Special nakshatras for 27 or 28 stars (Ramakrishna, Shiva...)

[Guest guest]

Dear Sanjay,

 

> no one can be born in Abhijit naká¹£atra.

 

Well, Abhijit nakshatra is 276 deg 40 min to 280 deg 53 min 20 sec. People CAN

be born in that.

 

> Please show me one horoscope where a pandit has written

> that the native is born in abhijit naká¹£atra.

 

That is because they use 27-star scheme, which is relevant for Vimsottari dasa

etc. If they make Sarvatobhadra chakra or Surya kalanala chakra or Chandra

kalanala chakra, they *will* show Moon in Abhijit for someone born with Moon

between 276 deg 40 min and 280 deg 53 min 20 sec.

 

* * *

 

Bottomline is this:

 

Abhisheka nakshatra is defined in classics as the 28th nakshatra from Moon. That

obviously refers to 28-star scheme including Abhijit. So, your idea of looking

at Vimsottari dasa lord of abhisheka nakshatra is invalid. For example, if Moon

is in Sravana and Abhijit is abhisheka nakshatra, its Vimsottari dasa lord is

undefined. I wonder if you are trying to cover your tracks by turning abhisheka

nakshatra into a 27-star thing.

 

* * *

 

> You are unable to differentiate between the physical 27

> and spiritual 28.

 

The 28 stars are used in the most physical of nakshatra chakras - Kota chakra

seen for physical issues. The 28 stars are also used in Surya kalanala chakra,

Chandra kalanala chakra, Sarvatobhadra chakra etc, from which several *physical*

results are described in classics.

 

You may have some creative and interesting theorization on 27 vs 28 stars, but

the issue is whether that is accurate...

 

> I am a mirror, I only reflect what shines on me.

 

Hmm, I look so different in this mirror! ;-)

 

Best regards,

Narasimha

 

Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam

Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpana

Spirituality:

Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

 

 

sohamsa , " Sanjay Rath " <sanjayrath wrote:

>

> oṠgurave namaḥ

>

> Dear Narasiá¹ha

>

> Again wrong learning ... no one can be born in Abhijit naká¹£atra. Please show

me one horoscope where a pandit has written that the native is born in abhijit

naká¹£atra. You are unable to differentiate between the physical 27 and

spiritual 28. I have explained this in some detail in the book bá¹›hat

naká¹£atra. Please go through that again

>

> I am a mirror, I only reflect what shines on me. Read your mails for the last

2 years or so, ever since I started the Jaimini Scholar program.

>

> Best Wishes

>

> Sanjay Rath

>

> WebPages: <http://srath.com/> http://srath.com

>

> Jaimini Scholar: <http://sohamsa.com/> http://sohamsa.com

>

> SJC: <http://.org/> http://.org

>

> Jyotish Digest, Books: <http://sagittariuspublications.com/>

http://sagittariuspublications.com

>

> sohamsa , " pvr108 " <pvr wrote:

>

> Namaste,

>

> > Secondly, the abhiśeka nakṣatra is the last nakṣatra,

> > be it the 27 or 28 naká¹£atra scheme that we use. You are

> > again wrong here

>

> To say that one can find special nakshatras using *either* 27-star scheme *or*

28-star scheme is not logical.

>

> Suppose one is born in Abhijit as per 28 star scheme and Uttarashadha as per

27 star scheme. You are saying that one can take *either* Uttarashadha *or*

Poorvashadha as the abhisheka nakshatra. That is illogical. There should be

*one* clearly defined abhisheka nakshatra. The fact that 28th star from the

birth star was specifically mentioned as abhisheka nakshatra in classics means

that 28-star scheme should be used and not 27-star scheme.

>

> > Thirdly, like the ÄrÅ«á¸ha, it will take a little time

> > for people to digest, so take your time.

>

> It is a fundamental principle of debate that a condescending and confident

tone does not make up for a lack of substance in one's argument.

>

> > There is no clear formula in jyotish

>

> Yes, there may be no perfect and clear formulas in Jyotish. But, if one is

using the correct building blocks and connecting them correctly, it should be

possible to have some well-defined principles that work in a good percentage of

cases (though not 100%) and do much better than random probabilities.

Unfortunately, the principle in your book does not do better than random

probabilities and hence not meaningful.

>

> That was my starting point and I tried hard to find some formula that is

common to those seven charts but not common in general. Despite hard work, I

could not find any. I only said that I prayed to Parasara after homam and a

formula struck to my mind which fits the bill nicely and laid it out with

examples. Instead of examining the formula, learned people focused on

surrounding issues and tried to misrepresent me by putting words in my mouth.

>

> At the end, all you manage to say is that " there is no clear formula in

jyotish " . Then why did you exhort me that there should be a " clear HYPOTHESIS " ?

Ironically, I did give a clear hypothesis. It is you who is saying " there is no

clear formula " .

>

> > time and again we have seen that every yoga has worked

> > in some charts and failed in others

>

> If a yoga that is supposed to show a king is present in 30% charts of kings

and 40% charts of normal people, the yoga is meaningless. Something is wrong.

