Guest guest Posted March 19, 2010 Report Share Posted March 19, 2010 Dear Sivaprakasam, I had the same problem yesterday. It is extremely annoying! Best Wishes Mrs.Wendy http://JyotishVidya.com =================== Sivaprakasam KPM Friday, March 19, 2010 6:15 PM jyotish-vidya Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini Namaste friends, I sent more than two messages in the morning on this thread " Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini " around 1030 hours IST, none has appeared so far. I dont know the reasons.... I send it once again... if they appear twice in your mail boxes, please bear with me. With regards, Sivaprakasam __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4957 (20100319) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2010 Report Share Posted March 19, 2010 Dear Vic, ///Leo and Cancer, on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as Sagittarius and Pisces. Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira blends it's inherent sattva with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of Cancer, the inherent sattva blends with chara's rajas./// I'm sorry Vic but I do have to disagree with this. One guna (alone) predominates. A sign is either one or the other, not more this than that. The other qualities, of course, need to be considered; but the guna itself is not modified to fit these other qualities. Guna IS, Dosha IS, Element IS etc... Best Wishes Mrs.Wendy http://JyotishVidya.com =================== Vic DiCara Friday, March 19, 2010 5:05 PM jyotish-vidya Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini Dear Krishna and All, In my experience, the most essential key to really grasping the shastras is *context*. In this particular case we find there is basically one shloka for each rashi. We find that Parashara has a group of qualities, and in each shloka he enumerates the way each rasha behaves in each category. Every shloka describes a guna for example. Therefore if we find one or two which do not, we suspect it is an error in translation. Sanskrit translators really have a difficult task and they very rarely do a passable job. Translations of Vedic shastras are extremely poor, in my opinion. It is very difficult to be fair, because one must have a mastery of three difficult subjects: (1) English, (2) Sanskrit and (3) Jyotish. So, therefore if there are some verses which the English lacks a specific for Guna, but for every other rashi parashara has enumerated the guna - we are quite suspicious of an oversight in translation. Upon closer examination of the shlokas missing the English translations for specifications of Guna, we find words in Sanskrit which pertain to the Gunas. It is extremely prudent and wise for us at this stage to understand that it is a mistake in translation. Thus we find confidently that Taurus is rajasic, Gemini tamasic, and Scorpio rajasic. Mrs. Wendy has brought up the topic that dvisvabhava relates to sattva-guna, chara to rajo-guna and sthira to tamo-guna. I find this thoroughly reasonable and valid personally. However, the two exist side by side, creating distinctions among the signs. Pisces and Sagittarius, for example are thoroughly sattvic signs, because they have the quality of sattva by their own nature, and their " guna " (as it is literally called, no?) also has the quality of sattva, being dvi-svabhavika. Leo and Cancer, on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as Sagittarius and Pisces. Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira blends it's inherent sattva with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of Cancer, the inherent sattva blends with chara's rajas. In this way, it all makes lovely sense and has a nice harmony. It is also interesting to differentiate the varnas. For example both the Sun and Mars are Ksatriyas, but the Sun is a sattvic ksatriya, while Mars is a tamasic Ksatriya. That nicely describes the difference in the nature of the Sun and Mars. The Moon is a sattvic vaishya, while mercury is a rajasic vaishya. Jupiter a sattvic brahman while Venus is a rajasic bhrahman. Saturn, Rahu and Ketu are all tamasic, but Saturn is structured and behaves as a shudra, whereas Rahu and Ketu are lawless and behave as mlecchas. It all makes very nice sense, in my opinion. Another thing very interesting to note is that the earth element pertains to vaishyas, the fire element to kshatriyas, the water element to brahmanas, and the air element to shudras. Yours, Vic DiCara __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4957 (20100319) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2010 Report Share Posted March 19, 2010 Dear Vic, Couple of things. a) If I don't assume that the word 'teekshna' has been used by the author to describe the guna, it could mean other things too b) It is not just teekshna, he has used 'teekshnagre', hence I guess he is trying to say something else. Regards, Krishna On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Vic DiCara <vicdicara wrote: > > > Dear Krishna, > > Why would you say that " teeksha-agro " could not refer to rajas? > > According to the standard English-Sanskrit dictionary (Sir Monier Monier > Williams dictionary), teekshna means: " sharp, hot, pungent, fiery, acid, > keen, and zealous " - these are all descriptions of rajo-guna, are they not? > > Yours, > Vic DiCara > > > On 2010/03/19, at 15:30, Krishnamurthy Seetharama wrote: > > > Dear Vic, > > > > The word is 'Teekshnagro' meaning sharp front end. That may not mean > rajas. > > > > Regards, > > Krishna > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Vic DiCara <vicdicara<vicdicara%40gmail.com>> > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Dear Krishna, > >> > >> It seems the translator takes the sanskrit for " sharp " to also mean > >> " passionate " which refers to rajas, rajo-guna. Can you locate that > Sanskrit > >> word? I apologize that I can't access the Sanskrit for BPHS right now. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Vic > >> > >> > >> On 2010/03/19, at 15:10, Krishnamurthy Seetharama wrote: > >> > >>> Dear Vic, > >>> > >>> Yes, it only says 'Brahmin'. So it is only varna. There is no mention > of > >>> Guna here. