Can we justify aspects in varga charts of Vedic Astrology?

[Guest guest]

Dear Respected members

 

While searching internet to find something else,i could get many new

infos as shared yesterday - Chandrashekhar jis views ,Parthas

views,Freedoms views etc.I will analyze Mr.Parthas views and

Mr.Freedoms views later.

 

 

Most importantly i found a brilliant article written in 2001 by an

elderly gentleman called Kuttikat Chandrabose(of my fathers age)

regarding aspects in ''varga charts''.I request everyone who is

having a scientific inclination to read this.

--

 

 

Can we justify aspects in varga charts of Vedic Astrology?

 

Until now I have not bothered myself to find out whether there are

contradictions in the written literature of Vedic Astrology. The

reason for this nonchalant attitude was the assumption that the

very planets that signify good tidings will also signify bad

indications, depending upon how the planets are linked to the

various matters, the various portfolios of human life.

 

So,contradictions become subjective to the native, depending on what

the native considers good or bad. As an example, my father left our

birthplace in India when I was 18 months old. He went to Singapore

(it was pre-world war II times) where he had made his fortune

before he married my mother, and I was born as the first offspring.

He was financially hard up when I was born. He (my father) knew

that he could land his old job in Singapore, where he was well paid.

World war II broke out, Singapore was a favored Japanese strategic

target, all whereabouts of my father along with several of his

friends were all lost without a trace. I have no recollection of my

fathers face or any memories of him.

Those of you dabble in both, Western as well as Eastern astrology,

know that aspects are one issue on which the two systems differ

fundamentally.The reason why I took an example from my birth chart

was to illustrate that an aspect in the birth chart modifies even an

unoccupied zodiac sign, a postulate only Vedic Astrology makes. I

have researched other cases which also seem to substantiate this

dictum.

 

Those of you who have access to Goravani Jyothish may cast my chart

for11/04/1936, TOB 1:40: AM, Trichur, India. In my birth chart, five

out of the nine Vedic astrology planets aspect my 9th House,

somewhat of a rare aspectual concentration on a single House. Four

out of the five are malefic planets. The dictum that a glance from

Jupiter will eliminate a thousand evils did not work for me, at

least about my father, because the 5th aspect of the benefic

Jupiter falls on the 9th House too. Looking back on my own life, my

9th House succumbed to the evil forces it was subjected to, with

respect to the experience I had about my father. But overall, for

myself, the 9th House considered as a House of luck or fortune, I

was rather blessed in the ambitions I had entertained in life

compared to my rather low birth (only financially) surroundings.

 

Thus, the science of astrology in fact allows for what are seemingly

apparent contradictions, but these are contradictions resulting from

differences in subjective interpretations, rather than those

inherent in astrological dictums.

 

I give my life experience here because it convinces me how aspects to

an empty rasi (unoccupied by any planet) in a birth chart can have

meaningful impacts on those matters in the native's life, signified

by that rasi. However, when I come to aspects in amsa charts (also

called varga charts) in Vedic Astrology, I am a little lost about

its significance in the astrological literature.

 

In general, most writings in Vedic Astrology literature allow for the

existence of aspects in amsa charts. If one accepts that aspects both

in Western as well in Eastern Astrology there seems to exist this

acceptance) result from some particular geometrical angular

relationships between planets, then it is difficult to see how in

Parasara designed amsa charts one can meaningfully assign aspects.

When a planet is transplanted from its rasi osition in a birth chart

(where in fact it is there in real time) to another Zodiac House in

an amsa chart, this planet looses its longitudinal identity which

characterized it in the birth chart.

 

Varga charts were introduced by Sage Parasara to fine tune the

astrological judgment of certain matters in the native's life. The

Sage declares their function in his book, albeit briefly but in no

uncertain terms, in his introduction to vargavivekadhiaya.

Parasara's justification for the creation of the varga charts is

based on his postulate that planets which have the common lordship

over a rasi, for example Mars over Mesha(Aries) and Vrischika

(Scorpio) are not necessarily the supreme rulers of the various

amsas (fractions) within the thirty degree span of the same rasis.

