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

Re: Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?

Expand Messages
  • gopalakrishna
    Jyotish itself is fascinating. is it not?yes BT should be correct to the minute for D60.But then one could get the Diamonds deep down the ocean of
    Message 1 of 11 , Feb 1, 2010
        Jyotish itself is fascinating. is it not?yes BT should be correct to the minute for D60.But then one could get the Diamonds deep down the ocean of astrology....which is more fascinating....
      Love and regards,
      gopi.
      --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@...> wrote:
      >
      > True Gopiji, But why only D-9 e.g. For career, one shall see Rasi, D-10 and D-60. I always use D-10 for career. It is such a facinating division to me.
      >
      > As far as D-60 is concerned, problem is how to see D-60? Secondly, timing has to be accurate within a minute or so for D-60.
      >
      > regds
      > Dev
      >
      > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "gopalakrishna" gopi_b927@ wrote:
      > >
      > > Dear Devji and Goel ji,
      > > interesting!!In this regard i would like to mention KNR ji said
      > > somewhere in his books that Learned astrologers of yore check
      > > Rasi,Navamsa and shastyamsa(D60) combination to come to any conclusion
      > > before predicting......
      > > Love and regards,
      > > gopi.
      > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@>
      > > wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Goelji,
      > > >
      > > > Thanks for your effort. Chapter 7 never mentions D-1 can be seen for
      > > everything. It says D-1 for Physique that means D-1 for Physical plane.
      > > Since most of the things that happen in life would relate to Physique.
      > > Yes, it shall be used for all matters but that also means one shall not
      > > arrive at a result on the basis of D-1 only.
      > > >
      > > > Actually it is D-45 & D-60 for which he mentions "All indications" and
      > > not D-1.
      > > >
      > > > regds
      > > > Dev
      > > >
      > > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, gopal krishna goel
      > > g.k.goel@ wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Dear Dev ji,
      > > > > Kindly refer sloka 1 to 8 of chapter 7 ( in some additions ch 8)
      > > > > of BPHS where in brief indications are given of 16 Vargas.
      > > > > D-1 general well being of natives physique -it covers every thing
      > > > > D-2- Sampatti -meaning all means of sustenance-reprented by
      > > luminaries
      > > > > representing cosmic energy.
      > > > > D-10 -Mahtphalam - This chart is constructed with combining
      > > > > 1st and 9th houses and each sign is divided in 10 equal
      > > parts.
      > > > > D-30 - Aristam as represented by five tara grahas representing five
      > > types of material energy
      > > > > D-40 (12*3+6)-Auspicious and inauspicious effects of all kinds
      > > > > D45 and D-60 All general indications
      > > > > D-1 is indicative as how to face and solve the problems of life and
      > > D-60 indicate
      > > > > why these problems are coming in life on account of past
      > > karma.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > G.K.GOEL
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > To: ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com
      > > > > From: axeplex@
      > > > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 07:53:09 +0000
      > > > > Subject: [ancient_indian_astrology] Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart
      > > can be used for everything?
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > Dear Members,
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > I was just browsing Prasara shastra, I could not find where he
