Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

November 26, 2003

Dear Ramadas Rao,

Thank you for agreeing with my views. I was beginning to think that I am making a fool of myself, saying Mandi and Gulika are one and the same; as almost everyone appeared to be convinced that they are different. Like you, I too based my opinion on classic texts.

Regards,

Ramadas Rao [ramadasrao]Tuesday, November 25, 2003 9:34 PMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekhar Ji,

Sorry for intererence.Regarding Gulika,even Prashna Margam says either Mandi or Gulika are same.Only Sarvartha Chintamani is differentiatin between the 2.Even the famous Kerala Jyotish Sri Ponnusseri Nilakantha Sharma also agrees that both Mandi and Gulika are the same.For Gulika,he mentions about Gulika Kala during which all auspicious functions are banned.So in this connection I also agree with you.

With Sri hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.

Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

Dear Prashant,

Shlokas can be interpreted in different ways. So forgetting about the calculations,let us try to find out whether Gulika and Mandi are same or not, which incidentally was the beginning of the discussion.Since you do not want to considered Jataka Parijata , which gives very clearly, Mandi as a synonym of Gulika; let us restrict to BPHS. Chaukhamba Sanskrit Sansthana Edition of BPHS has a shloka indicating Gulika and Mandi are one and the same Shloka 15 Ch.4 says" Namantaram tu tasyaiva Mandirityabhidheeyate".

For the sake of argument, if we write off that edition and restrict our selves the edition translated by R. Santanam( Khairatilal Edition, Sitaram Jha translation) when Parashara gives information on how to calculate all UpaGrahas from Dhoom to Mrityu and Gulika, if Mandi and Gulika are not the same why does not he indicate how Mandi's calculation is to be done? If there is any shloka indicating this, kindly indicate the same, so that I can refresh my knowledge, and may be add to it.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

prashant narang [prashantnarang]Monday, November 24, 2003 6:53 AMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

dera chandrashekhar ji,

there is absolutely no controversy about it, that gulika & mandi are two points on an arc.

points of difference are

1) if there is a separate gulika kal

2) wehther mandi is lordless or lorded by saturn.(i beieve its upagraha of saturn as given in uttara kalmitra)

anyway, one thing we should keep in mind while doing phaladesh that we should analyse if there is any planet on that arc or not . for example if gulika is 17degree scorpio, & mandi is 29deg scorpio, that means arc stretches to 10deg saggi. now if there is any planet on the arc, its caught, its significations will suffer badly. suppose if mars is at 0degrees saggi, it will seem to be away from mandi, but no, its very much near to mid-point of the arc, so its afflicted.

regards

prashantChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

Dear Prashant,

I too was referring to what has been stated by Acharyas. Jataka Parijata states categorically that Gulika is the synonym for Mandi.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

prashant narang [prashantnarang]Sunday, November 23, 2003 7:09 AMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

dear chandrashekhar ji,

being an unbiased student, i m trying to analyse mandi & gulika theory. as such no theory is mine, becuase i've not made any research myself, but just comparing to what i have been taught......

according to what u said , the other kaal velas should b calculated separately. but what i've been taught is that day /night is divided in 8equal parts . during the day , 7portions r distributed to 7 planets commencing from lord of the weekday. 8th is lordless.. the degree ascending on start of saturn's portion is gulika, the degree ascending at the mid point of this portion is called mandi. similarly, mid point of sun's portion is kala, mar's-mrityu, ju's-yamaghantaka, me's-ardhaprahara..

these points/degrees r kniown as upagrahas, no upagrahas r assigned to portion of moon & venus.

even if we ignore 5 kaal velas right now, u believe that mandi belongs to 8th lordless portion.

i think now narsimha ji /sanjay ji should explain this to us because i m writing what he has used in his software.

