Functional benefic or natural malefic!

RishiRahul

RishiRahul

Well-known member
Quote:
Originally Posted by RishiRahul
Dr Farr,

Please see the quotes highlighted by me in bold.

I am trying to understand you::happy:
Why is it that while choosing between 2nd. & 7th. house for maraka, we choose for higher SAV (first quote highlighted)

ANSWER: BECAUSE WE ARE IN THIS PROCESS LOOKING FOR HOUSE POWER (STRENGTH), EVEN THOUGH THE CONTEXT OF THIS (SEARCH FOR MARAKA) IS "MALEFIC" (WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE LIKELIEST "KILLING PLANET")
SO WE WANT TO FIND THE STRONGEST (HIGHEST SARVA BINDU) HOUSE AND THE STRONGEST PLANET AMONG THE MARAKA CANDIDATES, BECAUSE HERE WE ARE NOT CONSIDERING BENEFIC VS MALEFIC BUT RATHER STRENGTH ONLY



; but then we look for lower SAV also(second quote highlighted)?

ANSWER: WE COME TO THIS POINT IF AND ONLY IF WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE STRENGTH/WEAKNESS BASED MARAKA SELECTION PROCESS AND ALL POTENTIAL CHOICES HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED: IF THIS (RARE OCCURENCE) HAPPENS, THEN ESSENTIALLY WE ABANDON THE MARAKA SELECTION PROCESS, WHICH IS BASED ONLY ON STRENGTH VS WEAKNESS, AND FALL BACK UPON DETERMINATION OF WHETHER A PLANET IS A FUNCTIONAL BENEFIC OR A FUNCTIONAL MALEFIC-STRONG OR WEAK NOW HAS NO BEARING: SO WE LOOK FOR THE MOST FUNCTIONALLY MALEFIC PLANET IN THE CHART, WHICH (ON THE CRITERION OF BENEFIC VS MALEFIC RATHER THAN STRONG VS WEAK) IS THE PLANET WITH THE LOWEST SARVA BINDU TOTAL: AND SO, THIS BECOMES THE SELECTED MARAKA PLANET.

SO REMEMBER, IN ASHTAKAVARGA ANALYSES OF VARIOUS APPLICATIONS, WE HAVE 2 VIEWPOINTS WHICH ARE NOT THE SAME: ONE VIEWPOINT IS CONCERNED WITH INDICATIONS OF BENEFIC/MALEFIC AS TO QUALITY; THE OTHER VIEWPOINT IS CONCERNED WITH INDICATIONS OF STRENGTH VS WEAKNESS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A CERTAIN PROCESS WE ARE APPLYING FOR EVALUATION.

Also should we use zero ayanamsa here?

ANSWER: THAT IS UP TO EACH PERSON'S OPINION REGARDING WHETHER TO USE TROPICAL OR SIDEREAL AS THE BASIC ZODIACAL MATRIX; I'LL MENTION THAT ALL OF THE BOOKS ABOUT ASHTAKAVARGA, ARE FROM JYOTISH PRACTITIONERS USING THE SIDEREAL ZODIAC.

RishiRahul


Dr. Farr,

This is what I supposed; that there are two VIEWPOINTS.

One viewpoint has to be correct. How can both viewpoints be correct? In your experience.

More bindus/rekhas can either add to benefic strength or malefic strength logically; I doubt if it can add BOTH.

Bindus/rekhas in ashtavarga are ' positive beams' (this is also mentioned in page 3 of the ashtakvarga system of prediction by Dr B.V. Raman; also refer BPHS)........ viewpoint of Dr. B.V,Raman & BPHS.

More bindus/rekhas add to the positive strength of a house; this is my experience too that more beams add to beneficity/auspiciousness.

What is your experience (not viewpoint)?

