Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

[Guest guest]

Dear Chandrashekhar and Rao,

 

Hare Rama Krsna!

 

>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.

 

If I may again refer to Jaimini Upadesa Sutras by Sanjay Rath, on p.37-38

he writes Gulik rises at the 8th portion of night or day, since we know

the 7 planets (except Rahu-Ketu) have their respective portion of night or

day ruled by their respective children, but 8th portion is without a

governor, thus it is considered as Gulika Kala, and Gulik or Mandi, then

rules the 'end' of Shani's arc. We should make a clear distinction here

between Gulik and Gulika kala. Gulik destroys, thus whatever comes after

him is void, without a ruler and that's the 8th portion of day or night.

See the link, why 8th house has Shani as a karaka, and 8th house

represents death. Only Dharma has the power to overcome evil, and thus

karaka's of 9th house are Sun and Jupiter, giving new life.

 

Yours,

Dhira Krsna dasa,

Jyotisha

http://www.radhadesh.com

[Guest guest]

Dear Ramdasraoji,

I was just pointing to Rao Nemani, the logic missing in the arguments advanced in favour of Mandi and Gulika being different. Many texts could have different interpretations, no doubt. The reason I was pointing it out was that if jataka Parijata is not to be considered( though I do not know why) and one is to stick to BPHS, then the fact of the shlokas having been collected from different sources makes it necessary to look at all the editions before arriving at any conclusions.Gulika/ Mandi rule over the time allotted to Saturn and since the duration is of the Day/ Night it is obvious that Mandi sphuta will always be related to Sun rise/set as well as the weekday and sphuta will be beginning of the period lorded over by Saturn. Similar calculations are indicated for other UpaGrahas of different planet. How the concept of Gulika spashta being at a place different than beginning of the Saturn's time zone has come is not clear to me. May be there is some other classic which mentions it unambiguously.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

Ramadas Rao [ramadasrao]Friday, November 28, 2003 8:48 PMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekhar Ji,

I agree with you that Parashara Maharshi in BPHS ( translated by Sri G.C.Sharma ) says that both Gulika and Mandi are the same.But in Kalidasa's Uttara Kalamrita,he is very clear that both Gulika and Mandi are different and he says as per Mandavya Rishi ,these are 2 most harmful upagrahas and considers both as different Upagrahas of Shani.Shloka-7 deals about calculation of Mandi where he says " On the week days reckoned from Sunday onwards multiply the Dinamana ( length of the day from Sun Rise to Sun Set ) respectively by Charu ( 26 ),Khari ( 22 ),Jata ( 18 ),Vayo ( 14 ),Nata ( 10 ),Tanu (6 ),and Roon ( 2) and divide the product by Khanga (30 ) and the quotient arrived at in Ghatikas and Palas etc.,taken as Ishta,compute the Lagna.The Lagna discovered will be MANDI SPHUTA.The 8th part of the Dinamana or that of Ratri mana is the period of each planet.When the birth is during the day,the lords of 1st 7 muhurtas beginning with Sunday onwards will respectively be the Sun.Moon,Mars,Mercury,Jupiter,Venus and Saturn.For night births,5th day lord will be taken into consideration. Here the words Charu,Khari etc.have been interpreted with the help of Katapayadi system."

Now Shloka-8 says " The 8th Muhurta has no lord.In the case of day births,the portion belonging to saturn is called GULIKA.In case of night births,the lord of the 1st to 7 Muhurtas will be the same order as stated above,but the lord of the 1st 7 Muhurtas are reckoned not from the lord of the week day chosen,but from that of the 5th from it.Here alos the portion belonging to Saturn will be taken as that of Gulika.But Gulika will be from the last portion of Saturn ie.,at the end of Ghatikas 10,6,2,26,22,28 and 14 respectively.

More about Gulika and Mandi can be read from The Astrological Magazine Nov.97 and March 98,editorial by Smt.Gayatri Devi Vasudev.

The Shlokas 7 and 8 from Uttara Kalamrita,I can not quote here as some Sanskrit letters are missing in my book.

I hope this clarifies the controversy about Gulika and Mandi.

