Then, 6,8 & 12 houses counted from the lagna are for the native 6,8 & 12 houses; 4,6 & 10 houses for younger brother or sister (3H); 3,5 & 9 houses for mother; 2,4 & 8 houses for children (5H); 10, 12 & 4 houses for father (9H); and 8,10 & 2 houses for elder brother or sister (11H). (Allotted as per KP Reader II, p. 192-221 and VI, p.117-121 since there is a controversy to take 9 or 10H for father in Hindu astrology.) Of course, the outcome is showing different results for each of them, i.e. 6,8 & 12H for the native, and the implication of these 6,8 & 12 houses to each relative differently. No common indication --- to have the general principle --- good and bad are mixed up for relatives ---instead of --- generally bad. >>> the same printing error cannot be in reader3 ------ >>> for matters relating to the particular house we should count >>> from that house. such as for matters of father from 9th house. >>I do not see ant dichotomy at all... >>> The point I was making is that there is no editing/printing error. 7. Now, suppose --- no printing error ---, if " that particular sign " is taken as it is in Reader III & V, and 6,8 & 12 houses are counted (i) from the Lagna for the native, and (ii) from that particular sign for each relative, then 6,8 & 12 houses are commonly bad for all of them ---- particularly as regards to health. It looks like the general principle, which is consistent for all of them. 6,8 & 12 houses from a particular house are undesirable for that particular house or person. That particular house is a lagna for that particular person or matter. 8. One thing in my mind ---- How can a house be desirable if its significator is connected with 6,8 & 12 houses from that particular house? ---- traditional?--- or --- Hindu? --- KP? ---- sure--- not Western ---- still thinking to grasp the KP idea ----- --- because --- - 9. Sri K. HARIHARAN says, " Prof. Krishnamurti has accepted all the important basic principles of Hindu and Western Astrology in his system, such as --- (i) The constellational Zodiac of Hindu Astrology; (ii) The idea of dividing the constellation in the mysterious unequal Vimsottari proportion attributed to the venerable Sage Parasara (hailed as father of Indian Predictive Astrology who lived roughly around 5,000 years ago,tw)(mysterious? not yet known why recommended to follow a particular order of planet periods, and --- also why allotted each planet a particular numbers of years--- Prof. KSK); (iii) The Western Placidian cusps. 10. He continues to say, " However, Prof. Krishnamurti thoroughly revolutionized the predictive portion (Phalabhaga) in his Padhdhati " , and gives a noteworthy remark, " In the preliminary chapters of K.P. Reader II (Fundamentals of Astrology) Prof. Krishnamurti exhorts students of Astrology to learn thoroughly the works of our Sages and all books on Astrology written by the scholars on the subject " . (Pl note it is his remark, not mine. Credit or debit to him, not me. tw) ---- Sri K. HARIHARAN: NOTABLE PERSONS & KRISHNAMURTI PADHDHATI " , 1993, p. 9, 22-23 11. Needless to say about a common practice of counting houses from the allotted houses for relative in the following examples: (i) Under the of " CONSTELLATION AND SUB " in ANYONE of three books ---- a. KP Reader III, Part One, p.139-142, or b. KP Reader V, p. 139-142 or c. KP Reader VI, Third Edition, 1978, p. 83-86, exactly the same example for father, mother and child;. (ii) " A person goes on a pilgrimage, as lord of 9,10 & 12 jointly operate --- loss of two sons in theGanges due to the lordship of 6 & 8 houses counted from the 5H denoting health and longevity of children --- KP Reader V, p. 126. (iii) Sri K. HARIHARAN's HOW TO JUDGE LONGEVITY? p. 71-75. --- death inflicting houses for mother from the 4H of her child's horoscope, two examples in p. 30-33 & 38-41, and for maternal grand father taking 12H of the grand son's horoscope as the ascendant of the grandfather. >>>Kindly read Book " How to Cast and Read your horoscope " by K. >>>Hariharan S/O Shri >>>K.S. Krishnamurti. page 120-121 reads as >>>follows, " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants of >>>6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to occupy in the above >>>planets constellation or in their subs will produce bad results. >>>(Above evil houses are to be counted from that house which we have >>>to discuss). " >>>Are you sure that he is not simply explaining the standard Hindu >>>system in your quotation? 12. Absolutely sure, He is speaking in KP --- Before saying the above quoted para, he says in p. 118, " In most of our experience - -- planets posited in houses 6,8, 12 do not always produce evil results. So, it can be openly said that all the nine planets play good and bad events irrespective of their nature and disposition. This makes the astrologers who follow Traditional system, more confused. " After saying the above first quoted para ---- " According to K.P. Lords of 6,8, 12 ----- have to discuss) " , ---- he continues to remind the readers, " At the same time `treatise' warns the readers to see that 6th house has to give service and pet animals and receipts of loans when necessary and maternal uncle etc., 8th house deals with unexpected or income without efforts such as receipts of Insurance Bonus. The 12 th house corresponds with investments of money, treatment in hospitals, paternal properties, good sleep etc., etc. " >>>Also if a planet rules both a desirable and undesirable house are >>>there any rules as to which is dominant ie. moolotrikona etc.? 13. Explained in ---- (i) KP Reader III, Part 2, p. 8, para " Disease is indicated ------ " , and " In this case ------ " ……… ii) Also in KP Reader IV, Fourth Edition, 1984, p. 145, para " (One important factor ----- , how can it give marriage) " …... .. (iii) " If a planet has to offer a desirable as well as undesirable result, it will offer both. ---- " KP Reader IV, p. 180. >> >One final unrelated question - can someone please >> >tell me the maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another >> >planet, for them to act on behalf of that planet. 14. " Aspect and their significance " chapter in KP Reader I, fourth Edition, 1982, p. 109-126 ----- (in p. 124, also about devil houses ----(4) --- Any connection with malefics, more especially with lords of 6 or 8 or 12 --- portends evils --- for the affairs governed by the house occupied by the aspected planet.) 15. It is noteworthy for any one interested, repeat only for any one interested in additional information on Rahu, that ----- (i) Maharishi Parashara nowhere does attribute aspects to the nodes --- but their aspects have been widely practiced at present. --- - If any one interested, ------ it can be read by pressing ---- http://www.jyotishvidya.com/nodes.htm (ii) V. N. Krishna Rao says, " regarding Rahu's aspects, it is wrong to consider Rahu as aspecting the 7H. The 7H from Rahu is itself Kethu with qualities distinctly of its own " . While Rahu partakes of the qualities of Saturn, Kethu is considered to embody the qualities of Mars. It is my experience that the trinal aspects of Rahu are beneficial while the square aspects are particularly harmful.