Guest guest Posted November 7, 2000 Report Share Posted November 7, 2000 Dear Ash, No, not dispositors of the planet, but those of the Lagna, HL or GL or the lords of the seventh from them. Sanjay Rath - Ash Sam <ashsam73 <varahamihira > Monday, October 30, 2000 10:10 PM [sri Guru] Re: Yogada clarification > Pranam Narisimha, > > > (3) To become a yogada or maha yogada, the association a > > planet has with the three lagnas can be conjunction, > > aspect or even ownership. If Mercury owns GL, occupies > > HL and aspects lagna, for example, then he becomes a maha > > yogada. Some of you are considering aspect/conjunction > > with the lord of these lagnas also! That may be done, but > > a yoga obtained that way is diluted in power. If, for > > example, lagna lord or a planet in lagna aspects HL lord, > > he is not really a yogada. If the former planet aspects HL > > instead of HL lord, he will give much stronger results. > > > > IN CONSIDERING THE ASPECT/CONJUNCTION WITH THE LORDS OF HL AND GL DO > THIER DEPOSITERS ALSO NEED TO BE CONSIDERED ? THIS IS ON THE SIMILAR > PHILOSOPHY WITH RESPECT TO AN EXALTED PLANET IN WHICH ONE NEEDS TO > CONSIDER THE STRENGTH OF THE DEPOSITER INORDER FOR IT TO TRANSFER ITS > POWERS TO LAGNA, GL AND HL. > > WHAT WOUDLD BE THE RESULT IN WHICH THE PLANET ASPECT/COJOIN THE LORDS > OF GL, HL AND LAGNA AND THEIR DEPOSITER ALSO ASPECTS/COJOINS THE > LORDS OF GL AND HL AND LAGNA ? > > IF THE ABOVE IS THE CASE THEN HOW WOULD YOU CONSIDER THE STRNGTH OF > THE YOGADA, KEVAL YOGADA, MAHA YOGADA OR KEVAL MAHAGOGADA ? > > > Thank you for this stimulating discussion, > Your Sisya, > Ash > > > > > OM TAT SAT > Archive: varahamihira > Info: varahamihira/info.html > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 8, 2000 Report Share Posted November 8, 2000 Pranaam Gurudeva, > Dear Ash, > No, not dispositors of the planet, but those of the Lagna, HL or GL or the > lords of the seventh from them. > Sanjay Rath Based on what you wrote in Upadesa Sutras, I have taught the class that we take only the lords of lagna, HL and GL. Now you mentioned the ownership of 7th. Actually, in the book, you said this about aspect and not about lordship. You said that a planet aspecting the 7th from GL gives power to spouse and not to the native. Is the lordship different? Why? If owning the 7th house is acceptable, why not aspecting it? What is the difference? When teaching Sudasa, you taught that a planet in the 7th from GL can give power and I saw it in many charts. In that case, why did you say in Upadesa Sutras that yogada involving 7th gives power/wealth to spouse? The 1st house shows the invisible part and the 7th house shows the visible part. This may be why some scholars include the 7th in defining yogada. I have taught the class something that they can start with. Now, can you clarify on aspecting/occupying/owning the 7th from lagna/HL/GL and dispel our confusion? Your grateful sishya, Narasimha 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.