Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

"Parashari system" - hmm..define it!

Expand Messages
  • pvr108
    Dear friends, We had a nice Jyotish workshop at Boston. I see a lot of emails on Parashari vs Jaimini systems . Unfortunately, I have time to neither read
    Message 1 of 165 , Oct 17, 2005
      Dear friends,

      We had a nice Jyotish workshop at Boston.

      I see a lot of emails on "Parashari vs Jaimini systems".
      Unfortunately, I have time to neither read those emails nor argue
      with these gentlemen at great lengths.

      I just want to pose a small question to those who are using the
      term "Parashari system".

      The question is simple: What is the definition of "Parashari system"
      and what parameetrs and techniques does it include?

      What I am getting at is: Are chara karakas, arudha padas of houses,
      arudha padas of planets, sign aspects, argalas, chara dasa, sthira
      dasa, trikona dasa, mandooka dasa, shoola dasa, brahma dasa,
      drigdasa etc included in the so-called "Parashari system"?

      If yes, what really is the difference between basic parameters of
      the two "systems" in question then?

      If not, why not? They are mentioned in the available works of
      Parashara (BPHS in the form available today). Did Parashara come in
      your dream and tell you to ignore half the material in his available
      works?

      Whether Parasara lived before or after Jaimini and whether Parasara
      lived in 5000 BC or 700 AD is irrelevant here. The relevant point is
      that the available works of Parasara contain all the parameters I
      mentioned above. If any "system" is attributed to Parasara, it must
      contain all those parameters.

      You define "Parashari system" based on what Parasara taught. If you
      define "Parashari system" based on what Mantreshwara or Varahamihira
      taught, it would be a misuse of Parasara's name! Kindly give it
      another name!

      My intention is not to win a debate here. With the time I get to
      spend on this, I cannot. If I can influence a handful of talented
      youngsters to overcome this sadly popular notion, my job is done.
      IMHO, this non-existent distinction between the two "systems" is a
      hindrance to fully understanding the teachings of either of the two
      Sages!

      May Jupiter's light shine on us,
      Narasimha
      ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net
      Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org
      Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org
      ----------------------------------------------------------------
    • rohiniranjan
      No, Inderjit, as far as I recall the Mani I was talking about was US- based (California if I recall correctly) and goes back to 96-97 or perhaps earlier. Also,
      Message 165 of 165 , Jan 1 9:47 AM
        No, Inderjit, as far as I recall the Mani I was talking about was US-
        based (California if I recall correctly) and goes back to 96-97 or
        perhaps earlier. Also, I do not recall you being a member of the
        group at that time, unless you were reading but not posting.

