Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Chandrashekhar ji on Swamsha in 2004

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Dear Chandrashekhar ji

 

Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts were different

from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

 

Dear Partha,

 

''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied by the planet. So

5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be 5th from the

Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL Horoscope.

Of course others might have different views''.

 

Chandrashekhar.

 

You were able to see facts as advised by sages in 2004.What happened

then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

 

You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If you can see it

then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal horoscope.

 

Respect

Pradeep

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Pradeep,

 

I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my personal views on

aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the ancient texts the

sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which can only be seen

in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha drishti. Having read

the different texts, I can not deny that they did indicate such

position, though I do not personally accept them. The way I see all

these is to look for aspects in navamshas when specifically mentioned

and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where told by sages

or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

 

Chandrashekhar.

 

vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Chandrashekhar ji

>

> Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts were different

> from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

>

> Dear Partha,

>

> ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied by the planet. So

> 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be 5th from the

> Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL Horoscope.

> Of course others might have different views''.

>

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> You were able to see facts as advised by sages in 2004.What happened

> then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

>

> You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If you can see it

> then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal horoscope.

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

>

>

> ------

>

>

>

> Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release 7/24/2007

1:50 PM

>

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Chandrashekhr ji

 

There is a difference.If you think Vargas are charts,then while

understanding lagna shadvrgakes,planet can aspect lagna from any of

the varga charts,thereby making graha drishti a rule.

This was not your view.

 

Respect

Pradeep

, Chandrashekhar

<chandrashekhar46 wrote:

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my personal views

on

> aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the ancient

texts the

> sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which can only be

seen

> in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha drishti. Having

read

> the different texts, I can not deny that they did indicate such

> position, though I do not personally accept them. The way I see all

> these is to look for aspects in navamshas when specifically

mentioned

> and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where told by

sages

> or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

>

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> >

> > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> >

> > Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts were different

> > from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

> >

> > Dear Partha,

> >

> > ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied by the

planet. So

> > 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be 5th from the

> > Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL Horoscope.

> > Of course others might have different views''.

> >

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> > You were able to see facts as advised by sages in 2004.What

happened

> > then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

> >

> > You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If you can see it

> > then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal horoscope.

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> >

------

> >

> >

> >

> > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release Date:

7/24/2007 1:50 PM

> >

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Pradeep,

 

Why would they not aspect by rasi drishti, as there is something like

rashi tulya when we talk of D-Charts.

 

Chandrashekhar.

 

vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Chandrashekhr ji

>

> There is a difference.If you think Vargas are charts,then while

> understanding lagna shadvrgakes,planet can aspect lagna from any of

> the varga charts,thereby making graha drishti a rule.

> This was not your view.

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

>

> <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> <chandrashekhar46 wrote:

> >

> > Dear Pradeep,

> >

> > I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my personal views

> on

> > aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the ancient

> texts the

> > sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which can only be

> seen

> > in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha drishti. Having

> read

> > the different texts, I can not deny that they did indicate such

> > position, though I do not personally accept them. The way I see all

> > these is to look for aspects in navamshas when specifically

> mentioned

> > and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where told by

> sages

> > or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

> >

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > >

> > > Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts were different

> > > from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

> > >

> > > Dear Partha,

> > >

> > > ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied by the

> planet. So

> > > 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be 5th from the

> > > Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL Horoscope.

> > > Of course others might have different views''.

> > >

> > > Chandrashekhar.

> > >

> > > You were able to see facts as advised by sages in 2004.What

> happened

> > > then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

> > >

> > > You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If you can see it

> > > then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal horoscope.

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

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

> ------

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release Date:

> 7/24/2007 1:50 PM

> > >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Chandrashekhar ji

 

Concerned shloka is about Graha drishti.

 

Respect

Pradeep

 

, Chandrashekhar

<chandrashekhar46 wrote:

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> Why would they not aspect by rasi drishti, as there is something

like

> rashi tulya when we talk of D-Charts.

>

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> >

> > Dear Chandrashekhr ji

> >

> > There is a difference.If you think Vargas are charts,then while

> > understanding lagna shadvrgakes,planet can aspect lagna from any

of

> > the varga charts,thereby making graha drishti a rule.

