Ascendant as start of first house.

For discussion on planets, houses, signs, nakshatras, etc.
Forum rules
READ Forum-Wide Rules and Guidelines NOTICE: OFFENSIVE POSTS WILL BE DELETED, AND OFFENDERS WILL HAVE ALL POSTS MODERATED.
tylorechandra
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: 12 Jul 2012
Location: Mysore --- Karnataka

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by tylorechandra » 06 Dec 2018

Frankly, I find the whole discussion very funny. My whole quote was merely an expression of the beauty of english language as used by Sh.majestik108. The second sentence "Very Succintly put!" says it all. I never even for a moment thought that this would become a subject of technical nitpickings. But when it started, I just joined the fun.

As can be seen from the undercurrents in the statements that I made during the "discussion", the fact is that Astrologers are free to choose their methods as long as the basics are kept in mind. Parashara has never laid down any specific procedure for analysis. He has only given some statements and combinations, many of which are not clearly understood even to this day, specially the ones relating to results of bhavas. As such any "discussion" on such topics can never be fruitful since each side will stick to its stand. You may recall the number of discussions which have taken place on this very forum on the subject of divisional charts. Parashara has given some ways to use the charts. It doesn't imply that they are the only ones. New applications can always be found. It is only sufficient to remember that in many natural occurrence(s), what happens at the macro level also happens at the micro level - though the technical nitty gritties may be different.

TKC



ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 06 Dec 2018

I can then say that the two of us approach this forum & this thread specifically very differently. There is a place & time for fun, and there is a place and time for serious discussion. I was not investing my time here for "fun". From my perspective, this was a serious discussion where an important point regarding astrology was claimed to have support in BPHS where none existed.

Astrologers are free to choose their methods, but if they then claim their methods are backed up by BPHS, then they better produce evidence.

Let me await to see if majestik108 has anything to contribute to the discussion.
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

Lex
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 2542
Joined: 13 Apr 2014

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by Lex » 06 Dec 2018

ChandraLagna wrote:
06 Dec 2018
There is a place & time for fun, and there is a place and time for serious discussion. I was not investing my time here for "fun".
……….. but if they then claim their methods are backed up by BPHS, then they better produce evidence.
Super

tylorechandra
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 467
Joined: 12 Jul 2012
Location: Mysore --- Karnataka

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by tylorechandra » 06 Dec 2018

I would like to close my part of the discussion with a reiteration that while BPHS can be a guide, it can't be taken as THE only source for astrology. As Parashara has himself stated in the chapter on Ashtakavarga, even sages like Vasishta and Brihaspati can differ. We are mere mortals.

TKC

Khoo Hock Leong
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 7758
Joined: 03 Jan 2009

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 06 Dec 2018

Hi

I agree with CrystalPages stance. I use the Rashi whole sidereal sign sysyem. It works perfectly with the dashas in BPHS. The cusp is taken as the start (or most intense effect) of the bhava.

The other sytem advocated by BPHS is the cusp of the bhava where the sidereal signs fall is taken as the mid-point. I normally use this for the transit chart at that moment, so that would cover Prasna and Muhurtha. But if I were to want to analyse the position of the planet in the bhava like which portion of the house it falls for this chart at the moment(the twelve dwadashamsas for each bhava) then I woul have to refer back to the whole sidereal sign per bhava again. Using the cusp as the mid-point is more for aspects by bhava or position for planet in which bhava and not by aspects by sign used in natal horoscopy mentioned in my 1st paragraph.

As for Parasara referring to using the Placidus System (Unequal House System) for Tropical Signs, India did us that last before the advent of Parasara, so if Parasara did mrntion this 3rd system, it is no surprise. But the thing to remember is that before the ancient use of the Placidus system, the whole sidereal sign bhava system was used, so Parasara just brought the fold back to the old ways of doing things, he did not introduce a revolutionart syems (whole sidereal sign per bhava) into India.

The Placidus system always use the cusp of the house as the start (most intense) of the house. Most Tropical Astrologers use this like Astrodienst. But some Tropical Astrologers use the equal house system of tropical signs and is continuous so never is the case when one sign totally fits one house unless the sign at 0 degrees fit the cusp ofvthe house like in Astrotheme.

As for KP Astrology :

Nikhil use the Placidus system (hence tropical astrology for him) for KP Astrologyand he devote one full webpage (which may be several physical pages) for the rationale for this.

