Om Namah Sivaya Namaste Sri Visti, Sri Narasimha and others, I have been closely following the discussion

on Chara Karakas and the article by Narasimha. I observed in one of your (Visti’s) earlier mails, that you referred Sri Iranganti Rangacharya opines that Jaimini Sutras are complete and nothing is missing. Since, you referred to Rangacharya. I am interfering as I do have some interaction with him. Hence, I want to put forth the views of Sri Rangacharya, regarding the issue as I understood from him. But, I want to state that I am neither a spokesperson for Sri Rangacharya, nor a Jyotisha scholar nor a Sanskrit scholar. The following lines are purely my understanding regarding the issue. 1. Though, Sri Rangacharya never indicated that any sutra is missing from the first two adhyayas, but he always says that 3rd and 4th adhyayas available now are merely the interpolated versions. That’s the reason why he didn’t attempt to translate them, even after being persuaded by Sri B.V.Raman. 2. He always reiterates that to understand Jaimini Sage, Vriddha Karikas are the authority. He claims that he always followed the vriddha karakas and never contradicted or transgressed those slokas in his commentary. 3. He considers Jaimini sutras are much earlier to Parasara Hora since the Sutra Vangmaya is much earlier to Sloka Vangmaya. He considers Parasara Hora is a compendium of all the astrological principles available, that is a compilation work. 4. Regarding the Chara Karaka issue, he works out the way Narasimha worked out, excepting Rahu becoming Atma Karaka. He has shown how Rahu can be other Chara Karaka vide his Jaimini Sutramritam Sanskrit – English Commentary. He has not resolved the case with Rahu becoming higher longitude planet after deducting from 30 degrees, out of eight planets. 5. What he told me was different from what he explained in his book. But, I can’t pressurize him keeping his age in mind. He, now, concentrates more on his spiritual sadhana than Astrology. That’s the precise reason why he gave away all his collection of Jaimini works to one of his disciples. 6. He tells that Rahu can’t become Atma Karaka since Jaimini himself says that “ Sa Ishte Bandha Mokshayoh”, meaning that AK can give either Bandhana or Moksha. But, since Rahu is karaka for Bandhana, he can never be considered for chara atma karaka. I want to reiterate that he has not shown as how to consider Rahu when he becomes highest longitude planet. As I said earlier I am not a spokesperson for him and the above points can be taken worth of their salt. But, one thing I can honestly say that Sri Rangacharya is fighting through out his life for the cause of Jaimini Astrology. In his commentary, we don’t find pitri karaka after Matri Karaka. According to him, the karakas are AK,Amk,BK,MK,PK,GK and DK only. But, I admit that Pitri Karaka was mentioned in one of the manuscript (palm leave) I happened to see. Again, in the manuscript referred to by Sri Vadrevu Suryanarayana Murthy, he doesn’t find Pitri Karaka. By the way, I think, he is the first person to interpret Saturn as karaka for elder brother for the sutra “Mando Jyayan Graheshu”. Hence, it can be debated whether “Tasya Pitah” ever existed. In fact this debate is there for the ages. Hence, we have to resolve this not only with scientific approach but also with practical examples. Sri Narasimha was right in that direction. Sri Rangacharya opines that “Eke” word in “Mata Saha …” sutra means that Sage Jaimini does not endorse combining MK and PK. He tells that interpreting Sutra Vangmaya is different from the case with sloka Vangmaya. Somebody argued that Jaimini didn’t mention the special condition of including Rahu only when two planets occupy the same degree. Well, if you look in at the calculation of 8 th house given by

Sanjay ji is also not mentioned by Jaimini. That method is deduced from Vriddha Karika. Hence it should be kept in mind that to understand Jaimini, Vriddha Karikas are the authority. By the way, how many of us know that Raghava Bhatta and Nrisimha Suri extensively used calculation of 8th house according to vriddha karika? How many of us know there are special ayurdasas called “Jaya Bhava Pamsa, Atmano Bhava Pamsa Dasas extensively dealt by Raghava Bhatta and Nrisimha Suri ? I request all to read “Jaimini Sutramritam” by Sri Rangacharya, since he is the only commentator who dared to give Vriddha Karika slokas in his commentary. Why I say Parasara is not the final authority on Jamini Sutras is the fact that no astrological classic said to be Parasari, never dealt the concepts like Padas, Rasi Drishti and argala. Of course, Uttara Kalamrita and brihaspata samhita are exceptions. Jataka Tatwa by Mahadeva Pathak is very recent scholar and he never dealt any of Rasi dasas. Yes, BPHS can be taken as one of the vriddha karika, since Parasara is the only rishi who could compile so beautifully all the astrological principles available. Hence, HE can be treated as one of the authority but not the final. Even if we look at the verses given by Narasimha in his Chara Karaka article look like merely inspired / interpolated verses from Vriddha Karika. This is my humble view. The other way is also possible. Sorry for deviating from the issue. I write below my humble understanding regarding chara karaka. Jaimini is always specific in his sutras. In fact all sutra vangmaya is specific and cryptic as well. When he says “Eke”, it means that it is not his opinion. Taking 8 CK for living beings and 7 CK for Mundane is not given either in any Jaimini work or Vriddha karika or in BPHS. When Jaimini Speaks “Saptanam AshtanamVa” a. If he considers 8 CK then, he would never say “ Saptanam” b. He doesn’t endorse the opinion of MK and PK same. So he treats MK and PK different. Combining above two proves that only 7 CK and MK, PK different and they are AK, AmK, BK, MK, PK, GK, and DK. Vriddha Karika is again very specific c. If he considers only 7 planets, he would never say Asthtanaam Va”, hence he asks us to consider 8 planets. He didn’t spell out the condition as when to consider 7 or 8 planets. Now, Vriddha Karika comes to rescue. Sri Narasimha already gave that sloka in his earlier mail. d. Now, out of 7 CK, it is to be decided whether to include Pik or PK. Since sage himself spaks that MK and PK are different, PK must be included. e. If you closely look at the Sutras we don’t find specific sthira Karaka for Mata and Pita. Hence, one may doubt the inclusion of MK since no sthira karaka is mentioned. But Sage himself mentions MK vide sutra “Mata Saha Putra….”. Now, only Pitri Karaka inclusion in Chara Karaka scheme is doubtful and since it is there in some manuscripts and not in some, we must resolve it with research, experiments and sadhana. But, we can understand Venus is Karaka for Parents vide sutra “ Patni Pitarau …..”. f. Sage only states 4 sthira karakas 1. BK ---- Mars 2. PK ----- Jupiter 3. GK ---- Mercury 4. DK ----- Venus g. We can get the karaka for Mother and Father as the stronger of Moon and Mars, and the stronger of Sun and Venus respectively from other adhyayas. h. Interpreting 3rd house from Mars etc. is not new to Jaimini system. Its well known to the commentators like Sri Raghava Bhatta and Nrisimha Suri and they have even given the karakas for parents, brothers etc., apart from chara karakas. i. Now, how to include 8 planets for 7 CK scheme? If two planets are at the same degree, then Rahu comes in. If three planets are at the same degree, then one chara karaka will be omitted and will be filled up by corresponding sthira karaka.

