Vedic Bhava chalit

[mysbcrs]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

[RishiRahul]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

[Rohiniranjan]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

What you are recommending, and at some point earlier PVR has too if I recall correctly, is exactly what western tropical astrologers had been doing. They use different unequal house systems (Placidius, Regiomontanus, Koch, East point, Zenith etc etc) from what jyotishis use (Sripati, Porphyrii-like), and of course the tropical zodiac, and an entire retinue of different techniques such as primary, secondary, tertiary directions and different progressions which makes their system very different from ours. Western astrology is far more complex than simply sun-sign astrology which unfortunately has become stuck in the minds of casual astrophiles (newspaper column readers)!

So, while you are following a method which is pretty different from mainstream jyotishis (who use bhavmadhya or simply whole sign house), there is one or few who uses tropical zodiac and says that he finds jyotish rules applicable to tropical zodiac charts, which is what he uses.

There is a thriving Humanistic school in western realm (Rudhyar and followers) who maintain that human beings project their societal traits and attributes on planets etc and that makes astrology kind of attuned to their society/community/way of thinking.

There are so many systems and subsystems and nuances that one is amazed at the diverse capabilities of human minds, thinking etc that created the astrological frame of reference and its diverse approaches!

[Rohiniranjan]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

Dear CRS,

Why would chara karakas change? Did you mean padas?? For instance if Taurus 28 is rising, and venus is in 12th house, while Gemini is the dominant rashi in first house and mercury is in Gemini 15d, instead of lagna pada (arudha) being in pisces, you would consider it in aquarius...?

Can you please elaborate a bit more??

RR

[RishiRahul]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

What you are recommending, and at some point earlier PVR has too if I recall correctly, is exactly what western tropical astrologers had been doing. They use different unequal house systems (Placidius, Regiomontanus, Koch, East point, Zenith etc etc) from what jyotishis use (Sripati, Porphyrii-like), and of course the tropical zodiac, and an entire retinue of different techniques such as primary, secondary, tertiary directions and different progressions which makes their system very different from ours. Western astrology is far more complex than simply sun-sign astrology which unfortunately has become stuck in the minds of casual astrophiles (newspaper column readers)!

So, while you are following a method which is pretty different from mainstream jyotishis (who use bhavmadhya or simply whole sign house), there is one or few who uses tropical zodiac and says that he finds jyotish rules applicable to tropical zodiac charts, which is what he uses.

There is a thriving Humanistic school in western realm (Rudhyar and followers) who maintain that human beings project their societal traits and attributes on planets etc and that makes astrology kind of attuned to their society/community/way of thinking.

There are so many systems and subsystems and nuances that one is amazed at the diverse capabilities of human minds, thinking etc that created the astrological frame of reference and its diverse approaches!

Dada,

Thanks for this.

I am not recommending to not work on as vedic framework.

The total framework, including rasi chart is absolutely vedic. Nothing western or tropical in it.

The only departure is in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).
In the bhava chart the Arudhas do not change from the rasi chart also.
The only change in the bhava chart is the bhavarambha concept applied to planets.
I do not think Arudhas should change in bhava chart.

This may sound illogical though.

Rishi

[RishiRahul]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

What you are recommending, and at some point earlier PVR has too if I recall correctly, is exactly what western tropical astrologers had been doing. They use different unequal house systems (Placidius, Regiomontanus, Koch, East point, Zenith etc etc) from what jyotishis use (Sripati, Porphyrii-like), and of course the tropical zodiac, and an entire retinue of different techniques such as primary, secondary, tertiary directions and different progressions which makes their system very different from ours. Western astrology is far more complex than simply sun-sign astrology which unfortunately has become stuck in the minds of casual astrophiles (newspaper column readers)!

So, while you are following a method which is pretty different from mainstream jyotishis (who use bhavmadhya or simply whole sign house), there is one or few who uses tropical zodiac and says that he finds jyotish rules applicable to tropical zodiac charts, which is what he uses.

There is a thriving Humanistic school in western realm (Rudhyar and followers) who maintain that human beings project their societal traits and attributes on planets etc and that makes astrology kind of attuned to their society/community/way of thinking.

