Ascendant as start of first house.

[ChandraLagna]

नमः शिवाय!

As per the definition Ascendant degree is chosen as Bhaava madhya (not the starting point of 1st house) if people tells the other way ask them the logic & source! Yes you've Ascendant in Aries.
I'll definitely provide the logic. Astrologers like B. V. Raman Ji, Sunjay Rath Ji, KN Rao Gaaru, PVR Narasimha rao gaaru, Vaughn Paul Ji & so many respected Astrologers have implemented the same & It's logical to choose Ascendant degree as middle of the 1st house! Some people who follow western & so called K.P. will choose illogically as Ascendant degree as starting point of the 1st house.

Well...believing something because someone else is following it, is not logic. It's faith in someone's ability and decision.

Secondly, of the list above,

• As far as I know, K N Rao ji does use ascendant as Bhava Madhya going by his students on the forum; do you have any reference of him using BM ?
  PVR Narasimha does not use ascendent as Bhava madhya last I know; he did use ascendant as start of house at one point and he is known to change, or even reverse positions often.
  If K N Rao ji does not use Ascendant as BM, it is unlikely that Vaughn Paul does. It will be an interesting thing if you can get an example of him using it thus.

Lastly before you dismiss KP as illogical, please make an effort to understand WHY the system chooses ascendant as start of first house. Why dont you start a thread and ask Lex and Kimahy to help you understand?

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!

Well...believing something because someone else is following it, is not logic. It's faith in someone's ability and decision.

I'll definitely provide the logic.

I've already told her that I'll provide the logic! & CL Ji, I think you might not come across a post by me, I was already explained why Ascendant degree is chosen as Bhaava Madhya in other post.
Let me paste the link here & also the explanation
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=35798&p=259519#p259519

Let's say a Graha is transiting from one house to other house. It means, the Graha is acquiring new qualities, strength or weakness whatever. So, while Ascendant is transiting from one sign to other sign It's also acquiring the same!
Let us link with an analogy, Let's say we went to a new house, say we're exactly at the entrance of the house. By standing there you can't claim that inside aunt is cooking capsicum curry & uncle is busy in playing with his children! You can claim the above scenario only when you take little steps forward, isn't it?

In Physics we've a concept called Inertia, if say a body is continuing in motion with same speed it continues to move with same speed at next instant too! Provided there's no dissipative forces acting on the body. So, the same way Ascendant also suddenly can't loose its qualities when it's say in 12° Libra to 26° Libra. It preserves, but slowly the effect of the lagna perishes when the eastern horizon is in motion!
That's the reason why I disagree completely with KP in choosing Ascendant degree as starting point of the house.

Let's say in my horoscope, If I change settings in JHora as KP (Placidus houses) & choosing Ascendant degree as beginning as 1st house. I'll be getting Ketu in 3rd which I disagree completely! I can relate myself of Ketu being in 4th with my past rather than being in 3rd. Same with Moon It's in 7th with above system. But I can clearly perceive myself as Moon being in 8th house.
Hence I disagree completely as well as by checking with my life instants KP system (Placidus houses) & Ascendant degree as starting point of 1st house concept fails

Hope It's clear!
This is just a self speculation! So, comments are highly appreciated!

I've copy pasted the same thing what I've written in that page! & I've already mentioned It's my speculation!

& in the "mystic board" I've opined the same as follows:

नमः शिवाय,
A little speculation on why is Ascendant degree chosen as Bhaava Madhya rather than starting point of the bhaava?
Here's my understanding:
We all know that every Zodiac sign has an intrinsic quality, this information I'll be using it as a basis, let's take Cancer as an example, Cancer is a Watery & 1st Moksha trikona sthaanam, it's ruled by Moon, Moon is our Mind (merely our thoughts) as it's a watery house it represents intuition, as intuition needs depth, only in water we could find depth "Easier". Where as if we take earthy signs it's harder to dig (No idea what information lies underneath it). If in fiery signs, going deeper causes little risky because our human body may or may not resist the heat (here also I've no idea what will be underneath, or we can go depth, there might not be depth at all), In Airy signs i don't think so there's depth information lying (You could counteract my statement if this doesn't make a sense).