> > This was not your view.

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Pradeep,

> > >

> > > I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my personal

views

> > on

> > > aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the ancient

> > texts the

> > > sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which can only

be

> > seen

> > > in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha drishti.

Having

> > read

> > > the different texts, I can not deny that they did indicate such

> > > position, though I do not personally accept them. The way I see

all

> > > these is to look for aspects in navamshas when specifically

> > mentioned

> > > and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where told by

> > sages

> > > or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

> > >

> > > Chandrashekhar.

> > >

> > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > > >

> > > > Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts were

different

> > > > from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

> > > >

> > > > Dear Partha,

> > > >

> > > > ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied by the

> > planet. So

> > > > 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be 5th

from the

> > > > Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL

Horoscope.

> > > > Of course others might have different views''.

> > > >

> > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > >

> > > > You were able to see facts as advised by sages in 2004.What

> > happened

> > > > then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

> > > >

> > > > You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If you can

see it

> > > > then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal horoscope.

> > > >

> > > > Respect

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > > >

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

> > ------

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release

Date:

> > 7/24/2007 1:50 PM

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Pradeep,

 

I am glad that you at least accept that there could be specific yogas

where in aspects in navamsha are given by the Sage. Having said that I

shall tell why I referred to rasi drishti too. I have given the

translation as given by R. Santanam, the commentator. But the sage could

have also implied that if in all shadvarga lagnas are aspected by a

single graha the effects of the raj yoga is full, if it only aspects 3

shadvargas the effects are half and if two, the effects are a quarter.

So the reference need not necessarily be to graha drishti. Or even full,

three fourths and half strength graha drishti but to full graha drishti.

 

Chandrashekhar.

 

vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Chandrashekhar ji

>

> Concerned shloka is about Graha drishti.

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

>

>

> <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> <chandrashekhar46 wrote:

> >

> > Dear Pradeep,

> >

> > Why would they not aspect by rasi drishti, as there is something

> like

> > rashi tulya when we talk of D-Charts.

> >

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Chandrashekhr ji

> > >

> > > There is a difference.If you think Vargas are charts,then while

> > > understanding lagna shadvrgakes,planet can aspect lagna from any

> of

> > > the varga charts,thereby making graha drishti a rule.

> > > This was not your view.

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> <%40>

> > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my personal

> views

> > > on

> > > > aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the ancient

> > > texts the

> > > > sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which can only

> be

> > > seen

> > > > in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha drishti.

> Having

> > > read

> > > > the different texts, I can not deny that they did indicate such

> > > > position, though I do not personally accept them. The way I see

> all

> > > > these is to look for aspects in navamshas when specifically

> > > mentioned

> > > > and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where told by

> > > sages

> > > > or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

> > > >

> > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > >

> > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > > > >

> > > > > Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts were

> different

> > > > > from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Partha,

> > > > >

> > > > > ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied by the

> > > planet. So

> > > > > 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be 5th

> from the

> > > > > Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL

> Horoscope.

> > > > > Of course others might have different views''.

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > >

> > > > > You were able to see facts as advised by sages in 2004.What

> > > happened

> > > > > then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

> > > > >

> > > > > You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If you can

> see it

> > > > > then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal horoscope.

> > > > >

> > > > > Respect

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > >

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

> > > ------

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release

> Date:

> > > 7/24/2007 1:50 PM

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Chandrashekhar ji

 

I have never accepetd as you have said.If you ask my personal

opinion,aspects on lagna drekkana etc are taken by you as examples

for aspects in varga chakras.This is your personal opinion and i have

no problem.

 

But as per my understanding,sage will not set differential rules.

 

The concerned shloka does not indicate Rashi drishti.Kindly do not

mix the two.If it was Rashi drishti,you mean to say Santhanam ws

having concerns with Rashi drishti as well.

 

It is Graha drishti as grades are mentioned.You too had accepted it 3

ds back.