Thus, while Mars rules the whole of Mesha in general, Mars has some

added rulership-right on the first Navamsha of Mesha(0-3°20')

compared to the rest of 8 Navamshas of Mesha. The remaining 8

Navamshas may be considered to be leased, (figuratively speaking!) by

Mars from other planets, giving him the general rulership all over

Mesha, while on the first Navamsha Mars is the absolute territorial

lord. Such considerations form the basis of the origin of an amsa

chart, requiring the placement of a planet within 0-3°20' of Mesha

in a birth chart in Mesha itself in the Navamsha chart, while a

planet that is occupying a longitude 3°20' 6°40' in Mesha is placed

in Vrisha(Taurus). The different arrangement of planets in the amsa

chart from that of the birth chart is to be used to get a better

glimpse of the indications of the native's life, but only when

judging those matters laid down by the originator of the amsa

chart. Thus, Navamsha for marriage or partnerships, Dasamsa for

career etc;

 

In time various post-Parasara writings have accumulated paving a way

for two distinct line of thoughts. 1) When the amsa chart is to be

interpreted there is no need to pay attention to those aspects in

birth chart, obviously they(those aspects which were in the birth

chart) may indeed be non existent in the amsa chart, 2) Planets in

Amsa charts develop drishtis (aspects) under the same Parasara

rules as in birth chart. Example, all oppositions in a varga chart

have the same meaning as in rasi chart, the special aspects of

Jupiter, Mars, and Saturn are applicable to the amsa charts the

same way it is applied to rasi chart.

 

I find two problems with the above concept.

1) A whole chapter in Parasara Hora has been devoted to drikbala of

planets.

Those of you click through GJ need not be told that drikbala is an

important attribute of planetary shadbala strength. The starting

point of the math for evaluation of drikbala function is the

longitude of planets. Is it not clear that the drikbala is

aspectual strength? If there is no longitudinal identity,

and consequently no angular relationship can be attributed between

planets in an amsa chart, does it not make aspect and aspectual

strength a foregone conclusion in amsa charts? One has to remember

that when a planet is in Thula(Libra) and another one is in Mesha

in Navamsha chart, they are there in those respective rasis because

those planets occupied (in the birth chart) segments ruled by

Venus and Mars, the lords of Thula and Mesha respectively. Such a

relationship originates in the amsa lordship between segments of a

given rasi, it has got nothing to do with any angular relationship

between planets existing at the time of birth. Therefore, there is

no justification to consider that these planets are in opposition

in the same sense as they will be in rasi, if they are similarly

placed.

 

2) Nowhere do I see aspect in varga charts explicitly mentioned in

Parasara Hora.(see the exception in Karakamsha charts mentioned

below). In the chapter where the Sage mentions vimshopaka strength

of planets (amsa charts do play a big role here) he makes no

mention of aspects, while exaltation(ucha) and own house

(swakhetram) are given appropriate considerations. Am I to suppose

that the Muni who carefully laid down precise mathematical rules to

apportion aspectual strengths in shadbala made an inadvertent

omission in vimshopaka?

 

There is, however, a chapter in Hora sastra that mentions a general

aspect, one that is not tied up in a longitudinal link on the

zodiac. In this chapter(chapter 9) there is a mention of aspects of

signs. The opposite signs and the planets contained within opposing

signs are considered to be aspecting each other, in addition to a

certain other combinations that gives fractional aspects. Thus,

when the term sputadrishti(an aspect characterized by a longitude in

the zodiac) is used, it becomes necessary to distinguish it from

another kind of drishti, one that is not associated with sputam

(longitude). May be one can claim that the later kind of aspect is

the one Sage Parasara is referring to in Karakamsha chart, when the

Sage uses the term ''Yutekshithe'' (to mean conjunct or aspected ).

By and large in astrological applications these general aspects

(mentioned in chapter 9) are ignored. When aspects are mentioned in

modern writings, almost invariably, the author implies aspects that

modify planetary attributes by divination or karakatwas of

aspecting and aspected planets. Such aspects are the ones between

planets in oppositions, or the special aspects of outer planets and

Mars. Such aspects can be meaningfully implicated only with their

longitudinal identity, a parameter not existing in amsa charts.

 

Thus, when Parasara uses the word " yutekshite " as he does in the

many verses in the chapter on Karakamsha in his monumental work, Hora

Sastra, a distinction has to made by the readers between such

drishti and those discussed in the birth chart. The later ones are

the only aspects that results in drikbala. The one in amsa charts

are supposed to be the ones, or those like the ones, mentioned in

chapter 9. The aspects that quantitatively modifies the properties

and significations by imparting characteristics of the aspecting and

aspected planets are always the ones that arise out of a defined

geometrical configuration. Such aspects cannot be existing in amsa

charts unless the design framework of amsa charts are modified from

that laid down by Sage Parasara.

