Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

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.
Post Reply
murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by murthys68 » 06 Dec 2018

तत् द्वादशविभागास्तु तुल्या मेषादिसंज्ञकाः|
प्रसिद्धा राशयः सन्ति ग्रहस्त्वर्कादिसंज्ञकाः||

In IAST format:
Tat Dvādaśavibhāgāstu tulya meṣādisanjñakāḥ|
Prasiddhā rāśayaḥ santi grahastvarkādisanjñakāḥ||

Interestingly, the above one which is a 5th śloka from 3rd Adhyāya recommends that all the Bhāvās / Rāśis should be taken as equally divided!

The 1st line meanings of the above verse goes like the way as follows:
तत् / Tat meaning that, द्वादशविभाग / Dvādaśavibhāga meaning 12 parts here it means 12 Rāśis, आस्तु / Astu meaning be it so or let it be or Okay. तुल्या / tulyā here means equal. We know what does Tulā Rāśi means. Tulyam means balance. sanjña meaning noun.

In the 1st line of the above verse Mahaṛṣi says that all the Meṣādisanjñakās which are in 12 parts should be tulya (balanced) or equally divided!

When I use to think of so called placidus houses as they've claimed that Aquarius covers only lesser area when compared to Leo or some other zodiacs & all the houses are not equally divided!
But the above strictly recommends everyone to consider all the Bhāvās / Rāśi to be tulya meaning balanced or equal!

We all know Earth revolves around the Sun "elliptically" but "not circularly". In earth frame of reference (as we are in earth, we need to consider everything from earth only!) Sun is revolving around earth! Relative i.e., w.r.t. earth. So, we will obviously think that all the zodiac signs that we take shouldn't be equal as the motion is elliptical! This conclusion could be obvious to everyone of us, but Mahaṛṣi himself has told the above verse. So, following only that would give correct results.

All are cordially invited to this discussion!

Namaḥśśivāya!



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

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 08 Dec 2018

Hi

The simplest answer to this logic is :

Whatever logic provided by astronomy to the contrary, like the tilt of the Earth, the celestial plane, the orbit of the Earth round the Sun or the orbit of the Moon round the Earth; bear in mind that Jyotish has bhavas as a concept discovered (not invented) by the ancient sages so that the different departments of life of an individual are given equal weightage. The bhavas are to be used with sidereal signs, the latter representing our inner core of personality, the Sun being the karaka of Sidereal Signs. Tropical Signs on the other habd represent our outer personality, defined by the Sun's ingress into Tropical Aires (0 degree Aires technically) during each spring, and the ingress point is regressing backwards slowly throughout all these centuries. That is why compared with our ancient forefathers, our outer personality of Tropical Signs has slightly changed but not our inner core of personality of Sidereal Signs, Sidereal Signs has the reference point via the Nakshatras which jumps from Nakshatra to Nakshatra based on the yuga we are in (that is why people in different yugas has different characteristics, but the evolvement across yugas is fast unlike the Theory of Evolution by Charles Darwin).

To the sages, it is the inner core of personality that make or break our prosperity (material and spiritual) represented by the Sidereal Signs. So the Sidereal Signs are to be used with the bhavas (remember India used Sidereal Signs then Tropical Signs then back to Sidereal Signs brought back by Parasara). Since bhavas there is no overlap, Sidereal Signs are to be used in such a way that the Sidereal Sign tie to each bhava with no overlap too. So therefore astrological texts (nearly all were written during the Parasara era, especially those dealing with individual horoscopy) when they mention about which ruler for which bhava, they assume one Sidereal Sign per bhava.

But Parasara understand a bit about Prshna and Murhurtha where transits play some importance. He thus understood that the Sidereal Signs (which can be obtained by Tropical Signs by subtracting the necessary degrees depending on the year in question) keep rotating anti-clockwise throughout the day, and the cusp of the bhava by subtracting 15 degrees, we get another sidereal chart with two signs per bhava, unless the the bhava happens to be 15 degrees of a sign. This chart shows the most potent influence of each bhava while the signs are rotating.

So this second type of Sidereal Chart is ideal for the use in Prashna and Murhurtha, unless we are analysing the portion of the bhava a planet is in (the 144 dwadarshansas of the bhavas).

Natal Horoscopy we use the normal Sidereal Chart. We can even use this for KP Astrology as advocated by Raj Kumar by just introducing the sub-lord.

