Jyotish

February 19, 2006

RR ji,

I beg to differ, I am not taking it that way, I am not even an

astrologer or even a serious minded student of astrology, yet,to be

a Crusader.

It is that when in a public forum I should retract , If I had

attributed something to a person when he did not. It is really

healthy discussing, debating. and it would be foolish if one thinks

one has the might to defend jyotish. Emotionally, probably yes, I am

emotional and a little too passionate and vocal when in the midst of

friends and the like minded. I love treading dangerous grounds and

sometimes get burnt ,My martian energy, no, matter all in the course

of learning. I would only be too happy to stand corrected and also

have new ideas and thinking, I am now a little more focussed on the

flip side. I have always thought of these exchanges a nice exercise

in acquiring what one did not have and never a one to one combat. I

am sorry if it has seemed that.

Regards

nalini

, "rohiniranjan" <rrgb

wrote:

>

> Nalini ji (both of you!)

>

> It seems you are taking this too personally and emotionally. If we

> all are going to benefit from this thread (I being the culprit who

> started it :-( we would have to not take every statement as if it

> was directed at us personally or as if we were being put in a cage

> where someone would sit in judgment over us. Maybe I am

overreacting

> and overinterpreting your posting but I say what I sincerely feel

> and I am not going to change -- sorry!

>

> We are trying to examine not only astrology/jyotish here but how

> people, otherwise devoted and dedicated to the crafts, feel about

> it. It is not about RR vs Krishnan or Nalini vs RR or Nalini vs

the

> rest of the world.

>

> None of us, no matter how accomplished, or how dedicated or how

much

> in love with jyotish or spiritual realm -- is really equipped to

> defend jyotish. It is much bigger than any and all of us and

> considering the silent majority and sometimes honestly I am

thankful

> and say Grace that they remain so -- and all we can do is study it

> through the eyes of our other playmates, all 25 vocal ones of them

> here, and only through taking in and absorbing the different

> perspectives of the entire classroom shall we even begin to

> understand what jyotish means to each of us and all of us,

> individually and together!

>

> RR

>

> , "auromirra19"

> <nalini2818@> wrote:

> >

> > Hi,

> > I would respond to the latter part : I have known astrologers

> > (professional or otherwise, i.e whether astrology is their

> vocation

> > or avocation) elsewhere where after a free reading ask for feed

> > backs: would you believe it?As for accountability I thought I

had

> > heard the last of it when I had got out of the bank, well go

ahead

> > consumerise astrology, create accountability, consumer forums,

> > grievance redressal bureaux, ombudsman !!!!!

> > one can consider oneself blessed if confused by astrologers,

> imagine

> > being confused by doctors( situations where life matters) which

> > would certainly have life(less)?long repurcussions.

> > I dont mean disrespect to the medical community whose hackles I

do

> > not want to raise but each profession/ field cannot be condemned

> > outright. Each has memebers on both sides of the line.

> > Why does not jyotish have a goal? Can it not help in

> > identifying/making a SWOT analysis, of oneself, analyse put 2 an

2

> > together and arrive at a new You = 5? Can it not make u a better

> > person to live with and understand why someone behaves like how

he

> > does?understand and accept it? and generally make life more

worthy

> > of living? Well astrology is not only a science but also an art.

> > No hurt or disrespect intended please

> > Nalini

> >

> > , "shantala_pandit"

> > <shantala_pandit@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Hi all,

> > > I found this topic very interesting..in my humble opinion:

> > > Jyotish is a means and not an end in itself..we can glorify it

> all

> > > we want to but at the end of the day this group has 4599

members

> > on

> > > date of which my guess is 90% are here to get answers to their

> > > immediate concerns about the problems they face in this

> > birth...and

> > > unless those are addressed accurately Jyotish can never be put

> on

> > > the same pedestal as science although we all would like to see

> > that

> > > happen. Science has a goal, what is the goal of Jyotish??

> > >

> > > I find most astrologers egoistic about their abilities unlike

> > > doctors who never feel bad about someone getting a second

> opinion,

> > > most infact suggest it in serious cases..