        --- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, "Inder Jit Sahni"
        <inder_jit_sahni@y...> wrote:
        >
        > > > I have publicly stated, all my life, the discomfort regarding
        > > > celebrity charts and more so with rectified charts! Right here
        in
        > > > this forum, old timers may remember one person named Mani who
        did not
        > > > have correct time and a few intrepid ones tried to rectify his
        > > > birthtime by a few minutes here and there. He then went to
        Pandit
        > > > Karveji about whom Raoji and Goravani have written here and
        > > > elsewhere. Karveji gave Mani a time and lagna which was about
        2 hours
        > > > different from what he had posted and one sign later than what
        was
        > > > being used earlier. I will just leave that as one example and
        just at
        > > > that.
        > Dear Ranjan,
        > I dont know , but I think you are talking about the the Mani who
        was an
        > South Indian and living in German.
        > I rectified his birth time, I predicted some dates for him, an
        operation
        > date for his nose operation. and then his last time.
        > Generaly one shall avoid predicting death to some one .
        > I assume he is no more.
        > He beleived my time as the most correct.
        > The dates except death were confirmed by him.
        > I dont have records with me. But my old list companions may
        remember.
        > I was reading the pending mails ; sorry I read your (October
        mail , in Dec ;)this mail just now.
        > With Best wishes,
        > Inder Jit sahni
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "rohiniranjan"
        > To:
        > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:00 AM
        > Subject: [JyotishGroup] Re: BPHS and varga-kundali
        >
        > > I am not surprised. But good to hear about the 'other side' of
        the
        > > coin from someone who experienced same :-)
        > >
        > > RR
        > >
        > > --- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, Bharat Hindu Astrology
        > > wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Namaskaar Sri Rohini
        > > >
        > > > To add to your discussion on birth time. Yogi Karve gave my
        time at
        > > 14:45
        > > > but my mother had recorded it to be 15:00 Hrs. I questioned my
        > > mother again
        > > > and she said that she saw the watch and my birth was couple of
        > > minutes after
        > > > 15:00 hrs.
        > > >
        > > > Yogi Karve was correct in my brother's case.
        > > >
        > > > The point is one cannot totally depend upon him as he may be
        tired,
        > > etc.,
        > > > which might lead him to be incorrect.
        > > >
        > > > What I liked about him was his simplicity and devotion. I met
        him
        > > twice -
        > > > one in Gurgaon at someone's home and again at Swami Dayananda
        Ashram in
        > > > Rishikesh in 1997.
        > > >
        > > > Thanks and Regards
        > > > Bharat
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > On 10/26/05, rohiniranjan wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > Mr. Chandrashekhar,
        > > > >
        > > > > In all these discussions that have taken place on this or
        similar
        > > > > threads, I have never presumed that that necessarily
        represents what
        > > > > individuals rigidly use, all the time, regardless of a
        certain
        > > > > position they are defending. Practical astrology, let us
        face it, is
        > > > > more complex than that. This does not mean that people say
        what they
        > > > > don't necessarily do but simply that astrology is not black
        and white
        > > > > and there are a lot of uncertainties. Let us just leave it
        at that
        > > > > without even defending personal positions or preferences.
        You are
        > > > > right, in the end, what matters is that one is able to help
        others
        > > > > and if astrology plays a role in that to whatever extent,
        that is
        > > > > enough for astrology's raison d'etre.
        > > > >
        > > > > I have publicly stated, all my life, the discomfort regarding
        > > > > celebrity charts and more so with rectified charts! Right
        here in
        > > > > this forum, old timers may remember one person named Mani
        who did not
        > > > > have correct time and a few intrepid ones tried to rectify
        his
        > > > > birthtime by a few minutes here and there. He then went to
        Pandit
        > > > > Karveji about whom Raoji and Goravani have written here and
        > > > > elsewhere. Karveji gave Mani a time and lagna which was
        about 2 hours
        > > > > different from what he had posted and one sign later than
        what was
        > > > > being used earlier. I will just leave that as one example
        and just at
        > > > > that.
        > > > >
        > > > > In defence of celebrity charts, if accurate, regardless of
        their
        > > > > utility in astrology applied to commoners, we know that the
        promise
        > > > > of destiny has been fulfilled and so they make interesting
        study
        > > > > material and just that. However, since astrology
        interpretations are
        > > > > flexible and fuzzy multifactorial considerations -- one
        should be
        > > > > careful in making the box too rigid just based on faith or
        even based
        > > > > on what a revered teacher has said or written. This is just
        caution
        > > > > and not confusion, though some would love to confuse it to
        mean
        > > > > exactly that!
        > > > >
        > > > > RR
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, Chandrashekhar
        > > > > wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Dear Rohini,
        > > > > >
        > > > > > If I gave the indication that I do not appreciate people
        using
        > > > > Varga
        > > > > > charts as standalone chart, let me clarify that as long as
        one can
        > > > > > predict right and show the right path/help to a person in
        distress,
        > > > > I
        > > > > > have not objection to that. That is the aim of Jyotish. I
        have
        > > > > already
        > > > > > indicated that K.A. Abhyankar did use some charts that
        way. Only
        > > > > that I
        > > > > > do not use them(Varga charts) in that way, myself for the
        reasons I
        > > > > have
        > > > > > already given.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > The problem with the new theories being propounded is that
        the
        > > > > example
        > > > > > charts are mostly of celebrities, whose birth data is
        generally not
        > > > > very
        > > > > > reliable and what is given as the results is the
        perception of
        > > > > people
        > > > > > about them. I have seen one chart where the date of birth
        was off
        > > > > by 2
        > > > > > years being given as that of one leader and various charts
        being
        > > > > used to
        > > > > > show how they give right results.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > I have seen similar things happening with Mahatma Gandhi's
        chart
        > > > > also.
        > > > > > Rare is the astrologer that has tried to comment on his
        children
        > > > > and his
        > > > > > relations with his wife, which is on record, while
        ascribing only
        > > > > > saintly qualities to him, using Varga charts, as that is
        the
        > > > > popular
        > > > > > perception. While true as far we the Indians is concerned
        was it
        > > > > seen as
        > > > > > such by his family and if not why not is something that is
        not seen
        > > > > > demonstrated through the yogas in his Vargas.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > I wish people consistently use the divisional charts (all
        16 of
        > > > > them) in
        > > > > > predictions rather than where results are thought to be
        known and
        > > > > come
        > > > > > to an honest conclusion. But then as i said, I am from a
        different
        > > > > > generation and have different views.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Chandrashekhar.
        > > > > > rohiniranjan wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji,
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > I shall address just one point in your post, regarding
        whether
        > > > > vargas
        > > > > > > can be used as a "standalone" chart. This thread has
        moved around
        > > > > and
        > > > > > > shifted quite a bit and rightly so because that is how a
        topic is
        > > > > > > explored. I must confess that I am no spring chicken
        either and so
        > > > > > > find some of the 'new' views a bit unsettling. However,
        in such
        > > > > cases
        > > > > > > my tendency is not necessarily to run back to classics
        which, as
        > > > > you
        > > > > > > have rightly pointed out are not available in full or
        pure form,
        > > > > just
        > > > > > > going by the variations and so on in the editions
        available. I
        > > > > wrote
        > > > > > > an article about that very matter some years ago, so I
        am very
        > > > > > > painfully aware of that hiatus, please believe me. My
        tendency in
        > > > > > > such instances is to go in an empirical mode. I will not
        > > > > immediately
        > > > > > > begin using the 'new' technique but would wait patiently
        for the
        > > > > > > proponent to bring forth evidence and him/her and a few
        others
        > > > > > > demonstrate the validity or practical applications. This
        is easier
        > > > > > > said than done because research and proof is difficult
        to bring
        > > > > forth
        > > > > > > in astrology, because so many variables operate
        simultaneously.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > As far as using standalone vargas (e.g., navamsha by
        itself,
        > > > > without
        > > > > > > reference to rashi) I don't use that -- I guess that
        makes me from
        > > > > > > the old school and conservative too :-) -- however, if
        someone
        > > > > brings
        > > > > > > forth evidence, I shall examine it with interest. The
        problem is
        > > > > that
        > > > > > > the craft is long and life brief -- even if the pandemic
        does not
        > > > > hit
        > > > > > > us in near future!
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > RR
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > --- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, Chandrashekhar
        > > > > > > wrote:
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > Dear Rohini,
        > > > > > > > You are right, it is good that astrologers would see
        for
        > > > > themselves
        > > > > > > what
        > > > > > > > the classics actually say. People generally say,
        Parashara said
        > > > > > > this or
        > > > > > > > that but mean that is the interpretation offered by
        translator
        > > > > or
        > > > > > > > themselves and this is not to be confused with what is
        > > > > available as
        > > > > > > BPHS
        > > > > > > > in this era. Even within different editions of BPHS
        some shlokas
        > > > > > > are
        > > > > > > > different or missing and by implication added. The
        case in
        > > > > point is
