KSY Shani SS and BVB (KNRao) position!...... and arising from it

[Rohiniranjan]

My take: Sade sati, dasa of the atmakrakra, narayan dasa of atmakarak, ksy etc have their special flavours quite unique like itself.

A problem= sade sati can be good or bad or both; during data studies we use data of personally known + not so personally known + very less persnally known people.

Data studies occur after sade sati is over by a few/few many years.
As Arudhas rule perceptions, there is a tendency of equating the sade sati faced in material related terms of success & failure.  There mistake in understanding occurs, as success or failure is a material related aspects; hardships during the process is different.

This is the MAIN  drawback of data studies; like everything has its drawbacks.

Ideally data studies should be done with the HUMAN  factor, as I have always maintained.

Rishi

Sorry if I am sounding like the proverbial sticky wicket, but could you elaborate a bit on this "HUMAN" factor, Rishi. Just so that my arudha-perceptions do not make me see meanings very different from what you meant? Before we think a bit more about what you refer to as 'data studies'!

Also a bit more about why you think that arudhas are about perceptions! I realize that many believe that to be the case but there have been some confusing statements made earlier about that and also chhaya, image, mirrors etc that have been mentioned (by many) w.r.t. arudhas/padas etc.

Thanks,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

Lets play the reverse.

Do you think Arudha is about perceptions?

Chhaya/image/mirrors are similar things  if not taken literally.

Rishi

I don't understand two things now, Rishi!  :smt017

1. Why did you think I or we are playing? My questions were very serious and fundamental! Unless I understand clearly what you meant exactly there could arise mis-communication!

2. Why did you skip my first question, namely, what did you mean exactly by "the HUMAN factor"?

May I ask you again, brother, what did you mean by that w.r.t. "data studies' in astrology?

Then we can together solve the issue about images, chhaya, mirrors, and arudha, etc?

Awaiting your kind elaboration of just this 'HUMAN' factor thing. If we begin talking about more than one thing, we might risk the D.B. factor...!  

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

[RishiRahul]

My take: Sade sati, dasa of the atmakrakra, narayan dasa of atmakarak, ksy etc have their special flavours quite unique like itself.

A problem= sade sati can be good or bad or both; during data studies we use data of personally known + not so personally known + very less persnally known people.

Data studies occur after sade sati is over by a few/few many years.
As Arudhas rule perceptions, there is a tendency of equating the sade sati faced in material related terms of success & failure.  There mistake in understanding occurs, as success or failure is a material related aspects; hardships during the process is different.

This is the MAIN  drawback of data studies; like everything has its drawbacks.

Ideally data studies should be done with the HUMAN  factor, as I have always maintained.

Rishi

Sorry if I am sounding like the proverbial sticky wicket, but could you elaborate a bit on this "HUMAN" factor, Rishi. Just so that my arudha-perceptions do not make me see meanings very different from what you meant? Before we think a bit more about what you refer to as 'data studies'!

Also a bit more about why you think that arudhas are about perceptions! I realize that many believe that to be the case but there have been some confusing statements made earlier about that and also chhaya, image, mirrors etc that have been mentioned (by many) w.r.t. arudhas/padas etc.

Thanks,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

Lets play the reverse.

Do you think Arudha is about perceptions?

Chhaya/image/mirrors are similar things  if not taken literally.

Rishi

I don't understand two things now, Rishi!  :smt017

1. Why did you think I or we are playing? My questions were very serious and fundamental! Unless I understand clearly what you meant exactly there could arise mis-communication!

2. Why did you skip my first question, namely, what did you mean exactly by "the HUMAN factor"?

May I ask you again, brother, what did you mean by that w.r.t. "data studies' in astrology?

Then we can together solve the issue about images, chhaya, mirrors, and arudha, etc?

Awaiting your kind elaboration of just this 'HUMAN' factor thing. If we begin talking about more than one thing, we might risk the D.B. factor...!  

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

I just asked the same question to you about what you think of Arudha as perceptions. Do share.

There was a thread in the recent past, where you agreed that the human factor was important.... Anyway.

What do you think could be the human factor out of data of personally known + not so personally known + very less personally known people?
                 Unfortunately in data research by institutions all 3 are used together.


