Guest guest Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Dear Shri Vinay There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies will as well be posted. My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd after due study. In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular method of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha etc which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking for simple definition. Thanks for your understanding Pradeep Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have analyzed > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived according to a > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a HOD of > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore most of > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. If you > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the eastern end > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of the > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also supplied > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly applying to > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately biased > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you must have > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis which are > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to understand them. > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite the > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in terms > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to consult even > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon sages who > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give you more > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you interested only > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want to stop > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from you > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of these > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your choice. " You > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom you do > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and tail are > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud in your > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my website > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you must > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of Jyotisha , > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work on four > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, Floods, > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according to the > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this university > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of plagiary > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being carried on > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > (/message/17334) , there > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without my > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > chance to counter!! > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " Tomorrow, > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of Hindus > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. Research > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods to find > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to find out > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It is not > possible to please everyone. > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in me,you > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at many > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/World+Economy+%3A+Apr+2009- Mar+2010 > or > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/National+Astrology+% 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to explain > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these ancient > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you should > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly read > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of KSD > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient techniques. > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and propagate, > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, like me. > > -Vinay Jha > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@> > wrote: > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this linear > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework was so > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or short > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are precisely of > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one runs into > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your thoughts? > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava chalitha. > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha etc are > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from Chalitha > > chart. > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and Bhaava- > > chalita, > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But in > > Raashi- > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding 30 > > degrees > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are reckoned > > > independently''. > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is approximately 30 > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains below the > > > horizon''. > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you please > > explain > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > Chakra?. > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees (elliptic) > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same article > > or > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga chakras'' which > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree delineation > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider them as > > so > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in your > > view > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for these ''varga > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in total > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking about the > > > same. > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and new > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have copied and > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars which is > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > manifestation > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the essence or the > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. But you > > are > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying to draw > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are they two > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble knowlegde. But > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non-logic with > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be more > > polite > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However after > > seeing > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana etc , if one > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > Thanks > > > Pradeep > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 Pradeep Jee, I guess you were swayed by disinformation about me by some persons which prompted you to charge me of " copying " ideas from other modern authors(whom?) and claiming them as my " new " theories. If you are really sincere, which I assume you are, then why you are diverting the topic away from those " ideas " which I had supposedly stolen, to new topics like vargas. My work alluded above had no bearing on vargas. If you have forgotten the context, may I request you to see something which is related to the art or science of astro... : http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s+Report%3B+%26+my+Paper+accepted+by\ +CAOS%2C+IISc I am a software veveloper, and you have no interest in even testing my free software. Do you want to test the pudding merely by discussing it?? -VJ , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Shri Vinay > > There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish > group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies will > as well be posted. > > My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd after > due study. > > In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular method > of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me > Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha etc > which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking for > simple definition. > > Thanks for your understanding > Pradeep > > Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " > <vinayjhaa16@> wrote: > > > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have analyzed > > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived according to > a > > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a HOD > of > > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore most > of > > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. If > you > > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... > > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the eastern > end > > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of the > > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also supplied > > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly applying > to > > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately biased > > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you must > have > > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis which > are > > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to > understand them. > > > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite the > > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in > terms > > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to consult > even > > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon sages who > > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give you > more > > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you interested > only > > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want to > stop > > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from you > > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of these > > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your choice. " > You > > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom you > do > > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and tail > are > > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud in > your > > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of > Dept > > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my website > > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you must > > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of > Jyotisha , > > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work on > four > > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, Floods, > > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according to > the > > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this university > > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of plagiary > > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being carried > on > > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > > > (/message/17334) > , there > > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without my > > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > > chance to counter!! > > > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " > Tomorrow, > > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of > Hindus > > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. > Research > > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods to > find > > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to find > out > > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It is > not > > possible to please everyone. > > > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in me,you > > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at many > > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/World+Economy+%3A+Apr+2009- > Mar+2010 > > or > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/National+Astrology+% > 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to explain > > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these ancient > > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you should > > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly read > > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of KSD > > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient > techniques. > > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and propagate, > > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, > like me. > > > > -Vinay Jha > > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > > , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this linear > > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework was > so > > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or > short > > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are precisely > of > > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one runs > into > > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your > thoughts? > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava > chalitha. > > > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha etc > are > > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from Chalitha > > > chart. > > > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and Bhaava- > > > chalita, > > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But in > > > Raashi- > > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding 30 > > > degrees > > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are > reckoned > > > > independently''. > > > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is > approximately 30 > > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains below > the > > > > horizon''. > > > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you please > > > explain > > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > > Chakra?. > > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees > (elliptic) > > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same > article > > > or > > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga chakras'' > which > > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree > delineation > > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider them > as > > > so > > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in > your > > > view > > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for these ''varga > > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in total > > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking about > the > > > > same. > > > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and new > > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have copied > and > > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars > which is > > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > > manifestation > > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the essence or > the > > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. But > you > > > are > > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying to > draw > > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are they > two > > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble knowlegde. > But > > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non-logic with > > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri > Krishna. > > > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be more > > > polite > > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However after > > > seeing > > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana etc , if > one > > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 15, 2009 Report Share Posted January 15, 2009 vijayadas_pradeep jee, You are a good practicing astrologer. I am a software developer. Cannot we work together to solve " practical " problems, instead of arguing over concepts ? Initially, I made software based on modern physical astronomy along Lahiri's principles, but I was soon disenchanted and owing to some a great departed soul got an alternative which works better. We can discuss theory only if is fruitful in practice. Why you do not test my software ? Should I remove all essays & c from my website because they repel you ? But then, seeing the mathematical " oddities " of a different ayanamsha, Vimshottari year and planetary longitudes, will you not throw my software away without testing. Faith is a thing which cannot be preached. I cannot convince you by lecturing that my software will give you more satisfaction ; the only way is TEST. After that, I will like to discuss all points, and even experiment with your sound proposals by changing my software. -VJ =============== ============== , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Shri Vinay > > There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish > group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies will > as well be posted. > > My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd after > due study. > > In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular method > of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me > Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha etc > which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking for > simple definition. > > Thanks for your understanding > Pradeep > > Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " > vinayjhaa16@ wrote: > > > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have analyzed > > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived according to > a > > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a HOD > of > > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore most > of > > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. If > you > > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... > > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the eastern > end > > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of the > > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also supplied > > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly applying > to > > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately biased > > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you must > have > > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis which > are > > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to > understand them. > > > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite the > > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in > terms > > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to consult > even > > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon sages who > > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give you > more > > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you interested > only > > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want to > stop > > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from you > > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of these > > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your choice. " > You > > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom you > do > > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and tail > are > > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud in > your > > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of > Dept > > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my website > > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you must > > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of > Jyotisha , > > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work on > four > > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, Floods, > > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according to > the > > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this university > > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of plagiary > > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being carried > on > > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > > > (/message/17334) > , there > > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without my > > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > > chance to counter!! > > > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " > Tomorrow, > > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of > Hindus > > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. > Research > > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods to > find > > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to find > out > > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It is > not > > possible to please everyone. > > > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in me,you > > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at many > > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/World+Economy+%3A+Apr+2009- > Mar+2010 > > or > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/National+Astrology+% > 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to explain > > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these ancient > > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you should > > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly read > > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of KSD > > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient > techniques. > > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and propagate, > > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, > like me. > > > > -Vinay Jha > > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > > , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this linear > > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework was > so > > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or > short > > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are precisely > of > > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one runs > into > > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your > thoughts? > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava > chalitha. > > > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha etc > are > > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from Chalitha > > > chart. > > > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and Bhaava- > > > chalita, > > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But in > > > Raashi- > > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding 30 > > > degrees > > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are > reckoned > > > > independently''. > > > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is > approximately 30 > > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains below > the > > > > horizon''. > > > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you please > > > explain > > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > > Chakra?. > > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees > (elliptic) > > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same > article > > > or > > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga chakras'' > which > > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree > delineation > > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider them > as > > > so > > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in > your > > > view > > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for these ''varga > > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in total > > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking about > the > > > > same. > > > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and new > > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have copied > and > > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars > which is > > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > > manifestation > > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the essence or > the > > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. But > you > > > are > > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying to > draw > > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are they > two > > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble knowlegde. > But > > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non-logic with > > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri > Krishna. > > > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be more > > > polite > > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However after > > > seeing > > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana etc , if > one > > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2009 Report Share Posted January 19, 2009 Pradeep Jee, Forget trifles. As for divisionals, I made my software according to BPHS. I use D9 in analysis frequently, and I am sure the results are good in my software. Higher divisionals like D60 need precision in birthtime, but I have found no proof against divisionals upto D30 as yet. Excepting cases of