Vargas are NOT to be read as Rashi

[rathore]

Dear Members,

This is an enhanced re-post of my posts from the following thread to give it proper categorization and searchable independently.

http://www.lightonvedicastrology.com/ph ... 6&start=25

Dear Khoo ji,
I am responding to Dr. Suresh Chandra's tidbits on user request regarding treating Vargas as Rashi:

Khoo Hock Leong wrote:
Parashara, for example, states that in the Karkamsha chart, the Sun and Rahu placed together and aspected by Mars, bereft of any other aspect, ruin the native’s houses, whereas these two together aspected by Mercury alone cause no harm

1. Atmakarak is a Jaimini concept and so is Karakamsa, so here any drishti/aspect mentioned is Rashi drishti. Whether one uses Karakamsa Lagna in Navamsa itself or interpolates it to Rashi chart the drishti/aspect will remain Rashi otherwise one is mixing systems. So in this case considering Graha drishti in Vargas is incorrect.

Khoo Hock Leong wrote:
Similarly, if a planet aspect first bhava of Lagna chart or Dreshkona or Navamsha or Dwadamsha or any other main divisional chart than also that planet becomes best karaka.

2. There are no Bhavas and Drishti in Vargas and the above translation is corrupt (as it mentions Bhavas) as well as incomplete. This is probably Dr. Suresh's own modified version. I am posting the screenshot of the actual Sloka translation below from BPHS Santhanam edition:

BPHS1.png

BPHS2.png

2a. The Sloka is talking about degrees of a planet (without explicitly stating it) for the ease of the Astrologer. All this Sloka means is if a Planet is very close to Ascendant degrees in the Ascendant or the 7th house (from which it aspects the Ascendant) then a Raj Yoga is formed. This is because we know a planet close to Ascending degrees has greater impact. Please create any chart with a planet conjunct Ascending degrees in 1st house or 7th house and you will see it shows up in rising of all Shadvargas or 7th from it i.e. it has much impact on the native. When the Sloka says "aspecting by one and same planet" it means from the 7th house aspecting (in Rashi only) the Ascendant. This is because Lagna falls in some Navamsa, Drekkana, Trimsamsa, Hora, Dwadasmsa but all these amsas are still in the Rashi Chart only. In fact they exist at the exact Ascending degrees which is what is aspected by a planet from 7th with an exact aspect. I can add an example if required.

2b. Notice the Sloka also says "Full, Partial, one fourth " aspect which is one of the "incomplete" parts not included by Dr. Suresh. Now, how can there be a "Partial OR one fourth" aspect in Vargas? People who consider aspects in divisional "charts" have no choice but the consider only "Full" aspect. So obviously it is talking about aspect in Rashi.

2c. Another "incomplete" part that Dr. Suresh skipped (included in the Screenshot earlier) is Sri Santhanam's comment on the Sloka where he says: Aspects are referred to in the divisional charts here. I am unable to fully conceive the logic in aspects in divisional charts for the sage himself referred to longitudinal aspectual evaluations in an earlier chapter. Without commenting further on this controversial aspect I leave it at that, accepting my limitations to explain this fully.
The controversy here is that Parashara is contradicting himself. In any case, the actual meaning is explained above and Parashara is NOT contradicting himself.

Continued...

[rathore]

Khoo Hock Leong wrote:
Similarly, in the Saaravali, Drishti Phaladhyaaya, Kalyan Verma describes result of mutual Drishti of Aun, Mercury and Venus.

3. Saravali is a compilation of various Rishi horas . Now we all know the great Rishi Viswamitra. Here is story of such Astronomically impossible aspects (in the present era) which Dr. Suresh has not considered or isn't aware of.