 

Therefore, the total of 16 vargas giving rise to 144 aspects (not

counting special aspects of outer planets) does seem to be an

unnecessary complication that is not warranted by the definition of

aspects resulting in drikbala. Those aspects which do not have

aspectual strengths obviously cannot be equated on the same par to

those whose aspectual strength can be quantified. Many writings in

Vedic Astrology, dating back even to the beginning of the 19th

century, make no distinction between an aspect in the birth chart

and that in an amsa chart.

I do not mean to implicate that because there is not a longitudinal

identity there is no planetary interaction in a varga chart between

planets. My reasoning on aspects is exclusive of the relative ease

or difficulty of interaction between planets when they are in 1:9

and a 1:8 rasi position with respect to one another. Such

positional identities do not need an angular arc, described by

degree min second to define their position By assigning meaningful

aspects in amsa chart one actually begins to open a whole can of

worms. In some amsa charts, especially in those of smaller

fractional values, one starts to see the Moon's two nodes lumped

together in a single sign. How can one imagibe or justify a Rahu

falling out of of aspect from Ketu? In Parasara's Hora chart (the

fractional basis of Hora chart is fifteen degrees, half of a sign)

all planets have to line up in either Cancer or Leo. Is it that in

Hora chart, aspects between planets can be ignored, or they do not

exist there, but in all other amsa charts aspects are meaningful?

Vedic classics texts do mention that strengths of Yogas are

inversely dependant on the inter-planetary distance within a sign.

Lot of post parasara writings speak about Yogas in amsa charts. How

do these authors assign orbs, and consequently strength of Yogas

when planets are conjunct in amsa chart signs?

 

In the absence of written word from the Sage who originated the amsa

chart, one has only common sense to guide him through. My common

sense does see a necessity for longitude to justify aspect in

meaningful fashion, for aspect that cannot be quantitatively

ascertained has to be considered as an inferior parameter to

sputadrishti which can be quantitatively assessed. In my experience,

it is not only unjustified to treat aspects in amsa charts

the same way as one treats it in birth chart, but also leaving out

aspects from amsa charts do not take away any of the thunder out of

any predictions in Vedic Astrology. I hope to hear from those of

you who enjoy clicking through the invaluable gift bestowed on us

by Das Goravani. Happy clicking!,

--- Kuttikkat Chandrabose

--- kuttikkatbose

--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.

[Guest guest]

Mr Pradeep

 

Of course that is a brilliant and knowledgeable article by Mr Chandrabose

which u v presented for the group. It is quite refreshing and thought provoking.

I would like to know if he has written any books or articles in magazine like

Astrological Magazine or Star Teller or Journal of Astrology.

 

savithri

 

vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

Dear Respected members

 

While searching internet to find something else,i could get many new

infos as shared yesterday - Chandrashekhar jis views ,Parthas

views,Freedoms views etc.I will analyze Mr.Parthas views and

Mr.Freedoms views later.

 

Most importantly i found a brilliant article written in 2001 by an

elderly gentleman called Kuttikat Chandrabose(of my fathers age)

regarding aspects in ''varga charts''.I request everyone who is

having a scientific inclination to read this.

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

 

Can we justify aspects in varga charts of Vedic Astrology?

 

Until now I have not bothered myself to find out whether there are

contradictions in the written literature of Vedic Astrology. The

reason for this nonchalant attitude was the assumption that the

very planets that signify good tidings will also signify bad

indications, depending upon how the planets are linked to the

various matters, the various portfolios of human life.

 

So,contradictions become subjective to the native, depending on what

the native considers good or bad. As an example, my father left our

birthplace in India when I was 18 months old. He went to Singapore

(it was pre-world war II times) where he had made his fortune

before he married my mother, and I was born as the first offspring.

He was financially hard up when I was born. He (my father) knew

that he could land his old job in Singapore, where he was well paid.

World war II broke out, Singapore was a favored Japanese strategic

target, all whereabouts of my father along with several of his

friends were all lost without a trace. I have no recollection of my

fathers face or any memories of him.

Those of you dabble in both, Western as well as Eastern astrology,

know that aspects are one issue on which the two systems differ

fundamentally.The reason why I took an example from my birth chart

was to illustrate that an aspect in the birth chart modifies even an

unoccupied zodiac sign, a postulate only Vedic Astrology makes. I

have researched other cases which also seem to substantiate this

dictum.