---- in his article --- " Place of Rahu in Prediction " (iii) In 's " SYSTEM'S APPROACH " analysis, percentage-wise influence of planets are calculated by their software --- http://www.jyotishtools.com/ ----- what they called " Triple Transit " , ie., Transits Influences over Natal Planets and MEPs (Most Effective Points), Transit Influence over Transit Planets, and Natal Influences over Transit Planets. (Pl note true node is used in their SA) LONG LIVE KP! Best wishes and regards, tw , Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1> wrote: > Dear Ron, > You remind me of an internee,who has recently > learnt about the signs and symptoms of some serious > diseases,and when some of the symptoms appear to be > being experienced by himself,he begins to dread that > he himself is suffering from the disease... > This a normal phenomenon,with ALL beginners,IN > ALL FIELDS...pl. don't be alarmed...remain cool,calm > and collected,APPLY K.P., as much as you > can...everyday you will get a new insight...! > The houses VI,VIII & XII are generally bad,but > in a few circumstances they are good....for example VI > could signify disease/illness and also Victory over an > enemy...It depends entirely,on the context in which > you are analysing the horoscope...and so on... > VIII means death,but could also mean unearned > income,legacy or windfall...depending upon one's > destiny...as has been explained already in these > columns...Not everybody whose Sublord of III signfies > the IInd and XIth gets the First prize in a lottery... > Have you thought... WHY this happens ? > Experience and reading and applying,and this > cycle repeated over and over again will enable you to > master K.P. > Just by reading a book,once or twice or even > ten times will not help...practice > helps...analysis...practice...reading...analysis...practise...reading. ... > on a continuous basis,alone will help > There is NO INSTANT FORMULA TO MASTER K.P. > Yours sincerely, > lyrastro1 > GOOD LUCK ! > > > > Mukesh, > > I don't have a copy of " how to cast your horoscope " so > I cannot > check, but I am surprised to see 6, 8, and 12th Lords > being > quoted as " bad " . The little study I have done so > far suggests > that Prof. K. saw any particular planet as being > both good and > bad under different circumstances. > > One of the problems I encountered on first reading > Prof K's. book > on Transits (Reader V) is that he explains both the > Western and > the Hindu systems in detail as though he is advocating > each of > the systems. Only afterwards does he state that in > his opinion > they are not correct and then explains the KP > position. Are > you sure that he is not simply explaining the standard > Hindu > system in your quotation? > > > Ron Gaunt > > Ron Gaunt > > > On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:53:36 -0700, you wrote: > > >Dear Shri Lajmi, > > > >Kindly read Book " How to Cast and Read your > horoscope " by K. Hariharan S/O Shri K.S. Krishnamurti. > page 120-121 reads as follows, > > " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants > of 6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to > occupy in the above planets constellation or in their > subs will produce bad results. (Above evil houses are > to be counted from that house which we have to > discuss). " > >The point I was making is that there is no > editing/printing error. I am only learning KP for last > one year and not an expert as you claim to be. > >Yours sincerely, > >Mukesh Gupta > > > >Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1> wrote: > >Dear Shri Gupta, > > The IXth is the ascendant of the > >Father,Vth the ascendant of a child etc... > > I do not see ant dichotomy at all... > > Yours sincerely, > > lyrastro1 > > GOOD LUCK ! > > > >> the same printing error can not be in reader3 > >> page135 (9th Edition), kpreader 5 pg 135 (9th > >> edition), kp reader 3 page 128 (7th edition). > >> > >> What I understand is that for matters dependent on > >> Asc. we should count 6,8,12 from Asc and for > matters > >> relating to the particular house we should count > >> from that house. such as for matters of father from > >> 9th house. > >> > >> Mukesh Gupta > >> > >> > >> rongaunt <rongaunt@b...> wrote: > >> Yogesh, > >> > >> Thanks for your reply > >> > >> Ron Gaunt > >> > >> > >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote: > >> > >> >Dear Ron, > >> > A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly... > >> > VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical > >> to > >> >a house counted from itself,naturally...! > >> > The editing seems to be at fault... > >> > Yours 'ly, > >> > lyastro1. > >> > GOOD LUCK ! > >> > > >> > > >> >In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page > >> 135 > >> >(8th > >> >edition) the question is posed: > >> > > >> > " now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a > >> >person? " > >> > > >> >and under para (b) it states: > >> > > >> > " Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to > >> the > >> >matter > >> >signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy > >> the > >> >constellation and sub of the significator of the > >> >houses 6,8 and > >> >12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). > >> Similarly, > >> >for each > >> >house we have to note whether the significator of > >> the > >> >house , is > >> >posited in the constellation and sub of the > >> >significator of the > >> >houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR > >> SIGN. > >> >If any > >> >planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with > the > >> >lords of such > >> >houses, the planet offers adverse results by > >> >lordship. " > >> > > >> >Here we see two different starting points quoted. > > >> Is > >> >this > >> >correct? If not is it the Lagna or the > particular > >> >sign that is > >> >the starting point? > >> > > >> >Another point regarding undesirable houses. I > >> >realize that > >> >planets can have both desirable and undesirable > >> >effects. > >> >However, there is reference in 'Handbook on > >> Astrology > >> >Part 1 > >> >pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 > >> and > >> >11, and > >> >undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this > >> mean > >> >that we > >> >should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords > >> as > >> >benefic for > >> >the desirable houses and malefic for the > >> undesirable > >> >houses? > >> >Also if a planet rules both a desirable and > >> >undesirable house > >> >are there any rules as to which is dominant ie. > >> >moolotrikona > >> >etc.? > >> > > >> >One final unrelated question - can someone > please > >> >tell me the > >> >maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another > >> >planet, for > >> >them to act on behalf of that planet. > >> > > >> >Thanks > >> > > >> > > >> >Ron Gaunt > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2004 Report