Thanks,

RishiRahul


 
Crystalpages

Crystalpages

Well-known member
Rishi,

If I may add my two cents...! Not just ashtakavarga but in other areas/considerations in jyotish we see these two, namely the qualitative (ben/mal) and the quantitative (strong/weak). I prefer to call them as co-existing dimensions (of planets and the rest of the 9 yards) and not as two mutually-exclusive facets. They have implications in jyotish delineations (and predictions) and also in the fascinating application known as remedial astrology. For instance, an exalted planet is seen by many as more quantitative (strong) but by others as more qualitative (benefic), and similarly the pakshabala of moon. Is a amavasya moon more quantitative (weak) or is it more qualitative (malefic)? Both phasic attributes, pretty much similar to the sthanbala and other phasic attributes used in shadbala (strength estimations).

If we carry out a poll, the jury seems to be out (uhapoha?) so individuals have to go with what they have and make the most of it. The nativities will not wait patiently for the Jury to return and the final verdict pronounced. This, then, leads to viewpoints, of individual astrologers, which may be differing (Munde munde mati bhinna). I think all of these must be respected, even if sounding logically implausible. I wish the Jury (whoever or wherever it is...) returns before the cows come home...! :p

Makes for great and stimulating conversation, though...!

Regards,

Rohiniranjan
 
RishiRahul

RishiRahul

Well-known member
Crystalpages said:
Rishi,

If I may add my two cents...! Not just ashtakavarga but in other areas/considerations in jyotish we see these two, namely the qualitative (ben/mal) and the quantitative (strong/weak). I prefer to call them as co-existing dimensions (of planets and the rest of the 9 yards) and not as two mutually-exclusive facets. They have implications in jyotish delineations (and predictions) and also in the fascinating application known as remedial astrology. For instance, an exalted planet is seen by many as more quantitative (strong) but by others as more qualitative (benefic), and similarly the pakshabala of moon. Is a amavasya moon more quantitative (weak) or is it more qualitative (malefic)? Both phasic attributes, pretty much similar to the sthanbala and other phasic attributes used in shadbala (strength estimations).

If we carry out a poll, the jury seems to be out (uhapoha?) so individuals have to go with what they have and make the most of it. The nativities will not wait patiently for the Jury to return and the final verdict pronounced. This, then, leads to viewpoints, of individual astrologers, which may be differing (Munde munde mati bhinna). I think all of these must be respected, even if sounding logically implausible. I wish the Jury (whoever or wherever it is...) returns before the cows come home...! :p

Makes for great and stimulating conversation, though...!

Regards,

Rohiniranjan
Click to expand...


Rohiniranjanji,

Yes, they do co exist!

Pakshabala is a strength of beneficence of moon; while exaltation of moon would be more of quality beneficence.

Such ben mal & strong weak is similar in other areas of Jyotish, or even Western astrology.

Using them rightly is the key to predictive astrology too.

Rishi
 
Crystalpages

Crystalpages

Well-known member
RishiRahul said:
Rohiniranjanji,

Yes, they do co exist!

Pakshabala is a strength of beneficence of moon; while exaltation of moon would be more of quality beneficence.

Such ben mal & strong weak is similar in other areas of Jyotish, or even Western astrology.

Using them rightly is the key to predictive astrology too.

Rishi
Click to expand...

Rishi bhaiyaa,

What if we find that though moon has pakshabala (quantitative strength) and perhaps also high in exaltation bala but weak on overall shadbala? The similar situation when a planet is not exalted but strong in shadbala!

The interesting consideration also when seeing shadbala in closer view (Devil always being in details, as they say!), exaltation is counted as a factor in shadbal which is essentially quantitative, but only in kshetra varga, not the others. Then we have the states or avasthas which when looked closer work in a seemingly inharmonious way from exaltation etc, for instance a maximally exalted moon will be 'DEAD' in avastha (Baladi consideration) but AWAKE (in shayanadi consideration)...! (?)

And, if we look at BPHS, Parashara seems to indicate that exalted (max.) planets are benefic and strong (Qualitative & Quantitative...!), "Svochhay Shubham Balam Poornay... etc)...! :)

Now I know that many perhaps do not even use these, particularly beginners, let alone ashtakavarga, but in Jyotish, it seems SINGLETs are not the wise way to proceed? Jyotish being multifactorial...! ;-)

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

Addendum [Disclaimer] -- Just so there is no misinterpretation or misunderstanding, I am not a teacher and certainly NOT trying to teach anyone Jyotish fundamentals or anything like that or advice others to begin to look at jyotish considerations a bit more critically, and less with simplistic FAITH! And, hopefully, sincere honesty.
 