For example 1. If each planet at different degrees  No Rahu coming in. 2. If AK and AmK at same degree  No Rahu coming in, Nasargika Bala considered 3. If AK, AmK, BK same degree  Rahu comes in and one planet omitted Now other than AK 1. If two Planets 1. If three planets 3. If four planets 4. If five planets 5. If six planets 6. If seven planets  one planet, No karaka  two planets, one Karaka omitted  three planets, two karakas  4 planets, three karakas  5 planets, 4 karakas  -do-

The above is found in Rangacharya’s Jaimini Sutramritam and he has been following it since 30-40 years. I know the above explanation is not clear and logical but it shows the way vriddha karikas instructed to do. It shall be born in mind that we must move further keeping and continually referring to vriddha karikas to understand Jaimini Sutras. So, whatever Narasimha wrote in his article is not new and well practiced by Jaimini scholars excepting Rahu becoming AK, and taking PiK in place of PK in 7 CK scheme. j. Now, comes how to use karaka lopa. Vriddha Karika shows two ways of Ommission of Antya Karaka and Agrima Karaka. It must be researched and applied to know the accuracy of each scheme, not just debating on it, since it is vriddha showing the beacon of light. I request all to understand vriddha karka slokas well. Alas, most English Jaimini commentaries never mention these slokas. k. Vriddha karika again mentions that Atma Karaka never gets omitted in Antya karak lopa scheme. That’s the precise reason why you don’t find sthira karaka for Atma and Amatya karaka. Sri Narasimha considers Agrima Karaka lopa, if so then, when Ak and Amk are at the same degree, then AK must be taken over by sthira karaka. But he doesn’t apply this to AK, where in he takes the DMS again to find the AK. Here Vriddha karika is very specific that AK cannot be omitted. So, if Narsimha considers AK can’t be taken over, then he must consider Antya Karaka Lopa scheme. I am giving below the relevant Vriddha Karika sloka. “Amsa Samye Grahau Dwau Chet Jayetam Yasya Janmani Swa Karakam Vina Lupyati Chantya Karakaha Nischayam” l. So, Sri Rangacharya’s method of taking Naisargika strong Graha for AK when AK and AmK are at the Same Degree seems logical and in accordance with Vriddha Karika. m. Well, Karaka dasa given by Narasimha, is different in Jaimini Astrology. It is called AtmaKaraka Dasa and start from the Rasi occupied by AK and proceeds Kendras, Panapharas and Apoklimas. The duration calculation is very peculiar, based on the “Satallabhayo ….” Sutra. If anyone gets the feeling that I am saying there shall not be any independent interpretation of sutras, my answer is NO. I want to say that whatever the interpretation, it must not contradict the vriddha karika slokas. Now, new sort of distorting knowledge is happening. Some learned scholars even wrote article on Lagnamsaka dasa as phalita dasa. But, Krishna Mishra in his Jyotish Phala Ratanamaala, mentions Lagnamsaka dasa as Ayur dasa. This is like the other scholar writing book on Manduka dasa without understanding what Vriddha karika says about Manduka dasa. New Commentator may contradict with other ancient commentators like Neelakantha, Raghava Bhatta, but not with Vriddha Karikas. They are like sritis. As it is said if you have a doubt and Sriti and Purana differing on the issue, preference must be given to Sriti only. Similarly if commentator contradicts with Vriddha Karika, we must follow vriddha only. It

is proven time and again and Narasimha finds the same. Vriddha Karika method of including Rahu when two planets are at the same degree, works well. I have been contemplating to write this mail, but finally I decided to write, let whatever may happen. I hope I could put my points straight. Thanks for reading along, and I request readers to study vriddha karikas, not merely asking to explain every thing under the sky with chara karaks. Well, I have not touched how to use chara karakas for interpretation, sincerely; I don’t know how to use. This is my beginning in understanding CK scheme. Let the knowledge come everywhere. Warm Regards, Shanmukha.