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Krishna > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Vic DiCara <vicdicara<vicdicara%40gmail.com> > <vicdicara%40gmail.com>> > > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dear Krishna, > >>>> > >>>> Did my previous post on this topic make it to the group? I wanted to > ask > >> on > >>>> which basis you say that Scorpio is Sattvic? It appears to me that > >> Parashara > >>>> describes it's varna as brahmin but it's guna as rajas. My Parashara's > >> Light > >>>> is crashing when I try to open the sanskrit BPHS. Can you kindly check > >> the > >>>> Sanskrit for BPHS 4.16? > >>>> > >>>> The english is: " denotes brahmins " ... " is very sharp (passionate) " > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 2010/03/19, at 10:24, Krishnamurthy Seetharama wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> If anyone has any inputs about the included message pls. do share. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Krishna > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Krishnamurthy Seetharama < > >>>>> kmurthys58 <kmurthys58%40gmail.com> <kmurthys58% > 40gmail.com> <kmurthys58%40gmail.com>> > > >> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Dear Mrs. Wendy, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Sun, Moon and Jupiter are Satvik planets and so are the signs owned > by > >>>>>> them. > >>>>>> Venus is Rajasik and so are the signs owned by it. > >>>>>> Saturn is Tamasik and so are the signs owned by it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> But, such a consistency is not seen for Mercury and Mars. Mercury is > a > >>>>>> Rajasik planet while the signs owned by it are both Tamasik. > Similarly > >>>> Mars > >>>>>> is Tamasik while Aries is said to be Rajasik and Scorpio to be > Satvik. > >> I > >>>> am > >>>>>> not able to comprehend this deviation for Mercury and Mars. Please > >> shed > >>>> some > >>>>>> light on this. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>> Krishna > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Mrs.Wendy < > jyotishvidya <jyotishvidya%40bigpond.com><jyotishvidya% > 40bigpond.com> > >> <jyotishvidya%40bigpond.com> > >> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Dear Vic, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Taurus is rajaguna. Gemini is tamas... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Best Wishes > >>>>>>> Mrs.Wendy > >>>>>>> http://JyotishVidya.com <http://jyotishvidya.com/> > >>>> > >>>>>>> =================== > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Vic DiCara > >>>>>>> Thursday, March 18, 2010 3:52 PM > >>>>>>> To: jyotish-vidya <jyotish-vidya%40><jyotish-vidya% > 40><jyotish-vidya% > >> 40><jyotish-vidya% > >> > >>>> 40> > >>>> > >>>>>>> Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> A question for any and all: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In BPHS Ch.4, the esteemed author describes the triguna of each > >> rashi, > >>>>>>> EXCEPT Taurus and Gemini. Are these described/ defined anywhere? > What > >>>> is the > >>>>>>> triguna of these? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thank you, > >>>>>>> Vic DiCara > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus > >>>>>>> signature database 4953 (20100317) __________ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> http://www.eset.com > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2010 Report Share Posted March 19, 2010 Dear Vic, // It is very difficult to be fair, because one must have a mastery of three difficult subjects: (1) English, (2) Sanskrit and (3) Jyotish. // You might be correct in your observations. As far as I am concerned, I know that the translators are definitely better than me in Sanskrit and Jyotish. Some could possibly be better than me in English as well. Hence, I give more weightage to their translations. Regards, Krishna On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Vic DiCara <vicdicara wrote: > > > Dear Krishna and All, > > In my experience, the most essential key to really grasping the shastras is > *context*. In this particular case we find there is basically one shloka for > each rashi. We find that Parashara has a group of qualities, and in each > shloka he enumerates the way each rasha behaves in each category. Every > shloka describes a guna for example. Therefore if we find one or two which > do not, we suspect it is an error in translation. > > Sanskrit translators really have a difficult task and they very rarely do a > passable job. Translations of Vedic shastras are extremely poor, in my > opinion. It is very difficult to be fair, because one must have a mastery of > three difficult subjects: (1) English, (2) Sanskrit and (3) Jyotish. > > So, therefore if there are some verses which the English lacks a specific > for Guna, but for every other rashi parashara has enumerated the guna - we > are quite suspicious of an oversight in translation. Upon closer examination > of the shlokas missing the English translations for specifications of Guna, > we find words in Sanskrit which pertain to the Gunas. It is extremely > prudent and wise for us at this stage to understand that it is a mistake in > translation. > > Thus we find confidently that Taurus is rajasic, Gemini tamasic, and > Scorpio rajasic. > > Mrs. Wendy has brought up the topic that dvisvabhava relates to > sattva-guna, chara to rajo-guna and sthira to tamo-guna. I find this > thoroughly reasonable and valid personally. However, the two exist side by > side, creating distinctions among the signs. Pisces and Sagittarius, for > example are thoroughly sattvic signs, because they have the quality of > sattva by their own nature, and their " guna " (as it is literally called, > no?) also has the quality of sattva, being dvi-svabhavika. Leo and Cancer, > on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as Sagittarius and Pisces. > Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira blends it's