Wednesday, October 19, 2005
I am not certain if anyone has really carried out a serious trial to
see if "Jaimini" and 'Parashari' principles (as some individuals like
to categorize those) work together or not. Assuming (and that is a
BIG assumption) that the two are somehow separate (I do not believe
that at all) and that Jaimini did not describe or recommend
Vimshottari dasha (assuming that Updesha Sutra forms the boundaries
of Jaimini system), then it is safe to assume that the charakarakas
and vimshottari dasha are from different systems. Mr. KN Rao's
student Supriya Jagdeesh (hope I am getting the name right) has
published a work in a research anthology on the use of charakaraa and
vimshottari in predicting marriage.
I do not read a lot of journals and magazines these days so there
might have been other publications on the use of factors that fall in
similar *perceived* duality of Parashari/Jaimini!
This is afterall a bipolar universe!
--- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, Bharat Hindu Astrology
Namaskaar Sri Vinay
It isn't my definition. I am only clarifying how many are viewing
Frankly, I do not know if the two systems are same or not. I am more
concerned about their usage. If you see, my responses are on their
I am yet to see a single reply regarding their combined or
Thanks and Regards
Dear Ranjan and Bharat,
You can find many illustrations of applying an integrated approach in which the so-called Parasari and Jaimini systems are combined into one integrated approach.
If you see my book "Vedic Astrology: An Integrated Approach" or my free mp3 lessons on the internet (see the link below) or several works coming from the "Sri Jagannatha Centre" stable, you will see many illustrations. We are very happy with the integrated approach. To us, the integrated approach is nothing but the real "Parasari system", if you define it based on the available works of Parasara.
To me, houses and arudha padas exist always. Bhava means a concept or thought. Pada means a word or a symbol. Arudha padas are to houses what padas is to bhavas, i.e. what words or to the meanings/concepts they represent. Thoughts are intangible, while words that attempt to represent them are their tangible expressions/manifestations. You cannot see the thoughts in my mind, but you can hear the words that come out of my mouth (or my fingers). Similarly, houses show intangibles and their arudha padas show the the tangible
expressions/manifestations. One's happiness from vehicle (4th house) is intangible, while one's vehicle itself is a tangible (arudha pada of 4th house).
We see arudha padas always, when looking at tangible things. We see houses when looking at the intangibles under them.
Let us look at one example to illustrate our approach, as Bharat was more concerned with practical usage rather than theoretical debates.
Rajiv Gandhi (1944 Aug 20, 7:12 IST, 72e49, 18n58)
He has a very strong Sun in lagna and hence Shashtihayani dasa applies. His mother was assassinated in Sun's shashtihayani dasa and Rahu's Vimsottari dasa.
From the 4th house from lagna/Moon in rasi, Sun is the 10th lord in 10th and not a maraka. Rahu is the 4th lord in 9th and not a maraka either.
In Dwadasamsa (D-12, the chart recommended by Parasara to see parents), Sun is the 5th lord in 6th from the 4th house of mother. Rahu is the 11th lord in 5th. Neither is a maraka. From the 4th house from Moon, Sun is the 4th lord in 5th and Rahu is the 10th lord in 4th. Again, neither is a maraka.
Now, switch to arudhas, because we are talking about tangibles. Mother's love/caring is an intangible, but mother's body and physical life are tanglibles. So to see Indira Gandhi's death, arudha of the 4th house (A4) is more appropriate than 4th house. Take matripada or A4 (mother) in D-12 (chart of parents). From A4, Rahu is in 7th and Sun is the 7th lord in 8th with 3rd lord Mars. Parasara clearly mentioned malefics in 7th and 7th lord as marakas. Thus, both Sun and Rahu are clear marakas. That is why Rahu's Vimsottari dasa and Sun's Shashtihayani dasa killed mother.
We look at the houses when seeing intangibles. We look at the arudha padas of houses when seeing tangible manifestations. Similarly, we have clear distinctions between various parameters and do not indiscriminately mix them up. If the concern of some people is that the presence of multiple parameters enables indiscriminate usage, it is a valid concern. But, we do not advocate such indiscriminate use. We advocate that each parameter has a unique meaning and use. We have some insights coming in tradition and we are trying to refine
the understanding. I believe that we are going in the right direction. If others take a different approach, I can understand it. But, I cannot understand why some people insist that Parashari system is different from Jaimini system, without even caring to define exactly what Parashari system is, what parameters it includes and WHY. They are defining Parasari system based on their wishes and not based on what Parasara actually taught. That's quite irresponsible and arbitrary.
Those who are interested in understanding how arudha padas, argalas, chara karakas, sign aspects etc fit with the rest of the teachings of Parasara and how they are used, please feel free to listen to my free MP3 lessons.
May Jupiter's light shine on us,
I have seen the books written by some of the new
writers in astrology you will find them mixing Jaimini
Astrology and Parashari astrology at various places to
explain things on charts that suit their ideas and
even by citing incorrect charts.
Lets stay clear of all this and try and concentrate on
the basic principles of the two systems. If you are
looking at Jaimini use the Karakas and rashi aspects
and dasha and things which are integral to Jaimini
astrology but kindly dont explain it away where you
cant do it by bringing in aspects of Parashari.
Dear Manoj ji,
I am willing to give the benefit of doubt to your view and consider it.
But I wish you could clarify for me what is the definition of "Parashari astrology" and how we decide what is part of it and what is not!!
Is it based on the BPHS that is available today (which seems like an amazing and brilliant work irrespective of who wrote/compiled it and when)?
If not, what is the basis or source for deciding what is part of "Parashari astrology" and what is not?
I asked this simple and natural question and nobody answered it. As there seem to be many people with strong views on "Parashari astrology/system", I am hoping that someone would be able to answer this.
Thanks a lot in advance for answering this important question!
May Jupiter's light shine on us,