Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Hello everyone,


When a planet is a natural malefic but functional benefic (or vice-a-versa), does it leave its maleficence or beneficence as the case may be? Or in other words, whether such planet should be taken as benefic (disregarding it malefic nature) or its malefic nature is somewhat decreased?


Thanks

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

It ceases to be a malefic; rather sheds its natural malefic qualities.
While it will act as a functional benefic.

The 'vice versa' is differently applied.

RishiRahul

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Thanks for clarifying. And I would be even more grateful if you could tell how differently should the 'vice-a-versa' part be interpreted.

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

If a natural malefic is transformed (in a specific chart) into a functional benefic, it loses (for that chart) all malefic qualities: if a natural benefic is transformed (in a specific chrt) into a functional malefic, it loses (for that chart) all benefic qualities.
HOWEVER-be aware that any planet can-depending upon concurrent circumstances-only be PARTIALLY transformed: in these very common cases, the natural tendency of the planet will be SOMEWHAT MORE DOMINANT in such partial (ie mixed) circumstances: eg, Saturn has 27 sarva bindus in its placement in X chart-Saturn is thus PARTIALLY transformed into a PARTIAL (MIXED) functional benefic-however, since this is only a PARTIAL transformation, there will be SOMEWHAT more - Saturn influence in its mixture, than + Saturn influence, since Saturn is a "natural" malefic (if Saturn had 31 or more sarva bindus, it would have been completely transformed into a functional benefic and no malefic qualities of Saturn would be expected to have influence in that chart)
...same principle applies to all the planets...

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Hello,

For the 'vice versa' apply the same logic as I mentioned above.

Then there are strengths due to placements which come in later, and should not be mixed up for evaluating this.

The natural & functional thing is for a different, separate reason; without care for placements. Just the raw form for all lagnas.

Say for a particular lagna Mars is always a natural malefic; but for Meen lagna Mars is a functional benefic being the 2nd. & 9th lord.



RishiRahul

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Hello,

Thanks dr. farr. and RishiRahul for explaining. Dr. farr. given below is ashtakvarga table taken from astrosage.com. When you say a planet has 27 bindus, are you adding up the numbers given in front of them in this table?


Ashtakvarga Table
Sign No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Sun 2 4 4 4 4 4 3 6 3 3 6 5
Moon 3 1 4 4 3 5 6 3 4 4 6 6
Mars 2 2 2 4 3 5 3 4 3 2 6 3
Merc 4 5 5 4 4 5 3 5 4 6 4
Jupt 5 5 5 4 3 5 5 2 5 7 3 7
Venu 6 3 2 5 6 2 5 5 5 5 5 3
Satn 3 4 1 2 3 3 2 4 2 3 6 6
Total 26 23 23 28 26 28 29 27 27 28 38 34

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Where it says "total" (at the bottom) this = the total sarva bindus for that sign: any planet in that sign would have that total of sarva bindus (sign # = signs from Aries, #1, to Pisces, #12)

Example: in the posted table: Aries = 26 bindus; Taurus = 23 bindus; Gemini = 23 bindus; Cancer = 28 bindus; Leo = 26 bindus; Virgo = 28 bindus; Libra = 29 bindus; Scorpio = 27 bindus; Sagittarius = 27 bindus; Capricorn = 28 bindus; Aquarius = 38 bindus; Pisces = 34 bindus.

The list of numbers next to each planet, show the bindus contributed by each planet to each sign:
Example: Saturn: 3 (under sign 1) means Saturn contributes 3 bindus to Aries; next number, 4, (under sign 2) means Saturn contributes 4 bindus to Taurus, etc etc; same with all the other planets.

Determining the dignity/detriment (hence functional benefic/functional malefic) qualities of each planet based on sarva bindus:
-find the sign the planet is posited in
-see the total sarva bindus for that sign (at the bottom of the list by the word) Total
-use the following table to determine if the planet is "dignified" (by sarva bindu totals) or mixed or "detrimented" (by sarva bindu totals)

-24 or fewer sarva bindus = detrimented (= functionally malefic)
-25 to 30 sarva bindus = mixed (see my discussion of "partial transformation" in my earlier post to this thread)
-31 or higher sarva bindus = dignified (= functionally benefic)

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Which means that since Aries has 26 bindus, any planet posited in Aries would also have 26 bindus.