There are so many systems and subsystems and nuances that one is amazed at the diverse capabilities of human minds, thinking etc that created the astrological frame of reference and its diverse approaches!

Dada,

Thanks for this.

I am not recommending to not work on as vedic framework.

The total framework, including rasi chart is absolutely vedic. Nothing western or tropical in it.

The only departure is in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).
In the bhava chart the Arudhas do not change from the rasi chart also.
The only change in the bhava chart is the bhavarambha concept applied to planets.
I do not think Arudhas should change in bhava chart.

This may sound illogical though.

Rishi

An addendum:=

Sorry I am take back my words about 'recommending'; rather this is what I do , arrived at only while deeper perceptions.

For lighter general perceptions into an event this is not a necessity.
Example: Jupiter in transit is favorable works for eveyone (to some general extent). I mean Jupiter transit in 2,5,7,9,11 is good.

Rishi

[Rohiniranjan]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

What you are recommending, and at some point earlier PVR has too if I recall correctly, is exactly what western tropical astrologers had been doing. They use different unequal house systems (Placidius, Regiomontanus, Koch, East point, Zenith etc etc) from what jyotishis use (Sripati, Porphyrii-like), and of course the tropical zodiac, and an entire retinue of different techniques such as primary, secondary, tertiary directions and different progressions which makes their system very different from ours. Western astrology is far more complex than simply sun-sign astrology which unfortunately has become stuck in the minds of casual astrophiles (newspaper column readers)!

So, while you are following a method which is pretty different from mainstream jyotishis (who use bhavmadhya or simply whole sign house), there is one or few who uses tropical zodiac and says that he finds jyotish rules applicable to tropical zodiac charts, which is what he uses.

There is a thriving Humanistic school in western realm (Rudhyar and followers) who maintain that human beings project their societal traits and attributes on planets etc and that makes astrology kind of attuned to their society/community/way of thinking.

There are so many systems and subsystems and nuances that one is amazed at the diverse capabilities of human minds, thinking etc that created the astrological frame of reference and its diverse approaches!

Dada,

Thanks for this.

I am not recommending to not work on as vedic framework.

The total framework, including rasi chart is absolutely vedic. Nothing western or tropical in it.

The only departure is in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).
In the bhava chart the Arudhas do not change from the rasi chart also.
The only change in the bhava chart is the bhavarambha concept applied to planets.
I do not think Arudhas should change in bhava chart.

This may sound illogical though.

Rishi

An addendum:=

Sorry I am take back my words about 'recommending'; rather this is what I do , arrived at only while deeper perceptions.

For lighter general perceptions into an event this is not a necessity.
Example: Jupiter in transit is favorable works for eveyone (to some general extent). I mean Jupiter transit in 2,5,7,9,11 is good.

Rishi

Padas can change, and so do chsrakarakas, Rishi! I am referring to my post to CRS who expressed a desire to experiment. I do not see a problem with experimenting, at all! Although, that may seem to run counter to logic or might reflect a departure from BPHS etc.

For instance if someone wants to experiment with karakas based on elongation (or interval) from the cusp, as opposed to the natural cusps! Similarly the example I gave in my response to him where the cusp might be in the fag-end of Taurus, but the dominant (by acerage (!) will be Gemini, particularly if cusp is used a bhavarambha.

That problem will not occur if one uses equal house system, since even if the last degree of a sign is rising, that sign will have relatively more territory in that house. One may argue about the situation where the birth (accurate time) happens to fall on the very sandhi of signs by d.m.s! Would be a very rare occurance.

Personally, I would be a bit wary of going that route! Similarly, I would be wary of not applying ayanamsha to sun or any particular planet while leaving the rest, as is. If CRS is reading this, it must not be taken as a criticism of those experimental approaches, at all, but just my feeling about the matter.