> > > If the experienced astrologers of this group want, they can

> create

> > a

> > > expert panel, study a pool of horoscopes, make their

> predictions,

> > > match their findings and follow-up on their clients for a pre-

> > > determined period of time to see what percentage of their

> findings

> > > have materialzed.. first solve the problems/trials and

> > tribulations

> > > of this birth for individuals or maybe even for nations and

then

> > > decide whether other things should be within the scope of the

> > study

> > > or not.

> > >

> > > If astrologers can be made accountable for their statements,

> their

> > > credibility as a breed would increase.

> > > My apologies beforehand in case I have hurt anyone's

sentiments

> > > about astrology, that is not my intention. I am a layman

> > frequently

> > > confused by astrologers :-)

> > > with regards,

> > > Shantala

> > >

> > > , "auromirra19"

> > > <nalini2818@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > RRji,

> > > > Yes, sir, it is true that every jyotishi in the true spirit

of

> a

> > > > scientist has to accept in to validate his/her findings and

> also

> > > not

> > > > lose the enthusiasm and the urge to explore beyond the

realms

> > > > because once that is lost either theyare in the danger of

> > becoming

> > > > too complacent or getting stuck in a groove.But then as you

> said

> > > we

> > > > are in the rat race and have hardly the time or energy to

> devote

> > > to

> > > > a time consuming exercise which is not profit making.I did

not

> > > mean

> > > > that the two pronged stick was not science, it is the base

for

> > > later

> > > > research on water divination but it is used for water

> divination

> > > > alone. Well thank God , we are in a world where people are

> there

> > > to

> > > > question findings, applications. Socrates would have been

> > spared

> > > > his hemlock had he been as fortunate as us. Debating does

lead

> > us

> > > to

> > > > new topics, though superficially and at a cursory glance may

> > sound

> > > > or seem so distanced from the point in question. Not to ask

> > > > questions or be curious as to how it was unearthed is simply

> > going

> > > > through the motions of the earlier inhabitants of the world

> and

> > > like

> > > > prescribing hemlock to socrates. As krishnanji, said

research

> > for

> > > > the sake of research, the basics, is something lot others

have

> > no

> > > > respect for.given the basics, research and invent thousand

> > > > applications and be happy.

> > > > If we think we have arrived at the end and stop it is the

end

> > and

> > > if

> > > > we stop and probe beyond the end then it is the beginning,

of

> > who

> > > > knows, a far more beautiful world.

> > > > Nalini

> > > >

> > > > , "rohiniranjan"

> <rrgb@>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > I will share my views with both of you (Krishnanji and

> Nalini)

> > > in

> > > > > one message, if I may.

> > > > >

> > > > > My point which I shall reiterate, is not about what the

> > > potential

> > > > or

> > > > > ultimate scope or capability of jyotish is. That none of

us

> > > know.

> > > > It

> > > > > is quite possible that in proper hands, as you say, there

> > might

> > > > lie

> > > > > the answers to every question in the universe. For those

who

> > are

> > > > > doing research or experimenting what can be made with sand

> at

> > > the

> > > > > beaches or in computer chip making industry (and there is

a

> > > > certain

> > > > > pleasure in that activity for those inclined so!), and as

> long

> > > as

> > > > > they state so, rather than giving an impression that it is

a

> > > > > validated and well-tested matter, causes misunderstanding

> > about

> > > > the

> > > > > real state of the knowledge. My issue is that for 'non-

> > research'

> > > > > aplications or situations, one should sound caution just

to

> be

> > > > fair

> > > > > to the 'consumer' who may understandably be less

> knowledgeable

> > > and

> > > > > often very trusting. Particularly when costly remedies or

> > > raising

> > > > > hopes which may have the potential to crash.

> > > > >

> > > > > Until such new explorations, yet not fully established or

> not

> > > > easily

> > > > > validatable (ishta devta, moksha, last birth, next birth

> etc),

> > > are

> > > > > definitively and demonstratively established, due to their

> > > > intrinsic

> > > > > uncertainty, we should continue to sound such caution.

> > > > >

> > > > > Can Jyotish (as it stands now) tell everything? Emotions

and

> > > > > devotions would indicate so. However such OBVIOUS things

> such

> > as

> > > > > gender, race, nationality to name three cannot be reliably

> > > > > identified from a horoscope (or horoscopes) using only

> > astrology

> > > > > principles. Why is the obvious so difficult and the

> > unverifiable

> > > > > unobvious such as poorvajanma, next janma, etc can be so

> > > > confidently

> > > > > described as if there is some formula to identify these

> raises

> > > > some

> > > > > concerns.

