Parampara Knowledge (Char Karka)

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sundeep and others,

 

> Or if they were, > were they just deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might as > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the air > and predict using spiritual strength, no?

 

Let us take a step back. Some of the SJC gurus and some other people at SJC were once using 7 chara karakas and arudha padas as taught by Sri KN Rao. Some of them were happy and found them working. When they came to SJC, they switched and found things working better. The bottomline is that their knowledge was incomplete before, but contained some useful stuff nevertheless.

 

I am pretty sure there are a lot of mistakes in our understanding even now. The bottomline is that our knowledge is incomplete now, but contains some useful stuff nevertheless.

 

One more thing: Not all knowledge is equally critical in our practical predictions.

 

Suppose I predict someone's marriage or promotion. Whether I see D-9 or D-10 for marriage is critical. Whether I see D-10 or D-12 for promotion is critical. Whether I use TA dasa with TP charts or not is critical. Whether I take the 6th or 7th house for marriage is critical.

 

But, if I evaluate the argalas on 7th house or UL incorrectly, it may be masked off in the other things I consider. If I use a wrong planet as DK or AmK or PK, again it may be masked off in the other things I consider. After all, we consider multiple factors and make a prediction when there is an agreement between several factors.

 

Thus, we use a lot of knowledge and techniques and some of them critical and some of them are less critical in our predictions. Our predictions are due to multiple factors and not just one.

 

Bottomline on the negative side: We have some incorrect knowledge. Though this may make some uncomfortable, this is the truth.

 

Bottomline on the positive side: We have a decent body of knowledge with a good degree of reliability and, when we combine multiple techniques, we are in a good shape a good percentage of times! The same is true with others outside our parampara also (like Sri KN Rao's followers), though the degree of correctness may be different with different techniques used by them.

 

> And relatedly, note that all this suddenly puts a lot of parampara > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats parampara > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that this > knowledge has been tested over the generations.

 

Apart from knowledge in a parampara getting corrupted in time, there is another issue - knowledge not from a parampara may be misunderstood to be from a parampara.

 

I subjectively found a lot of difference between some of Sanjay ji's initial teachings like Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa and some of his later teachings. The initial teachings were simple, logical and beautiful, but I was not convinced by several teachings later on. I had a strong suspicion that some of those teachings were Sanjay ji's own research/extrapolations. It seemed to me like several teachings that were not identified explicitly as either research or parampara knowledge may actually be his research.

 

I did not hide my suspicion from him. I mentioned it privately to him. On several occasions, I privately requested him to acknowledge whether a specific teaching was strictly from parampara or his own research/extrapolation. On each occasion, he just smiled and evaded the question. I told him that it is important to me and perhaps others to know which knowledge is from parampara and which knowledge is his own research and requested that he should clarify when teaching new things.

 

From his reaction, my subjective judgment was that he was mixing up the two, though some people may be assuming that anything from him not explicitly identified as research is from parampara. As a seeker of knowledge who has a good level of belief in the knowledge coming from Sri Achyutananda, this ambivalence from Sanjay ji made things particularly challenging for me.

 

 

> replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation), into the trash can,

Regarding drigdasa calculation, Sanjay ji privately told me several years back that he was taught drigdasa along with so many other dasas in one afternoon and that he just took very brief notes on so many things at once. He said there could have beem confusion or mistakes in drigdasa. Given this uncertainty, it is not impossible that what he finally taught is different from Achyutananda's teaching.

 

Parasara's verses on drigdasa were translated the same way by all translators I saw. And I have not deviated from Santhanam etc. I only supplemented it with a small rule related to interpretation. Thus, what I shared on drigdasa calculations is not just my own independent interpretation, but an interpretation of Santhanam and Sharma too.

 

Krishnaarpanamastu,NarasimhaDo a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homamDo Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpanaSpirituality: Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.netFree Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.orgSri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

sohamsa , "vedicastrostudent" <vedicastrostudent wrote:>> Dear Narasimhaji (and Vistiji),> While I cant question Narasimhaji's scholarship, it is clear that > these kind of issues question the very root of parampara knowledge > if not astrology itself. The silence (from SJC Gurus and Sanjayji) > surprises me.> > In scientific subjects, if a new theory comes up that contradicts > an old one, it must either be a generalization of the old theory > (e.g. Einstein's theory of relativity (new) is not in contradiction > with Newton's theory (old) at speeds far less than the speed of > light), or at the very least it must explain why the old theory > correctly predicted in some cases, or if the old theory didnt even > do that, then why the old theory's observations were wrong (since > those wrong observations supported the old theory).> > In this case, Narasimhaji has simply thrown the entire CK > replacement theory into the trash can. Which immediately begs the > question: So are Sanjayji's explanations of Alan Leo's and Mahatma > Gandhi's charts, in his AK paper, wrong? Narasimhaji, after your new > found knowledge, you must either conclude that the events in one's > life (i.e. total change of motivation and direction in life, not > present in most people's life) that Sanjayji has hitherto explained > using AK replacement, do not exist i.e Sanjayji was merely deluding > himself, OR that they are explained by some other astrological > combination. So far, in the new scheme of things, you havent > volunteered any astrological combination that explains ALL and ONLY > those events that have so far been explained by Sanjayji as CK > replacement. I quote directly from Sanjayji's paper, Section 3.1 -> "The carakaraka being replaced gives us an idea of the area of life > where a major unheaval is expected to occur while the slot, which is > falling vacant, needs the strong support of Lord Siva in the form of > a strong sthira karaka so that the concerned relation/aspect of life > is not disturbed or destroyed. <some omitted>. The spiritual impact > on the person is very strong if the AK, AMK or BK are involved..". > Please clarify your position on this.> > And relatedly, note that all this suddenly puts a lot of parampara > knowledge in question. An average person like me treats parampara > knowledge with respect because one naturally assumes that this > knowledge has been tested over the generations. As an example, how > do I build confidence that one day some one wont come up with a key > undiscovered precursor verse of Parasara that unambiguously says "In > all my remaining verses, when I say Rahu I actually mean Jupiter and > when I say Jupiter, I actually mean Rahu", and in doing so trashes > all current knowledge. The way I build that confidence is that I see > that the current knowledge WORKS IN PRACTICE. Since it WORKS IN > PRACTICE, I know that the probability of discovering such a verse is > next to nil. And Narasimhaji, now that you have thrown CK > replacement (and earlier Drig Dasa calculation), into the trash can, > it makes me wonder - Were Sanjay Rathji, his Guru Pt Kasinath > Rathji, or his Guru Pt Jagannath Rathji, and their Gurus, were they > all using this knowledge previously AT ALL or NOT? Or if they were, > were they just deluding themselves? Were they simply predicting > correctly because of their spiritual strength? If so, we might as > well all give up astrology, and throw some tea leaves up in the air > and predict using spiritual strength, no?> > Regards,> > Sundeep