Ganit

गणित

Ank · अंक

Your numbers name four grahas. We can tell you where they actually are.

Every other numerology page stops at “your number is 9, so Mars rules you.” Ganit computes Mars — its sign, its degree, its nakshatra pada, and the years it runs in your dasha. The numbers need a name and a date and nothing else: no birth time, no account, and nothing sent anywhere.

The name is worked out in this browser tab and never sent to us — there is no reason for a server to see it, so it does not, and it is kept out of the address bar too. A link to this page carries the birth and not the name.  ·  Add a birth time and place, and the grahas your numbers name are looked up in your own chart

Only this half needs a server, and only because the ephemeris does. The chart is free, as it is at /kundli — if you have already cast one there, the link at the bottom of it brings the birth here without retyping it.

What this page will not do

It will not call four or eight unlucky.

Those are Rahu’s and Shani’s numbers, and they are the ones commercial numerology charges to “fix”, usually by selling a new spelling of your name. No classical Indian source grades the numbers good or bad, so neither does this page.

No source grades them · so none is cited
It will not pick a date for you.

A muhurta is chosen from the panchang — the tithi, the nakshatra and the determination window for the rite in question. Ganit computes that calendar properly and will not let a number override it.

The calendar decides · the number does not
It will not tell you a new spelling changed anything.

Try another spelling below if you like — you will try it somewhere, and better here. It gives a different total, because the letters are different. It moves no graha by one arcsecond, because the ephemeris does not read your passport.

Shown, and labelled for what it is
It will not sell you a stone, a colour or a lucky number.

Where Ganit carries a remedy at all it states what a text prescribes and who says it, and there is nothing to buy at the end of it. There is no shop behind this page.

Sourced, never sold
It will not score a marriage.

There is no numerological compatibility here and there will not be. Guna Milan already computes thirty-six points with both all-or-nothing kootas and Manglik read from three separate reference points. A second, weaker verdict on the same couple would be worse than no verdict.

Deliberately absent

Where this comes from

Three claims sit on this page and only one of them is ancient. Ganit’s astronomy genuinely is old; running that together with this would be the easiest thing on the site to get wrong, so here is the split.

Namakshara is the classical one.

Naming a child from the quarter of the nakshatra the Moon stood in at birth is the namakarana custom, and the syllable tables are printed in panchangs today. It is the one item here with a lineage — and the one that needs the ephemeris, because a pada is a quarter of 13°20′.

Namakarana · the commonly printed pada table
The 1–9 to navagraha map is current Indian practice.

It is what practitioners use and what your family will recognise. How far back it goes is something we have not established and are not going to assert.

Attested in modern practice · earlier route unestablished
The Chaldean letter table is modern, and Western.

It reaches Indian numerology through Cheiro — Louis Hamon — and Sepharial, published in London in the early 1900s. The name implies Babylon. We have found no text that carries it there, and we are not going to imply one.

Cheiro, Sepharial · early twentieth century
Katapayadi is not this.

Sanskrit does have a real classical letter-to-number system: katapayadi, used to encode astronomical constants inside verse so they could be memorised. It is the thing most often cited to make numerology sound Vedic. It is a different system doing a different job, and saying so costs this page nothing it was entitled to.

A different system · named rather than borrowed

No Sanskritist has read this page. The pada syllables are the ones commonly printed and have not been collated against manuscripts; where a popular claim has no classical basis we say so and cite nothing, which is the same rule Hasta Rekha follows.