regards

prashant

Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

Dear Brendan,

I agree that much more needs to be done in the matter of understanding Badhakas and that position of planets house ownerships etc. needs to be studied before labeling a planet a Badhaka. I am happy that you see my point of view I think many Acharyas have commented that Mandi and Gulika are one and the same. Gulika Kaala is different from Gulika.Gulika Kaala is one of the 5 KalaVelas. Whereas Mandi is the portion(8th) of a day, not lorded over by any planet( or rather Mandi spashta is when the portion of Saturn ends), Gulika kaala is the portion lorded over by Saturn in the first five parts, Moon and Venus parts being left off. Parashara says in Chapter 4 Shloka 15 " Namantaram tu tasyaiva Mandirityabhidheeyate" in Benares edition of Chaukhamba Sanskrit Sansthana. this shloka is not in the editions available with English Translations. Jataka Parijata also says that Mandi and Gulika are synonymous vide shloka 4 1/2 ch. 2. So There should be no confusion, is what I think.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

Bpfeeley [bpfeeley]Friday, November 21, 2003 11:05 AMvarahamihira Subject: Re: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activateIn a message dated 11/20/2003 4:12:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, boxdel writes:Hare Rama KrishnaDear Chandrashekar,You bring up some very good points and again, we must look at each chart and do the analysis. I had a discussion with Sanjay a few weeks ago on this topic and I was left with the conclusion I mention in my last e-mail wrt the effect of the badhaka on the native. So much depends on the placement and whether it is in a movable, fixed or dual rasi and also the aspects on the planet and it placement in the Navamsa. It also depends on whether the badhaka is associated with the lagna or its lord or the 6th and 8th lords. Again, I really believe the greater the maleficience the more evil the results and Sanjay has mention the effects of the Sarpa yoga and Pisaca yoga in association with the badhak. It sound much like a witches cauldron and the impact of evil spirits on the life of the native and in some cases where the native himself can be used by such forces to do destructive work if associated with the 10th house of karmas.Gulika and Maandi are different and I will search for some notes that I have on that topic. Some regards them to be the same but a convincing paper was written by an SJC Guru/Sishya a few years ago. As I understand it the JHora calculations are based on that paper. That's what I use myself for these upagrahas.You make a great point with the list of charts with fixed sign lagnas and what can I say. This is worth a good study under Sanjay guidance for we really need to tease out this topic. I am far from being happy with my own understanding on this.In my own chart, The Moon is my 9th lord and was very close to my Guru in my Moon dasa. Yes, there was obstruction in my mind and I also qualify as a stubborn soul, but the dasa was extremely wonderful and devotional for my life as a bhakta to Radha/Krishna. The Moon is conjoined Sani and aspected by Rahu and Mars, but also aspected by Mercury and Venus. In fact, I found my Guru in Moon/Rahu but the combo is also in the 12th to Karakamsa.All this needs more work and this is the way we do the work.Regards,Brendan

Dear Brendan,Correct me if I am wrong, but is Gulika and Mandi not the same? Perhaps you meant Gulika Kaala? About generalization of Sthira Lagnas, Lord Krishna's chart that is generally accepted shows, if I remember right, Sthira Lagna. Would you attribute the qualities of Such natives don't easily accept God into their lives or do so according to their own beliefs. as, suggested, by you, to the Lord? Or can the theory be extended to Prophet Mohammed, Pope Alexander VII, Ramakrishna Paramhans (All with Aquarius Rising), Shri Satya Sai baba(Scorpio),Shri Chaitanya Maha Prabhu(Leo), Yes he Lama(Leo) Yoganand Paramhans (Leo)? I am sure you would not think that right. This is, precisely, the reason that I think mere owning of 11,9 and 7th house for Chara Sthira and Dual Ascendant can not be the only qualification for a planet being termed as Badhaka. Some additional malfeasance is necessary for the planet to become Badhaka(Obstructer).I could accept if the additional qualifications included being or conjoining Lords of 64th Navamsha or even 8th lord as you suggest if some textual support for it comes out. However accepting that mere ownership of the houses suggested makes a planet Badhaka is, at least to me, a bit of a flat statement. Of course this is my personal opinion and other worthies might have their own opinions.Regards,Chandrashekhar.|Om Tat Sat|http://www.varahamihira

November 26, 2003

Dear Prashant,

My personal experience though is that it works as well with the end point

of Saturn's arc. It's very mystical, and I guess more research is

necessary. Which are the quotes from BPHS which indicate it to be the

starting and midpoint?