Also every Graha has innate nature, we know that. So, when ग्रह संक्रमणम् (Graha transition) happens from one Zodiac sign to other zodiac sign it absorbs the energy & the properties & it acts accordingly.

Now, I want to make an analogy, Every body continues to be in state of rest or uniform motion until an external force acts on it to change its state of motion. This is just merely an observation of nature, thus it's law, this was observed by our ancient seers as well but, in modern time it was observed by Isaac Newton, thus it became Newton's 1st law of motion. Now, in a ग्रह transition ग्रह will try to absorb new energy & leaves the other bhaava energy, it requires time & it is in continuous motion. So, leaving complete properties of a previous bhaava needs energy to give away consumes time in a motion. It's not an easy process (taking & giving). Thus i think for Ascendant also i think it works the same way. Thus we've to choose +/- 15° to the Ascendant degree to get the Bhaava extreme degree.

In a simple way, Let's say we've a bad habit (again I've to define what's bad & good, for time being let's assume this in mundane sense) to overcome this bad habit we need will from inside to overcome. Will consumes "Energy" since it's not natural process! it consumes time too, let's say in this process the person is overcoming the so called bad habit, now as time passes in continuous observation we perceive that person is in changing phase from bad to good. Finally the person becomes good. So, during ग्रह transition also it needs some time to leave the previous bhaava properties. So as Ascendant too

Kindly forgive & rectify if I'm in a wrong way, this is just my self speculation.
Thanks for your patience
Any comment is highly welcome.

ChandraLagna Ji, FYI I've asked the same question in our forum in the following topic:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=13898&p=254266#p254266

& Subrahmanium Ji has opined the way as follows:
Ascendant degree as starting point will put the ascendant at BHAVA SANDHI. Lagna will become weak by default then. It is not logical .
In the same topic!

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!


Finally, CL Ji you've told about trusting Astrologers! You should see my birth chart & tell me whether I'll accept things as the way it is! I'm a Physics student & It's natural that I've developed myself by one thing i.e., by "questioning" persistently! I'm too much adamant & I'll not accept the things if It's not involved with either logic or "proper" intuition! & If I catch something I can't leave it till I get clarity! You should see, how many times I've requested Joyd bhaiyya to explain Vimshottari dasha logic!
& regarding with Bhaava madhya, there's been an Astrologer & a nice person who have helped me to understand various things in Jyotisham other than Joyd bhaiyya is Rohiniranjan Ji. I've discussed the same topic with him & opined the same!
I hope you've understood!

[tylorechandra]

@ Vivek Surya,

Although I personally am not inclined towards the KP system, I am not in agreement with you in writing off a system as being unworthy. Though it is not following all the principles of Parashara, it is a system which has stood the test of time in some cases. And, like for any new evolving system, one must try to keep an open mind and not discard it as irrelevant.

I am sure that in Physics too many new researches are leading to overturning the existing beliefs. And it is the same in all fields. While Sage Parashara has laid down the guidelines, he has never mentioned anywhere that his theories are the ONLY ONEs that count. Definitely, in today’s world, experiments will continue, including in the Parashara system itself.

TKC

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!

I am not in agreement with you in writing off a system as being unworthy. Though it is not following all the principles of Parashara

TKC Ji, Everyone is welcome to disagree my view. So, you're! But there should be some logical evidence to agree / disagree! Isn't it?

it is a system which has stood the test of time in some cases.