In the times of yore, when Viswamitra began to have a fierce competition with Vashistha, the son of Brahma, he perfomed a terrible penace. He was desirous of becoming equal to him. One time, when he was engaged in austerities, Narada approached him and was formally welcomed by him. When Narada was seated on a beautiful seat then, upon being asked by him (Viswamitra), with a smiling face, Narada told him about the latest happenings. If Viswamitra desires to attain equality with Vasishtha, then first and foremost, he must compose a detailed Hora text. Our guru (Vasishtha) has written an elaborate Hora text. (If he wants to compete Vasishtha, then) the other (Viswamitra) should first write a Hora text that is is as much elaborate (as Vasishtha Hora). I have seen a few people wearing tiger skin and carrying walking sticks, sitting outside Vasishtha's ashrama and talking with each other in this way. I do not know about any other new happenings which you should hear of. After listening to these words of his, the great minded Vishwamitra (said): I have heard that the Hora of Vasishtha has eighteen thousand Slokas. If the Vasishtha Hora is only this large, what is so great about it? If you agree, I will compose another Hora which will shed light on all kinds of results. It will have thirty six thousand Slokas.

Having listened to these words of his, Narada smiled and again said the following to him, who wanted to compete but was not capable of it. O the one observing good vows! I don't know how you are going to implement this task, because you don't know the Jyotishmati vidya like Vasishtha. In the appendices of Atharva Veda, there is a great upanishad. Right now, it is known to Brahma and Prajapati Daksha, Marichi, Angiras, Atri, Vasishtha, Pulaha, Pulastya, Bhrigu, Kratu and no one else. Lord Skanda, who acquired the knowledge of this text himself (through meditation), pleased with the penace of Brahma, granted it to him. It is the same text which a few people of the Satya Loka call Skanda Hora. Brahma gave it to his son Daksha since he was very dear to him. Prompted by love for his brothers, he gave it to others. But he did not gave it to me (even though I was also his brother) since I roam around (and do not stay in one place). If you are able to learn it from somewhere then your vow shall be fulfilled and your deeds will be completed. May you have wellness in all ways. I have rested. Having said this and having taken his leave, saga Narada stood up. How can I acquire the Jyotishmati knowledge? From where can I get it? Thinking in this way, Viswamitra stood there with an anxious mind.

While he was in this state and fifteen days had elapsed, some old Brahmin arrived there with a book in his hands. Kaushika (Viswamitra) worshipped him by offering water to drink and water to wash his feet etc and said :- Please be seated and gave up his seat for him. After accepting his worship, he waited for a muhurta (48 min approx) to get rid of his tiredness from traveling, and then said the following. I found this great upanishadic text named Jyotishmati while I was traveling on the road and had been sitting in the roots of a tree somewhere. I do not know what topic is discussed in this book. I know only the name of this book by looking at the ending of the chapters. What shall I do with this book? I will give it to you, a learned Brahmin, if you agree. Hearing these words of his, Vishwamitra was very pleased. After he left, he took the book in hand and looked at it. Considering this to be an event destined for the future, he collected those pages which had been randomly arranged, and bound them at one place them with threads. Viswamitra did a lot of hard work (to arrange the text which) contained beautiful words at some places and grave words at other places. It contained sweet words at all other places.

This text came to be known as Kaushiki Hora in due course of time. It contained thirty six thousand Slokas. That Hora (i.e. Viswamitra hora) was not fully correct because of Viswamitra's jealousy towards the lustrous and calm son of Brahma named sage Vasishtha. Moreover, he composed Viswamitra hora without knowning Ganita Skanda. Therefore, the next deviated from reality at some places, not all.

Continued...

[rathore]

In this way, by finding the text to be correct at some places and incorrect at some other places, the disciples of Vasishtha began to laugh this is what we have heard (says sage Sounaka). Thus it became well known that that disciples of Vasishtha as well as some other people are laughing after looking at the Hora text created by Viswamitra. Listening to it, Viswamitra was troubled and was thinking about it on the road when Maya, the disciple of Sun, appeared. From him he came to know that some things (he had mentioned in his text) were impossible according to the rules of planetary motion. He lamented saying my words have become untrue. He concluded - This is cannot be the true Jyotishmati knowledge, some disciple of Vasishtha has handed it over to me to fool me. Regaining his equanimity, he made a resolution - "I will make the planets move as I have mentioned in my text."