 

Those of you who have access to Goravani Jyothish may cast my chart

for11/04/1936, TOB 1:40: AM, Trichur, India. In my birth chart, five

out of the nine Vedic astrology planets aspect my 9th House,

somewhat of a rare aspectual concentration on a single House. Four

out of the five are malefic planets. The dictum that a glance from

Jupiter will eliminate a thousand evils did not work for me, at

least about my father, because the 5th aspect of the benefic

Jupiter falls on the 9th House too. Looking back on my own life, my

9th House succumbed to the evil forces it was subjected to, with

respect to the experience I had about my father. But overall, for

myself, the 9th House considered as a House of luck or fortune, I

was rather blessed in the ambitions I had entertained in life

compared to my rather low birth (only financially) surroundings.

 

Thus, the science of astrology in fact allows for what are seemingly

apparent contradictions, but these are contradictions resulting from

differences in subjective interpretations, rather than those

inherent in astrological dictums.

 

I give my life experience here because it convinces me how aspects to

an empty rasi (unoccupied by any planet) in a birth chart can have

meaningful impacts on those matters in the native's life, signified

by that rasi. However, when I come to aspects in amsa charts (also

called varga charts) in Vedic Astrology, I am a little lost about

its significance in the astrological literature.

 

In general, most writings in Vedic Astrology literature allow for the

existence of aspects in amsa charts. If one accepts that aspects both

in Western as well in Eastern Astrology there seems to exist this

acceptance) result from some particular geometrical angular

relationships between planets, then it is difficult to see how in

Parasara designed amsa charts one can meaningfully assign aspects.

When a planet is transplanted from its rasi osition in a birth chart

(where in fact it is there in real time) to another Zodiac House in

an amsa chart, this planet looses its longitudinal identity which

characterized it in the birth chart.

 

Varga charts were introduced by Sage Parasara to fine tune the

astrological judgment of certain matters in the native's life. The

Sage declares their function in his book, albeit briefly but in no

uncertain terms, in his introduction to vargavivekadhiaya.

Parasara's justification for the creation of the varga charts is

based on his postulate that planets which have the common lordship

over a rasi, for example Mars over Mesha(Aries) and Vrischika

(Scorpio) are not necessarily the supreme rulers of the various

amsas (fractions) within the thirty degree span of the same rasis.

Thus, while Mars rules the whole of Mesha in general, Mars has some

added rulership-right on the first Navamsha of Mesha(0-3°20')

compared to the rest of 8 Navamshas of Mesha. The remaining 8

Navamshas may be considered to be leased, (figuratively speaking!) by

Mars from other planets, giving him the general rulership all over

Mesha, while on the first Navamsha Mars is the absolute territorial

lord. Such considerations form the basis of the origin of an amsa

chart, requiring the placement of a planet within 0-3°20' of Mesha

in a birth chart in Mesha itself in the Navamsha chart, while a

planet that is occupying a longitude 3°20' 6°40' in Mesha is placed

in Vrisha(Taurus). The different arrangement of planets in the amsa

chart from that of the birth chart is to be used to get a better

glimpse of the indications of the native's life, but only when

judging those matters laid down by the originator of the amsa

chart. Thus, Navamsha for marriage or partnerships, Dasamsa for

career etc;

 

In time various post-Parasara writings have accumulated paving a way

for two distinct line of thoughts. 1) When the amsa chart is to be

interpreted there is no need to pay attention to those aspects in

birth chart, obviously they(those aspects which were in the birth

chart) may indeed be non existent in the amsa chart, 2) Planets in

Amsa charts develop drishtis (aspects) under the same Parasara

rules as in birth chart. Example, all oppositions in a varga chart

have the same meaning as in rasi chart, the special aspects of

Jupiter, Mars, and Saturn are applicable to the amsa charts the

same way it is applied to rasi chart.

 

I find two problems with the above concept.

1) A whole chapter in Parasara Hora has been devoted to drikbala of

planets.

Those of you click through GJ need not be told that drikbala is an

important attribute of planetary shadbala strength. The starting

point of the math for evaluation of drikbala function is the

longitude of planets. Is it not clear that the drikbala is

aspectual strength? If there is no longitudinal identity,

and consequently no angular relationship can be attributed between

planets in an amsa chart, does it not make aspect and aspectual

strength a foregone conclusion in amsa charts? One has to remember

that when a planet is in Thula(Libra) and another one is in Mesha

in Navamsha chart, they are there in those respective rasis because

those planets occupied (in the birth chart) segments ruled by

Venus and Mars, the lords of Thula and Mesha respectively. Such a

relationship originates in the amsa lordship between segments of a

given rasi, it has got nothing to do with any angular relationship

between planets existing at the time of birth. Therefore, there is

no justification to consider that these planets are in opposition

in the same sense as they will be in rasi, if they are similarly

placed.