        > > > > > > the
        > > > > > > > aspects of Rahu, which appears in one of the editions
        and not in
        > > > > > > > majority of the other editions.One edition,
        Chaukhamba, if
        > > > > memory
        > > > > > > serves
        > > > > > > > me right, clearly says that Gulika and Mandi are
        synonymous
        > > > > whereas
        > > > > > > > other editions do not say comment on this.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > We must remember that what we have are the texts
        reduced to
        > > > > writing
        > > > > > > from
        > > > > > > > memory of many astrologers and there could be some
        impurities.
        > > > > > > However
        > > > > > > > whenever the results are based on sound astrological
        principles,
        > > > > > > they
        > > > > > > > could be accepted as post Varahamihira days texts were
        in
        > > > > written
        > > > > > > form
        > > > > > > > and we have Vaidyanatha, Mantreshwara and other
        authors from
        > > > > that
        > > > > > > era.
        > > > > > > > Ududaya Pradeep or Laghu Parashari was also found in
        manuscript
        > > > > > > form in
        > > > > > > > Roha.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > It must also be remembered that BPHS talks of grahas
        in trine or
        > > > > > > Kendra,
        > > > > > > > exaltation etc., so casting of Varga chart is not in
        dispute at
        > > > > > > all. The
        > > > > > > > difference is about whether they could be taken as
        standalone
        > > > > > > charts and
        > > > > > > > read as such. Personally, at my age, I go with
        specific yogas
        > > > > > > mentioned
        > > > > > > > for Varga charts (mostly they are in respect of
        Navamsha).
        > > > > However
        > > > > > > I
        > > > > > > > would hesitate to use aspects in charts other than
        Navamsha as
        > > > > > > aspects
        > > > > > > > are based on multiples of 30 degrees as evident from
        the way of
        > > > > > > deriving
        > > > > > > > Drigbala or aspectual strength. I would still be not
        > > > > uncomfortable
        > > > > > > using
        > > > > > > > them in Navamsha as one Navamsha represents one
        Nakshatra Pada.
        > > > > > > When
        > > > > > > > certain yogas are mentioned as being at a certain
        house from
        > > > > > > Karakamsha,
        > > > > > > > I would treat them in position that the AK occupies in
        Navamsha
        > > > > > > chart
        > > > > > > > rather than the natal chart, since I do find Parashara
        talking
        > > > > > > about X
        > > > > > > > distance from Karakamsha clearly giving a hint that
        this is to
        > > > > be
        > > > > > > seen
        > > > > > > > in Navamsha chart. I have also seen K.A. Abhyankar
        using
        > > > > Karakamsha
        > > > > > > > Lagna Chart in his commentary on Jaimini Sutra, so I
        may not be
        > > > > the
        > > > > > > only
        > > > > > > > one supporting this view.
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > But then I am from an earlier generation and a bit
        conservative
        > > > > in
        > > > > > > my
        > > > > > > > approach to astrology. I was taught that there are two
        basic
        > > > > > > factors for
        > > > > > > > supporting an argument, Pramana (proof by way of
        quotes of
        > > > > > > authorities
        > > > > > > > in the subject) and Tarka (logic derived from Pramana).
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.
        > > > > > > > rohiniranjan wrote:
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Dear Chandrashekhar ji,
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > One positive thing this discussion is doing is
        making us all
        > > > > go
        > > > > > > and
        > > > > > > > > reread the classics, at least BPHS, the motherlode
        par none
        > > > > of all
        > > > > > > > > jyotish knowledge :-)
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > You have rightly pointed out that chapter 5
        describes how to
        > > > > > > derive
        > > > > > > > > houses from the lagna, dasham etc by the trisection
        method and
        > > > > > > this
        > > > > > > > > can only apply to the rashi varga or sign chart.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > This would seem to indicate that BPHS does not talk
        about
        > > > > varga-
        > > > > > > > > kundali at all. However, later on in Chapter 35
        > > > > > > > > (Karakamshaphalaadhyaaya), BPHS mentions about
        effects of
        > > > > planets
        > > > > > > > > that are in 2nd or 5th from karakamsha (sloka 30-31
        for
        > > > > instance)
        > > > > > > and
        > > > > > > > > other houses in subsequent slokas. Additionally, in
        sloka 33
        > > > > BPHS
        > > > > > > > > mentions about aspect of moon and venus on the 4th
        from
        > > > > karakamsha
        > > > > > > > > and also in sloka 13.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Now, here comes the problem:
        > > > > > > > > BPHS has to the best of my understanding not
        clarified if the
        > > > > > > > > karakamsha kundali is to be read in the navamsha
        arrangement
        > > > > or
        > > > > > > the
        > > > > > > > > rashi arrangement (even though in both case the
        karakamsha
        > > > > sign
        > > > > > > will
        > > > > > > > > be taken from the navamsha where AK is placed).
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > My guess is that since this forum has a large number
        of
        > > > > followers
        > > > > > > of
        > > > > > > > > Mr. KN Rao and since he recommends reading the