I think, we jyotishis, have bigger issues and problems already on our desk. To name a few, the two views about karakamsa (once determined should it be applied to navamsha chart or kshetra varga chart, or both and what exactly are the differences and practical applications? And that is just the tip of the ice-berg in our plate, rather than an ice-crème cone! :-(

[RishiRahul]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

What you are recommending, and at some point earlier PVR has too if I recall correctly, is exactly what western tropical astrologers had been doing. They use different unequal house systems (Placidius, Regiomontanus, Koch, East point, Zenith etc etc) from what jyotishis use (Sripati, Porphyrii-like), and of course the tropical zodiac, and an entire retinue of different techniques such as primary, secondary, tertiary directions and different progressions which makes their system very different from ours. Western astrology is far more complex than simply sun-sign astrology which unfortunately has become stuck in the minds of casual astrophiles (newspaper column readers)!

So, while you are following a method which is pretty different from mainstream jyotishis (who use bhavmadhya or simply whole sign house), there is one or few who uses tropical zodiac and says that he finds jyotish rules applicable to tropical zodiac charts, which is what he uses.

There is a thriving Humanistic school in western realm (Rudhyar and followers) who maintain that human beings project their societal traits and attributes on planets etc and that makes astrology kind of attuned to their society/community/way of thinking.

There are so many systems and subsystems and nuances that one is amazed at the diverse capabilities of human minds, thinking etc that created the astrological frame of reference and its diverse approaches!

Dada,

Thanks for this.

I am not recommending to not work on as vedic framework.

The total framework, including rasi chart is absolutely vedic. Nothing western or tropical in it.

The only departure is in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).
In the bhava chart the Arudhas do not change from the rasi chart also.
The only change in the bhava chart is the bhavarambha concept applied to planets.
I do not think Arudhas should change in bhava chart.

This may sound illogical though.

Rishi

An addendum:=

Sorry I am take back my words about 'recommending'; rather this is what I do , arrived at only while deeper perceptions.

For lighter general perceptions into an event this is not a necessity.
Example: Jupiter in transit is favorable works for eveyone (to some general extent). I mean Jupiter transit in 2,5,7,9,11 is good.

Rishi

Padas can change, and so do chsrakarakas, Rishi! I am referring to my post to CRS who expressed a desire to experiment. I do not see a problem with experimenting, at all! Although, that may seem to run counter to logic or might reflect a departure from BPHS etc.

For instance if someone wants to experiment with karakas based on elongation (or interval) from the cusp, as opposed to the natural cusps! Similarly the example I gave in my response to him where the cusp might be in the fag-end of Taurus, but the dominant (by acerage (!) will be Gemini, particularly if cusp is used a bhavarambha.

That problem will not occur if one uses equal house system, since even if the last degree of a sign is rising, that sign will have relatively more territory in that house. One may argue about the situation where the birth (accurate time) happens to fall on the very sandhi of signs by d.m.s! Would be a very rare occurance.

Personally, I would be a bit wary of going that route! Similarly, I would be wary of not applying ayanamsha to sun or any particular planet while leaving the rest, as is. If CRS is reading this, it must not be taken as a criticism of those experimental approaches, at all, but just my feeling about the matter.

I think, we jyotishis, have bigger issues and problems already on our desk. To name a few, the two views about karakamsa (once determined should it be applied to navamsha chart or kshetra varga chart, or both and what exactly are the differences and practical applications? And that is just the tip of the ice-berg in our plate, rather than an ice-crème cone! :-(

No No. I am not discouraging CRS or anyone in his search.

Since I started this thread & mentioned this concept, I was just explaining my take on this; just in case he/others misunderstood it.

About Karakamsas shouldn't it be both; but this needs another thread  :smt005

Rishi

[Rohiniranjan]

What good will that do, my friend...?

[RishiRahul]

What good will that do, my friend...?

Which dada? The bhava concept or karakamsa!

Rishi

[mysbcrs]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

What you are recommending, and at some point earlier PVR has too if I recall correctly, is exactly what western tropical astrologers had been doing. They use different unequal house systems (Placidius, Regiomontanus, Koch, East point, Zenith etc etc) from what jyotishis use (Sripati, Porphyrii-like), and of course the tropical zodiac, and an entire retinue of different techniques such as primary, secondary, tertiary directions and different progressions which makes their system very different from ours. Western astrology is far more complex than simply sun-sign astrology which unfortunately has become stuck in the minds of casual astrophiles (newspaper column readers)!

