the politics around Astrology

[Guest guest]

Following

up a thread on astrology on another forum, here are a few non technical aspects

regarding astrology, that do not have to do directly with the accuracy

of the subject. But before going ahead, let me clarify that I am not an

astrologer. I am not a scholar either - I am a Hindu and to me what

matters is the socio-cultural aspect. What is the relevance of astrology in life? Astrology

has limited relevance. It is not responsible for your fate, it is an

indicator. What will one do by knowing the future when he cannot change

it? However, astrology is not about averting future. It is about

channeling one's efforts suitably to good and bad times. And when put

in perspective, one can live without astrology. It only aids, it does

not substitute anything. However depending on many factors like their

exposure to astrology, their general tendency to believe in daiva or

ruju vartana, people rely on it to different degrees. Why do predictions fail? For a

variety of reasons, a few to mention: 1.

Some of the events can be overcome, some cannot be. When something is

inevitable, it is not told. That is not a failure of the astrologer but

only appears like he failed to predict it. It is human tendency to know

of good. Bad is not usually told - unless when there is a good chance

to avert it. 2. The inputs like place and time are wrong. This is

done for many reasons - either when they are not known or sometimes

deliberately to cook up a good chart. In that case it can be known and

verified against the major events of the life of the person. 3.

Many of the astrologers lack the experience - both in astrology and the

required mantra sakti. Since astrology is a combination of study,

experience and japa bala, accuracy is possible only when all these

match. Most of the times people do it as a past time and therefore the

required effort to learn does not go in. Why is astrology in rise? 1.

There is a raise of fatalism in Hindus. That is a general trend. Astrology is not the reason for it, it is an indicator. 2.

Dharma cintana is replaced by papa bheeti. The general Hindu approach

of doing karma and following dharma is suffering. Therefore the

tendency to escape karma phala is on the rise. However this is a

consequence of the former and not the cause. 3. Most of the

brahmins whose traditional profession is invalidated in the recent

times, see "astrology, performing santi and japa" as an alternate

profession (And this is how for reasons not debated so far, the attack

on "astrology" is a subtle attack on brahmins too. We might not see it,

but the enemy does). Added to this is the general response of people.

You go to someone and talk of a punya karya or service to vedic

knowledge, you get a shoe. You threaten him he has a bad grahacara,

he will shell down any amount for santi. So why pursue any veda, why

spend your life on something that does not fetch you livelihood! Thrive

on people's weakness, fulfill your swartha by appealing to their

swartha. Not an "evil", the "order of the day". However it is similar

to any other so called profession (Of course, it is no more limited to

brahmins and is seen as a money generation by many.). There are doctors

who care about patient's health, there are doctors who care more about

their pockets. Same with astrologers. And same with the client's

mentality too. There are paranoids who insist on tests and medication,

and so are people who insist on santis or whatever. The way it does not

make medicine a bad profession, it does not make astrology bad either.

It is all about the sense of proportion and relevance. For

this reason, people attacking astrology should see why it is becoming a

profession when it had never been. If genuinely interested in helping

they should put their efforts on restoring the economic and social

validity of pursuit of those knowledge forms whose invalidation is

resulting in this. Attacking the symptom is not going to really help.

On top of it, they are basically attacking someone's occupation - and

its result is not pleasant as we can see on our forum. Bhukti is more

important than scholarship or dispassionate search of truth after all! Validity and Refutation Most

astrologers are not Vedic scholars. Anyone who learns jyotisha learns

from a learned man, and gains the functional knowledge. He basically

gets initiated into mula mantras of adhisthana devatas of grahas,

lokapalakas and grahas. And he will, along with doing predictions, do

santis and so on. You go to him and say his graha mantra is not vedic,

he will tell you "This is vedic - that is what my guru told me and I am

doing it." He cannot tell you that they are found in Aruna patha or

somewhere else. So the debate of "Vedic authenticity" is out of place

with an astrologer. And those who are of scholarly temperament usually

abstain from talking over the fluid practical side of it. This fact is used to the hilt by many for

