About Abhijit

As far as I understand this “left out” star literally is left out. It is supposed to be the star Vega, and the surrounding stars – which is in the constellation of Lyra, which is way outside of the zodiac area. In fact, Vega becomes the Dhruva, the polestar, every 26,000 years. In other words it is way up north and outside the ecliptic belt of the zodiac. This a valid reason to leave it out of the calculations of planetary positions. If you trace it’s position downward into the ecliptic it slides in between Uttarāṣāḍhā and Śravaṇa. Some have said that it is a theoretical area that pertains to time rather than space and is therefore of importance to determining auspicious times of day, and not to calculating or describing planetary positions.

For the present, at least, I feel it is safe to omit Abhijit from my system of natal astrology. But I will keep my ears and mind open towards it.

Vega

The purpose of ritual is to obtain a specific boon. The god of ritual fire empowers Viśākhā to be a star that focuses and fixes our determination upon a specific objective, often to the point of obsession. The symbol of this star, a finish line, illustrates this mentality nicely.

The reason nakshatras are essential in calculating the flow of time can be known by knowing the first part of the first chapter of Surya Siddhanta. There it explains:

There are two types of time: philosophical and practical. The Surya Siddhanta concerns itself with practical time. There are four types of practical time systems: sidereal, tropical, lunar, and civil.

Civil time is counted by sunrises. Each sunrise is a day. 30 sunrises is a month, and 12 such months is a civil year. It is the most simple way of reckoning practical time.

Lunar time is measured by the relative distance between the Sun and Moon. So it is a type of sidereal time (that is, it has no reference to the earth, only to the heavenly bodies). Each day of lunar time is a certain angle of distance between the Sun and Moon, called a “tithi.” 30 tithis is a month, and 12 such months is a lunar year.

Tropical time is measured by the relationship between the Sun and the Earth, specifically between the Sun and the Earth’s equator. This relationship defines the equinoxes, solstices and seasons. 1 degree of motion relative to the spring equinox constitutes one tropical day. Again 30 of them is a tropical month, and 12 of those is a tropical year.

Sidereal time in the Surya Siddhanta is not the same as modern sidereal time. Modern sidereal time is based on a sidereal year. Surya Siddhanta’s sidereal time is based on a sidereal day. A sidereal day is the amount of time elapsed between the rising of a given star (a star, not the Sun) in the east. Like always, 30 such days is a sidereal month, and 360 of them is a sidereal year by Surya Siddhanta’s calculations.

After giving these definitions, the Surya Siddhanta goes on to define three of the four as having specific limited application. Tropical time is specifically for determining rashis (the 12 “signs”) and seasons – which is most relevant to farming and other practical deeds. Lunar time is specifically for determine sacred events. Civil time is specifically meant for cases when long term accuracy is not important.

Sidereal time is therefore the primary way for counting the unfolding of practical time. “Philosophical time” is the conceptual force which causes creation and destruction. “Practical time” is the changing of one moment into the next so that events can unfold. So the Surya Siddhanta defines sidereal time as the primary measure for normal time – the unfolding of events.

“Sidereal” in sanskrit is “Nakshatra.” Nakshatra dasa in English literally means “sidereal phase.” A nakshatra dasa is a phase of sidereal time. Therefore the nakshatra (27 stars) of the sidereal zodiac are the main milestones measuring the pace of this type of time.

The most popular astrological timing systems in India are based on sidereal nakshatra because the whole purpose of a timing system is to understand how events will unfold in due course, and the correct way of measuring that is nakshatra-based time.

It begs mentioning that surya-siddhanta’s nakshatra year is the equivalent of 359.017 of our modern calendar days. So this is the length of the year that should be used when calculating the duration of nakshatra dasas.

- Vic DiCara

www.vicdicara.com

Reblogged from Bhagavatam By Braja:

1.7.1 Śaunaka asked: After Bādarāyaṇa heard godly Nārada speak and then leave, what did he do, O Sūta? Bādarāyaṇa is a name of Vyāsa, whose main headquarters is at Badarīk Ashram in the Himalayas. 2 Sūta answered: On the western shore of the sacred river Sarasvatī, in a place called Śamyāprāsa, is an ashram reputed to be ideal for spiritual research. 3 There, surrounded by Badarī trees, is Vyāsa’s personal ashrama where he sat, washed his hands and focused his mind within. Vyāsa’s …

This is a post from my study of Bhagavata-Purana, which should be of interest to astrologers as it makes a reference to the origin and function of Karma (fate).

Q: Do you find tropical signs more reliable in your practice?

Yes, I find tropical signs give a simpler, clearer picture more readily, if used with whole sign houses and sidereal nakshatras.