Astrosage uses the Sidereal Whole Sign per House with the cusp denoting the start of the houses. He uses the traditional dasha system and the KP timing. In addition for KP, he groups the houses based on the eventual outcome that he wants to find out. Personally I am skeptical about this, because by grouping the houses straight off for each eventual outcome we desire, you are glossing over the signs overlaying the house, and any planets posited therein and any aspects they receive or cast.

Raj Kumar uses the KP system like Astrosage but without the groupimg of the bhavas. I think Raj Kumar's way satsfy the reqirements for KP astrology. So sub-lord is is introuduced into the chart enumerated in the 1st paragrah without much change.

Rgds
Mac Khoo Hock Leong

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by murthys68 » 07 Dec 2018

For the Nikhil's case is concerned, He is biased!!! I've personally commented in his channel, he disabled my replies. No use! That page is full of flaws because he is biased with his own horoscope with those assumptions!

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by murthys68 » 07 Dec 2018

Dear Candra Lagna Ji & all,
If one analyzes a horoscope from Kārakāmśa lagna point of view, what one would take!?
We all know that Kārakāmśa means replacing the AK posited Navāmśa Rāśi back in D-1 & that Rāśi becomes Kārakāmśa lagna. Here we take whole Rāśi as a Bhāva! Now when we are analyzing aspects do we consider any degree? No! We just take its Rāśi sign.
In the Upadeśa sūtrās of Jamini Mahaṛṣi, Mahaṛṣi actually discusses every Graha, lagna & all Ārūḍa pādās. In that Mahaṛṣi considers Rāśi sign as a Bhāva only!

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by murthys68 » 09 Dec 2018

Forgot to mention... Because Kārakāmśa lagna doesn't have any degree! It is just sign / Bhāva

Khoo Hock Leong
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 7758
Joined: 03 Jan 2009

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 10 Dec 2018

Karakamsa Lagna is a concept from Jaimini and Jaimini seldom go for degrees because it uses aspect by sign, meaning the whole of a sign, so degrees are irrelevant.

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by murthys68 » 10 Dec 2018

Yes, aspects are only through Signs in Jaimini paddhati. But when that special lagna is concerned i.e., Kārakāmśa lagna we never consider the degree of a Graha! We just need Graha's zodiac sign!...Even Mahaṛṣi Parāśara has discussed sign aspects!

Khoo Hock Leong
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 7758
Joined: 03 Jan 2009

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 10 Dec 2018

I was replying to your post on Sat Dec 08 2018 at 3.49 am where you were asking do you consider by degrees since Jaimini is by sign aspects.

I said NO precisely because Jaimini is by sign aspects. My post is made Mon Dec 10 2018 4.07 am.

You withdrew your question by the post Mon Dec 10 2018 at 1.32 am BUT your this post got approved first before mine because it is also made at an earlier time from mine. So it looks as if I do not know what I am talking about from the you reply in your latest post Mon Dec 10 2018 6.53 am.

But as I already explained just now, I am replying to your much earlier post Sat Dec 2018 at 3.49 am.

Khoo Hock Leong
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 7758
Joined: 03 Jan 2009

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 10 Dec 2018

Note also at the point of my reply, only your EARLIEST post was approved, the one where you ask the question about the degree for Karakamsa Lagna. I did not realise you found the reply after about 1 day reflection going by the timing of your next post. Or was it intentional?

ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 14 Dec 2018

@TKC: If you look at my earlier quote from BPHS, it is one which cannot be seen in reality today, & its very difficult to visualise how it could have been possible in earlier eras. So it is not my point that BPHS is the only source of astrology. My point is that the text does not seem to mention anywhere that a sign equals a house, which is what Majestic108 quoted & I guess it is a widely held belief that BPHS says so. It doesn't. This is a concept that is followed by lot of practitioners in astrologers with the belief that this is prescribed in BPHS & so it was important to bring this out unambiguously.