 

2) Nowhere do I see aspect in varga charts explicitly mentioned in

Parasara Hora.(see the exception in Karakamsha charts mentioned

below). In the chapter where the Sage mentions vimshopaka strength

of planets (amsa charts do play a big role here) he makes no

mention of aspects, while exaltation(ucha) and own house

(swakhetram) are given appropriate considerations. Am I to suppose

that the Muni who carefully laid down precise mathematical rules to

apportion aspectual strengths in shadbala made an inadvertent

omission in vimshopaka?

 

There is, however, a chapter in Hora sastra that mentions a general

aspect, one that is not tied up in a longitudinal link on the

zodiac. In this chapter(chapter 9) there is a mention of aspects of

signs. The opposite signs and the planets contained within opposing

signs are considered to be aspecting each other, in addition to a

certain other combinations that gives fractional aspects. Thus,

when the term sputadrishti(an aspect characterized by a longitude in

the zodiac) is used, it becomes necessary to distinguish it from

another kind of drishti, one that is not associated with sputam

(longitude). May be one can claim that the later kind of aspect is

the one Sage Parasara is referring to in Karakamsha chart, when the

Sage uses the term ''Yutekshithe'' (to mean conjunct or aspected ).

By and large in astrological applications these general aspects

(mentioned in chapter 9) are ignored. When aspects are mentioned in

modern writings, almost invariably, the author implies aspects that

modify planetary attributes by divination or karakatwas of

aspecting and aspected planets. Such aspects are the ones between

planets in oppositions, or the special aspects of outer planets and

Mars. Such aspects can be meaningfully implicated only with their

longitudinal identity, a parameter not existing in amsa charts.

 

Thus, when Parasara uses the word " yutekshite " as he does in the

many verses in the chapter on Karakamsha in his monumental work, Hora

Sastra, a distinction has to made by the readers between such

drishti and those discussed in the birth chart. The later ones are

the only aspects that results in drikbala. The one in amsa charts

are supposed to be the ones, or those like the ones, mentioned in

chapter 9. The aspects that quantitatively modifies the properties

and significations by imparting characteristics of the aspecting and

aspected planets are always the ones that arise out of a defined

geometrical configuration. Such aspects cannot be existing in amsa

charts unless the design framework of amsa charts are modified from

that laid down by Sage Parasara.

 

Therefore, the total of 16 vargas giving rise to 144 aspects (not

counting special aspects of outer planets) does seem to be an

unnecessary complication that is not warranted by the definition of

aspects resulting in drikbala. Those aspects which do not have

aspectual strengths obviously cannot be equated on the same par to

those whose aspectual strength can be quantified. Many writings in

Vedic Astrology, dating back even to the beginning of the 19th

century, make no distinction between an aspect in the birth chart

and that in an amsa chart.

I do not mean to implicate that because there is not a longitudinal

identity there is no planetary interaction in a varga chart between

planets. My reasoning on aspects is exclusive of the relative ease

or difficulty of interaction between planets when they are in 1:9

and a 1:8 rasi position with respect to one another. Such

positional identities do not need an angular arc, described by

degree min second to define their position By assigning meaningful

aspects in amsa chart one actually begins to open a whole can of

worms. In some amsa charts, especially in those of smaller

fractional values, one starts to see the Moon's two nodes lumped

together in a single sign. How can one imagibe or justify a Rahu

falling out of of aspect from Ketu? In Parasara's Hora chart (the

fractional basis of Hora chart is fifteen degrees, half of a sign)

all planets have to line up in either Cancer or Leo. Is it that in

Hora chart, aspects between planets can be ignored, or they do not

exist there, but in all other amsa charts aspects are meaningful?

Vedic classics texts do mention that strengths of Yogas are

inversely dependant on the inter-planetary distance within a sign.

Lot of post parasara writings speak about Yogas in amsa charts. How

do these authors assign orbs, and consequently strength of Yogas

when planets are conjunct in amsa chart signs?