Rishi

[Rohiniranjan]

My take: Sade sati, dasa of the atmakrakra, narayan dasa of atmakarak, ksy etc have their special flavours quite unique like itself.

A problem= sade sati can be good or bad or both; during data studies we use data of personally known + not so personally known + very less persnally known people.

Data studies occur after sade sati is over by a few/few many years.
As Arudhas rule perceptions, there is a tendency of equating the sade sati faced in material related terms of success & failure.  There mistake in understanding occurs, as success or failure is a material related aspects; hardships during the process is different.

This is the MAIN  drawback of data studies; like everything has its drawbacks.

Ideally data studies should be done with the HUMAN  factor, as I have always maintained.

Rishi

Sorry if I am sounding like the proverbial sticky wicket, but could you elaborate a bit on this "HUMAN" factor, Rishi. Just so that my arudha-perceptions do not make me see meanings very different from what you meant? Before we think a bit more about what you refer to as 'data studies'!

Also a bit more about why you think that arudhas are about perceptions! I realize that many believe that to be the case but there have been some confusing statements made earlier about that and also chhaya, image, mirrors etc that have been mentioned (by many) w.r.t. arudhas/padas etc.

Thanks,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

Lets play the reverse.

Do you think Arudha is about perceptions?

Chhaya/image/mirrors are similar things  if not taken literally.

Rishi

I don't understand two things now, Rishi!  :smt017

1. Why did you think I or we are playing? My questions were very serious and fundamental! Unless I understand clearly what you meant exactly there could arise mis-communication!

2. Why did you skip my first question, namely, what did you mean exactly by "the HUMAN factor"?

May I ask you again, brother, what did you mean by that w.r.t. "data studies' in astrology?

Then we can together solve the issue about images, chhaya, mirrors, and arudha, etc?

Awaiting your kind elaboration of just this 'HUMAN' factor thing. If we begin talking about more than one thing, we might risk the D.B. factor...!  

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

I just asked the same question to you about what you think of Arudha as perceptions. Do share.

There was a thread in the recent past, where you agreed that the human factor was important.... Anyway.

What do you think could be the human factor out of data of personally known + not so personally known + very less personally known people?
                 Unfortunately in data research by institutions all 3 are used together.


Rishi

What I understood then was in the context of a "reading" where we are reading for an in the context of a human being, his life, etc and not testing the role of astrological factors etc  in a research or investigative context, which is what data-studies in my understanding are.

This 'human factor' as I understand or 'assume' you meant in the current context -- is subjective and can lead to biases and misinterpreting the value or weight of the astrological factor undergoing testing!

So, since you brought up the term again in the context of 'data studies' testing "single factor" and its impact --which has been repeatedly demonstrated by me here and elsewhere and shown repeatedly as non-functional!

So, since you seem to be shying away from elaborating, at least let me know if my assumption of what you meant is correct or not! Otherwise the question will arise in my mind again and again when the term 'the HUMAN factor' is used in future.

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

[RishiRahul]

My take: Sade sati, dasa of the atmakrakra, narayan dasa of atmakarak, ksy etc have their special flavours quite unique like itself.

A problem= sade sati can be good or bad or both; during data studies we use data of personally known + not so personally known + very less persnally known people.

Data studies occur after sade sati is over by a few/few many years.
As Arudhas rule perceptions, there is a tendency of equating the sade sati faced in material related terms of success & failure.  There mistake in understanding occurs, as success or failure is a material related aspects; hardships during the process is different.

This is the MAIN  drawback of data studies; like everything has its drawbacks.

Ideally data studies should be done with the HUMAN  factor, as I have always maintained.

Rishi

Sorry if I am sounding like the proverbial sticky wicket, but could you elaborate a bit on this "HUMAN" factor, Rishi. Just so that my arudha-perceptions do not make me see meanings very different from what you meant? Before we think a bit more about what you refer to as 'data studies'!

Also a bit more about why you think that arudhas are about perceptions! I realize that many believe that to be the case but there have been some confusing statements made earlier about that and also chhaya, image, mirrors etc that have been mentioned (by many) w.r.t. arudhas/padas etc.

Thanks,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

Lets play the reverse.

Do you think Arudha is about perceptions?

Chhaya/image/mirrors are similar things  if not taken literally.

