Vargas are NOT to be read as Rashi

[shilpa]

Dear Rathore,
well presented case and your politeness in discussions is appreciated.

some of my views:

--the approach of
"I find a statment in a classic to counter your statment...and then the battle of scanning classics"..... is of limited productivity

--WHY ? for 2 reasons:

1) Not everything written in classics works in the real world.

2) Not everything that works in the real world is covered in classics.

there are gaps in the classics of many types. viz:
...inoformation that perhaps got lost in taking notes of the verbal commentaries of the sages by their disciples
.....lost informations and context passing from one generation of dsicipiles to the others over 1000s of years
.....loss of both content and conetxt in translations.

--One day on one of the threads I was negatively critical of SJC/ PVR/ Rath group about their criss-crossing between jaimini and Parashari and usage of multiple lagnas and too many variable to just about retrospectively prove anything.

--Today I would like to highlight their positive side......on the strength of their computer programs they have take the D-charts analysis to a whole new paradigm.....the Starteks immortal lines apply here " Where no man has ever gone before"


--I find the classics quite limited in their coverage of D-charts beyond Navamsa.
there is an accurate mention of how to calculate but not much more than that in terms of analysis......other a than some passing remarks.

--In contrast For example Visti Larsen's well documented methodologies on Siddhamsa interpetation are one of the best works on analyzing the D24 charts......and it works on most real cases.

PVR Rao's longitudnal corelations in D-charts and Saptrishi's article on using D60 chandra lagna for analysis of transits are not covered by any classsics but very good pieces of research that works on many real charts.

--the sages left for us a huge repository of astrological knowldge but that to me is not the "all and end all" of knowldge

Modern day human mind is capable of and has demonstrated that it can interpolate between the lines of and extrapolate beyond what's written in the classics...in small steps.

and the approach of " if it's not written in classics"
OR
" if it's diffrent from what's stated in classics"
is wrong......is simply dogmatic.

---So SJC/ PVR rao / Visti/ Rath/ Saptrishi / a number of contemporary astrologers and our own Khoo's works should not be dismissed or even discounted because they are " diffrent from or not contained in classics"

regards

PS* In my humble experience conjunctions of planets defnitely work in all D-charts.......aspects defnitely work in Navamsa and Siddhamsa and defnitely not in Shashtyamsa......I cannot say if they do or don't in other charts.
But this is besides the point....the main point in my view is the one I stated in bold and italics

[rathore]

Astroduffer ji, please do add inputs.

Ghrishneswar ji, thanks for inviting attention to this topic.

Shilpa ji, Good to see you here.

There are two parts to keep in mind about Classical Texts:

#1. Basic Technical aspects/calculations chapters
#2. Phalit chapters (Juicy part)

Majority of us either skip #1 or just skim through & get to #2 as its the Application of Jyotish (hence the juicy part). Which is why many of us have little clue about what a Nadika is, what an Aspect is, what a Division is and so on at the technical level. Or we have spread over knowledge here and there (technically) which is not sound though.

This is a correct statement that there is lost information. But which information? Technical or Phalit? Its Phalit, because not only it is the major part of any text but many texts are only Phalit. Like you said there is not much info beyond Navamsa results (in texts) so indeed its lost/unavailable - this is Phalit. And yes, not everything written in classics works (at some places there are even contradicting views among Rishis for the same placement) but again that is the "Phalit" part.

Also, even though we know there are "Phalit" parts which are lost etc. however the ones we have access to there are no verses found that speaks about using so called D - "Charts" just like the Rashi chart. This is just highly improbable that all Phalit Jyotish Verses on using Vargas as D "charts" got lost somehow and the others remained. Not to mention the ones that do mention Navamsa placements never use words such as "House" in Navamsa. There are other things I am not mentioning because just the part that these Verses work beautifully demonstrates their technical application (of not using D "charts"). In any case, the information contained in this paragraph should raise a Red flag in one's mind (about using of D-"charts").

--I find the classics quite limited in their coverage of D-charts beyond Navamsa.
there is an accurate mention of how to calculate but not much more than that in terms of analysis......other a than some passing remarks.

Yes, if there was loss in any way of "Basic Technical information" (which is the minority of Textual content to begin with, yet is the foundation of it) then Jyotish would have been resting on shakey ground.

