Vijayadas Pradeep:

I would like to clear the following doubt on Rasi drishti before proceeding to Graha
Drishti.
1) How is Rasi drishti working?
2) What makes Chara and Sthira aspect each other -Why is the adjacent sign avoided
(certain angle is a must for drishti)?
3) If planets are not present in Rasis undergoing Rasi drishti, do such drishtis have any
effect?
4) Can Rasi drishti, be universally applied?
Sreenadh:
I am not that familiar with Rasi Drishti and its application. I invite other learned member to
comment on "Rasi Drishti", supplying relevant quotes as well.
Panditji:
I am of the opinion that Rishis mentioned 'bhava'. They did also mention rashis. Is Bhava and
rashi (sign) one and the same thing? I do not subscribe to complex division of houses for the
reasons of simplicity and like bhava kundali with equal house divisions, meaning each with a
30-degree span. So some grahas will change bhavas. The rashi kundali is used only from
chandra (Moon). So when I look at the kundali from chandra lagna, I call that rashi kundali
and here only sign positions are taken into account and it is sign = bhava. Looking at kundali
from lagna I call it bhava kundali and here the grahas do sift signs based on their degrees vis
a vis lagna degree.
Sreenadh:
I don' find any statement in support of considering Rasi and Bhava as separate entities in
texts before 10th century. But I do find statements that support considering Rasi and Bhava
as one and the same entities, with the only difference that Rasis starts from Aries, and
Bhavas starts from Lagna. I support and agree with you point you raised Is Bhava and
rashi (sign) one and the same thing?; I would say, yes, they are. .
[Editor: Then Vinita referred to Sanjay Rath and SJC school of thought, connected with the
use of the BPHS/Jaimini concept of Rashi drishti, and the discussion branched to became a
criticism of SJC school of astrological thought]
Vinita:
Quote
"I am not that familiar with Rasi Drishti and its application."
Unquote
I too wasnt till I got to hear Sanjay Rathji in the last Atri class. Rasi drishti is explained in
Chapter 8 of BPHS, which u must already be aware of. One of its applications, according to
Jaimini Sutra, is in D-9. According to this Sutra Rasi drishti is to be seen to find the

connection with karakas. For instance, the connection with Ketu through Rasi drishti indicates
the path for Moksha. You could perhaps listen to the MP3 audio of Sanjayji's class to
understand one of the applications of Rasi drishti.

The other very beautiful thing I found about the lecture was the intro to Vedic Numerology
where the generation of numbers was compared to the wheels within the slot machine.
Its very exhilarating to think that each one of us could have a unique number generated
by the GREAT TIME SLOT MACHINE.
Sreenadh:
Quote
I am not that familiar with Rasi Drishti and its application.
Unquote
The reason behind was something else. That is, Rasi drishti is not at all discussed in other
schools of astrology, except by Parasara and Jaimini. I was more interested in the Arsha, Jain
(Garga), Yavana Schools of thought, than Yavana, Parasara and Jaimini for long The
reason being that the first 2 still remain unexplored. The new revival stream is after Parasara,
Jaimini and others will explore it. It is work sharing. And my field seems to be different.
Parasara puts forward many new methods - but let us first have a clear idea of the methods
that were in use before him. Yes, the fact that he mixed several ideas of Yavanacharya with
the true Indian system holds me back to an extend. But yes, he was great! I don't know much
about "Jaimini system" and that too seems to be different from the original stream - and I am
still in doubt, to what extend we can appreciate the mixing of different streams/schools of
thought.
Now coming to Sanjay Rath, I appreciate his efforts, and recently got his book "Crux of Vedic
Astrology", and yet to go through it in detail. I appreciate his efforts in bring into light the
various dasa systems. But for that he seems to depend too much on "Jataka Parijata" of
recent origin. This text "Jataka Parijata" by "Vidya nadha suri" is considered as a poetical
elaboration of the concepts put forward in "Varaha Hora". But many of the concepts put
forward in this text ""Jataka Parijata" does not find authentic classical support, and to add
many are "against" the classical ideas! This is a text that should be approached only with
care - but still an appreciable and worthy text. I am totally against the divisional chart concept
and its absurd explanations put forward by Sanjay Rath. They find no support from classics,
and it seems that he is intentionally trying to misinterpret the slokas as far as divisional charts
are concerned. Yes, It is his efforts on explaining various dasa systems that should be valued,
than that funny (since no classics supports it) divisional charts concept which came into light
from nowhere. I am stating this only on the basing of having a passing view of his book, "Crux
of Vedic astrology". Yes, but I should add that it is worthy book for
reading which gives a new outlook for the astrology students and learners. I appreciate this. It
seems that it is the period of renaissance for astrology. Let
it be Chandra Hari, PVR, Sanjay Rath, or our humble efforts - it is causing a new out look to
emerge. Yes, this list is vast, a new thought and an innovative idea joining hand in this tide
every moment.