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Note: the posted table is based on the bhinnashtakavarga totals for each planet, which excludes the consideration of the bindus contributed to each sign by the lagna (ascendant); a sarvashtakavarga table includes the bhinnashtakavarga totals for each planet for each sign PLUS the bindus contributed by the lagna (ascendant) in coming to the TOTAL sarva bindus for each sign (and thus for each planet posited in each sign): apparently the posted table is not reliable to use as a sarvashtakavarga evaluation for the given chart (since it apparently excludes sarva bindus contributed to each sign by the lagna)

"Ashtakvarga" means "8 sources of power": the 8 are, the 7 (traditional) planets + the lagna (ascendant)

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Yes (also any Node posited there as well)

There is another method which counts:
-the sarva bindus of the sign the planet is in
...+
-the sarva bindus of the sign (Sun, Moon) or signs (other 5 planets) owned by the planet
...these bindu totals are added together, then divided by the number of factors involved, the remainder (rounded to the next higher sarva bindu number if a fraction remains) = the "net" (or averaged) sarva bindu total for that planet: the same table of relative sarva bindu totals which I have already posted, is used in making a final detriment/mixed/dignified evaluation...

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

This is tricky for me. Mars and sun are functional benefics for my lagna i.e. Sag. But when ashtakvarga method is taken into account, they both become functionally malefic for me, since sun is tenanting taurus and mars gemini. How?

Or I can say that though both mars and sun are functional benefics but owing to there position in the signs with number of bindus less than 24, they may not be able to give very good results. As sarva bindus are measure of receptivity of a sign.

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

The sarva bindus show how ALL OTHER PLANETS AND THE LAGNA contribute energies to EACH planet (under consideration): it shows HOW WELL ALL the planets and lagna will allow the planet under consideration, to perform; if the total contributed bindus are low (under 25) the totality effect of all planets and lagna will be - toward the planet under consideration, hence its - qualities will be encouraged by this combination of total influences, over its + qualities; and vice versa (regarding high sarva bindus) So sarva bindus are the combined influences of all planets and the lagna, held within the given sign (and thus shared with any planet positing that sign)

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

You could say that.
However, for ME, the BAV and sarva bindu indications supercede all other debility/dignity considerations (shadbala indications, benefic/malefic based on lagnas, etc)-usually, though, most practitioners (who use ashtakavarga at all) consider it one factor among several, in making their evaluations.

The Aditya book ("Dots of Destiny") and his more advanced "Practical Ashtakavarga", will make these matters clearer to you.

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

You are very patient. Thank you for explaining it so fully. I went to get Dots of Destiny from the only bookstore I know that sells Astrology books yesterday but it was closed. Now I am waiting for tomorrow, when I might get it at the institute where I study astrology.

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Best wishes in your studies: you will find that ashtakavarga is a valuable tool, if properly understood and applied.

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

I got the book and its easy to understand and fun to read, just as you suggested. But after I calculated sarva bindus (sarvaashtakvarga method), I found that even my markas (i.e. venus and saturn) have turned into benefics, both having 33 sarva bindu. And my kalatra bhava has only 28 bindus, which has me worried.

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

28 is in the higher "average" sarva bindu totals (under 25 below average, 25-27 lower average, 28-30 higher average, 31+ above average) So don't worry about it (I have 29 sarva bindus in the 7th house: my late wife and I were together for 40 years!)