inherent sattva > with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of Cancer, the inherent sattva > blends with chara's rajas. > > In this way, it all makes lovely sense and has a nice harmony. > > It is also interesting to differentiate the varnas. For example both the > Sun and Mars are Ksatriyas, but the Sun is a sattvic ksatriya, while Mars is > a tamasic Ksatriya. That nicely describes the difference in the nature of > the Sun and Mars. The Moon is a sattvic vaishya, while mercury is a rajasic > vaishya. Jupiter a sattvic brahman while Venus is a rajasic bhrahman. > Saturn, Rahu and Ketu are all tamasic, but Saturn is structured and behaves > as a shudra, whereas Rahu and Ketu are lawless and behave as mlecchas. > > It all makes very nice sense, in my opinion. > > Another thing very interesting to note is that the earth element pertains > to vaishyas, the fire element to kshatriyas, the water element to brahmanas, > and the air element to shudras. > > Yours, > Vic DiCara > > > On 2010/03/19, at 16:55, Krishnamurthy Seetharama wrote: > > > Dear Gopi ji, > > > > One is free to draw conclusions. However, Sharma's translation says - > sharp > > forepart (sharp like sting). > > > > Regards, > > Krishna > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:56 PM, gopalakrishna <gopi_b927<gopi_b927%40>> > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Dear Krishna ji/vic ji, > >> the word teekshanagro could mean Rajas(rajo guna) also.Sanskrit has got > >> many meanings to a word than any other language.Hence it is also called > >> language of gods!!... > >> More over Mars/8H of natural zodiac can not be satwic(logical i > >> believe).............I have my own reservations about it since it could > >> only be Rajasic/tamasic.My personal opinion goes(though doesnt matter) > >> to Tamasic since Aries is Rajasic............. > >> Love and regards, > >> gopi. > >> > >> jyotish-vidya <jyotish-vidya%40><jyotish-vidya% > 40>, > > >> Krishnamurthy Seetharama > >> <kmurthys58 wrote: > >>> > >>> Dear Vic, > >>> > >>> The word is 'Teekshnagro' meaning sharp front end. That may not mean > >> rajas. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Krishna > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Vic DiCara vicdicara wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Dear Krishna, > >>>> > >>>> It seems the translator takes the sanskrit for " sharp " to also mean > >>>> " passionate " which refers to rajas, rajo-guna. Can you locate that > >> Sanskrit > >>>> word? I apologize that I can't access the Sanskrit for BPHS right > >> now. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Vic > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 2010/03/19, at 15:10, Krishnamurthy Seetharama wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Dear Vic, > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes, it only says 'Brahmin'. So it is only varna. There is no > >> mention of > >>>>> Guna here. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Krishna > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Vic DiCara > >> vicdicara<vicdicara%40gmail.com>> > >> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Dear Krishna, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Did my previous post on this topic make it to the group? I wanted > >> to ask > >>>> on > >>>>>> which basis you say that Scorpio is Sattvic? It appears to me > >> that > >>>> Parashara > >>>>>> describes it's varna as brahmin but it's guna as rajas. My > >> Parashara's > >>>> Light > >>>>>> is crashing when I try to open the sanskrit BPHS. Can you kindly > >> check > >>>> the > >>>>>> Sanskrit for BPHS 4.16? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The english is: " denotes brahmins " ... " is very sharp > >> (passionate) " > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 2010/03/19, at 10:24, Krishnamurthy Seetharama wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> If anyone has any inputs about the included message pls. do > >> share. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>> Krishna > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Krishnamurthy Seetharama < > >>>>>>> kmurthys58 <kmurthys58%40gmail.com> > >> > >> <kmurthys58%40gmail.com>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Dear Mrs. Wendy, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Sun, Moon and Jupiter are Satvik planets and so are the signs > >> owned by > >>>>>>>> them. > >>>>>>>> Venus is Rajasik and so are the signs owned by it. > >>>>>>>> Saturn is Tamasik and so are the signs owned by it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> But, such a consistency is not seen for Mercury and Mars. > >> Mercury is a > >>>>>>>> Rajasik planet while the signs owned by it are both Tamasik. > >> Similarly > >>>>>> Mars > >>>>>>>> is Tamasik while Aries is said to be Rajasik and Scorpio to be > >> Satvik. > >>>> I > >>>>>> am > >>>>>>>> not able to comprehend this deviation for Mercury and Mars. > >> Please > >>>> shed > >>>>>> some > >>>>>>>> light on this. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>> Krishna > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Mrs.Wendy > >> jyotishvidya<jyotishvidya%40bigpond.com> > >> > >>>> <jyotishvidya%40bigpond.com> > >>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Dear Vic, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Taurus is rajaguna. Gemini is tamas... > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Best Wishes > >>>>>>>>> Mrs.Wendy > >>>>>>>>> http://JyotishVidya.com <http://jyotishvidya.com/> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> =================== > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Vic DiCara > >>>>>>>>> Thursday, March 18, 2010 3:52 PM > >>>>>>>>> jyotish-vidya <jyotish-vidya%40> > <jyotish-vidya%40> > >> <jyotish-vidya%40><jyotish-vidya% > >>>> 40><jyotish-vidya% > >>>> > >>>>>> 40> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> A question for any and all: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> In BPHS Ch.4, the esteemed author describes the triguna of > >> each > >>>> rashi, > >>>>>>>>> EXCEPT Taurus and Gemini. Are these described/ defined > >> anywhere? What > >>>>>> is the > >>>>>>>>> triguna of these? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thank you, > >>>>>>>>> Vic DiCara > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of > >> virus > >>>>>>>>> signature database 4953 (20100317) __________ > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> http://www.eset.com > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2010 Report Share Posted March 21, 2010 Dear Mrs. Wendy, Since I was also taught that the Nakshatras have three layers of gunas operating simultaneously (a core interest, a mood, and a practical layer), all of which are usually different - it doesn't seem a leap for me to understand the Solar Signs (Rashis) to have more than one layer on which the trigunas operate. But I respect, of course, if you wish to conceive of it differently from how I do. Yours, Vic On 2010/03/19, at 20:44, Mrs.Wendy wrote: > Dear Vic, > > ///Leo and Cancer, on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as Sagittarius and Pisces. Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira blends it's inherent sattva with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of Cancer, the inherent sattva blends with chara's rajas./// > > I'm sorry Vic but I do have to disagree with this. One guna (alone) predominates. A sign is either one or the other, not more this than that. The other qualities, of course, need to be considered; but the guna itself is not modified to fit these other qualities. Guna IS, Dosha IS, Element IS etc... > > Best Wishes > Mrs.Wendy > http://JyotishVidya.com > =================== > > Vic DiCara > Friday, March 19, 2010 5:05 PM > jyotish-vidya > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > > Dear Krishna and All, > > In my experience, the most essential key to really grasping the shastras is *context*. In this particular case we find there is basically one shloka for each rashi. We find that Parashara has a group of qualities, and in each shloka he enumerates the way each rasha behaves in each category. Every shloka describes a guna for example. Therefore if we find one or two which do not, we suspect it is an error in translation. > > Sanskrit translators really have a difficult task and they very rarely do a passable job. Translations of Vedic shastras are extremely poor, in my opinion. It is very difficult to be fair, because one must have a mastery of three difficult subjects: (1) English, (2) Sanskrit and (3) Jyotish. > > So, therefore if there are some verses which the English lacks a specific for Guna, but for every other rashi parashara has enumerated the guna - we are quite suspicious of an oversight in translation. Upon closer examination of the shlokas missing the English translations for specifications of Guna, we find words in Sanskrit which pertain to the Gunas. It is extremely prudent and wise for us at this stage to understand that it is a mistake in translation. > > Thus we find confidently that Taurus is rajasic, Gemini tamasic, and Scorpio rajasic. > > Mrs. Wendy has brought up the topic that dvisvabhava relates to sattva-guna, chara to rajo-guna and sthira to tamo-guna. I find this thoroughly reasonable and valid personally. However, the two exist side by side, creating distinctions among the signs. Pisces and Sagittarius, for example are thoroughly sattvic signs, because they have the quality of sattva by their own nature, and their " guna " (as it is literally called, no?) also has the quality of sattva, being dvi-svabhavika. Leo and Cancer, on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as Sagittarius and Pisces. Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira blends it's inherent sattva with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of Cancer, the inherent sattva blends with chara's rajas. > > In this way, it all makes lovely sense and has a nice harmony. > > It is also interesting to differentiate the varnas. For example both the Sun and Mars are Ksatriyas, but the Sun is a sattvic ksatriya, while Mars is a tamasic Ksatriya. That nicely describes the difference in the nature of the Sun and Mars. The Moon is a sattvic vaishya, while mercury is a rajasic vaishya. Jupiter a sattvic brahman while Venus is a rajasic bhrahman. Saturn, Rahu and Ketu are all tamasic, but Saturn is structured and behaves as a shudra, whereas Rahu and Ketu are lawless and behave as mlecchas. > > It all makes very nice sense, in my opinion. > > Another thing very interesting to note is that the earth element pertains to vaishyas, the fire element to kshatriyas, the water element to brahmanas, and the air element to shudras. > > Yours, > Vic DiCara > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4957 (20100319) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2010 Report Share Posted March 21, 2010 Dear Vic, As I have no idea who your teacher was/is, I cannot comment on his/her authenticity...perhaps you can share with us? However, the fact is; that, although the three gunas exist in everything, only one (unlike the doshas) dominates. Gunas shape deeper levels than our biological constitutions (vata, pitta and kapha)...they, in actual fact, reveal our state of consciousness and spiritual condition... Sattwa is the quality of intelligence, morality and goodness. It creates harmony, equilibrium and stability and brings an awakening of consciousness. It's understandable therefore that Leo (ruled by AtmaKaraka Sun) is a Sattwa rashi. It's also understandable that on the physical (biological) level, because of the heat of Sun's rays (fiery element) both Leo and Sun reflect the Pitta dosha. Best Wishes Mrs.Wendy http://JyotishVidya.com =================== ----------------- " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara Monday, March 22, 2010 9:31 AM <jyotish-vidya > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini Dear Mrs. Wendy, Since I was also taught that the Nakshatras have three layers of gunas operating simultaneously (a core interest, a mood, and a practical layer), all of which are usually different - it doesn't seem a leap for me to understand the Solar Signs (Rashis) to have more than one layer on which the trigunas operate. But I respect, of course, if you wish to conceive of it differently from how I do. Yours, Vic On 2010/03/19, at 20:44, Mrs.Wendy wrote: > Dear Vic, > > ///Leo and Cancer, on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as > Sagittarius and Pisces. Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira > blends it's inherent sattva with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of > Cancer, the inherent sattva blends with chara's rajas./// > > I'm sorry Vic but I do have to disagree with this. One guna (alone) > predominates. A sign is either one or the other, not more this than that. > The other qualities, of course, need to be considered; but the guna itself > is not modified to fit these other qualities. Guna IS, Dosha IS, Element > IS etc... > > Best Wishes > Mrs.Wendy > http://JyotishVidya.com > =================== > > Vic DiCara > Friday, March 19, 2010 5:05 PM > jyotish-vidya > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > > Dear Krishna and All, > > In my experience, the most essential key to really grasping the shastras > is *context*. In this particular case we find there is basically one > shloka for each rashi. We find that Parashara has a group of qualities, > and in each shloka he enumerates the way each rasha behaves in each > category. Every shloka describes a guna for example. Therefore if we find > one or two which do not, we suspect it is an error in translation. > > Sanskrit translators really have a difficult task and they very rarely do > a passable job. Translations of Vedic shastras are extremely poor, in my > opinion. It is very difficult to be fair, because one must have a mastery > of three difficult subjects: (1) English, (2) Sanskrit and (3) Jyotish. > > So, therefore if there are some verses which the English lacks a specific > for Guna, but for every other rashi parashara has enumerated the guna - we > are quite suspicious of an oversight in translation. Upon closer > examination of the shlokas missing the English translations for > specifications of Guna, we find words in Sanskrit which pertain to the > Gunas. It is extremely prudent and wise for us at this stage to understand > that it is a mistake in translation. > > Thus we find confidently that Taurus is rajasic, Gemini tamasic, and > Scorpio rajasic. > > Mrs. Wendy has brought up the topic that dvisvabhava relates to > sattva-guna, chara to rajo-guna and sthira to tamo-guna. I find this > thoroughly reasonable and valid personally. However, the two exist side by > side, creating distinctions among the signs. Pisces and Sagittarius, for > example are thoroughly sattvic signs, because they have the quality of > sattva by their own nature, and their " guna " (as it is literally called, > no?) also has the quality of sattva, being dvi-svabhavika. Leo and Cancer, > on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as Sagittarius and Pisces. > Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira blends it's inherent sattva > with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of Cancer, the inherent sattva > blends with chara's rajas. > > In this way, it all makes lovely sense and has a nice harmony. > > It is also interesting to differentiate the varnas. For example both the > Sun and Mars are Ksatriyas, but the Sun is a sattvic ksatriya, while Mars > is a tamasic Ksatriya. That nicely describes the difference in the nature > of the Sun and Mars. The Moon is a sattvic vaishya, while mercury is a > rajasic vaishya. Jupiter a sattvic brahman while Venus is a rajasic > bhrahman. Saturn, Rahu and Ketu are all tamasic, but Saturn is structured > and behaves as a shudra, whereas Rahu and Ketu are lawless and behave as > mlecchas. > > It all makes very nice sense, in my opinion. > > Another thing very interesting to note is that the earth element pertains > to vaishyas, the fire element to kshatriyas, the water element to > brahmanas, and the air element to shudras. > > Yours, > Vic DiCara __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4963 (20100321) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2010 Report Share Posted March 21, 2010 Dear Mrs. Wendy, This one about the three layers of gunas operating in the nakshatras I learned from David Frawley. Yours, Vic On 2010/03/22, at 11:14, Mrs.Wendy wrote: > Dear Vic, > > As I have no idea who your teacher was/is, I cannot comment on his/her > authenticity...perhaps you can share with us? However, the fact is; that, > although the three gunas exist in everything, only one (unlike the doshas) > dominates. > > Gunas shape deeper levels than our biological constitutions (vata, pitta and > kapha)...they, in actual fact, reveal our state of consciousness and > spiritual condition... > > Sattwa is the quality of intelligence, morality and goodness. It creates > harmony, equilibrium and stability and brings an awakening of consciousness. > It's understandable therefore that Leo (ruled by AtmaKaraka Sun) is a Sattwa > rashi. It's also understandable that on the physical (biological) level, > because of the heat of Sun's rays (fiery element) both Leo and Sun reflect > the Pitta dosha. > > Best Wishes > Mrs.Wendy > http://JyotishVidya.com > =================== > > ----------------- > " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara > Monday, March 22, 2010 9:31 AM > <jyotish-vidya > > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > > Dear Mrs. Wendy, > > Since I was also taught that the Nakshatras have three layers of gunas > operating simultaneously (a core interest, a mood, and a practical layer), > all of which are usually different - it doesn't seem a leap for me to > understand the Solar Signs (Rashis) to have more than one layer on which the > trigunas operate. But I respect, of course, if you wish to conceive of it > differently from how I do. > > Yours, > Vic > > On 2010/03/19, at 20:44, Mrs.Wendy wrote: > > > Dear Vic, > > > > ///Leo and Cancer, on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as > > Sagittarius and Pisces. Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira > > blends it's inherent sattva with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of > > Cancer, the inherent sattva blends with chara's rajas./// > > > > I'm sorry Vic but I do have to disagree with this. One guna (alone) > > predominates. A sign is either one or the other, not more this than that. > > The other qualities, of course, need to be considered; but the guna itself > > is not modified to fit these other qualities. Guna IS, Dosha IS, Element > > IS etc... > > > > Best Wishes > > Mrs.Wendy > > http://JyotishVidya.com > > =================== > > > > Vic DiCara > > Friday, March 19, 2010 5:05 PM > > jyotish-vidya > > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > > > > Dear Krishna and All, > > > > In my experience, the most essential key to really grasping the shastras > > is *context*. In this particular case we find there is basically one > > shloka for each rashi. We find that Parashara has a group of qualities, > > and in each shloka he enumerates the way each rasha behaves in each > > category. Every shloka describes a guna for example. Therefore if we find > > one or two which do not, we suspect it is an error in translation. > > > > Sanskrit translators really have a difficult task and they very rarely do > > a passable job. Translations of Vedic shastras are extremely poor, in my > > opinion. It is very difficult to be fair, because one must have a mastery > > of three difficult subjects: (1) English, (2) Sanskrit and (3) Jyotish. > > > > So, therefore if there are some verses which the English lacks a specific > > for Guna, but for every other rashi parashara has enumerated the guna - we > > are quite suspicious of an oversight in translation. Upon closer > > examination of the shlokas missing the English translations for > > specifications of Guna, we find words in Sanskrit which pertain to the > > Gunas. It is extremely prudent and wise for us at this stage to understand > > that it is a mistake in translation. > > > > Thus we find confidently that Taurus is rajasic, Gemini tamasic, and > > Scorpio rajasic. > > > > Mrs. Wendy has brought up the topic that dvisvabhava relates to > > sattva-guna, chara to rajo-guna and sthira to tamo-guna. I find this > > thoroughly reasonable and valid personally. However, the two exist side by > > side, creating distinctions among the signs. Pisces and Sagittarius, for > > example are thoroughly sattvic signs, because they have the quality of > > sattva by their own nature, and their " guna " (as it is literally called, > > no?) also has the quality of sattva, being dvi-svabhavika. Leo and Cancer, > > on the other hand are not as purely sattvic as Sagittarius and Pisces. > > Because in the case of Leo, it's being sthira blends it's inherent sattva > > with sthira's quality of tamas. In the case of Cancer, the inherent sattva > > blends with chara's rajas. > > > > In this way, it all makes lovely sense and has a nice harmony. > > > > It is also interesting to differentiate the varnas. For example both the > > Sun and Mars are Ksatriyas, but the Sun is a sattvic ksatriya, while Mars > > is a tamasic Ksatriya. That nicely describes the difference in the nature > > of the Sun and Mars. The Moon is a sattvic vaishya, while mercury is a > > rajasic vaishya. Jupiter a sattvic brahman while Venus is a rajasic > > bhrahman. Saturn, Rahu and Ketu are all tamasic, but Saturn is structured > > and behaves as a shudra, whereas Rahu and Ketu are lawless and behave as > > mlecchas. > > > > It all makes very nice sense, in my opinion. > > > > Another thing very interesting to note is that the earth element pertains > > to vaishyas, the fire element to kshatriyas, the water element to > > brahmanas, and the air element to shudras. > > > > Yours, > > Vic DiCara > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4963 (20100321) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2010 Report Share Posted March 21, 2010 Dear Vic, Is this (perhaps) what you're referring to?? http://www.vedicsociety.org/shaktis-of-the-nakshatras-a-238.html http://satyavidya.com/Nakshatras.htm As you can see I'm finding it difficult to find any reference to David Frawley's teaching that the individual nakshatras express all three gunas (albeit on different levels). I've also had a quick look through his book " The Astrology of the Seers " but have not found anything so far. It would be a great help if you could point to a specific reference. Best Wishes Mrs.Wendy http://JyotishVidya.com =================== ----------------- " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara Monday, March 22, 2010 11:10 AM <jyotish-vidya > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini Dear Mrs. Wendy, This one about the three layers of gunas operating in the nakshatras I learned from David Frawley. Yours, Vic On 2010/03/22, at 11:14, Mrs.Wendy wrote: > Dear Vic, > > As I have no idea who your teacher was/is, I cannot comment on his/her > authenticity...perhaps you can share with us? However, the fact is; that, > although the three gunas exist in everything, only one (unlike the doshas) > dominates. > > Gunas shape deeper levels than our biological constitutions (vata, pitta > and > kapha)...they, in actual fact, reveal our state of consciousness and > spiritual condition... > > Sattwa is the quality of intelligence, morality and goodness. It creates > harmony, equilibrium and stability and brings an awakening of > consciousness. > It's understandable therefore that Leo (ruled by AtmaKaraka Sun) is a > Sattwa > rashi. It's also understandable that on the physical (biological) level, > because of the heat of Sun's rays (fiery element) both Leo and Sun reflect > the Pitta dosha. > > Best Wishes > Mrs.Wendy > http://JyotishVidya.com > =================== > > ----------------- > " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara > Monday, March 22, 2010 9:31 AM > <jyotish-vidya > > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > > Dear Mrs. Wendy, > > Since I was also