With Sri Hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.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 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> >

[Guest guest]

Dear Prashant,

 

If you read Ramdas Raoji's mail to me you will find that he mentions that G>C. Sharma's commentary indicates that Mandi and Gulika are identical. I think confusion is arising as you are probably referring to Gulika Kaala as the arch. Both calculations for Mandi as well as Gulika mention that its sphuta would be the beginning of the Time slot lorded over by Saturn, to the best of my knowledge. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected. I do not know the source of calculating Gulika at a different point and Mandi at a different point. As I said earlier, Sanjay might have some ancient classic in his possession which mentions this. Till such time that he cares to comment, I can not accept that these are two different UpaGrahas of Saturn.

 

I may appear obstinate, but for want of some authoritative text quoting specifically that these are different and in view of the fact that Parashara himself does not give two different methods of such calculations; it is difficult to accept the premise.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

prashant narang [prashantnarang]Friday, November 28, 2003 6:46 AMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

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?

regards

prashantChandrashekhar 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 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> >

[Guest guest]

dear chandrashekhar ji,

no, u dont appear to b obstinate, u have the full right to believe in a theory u think is right

gc sharma translation has used this word "mandi", that's what i was trying to show u , & that too as the mid point. ( & that's how he calculated nishka lagna also with an example)

on the other hand, he has explained gulika before that as the initial point in chapter 3. here gc sharma also quotes sravartha chaintamani that there in a single verse both gulika & mandi r described as two upagrhas of saturn.

i would like to know the sloka no in gc sharma translation which says gulika & mandi r same.

secondly the slokas which mr. raghunatha rao had provided, few of those had referrd to gulika kal,; many others , i saw from other classics prove the importance of gulika kal(the entire saturn's portion), hence i felt it may b that when they say gulika, they might b refffering to whole portion. because the results will not b felt at just the intial point, but at any point on the arc.

practically, i dont see much use of gulika as the initial point other than defining the arc. but if parasra has defined this point , it must b of some great use which we r unaware of. but this can create confsion in divisional charts if taken there.

i dont have uttara kalmitra, but i was told that there is some discrepency as it describes gulika as end point, whereas bphs clearly says gulika is the initial point.sloka 70chapter 3.

the verse which ramdas ji qouted , i have a doubt.

"......But Gulika will be from the last portion of Saturn ie.,at the end of Ghatikas 10,6,2,26,22,28 and 14 respectively....."

shoulnt it b 30 instead of 28?

well, narsimha ji takes gulika as the initial point & mandi as the mid point of the arc, that's what he has providd in j hora. sanjay ji also agrees to this i hope. so, i request them to break their silence now & enlighten us with their kind guidance.

regards

prashantChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

 

Dear Prashant,

 

If you read Ramdas Raoji's mail to me you will find that he mentions that G>C. Sharma's commentary indicates that Mandi and Gulika are identical. I think confusion is arising as you are probably referring to Gulika Kaala as the arch. Both calculations for Mandi as well as Gulika mention that its sphuta would be the beginning of the Time slot lorded over by Saturn, to the best of my knowledge. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected. I do not know the source of calculating Gulika at a different point and Mandi at a different point. As I said earlier, Sanjay might have some ancient classic in his possession which mentions this. Till such time that he cares to comment, I can not accept that these are two different UpaGrahas of Saturn.

 

I may appear obstinate, but for want of some authoritative text quoting specifically that these are different and in view of the fact that Parashara himself does not give two different methods of such calculations; it is difficult to accept the premise.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

prashant narang [prashantnarang]Friday, November 28, 2003 6:46 AMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

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?

regards

prashantChandrashekhar 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 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> >

[Guest guest]

Dear Dhira Krishna das,

Parashara says that degree ascending at the start of Gulik's portion is the degree of Gulika. My persona opinion is that Gulika and Mandi are identical. Gulik's portion being identical with that of Saturn, it would indicate beginning of Saturn's time.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