 

In the absence of written word from the Sage who originated the amsa

chart, one has only common sense to guide him through. My common

sense does see a necessity for longitude to justify aspect in

meaningful fashion, for aspect that cannot be quantitatively

ascertained has to be considered as an inferior parameter to

sputadrishti which can be quantitatively assessed. In my experience,

it is not only unjustified to treat aspects in amsa charts

the same way as one treats it in birth chart, but also leaving out

aspects from amsa charts do not take away any of the thunder out of

any predictions in Vedic Astrology. I hope to hear from those of

you who enjoy clicking through the invaluable gift bestowed on us

by Das Goravani. Happy clicking!,

--- Kuttikkat Chandrabose

--- kuttikkatbose

--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Get the free toolbar and rest assured with the added security of spyware

protection.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Ms Savithri

 

Thanks a lot for your views.I do not know this gentleman.But from

the way in which he has written,i assume,he would have contributed

to astrological magazines etc.I was able to find one Kuttikkat

Ayyappan Chandrabose,authoring one article for Dr.Charaks astrology

magazine,from the net.Hope he is the same.

 

The views from this gentleman is an objective one.It will come to

your mind as well as my mind,even if we haven't read his

views,provided we try to read from HIS library ,the library

within.Whenever in doubt the library within gives all the answers.

From this library we all get one answer.

 

Regds

Pradeep

, SAVITHRI MAHESH

<savithri_mahesh2000 wrote:

>

> Mr Pradeep

>

> Of course that is a brilliant and knowledgeable article by Mr

Chandrabose which u v presented for the group. It is quite

refreshing and thought provoking. I would like to know if he has

written any books or articles in magazine like Astrological Magazine

or Star Teller or Journal of Astrology.

>

> savithri

>

> vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep wrote:

> Dear Respected members

>

> While searching internet to find something else,i could get many

new

> infos as shared yesterday - Chandrashekhar jis views ,Parthas

> views,Freedoms views etc.I will analyze Mr.Parthas views and

> Mr.Freedoms views later.

>

> Most importantly i found a brilliant article written in 2001 by an

> elderly gentleman called Kuttikat Chandrabose(of my fathers age)

> regarding aspects in ''varga charts''.I request everyone who is

> having a scientific inclination to read this.

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

>

> Can we justify aspects in varga charts of Vedic Astrology?

>

> Until now I have not bothered myself to find out whether there are

> contradictions in the written literature of Vedic Astrology. The

> reason for this nonchalant attitude was the assumption that the

> very planets that signify good tidings will also signify bad

> indications, depending upon how the planets are linked to the

> various matters, the various portfolios of human life.

>

> So,contradictions become subjective to the native, depending on

what

> the native considers good or bad. As an example, my father left

our

> birthplace in India when I was 18 months old. He went to Singapore

> (it was pre-world war II times) where he had made his fortune

> before he married my mother, and I was born as the first

offspring.

> He was financially hard up when I was born. He (my father) knew

> that he could land his old job in Singapore, where he was well

paid.

> World war II broke out, Singapore was a favored Japanese strategic

> target, all whereabouts of my father along with several of his

> friends were all lost without a trace. I have no recollection of

my

> fathers face or any memories of him.

> Those of you dabble in both, Western as well as Eastern astrology,

> know that aspects are one issue on which the two systems differ

> fundamentally.The reason why I took an example from my birth chart

> was to illustrate that an aspect in the birth chart modifies even

an

> unoccupied zodiac sign, a postulate only Vedic Astrology makes. I

> have researched other cases which also seem to substantiate this

> dictum.

>

> Those of you who have access to Goravani Jyothish may cast my chart

> for11/04/1936, TOB 1:40: AM, Trichur, India. In my birth chart,

five

> out of the nine Vedic astrology planets aspect my 9th House,

> somewhat of a rare aspectual concentration on a single House. Four

> out of the five are malefic planets. The dictum that a glance from

> Jupiter will eliminate a thousand evils did not work for me, at

> least about my father, because the 5th aspect of the benefic

> Jupiter falls on the 9th House too. Looking back on my own life,

my

> 9th House succumbed to the evil forces it was subjected to, with

> respect to the experience I had about my father. But overall, for

> myself, the 9th House considered as a House of luck or fortune, I

> was rather blessed in the ambitions I had entertained in life

> compared to my rather low birth (only financially) surroundings.

>

> Thus, the science of astrology in fact allows for what are

seemingly

> apparent contradictions, but these are contradictions resulting

from

> differences in subjective interpretations, rather than those

> inherent in astrological dictums.

>

> I give my life experience here because it convinces me how aspects

to

> an empty rasi (unoccupied by any planet) in a birth chart can have

> meaningful impacts on those matters in the native's life,

signified

> by that rasi. However, when I come to aspects in amsa charts (also

> called varga charts) in Vedic Astrology, I am a little lost about

> its significance in the astrological literature.