doubtful birthtime, they are right. Experienced astrologers may not believe above statement. But the reason behind my confidence in BPHS is not blind faith, but accuracy of results. But it needs Kundalee software which uses three offsets instead of two used by other softwares : others give options for offsets in ayanamsha and length of Vimshottari year, while I provided offsets for planetary positions plus lagna and dashama (I used ancient tables). The very name " ancient " repels people , I cannot help it. Test this magic. There is no other way -VJ =============== ==================== =============== , " vijayadas_pradeep " <vijayadas_pradeep wrote: > > Dear Shri Vinay > > There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish > group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies will > as well be posted. > > My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd after > due study. > > In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular method > of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me > Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha etc > which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking for > simple definition. > > Thanks for your understanding > Pradeep > > Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " > <vinayjhaa16@> wrote: > > > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have analyzed > > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived according to > a > > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a HOD > of > > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore most > of > > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. If > you > > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... > > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the eastern > end > > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of the > > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also supplied > > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly applying > to > > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately biased > > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you must > have > > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis which > are > > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to > understand them. > > > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite the > > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in > terms > > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to consult > even > > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon sages who > > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give you > more > > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you interested > only > > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want to > stop > > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from you > > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of these > > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your choice. " > You > > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom you > do > > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and tail > are > > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud in > your > > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of > Dept > > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my website > > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you must > > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of > Jyotisha , > > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work on > four > > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, Floods, > > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according to > the > > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this university > > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of plagiary > > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being carried > on > > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > > > (/message/17334) > , there > > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without my > > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > > chance to counter!! > > > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " > Tomorrow, > > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of > Hindus > > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. > Research > > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods to > find > > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to find > out > > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It is > not > > possible to please everyone. > > > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in me,you > > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at many > > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/World+Economy+%3A+Apr+2009- > Mar+2010 > > or > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/National+Astrology+% > 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to explain > > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these ancient > > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you should > > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly read > > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of KSD > > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient > techniques. > > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and propagate, > > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, > like me. > > > > -Vinay Jha > > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > > , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this linear > > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework was > so > > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or > short > > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are precisely > of > > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one runs > into > > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your > thoughts? > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava > chalitha. > > > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha etc > are > > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from Chalitha > > > chart. > > > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and Bhaava- > > > chalita, > > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But in > > > Raashi- > > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding 30 > > > degrees > > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are > reckoned > > > > independently''. > > > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is > approximately 30 > > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains below > the > > > > horizon''. > > > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you please > > > explain > > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > > Chakra?. > > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees > (elliptic) > > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same > article > > > or > > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga chakras'' > which > > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree > delineation > > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider them > as > > > so > > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in > your > > > view > > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for these ''varga > > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in total > > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking about > the > > > > same. > > > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and new > > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have copied > and > > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars > which is > > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > > manifestation > > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the essence or > the > > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. But > you > > > are > > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying to > draw > > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are they > two > > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble knowlegde. > But > > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non-logic with > > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri > Krishna. > > > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be more > > > polite > > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However after > > > seeing > > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana etc , if > one > > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 Dear Shri Vinay As long as you do not give me a different method and derivation of vargamshas, there is not much to discuss. When you say it is not based on 30 degrees ,give me the proper derivation. Thats all. Basics/fundamentals. Rest we will discuss afterwards. Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > Pradeep Jee, > Forget trifles. As for divisionals, I made my software according to > BPHS. I use D9 in analysis frequently, and I am sure the results are > good in my software. Higher divisionals like D60 need precision in > birthtime, but I have found no proof against divisionals upto D30 as > yet. Excepting cases of doubtful birthtime, they are right. > > Experienced astrologers may not believe above statement. But the > reason behind my confidence in BPHS is not blind faith, but accuracy > of results. But it needs Kundalee software which uses three offsets > instead of two used by other softwares : others give options for > offsets in ayanamsha and length of Vimshottari year, while I provided > offsets for planetary positions plus lagna and dashama (I used ancient > tables). The very name " ancient " repels people , I cannot help it. > > Test this magic. There is no other way > > -VJ > =============== ==================== =============== > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > Dear Shri Vinay > > > > There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish > > group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies will > > as well be posted. > > > > My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd after > > due study. > > > > In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular method > > of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me > > Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha etc > > which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking for > > simple definition. > > > > Thanks for your understanding > > Pradeep > > > > Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " > > <vinayjhaa16@> wrote: > > > > > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > > > > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have analyzed > > > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > > > > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived according to > > a > > > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > > > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a HOD > > of > > > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > > > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore most > > of > > > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > > > > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > > > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. If > > you > > > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... > > > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the eastern > > end > > > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of the > > > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also supplied > > > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly applying > > to > > > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately biased > > > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you must > > have > > > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis which > > are > > > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to > > understand them. > > > > > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite the > > > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > > > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in > > terms > > > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to consult > > even > > > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon sages who > > > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give you > > more > > > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > > > > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > > > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you interested > > only > > > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want to > > stop > > > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from you > > > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of these > > > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your choice. " > > You > > > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > > > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > > > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > > > > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom you > > do > > > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > > > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and tail > > are > > > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud in > > your > > > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > > > > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of > > Dept > > > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my website > > > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > > > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you must > > > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of > > Jyotisha , > > > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work on > > four > > > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, Floods, > > > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according to > > the > > > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > > > > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this university > > > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of plagiary > > > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being carried > > on > > > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > > > > > (/message/17334) > > , there > > > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without my > > > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > > > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > > > chance to counter!! > > > > > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " > > Tomorrow, > > > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of > > Hindus > > > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > > > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. > > Research > > > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods to > > find > > > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to find > > out > > > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It is > > not > > > possible to please everyone. > > > > > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in me,you > > > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at many > > > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/World+Economy+%3A+Apr+2009- > > Mar+2010 > > > or > > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/National+Astrology+% > > 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > > > > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > > > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to explain > > > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these ancient > > > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you should > > > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly read > > > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of KSD > > > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient > > techniques. > > > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and propagate, > > > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, > > like me. > > > > > > -Vinay Jha > > > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > > > , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this linear > > > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework was > > so > > > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or > > short > > > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are precisely > > of > > > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one runs > > into > > > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava > > chalitha. > > > > > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha etc > > are > > > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from Chalitha > > > > chart. > > > > > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and Bhaava- > > > > chalita, > > > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But in > > > > Raashi- > > > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding 30 > > > > degrees > > > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are > > reckoned > > > > > independently''. > > > > > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is > > approximately 30 > > > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains below > > the > > > > > horizon''. > > > > > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you please > > > > explain > > > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > > > Chakra?. > > > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees > > (elliptic) > > > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same > > article > > > > or > > > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga chakras'' > > which > > > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree > > delineation > > > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider them > > as > > > > so > > > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in > > your > > > > view > > > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for these ''varga > > > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in total > > > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking about > > the > > > > > same. > > > > > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and new > > > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have copied > > and > > > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars > > which is > > > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > > > manifestation > > > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the essence or > > the > > > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. But > > you > > > > are > > > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying to > > draw > > > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are they > > two > > > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble knowlegde. > > But > > > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non-logic with > > > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri > > Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be more > > > > polite > > > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However after > > > > seeing > > > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana etc , if > > one > > > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2009 Report Share Posted January 20, 2009 Dear Shri Vinay I am neither against you nor your software. It was not a deviation.There was an article on Varga on your website. Regarding ayanamsha i am not an expert to comment with authenticity.I cannot counter your claims unless i study them properly. In the case of shri Chandraharis views, i have supported the moola origin concept due to the reasons already given. Ayanamsha calculation is not simple and involves many assumptions, which can bring in differences.The concept of time and yugas may not be that sinple as we assume.Thus it involves deep study of basics and hence i cannot comment at the moment. Regarding testing ,proof pudding etc - i have expressed my view in the past as well. Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time.There may be many who wants to build a house first and then demolish it for weak basement. If it is fine with them they may do so. For me building the foundation is of utmost importance before building theories and promulgating them. Others better learned may disagree. Regards Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > Pradeep Jee, > > I guess you were swayed by disinformation about me by some persons > which prompted you to charge me of " copying " ideas from other modern > authors(whom?) and claiming them as my " new " theories. If you are > really sincere, which I assume you are, then why you are diverting the > topic away from those " ideas " which I had supposedly stolen, to new > topics like vargas. My work alluded above had no bearing on vargas. If > you have forgotten the context, may I request you to see something > which is related to the art or science of astro... : > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/NASA%27s+Report%3B+% 26+my+Paper+accepted+by+CAOS%2C+IISc > > I am a software veveloper, and you have no interest in even testing my > free software. Do you want to test the pudding merely by discussing it?? > > -VJ > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > Dear Shri Vinay > > > > There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish > > group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies will > > as well be posted. > > > > My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd after > > due study. > > > > In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular method > > of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me > > Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha etc > > which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking for > > simple definition. > > > > Thanks for your understanding > > Pradeep > > > > Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " > > <vinayjhaa16@> wrote: > > > > > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > > > > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have analyzed > > > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > > > > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived according to > > a > > > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > > > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a HOD > > of > > > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > > > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore most > > of > > > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > > > > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > > > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. If > > you > > > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... > > > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the eastern > > end > > > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of the > > > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also supplied > > > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly applying > > to > > > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately biased > > > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you must > > have > > > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis which > > are > > > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to > > understand them. > > > > > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite the > > > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > > > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in > > terms > > > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to consult > > even > > > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon sages who > > > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give you > > more > > > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > > > > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > > > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you interested > > only > > > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want to > > stop > > > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from you > > > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of these > > > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your choice. " > > You > > > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > > > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > > > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > > > > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom you > > do > > > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > > > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and tail > > are > > > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud in > > your > > > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > > > > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of > > Dept > > > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my website > > > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > > > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you must > > > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of > > Jyotisha , > > > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work on > > four > > > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, Floods, > > > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according to > > the > > > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > > > > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this university > > > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of plagiary > > > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being carried > > on > > > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > > > > > (/message/17334) > > , there > > > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without my > > > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > > > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > > > chance to counter!! > > > > > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " > > Tomorrow, > > > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of > > Hindus > > > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > > > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. > > Research > > > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods to > > find > > > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to find > > out > > > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It is > > not > > > possible to please everyone. > > > > > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in me,you > > > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at many > > > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/World+Economy+%3A+Apr+2009- > > Mar+2010 > > > or > > > http://jyotirvidya.wetpaint.com/page/National+Astrology+% > > 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > > > > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > > > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to explain > > > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these ancient > > > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you should > > > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly read > > > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of KSD > > > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient > > techniques. > > > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and propagate, > > > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, > > like me. > > > > > > -Vinay Jha > > > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > > > , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this linear > > > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework was > > so > > > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or > > short > > > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are precisely > > of > > > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one runs > > into > > > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava > > chalitha. > > > > > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha etc > > are > > > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from Chalitha > > > > chart. > > > > > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and Bhaava- > > > > chalita, > > > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But in > > > > Raashi- > > > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding 30 > > > > degrees > > > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are > > reckoned > > > > > independently''. > > > > > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is > > approximately 30 > > > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains below > > the > > > > > horizon''. > > > > > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you please > > > > explain > > > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > > > Chakra?. > > > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees > > (elliptic) > > > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same > > article > > > > or > > > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga chakras'' > > which > > > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree > > delineation > > > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider them > > as > > > > so > > > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in > > your > > > > view > > > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for these ''varga > > > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in total > > > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking about > > the > > > > > same. > > > > > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and new > > > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have copied > > and > > > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars > > which is > > > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > > > manifestation > > > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the essence or > > the > > > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. But > > you > > > > are > > > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying to > > draw > > > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are they > > two > > > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble knowlegde. > > But > > > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non-logic with > > > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri > > Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be more > > > > polite > > > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However after > > > > seeing > > > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana etc , if > > one > > > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Pradeep Jee, You say " There was an article on Varga on your website. " It is not correct. The article you refer to is " Interpretation of Horoscope : Basics " which is for beginners and as the title suggests is concerned merely with " basics " . I never proposed any new idea about vargas, hence your following statement is baseless : " Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time.There may be many who wants to build a house first and then demolish it for weak basement. If it is fine with them they may do so. For me building the foundation is of utmost importance before building theories and promulgating them. " It is not me but Mr Chandrahari and his mates who are building new theories, and wrongly charging me of building theories. Neither my ayanamsha concept is mine, nor the varga concept is mine. The root of your problem is that you have no time to understand me, but have plenty of time to comment on me. I left AIA not due to unwarranted abuses regularly heaped on me in a planned manner, but due to this attitude of not testing the software but the " ideas " behind it. No software developer in the world has ever been treated thus. You may reject the software without testing, as you have said : " Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time. " I made a free gift which you are rejecting without any valid reason. Mr Chandrahari has every right to propund his theory, but he has no right to use the name of Suryasiddhanta to propound his own theory. You do not want to " waste " you time on me, and I have no time to waste on useless feuds. Astrology is a practical science, and it is wastge of time to discuss astrology without practical test. -VJ ________________________________ vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:03:15 AM Re: Replies to Shri Vinay Jha Dear Shri Vinay I am neither against you nor your software. It was not a deviation.There was an article on Varga on your website. Regarding ayanamsha i am not an expert to comment with authenticity. I cannot counter your claims unless i study them properly. In the case of shri Chandraharis views, i have supported the moola origin concept due to the reasons already given. Ayanamsha calculation is not simple and involves many assumptions, which can bring in differences. The concept of time and yugas may not be that sinple as we assume.Thus it involves deep study of basics and hence i cannot comment at the moment. Regarding testing ,proof pudding etc - i have expressed my view in the past as well. Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time.There may be many who wants to build a house first and then demolish it for weak basement. If it is fine with them they may do so. For me building the foundation is of utmost importance before building theories and promulgating them. Others better learned may disagree. Regards Pradeep , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > Pradeep Jee, > > I guess you were swayed by disinformation about me by some persons > which prompted you to charge me of " copying " ideas from other modern > authors(whom? ) and claiming them as my " new " theories. If you are > really sincere, which I assume you are, then why you are diverting the > topic away from those " ideas " which I had supposedly stolen, to new > topics like vargas. My work alluded above had no bearing on vargas. If > you have forgotten the context, may I request you to see something > which is related to the art or science of astro... : > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s+ Report%3B+ % 26+my+Paper+ accepted+ by+CAOS%2C+ IISc > > I am a software veveloper, and you have no interest in even testing my > free software. Do you want to test the pudding merely by discussing it?? > > -VJ > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > <vijayadas_pradeep@ > wrote: > > > > Dear Shri Vinay > > > > There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish > > group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies will > > as well be posted. > > > > My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd after > > due study. > > > > In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular method > > of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me > > Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha etc > > which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking for > > simple definition. > > > > Thanks for your understanding > > Pradeep > > > > Pradeep, " vinayjhaa16 " > > <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > > > > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have analyzed > > > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > > > > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived according to > > a > > > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > > > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a HOD > > of > > > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > > > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore most > > of > > > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > > > > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > > > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. If > > you > > > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... > > > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the eastern > > end > > > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of the > > > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also supplied > > > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly applying > > to > > > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately biased > > > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you must > > have > > > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis which > > are > > > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to > > understand them. > > > > > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite the > > > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > > > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in > > terms > > > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to consult > > even > > > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon sages who > > > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give you > > more > > > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > > > > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > > > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you interested > > only > > > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want to > > stop > > > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from you > > > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of these > > > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your choice. " > > You > > > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > > > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > > > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > > > > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom you > > do > > > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > > > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and tail > > are > > > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud in > > your > > > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > > > > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of > > Dept > > > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my website > > > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > > > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you must > > > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of > > Jyotisha , > > > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work on > > four > > > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, Floods, > > > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according to > > the > > > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > > > > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this university > > > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of plagiary > > > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being carried > > on > > > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > > > > > (http://groups. / group/ancient_ indian_astrology /message/ 17334) > > , there > > > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without my > > > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > > > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > > > chance to counter!! > > > > > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " > > Tomorrow, > > > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of > > Hindus > > > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > > > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. > > Research > > > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods to > > find > > > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to find > > out > > > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It is > > not > > > possible to please everyone. > > > > > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in me,you > > > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at many > > > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ World+Economy+ %3A+Apr+2009- > > Mar+2010 > > > or > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ National+ Astrology+ % > > 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > > > > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > > > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to explain > > > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these ancient > > > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you should > > > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly read > > > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of KSD > > > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient > > techniques. > > > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and propagate, > > > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, > > like me. > > > > > > -Vinay Jha > > > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > > > , " Rohiniranjan " <jyotish_vani@ > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this linear > > > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework was > > so > > > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or > > short > > > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are precisely > > of > > > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one runs > > into > > > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava > > chalitha. > > > > > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha etc > > are > > > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from Chalitha > > > > chart. > > > > > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and Bhaava- > > > > chalita, > > > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But in > > > > Raashi- > > > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding 30 > > > > degrees > > > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are > > reckoned > > > > > independently' '. > > > > > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is > > approximately 30 > > > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains below > > the > > > > > horizon''. > > > > > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you please > > > > explain > > > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > > > Chakra?. > > > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees > > (elliptic) > > > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same > > article > > > > or > > > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga chakras'' > > which > > > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree > > delineation > > > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider them > > as > > > > so > > > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in > > your > > > > view > > > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for these ''varga > > > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in total > > > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking about > > the > > > > > same. > > > > > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and new > > > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have copied > > and > > > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars > > which is > > > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > > > manifestation > > > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the essence or > > the > > > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. But > > you > > > > are > > > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying to > > draw > > > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are they > > two > > > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble knowlegde. > > But > > > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non-logic with > > > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri > > Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be more > > > > polite > > > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However after > > > > seeing > > > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana etc , if > > one > > > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2009 Report Share Posted January 21, 2009 Dear Vinay ji If your article is about interpretation of horoscope:basics then it is even better. You are speaking about chalitha and disputing 30 degrees concept and derivation of amshas. Since it is about basics - i have only ONE question. Please give me an example of deriving vargamshas - your non popular version. Do you think i have to test every new theory,conferences lectures when i am struggling even to comprehend what maharishis have taught.Let me first concentrate on their teachings first. Thus if you have anything fundamental in nature please provide else i feel this discussion is of no use. Regarding C.Hari Ayanamsha, i was only talking about the Moola basis. This is the fundamental point. Rest can be discussed later. Pradeep , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16 wrote: > > Pradeep Jee, > > You say " There was an article on Varga on your website. " It is not correct. The article you refer to is " Interpretation of Horoscope : Basics " which is for beginners and as the title suggests is concerned merely with " basics " . I never proposed any new idea about vargas, hence your following statement is baseless : " Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time.There may be many who wants to build a house first and then demolish it for weak basement. If it is fine with them they may do so. For me building the foundation is of utmost importance before building theories and promulgating them. " > > It is not me but Mr Chandrahari and his mates who are building new theories, and wrongly charging me of building theories. Neither my ayanamsha concept is mine, nor the varga concept is mine. The root of your problem is that you have no time to understand me, but have plenty of time to comment on me. > > I left AIA not due to unwarranted abuses regularly heaped on me in a planned manner, but due to this attitude of not testing the software but the " ideas " behind it. No software developer in the world has ever been treated thus. You may reject the software without testing, as you have said : " Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time. " > > I made a free gift which you are rejecting without any valid reason. Mr Chandrahari has every right to propund his theory, but he has no right to use the name of Suryasiddhanta to propound his own theory. You do not want to " waste " you time on me, and I have no time to waste on useless feuds. Astrology is a practical science, and it is wastge of time to discuss astrology without practical test. > > -VJ > > > > > ________________________________ > vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep > > Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:03:15 AM > Re: Replies to Shri Vinay Jha > > > Dear Shri Vinay > > I am neither against you nor your software. > It was not a deviation.There was an article on Varga on your website. > > Regarding ayanamsha i am not an expert to comment with authenticity. I > cannot counter your claims unless i study them properly. In the case > of shri Chandraharis views, i have supported the moola origin concept > due to the reasons already given. > > Ayanamsha calculation is not simple and involves many assumptions, > which can bring in differences. The concept of time and yugas may not > be that sinple as we assume.Thus it involves deep study of basics and > hence i cannot comment at the moment. > > Regarding testing ,proof pudding etc - i have expressed my view in > the past as well. > > Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time.There may be > many who wants to build a house first and then demolish it for weak > basement. If it is fine with them they may do so. For me building the > foundation is of utmost importance before building theories and > promulgating them. > > Others better learned may disagree. > > Regards > Pradeep > > , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > wrote: > > > > Pradeep Jee, > > > > I guess you were swayed by disinformation about me by some persons > > which prompted you to charge me of " copying " ideas from other modern > > authors(whom? ) and claiming them as my " new " theories. If you are > > really sincere, which I assume you are, then why you are diverting > the > > topic away from those " ideas " which I had supposedly stolen, to new > > topics like vargas. My work alluded above had no bearing on vargas. > If > > you have forgotten the context, may I request you to see something > > which is related to the art or science of astro... : > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s+ Report%3B+ % > 26+my+Paper+ accepted+ by+CAOS%2C+ IISc > > > > I am a software veveloper, and you have no interest in even testing > my > > free software. Do you want to test the pudding merely by discussing > it?? > > > > -VJ > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > <vijayadas_pradeep@ > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Shri Vinay > > > > > > There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish > > > group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies > will > > > as well be posted. > > > > > > My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd > after > > > due study. > > > > > > In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular > method > > > of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me > > > Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha > etc > > > which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking > for > > > simple definition. > > > > > > Thanks for your understanding > > > Pradeep > > > > > > Pradeep, " vinayjhaa16 " > > > <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > > > > > > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have > analyzed > > > > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > > > > > > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived > according to > > > a > > > > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > > > > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a > HOD > > > of > > > > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > > > > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore > most > > > of > > > > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > > > > > > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > > > > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. > If > > > you > > > > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World > Economy... > > > > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the > eastern > > > end > > > > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of > the > > > > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also > supplied > > > > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly > applying > > > to > > > > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately > biased > > > > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you > must > > > have > > > > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis > which > > > are > > > > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to > > > understand them. > > > > > > > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite > the > > > > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > > > > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in > > > terms > > > > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to > consult > > > even > > > > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon > sages who > > > > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give > you > > > more > > > > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > > > > > > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > > > > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you > interested > > > only > > > > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want > to > > > stop > > > > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from > you > > > > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of > these > > > > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your > choice. " > > > You > > > > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > > > > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > > > > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > > > > > > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom > you > > > do > > > > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > > > > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and > tail > > > are > > > > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud > in > > > your > > > > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > > > > > > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head > of > > > Dept > > > > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my > website > > > > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > > > > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you > must > > > > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of > > > Jyotisha , > > > > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work > on > > > four > > > > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, > Floods, > > > > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according > to > > > the > > > > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > > > > > > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this > university > > > > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of > plagiary > > > > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being > carried > > > on > > > > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > > > > > > > > (http://groups. / group/ancient_ indian_astrology /message/ 17334) > > > , there > > > > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without > my > > > > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > > > > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > > > > chance to counter!! > > > > > > > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " > > > Tomorrow, > > > > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of > > > Hindus > > > > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > > > > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. > > > Research > > > > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods > to > > > find > > > > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to > find > > > out > > > > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It > is > > > not > > > > possible to please everyone. > > > > > > > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in > me,you > > > > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at > many > > > > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ World+Economy+ % 3A+Apr+2009- > > > Mar+2010 > > > > or > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ National+ Astrology+ % > > > 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > > > > > > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > > > > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to > explain > > > > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these > ancient > > > > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you > should > > > > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly > read > > > > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of > KSD > > > > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient > > > techniques. > > > > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and > propagate, > > > > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, > > > like me. > > > > > > > > -Vinay Jha > > > > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > > > > , " Rohiniranjan " > <jyotish_vani@ > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > > > > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this > linear > > > > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework > was > > > so > > > > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or > > > short > > > > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are > precisely > > > of > > > > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one > runs > > > into > > > > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > > > > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava > > > chalitha. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha > etc > > > are > > > > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from > Chalitha > > > > > chart. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and > Bhaava- > > > > > chalita, > > > > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But > in > > > > > Raashi- > > > > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding > 30 > > > > > degrees > > > > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are > > > reckoned > > > > > > independently' '. > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is > > > approximately 30 > > > > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains > below > > > the > > > > > > horizon''. > > > > > > > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you > please > > > > > explain > > > > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > > > > Chakra?. > > > > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees > > > (elliptic) > > > > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same > > > article > > > > > or > > > > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga > chakras'' > > > which > > > > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree > > > delineation > > > > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider > them > > > as > > > > > so > > > > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in > > > your > > > > > view > > > > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for > these ''varga > > > > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in > total > > > > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking > about > > > the > > > > > > same. > > > > > > > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and > new > > > > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have > copied > > > and > > > > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars > > > which is > > > > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > > > > manifestation > > > > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the > essence or > > > the > > > > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. > But > > > you > > > > > are > > > > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying > to > > > draw > > > > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are > they > > > two > > > > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble > knowlegde. > > > But > > > > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non- logic > with > > > > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri > > > Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be > more > > > > > polite > > > > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However > after > > > > > seeing > > > > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana > etc , if > > > one > > > > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2009 Report Share Posted January 22, 2009 pradeep Jee, Chalita does not have equal 30 degree distribution. In chalita, some bhaava are >30 and others are <30. It is not my discovery. Secondly, I never said anything new about vargas. If you feel I said anything new about chalita or varga, please specify those points. I want to know what is my " new theory " !!! -VJ ________________________________ vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep Thursday, January 22, 2009 3:22:20 AM Re: Replies to Shri Vinay Jha Dear Vinay ji If your article is about interpretation of horoscope:basics then it is even better. You are speaking about chalitha and disputing 30 degrees concept and derivation of amshas. Since it is about basics - i have only ONE question. Please give me an example of deriving vargamshas - your non popular version. Do you think i have to test every new theory,conferences lectures when i am struggling even to comprehend what maharishis have taught.Let me first concentrate on their teachings first. Thus if you have anything fundamental in nature please provide else i feel this discussion is of no use. Regarding C.Hari Ayanamsha, i was only talking about the Moola basis. This is the fundamental point. Rest can be discussed later. Pradeep , Vinay Jha <vinayjhaa16@ ...> wrote: > > Pradeep Jee, > > You say " There was an article on Varga on your website. " It is not correct. The article you refer to is " Interpretation of Horoscope : Basics " which is for beginners and as the title suggests is concerned merely with " basics " . I never proposed any new idea about vargas, hence your following statement is baseless : " Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time.There may be many who wants to build a house first and then demolish it for weak basement. If it is fine with them they may do so. For me building the foundation is of utmost importance before building theories and promulgating them. " > > It is not me but Mr Chandrahari and his mates who are building new theories, and wrongly charging me of building theories. Neither my ayanamsha concept is mine, nor the varga concept is mine. The root of your problem is that you have no time to understand me, but have plenty of time to comment on me. > > I left AIA not due to unwarranted abuses regularly heaped on me in a planned manner, but due to this attitude of not testing the software but the " ideas " behind it. No software developer in the world has ever been treated thus. You may reject the software without testing, as you have said : " Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time. " > > I made a free gift which you are rejecting without any valid reason. Mr Chandrahari has every right to propund his theory, but he has no right to use the name of Suryasiddhanta to propound his own theory. You do not want to " waste " you time on me, and I have no time to waste on useless feuds. Astrology is a practical science, and it is wastge of time to discuss astrology without practical test. > > -VJ > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > vijayadas_pradeep <vijayadas_pradeep@ ...> > > Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:03:15 AM > Re: Replies to Shri Vinay Jha > > > Dear Shri Vinay > > I am neither against you nor your software. > It was not a deviation.There was an article on Varga on your website. > > Regarding ayanamsha i am not an expert to comment with authenticity. I > cannot counter your claims unless i study them properly. In the case > of shri Chandraharis views, i have supported the moola origin concept > due to the reasons already given. > > Ayanamsha calculation is not simple and involves many assumptions, > which can bring in differences. The concept of time and yugas may not > be that sinple as we assume.Thus it involves deep study of basics and > hence i cannot comment at the moment. > > Regarding testing ,proof pudding etc - i have expressed my view in > the past as well. > > Unless basics are clear, i do not wish to waste my time.There may be > many who wants to build a house first and then demolish it for weak > basement. If it is fine with them they may do so. For me building the > foundation is of utmost importance before building theories and > promulgating them. > > Others better learned may disagree. > > Regards > Pradeep > > , " vinayjhaa16 " <vinayjhaa16@ ...