At the risk of repeating myself and risking friendly 'darts' from those who have already read my thoughts on a related quancry about the extrasaturnine planets! Not yet resolved by jyotish, to keep or not to keep! --

Many decades ago I surmised that the 3 were not included because they are not visible! Well one clever fellow pointed out that back in the vedic ages, perhaps the skies were clearer and fewer industries around, so at least uranus must have been visible!

My visibility theory shot down, the answer next presented had to do with life-span and planetary periodicities, strange as it may sound.

The fact that pluto and neptune have periodicities longer than average human lifespan and Uranus barely cutting at par (84 years to go around the zodiac once) perhaps there might be something to consider!

Crazy as it may seem!

RR

[quote="RishiRahul"][quote="Sartaj Ahmed"]Hi,

What is your opinion about these 3 new planets that discovered in this year 2006.  Is new born people will be categorised under them.?

Sartaj Ahmed[/quote]


Hello,

The 3 new planets were dicovered later, but they were there all along.

The Westerns followed them as extra Saturnine planets all along. The Vedic sages for some reason did not follow them or use them, although they were aware of them, but did not refer to them as proper planets fulfilling the astrological needs, as they had many Cchaya grahas, not only Rahu and Ketu. Maybe Arun, Barun, Kiranmala too !

Wonder why?

RishiRahul[/quote]