So, while you are following a method which is pretty different from mainstream jyotishis (who use bhavmadhya or simply whole sign house), there is one or few who uses tropical zodiac and says that he finds jyotish rules applicable to tropical zodiac charts, which is what he uses.

There is a thriving Humanistic school in western realm (Rudhyar and followers) who maintain that human beings project their societal traits and attributes on planets etc and that makes astrology kind of attuned to their society/community/way of thinking.

There are so many systems and subsystems and nuances that one is amazed at the diverse capabilities of human minds, thinking etc that created the astrological frame of reference and its diverse approaches!

Dada,

Thanks for this.

I am not recommending to not work on as vedic framework.

The total framework, including rasi chart is absolutely vedic. Nothing western or tropical in it.

The only departure is in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).
In the bhava chart the Arudhas do not change from the rasi chart also.
The only change in the bhava chart is the bhavarambha concept applied to planets.
I do not think Arudhas should change in bhava chart.

This may sound illogical though.

Rishi

An addendum:=

Sorry I am take back my words about 'recommending'; rather this is what I do , arrived at only while deeper perceptions.

For lighter general perceptions into an event this is not a necessity.
Example: Jupiter in transit is favorable works for eveyone (to some general extent). I mean Jupiter transit in 2,5,7,9,11 is good.

Rishi

Padas can change, and so do chsrakarakas, Rishi! I am referring to my post to CRS who expressed a desire to experiment. I do not see a problem with experimenting, at all! Although, that may seem to run counter to logic or might reflect a departure from BPHS etc.

For instance if someone wants to experiment with karakas based on elongation (or interval) from the cusp, as opposed to the natural cusps! Similarly the example I gave in my response to him where the cusp might be in the fag-end of Taurus, but the dominant (by acerage (!) will be Gemini, particularly if cusp is used a bhavarambha.

That problem will not occur if one uses equal house system, since even if the last degree of a sign is rising, that sign will have relatively more territory in that house. One may argue about the situation where the birth (accurate time) happens to fall on the very sandhi of signs by d.m.s! Would be a very rare occurance.

Personally, I would be a bit wary of going that route! Similarly, I would be wary of not applying ayanamsha to sun or any particular planet while leaving the rest, as is. If CRS is reading this, it must not be taken as a criticism of those experimental approaches, at all, but just my feeling about the matter.

I think, we jyotishis, have bigger issues and problems already on our desk. To name a few, the two views about karakamsa (once determined should it be applied to navamsha chart or kshetra varga chart, or both and what exactly are the differences and practical applications? And that is just the tip of the ice-berg in our plate, rather than an ice-crème cone! :-(

RR ji, rishi ji,

What I meant essentially was to look at the placemt of a graha in Bhava from cusp as Bhavarambha rather than placement in  sign. In the scenario you have given, if a graha is placed at 29Ta50 and all other grahas are more than 1 degree away from the end of whichever sign they are in, current understanding makes it the AK. But from the lagna bhavarambha it is just one degree away. It will probably become the dara kaaraka.

This would result in less number of people having the set of same chara karakas.

As for ayanamsha for Sun - He says results for Sun's placement works better without ayanmsha. He uses Lahiri for others.

As for Pada, to be frank, I have not given any thought to it.

[Rohiniranjan]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

What you are recommending, and at some point earlier PVR has too if I recall correctly, is exactly what western tropical astrologers had been doing. They use different unequal house systems (Placidius, Regiomontanus, Koch, East point, Zenith etc etc) from what jyotishis use (Sripati, Porphyrii-like), and of course the tropical zodiac, and an entire retinue of different techniques such as primary, secondary, tertiary directions and different progressions which makes their system very different from ours. Western astrology is far more complex than simply sun-sign astrology which unfortunately has become stuck in the minds of casual astrophiles (newspaper column readers)!

So, while you are following a method which is pretty different from mainstream jyotishis (who use bhavmadhya or simply whole sign house), there is one or few who uses tropical zodiac and says that he finds jyotish rules applicable to tropical zodiac charts, which is what he uses.

