Varshaphala, Parasara, Pluto & Fifi

[Guest guest]

Vyaam Vyaasa Devaaya Namaha

My dear Pursottam,

 

Your infectious enthusiasm, indomitable spirit of investigation and

commitment to astrology are refreshing. Keep them up, brother!

 

When I mentioned my and Robert's " blind faith " in Parasara, you brought

in varshaphala and tried to equate it to Pluto. Just a word there from

your elder brother:

 

Many chapters of BPHS, including many dasas, are thought to be lost.

BPHS as available today is incomplete.

 

I know I am *speculating* here, but it is *conceivable* that Parasara

covered varshaphala in some lost chapters. Not only did Parasara not say

anything that rules out varsha phala, but varsha phala actually *fits

well* with some of his teachings.

 

I pointed out earlier that Tajaka varsha/maasa/hora chakras are nothing

but the dasa pravesh, antardasa pravesh and pratyantardasa pravesh

charts of Parasara's ubiquitous Sudarsana Chakra (SC) dasa. Dasa rasi is

given importance in dasa pravesh charts and it is interesting to note

that *muntha*, which is given a lot of importance in varshaphala, is

nothing but the dasa rasi as per SC dasa!

 

So it is conceivable that Parasara wrote about the so-called Tajaka

techniques in some lost chapters on dasa pravesh charts. It is only

speculation, but it *can* be true.

 

On the other hand - read Robert Koch's post again if you dispute this -

Parasara laid the basics very clearly and we can say without any doubt

that he did *not* intend to consider extra-Saturnine planets at all.

There is no parallel between using varsha phala and using Pluto.

 

Of course, as long as it makes you happy, you are still free to use any

bodies in your astrology - stars, black holes, Pluto, Fifi :-),

whatever. I have NO PROBLEM with that! But it is clearly against

Parasara's teachings.

 

Purushottama, may Krishna continue to show you the way!

 

May Jupiter's light shine on us,

Narasimha

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

You wrote:

 

> >>Of course, I understand that not everyone needs to

> have as blind faith in Parasara as you and I do.<<

>

> Does blind faith mean one is not allowed to research

> and use the findings of that research??? Narasimha,

> look, we all want to understand and follow Parashara.

> However at the same time, you also use techniques not

> mentioned by Parashara - Varshaphala -with it's yogas,

> sahams etc, the Ashtamsha chart in combination with

> Parashari dasha's etc. Using this stuff doesn't mean

> that you're not trying understand Parashara. It just

> means that from research, you've found somethings that

> work and you therefore use them. There is nothing

> wrong with that. In fact, I think Parashara would

> probably be pleased with us, if as a result of his

> teachings, we are able to do our own intelligent

> research. He wants to TEACH us to be intelligent,

> capable Astrologers. Not parrots. If he were in our

> presence right now, and we were to tell him that we

> had done some research and and reached some findings,

> I think he would be pleased with us. It shows

> intelligence and intelligence is one of the

> qualifications of an astrologer. So look, you use

> additional stuff, I use additional stuff, Robert uses

> additional stuff, and the chances are most of us use

> additional stuff. There is nothing wrong with this.

[Guest guest]

Dear Narasimha:

 

I think it has been loing thought (and maybe verified) that the Tajaka system

did not get introduced into India until Moslem rule in the 13th century and

that Tajaka system is the element of arabic astrology that streams in after

this time. Varshaphal (or solar returns) were used in Arabic astrology and

may have had their origin in Persian astrology (I can check this out with

some friends who know this better thatn I do). I don't think that just

because something in not in Parasara that it necessarily should not be used.

However, to each his own. Some people prefer to be more " pure " in their

astrology and stick to one source.

 

I know that some people do feel that Uranus, Neptune and Pluto were very

clear to the ancients and that it was a matter of choice that they were not

used. I am of the opinion that they were not used because they were not

observed. However, I personally do not used uranus, neptune and pluto in my

chart calculations. I do look at their transits however.

 

It is the same with the debate about true v. mean nodes. While Parasara

indeed used mean nodes, this can also be attributed to the fact that true

nodes were not calculated then. If we develop the means to calculate more

sophisticated astronomical data, should we not use it because it was not

mentioned in Parasara?

 

Obviously this is subjective for the individual astrologer to decide. Thanks

for the information.

 

Ronnie

[Guest guest]

JAYA JAGANNATH

Dear Ronnie,

The main reason for Parasara adopting Mean nodes is that THEN ONLY ARE THEY

RETROGRADE ALL THE TIME. Else if you use True Nodes, then the nodes are direct

for some time and retrograde at other times. This seems to go against thir

primary nature as the Karmic Control Planets.

Hare Krishna

Sanjay Rath

-

Narasimha Rao <pvr

<vedic astrology >

Cc: <gjlist

Sunday, October 03, 1999 3:15 AM

Re: Varshaphala, Parasara, Pluto & Fifi

 

 

> Namaste Ronnie,

>

> > mean v. true or vice versa. Given that any ancient system is in fact

ancient

> > means, in my opinion, that we have to use it with good sense. Quoting

> > balarishta examples in ancient texts for example will probably not work

today

> > due to modern science and the ability to keep infants, premature infants and

> > children alive. However, those combinations might still indicate troubled

> > times, and illness, and, in some cases though not all, death. But I

> > digress....

>

> It is said that different results within the constraints of the basic

parameters

> are experienced based on desa, kala, patras (region one belongs to, time/age

one

> is living in and the class of the person).

>

> > Back to the nodes...Your argument that the mean nodes work in a particular

> > dasa system is a good reason for using them. We should base things in my

> > opinion on what works in practice. I have never had trouble using the true

> > nodes, especially when they station, but I have not yet tried the SC dasa

> > system. Given that I used true nodes for years, I just have never switched.

> > However, when I try that dasa system I will keep it in mind.

>

> I think Robert was talking about Narayana (Padakrama) dasa of Jaimini and not

SC

> (Sudarsana Chakra) dasa.

>

> May Jupiter's light shine on us,

> Narasimha

>

>