So whatever astronomy dictates about using the Placidus system (Tropical Signs with more than one sign per house and house in Tropical Astrology is also different from the concept of bhava), stick to Sidereal Signs, and also one sidereal sign per bhava.

Remember, Vedic Astrology may come from Vedic Astronomy, but like I told Ernst Wilhelm, Vedic Astrology is different from Vedic Astronomy too as it is ued for divinator purposee. Just like we can see light as a wave or see light as a stream of photons but it still light we are talking about, but it is just that we use different models to explain different phenomenon. This is the gift God has given us, to be abke to use different concepts and models to explain different things around us.

That is we can even talk about degrees in divisional charts, as all our theories and logic come from God unless we get inflated by our egos.

Khoo

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by murthys68 » 09 Dec 2018

Dear Khoo, I didn't understand why have you written this much big! Yeah, of course we use equal house division as per the above prescribed verse by Mahaṛṣi! If you doesn't agree with the above verse which was said by Mahaṛṣi! It's your wish!

Mahaṛṣi has clearly mentioned in the above verse to use equal distribution of zodiacs!

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

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 10 Dec 2018

What I have said is to use one sidereal sign per bhava - the third last paragraph. That is even tighter than the condition of the use of equal distribution of zodiacs which mean an equal proportion of two zodiacs per bhava. The former is for natal horoscopy and the latter is the bhava chalit chart by Parasara which is suitable for use for Prashna and Murhurtha. B

Both chart types above I also mentioned in the initial paragraphs..

The reason why I have written so big for equal distribution of zodiacs as you call it, is because your question was, why can't we use the unequal distribution of zodiacs for jyotisham, meaning it implies you aren't quite sure why we have to go for equal distribution of zodiacs. That is the logical conclusion isn't it?

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by murthys68 » 10 Dec 2018

Dear Khoo, It'd really be helpful if you could show a verse on which Mahaṛṣi has spoken about unequal distribution & Chalit chart. I've clearly shown the above verse from BPHS which Mahaṛṣi has recommended to use equal distribution of zodiac.
Let's assume Mahaṛṣi has spoken, then definitely Mahaṛṣi will define lordships.
I repeat, I need a Śloka from Mahaṛṣi Parāśara or from Vasiṣṭha Mahaṛṣi or Deva Guru.
Then I'll consider :)

shivathmika
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 51
Joined: 25 Oct 2018

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by shivathmika » 10 Dec 2018

We are on earth and earth revolves around Sun elliptically . In earth frame of reference it may seem logical . But it is an optical illusion in essence . It is not applicable to all the Meshadi rashis . So we have to go by the theory of equal house division only and unequal division is not scientific . Rakesh Sarma said earth looked like globe and round . The time is compared to wheel and described as kala chakram .The two points -----time and space refer to the concept of circle which says that the division should be equal .

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

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 10 Dec 2018

The bhava chalit chart from BPHS I got it from shilpa.. You can PM her. All my outstanding PMs in my Inbox have been deleted by the Board Administrator 3-4 days ago as of now.

As for unequal and equal distribution of signs, Parasara never mention it directly, but he talks about sign rulership of bhavas throughout BPHS with no qualifications of "what if the planet is in the other sign of the bhava" meaning for natal horoscopy, only Rashi Chart is to be used.

Rgds

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by murthys68 » 10 Dec 2018

Khoo mind it, you are not suppose to comment here until you show the relevant Śloka. How you are saying that Mahaṛṣi has spoken directly or indirectly?

Again I repeat, you are most welcome over here with "relevant Śloka" from ancient sages which support your argument. If not, who will believe your words? I've already provided & explained the meaning of each word of the 1st stanza in which Mahaṛṣi has clearly recommended to use equal house division. Then, what else?

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

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 11 Dec 2018

I have mentioned this many times.

We are allowed to make inference of the scriptures because each of us carry a part of God. In the Vedic culture, we can make inferences, even if we do not see it with our own eyes. Good vedic astrologers can do that. But what if a bad astrologer make wrong deductions? Then it is for another godd astrologer to point out. It can also be the form of alternative suggestions rather than taking up on the same point directly. This is called Satsaang.

Which comes to my point is that other people also has a part of them from God. No one person can obtain all the inspiration from God by himself. So it is for others around him who are Godly to pick and choose and bring up to the blog for discussion.

