James wrote:

the bigger question for me is what is the difference between a 'divisional' chart and a 'harmonic' chart? they are both dividing the chart so they share that in common! what else do they share in common? some of them are the very same and some aren't..

Sometimes these are the same if the chart is a straight mathematical harmonic as, for example, the navamsa is a straight 9th harmonic. Begin with Aries at the beginning of the zodiac, and continue straight through without a break; Aries through Pisces, Aries through Pisces, etc. until the last degree of Pisces is reached.

Some of India's divisional charts aren't straight harmonics, however. As the dwad chart has Aries through Pisces for Aries, but then Taurus begins with Taurus. So an Aries segment is skipped, and the harmonic pattern is broken.

Divisional is just a term to indicate that signs are broken into segments. But India's divisional charts are unique. All of John Addey's divisions were straight harmonics.

thanks therese,

dwad charts compared to 12th harmonic charts was the first area i looked when comparing indias divisional charts with john addeys harmonic charts. one is a straight division of the circle by 12 starting at aries, while the other is like small circles within circles where the division starts over again at the beginning of each of the 12 signs..

how do you personally use the data?

I am still in the beginning exploratory stage of astrology, therefore if I state how to use divisional charts I may have to recant things later on, but I will state some ideas I have read on various uses of the divisional charts.

Some people interpret certain divisional charts the same way as the D-1 root chart, e.g. the D-9 and/or the karakamsha lagna: D-1 AK placement in the D-9 as the 1st house.

There has been much talk about analyzing the D-9 charts for synastry in marriage, but those who did this also compared many other things, besides just the D-9 charts, and so this has given some the wrong impression that the D-9 is related to marriage, which I do not believe. I think the only reason the D-9 was used in synastry analysis was because the D-9 is perhaps the most powerful divisional chart as far as planetary strength and showing the nature of a thing or person ? in regards to analyzing it as a stand-alone chart or even comparing it with another person's D-1.

Some people interpret certain divisional charts by analyzing certain dasha sequences using the D-1 root and that particular divisional chart, e.g. the D-1 planets with the D-60 planets in conjunction with the moola dasha.

Some people interpret divisional charts by interpreting and understanding the names of the deities which rule various divisions, e.g. the D-27 and D-60.

Some people used the divisional charts as a measurement of planetary strength in a similar manner as in if we see, e.g., the Moon in Scorpio in the D-1, we would consider this to be a debilitated Moon, and so if the Moon is in Scorpio in many divisional charts used for this purpose, then we would consider the Moon to be afflicted, even if the D-1 Moon is exalted.

Here are two examples of using the divisional charts as a measurement of planetary strength:
Dvadashavargiya Bala (12-fold strength)
1) D-1 sign placement of each planet (e.g. exalted, friendly with ruler of that sign, etc.)
2) D-2 sign placement
3) D-3 placement
4) D-4
5) D-5
6) D-6
7) D-7
D-8
9) D-9
10) D-10
11) D-11
12) D-12

A table is drawn listing each planet from Sun to Saturn (not nodes) in a column, then the top row lists each of these divisional charts according to the standard of whether that planet is Friendly, Neutral, Inimical, or Ruler of that Sign placement or the ruler of that Sign in relationship to the planet in that sign in each D-1 through D-12 placement. Then the results are tallied up in another table with the planets given a category of auspicious, neutral, or adverse placements, and one can then see if that planet is placed in favourable signs for itself, or adverse signs, or neutral signs, overall. This enables a more comprehensive look at how the planet will act for that natal chart.

The second example of using divisional charts for measuring planet strength is called the Panchavargiya Bala or 5-fold strength. This is based on 5 factors: Ksetra Bala, Ucca Bala, Hadda, Drekkan, and Navamamsa.

Ksetra Bala this is based on a tally of points given for each planet in sign placements in the D-1 based on whether it owns the sign it is in, or it is friends with the ruler of the sign it is in, or if it is neutral to the ruler of its sign placement, or if it is an enemy of the ruler of the sign it is in.