Share Posted September 30, 2004 Dear Tin Win, Truly,I'm quite impressed with your scholarly mastery of K.P.,especially over Shri Haiharan's book... However instead of engaging in an exercise of " nit-picking " ,I suggest we should all enter into discussing more interesting topics,like the sub-sub theory,like the CMT theory and so on,the new researches being published by Stalwats such as Prof.K.Balachandran,Pt.K.R.Kar,et al...this will benefit K.P. more...I think... This discussion seems to be heading towards an entirely needless exercise of point & counter point...I wonder,to prove what...that one has read and understood better than the other...? Needless because K.P.,remains the same...its principles are constant...and I personally feel that this discussion is carrying on too far,and is degenerating into a " slug-fest " of sorts,... " my interpretation is more correct... " and so on...in the final analysis,as KSK used to often say, " ...the proof of the pudding is in eating it... " I suggest that we all agree to END this discussion forthwith...and move on to more exciting topics... Yours sincerely, lyrastro1 GOOD LUCK ! Dear All, >>I am surprised to see 6, 8, and 12th Lords being >>quoted as " bad " . The little study I have done so far suggests >>that Prof. K. saw any particular planet as being both good and >>bad under different circumstances. >>>The houses VI,VIII & XII are generally bad, but >>>in a few circumstances they are good....for example VI >>>could signify disease/illness and also Victory over an >>>enemy...It depends entirely, on the context in which >>>you are analyzing the horoscope...and so on... >>>VIII means death, but could also mean unearned >>>income, legacy or windfall...depending upon one's >>>destiny... 1. They are bad, indeed, because conducive to end of life --- Gurugi KSK says, " However old he may be, would like to live for some more years " . " 6H ---disease; 8H --- incidents; 12H --- danger, death (Moksha). If the sub (of the Lagna) is a malefic i.e. lords of 6, 8 and 12, life is short. ---- Houses 1, 8 and 3 are judged for longevity. The 12H to 1,8 & 3 are 12, 7 and 2 death-inflicting houses; 2 & 7H are called Maraka and 12 Moksha (death). The Bhadhaka houses are the worst malefics for death. " --- KP Reader III, Fourth Edition, 1984, Part Two, p.6, 8-10, 12-13--- The 8H and the 8th from that, i.e., the 3H are called " houses of longevity " . 2. In the traditional Hindu astrology, these three misery- producing 6,8 & 12 houses are considered the evil houses of suffering or " Dusthana " representing the things in life that most people generally fear, like illness, loss and death---- also anxieties, enemies, lawsuits, injuries, surgeries, scandals etc ------Any planet associated with one of these houses in any way is harmed or empowered to cause destruction. Houses aspected by the lord of one of these dusthanas are spoiled. ----- Of course, in KP constellation and sub are more important and decisive than the planet itself. 3. In my KP observation of three level death-related dasas of 40 notable horoscopes ---- Nostradamus (d. 1556), Napoleon (d. 1821) ---- - B V Raman (d. 1998), JFK JR (d. 1995) --- frequency of 6H with any of three dasa level is 35/40 --- 75%, 8H connection is 62% --- 12H involvement is 70% in any level of dasa, ----- of course Maraka (2 or 7H) at top with 90% and Badhaka 72% ------ In 34 divorce cases of 20 notable horoscopes ------ Napoleon, Einstein ---- E. Taylor, John Kerry --- 6H connection with any of three dasa levels is 50% and 12H influence is 56%. >>>Another point regarding undesirable houses. I >>>realize that planets can have both desirable and undesirable >> >effects. However, there is reference in 'Handbook on Astrology > >>>Part 1 >> pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 and >>>11, and undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this mean that we >>>should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords as benefic for >>>the desirable houses and malefic for the undesirable houses? 4. Desirable or undesirable --- depends on the native --- which he or she considers, as desirable results, agreeable to him. Certain beneficial results to the native are disadvantageous to his or her relatives ----- 2H (promotion, money) for the native may be death of wife, --- 10H (promotion) is maraka for parents and also serious illness of the child--- beneficial 4 & 5 houses are detrimental for the children ----- 2 & 7 may be desirable at younger age for money and love, but undesirable for maraka at older age --etc----, houses of loss --- 4,5,7,8,9 and 12 are useful for foreign travel, matters of house & car, education and parents --- etc ---- 5. The above two groups of houses are mentioned in ---- (i) KP Reader III, Part 2, p. 41-42 -- 1,2,3,6,10 and 11--- as " gain, victory, etc. " and 4,5,7,8,9 and 12 -- " loss, disappointment " --- (ii) Sri K. HARIHARAN: HOW TO JUDGE LONGEVITY? , Third Edition, 1997, p. 4 --- as " beneficial (advantage) " and ---- " malefic (disadvantage) " ---- (iii) but not used " desirable or undesirable " --- (iii) the most important thing is to grasp the combination of houses of gain in three levels of dasa --- of course, in terms of constellation lord and sub lord. >>>Here we see two different starting points quoted. >>>Is this correct? >>>A printer's devil?, 6. Even though it is not a practice to count for matters of relatives from the lagna of the native, let me try to find a way to dispel the controversial topic of discussion simply by understanding the logic behind the issue. ---- Suppose " that particular sign " was a printing or editing error in place of " Lagna " in the para " (b) Lord of the second house ----- by lordship. The above is the general principle " (It is important to note " the general principle. " tw) in - (i) KP Reader III, Fourth Edition, 1984, p. 128, and (ii) Reader V, Fourth Edition, 1983, p. 128. Then, 6,8 & 12 houses counted from the lagna are for the native 6,8 & 12 houses; 4,6 & 10 houses for younger brother or sister (3H); 3,5 & 9 houses for mother; 2,4 & 8 houses for children (5H); 10, 12 & 4 houses for father (9H); and 8,10 & 2 houses for elder brother or sister (11H). (Allotted as per KP Reader II, p. 192-221 and VI, p.117-121 since there is a controversy to take 9 or 10H for father in Hindu astrology.) Of course, the outcome is showing different results for each of them, i.e. 6,8 & 12H for the native, and the implication of these 6,8 & 12 houses to each relative differently. No common indication --- to have the general principle --- good and bad are mixed up for relatives ---instead of --- generally bad. >>> the same printing error cannot be in reader3 ------ >>> for matters relating to the particular house we should count >>> from that house. such as for matters of father from 9th house. >>I do not see ant dichotomy at all... >>> The point I was making is that there is no editing/printing error. 