>

> On the other hand, if a yoga that is supposed to show a king is present in 80%

charts of kings and only in 15% charts of normal people, the correlation is

signigicant and the yoga is meaningful.

>

> Thus, there is a way to analyze how good a yoga is, though no yoga works 100%.

>

> Best regards,

> Narasimha

>

> Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam

> Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpana

> Spirituality:

> Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

>

>

> sohamsa , " Sanjay Rath " <sanjayrath@> wrote:

> > oṠgurave namaḥ

> >

> > Dear Narasiá¹ha

> >

> > Firstly, that is the first volume of the book to show how the 27 naká¹£atra

work

> >

> > Secondly, the abhiśeka nakṣatra is the last nakṣatra, be it the 27 or

28 naká¹£atra scheme that we use. You are again wrong here

> >

> > Thirdly, like the ÄrÅ«á¸ha, it will take a little time for people to

digest, so take your time. There is no clear formula in jyotish and time and

again we have seen that every yoga has worked in some charts and failed in

others. It depends on how high we are aiming to go in this subject to learn the

*fine print* of the rishi

> >

> > Best Wishes

> >

> > Sanjay Rath

> >

> > WebPages: <http://srath.com/> http://srath.com

> >

> > Jaimini Scholar: <http://sohamsa.com/> http://sohamsa.com

> >

> > SJC: <http://.org/> http://.org

> >

> > Jyotish Digest, Books: <http://sagittariuspublications.com/>

http://sagittariuspublications.com

> >

> > sohamsa [sohamsa ] On Behalf Of

Narasimha PVR Rao

> > 15 September 2009 02:36

> > sohamsa

> > Re: Ramakrishna, Shiva and Abhisheka Nakshatra

> >

> > Namaste,

> >

> > > It is so simple and so obvious. I am really surprised

> > > that you could not see it. Now go back and work out the

> > > other examples

> >

> > Several new factors are introduced here, diluting the original principle. If

one keeps adding new parameters, one can explain any number of charts. If there

is a clearly and objectively defined principle that works for most of the great

saints/yogis and does not work for most of the normal people, that will mean

something.

> >

> > You talked about a clear hypothesis below ( " There must be a clear

HYPOTHESIS " ). I gave mine in clear objective terms. It is not something that

commonly occurs in many charts and is a rare combination. But it occurs in 7 top

notch yogi/saint charts I picked. What exactly is *your* " clear HYPOTHESIS " ,

regarding the use of abhisheka nakshatra to see " high level souls " that

experience high level spiritual realization?

> >

> > There seemed to be a clear hypothesis in the book, which did not work, but

now you seem to be implying that there is a lot of *fine print*.

> >

> > If you are able to lay down a hypothesis in clear objective terms, please do

so and we can then evaluate it.

> >

> > * * *

> >

> > The correlation that Vivekananda and Ramakrishna had AK owning the abhisheka

nakshatra was pointed out as some important factor. But, given how many normal

people have it and given that several spiritual greats do not have it, one

wonders whether that correlation has any significance at all. One also wonders

how many irrelevant correlations were incorrectly observed and highlighted by

modern Jyotish authors..

> >

> > Moreover, we are mixing up different spaces here. Abhisheka nakshatra is

defined in the space of 28 stars and Vimsottari lordship is in a space of 27

stars (Abhijit can be abhisheka nakshatra. It has a part of Uttarashadha lorded

by Sun and a part of Sravana lorded by Moon). To top it, AK is defined in a

space of 8 planets and not 9. Thus, there is mixing up of apples and oranges and

grapes here and that makes it is an ill-constructed principle. The fact that it

does not do well in practical evaluation does not help either.

> >

> > Best regards,

> > Narasimha

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

> > Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam

> > Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpana

> > Spirituality:

> > Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

> > Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> > Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

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

> >

> > sohamsa <sohamsa%40> , " Sanjay

Rath " <sanjayrath@> wrote:

> > >

> > > oṠgurave namaḥ

> > >

> > > Here is one example.

> > >

> > > Sarada Mata - born in cancer lagna with the lagneśa Moon,

compassionate and caring, as the chara ÄÂtmakÄÂraka in Uttara

PhÄÂlguṇī naká¹£atra. The abhiÅ›eka tÄÂrÄ is PÅ«rva

PhÄÂlguṇī which is ruled by Venus the natural significator of spouse

which is placed in the 7th house of marriage. Therefore the one who deserves the

abhiÅ›eka is her spouse Ã…Å¡rÄ« Ramakrshna Paramhaá¹Âsa. Venus is in

Capricorn and ÄÂtmakÄÂraka Moon is in the sammukha rÄÂÅ›i Leo forming

YÄÂnavanta Yoga. It is very obvious that she is very spiritual but her path to

spiritual enlightenment and moká¹£a comes from her spouse.