I was explained briefly & took the example of my horoscope! By comparing with my life events I'm quite sure of placements of Ketu, Moon, Mercury in my horoscope. In K. P. Ketu is in 3rd! So, I completely disagree! I could feel myself Ketu being in my 4th house! & Moon being in my 8th house! But Moon is in 7th house in K. P. which is again false! If K. P. is correct paddhati one should get the correct analysis from it, if it's wrong with at most one horoscope, we need to disagree it & logically I've provided the reasons in my earlier post! Now, TKC Ji, you may disagree with my aforementioned post by providing logic! Here I'm susceptible to change my perspective if there's some logic involved in disagreeing with my understanding!
Hope you got it!

[tylorechandra]

@ Vivek Surya,

First, thanks for granting the privilege of disagreement.

Regarding your chart in KP system, according the little bit I know, analysis in the said system is not merely on the placements. One has to take consider the Ascendant/House star lord, sub-lord and the sub-sub-lord as well apart from the Star lord etc of the planets in the house. A linkage has to be seen with the Karaka. Perhaps you can get the chart fully analyzed from a good KP astrologer. He may be able to tally your life events even with the apparently changed placements. He may not, however, be able to identify your traits and personality like in Parashari System, but definitely should be able to come good with the events tally.

TKC

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!

He may not, however, be able to identify your traits and personality like in Parashari System

Then how could you say that It's a paddhati which conveys some meaningful analysis, if it doesn't say traits & personality!
And another major drawback of K. P. It completely neglects the concept of Ashtakavarga. I don't even know with what logical / sensible evidence people have accepted this paddhati when Ascendant itself tells about the person wrongly?!

[ChandraLagna]

PVR presents this argument in favor of ascendant being start of first house.

Regarding bhavas, two simple points:



(1) The 7th-12th houses are called "visible" and 1st-6th houses are called "invisible". Physically, 180 deg behind lagna is visible and 180 deg after lagna is invisible. What does this mean? Shouldn't 30 deg after lagna be the first house (invisible) and 30 deg behind lagna be the 12th house (visible)? How can lagna be in the middle of the first house if lagna is on the border of visible and insible halves? How can any solution other than lagna being at the beginning of first house fit with the physical truth?



(2) Parasara gave clear rules for evaluating the strengths of house-based planetary aspects using longitudes. Based on Parasara's clear rules, Mars and Jupiter both have 58.33% aspect on 80 deg point from their longitudes, including Mars. Mars does not have any higher aspect than Jupiter, on the 80 deg point from him. On the 90 deg point from him, Mars has 100% aspect while Jupiter only has 75% aspect. On the 110 deg point from him, Jupiter has only 58.33% aspect but Mars has 83.33% aspect. Basically, in the 90-120 deg portion from him, Mars has 25% more aspect than Jupiter (or other planets).


Doesn't it make it amply clear that 90-120 deg from a planet is the 4th house from it? Isn't it possible only if lagna is the beginning of the first house? Simialrly, Parasara's clear rules for aspect evaluation show that 120-150 deg from Jupiter is the 5th house from him, 60-90 deg from Saturn is the 3rd house from him and so on.

The above formulas for quantifying planetary aspects are clearly given in BPHS and used by everybody to find drishti bala, which is a part of shadbala. It is quite unambiguous. Still, people have not applied that understanding elsewhere!

Note though that PVR reversed this position a few years later and I am sure he had logical reasoning then too. If you are very smart, you can argue both sides and win both! Also, PVR has made some statements on other topics that will not stand the test of logic or mathematics so one has to be very careful with what one chooses to pick from PVR's repertoire.

All that said, let's wait for a real practitioner Lex ji to write up on the topic.

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!
ChandraLagna Ji, I'm glad! Thank you so much in taking efforts & giving me some more inputs to think!

(1) The 7th-12th houses are called "visible" and 1st-6th houses are called "invisible". Physically, 180 deg behind lagna is visible and 180 deg after lagna is invisible. What does this mean? Shouldn't 30 deg after lagna be the first house (invisible) and 30 deg behind lagna be the 12th house (visible)? How can lagna be in the middle of the first house if lagna is on the border of visible and insible halves?