Dhira Krsna BCS [Dhira.Krsna.BCS]Saturday, November 29, 2003 1:47 AMvarahamihira Subject: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activateDear Chandrashekhar and Rao,Hare Rama Krsna!>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.If I may again refer to Jaimini Upadesa Sutras by Sanjay Rath, on p.37-38he writes Gulik rises at the 8th portion of night or day, since we knowthe 7 planets (except Rahu-Ketu) have their respective portion of night orday ruled by their respective children, but 8th portion is without agovernor, thus it is considered as Gulika Kala, and Gulik or Mandi, thenrules the 'end' of Shani's arc. We should make a clear distinction herebetween Gulik and Gulika kala. Gulik destroys, thus whatever comes afterhim is void, without a ruler and that's the 8th portion of day or night.See the link, why 8th house has Shani as a karaka, and 8th houserepresents death. Only Dharma has the power to overcome evil, and thuskaraka's of 9th house are Sun and Jupiter, giving new life.Yours,Dhira Krsna dasa,Jyotishahttp://www.radhadesh.com|Om Tat Sat|http://www.varahamihira

[Guest guest]

Dear Prashant,

I had not referred to G.C.Sharma's version,it was Ramdas Rao who referred to it in his answer. However Chaukhamba Edition mentions Gulika and Mandi being identical vide Shloka15 Ch.4. Your interpretation of Gulika being referred to interchangeably as Gulika Kaala does have some merit. However when we calculate degrees of (rising) Gulika/Mandi then it indeed is beginning of its time as rightly mentioned by you and stated by sage Parashara.

Jataka Parijata specifically says that Gulika is synonym of Mandi. If one looks at the scheme of things given by Parashara shloka 66 to 69 CH.3 it appears each of the Kaala Vela is the time of each of the UpaGrahas( or sons if you lie) of each Planet via,Ardha Prahara,Yamaghantak,Mrityu,Kaala and Gulika/Mandi. Portions of Moon and Venus are not considered by the Sage here. Now it would be something worth pondering over as to why Saturn be allotted two UpaGrahas, if Gulika and Mandi are not identical and why the sage does not indicate which portion Mandi(not mentioned by him) belongs to unless they are identical.

Hope I am able to convey my meaning.

Chandrashekhar.

 

prashant narang [prashantnarang]Saturday, November 29, 2003 8:00 AMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

dear chandrashekhar ji,

no, u dont appear to b obstinate, u have the full right to believe in a theory u think is right

gc sharma translation has used this word "mandi", that's what i was trying to show u , & that too as the mid point. ( & that's how he calculated nishka lagna also with an example)

on the other hand, he has explained gulika before that as the initial point in chapter 3. here gc sharma also quotes sravartha chaintamani that there in a single verse both gulika & mandi r described as two upagrhas of saturn.

i would like to know the sloka no in gc sharma translation which says gulika & mandi r same.

secondly the slokas which mr. raghunatha rao had provided, few of those had referrd to gulika kal,; many others , i saw from other classics prove the importance of gulika kal(the entire saturn's portion), hence i felt it may b that when they say gulika, they might b refffering to whole portion. because the results will not b felt at just the intial point, but at any point on the arc.

practically, i dont see much use of gulika as the initial point other than defining the arc. but if parasra has defined this point , it must b of some great use which we r unaware of. but this can create confsion in divisional charts if taken there.

i dont have uttara kalmitra, but i was told that there is some discrepency as it describes gulika as end point, whereas bphs clearly says gulika is the initial point.sloka 70chapter 3.

the verse which ramdas ji qouted , i have a doubt.

"......But Gulika will be from the last portion of Saturn ie.,at the end of Ghatikas 10,6,2,26,22,28 and 14 respectively....."

shoulnt it b 30 instead of 28?

well, narsimha ji takes gulika as the initial point & mandi as the mid point of the arc, that's what he has providd in j hora. sanjay ji also agrees to this i hope. so, i request them to break their silence now & enlighten us with their kind guidance.

regards

prashantChandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

 

Dear Prashant,

 

If you read Ramdas Raoji's mail to me you will find that he mentions that G>C. Sharma's commentary indicates that Mandi and Gulika are identical. I think confusion is arising as you are probably referring to Gulika Kaala as the arch. Both calculations for Mandi as well as Gulika mention that its sphuta would be the beginning of the Time slot lorded over by Saturn, to the best of my knowledge. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected. I do not know the source of calculating Gulika at a different point and Mandi at a different point. As I said earlier, Sanjay might have some ancient classic in his possession which mentions this. Till such time that he cares to comment, I can not accept that these are two different UpaGrahas of Saturn.