      > > mentions "Rasi chart can be used for everything.". Offcourse, all charts
      > > are derived from Rasi chart and there is no dispute on that. If someone
      > > can provide me reference, thanks in advance.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > KP practitioners may ignore this since KP is entirely based on Rasi/
      > > Bhava chart. But there, divisions exist differently as sub/ sub-sub
      > > etc...
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > regds
      > > > >
      > > > > Dev
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > _________________________________________________________________
      > > > > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
      > > > > https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      >
    • sreesog
      Dear Dev ji, I don t know much about Parasara. But there are certainly quotes that says - Prayena lagnena vichintya sarvam (Almost everything can be thought
      Message 2 of 11 , Feb 1, 2010
        Dear Dev ji,
        I don't know much about Parasara. But there are certainly quotes that says - "Prayena lagnena vichintya sarvam" (Almost everything can be thought based on Lagna alone). But does that mean that - everything can be predicted with D-1???
        To tell that, first you will have to answer the question - What to do you mean by D-1? There could be two opinions.
        1) 'D' in D-1 means 'DIVISION of a Sign'. If so D-1 means, Sign (Lagna), D-2 means half of sign (Hora), D-3 means 1/3rd of a sign (Drekkana), D-9 means 1/9th of a sign (Navamsa) etc.
        This is the opinion me too support and so the statement 'everything can be predicted with lagna alone' can be translated to 'everything can be predicted with D-1 alone'. And so the statement is correct.
        Now let us look at the second opinion.
        2) 'D' in D-1 means 'Division of ZODIAC'! (This is one of the stupidest opinions with not even a single reference to support it! No - not even from Parasara!). If one go by this opinion, then D-1 means Zodiac (Rasi Chakra = Rasi Chart), D-2 means Half of Zodiac(Hora Chakra?) etc. I wonder how they get it Half of Zodiac is equal to Hora chakra - how can it be?!! Any way, as per them, D-3 is Drekkana Chakra, D-9 is Navamsa Chakra etc. God only knows what is their reference.
        If one goes by this baseless track (regarding reference or sage support) - but which some use effectively in practice - there is possibly no statement from Parasara (I am not sure, there could be), that states that 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chart' which can be translated into 'everything can be predicted with D-1' (as per the above opinion.
        I hope you had the question - 'where is it that Parasara states, 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chakra alone', when you asked the question - "Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?" in subject line but goes on to speak about D-1 in the mail content.
        I hope the above clarification might have cleared the doubt.
        Note: I am NOT against the use of D-Charts, but I am allergic to the fallacious arguments such as -
        1) Sages spoke about D-charts
        2) D-1,2,3 etc represent Rasi Chakra, Hora Chakra, Drekkana Chakra etc and NOT Rasi (whole of sign), Hora (half of sign), Drekkana (1/3rd of sign) etc. 1st Amsa (1st Division; D-1) means Rasi Chakra (Zodiac) and NOT Rasi (Sign)!
        The above arguments are mad, insincere and illogical. But certainly the method is new (born around 15th century or so), useful and unique.
        It is just upto you to select which path to follow, and to select which is the correct opinion. I have clearly expressed my opinion - and I go with the first.
        Love and regards,
        Sreenadh