Rishi

I don't understand two things now, Rishi!  :smt017

1. Why did you think I or we are playing? My questions were very serious and fundamental! Unless I understand clearly what you meant exactly there could arise mis-communication!

2. Why did you skip my first question, namely, what did you mean exactly by "the HUMAN factor"?

May I ask you again, brother, what did you mean by that w.r.t. "data studies' in astrology?

Then we can together solve the issue about images, chhaya, mirrors, and arudha, etc?

Awaiting your kind elaboration of just this 'HUMAN' factor thing. If we begin talking about more than one thing, we might risk the D.B. factor...!  

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

I just asked the same question to you about what you think of Arudha as perceptions. Do share.

There was a thread in the recent past, where you agreed that the human factor was important.... Anyway.

What do you think could be the human factor out of data of personally known + not so personally known + very less personally known people?
                 Unfortunately in data research by institutions all 3 are used together.


Rishi

What I understood then was in the context of a "reading" where we are reading for an in the context of a human being, his life, etc and not testing the role of astrological factors etc  in a research or investigative context, which is what data-studies in my understanding are.

This 'human factor' as I understand or 'assume' you meant in the current context -- is subjective and can lead to biases and misinterpreting the value or weight of the astrological factor undergoing testing!

So, since you brought up the term again in the context of 'data studies' testing "single factor" and its impact --which has been repeatedly demonstrated by me here and elsewhere and shown repeatedly as non-functional!

So, since you seem to be shying away from elaborating, at least let me know if my assumption of what you meant is correct or not! Otherwise the question will arise in my mind again and again when the term 'the HUMAN factor' is used in future.

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

How can the 'human factor' lead to biases and misinterpreting the value or weight of the astrological factor undergoing testing!?

Wonder why you think of me shying away? I thought I explained the human factor well.
Out of the 3 types  mentioned above which is included in data testing, one should include the types where the human/personal feelings are revealed and taken into consideration.

So since the single factor stuff is non functional should we leave it out as unimportant?
Do you consider sade sati as a single factor non functional?  :smt017

Rishi

[Rohiniranjan]

...


What I understood then was in the context of a "reading" where we are reading for an in the context of a human being, his life, etc and not testing the role of astrological factors etc  in a research or investigative context, which is what data-studies in my understanding are.

This 'human factor' as I understand or 'assume' you meant in the current context -- is subjective and can lead to biases and misinterpreting the value or weight of the astrological factor undergoing testing!

So, since you brought up the term again in the context of 'data studies' testing "single factor" and its impact --which has been repeatedly demonstrated by me here and elsewhere and shown repeatedly as non-functional!

So, since you seem to be shying away from elaborating, at least let me know if my assumption of what you meant is correct or not! Otherwise the question will arise in my mind again and again when the term 'the HUMAN factor' is used in future.

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

How can the 'human factor' lead to biases and misinterpreting the value or weight of the astrological factor undergoing testing!?

Wonder why you think of me shying away? I thought I explained the human factor well.
Out of the 3 types  mentioned above which is included in data testing, one should include the types where the human/personal feelings are revealed and taken into consideration.

So since the single factor stuff is non functional should we leave it out as unimportant?
Do you consider sade sati as a single factor non functional?  :smt017

Rishi

Because human perceptions get involved and subjectivity! Now I am becoming more convinced that you are not willing to describe in simple straight language what you meant by "the HUMAN factor"!

Let us get to the bottom of this, shall we? Hopefully, you will address it simply...!

Maybe give an example to help me understand your pov.

A single factor is like seeing one robin! It is a flag, something to make note of before putting away the snow shovels and concluding that winter is over (winter analogy!).

Sade sati too! A single factor! Also KSY and so too so called combustion of a planet! Or statements such as Jupiter in lagna is always protective or so many such 'pointers', none to be neglected but simply a starting point, not singly the final determinator!

In a data-set examination, whether from a personal database or a reliable third-party source, which some do not seem to like -- subjective bias, sampling variations and other traps are minimized, compared to anecdotal evidences.

Whether in science or in astrology...!

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

[RishiRahul]

...


What I understood then was in the context of a "reading" where we are reading for an in the context of a human being, his life, etc and not testing the role of astrological factors etc  in a research or investigative context, which is what data-studies in my understanding are.

This 'human factor' as I understand or 'assume' you meant in the current context -- is subjective and can lead to biases and misinterpreting the value or weight of the astrological factor undergoing testing!