For a normal human eye field of view is greater than 180°. So, why Ascendant degree shouldn't be middle of the 1st house!? Just stretch your 2 hands sideways & now rotate your right eye or left eye without turning your head, you could perceive the things which are beyond your hands it means which is greater than 180°

Doesn't it make it amply clear that 90-120 deg from a planet is the 4th house from it? Isn't it possible only if lagna is the beginning of the first house?

No! He assumed Ascendant degree as starting as the 1st house & he claimed that 90°-120° is 4th house! But I couldn't see any proper justification that made for Ascendant degree as starting of 1st house. What I'm saying is It's possible if we take Ascendant degree as middle & from there 90°-120° is 4th Bhaava from Ascendant degree.

If you are very smart, you can argue both sides and win both!

Of course I'm! I've Venus in 2nd house & Moon aspecting 2nd house from 8th & I've Mars Venus conjunction & 2nd Lord Saturn is in own sign. So, I look smart! Just kidding!

[ChandraLagna]

नमः शिवाय!
ChandraLagna Ji, I'm glad! Thank you so much in taking efforts & giving me some more inputs to think!

If you are very smart, you can argue both sides and win both!

Of course I'm! I've Venus in 2nd house & Moon aspecting 2nd house from 8th & I've Mars Venus conjunction & 2nd Lord Saturn is in own sign. So, I look smart! Just kidding!

Actually, I referred to PVR as being smart, since he has reversed positions on this topic apparently logically both times.

I'd like to toss a phrase familiar to you on this forum.....think again on the lines PVR has written and read repeatedly, mediate deeply and come back if you cannot understand them after deep thought. At this moment it appears that the urge to respond has overtaken the need to understand the matter.

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!

Actually, I referred to PVR as being smart, since he has reversed positions on this topic apparently logically both times.

If PVR Gaaru has reversed from his 1st claim how could we coin 1st claim as logical?!

&

(1) The 7th-12th houses are called "visible" and 1st-6th houses are called "invisible".

How?! & to whom

Shouldn't 30 deg after lagna be the first house (invisible) and 30 deg behind lagna be the 12th house (visible)?

If so, How is it justified?!

How can lagna be in the middle of the first house if lagna is on the border of visible and insible halves?

Why not?! 1st I need to understand why they've defined Visible half as from 7th to 12th & to whom it is & after understanding it, I've think the other way, why Lagna cannot be the border of both halves! PVR gaaru have made a claim that how can it be. Now my claim is why it shouldn't be in between both halves & what made him to think that it shouldn't be this way.

Could you please give me his reverse claim also.
Thank you ChandraLagna Ji.

[ChandraLagna]

First off, you need to do some homework and not be like the boy in first bench of the class asking questions all the time in a bid to impress!

नमः शिवाय!
ChandraLagna Ji, I'm glad! Thank you so much in taking efforts & giving me some more inputs to think!

For a normal human eye field of view is greater than 180°. So, why Ascendant degree shouldn't be middle of the 1st house!? Just stretch your 2 hands sideways & now rotate your right eye or left eye without turning your head, you could perceive the things which are beyond your hands it means which is greater than 180°

Wrong. Human eye vision span is roughly 120 degrees.

But that is NOT germane to this discussion. The above point shows you need to first understand what is Ascendant. Please read this up first and then everything falls in place. This has nothing to do with rotating eyes!

Tip: Middle school geography and how day/night is caused will help immensely here.

No! He assumed Ascendant degree as starting as the 1st house & he claimed that 90°-120° is 4th house! But I couldn't see any proper justification that made for Ascendant degree as starting of 1st house. What I'm saying is It's possible if we take Ascendant degree as middle & from there 90°-120° is 4th Bhaava from Ascendant degree.

Wrong, again! You should read more carefully. Where has he referred to ascendant here? He just calculated the strength of Mars and Jupiter without considering ascendant, or where the two planets are placed. From this calculation, he showed where the highest strength of the aspects of the two planets lay, then used logical induction to say the same principle applies to Ascendant as well.