@murthy68/VivekSurya/Rooba143/Spirit Seeker/Sweetv: It is well known by any serious student of astrology that Jaimini system is conceptually very different from the “Parashari” system. BPHS mentions Jaimini methods but those are not to be confused or intermixed with the house system as used by rest of the BPHS. Karakamsa Lagna is very different from Lagna or Ascendant which is the topic of this discussion, so don’t mix them up.
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by murthys68 » 15 Dec 2018

Why Ascendant shouldn't / should be treated as starting point of the house is a very simple doubt that everyone gets, but since no ancient seer have mentioned about two zodiacs can be merged to form a Bhāva, proceeding as the above will not make any valid point, how can we even judge / decide a lordship over other, when someone is ruling the major part of the Bhāva? For instance, Jupiter being Ascendant lord when Ascendant degree is at 29° of Pisces. If we choose in the following manner, what about other lordship? Ancient Seers haven't mentioned this at all. Thus it is imperative to consider whole zodiac as a Bhāva, if not how can we define lordship of a Bhāva? Let's assume if someone (giant) defines it, then we need to verify its validation from ancient scriptures.
As CL Ji has mentioned that lot of practitioners in Astrology have been chosen & is been choosing whole zodiac as Bhāva because they are getting right predictions. I can quote, Pandit Sunjay Rath Ji has never mingled two zodiacs & considered a Bhāva, even K.N. Rao Ji too, so as many.
Now, I should keep a full stop from writing since, would like to learn it conventionally & then come & contribute here.
Oh Yes, I know that we shouldn't intermix the methods, I know that because they has different definitions for that. Sunjay Rath Ji has explained.
I've explained about Kārakāmśa because we don't consider degree at all while analyzing.

What I feel is, let's say Aries represents head & Ascendant degree is somewhere in Aries, choosing head from Ascendant degree & the previous part remained doesn't come under head is not seemingly a sensible point.
In Kāla Puruṣa chart it's said that Aries / here 1st Bhāva represents head, but they have never ever mentioned, that house is starting from a particular degree.

ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 16 Dec 2018

Murthy68/Vivek Surya,

I've been ignoring you for a while hoping better sense would prevail with you, but now a detailed response is needed.
murthys68 wrote:
15 Dec 2018

Now, I should keep a full stop from writing since, would like to learn it conventionally & then come & contribute here.
It was obvious for a long time that you have been writing here without learning.
murthys68 wrote:
15 Dec 2018

Oh Yes, I know that we shouldn't intermix the methods, I know that because they has different definitions for that. Sunjay Rath Ji has explained.
I've explained about Kārakāmśa because we don't consider degree at all while analyzing.
Then why did you quote Karakamsa Lagna example in the current discussion ? It is very likely that you did not know then, but learnt about it later and admit it as much now. It should be obvious to all readers that Jaimini methods are not to be intermixed with Parashari methods.
murthys68 wrote:
15 Dec 2018

but since no ancient seer have mentioned about two zodiacs can be merged to form a Bhāva, proceeding as the above will not make any valid point, how can we even judge /...Thus it is imperative to consider whole zodiac as a Bhāva, if not how can
You have no idea what you are talking about, do you. There is no two zodiacs. There is one zodiac, which is 360 degrees and this is then divided into 12 parts. Clearly, the above statement made by you is utter nonsense.
murthys68 wrote:
15 Dec 2018

As CL Ji has mentioned that lot of practitioners in Astrology have been chosen & is been choosing whole zodiac as Bhāva because they are getting right predictions.
The initial position at start of the thread was that BPHS stated this house as whole sign. Now the justification is that practitioners have got results. One can start going down the path of statistical verification of each result, but that is not the point here. As I've said repeatedly, this thread is exploring if there is any statement within BPHS where a sign is a house and I perfectly willing to discuss it if someone is able to find such a reference, as I have found none.
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

User avatar
Shivoham
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 226
Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Location: Jaipur, Rajasthan

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by Shivoham » 21 Dec 2018

Modern Astrologers have confused me a lot with regard to their views on Bhav Chalit. I am sure many amongst us face the same dilemma.

Different views regarding Bhav Chalit...

So According to PVR ji, The yoga's & aspects changes due to Bhav Chalit due to movement of a planet from one house to another in Bhav Chalit. For eg. If Saturn is in 6th house in Capricorn in D-1 & shifts to 7th house in Chalit then it will give results of Shasha Mahapurush Yoga by virtue of being in Kendra in his own sign. Note that Saturn still remains in Capricorn & doesn't goes into Aquarius.

As per mainstream astrology giants like KN RAO ji, Bhav Chalit is not given any significance & as per Sanjay Rath ji, Bhav Chalit is not a natural way of looking at things & it's native's perception only which is propagated by his disciples like Visti Larsen ji & others as well.

As per Parashar Light creator, Rashi should be seen from D-1 & house position from Bhav Chalit & planet gives mixed results of the house in which it's sitting in D-1 & Bhav Chalit house but prominent result will be of bhav chalit house.

