Astro Shop  |  Glossary  |  Astrology App

  • aries

  • taurus

  • gemini

  • cancer

  • leo

  • virgo

  • libra

  • scorpio

  • sagittarius

  • capricorn

  • aquarius

  • pisces
  •    
    Parents by Choice, Chance or Design: part 1 | part 2 | part 3Ayurveda
    Souls entering the world

    Parents: by Choice, Chance, or Design?
    Eligibility and Astrological Correspondences

    Ram Ramakrishnan, in the second part of this intriguing, technical article, continues his exposiytion of the results of his researches in the field of uncovering the astrological principals behind family convergences. Ram invites participation; you can contact him by clicking the link at the end of the article.

    Going back to the astrological texts reveals, that it is suggested to consider a chart for analysis from other points of reference also, in addition to the ascendant. These points of reference are the position of the Sun, and the position of the Moon. Expanding the eligibility criteria to include the dispositor of the fourth cusps from the Sun and the Moon and planets resident in such fourth houses, the instances where one of those from this set occurs as a 'giver' is seen to increase (see table 2 below).

    Table 2
    Number of child-mother pairs considered Number of instances where one of the entities considered eligible is a 'giver' in the planetary sequence corresponding to the mother's date of birth Percentage occurrence
    796 383 48.12

    The inclusion of the additional criteria to identify eligibility does seem to have increased the incidence of the occurrence of an eligible entity as a 'giver'. Yet, a large gap still remains (51.88%) to be accounted for.

    By the inclusion of the additional criteria above, another peculiarity is introduced into the exercise -- that of an entity being eligible on a number of counts to make the event happen. For instance, a planet can be the dispositor of the fourth cusp from the ascendant and the Sun, making it eligible on two counts. If the two fourth house dispositors were to be the Moon, the count of eligibility will rise to three. In addition, if this entity were to be resident in any one of the fourth houses, the eligibility count climbs to four. This peculiarity would have existed in the analysis of Table 1 as well, but its effects (if any) will be more pronounced here. It will be interesting to see the correspondence between the count of eligibility (henceforth referred to as E-score) and the incidence of occurrence as a 'giver' for all entities (Table 3).

    Table 3
    Correspondence of count of eligibility (E-Score) to incidence of occurrence as 'giver'
    E-Score 0 1 2 >2 Total
    Number of entities with E-Score 3810 2767 565 22 7164 (9 x 796)
    Occurrence as 'giver' 413 308 72 3 792/383
    Percentage occurrence 10.84 11.13 12.74 13.63 48.12

    The trend above indicates that the percentage occurrence as a 'giver' increases with the E-score.

    Astrological texts also suggest that the position of the significator of a house be considered as yet another reference point (Brihat Parasara Hora Sastra2). This suggestion opens up new possibilities. One of the texts -- Jaataka Paarijata3, mentions that the Moon and Mars, be considered as significators of 'Mother'. Then there is the concept of chart specific significators or Chara Kaaraka4. So we have two further reference points in addition to the ascendant, the Sun and the Moon - namely, Mars and the chart specific significator. (If the chart specific significator were to be the nodes, then there will be three reference points.)

    Yet another entity that can be included into the eligible list of entities that represent the fourth-house, is the dispositor of the fourth Dvaadasaamsa5 from the Dvaadasaamsa ascendant.

    Table 4 provides an analysis of the incidence of 'givers' from the set of eligible entities by the new criteria and the equivalent 'E-score - Occurrence' correspondence analysis.

    Table 4
    Correspondence of count of eligibility (E-Score) to incidence of occurrence as 'giver'
    E-Score 0 1 2 >2 Total
    Number of entities with E-Score 1638 2714 1742 1070 7164 (9 x 796)
    Occurrence as 'giver' 156 281 201 158 796/640
    Percentage occurrence 10.84 9.52 11.54 14.77 80.40

    Here we see the consolidation of the trend that the incidence of occurrence as a giver increases with an increase in the count of eligibility. This in itself does not prove anything. If the same exercise as above is attempted with a different set of eligibility criteria -- for instance the 5th house dispositors from each of the reference points with the replacement of Jupiter for the Moon (as the significator of children) and chart specific significator of children in place of that of the mother, and consider their frequency of occurrence as the 'giver' in the planetary sequence corresponding to the date of the mother, a very similar pattern is observed. The trends shown in the tables here only affirm the idea that an entity with multiple eligibilities has a better probability of being a 'giver'.

    The incidence of occurrence of almost 20% of 'givers' that are outside the eligibility set is still to be accounted for. This calls for further expanding the eligibility set to include planets that interact with those in the eligibility set by virtue of their placement in the chart. Also, it is seen that less than 15% of those entities that are eligible within a given E-score category become givers. This necessitates grading of eligible entities within a chart with similar E-scores according to their apparent strengths attributable to their position in the chart and their interaction with other planets, in order to identify the strongest among them that go on to become a 'giver'. It can also be inferred from the table above that mere eligibility on a number of counts alone does not ensure a planet's occurrence as a giver. Between two planets with dissimilar E-scores, the one with a lower score can take precedence over the other with a higher score if the former is stronger by position while the latter is weaker on this count.

    Positional Eligibility

    The arguments above point to assessing a planet's occurrence as a 'giver' under two heads -- its positional attributes and its functional attributes and consider a blend of the two tendencies. The analysis so far has been made only on the functional attributes. We will consider an example positional attribute -- the proximity of a planet to the Sun, and analyze its bearing on the effectiveness of an eligible planet to be a 'giver'. Texts suggest various sets of angular distances for planets to be considered 'combust' -- a term that is used to describe a planet's close proximity to the Sun in a chart and that suggests that the planet in question is adversely affected. We will consider a standard angular separation of 7 30' between the Sun and any other planet within which the planet is deemed combust. Table 5 lists the occurrence of planets as givers under two heads -- combust and not combust. A further distinction is made between planets possessing an even or odd number of individual 'blemishes'. The preceding statement needs elaboration.

    Go Forward Read part three of Parents by Choice, Chance or Design.

    |

     

    Go to Top
    Parents by Choice, Chance or Design: part 1 | part 2 | part 3Ayurveda

    Articles | AstroMatch | Search | Books | Contact | Feed Subscribe to Feed | Forum | Postcards | Glossary | Links | Site Map

    Astrology on the Web



    Click here to go to Pisces Click here to go to Aquarius Click here to go to Capricorn Click here to go to Sagittarius Click here to go to Scorpio Click here to go to Libra Click here to go to Virgo Click here to go to Leo Click here to go to Cancer Click here to go to Gemini Click here to go to Taurus Click here to go to Aries

    privacy policy