various reasons - either to invalidate the subject or with some other motive. Why astrology alone? If

the whole point is about papa bheeti and not developing ruju vartana or

daiva cintana, then why speak of astrology alone? Worship of siddha

purushas as a short-cut for ista purti instead of pradhana devatas,

graha japas, all these fall in the same category. Surprisingly, when it

comes to that, people actually second such efforts and not call them

undesirable. It is called undesirable only when it is about driven by

astrology. The way the required stress on niyama and tapas is diluted

through the semi and pseudo cults, and its larger impact on Hinduism is

rarely discussed and seldom criticized.

[Guest guest]

Dear Shankara Bharadwaj ji, Thanks for the informative mail.Love and regards,Sreenadh , ShankaraBharadwaj Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj wrote:>> > Following> up a thread on astrology on another forum, here are a few non technical aspects> regarding astrology, that do not have to do directly with the accuracy> of the subject. But before going ahead, let me clarify that I am not an> astrologer. I am not a scholar either - I am a Hindu and to me what> matters is the socio-cultural aspect. > > What is the relevance of astrology in life? > > Astrology> has limited relevance. It is not responsible for your fate, it is an> indicator. What will one do by knowing the future when he cannot change> it? However, astrology is not about averting future. It is about> channeling one's efforts suitably to good and bad times. And when put> in perspective, one can live without astrology. It only aids, it does> not substitute anything. However depending on many factors like their> exposure to astrology, their general tendency to believe in daiva or> ruju vartana, people rely on it to different degrees. > > Why do predictions fail? > For a variety of reasons, a few to mention: > 1.> Some of the events can be overcome, some cannot be. When something is> inevitable, it is not told. That is not a failure of the astrologer but> only appears like he failed to predict it. It is human tendency to know> of good. Bad is not usually told - unless when there is a good chance> to avert it. > 2. The inputs like place and time are wrong. This is> done for many reasons - either when they are not known or sometimes> deliberately to cook up a good chart. In that case it can be known and> verified against the major events of the life of the person. > 3.> Many of the astrologers lack the experience - both in astrology and the> required mantra sakti. Since astrology is a combination of study,> experience and japa bala, accuracy is possible only when all these> match. Most of the times people do it as a past time and therefore the> required effort to learn does not go in. > > Why is astrology in rise? > 1. There is a raise of fatalism in Hindus. That is a general trend. Astrology is not the reason for it, it is an indicator. > 2.> Dharma cintana is replaced by papa bheeti. The general Hindu approach> of doing karma and following dharma is suffering. Therefore the> tendency to escape karma phala is on the rise. However this is a> consequence of the former and not the cause. > 3. Most of the> brahmins whose traditional profession is invalidated in the recent> times, see "astrology, performing santi and japa" as an alternate> profession (And this is how for reasons not debated so far, the attack> on "astrology" is a subtle attack on brahmins too. We might not see it,> but the enemy does). Added to this is the general response of people.> You go to someone and talk of a punya karya or service to vedic> knowledge, you get a shoe. You threaten him he has a bad grahacara,> he will shell down any amount for santi. So why pursue any veda, why> spend your life on something that does not fetch you livelihood! Thrive> on people's weakness, fulfill your swartha by appealing to their> swartha. Not an "evil", the "order of the day". However it is similar> to any other so called profession (Of course, it is no more limited to> brahmins and is seen as a money generation by many.). There are doctors> who care about patient's health, there are doctors who care more about> their pockets. Same with astrologers. And same with the client's> mentality too. There are paranoids who insist on tests and medication,> and so are people who insist on santis or whatever. The way it does not> make medicine a bad profession, it does not make astrology bad either.> It is all about the sense of proportion and relevance. > > For> this reason, people attacking astrology should see why it is becoming a> profession when it had never been. If genuinely interested in helping> they should put their efforts on restoring the economic and social> validity of pursuit of those knowledge forms whose invalidation is> resulting in this. Attacking the symptom is not going to really help.> On top of it, they are basically attacking someone's occupation - and> its result is not pleasant as we can see on our forum. Bhukti is more> important than scholarship or dispassionate search of truth after all! > > Validity and Refutation > Most> astrologers are not Vedic scholars. Anyone who learns jyotisha learns> from a learned man, and gains the functional knowledge. He basically> gets initiated into mula mantras of adhisthana devatas of grahas,> lokapalakas and grahas. And he will, along with doing predictions, do> santis and so on. You go to him and say his graha mantra is not vedic,> he will tell you "This is vedic - that is what my guru told me and I am> doing it." He cannot tell you that they are found in Aruna patha or> somewhere else. So the debate of "Vedic authenticity" is out of place> with an astrologer. And those who are of scholarly temperament usually> abstain from talking over the fluid practical side of it. > > This fact is used to the hilt by many for various reasons - either to invalidate the subject or with some other motive. > > Why astrology alone? > If> the whole point is about papa bheeti and not developing ruju vartana or> daiva cintana, then why speak of astrology alone? Worship of siddha> purushas as a short-cut for ista purti instead of pradhana devatas,> graha japas, all these fall in the same category. Surprisingly, when it> comes to that, people actually second such efforts and not call them> undesirable. It is called undesirable only when it is about driven by> astrology. The way the required stress on niyama and tapas is diluted> through the semi and pseudo cults, and its larger impact on Hinduism is> rarely discussed and seldom criticized.>

