Chara Karakas: Ranking Degrees, Minutes and Ties
Calculate chara-karaka order from within-sign longitude, keep full precision, and distinguish exact ties from rounded display matches.
Overview
Chara karakas are variable roles assigned by descending advancement within a sign. The selected seven- or eight-body scheme controls the role list; full precision and a stated tie policy are needed for reproducible assignments.
At a glance
- Sort field
- Advancement within the occupied sign
- Precision
- Compare degrees, minutes and seconds
- Seven-role order
- AK, AmK, BK, MK, PK, GK, DK
- Tie warning
- Display equality is not exact equality
How is the list calculated?
For an ordinary planet, reduce its normalized longitude to the 0°–30° advance within its sign. Sort eligible bodies from greatest to least, then attach the chosen scheme’s role labels. Ketu is not included in either scheme described here.
The eight-role method in Rao additionally uses Rahu and measures its advance from the sign’s end. That reversal applies to Rahu under that method; it is not a rule to reverse every retrograde planet.
Two equal-looking degrees are not a tie
Take an invented Sun at 12°30′30″ and Moon at 12°30′20″ within their respective signs, with all other eligible advances lower. The Sun is ahead by ten arcseconds, so it precedes the Moon even if a screen prints both as 12°30′.
If the underlying values are truly equal, a convention is necessary. Rao describes a shared signification and an unfilled following role; the inspected OpenFate seven-body implementation instead breaks an exact tie by classical body order. Those are different rules, not interchangeable explanations.
What should be withheld?
Do not invent missing seconds to force a preferred result. If plausible input values reverse a close ordering, report the competing assignments and the reason they remain unresolved. More decimal places on a screen do not guarantee a more accurate birth input.
A computed role is not a measured personality, moral quality or relationship diagnosis. Preserve the original role list and settings before considering symbolic interpretation, so later commentary cannot silently rewrite the arithmetic.
Sources and editorial basis
- P. V. R. Narasimha Rao: Vedic Astrology — An Integrated ApproachRao, Chapter 8, §§8.1–8.4, printed pp. 79–83; especially §8.2 and Table 13, pp. 80–81: within-sign advancement, the eight-role table, Rahu measured from the sign end, and exact-tie sharing. The seven-role OpenFate policy and its deterministic tie break come from a separate implementation review, not from pretending this eight-role table specifies them. Original ranking examples are editorial arithmetic, not birth-chart evidence or proof of moral, spiritual or family outcomes.A named practitioner’s introduction to Jyotish. Used for terminology and a stated method, not universal school agreement or scientific validation. The added March 18, 2010 note describes changed views; it does not establish a fully revised 2010 edition.
- OpenFate Editorial MethodologyOpenFate Editorial Methodology, stable sections #editorial-principles, #editorial-workflow, #editorial-ai, and #editorial-context. Used for the calculation/interpretation and evidence-boundary policy.OpenFate separates deterministic chart calculation, traditional interpretation, and modern editorial explanation.
- OpenFate Vedic implementation: local source review, 2026-09-08OpenFate local implementation review, 2026-09-08: app/modules/vedic/logic/policy.ts VEDIC_ENGINE_POLICY.karakaScheme and supportsVedicBav; facts.ts computeKarakas and computeSarvashtakavarga; constants.ts SAV_TABLES, SAV_EXPECTED_TOTALS and SAV_EXPECTED_GRAND_TOTAL; career-evidence.ts buildVedicCareerEvidence.unavailable. The reviewed policy uses seven roles without Rahu and a fixed classical-order exact-tie break. Raw BAV rows total 48/49/39/54/56/52/39, summing to 337; the Moon/Venus variant entries differ from Rao’s stated preference. BAV visibility depends on stored contract, and career evidence explicitly marks shadbala unavailable. This is a dated code review, not proof of current deployment or empirical prediction accuracy.An editorial review of local policy and calculation source files, not an independently accessible publication or proof of the deployed version. Implementation limitations and discrepancies remain separate from traditional arithmetic.