PS: Many tides may clash each other exchanging energy or causing change of direction
to many others. But they are all tides for sure. Let us value the beauty of every tide we
see around us.

Vinita:
I wish you and others on this forum good luck in your explorations. As for me, I get too
much daunted by this ocean of knowledge and all the waves.....I would like to just stand
by and watch the play....hoping that things would connect anyway....even without the
knowledge / jyotishmati.

I forgot to add one point. You said:

Quote
Rasi drishti is to be seen to find the connection with karakas. For instance, the
connection with Ketu through Rasi drishti indicates the path for Moksha.
Unquote
The point that instantaneously originated in my mind is that, we haven't yet discussed the
point "How karakatwas (significance) are considered?" or "How significance of various
things gets associated with planets". The important point is: "Any planet can be a karaka
for anything (as per placement)"! The sloka that instantaneously comes to my mind is

"Adhipa sarva bhavanam karaka parikeertita" Meaning, the lord of any house is
significator for all the things indicated by that house. House and sign are the same. So it
means that, that planet becomes the significator for everything indicated by that sign as
well! As told earlier, Significance is assigned to
1) Signs 2) Houses 4) Nakshatras 3) Planets
Let us take the question, who is vidya karaka? Me is vidya karaka, Ju is vidya karaka, Sa
is vidya karaka especially related to sanyasa, Su is vidya karaka since sun represents
atma, Mo is vidyakaraka since mo represents mind, Ma is vidyakaraka especially related
to weapons, etc. Any one can extend it and we would be in trouble if we are trying to
assign vidya karakatwa to a single planet alone! The same is the situation, when we are
trying to locate Atma karaka and Moksha karaka as well! So I am against the
compartmentalization is karakatwas, and let us be flexible in such issues, as we are
dealing with a subject that follows holistic method. In this light if we are looking at

1) Atmakaraka, Pitr karaka etc concept (Parasara/Jaimini)

2) Assigning special fixed karakas to houses
3) Sahamas concept (Forgive my ignorance - who coined that word?) which as per
classical astrology is termed "Sphuta Yoga" which associates a single thing with special
longitudinal degrees.
What should be our view? All these are innovative methods and should be appreciated.
But are they part of the original stream of thought? I invite all to shed more light on the
issues involved.

PS: We should disuses the question "In how many methods significance could get
associated to a planet?' in detail. That is also part of the basics. Vinita ji, thanks for the
information shared and my regards to Sanjay ji as well. Forgive my ignorance - but I am
yet to learn in detail BPHS and Jaimini sutra. Or it is better to say I am familiar with BPHS
to an extend (at least about the concepts discussed in BPHS that are in line with the
conventional astrology), but have no idea about Jaimini sutra till now. I should turn my
attention in those directions as well - but before that itself, much work to do in other
areas.
Vinita:
In the final tier, I suppose everything merges. So what is the purpose of
compartmentalization, whether it is bhavas, grahas, Karakatwas, or whatever...