[Guest guest]

Hare rama krishna

dear shankarabharadwaj ji

Thanks ,very good informativ and thought provoking mail

 

regrds sunil nair

om shreem mahalaxmai namah

, ShankaraBharadwaj Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj wrote:>> > Following> up a thread on astrology on another forum, here are a few non technical aspects> regarding astrology, that do not have to do directly with the accuracy> of the subject. But before going ahead, let me clarify that I am not an> astrologer. I am not a scholar either - I am a Hindu and to me what> matters is the socio-cultural aspect. > > What is the relevance of astrology in life? > > Astrology> has limited relevance. It is not responsible for your fate, it is an> indicator. What will one do by knowing the future when he cannot change> it? However, astrology is not about averting future. It is about> channeling one's efforts suitably to good and bad times. And when put> in perspective, one can live without astrology. It only aids, it does> not substitute anything. However depending on many factors like their> exposure to astrology, their general tendency to believe in daiva or> ruju vartana, people rely on it to different degrees. > > Why do predictions fail? > For a variety of reasons, a few to mention: > 1.> Some of the events can be overcome, some cannot be. When something is> inevitable, it is not told. That is not a failure of the astrologer but> only appears like he failed to predict it. It is human tendency to know> of good. Bad is not usually told - unless when there is a good chance> to avert it. > 2. The inputs like place and time are wrong. This is> done for many reasons - either when they are not known or sometimes> deliberately to cook up a good chart. In that case it can be known and> verified against the major events of the life of the person. > 3.> Many of the astrologers lack the experience - both in astrology and the> required mantra sakti. Since astrology is a combination of study,> experience and japa bala, accuracy is possible only when all these> match. Most of the times people do it as a past time and therefore the> required effort to learn does not go in. > > Why is astrology in rise? > 1. There is a raise of fatalism in Hindus. That is a general trend. Astrology is not the reason for it, it is an indicator. > 2.> Dharma cintana is replaced by papa bheeti. The general Hindu approach> of doing karma and following dharma is suffering. Therefore the> tendency to escape karma phala is on the rise. However this is a> consequence of the former and not the cause. > 3. Most of the> brahmins whose traditional profession is invalidated in the recent> times, see "astrology, performing santi and japa" as an alternate> profession (And this is how for reasons not debated so far, the attack> on "astrology" is a subtle attack on brahmins too. We might not see it,> but the enemy does). Added to this is the general response of people.> You go to someone and talk of a punya karya or service to vedic> knowledge, you get a shoe. You threaten him he has a bad grahacara,> he will shell down any amount for santi. So why pursue any veda, why> spend your life on something that does not fetch you livelihood! Thrive> on people's weakness, fulfill your swartha by appealing to their> swartha. Not an "evil", the "order of the day". However it is similar> to any other so called profession (Of course, it is no more limited to> brahmins and is seen as a money generation by many.). There are doctors> who care about patient's health, there are doctors who care more about> their pockets. Same with astrologers. And same with the client's> mentality too. There are paranoids who insist on tests and medication,> and so are people who insist on santis or whatever. The way it does not> make medicine a bad profession, it does not make astrology bad either.