taught that the Nakshatras have three layers of gunas > operating simultaneously (a core interest, a mood, and a practical layer), > all of which are usually different - it doesn't seem a leap for me to > understand the Solar Signs (Rashis) to have more than one layer on which > the > trigunas operate. But I respect, of course, if you wish to conceive of it > differently from how I do. > > Yours, > Vic __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4963 (20100321) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2010 Report Share Posted March 21, 2010 PS: As his teachings are widely publicized, some reference to this must surely be available. ________________________________ Dear Vic, Is this (perhaps) what you're referring to?? http://www.vedicsociety.org/shaktis-of-the-nakshatras-a-238.html http://satyavidya.com/Nakshatras.htm As you can see I'm finding it difficult to find any reference to David Frawley's teaching that the individual nakshatras express all three gunas (albeit on different levels). I've also had a quick look through his book " The Astrology of the Seers " but have not found anything so far. It would be a great help if you could point to a specific reference. Best Wishes Mrs.Wendy http://JyotishVidya.com =================== ----------------- " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara Monday, March 22, 2010 11:10 AM <jyotish-vidya > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini Dear Mrs. Wendy, This one about the three layers of gunas operating in the nakshatras I learned from David Frawley. Yours, Vic __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4963 (20100321) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2010 Report Share Posted March 21, 2010 Dear Mrs. Wendy, It's not from those links. I do believe it was from Astrology of the Seers. I lent that book out so I can't recheck it. However I have found a link from another source which is what I was talking about - though I am pretty sure this was not the original source that I first learned it from: http://www.dirah.org/nakshatras.htm There is so much complexity to the world. There are so many different angles on the same reality, and then on top of that there are so many different ways to describe each angle. So of course there are so many descriptions which appear to be at odds with one another on the surface. I feel that knowledge really gets deep and exciting when we figure out who these apparently divergent descriptions become unified into a coherent whole. Yours, Vic On 2010/03/22, at 12:56, Mrs.Wendy wrote: > Dear Vic, > > Is this (perhaps) what you're referring to?? > > http://www.vedicsociety.org/shaktis-of-the-nakshatras-a-238.html > > http://satyavidya.com/Nakshatras.htm > > As you can see I'm finding it difficult to find any reference to David > Frawley's teaching that the individual nakshatras express all three gunas > (albeit on different levels). I've also had a quick look through his book > " The Astrology of the Seers " but have not found anything so far. It would be > a great help if you could point to a specific reference. > > Best Wishes > Mrs.Wendy > http://JyotishVidya.com > =================== > > ----------------- > " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara > Monday, March 22, 2010 11:10 AM > <jyotish-vidya > > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > > Dear Mrs. Wendy, > > This one about the three layers of gunas operating in the nakshatras I > learned from David Frawley. > > Yours, > Vic > > On 2010/03/22, at 11:14, Mrs.Wendy wrote: > > > Dear Vic, > > > > As I have no idea who your teacher was/is, I cannot comment on his/her > > authenticity...perhaps you can share with us? However, the fact is; that, > > although the three gunas exist in everything, only one (unlike the doshas) > > dominates. > > > > Gunas shape deeper levels than our biological constitutions (vata, pitta > > and > > kapha)...they, in actual fact, reveal our state of consciousness and > > spiritual condition... > > > > Sattwa is the quality of intelligence, morality and goodness. It creates > > harmony, equilibrium and stability and brings an awakening of > > consciousness. > > It's understandable therefore that Leo (ruled by AtmaKaraka Sun) is a > > Sattwa > > rashi. It's also understandable that on the physical (biological) level, > > because of the heat of Sun's rays (fiery element) both Leo and Sun reflect > > the Pitta dosha. > > > > Best Wishes > > Mrs.Wendy > > http://JyotishVidya.com > > =================== > > > > ----------------- > > " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara > > Monday, March 22, 2010 9:31 AM > > <jyotish-vidya > > > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > > > > Dear Mrs. Wendy, > > > > Since I was also taught that the Nakshatras have three layers of gunas > > operating simultaneously (a core interest, a mood, and a practical layer), > > all of which are usually different - it doesn't seem a leap for me to > > understand the Solar Signs (Rashis) to have more than one layer on which > > the > > trigunas operate. But I respect, of course, if you wish to conceive of it > > differently from how I do. > > > > Yours, > > Vic > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4963 (20100321) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2010 Report Share Posted March 22, 2010 Dear Vic, I'm quite familiar with Roland De Looff having been a teacher at Dirah Academy some years back (many years now). I left under most uncongenial circumstances when he introduced Jaimini principles in conjunction with Parashara. Don't know if that's still the case, but it certainly was at that time. I quickly informed him that I could no longer, in good conscience, remain as a teacher. Things quickly became rather nasty when I let it be known that I disapproved of the teaching of Sanjay Rath which he (Roland, and hence Dirah Academy)) had aligned himself with. During this unpleasant severing of our relationship, Roland revealed himself as a most vicious adversary...writing to organizations such as 'The Australian Council of Vedic Astrologers' and 