Last edited:
Crystalpages

Crystalpages

Well-known member
dr. farr said:
Examples of potential critical periods (based on Mars being maraka):
-Mars mahadasha+Mars antar+Mars sub sub
-also Mars antar+Mars sub sub during any weak planet's mahadasha
-also Mars transit conjunction the Bhrigu Bindu point, while a Mars maha or a Mars antar or even a Mars sub sub, is operative
-also Mars transit a low (below 25) sarva bindu sign in the D1, while a Mars maha or a Mars antar or a Mars sub sub, is running
-also Mars transiting a sign which in the D30 chart has (in that chart) the highest sarva bindu total, while a Mars maha or a Mars antar or a Mars sub sub, is running
-also Mars becoming the lord of the year in any Varshaphala year (regardless of whether a Mars maha, antar or sub sub is running during that year)
-also Mars transiting a sign in the BAV table of the lord of the ascendant of the D1, which has 3 or fewer BAV bindus, especially so if a Mars maha or antar or sub sub is runing at the same time

...are a few examples which come to mind.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I am sorry for late response -- I was under the impression that I had already replied to this sharing :-(

I am definitely not trying to be flippant or criticising you, Dr. Farr, but this brings up so many points in time when marakatwa (death?) could be possible. Of course longevity questions come up from time to time, generally from older individuals or where relatives are terminally-ill, etc. But, just thinking aloud, one would expect that maraka periods -- even when not making the curtain fall (in most cases death happens/occurs only once, although we do have documented cases of NDE where seemingly dead people do return despite being declared clinically-dead) -- would or should bring up the fear or thoughts of possible death in the nativities going through maraka periods! I believe that is a reasonable expectation if the infrastructure of astrology really works. This individual was unique because though fairly ill for a long period of time and after coronary bypass etc used to be a bit of dare-devil and loved life with a rare gusto. He even a few years prior to actual death was visiting a SE Asian country and gave parasailing a try at his age and medical condition. Something, I would not even dare to try during my non-maraka transits! Remarkable man in other ways as well! :)

Regards,

Rohiniranjan
 
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
Your description of the man certainly shows Mars qualities (eg courage) ! I think of potential life-threatening times as "critical periods", when the chances for death are elevated, although this elevation does not necessarily mean that death or near-death, will occur.

And here is my problem with the traditional doctrine of the maraka planet (which I had hinted at in an earlier post): I believe the entire doctrine puts too much emphasis upon ONE planetary factor (eg the maraka and its dasha, transit, etc) whereas in the determining of potential critical periods it is always a confluence of several (oftentimes numerous) astrological factors coming together and pointing in one particular direction, its almost never just ONE factor that is capable of doing so.
That is why I do not follow the maraka doctrine (although I have outlined my understanding of this doctrine, within the context of ashtakavarga, for illustrative purposes, in my posts to this thread) I myself never seek to find a "maraka" planet, choosing instead to look at a rather wide variety of potential factors, when determining a potential time for a forthcoming critical period.
 
Crystalpages

Crystalpages

Well-known member
dr. farr said:
Your description of the man certainly shows Mars qualities (eg courage) ! I think of potential life-threatening times as "critical periods", when the chances for death are elevated, although this elevation does not necessarily mean that death or near-death, will occur.

And here is my problem with the traditional doctrine of the maraka planet (which I had hinted at in an earlier post): I believe the entire doctrine puts too much emphasis upon ONE planetary factor (eg the maraka and its dasha, transit, etc) whereas in the determining of potential critical periods it is always a confluence of several (oftentimes numerous) astrological factors coming together and pointing in one particular direction, its almost never just ONE factor that is capable of doing so.
That is why I do not follow the maraka doctrine (although I have outlined my understanding of this doctrine, within the context of ashtakavarga, for illustrative purposes, in my posts to this thread) I myself never seek to find a "maraka" planet, choosing instead to look at a rather wide variety of potential factors, when determining a potential time for a forthcoming critical period.
Click to expand...