        --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@...> wrote:
        >
        > Goelji,
        >
        > Thanks for your effort. Chapter 7 never mentions D-1 can be seen for everything. It says D-1 for Physique that means D-1 for Physical plane. Since most of the things that happen in life would relate to Physique. Yes, it shall be used for all matters but that also means one shall not arrive at a result on the basis of D-1 only.
        >
        > Actually it is D-45 & D-60 for which he mentions "All indications" and not D-1.
        >
        > regds
        > Dev
        >
        > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, gopal krishna goel <g.k.goel@> wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > Dear Dev ji,
        > > Kindly refer sloka 1 to 8 of chapter 7 ( in some additions ch 8)
        > > of BPHS where in brief indications are given of 16 Vargas.
        > > D-1 general well being of natives physique -it covers every thing
        > > D-2- Sampatti -meaning all means of sustenance-reprented by luminaries
        > > representing cosmic energy.
        > > D-10 -Mahtphalam - This chart is constructed with combining
        > > 1st and 9th houses and each sign is divided in 10 equal parts.
        > > D-30 - Aristam as represented by five tara grahas representing five types of material energy
        > > D-40 (12*3+6)-Auspicious and inauspicious effects of all kinds
        > > D45 and D-60 All general indications
        > > D-1 is indicative as how to face and solve the problems of life and D-60 indicate
        > > why these problems are coming in life on account of past karma.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > G.K.GOEL
        > >
        > >
        > > To: ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com
        > > From: axeplex@
        > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 07:53:09 +0000
        > > Subject: [ancient_indian_astrology] Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Dear Members,
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > I was just browsing Prasara shastra, I could not find where he mentions "Rasi chart can be used for everything.". Offcourse, all charts are derived from Rasi chart and there is no dispute on that. If someone can provide me reference, thanks in advance.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > KP practitioners may ignore this since KP is entirely based on Rasi/ Bhava chart. But there, divisions exist differently as sub/ sub-sub etc...
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > regds
        > >
        > > Dev
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > _________________________________________________________________
        > > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
        > > https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
        > >
        >
      • axeplex
        Dear Sreenadhji, While I appreciate what you follow, I am fully supportive of D-charts but yes, am open to considering only few points related to divisions, if
        Message 3 of 11 , Feb 1, 2010
          Dear Sreenadhji,

          While I appreciate what you follow, I am fully supportive of D-charts but yes, am open to considering only few points related to divisions, if I am convinced.

