|
|
|
|
Srila Prabhupada Was Makara Lagnaas the secretary typing up the letter. Hansadutta prabhu was not there at the time, as the letters bracketing this one indicate. It is probable that Hari Sauri das Adhikari was that secretary, although it is also possible that Hayagriva das Adhikari was in charge of this service at the time. Whoever it was, he obviously did not have knowledge about astrology, misspelling the Sanskrit term for Gemini (“Metthuna”). However, as we shall see, this is the key element in the letter, which is authoritative. Bear with me here, because I am going to repeat: The last sentence of the letter is authoritative. Srila Prabhupada did not say, “Some astrologer has told me . . .” He did not say, “I think that someone said . . .” No. He said: “My rasi is Mithuna.” Mithuna means Gemini. When someone is referring to his rasi, he is referring to the sign in which his Moon was positioned at birth. Srila Prabhupada’s Moon, at the time of his birth (“about 4:00 PM”) was in the sign of Gemini. This means it was not in the sign of Taurus, the previous sign. It also means that his Moon was not exalted; actually, even if it had been in Taurus, it would have not been exalted. This is because the last twenty-seven degrees of Taurus are not places where the Moon is exalted, but, instead, are sidereal degrees in which the Moon is Mula-Trikona. If you employ the Lahiri ayanamsa for anytime around 4 p.m. on that date, the Moon is still in Taurus; as such, this disproves that ayanamsa. Ditto for Yuktesvara’s, Krishnamurti’s, and Raman’s; all of these are too long (although Raman’s is somewhat accurate). Now, you may think that this article could become tangential and meander into the ayanamsa controversy; it is not going to go there. If you accept Srila Prabhupada’s statement as authoritative, then you will find that-in order for his Moon to have been in Gemini (which it was)-he had to have been a Capricorn ascendant. In Latin, this is called eliminatio logica. That is actually what this article is about. Secondarily, we dispute the mental speculation that Srila Prabhupada’s Moon was in Taurus, supposedly exalted. It most definitely was not. I use an ayanamsa that is accurate; this would require another separate article of considerable length to explain, however. Take any quality astrological program; make sure it features a user defined data-entry option in relation to ayanamsa. Program into that software an ayanamsa that is either very accurate or close to accurate. Apply some time “around 4:00 in the afternoon” on the date (incidentally, I believe the birth to have been at somewhere close to, if not exactly at, 4:10 p.m.). You will then find a Capricorn lagna at that time-and there can only be a Capricorn lagna if the Moon has already made it past the cusp into Gemini. On that date, Sagg lagna ends somewhere around 3:30 p. m. This article is a rebuttal to the false propaganda, conceived from mental speculation, that Srila Prabhupada was a Sagittarius ascendant, and his Moon was “exalted” in Taurus; it’s simply not so. He had two exaltations in his chart, and his Moon was converted into a benefic (according to the rules of the science) by the fact of it being a waning Moon that was lord of the seventh, a quadrant. The lord of his ascendant was still in exaltation but past the point of deepest exaltation by about four degrees. This was Saturn in the tenth, and I still consider that to be a Mahapurusha Yoga. His benefics were: Mercury (fully exalted and exceptionally strong), Saturn (exalted), Sun (Mula Trikona), Venus (yoga-karaka for the chart in neecha-bhanga raja-yoga), Moon (in a great friend’s sign), and Rahu in a favorable sign. His malefics were Mars, Jupiter, and Ketu. Mercury and Venus were in the ninth forming a powerful raja-yoga. Rahu was in the second in Aquarius. Mars was in the fifth in Taurus (indicating trouble with disciples). Moon was in the sixth in Gemini, as aforementioned. Sun was in Mula-Trikona in the eighth, accompanied by Jupiter and Ketu. This is the actual chart of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. I know who initiated the idea that Srila Prabhupada could not possibly have been a Capricorn ascendant; this man has practically a fanatical hatred against the sign of Capricorn. His propaganda spread, on the false assumption that a Sagg lagna was far better; actually, that is not so. The wrong chart has even made it to the printed page. For anyone who wishes to contact me in order to elucidate a further explanation, a hyperlink has been provided below. I am choosing not to extend the length of this article and expound upon any of this. If someone composes some sort of challenge or counterpoint, if he sticks to topic, to the rules of the science, and to an intelligent presentation, then I shall respond to it. If it contains personal invective, then I shall not respond. Misuse of a great science does not make it useless. OM TAT SAT.
| |