If PVR Gaaru has reversed from his 1st claim how could we coin 1st claim as logical?!

That is why we need to think, understand and accept what we believe is correct. Also, the counter claim need not be based on reverse logic, i.e. it need not be -180 degree of the original logic. It can also be on the "j' axis. I quoted him because of his crisp articulation and forceful argument. He is not the first proponent of Ascendant = start of first house. The logic about 180 degrees is what you should draw here, not WHO said it.

Could you please give me his reverse claim also.

Really!?? You should search for this....PVR is one of the most widely followed astrologers and so much content is present online and yet you do not want to make even this minimal effort !?

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!

Wrong. Human eye vision span is roughly 120 degrees.

Sorry! I'm wrong I've not seen any source mentioning it is more than 180°. I felt it just by looking my right & left right without turning my head, though some of the things aren't clear beyond 180° but there is sight we can perceive, that's what I meant.

But that is NOT germane to this discussion. The above point shows you need to first understand what is Ascendant. Please read this up first and then everything falls in place. This has nothing to do with rotating eyes!

ChandraLagna Ji I know what Ascendant is, It's the Raashi & the degree that is Ascending at the eastern horizon at time t & at some (x, y, z) coordinate, in simple it is close to the intersection of the ecliptic with the eastern horizon. Eastern horizon means the ray at which the earth's surface and the sky appear to meet (meet here is as close as it appear to our sight) in the east.
You can't generalize that I've to understand what is Ascendant just because that 180° field of view was not appropriate.
Again I'm saying & I already said, It's just my speculation. So, there could be wrongs in it. See, I'm wrong for the field of view concept as 180°. Now I came to know It's lesser than that.
& I thought that by assuming humans perception as Ascendant degree there by I've proceeded. Like if we turn our eyes we can perceive the things whatever is in front thus I felt same way Ascendant degree will also perceives the energy of the zodiac just like a human eye. This made sense to me.

The logic about 180 degrees is what you should draw here

As I already mentioned that visible & invisible is not at all clear! To whom it is visible & why 7th-12th are visible. When you talked about visibility that led me to think on eye & perception. I hope you got why I've thought like this.

Could you please give me his reverse claim also.

Really!?? You should search for this....PVR is one of the most widely followed astrologers and so much content is present online and yet you do not want to make even this minimal effort !?

Come on Chandra Ji, do you think I didn't search it online!? I did! Frankly speaking, I was wondering from where did you get the 1st 3 points as you've mentioned it was by PVR gaaru.
Now also I've searched, I didn't get in online. I thought that as you're an Astrologer & you might be reading several books. So, in one book or personally he might've discussed with you (no idea though)
I've typed as: PVR Narasimha Rao views on Ascendant degree as starting of the 1st house & as you said he reversed it then I've typed PVR Narasimha Rao views on Ascendant degree as middle of the 1st house.
I didn't get in online. That's why I've asked could you please provide.

First off, you need to do some homework

Yes I'll! But 1st I've to be clearer on what homework exactly is..., right? I got a doubt as why he chosen or why is it defined as 1st to 6th as invisible & the later as visible. That's why I've left 1st statement.

First off, you need to do some homework and not be like the boy in first bench of the class asking questions all the time in a bid to impress!

I really care for the knowledge & try to acquire from a teacher & I don't care in impressing because I don't get anything. But I do care if I want something more from them if they're like extremely awesome & will try to acquire from them! But here, come on.......! I didn't mean at all, I think you took me negatively! Anyway you could guide me as much as you can & as much as you wish!

& FYI I got fed up with educational system & thus I had lot of attendance shortage. Though I got proxies

But I've already aforementioned my understanding on why Ascendant degree should be chosen as Bhaava madhya in brief!

[ChandraLagna]

For the benefit of readers who can spend a few minutes experimenting with their astrology software ( & not merely roll their eyes), here’s a couple of simple things to do to understand Ascendant, visible and invisible halves as well as few other points practically.