          There is ceratainly a gap. That is why we are here to know more. May be, we need to sit together, take some charts and then understand the gaps. But that would need a lot of time.

          regds
          Dev

          --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "sreesog" <sreesog@...> wrote:
          >
          > Dear Dev ji,
          > I don't know much about Parasara. But there are certainly quotes that says - "Prayena lagnena vichintya sarvam" (Almost everything can be thought based on Lagna alone). But does that mean that - everything can be predicted with D-1???
          > To tell that, first you will have to answer the question - What to do you mean by D-1? There could be two opinions.
          > 1) 'D' in D-1 means 'DIVISION of a Sign'. If so D-1 means, Sign (Lagna), D-2 means half of sign (Hora), D-3 means 1/3rd of a sign (Drekkana), D-9 means 1/9th of a sign (Navamsa) etc.
          > This is the opinion me too support and so the statement 'everything can be predicted with lagna alone' can be translated to 'everything can be predicted with D-1 alone'. And so the statement is correct.
          > Now let us look at the second opinion.
          > 2) 'D' in D-1 means 'Division of ZODIAC'! (This is one of the stupidest opinions with not even a single reference to support it! No - not even from Parasara!). If one go by this opinion, then D-1 means Zodiac (Rasi Chakra = Rasi Chart), D-2 means Half of Zodiac(Hora Chakra?) etc. I wonder how they get it Half of Zodiac is equal to Hora chakra - how can it be?!! Any way, as per them, D-3 is Drekkana Chakra, D-9 is Navamsa Chakra etc. God only knows what is their reference.
          > If one goes by this baseless track (regarding reference or sage support) - but which some use effectively in practice - there is possibly no statement from Parasara (I am not sure, there could be), that states that 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chart' which can be translated into 'everything can be predicted with D-1' (as per the above opinion.
          > I hope you had the question - 'where is it that Parasara states, 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chakra alone', when you asked the question - "Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?" in subject line but goes on to speak about D-1 in the mail content.
          > I hope the above clarification might have cleared the doubt.
          > Note: I am NOT against the use of D-Charts, but I am allergic to the fallacious arguments such as -
          > 1) Sages spoke about D-charts
          > 2) D-1,2,3 etc represent Rasi Chakra, Hora Chakra, Drekkana Chakra etc and NOT Rasi (whole of sign), Hora (half of sign), Drekkana (1/3rd of sign) etc. 1st Amsa (1st Division; D-1) means Rasi Chakra (Zodiac) and NOT Rasi (Sign)!
          > The above arguments are mad, insincere and illogical. But certainly the method is new (born around 15th century or so), useful and unique.
          > It is just upto you to select which path to follow, and to select which is the correct opinion. I have clearly expressed my opinion - and I go with the first.
          > Love and regards,
          > Sreenadh
          >
          > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Goelji,
          > >
          > > Thanks for your effort. Chapter 7 never mentions D-1 can be seen for everything. It says D-1 for Physique that means D-1 for Physical plane. Since most of the things that happen in life would relate to Physique. Yes, it shall be used for all matters but that also means one shall not arrive at a result on the basis of D-1 only.
          > >
          > > Actually it is D-45 & D-60 for which he mentions "All indications" and not D-1.
          > >
          > > regds
          > > Dev
          > >
          > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, gopal krishna goel <g.k.goel@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Dear Dev ji,
          > > > Kindly refer sloka 1 to 8 of chapter 7 ( in some additions ch 8)
          > > > of BPHS where in brief indications are given of 16 Vargas.
          > > > D-1 general well being of natives physique -it covers every thing
          > > > D-2- Sampatti -meaning all means of sustenance-reprented by luminaries
          > > > representing cosmic energy.
          > > > D-10 -Mahtphalam - This chart is constructed with combining
          > > > 1st and 9th houses and each sign is divided in 10 equal parts.
          > > > D-30 - Aristam as represented by five tara grahas representing five types of material energy
          > > > D-40 (12*3+6)-Auspicious and inauspicious effects of all kinds
          > > > D45 and D-60 All general indications
          > > > D-1 is indicative as how to face and solve the problems of life and D-60 indicate
          > > > why these problems are coming in life on account of past karma.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > G.K.GOEL
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > To: ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com
          > > > From: axeplex@
          > > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 07:53:09 +0000
          > > > Subject: [ancient_indian_astrology] Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Dear Members,
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > I was just browsing Prasara shastra, I could not find where he mentions "Rasi chart can be used for everything.". Offcourse, all charts are derived from Rasi chart and there is no dispute on that. If someone can provide me reference, thanks in advance.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > KP practitioners may ignore this since KP is entirely based on Rasi/ Bhava chart. But there, divisions exist differently as sub/ sub-sub etc...
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > regds
          > > >
          > > > Dev
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > _________________________________________________________________
          > > > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
          > > > https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
          > > >
          > >
          >
        • sreesog
          Dear Devi singh ji, // There is ceratainly a gap. That is why we are here to know more. May be, we need to sit together, take some charts and then understand
          Message 4 of 11 , Feb 1, 2010
            Dear Devi singh ji,
            //> There is ceratainly a gap. That is why we are here to know more. May be, we need to sit together, take some charts and then understand the gaps. But that would need a lot of time.//
            Actually 'sitting with the charts' is NOT required in this case, due to the following reasons -
            1) The first method of considering Divisions (Amsas) as divisions of a SIGN is -
            a) well accepted by ALL the ancient astrological classics.
            b) the practical usefulness of this technique is well known to almost every practicing astrologer and clarified in almost every astro classic (whether it be Brihat Jataka or BPHS or anything else).
            2) The second method is of considering DIVISIONS as "Divisions of Zodiac" (?) or as some kind of D-Charts is -
            a) possibly (it is controversial) to the best of my understanding NOT supported by any astrological classics.
            b) BUT, this method is practically very useful and you can see many scholars who efficiently use this technique within this group and outside. (Neelam ji, Sunil ji etc all use D-charts as well I know)