Now since the "Basic Technical Information" is accurate it is essential to understand it mathematically (its mathematical to begin with) and a Jyotish Practitioner is supposed to be good mathematically. This is how a Jyotish (with his mathematical skills) should also understand that by using several "charts" for a native "just about any" result is derivable - Simple mathematical permutations/combinations. But this statement given by me one can still ignore and just read the rest.

---So SJC/ PVR rao / Visti/ Rath/ Saptrishi / a number of contemporary astrologers and our own Khoo's works should not be dismissed or even discounted because they are " diffrent from or not contained in classics"

One can and should apply their brains/imagination to the "Phalit" part (such as telling results in terms of Desh, Kaal, Patra or what can some placement mean) just like our Dear Khoo does. It is also good to test new concepts (even Technically as this is how compounding of rules can be discovered). Yet this should happen without bending/breaking the "Basic Technical rules". Otherwise one is on "shakey" ground. So yes, not everything that works in the real world is covered in classics and at the same time it doesn't mean to bend/break the "Basic Technical rules" for telling "Phalit" results in the real world.

Continued...

[rathore]

--In contrast For example Visti Larsen's well documented methodologies on Siddhamsa interpetation are one of the best works on analyzing the D24 charts......and it works on most real cases

I indicated this in another thread the relative placements of planets within Vargas (square, trine, 6-8, opposite etc.) is just pointing to the kind of relationship (i.e. Yoga) they are sharing in the 360 degree zodiac. This is why there is some success to using the independent D "charts" methods because relative placements, dignity etc. are still used (i.e. some basic concepts are used well). This however does not conclude Planetary aspects in Vargas as then its breaking of basic technicality of a what a Planetary aspect is. Basic Technical information when it becomes second nature brings this to the front. And then there is no need of juggling of D-"charts" which ends up diluting results (because of breaking basic technical rules), all such results can be told with confidence by just looking at the Rashi chart and the planet's division etc.

PVR Rao's longitudnal corelations in D-charts and Saptrishi's article on using D60 chandra lagna for analysis of transits are not covered by any classsics but very good pieces of research that works on most real charts.

Any Varga above Trimsamsa becomes highly Aynamsa (and other factors) specific and there is every chance the planets are placed in incorrect signs there. More so when moving to very minute 60th Division but most likely (as indicated earlier), the relative positions stay the same, hence it has some success to it i.e. establishing a conducive or otherwise or neutral relationship in the real zodiac. This goes back to the same point earlier, do research just not at the cost of bending basic technical rules. Nadi rules allow transits based on Navamsa rashi of a planet or a trine thereof (but the Transits happen only in the Rashi chart). PVR ji extending this to Shastiamsa is good research but hope not jumping technical rules.

In my humble experience conjunctions of planets defnitely work in all D-charts.......aspects defnitely work in Navamsa and Siddhamsa and defnitely not in Shashtyamsa......I cannot say if they do or don't in other charts.

Conjunction results may work in Vargas (although not like Rashi) as they are under the rulership of same Rashi/Planet (hence a relationship is established).

Shilpa ji, please note a handful of users have been asking why this attempt? The primary reason I want to tell is (and others who may be wondering why) - Please get well versed with the Technical jargon/calculations of Jyotish if one is serious and use their hand-eye-paper in practicing the Technical part, it will give great insights/realizations/aha moments/epiphanies. Once technically sound many questions/doubts/confusions will simply disappear. Also then one can make a solid conclusion about the result of this thread for himself/herself.

Rathore

[rathore]

I was asked to look at Shri CS Patel's book about him mentioning Vidyamadhaviyam and its usage of independent D "charts".

I have read CS Patel's books but not Vidyamadhaviyam as its a rare text (although I am aware of it as its quoted much in Prashna Marga).

Excerpt from CS Patel's book:
Vidyamadhaviyam [Mysore University] freely uses Navamsa Chart as an independent chart, for aspects, ownership, positions etc in about six hundred verses. Page 11, Navamsa in Astrology by C.S Patel.

Response:
Checked with Kerala scholars well read in Malayalam version of Vidyamadhaveeyam.

Summary of their input:
Vidyamadhaveeyam (popularly known as Madhaveeyam) is a text by the 12th century scholar Madhava. A good text on Muhurtam it does NOT use D "charts" anywhere and is well in tune with other ancient classics till that date.