> It is all about the sense of proportion and relevance. > > For> this reason, people attacking astrology should see why it is becoming a> profession when it had never been. If genuinely interested in helping> they should put their efforts on restoring the economic and social> validity of pursuit of those knowledge forms whose invalidation is> resulting in this. Attacking the symptom is not going to really help.> On top of it, they are basically attacking someone's occupation - and> its result is not pleasant as we can see on our forum. Bhukti is more> important than scholarship or dispassionate search of truth after all! > > Validity and Refutation > Most> astrologers are not Vedic scholars. Anyone who learns jyotisha learns> from a learned man, and gains the functional knowledge. He basically> gets initiated into mula mantras of adhisthana devatas of grahas,> lokapalakas and grahas. And he will, along with doing predictions, do> santis and so on. You go to him and say his graha mantra is not vedic,> he will tell you "This is vedic - that is what my guru told me and I am> doing it." He cannot tell you that they are found in Aruna patha or> somewhere else. So the debate of "Vedic authenticity" is out of place> with an astrologer. And those who are of scholarly temperament usually> abstain from talking over the fluid practical side of it. > > This fact is used to the hilt by many for various reasons - either to invalidate the subject or with some other motive. > > Why astrology alone? > If> the whole point is about papa bheeti and not developing ruju vartana or> daiva cintana, then why speak of astrology alone? Worship of siddha> purushas as a short-cut for ista purti instead of pradhana devatas,> graha japas, all these fall in the same category. Surprisingly, when it> comes to that, people actually second such efforts and not call them> undesirable. It is called undesirable only when it is about driven by> astrology. The way the required stress on niyama and tapas is diluted> through the semi and pseudo cults, and its larger impact on Hinduism is> rarely discussed and seldom criticized.>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sri Prashant,

 

" > most of what u brought out here seems to true but needs more

factors that

> have been missed out "

 

The intent of the post is to touch the broad areas that have to do

with astrology, and my intention was not really to delve into the

sociological changes. Therefore I referred to those as " dharma

cintana " , " daiva cintana " , " ruju vartana " , " papa bheeti " and " karma

phala " . I believe they cover the overall change in attitude of people

- individual or social. I left it at that because delving into it will

make it too lengthy and I may not be able to really complete the post

 

" > 7 astrology is less Brahaminical as u said it used topart of every

learned

> member in the oldertimes, except that they took the word from a

Brahmin more

> sacredly, "

 

The point is not whether brahmins alone knew astrology. In general

astrology was not an exclusive profession - though it has always been

a specialized subject. When the vedic professions were invalidated by

the British, it was those brahmins who started moving into this

subject and made this a profession.

 

 

 

, " astro desk "

<astro.prashantkumar wrote:

>

> Dear SB Khandavalli,

>

> most of what u brought out here seems to true but needs more factors

that

> have been missed out

>

> 1. the decline of the family as an instution

> 2. decline in value system no question of give and take respect

leave alone

> respect ur elders.