So, since you brought up the term again in the context of 'data studies' testing "single factor" and its impact --which has been repeatedly demonstrated by me here and elsewhere and shown repeatedly as non-functional!

So, since you seem to be shying away from elaborating, at least let me know if my assumption of what you meant is correct or not! Otherwise the question will arise in my mind again and again when the term 'the HUMAN factor' is used in future.

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

How can the 'human factor' lead to biases and misinterpreting the value or weight of the astrological factor undergoing testing!?

Wonder why you think of me shying away? I thought I explained the human factor well.
Out of the 3 types  mentioned above which is included in data testing, one should include the types where the human/personal feelings are revealed and taken into consideration.

So since the single factor stuff is non functional should we leave it out as unimportant?
Do you consider sade sati as a single factor non functional?  :smt017

Rishi

Because human perceptions get involved and subjectivity! Now I am becoming more convinced that you are not willing to describe in simple straight language what you meant by "the HUMAN factor"!

Let us get to the bottom of this, shall we? Hopefully, you will address it simply...!

Maybe give an example to help me understand your pov.

A single factor is like seeing one robin! It is a flag, something to make note of before putting away the snow shovels and concluding that winter is over (winter analogy!).

Sade sati too! A single factor! Also KSY and so too so called combustion of a planet! Or statements such as Jupiter in lagna is always protective or so many such 'pointers', none to be neglected but simply a starting point, not singly the final determinator!

In a data-set examination, whether from a personal database or a reliable third-party source, which some do not seem to like -- subjective bias, sampling variations and other traps are minimized, compared to anecdotal evidences.

Whether in science or in astrology...!

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

I never meant to only take the human factor, but to take the human factor......... also.
I am not trying to not address things simply. Its the best I could explain.

Well, I guess single factors should be left out as unimportant

Rishi

[Vinay Jha]

Sorry to intrude. BPHS is very clear about the function of Arudha. There is no classical support in any ancient text about Arudha being related to perceptions.  "Arudha is about perceptions"  is a modern invention. Maayaa versus Satya is also a modern invention, and this line of thinking is diametrically opposite to Vedic-Puranic philosophy which regards both This Worls as well as the Perceptions about This World as Maayaa, Satya is the pure Atman.

According to BPHS, Arudha has two functions : its main role is about the MEANS through which the Bhaava gives its fruits, and its secondary role is that it helps or retards the magnitude of the fruit of its Bhaava depending on the conditions of the Arudha. For instance, if 11H in the Arudha of Lagna is malefic , then the source of income will be unethical : this is the CHIEF  function of Arudha. But if the 11H of Arudha Lagna is strong, then the fruit of 11H of Lagna chart will be further strengthened in magnitude of income too.

"Pada" in Sanskrit means "means" to attain some goal. That is why it denotes FOOT also, because foot or step is needed to reach somewhere. There, Pada in astrology means the characteristics of MEANS  through which results of a bhaava are attained. This view is based on BPHS.

VJ

[Rohiniranjan]

Sorry to intrude. BPHS is very clear about the function of Arudha. There is no classical support in any ancient text about Arudha being related to perceptions.  "Arudha is about perceptions"  is a modern invention. Maayaa versus Satya is also a modern invention, and this line of thinking is diametrically opposite to Vedic-Puranic philosophy which regards both This Worls as well as the Perceptions about This World as Maayaa, Satya is the pure Atman.

According to BPHS, Arudha has two functions : its main role is about the MEANS through which the Bhaava gives its fruits, and its secondary role is that it helps or retards the magnitude of the fruit of its Bhaava depending on the conditions of the Arudha. For instance, if 11H in the Arudha of Lagna is malefic , then the source of income will be unethical : this is the CHIEF  function of Arudha. But if the 11H of Arudha Lagna is strong, then the fruit of 11H of Lagna chart will be further strengthened in magnitude of income too.

"Pada" in Sanskrit means "means" to attain some goal. That is why it denotes FOOT also, because foot or step is needed to reach somewhere. There, Pada in astrology means the characteristics of MEANS  through which results of a bhaava are attained. This view is based on BPHS.