            So the point is -
            * From the practical perspective both the tools are useful.
            * From the theoretical and astro classical perspective the first has excellent sage support and support from astro classics, while the support for the second is controversial.
            If BOTH THE SYSTEMS WORK, then what is the use of 'sitting with the charts'? Even without that itself, in this case the ANSWER is clear. :)
            Love and regards,
            Sreenadh

            --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@...> wrote:
            >
            > Dear Sreenadhji,
            >
            > While I appreciate what you follow, I am fully supportive of D-charts but yes, am open to considering only few points related to divisions, if I am convinced.
            >
            > There is ceratainly a gap. That is why we are here to know more. May be, we need to sit together, take some charts and then understand the gaps. But that would need a lot of time.
            >
            > regds
            > Dev
            >
            > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "sreesog" <sreesog@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Dear Dev ji,
            > > I don't know much about Parasara. But there are certainly quotes that says - "Prayena lagnena vichintya sarvam" (Almost everything can be thought based on Lagna alone). But does that mean that - everything can be predicted with D-1???
            > > To tell that, first you will have to answer the question - What to do you mean by D-1? There could be two opinions.
            > > 1) 'D' in D-1 means 'DIVISION of a Sign'. If so D-1 means, Sign (Lagna), D-2 means half of sign (Hora), D-3 means 1/3rd of a sign (Drekkana), D-9 means 1/9th of a sign (Navamsa) etc.
            > > This is the opinion me too support and so the statement 'everything can be predicted with lagna alone' can be translated to 'everything can be predicted with D-1 alone'. And so the statement is correct.
            > > Now let us look at the second opinion.
            > > 2) 'D' in D-1 means 'Division of ZODIAC'! (This is one of the stupidest opinions with not even a single reference to support it! No - not even from Parasara!). If one go by this opinion, then D-1 means Zodiac (Rasi Chakra = Rasi Chart), D-2 means Half of Zodiac(Hora Chakra?) etc. I wonder how they get it Half of Zodiac is equal to Hora chakra - how can it be?!! Any way, as per them, D-3 is Drekkana Chakra, D-9 is Navamsa Chakra etc. God only knows what is their reference.
            > > If one goes by this baseless track (regarding reference or sage support) - but which some use effectively in practice - there is possibly no statement from Parasara (I am not sure, there could be), that states that 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chart' which can be translated into 'everything can be predicted with D-1' (as per the above opinion.
            > > I hope you had the question - 'where is it that Parasara states, 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chakra alone', when you asked the question - "Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?" in subject line but goes on to speak about D-1 in the mail content.
            > > I hope the above clarification might have cleared the doubt.
            > > Note: I am NOT against the use of D-Charts, but I am allergic to the fallacious arguments such as -
            > > 1) Sages spoke about D-charts
            > > 2) D-1,2,3 etc represent Rasi Chakra, Hora Chakra, Drekkana Chakra etc and NOT Rasi (whole of sign), Hora (half of sign), Drekkana (1/3rd of sign) etc. 1st Amsa (1st Division; D-1) means Rasi Chakra (Zodiac) and NOT Rasi (Sign)!
            > > The above arguments are mad, insincere and illogical. But certainly the method is new (born around 15th century or so), useful and unique.
            > > It is just upto you to select which path to follow, and to select which is the correct opinion. I have clearly expressed my opinion - and I go with the first.
            > > Love and regards,
            > > Sreenadh
            > >
            > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > Goelji,
            > > >
            > > > Thanks for your effort. Chapter 7 never mentions D-1 can be seen for everything. It says D-1 for Physique that means D-1 for Physical plane. Since most of the things that happen in life would relate to Physique. Yes, it shall be used for all matters but that also means one shall not arrive at a result on the basis of D-1 only.
            > > >
            > > > Actually it is D-45 & D-60 for which he mentions "All indications" and not D-1.
            > > >
            > > > regds
            > > > Dev
            > > >
            > > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, gopal krishna goel <g.k.goel@> wrote:
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > Dear Dev ji,
            > > > > Kindly refer sloka 1 to 8 of chapter 7 ( in some additions ch 8)
            > > > > of BPHS where in brief indications are given of 16 Vargas.
            > > > > D-1 general well being of natives physique -it covers every thing
            > > > > D-2- Sampatti -meaning all means of sustenance-reprented by luminaries
            > > > > representing cosmic energy.
            > > > > D-10 -Mahtphalam - This chart is constructed with combining
            > > > > 1st and 9th houses and each sign is divided in 10 equal parts.
            > > > > D-30 - Aristam as represented by five tara grahas representing five types of material energy
            > > > > D-40 (12*3+6)-Auspicious and inauspicious effects of all kinds
            > > > > D45 and D-60 All general indications
            > > > > D-1 is indicative as how to face and solve the problems of life and D-60 indicate
            > > > > why these problems are coming in life on account of past karma.
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > G.K.GOEL
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > To: ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com
            > > > > From: axeplex@
            > > > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 07:53:09 +0000
            > > > > Subject: [ancient_indian_astrology] Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > Dear Members,
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > I was just browsing Prasara shastra, I could not find where he mentions "Rasi chart can be used for everything.". Offcourse, all charts are derived from Rasi chart and there is no dispute on that. If someone can provide me reference, thanks in advance.
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > KP practitioners may ignore this since KP is entirely based on Rasi/ Bhava chart. But there, divisions exist differently as sub/ sub-sub etc...
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > regds
            > > > >
            > > > > Dev
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > _________________________________________________________________
            > > > > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
            > > > > https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
            > > > >
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • axeplex
            Sreenadhji, I am not Devi Singh, He is different guy in the forum. But anyway, since you have mentioned both systems work well, it is accepted. Question was
            Message 5 of 11 , Feb 2, 2010
              Sreenadhji,

              I am not Devi Singh, He is different guy in the forum.
              But anyway, since you have mentioned both systems work well, it is accepted. Question was not that which system is better but what Prasara shastra says.

