Theory of Disposition

Our Ancient seers had sound knowledge of the Zodiac and the nature of
Planets. They were very specific in declaring dictums of Astrology. They
stated categorically that a Planet exalts at a specific degree. For example
Moon exalts at 3 degree Taurus. In saying so they never laid down any
condition about the state of Venus (dignified by Sign or House position) that
rules Taurus. They were clear in their mind that Zodiac is the store house of
energy formed by collective rays of celestial bodies. When a Planet is in a
particular degree the energy content of which synchronizes with its own nature
we say that Planet is in the state of exaltation. At our level we say that the
Planet is under the influence of zodiacal energy content that synthesizes the
energy content of the Planets that co-rule that particular degree of the zodiac.

Let us take the case Moon’s exaltation at 3degrees Taurus. This degree is
co-ruled by Venus as Sign lord, Sun as Star lord, And Saturn as Navamsa
lord. But Navamsa of Saturn starts at 0 degree Taurus. Why Moon should not
exalt at 0 degree Taurus? This clearly points that this degree in fact
symbolizes the Shodas Verga energy. Our Ancients called it the concept of
Nadiamsa. A Planet exalts only when placed in a particular Nadiamsa. Three
degree Taurus rises in Kutilaa (as per C.G.Rajan) or named as Prabbaa as
per Deva Keralam.

I have not met with much success in finding a source where detailed
significations of Nadiamsas are written. How ever this is how I interpret this
degree. In Sub-Sub concept 3 degree Taurus is co-ruled by Venus-Sun-Sat-
Sat. From this degree we find that Venus rules 1 and 6,Sun rules 4 and Saturn
rules 9 and 10.All these houses are favourable with respect to Moon’s position
at 3 degree Taurus.

Theory of Disposition and its Application: If we critically analyse theory of

disposition in light of what has been stated above we find that it refers to the
dynamic* significations of the Planets that co-rule the degree in which a Planet
is placed in a chart. In most of the current literature on Astrology we find its
application limited only to the lord of the Sign in which the Planet is placed.
More over treating the Planet as dignified or not by Sign or House has its own
limitations. The dispositor of a Planet may be placed in 10th house but if it has
no PS then I feel that the dispositor can do nothing for 10th house. More over
zodiacal degree in which a Planet is placed only modifies the nature of the
Planet. Significations of the Planet are as per its PS and Stellar Status.
*Dynamic significations mean houses signified by a Planet as per its PS and
Stellar Status in a particular chart.

Divisional Charts and Theory of Disposition: I have been quite modest in

voicing my views on the significance of Navamsa in Chapter 17 of my book
Basic and Traditional Concepts•. Our Ancients created the Varga concept to
delineate the significations of particular aspects of Human life. They were
conspicuous in their understanding that Human being takes birth at a
particular moment on a particular day when the energy content of the Ascdt
and Planetary positions in the chart corresponds to the Karmic code of soul
that incarnates. To them Varga only meant specifying the degree of the Ascdt
and correspondingly other house positions. Similarly for Planets these Vargas
meant to place the Planet in a specific position according to the concept of
Varga. Moon in 3 degree Taurus in a natal chart is disposed by Venus that
tells upon the nature of Moon which has to be as per native’s Karmic
code. Placing Moon in Capricorn as per its Navamsa Sign would greatly defy
the very concept of Human birth as per theory of incarnation.

In the light of above it is difficult for me to reconcile to the study of Divisional

Charts as per prevalent technique of casting these charts.Applying theories of
disposition to divisional charts means to me confusion confounded.

Above are my personal views based on my under standing of Ancient

Seers dictums on Astrology. Many may not agree with me. Let us follow
the principle Agree to disagree.