Uccabala: This is a measurement of how near or far a planet is to its exaltation and debiliatation points.

Hadda or ?limit? is the Egyptian Bounds/Terms placements in the D-1.

Drekkan is the planet placement in the signs of the D-3.

Navamamsa is the planet placement in the signs of the D-9.

Both the 12-fold strength and 5-fold strength can be, and are, used to analyze the solar return chart. However, these divisional charts are different from the Addey system.

Which brings me back to the mention of the D-9 and H-9 being the ?same,? in fact, the D-9 and H-9 are not the same, in spite of the fact that the end result looks the same - this is a coincidence. Let us look at the principle of calculation of the D-9:

D-9 ?The Nav?m?a calculation are for a Movable R??i from there itself, for a Fixed R??i from the 9th thereof and for a Dual R??i from the 5th thereof.?

I believe the calculation rules of each divisional chart give clues as to what that divisional chart is based upon, and therefore how it may be of interpretive use. Notice that, contrary to the Addey system and parivritti charts, the divisional charts have a certain basis for each type of sign and sometimes the calculations are reversed in alternating signs and such. Notice that the focus of the D-9 calculation is on Cardinal signs starting with the same Cardinal sign; Fixed signs start with the 9th sign from themselves; and Mutable signs start with the 5th sign from themselves.

This tells me there is something important for Cardinal Signs in relation to themselves; something important in regards to Fixed signs and the 9th house; something important in regards to Mutable signs and 5th houses. It also tells me the D-9 has some relation to the trikona houses, or triplicities, or both. I believe these calculation rules are important for understanding the nature of each unique divisional chart. The reason I say this is because the Addey system divides up signs into numbers and repeats from the start of the zodiac to the end, in a cyclical pattern, thus deserving of, e.g. the title: H-5 and not D-5.

This is how the Addey system is different, because the Addey system only used one principle for everything, and the divisional charts use many different principles, depending on which divisional chart it is.

james_m wrote:thanks therese,
how do you personally use the data?

I have really only worked extensively with the navamsa chart, and find it absolutely necessary in interpreting the natal chart. I have not found the navamsa chart to describe the marriage partner. However the ascendant axis is important in partnership, as there will generally be an overlap with the mate's chart. In my case my navamsa ascendant is Taurus which is my husband's natal descendant sign. I see this kind of interchange all the time between charts. Also the partner's planets will fall on the mate's navamsa ascendant axis or conjoin navamsa planets. This tells a lot about the relationship.

Major navamsa aspects to the Moon (generally only the conjunction, square and opposition) will always describe personality traits (and perhaps help to describe the temperament as well). So the navamsa Moon is a very helpful adjunct to the natal Moon that often says more about the person than the natal Moon.

I move back and forth between the natal and navamsa charts, and note close conjunctions to planets and equal house cusps in the natal chart. Any planets falling close to natal cusps will be significant for affairs of that house. Any planetary conjunctions between charts will behave like natal conjunctions since the navamsa signs are little "notes" similar to the larger natal signs.

There's a lot more detail, but I have no time to write it all now.

Therese

thanks varuna and therese for your comments here.

i was mildly interested in what the navamsha chart was from a long time ago.. 3 or 4 years ago i read all of john addeys books. his focus is on the harmonics.. i thought there were some similarities, but i knew they were not one and the same..

if i had to read all the sacred vedic texts on this issue i am pretty sure i would run out of money or go crazy, or both!

i think i will just stick with what i know about using these charts in the way that i understand them and forget about trying to understand how indian astrologers use them, while acknowledging they aren't one and the same.. the vedic charts seem like small circles inside of small circles while addeys harmonic charts are one new circle off the same starting point - zero trop aries.. the vedic divisional thing seems opaque to me, but i appreciate your kindness and telling me what you know.. thanks!