 

I may appear obstinate, but for want of some authoritative text quoting specifically that these are different and in view of the fact that Parashara himself does not give two different methods of such calculations; it is difficult to accept the premise.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

prashant narang [prashantnarang]Friday, November 28, 2003 6:46 AMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

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?

regards

prashantChandrashekhar 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 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> >

[Guest guest]

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekar Ji,

Thanks for the mail.I am against your statements made about Gulika and Mandi.You have referred to Jataka Parijata which we have to respect but other ancient classics like Sarvartha Chintamani,Prashna Margam and Uttara Kalamrita have mentioned that both these are different.

I have a great respect for you and your knowledge.Even Mr.M.R.Bhat in his book " Fundamentals of Astrology " also he gave the method of calculating both Gulika and Mandi.Mr.M.R.Bhat wrote many books and he translated also Varaha Mihira's Brihat Samhita.Till now I did'nt find anybody other than Mr.Bhat who has translated this monumental classic in English.Of course Mr.M.R.Bhat is no more now.

This is for your information.

With Sri Hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

 

Dear Ramdasraoji,

I was just pointing to Rao Nemani, the logic missing in the arguments advanced in favour of Mandi and Gulika being different. Many texts could have different interpretations, no doubt. The reason I was pointing it out was that if jataka Parijata is not to be considered( though I do not know why) and one is to stick to BPHS, then the fact of the shlokas having been collected from different sources makes it necessary to look at all the editions before arriving at any conclusions.Gulika/ Mandi rule over the time allotted to Saturn and since the duration is of the Day/ Night it is obvious that Mandi sphuta will always be related to Sun rise/set as well as the weekday and sphuta will be beginning of the period lorded over by Saturn. Similar calculations are indicated for other UpaGrahas of different planet. How the concept of Gulika spashta being at a place different than beginning of the Saturn's time zone has come

is not clear to me. May be there is some other classic which mentions it unambiguously.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

Ramadas Rao [ramadasrao]Friday, November 28, 2003 8:48 PMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekhar Ji,

I agree with you that Parashara Maharshi in BPHS ( translated by Sri G.C.Sharma ) says that both Gulika and Mandi are the same.But in Kalidasa's Uttara Kalamrita,he is very clear that both Gulika and Mandi are different and he says as per Mandavya Rishi ,these are 2 most harmful upagrahas and considers both as different Upagrahas of Shani.Shloka-7 deals about calculation of Mandi where he says " On the week days reckoned from Sunday onwards multiply the Dinamana ( length of the day from Sun Rise to Sun Set ) respectively by Charu ( 26 ),Khari ( 22 ),Jata ( 18 ),Vayo ( 14 ),Nata ( 10 ),Tanu (6 ),and Roon ( 2) and divide the product by Khanga (30 ) and the quotient arrived at in Ghatikas and Palas etc.,taken as Ishta,compute the Lagna.The Lagna discovered will be MANDI SPHUTA.The 8th part of the Dinamana or that of Ratri mana is the period of each planet.When the birth is during the day,the lords of 1st 7 muhurtas

beginning with Sunday onwards will respectively be the Sun.Moon,Mars,Mercury,Jupiter,Venus and Saturn.For night births,5th day lord will be taken into consideration. Here the words Charu,Khari etc.have been interpreted with the help of Katapayadi system."

Now Shloka-8 says " The 8th Muhurta has no lord.In the case of day births,the portion belonging to saturn is called GULIKA.In case of night births,the lord of the 1st to 7 Muhurtas will be the same order as stated above,but the lord of the 1st 7 Muhurtas are reckoned not from the lord of the week day chosen,but from that of the 5th from it.Here alos the portion belonging to Saturn will be taken as that of Gulika.But Gulika will be from the last portion of Saturn ie.,at the end of Ghatikas 10,6,2,26,22,28 and 14 respectively.