There is a thriving Humanistic school in western realm (Rudhyar and followers) who maintain that human beings project their societal traits and attributes on planets etc and that makes astrology kind of attuned to their society/community/way of thinking.

There are so many systems and subsystems and nuances that one is amazed at the diverse capabilities of human minds, thinking etc that created the astrological frame of reference and its diverse approaches!

Dada,

Thanks for this.

I am not recommending to not work on as vedic framework.

The total framework, including rasi chart is absolutely vedic. Nothing western or tropical in it.

The only departure is in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).
In the bhava chart the Arudhas do not change from the rasi chart also.
The only change in the bhava chart is the bhavarambha concept applied to planets.
I do not think Arudhas should change in bhava chart.

This may sound illogical though.

Rishi

An addendum:=

Sorry I am take back my words about 'recommending'; rather this is what I do , arrived at only while deeper perceptions.

For lighter general perceptions into an event this is not a necessity.
Example: Jupiter in transit is favorable works for eveyone (to some general extent). I mean Jupiter transit in 2,5,7,9,11 is good.

Rishi

Padas can change, and so do chsrakarakas, Rishi! I am referring to my post to CRS who expressed a desire to experiment. I do not see a problem with experimenting, at all! Although, that may seem to run counter to logic or might reflect a departure from BPHS etc.

For instance if someone wants to experiment with karakas based on elongation (or interval) from the cusp, as opposed to the natural cusps! Similarly the example I gave in my response to him where the cusp might be in the fag-end of Taurus, but the dominant (by acerage (!) will be Gemini, particularly if cusp is used a bhavarambha.

That problem will not occur if one uses equal house system, since even if the last degree of a sign is rising, that sign will have relatively more territory in that house. One may argue about the situation where the birth (accurate time) happens to fall on the very sandhi of signs by d.m.s! Would be a very rare occurance.

Personally, I would be a bit wary of going that route! Similarly, I would be wary of not applying ayanamsha to sun or any particular planet while leaving the rest, as is. If CRS is reading this, it must not be taken as a criticism of those experimental approaches, at all, but just my feeling about the matter.

I think, we jyotishis, have bigger issues and problems already on our desk. To name a few, the two views about karakamsa (once determined should it be applied to navamsha chart or kshetra varga chart, or both and what exactly are the differences and practical applications? And that is just the tip of the ice-berg in our plate, rather than an ice-crème cone! :-(

RR ji, rishi ji,

What I meant essentially was to look at the placemt of a graha in Bhava from cusp as Bhavarambha rather than placement in  sign. In the scenario you have given, if a graha is placed at 29Ta50 and all other grahas are more than 1 degree away from the end of whichever sign they are in, current understanding makes it the AK. But from the lagna bhavarambha it is just one degree away. It will probably become the dara kaaraka.

This would result in less number of people having the set of same chara karakas.

As for ayanamsha for Sun - He says results for Sun's placement works better without ayanmsha. He uses Lahiri for others.

As for Pada, to be frank, I have not given any thought to it.

Hi CRS,

That is what I assumed (figured out), you meant See my red-font text!

Of course, doing so will mean that you would have to factor in which house system you are using. Most cusps differ, depending on whether equal house is chosen or sripati or others. Also, as the latitude of birth rises (N or S of equator), you would run into the issue of what to do with houses that are much wider than 30 (or smaller than 30 and even non-existent (intercepted).

But why the heck am I even worrying about your experiment <LOL>?

Good luck! Wishing you success.

Rohiniranjan

[RishiRahul]

Namasthe,

One of the reasons I am tempted to try ascendant as Bhavaarambha is the possibility of looking at chara kaaraks based on such a bhava. Otherwise, chara kaarkas would be the same for a large number of population.

I also came across another interwsting suggestion from a friend who says ayanamsha should be applied for all except Sun!

My experiment with this showed that planets should be seen 'ascendant in bhavaarambha' in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).


Just expressed my view.