VJ

Vinay ji,

This is a very concise, and clear statement about arudha and padas. Like in pretty much everything in Jyotish as I understand, it is like a symphony, where a balanced, coordinated performance of all participants is the key to success, and TIMING is very important element too! Just like one would expect in a music of the spheres!

Regards and Thanks!

Rohiniranjan

[Rohiniranjan]

...

Because human perceptions get involved and subjectivity! Now I am becoming more convinced that you are not willing to describe in simple straight language what you meant by "the HUMAN factor"!

Let us get to the bottom of this, shall we? Hopefully, you will address it simply...!

Maybe give an example to help me understand your pov.

A single factor is like seeing one robin! It is a flag, something to make note of before putting away the snow shovels and concluding that winter is over (winter analogy!).

Sade sati too! A single factor! Also KSY and so too so called combustion of a planet! Or statements such as Jupiter in lagna is always protective or so many such 'pointers', none to be neglected but simply a starting point, not singly the final determinator!

In a data-set examination, whether from a personal database or a reliable third-party source, which some do not seem to like -- subjective bias, sampling variations and other traps are minimized, compared to anecdotal evidences.

Whether in science or in astrology...!

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

I never meant to only take the human factor, but to take the human factor......... also.
I am not trying to not address things simply. Its the best I could explain.

Well, I guess single factors should be left out as unimportant

Rishi

Dear Rishi,

You have still not explained/described what 'the HUMAN factor" means! I really do not understand why you are avoiding that...!! I am not teasing you, but I sense that the key lies around understanding what you meant by that phrase, Rishi bhai!

About the impact and participation of 'single factors', please review my past statement (above) in boldface-red.

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

[Votive]

If I may...

As I understand Rishiji is trying to communicate that individual jyotish readings is a rather intimate act between the Jyotishi and the reader. Many of the institutions which are collating and applying data analysis to charts is on the basis of publicly known events about the nativity (I will not even term them as facts).
To illustrate, a person may have had enormous success in career or reputation or finances but his/her relationships may have been at a nadir in the same period, so if the jyotishi knows that person and his life very well, he/she will have a different take than if he/she is watching from a distance and another take if he/she does not even personally know the native. That I think is the 'human' factor in interpreting.

Votive

[Rohiniranjan]

If I may...

As I understand Rishiji is trying to communicate that individual jyotish readings is a rather intimate act between the Jyotishi and the reader. Many of the institutions which are collating and applying data analysis to charts is on the basis of publicly known events about the nativity (I will not even term them as facts).
To illustrate, a person may have had enormous success in career or reputation or finances but his/her relationships may have been at a nadir in the same period, so if the jyotishi knows that person and his life very well, he/she will have a different take than if he/she is watching from a distance and another take if he/she does not even personally know the native. That I think is the 'human' factor in interpreting.

Votive

Thanks Votive ji for your thoughts.
Though I really hoped Rishi ji would have shared actually what he meant, rather than we second guessing what was in his mind when he used the term "the HUMAN factor".

A reading is a different situation than a research setting or data-testing in a large group of charts, with facts knows about the nativities in a retrospective analysis, which is the matter in the current context.

A proper reading, though, tends to be multi-factorial, and different from 'cold' research we are talking about where single cards such as "KSY" or "SS" are being examined.

The essential purpose of such research methodology involves reducing if not eliminating the source of bias! This is not a derogatory term but a naturally-present factor which can lead to seeing things where none or only a wisp of smoke exists.

Most such studies, as presumably, BVB conducted were on nativities that were known or the facts about their lives etc were known. Similar testing on nativities whose lives are unknown (aka, cold or blinded studies as you know) are even more rigorous but not easy to conduct. Some have been documented in the book I keep refering to.

Anyway, this 'human factor' as you have described leads to another major variable: "the inter-astrologer diversity", which is real, but difficult to capture or study easily or "control" in a study of numbers, and so would pertain to a given individual astrologer and not at all we should be talking about in the current context.

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

[Rohiniranjan]

From time to time, 'data studies' as have been mentioned have been dismissively and rather diminuitively commented upon, and even criticised without even knowing about the methodology used, etc. This thread was started by me, to find out more about these two KSY and SS studies conducted by BVB under Shri Rao's guidance. I could not find that here but it seems at least two books have been published by them, one on KSY and another on Shani sadesati etc. I will try to acquire those. Apparently, there is an organization called india book house which might have those and I will be pursuing that, so as far as my quest was, that has been accomplished.