              To me, there is no clarity on this and one can have one's own interpretation out of what is written in the Prasara shastra.

              regd
              Dev

              --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "sreesog" <sreesog@...> wrote:
              >
              > Dear Devi singh ji,
              > //> There is ceratainly a gap. That is why we are here to know more. May be, we need to sit together, take some charts and then understand the gaps. But that would need a lot of time.//
              > Actually 'sitting with the charts' is NOT required in this case, due to the following reasons -
              > 1) The first method of considering Divisions (Amsas) as divisions of a SIGN is -
              > a) well accepted by ALL the ancient astrological classics.
              > b) the practical usefulness of this technique is well known to almost every practicing astrologer and clarified in almost every astro classic (whether it be Brihat Jataka or BPHS or anything else).
              > 2) The second method is of considering DIVISIONS as "Divisions of Zodiac" (?) or as some kind of D-Charts is -
              > a) possibly (it is controversial) to the best of my understanding NOT supported by any astrological classics.
              > b) BUT, this method is practically very useful and you can see many scholars who efficiently use this technique within this group and outside. (Neelam ji, Sunil ji etc all use D-charts as well I know)
              >
              > So the point is -
              > * From the practical perspective both the tools are useful.
              > * From the theoretical and astro classical perspective the first has excellent sage support and support from astro classics, while the support for the second is controversial.
              > If BOTH THE SYSTEMS WORK, then what is the use of 'sitting with the charts'? Even without that itself, in this case the ANSWER is clear. :)
              > Love and regards,
              > Sreenadh
              >
              > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Dear Sreenadhji,
              > >
              > > While I appreciate what you follow, I am fully supportive of D-charts but yes, am open to considering only few points related to divisions, if I am convinced.
              > >
              > > There is ceratainly a gap. That is why we are here to know more. May be, we need to sit together, take some charts and then understand the gaps. But that would need a lot of time.
              > >
              > > regds
              > > Dev
              > >
              > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "sreesog" <sreesog@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > Dear Dev ji,
              > > > I don't know much about Parasara. But there are certainly quotes that says - "Prayena lagnena vichintya sarvam" (Almost everything can be thought based on Lagna alone). But does that mean that - everything can be predicted with D-1???
              > > > To tell that, first you will have to answer the question - What to do you mean by D-1? There could be two opinions.
              > > > 1) 'D' in D-1 means 'DIVISION of a Sign'. If so D-1 means, Sign (Lagna), D-2 means half of sign (Hora), D-3 means 1/3rd of a sign (Drekkana), D-9 means 1/9th of a sign (Navamsa) etc.
              > > > This is the opinion me too support and so the statement 'everything can be predicted with lagna alone' can be translated to 'everything can be predicted with D-1 alone'. And so the statement is correct.
              > > > Now let us look at the second opinion.
              > > > 2) 'D' in D-1 means 'Division of ZODIAC'! (This is one of the stupidest opinions with not even a single reference to support it! No - not even from Parasara!). If one go by this opinion, then D-1 means Zodiac (Rasi Chakra = Rasi Chart), D-2 means Half of Zodiac(Hora Chakra?) etc. I wonder how they get it Half of Zodiac is equal to Hora chakra - how can it be?!! Any way, as per them, D-3 is Drekkana Chakra, D-9 is Navamsa Chakra etc. God only knows what is their reference.
              > > > If one goes by this baseless track (regarding reference or sage support) - but which some use effectively in practice - there is possibly no statement from Parasara (I am not sure, there could be), that states that 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chart' which can be translated into 'everything can be predicted with D-1' (as per the above opinion.
              > > > I hope you had the question - 'where is it that Parasara states, 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chakra alone', when you asked the question - "Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?" in subject line but goes on to speak about D-1 in the mail content.
              > > > I hope the above clarification might have cleared the doubt.
