Justification of Divisional Longitudes (Transit of Nakshatra..)

[Guest guest]

Namaste To All Concerned :

 

PVR is fully justified in supporting the notion of divisional

longitudes. When one ponders over the exact method of making

divisionals, it becomes apparent. In my Kundalee software, I have used

the idea of divisional longitudes in determination of phenomena like

exaltation & c in all divisionals exactly in the manner enunciated by

PVR.

 

Mr Nitish puts this problem wrongly : " The question here was how do you

justify D-1800 (the 30 longitudinal divisions of your D-60 chart in your

software, that require 1800 divisions in Rashi chart) ? " He forgets

that 30 longitudinal divisions of D-60 chart does not make a D-1800

chart. Divisional charts are not made in this fashion. Half of the

famous 16 divisionals follow a uniform mechanism of making these

divisionals, while the remaining half follow non-uniform mechanisms. It

is, therefore, a moot point how to make those divisionals whose method

of construction has not been clarified in ancient texts, eg D-44 or

D-59. Equal division of rashi chart cannot be used to make all

divisionals. Software developers should address this important aspect

of non-traditional divisionals.

 

Mr Nitish should avoid words like " Who gave you that 'scholarly' idea ?

Has anybody ever heard of anything more than D-300 anyways ? "

 

Is the idea of D-256 " scholarly " just because some Western astrologer

has promoted it ? PVR has not put forth the idea of any new type of

divisionals. He is simply stressing the need of mathematical accuracy. I

also thank PVR for stressing that entire signs are not bhavas, many

astrologers are not using this correct approach.

 

But I differ with PVR on two counts :

 

(1)

Although phenomena like exaltation & c must be determined in all

divisionals with longitudinal accuracy as PVR says, the astrological

(phalita) benefit of exaltation or debility is experienced by the entire

BHAAVA in any divisional and not merely by the point of exaltation. I

hope PVR will not differ on this point.

 

(2) But will certainly differ on next point, PVR says :

<<<

" Planets of rasi chart are physical points in zodiac that can be

correlated to physical objects. Planets of navamsa (and other divisional

charts) may not have a physical representation, but they are abstract

*points* that are placed at various positions in the same zodiac! If

Moon in navamsa is in Libra, the question arises " where in Libra " .

>>>

 

If planets of other divisionals are merely " abstract points " instead of

being physical planets, why the planets of D-1 cannot be the same, at

least for research purpose ?? After all, astrology is not a branch of

physical sciene and characteristics of astrological planets do not allow

any affinity with physical planets. Physical planets are characterized

with physical properties like mass. But such properties cannot be

imagined in astrological planets, whose astrological powers are not

related to their physical dimensions. Some modernisers want to expel

Rahu and Ketu from astrology, but they forget that Sun is six million

times as massive as Mercury.

 

PVR has given the option of many types of Vimshottari years. Had he

provided such options in adding or substracting longitudinal offsets to

all planets, I would not have wasted years on making a different

software.

 

I know the present mood of a majority of internet astrologers and I am

not hopeful of any meaningful dialogue in near future. But I know there

is no alternative. I worked with physical planets earlier, but had to

switch over to " abstract " planets later. The criterion of truth in

astrology is not physical planet but astrological accuracy.

 

-Vinay Jha

====================== ====

vedic astrology , " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao " <pvr

wrote:

>

> Namaste friends,

>

> Parasara mentioned planets in exaltation in divisional charts. Even in

tradition, we consider it. For example, a planet that is debilitated in

rasi and exalted in navamsa is considered to have neecha bhanga.

>

> How can one define exaltation of a planet in a divisional chart,

without having the concept of longitude in the divisional chart???

>

> Unfortunately, people use many approximations to the teachings of

rishis today. They assume that planets are exalted in entire signs. But

that is NOT what Parasara taught. Moon is in exaltation only in the

first 3 deg of Taurus and not entire Taurus. Mercury is in exaltation

only the first 15 deg of Virgo and not entire Virgo.

>

> In order to see if Moon or Mercury is in exaltation in navamsa or

another divisional chart, one MUST know the longitude of the planet in

that divisional chart. It is not enough to know that Moon is in Taurus.

One needs to know if he is in the first 3 deg of Taurus! If there is

nothing called divisional longitudes, one cannot talk about exaltation

of planets in divisional charts such as navamsa.

>

> * * *

>

> When teaching the special graha drishtis based on " bhavas " , Parasara

taught that Mars has full aspect on 4th and 8th houses from him, Jupiter

on 5th and 9th houses from him and Saturn on 3rd and 10th houses from

him. Then he clarified further and gave clear formulas to quantify the

extent of aspect from a planet on various points of the zodiac. The

formulas clearly establish that 90-120 deg from Mars is the 4th house

from Mars, 210-240 deg from Mars is the 8th house from Mars, 120-150 deg

from Jupiter is the 5th house from Jupiter and so on.

