On Kunda Correction - to Nitish

[Guest guest]

Hello Nitish,I really appreciated your comments because I believe more in the school of experimental ism myself, undoubtedly experimental way of proving a theory was introduced by Europe during the age of Enlightenment, but older cultures and their texts did not prescribe to this quantifiable way of verifying knowledge or theories. The modern age of course prescribes to it completely, and in my opinion that's how it should be. But interestingly I have been following this thread, and I was reading "Myths & Symbols of Vedic Astrology" by Bepin Behari and on p.112, I came across a statement he makes about sage Jaimini, the founder of the Mimamsa school of philosophy. "This philosophy is mainly concerned with the correct interpretation of rituals and the settlement of controversial points in regard to Vedic texts."As this forum is based

on Jaimini astrology, it seems to me that the knowledge provided here would adhere to the mandate outlined by sage Jaimini.Just my 2 cents,Nadia--- On Sun, 2/22/09, Michal Dziwulski <nearmichal wrote:Michal Dziwulski <nearmichalRe: Re: On Kunda Correction - to Vistisohamsa Received: Sunday, February 22, 2009, 5:00 PM

 

Hare Rama Krsna ||Dear Nitish,If you feel that you have made some groundbreaking finding then please present it in a scholarly way. Passing comments on this list is not a way to prove your point. They seam more like a vent for your frustration. You have already once said that you are leaving this discussion, and within a week you are raising the issue again.No one here is going to be convinced by a couple of paragraphs. Pandit Rath has produced so many articles, books, papers, recordings etc. etc. and still there are those that question (which is not a bad thing if done politely), so what to speak of a few casual comments by yourself?Respectfully,Michalyeeahoo_99 <nitish.arya@ gmail.com>sohamsa@ .comMonday, 23 February, 2009 2:30:37 AM Re: On Kunda Correction - to Visti

 

|| OM TAT SAT ||

Dear Visti,

 

You don't have a right to tell others not to do things they think

are right. It is better you learn to accept your mistakes, before

people stop pointing them out, otherwise you will fall harder than

anybody could help you.

 

If the ancient and modern rectification methods were really

sufficient for the purpose, there was never a need for Sanjay talking

about chaturpada of ardha-naadiamsa and vighatika, after the

prevalent use of Kunda and Pranapada has been shown to fail to

explain the octuplets. And this discussion also wouldn't be there.

 

There is no practical utility in trying to extract juice out of

poor old texts (read bones), without first acquiring inner

illumination. Don't you see that author of every age is just adding

to the list of books on rectification, without really pinning it down

once and for all. What do you think these people were doing, re-

inventing Jyotish or obscuring the truth by imprecise observations or

limiting their vision to interpretation of sutras in Jyotish texts ?

What makes you (and many others on this list) so upset, when a

reasonable application of Yoga principles to Jyotish, only serves to

bring out what all those authors failed to find out in their entire

lives studying Jyotish?

 

I hope you don't want to take us back to the dark ages, and the

only way forward comes through by advancement of applied knowledge

across schools of thought. For the re-inventing Jyotish part, do let

me know of one method in those ancient texts, that talks about Kunda

and Pranapada based BT Rectification using yoga principles. If

possible, please use your time in constructive analysis born out of

an actual need/realization, life is precious.

 

Don't worry about Rishis and transits, as they don't touchbase

with you as far as answering to the point about Kunda is concerned

unless you have achieved cosmic consciousness. Telling others to

study the crap that wasted your time could only be an old gimmick to

buy time. It is good only for your disciples, so that they are

eternally trying to catch up with you, unless wisdom dawns upon them.

 

Otherwise, if you are so much troubled in answering to my mails

that you find it simpler to diverge the focus, then simply say so.

This will save my time as I can spend it on worthwhile pursuits than

writing this kind of mail.