>

> In general, most writings in Vedic Astrology literature allow for

the

> existence of aspects in amsa charts. If one accepts that aspects

both

> in Western as well in Eastern Astrology there seems to exist this

> acceptance) result from some particular geometrical angular

> relationships between planets, then it is difficult to see how in

> Parasara designed amsa charts one can meaningfully assign aspects.

> When a planet is transplanted from its rasi osition in a birth

chart

> (where in fact it is there in real time) to another Zodiac House

in

> an amsa chart, this planet looses its longitudinal identity which

> characterized it in the birth chart.

>

> Varga charts were introduced by Sage Parasara to fine tune the

> astrological judgment of certain matters in the native's life. The

> Sage declares their function in his book, albeit briefly but in no

> uncertain terms, in his introduction to vargavivekadhiaya.

> Parasara's justification for the creation of the varga charts is

> based on his postulate that planets which have the common lordship

> over a rasi, for example Mars over Mesha(Aries) and Vrischika

> (Scorpio) are not necessarily the supreme rulers of the various

> amsas (fractions) within the thirty degree span of the same rasis.

> Thus, while Mars rules the whole of Mesha in general, Mars has

some

> added rulership-right on the first Navamsha of Mesha(0-3°20')

> compared to the rest of 8 Navamshas of Mesha. The remaining 8

> Navamshas may be considered to be leased, (figuratively speaking!)

by

> Mars from other planets, giving him the general rulership all over

> Mesha, while on the first Navamsha Mars is the absolute

territorial

> lord. Such considerations form the basis of the origin of an amsa

> chart, requiring the placement of a planet within 0-3°20' of Mesha

> in a birth chart in Mesha itself in the Navamsha chart, while a

> planet that is occupying a longitude 3°20' 6°40' in Mesha is

placed

> in Vrisha(Taurus). The different arrangement of planets in the

amsa

> chart from that of the birth chart is to be used to get a better

> glimpse of the indications of the native's life, but only when

> judging those matters laid down by the originator of the amsa

> chart. Thus, Navamsha for marriage or partnerships, Dasamsa for

> career etc;

>

> In time various post-Parasara writings have accumulated paving a

way

> for two distinct line of thoughts. 1) When the amsa chart is to be

> interpreted there is no need to pay attention to those aspects in

> birth chart, obviously they(those aspects which were in the birth

> chart) may indeed be non existent in the amsa chart, 2) Planets in

> Amsa charts develop drishtis (aspects) under the same Parasara

> rules as in birth chart. Example, all oppositions in a varga chart

> have the same meaning as in rasi chart, the special aspects of

> Jupiter, Mars, and Saturn are applicable to the amsa charts the

> same way it is applied to rasi chart.

>

> I find two problems with the above concept.

> 1) A whole chapter in Parasara Hora has been devoted to drikbala of

> planets.

> Those of you click through GJ need not be told that drikbala is an

> important attribute of planetary shadbala strength. The starting

> point of the math for evaluation of drikbala function is the

> longitude of planets. Is it not clear that the drikbala is

> aspectual strength? If there is no longitudinal identity,

> and consequently no angular relationship can be attributed between

> planets in an amsa chart, does it not make aspect and aspectual

> strength a foregone conclusion in amsa charts? One has to remember

> that when a planet is in Thula(Libra) and another one is in Mesha

> in Navamsha chart, they are there in those respective rasis

because

> those planets occupied (in the birth chart) segments ruled by

> Venus and Mars, the lords of Thula and Mesha respectively. Such a

> relationship originates in the amsa lordship between segments of a

> given rasi, it has got nothing to do with any angular relationship

> between planets existing at the time of birth. Therefore, there is

> no justification to consider that these planets are in opposition

> in the same sense as they will be in rasi, if they are similarly

> placed.

>

> 2) Nowhere do I see aspect in varga charts explicitly mentioned in

> Parasara Hora.(see the exception in Karakamsha charts mentioned

> below). In the chapter where the Sage mentions vimshopaka strength

> of planets (amsa charts do play a big role here) he makes no

> mention of aspects, while exaltation(ucha) and own house

> (swakhetram) are given appropriate considerations. Am I to suppose

> that the Muni who carefully laid down precise mathematical rules

to

> apportion aspectual strengths in shadbala made an inadvertent

> omission in vimshopaka?

