Re: Moon in 2nd and Garga Hora
- ||Jai Ramakrishna||
Dear Shree Sreenadhji & learned members,
My few "paise" for the meaning..
"Vaidya kanchana yuktascha mani ratna dhano bhavet
Karpoora chandanamodee dhanee kumuda bandhave".
----He is "Vaidya" which has its root as "Vit", meaning "to know". So
I dont think the original meaning should be physician, rather one
possessing good knowledge.
"Kanchana yuktascha mani ratno dhano bhavet"--he will possess
valuables, like jewelleries, gold, precious metals etc.
What is his profession??
"karpoora chandanamodee dhanee"---he will be rich by dealing with
luxurious items, specially Camphor, Sandalwood(it today's lingo,
But the last word of the 2nd line changes the meaning... "Kumeda
bandhave"--meaning Moon in the house of friends..."fourth house". If
Moon is in 4th house(4th house also stands for knowledge), he will
directly aspect the 10th house from Lagna, & we know, planets
aspecting the 10th house has a say in native's profession. Moon, by
nature is a trader.
Upon members to comment on this.
Let us look at some other classics, what they say when Moon in 2nd house.
"Sukhaatmaja-dravyayuto bineeto bhabennarah purnobidhou dwitiye|
Kshinwe skhaladvaag bidhano-alpobuddhir-nyunnaadhikatwe phalataaratamyam|
Chandrah Kutumbabhabane shukrena nirikshito dhanadaata||
Meaning-One who has strong Moon in 2nd house, is happy with son,
possess a lot of things, & has humility.
If Moon be weak, he will not speak well, (skhaladvaag), less money &
poor intelligence. However, results will vary according to condition
Further "If Moon in 2nd house,be aspected by Venus, one becomes
rich"(that means Venus should aspect from 8th house, giving some form
inheritence, probably, or share market etc..)
I would appreciate any comments...
--- In email@example.com, "Sreenadh"
> Dear All,
> As per Garga Hora -
> Vaidya kanchana yuktascha mani ratna dhano bhavet
> Karpoora chandanamodee dhanee kumuda bandhave
> [The Moon in the 2nd house makes the native a physician endowed with
> gold. He becomes rich by trading with gems and valuables] (Translation
> by KK Pathak)
> I don't think that this result is true. There is some thing wrong
> either with the sloka or the meaning provided. What to do say? What
> were the actual results experienced?
> I hope to hear the comments about the same from the learned souls, as
> well the description of actual experience by people having Moon in 2nd
> from Lagna, for whom Moon dasa is already over.
> Love and regards,
- Dear Devinderji,A very apt question indeed.But to escape it all, he may say there is no relationship between nirayan Rashi sankranti, purnima and nakshyatra. He should know that sankrantis like nirayan Mesh sankranti control purnima like chaitra purnima by adhimasa. Also purnimas are related to nakshaytra by nomenlatures like Chitra nakshaytra to Chaitra purnima etc..
Thus Mesh sankranti and Chitra nakshayatra and Chaitra purnima are related by 180 degrees. Thus the relationship of nirayan Mesh sankranti to VE ( ie ayanamsha) can be controlled only by the fluctuation zone of Chaitra purnima over 30 degrees, 15 degrees before and 15 degrees after Mesh sankranti.. After crossing over this 30 degrees in about 2150 years, the VE moves over to Falgun purnima zone and we have to move the zero point of ayanamsha by 30 degrees to the new manawantar..Such complicated vedic system is difficult for Kaulji to understand.Any way I liked your careful questoning to him.Thank you.Hari Malla--- On Thu, 8/2/12, DD <axeplex@...> wrote:
From: DD <axeplex@...>
Subject: [JyotishGroup] Does Phalita Jyotish Work? (Re: Rohini-paksha Ayanamsa!)
Date: Thursday, August 2, 2012, 4:38 AMDear Sh AKK,
////Well, clearly you have not read the Vedas, because they tell us that stars comprise nakshatras! ////
If you understand this, then how can you go for your sayana calendar?
--- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, AK Kaul <jyotirved@...> wrote:
> Shri Harsha Indersenji,
> Jai Shri Ram!
> You have said, "I do not consider nakshatras as having any degree of
> motion, not even an arc second in 26000 years. Nakshatras are *absolutely
> fixed areas* along the ecliptic."
> Obviously, you are talking about Ashvini, Bharni etc. 27 nakshatras of
> Pahlatia-waalas! These 27 divisions are as imaginary as the twelve Mesha,
> Vrisha etc. rashi divisions, to which they are appended!
> So you can treat them any you want to, whether fixed or moving or both!
> <Nakshatras cannot be anchored on to moving stars.>
> Yes, phalita-jyotisha nakshatras cannot be anchored to anything, including
> moving stars, because an imaginary "division" cannot be "anchored" to
> anything, much less "fixed stars"
> <The concept of fixed stars is a myth.>
> But even that myth has been created by phalita-walaas, since astronomically
> there are no "fixed stars" actually, because every star does have some
> motion, howsoever small it may be!
> <Stars are of help only as reference points>
> *Yes, because they are real "physical entities", with some stars being
> hundreds of times larger than our sun! The "Chitra-walas' darling Chitra"
> star itself is an example! It is about 200 times larger than our sun and
> that is why it is visible from a distance of 260 light years for people
> like you and me!*.
> <Stars do not represent Nakshatras. Stars are only residents of Nakshatras,
> just like planets and the Moon.>
> Well, clearly you have not read the Vedas, because they tell us that stars
> comprise nakshatras!
> The Yajureda tells us that though all the nakshatras have one or two or
> three or even four stars, Krittika nakshatra has a much larger number of
> stars than all of them!
> The only problem is that we do not know as to which stars the Vedas
> referred to! i.e. We do not know whether it is the same stars of Vedic
> nakshatra divisions as have been referred to in the Surya Siddhanta
> vis-a-vis their namesake stars or the Vedic seers were talking of some
> other stars!
> But then phalita-waalas should not bother about such Vedic canons, since
> then they will not be able to practice pahlita, as that is based only on
> imaginary divisions, whether nakshatras or rashis!
> Jai Shri Ram!
> A K Kaul
> --- In JyotishGroup@yahoogroups.com, Hari Malla <harimalla@> wrote:
> Fw: [parvasudhar2065] Re: [AIA] Fw: [JyotishGroup] Does Phalita Jyotish
> Work? (Re: Rohini-paksha Ayanamsa!)
> Dear Goelji and Kaulji,
> HAri Malla
> --- On *Wed, 8/1/12, Hari Malla <harimalla@>* wrote:
> From: Hari Malla <harimalla@>
> Subject: [parvasudhar2065] Re: [AIA] Fw: [JyotishGroup] Does Phalita
> Jyotish Work? (Re: Rohini-paksha Ayanamsa!)
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Cc: "Harsha Indrasena" <indrasenaharsha@>,
> Date: Wednesday, August 1, 2012, 2:50 AM
> Dear Harsha indrasenji,
> HAri malla
> --- On *Tue, 7/31/12, Harsha Indrasena <indrasenaharsha@>* wrote:
> From: Harsha Indrasena <indrasenaharsha@>
> Subject: Re: [AIA] Fw: [JyotishGroup] Does Phalita Jyotish Work? (Re:
> Rohini-paksha Ayanamsa!)
> To: email@example.com
> Date: Tuesday, July 31, 2012, 6:33 PM
> Dear Mr. Hari Malla,
> I do not consider nakshatras as having any degree of motion, not even an
> arc second in 26000 years. Nakshatras are absolutely fixed areas along the
> ecliptic. Nakshatras cannot be anchored on to moving stars. The concept of
> fixed stars is a myth. Stars are of help only as reference points. Stars do
> not represent Nakshatras. Stars are only residents of Nakshatras, just like
> planets and the Moon.
> With regards Harsha Indrasena