        Karakamsha in
        > > > > the
        > > > > > > sign
        > > > > > > > > horoscope, the above slokas would not be taken by
        them to
        > > > > indicate
        > > > > > > > > that BPHS recommends using vargakundalis (since all
        those 2nd
        > > > > and
        > > > > > > 3rd
        > > > > > > > > house references and aspects would be in the rashi
        arrangement
        > > > > > > once
        > > > > > > > > karkamsha has been identified)
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > On the other hand, for those people who view the
        karakamsha
        > > > > > > kundali
        > > > > > > > > in the navamsha chart entirely, then the above
        quoted slokas
        > > > > would
        > > > > > > > > indicate that BPHS recommends using navamsha
        vargakundali
        > > > > based
        > > > > > > on
        > > > > > > > > the reference to the houses and aspects, etc. By
        judicious
        > > > > > > > > extrapolation, the same arrangement can be extended
        to the
        > > > > other
        > > > > > > > > vargas.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Please note that there still could be other Indian
        classics
        > > > > which
        > > > > > > we
        > > > > > > > > have not really scoured for evidence of vargakundali
        or not
        > > > > and
        > > > > > > may
        > > > > > > > > not have the time to do so systematically. This
        thing about
        > > > > > > whether
        > > > > > > > > recommended in classics is a distraction anyway
        because
        > > > > whether
        > > > > > > > > something is recommended in classics or not, it
        would need to
        > > > > be
        > > > > > > > > tested to see if it works or not. This I believe is
        the
        > > > > > > > > recommendation of Mr. K.N. Rao saheb too. There is a
        lot of
        > > > > > > > > information in the classics that has not been tested
        but that
        > > > > is
        > > > > > > > > besides the point for this conversation (item c in
        below-
        > > > > mentioned
        > > > > > > > > message).
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > I remind all fellow forum members who are interested
        in this
        > > > > topic
        > > > > > > > > about what I wrote in message 9136 (quoted here to
        save people
        > > > > > > from
        > > > > > > > > hunting around in the forum). Issue (b) is the
        important one
        > > > > and
        > > > > > > > > requires our focus and hard attention. Issue (a) is
        really an
        > > > > > > > > academic curiosity as always. Not that I am trying
        to demean
        > > > > > > anyone
        > > > > > > > > with a keen interest in history etc.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Rohiniranjan
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > *******quoted from 9136*************
        > > > > > > > > Satish ji,
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > There are two issues here:
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > a) Are divisional charts 'historically' ancient or
        not, i.e.,
        > > > > > > > > described in classics or not
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > b) Do divisional charts, such as navamsha work or
        not and are
        > > > > > > useful
        > > > > > > > > primary or secondary tools of utility or not
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > I for one am not interested in the first issue,
        because only
        > > > > > > > > practicing specialists in that area can examine all
        the
        > > > > evidence
        > > > > > > and
        > > > > > > > > figure out where to draw the time-line of what is
        classics or
        > > > > not,
        > > > > > > > > what is original or not, what has been inserted or
        not etc.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > I am more interested in the 2nd issue from the point
        of
        > > > > practical
        > > > > > > > > astrology. Do vargas work or not, are they useful or
        not.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > A third issue (c) can mistakenly arise that
        everything that is
        > > > > > > non-
        > > > > > > > > classical and new is not worthy of attention of
        jyotishis.
        > > > > This
        > > > > > > would
        > > > > > > > > be rather extreme a position if someone takes that
        without
        > > > > > > examining
        > > > > > > > > it properly and for some time.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > Since 'navamsha' has been considered the
        representative varga
        > > > > > > chart
        > > > > > > > > for some time in relatively modern texts from
        illustrious
        > > > > teachers
        > > > > > > > > writers such as Prof. Raman, Mr. Rao, Mr. Sastry,
        etc. items
        > > > > (a)
        > > > > > > and
        > > > > > > > > (b) are moot points as far as I am concerned. Most
        pragmatic
        > > > > > > > > astrologers would agree.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > However, if someone brings forth evidence to the
        contrary,
        > > > > namely,
        > > > > > > > > that these kundalis are worthless, I will not
        immediately
        > > > > yield to
        > > > > > > > > aggression but calmly examine the evidence. That is
        the sane
        > > > > way,
        > > > > > > I
        > > > > > > > > think.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > RR
        > > > > > > > > ******end of quote from 9136*********
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > --- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, Chandrashekhar
        > > > > > > > > wrote:
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > Dear Astrologers,
