Display posts from previous
Sort by

Counting Neechabhangas

1 by delaforge
Can someone help me with a neechabhanga problem.
A neecha planet attains neechabhanga if the ruler of its exaltation sign is in a kendra from the Moon.
It also attains neechabhanga if the lord of the sign where the neecha planet is and the lord of the planet?s exaltation sign are in mutual kendras.

Sometimes one sees remarks like, ?Jupiter is neecha but has attained three neechabhangas?. If we are ?counting neechabhangas?, then are the two possibilities outlined above counted twice in a case where
  • Mars is in Cancer (where he is neecha)
    Saturn is in Sagittarius (as lord of Mars?s exaltation sign) and
    Moon is in Pisces (as lord of the sign in which Mars is placed) ?
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Melissa

Counting Neechabhangas

3 by delaforge
varuna

Thank you for your most helpful answer.

Besides these two neechabhangas (since we are counting Moon in mutual kendra from Saturn twice) there are at least two others in the chart I am looking at. Jupiter (exalted in Mars's neecha rashi) is also in mutual kendras from Moon and Saturn. And Mars is retrograde, another cause of neechabhanga.

In your opinion, varuna, how many neechabhangas are necessary to cancel out neecha? (On the understanding that neecha can never be totally obliterated; that some degree, however small, of the effect of a planet being neecha will always be present.)

Melissa

5 by pankajdubey
A few random points on cancellation of debility(from memory).

The more the merrier.

The cancellation of debility gives you the jump.
(In older terminology, think- born a commoner/pauper became a royal/rich).

It is better to have a debilitated planet in Rasi but in exalted in Navamsa than exalted in rasi but debilitated in navamsa.

The effects are mainly monetary and show after 32 years of age.

The weakness does not really go away.It shows up, then the cancellation kick in to lift you up,depending upon the strength of cancellation.

Einstein had weak mercury by birth which caused autism but the neecha was cancelled strongly and he came up with something good we are told.

A random site but worth going through.
http://www.barbarapijan.com/bpa/Amsha/n ... bhanga.htm

PD

Counting Neechabhangas

6 by delaforge
varuna

I wasn't thinking of the chart I am currently working on. My question was more general:
  • How many neechabhangas would it take to remove the neecha effect almost totally - for any chart?
In the chart I am working on, there are pros and cons for Mars. I am satisfied, therefore, that the neechabhangas relieve some of the baleful influences of Mars in Cancer but by no means do they remove such influences completely.

Melissa

Counting Neechabhangas

7 by delaforge
P.D.

Your remarks shed light on my researches and I thank you for them.

I will return to Einstein's chart and reacquaint myself with his neecha Mercury. I will also visit the site you've provided a link to over the holidays.

You have given me much food for thought.

Melissa

Counting Neechabhangas

8 by delaforge
I was busy over the holiday period - as were a good many others who frequent the Skyscript forums, no doubt. That accounts for my absence.

I return to report that I have read the page punkajdubey gave a link to. Now I am feeling rather shamefaced because I have read Mr Frawley's 'Astrology of the Seers' and his remarks on the need for two neechabhangas to be in force before a planet can be considered properly neechabhanga failed to penetrate my consciousness!

That matter is settled, then.

But, if only two conditions need to be satisfied, I am left wondering why some authors (B.V. Raman is a case in point) speak of a planet having three or four neechbhangas. Is it better to have three neechabhangas then two? Logic suggests that it is - otherwise why take the trouble to note how many neechabhangas a planet has beyond two?

Melissa

Re: Counting Neechabhangas

9 by pankajdubey
delaforge wrote:I was busy over the holiday period - as were a good many others who frequent the Skyscript forums, no doubt. That accounts for my absence.

I return to report that I have read the page punkajdubey gave a link to. Now I am feeling rather shamefaced because I have read Mr Frawley's 'Astrology of the Seers' and his remarks on the need for two neechabhangas to be in force before a planet can be considered properly neechabhanga failed to penetrate my consciousness!

That matter is settled, then.

But, if only two conditions need to be satisfied, I am left wondering why some authors (B.V. Raman is a case in point) speak of a planet having three or four neechbhangas. Is it better to have three neechabhangas then two? Logic suggests that it is - otherwise why take the trouble to note how many neechabhangas a planet has beyond two?

Melissa
Multiple planets will cover more ground.
Say, Venus is Neecha(fall) and gets the debility cancelled by virtue of placement of Saturn(19 years),and Moon(10yrs).
Then in the Persiod of venus(20yrs)- the sub-periods of Saturn(3yrs and 2 months) and Moon(1 yr 8 months) will give the effects of the weakness cancelled.
That is why the more the merrier.
So, in a way, it is good if the cancellation is by virtue of different planets, as well as the fallen planet getting secondary strength from it's own placement from lagna or moon.

That is the theory.

PD

Counting Neechabhangas

10 by delaforge
That's a really helpful answer, punkajdubey. Thank you very much. I'm weak in the area of dasas, which I haven't explored much as yet. I will put the information you've shared in my dasas file ready for when I work with them properly.

I'm also keen on theory - as a starting point, at any rate. So your answer pleased me from that angle too!

While not in the least disparaging anything you said, I'm still bewildered as to why authors talk of 'three neechabhangas', 'four needhabhangas'. If the accent is purely on the planets giving rise to the neechabhangs, it would make more sense to say: 'with neechabhangas from Saturn and the Moon'.

It seems to me the enumeration of neechabhangas has a purpose of its own. But as I can't find it, and no one has replied taking up that side of the question, it could be that I am reading something into what these authors have written that isn't there. I learned early on in my study of Vedic astrology that Indian English isn't the same as UK English!

Melissa

11 by pankajdubey
The stress is on multiplicity of potent help.

Generally, Indian translators are from the age of "Wren and Martin's grammar" and seem to retain the original sanskrit word (Sanglish).
In it's common usage form it is called -"Indish".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wren_%26_Martin

The title of this article is an understatement.IT should be The Rise and Rise of Indian English.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... glish.html

http://grammar.about.com/od/il/g/Indian ... h-Inde.htm

Before I ventured out of India, I wrote to a journal about the problem I had with another famous textbook's grammar, and suggested a change.They told me how "interesting" the idea was but could not publish it due to space constraints.

It took me a few years to get that :)

PD

Counting Neechabhangas

12 by delaforge
P.D.
The stress is on multiplicity of potent help.
That clarifies the matter wonderfully! My apologies for being so dense.

I so enjoyed your diversion into Sanglish aka Indish. It puts numerous ideas into my head but I must restrain my desire to share them with you for we will get into trouble for going way off-topic.

Melissa
!! Read first: forum policies
Recent topics
Post Reply

Return to “Indian and Asian astrology”