With a rigid resolution and with breath under control, he began to perform a severe penance. The entire world (became too hot and thus) was miserable because of his penance. During this time, Lord Vishnu, being requested by Gods including Brahma and Shiva appeared in front of him. He said to him, O Sage! What is your resolution? Tell me. I will fulfill it. With folded hands he (Viswamitra) said to him: O Lord! O Janardana! If you have come to grant me a boon, then grant me this one boon even if it is a childish one, O Hari! Going by whatever conclusions, even if they are false, whatever I have stated in my text, let the planets move according to that. If you are pleased with this long penance of mine, then grant me this much in my first boon. Also listen to me about what else (I want). Those who reject my sayings considering them wrong, let their words lose significance. Let this desire of mine be fulfilled. (My next wish is) - Even though my words (told in Viswamitra Hora) are false, if someone speaks the same with confirmed trust that it is true, then his words should gain repute and fame in the world (and he should not be ridiculed). Grant me these three boons. Without doubt you have come to grants me boons. You are extolled by the rishis by all their might.

Upon being said so, the lotus eyed lord said: Dear great one! Throw away this ignorance. Not a single untruthful word came out of you. (It being so, now) What you have to do with the motion of planets such as Surya (Chandra, Mars...) etc... The way in which you have ascertained the motion of the planets in your Hora, the planets moved according to that in some previous kalpa. They will also have that motion in a future kalpa (as well), but not in this kalpa. If it is so, what wrong has fallen upon your text? Oh! the one who has his senses in control! (If) People with sincere minds, who know this difference at the present time and (if they) do not accept your words, how can they obstruct you? (i.e. since you have your senses in control, you should not be bothered about those people.) Those who consider your text to be not fully correct in this kalpa, but to be fully accurate (if we consider) the past and future kalpas as well, let them accept your entire text. Let them spread it without any obstruction. Let this happen because of your love for me and my favour on you. I grant you this as the second boon. By the third boon, since I have been made indebted to you, let the pure Jyotishmati knowledge appear in your mind along with its meaning. Let also the motion of the planets in the past and future (appear in your mind). In this way, granting him three very dear boons and talking to him, (Vishnu) took his leave and vanished there itself. When the lord had disappeared, even though in this text there were discrepancies with the present motions of the planets at some places.

After ensuring that the correctness of his statements does not get destroyed, after seeing the past and the future motion of the planets by divine eyes, Viswamitra was very pleased by the boon he had obtained by his penance. The pure Jyotishmati knowledge shone in his inner mind in pure form, with its pure meaning, without obstruction, every moment. His words, even if they mentioned something which was not possible, were accepted by lots of knowledgeable people and writers of tantras, by minimal slandering, for the sake of the spreading of their own tantras/works (because Vishnu has blessed that if anyone quotes Viswamitra Hora, then his words will became popular; and people want their own text to be popular; and therefore quotes from Viswamitra hora). (Sage sounaka says) So I have followed this dharma of theirs at some places (and provided some unrealistic combinations at some places, such as the Vajradaya yogas). I have told you the truth. Let there be no misgivings in you. Whatever I tell you, you should all hear all of it with a pleasant mind.

Continued...

[rathore]

The above explains the impossible combinations mentioned in Compilations (because they are compilations of various Rishi Horas), such impossible combinations are not found in regular Rishi Horas (obviously they are in Viswamitra's). One can now make out why even if such combinations are mentioned, they are not to be applied in Vargas.

[rathore]

Khoo Hock Leong wrote:
In the Brihat Jatakam, Chapter I, Shloka 6, Varaha mentions:
That in all the divisional charts the rashi lordship of planets remains intact, so that the treatment attributed to rashi must be given in the divisional charts also.

4. Where is this mentioned in Saravali? I couldn't find it. And if it is and I missed it, it is not mentioned the way Dr. Suresh puts it. I am pretty sure this is either non existent or Dr. Suresh's own version/interpretation.

Side Note: I don't remember finding the word "regulation" so far in English version of Brihat Jatakam. Hence this is most likely Dr. Suresh's own take (not in line with the actual text).

Khoo Hock Leong wrote:
The Saravali reveals that all rules and regulations relevant to the lagna chart are applicable to the Dwadashamsha chart. This means that this varga is equivalent to the lagna chart, and the two should be treated alike in respect of placement, aspect and relationship of planets.