Madhava was the contemporary of Krishanacharya who wrote Krishniya. Madhava's son Vishnu too was an eminent scholar and became a student of Krishnacharya (the author of Krishneeya) and wrote the famous commentary named Chatura Sundari to Krishniya. Chatura Sundari commentary to Krishniya is as famous (in Kerala) as the Dashadhyayi commentary to Brihat Jataka. Madhava and his son Vishnu lived in Gokarna which is part of present day Karnataka.

My Input:
It is heavily used in Prashna Marga and one who is read in Prashna Marga knows it doesn't use D "chart" concepts. Moreover CS Patel himself did NOT use absurd D "charts" and he has supposed mastery over Navamsa. So it could very well be that he had some misunderstanding regarding Madhaveeyam as he did not had direct access to it. He just mentions it as an FYI (out of his misunderstanding). It could also be tricky English translation (if it was there at that time and if he had access to it), similar problems are seen with some folks reading English version of Saravali (Phalit part), without getting sound with the technical chapters.

Note: English is unable to handle Sanskrit well so English translations are to be dealt carefully. But in any case if one reads the whole text he/she will get a good idea of the Princples in use and will know what its talking about (even if there is ambiguity).

All of the above has been put forward for Reader's information.

Rathore

[2002diksha]

Rathoreji,
A very comprehensive write-up.Could you take time to give replies to following queries:
What if rashi is good but navamsa and subsequent divisional charts indicate an event. What are possibilities of event taking place.Will the rashi chart have an influencing effect or the result be moderated. When reading a chart do have to take intermixing effect of rashi and navamsa .How much is the effect of navamsa. Is it 50 percent or 100 percent.
According to my observation rashi is supreme.Even if rashi indicates an event and navamsa has no indication the result will show due to presence in rashi. But does vice versa happen. that is will an event take place just because it is mentioned in navamsa and rashi chart does not show.
regards

[rathore]

What if rashi is good but navamsa and subsequent divisional charts indicate an event. What are possibilities of event taking place.Will the rashi chart have an influencing effect or the result be moderated. When reading a chart do have to take intermixing effect of rashi and navamsa .How much is the effect of navamsa. Is it 50 percent or 100 percent.
According to my observation rashi is supreme.Even if rashi indicates an event and navamsa has no indication the result will show due to presence in rashi. But does vice versa happen. that is will an event take place just because it is mentioned in navamsa and rashi chart does not show.

2002diksha ji,

There is only one chart i.e. Rashi chart. All other diagrams drawn (Vargas) are derived from Rashi chart only so they are not "separate" charts of their own. This is why you will never find a verse talking about a specific event based on planetary position in a Varga only.

For e.g. you will find Verses like this:
Natal 8th lord in 7th house while Venus in Lagna Navamsa means marriage in 25th/33rd year. Here the specific event is the marriage in 25th or 33rd year.

You will NOT find a Verse declaring a specific prediction such as: 8th lord of Navamsa in 7th house of Navamsa while Venus in Lagna Navamsa means marriage in 25th/33rd year.
This is because there is no 7th house or 8th lord of the Navamsa diagram by itself (which is derived from Rashi to begin with) so they cannot give specific event based on a "separate" diagram.

You will find verses talking about results (just like Planet in signs) for a native based on Planet's/Lagna's sign in Vargas. Notice these are not specific event predictions of when something will happen (but only how a native would be and what he may have i.e. just like Planets in signs).

What does all of the above point to? It means - Vargas are not "separate" charts and so they do not/cannot have Yogas, Houses & hence events on their own. All events are to be seen from Rashi chart only (again there is no other "separate" chart to look for an event). So Navamsa is not independent of Rashi chart & hence will never indicate an event just on its own (unless one starts to read it as a "separate" chart which is incorrect to begin with).

Hope this helps, please put forward any more doubts as and when they arise.

Rathore

[rathore]

Dear All,

I have been asked to also add textual reference here. I feel its a good idea because many will not look at the Texts & take the words (beliefs) of others as-is. Moreover this provides a ready textual reference:

So here is the B.P.H.S textual proof that Planetary Aspects (mentioned as "Aspects" from hereon) are (only) longitude based:



Please read it all carefully including the highlighted parts. It starts talking about partial Aspects and then goes onto longitudinal technicality of Aspects. One can see Parashara is clearly talking in terms of longitudes to evaluate Aspects.