For the purpose of illustration, I have taken the place of birth as Udupi, date 2nd July 2018.
At this place and on this day, Sunrise is at 6:11 AM and sunset is at 18:58 PM.

I have cast a chart with the data as: place of birth = Udupi, Time of birth=6:11 AM, date of birth = 2-July-2018. My explanations and numbers below are with this data. You can cast a chart similarly with any place. What do you see?

You see that Ascendant degree is exactly the same as the degree of sun, at 16 degrees in Gemini. This is the reference for today, i.e. the sunrise defines where in the zodiac the starting point for the day lies. Now, move the time of birth later by 2 hours, i.e. now set time of birth to 8:11 AM. Where is the sun now? Is it in 2nd house, or 12th house? And, sunlight is bright and glorious now, right? Move the time of birth earlier by 2 hours, i.e. to 4:11 AM. Where is the sun now? In 12th house, or 2nd house? Is the sun visible at 4:11 AM? So, does this simple 1-minute exercise explain the visible and invisible half?

Now let’s do one more exercise. Since a day is divided into 24 hours, move the time of birth by 12 hours, i.e. to 18:11 hours in evening. What do you see? Hmm….why is ascendant not exactly at 180 degree away, i.e. at 16 degree in Sagittarius? So, let’s move the time of birth to coincide with the time of sunset, i.e. 18:58PM. Now what do you see? Ascendant is exactly at 16 degrees in Sagittarius, i.e. 180 degrees away from the ascendant in Gemini! So, the lesson here is, if you move the time by 12 hours, the ascendant is short by 11 degrees in Sagittarius, thus the visible part being more, or, in other words, in Summer, the days are longer! Repeat this exercise for a winter day, say January-2 and see what happens.

This simple experimenting with your software yielded insights into Ascendant, visible and invisible halves. Try all of the above with a date in Winter, i.e. January-2. You will find some interesting observations.

[ChandraLagna]

Now coming to PVR Rao’s views, a simple google search results in the first hit being the one of interest and quoted in this thread!


PVR Rao has written a book on Vedic astrology, and once you download that, you will find the following paragraph where he shares his thoughts on Lagna & first bhava. Note now that there is no mathematical reasoning provided, just taking cover under BPHS.

Houses are found with respect to lagna, special lagnas and some planets. Houses are
found in rasi chart and in all the divisional charts. Some scholars ignore all these and
take houses only with respect to lagna and only in rasi chart. They prepare something
called “bhaava chakra” or “chalit chakra”, in which houses can start in one rasi and
end in another. They take lagna’s longitude to be the mid-point of the first house and
construct all the houses accordingly. In the “equal house method”, they take a 30º arc
with center at lagna as the 1st house. The next 30º arc is taken as the 2nd house and so
on. This method is popular among Indian astrologers. Another method taught by
Sripathi is more complicated and it is also popular. However, this author
recommends neither. Each rasi is a house. The rasi containing the reference point
chosen is the 1st house and the next rasi is the 2nd house.
Though there are some indirect references in BPHS19 suggesting that Parasara
supported house divisions placing houses in 2 rasis, there are quite a few direct
references making it amply clear that each house falls in one rasi. Parasara taught us
to find houses by counting rasis from the reference chosen.
So readers are advised to ignore all the discussions found in other textbooks on
house division methods, “bhaava chakra” and “chalit chakra”. It may do good to
follow the instructions in this chapter.

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!
Chandra Ji, I've done this few days ago the one you shifted lagna degree & so on. I've seen a video Sun in various houses on YouTube. In that he mentioned time when Sun is in 4th, 10th. When Sun is in 10th it is exactly afternoon & when it is in 4th it is midnight. Then I've opened the software & did the same like you've done I thought of writing my observations at that time... But I was banned during that time. So, couldn't login, after few days I forgot about this topic completely!