7. Now, suppose --- no printing error ---, if " that particular sign " is taken as it is in Reader III & V, and 6,8 & 12 houses are counted (i) from the Lagna for the native, and (ii) from that particular sign for each relative, then 6,8 & 12 houses are commonly bad for all of them ---- particularly as regards to health. It looks like the general principle, which is consistent for all of them. 6,8 & 12 houses from a particular house are undesirable for that particular house or person. That particular house is a lagna for that particular person or matter. 8. One thing in my mind ---- How can a house be desirable if its significator is connected with 6,8 & 12 houses from that particular house? ---- traditional?--- or --- Hindu? --- KP? ---- sure--- not Western ---- still thinking to grasp the KP idea ----- --- because --- - 9. Sri K. HARIHARAN says, " Prof. Krishnamurti has accepted all the important basic principles of Hindu and Western Astrology in his system, such as --- (i) The constellational Zodiac of Hindu Astrology; (ii) The idea of dividing the constellation in the mysterious unequal Vimsottari proportion attributed to the venerable Sage Parasara (hailed as father of Indian Predictive Astrology who lived roughly around 5,000 years ago,tw)(mysterious? not yet known why recommended to follow a particular order of planet periods, and --- also why allotted each planet a particular numbers of years--- Prof. KSK); (iii) The Western Placidian cusps. 10. He continues to say, " However, Prof. Krishnamurti thoroughly revolutionized the predictive portion (Phalabhaga) in his Padhdhati " , and gives a noteworthy remark, " In the preliminary chapters of K.P. Reader II (Fundamentals of Astrology) Prof. Krishnamurti exhorts students of Astrology to learn thoroughly the works of our Sages and all books on Astrology written by the scholars on the subject " . (Pl note it is his remark, not mine. Credit or debit to him, not me. tw) ---- Sri K. HARIHARAN: NOTABLE PERSONS & KRISHNAMURTI PADHDHATI " , 1993, p. 9, 22-23 11. Needless to say about a common practice of counting houses from the allotted houses for relative in the following examples: (i) Under the of " CONSTELLATION AND SUB " in ANYONE of three books ---- a. KP Reader III, Part One, p.139-142, or b. KP Reader V, p. 139-142 or c. KP Reader VI, Third Edition, 1978, p. 83-86, exactly the same example for father, mother and child;. (ii) " A person goes on a pilgrimage, as lord of 9,10 & 12 jointly operate --- loss of two sons in theGanges due to the lordship of 6 & 8 houses counted from the 5H denoting health and longevity of children --- KP Reader V, p. 126. (iii) Sri K. HARIHARAN's HOW TO JUDGE LONGEVITY? p. 71-75. --- death inflicting houses for mother from the 4H of her child's horoscope, two examples in p. 30-33 & 38-41, and for maternal grand father taking 12H of the grand son's horoscope as the ascendant of the grandfather. >>>Kindly read Book " How to Cast and Read your horoscope " by K. >>>Hariharan S/O Shri >>>K.S. Krishnamurti. page 120-121 reads as >>>follows, " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants of >>>6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to occupy in the above >>>planets constellation or in their subs will produce bad results. >>>(Above evil houses are to be counted from that house which we have >>>to discuss). " >>>Are you sure that he is not simply explaining the standard Hindu >>>system in your quotation? 12. Absolutely sure, He is speaking in KP --- Before saying the above quoted para, he says in p. 118, " In most of our experience - -- planets posited in houses 6,8, 12 do not always produce evil results. So, it can be openly said that all the nine planets play good and bad events irrespective of their nature and disposition. This makes the astrologers who follow Traditional system, more confused. " After saying the above first quoted para ---- " According to K.P. Lords of 6,8, 12 ----- have to discuss) " , ---- he continues to remind the readers, " At the same time `treatise' warns the readers to see that 6th house has to give service and pet animals and receipts of loans when necessary and maternal uncle etc., 8th house deals with unexpected or income without efforts such as receipts of Insurance Bonus. The 12 th house corresponds with investments of money, treatment in hospitals, paternal properties, good sleep etc., etc. " >>>Also if a planet rules both a desirable and undesirable house are >>>there any rules as to which is dominant ie. moolotrikona etc.? 13. Explained in ---- (i) KP Reader III, Part 2, p. 8, para " Disease is indicated ------ " , and " In this case ------ " ……… ii) Also in KP Reader IV, Fourth Edition, 1984, p. 145, para " (One important factor ----- , how can it give marriage) " …... .. (iii) " If a planet has to offer a desirable as well as undesirable result, it will offer both. ---- " KP Reader IV, p. 180. >> >One final unrelated question - can someone please >> >tell me the maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another >> >planet, for them to act on behalf of that planet. 14. " Aspect and their significance " chapter in KP Reader I, fourth Edition, 1982, p. 109-126 ----- (in p. 124, also about devil houses ----(4) --- Any connection with malefics, more especially with lords of 6 or 8 or 12 --- portends evils --- for the affairs governed by the house occupied by the aspected planet.) 15. It is noteworthy for any one interested, repeat only for any one interested in additional information on Rahu, that ----- (i) Maharishi Parashara nowhere does attribute aspects to the nodes --- but their aspects have been widely practiced at present. --- - If any one interested, ------ it can be read by pressing ---- http://www.jyotishvidya.com/nodes.htm (ii) V. N. Krishna Rao says, " regarding Rahu's aspects, it is wrong to consider Rahu as aspecting the 7H. The 7H from Rahu is itself Kethu with qualities distinctly of its own " . While Rahu partakes of the qualities of Saturn, Kethu is considered to embody the qualities of Mars. It is my experience that the trinal aspects of Rahu are beneficial while the square aspects are particularly harmful.