More about Gulika and Mandi can be read from The Astrological Magazine Nov.97 and March 98,editorial by Smt.Gayatri Devi Vasudev.

The Shlokas 7 and 8 from Uttara Kalamrita,I can not quote here as some Sanskrit letters are missing in my book.

I hope this clarifies the controversy about Gulika and Mandi.

With Sri Hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.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 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> >

[Guest guest]

Dear Ramdas Raoji,

I have no doubt that what you are saying is correct. My skepticism arises out of the fact that no body has so far quoted, from an ancient text, a shloka which clearly states that Gulika and Mandi are different, whereas Jataka Paarijaata clearly does indicate that they are one and so does the Chaukhamba edition of BPHS, at least to my knowledge.Even the Khairatilal edition used by R. Santanam does not mention separate calculation for Mandi. You know my horoscope and certainly understand the reason for my line of thinking. I have an unfortunate habit of trusting the ancient texts, but not necessarily the modern commentator's interpretation if it apparently goes against the logic of the text. I do not mean any disrespect to the commentators but this is the way I approach any complex subject.

M.R. Bhat was no doubt a renowned astrologer, but not having read his book, I can not comment on it. I have already said that perhaps Sanjay has some ancient text which does mention it and I am looking forward to his comments.

Till such time that Sanjay clarifies the situation, let us agree to hold our own views in the matter.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

Ramadas Rao [ramadasrao]Tuesday, December 02, 2003 12:04 PMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekar Ji,

Thanks for the mail.I am against your statements made about Gulika and Mandi.You have referred to Jataka Parijata which we have to respect but other ancient classics like Sarvartha Chintamani,Prashna Margam and Uttara Kalamrita have mentioned that both these are different.

I have a great respect for you and your knowledge.Even Mr.M.R.Bhat in his book " Fundamentals of Astrology " also he gave the method of calculating both Gulika and Mandi.Mr.M.R.Bhat wrote many books and he translated also Varaha Mihira's Brihat Samhita.Till now I did'nt find anybody other than Mr.Bhat who has translated this monumental classic in English.Of course Mr.M.R.Bhat is no more now.

This is for your information.

With Sri Hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

 

Dear Ramdasraoji,

I was just pointing to Rao Nemani, the logic missing in the arguments advanced in favour of Mandi and Gulika being different. Many texts could have different interpretations, no doubt. The reason I was pointing it out was that if jataka Parijata is not to be considered( though I do not know why) and one is to stick to BPHS, then the fact of the shlokas having been collected from different sources makes it necessary to look at all the editions before arriving at any conclusions.Gulika/ Mandi rule over the time allotted to Saturn and since the duration is of the Day/ Night it is obvious that Mandi sphuta will always be related to Sun rise/set as well as the weekday and sphuta will be beginning of the period lorded over by Saturn. Similar calculations are indicated for other UpaGrahas of different planet. How the concept of Gulika spashta being at a place different than beginning of the Saturn's time zone has come is not clear to me. May be there is some other classic which mentions it unambiguously.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

Ramadas Rao [ramadasrao]Friday, November 28, 2003 8:48 PMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekhar Ji,

I agree with you that Parashara Maharshi in BPHS ( translated by Sri G.C.Sharma ) says that both Gulika and Mandi are the same.But in Kalidasa's Uttara Kalamrita,he is very clear that both Gulika and Mandi are different and he says as per Mandavya Rishi ,these are 2 most harmful upagrahas and considers both as different Upagrahas of Shani.Shloka-7 deals about calculation of Mandi where he says " On the week days reckoned from Sunday onwards multiply the Dinamana ( length of the day from Sun Rise to Sun Set ) respectively by Charu ( 26 ),Khari ( 22 ),Jata ( 18 ),Vayo ( 14 ),Nata ( 10 ),Tanu (6 ),and Roon ( 2) and divide the product by Khanga (30 ) and the quotient arrived at in Ghatikas and Palas etc.,taken as Ishta,compute the Lagna.The Lagna discovered will be MANDI SPHUTA.The 8th part of the Dinamana or that of Ratri mana is the period of each planet.When the birth is during the day,the lords of 1st 7 muhurtas beginning with Sunday onwards will respectively be the Sun.Moon,Mars,Mercury,Jupiter,Venus and Saturn.For night births,5th day lord will be taken into consideration. Here the words Charu,Khari etc.have been interpreted with the help of Katapayadi system."

