NADI NAVAMSA – Sri Sanjay Rath

Om Namah Sivaya

 

Dear Friends,

 

A couple of weeks back Sri Sanjay Rath came out with a new variation of Navamsa reckoning in the name of “Nadi Navamsa”. Readers may visit http://sohamsa.com for the presentation on this new Nadi Navamsa.

 

Sri Rath claimed that this variation was culled from Chandra Kala Nadi and also quoted one verse from the work as well. Sri Narasimha has given a detailed critique on this and we all know the outcome of it. Now, without going into details of their discussion, let us try to understand what this Nadi Navamsa does mean.

 

It was pointed out by many of the scholars on Internet that this variation is nothing but the Krishna Mishra Navamsa advocated by Krishna Mishra in his Jyotisha Phalaratnamala. I wrote a two part article on this variation, trying to understand the Karakamsa chapter of Jaimini Sutras. We have a couple of blogs on this Navamsa variation on this blog as well.

 

Let us see what Sri Rath wrote about this variation in his commentary on Jaimini Sutras. Jaimini Maharshi Upadesha Sutras (JMUS), translated by Sri Sanjay Rath, and published by Sagar Publications, India, Page No. 26 first paragraph reads as follows “Some astrologers use the Phalaratnamala whereby the reckoning of navamsas, although regular for odd signs, is reverse for even signs. This is not recommended”. So, Sri Sanjay opines that Krishna Mishra variation of Navamsa is not recommended. Now, he came up with (rechristened according to his ex-disciple) a new variation namely Nadi Navamsa, which is nothing but the reckoning explained in Phalaratnamala. What did make Sri Sanjay to take U turn?

 

Yes, I admit that we all learn from experience and grow continually, which is scholarly approach. Yet, at the same time, we must admit that fact.

 

It was indicated by Sri Sanjay that he referred to Phalaratnamala (See the “Select Bibliography” in JMUS) while writing commentary on Jaimini Sutras, but couldn’t understand the Navamsa reckoning as advocated by Krishna Mishra till he studied Chandra Kala Nadi. As we all know, he is considered the best teacher on Jaimini system with a centuries old lineage of Jaimini. May be he had felt our generation was not matured to understand this subtle concepts.

 

Let me state a few facts about this.

 

1. This variation of Navamsa was explained by Krishna Mishra vide the 3^rd verse of first chapter.
2. It was Sri Rangacharya, perhaps the first who first brought out the correct interpretation this verse and used for practical predictions. I am an eyewitness for his meticulous explanation of this Navamsa while explaining Karakamsa results.
3. Sri Sanjay writes that he observed this reckoning from Chandra Kala Nadi, 3^rd volume.
4. The reckoning in reverse for even sign is only used in Jaimini system, which was clearly explained by Sage Jaimini vide sutra “प्राची वृत्तिर्विषमेषु , परा वृत्त्योत्तरेषु .

 

Now, the very clear questions.

 

1. Does anywhere, except in Jaimini system, the Prakriti Chakra reckoning used? What does Sri Sanjay say about concepts like Ayur Lagna, Sapada Ghaatika Lagna, also mentioned in Chandra Kala Nadi? Does he put them under Nadi concepts for mere mention in CKN?
   
   
2. Is it not apparent that this Nadi Navamsa is not nothing but Navamsa calculation based on Prakriti Chakra reckoning?
   
   
3. If Sri Rath had studied Phalarantamala, how could he miss the very important concept, which Krishna Mishra exposed in first chapter and used extensively in dasas as well?
   
   
4. Could he advocate or name the Hora Lagna calculation given in CKN as Nadi Hora Lagna. This calculation was used by Raghava Bhatta in Hora Dasa and again is entirely different from Hora Lagna in BPHS?
   
   
5. Is not logical to assume that Sri Sanjay was on record not to recommend this variation without extensive testing / understanding of ancient literature? We all know he is the world’s best teacher in Jaimini and theorizing many concepts.
   
   
6. Is it not proper to attribute this variation to Krishna Mishra, who is the original originator of this variation? Of course, some of the concepts of Jaimini find mention in Nadi texts, yet this very fact doesn’t suffice to attribute Prakriti chakra to Nadi texts. Prakriti Chakra, which is the base of this variation, is proprietary of Sage Jaimini and of his ancient commentators.
   
   
7. A Guru of the Parampara claimed that it is their parampara which survived Jaimini system. I admit that it is their parampara that popularized Jaimini System in recent times at the same time introduced many half baked Jaimini concepts. He writes “Guruji (Sri Sanjay Rath) has read all these commentaries, understood them, tested them, (has rare commentaries not available to the average public), and has the teaching of a living lineage (Parampara) of Jaimini which he was born into and is required to continue. Sanjay's family lineage was invited to Orissa by the King of Puri because of their jnana.” If you want to read more, you can at http://jyotish-blog.blogspot.com/2009/08/on-various-commentaries-jaimini.html
   
   
8. Did they ever bring out the any reference from any of the commentaries except BHPS, which in itself has many incoherent concepts of Jaimini system?

 

I tried to send this request from http://sohamsa.com feedback facility as I don’t have Sanjay’s mail id, but somehow it failed. As I voluntarily abstained from participating sohamsa group, wherein I need to write only on the concepts advocated by Sri Sanjay and of course, I need to concentrate much on the respect to Sri Sanjay than Astrology itself, I dared to write these few lines on my blog. I hope some could forward these points to Sri Sanjay. 

 

Now, the following are my humble requests to Sri Sanjay Rath.

 

1. Kindly explain, how he missed and opined not to recommend this variation and how he justify this variation now?

 

2. Kindly attribute this variation to Krishna Mishra, even though Sri Sanjay found it mentioned in Chandra Kala Nadi. After all, it is Krishan Mishra who gave us this variation in line with Sage Jaimini and concepts like Rasyarudha, Drik Arudha, Yogada etc. in his Jyotisha Phalaratnamala the Magnum Opus on Jaimini system.

 

3. Kindly bring out the references from ancient commentaries either from your parampara or from your Bengal school of thought, which are in possession of your parampara for the benefit of readers. There are very few of them in the articles by the authors from your school.

 

Sri Sanjay, thank you very much for introducing this wonderful world of Jaimini to this generation and we need much more from you.

 

Seeking Blessings

Shanmukha