Since Longitudes do NOT exist in Divisions (which are derived from Rashi chart to begin with), does that not make Aspects in Vargas a foregone conclusion?

Continued...

[rathore]

Verses such as below confuse folks who are not familiar with the technicality of Aspects - If the Sun is aspected by Saturn and be in Aries/Scorpio Navamsa the father would have given up the family before the birth of the child or would have passed away.

It means (because the Sage has already defined what Aspects are)- If the Sun is aspected by Saturn (in Rashi chart) AND be itself in Aries/Scorpio Navamsa then no Papa ji present.

Its a given at this point that the listener knows what an Aspect is, so the Sage doesn't need to say - O Mr. Brahmin, understand that this Aspect is in Rashi chart and not some absurd Navamsa "chart" because you bunked the "technical" class the other day. You didn't do your home work either go become a murga near that banyan tree.

Sadly, many of us bunked the "technical" classes of the Sage.

Continued..

[rathore]

Additional textual reference for Saturn's Special Aspect consideration. Note it is too talking in terms of longitudes. Interested reader can pick the text for himself for more. Chapter 26, Santhanam's BPHS.




One who understands these clear cut references and still concludes Aspects applicability in Divisions please help me understand it too at the Technical level. I will be grateful and you will take care of a major misunderstood area in Jyotish.

P.S: Kindly refrain calling Divisions as Divisional "charts" unless one really understands how Divisions are derived. This is because just the term "chart" pre-supposes something which has an independent existence in terms of reading it. For e.g. draw any two Bar charts (or Pie charts or graphs or any sort of chart) the same rules of chart reading automatically applies to both charts belonging to the same category (e.g. Bar charts).

Astrologically Rashi chart versus Navamsa "chart" (or any Varga "chart") faces the same consequences. And as we know there is no independent Navamsa "chart" & there is ONLY one Chart i.e. Rashi chart (while everything else is mathematically derived from it). But when one assumes different independent Varga "charts" the resultant conclusion obviously is - reading them like Rashi Chart (Bar chart analogy). The term "chart" is the misnomer here. That being said, one can use the term "chart" with Vargas as long as the fine technicalities are understood.

Rathore

[Anandham]

Rathore ji, if possible, can you use a sample chart of your choice and explain how to read rasi chart vis a vis the D-9? It would greatly help in our understanding. Thank you.

[anuradha]

[skcons]

Ms.anuradha

I cant read Hindi, can you translate highlighted portions to English

[rathore]

Ojas ji, please study on how to read Rashi Tulya Navamsa. This is how Navamsa subtle (sookhsma) results are to be read along with Rashi chart.

Thanks a lot Anuradha ji for looking up references. This is the kind of participation needed to deal with topics of such nature. I am grateful to you for caring about this topic.

Dear Readers,

This reference is from Mansagari. I will go through it at two levels - Header & Item.

Some must knows for readers:
+ Sanskrit Verses when dealing with Navamsa use the word endings "ansh" or the whole word "Navamsa"
+ (Panchamasthgrahaphalam) means "Results of planets occupying 5th house"
+ Iti Navamsa Phalam means "End of Navamsa results"

Header:
1. Except the translation in Hindi, nowhere the Verse says "ansh" or "Navamsa". At the end its talking about Moon's Navamsa & that is the only reference (we will come back to it later)

2. Adhyaya-3 of Mansagari is flowing like this - Drekkanaphalam, Saptamanshphalam, Navamsaphalam and suddenly there is an inclusion of "Panchamasthgrahaphalam" and then it continues on normally to Dwadasamsa phalam, Trimsamsaphalam etc. This suggests it is an out of order inclusion in the original Text itself

3. Moreover at the end of every Varga chapter it (Mansagari) says "Iti <varga-name> phalam" so on the page before the page presented by Anuradha ji, it should say "Iti Navamsa Phalam" i.e. the results of Navamsa have ended & hence the next page is NOT Navamsa results. This too suggests it is an out of order inclusion. Last line that talks about Moon's Navamsa is just suggesting the view to look at Moon's Navamsa and this is not acceptable to the original Author as its a minority view (i.e. some Acharyas)

4. How the Translator translated "Panchamasthgrahaphalam" to "Results of 5th Bhava of Navamsa kundli" is something only the Translator knows. It could be that the Translator is of the opinion of using independent Varga "charts" hence no wonder the translation says - 3rd, 4th or 5th Bhava in some absurd Navamsa "kundli". However as its clearly noticed the Sanskrit verse does NOT say anything like this

The itemized part below will add further clarity.