Yours,

Dhira Krsna dasa,

Jyotisha

http://www.radhadesh.com

November 26, 2003

Hare Rama Krishna

Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji,

I am reading this thread with a great interest and learning

quite a few things here. Having said that, if Mandi and

Gulika are the same then, why they are treated as two

separate UpaGrahas and why not we could call them like,

Chandra/Soma, Sura/Ravi etc.,

Also, please educate me on why the placements of Mandi and

Gulika have a separate meanings in the Rasi, Navamsa and other

Divisional Charts as per some classics. For example:-

1) BPHS : Chapter-4: Shlokas : 25-40

25-30. Nishek Lagn. O excellent of Brahmins, now is a step

explained to arrive at the Nishek Lagn, when the natal Lagn

is known. Note the angular distance between Shani and

Mandi (Gulika). Add this to the difference between the

Lagn Bhava (Madhya, or cusp) and the 9th Bhava (cusp).

The resultant product in Râúis, degrees etc. will represent

the months, days etc., that elapsed between Nishek and birth.

*** Note, here Mandi and Gulika are treated as SAME.

2) BPHS : Chapter-16 : Sholkas : 23

23. Should Mandi be in Lagna, while Lagn's Lord is in fall,

grief on account of loss of child at the age of 56 will

come to pass.

** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate,

becuse it was not mentioned like the previous Sholka

as Mandi(Gulika).

3) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 24:

Should Yuvati and Randhr Bhava be occupied by malefic Grahas,

while Lagns lord is in fall in Rasii, or Navamsh, one born

in Gulik Kala will destroy his family.

** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate

4) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 6:

Should Surya and Candr be in Lagn and benefics be in a

Bhava other than a Kendr, or Randhr Bhava, one born in

Gulikas Muhurta will live up to 36.

** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate

4) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 2:

Mandi, the son of Sani, has many colours. Rahus colour is

dark collyrium (blue mix). Although the Rasis have pleasing

colours, these are changed according to the occupants.

** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate

5) Jaimini Sutras: ADHYAYA 1- PADA 2

SU. 29. - Sagulike vishado vishahato va.

If the Karaka Navamsa falls in Gulikakala or the time

governed by Gulika, the person will administer poison

to others and kill them or be killed by such

administrations of poison by others.

**Note: Here Mandi and Gulika are treated separate

6) Jaimini Sutras: ADHYAYA 2-PADA 2

SU. 19. Mundamandibhyam vishasarpaja lodbandhanadibhihi.

If the 3rd from Lagna or Karaka is occupied by Sani and

Gulika, the person will die from the effects of poison,

from snakes; from chains and shakles and from water.

***Note: Here Mandi and Gulika are treated as SAME.

Thanks for teaching me this so that I can understand

better on these two Upagrahas.

Regards

Raghunadha Rao

varahamihira , " Chandrashekhar Sharma "

<boxdel> wrote:

> Dear Dhira Krishna dasa,

> I appreciate your support. I too am awaiting Sanjay's comments and

source.

> Regards,

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> Dhira Krsna BCS [Dhira.Krsna.BCS@p...]

> Wednesday, November 26, 2003 2:27 AM

> varahamihira

> |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or

Kharesha to

> activate

>

> Dear Chandrashekhar,

>

> I agree with Mandi being same with Gulik. The translation of

Mandi is:

> 'son of Manda' while Manda is another name for Shani. Gulik is

the son of

> Shani, so there are one and the same. However, I have a doubt in

the

> calculation of Mandi-Gulik. In Jaimini Sutras Sanjay Rath has

described

> Gulik as being the end of Saturn's portion of day or night

respectively,

> yet later on I see in his books that he changed to the opinion of

> beginning of Saturn's portion and makes a distinction between

Gulik and

> Mandi. Maybe Sanjay Rath could enlighten us further on this?