 

Respect

Pradeep

 

, Chandrashekhar

<chandrashekhar46 wrote:

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> I am glad that you at least accept that there could be specific

yogas

> where in aspects in navamsha are given by the Sage. Having said

that I

> shall tell why I referred to rasi drishti too. I have given the

> translation as given by R. Santanam, the commentator. But the sage

could

> have also implied that if in all shadvarga lagnas are aspected by a

> single graha the effects of the raj yoga is full, if it only

aspects 3

> shadvargas the effects are half and if two, the effects are a

quarter.

> So the reference need not necessarily be to graha drishti. Or even

full,

> three fourths and half strength graha drishti but to full graha

drishti.

>

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> >

> > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> >

> > Concerned shloka is about Graha drishti.

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Pradeep,

> > >

> > > Why would they not aspect by rasi drishti, as there is something

> > like

> > > rashi tulya when we talk of D-Charts.

> > >

> > > Chandrashekhar.

> > >

> > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Chandrashekhr ji

> > > >

> > > > There is a difference.If you think Vargas are charts,then

while

> > > > understanding lagna shadvrgakes,planet can aspect lagna from

any

> > of

> > > > the varga charts,thereby making graha drishti a rule.

> > > > This was not your view.

> > > >

> > > > Respect

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > <%40>

> > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > >

> > > > > I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my personal

> > views

> > > > on

> > > > > aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the

ancient

> > > > texts the

> > > > > sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which can

only

> > be

> > > > seen

> > > > > in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha drishti.

> > Having

> > > > read

> > > > > the different texts, I can not deny that they did indicate

such

> > > > > position, though I do not personally accept them. The way I

see

> > all

> > > > > these is to look for aspects in navamshas when specifically

> > > > mentioned

> > > > > and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where

told by

> > > > sages

> > > > > or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > >

> > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts were

> > different

> > > > > > from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Partha,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied by the

> > > > planet. So

> > > > > > 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be 5th

> > from the

> > > > > > Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL

> > Horoscope.

> > > > > > Of course others might have different views''.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You were able to see facts as advised by sages in

2004.What

> > > > happened

> > > > > > then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If you can

> > see it

> > > > > > then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal

horoscope.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

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

> > > > ------

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release

> > Date:

> > > > 7/24/2007 1:50 PM

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Pradeep,

 

I thought we were discussing what the sage was saying and not what

Santanam thought. The two are different. I can show you where

translation of a shloka by Santanam and Sitaram Jha differed, if you

like. So just because Santanam translated a shloka in a particular

fashion, it does not mean that it can not have any other meaning and the

same holds true of even my opinions.

 

I can not help what is your understanding, but assuming that the Sage

could have only meant graha drishti is an assumption and truth could be

different than what you perceive. I have quoted what was told by

Santanam as you asked for the translation. I also said that it could be

partial graha drishti but I am also pointing out another meaning of the

shloka. That is the way a vada (scholarly discussions on hindu sciences)

on hindu science is conducted. First give differing opinions and then

give your own. Or at least that is my understanding. You may have a

different interpretation of how the Vada is conducted and you are free

to your opinion..

 

Chandrashekhar.

 

vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Chandrashekhar ji

>

> I have never accepetd as you have said.If you ask my personal

> opinion,aspects on lagna drekkana etc are taken by you as examples

> for aspects in varga chakras.This is your personal opinion and i have

> no problem.

>

> But as per my understanding,sage will not set differential rules.

>

> The concerned shloka does not indicate Rashi drishti.Kindly do not

> mix the two.If it was Rashi drishti,you mean to say Santhanam ws

> having concerns with Rashi drishti as well.

>

> It is Graha drishti as grades are mentioned.You too had accepted it 3

> ds back.

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

>

>

> <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> <chandrashekhar46 wrote:

> >

> > Dear Pradeep,

> >

> > I am glad that you at least accept that there could be specific

> yogas

> > where in aspects in navamsha are given by the Sage. Having said

> that I

> > shall tell why I referred to rasi drishti too. I have given the

> > translation as given by R. Santanam, the commentator. But the sage

> could

> > have also implied that if in all shadvarga lagnas are aspected by a

> > single graha the effects of the raj yoga is full, if it only

> aspects 3

> > shadvargas the effects are half and if two, the effects are a

> quarter.

