[quote="projenator"][quote="rohiniranjan"]

What I understand then is:

Ketu is {nearly always} about detachment (detachment as in neglect or obliviousness or avoidance?)

Rahu in 10 with moon (assuming that different lagnas were involved in the cases you observed), regardless of the rulership of moon in the given chart made the nativity obsessive about the house of occupation.

The above if observed, would make one question the jyotish tenet that nodes become surrogates for planets they are associated with. Since in these charts studied by you, moon would represent different houses by lordship.

Am I following you correctly so far, Proj?[/quote]


RR,
     Those were very generic comments on a few factors in a horoscope which might lead to impulsive eccentric behavior depending on recurrence, strength etc. Lordship of houses definitely need to be looked at and much more for a detailed study.

The mystery of Rahu in a horoscope by Shivraj Sharma, guide and editor KNR tabulates what most of the classics say about Rahu in a pretty nice way and I see some generic comments being made there like Rahu in 10th is almost always good in its mahadasha or Rahu in 3rd, 6th and 11th is good, but also mention the surrogate theory which if I remember correctly is from Laghu parashari (stated somewhere in that book)

So I don't think its awfully wrong to have a few generic ideas in mind when one is flexible and open to deeper holistic analysis.

To be honest with you, I read voraciously about rahu and ketu, anything and everything I can lay my hands on but I am still very confused about them.[/quote]


Proj,

I don't say mockingly or sarcastically or snootily or all-knowlingly but nodes are indeed very difficult to decipher. Partly because little has been written/revealed about them in classics (almost the same level in scriptural reticence as is the case for vargas other than rasis ) and also because of their hide-and-seek, dynamic/metamorphic inherent nature (I think!). Even in something like BPHS for instance, nodes have been treated variably in different places in their description. You must probably know that Varahamihira did not include the nodes in the phalit  book by him (Vrihajjatakam). One fellow I once knew who was on a "Hindu-astrology came from Alexandria/Babylonia wagon" interpreted this many years ago as evidence that Varahamihira must be from earlier times when they did not know of nodes and eclipses! Obviously this very interesting gentleman had not read Vrihatsamhita, also written by Varahamihira

Perhaps I should not be making fun like this since there might be a student or follower here who may get offended and another RR-bashing will begin! :-(