>

> Yours,

> Dhira Krsna dasa,

> Jyotisha

> http://www.radhadesh.com

>

November 27, 2003

Dear Rao,

As a matter of fact I had decided not to elaborate on this as almost everyone was convinced that Gulika and Mandi are separate. I thought the discussion was going in no direction.Once a person makes up his mind it is difficult for one to see reason.I was afraid of hurting anyone's sentiments by my straight forward style of writing. However I think I know you well and am therefore responding.

Think about this, does BPHS shloka 4-25-30 say Mandi(Gulika)? You will find this is not so. Also try to find out whether Parashara has mentioned Gulika and Mandi being separate UpaGrahas in any shloka? I have already given the shloka carried in the Chaukhamba edition of BPHS, where Parashara indicates that Mandi and Gulika are same, but no body has so far taken pains to verify that edition.

Jataka Parijata unambiguously states Gulika as one of the names of Mandi. Again Parashar has no where mentioned Gulika and Mandi as separate entities, and has not given how to calculate Mandi separately for that reason. Otherwise it is difficult to explain why having given details of how to calculate even Paridhi, Indrachapa etc., much less used indicators in astrology, and chooses to skip Mandi calculations as if on a whim. The reason is obvious, they are identical.

Now coming to Shloka 23 Chapter 16, read again what you have written. Can one then extend the same logic and assume that CH.3 Shloka 21 Says Guru Kuja Shani, Arka etc. and does not mention them as Jeeva Dharaputra, Surya Putra, and Surya there; but does so in Shloka 22 but does not mention earlier names in that shloka these are different planets? Certainly not, I presume.

Read other examples up to example 5 and tell me why Arka should not be treated as something other than Surya if this logic is to be applied. As to point 6. where do you find mention of the word Gulika in the Sutra? Gulika is mentioned by the translator as he understands them to be synonymous.

I think one yardstick should be applied to any form of interpretation accepted, but this is seldom done. However what is done is that synonyms are accepted for other planets from texts other than BPHS and when it comes to Mandi we want synonym to be specifically mentioned by Parashara. This even if he does so but it is not seen in the edition we possess.

It would be better if we begin understanding how the different editions came into being before saying there is nothing beyond BPHS. That Brihat Parashara Hora Sara is the most exhaustive treatise is not in doubt. What is in doubt is whether all the shlokas available have been located and whether, through inadvertent oversight, shlokas from source other than Parashara have crept in the edition at hand.

If I sound harsh,please excuse me. I did not intend to be. I am only trying to point out where application of logic is necessary. If one wants to stick to one text, there is no harm. But confusion arises when one calculates from one text say Gulika and then goes on and takes Mandi's calculations from other text, and then wants to exclude that text when understanding whether Mandi and Gulika are the same. Of course those having access to more ancient texts could throw more light on this. I am certainly open to correction if some logical explanation is forthcoming.

Hope this helps,

Chandrashekhar.