>

> There is, however, a chapter in Hora sastra that mentions a general

> aspect, one that is not tied up in a longitudinal link on the

> zodiac. In this chapter(chapter 9) there is a mention of aspects

of

> signs. The opposite signs and the planets contained within

opposing

> signs are considered to be aspecting each other, in addition to a

> certain other combinations that gives fractional aspects. Thus,

> when the term sputadrishti(an aspect characterized by a longitude

in

> the zodiac) is used, it becomes necessary to distinguish it from

> another kind of drishti, one that is not associated with sputam

> (longitude). May be one can claim that the later kind of aspect is

> the one Sage Parasara is referring to in Karakamsha chart, when

the

> Sage uses the term ''Yutekshithe'' (to mean conjunct or

aspected ).

> By and large in astrological applications these general aspects

> (mentioned in chapter 9) are ignored. When aspects are mentioned

in

> modern writings, almost invariably, the author implies aspects

that

> modify planetary attributes by divination or karakatwas of

> aspecting and aspected planets. Such aspects are the ones between

> planets in oppositions, or the special aspects of outer planets and

> Mars. Such aspects can be meaningfully implicated only with their

> longitudinal identity, a parameter not existing in amsa charts.

>

> Thus, when Parasara uses the word " yutekshite " as he does in the

> many verses in the chapter on Karakamsha in his monumental work,

Hora

> Sastra, a distinction has to made by the readers between such

> drishti and those discussed in the birth chart. The later ones are

> the only aspects that results in drikbala. The one in amsa charts

> are supposed to be the ones, or those like the ones, mentioned in

> chapter 9. The aspects that quantitatively modifies the properties

> and significations by imparting characteristics of the aspecting

and

> aspected planets are always the ones that arise out of a defined

> geometrical configuration. Such aspects cannot be existing in amsa

> charts unless the design framework of amsa charts are modified

from

> that laid down by Sage Parasara.

>

> Therefore, the total of 16 vargas giving rise to 144 aspects (not

> counting special aspects of outer planets) does seem to be an

> unnecessary complication that is not warranted by the definition

of

> aspects resulting in drikbala. Those aspects which do not have

> aspectual strengths obviously cannot be equated on the same par to

> those whose aspectual strength can be quantified. Many writings in

> Vedic Astrology, dating back even to the beginning of the 19th

> century, make no distinction between an aspect in the birth chart

> and that in an amsa chart.

> I do not mean to implicate that because there is not a longitudinal

> identity there is no planetary interaction in a varga chart

between

> planets. My reasoning on aspects is exclusive of the relative ease

> or difficulty of interaction between planets when they are in 1:9

> and a 1:8 rasi position with respect to one another. Such

> positional identities do not need an angular arc, described by

> degree min second to define their position By assigning meaningful

> aspects in amsa chart one actually begins to open a whole can of

> worms. In some amsa charts, especially in those of smaller

> fractional values, one starts to see the Moon's two nodes lumped

> together in a single sign. How can one imagibe or justify a Rahu

> falling out of of aspect from Ketu? In Parasara's Hora chart (the

> fractional basis of Hora chart is fifteen degrees, half of a sign)

> all planets have to line up in either Cancer or Leo. Is it that in

> Hora chart, aspects between planets can be ignored, or they do not

> exist there, but in all other amsa charts aspects are meaningful?

> Vedic classics texts do mention that strengths of Yogas are

> inversely dependant on the inter-planetary distance within a sign.

> Lot of post parasara writings speak about Yogas in amsa charts.

How

> do these authors assign orbs, and consequently strength of Yogas

> when planets are conjunct in amsa chart signs?

>

> In the absence of written word from the Sage who originated the

amsa

> chart, one has only common sense to guide him through. My common

> sense does see a necessity for longitude to justify aspect in

> meaningful fashion, for aspect that cannot be quantitatively

> ascertained has to be considered as an inferior parameter to

> sputadrishti which can be quantitatively assessed. In my

experience,

> it is not only unjustified to treat aspects in amsa charts

> the same way as one treats it in birth chart, but also leaving out

> aspects from amsa charts do not take away any of the thunder out

of

> any predictions in Vedic Astrology. I hope to hear from those of

> you who enjoy clicking through the invaluable gift bestowed on us

> by Das Goravani. Happy clicking!,

> --- Kuttikkat Chandrabose

> --- kuttikkatbose@

> --- EarthLink: It's your Internet.

 

> Get the free toolbar and rest assured with the added

security of spyware protection.

>

>