> > So the reference need not necessarily be to graha drishti. Or even

> full,

> > three fourths and half strength graha drishti but to full graha

> drishti.

> >

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > >

> > > Concerned shloka is about Graha drishti.

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

> <%40>

> > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > Why would they not aspect by rasi drishti, as there is something

> > > like

> > > > rashi tulya when we talk of D-Charts.

> > > >

> > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > >

> > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Chandrashekhr ji

> > > > >

> > > > > There is a difference.If you think Vargas are charts,then

> while

> > > > > understanding lagna shadvrgakes,planet can aspect lagna from

> any

> > > of

> > > > > the varga charts,thereby making graha drishti a rule.

> > > > > This was not your view.

> > > > >

> > > > > Respect

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> <%40>

> > > <%40>

> > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my personal

> > > views

> > > > > on

> > > > > > aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the

> ancient

> > > > > texts the

> > > > > > sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which can

> only

> > > be

> > > > > seen

> > > > > > in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha drishti.

> > > Having

> > > > > read

> > > > > > the different texts, I can not deny that they did indicate

> such

> > > > > > position, though I do not personally accept them. The way I

> see

> > > all

> > > > > > these is to look for aspects in navamshas when specifically

> > > > > mentioned

> > > > > > and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where

> told by

> > > > > sages

> > > > > > or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts were

> > > different

> > > > > > > from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Partha,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied by the

> > > > > planet. So

> > > > > > > 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be 5th

> > > from the

> > > > > > > Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL

> > > Horoscope.

> > > > > > > Of course others might have different views''.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > You were able to see facts as advised by sages in

> 2004.What

> > > > > happened

> > > > > > > then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If you can

> > > see it

> > > > > > > then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal

> horoscope.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

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

> > > > > ------

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 - Release

> > > Date:

> > > > > 7/24/2007 1:50 PM

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Chandrashekhar ji

 

The answer for this will come if you give the reason on why you

consider graha drishti as non appropriate.\

 

Respect

Pradeep

 

, Chandrashekhar

<chandrashekhar46 wrote:

>

> Dear Pradeep,

>

> I thought we were discussing what the sage was saying and not what

> Santanam thought. The two are different. I can show you where

> translation of a shloka by Santanam and Sitaram Jha differed, if

you

> like. So just because Santanam translated a shloka in a particular

> fashion, it does not mean that it can not have any other meaning

and the

> same holds true of even my opinions.

>

> I can not help what is your understanding, but assuming that the

Sage

> could have only meant graha drishti is an assumption and truth

could be

> different than what you perceive. I have quoted what was told by

> Santanam as you asked for the translation. I also said that it

could be

> partial graha drishti but I am also pointing out another meaning of

the

> shloka. That is the way a vada (scholarly discussions on hindu

sciences)

> on hindu science is conducted. First give differing opinions and

then

> give your own. Or at least that is my understanding. You may have a

> different interpretation of how the Vada is conducted and you are

free

> to your opinion..

>

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> >

> > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> >

> > I have never accepetd as you have said.If you ask my personal

> > opinion,aspects on lagna drekkana etc are taken by you as examples

> > for aspects in varga chakras.This is your personal opinion and i

have

> > no problem.

> >

> > But as per my understanding,sage will not set differential rules.

> >

> > The concerned shloka does not indicate Rashi drishti.Kindly do not

> > mix the two.If it was Rashi drishti,you mean to say Santhanam ws

> > having concerns with Rashi drishti as well.

> >

> > It is Graha drishti as grades are mentioned.You too had accepted

it 3

> > ds back.

> >

> > Respect

> > Pradeep

> >

> >

> > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Pradeep,

> > >

> > > I am glad that you at least accept that there could be specific

> > yogas

> > > where in aspects in navamsha are given by the Sage. Having said

> > that I

> > > shall tell why I referred to rasi drishti too. I have given the

> > > translation as given by R. Santanam, the commentator. But the

sage

> > could

> > > have also implied that if in all shadvarga lagnas are aspected

by a

> > > single graha the effects of the raj yoga is full, if it only

> > aspects 3

> > > shadvargas the effects are half and if two, the effects are a

> > quarter.