Also, The best astrologers in Jaipur like Pandit Rampal ji, Shri Krishna Gopal Brijesh ji & his disciples like Vinod Shastri do give significance to Bhav Chalit. The first two are legendary astrologers. They don't reveal much when asked but one thing Brijesh ji Maharaj said was Yoga gets bhang if a planet changes its position in bhav chalit & that sign of the planet remains the same irrespective of it movement in chalit.

Another proponents of bhav chalit argue that Yoga's should be seen from Rashi Chart only & not bhav chalit. The chalit chart should be used for planetary aspects & house position only.

I think ascendant Degree becomes extremely significant in deciding all these factors. What's happening in the sky vs what's happening in the life of the native will have things in common but native's free will can not be neglected which is shown through the chalit chart. D-1 & Chalit are like what's happening above in the sky vs what's happening below individually

Would love to know the view of enlightened & erudite astrologers specially Chandra Lagna & Khoo

Regards,
Shivoham

ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 28 Dec 2018

tylorechandra wrote:
06 Dec 2018
It also clarifies that BPHS does not state otherwise, namely, that Rasi and Bhava are different !!

TKC
murthys68 wrote:
06 Dec 2018
Yes & tylorechandra Ji as stated, it is very important to note that there is no where Mahaṛṣi has stated that a Bhāva can contain 2 Rāśis! Thus, taking something which ancient seers hasn't mentioned is not a proper conclusion. Thus, it is very obvious to consider whole Rāśi as a Bhāva if not, what else one would take at all? Defining lordship will be crucial in that case
Let me present the first example in BPHS where it is very explicitly mentioned that a Bhava can contain parts of two rasis, thus invalidating the claim posted as above that a house is a whole sign.

The below verses clearly and unambiguously point out that a bhava can span multiple rasis, or signs. There is also a method about how to resolve such situations.

Chapter 28, verse 18-20;
In Ashtak Varg add Bindus (auspicious points) and deduct Karanas (inauspicious points). If a Bhava extends to two Rāśis, the rectification will be done, as per both the Lords. In that case, whichever Rāśi has more Bindus, that Rāśi will yield more favourable results, concerning that Bhava. If both the Rāśis have more auspicious Bindus, take the average. Thus the auspicious and inauspicious effects of a Bhava be understood.

Vivek Surya aka murthy68 has also written utter nonsense earlier that degrees are not considered in analysis. On the contrary anyone who reads BPHS will know that every calculation is based on degrees and that is the basis for all finer understanding of strengths, aspects, and ultimately, results.

Summing up the progress of this thread till now,
1. We have not seen any verse in BPHS that states that a house or bhava is a whole sign or rashi, despite this discussion thread on-going for many months now. If any of members has such a direct reference from BPHS, pl add to this discussion, not opinions, practices, or stances, since each of us has a favorite stance.
2. We have now seen a verse in BPHS that states that a house can span multiple signs or rashis
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

User avatar
Shivoham
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 226
Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Location: Jaipur, Rajasthan

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by Shivoham » 29 Dec 2018

After reading & considering all the stuff regarding Bhav Chalit & the comment section here, Chandra Lagna's views seems to be the most appealing to me. Chandra Lagna Sir, Can you kindly put all your views in a single comment. Thanks

ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 31 Dec 2018

Shivoham, all,
I am going slow on this thread to provide ample opportunity to members to present their case with textual reference. For far too long there has been a widely held view that BPHS mandates one sign is one house irrespective of the Lagna and it turns out now that there is not one single reference in the text. However there seems evidence to the contrary, i.e. verses which declare a house to span two rasis or signs. Let's wait for sometime to see whether anyone is able to provide textual reference within BPHS about one sign being one house. During the process of this exploration, we have also uncovered some translation errors and biases of translators, so its in everyone's interest to go slow as this is such a widely held belief that is being put to test!
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

lovacrs
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 903
Joined: 18 Feb 2009

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by lovacrs » 31 Dec 2018

IMO more than references from classics, a dozen case studies from both camps will go a long way, since IMO current day mindsets may never comprehend fully the original intent in the classic (assuming the classics as we have are indeed original).
Those who feel first bhava should start at lagna should give 12 (or more if practical) not only to demonstrate this but also to simultaneously demonstrate that the same results would not be valid if first Bhava were to be the ascendant sign.
Likewise for the other camp.
Most people are quite comfortable explaining the past events. Divination of future is very different. You will see multiple possibilities for a given period in future and multiple periods for a chosen possibility.
CRS

Lex
Frequent Contributor
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 2542
Joined: 13 Apr 2014

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by Lex » 01 Jan 2019

CL ji

That's brings … the whole understanding of Traditional astrology... in journal :? or internet :( to ignorant student or querent looks bizarre.