        > > > > > > > > > Though there is no reason one may not use
        divisional charts
        > > > > as
        > > > > > > > > stand
        > > > > > > > > > alone charts, if one desires to do so, what Finn
        says is
        > > > > > > factually
        > > > > > > > > > correct. And for record, Parashara does talk about
        casting
        > > > > > > > > horoscopes
        > > > > > > > > > for Rasi, Bhava, Hora and Ghatika Lagna very
        clearly in
        > > > > chapter
        > > > > > > 5
        > > > > > > > > shloka
        > > > > > > > > > 9. So the contention that Parashara does not
        mention Lagna
        > > > > chart
        > > > > > > > > > specifically may not be correct.
        > > > > > > > > > Chandrashekhar.
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > Finn Wandahl wrote:
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Please stop being so polemic and irritating,
        Ranjan
        > > > > Bose,
        > > > > > > and
        > > > > > > > > see if
        > > > > > > > > > > you can find even a single example of any
        classic on hindu
        > > > > > > > > astrology
        > > > > > > > > > > that has ever suggested the use of Divisional
        charts.
        > > > > > > > > > > Many of of the Classics are however suggesting
        the
        > > > > use of
        > > > > > > > > Vargas,
        > > > > > > > > > > but not of them has ever turned these Vargas into
        > > > > divisional
        > > > > > > > > charts.
        > > > > > > > > > > Divisional charts is a recent discovery.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Finn
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > rohiniranjan wrote:
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > Manoj ji,
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >From what I gathered some of the discussants
        here were
        > > > > > > > > mentioning
        > > > > > > > > > > > that Sage Parashara did not mention
        the 'kundalis' but
        > > > > just
        > > > > > > > > described
        > > > > > > > > > > > the vargas. Their suggestion is to treat the
        vargas as
        > > > > > > segments
        > > > > > > > > by
        > > > > > > > > > > > themselves and not treat them as kundalis or
        chakras.
        > > > > So for
        > > > > > > > > example,
        > > > > > > > > > > > just because mars is in pisces navamsha and
        moon is in
        > > > > aries
        > > > > > > > > > > > navamsha, they are not in an organizational
        sense next
        > > > > to
        > > > > > > each
        > > > > > > > > other
        > > > > > > > > > > > in 'bhava' configuration in navamsha chart for
        instance
        > > > > > > > > (regardless
        > > > > > > > > > > > of how it is popularly depicted). Because
        navamsha
        > > > > chakra or
        > > > > > > > > kundali
        > > > > > > > > > > > as such has not been explicitly described in
        BPHS or
        > > > > other
        > > > > > > > > classics.
        > > > > > > > > > > > >From such a perspective, I do not clearly see
        even
        > > > > lagna
        > > > > > > > > kundali
        > > > > > > > > > > > being described as such in BPHS. This creates
        > > > > difficulties,
        > > > > > > > > obviously!
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > RR
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > --- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, Manoj
        Kumar
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > wrote:
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Satish,
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > I am really perplexed then why at all
        Parashara
        > > > > > > > > > > > > mentioned these 16 varga kundlis (divisional
        charts)
        > > > > > > > > > > > > in his treatise then.
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > regards,
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Manoj
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________
        > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel
        sites in one
        > > > > > > click.
        > > > > > > > > > > > > http://farechase.yahoo.com
        > > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Astrological chart Case study
        > > > > Vedic
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > Vedic astrology Free vedic astrology
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > -----------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ----
        > > > > > > ----
        > > > > > > > > -------
        > > > > > > > > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > + Visit your group "JyotishGroup" on the web.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > + To unsubscribe from this group, send an
        email to:
        > > > > > > > > > > > JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > + Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
        Yahoo!
        > > > > > > Terms
        > > > > > > > > of
        > > > > > > > > > > > Service.
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > > -----------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ----
        > > > > > > ----
        > > > > > > > > -------
        > > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        removed]
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ----
        > > > > > > ----
        > > > > > > > > ------
        > > > > > > > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > * Visit your group "JyotishGroup
        > > > > > > > > > > " on the
        > > > > > > web.
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
        to:
        > > > > > > > > > > JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > subject=Unsubscribe>
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
        Yahoo!
        > > > > > > Terms of
        > > > > > > > > > > Service .
