Time and spirited negotiations take place on internet fora regarding a study of the status of a number of jyotish parameters, including chara dasha (a signal based cortical period astrofactor) along with karakamsha (the navamsha where the atmakaraka (most complex planet in longitude) is placed. As happens, several of the discussants began to branch into other negative discussions which really had nothing related to all the first questions or themes along with some actually became a bit resolved and emotional, as additionally frequently happens on the internet where attention spans of days and weeks have been required to be able to get to the bottom of things and where sometimes an interest is being discussed on many unique boards and lots of issues simultaneously on a particular board! As too is typical, nothing has been resolved, and some of the regulars began expressing their insecurities concerning these issues coming up again and again and again directing people to writings etc.. Unfortunately, the yahoo forums/fora are such that only limited hunting of past messages is possible without losing most one's hair, and also the writings are often maintained on another yahoo site and this will not help matters when all one wants is to find a quick overview of what others are using and if possible their good reasons for adopting a certain position! This latter usually brings out more gall than good advice even though the aim of the person posing the question might have been very noble and not in any way confrontational.
Somewhere, across the path with the former quest, another topic got born and began questioning the use of varga kundalis or even varga chakras, divisional horoscopes which are the heart of jyotish and have been used by tropical astrologers at the form of harmonic graphs. This is some thing that is utilized in Jyotish going straight back to nearly the first memories of even the oldest members at the discussion that finally confessed to this type of situation. I myself, though myself perhaps not that mature, have experienced horoscopes which were attracted from the century before where the jyotishi had attracted the rashi chakra and navamsha along with dashamsha and so forth and much more importantly had commented on these charts in his hearing. kalyan chart Therefore, at the very least many people were utilizing varga-charts a couple of 100 years ago and possibly even prior to those times.
Somewhere through the discussion, in one of those lists, one of the members made available an article in that the writer had voiced thoughts to the contrary, i.e., vargas should not be utilised in a chart format. A conversation ensued which side stepped the important and pertinent matter of the practical virtues of utilizing navamsha varga as a second graph. A couple of individuals requested for accusations in classics that indicates that early jyotishis advocated of varga chakras. The discussants emphasized that ONLY rashi chakra must be used along with varga placements should only be used for determining the advantages of planets etc..
One of those associates brought to each of astrologers' attention that Parashara had clarified very plainly how to find out bhavas in the rashi chart (ascendant, 10th house and then trisection of the arcs, etc. . V of BPHS). This was indeed true and a positive step ahead of the discussion. There were also parallel discussions going which were rehashing the point that BPHS wasn't original and was not even a timeless and written by one or even a group of'latter day saints' [my word, not the original poster!] In Jyotish and for that reason cannot be treated like a timeless. Evidently, there is some support for this could possibly be similarly expected if someone should happen to make a comment that Jyotish had been nothing but a derivative of Babylonian astrology which the army that was included with Alexander attracted to India. A topic that's been proven to attract even sedate jyotishis on the"warpath!"
To those who were interested and intrigued by this, there looked to be two streams of thought prevailing:
(a) Only Rashi horoscopes should be properly used. Other varga kundalis would be the product of corrupt understanding of the classics - which themselves many agree may not have lived in pristine form [though some of these have thankfully survived in pretty great shape1]. I don't know how much of the iceberg postulate is established data and just how much is wishful fiction. As stated by the purists of this stream of thought, vargas MUST only be used as measures of quantitative and qualitative strength of planets and for the consideration of this deities and primal forces people represent although maybe not in the form of a horoscope and certainly no critical consideration has to be given to aspects and bhava considerations. Only for clarity, they'd maintain, for instance, that while the 2nd dwelling lord in navamsha is a significant indicator, the simple fact that it is placed in the 2nd navamsha varga from the navamsha lagna (essentially in 2nd house in navamsha graph ) isn't significant. Or, for instance, when Mars is in Aries sign and Libra navamsha, and Saturn is in Gemini sign and Libra navamsha, both planets are not related (though they'd be portrayed to be conjoined in the exact same navamsha varga at a navamsha graph ).
(b) Irrespective of whether specifically clarified or perhaps not, one other stream of believing maintains that varga kundalis have an important part to play in Jyotish and potentially are of significant usefulness in discerning chief mandates matters regarding the prescription written by sages. To put it differently, navamsha graph, by way of example, would hold significant sway within topics of marriage and spouse, whilst saptamsha chart are of similar import from the study of kids in a particular nativity's reading. All these Vargas should be examined in a chart format.
I don't really remember anybody in the'camp (b)' saying that the very first part of (a) is not correct, namely, the Varga rankings have to be contemplated, perse, to get an examination of strength and quality of an entire planet as prescribed over the Jyotish frame. In reality, the majority of them utilized concepts from (a) and (b) streams. There appeared to be a few different individuals who totally denied that the veracity of thought stream (b) and a few were a bit taciturn about it, perhaps to avoid acrimony and becoming ensnared from the controversy. Or perhaps there were some other reasons, known only for them.