---- in his article --- " Place of Rahu in Prediction " (iii) In 's " SYSTEM'S APPROACH " analysis, percentage-wise influence of planets are calculated by their software --- http://www.jyotishtools.com/ ----- what they called " Triple Transit " , ie., Transits Influences over Natal Planets and MEPs (Most Effective Points), Transit Influence over Transit Planets, and Natal Influences over Transit Planets. (Pl note true node is used in their SA) LONG LIVE KP! Best wishes and regards, tw , Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1> wrote: > Dear Ron, > You remind me of an internee,who has recently > learnt about the signs and symptoms of some serious > diseases,and when some of the symptoms appear to be > being experienced by himself,he begins to dread that > he himself is suffering from the disease... > This a normal phenomenon,with ALL beginners,IN > ALL FIELDS...pl. don't be alarmed...remain cool,calm > and collected,APPLY K.P., as much as you > can...everyday you will get a new insight...! > The houses VI,VIII & XII are generally bad,but > in a few circumstances they are good....for example VI > could signify disease/illness and also Victory over an > enemy...It depends entirely,on the context in which > you are analysing the horoscope...and so on... > VIII means death,but could also mean unearned > income,legacy or windfall...depending upon one's > destiny...as has been explained already in these > columns...Not everybody whose Sublord of III signfies > the IInd and XIth gets the First prize in a lottery... > Have you thought... WHY this happens ? > Experience and reading and applying,and this > cycle repeated over and over again will enable you to > master K.P. > Just by reading a book,once or twice or even > ten times will not help...practice > helps...analysis...practice...reading...analysis...practise...reading. ... > on a continuous basis,alone will help > There is NO INSTANT FORMULA TO MASTER K.P. > Yours sincerely, > lyrastro1 > GOOD LUCK ! > > > > Mukesh, > > I don't have a copy of " how to cast your horoscope " so > I cannot > check, but I am surprised to see 6, 8, and 12th Lords > being > quoted as " bad " . The little study I have done so > far suggests > that Prof. K. saw any particular planet as being > both good and > bad under different circumstances. > > One of the problems I encountered on first reading > Prof K's. book > on Transits (Reader V) is that he explains both the > Western and > the Hindu systems in detail as though he is advocating > each of > the systems. Only afterwards does he state that in > his opinion > they are not correct and then explains the KP > position. Are > you sure that he is not simply explaining the standard > Hindu > system in your quotation? > > > Ron Gaunt > > Ron Gaunt > > > On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:53:36 -0700, you wrote: > > >Dear Shri Lajmi, > > > >Kindly read Book " How to Cast and Read your > horoscope " by K. Hariharan S/O Shri K.S. Krishnamurti. > page 120-121 reads as follows, > > " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants > of 6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to > occupy in the above planets constellation or in their > subs will produce bad results. (Above evil houses are > to be counted from that house which we have to > discuss). " > >The point I was making is that there is no > editing/printing error. I am only learning KP for last > one year and not an expert as you claim to be. > >Yours sincerely, > >Mukesh Gupta > > > >Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1> wrote: > >Dear Shri Gupta, > > The IXth is the ascendant of the > >Father,Vth the ascendant of a child etc... > > I do not see ant dichotomy at all... > > Yours sincerely, > > lyrastro1 > > GOOD LUCK ! > > > >> the same printing error can not be in reader3 > >> page135 (9th Edition), kpreader 5 pg 135 (9th > >> edition), kp reader 3 page 128 (7th edition). > >> > >> What I understand is that for matters dependent on > >> Asc. we should count 6,8,12 from Asc and for > matters > >> relating to the particular house we should count > >> from that house. such as for matters of father from > >> 9th house. > >> > >> Mukesh Gupta > >> > >> > >> rongaunt <rongaunt@b...> wrote: > >> Yogesh, > >> > >> Thanks for your reply > >> > >> Ron Gaunt > >> > >> > >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote: > >> > >> >Dear Ron, > >> > A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly... > >> > VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical > >> to > >> >a house counted from itself,naturally...! > >> > The editing seems to be at fault... > >> > Yours 'ly, > >> > lyastro1. > >> > GOOD LUCK ! > >> > > >> > > >> >In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page > >> 135 > >> >(8th > >> >edition) the question is posed: > >> > > >> > " now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a > >> >person? " > >> > > >> >and under para (b) it states: > >> > > >> > " Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to > >> the > >> >matter > >> >signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy > >> the > >> >constellation and sub of the significator of the > >> >houses 6,8 and > >> >12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). > >> Similarly, > >> >for each > >> >house we have to note whether the significator of > >> the > >> >house , is > >> >posited in the constellation and sub of the > >> >significator of the > >> >houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR > >> SIGN. > >> >If any > >> >planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with > the > >> >lords of such > >> >houses, the planet offers adverse results by > >> >lordship. " > >> > > >> >Here we see two different starting points quoted. > > >> Is > >> >this > >> >correct? If not is it the Lagna or the > particular > >> >sign that is > >> >the starting point? > >> > > >> >Another point regarding undesirable houses. I > >> >realize that > >> >planets can have both desirable and undesirable > >> >effects. > >> >However, there is reference in 'Handbook on > >> Astrology > >> >Part 1 > >> >pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 > >> and > >> >11, and > >> >undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this > >> mean > >> >that we > >> >should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords > >> as > >> >benefic for > >> >the desirable houses and malefic for the > >> undesirable > >> >houses? > >> >Also if a planet rules both a desirable and > >> >undesirable house > >> >are there any rules as to which is dominant ie. > >> >moolotrikona > >> >etc.? > >> > > >> >One final unrelated question - can someone > please > >> >tell me the > >> >maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another > >> >planet, for > >> >them to act on behalf of that planet. > >> > > >> >Thanks > >> > > >> > > >> >Ron Gaunt > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 4, 2004 Report Share Posted October 4, 2004 tw - ( and interested members), Thank you for your detailed explanation. Please see follow up questions **.................** Ron Gaunt >>> >One unrelated question - can someone please >>> >tell me the maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another >>> >planet, for them to act on behalf of that planet. > >14. " Aspect and their significance " chapter in KP Reader I, >fourth Edition, 1982, p. 109-126 ----- (in p. 124, also about devil >houses ----(4) --- Any connection with malefics, more especially with >lords of 6 or 8 or 12 --- portends evils --- for the affairs governed >by the house occupied by the aspected planet.) > >15. It is noteworthy for any one interested, repeat only for any one >interested in additional information on Rahu, that ----- > >(i) Maharishi Parashara nowhere does attribute aspects to the >nodes --- but their aspects have been widely practiced at present. --- >- If any one interested, ------ it can be read by pressing ---- > > >http://www.jyotishvidya.com/nodes.htm ** What I was really asking was is there an ORB for aspects ie 8* or is it whole sign as in traditional Hindu astrology, or is it limited to the boundaries of the constellation? ** >(ii) V. N. Krishna Rao says, " regarding Rahu's aspects, it is >wrong to consider Rahu as aspecting the 7H. The 7H from Rahu is >itself Kethu with qualities distinctly of its own " . While Rahu >partakes of the qualities of Saturn, Kethu is considered to embody >the qualities of Mars. It is my experience that the trinal aspects of >Rahu are beneficial while the square aspects are particularly >harmful.