> > wrote: > > > > Pradeep Jee, > > > > I guess you were swayed by disinformation about me by some persons > > which prompted you to charge me of " copying " ideas from other modern > > authors(whom? ) and claiming them as my " new " theories. If you are > > really sincere, which I assume you are, then why you are diverting > the > > topic away from those " ideas " which I had supposedly stolen, to new > > topics like vargas. My work alluded above had no bearing on vargas. > If > > you have forgotten the context, may I request you to see something > > which is related to the art or science of astro... : > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ NASA%27s+ Report%3B+ % > 26+my+Paper+ accepted+ by+CAOS%2C+ IISc > > > > I am a software veveloper, and you have no interest in even testing > my > > free software. Do you want to test the pudding merely by discussing > it?? > > > > -VJ > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > <vijayadas_pradeep@ > wrote: > > > > > > Dear Shri Vinay > > > > > > There is no false intention.Messages were also posted on Jyotish > > > group where i am a regular member.If i post again your replies > will > > > as well be posted. > > > > > > My replies are delayed due to time constraint and will be postd > after > > > due study. > > > > > > In the mean time i will be interested to know the non-popular > method > > > of deriving vargas.(If not based on 30 degrees).Please give me > > > Pramana and example of vargamshas derivation -drekkana,navamsha > etc > > > which is different from the 30 degree derivation. I am looking > for > > > simple definition. > > > > > > Thanks for your understanding > > > Pradeep > > > > > > Pradeep, " vinayjhaa16 " > > > <vinayjhaa16@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > Answer to Mr Pradeep's Rumour Mongering : > > > > > > > > You are much more polite than Mr Chandra Hari, but I have > analyzed > > > > your post carefully and arrived at following conclusions : > > > > > > > > (1)I had clearly stated " Twelve Bhaavas were conceived > according to > > > a > > > > well designed logical plan ... " . I gave examples of this ancient > > > > design in the Kali-kundali as well as in World Economy... by a > HOD > > > of > > > > Jyotisha, which are related to national astrology which is not a > > > > lucrative business for professional astrologers, and therefore > most > > > of > > > > the astrologers are not interested in these ancient techniques. > > > > > > > > Instead of asking me for the sources or authorities of these > > > > statements, You quoted me out of context in order to befool me. > If > > > you > > > > are really sincere, read Kali-kundali as well as in World > Economy... > > > > carefully, you will find the middle of Mesha always at the > eastern > > > end > > > > of the equator in World Map or India Map. I clearly talked of > the > > > > ancient " original plan " of Medini Jyotisha for which i also > supplied > > > > two detailed examples in my website, which you are wrongly > applying > > > to > > > > horoscopy astrology of individuals. You are not deliberately > biased > > > > against me, but you are unconsciously biased, otherwise you > must > > > have > > > > tried to find the logic of bhaavachalita in medini-kundalis > which > > > are > > > > so unpalatable to you that you did not fit it advisabe to > > > understand them. > > > > > > > > (2) Who told you varga chakras are based on 30 degrees ? Cite > the > > > > original sources of your claims. BPHS clearly says D1 (first > > > > divisional is Lagna and not Raashi. Lagna is clearly defined in > > > terms > > > > of the ecliptic in original sources which you ignored to > consult > > > even > > > > after readinh me. Do not impose your " popular method " upon > sages who > > > > composed shaastras. Your " popular method " will certainly give > you > > > more > > > > votes, but it will destroy shaastras. > > > > > > > > (3)And then you say " As i am not interested in a debate on Varga > > > > charts and new theories let us keep it aside. " Are you > interested > > > only > > > > in finding fault in my supposedly " new theory " , and then want > to > > > stop > > > > me from answering, by leaving it aside? Your tone is clear from > you > > > > charge " I can see that you have copied and borrowed some of > these > > > > theories from contemporary scholars which is purely your > choice. " > > > You > > > > say that I am putting forth my " new theories " which I copied > > > > (stole/plagiarised) from modern authors !! If I stole them from > > > > existing theories of others, how they can be " new " theories? > > > > > > > > If these theories are old, them I stole them from others (whom > you > > > do > > > > not name), and if these theories are my own creations then I am > > > > distorting shaastras with my novelties ; hence both head and > tail > > > are > > > > yours ! You should name those " original " authors. I am a fraud > in > > > your > > > > eyes, but you do not feel it necessary to provide the proof. > > > > > > > > I guess you are perhaps alluding to Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head > of > > > Dept > > > > of Jyotisha in KSD Sanskrit University, whose article at my > website > > > > uses the same method which is used in Kali-kundali. You > > > > imagined that I must have stolen his " novel concept " . But you > must > > > > have read at the same website : " Decision of Department of > > > Jyotisha , > > > > KSD Sanskrit University, Bih & #257;r, India in Sep 2008 to work > on > > > four > > > > projects related to natural disasters (forecasting Rains, > Floods, > > > > Cyclones, Earthquakes) with the collaboration of and according > to > > > the > > > > computations of Vinay Jha. " > > > > > > > > If this statement is wrong, why you do not report to this > university > > > > or to a legal authority, instead of directly accusing me of > plagiary > > > > sans evidences on various websites ? This debate was being > carried > > > on > > > > at the forum of Chandra Hari's students > > > > > > > > (http://groups. / group/ancient_ indian_astrology /message/ 17334) > > > , there > > > > was no need to copy and post rumours about me elsewhere without > my > > > > inforfation. I do not know at how many websites Chandra Hari and > > > > Pradeep are spreading false rumours about me without giving me a > > > > chance to counter!! > > > > > > > > (4)You say " Please don't draw the kundali of Shri Krishna. " > > > Tomorrow, > > > > someone will say " Please don't call thiese fictious figures of > > > Hindus > > > > as real personalities " . I firmly believe that Lord Krishna was a > > > > historical figure, although I am not sure of his birth year. > > > Research > > > > in his horoscope and related events is one of the many methods > to > > > find > > > > out his actual time. If you dislike me just because I want to > find > > > out > > > > accurate time of ancient personages, you are free to do so. It > is > > > not > > > > possible to please everyone. > > > > > > > > Instead of concentrating on finding or inventing faults in > me,you > > > > should have tried to understand the medini kundalis provided at > many > > > > pages of my website which have read but with a lens , such as > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ World+Economy+ % 3A+Apr+2009- > > > Mar+2010 > > > > or > > > > http://jyotirvidya. wetpaint. com/page/ National+ Astrology+ % > > > 3A+Medini+Jyotisha > > > > > > > > Do you think this type of allegations of " copying " other's ideas > > > > leveled on me, without proving ant proof, will induce me to > explain > > > > these ancient theories to you. If you want to learn these > ancient > > > > things of shaastra, which you refuse to be ancient, then you > should > > > > enrol as a student in some Sanskrit university : you certainly > read > > > > the article of Dr Radhakant Mishra, Head of Dept of Jyotisha of > KSD > > > > Sanskrit University cited above, which used these ancient > > > techniques. > > > > But like Mr Chandra Hari, you are willing to believe and > propagate, > > > > without evidences, that this university is also a den of fraud, > > > like me. > > > > > > > > -Vinay Jha > > > > ======= ======= ======= ======= ======= > > > > , " Rohiniranjan " > <jyotish_vani@ > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Namashkaar Vijay ji and a Happy New Year to you! > > > > > > > > > > Going off on a diagonal or perhaps on a tangent -from this > linear > > > > > thread -- it has often perplexed me that the basic framework > was > > > so > > > > > uniform with each rashi regardless of those being of long or > > > short > > > > > ascension depending on the hemisphere of residence are > precisely > > > of > > > > > 30 degrees each and nakshatras of 13d20m each, unless one > runs > > > into > > > > > the ashtottari scheme! > > > > > > > > > > Have you thought about that and would you care to share your > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Rohiniranjan > > > > > > > > > > , " vijayadas_pradeep " > > > > > <vijayadas_pradeep@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Vinay ji > > > > > > > > > > > > In one of your articles, you have mentioned about Bhava > > > chalitha. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) You have mentioned that aspects,friendship ucha neecha > etc > > > are > > > > > > judged from ''rashi chart'' while phala is judged from > Chalitha > > > > > chart. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) You have mentioned that ''In both Rashi-chakra and > Bhaava- > > > > > chalita, > > > > > > lagna is always placed at the centre of first mansion. But > in > > > > > Raashi- > > > > > > chakra, successive mansions are computed by merely adding > 30 > > > > > degrees > > > > > > to the lagna, whereas in the bhaava-chalita bhaavas are > > > reckoned > > > > > > independently' '. > > > > > > > > > > > > Moreover you said - ''The entire house of Lagna is > > > approximately 30 > > > > > > degrees (plus or minus few degrees), half of it remains > below > > > the > > > > > > horizon''. > > > > > > > > > > > > For instance if Lagna is 27 degree pisces then can you > please > > > > > explain > > > > > > how is Lagna placed at the CENTRE of first mansion in Rashi > > > > > Chakra?. > > > > > > And how is half of it below horizon. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) You have mentioned that all rashis are not 30 degrees > > > (elliptic) > > > > > > and hence chalitha chart is important. However in the same > > > article > > > > > or > > > > > > another article you are speaking high about ''varga > chakras'' > > > which > > > > > > are based on 30 degrees. In your view if this 30 degree > > > delineation > > > > > > is approximate then how do you support vargas and consider > them > > > as > > > > > so > > > > > > important? Don't you feel self-contradiction here ? Also in > > > your > > > > > view > > > > > > don't you think we have to draw bhava chalith for > these ''varga > > > > > > kundalees'' as well ?Are we in a loop ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that at certain places you talk logic and in > total > > > > > > contradiction and illogical at other places while talking > about > > > the > > > > > > same. > > > > > > > > > > > > As i am not interested in a debate on '' Varga charts'' and > new > > > > > > theories let us keep it aside. I can see that you have > copied > > > and > > > > > > borrowed some of these theories from contemporary scholars > > > which is > > > > > > purely your choice. > > > > > > > > > > > > However please be consistent in your logic. > > > > > > > > > > > > Dieties are the inner dwellers in a Kshethra. Physical > > > > > manifestation > > > > > > of a graha can be seen with sensory organs while the > essence or > > > the > > > > > > atma of the graha has to be felt using inner instruments. > But > > > you > > > > > are > > > > > > creating new theories and talking about two suns and trying > to > > > draw > > > > > > an invisible sun with the help of software? Vinay ji are > they > > > two > > > > > > suns or different talas of the same sun ? > > > > > > > > > > > > I can see that you are fortunate to access valauble > knowlegde. > > > But > > > > > > please don't re-create the same errors by mixing non- logic > with > > > > > > paramparic knowledge. Please don't draw the kundali of Shri > > > Krishna. > > > > > > > > > > > > There could be different ways of expressing rosha- can be > more > > > > > polite > > > > > > as compared to Chandra ji - in some one's views. However > after > > > > > seeing > > > > > > all these , Kaliyuga, Dashamsha Chakra of ShriKrishana > etc , if > > > one > > > > > > remains silent, is one doing justice to oneself ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.