Rao Nemani [raon1008]Thursday, November 27, 2003 3:35 AMvarahamihira Subject: Re: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activateHare Rama KrishnaNamaste ChandraShekhar Ji,I am reading this thread with a great interest and learningquite a few things here. Having said that, if Mandi and Gulika are the same then, why they are treated as two separate UpaGrahas and why not we could call them like, Chandra/Soma, Sura/Ravi etc.,Also, please educate me on why the placements of Mandi andGulika have a separate meanings in the Rasi, Navamsa and otherDivisional Charts as per some classics. For example:-1) BPHS : Chapter-4: Shlokas : 25-4025-30. Nishek Lagn. O excellent of Brahmins, now is a step explained to arrive at the Nishek Lagn, when the natal Lagn is known. Note the angular distance between Shani and Mandi (Gulika). Add this to the difference between the Lagn Bhava (Madhya, or cusp) and the 9th Bhava (cusp). The resultant product in Râúis, degrees etc. will represent the months, days etc., that elapsed between Nishek and birth. *** Note, here Mandi and Gulika are treated as SAME.2) BPHS : Chapter-16 : Sholkas : 2323. Should Mandi be in Lagna, while Lagn's Lord is in fall, grief on account of loss of child at the age of 56 will come to pass.** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate,becuse it was not mentioned like the previous Sholkaas Mandi(Gulika).3) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 24:Should Yuvati and Randhr Bhava be occupied by malefic Grahas, while Lagns lord is in fall in Rasii, or Navamsh, one born in Gulik Kala will destroy his family.** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate4) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 6:Should Surya and Candr be in Lagn and benefics be in a Bhava other than a Kendr, or Randhr Bhava, one born in Gulikas Muhurta will live up to 36.** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate4) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 2:Mandi, the son of Sani, has many colours. Rahus colour is dark collyrium (blue mix). Although the Rasis have pleasing colours, these are changed according to the occupants.** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate5) Jaimini Sutras: ADHYAYA 1- PADA 2SU. 29. - Sagulike vishado vishahato va. If the Karaka Navamsa falls in Gulikakala or the time governed by Gulika, the person will administer poison to others and kill them or be killed by suchadministrations of poison by others.**Note: Here Mandi and Gulika are treated separate6) Jaimini Sutras: ADHYAYA 2-PADA 2SU. 19. Mundamandibhyam vishasarpaja lodbandhanadibhihi. If the 3rd from Lagna or Karaka is occupied by Sani and Gulika, the person will die from the effects of poison, from snakes; from chains and shakles and from water.***Note: Here Mandi and Gulika are treated as SAME.Thanks for teaching me this so that I can understand better on these two Upagrahas.RegardsRaghunadha Raovarahamihira , "Chandrashekhar Sharma" <boxdel> wrote:> Dear Dhira Krishna dasa,> I appreciate your support. I too am awaiting Sanjay's comments and source.> Regards,> Chandrashekhar.> > Dhira Krsna BCS [Dhira.Krsna.BCS@p...]> Wednesday, November 26, 2003 2:27 AM> varahamihira > |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to> activate> > > Dear Chandrashekhar,> > I agree with Mandi being same with Gulik. The translation of Mandi is:> 'son of Manda' while Manda is another name for Shani. Gulik is the son of> Shani, so there are one and the same. However, I have a doubt in the> calculation of Mandi-Gulik. In Jaimini Sutras Sanjay Rath has described> Gulik as being the end of Saturn's portion of day or night respectively,> yet later on I see in his books that he changed to the opinion of> beginning of Saturn's portion and makes a distinction between Gulik and> Mandi. Maybe Sanjay Rath could enlighten us further on this?> > Yours,> Dhira Krsna dasa,> Jyotisha> http://www.radhadesh.com> >

November 27, 2003

Hare Rama Krishna

Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji,

First of all I will agree with you and would like to

Thank you for the detailed explaination on my notes and

findings and I really appreciate your time in clarifying /

teaching me the application of principles given by the sages

and its usage in a logical manner.

Thanks for your time, and making me think more clearly

everytime I get a reply from you, my Guru Ji, other Guru's

and other Learned Members.

Regards

Raghunadha Rao

varahamihira , " Chandrashekhar Sharma "

<boxdel> wrote:

> Dear Rao,

> As a matter of fact I had decided not to elaborate on this as

almost

> everyone was convinced that Gulika and Mandi are separate. I

thought the

> discussion was going in no direction.Once a person makes up his

mind it is

> difficult for one to see reason.I was afraid of hurting anyone's

sentiments

> by my straight forward style of writing. However I think I know

you well and

> am therefore responding.

>

> Think about this, does BPHS shloka 4-25-30 say Mandi(Gulika)? You

will find

> this is not so. Also try to find out whether Parashara has

mentioned Gulika

> and Mandi being separate UpaGrahas in any shloka? I have already

given the

> shloka carried in the Chaukhamba edition of BPHS, where Parashara

indicates

> that Mandi and Gulika are same, but no body has so far taken pains

to verify

> that edition.