---- in his article --- " Place of Rahu in Prediction " ** It is noted that this conflicts with 'Astrosecrets & Krishnamurti Padhati' Part 1 fourth edition April 2003. Here it states " when a planet is conjoined with Kethu, that planet is under the aspect of Rahu. For this reason Kethu cannot act for the conjoined planet " . The implication in the author's prior explanation of Rahu and Kethu, is that Rahu is dominant hence " Ketu will not subject itself to several level matters, like that of Rahu " . ** A further question stemming from this book is results from Rahu and Ketu. The primary result is shown on page 308 to be: " 1. Any planet deposited in the star of Rahu/Keth " . Can anyone tell me whether when MORE THAN ONE planet is deposited in the star of Rahu or Ketu what is the order of precedence?. ie. 1. Does Rahu/Ketu take on both planets qualities; and if so how are these effected. ie. is it through relevant dasas, and/or transits? 2. Or does Rahu/Ketu take on only one of the planets qualities; and if so how does one determine which planet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2004 Report Share Posted October 13, 2004 TW, Many thanks for your explanations. I will take them and one at a time and try to assimilate them. Ron Gaunt On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 16:38:09 +0000, you wrote: >Dear All, > > >>>I am surprised to see 6, 8, and 12th Lords being >>>quoted as " bad " . The little study I have done so far suggests >>>that Prof. K. saw any particular planet as being both good and >>>bad under different circumstances. > >>>>The houses VI,VIII & XII are generally bad, but >>>>in a few circumstances they are good....for example VI >>>>could signify disease/illness and also Victory over an >>>>enemy...It depends entirely, on the context in which >>>>you are analyzing the horoscope...and so on... >>>>VIII means death, but could also mean unearned >>>>income, legacy or windfall...depending upon one's >>>>destiny... > >1. They are bad, indeed, because conducive to end of life --- >Gurugi KSK says, " However old he may be, would like to live for some >more years " . " 6H ---disease; 8H --- incidents; 12H --- danger, death >(Moksha). If the sub (of the Lagna) is a malefic i.e. lords of 6, 8 >and 12, life is short. ---- Houses 1, 8 and 3 are judged for >longevity. The 12H to 1,8 & 3 are 12, 7 and 2 death-inflicting >houses; 2 & 7H are called Maraka and 12 Moksha (death). The Bhadhaka >houses are the worst malefics for death. " --- KP Reader III, Fourth >Edition, 1984, Part Two, p.6, 8-10, 12-13--- The 8H and the 8th >from that, i.e., the 3H are called " houses of longevity " . > >2. In the traditional Hindu astrology, these three misery- >producing 6,8 & 12 houses are considered the evil houses of suffering >or " Dusthana " representing the things in life that most people >generally fear, like illness, loss and death---- also anxieties, >enemies, lawsuits, injuries, surgeries, scandals etc ------Any planet >associated with one of these houses in any way is harmed or empowered >to cause destruction. Houses aspected by the lord of one of these >dusthanas are spoiled. ----- Of course, in KP constellation and sub >are more important and decisive than the planet itself. > >3. In my KP observation of three level death-related dasas of 40 >notable horoscopes ---- Nostradamus (d. 1556), Napoleon (d. 1821) ---- >- B V Raman (d. 1998), JFK JR (d. 1995) --- frequency of 6H with any >of three dasa level is 35/40 --- 75%, 8H connection is 62% --- 12H >involvement is 70% in any level of dasa, ----- of course Maraka (2 >or 7H) at top with 90% and Badhaka 72% ------ In 34 divorce cases >of 20 notable horoscopes ------ Napoleon, Einstein ---- E. Taylor, >John Kerry --- 6H connection with any of three dasa levels is 50% >and 12H influence is 56%. > >>>>Another point regarding undesirable houses. I >>>>realize that planets can have both desirable and undesirable >>> >effects. However, there is reference in 'Handbook on Astrology > >>>>Part 1 >> pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 and >>>>11, and undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this mean that we >>>>should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords as benefic for >>>>the desirable houses and malefic for the undesirable houses? > >4. Desirable or undesirable --- depends on the native --- which >he or she considers, as desirable results, agreeable to him. Certain >beneficial results to the native are disadvantageous to his or her >relatives ----- 2H (promotion, money) for the native may be death of >wife, --- 10H (promotion) is maraka for parents and also serious >illness of the child--- beneficial 4 & 5 houses are detrimental for >the children ----- 2 & 7 may be desirable at younger age for money >and love, but undesirable for maraka at older age --etc----, houses >of loss --- 4,5,7,8,9 and 12 are useful for foreign travel, matters >of house & car, education and parents --- etc ---- > >5. The above two groups of houses are mentioned in ---- > >(i) KP Reader III, Part 2, p. 41-42 -- 1,2,3,6,10 and 11--- >as " gain, victory, etc. " and 4,5,7,8,9 and 12 -- " loss, >disappointment " --- > >(ii) Sri K. HARIHARAN: HOW TO JUDGE LONGEVITY? , Third Edition, >1997, p. 4 --- as " beneficial (advantage) " and ---- " malefic >(disadvantage) " ---- > >(iii) but not used " desirable or undesirable " --- > >(iii) the most important thing is to grasp the combination of houses >of gain in three levels of dasa --- of course, in terms of >constellation lord and sub lord. > > >>>>Here we see two different starting points quoted. >>>>Is this correct? > >>>>A printer's devil?, > >6. Even though it is not a practice to count for matters of >relatives from the lagna of the native, let me try to find a way to >dispel the controversial topic of discussion simply by understanding >the logic behind the issue. ---- Suppose " that particular sign " >was a printing or editing error in place of " Lagna " in the para " (b) >Lord of the second house ----- by lordship. The above is the general >principle " (It is important to note " the general principle. " tw) in - > >(i) KP Reader III, Fourth Edition, 1984, p. 128, and > >(ii) Reader V, Fourth Edition, 1983, p. 128. > >Then, 6,8 & 12 houses counted from the lagna are for the native 6,8 > & 12 houses; 4,6 & 10 houses for younger brother or sister (3H); 3,5 > & 9 houses for mother; 2,4 & 8 houses for children (5H); 10, 12 & 4 >houses for father (9H); and 8,10 & 2 houses for elder brother or >sister (11H). (Allotted as per KP Reader II, p. 