5. This is mentioning about Sign lordship (as Dr. Suresh himself says Rashi Lordship) which of course is the same because this is Chapter 1 where Mihir is writing the basics. This is NOT House lordship in Vargas. And nowhere it says to treat Divisions as Rashi chart. This seems to be Dr. Suresh's own addition. All it is saying for e.g. is if Mars is in Pisces Dwadasamsa then Mars-Pisces (Planet-Sign only NOT House) sookshma result can be told in matters of Dwadasmsa.

Note: Varaha Mihira goes on to talk about impossible Astronomical combinations and discards their results several times saying they are impossible (such as Sun aspecting Mercury/Venus or Mercury aspecting Venus and vice versa). If they were applicable in Vargas why would he discard them? Anybody who has read Brihat Jatakam knows this. Still, he too included them (impossible combinations) because Brihat Jatakam is also a compilation of various Rishi Horas and not a Rishi Hora itself.

Continued...

[rathore]

Khoo Hock Leong wrote:
Varaha Mihira states that Saturn and Venus exchanging houses in the navamsha or mutually aspecting in the navamsha (e.g., Saturn in Vrisha and Venus in Kumbha in the navamsha, or Venus-Saturn conjunct in any of the signs Vrisha, Tula, Makara, Kumbha) make the native highly sensual.

6. Incorrect translation - it says exchanging each other Navamsas NOT houses. The actual translation is below in the screenshot. Note it says exchanging Navamsas AND aspecting each other. This is impossible to occur at the same time so obviously Mihir is talking about aspecting each other in Rashi while exchanging Navamsa. Dr. Suresh seems to be using his own modified version and making a conclusion.

BrihatJatakam.png

I hope this helps ones who are in search of Astrological knowledge about using Vargas as narrated by the Sages.

Rathore

[SWARNIM]

Rathore ji,

Good logical explanation. Thanks for the efforts put in by you.

[elipsis]

Dear Rathore,

Sorry for barging into your thread. But I would like to ask you how exactly do you establish relationship between planets in a division without considering their effect on the rashi chart. I believe each division stands on its own merits. So, do you only take planets falling in the same amsa as a 'relationship' or do you consider other factors as well?

Regards

[rathore]

Swarnim ji, Thanks for the kind words. Its not logic I came up with, it is just from Classical texts

Elipsis ji,

As per texts there are five major ways planets establish relationships:
1. Conjunction
2. Mutual aspect
3. Exchange in Rashi
4. In each other's Drekkana
5. In each other's Navamsa

The above are strong relationships. Now a planet falling in a certain Navamsa e.g. Sun in Cancer is also a relationship of Sun to Moon so Sun in Cancer sookshma result can be told. But this relationship is not as strong as ones listed above. Vargottama is a stronger relationship than this.

The Rashi Tulya Navamsa method (approved by Texts) is the way to go. For e.g. Virgo Ascendant with Jupiter in Gemini (10th house) and in Libra Navamsa. This means Jupiter has given its Navamsa to 2nd house in Rashi. So Jupiter in 2nd house, Jupiter in Libra, Jupiter in 2nd house + Libra, 4th/7th lord in 2nd house ..these sookshma results are to be told. That is, main result is Jupiter in 10th house, Jupiter in Gemini, Jupiter in 10th house + Gemini, 4th/7th lord in 10th house but further colored by sookshma results as above.

I would like to ask you how exactly do you establish relationship between planets in a division without considering their effect on the rashi chart.

As you know planets shown in divisions are in Rashi only (i.e. not outside Rashi because Rashi is the whole 360 degree zodiac) so their effect is on the Rashi chart (native's whole life) only. Its just that after determining the planet's Navamsa (or any other division) the subtle results can be told. In this example 7th lord in 10th house is supposed to give a disobedient wife (some say obedient) and 7th lord in 2nd gives wealth through wife (probably dowry etc.). The result is: The native's disobedient (or obedient) wife will bring wealth.

Side note: More chances of disobedient wife for 7th lord in 10th because 7th lord will either be in an inimical sign for itself or in an inimical sign to the Lagna lord. Of course these results can't be applied in toto without seeing the whole chart.

I hope this thread gets more good questions like yours and progresses.