> > >

> > > It is so simple and so obvious. I am really surprised that you could not

see it. Now go back and work out the other examples

> > >

> > > Best Wishes, Sanjay Rath

> > >

> > > sohamsa <sohamsa%40>

[sohamsa <sohamsa%40> ] On Behalf

Of Narasimha P.V.R. Rao

> > > 14 September 2009 05:16

> > > sohamsa <sohamsa%40>

> > > Re: Ramakrishna, Shiva and Abhisheka Nakshatra

> > >

> > > Pranaam Sanjay,

> > >

> > > > However, there are many examples like Sarada Mata, Ramana Maharshi,

> > > > Swami Chandrasekhara Saraswati, Srila Prabhupada and Swami Sivananda,

> > > > which do not satisfy the criterion. All of them are definitely " high

level souls

> > > > having incarnated " .

> > >

> > > > [sJR::] It is not good to cast aspersions on the writings of someone

without

> > > > giving examples in detail.

> > >

> > > A factual statement accompanied by the names of spiritual giants who serve

as counter-examples to a principle mentioned by someone in print can hardly be

called an " aspersion " .

> > >

> > > > [sJR::] Depends on how many accurate charts you are using them and how

> > > > well you apply the principle.

> > >

> > > The principle you mentioned (AK being the abhisheka naksahtra lord) does

not require accurate data. As long as Moon remains in the same nakshatra and AK

remains the same, any amount of error in time does not change the result of

applying the principle in a chart.

> > >

> > > I mentioned five spiritual giants who do not have this and I gave the

birthdata of 6 normal people who have this.

> > >

> > > > There must be a CONTROL GROUP and then you have to give the results.

> > > > That way research is done. What is this sleep talking?

> > >

> > > I tested with seven reliable charts of spiritual giants as well as normal

people.

> > >

> > > You may call this " sleep talking " because you look at the background I

provided with suspicion, but the bottomline is that I tested my principle

thoroughly with charts. It is hardly sleep talking or sleep walking. On the

other hand, it is *your* principle (of AK being abhisheka nakshatra lord

indicating a high level soul) that fails in the charts of several spiritual

giants and wrongly applies to several normal people!

> > >

> > > Whether one is " sleep talking " or " awake talking " , what really matters is

that one should talk sense.

> > >

> > > > It is time to stop meditating and start working.

> > >

> > > Meditation and surrender to god are never obstructions to " working " and

research. They can complement it very well. No matter how one arrived at a

principle, one can be thorough and systematic in testing it!

> > >

> > > > [sJR::] Mapping naká¹£atra into varga?? You are too advanced. I

will leave it here.

> > >

> > > I did not map " nakshatra into varga " . I took the regular nakshatra chakra

(SarvatoBhadra Chakra), took the abhisheka nakshatra from AK (instead of Moon as

you did) and saw vedhas and aspects on it (instead of taking Vimsottari lord as

you did). Then I correlated with other influences in rasi and varga.

> > >

> > > > do you realise how you sound?

> > >

> > > I will sound differently to different people, depending on their karmic

debts with me and depending on the conditioning of their minds..

> > >

> > > Best regards,

> > > Narasimha

[Guest guest]

 

 

oṠgurave namaḥ

Dear Narasiá¹ha

You are still mixing two separate things – the material and

spiritual naká¹£atra. In have also shown how the material naká¹£atra 27

actually map to the triloka chakra = bhū loka, bhuva loka and svarga loka

The 28 naká¹£atra map into the 4 higher spiritual planes and

hence they are fomed as four kendra of 7 stars each.

Human beings born on planet earth are in bhū loka and their

janma naká¹£atra will have to be one of the 27

Why?

Because the human being shall die one day and naká¹£atra governs

the longevity as it assimilates the prÄṇa for the body. That is why vÄyu

tattva is related to naká¹£atra in pañcÄñga – for longevity

Please again go through the Bá¹›hat naká¹£atra before

confusing tow completely separate paradigms on naká¹£atra

Best Wishes

Sanjay Rath

WebPages: http://srath.com

Jaimini Scholar: http://sohamsa.com

SJC: http://.org

Jyotish Digest, Books: http://sagittariuspublications.com

 

 

 

 

sohamsa

[sohamsa ] On Behalf Of pvr108

18 September 2009 00:25

sohamsa

Special nakshatras for 27 or 28 stars (Re:

Ramakrishna, Shiva...)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Sanjay,

 

> no one can be born in Abhijit naká¹£atra.

 

Well, Abhijit nakshatra is 276 deg 40 min to 280 deg 53 min 20 sec. People CAN

be born in that.

 

> Please show me one horoscope where a pandit has written

> that the native is born in abhijit naká¹£atra.

 

That is because they use 27-star scheme, which is relevant for Vimsottari dasa

etc. If they make Sarvatobhadra chakra or Surya kalanala chakra or Chandra

kalanala chakra, they *will* show Moon in Abhijit for someone born with Moon

between 276 deg 40 min and 280 deg 53 min 20 sec.

 

* * *

 

Bottomline is this:

 

Abhisheka nakshatra is defined in classics as the 28th nakshatra from Moon.

That obviously refers to 28-star scheme including Abhijit. So, your idea of looking

at Vimsottari dasa lord of abhisheka nakshatra is invalid. For example, if Moon

is in Sravana and Abhijit is abhisheka nakshatra, its Vimsottari dasa lord is

undefined. I wonder if you are trying to cover your tracks by turning abhisheka

nakshatra into a 27-star thing.

 

* * *