192-221 and VI, >p.117-121 since there is a controversy to take 9 or 10H for father in >Hindu astrology.) Of course, the outcome is showing different >results for each of them, i.e. 6,8 & 12H for the native, and the >implication of these 6,8 & 12 houses to each relative differently. >No common indication --- to have the general principle --- good and >bad are mixed up for relatives ---instead of --- generally bad. > > >>>> the same printing error cannot be in reader3 ------ > >>>> for matters relating to the particular house we should count >>>> from that house. such as for matters of father from 9th house. > >>>I do not see ant dichotomy at all... > >>>> The point I was making is that there is no editing/printing error. > >7. Now, suppose --- no printing error ---, if " that >particular sign " is taken as it is in Reader III & V, and 6,8 & 12 >houses are counted > >(i) from the Lagna for the native, and > >(ii) from that particular sign for each relative, > >then 6,8 & 12 houses are commonly bad for all of them ---- >particularly as regards to health. It looks like the general >principle, which is consistent for all of them. 6,8 & 12 houses from >a particular house are undesirable for that particular house or >person. That particular house is a lagna for that particular person >or matter. > >8. One thing in my mind ---- How can a house be desirable if its >significator is connected with 6,8 & 12 houses from that particular >house? ---- traditional?--- or --- Hindu? --- KP? ---- sure--- not >Western ---- still thinking to grasp the KP idea ----- --- because --- >- > >9. Sri K. HARIHARAN says, " Prof. Krishnamurti has accepted all >the important basic principles of Hindu and Western Astrology in his >system, such as --- > >(i) The constellational Zodiac of Hindu Astrology; > >(ii) The idea of dividing the constellation in the mysterious >unequal Vimsottari proportion attributed to the venerable Sage >Parasara (hailed as father of Indian Predictive Astrology who lived >roughly around 5,000 years ago,tw)(mysterious? not yet known why >recommended to follow a particular order of planet periods, and --- >also why allotted each planet a particular numbers of years--- Prof. >KSK); > >(iii) The Western Placidian cusps. > >10. He continues to say, " However, Prof. Krishnamurti thoroughly >revolutionized the predictive portion (Phalabhaga) in his Padhdhati " , >and gives a noteworthy remark, " In the preliminary chapters of K.P. >Reader II (Fundamentals of Astrology) Prof. Krishnamurti exhorts >students of Astrology to learn thoroughly the works of our Sages and >all books on Astrology written by the scholars on the subject " . (Pl >note it is his remark, not mine. Credit or debit to him, not me. >tw) ---- Sri K. HARIHARAN: NOTABLE PERSONS & KRISHNAMURTI >PADHDHATI " , 1993, p. 9, 22-23 > >11. Needless to say about a common practice of counting houses >from the allotted houses for relative in the following examples: > >(i) Under the of " CONSTELLATION AND SUB " in ANYONE of three >books ---- > >a. KP Reader III, Part One, p.139-142, or > >b. KP Reader V, p. 139-142 or > >c. KP Reader VI, Third Edition, 1978, p. 83-86, exactly the same >example for father, mother and child;. > >(ii) " A person goes on a pilgrimage, as lord of 9,10 & 12 jointly >operate --- loss of two sons in theGanges due to the lordship of 6 & >8 houses counted from the 5H denoting health and longevity of >children --- KP Reader V, p. 126. > >(iii) Sri K. HARIHARAN's HOW TO JUDGE LONGEVITY? p. 71-75. > --- death inflicting houses for mother from the 4H of her child's >horoscope, two examples in p. 30-33 & 38-41, and for maternal grand >father taking 12H of the grand son's horoscope as the ascendant of >the grandfather. > > >>>>Kindly read Book " How to Cast and Read your horoscope " by K. >>>>Hariharan S/O Shri >>>K.S. Krishnamurti. page 120-121 reads as >>>>follows, " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants of >>>>6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to occupy in the above >>>>planets constellation or in their subs will produce bad results. >>>>(Above evil houses are to be counted from that house which we have >>>>to discuss). " > >>>>Are you sure that he is not simply explaining the standard Hindu >>>>system in your quotation? > >12. Absolutely sure, He is speaking in KP --- Before saying the >above quoted para, he says in p. 118, " In most of our experience - >-- planets posited in houses 6,8, 12 do not always produce evil >results. So, it can be openly said that all the nine planets play >good and bad events irrespective of their nature and disposition. >This makes the astrologers who follow Traditional system, more >confused. " After saying the above first quoted para ---- > " According to K.P. Lords of 6,8, 12 ----- have to discuss) " , ---- >he continues to remind the readers, " At the same time `treatise' >warns the readers to see that 6th house has to give service and pet >animals and receipts of loans when necessary and maternal uncle etc., >8th house deals with unexpected or income without efforts such as >receipts of Insurance Bonus. The 12 th house corresponds with >investments of money, treatment in hospitals, paternal properties, >good sleep etc., etc. " > > >>>>Also if a planet rules both a desirable and undesirable house are >>>>there any rules as to which is dominant ie. moolotrikona etc.? > >13. Explained in ---- > >(i) KP Reader III, Part 2, p. 8, para " Disease is indicated ------ " , >and " In this case ------ " ……… > >ii) Also in KP Reader IV, Fourth Edition, 1984, p. 145, para " (One >important factor ----- , how can it give marriage) " …... .. > >(iii) " If a planet has to offer a desirable as well as undesirable >result, it will offer both. ---- " KP Reader IV, p. 180. > > >>> >One final unrelated question - can someone please >>> >tell me the maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another >>> >planet, for them to act on behalf of that planet. > >14. " Aspect and their significance " chapter in KP Reader I, >fourth Edition, 1982, p. 109-126 ----- (in p. 124, also about devil >houses ----(4) --- Any connection with malefics, more especially with >lords of 6 or 8 or 12 --- portends evils --- for the affairs governed >by the house occupied by the aspected planet.) > >15. It is noteworthy for any one interested, repeat only for any one >interested in additional information on Rahu, that ----- > >(i) Maharishi Parashara nowhere does attribute aspects to the >nodes --- but their aspects have been widely practiced at present. --- >- If any one interested, ------ it can be read by pressing ---- > > >http://www.jyotishvidya.com/nodes.htm > >(ii) V. N. Krishna Rao says, " regarding Rahu's aspects, it is >wrong to consider Rahu as aspecting the 7H. The 7H from Rahu is >itself Kethu with qualities distinctly of its own " . While Rahu >partakes of the qualities of Saturn, Kethu is considered to embody >the qualities of Mars. It is my experience that the trinal aspects of >Rahu are beneficial while the square aspects are particularly >harmful.