>

> Unfortunately, as I said before, people use many approximations to the

teachings of rishis today. If Mars is at 27Ge43, they assume that 4th

house from Mars is entire Virgo. But that is NOT what Parasara taught.

If Mars is at 27Ge43, then 27Vi43-27Li42 is the 4th house from Mars.

>

> (Note: This also explains why Parasara recommended making separate

bhava chakras from lagna, Sun, Moon etc. If entire signs are bhavas, one

can make one chart and keep rotating it. There is no need to really make

different charts. But, if house of a planet depends on the longitude of

reference and longitude of planet, then it makes sense to make multiple

charts and keep them handy.)

>

> Now, Parasara mentioned placement of planets in divisional charts in

houses from various references. As a simple example, there is a

reference to a planet placed in various divisions in a quadrant from

" svaarudha " . As the 1st, 4th, 7th and 10th houses from a reference

depend on its exact longitude, one cannot determine if Sun in D-9 or

Moon in D-10 or Jupiter in D-12 is in a quadrant from " svaarudha " unless

one knows the exact longitudes of Sun in D-9 or Moon in D-10 or Jupiter

in D-12.

>

> * * *

>

> When we say that Moon in navamsa is in Libra, it is not a special

abstract Libra. It is the same Libra that was described by Parasara in

the chapter on rasis. Planets of rasi chart are physical points in

zodiac that can be correlated to physical objects. Planets of navamsa

(and other divisional charts) may not have a physical representation,

but they are abstract *points* that are placed at various positions in

the same zodiac! If Moon in navamsa is in Libra, the question arises

" where in Libra " .

>

> In fact, Parasara did not really teach making navamsa chart, dasamsa

chart etc. He taught finding the " rasi Sun " , " rasi Sun " , " navamsa Sun " ,

" navamsa Moon " , " dasamsa Sun " , " dasamsa Moon " etc as points in the

zodiac containing 12 rasis.

>

> * * *

>

> If one studies Parasara carefully or peruses the above pointers with

intellectual honesty, one can see why divisional longitudes are

justified and needed.

>

> Finding them is straight-forward. Suppose Moon is at 22Ar00

physically, i.e. in rasi chart. As 20Ar00-23Ar20 is mapped to Libra in

navamsa, Moon in navamsa is in Libra. As 3 deg 20 min of rasi chart is

mapped to 30 deg in navamsa chart, each deg of rasi chart is mapped to 9

deg in navamsa. Moon is advanced by 2 deg in the 3 deg 20 min physical

arc of Aries that is mapped to Libra in navamsa. Multiplying by 9, he is

at 18 deg in Libra.

>

> * * *

>

> Some people may be uncomfortable that this opens a lot of messy

questions. For example, do we find AK based on longitudes in rasi chart

only or use longitudes in divisional charts? Do we find nakshatras,

sarvatobhadra chakra, nakshatra dasas etc based on longitudes in rasi

chart only or use longitudes in divisional charts?

>

> If one does not think straight or research thoroughly, it is easy to

draw wrong conclusions. There is no hurry to answer these questions. It

is possible that nakshatras or chara karakas found based on a divisional

chart have a subtler purpose but we need to find them based on rasi

chart alone for the purposes we are used to.

>

> In any case, rejecting the concept of divisional longitudes altogether

because there are some unresolved and complicated questions that perhaps

need more study, is akin to placing the cart before the bullock. It

should be the other way around. If there is clear justification for

divisional longitudes, accept them first and then consider the questions

that rise and try to answer them.

>

> * * *

>

> Anybody who honestly studies the two research articles titled

" Stationary Planets in Transit " and " Transit of Nakshatra Dasa Lord: A

Specific Principle " has to wonder whether such specific *longitudinal*

correlations between transiting planets in rasi chart and natal planets

in *divisional* charts can be mere coincidences.

>

> Please note that I am not offering circumstantial evidence alone. In

addition to this circumstantial evidence, I gave theoretical

justification above.

>

> Best regards,

> Narasimha

> -

> Free Jyotish Software, Free Jyotish Lessons, Jyotish Writings,

> " Do It Yourself " ritual manuals for short Homam and Pitri Tarpana:

> http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

> Films that make a difference: http://SaraswatiFilms.org

> Spirituality:

> Jyotish writings: JyotishWritings

> -

>

> , " yeeahoo_99 " nitish.arya@ wrote:

> >

> > || OM TAT SAT ||

> > Namaskar Narasimha,

> >

> > It is futile to use a car that has no steering, irrespective of

how good the design is.