Somebody compared the different systems of astrology to the different systems that work
on computers. Each works fine and independently of the other and gives the desired
result.

When I read about the predictions for Pramod Mahajan the thought crossed my mind that
even with difference of one year in the date of birth / lagna, etc., the predictions
converged....not just of the demise but the life profile too!!!

Each person had very convincing reasons for the prediction. (How convincing I am no
one to judge because I know nothing of the subject). Maybe we should not mix up
systems because then we will get very mixed up results. Each branch of knowledge can
shine on its own, perhaps.

Sreenadh:
Quote
In the final tier, I suppose everything merges. So what is the purpose of
compartmentalization, whether it is bhavas, grahas, Karakatwas, or whatever...

Unquote
Yes, you are right. But the point is "mind can ONLY deal with classifications", and so
there is no other way but to compartmentalize. But it leads to the thought that, every
compartment (or parts of the system) is water proof and is not at all connected with the
other. Where us whole does not have any compartmentalization/classification at all!! The
is reason for my statement, I am against compartmentalization, but from the above you
could see that, me (or any one) have to resort to classifications and compartmentalization
to an extend. There is no other way! It is the way the mind works, so we have no escape!
It is something like trying to have a grasp of the thing beyond the system from within the
system (or by using the system) itself. Since the system is also part of the
beyond. It is again where the frame of reference comes into consideration.

Quote:
Maybe we should not mix up systems because then we will get very mixed up
results.
Unquote
The same reasons for compartmentalization applies here as well. Let us study the parts and
then try to get the total view and resolve the "Why?"s. Otherwise we will get unnecessarily
confused. That is why "not mixing the systems" becomes important.
Quote
Each branch of knowledge can shine on its own, perhaps.
Unquote
Yes, Each branch of knowledge can shine on its own. And it can shine together only in
the hands of a person who is the true master of all systems! Even those Rishis never
argued that they are master of all and better than all! You are exactly on the crux!
Panditji:
One thing Vinitaji said caught my eye.
Quote
Even with a difference of one year, the predictions converged, even life profile.
Unquote
One will realize very soon in this subject that once the event is known or the facts are known,
anything can be justified, seen and even portrayed as obvious. The modern day reliance on
divisions as divisional charts, myriads of dasas without understanding of how to apply them,
has completely messed up all the things even more. People who introduce new parameters,
some with a classical reference interpreted to one's convenience and some invented
parameters; it is not too difficult to see ANY known event in ANY chart. It will not surprise me
if Bill Gates' Dhana Yogas are seen in my chart if my chart was presented as a authentic
chart of Bill gates. Post your own chart here and say it belongs to latest newsmakers and be
assured that everything will be seen in that chart.
The best jyotishi is one who uses time-tested principles and applies them consistently
and if he fails in predictions atleast he has a foundation to go back to and refine his
understanding. If one chases after new inventions in jyotish, there is no prayer of ever
making correct predictions.
Coming back to Mr. Mahajan's chart, someone shot at close range [Editor: He is hinting at KN
Raos and Madhu Nairs predictions], there were only three outcomes possible, Death,
Recovery with impairment, or full recovery. The third option, with seriousness of the event
was remote. So all one had to do was look at the latest reports and move in that direction. It
is funny how a few predicted recovery, [Editor: he is hinting at Sanjay Raths prediction] after
star news reported that things are improving. An event whose probability was 50-50 or at
worst 33-33-33, does one really need jyotish?