---- in his article --- " Place of Rahu in Prediction " > >(iii) In 's " SYSTEM'S APPROACH " analysis, >percentage-wise influence of planets are calculated by their >software --- > >http://www.jyotishtools.com/ > >----- what they called " Triple Transit " , ie., Transits Influences >over Natal Planets and MEPs (Most Effective Points), Transit >Influence over Transit Planets, and Natal Influences over Transit >Planets. (Pl note true node is used in their SA) > > >LONG LIVE KP! > >Best wishes and regards, > >tw > > > > > > , Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1> >wrote: >> Dear Ron, >> You remind me of an internee,who has recently >> learnt about the signs and symptoms of some serious >> diseases,and when some of the symptoms appear to be >> being experienced by himself,he begins to dread that >> he himself is suffering from the disease... >> This a normal phenomenon,with ALL beginners,IN >> ALL FIELDS...pl. don't be alarmed...remain cool,calm >> and collected,APPLY K.P., as much as you >> can...everyday you will get a new insight...! >> The houses VI,VIII & XII are generally bad,but >> in a few circumstances they are good....for example VI >> could signify disease/illness and also Victory over an >> enemy...It depends entirely,on the context in which >> you are analysing the horoscope...and so on... >> VIII means death,but could also mean unearned >> income,legacy or windfall...depending upon one's >> destiny...as has been explained already in these >> columns...Not everybody whose Sublord of III signfies >> the IInd and XIth gets the First prize in a lottery... >> Have you thought... WHY this happens ? >> Experience and reading and applying,and this >> cycle repeated over and over again will enable you to >> master K.P. >> Just by reading a book,once or twice or even >> ten times will not help...practice >> >helps...analysis...practice...reading...analysis...practise...reading. >.. >> on a continuous basis,alone will help >> There is NO INSTANT FORMULA TO MASTER K.P. >> Yours sincerely, >> lyrastro1 >> GOOD LUCK ! >> >> >> >> Mukesh, >> >> I don't have a copy of " how to cast your horoscope " so >> I cannot >> check, but I am surprised to see 6, 8, and 12th Lords >> being >> quoted as " bad " . The little study I have done so >> far suggests >> that Prof. K. saw any particular planet as being >> both good and >> bad under different circumstances. >> >> One of the problems I encountered on first reading >> Prof K's. book >> on Transits (Reader V) is that he explains both the >> Western and >> the Hindu systems in detail as though he is advocating >> each of >> the systems. Only afterwards does he state that in >> his opinion >> they are not correct and then explains the KP >> position. Are >> you sure that he is not simply explaining the standard >> Hindu >> system in your quotation? >> >> >> Ron Gaunt >> >> Ron Gaunt >> >> >> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:53:36 -0700, you wrote: >> >> >Dear Shri Lajmi, >> > >> >Kindly read Book " How to Cast and Read your >> horoscope " by K. Hariharan S/O Shri K.S. Krishnamurti. >> page 120-121 reads as follows, >> > " According to K.P lords of 6, 8, 12 or the occupants >> of 6, 8, 12 are bad and if any planets happen to >> occupy in the above planets constellation or in their >> subs will produce bad results. (Above evil houses are >> to be counted from that house which we have to >> discuss). " >> >The point I was making is that there is no >> editing/printing error. I am only learning KP for last >> one year and not an expert as you claim to be. >> >Yours sincerely, >> >Mukesh Gupta >> > >> >Yogesh Rao Lajmi <lyrastro1> wrote: >> >Dear Shri Gupta, >> > The IXth is the ascendant of the >> >Father,Vth the ascendant of a child etc... >> > I do not see ant dichotomy at all... >> > Yours sincerely, >> > lyrastro1 >> > GOOD LUCK ! >> > >> >> the same printing error can not be in reader3 >> >> page135 (9th Edition), kpreader 5 pg 135 (9th >> >> edition), kp reader 3 page 128 (7th edition). >> >> >> >> What I understand is that for matters dependent on >> >> Asc. we should count 6,8,12 from Asc and for >> matters >> >> relating to the particular house we should count >> >> from that house. such as for matters of father from >> >> 9th house. >> >> >> >> Mukesh Gupta >> >> >> >> >> >> rongaunt <rongaunt@b...> wrote: >> >> Yogesh, >> >> >> >> Thanks for your reply >> >> >> >> Ron Gaunt >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 25 Sep 2004 08:32:05 +0100, you wrote: >> >> >> >> >Dear Ron, >> >> > A printer's devil?,somewhere,possibly... >> >> > VI,VIII, & XII,are supposed to be inimical >> >> to >> >> >a house counted from itself,naturally...! >> >> > The editing seems to be at fault... >> >> > Yours 'ly, >> >> > lyastro1. >> >> > GOOD LUCK ! >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >In the 5th Krishnamurti Reader 'Transit' on page >> >> 135 >> >> >(8th >> >> >edition) the question is posed: >> >> > >> >> > " now one may ask which are undesirable houses to a >> >> >person? " >> >> > >> >> >and under para (b) it states: >> >> > >> >> > " Lord of 2nd house will prove to be a benefic to >> >> the >> >> >matter >> >> >signified by the 2nd house, if it does not occupy >> >> the >> >> >constellation and sub of the significator of the >> >> >houses 6,8 and >> >> >12 counted FROM THE LAGNA (my emphasis). >> >> Similarly, >> >> >for each >> >> >house we have to note whether the significator of >> >> the >> >> >house , is >> >> >posited in the constellation and sub of the >> >> >significator of the >> >> >houses 6,8 and 12 counted FROM THAT PARTICULAR >> >> SIGN. >> >> >If any >> >> >planet is so posited or if it is conjoined with >> the >> >> >lords of such >> >> >houses, the planet offers adverse results by >> >> >lordship. " >> >> > >> >> >Here we see two different starting points quoted. >> >> >> Is >> >> >this >> >> >correct? If not is it the Lagna or the >> particular >> >> >sign that is >> >> >the starting point? >> >> > >> >> >Another point regarding undesirable houses. I >> >> >realize that >> >> >planets can have both desirable and undesirable >> >> >effects. >> >> >However, there is reference in 'Handbook on >> >> Astrology >> >> >Part 1 >> >> >pages 76/77' to desirable houses being 1,2,3,6,10 >> >> and >> >> >11, and >> >> >undesirable being 4,5,7,8,9 and 12. Does this >> >> mean >> >> >that we >> >> >should take rasi ownership to classify sub lords >> >> as >> >> >benefic for >> >> >the desirable houses and malefic for the >> >> undesirable >> >> >houses? >> >> >Also if a planet rules both a desirable and >> >> >undesirable house >> >> >are there any rules as to which is dominant ie. >> >> >moolotrikona >> >> >etc.? >> >> > >> >> >One final unrelated question - can someone >> please >> >> >tell me the >> >> >maxim orb of contact for Rahu and Ketu to another >> >> >planet, for >> >> >them to act on behalf of that planet. >> >> > >> >> >Thanks >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >Ron Gaunt >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.