> > > So the reference need not necessarily be to graha drishti. Or

even

> > full,

> > > three fourths and half strength graha drishti but to full graha

> > drishti.

> > >

> > > Chandrashekhar.

> > >

> > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > > >

> > > > Concerned shloka is about Graha drishti.

> > > >

> > > > Respect

> > > > Pradeep

> > > >

> > > >

> > <%40>

> > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > >

> > > > > Why would they not aspect by rasi drishti, as there is

something

> > > > like

> > > > > rashi tulya when we talk of D-Charts.

> > > > >

> > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > >

> > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhr ji

> > > > > >

> > > > > > There is a difference.If you think Vargas are charts,then

> > while

> > > > > > understanding lagna shadvrgakes,planet can aspect lagna

from

> > any

> > > > of

> > > > > > the varga charts,thereby making graha drishti a rule.

> > > > > > This was not your view.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > >

> > <%40>

> > > > <%40>

> > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my

personal

> > > > views

> > > > > > on

> > > > > > > aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the

> > ancient

> > > > > > texts the

> > > > > > > sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which

can

> > only

> > > > be

> > > > > > seen

> > > > > > > in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha

drishti.

> > > > Having

> > > > > > read

> > > > > > > the different texts, I can not deny that they did

indicate

> > such

> > > > > > > position, though I do not personally accept them. The

way I

> > see

> > > > all

> > > > > > > these is to look for aspects in navamshas when

specifically

> > > > > > mentioned

> > > > > > > and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where

> > told by

> > > > > > sages

> > > > > > > or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts

were

> > > > different

> > > > > > > > from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Partha,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied

by the

> > > > > > planet. So

> > > > > > > > 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be

5th

> > > > from the

> > > > > > > > Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL

> > > > Horoscope.

> > > > > > > > Of course others might have different views''.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > You were able to see facts as advised by sages in

> > 2004.What

> > > > > > happened

> > > > > > > > then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If

you can

> > > > see it

> > > > > > > > then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal

> > horoscope.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

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

----

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

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 -

Release

> > > > Date:

> > > > > > 7/24/2007 1:50 PM

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Pradeep,

 

Let me make two things very clear, I only suggested that the drishtis

could also be rasi drishti and not only necessarily only graha drishti

of differing strength or otherwise as is being assumed.

 

I shall give my opinion on why graha drishti may be inappropriate in

certain charts and not in others, in response to the mail that you sent

about my personal opinion.

 

Chandrashekhar.

 

vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

>

> Dear Chandrashekhar ji

>

> The answer for this will come if you give the reason on why you

> consider graha drishti as non appropriate.\

>

> Respect

> Pradeep

>

>

> <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> <chandrashekhar46 wrote:

> >

> > Dear Pradeep,

> >

> > I thought we were discussing what the sage was saying and not what

> > Santanam thought. The two are different. I can show you where

> > translation of a shloka by Santanam and Sitaram Jha differed, if

> you

> > like. So just because Santanam translated a shloka in a particular

> > fashion, it does not mean that it can not have any other meaning

> and the

> > same holds true of even my opinions.

> >

> > I can not help what is your understanding, but assuming that the

> Sage

> > could have only meant graha drishti is an assumption and truth

> could be

> > different than what you perceive. I have quoted what was told by

> > Santanam as you asked for the translation. I also said that it

> could be

> > partial graha drishti but I am also pointing out another meaning of

> the

> > shloka. That is the way a vada (scholarly discussions on hindu

> sciences)

> > on hindu science is conducted. First give differing opinions and

> then

> > give your own. Or at least that is my understanding. You may have a

> > different interpretation of how the Vada is conducted and you are

> free

> > to your opinion..

> >

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > >

> > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > >

> > > I have never accepetd as you have said.If you ask my personal

> > > opinion,aspects on lagna drekkana etc are taken by you as examples

> > > for aspects in varga chakras.This is your personal opinion and i

> have

> > > no problem.