Continued..

[rathore]

Itemized (with Actual translations):

1.
Translation: Should Mars occupty the 5th bhava as Jupiter occupies the 4th, the jataka shall have one, three of five children. Should Mercury and Venus occupy the 5th as Saturn occupies the 4th, the jataka shall have two, four or six children.

Comment: No Navamsa Bhavas mentioned here, plain Rashi chart results

2.
Translation: Should Leo be in the 3rd bhava as Jupiter & Ketu occupy the 5th, Saturn in the 6th & Sun the 7th bhava, Rahu occupy the 5th as Mars occupies the 10th the jataka shall lose all progeny (or will have no progeny)

Comment: Ketu in 5th and Rahu in Kendra is impossible. This shloka is corrupt but in any case it does not mention Navamsa bhavas like above

3.
Translation: Should the lord of the 12th be a malefic and occupy 9th, 6th, 3rd or the 12 bhava as Mars occupies the 5th bhava, the jataka's progeny dies.

Comment: No Navamsa Bhavas mentioned here, plain Rashi chart results

Now the same Shloka is worded differently in another version of Mansagari as below:

Translation: Should the lord of the 12th be a malefic and occupy 9th, 6th, 3rd or the 12 bhava as COMBUST Mars occupies the 5th bhava, the jataka's progeny dies.

Comment: There is no combustion in Vargas. This is clear now its talking about Rashi chart results. Moreover again no mention of Bhavas in Navamsa


Conclusion: The reference presented is NOT talking about Navamsa "chart" 5th Bhava results. These are only Rashi chart results.

Continued..

[rathore]

Other points:

1. BPHS screenshot presented earlier clearly establishes that Aspects are NOT possible in Vargas so whenever one comes across such references (such as Mansagari) one must research it. The research here leads to a clear conclusion which is in tune with Parashara.

2. Should someone here want to attempt to translate these Verses it would be helpful to the readers.

3. Out of order inclusions are somewhat common in Classical Texts. Perhaps because some parts are lost in between or whatever is the reason I don't know, but it happens. Even if this particular case is not out of order the Sanskrit content of the Verses, heading and ending of Navamsa results prior to it concludes this is talking about Rashi chart.

Hope this helps.

Rathore

[anuradha]

[anuradha]

[anuradha]

[anuradha]

[anuradha]

[manya]

Anuradha ji,

The texts you have provided clearly states that aspect of planet is valid in vargas.

[anuradha]

http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/4262/0e8b.jpg

[anuradha]

http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/8079/xjk9.jpg
http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/7486/jqaw.jpg

[manya]

Anuradha ji,

It is clear now, i think to everyone also.

[rathore]

Thanks Anuradha ji for posting these & I am hoping you understood the BPHS planetary aspects reference technically because most of the references you posted are in line with BPHS's definition of planetary aspects. This will be demonstrated in a moment if there is confusion still.

Things to keep in mind when dealing with Classical Texts:
~ Primary Classical Texts are Rishi Horas such as Parashara Hora, Garga Hora, Kausika Hora, Vasishtha Hora etc. etc. These are from BC by Sages who got it directly from the Gods (Brahma, Surya, Siva etc)
~ Then there are compilations of the above such as Jataka Parijaat, Hora Ratnam etc. These are compiled in AD using various Rishi Horas. They are compiled by Scholars (who are not Sages).

The caveat to the "Compilations" is that they happened several centuries later and in between several scholars had their "opinion/views" on Rishi Horas. One such example is Bhava chalit chart & even Sh. KN Rao doesn't endorse it as there are plethora of them created by scholars at a later time.

Other than dealing with regular Sages, Hora Ratna (a compilation) is dealing with Yavanas and even Tajik. Similarly all compilations have been touched by N number of Scholars, Astrological Systems and a reader is dealing with it all. One has to be careful in reading through these as many concepts presented are scholarly thought/opinion at a later point of time than what was said by the Sages (like SJC is doing these days creating a bad name). Hence for fundamentals of Jyotish it is sensible to stick to Rishi Horas.

Continued..