> >

> > The question here was how do you justify D-1800 (the 30

longitudinal divisions of your D-60 chart in your software, that require

1800 divisions in Rashi chart) ? Actually your software divides D-144

also in 30 parts so that is something like D-4320 - sounds more like an

apartment number !

> >

> > Please defend that first. Who gave you that " scholarly " idea ?

> > Has anybody ever heard of anything more than D-300 anyways ?

> >

> > Regards,

> > Nitish

> >

> > , " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao " <pvr@>

wrote:

> > >

> > > Namaste,

> > >

> > > Most charts used were rectified based on several events and

several techniques. Of course, one has the right to remain skeptical.

> > >

> > > Inquisitive students of Jyotish may note that the coincidences are

too good to be random. If you look carefully, multiple events are used

with several charts in the examples. If you think that D-60 lagna was

doctored for one exmaple, what about the others based on the same chart?

> > >

> > > For example, examples 10, 22 and 23 use the same chart. The native

of the chart is a famous astrology savant and the D-60 lagna was

rectified by him (and me too). Isn't it very interesting that the dasa

lord closely aspected the D-60 longitude of a planet with a strong link

to the 7th house by less than 1 deg at the time of his marriage and

closely aspected the D-60 longitudes of two planets having a strong link

to the 5th house by 2 deg at the time of birth of both his children? A

very close aspect on vital planets by dasa lord at the time of 3

important events! I have shown such close correlations in several

examples.

> > >

> > > * * *

> > >

> > > In my personal opinion, the last two articles on the transit of

stationary planets and dasa lord's transit are my best contributions to

Jyotish research.

> > >

> > > In any case, I am not here to sell anything. For a while, I will

defend my work as a scholar. After that, I will move on. Whether some

fruits will come from this seed I sowed or not and who enjoys the fruits

does not concern me, as it is not in my hands. As I said at the end of

the article, " If you like this knowledge, please feel free to refine it,

use it and spread it. If not, please leave it. "

> > >

> > > Those interested in the article may download the FREE PDF at:

> > >

> > > http://VedicAstrologer.org/articles

> > > " Transit of Nakshatra Dasa Lord: A Specific Principle "

> > >

> > > * * *

> > >

> > > I gave multiple examples of each type of event (e.g. marriage,

childbirth, going abroad etc). As I gave Ramana Maharshi's realization

of Self as an example, I wanted to give another example that uses the

same parameters, to demonstrate consistency like with other events.

While the dates when yogis like Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Swami

Vivekananda, Swami Sivananda, Aurobindo etc realized Self are not known,

I happened to have that data for a contemporary yogi who happened to

reach Nirvikalpa samadhi and have his permission to share his birthdata.

Hence I shared that example. I gave the theoretical definition of

Nirvikalpa samadhi as some Jyotish students may not know the term. Looks

like there is a lot of discussion on that definition rather than the

Jyotish content of my research article.

> > >

> > > Self is indescribable and so is realization of Self. However, it

is not without a reason that rishis attempted to describe concepts and

things associated with it. Though theoretical discussions are neither

necessary not sufficient for Self-realization, they can be helpful to

some seekers.

> > >

> > > However, instead of using a list dedicated to Jyotish for

discussing varieties of samadhi and what they mean, I invite anybody

interested in a discussion to join where I

discuss matters related to spirituality in depth.

> > >

> > > Best regards,

> > > Narasimha

> > >

> > > , " utkal.panigrahi "

<utkal.panigrahi@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Agreed, Studies based on unconfirmed birth charts, applying

finer D

> > > > charts could be misleading.

> > > >

> > > > regards,

> > > > Utkal

> > > >

> > > > , " yeeahoo_99 " <nitish.arya@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > || OM TAT SAT ||

> > > > > Namaskar Narasimha,

> > > > >

> > > > > Am afraid that your article lacks scriptural authority and

proper

> > > > analysis. It is based on your unexplained " longitudes of planets

in

> > > > divisional charts " that looks like more of a mathematical

gimmick than a

> > > > REALITY.

> > > > >

> > > > > Essentially, You are attempting to divide what is already a

division

> > > > and exists as a unit (Shastyamsa). And then comparing it with

what

> > > > actually exists, i.e. longitude of a planet in Transit.

> > > > >

> > > > > What it really means (am not counting the seconds part, just

the 30

> > > > imaginative degrees of divisional longitudes your software

shows) is

> > > > that you are talking about a subdivision which is 1/30th of the

D-60

> > > > division, i.e. D-1800.