RishiRahul

What you are recommending, and at some point earlier PVR has too if I recall correctly, is exactly what western tropical astrologers had been doing. They use different unequal house systems (Placidius, Regiomontanus, Koch, East point, Zenith etc etc) from what jyotishis use (Sripati, Porphyrii-like), and of course the tropical zodiac, and an entire retinue of different techniques such as primary, secondary, tertiary directions and different progressions which makes their system very different from ours. Western astrology is far more complex than simply sun-sign astrology which unfortunately has become stuck in the minds of casual astrophiles (newspaper column readers)!

So, while you are following a method which is pretty different from mainstream jyotishis (who use bhavmadhya or simply whole sign house), there is one or few who uses tropical zodiac and says that he finds jyotish rules applicable to tropical zodiac charts, which is what he uses.

There is a thriving Humanistic school in western realm (Rudhyar and followers) who maintain that human beings project their societal traits and attributes on planets etc and that makes astrology kind of attuned to their society/community/way of thinking.

There are so many systems and subsystems and nuances that one is amazed at the diverse capabilities of human minds, thinking etc that created the astrological frame of reference and its diverse approaches!

Dada,

Thanks for this.

I am not recommending to not work on as vedic framework.

The total framework, including rasi chart is absolutely vedic. Nothing western or tropical in it.

The only departure is in the bhava chart (not rasi chart).
In the bhava chart the Arudhas do not change from the rasi chart also.
The only change in the bhava chart is the bhavarambha concept applied to planets.
I do not think Arudhas should change in bhava chart.

This may sound illogical though.

Rishi

An addendum:=

Sorry I am take back my words about 'recommending'; rather this is what I do , arrived at only while deeper perceptions.

For lighter general perceptions into an event this is not a necessity.
Example: Jupiter in transit is favorable works for eveyone (to some general extent). I mean Jupiter transit in 2,5,7,9,11 is good.

Rishi

Padas can change, and so do chsrakarakas, Rishi! I am referring to my post to CRS who expressed a desire to experiment. I do not see a problem with experimenting, at all! Although, that may seem to run counter to logic or might reflect a departure from BPHS etc.

For instance if someone wants to experiment with karakas based on elongation (or interval) from the cusp, as opposed to the natural cusps! Similarly the example I gave in my response to him where the cusp might be in the fag-end of Taurus, but the dominant (by acerage (!) will be Gemini, particularly if cusp is used a bhavarambha.

That problem will not occur if one uses equal house system, since even if the last degree of a sign is rising, that sign will have relatively more territory in that house. One may argue about the situation where the birth (accurate time) happens to fall on the very sandhi of signs by d.m.s! Would be a very rare occurance.

Personally, I would be a bit wary of going that route! Similarly, I would be wary of not applying ayanamsha to sun or any particular planet while leaving the rest, as is. If CRS is reading this, it must not be taken as a criticism of those experimental approaches, at all, but just my feeling about the matter.

I think, we jyotishis, have bigger issues and problems already on our desk. To name a few, the two views about karakamsa (once determined should it be applied to navamsha chart or kshetra varga chart, or both and what exactly are the differences and practical applications? And that is just the tip of the ice-berg in our plate, rather than an ice-crème cone! :-(

RR ji, rishi ji,

What I meant essentially was to look at the placemt of a graha in Bhava from cusp as Bhavarambha rather than placement in  sign. In the scenario you have given, if a graha is placed at 29Ta50 and all other grahas are more than 1 degree away from the end of whichever sign they are in, current understanding makes it the AK. But from the lagna bhavarambha it is just one degree away. It will probably become the dara kaaraka.

This would result in less number of people having the set of same chara karakas.

As for ayanamsha for Sun - He says results for Sun's placement works better without ayanmsha. He uses Lahiri for others.

As for Pada, to be frank, I have not given any thought to it.

Dear mysbcrs,

I had guessed what you were meaning all the while. For which I again mentioned my take, after experimentation.

Of course, experiments should still be open for growth & development.

Do let us know your findings please.

RishiRahul

[Rohiniranjan]

GOOD!
Next stop, whenever -- LANGUAGES?

I personally have gone through a few in my lifetime and as I HOPPED and embraced or was forced to embrace, each embrace taught me about global cultures and what they could and could not and so THANKS to MA! ;-|

Rohiniranjan

[mysbcrs]

Thanks RR ji, Rishi ji.