              > > > Note: I am NOT against the use of D-Charts, but I am allergic to the fallacious arguments such as -
              > > > 1) Sages spoke about D-charts
              > > > 2) D-1,2,3 etc represent Rasi Chakra, Hora Chakra, Drekkana Chakra etc and NOT Rasi (whole of sign), Hora (half of sign), Drekkana (1/3rd of sign) etc. 1st Amsa (1st Division; D-1) means Rasi Chakra (Zodiac) and NOT Rasi (Sign)!
              > > > The above arguments are mad, insincere and illogical. But certainly the method is new (born around 15th century or so), useful and unique.
              > > > It is just upto you to select which path to follow, and to select which is the correct opinion. I have clearly expressed my opinion - and I go with the first.
              > > > Love and regards,
              > > > Sreenadh
              > > >
              > > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@> wrote:
              > > > >
              > > > > Goelji,
              > > > >
              > > > > Thanks for your effort. Chapter 7 never mentions D-1 can be seen for everything. It says D-1 for Physique that means D-1 for Physical plane. Since most of the things that happen in life would relate to Physique. Yes, it shall be used for all matters but that also means one shall not arrive at a result on the basis of D-1 only.
              > > > >
              > > > > Actually it is D-45 & D-60 for which he mentions "All indications" and not D-1.
              > > > >
              > > > > regds
              > > > > Dev
              > > > >
              > > > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, gopal krishna goel <g.k.goel@> wrote:
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Dear Dev ji,
              > > > > > Kindly refer sloka 1 to 8 of chapter 7 ( in some additions ch 8)
              > > > > > of BPHS where in brief indications are given of 16 Vargas.
              > > > > > D-1 general well being of natives physique -it covers every thing
              > > > > > D-2- Sampatti -meaning all means of sustenance-reprented by luminaries
              > > > > > representing cosmic energy.
              > > > > > D-10 -Mahtphalam - This chart is constructed with combining
              > > > > > 1st and 9th houses and each sign is divided in 10 equal parts.
              > > > > > D-30 - Aristam as represented by five tara grahas representing five types of material energy
              > > > > > D-40 (12*3+6)-Auspicious and inauspicious effects of all kinds
              > > > > > D45 and D-60 All general indications
              > > > > > D-1 is indicative as how to face and solve the problems of life and D-60 indicate
              > > > > > why these problems are coming in life on account of past karma.
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > G.K.GOEL
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > To: ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com
              > > > > > From: axeplex@
              > > > > > Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 07:53:09 +0000
              > > > > > Subject: [ancient_indian_astrology] Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Dear Members,
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > I was just browsing Prasara shastra, I could not find where he mentions "Rasi chart can be used for everything.". Offcourse, all charts are derived from Rasi chart and there is no dispute on that. If someone can provide me reference, thanks in advance.
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > KP practitioners may ignore this since KP is entirely based on Rasi/ Bhava chart. But there, divisions exist differently as sub/ sub-sub etc...
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > regds
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Dev
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > _________________________________________________________________
              > > > > > Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
              > > > > > https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
              > > > > >
              > > > >
              > > >
              > >
              >
            • sreesog
              Dear Dev ji, Sorry for the name confusion in the previous mail. Now coming to the subject - //since you have mentioned both systems work well, it is
              Message 6 of 11 , Feb 2, 2010
                Dear Dev ji,
                   Sorry for the name confusion in the previous mail. Now coming to the subject -
                //since you have mentioned both systems work well, it is accepted.//
                  Thanks. :)
                //Question was not that which system is better but what Prasara shastra says.
                > To me, there is no clarity on this and one can
                have one's own interpretation out of what is written in the Prasara shastra.//