Rathore

[elipsis]

Follow up:

1. What if the 7th lord falls in a friendly navamsa. Like if 7th lord venus is in Aquarius navamsa with exalted saturn in rasi. How does that affect the chart?

2. Do you consider aspects that fall outside of the parashari and jaimini model? Like in western astrology - the sextile (3/11) and Quincunx (6/8) relations between planets represent wealth and misfortune.

3. Do you consider Brighu nadi aspects? Like Mercury has a 10th aspect because it falls in the trine from the primary karaka's (saturn) house

4. Are you aware of other nadi aspects?

Thanks

[rathore]

1. What if the 7th lord falls in a friendly navamsa. Like if 7th lord venus is in Aquarius navamsa with exalted saturn in rasi. How does that affect the chart?

Divisions of planets which are Exalted, Mooltrikon etc. etc. (in Rashi), flourish. Divisions of planets combust, defeated in war, in debilitation etc etc. have a harder time flourishing.

2. Do you consider aspects that fall outside of the parashari and jaimini model? Like in western astrology - the sextile (3/11) and Quincunx (6/8) relations between planets represent wealth and misfortune.

These aspects (which are mostly Partial aspects in Vedic) are the reason Western Astrology has credibility. Because such aspects are a Class of Yogas (i.e. relative positions of Planets in the zodiac and their results). One can see how in such a scenario Sidereal/Tropical doesn't really matter (as the relative position is still the same). And Yogas is the heart of Astrology. Western Astrology uses this heavily. I don't use them like they do as I myself look for Yogas literally (many of which don't make sense until one looks for Partial aspects)

3. Do you consider Brighu nadi aspects? Like Mercury has a 10th aspect because it falls in the trine from the primary karaka's (saturn) house
4. Are you aware of other nadi aspects?

For Graha drishti, I use standard 7th and special aspects. Other kind of Planetary aspects are usually usage of Partial aspects and their mingling with each other to create Yogas.

Rathore

[VioletTwilight]

Dear Rathore,

Thanks for a very rational and easily understandable presentation about some of the key concepts in Jyotish.

From your interpretation of partial aspects, how do you consider the concept of argala coming in to it? Is it connected to the partial aspects issue too?

Please forgive if it is a too obvious question. I struggle to make sense of argala.

Best regards,
Violet

[elipsis]

Rathore,

Thank for answering all of my questions, I found your answers to be very exceptional.

Regards
elipsis

[rathore]

Thank you VioletTwilight ji and Elipsis ji. I personally would like more questions for this topic as the usual practice of treating Vargas as Rashi is a mistake of EPIC proportions which will be felt for centuries. Even though one may say famous Astrologers of today use it but that is just the last 200 years or so. Comparing it against several thousands years of how it has been practiced brings the contrast/perspective.

From your interpretation of partial aspects, how do you consider the concept of argala coming in to it? Is it connected to the partial aspects issue too?

Argala is a concept which is described in various manners in various texts (even BPHS versions differ). So its either not presented in the way it was intended to or its just lost or could even be a bogus later addition to BPHS. And, if the rules differ how can one even apply the concept? So it is either a research topic (for predictions not post mortems) or best left alone.

Rathore

[astrolearner15]

Thank you for the detailed explanation, Rathoreji.
Many astrologers online say that the D9 can be read on its own, especially later in life (in fact, I remember reading that KN Raoji also uses Houses in Vargas for predictions), so reading your posts has been very helpful.

[lovacrs]

Rathore ji,

Thanks for the cogent writeup. I have come across numerous views from reasonably knowledgeable people on both sides. Of-course the last word on this has not yet been said!

Going from what you have divisional charts (chakra) is irrelevant since relative placement in navamsa may or may not agree with the "physical" placement shown by the rasi chart. If this is indeed the case is there any meaning in identifying the divisional lagna at all, since the purpose of lagna is to provide a point of reference to the grahas?

[rathore]

Thanks Astrolearner15 and Lovacrs ji

Of-course the last word on this has not yet been said!

