> I admire your views. I refered BPHS and found the views on shodasha
> vargas and what Parasara says about akshavedamsa and shashtiamsa.
> Infact apart from shashtiamsa Maharshi gives more importance to
> akshavedamsa also, compared to other vargas while he stresses to see
> everything from Shashtiamsa. I would look forward to your studies in
> this regard.
Dear Saaji, I have some insights into D-60, but haven't worked much with D-45. My guru Pt Sanjay Rath teaches that it shows karma inherited from father and his ancestors. If your grandfather did great deeds, you will also benefit from that karma. D-45 shows that. However, I haven't used it that much.
> You said in Dasavarga scheme, Parasara gave more value to
> Shashtiamsa, but if you see BPHS, Parasara speaks about shadvarga and
> saptavarga scheme before moving onto Dasavarga. Why Shashtiamsa didnt
> fall in shadvarga group surprises me
You raise a very pertinent issue.
Some people hold the view one can 'pick' a varga scheme and use it. One may like shadvarga scheme and use it and one may like dasavarga scheme and use it.
But I find this view illogical. How can D-60 have a higher weightage than rasi and navamsa combined in dasavarga and yet not figure in shadvarga? Obviously, there is a specific purpose for each varga and only one varga is relevant in a particular case. You can't pick the varga scheme based on your wishes.
In our tradition, we believe that dasa varga is applicable in normal manushya jaataka (human horoscopy) and shadvarga is applicable in mundane horoscopy. As "karma carried from past lives" is far less important in mundane charts than present karma, D-60 is not important and does not find place in shadvarga. However, "karma carried from past lives" is the main factor in determining the fortunes of individuals and hence it is the most important chart in dasa varga and has a higher weightage than rasi and navamsa combined.
If you look at various combinations given for dhana yogas and raja yogas using vaiseshikamsas in classics such as BPHS and Jataka Parijatam, you will see Uttamamsa, Gopuramsa etc (based on dasa varga) used and not Kimshukamsa, Vyanjanamsa etc (based on shadvarga). This is in line with the teachings of our tradition that dasa varga is the most relevant in manushya jataka.
Parasara obviously expected us to be intelligent and figure out when to use which varga.
> Again when we write a book, we will naturally devote more space to
> discuss important aspects in detail compared to others and as far as
> shashtiamsa is concerned, I didnt see anything more than
> benefic/malefic shashtiamsa and Vimsopaka strength.
I disagree. Judging the importance of a topic from the number of pages devoted to it is superficial. Parasara would not decide the numbers of verses devoted to a topic based on its importance. He would do so based on how much he had to say on it. The very fact that Parasara said "everything" can be seen in D-60 and gave it the highest weightage in the varga schemes in which it figures (dasa and shodasa) clearly proves its importance.
Moreover, we cannot be sure that we have the entire BPHS. There may be lost chapters. In fact, I did hear about chapters on D-60 existing in some quarters.
> Whatever veterans say treat it as a mantra, a thread. Try to develop it, elaborate
> it. I will sincerely advise you to read all the books of Shri K.N.Rao again and
> again and contemplate over it keeping aside your present belief system, at
> least temporarily. You will gain immensely.
Dear Praveen, I do have several books by Sri KN Rao. I did read them. In my view, he does not have a consistent and logical methodology for using various parameters of Jyotish. He uses a lot of them interchangably and that's unappealing to me. For example, he uses arudha padas sometimes, but he uses them intercgangably with houses. If 5th house, arudha pada of 5th and 5th lord show the same thing, it seems illogical to me. They are different parameters and must have different meanings and must have different uses. I respect Sri Rao, but I did not find the answers I was looking for in Sri KN Rao's books. I found them only at SJC and in the teachings of Pt Sanjay Rath.
I too can behave like you and tell you to keep aside "your present belief system, at least temporarily" and consider our teachings.
> Dear Pradeep, please quote a mail from me that says "rasi chakra is
> simple".
> Give me the yahoogroup name and the mail number.
>
> You wrote -under misc.replies
> '''We are often doing imperfect astrology for the sake of simplicity
> and look at only one chart''.
>
> I assumed you meant rashi chakra analysis is simplistic(the one
> chart we use is Rashi chakra).If you did not mean it kindly ignore.
I was talking about using a single chart (could be rasi, could be dasamsa) vs combining multiple charts. I was not talking about rasi chart.
Neither rasi chart nor dasamsa nor shashtyamsa is simple. All are complicated.
For perfect readings, we need to consider various charts. For example, take career. Rasi shows physical existence and physical activities. D-10 shows the professional enivornment. D-24 shows one's learning environment. D-2 shows one's financial environment. D-9 shows one's dharmik environment. D-60 shows the karma to be experienced in various areas of life due to past life karma. How can we judge one's career perfectly, without taking all these charts into consideration? But, it is a tough task. In comparison, it is much simpler to just see rasi or D-10 and judge career. That is what I was saying.
When I have to compromise and use only one chart, I am more comfortable using D-10 for career than rasi. That works better for me. But I was saying that it is imperfect and the perfect solution involves multiple charts.
> I am not aware of any publicly available predictions on mundane
> events/famous people from the SJC group. If you have any links to
> these, please let me know. Please also note that I am asking this in
> all earnestness - I was considering buying Shri Sanjay Rath's
> Narayana Dasa but having seen no public, stated-in-advance
> predictions I was disinclined to do so.
It was using compressed navamsa Narayana dasa of Vajpayee's swearing-in chart that I had written in Express Star Teller magazine that India would have fresh troubles from terrorism after March 19, 1999 (Pakistani incursion into Kargil started then and went on for a couple of months before India detected it) and a confrontation with another nation after May 19, 1999 (Kargil war broke on May 25, 1999).
If you forget mundane horoscopy and focus on individual horoscopy, there were several predictions made by several people using Narayana dasa on vedic-astrology yahoogroup. You can find many correct individual predictions and correctly solved puzzles on vedic-astrology yahoogroup using several techniques based on our tradition, such as Tithi Pravesha and Narayana dasa.
It is very easy to conduct propaganda, intentionally or unintentionally, and discredit sincere and capable people. But it is bad karma for one who engages in it, irrespective of whether there were malicious intentions or not.
BTW, you don't have to buy the Narayana dasa book. It is available for a free download, thanks to the generosity of Sanjay ji. Go to
http://srath.com/books/narayana_dasa.htm
Some interpretation techniques that Sanjay ji did not clearly cover in his book were more clearly dealt with in my classes. So consider downloading my mp3 lessons related to Narayana dasa also. They will supplement the book nicely.
> Moolatrikona,swakshethra etc are not bhavas.We are talking about
> bhavas in amshas.
> also asked before -why 64th navamsha is counted in Rashi and not a
> particular bhava in navamsha ''chart''.I have also quoted shri Gayatri
> devis comment 20 years back - supporting usage of navamsha as chart
> -why should smt .Devi try to support something - if it was not
> questioned? Also smt devi will not respond if the allegator was a
> common soul like pradeep.Thus it is clear that people of stature had
> questioned usage of navamsha and vargas with bhavas.
Pradeep, do you support taking houses in navamsa or not? Please make that clear.
If you do, then all your objections to taking houses in other divisions will be quite illogical.
If you don't, how do you explain glaring differences between some twins? The only thing that differentiates them is lagna in some divisional charts (and hence houses in them).
May Jupiter's light shine on us,
Narasimha