> > > > >

> > > > > Nalini, you and many others insist that jyotish is a

> science.

> > > But

> > > > > then two things must follow: Jyotishis should think like

> > > > scientists

> > > > > and not take new findings without a pinch of salt and

demand

> > > that

> > > > > they be validated, verified, explained. I realize that

time,

> > > > > resources etc would make this difficult but the questions

> > should

> > > > not

> > > > > stop. Someone, somewhere will have the time and resources

to

> > > > answer

> > > > > the questions. Where I can, at the very least you can

expect

> > me

> > > to

> > > > > ask such questions. The second thing is that even the most

> > hard-

> > > > > boiled, hard-core scientist must not lose the intrinsic

> > > curiosity

> > > > of

> > > > > a child and the optimism too that something lies just

beyond

> > the

> > > > > horizon of knowing, hence the exploration must continue.

> Just

> > > > > because we do not know what is the mechanism behind the

> Yarrow

> > > > stick

> > > > > finding water, we should not dismiss it as having nothing

to

> > do

> > > > with

> > > > > science :-) After all, the scientists in H.G. Wells'

times

> > > would

> > > > > have guffawed at the thought of men actually going to

moon.

> > > Wells,

> > > > > on the other hand thought otherwise when he wrote his

famous

> > > > classic

> > > > > novel.

> > > > >

> > > > > Speaking of classics, given the ambiguity, uncertainty and

> so

> > on

> > > > > around what we consider classics in astrology -- a list

that

> > > > shrinks

> > > > > and expands often to fit the burden of proof required -- I

> > > refuse

> > > > to

> > > > > take what is described in there as absolute proof that

> someone

> > > has

> > > > > done all the homework and validated every single

combination

> > > given

> > > > > therein or even every single principle is on rock steady

> > ground

> > > of

> > > > > reality and directly applicable without any discussion.

That

> > > sort

> > > > of

> > > > > blanket acceptance does not sound scientific or rational

or

> > what

> > > > > science was built upon.

> > > > >

> > > > > I apologize if I am making anyone uncomfortable or walking

> > into

> > > > > anyone's sand castle, but these things have to be stated

> again

> > > and

> > > > > again for the benefit not of those with already firm

> > > convictions,

> > > > > right or wrong, but those who are still playing with sand -

-

> > > > perhaps

> > > > > for the first time.

> > > > >

> > > > > Again, I have no reservations myself towards

experimentation

> > so

> > > > > please don't wrongly think of me as anti-progress or

rigid.

> > > > However,

> > > > > the statements and pronouncements made by a jyotishi,

> > > particularly

> > > > > in a reading must carefully and clearly indicate things

that

> > are

> > > > > experimental and those that are more certain. As advisors

> and

> > > > > counsellors we owe that to our clients, the nativity --

> > whether

> > > > they

> > > > > are paying or not. In this sense, 'professional' does not

> mean

> > > > > necessarily, as in other fields, one who makes a living

out

> of

> > > > > jyotish. All of us who are serious about jyotish and

> dedicated

> > > to

> > > > > serving others through it are professionals and must

> maintain

> > > the

> > > > > integrity of what we say and how we say it.

> > > > >

> > > > > RR

> > > > >

> > > > > , vattem krishnan

> > > > > <bursar_99@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Jyotish(ASTROLOGY) ,that concerns about Nature has

> > everything

> > > to

> > > > > boast off .Yet we do not know whether it is put in the

> (right)

> > > > hands

> > > > > to come out with right perspectives..The subject/topic has

> > great

> > > > > swings providing scope for further studies like any other

> > > > > science.But then all in Nature whch we can not be

> conditioned

> > > > though

> > > > > the subjects may be conditioned always waiting in one or

> other

> > > > > shelters for something to repeat.we are not sure.As a

result

> > we

> > > > > discuss about several issues which are of immediate

> objectives

> > > not

> > > > > of things that likely to effect at a distant future.It is

> not

> > > that

> > > > > the subject Astrology is not capable,but pleasure seekers

on

> > the

> > > > > beaches are busy with their own smal creations on beach

sides

> > > > > > krishnan

> > > > > >

> > > > > > auromirra19 <nalini2818@> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Astrology is a science. If it can answer and provide a