The question of "last word" arises when there is ambiguity. One who reads the texts won't have ambiguity. And as you would see earlier in this thread proponents treating Vargas as D-"charts" misquote or quote the Texts selectively/partially or add their own version/words (as Dr. Suresh has and three screenshots from Texts were attached for cross checking). Others come up with ideas such as applying degrees to Vargas (by saying lets assume 3 degree 20 minutes of each navamsa is mapped to 30 degrees). Why assume?

Assuming anything new in an Esoteric subject can have huge implications on the subject (which we are experiencing) because Esoteric subjects have little to no empirical proof. Try saying now Saturn has 5th aspect too because in Kaliyug it needs to keep more watch and punish more sinners. The implications of this new concept would be huge not to mention many will agree and prove it with time/charts.

Yet others say we have the proof which is usually a product of (already assumed & questionable) concepts. For e.g. Dr. Suresh saying planet aspecting Lagna in all Vargas creating Raj yoga where he ignores the Full/Partial aspect statement, which is were it becomes a questionable/incomplete concept (but the reader doesn't know that). So based on an already questionable incomplete concept (of ignoring Full/Partial aspect part of the Sloka), he arrives to the conclusion of aspects in Vargas. I don't know what to say but this is just wrong (i.e. getting to conclusions based on already questionable/incomplete assumptions).

Theme to be noticed with proponents: Beating around the bush with creation of own ideas and building subsequent concepts on top of that. E.g. Navamsa manglik. One can then be a Dasamsa manglik, Drekkana manglik etc. etc. One can have Kemdrum in Navamsa - whatever that means e.g. you feel lonely in marriage because you have Kemdrum in Navamsa . Starts to sound absurd...

In Hora everybody in the world has Yuga Yoga. This is where these concepts (Aspects, Yogas etc. in Vargas) go haywire.

One who wants to know for himself/herself just read the starting mathematical chapters from a few Texts (before reading today's Authors texts).

Going from what you have divisional charts (chakra) is irrelevant since relative placement in navamsa may or may not agree with the "physical" placement shown by the rasi chart. If this is indeed the case is there any meaning in identifying the divisional lagna at all, since the purpose of lagna is to provide a point of reference to the grahas?

This is one of the reasons Vargas have been misinterpreted as stand alone "charts". Just like for any planet (which is basically a point in the zodiac) we call it Planet X's Navamsa or Navamsa of Planet X (Moon's Navamsa or Navamsa of Moon) similarly it is "Lagna Navamsa" or Navamsa of Lagna (and NOT "Navamsa Lagna"). This interchange of words causes the (mis)understanding that Navamsa has a Lagna (Navamsa Lagna). Just like a Planet is a point with a degree assigned, so is Lagna and they all fall in some Navamsa. There is no placement of planets in a different location in Vargas, the planet has only one location in the zodiac, its just that ..the location (point) itself is under the rulership of many planets for various divisions.

For e.g. Jupiter in Gemini at 21 degrees 14 minutes right now falls in Aries Navamsa, Aquarius Drekkana, Gemini Trimsamsa, Capricorn Dasamsa. It means, this "physical area" in the zodiac (21d 14m in Gemini) is under Mercury's main rulership, Mar's Navamsa, Saturn's Drekkana, Mercury's Trimsamsa and Saturn's Dasamsa. Any planet (point) transiting this area will fall under the same rulerships every single time. So the planet (point) has only one physical location i.e. 21d 14m Gemini in the zodiac (it is not suddenly in a different location in the zodiac just because its in Mar's Navamsa). The Vargas are drawn to show these other signs/their rulers having a say at that "particular physical location in the zodiac" for different areas of life (Vargas). This is for the ease of the Astrologer.

Continued..

[rathore]

Thank you for the detailed explanation, Rathoreji.
Many astrologers online say that the D9 can be read on its own, especially later in life (in fact, I remember reading that KN Raoji also uses Houses in Vargas for predictions), so reading your posts has been very helpful.

Concept like these (Navamsa has own standing independent of Rashi) are a result of conclusions made over questionable concepts. This is a (made up) concept which works well with explaining away anything (because now one has two "charts" to explain an event).