When we make other considerations (other than simply benefic/malefic) using sarva bindu totals, we use varying criteria: for example, whatever potential maraka planet-candidate (chosen according to the rules/methods for deciding the likely maraka) has the HIGHER sarva bindu count (among the maraka candidates) is the most likely maraka planet-whether benefic or malefic ON ITS OWN (within the simple context of sarvas indicating a planet will be a malefic or a benefic) makes no difference, in coming to decide the maraka planet (using the methodology of selecting maraka candidate planets)

In "breaking a tie" regarding determination of likely maraka (eg Venus and Saturn both having 33 sarva bindus), do the following:
-add up the sarva bindus for the place (sign) Venus is in and also for the 2 signs it owns (Taurus and Libra)
-do the same for the place (sign) Saturn is in and also for the 2 signs it own (Capricorn and Aquarius)
-compare the sarva bindu totals for Venus and Saturn: whichever has the highest total = the likely maraka planet
(still tied? then BAV tables would have to be used: find the BAV for the planetary lord of the ascendant; now in that planet's BAV table note the BAV bindus for the sign Venus is in and the sign Saturn is in: whichever HAS THE LOWER BAV BINDUS in the planetary lord of the ascendant's BAV table, between Venus and Saturn, would be the most likely maraka planet-note here that a different criteria is applied for BAV than for SAV)

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Dear Dr Farr,

I am just trying to get my logic right.

The potential maraka getting more bindus in SAV becomes a strong maraka.... as you said.
If so, it would mean the natural propensity of a planet gets stronger having more SAV bindus.

Would this mean: a natural malefic having more SAV bindus will become a stronger malefic?

Thanks,

RishiRahul

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

An example often CLARIFIES way more than a SUPPOSITION? And, then discussed...?

Especially, when STRONG claims get made...?

Love and Light and REALITY

Rohiniranjan

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

This nativity has always intrigued me and I never did the ashtakavarga analysis? Maybe you can help me understand?

January 16, 1981
17:35 (checked)
Lucknow, India

Thank you!
Regards,
Rohiniranjan

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Basically we could try to simplify and say the following:
-in determining if a planet will express benefic or malefic trends PER SE, higher sarva bindus = benefic trends (regardless of the natural tendency of the planet) and lower sarva bindus = malefic trends (regardless of the natural tendency of the planet)
-in determinig relative strength/weakness of various processes being used in making certain specific delineations, higher sarva bindu totals = stronger (whether for good or ill) and lower sarva bindu totals = weaker (whether for good or ill)
Example: in the process of determining if the House of Life (ascendant, lagna, 1st house) tends to be stronger than houses potentially challenging to the House of Life (ie, the 8th house and the 12th house), one compares the total sarva bindu count of the 3 houses considered in this particular delineative process: if the lagna has higher sarva bindu totals than either the 8th or the 12th house have, then-within the context of this special particular delineative process-we would say that the House of Life is stronger than its challengers (8th house and 12th)-or, vice versa if the 8th house and 12th house hold higher sarva bindu totals than the lagna: but say that all of these houses each have over 30 bindus, eg:
Lagna 34 bindus
8th 31 bindus
12th 32 bindus
None of these houses is "weak" (having a low bindu count), none is "afflicted" (since they all have more than 30 bindus), none are "malefic", because they all have high bindu totals: so hopefully you can see that, in practically applying ashtakavarga evaluations, we must ALWAYS make our determinations within the CONTEXT of what we are specially looking into, in making such an application.

Ashtakavarga is an advanced evaluative technique-reference to the explanatory literature elaborating this ancient methodology, is strongly advised (the Aditya books mentioned in this thread; also Patel's book on Ashtakavarga, are suggested)

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

I'll check it out and see what I come up with, over the next several days:happy:

(PS: would you prefer that I use sidereal as the matrix, or my usual method, using tropical? Either way you prefer is fine!)

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Whatever you would normally use, Dr. Farr. I would be able to adjust the ayanamsha (=0) and look at it from your vantage.

Thanks and no rush at all. Take as much time you wish.

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Of course! but at first should we not try to get the logic right. Isnt tthe logic important here too?

RishiRahul

Re: Functional benefic or natural malefic!
 

Anything you are comfortable with.

But first, and also if you could clear my head about the question I made in my earlier post, Dr Farr:see quote below
RishiRahul