We are not getting anywhere on this thread here so thanks for all the peripheral discussions etc and all the participants!

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

[RishiRahul]

Sorry to intrude. BPHS is very clear about the function of Arudha. There is no classical support in any ancient text about Arudha being related to perceptions.  "Arudha is about perceptions"  is a modern invention. Maayaa versus Satya is also a modern invention, and this line of thinking is diametrically opposite to Vedic-Puranic philosophy which regards both This Worls as well as the Perceptions about This World as Maayaa, Satya is the pure Atman.
Rishi= Well, I do not remember what bphs mentioned about Arudhas exactly, but certainly I do find the Arudha Lagna brightening a certain perception of people.... through practical application.
I wonder if it is a 'modern invention' or 'modern derivation'?
Whatever one may choose to call it, do you think its nonsense/not true in application
Books like bphs spoke in riddles many times. Some others made their own efforts to interpret.
World is not maya but driven by Maya is my view; but this is not the point/context of this thread.
Did bphs mention that Al is the paka lagna of paka lagna, and what this can mean. Everything may not be limited to bphs.
Modernists can give a lot of different views/explanations,; many of which may be marketing, sometimes true sometimes not.
There can be many aspects to a truth.



According to BPHS, Arudha has two functions : its main role is about the MEANS through which the Bhaava gives its fruits, and its secondary role is that it helps or retards the magnitude of the fruit of its Bhaava depending on the conditions of the Arudha. For instance, if 11H in the Arudha of Lagna is malefic , then the source of income will be unethical : this is the CHIEF  function of Arudha. But if the 11H of Arudha Lagna is strong, then the fruit of 11H of Lagna chart will be further strengthened in magnitude of income too.
"Pada" in Sanskrit means "means" to attain some goal. That is why it denotes FOOT also, because foot or step is needed to reach somewhere. There, Pada in astrology means the characteristics of MEANS  through which results of a bhaava are attained. This view is based on BPHS.
Rishi= These mentioned are very much true, and is this out of tune with Al being related to perceptions?

VJ

Rishi

[RishiRahul]

...

Because human perceptions get involved and subjectivity! Now I am becoming more convinced that you are not willing to describe in simple straight language what you meant by "the HUMAN factor"!

Let us get to the bottom of this, shall we? Hopefully, you will address it simply...!

Maybe give an example to help me understand your pov.

A single factor is like seeing one robin! It is a flag, something to make note of before putting away the snow shovels and concluding that winter is over (winter analogy!).

Sade sati too! A single factor! Also KSY and so too so called combustion of a planet! Or statements such as Jupiter in lagna is always protective or so many such 'pointers', none to be neglected but simply a starting point, not singly the final determinator!

In a data-set examination, whether from a personal database or a reliable third-party source, which some do not seem to like -- subjective bias, sampling variations and other traps are minimized, compared to anecdotal evidences.

Whether in science or in astrology...!

Love and Light,

Rohiniranjan

I never meant to only take the human factor, but to take the human factor......... also.
I am not trying to not address things simply. Its the best I could explain.

Well, I guess single factors should be left out as unimportant

Rishi

Dear Rishi,

You have still not explained/described what 'the HUMAN factor" means! I really do not understand why you are avoiding that...!! I am not teasing you, but I sense that the key lies around understanding what you meant by that phrase, Rishi bhai!

About the impact and participation of 'single factors', please review my past statement (above) in boldface-red.

Regards,

Rohiniranjan

Dada,

What I meant by human factor has been explained well by votive at the below quoted post. I am sorry I could not explain it (thanks votive!!) better....communication skills after all.

Regarding single factor both of us understand it quite well, I am sure.
Difference lies in our way of explaining the single factor ,and perceiving its importance.

Being resonably mature astrologers both of us know how to deal with it.

Rishi

If I may...

As I understand Rishiji is trying to communicate that individual jyotish readings is a rather intimate act between the Jyotishi and the reader. Many of the institutions which are collating and applying data analysis to charts is on the basis of publicly known events about the nativity (I will not even term them as facts).
To illustrate, a person may have had enormous success in career or reputation or finances but his/her relationships may have been at a nadir in the same period, so if the jyotishi knows that person and his life very well, he/she will have a different take than if he/she is watching from a distance and another take if he/she does not even personally know the native. That I think is the 'human' factor in interpreting.