Bhava concept hardly used , forget nirayana rasi cannot even read properly , that's besides another …….

ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 11 Jan 2019

Now a second example where it is clear that a bhava and rasi are not the same.

Chapter 27:
26-29 BHAVA BALAS .' Thus I explained about the
planetary strengths. Deduct the 7th house( longitude of descendant)
from the bhava if the bhava happens to be in Virgo,
Gemini,Libra,Aquarius or the first half of Sagittarius. If Aries,
Taurus, Leo or first half of Capricorn or the second half of
Sagittarius happens to be the bhava deduct the 4th house( Nadir)
from it. Should the Bhava be in Cancer or in Scorpio deduct
from it the ascendant. And deduct the lOth house (meridian)
from the bhava happening to fall in Capricorn second half or
Pisces. Convert the product so obtained( in the respective case)
into degrees etc and divide by 3 to get the strength of the bhava.
.....etc.
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 26 Jan 2019

Chapter 27:
39-40. Eligibility of Issue Fruitful Predictions. O Maitreya, the words of one, who has achieved skill in mathematics, one, who has put in industrious efforts in the branch of grammar, one, who has knowledge of justice, one, who is intelligent, one, who has knowledge of geography, space and time, one, who has conquered his senses, one, who is skilfully logical (in estimation) and one, who is favourable to Jyotish, will doubtless be truthful.


Realize that the above text requires the reader or aspiring astrologer to have adequate knowledge of basic sciences and be logical. This requirement comes about because Parashara clearly expected that a reader would have doubts and thus be able to resolve them using his knowledge and intelligence. Merely learning the verses by rote and able to quote them is not a sufficient condition for an aspirant.
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 04 Feb 2019

What is Lagna?

लग्न m. lagna point where the horizon intersects the ecliptic or path of the planets

लग्न m.n. lagna the point of contact or intersection

What does the lagna divide the zodiac into? Visible and Invisible parts. This much is indisputable.

Now, IF we assume that the sign where the Ascendant rises is the first house, it lands us into the following situation.

If Ascendent is at 29 deg in any sign, say Aries and Sun is at 1 deg in Aries, is sun in invisible, or visible half? (Ans: visible, thus 12H) What if the degrees are reversed? If now the ascendant is at 1 deg in Aries and Sun is in 29 degrees in Aries, is it now sun in first house or 12th house? ( Ans: Invisible, 1H)

The above simple example also is the reason why Ascendent cannot be taken as middle of first house. The starting point the horizon and visibility of every planet and house is defined by this point , and the beginning of the first house is thus from the ascendant.

Taking the degrees of Ascendent and sun ( or any planet) as immaterial and making them part of same house thus defeats the visible/invisible divisions of the zodiac!
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

ChandraLagna
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 2416
Joined: 17 Apr 2011

Re: Ascendant as start of first house.

Post by ChandraLagna » 04 Feb 2019

Chapter 4:

25-30. Nishek Lagn. O excellent of Brahmins, now is a step explained to arrive at the Nishek Lagn, when the natal Lagn is known. Note the angular distance between Śani and Mandi (Gulik). Add this to the difference between the Lagn Bhava and the 9th Bhava. The resultant product in Rāśis, degrees etc. will represent the months, days etc., that elapsed between Nishek and birth. At birth, if Lagn Lord is in the invisible half (i.e. from Lagn cusp to descendental cusp), add the degrees etc., Candr moved in the particular Rāśi, occupied by her, to the above-mentioned product. Then Lagn at Nishek can be worked out and the good and bad, experienced by the native in the womb, can be guessed. One can also guess with the help of Nishek Lagn effects, like longevity, death etc. of the parents.

This clearly demonstrates the importance of using visible and invisible halves to divide the zodiac based on lagna. Using a whole sign based approach makes the Lagna lose its most important role !
--भज गोविन्दं... भज गोविन्दं...गोविन्दं भज, मूढमते --

With Regards,
ChandraLagna

Post Reply