Skyscript Astrology Forum

Atlantean wrote (copied from another thread):

I read through [this] whole thread...I had even taken part in the thread. While linchi is direct in his expression of what he has researched, I don't see anything exceptionally flame-worthy in his comments. His "put up or shut up" stance might set some on edge, but at heart he is researching and presenting and though his style might rub a few the wrong way, it's a small price to pay related to the learning possibility.

Linchi wrote:

Conclusion : If it is true, which seems to be the case, that harmonic 9 is out of question, that is wrong, then Navamsa (D-9) would be wrong and inevitably Vargottoma would be wrong in some persons (for example Joe Biden).

The correct rule would be: If a planet in radix and in harmonic 8 is the same zodiac sign, it is Vargottama.

If my assumption is correct, then it would be disastrous for Vedic astrology. Therefore, one should not take everything for granted and always check if one can.

Ouranos wrote:

In your system yes as you demonstrate with your examples but not in the way the system is used by Indian astrologers.
You are trying to fit 2 pieces of a puzzle which have different premises (etc.)

Atlantean, I think you missed the point of this entire thread. Linchi is presenting his view of why the 8th harmonic works while the 9th harmonic is not accurate. But his analysis has nothing to do with India’s navamsa chart. When Ouranos pointed this out, he was summarily shut down as not being qualified to question Linchi’s work.

Reading to the end of this thread it is apparent that Linchi did not understand the structure, calculation or use of the navamsa chart. Thus, no matter how logical his 8th-9th harmonic analysis is, it has no relationship to the way India calculates and reads the navamsa (a varga chart) as such. Ouranos pointed out some of the differences, and I tried to explain the two different ‘harmonic’ approaches toward the end of the thread.

Therese wrote:

But what is important, I think, is to recognize that there is a critical difference in the fundamental premise of Linchi's concept of harmonics and the 'subtle divisions' of India's varga charts. They are basically separate universes. Our failure to recognize this has led to misunderstandings, defensive reactions (even insults) and unnecessary blame and conflicts.

There may be harmonic overtones to India's varga charts, but that is a completely different understanding of harmonics than the basis of Linchi's methods. Linchi's '9th harmonic' has nothing in common with India's navamsa chart. (And, of course perceiving the navamsa as a 'suble division' of the zodiac means that there can be an many navamsa charts as astrologers wish to invent.) But it is wrong to say that Linchi's 9th harmonic negates the utility and truth of India's navamsa chart. They are completely different entities.

Therese Hamilton wrote: Reading to the end of this thread it is apparent that Linchi did not understand the structure, calculation or use of the navamsa chart.

You have not understood how to calculate Navamsa.

Navamsa D9 and Harmonic 9th are using different calculation formula, but they both will give you the same result.

https://horoscopes.astro-seek.com/navam ... calculator

The navamsa and Harmonic 9 calculations are both the same. If both Zet and Jagannatha Hora images are compared to the images below for Joe Biden, you can see that the calculations are the same. The difference of 4-5 minutes is due to the software calculations. My point was that Indian astrologers give a lot of importance to navamsa, which I think is exaggerated and not correct.

Thus, no matter how logical his 8th-9th harmonic analysis is, it has no relationship to the way India calculates and reads the navamsa (a varga chart) as such.

I have shown above that the calculations are the same. And you can't tell me how to read it. Otherwise we would have to interrupt all research and continue as we have been doing up to now.

Ouranos pointed out some of the differences, and I tried to explain the two different ‘harmonic’ approaches toward the end of the thread.

Ouranos wrote:

If you focus on your system (which works perfectly by its own!) without trying to incorporate the different premises of other systems you will demonstrate a lot more.

Where does he get the right to tell me what I should or should not do astrologically ?
Who is he ?

linchi wrote:Ouranos wrote:

If you focus on your system (which works perfectly by its own!) without trying to incorporate the different premises of other systems you will demonstrate a lot more.

Where does he get the right to tell me what I should or should not do astrologically ?
Who is he ?

Nobody is telling you what to do, so there is no need to bristle. Ouranos was simply expressing his point of view, which you are free to ignore.

It is true that the Indian nav??ṃśa is one of the zodiacal divisions which agree in point of calculation with the corresponding harmonic chart, but I believe that what others have tried to point out is that it still differs conceptually from harmonic theory. The nav??ṃśas are simply conceived as subdivisions within a zodiacal sign.

Martin Gansten wrote: It is true that the Indian nav??ṃśa is one of the zodiacal divisions which agree in point of calculation with the corresponding harmonic chart, but I believe that what others have tried to point out is that it still differs conceptually from harmonic theory. The nav??ṃśas are simply conceived as subdivisions within a zodiacal sign.

I also know that there are differences. My point was that it makes no sense to divide the zodiac into nine. It is my opinion. If others want to prove otherwise, they should bring examples so it can be discussed.
However, since a week ago I have realised that I should ignore a lot of things here and post less so that I don't annoy anyone. In the future I will definitely do it.

linchi

i am sorry you are having a hard time with some of these conversations... i truly believe there may be some language barriers that have led to this confusion... it is unfortunate it is happening, but no one is trying to undermine you, or your work... at the same time i think it would be wise to acknowledge that if we don't know something about a particular approach to astrology, it doesn't necessarily mean it is irrelevant or not worth consideration... this would apply both to higher harmonic work which you are focused on and the use of the navamsa chart which others might be focused on... neither one negates the other... they can stand alone and be independent of one another, much like posters here at skyscript can stand alone as well..

i really believe the source of you angst linchi is connected to communication and has nothing to do with astrology.. of course communication matters a great deal as it is what allows us to understand or interpret others viewpoints accurately... cheers james

i apologize in advance if this has confused anyone more!

Martin Gansten wrote:

It is true that the Indian nav??ṃśa is one of the zodiacal divisions which agree in point of calculation with the corresponding harmonic chart, but I believe that what others have tried to point out is that it still differs conceptually from harmonic theory. The nav??ṃśas are simply conceived as subdivisions within a zodiacal sign.

EDIT: December 30
I have bolded and italicized the last sentence in Martin's quote for emphasis. Thousands of years ago when India’s varga charts were first discovered or devised there was no computer software to calculate these charts. The math was very simple: Each SIGN is DIVIDED into a specific number of sectors for individual varga charts. The 360 degree circle is not the basis for calculation. These are DIVISIONAL charts, the division of 30 degree signs of the zodiac. Thus the principle for calculation of these charts is entirely different from Linchi's harmonic calculations which use the 360 degree circle.

For example, the value of Linchi's 16th harmonic is 22° 30'. But the 1/16 Indian Shodashamsha value is 1° 52' 30" portion of a zodiac sign. The navamsa is simply the division of a SIGN into nine parts of 3° 20' each.