> third

> > > > > > diemnsion to logic and reason in identifying our ishta

> > devatas

> > > > why

> > > > > > not in other aspects mundane, astral, spiritual. It is

not

> > > some

> > > > > two

> > > > > > pronged stick which helps in identifying source of water

> and

> > > > water

> > > > > > alone. In the hands of the right person astrology can

> answer

> > > any

> > > > > > question pertaining to the above with or without

spiritual

> > > gifts

> > > > > or

> > > > > > intuition.If a native wants to know when marriage will

> take

> > > > place,

> > > > > > when will he/she acquire a house as opposed to another`s

> > query

> > > > reg

> > > > > > ishta devatas, spiritual leanings etc is all a matter of

> > > > priority

> > > > > > they have in their lives.It is because of the stark

> > > materialistc

> > > > > > world we inhabit, majority of concerns equally

> > materialistic,

> > > > > people

> > > > > > need a recourse and astrology is the finest science to

> > provide

> > > > > them

> > > > > > with answers. So it is difficult for them accept that

> > > astrology

> > > > > can

> > > > > > provide remedies to failure in love to spiritual

> > emanicipation

> > > > and

> > > > > > why not Bhakthi? Should not a jyotish be a bhaktha? Does

> > > jyotish

> > > > > > advocate rationalism? Why should we confine ourselves to

> the

> > > > yokes

> > > > > > of the regular? can we not atleast struggle to think out

> > side

> > > > the

> > > > > > box? someone wondered what ishtadevatas and bhakthi

were

> > > doing

> > > > > > among jyotish and planets.

> > > > > > Regards

> > > > > > Nalini

> > > > > >

> > > > > > , vattem krishnan

> > > > > > <bursar_99@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dear Rohini da,

> > > > > > > Jyotish has to trascend from materialistic concers

> > to"Such

> > > > > stark

> > > > > > and commonplace realities which hardly can be doubted

> about

> > > > should

> > > > > > be easy as pie for jyotishtodiscern,

> > > > > > > yet it appears we need to look for takers for this

> > change

> > > > over

> > > > > > to happen.No sign boards in that even are required for

> > jyotish

> > > > to

> > > > > > subject issues of less pep and sour tastes

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I often find in my educational set up people tend to

> be

> > > > > > application oriented research than to basic

research.Every

> > > body

> > > > > > knows that limit knowledge stems out from

> applications.where

> > > as

> > > > > > basics have long life to go and forms ground work.Rulers

> > > > > > particularly Rajaas(more in democratic form) have less

> > > interest

> > > > in

> > > > > > common realities and must have noticed how diversity is

> the

> > > base

> > > > > for

> > > > > > unanimity otherwise for unity.Secularity is attached

more

> > > > > important

> > > > > > than catholocism.In reality groups and associations tend

> to

> > > > > operate

> > > > > > in a limited way than to vastness.Ethinicism,though

> endured

> > > but

> > > > > not

> > > > > > whole heartedly.Insecurity in life is difficult

> perspective

> > to

> > > > > > control.So humans can not be differentiated as a result

> from

> > > > > animal

> > > > > > kingdom,though as homosapiens.

> > > > > > > People mind tomorrow for materialistic purposes but

> not

> > > for

> > > > > > brooding over common realities.This is hard fact of life.

> > > > > > > Given a push and drive the cultures,races, and

> politics

> > > > could

> > > > > > have been scanned of the past,present and

future.Immediate

> > > > > concerns

> > > > > > were not of things that can easily be discerned but for

> > > chasing

> > > > > > lagoons.

> > > > > > > That's how the world is mystic!Jyotish therefore has

> to

> > > > > > transcend from obvuous things to mtaphysical aspects be

it

> > > > > > spirtual,philosophical and less sour religeous realities.

> > > > > > > In the univesrse what scores is not unlimited

vastness

> > but

> > > > > > limited approach of desh and kaalmaan perspectives.More

on

> > > > > specifics?

> > > > > > Always jyotishis were ordained for lesser things be it a

> > > > > > materialtistic things but certainly of things immediate

> > > > > > importance.Though cultures transform but less fast and

> races

> > > > > mutate

> > > > > > but again slow and affiliations particularly political

> > > transcend

> > > > > > takes generations to pass.

