I think the discussion of vargas deserves its own thread because essentially it is the crux of applied jyotish.

One request from all though, if I may? Let us remain disciplined and not let the thread drift into a critique of what a certain jyotishi does or a school follows etc. This is a huge forum and I am sure there are people here from all schools and camps and paddhatis and systems of jyotish that are prevalent in India. Let us just talk technical and not judgmental please! I am sure we all are mature enough to do that for after all, we are aspiring jyotishis and that in itself requires a certain discipline. Also, the fact is that none of us is really an expert, so what right do we have to judge those who have made a name for themselves in the field of jyotish? It matters not what one person may think of one of these jyotishis, but there must be many others who think that they amount to something and let us respect those feelings of the individuals that are here and practice prudence. Fact of the matter is that most likely these experts that we may be criticising are not even here and certainly not listening to us! So what are we doing other than venting and acting like trees that fall in the forest and no one even hears! Or the hindi song which translated means: The peacock danced in the forest but no one was there to witness or appreciate! So why waste energy?

Parashara enumerated 16 vargas or divisions, starting with Rashi and ending with shastiamsha. Others have added a few more to this scheme. Parashara also talks about different groupings of the vargas, shad, sapta etc. His verses also indicate how the awasthas play a role in the overall consideration etc.

In modern times, there seem to prevail three views:
1. One states that rashi is the primary chart and alone may suffice the needs of most.
2. The other group indicates that without the other vargas, there would remain gaps and in no uncertain terms advocates the analysis of vargas. Sometimes to the exclusion of the rashi chart.
3. Yet another group strongly maintains that vargas other than rashi varga must not be studied as kundalis or charts as seems to have been the prevailing practice. They maintain that vargas should only be utilized for determining the quality and strength of the planets and that must be tied to their jurisdictions indicated by Parashara. To clarify, this would mean the examination of the 7th lord's (in rashi varga) status (strength and quality) in navamsha to determine the condition around marriage, or the fifth lord's quality and strength in the saptamsha varga.

Then there are other variances of these major views.

Where there are 'gaps' in information, rumours start and that is a human phenomenon. Parashara left some gaps (or maybe we do not have the entire text available in an original form. That explains the different versions of BPHS that exist). There are no clear instructions regarding how exactly to read the different vargas and if there are any special rules pertaining to those or if all vargas must follow the same rule structures for interpretation. With hard work, dedication and sincere observation and sifting through practical horoscope analysis, this can be bridged...

Chandra kala nadi gives a few more hints where it talks about navamsha tulya rashi and rasi tulya navamsha concept and also a repetitive 'pattern' which signifies the importance of planets situated in trines from certain indicators.

Let us not make up our minds too soon, dear friends. There are some significant missing links in jyotish and the only way we can hope to find those is to keep our minds open and to not stop observing and examining charts, like an astronomer who sits there peering into the dark skies and sometimes finds jewels!

At the same time, I am not suggesting 'naming' and adding to the star catalogue each time we see a movement in the telescope! It is called healthy scepticism and when coupled with curiosity and explorativeness was what got us out of our caves and into the modern age!

RR