Controversial Dictums/Principles in Jyotish

[Vaughn Paul]

Dear Astrologers,
Any dictum or principle in Jyotish is potentially controversial, it doesn't matter what it is, because they never work 100% of the time. Someone can always find an example chart where it doesn't work.

The dictum of sage Garga discussed in the previous two topics is nothing special in this sense. It's not necessarily any more or less controversial than others. It may work some of the time.

A dictum is never foolproof or should be treated as an absolute even if it's worded that way in a classic text. This is because an interpretation is never based on one isolated planetary configuration, but a synthesis of many factors in the chart, and the navamsha, etc. On this forum we need to keep this in mind or else mini wars with opposing camps, will be inevitable. Learn to put an asterisk in your mind next to any principle that claims to be fool proof and think instead, "That may work most of the time, but there will be exceptions." For instance, there's no way that a person with one or more exalted planets without a debilitated planet will always live in poverty as the quote by sage Garga claims. There needs to many more factors in place to lead to real poverty. Classic texts in Jyotish are full of absolute, extreme claims like this. Learn to understand them in the rightful way: as possibilities only, when many other factors are also supporting it in the chart.

Astrologers are like detectives looking for clues, but you need many clues to support a hypothesis, not just one. The principle then becomes just one factor to consider among many factors. Learning many principles like this is useful for this reason. We should be grateful to the person who brings it to our attention, in this case Astroboy, so that it can discussed on the forum with an open mind. One point about Sage Garga's principle, I think the beneficial effects of the debilitated planet will be great if it attains neecha bhanga raja yoga, and if the exalted planet is the contributing factor that causes this. For instance, debilitated Mercury conjunct exalted Venus in the 10th house in Einstein's chart. Vaughn Paul

[ChandraLagna]

Hello VPji,

I fully, completely, totally agree with the fact that nothing works 100% of the time on 100% of the charts.

In a public discussion however, the only expectation is for members to show courtesy and respect to each other. And, approach any dictum with an open mind, to see whether it works and examine the reasons if it does or if it does not.

Best Regards,
Arun

[chaks]

I couldn't agree more with Vaughn Paul and Arun.

[chavitarun]

respected members & elders
namaskar & pranam

There should be research jointly by astrologers for such controversial dictums/ astro principles
as rightly said by shri K N rao ji sometime back, so a meaningful conclusion & consensus can be reached,
for all astro learned & learners & use for the benefit for mankind. it also depends on desh , kal & patra.

One principle may be valid in particular era., which have now been outdated.
for example -it is said in a dictum ,the native will have many horses , in todays context it refers to car/ motor.
Regards

[Dinesh.Srivastava]

Paul Vaughan Wrote :
by Vaughn Paul » Wed Dec 14, 2011 8:49 am

there's no way that a person with one or more exalted planets without a debilitated planet will always live in poverty as the quote by sage Garga claims. There needs to many more factors in place to lead to real poverty.

Swamykool Wrote :
by swamykool » Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:29 am

As the text mentions, only exalted planets and no deb planets (or retro) will give poverty - this does not appear to be entirely correct. For poverty, there must be additional yogas for poverty.

A - BIG - THANK YOU - TO - BOTH - OF - YOU

That's EXACTLY what I intended to prove ...... and I Did

BLANKET - RULES , are MISLEADING to general - public and DETRIMENTAL for Astrology .

LET - ME - CLARIFY - CERTAIN - THINGS :

• I NEVER complain about anyone ever to any of the Moderators at the personal Level . People can check with all the moderators .

• SHILPHA and I never shared any personal conversation ever , not even a single PM , never ever since I joined the forum .

• About my thread "A controversial Topic " {Reference : http://lightonvedicastrology.com/phpBB3 ... =5&t=12846 } ,
I never complained to any moderators or even to Paul Vaughan Himself either, regarding it .



• I did not Even complain about the CHEAP and VULGAR word posted in my thread by the other side .

• I do not wish to score any points with anyone , neither with moderators or with any one else on this forum or anywhere else .... that's just simply Lame

• I have been very dignified in all my threads including the above mentioned , I never make any personal attacks , infact even in the aforementioned thread I referred to the other side as "esteemed astrologer participating on this forum" , please do read my opening statement in the thread again .



• I could have opened another thread and given response to the other side in language which suits them , but I am refraining from doing so because I cannot fall to that level , and that's why I am choosing this thread to give a dignified response .

• I never name names because all I am concerned about is Astrology and not Astrologers .

• People have a right to think highly of themselves but they do not have a right to say that I or anyone else is not sincere to astrology .



• If people have a PHOBIA that other people are plotting against them , then its there problem not mine and it certainly do not give them the right to abuse others .

• I Just Noticed , that the Name of my thread has been changed without my permission or even informing me .... hmmm interesting

• I wished to discuss only Astrology , but People become Abusive the minute their Logic is challenged and there Darkest - Fantasy , Phobias and Biased Approach start to manifest . This is not the way I Practice Astrology and I do not intend to be a part of any such discussion .

May The LIGHT - OF - ASTROLOGY , Enlighten The Heart of all the Readers .

GOD - BLESS - US - ALL

Regards
--- Dinesh

[anuradha]

We should be grateful to the person who brings it to our attention, in this case Astroboy, so that it can discussed on the forum with an open mind. One point about Sage Garga's principle, I think the beneficial effects of the debilitated planet will be great if it attains neecha bhanga raja yoga, and if the exalted planet is the contributing factor that causes this. For instance, debilitated Mercury conjunct exalted Venus in the 10th house in Einstein's chart. Vaughn Paul

Sir, I agree with this. I really appreciate his en devour to give the classical principle to all of us, and it is our duty to test it with open mind. Moreover classical principles should be used liberally not literally. regards anu

[Waterbearer]

I must stress that there must be a seperate sub-forum for controversial Dictums/Principles in Jyotish. It will shed more light on the unusual phenomenon which occur in astrology & hopefully to what causes them, resulting in a better understanding of this esoteric subject & greater accuracy in predictions.

[KRN]

Dear All,

I concur with the idea enunciated above.

Would like to just add that this is one of the reasons why Saadhana is also expected from the Astrologer. Regular, devoted Saadhana can give great insight which is of utmost necessity in a "divine" subject like Astrology, rather than mere rule-based interpretations.

KRN

[Ghrishneswar]

There are 2 reasons we may have controversy:
1) the source of dictum is not verifiable
2) The source is not questionable but the principle itself is not verifiable in actual horoscopes.
# 1 is always causes controversy...Some principles attributed to classical authors cannnot be traced to them. This is where we have a lot of issues. I will have my reservations about any such principle and look it with a lot more skeptism compared to #2.

Irrespective of source of dictum #1 or # #2, we should have an open mind about any principle.