The above two points is applicable for all topics in the blog - that is how ideas get fermented - but it applies especially for spiritual and occult topics as these topics are the ones closest to God as vedic astrlogy are the eyes of the vedas.

What I have just said is basically we do start any discussion base on the axioms from scratch. In vedic culture, there is a topic which deals with how knowledge can be transmitted and there are many schools of thought for this, just like there are many systems of Hindu (vedic) philosophy.

Having said all the above, getting down to the brass tacks is that you are not the moderator to decide.

Bhavat Chalit also by the way is discussed by almost all vedic astrologers. Do the moderators stop anyone from discussing it just because they do not know the sloaka from BPHS from where it come from? Obviously not!

Unequal distribution of zodiac for the bhavas, that is by deduction, and I have already explained that point.

Deduction for philosophical subjects of which spirituality and occult topics is one, is just as valid as using the deductory method is sciecpnce which is based on theorems, modellung and laboratory experimental results.

Plus shilpa is a moderator here and she has been around here some time so I do have a guage of her spiritual standing from the way she discusses things.

Mind you, please be a little bit more reflective before you craft your reply to anyone in this forum.

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

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 11 Dec 2018

The other thing is I have also used the Bhava Chalits and found that it works best (give accurate and predictive results) for transit analysis which is in the fields of Murhurtha and Prasna.

Natal horoscopy is about the soul of a person and Sun is the karaka for the signs (please do not start asking me to quote from scriptures again). So the natal chart uses the Rashi chart.

Prasna and Murhurtha is about the timing of the query and selecting an appropriate time for something,. So Saturn is the karaka as kala (time) comes under Saturn.

Your other post you asked how a person can be good in astrology. I told you from several sources (I discuss internal factors mostly like logic (8th) and mentioned the 2nd bhava (Parvarti which is also our cultural perception, culture being the accummulation of man's experience which is the divine play of Vishnu etc.).But I also credited knowledge which is the 5th for scriptures and the 11th for groups and scribes.

So experience, logic and perception also counts besides the divinity in each and everyone of us and satsaang mentioned earlier.

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

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 11 Dec 2018

In fact after giving the replies tou I watch one of Sadhguru's video which talks about young people these days, are always chasing for freedom but have forgotten about the process of doing things.

Very enlightened beings can quote scriptures ad verbatim, and they can truly understand it, mabye in past lives they have gleaned this knowledge throughly. But if you are not a super-being, wuoting scriptures in this blog without a full understanding of what they mean, is not rven a battle half won.

It is better to get some dicta from scriptures, from your experience, from inference and logic ie. various dources, try it out, juggle it within your soul etc, then you can get the freedom you want, some dicta which may not be directly from scriptures but rather from avenues like I mrntioned.

Then one fine day, you can read yhe scriptures from cover to cover, and that you already realise it through a different way, but because you are in touch with God, you got your facts straight anyway. If you are true to God, not likely you would have most facts gone astray. Otherwise get a Guru, which is the case for most people, but not all.

The ulyimate freedome to quote scriptures unabashedly (100%) is a consequrnce of hard work through various means, it is not a pre-requisite to discuss anything in this blog.

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

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by Khoo Hock Leong » 11 Dec 2018

What I haven talking to you about is Bhuteshwara. See this link :

https://isha.sadhguru.org/sg/en/wisdom/ ... o-ultimate

Vedic Astrology is one way to the ultimate, a tool, but Bhuteshwara is a method.

The ultimate method is of course :

Shiva-Sarveshwara-Shambho.

murthys68
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 76
Joined: 19 Oct 2018

Re: Why one should abstain in using "unequal distribution of zodiacs" in Jyotiṣam?

Post by murthys68 » 11 Dec 2018

[quote="Khoo Hock Leong" post_id=274262 time=1544550518 user_id=1017]
Bhavat Chalit also by the way is discussed by almost all vedic astrologers. Do the moderators stop anyone from discussing it just because they do not know the sloaka from BPHS from where it come from? Obviously not!
[/quote]
We can't believe until or unless there is a verse which is a support to your statement from ancient seers.
Khoo, It's over. No one believes you & of course you are illogical! Please stop rantings & I sincerely request Rathore Ji to contribute & help me.
Rathore Ji, Please help this thread from Khoo rantings.

Post Reply