If someone had predicted to him that there is danger to his life before the event, I call it
prediction; rest is an exercise in futility.
Vijayadas Pradeep:
Quote
It seems that you are speaking about "Rashi Drishti", although you are using the wordings 'for
a Graha to influence'.
Unquote
You are right, I was pointing to Rashi drishti -though using ''for a Graha to influence''.
I feel as you have said later in the mail, Grahas placed in Chara Rashi have a relation or
necessity to interact with Sthira and vice-versa. This is a fixed aspect concerned with the
nature of a Rashi. It is like one individual, subjected to specific circumstances, having a
desire/need to interact with one from another background. This has something to do with,
the fundamentals of astrology system (Why Chara should aspect Sthira). Some reason is
there behind the repetitive pattern of a) chara/sthira/ubhaya then again Chara
b)Dharama/Artha/Kama/Moksha c)Fire/earth/water/air etc.
Quote
Those statements contradict. By the first statement you are accepting that
"Drishti is 'related to' angle between planets/rashis".
Unquote
Regarding angles, I feel I was not clear enough - Though Chara aspects only Sthira, it does
not aspect the Sthira next to it. It means it is not just the nature (Chara/Sthira) but the angle
also matters for an aspect.
Thus for Rashi drishti the nature of rashis forms the basis, but the basic rule of an angle
is also needed for the grahas placed in those rashis.
As Ubhaya rashis can aspect only Ubhaya rashis, the question of angle does not arise. They
are in Kendras. Angle is the basic criterion. Graha decides Graha drishti, while nature of the
Rashi decides Rashi drishti.
As you have rightly said, these concepts are already incorporated, if we use all the
parameters like nature of rashi, male-female, dharma/artha, enmity, avsthas of planets etc
etc.
I feel progression of Rashis,have links with the process of Srishti-Sthiti-Samhara
(Creation-Sustaining-Destruction). Rashi drishti should be studied only when we use
timing patterns based on Rashi viz-Rashi dashas.
Thanks for the valuable points giving direction to our studies.
Sreenadh:

We cannot be sure whether 'Drishti' means 'relative angle between planets' or not. Have a
look at the question of Arjun ji. We don't know the exact logic behind special Drishtis. Till we
understand it, we can not be sure what Drishti is, although we can temporarily we can accept
the definition, 'Graha Drishti is relative signs the planets influence from the sign of their
placement'. But, yes, it does not look perfect.
But till we explore the logic behind 'Special Drishti' etc, I don't think we have another choice.
Accepting the definition, 'Drishti means relative angle between planets', is a definition that has
existence only after Sripati, and supporting it will bring to front the whole absurdity of
considering sign and house separately, calculating drishti percentage for all degrees etc. So
think twice before resorting to some definitions concerning 'Drishti'.

PS: It takes time for the stone fallen into the deep well to produce a sound. So is the mind
of the wise person. So is the info that falls into the mind of the wise. He patiently waits
long enough before forming conclusions, and spells them out. So please don't jump into
conclusions.
Vijayadas Pradeep:
Thanks for the tips. As you have rightly said, it is unwise to reach fast conclusions. We will
keep it open.

Now regarding question from Arjun ji - Some months back i had attempted the astronomical
angle of this, in Jyotish group site.

Imagine you are standing near a Huge Ball. Your visibility is just on the surface facing you.
Sun/Mercury/Venus are close to earth and within the inner circle -aspecting 7th
house(abhimukha).Once you start moving backwards, visibility increases. By aspect sages
are only considering Poorna (complete/full) drishti (including special aspects). Thus mutual
disposition between Earth/Mars gives Mars to aspect 4/8 houses apart from 7th.

Now think of Jupiter - Moving further back -It gives a possibility for tangential aspects
5th/9th.Thus you see the position of Jupiter is the best position to get a general/broad
overview of matters.

Now think of Saturn - moving backwards - try drawing tangential lines as if they are coming

from a torch - the angle of view narrows- aspecting 3 & 10.Why the aspect is on 10th and not
on 11th, can be based on the mutual disposition and angle/tilt.

Now why they are positioned like this. I feel they have a role to play on the said houses. Thus
astronomical positioning is just the projection of similar aspects within us.
[Editor: The thread stopped, and none came forward with new ideas to explain Rashi Drishti
and the possible logic behind the same. The questions raised by Vijayadas Pradeep ji
remained un-resolved even though some knowledge sharing happened]