Votive

[Vinay Jha]

This thread was about KSY and Sadhe Saati, but I am forced to post the following reply against my wishes (because I am being asked to) :

> "I do not remember what bphs mentioned about Arudhas"

It is not possible to remember everything in BPHS or in other texts. But it is easy to consult BPHS before answering, more so because its English commentary and Sanskrit text is freely available online. Unwillingness to consult BPHS before answering means BPHS is not valued as a basic text by you. This conclusion is supported by your next statement :

> "Did bphs mention that Al is the paka lagna of paka lagna, and what this can mean. Everything may not be limited to bphs."

BPHS is not the encyclopaedia of everything. But unwilling to consult the view of BPHS before arguing on fundamentals of Vedic Jyotisha is not good. I did not expect such a view from you, because I found you to be democratic, open-minded and scientifically tempered. BPHS and many other ancient texts contain interpolations, and nothing in ancient texts should be accepted without careful examination. But if some theory is expounded against the classics, we must be similarly careful.

As regards the details in Jaimini Sutras, some moderners have propagated that Jaimini advocated a different system than BPHS. Jaimini was the chief disciple of Parashara' Ji's son, and Jaimini Sutra detailed those aspects which were summarily dealt in BPHS. There were far more exhaustive texts which have not survived, and some of them are kept in private collections by selfish astrologers who neither understand them nor want others to read those works of sages.

Thirdly, Two thirds of BPHS have been lost.

> "do you think its nonsense/not true in application"

Yes, mental perceptions are linked with not Lagna's pada charts but with Chandra Kundali and its pada charts. Lagna is not Mind but Physical existence. Moreover, perception is an ever-changing , subjective and vague term. When astrologers are fighting over basic OBJECTIVE facts, it is useless to argue about SUBJECTIVE perceptions.

Leave aside arguments and references, my experience does not permit me to accept the perception hypothesis.

> "Books like bphs spoke in riddles many times. Some others made their own efforts to interpret."

BPHS has few riddles, Jaimini has more, due to the sutra (=formula) style of Jaimini.  Every astrologer has a right to interpret, but with proper references, case studies, and logic. Proponents of Perception Theory are prejudiced, because they deliberately neglect the traditional theory and put forth their own hypothesis only. It is good marketing (of ideas), but bad astrology.

> "World is not maya but driven by Maya is my view; but this is not the point/context of this thread."

There are countless persons who regard this world as Truth. But this view is not VEDIC. Vedic Astrology must not oppose the Vedic view. The last verse of Yajurveda is the foundation of Vedaanta (anta of Veda) ; it explicitly states :

'This golden (=attractive) world of senses is the lid which hides Truth, and Truth is the Purusha which is same in me as in the Sun-God.'

You or me deserve the right to propound our views, but not in the name of some ancient philosophy. Vedic Astrology cannot go against Vedic Thought.

> "These mentioned are very much true, and is this out of tune with Al being related to perceptions?"

Yes. Perception is reflection of Reality in the mind. The reflection may be correct or distorted, sometimes even merely a hallucination. Creating an astrological theory about mental perceptions by those who are debating for decades on ayanamshas and other basics is nothing but wastage of time.

Mind must be studied through Moon and its charts. This view is not my invention, but age old ASTROLOGICAL  wisdom.  

Today I am starting a new article about Upapada at my site. I had worked on it years ago, but did not write on it because astrologers are happy with misinterpretations (about things which they do not even test)  and do not feel the need to test alternative ideas. How many astrologers use Pada and Upapada in actual chart readings ? If someone does not use these things, how he/she can gain any experience ? I am posting my report with many case studies, in summarised form.

Your present views are welcome, but you must comment on BPHS or on other texts after consulting. Whenever my memory fails, I consult the relevant books before writing.

I have tested BPHS theory about padas for many years, hence I know this traditional theory is correct. As for perception hypothesis, I can only say that a vague and subjective term like perception should not be used to counter age-old theories of classics. Most of your clients cannot properly recall their real perceptions at the time of events in their lives, because perception is an ephemeral airy thing changing its nature before we catch it. We ought to deal with perception cautiously.

VJ