> > > > >

> > > > > While on one hand, you write in your article that research is

needed

> > > > to completely unearth the significance of D-60, OTOH, you are

pushing

> > > > your rather misleading suggestion of " divisional longitudes of

planets "

> > > > i.e. D-1800. Doesn't that double-standard remind us of

PoorvaBhadra

> > > > constellation ?

> > > > >

> > > > > Vivekananda wrote that Truth or true knowledge is never

inconsistent

> > > > with scriptures and analytic and inferential science. It is

always an

> > > > addition and not contradictory to existing true knowledge.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thus, many of your research-things that are based on

" divisional

> > > > longitudes of planets " are not Jyotish but comparable to dark

matter

> > > > theory, which would never be found in REALITY!

> > > > >

> > > > > * * *

> > > > >

> > > > > Here is a bit of diversion I came across in your article.

> > > > >

> > > > > While I understand that you might not be familiar with yoga,

your

> > > > sanskrit knowledge is good by your own evaluation. In this view,

here is

> > > > an excerpt from your article:

> > > > >

> > > > > " Nirvikalpa Samadhi is a state where I-ness (individualized

Self)

> > > > merges back into Brahman/Aatman (undifferentiated Self or the

Supreme

> > > > Cosmic Essence) and all objectification and duality ceases.

Observer,

> > > > observed and observation merge into one, without any

differentiation

> > > > whatsoever.... "

> > > > >

> > > > > If there is really no difference, Could you please illucidate

why you

> > > > won't use the specific term " Brahman-Sthiti " and instead use a

> > > > non-positive connotation " Nirvikalpa Samadhi " ?

> > > > >

> > > > > Meanwhile, here is a helpful hint from the now better-known

Yogi Sri

> > > > Yukteswar Giri:

> > > > >

> > > > > " As prophets are sent on earth to help men work out their

physical

> > > > karma, so I have been directed by God to serve on an astral

planet as a

> > > > savior, " Sri Yukteswar explained. " It is called Hiranyaloka or

> > > > 'Illumined Astral Planet.'... No one can enter Hiranyaloka

unless he has

> > > > passed on earth beyond the state of sabikalpa samadhi into the

higher

> > > > state of nirbikalpa samadhi.... "

> > > > >

> > > > > It implies that Nirbikalpa/Nirvikalpa is a high-spiritual

state,

> > > > nothing more than a passport to enter another high Astral Plane,

and not

> > > > equivalent to " Brahman-Sthithi " as You are stating.

> > > > >

> > > > > If you are convinced with the explanation of Sri Yukteswar,

you

> > > > needn't reply to this non-astrological diversion.

> > > > >

> > > > > Thanks and Regards,

> > > > > Nitish

> > > > >

> > > > > , " Narasimha P.V.R. Rao "

pvr@

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Namaste,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Another research article on Jyotish is available for a free

download

> > > > at

> > > > > >

> > > > > > VedicAstrologer.org/articles

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The article is titled " Transit of Nakshatra Dasa Lord: A

Specific

> > > > Principle " . It contains an original principle that is simple and

> > > > replicable, illustrated with 36 practical examples. A small

excerpt from

> > > > the beginning of the article is reproduced below.

> > > > > >

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

> > > > > > Introduction

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nakshatra dasas such as Vimsottari dasa are very important

for

> > > > timing events. Nakshatra dasa lord is a very important planet

and he has

> > > > a strong influence on the mind of a native at the time. Vedic

> > > > Astrologers have traditionally used the nakshatra dasa lord's

transit in

> > > > various ways, e.g. houses occupied from natal Moon and natal

lagna and

> > > > aspects on natal positions in rasi chart.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I found an interesting correlation between the longitude of

> > > > nakshatra dasa lord in transit and divisional longitudes of

natal

> > > > planets. I want to share a specific principle based on the

correlation I

> > > > found. Please note that this principle is not intended to

replace the

> > > > techniques that Vedic astrologers traditionally employ, but

meant to

> > > > augment them.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Principle

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Maharshi Parasara defined 16 divisional charts. While

mentioning the

> > > > matters seen in each divisional chart, he said shashtyamsa

(D-60) shows

> > > > ÃÆ' ¢Ã¢ €š ¬Ã… " everythingÃÆ'

¢Ã¢ €š ¬Ã¯ ¿ ½. In the vimsopaka bala of

dasa varga

> > > > and shodasa varga, shashtyamsa is given a higher weightage than

even the

> > > > rasi chart. It seems like a key chart. The correlation I found

between

> > > > the longitude of nakshatra dasa lord in transit and longitudes

of natal

> > > > planets involves D-60.

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

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Happy New Year,

> > > > > > Narasimha

>