> > >

> > > But as per my understanding,sage will not set differential rules.

> > >

> > > The concerned shloka does not indicate Rashi drishti.Kindly do not

> > > mix the two.If it was Rashi drishti,you mean to say Santhanam ws

> > > having concerns with Rashi drishti as well.

> > >

> > > It is Graha drishti as grades are mentioned.You too had accepted

> it 3

> > > ds back.

> > >

> > > Respect

> > > Pradeep

> > >

> > >

> <%40>

> > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > >

> > > > I am glad that you at least accept that there could be specific

> > > yogas

> > > > where in aspects in navamsha are given by the Sage. Having said

> > > that I

> > > > shall tell why I referred to rasi drishti too. I have given the

> > > > translation as given by R. Santanam, the commentator. But the

> sage

> > > could

> > > > have also implied that if in all shadvarga lagnas are aspected

> by a

> > > > single graha the effects of the raj yoga is full, if it only

> > > aspects 3

> > > > shadvargas the effects are half and if two, the effects are a

> > > quarter.

> > > > So the reference need not necessarily be to graha drishti. Or

> even

> > > full,

> > > > three fourths and half strength graha drishti but to full graha

> > > drishti.

> > > >

> > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > >

> > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > > > >

> > > > > Concerned shloka is about Graha drishti.

> > > > >

> > > > > Respect

> > > > > Pradeep

> > > > >

> > > > >

> <%40>

> > > <%40>

> > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Why would they not aspect by rasi drishti, as there is

> something

> > > > > like

> > > > > > rashi tulya when we talk of D-Charts.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhr ji

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > There is a difference.If you think Vargas are charts,then

> > > while

> > > > > > > understanding lagna shadvrgakes,planet can aspect lagna

> from

> > > any

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > the varga charts,thereby making graha drishti a rule.

> > > > > > > This was not your view.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > >

> <%40>

> > > <%40>

> > > > > <%40>

> > > > > > > <%40>, Chandrashekhar

> > > > > > > <chandrashekhar46@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dear Pradeep,

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I am the same Chandrashekhar. As I said earlier, my

> personal

> > > > > views

> > > > > > > on

> > > > > > > > aspects in D-Charts have not changed. Only that in the

> > > ancient

> > > > > > > texts the

> > > > > > > > sages have indeed given some positions or yogas which

> can

> > > only

> > > > > be

> > > > > > > seen

> > > > > > > > in navamshas or D-Charts and not always with Graha

> drishti.

> > > > > Having

> > > > > > > read

> > > > > > > > the different texts, I can not deny that they did

> indicate

> > > such

> > > > > > > > position, though I do not personally accept them. The

> way I

> > > see

> > > > > all

> > > > > > > > these is to look for aspects in navamshas when

> specifically

> > > > > > > mentioned

> > > > > > > > and to look at rasi drishti in other Graha charts, where

> > > told by

> > > > > > > sages

> > > > > > > > or surmised to be so told on account of the yogas given.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Can i get back my Chandrashekhar ji ,whose thoughts

> were

> > > > > different

> > > > > > > > > from today.How did my Chandrashekhar ji change?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Dear Partha,

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > ''I think Swamsha would mean Navamsha Rasi occupied

> by the

> > > > > > > planet. So

> > > > > > > > > 5th from swamsha would mean that the planet has to be

> 5th

> > > > > from the

> > > > > > > > > Rasi in Navamsha occupied by him to be seen in NATAL

> > > > > Horoscope.

> > > > > > > > > Of course others might have different views''.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > You were able to see facts as advised by sages in

> > > 2004.What

> > > > > > > happened

> > > > > > > > > then.Can i pray to Lord Shankra.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > You were able to see them as in NATAL horoscope.If

> you can

> > > > > see it

> > > > > > > > > then,can you see the shadvargas of Lagna from Natal

> > > horoscope.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Respect

> > > > > > > > > Pradeep

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

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

> ----

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

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.17/915 -

> Release

> > > > > Date:

> > > > > > > 7/24/2007 1:50 PM

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...