'The Planetary Gemologist Association' in an effort to defame me. Ultimately he was obliged to write a public apology in order to settle the dispute. As you can imagine, I don't put much store in anything Roland says. If you wish to validate your perspective on the gunas/nakshatras it would be good if you could point to some scriptural reference. Best Wishes Mrs.Wendy http://JyotishVidya.com =================== ----------------- " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara Monday, March 22, 2010 12:10 PM <jyotish-vidya > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini Dear Mrs. Wendy, It's not from those links. I do believe it was from Astrology of the Seers. I lent that book out so I can't recheck it. However I have found a link from another source which is what I was talking about - though I am pretty sure this was not the original source that I first learned it from: http://www.dirah.org/nakshatras.htm There is so much complexity to the world. There are so many different angles on the same reality, and then on top of that there are so many different ways to describe each angle. So of course there are so many descriptions which appear to be at odds with one another on the surface. I feel that knowledge really gets deep and exciting when we figure out who these apparently divergent descriptions become unified into a coherent whole. Yours, Vic __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4963 (20100321) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2010 Report Share Posted March 22, 2010 Dear Mrs. Wendy, Sorry to hear about the problem with Roland. I don't really want to go into validating this point. My intention was just to offer a potential avenue for resolving the conflict pertaining to the different ways that triguna is described in the rashis, and to their gunas (chara, sthira & dvi). For getting thoroughly involved in this specific discussion I lack the time currently. I apologize. Sincerely, Vic On 2010/03/22, at 14:08, Mrs.Wendy wrote: > Dear Vic, > > I'm quite familiar with Roland De Looff having been a teacher at Dirah > Academy some years back (many years now). I left under most uncongenial > circumstances when he introduced Jaimini principles in conjunction with > Parashara. Don't know if that's still the case, but it certainly was at that > time. I quickly informed him that I could no longer, in good conscience, > remain as a teacher. Things quickly became rather nasty when I let it be > known that I disapproved of the teaching of Sanjay Rath which he (Roland, > and hence Dirah Academy)) had aligned himself with. > > During this unpleasant severing of our relationship, Roland revealed himself > as a most vicious adversary...writing to organizations such as 'The > Australian Council of Vedic Astrologers' and 'The Planetary Gemologist > Association' in an effort to defame me. Ultimately he was obliged to write a > public apology in order to settle the dispute. As you can imagine, I don't > put much store in anything Roland says. > > If you wish to validate your perspective on the gunas/nakshatras it would be > good if you could point to some scriptural reference. > > Best Wishes > Mrs.Wendy > http://JyotishVidya.com > =================== > > ----------------- > " Vic DiCara " <vicdicara > Monday, March 22, 2010 12:10 PM > <jyotish-vidya > > Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini > > Dear Mrs. Wendy, > > It's not from those links. I do believe it was from Astrology of the Seers. > I lent that book out so I can't recheck it. However I have found a link from > another source which is what I was talking about - though I am pretty sure > this was not the original source that I first learned it from: > > http://www.dirah.org/nakshatras.htm > > There is so much complexity to the world. There are so many different angles > on the same reality, and then on top of that there are so many different > ways to describe each angle. So of course there are so many descriptions > which appear to be at odds with one another on the surface. I feel that > knowledge really gets deep and exciting when we figure out who these > apparently divergent descriptions become unified into a coherent whole. > > Yours, > Vic > > __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4963 (20100321) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. > > http://www.eset.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2010 Report Share Posted March 22, 2010 PS: It's (also) important to emphasize the fact that the discussion, at this stage, is purely on the Rashi's...not nakshatras! Best Wishes Mrs.Wendy http://JyotishVidya.com =================== Mrs.Wendy Monday, March 22, 2010 1:08 PM jyotish-vidya Re: Re: Tri-guna of Taurus and Gemini Dear Vic, I'm quite familiar with Roland De Looff having been a teacher at Dirah Academy some years back (many years now). I left under most uncongenial circumstances when he introduced Jaimini principles in conjunction with Parashara. Don't know if that's still the case, but it certainly was at that time. I quickly informed him that I could no longer, in good conscience, remain as a teacher. Things quickly became rather nasty when I let it be known that I disapproved of the teaching of Sanjay Rath which he (Roland, and hence Dirah Academy)) had aligned himself with. During this unpleasant severing of our relationship, Roland revealed himself as a most vicious adversary...writing to organizations such as 'The Australian Council of Vedic Astrologers' and 'The Planetary Gemologist Association' in an effort to defame me. Ultimately he was obliged to write a public apology in order to settle the dispute. As you can imagine, I don't put much store in anything Roland says. If you wish to validate your perspective on the gunas/nakshatras it would be good if you could point to some scriptural reference. Best Wishes Mrs.Wendy http://JyotishVidya.com =================== __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4963 (20100321) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com 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.