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ----
        > > > > > > ----
        > > > > > > > > ------
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ----
        > > > > > > ----
        > > > > > > > > -----
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > > > > > > > > >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
        > > > > > > > > > >Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.4/146 -
        Release
        > > > > Date:
        > > > > > > > > 10/21/2005
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
        removed]
        > > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > -----------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ----
        > > > > > > ------
        > > > > > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > * Visit your group "JyotishGroup
        > > > > > > > > " on the
        > > > > web.
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > > > > > > > JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > > > > > > > > > > subject=Unsubscribe>
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
        > > > > Terms of
        > > > > > > > > Service .
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > > -----------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ----
        > > > > > > ------
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ----
        > > > > > > -----
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > > > > > > >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
        > > > > > > > >Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.4/146 -
        Release Date:
        > > > > > > 10/21/2005
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS
        > > > > > > Astrological chart
        > > > > > > > > >
        t=ms&k=Astrological+chart&w1=Astrological+chart&w2=Case+study&w3=Vedi
        c
        > > > >
        &w4=Vedic+astrology&w5=Free+vedic+astrology&c=5&s=98&.sig=WoThAwPfpdF
        N
        > > > > PgMlToNrCg>
        > > > > > > Case study
        > > > > > > > > >
        t=ms&k=Case+study&w1=Astrological+chart&w2=Case+study&w3=Vedic&w4=Ved
        i
        > > > >
        c+astrology&w5=Free+vedic+astrology&c=5&s=98&.sig=y9oVB5wzz5OStWh-
        > > > > 7_XD7Q>
        > > > > > > Vedic
        > > > > > > > > >
        t=ms&k=Vedic&w1=Astrological+chart&w2=Case+study&w3=Vedic&w4=Vedic+as
        t
        > > > >
        rology&w5=Free+vedic+astrology&c=5&s=98&.sig=YJEUgqlxVJecC1nEVinRkA>
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > Vedic astrology
        > > > > > > > > >
        t=ms&k=Vedic+astrology&w1=Astrological+chart&w2=Case+study&w3=Vedic&w
        4
        > > > >
        =Vedic+astrology&w5=Free+vedic+astrology&c=5&s=98&.sig=mdDAF8P8-
        > > > > UiCkdeyXc5wOQ>
        > > > > > > Free vedic astrology
        > > > > > > > > >
        t=ms&k=Free+vedic+astrology&w1=Astrological+chart&w2=Case+study&w3=Ve
        d
        > > > >
        ic&w4=Vedic+astrology&w5=Free+vedic+astrology&c=5&s=98&.sig=QXEhN0gie
        u
        > > > > Nf1K5uLRkdsQ>
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ------
        > > > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > * Visit your group "JyotishGroup
        > > > > > > " on the web.
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > > > > > JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > > > > > > subject=Unsubscribe>
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
        Terms of
        > > > > > > Service .
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > ------
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >----------------------------------------------------------
        ---------
        > > > > -----
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > > > > >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
        > > > > > >Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.4/146 - Release
        Date:
        > > > > 10/21/2005
        > > > > > >
        > > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > >
        > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > SPONSORED LINKS
        > > > > Astrological
        > >
        >
        chart+chart&w2=Case+study&w3=Vedic&w4=Vedic+astrology&w5=Free+vedic+a
        strology&c=5
        > &s=98&.sig=WoThAwPfpdFNPgMlToNrCg>
        > > Case
        > > > >
        > >
        >
        study2=Case+study&w3=Vedic&w4=Vedic+astrology&w5=Free+vedic+astrology
        &c=5&s=98&.s
        > ig=y9oVB5wzz5OStWh-7_XD7Q>
        > > > >
        > >
        >
        Vedice+study&w3=Vedic&w4=Vedic+astrology&w5=Free+vedic+astrology&c=5&
        s=98&.sig=YJ
        > EUgqlxVJecC1nEVinRkA>
        > > Vedic
        > > > >
        > >
        >
        astrologyl+chart&w2=Case+study&w3=Vedic&w4=Vedic+astrology&w5=Free+ve
        dic+astrology&c=
        > 5&s=98&.sig=mdDAF8P8-UiCkdeyXc5wOQ>
        > > Free
        > > > > vedic
        > >
        >
        astrologyogical+chart&w2=Case+study&w3=Vedic&w4=Vedic+astrology&w5=Fr
        ee+vedic+astrolo
        > gy&c=5&s=98&.sig=QXEhN0gieuNf1K5uLRkdsQ>
        > > > > ------------------------------
        > > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > - Visit your group
        > > "JyotishGroup"
        > > > > on the web.
        > > > > - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > > >
        > >
        > JyotishGroup-unsubscribe@y...?subject=Unsubscribe>
        > > > > - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > > > > Service .
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > ------------------------------
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --
        > > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
        > > Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.5/150 - Release Date:
        10/27/2005
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Make sure YOUR emails don't get lost! Download Mailinfo here
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.