Bharatiya Jyotihshastra (History of Indian Astronomy), translated by R. V. Vaidya v2.c14.10

v2.c14.10

those houses. For example, all problems relating to wife are judged from the seventh house. These twelve houses are known by other names also. It is not that these are orly 12 things in life which make a man happy or unhappy. But the names given to the houses serve as general keywords. The problem under consideration is supposed to fall within the purview of one of the twelve houses. For example, all problems related to the king are to be considered from the tenth house. Most of the questions are to be judged from the horoscope of birth. On rare occcasions, they are considered on the basis of the “rāśikundali”, that is that horoscope, in which the sign occupied by the moon at birth is placed in the first house. Other types of horoscopes have also been devised. It has been assumed that a particular sign is the ‘own-house’ or the ‘Uchcha’ (i.e. sign of exaltation) of a particular planet. Cancer and Leo are respectively under the ownership of the sun and the moon. The signs on either side of these, viz. Gemini and Virgo are of Mercury. The next signs on either side, viz. Taurus and Libra are the own houses of Venus. Those beyond the two, viz. Aries and Scorpio are owned by Mars. Those still beyond viz. Pisces and Sagittarius are owned by Jupiter; and lastly, Capricon and Aquarius have been assumedto be the own houses of Saturn. The signs of exaltation are not governed by any order. The mathematical positions of ‘Uchcha’ (aphelia) are quite different. For instance, the sun’s mathematical positions of ‘Uchcha’ (apogee) at the present time is nirayaṇa Mithuna (Gemini) and sāyana Karka (Cancer). But in astrology, Meṣa is the ‘Uchcha’ of the sun. It is not known on what principle these Uchchas have been determined. The sāyana aphelia have got considerable motion. Hence some people maintain that the points of exaltation in astrology were determined at a time when they actually coincided with the orbital ‘Uchchas’ or aphelia of the planets according to the sāyana measure. The followers of nirayaṇa system will never accept the view. But even if the theory is considered plausible, it is hardly acceptable from the chronological point of view. The sun’s apogee was in sāyana Aries between 4100 B.S. and 2300 B.S. Circa. The “Uchcha” of Mars in astrology is Capricon, while its orbital uchcha (aphelion) was in sāyana Capricorn between the years 11500 B.S. and 9700 B.S. and never later than that. But when it is extremely doubtful whether the science of astrology had come into being at all in such ancient times, how can the theory be regarded as even plausible? There are some persons who believe that Meṣa and other terms existed in such ancient times, that the planets were known, and that over and above this astronomy and astrology had reached a very high level. But the author does not consider it possible. Leaving this question aside, one finds that friendship and enmity among the planets have also been postulated. It is further assumed that when planets occupy their own signs or signs of exaltation they produce a highly benefic effect, if they are in their fall or in houses owned by their enemies. The effect is different and a still different effect follows if the planets are retrograde, and the planets show benefic or evil effects or more or less powerful effects according to their aspects to other house. Some of the ideas appear to have been based on the common experiences in practical life but there are others that defy explanation. Again not all authors are unanimous regarding the results; one comes across divergent views on many a point. At present European astrologers read the horoscopes on the basis of the sāyana signs. MADHAVARAO BRAHMAJI, Jeevanrao Tryambakrao CHITNIS *and others claim that the interpretations of planets given in our ancient works can be verified much better on the basis of the sāvana system than on that of the nirayaṇa system.