One subsequent band-aid rule created with independent Navamsa in mind is: if results are not indicated in Rashi but indicated in Navamsa then it will not happen. Well one has to come up with that otherwise it becomes hard to explain Navamsa's independent existence. Although many times folks will be ignoring this (made up) rule and declare - you got a divorce because you were manglik in Navamsa or whatever.

Concept of Navamsa taking over later in life is also an outcome of - independent reading of Navamsa concept. Good dignity of planets in Navamsa helps the native over a life time (i.e. Dashas) and more so in second part because that is when the native is more involved in his Dharma, Artha, Kama (all responsibilities). If planets have bad dignity, the person will likely not do well (with his responsibilities) in second part of life bringing disgrace to the family/lineage and negatively impacting his upcoming generation. This just means good dignity in Navamsa helps a lot. This however does not mean it takes over (because its a "chart" of its own ). That is the mix up.

Rathore

[lovacrs]

Rathore ji,

Thanks for the response. Please also explain the utility (astrological usage) of determining the navamsa of lagna. What I mean is "statements like Ju is in own sign but in enemy's amsa" (which has an astrological relevance) will not apply to lagna. What do we use "navamsa of lagna" for?

In general I agree that introducing a principle or rule in astrology that has no basis in classics can be quite dangerous. But we cant ignore the fact that the very definition of what is "classic" and their contents itself is debatable.

On the other hand the "proof the pudding lies in eating" ! If I am to explain events without using navamsa chakra (divisional chart NOT as divisions) invariably and consistently, then that by itself could lend support to the view portrayed by you.

If I am not mistaken the issue is not so clear. Proponents of both concepts have come up with example charts that requires their repesctive viewpoints to be applied to explain the events satisfactorily from an astrological perspective.

It will be nice if you can share some sample charts and share with us as to how you would analize the divisional charts. My personal preference is to avoid celebrity charts since I feel that there is a greater likelihood of the charts having been "reverse engineered" to fit the events! You can probably use a couple of charts of the questers in this forum.

[rathore]

Lovacrs ji,

Thanks for the response. Please also explain the utility (astrological usage) of determining the navamsa of lagna. What I mean is "statements like Ju is in own sign but in enemy's amsa" (which has an astrological relevance) will not apply to lagna. What do we use "navamsa of lagna" for?

Just like Planets in a particular Navamsa color the results (sookshma results) so does Lagna. Yavanas, Saravali have listed detailed results of what it means when the Lagna falls in a particular Navamsa. Since its the Navamsa of the Lagna/Ascendant (self) so it pertains to the personality of the person. Please read Nashta Jataka chapter in Saravali.

In general I agree that introducing a principle or rule in astrology that has no basis in classics can be quite dangerous. But we cant ignore the fact that the very definition of what is "classic" and their contents itself is debatable.

Some translations of classical texts are spurious but the texts themselves are solid. Classical texts in general mean ones written in BC even though they may have been put on paper in AD. It is not debatable for what is a Classical text (most of them). There are a few which are debatable. The content at some places in Classical texts can talk about opposite results but this only happens in a few cases and can just be a result of someone adding their own ideas at a later point of time. In any case, most results match and are reliable.

If I am not mistaken the issue is not so clear. Proponents of both concepts have come up with example charts that requires their repesctive viewpoints to be applied to explain the events satisfactorily from an astrological perspective.

Proponents of so called divisional "charts" can't really prove anything. Why? Because using many independent charts to explain an event one can prove just about anything which is exactly what happens on the forums. It literally becomes a child's play. Somewhere or the other one will find something to explain the event and build from there. Add Arudha, Rashi drishti to it and mix systems and one has the "Theory of Everything" which is what Einstein was looking for. SJC has found it.

On the other hand the "proof the pudding lies in eating" ! If I am to explain events without using navamsa chakra (divisional chart NOT as divisions) invariably and consistently, then that by itself could lend support to the view portrayed by you

There are no Divisional "charts" but only "Divisions". I am glad you asked, other users did too:
http://www.lightonvedicastrology.com/ph ... 73#p175573

Rathore

[ChandraLagna]

Dear Rathore -

Commendable effort in writing this thread. Somehow over the years, this practice of reading a divisional as an independent chart has crept in and its heartening to see someone take up the the cause of setting the record right, with gusto !

