new.morning wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <no_reply@> >> wrote: >> >>> Jyotish does not work, and you have zero evidence for it. GW Bush >>> has as much evidence for his ghost jesus as any jyotish. No jyotish >>> has EVER predicted anything of significance. This is SOLID >>> STATISTICAL proof that it is BS. >>> >> *********** >> >> Jyotish, done with a reliable program like Parashara's Light ( >> http://www.parashara.com/ ) certainly does produce significant results, >> and since you mention our beloved Dumbya, here's a very simple >> presentation of some salient elements of his chart that clearly >> represent his character and life: >> >> http://geocities.com/bbrigante/bush.html >> >> > > I disagree. Popular programs, such as PL or GJoyotish, can be great > tools. But they hardly provided a considered, textured, nuanced, > integrated, reading of a chart. > > All jyotish calculations will provide a chart. Some will "dump" canned > attributes of a single atttribute. But this is usually highly limited. > A jyotish assessment needs to look at the interaction of many factors. > For example, you cite attributes of planets in a house. > > "Mercury in 1st house: conceited, constantly bragging, and lacking > in real confidence > > Mars in 2nd house: amasses a good amount of wealth through > deceitful means; not well educated or knowledgeable; quarrelsome, > harsh in speech, and will enjoy using foul language; may speak > falsehoods; family life is disturbed; neither charitable nor virtuous; > may be irritable, short-tempered, and also eats poor quality foods; > associates with bad people > > Moon in the 3rd house: will desire a position influencing the > masses; strong and intoxicated with power" > > Only taking these factors into account provides a very weak and > generalized assessment. On average, 1 in 12 people will have Mercury > in first, of moon in third. So think about it. In a room of 100 people > do eight people really "will desire a position influencing the masses; > strong and intoxicated with power"? > > Looking at planet positions is one consideration out of many. To get a > deeper undrstanding of what is going on in a chart (per theory) one > would need look at, say, mars in second: > > per ascendant, is mars benefic or malific, > who is ruler of that sign, > is that ruler benefic or malific, > are any planets aspecting mars, > is mars aspecting any planets, > what rulers is it aspecting, > is mars involved in any yogas, > what does mars look like in using sun and moon lagnas, and in higher > harmonic charts, > is mars strong or weak per several "indexes", > what houses and planets is mars currently transiting, > which planets are transiting it, > is mars involved in any current or upcoming dashas, > what nakshatras is mars in natally and transiting, is mars exalted or > debilitated, > is it in its own house or that of a friend, etc. > > Canned output of attributes from a program will ususally focus on, > provide an "unconsidered" dump of attributes for a single such > attribute above. For anyone who has studied jyotish, such things are > already seen without consulting such a dump. But that is not a reading > or jyotish assessment. > > To provide an accurate assessment, one needs to look at all of the > above such factors and interactions for a planet and assess the > overall flavor and texture of it. Doing such provides a much richer > and detailed portrait than the one dimensional representation you > provide above. (And of course James Braha, from whose book you quote, > would not endores solely using such uni-dimensional views.) > > Having done this for each planet then a second level of analysis is to > "blend" all of these factors for each planet and their interactions. > > All of the above provides a "map" of karma due for fruition in this > life. It will be influenced by and modified by all actions one has > taken since birth. And needs to be viewed in the context of the > persons specific current life -- and their society/ world. (Telling > some one they will gain many cows was a very cool thing, a sign of > much affluence and status in vedic times, but ishardly a great boon > for an urbane dweller.) > > Having created a map, then it becomes a task of working out when such > karma will ripen. > > Just because one has some karma that one will be "conceited, > constantly bragging, and lacking in real confidence", that tendency > will generally fructify, or become dominant, only at certain times. > Maybe for someone, that was how he was as a teen, but those influences > making him so, are now dormant. And/or ones actions in this life can > overcome such tendencies. > > So, I disagree. Popular programs, such as PL or GJoyotish, can be > great tools. But they hardly provided a considered, textured, nuanced, > integrated, reading of a chart. There are two schools of astrology: the academic and the intuitive. Some people can just look at a chart and with no deep training in the myriad of rules (most created by court astrologers trying to keep people from threatening their position by obfuscating it) and give good predictions. The academic school on the other hand is often populated by egotists trying to impress people with their mastering of the "bridge rules" of astrology. Often their predictions go awry. They also like to lambaste an intuitive when they point out a point or two in the chart that is the basis for their prediction in that "all elements must be taken into account" and when "all elements were taken into account" those one or two points *are* still the basis for the prediction.
And you are correct, Jyotish provides a propensity for events just like a weather report. But look at the "black and white" astrologers who believe the moment you go from one dasha to the next everything changes like it was a solid line written in sand. It is the "science of light" for chissakes and behaves like light one dasha blending into the next just like the houses at their cusps blend and as I mentioned before tend to give ambiguous results as they are a blend of the two houses. I like to recall the (not so) Amazing Randi's little experiment with astrology charts where he gave out readings (newspaper style) to a group and they claimed they fit. My experience is that if he had an astrologer prepare reading just based on the ascendant for each individual those who got the wrong ascendant would have said "this does not fit me at all." It's not an exacting science but good enough to spot trends that might be problematic or even advantages.out of the practice To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
