Re :Re : Simple question about exactly what Mars symbolizes

[Guest guest]

OM SHRI RAGHAVENDRAAYA NAMAHOM SHRI LAKSHMI NRUSIMHAAYA NAMAHDear Sundeep,The word ' naiyaayika ' means logician which refers to Kuja.Similarly Budha makes one 'Mimamsaka '.So there is a clear difference between the two.I hope this helps you.With Shri Hari Vaayu Guru Naama Smarana,Ramadas Rao.On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 02:37:36 -0000 sohamsa wroteDear Ramadas Raoji,Thank you for your informative reply. All these discussions are only because I had earlier misinterpreted "Mars in 1/5 gives a logician". I think that misinterpretation was because the word "logician" was wrongly or somewhat imprecisely used. I doubt if the word "logician" is really what was meant, if you agree with the what Tijana and Gordon are saying is the true nature of Mars.ThanksSundeepsohamsa , "Ramadas Rao" wrote:>> OM SHRI RAGHAVENDRAAYA NAMAHOM SHRI LAKSHMI NRUSIMHAAYA NAMAHDear Sundeep,Apart from Sanjay Ji's translation on Jaimini Sutras,here are some more informations from another Scholar of Jaimini Sutras, Sri Iranganti Rangacharya :Regarding Guru alone in Karakamsha or in 5th gives 2 important results :> गुरूणां सर्ववित् ग्रान्थिकश;्चा> > gurûṇâṁ sarvavit grânthikaúcâ Here the learned Scholar made two pasrts ie., 1-15 Degrees -Guru makes one a versatile scholar,15-30 Degrees -Guru makes one a writer.> न वाग्मी> > na vâgmî> meaning Guru in such position does not make the native an orator.> विशिष्य वेयाकरणे वेद वेदांगविच्;च> viúiṣya veyâkaraṇe veda vedâṁgaviccameaning Guru makes the native a grammarian and scholar of Veda Vedangas.Now regarding Budha :> बुधेन मीमांसकः> > budhena mîmâṁsakaḥ> Budha in such position makes on Mimamsaka.Here the word Mimamsa is derived from the word "mama"meaning " determination, measure "It is one of six systems of Hindu Philosophy.Mimamsa is a science of judicial interpretation of the sacrificial portion ( Karma Kanda )of the Veda just as Vedangas is that of Jnana Kanda.Regarding Kuja :> कुजेन नैयायिकः> > kujena naiyâyikaḥ> Meaning Kuja in such position makes the native a logician or a lawyer.So it is very clear from the above aphorisms it is very clear about the results of Guru, Budha and Kuja.I hope this helps.With Shri Hari Vaayu Guru Naama Smarana,Ramadas Rao.On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:54:18 -0000 sohamsa wroteDear all,I was looking at some old posts, and there was a discussion about Mars vs Mercury. Sanjayji said Mars rules logic because it rules Nyaaya (one of the Shad darsanas). Narasimhaji countered that Mercury ruled logic, not Mars, because Mercury rules reasoning in general. He was not comfortable with the equation of Nyaaya to logic.Net result of the discussion was not stated. I am left with a clear understanding of Mercury (detailed weighing of all alternatives using reasoning and principles, even if a conclusion isnt reached). Mercury is different from Jupiter because only Jupiter has the brilliance and intuition (because it rules consciousness, awareness) to reach a level of understanding that Mercury cannot reach because reasoning cannot reveal new facts, only clarify existing ones. However, I am left a little bit in the dark about Mars. Everyone keeps emphasizing its sudden and rash nature, nothing else. But that does not characterize Mars fully does it? After all, in my understanding of Nyaaya in Hindi, Nyaaya means justice, doesnt it? And justice implies fairness (treating people equally based on principles rather than on personal attachment to them). Also, if Mars were only sudden, rash and decisive, why do I see its correlation to intelligence in places (e.g. Mars in the 5th gives intelligence, although accompanied with rashness). Also in Jaimini's Upadesa Sutras isnt there mention of Mars in Navamsa Lagna giving an "irascible logician" (Sanjayji's translation). Can someone give me some additional symbolism here? Mars is clearly not intelligent like Jupiter in terms of expansive consciousness/awareness. It isnt intelligent like Mercury in terms of reasoning and weighing alternatives. Then how is it intelligent? Is it fair? Is it practical? Is it focussed? Are these its claims on intelligence?Thanks,Sundeep>