HALLELUJAH!

My sentiments and strife, exactly! Insofar as this single-minded pursuit for 'one robin announces the arrival of SPRING' mentality that some of the participants know prevails, and to which I had been rather allergic about! And have itched, whenever I could (Eh, Rishi?) ;-)

Regards,

Rohiniranjan
 
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
Astroenthusiast said:
Dr. Farr.


Since any planet posited in a house having high sarva bindus (say 35) is a benefic, so nodes in such houses also become benefic. Can it now be said that they are not afflicting the house they are placed in as also the houses they aspect?

ANSWER: YES

Going on the assumption that rahu is benefic for a native, I looked for its positive karakattawas (since a benefic planet gives good results which must come from positive action or a benefic planet gives good results irrespective of nature of action?), I found strength, research, dignity as the only karakas that I would consider positive.. So as a benefic, Rahu must supply strength (to what, will be determined by other factors present in the chart)..Am I going right?

ANSWER:YES
Click to expand...

However, while sarva bindus totals (and average of totals re to placement and lordship of houses) is an important factor, there is also another factor which needs to be factored in, and that is the bhinnashtakavarga totals for each planet (and for each Node) in each planet's BAV table. Use of only sarva bindus in the D1 is a reliable "snapshot", of course, but as in every evaluative methodology, deeper (and thus even more precisely accurate) analysis can be made; also, how the planets fare (sarva bindu wise) in the D9, in comparison to their sarva bindu totals in the D1, can make a very significant modification to the ACTUAL overall state of each planet's ability to express either its functionally benefic or functionally difficult ("malefic") qualities and influences...
 
A

Astroenthusiast

Well-known member
Thanks, Dr. Farr. You are a fount of knowledge. Are Ketu's benefic places the same as Rahu's? Vinay Aditya says so but in the same paragraph wonders why Yavanacharya didnot give Ashtakvarga of ketu and that it would be too presumptuous of him to give ketu the same benefic places as rahu. Talk about talking in circles!
 
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
Aditya answers his own question in his second book, "Practical Ashtakavarga", wherein both the Rahu BAV and the Ketu BAV calculating tables are provided.
 
RishiRahul

RishiRahul

Well-known member
Crystalpages said:
Rishi bhaiyaa,

What if we find that though moon has pakshabala (quantitative strength) and perhaps also high in exaltation bala but weak on overall shadbala? The similar situation when a planet is not exalted but strong in shadbala!

The interesting consideration also when seeing shadbala in closer view (Devil always being in details, as they say!), exaltation is counted as a factor in shadbal which is essentially quantitative, but only in kshetra varga, not the others. Then we have the states or avasthas which when looked closer work in a seemingly inharmonious way from exaltation etc, for instance a maximally exalted moon will be 'DEAD' in avastha (Baladi consideration) but AWAKE (in shayanadi consideration)...! (?)

And, if we look at BPHS, Parashara seems to indicate that exalted (max.) planets are benefic and strong (Qualitative & Quantitative...!), "Svochhay Shubham Balam Poornay... etc)...! :)

Now I know that many perhaps do not even use these, particularly beginners, let alone ashtakavarga, but in Jyotish, it seems SINGLETs are not the wise way to proceed? Jyotish being multifactorial...! ;-)

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

Addendum [Disclaimer] -- Just so there is no misinterpretation or misunderstanding, I am not a teacher and certainly NOT trying to teach anyone Jyotish fundamentals or anything like that or advice others to begin to look at jyotish considerations a bit more critically, and less with simplistic FAITH! And, hopefully, sincere honesty.
Click to expand...

The wonderfully elastic Jyotish!Just sharing an article on shadbalas etc
http://www.sushmajee.com/astrology/planets/planets-2/strength-1.htm

RishiRahul
 
Top