 

Since you have already gained self-sufficiency in life, you

needn't bear the responsibility for justifying every teaching that

proves to be wrong, even if it traces back to the fraternity of all

those who feel bound to carry the past and infect others with their

version of the knowledge, be it jyotish or yoga. And there is no

reason for anybody to pick on you, because your realization hasn't

failed you, its just a teaching that failed after you had hastily

copied and pasted it to 'tattva2.pdf' . I hope you didn't expect your

document to be the repository of eternal knowledge, because in that

case it requires serious updations.

 

Coming back to the point, Only those with a flaw in their

realization don't understand what I have put forth about Pranapada

and Kunda, and your mail is a tautology that proves that it includes

you. It would be wiser if you first try to arrange that your Jupiter,

Venus and Saturn breath fresh air.

 

As far as people like me are concerned, we carve our own path to

knowledge in all fields because we know that it is infinitely

manifested. This knowledge of Pranapada, that I have happened to

initiate is going to sprout as the only link between the BPHS and

Naadi, whether or not this effort is acknowledged.

 

Try and learn principles of yoga and meditation by the dint of

your own effort, so that, at the very least, you have a guarantee

that God will correct your mistakes and guide your actions and mails

henceforth.

 

Lastly, Knowledge is not to be sought from books, but from the

soul.

 

Regards,

Nitish

 

sohamsa@ .com, Visti Larsen <visti wrote:

>

> ??? ??? ?????

> Dear Nitish, Namaskar.

> Please don't invent new methods to compensate for what you don't

> understand. If everyone did this then we would really be at loss.

> Better is to study the slokas related to rectification and then try

to

> understand what the Rishis wanted you to know... that way you won't

have

> to invent new principles, which people are very susceptible to

during

> this current Guru transit.

> References: Last chapter of Nashta Jataka by Mukunda Daivagya (make

sure

> to read the Hindi and Sanskrit). Also Sarvartha Chintamani has a

> detailed exposition on all the rectification techniques used in

Prasna

> and Natal charts in its first chapter (i believe), just before it

speaks

> of Pachakadi Sambandha. It may not be easy to translate, but thats

much

> better than reinventing Jyotish.

> Yours sincerely, Visti Larsen

> ------------ --------- --------- --------- ----

> Jyotish Guru (Vedic Astrologer)

> www: http://srigaruda. com

> @: visti

>

> yeeahoo_99 skrev:

> >

> > || OM TAT SAT ||

> > Dear list and Visti,

> > The article "tattva2" at your site, refers to using Kunda in

> > trines/7th to D-1 lagna/lagna lord to cause creation. In the case

of

> > 8 babies born in L.A. in 5 minutes, Kunda moves from 3degPi to

> > 28degCn in 5 minutes from 10:43-10:48 am, thus coming in trines to

> > lagna/lagna lord only for 2 minutes out of 5. So, Kunda remains in

> > trines to Aries lagna for 1 minute and 7th from Mars for 1 minute.

> >

> > This example shows the D-1 usage of Kunda for BT Rectification as

> > "plain wrong". It seems that the only way to reconcile the

> > differences with the BT data is by checking Kunda Sign in trines/

7th

> > to D-60 lagna sign, where the lagna moves almost as fast as Kunda,

> > thereby remaining in trines to it for much longer duration

compared

> > to D-1.

> >

> > Also, as far as D-1 lagna is concerned, the creation has already

> > happened as the body of the baby is very much in place, so Kunda

has

> > nothing to do with the creation of Physical body. All that Kunda

can

> > refer to is timing the event of umbilical cord cutting, and

thereby

> > fix the D-60 lagna.

> >

> > Note that using Kunda to fix D-60 lagna is a method much grosser

> > than using Pranapada lagna as illustrated in my earlier posts.

With

> > this, I think some serious work should be done on BT

rectification on

> > this list. Anybody interested could mail me.

> >

> > Regards,

> > Nitish

> >

> >

>

 

 

 

Get the world's best email - Xtra Mail

 

 

Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!