>

> Jataka Parijata unambiguously states Gulika as one of the names of

Mandi.

> Again Parashar has no where mentioned Gulika and Mandi as separate

entities,

> and has not given how to calculate Mandi separately for that

reason.

> Otherwise it is difficult to explain why having given details of

how to

> calculate even Paridhi, Indrachapa etc., much less used indicators

in

> astrology, and chooses to skip Mandi calculations as if on a whim.

The

> reason is obvious, they are identical.

>

> Now coming to Shloka 23 Chapter 16, read again what you have

written. Can

> one then extend the same logic and assume that CH.3 Shloka 21 Says

Guru Kuja

> Shani, Arka etc. and does not mention them as Jeeva Dharaputra,

Surya Putra,

> and Surya there; but does so in Shloka 22 but does not mention

earlier names

> in that shloka these are different planets? Certainly not, I

presume.

> Read other examples up to example 5 and tell me why Arka should

not be

> treated as something other than Surya if this logic is to be

applied. As to

> point 6. where do you find mention of the word Gulika in the

Sutra? Gulika

> is mentioned by the translator as he understands them to be

synonymous.

>

> I think one yardstick should be applied to any form of

interpretation

> accepted, but this is seldom done. However what is done is that

synonyms are

> accepted for other planets from texts other than BPHS and when it

comes to

> Mandi we want synonym to be specifically mentioned by Parashara.

This even

> if he does so but it is not seen in the edition we possess.

>

> It would be better if we begin understanding how the different

editions came

> into being before saying there is nothing beyond BPHS. That Brihat

Parashara

> Hora Sara is the most exhaustive treatise is not in doubt. What is

in doubt

> is whether all the shlokas available have been located and

whether, through

> inadvertent oversight, shlokas from source other than Parashara

have crept

> in the edition at hand.

>

> If I sound harsh,please excuse me. I did not intend to be. I am

only trying

> to point out where application of logic is necessary. If one wants

to stick

> to one text, there is no harm. But confusion arises when one

calculates from

> one text say Gulika and then goes on and takes Mandi's

calculations from

> other text, and then wants to exclude that text when understanding

whether

> Mandi and Gulika are the same. Of course those having access to

more ancient

> texts could throw more light on this. I am certainly open to

correction if

> some logical explanation is forthcoming.

>

> Hope this helps,

> Chandrashekhar.

>

> Rao Nemani [raon1008]

> Thursday, November 27, 2003 3:35 AM

> varahamihira

> Re: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or

Kharesha

> to activate

>

> Hare Rama Krishna

>

> Namaste ChandraShekhar Ji,

>

> I am reading this thread with a great interest and learning

> quite a few things here. Having said that, if Mandi and

> Gulika are the same then, why they are treated as two

> separate UpaGrahas and why not we could call them like,

> Chandra/Soma, Sura/Ravi etc.,

>

> Also, please educate me on why the placements of Mandi and

> Gulika have a separate meanings in the Rasi, Navamsa and other

> Divisional Charts as per some classics. For example:-

>

> 1) BPHS : Chapter-4: Shlokas : 25-40

> 25-30. Nishek Lagn. O excellent of Brahmins, now is a step

> explained to arrive at the Nishek Lagn, when the natal Lagn

> is known. Note the angular distance between Shani and

> Mandi (Gulika). Add this to the difference between the

> Lagn Bhava (Madhya, or cusp) and the 9th Bhava (cusp).

> The resultant product in Râúis, degrees etc. will represent

> the months, days etc., that elapsed between Nishek and birth.

>

> *** Note, here Mandi and Gulika are treated as SAME.

>

> 2) BPHS : Chapter-16 : Sholkas : 23

>

> 23. Should Mandi be in Lagna, while Lagn's Lord is in fall,

> grief on account of loss of child at the age of 56 will

> come to pass.

>

> ** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate,

> becuse it was not mentioned like the previous Sholka

> as Mandi(Gulika).