Q: Do you believe that Jyotish classics as ParasaraBHS, BrighuS and others are meant for tropical signs?

The classic textbooks on Indian Astrology (Jyotish) were written in different time periods. I believe that India has been using sidereal zodiac signs for a very long time – probably about 1800 or so years. Classics written after this time (c. 200 AD) were probably written in reference to the sidereal zodiac. But it is most important to note that about 500 years before and after that key point in history (c. 300 BC – 700 AD) there was practically no difference between tropical and sidereal zodiacs. And even for another 500 years or so on either side (800 BC – 1200 AD) the difference was not very dramatic. Most of the classics were written in this time frame. Therefore even if they were written by authors who had adopted sidereal zodiac signs, the practical difference between tropical and sidereal signs contemporary for those authors was negligible.

The fact that there are no significant “classics” much after this time frame is another evidence that Indian astrology began to lose it’s original potency as the sidereal zodiac became more and more out of phase with the true zodiac signs.

Q: Do the methods given in Jyotish classics work with tropical signs?

Yes, the methods defined in classics work best with tropial signs. In fact some of the methods defined in the classics cannot work at all without tropical signs. A case in point is the shad-bala system for calculating the potency of a planet. One component of this calculation is declination, which cannot be determined outside of tropical system (“declination” means the distance north or south of the equator).

Q: Do the classics not say simply what zodiac we should use?

Most of what we consider classic “astrology” textbooks do not, no. I address this in my paper. Calculation and interpretation are separate branches of Indian astrology. The Surya Siddhanta is the authoritative text on calculations. It does indicate that tropical planetary coordinates should be used. It instructs us to use ayanamsha is a means of converting sidereal calculations to tropical, and not visa versa as is now the fashion. The Srimad Bhagavatam also contains several chapters on astronomical phenomena and unequivocally defines the zodiac signs as tropical, and the nakshatras distinctly as sidereal.

I have addressed this much more completely in my paper.

Q: Are there not any old examples of charts indicating what zodiac system they use?

Classic Indian literature sometimes gives example charts, but not the birth data. For example they describe the planetary configurations for Rama and Krishna – but they do not say what birth data creates those charts. This is because the planetary configurations are themselves the most universal and reliable method of determining a point in time – so the ancient scriptures express the time of an important event such as the birth of an incarnation of God, by describing the planetary configurations.

However, since there is no second reference it is not possible to verify if the classics are describing the configurations in a sidereal or tropical reference. It is also particularly confusing because these configurations refer to points in time that are – by our pygmy modern conceptions and methods – extremely distant in the past and therefore very hard to verify by calculations – since over vast periods of time the speeds and motions of planets and the earth are not at all constant.

An aspect doesn’t have dignity, a planet has dignity. You have to understand that dignity is about the relationship of the guest to the host. The planet is a guest and the owner of the sign the planet is in is the host. Next you have to understand what an aspect is. It is a “dhristi” – it is a line-of-sight, by which a planet can cast a glance upon a different place. The glance is the glance of the host, it is not the host itself. The glance is not received by the host of the sign it lands in, because the glance is not a guest, it is just a glance. If someone looks at your house, it is a hell of a lot different than if they come into your living room. If they look into your house you get affected by that, but if they are actually in your house they are a guest. The aspect is a glance. it is the power of the planet transfered by a glance.

So the dignity of a planet is decided by it’s relationship to the planet who hosts the sign it is in. Therefore the glances that planet casts by aspects carry that dignity with them wherever they land.

I absolutely do believe in reincarnation. It is merely the “Law of Conservation of Energy” applied to the enegy of our souls. For many lifetimes we have used or misused our freedoms, and that’s why we start this life with a certain “destiny” already in place.

The configuration of heaven and earth at the time you start your life reveals the initial destiny for your current lifetime. Why?

I definitely do not think it is because the configuration of planets and stars somehow influences us with rays, gravitons, waves, or whatever. Instead, I believe it is the compassion of our mother, the universe, to communicate to her children via the movements of her body, the stars and planets.

I am not going to mention Ephemeris and Tables of Houses – which we few remaining souls who have enjoyed calculating charts by hand sometimes will remember fondly – because these are just the output of the calculations put into a handy reference format. What i will describe here is actually the way the epemeris and tables of houses are created, in ancient and modern times.

Ancient Method

Let’s talk about how it was done in the old days (and this is the recorded method in Surya Siddhanta).

It was done by looking up at the sky and practically observing how fast and slow the planets move through the stars – when they become erratic and move backward, and how they slow down and speed up. After making such observations carefully for many years ancient scientists developed math which described the motions of the planets reasonably well.

Using that math, from a given point of time as a reference one could extrapolate where the planets would be in reference to the stars at any other given time previous to or after the point of reference. Here is an example to make it easier to grasp.

