Shadbala needs to be researched and revamped into a more workable system. While all the factors of Shadbala are important and should be considered to some degree (like whether a planet is strong by location, position or aspect), the present system of Shadbala for doing this may not be entirely accurate. There is still no substitute for insight and experience. Astrology requires qualitative judgments and these cannot always be reduced to mere quantitative calculations. While its calculations are each useful to consider in themselves, it is not always useful to average them all out. Shadbala factors sometimes cancel each other out. My experience has been that aspects are probably more important than any Shadbala factors. It seldom makes a difference of more than 5%. It does read aspectual strength into its factors but this does not count for much. Shadbala does not appear to adequately consider planetary aspects. Shadbala shows the basic strength and weakness of planets but we have to look back to the chart for what they are empowered to do. Similarly, if a planet has only average Shadbala but is strong in the chart in terms of position and aspect, it can still act in a very potent manner. Other factors have to be taken into consideration. If a planet has a high Shadbala, it does not necessarily mean it will always give good results or if it has a low one, it does not mean that it will give bad results. If a planet occupies in the rashichart its Moolatrikona sign it gets 45 Shashtiamsas (this is a special rule for the rashi. In all these charts we look at what kind of sign a certain planet is located. Other astrologers look more at the particular factors in Shadbala, like exaltation strength (uccha bala) and are not so concerned about the total figures for the planet. To calculate this we will have to look at the following seven harmonic charts: Rasi, Hora, Drekkana, Saptamsa, Navamsa, Dwadasamsa and Trimsamsa.
0 kommentar(er)