                  I think that Parasara is speaking ONLY about the first and not about the second. But anyway with these many interpolations from Jaimini system there is a chance that in the currently available BPHS we MAY find some lone quote most possibly adopted from Jaimini school that support the D-charts view as well. (Anyway, I am yet to find any such quote from BPHS till now).  One of the points to be remembered is that - "Most possibly it is some of the Jaimini school astrologers lived after 12th century AD in Andhra and Orissa who introduced  the D-charts concept first to the world".  So even if some one digs out a lone quote from somewhere in some version of currently available BPHS that can be INTERPRETED to support D-Charts then I won't be surprised. :) Literary history and interpolations has a large role to play in such matters. :)
                Love and regards,
                Sreenadh

                --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@...> wrote:
                >
                > Sreenadhji,
                >
                > I am not Devi Singh, He is different guy in the forum.
                > But anyway, since you have mentioned both systems work well, it is accepted. Question was not that which system is better but what Prasara shastra says.
                >
                > To me, there is no clarity on this and one can have one's own interpretation out of what is written in the Prasara shastra.
                >
                > regd
                > Dev
                >
                > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "sreesog" sreesog@ wrote:
                > >
                > > Dear Devi singh ji,
                > > //> There is ceratainly a gap. That is why we are here to know more. May be, we need to sit together, take some charts and then understand the gaps. But that would need a lot of time.//
                > > Actually 'sitting with the charts' is NOT required in this case, due to the following reasons -
                > > 1) The first method of considering Divisions (Amsas) as divisions of a SIGN is -
                > > a) well accepted by ALL the ancient astrological classics.
                > > b) the practical usefulness of this technique is well known to almost every practicing astrologer and clarified in almost every astro classic (whether it be Brihat Jataka or BPHS or anything else).
                > > 2) The second method is of considering DIVISIONS as "Divisions of Zodiac" (?) or as some kind of D-Charts is -
                > > a) possibly (it is controversial) to the best of my understanding NOT supported by any astrological classics.
                > > b) BUT, this method is practically very useful and you can see many scholars who efficiently use this technique within this group and outside. (Neelam ji, Sunil ji etc all use D-charts as well I know)
                > >
                > > So the point is -
                > > * From the practical perspective both the tools are useful.
                > > * From the theoretical and astro classical perspective the first has excellent sage support and support from astro classics, while the support for the second is controversial.
                > > If BOTH THE SYSTEMS WORK, then what is the use of 'sitting with the charts'? Even without that itself, in this case the ANSWER is clear. :)
                > > Love and regards,
                > > Sreenadh
                > >
                > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "axeplex" <axeplex@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Dear Sreenadhji,
                > > >
                > > > While I appreciate what you follow, I am fully supportive of D-charts but yes, am open to considering only few points related to divisions, if I am convinced.
                > > >
                > > > There is ceratainly a gap. That is why we are here to know more. May be, we need to sit together, take some charts and then understand the gaps. But that would need a lot of time.
                > > >
                > > > regds
                > > > Dev
                > > >
                > > > --- In ancient_indian_astrology@yahoogroups.com, "sreesog" <sreesog@> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > Dear Dev ji,
                > > > > I don't know much about Parasara. But there are certainly quotes that says - "Prayena lagnena vichintya sarvam" (Almost everything can be thought based on Lagna alone). But does that mean that - everything can be predicted with D-1???
                > > > > To tell that, first you will have to answer the question - What to do you mean by D-1? There could be two opinions.
                > > > > 1) 'D' in D-1 means 'DIVISION of a Sign'. If so D-1 means, Sign (Lagna), D-2 means half of sign (Hora), D-3 means 1/3rd of a sign (Drekkana), D-9 means 1/9th of a sign (Navamsa) etc.
                > > > > This is the opinion me too support and so the statement 'everything can be predicted with lagna alone' can be translated to 'everything can be predicted with D-1 alone'. And so the statement is correct.
                > > > > Now let us look at the second opinion.
                > > > > 2) 'D' in D-1 means 'Division of ZODIAC'! (This is one of the stupidest opinions with not even a single reference to support it! No - not even from Parasara!). If one go by this opinion, then D-1 means Zodiac (Rasi Chakra = Rasi Chart), D-2 means Half of Zodiac(Hora Chakra?) etc. I wonder how they get it Half of Zodiac is equal to Hora chakra - how can it be?!! Any way, as per them, D-3 is Drekkana Chakra, D-9 is Navamsa Chakra etc. God only knows what is their reference.
                > > > > If one goes by this baseless track (regarding reference or sage support) - but which some use effectively in practice - there is possibly no statement from Parasara (I am not sure, there could be), that states that 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chart' which can be translated into 'everything can be predicted with D-1' (as per the above opinion.
                > > > > I hope you had the question - 'where is it that Parasara states, 'everything can be predicted with Rasi chakra alone', when you asked the question - "Where Prasara wrote Rasi chart can be used for everything?" in subject line but goes on to speak about D-1 in the mail content.
                > > > > I hope the above clarification might have cleared the doubt.
                > > > > Note: I am NOT against the use of D-Charts, but I am allergic to the fallacious arguments such as -
                > > > > 1) Sages spoke about D-charts
                > > > > 2) D-1,2,3 etc represent Rasi Chakra, Hora Chakra, Drekkana Chakra etc and NOT Rasi (whole of sign), Hora (half of sign), Drekkana (1/3rd of sign) etc. 1st Amsa (1st Division; D-1) means Rasi Chakra (Zodiac) and NOT Rasi (Sign)!
                > > > > The above arguments are mad, insincere and illogical. But certainly the method is new (born around 15th century or so), useful and unique.
                > > > > It is just upto you to select which path to follow, and to select which is the correct opinion. I have clearly expressed my opinion - and I go with the first.
                > > > > Love and regards,
                > > > > Sreenadh

              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.