> > > > > > > regards

> > > > > > > krishnan

> > > > > > > rohiniranjan <rrgb@> wrote:

> > > > > > > Each of us, individuals that we are, have a very

> > different

> > > > > view

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > the scope of jyotish, as a divinatory craft and of

other

> > > > > > associated

> > > > > > > facets of it. Some of us view it as a means to

> understand

> > > the

> > > > > > > reality that surrounds and pervades through us,

perhaps

> an

> > > > > > > additional mean to others that are available to us,

> > > including

> > > > > > logic

> > > > > > > and reason. Others may seek it as an alternative and

> some

> > > sort

> > > > > of

> > > > > > a

> > > > > > > direct communication-line to God and His/Her plan for

us

> > and

> > > > > this

> > > > > > > reality. Philosophers would chime in and say that both

> are

> > > > > > possible

> > > > > > > in this unfathomable quantum reality.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Regardless of what one ideally visualizes for jyotish

> and

> > > its

> > > > > > > capability in a practical/deliverable sense (without

the

> > aid

> > > > of

> > > > > > > intuition and other spiritual gifts) -- what does

> jyotish

> > in

> > > > the

> > > > > > > hands of commonplace, regular practitioners and

students

> > > (us!)

> > > > > > > actually is capable of delivering demonstrably and not

> > just

> > > in

> > > > > > some

> > > > > > > flash of inspiration?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > We have discussed jyotish in the context of worldly

and

> > > > tangible

> > > > > > > things and events: marriage, sickness, money,

> occupation,

> > > > > > education,

> > > > > > > etc.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > We often wander into realms that are less tangible:

> > natures,

> > > > > one's

> > > > > > > thoughts and motivations, sometimes corroborated,

often

> > > > surmised

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > not really confirmed!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > And even more ethereal realms: Ishta devatas, moksha

or

> > not,

> > > > how

> > > > > > > many more janmas would I take, what was I in my last

> > birth,

> > > > what

> > > > > > > will I be in my next birth? Who was my daughter to me

in

> > my

> > > > last

> > > > > > > birth? Who will my father be when he would be reborn?

> > > > Jyotishis,

> > > > > > if

> > > > > > > not jyotish, always have an answer!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > And with such prowess, I would think, it should be

easy

> to

> > > > > figure

> > > > > > > out and explain through astrological logic, things so

> > > obvious,

> > > > > so

> > > > > > > rigid in many cases, with nearly no uncertainty and

> > > ambiguity:

> > > > > > > Things such as gender, race, religion and political

> > > > affiliation!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Such stark and commonplace realities which hardly can

be

> > > > doubted

> > > > > > > about should be easy as pie for jyotish to discern, as

> > they

> > > > say

> > > > > in

> > > > > > > India, 'baanyeyn haath kaa khel (english translation

> would

> > > be:

> > > > I

> > > > > > can

> > > > > > > do this with my right hand tied behind my back!).

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Given a set of birthdata, one should be able to tell

the

> > > > gender,

> > > > > > > religion, race (we will leave the caste of birth, and

> > > > political

> > > > > > > affiliation for later!), easily -- at least as easily

as

> > > some

> > > > of

> > > > > > the

> > > > > > > ethereal and undefinable attributes such as devatas

that

> > we

> > > > have

> > > > > > > been discussing and hearing about.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Comments, volunteers?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Rohiniranjan

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE

DIVINITY

> > AND

> > > > > RELISH

> > > > > > THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Hindu astrology Vedic astrology Free vedic

> > > > astrology

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web.

> > > > > > >

> > Terms

> > > > of

> > > > > > Service.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Mail

> > > > > > > Use Photomail to share photos without annoying

> > attachments.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > SURRENDER JOYFULLY TO THE WILL OF THE ULTIMATE DIVINITY

> AND

> > > > RELISH

> > > > > THE TASTE OF ABSOLUTE BLISS.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Hindu astrology Vedic astrology Free vedic

> > > astrology

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Visit your group "" on the web.

> > > > > >

> Terms

> > > of

> > > > > Service.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > What are the most popular cars? Find out at

Autos

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

February 19, 2006