For the Bhaava chakra & Chalit chakra... Thanks... I'll see it.
Anyway I couldn't see the document pasted by you!

[Vivek Surya]

नमः शिवाय!
Chandra Ji, I forgot to mention, 7th to 12th houses are visible houses & 1st to 6th houses are called invisible houses... It is when time taken as time of Sunrise. Today Sunrise in Ujjain was at 5:49 A.M. i.e., Sun conjunct Lagna degree during that time in Gemini. Now visible Raashis are Capricorn, AQUARIUS, PISCES, ARIES, TAURUS & some part of Gemini. Invisible Raashis are some part of Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra & some part of Sagittarius.
What if let's say I'm writing this particular sentence at 12:29 P.M. place chosen as Ujjain (random). Now Sun is at 10th house i.e., Sun is at top of us! Let's say after some time Sun be in 6th house. So, NOW concluding Aquarius being 2nd w.r.t. above time as invisible is incorrect right? Since Aquarius should be visible as per the above statement which was stated as 7th to 12th is visible!
The above statement which was stated as 7th house to 12th houses are visible & the rest are invisible houses can't be generalized, the above statement is true when initial time is chosen as "TIME OF SUNRISE!"... Isn't it?

So, now what happens when Lagna is chosen as middle of both visible & invisible half "WHEN REFERENCE TIME IS CHOSEN AS TIME OF SUNRISE?"
Chandra Ji, I don't see any point in the 1st claim by PVR gaaru which was mentioned in:
by ChandraLagna » Thu May 31, 2018 2:07 pm

[ChandraLagna]

It took multiple posts and a few weeks to understand visible and invisible halves which is really elementary school geography. I hope that given a few years of effort, the validity of PVR's statement will strike forth.

If you had read my posts, you would already have understood the concept of ascendant, what happens when time is moved etc.

[coffeeday]

If ascendant degree is taken as the mid point of first house , does it not amount to shift the birth time to one hour backwards in effect and essence . What is the logic in taking the birth degree as the mid point of first house . some argue that astrology is a science dealing with lights and a light spreads light equally on both sides of a point . Is it a valid argument . The logic may hold good in case of planets as they are light entities .But ascendant is a particular point and it does not have any light to spread .

[majestik108]

There is no logic to it if you follow Parashara. The system is internally consistent (it is after all from a Rishi) and these misconceptions happen when people try to mix different systems and/or 'add' to the system to 'improve' it.

When such thoughts arise, it's helpful to remember the primary difference between usual vyavaharika forms of knowledge (like science) and anything that is a Vedanga, and that is the fact that these were from Rishis and hence directly from Brahma. If there is a perceived 'error' in the system (assuming it is an authentic translation/source), the first step is to question one's own understanding rather than question the Rishis. This solves most supposed 'contradictions' even before they arise.

To sum up, if you follow Parashari astrology, the ascendant begins when the rasi begins. Period.

[SweetV]

I don't even agree with middle of the 1st house too
majestic1028, Rishi Parashara hasn't mentioned that Ascendant as starting point of the 1st house it is by Westerners & hence K.S. Krishnamurthy.
One has to D-1 with divisional charts then we will clearly understand. For twins, D-3 & D-60 are best to differentiate
Regards

[majestik108]

Jyotish uses the equal house system therefore the ascendant = start of the 1st house.

It's Western Astrology that uses bhava madhya.

I don't think there's any disagreement that all of the Jyotish Rishis followed the equal house system.

[coffeeday]

What I am given to understand is Parasara gave a dictum , that the ishtakala is the rising degree and first house starts with that degree .

[Thrawn]

[quote=coffeeday post_id=268235 time=1536063448 user_id=20048]
What I am given to understand is Parasara gave a dictum , that the ishtakala is the rising degree and first house starts with that degree .
[/quote]

How did you come to such understanding ?

[SweetV]

dear coffeeday, could you please tell what does Ishtakala mean in pertains to Astrology.

Comments are appreciated