>

> 3) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 24:

>

> Should Yuvati and Randhr Bhava be occupied by malefic Grahas,

> while Lagns lord is in fall in Rasii, or Navamsh, one born

> in Gulik Kala will destroy his family.

>

> ** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate

>

> 4) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 6:

>

> Should Surya and Candr be in Lagn and benefics be in a

> Bhava other than a Kendr, or Randhr Bhava, one born in

> Gulikas Muhurta will live up to 36.

>

> ** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate

>

> 4) Hora Sara of Prithuyasa : Chapter 2:

>

> Mandi, the son of Sani, has many colours. Rahus colour is

> dark collyrium (blue mix). Although the Rasis have pleasing

> colours, these are changed according to the occupants.

>

> ** Note: here Mandi and Gulika are treated as separate

>

> 5) Jaimini Sutras: ADHYAYA 1- PADA 2

>

> SU. 29. - Sagulike vishado vishahato va.

> If the Karaka Navamsa falls in Gulikakala or the time

> governed by Gulika, the person will administer poison

> to others and kill them or be killed by such

> administrations of poison by others.

>

> **Note: Here Mandi and Gulika are treated separate

>

> 6) Jaimini Sutras: ADHYAYA 2-PADA 2

>

> SU. 19. Mundamandibhyam vishasarpaja lodbandhanadibhihi.

> If the 3rd from Lagna or Karaka is occupied by Sani and

> Gulika, the person will die from the effects of poison,

> from snakes; from chains and shakles and from water.

>

> ***Note: Here Mandi and Gulika are treated as SAME.

>

> Thanks for teaching me this so that I can understand

> better on these two Upagrahas.

>

> Regards

> Raghunadha Rao

>

> varahamihira , " Chandrashekhar Sharma "

> <boxdel> wrote:

> > Dear Dhira Krishna dasa,

> > I appreciate your support. I too am awaiting Sanjay's comments

and

> source.

> > Regards,

> > Chandrashekhar.

> >

> > Dhira Krsna BCS [Dhira.Krsna.BCS@p...]

> > Wednesday, November 26, 2003 2:27 AM

> > varahamihira

> > |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or

> Kharesha to

> > activate

> >

> > Dear Chandrashekhar,

> >

> > I agree with Mandi being same with Gulik. The translation of

> Mandi is:

> > 'son of Manda' while Manda is another name for Shani. Gulik

is

> the son of

> > Shani, so there are one and the same. However, I have a

doubt in

> the

> > calculation of Mandi-Gulik. In Jaimini Sutras Sanjay Rath has

> described

> > Gulik as being the end of Saturn's portion of day or night

> respectively,

> > yet later on I see in his books that he changed to the

opinion of

> > beginning of Saturn's portion and makes a distinction between

> Gulik and

> > Mandi. Maybe Sanjay Rath could enlighten us further on this?

> >

> > Yours,

> > Dhira Krsna dasa,

> > Jyotisha

> > http://www.radhadesh.com

> >

November 28, 2003

dear chandrashekhar ji,

shakespere said "what's there in the name?"

the points which i gave earlier are not my research property. i've been taught .

so, i wont unnecessarily stick to them if i find them ilogical. but, till now i've found them to b convincing. prooof lies in use. & that comes with practice & experience.

as i wrote that what matters is the arc & the mid point, so i dont see any point in such controversies. we can interpret sutras on the same line. after all a sutra wont give different result if we apply it to mid point or / intial point, only its intensity will change.

i should have referred the edition n which u'll find mandi. its gc sharma-bphs.

without verifying , i can trust u, that it must b given in chaukhaba edition that mandi & gulika r same. i dont think so, it anyway contradicts the way we use it. i had asked u if u feel 5 kaalvelas & 8 equal portions could b separate. if u see any diffrenec between gulika kaal, & gulika. this could have opened other possibilites. we should discuss why moon & venus r not assigned any upagrahs

i feel most of the times gulika has been referred in the sutras, it may b for the arc. we need to do more research on this.

i would b more interesetd to know from sanjay ji- how did he use nakshatra lord of gulika

to asceratin dasa of death?