I would want to add one other visual imagery to add to whatever is written above.

ChandraLagna wrote:

Actually, visualise it this way. The Navamsa "chart" that you see written is a 12 layered chart - in the first Aries one, Capri to Pisces is blacked out. In the second chart, Libra to Sagi is blacked out and so on and so forth. These 12 Navamsa charts are neatly stacked out one on top of another..and appears as a single Navamsa "chart".

You can find this here: https://www.lightonvedicastrology.com/p ... 73#p127173

[Nitin21]

Well written Rathoreji

[rathore]

Dear ChandraLagna ji,

ChandraLagna wrote:
Commendable effort in writing this thread.
You can find this here: --> https://www.lightonvedicastrology.com/p ... 73#p127173

Thank you for the kind words and adding the link. The link has several useful questions which should be asked/pondered upon by any Astrology learner.

Astroduffer ji, I am glad you took the time to read it, please add any questions whatsoever.

Srcs ji, this thread is about a specific misunderstood area in chart reading. You are starting with some big generalizations (Sanskrit understanding, Education & books) -> applying to this specific case -> making a conclusion. And a assumption like there are zero Sanskrit scholars now a days who can fiddle with Ancient texts, is just that - a generic assumption.

Now even if this is assumed to be fully true (that we have zero good Sanskrit Scholars) please go read the starting chapters on what a sign/house is, what an aspect is. These are defined quantitatively (using longitudes). Then read about divisions along with their mathematical calculation. If after that you can still conclude to have 30 degree signs/houses in Vargas (or of lesser degrees) and also longitude based aspects in them then please share your insight with the forum. It will be very helpful. At least we can trust that today's Sanskrit Scholars translated the NUMBERS (quantitative) correctly if not the WORDS (which at times can have different meanings).

In any case, please keep in mind there will only be few Dhirubhais who are not well read but still did better than most others (because of their own intelligence) but only a few. Most who are not well read won't do well (compared to others who are well read). On the other hand, most people are who are well read do well (compared to those are not well read) but some still won't. You can see the statistics for yourself in terms of quality of life/social standing etc.

Anyway, the point is in Engineering/Medical Science one can still be not well read and with field experience get very good (even better than many Engineers who are well read and experienced ) but such cases are few (just like Dhirubhai) i.e. exceptional. Most of the times it won't happen, that is to be kept in mind.

Now coming to Esoteric subjects such as Astrology, there is no empirical proof (unlike Engineering/Medical) so you and I cannot prove Saturn's 3rd aspect or disprove (if its claimed) that it now has 4th aspect. This is why (I think you are getting the point so far), we have to rely on the Sages/Texts and take their word for it. Yes experience is experience but denying/changing the basic rules told by Sages in the Texts (in context of Esoteric subjects) is a recipe for disaster. One can empirically prove if nothing can/cannot travel faster than the speed of Light but can any one of us (empirically) prove that Mars is cruel? No we cannot! So do we really have a choice to discard words of the Sages or we just have to take their word for it?

This is why the statement of "its just bookish" knowledge can still apply to empirical subjects because it is empirical (although it still has to be taken with a grain of salt) but for Esoteric subjects we don't really have a choice to say the Sages were kidding and it "its just bookish" knowledge. None of us is Sage enough to do that but we can be Scientific enough to prove that something can/cannot travel faster the Light (even if we are not well read in Science and still very intelligent - although again such a case is exceptional).

On a side note, if you (or another reader of this thread) feel Vargas can be treated as separate "charts" and it has worked in your experience the only thing I would request you to look for (forget its not endorsed by Texts) is that - Does it work all the time (hint: it will)? Does it even work for events that never happened? If it does (hint: it will), then does it really work?

Rathore

[Nitin21]

Astroduffer ji, I am glad you took the time to read it, please add any questions whatsoever.

rathoreji ur bphs wrong trans thread is also interesting. Very few take trouble to dig deep. Currently in sootak. Will contribute after a few days.

[Ghrishneswar]

This thread is tackling the bull by its horns...I would like too see other astrologers add their inputs. I am curious to see commentaries from other senior astrologers also.