Why are dwiswabhava rashis considered to be stronger than sthira which in turn are considered to be stronger than chara rashis?

Are mithun, kanya, dhanu, meena equally strong or within that group there is a sub-order of strengths??

Surely, such a fundamental thing well-accepted amongst jyotishis must have been something pondered upon by many modern jyotishis (practising and/or academic!)

The question was about two aspects (not to be confused with drishtis!).

BPHS (and possibly other texts) ascribe an ascending order of strenghts to rashi-groups. Chara being the weakest, sthira middling and dwiswabhava being the strongest of the three groups.

And, the other aspect being that lagna, turyaa, saptama and dashama are lined up in ascending order of strength (10th being strongest, lagna being the weakest of four or perhaps least strong of these four might be politically more acceptable a term?

Can we combine the two 'aspects' and use those in practical astrology? Have you?

Comments, Opinions, Experiences...?

RR ji,

Since the heading includes "musings" and "speculations", I am venturing out .

I would think that moveable signs make people impulsive, fixed signs too hung up on some notions. The dual signs have a possibility to achieve a right mix. Trying to relate it to real life, measure of "success" in life differs in differing time scales. For e.g, if someone wants to learn astrology he/she will have to be prepared to persevere for a long time. In this period the same person may have other options to pursue that would make him/her "successful". I would think moveable sign makes it difficult to set out on such long range objectives. Fixed signs on the other hand may be able to do it but may lack the agility to withdraw, should there be a situation guaranteeing failure.

Dear Dada and others,

Firstly this is a very important/interesting idea to ponder on such thoughts/ideas as these tend to harden/strengthen our logic in Jyotish!!

My 'musing' on this: Since BPHS and Jaimini too has delivered this, it has to have a reason. Many truths are not apparently logical, unless we are able to find it/the guide shows us the path.

Now, if I take the narayan dasa computations, the results come right to MY satisfaction. So there should be good'right logic, at least on the twins being stronger than fixed and so forth.

NOW, trying to apply reasons to this:= (1) the twin signs also aspect each other through rasi drishti.
(2) If case1 was not there, then probably the super edge could have gone to fixed sign, as its the most stable of them all.
(3) explanation of mysbcrs= agreed.

So that settles the first order in my musing.




Now the second: : (If all the 4 are vacant, then the result would get affected by the placement of the lords. Now if we assume that the lorda exist as Jupiter and mercury, but neglect their placements; and lagna)

Mithuna, kanya, dhanu and meen           are             air, earth, fire and water respectively.

Out of which (maybe) earth (kanya) could be strongest; then fire (dhanu), then air mithuna), then water (meena)..................(in terms of stabilty/strength)
Another consideration helping/supporting this understanding:=
kanya- stable + upachaya in kalchakra
dhanu= fire + 9th in.........
mithun= air + less upachaya in ..........
meena= water + 12th in kalchakra

Hope I am not musing utter nonsense, as musings are rarely shared as they are the internallly logicising thing; so some parts could be illogical, but this is how I learn on my own/try to.

RishiRahul

Very nice! Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Love and Lux,