Now Shloka-8 says " The 8th Muhurta has no lord.In the case of day births,the portion belonging to saturn is called GULIKA.In case of night births,the lord of the 1st to 7 Muhurtas will be the same order as stated above,but the lord of the 1st 7 Muhurtas are reckoned not from the lord of the week day chosen,but from that of the 5th from it.Here alos the portion belonging to Saturn will be taken as that of Gulika.But Gulika will be from the last portion of Saturn ie.,at the end of Ghatikas 10,6,2,26,22,28 and 14 respectively.

More about Gulika and Mandi can be read from The Astrological Magazine Nov.97 and March 98,editorial by Smt.Gayatri Devi Vasudev.

The Shlokas 7 and 8 from Uttara Kalamrita,I can not quote here as some Sanskrit letters are missing in my book.

I hope this clarifies the controversy about Gulika and Mandi.

With Sri Hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.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 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> >

[Guest guest]

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekhar Ji,

Here below I give the Shlokas given in Uttara Kalamrita of Kalidasa for Mandi :

caé> oair jqa vyae nq tnU ên< *umanaht<

oa<gaÝ< rivvasraid"iqkaStTkalme mNdj>,

raÇaemaRnmh>àma[mihhœTo{fàma[< Éve-

dkaR*azinvasraNtidvse vareñrat! o{fpa>.

cäruù khäri jaöä vayo naöa tanü rünaà dyumänähataà

khäìgäptaà raviväsarädighaöikästatkälame mandajaù|

rätrormänamahaùpramäëamahihtkhaëòapramäëaà bhave-

darkädyäçaniväsaräntadivase väreçvarät khaëòapäù||

The meaning of the above Shloka has already been given in my previous mail.

Now I give below also the calculation Shloka for Gulika which is mentioned in the same Uttara Kalamrita.( A letter has missed in sha..damsha ? ) :

ANTya<zae ih inrIñrStu guilk> zd<zkStiÚzae

varezaidh pNcmaidt Ay< o{fatÉe<ze Évet!,

Syata< mNdsutavuÉavitolaivTyevmUce muin-

maR{fVy> ikl yÇ taE invstaE tÇEv hainàdaE.

antyäàço hi niréçvarastu gulikaù çadaàçakastanniço

väreçädiha pancamädita ayaà khaëòätabheàçe bhavet|

syätäà mandasutävubhävatikhalävityevamüce muni-

rmäëòavyaù kila yatra tau nivasatau tatraiva hänipradau||

I hope this helps you.

With Sri Hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.

 

Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

 

Dear Ramdas Raoji,

I have no doubt that what you are saying is correct. My skepticism arises out of the fact that no body has so far quoted, from an ancient text, a shloka which clearly states that Gulika and Mandi are different, whereas Jataka Paarijaata clearly does indicate that they are one and so does the Chaukhamba edition of BPHS, at least to my knowledge.Even the Khairatilal edition used by R. Santanam does not mention separate calculation for Mandi. You know my horoscope and certainly understand the reason for my line of thinking. I have an unfortunate habit of trusting the ancient texts, but not necessarily the modern commentator's interpretation if it apparently goes against the logic of the text. I do not mean any disrespect to the commentators but this is the way I approach any complex subject.

M.R. Bhat was no doubt a renowned astrologer, but not having read his book, I can not comment on it. I have already said that perhaps Sanjay has some ancient text which does mention it and I am looking forward to his comments.

Till such time that Sanjay clarifies the situation, let us agree to hold our own views in the matter.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

Ramadas Rao [ramadasrao]Tuesday, December 02, 2003 12:04 PMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekar Ji,

Thanks for the mail.I am against your statements made about Gulika and Mandi.You have referred to Jataka Parijata which we have to respect but other ancient classics like Sarvartha Chintamani,Prashna Margam and Uttara Kalamrita have mentioned that both these are different.