If you know a car moves north at 20 miles per hour on average, and you know that 3 hours ago it was at the intersection of 4th street and 5th avenue, you can predict reasonably well that 2 hours ago it was 20 miles north of that point. 1 hour ago it was 40 miles north, currently it is 60 miles north. 4 hours ago it was 20 miles south of the reference point. Etc.

The main reference point for calculations, used by Surya Siddhanta is the planetary alignment at the beginning of Kali Yuga (the current Age of the world). Then, knowing how much a given planet moves each day on average, you can estimate where the planet is on any given day before or after the beginning of Kali Yuga.

As you can tell this is a system of estimates only, it is not precise. If you want to be more precise you have to periodically recheck the cars speed and reset the reference points to less remote times. The Surya Siddhata advises to do this – rechecking the planetary motion and resetting the reference point – and calls the reset-values ‘bijam’ or ‘seeds’ which keep the calculations acceptably accurate. This has not been done for a very long time, though, because we stopped using this estimative method a long time and moved to new methods more based on direct observation.

Modern Method

The modern method benefits from centuries of mathematical refinement and improvement in our observational tools. As such it is far more accurate to the fine details. However, it is essentially the same as the old system – based on observing the planetary motions, creating mathematical descriptions of those motions, and using those formulas to know the position of any planet at any point in the future or past. It’s just that the current formulas are very very accurate and not really as much in need of periodic updating as the more general estimations of the Surya Siddhanta were.

Ancient Reference Point

The old calculations were done in reference to the stars themselves, the nakshatra. New calculations are done in reference to a point that is more stable from our vantage point on earth – the location of the Sun at the vernal equinox.

Why the difference?

I don’t really know, of course. But I suggest that maybe ancient methods use stellar (nakshatra) based math because it is so much simpler and more direct to look up at night and make observations relative to the stars. It is much more abstract and complicated to make observations relative to the point the Sun occupied at the vernal equinox. Therefore only in modern times with the benefit of better formulas and tools does it become viable and practical.

The concept of “ayanamsha” – the difference between the sun’s position at the vernal equinox and a certain fixed star, roughly the same as precession of the equinoxes – is something very old, defined in the Surya Siddhanta. Since the old calculations were made in reference to the sidereal stars (nakshatra), Surya Siddhanta told us how to convert those calculations to positions relative to the sun’s position at the vernal equinox.

So the true, original use of ayanamsha is to convert sidereal calculations to tropical ones, which are then used for creating the chart. Only in relatively modern times, when we let go of the old calculation formulas of Surya Siddhanta and adopted (better) modern formulas did the ayanamsha become misapplied as a way of converting tropical calculations to sidereal – because modern calculations are done in reference to a tropical point – the vernal equinox.

Interestingly, the modern conception of precession of the equinoxes is significantly different from the Surya Siddhanta’s conception of it expressed via “ayanamsha.” The modern theory is that the vernal point CONTINUES to precess (move backwards) through the zodiac and will complete a full lap. The ancient Surya Siddhanta concept is that the vernal point differs from its sidereal references in an arc of +/- about 27 degrees or so, and cycles back and forth within that.

How to Figure Out Nakshatra and Rashi Of A Planet

The way to calculate a planet’s nakshatra and rashi is different depending on if you use the ancient or modern formulas. Using the ancient formulas, your math is relative to a certain fixed star – a nakshatra. Using modern formulas, your math is relative to the position of the sun at the vernal equinox.

So if you are using ancient formulas, the initial math itself would give you the sidereal positions of planets (meaning the positions relative to the stars, the nakshatra). You would then need to utilize ayanamsha to get the tropical positions (relative to the vernal point, in the twelve rashis).

If you are using modern formulas, the initial math itself gives you the tropical position in the twelve rashis, so you would need to utilize ayanamsha to get the sidereal positions relative to the 27/28 stars (nakshatras).

Interestingly, you cannot cast a horoscope without tropical calculations – because you have to know the time of Sunrise on a given day in order to find out the ascendant (the focal point of the whole chart). Sunrise changes relative to the Suns position north or south of the equator – i.e. the Sun’s tropical position.

The ancient way to calculate the ascendant is to first calculate the Sun’s position relative to the stars / nakshtra. Then use ayanamsha to make it a tropical position. Then calculate (using other formulas) the time of Sunrise. And you then know that at that time the ascendant was identical to the tropical position of the Sun. After that you just adjust for the time of day you want the chart cast for, using a proportionate ratio.

Modern calculations are the same, except that since they start with tropical coordinates there is no need for ayanamsha, except if you want the sidereal equivalent of the ascendat, which might perhaps be useful for knowing the nakshatra related to the ascendant, for example.