I have a great respect for you and your knowledge.Even Mr.M.R.Bhat in his book " Fundamentals of Astrology " also he gave the method of calculating both Gulika and Mandi.Mr.M.R.Bhat wrote many books and he translated also Varaha Mihira's Brihat Samhita.Till now I did'nt find anybody other than Mr.Bhat who has translated this monumental classic in English.Of course Mr.M.R.Bhat is no more now.

This is for your information.

With Sri Hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.Chandrashekhar Sharma <boxdel wrote:

 

Dear Ramdasraoji,

I was just pointing to Rao Nemani, the logic missing in the arguments advanced in favour of Mandi and Gulika being different. Many texts could have different interpretations, no doubt. The reason I was pointing it out was that if jataka Parijata is not to be considered( though I do not know why) and one is to stick to BPHS, then the fact of the shlokas having been collected from different sources makes it necessary to look at all the editions before arriving at any conclusions.Gulika/ Mandi rule over the time allotted to Saturn and since the duration is of the Day/ Night it is obvious that Mandi sphuta will always be related to Sun rise/set as well as the weekday and sphuta will be beginning of the period lorded over by Saturn. Similar calculations are indicated for other UpaGrahas of different planet. How the concept of Gulika spashta being at a place different than beginning of the Saturn's time zone has come

is not clear to me. May be there is some other classic which mentions it unambiguously.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

 

Ramadas Rao [ramadasrao]Friday, November 28, 2003 8:48 PMvarahamihira Subject: RE: |Sri Varaha| Badhaka Discussion: Mandi (Gulika) or Kharesha to activate

` nmae naray[ay,

om namo näräyaëäya|Dear Chandrashekhar Ji,

I agree with you that Parashara Maharshi in BPHS ( translated by Sri G.C.Sharma ) says that both Gulika and Mandi are the same.But in Kalidasa's Uttara Kalamrita,he is very clear that both Gulika and Mandi are different and he says as per Mandavya Rishi ,these are 2 most harmful upagrahas and considers both as different Upagrahas of Shani.Shloka-7 deals about calculation of Mandi where he says " On the week days reckoned from Sunday onwards multiply the Dinamana ( length of the day from Sun Rise to Sun Set ) respectively by Charu ( 26 ),Khari ( 22 ),Jata ( 18 ),Vayo ( 14 ),Nata ( 10 ),Tanu (6 ),and Roon ( 2) and divide the product by Khanga (30 ) and the quotient arrived at in Ghatikas and Palas etc.,taken as Ishta,compute the Lagna.The Lagna discovered will be MANDI SPHUTA.The 8th part of the Dinamana or that of Ratri mana is the period of each planet.When the birth is during the day,the lords of 1st 7 muhurtas

beginning with Sunday onwards will respectively be the Sun.Moon,Mars,Mercury,Jupiter,Venus and Saturn.For night births,5th day lord will be taken into consideration. Here the words Charu,Khari etc.have been interpreted with the help of Katapayadi system."

Now Shloka-8 says " The 8th Muhurta has no lord.In the case of day births,the portion belonging to saturn is called GULIKA.In case of night births,the lord of the 1st to 7 Muhurtas will be the same order as stated above,but the lord of the 1st 7 Muhurtas are reckoned not from the lord of the week day chosen,but from that of the 5th from it.Here alos the portion belonging to Saturn will be taken as that of Gulika.But Gulika will be from the last portion of Saturn ie.,at the end of Ghatikas 10,6,2,26,22,28 and 14 respectively.

More about Gulika and Mandi can be read from The Astrological Magazine Nov.97 and March 98,editorial by Smt.Gayatri Devi Vasudev.

The Shlokas 7 and 8 from Uttara Kalamrita,I can not quote here as some Sanskrit letters are missing in my book.

I hope this clarifies the controversy about Gulika and Mandi.

With Sri Hari Vaayu Naama Smarana,

Ramadas Rao.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 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> >