> 3. no respect to ur gurus right from kindergarten to PHd levels

> 4. the decline of joint familes where elders in the family did more

good and

> some harm [interference or control and guding, counselling younger

> ones=depends on ur ego to listen to them or not many were good some very

> autocratic]

> 5 formost the above 4 it is rise in materialism over other areas of

> importance like character, self esteem, papa bheeti, shradha, bhakti

vidya,

> vinaya

> 6 the rise in TV audience earlier cinema has ruined many of the

above areas

> right from an Advt to program content it is glorifying bad

behaviour, the

> acid attackson rejected lovers is a casein point

> 7 astrology is less Brahaminical as u said it used topart of every

learned

> member in the oldertimes, except that they took the word from a

Brahmin more

> sacredly, u could not take them for a ride as they kew the

scriptures too

> if u see 3 out of castes were taught various shastras. more relevant

to them

> in detail.

> it is no comercialism that has ruined astrology the lack of social

support

> systems like in the past a village head or a wellto do man inthe village

> used to patronise them if not the rulers then.

> NOW IT IS A SIN to talk of anything hindu IF THIS CAME fropm West

Asia, or

> Europe or America it is sacred no doubt.

>

> we have no respect for our own culture, heritage, legacies,

knowledge as w r

> taught history writen by british first then by our own comunist

party men

> who glorify all invaders and demean our own people. the entire TV news

> channels and news papers r run by leftists and ppl who quit them and

joined

> others

> journalism is more like a personal view than a NEWS reposring giving

their

> hatred and contempt for Hidnu lives issues

>

> no one can ever talk of a Hindu propbel be it inKashmir or varanasi

pilgrim

> benefits, travel temple modifications upgradations

> Hundi collections from teples feed the minorities who also get huge

> donations from West asia and christian missionaries, Hindu temple

funds r

> wasted on them too

>

> if we can spread, sustain Hindu temples languages, vedic literature,

teach

> sanskrit at some level to all children of India we can say we hve done

> something else by another 15-25 yrs Hinduism is almost a dead

religion with

> widespread conversion by the church AND ALSO RAPID RISE IN Islamic

> pouplation. HINDUS ALSO HAVE TO SHARE THE BLAME, PROTECT THEIR FUNDS

THEIR

> INSTUTIONS BY PATRONAGE.

>

> Hindus have no time for visting their temples either unlike the

minorities

> sadly

>

> ANYWAY 2 RELIGIOUS WILL SURVIVE TERRORISM AND MATERIALISM

>

> Prashant

>

>

> On 1/3/09, ShankaraBharadwaj Khandavalli <shankarabharadwaj

> wrote:

> >

> > Following up a thread on astrology on another forum, here are a

few non

> > technical aspects regarding astrology, that do not have to do

directly with

> > the accuracy of the subject. But before going ahead, let me

clarify that I

> > am not an astrologer. I am not a scholar either - I am a Hindu and

to me

> > what matters is the socio-cultural aspect.

> >

> > What is the relevance of astrology in life?

> > Astrology has limited relevance. It is not responsible for your

fate, it is

> > an indicator. What will one do by knowing the future when he

cannot change

> > it? However, astrology is not about averting future. It is about

channeling

> > one's efforts suitably to good and bad times. And when put in

perspective,

> > one can live without astrology. It only aids, it does not substitute

> > anything. However depending on many factors like their exposure to

> > astrology, their general tendency to believe in daiva or ruju vartana,

> > people rely on it to different degrees.

> >

> > Why do predictions fail?

> > For a variety of reasons, a few to mention:

> > 1. Some of the events can be overcome, some cannot be. When

something is

> > inevitable, it is not told. That is not a failure of the

astrologer but only

> > appears like he failed to predict it. It is human tendency to know

of good.

> > Bad is not usually told - unless when there is a good chance to

avert it.

> > 2. The inputs like place and time are wrong. This is done for many

reasons

> > - either when they are not known or sometimes deliberately to cook

up a good

> > chart. In that case it can be known and verified against the major

events of

> > the life of the person.

> > 3. Many of the astrologers lack the experience - both in astrology

and the

> > required mantra sakti. Since astrology is a combination of study,

experience

> > and japa bala, accuracy is possible only when all these match.

Most of the

> > times people do it as a past time and therefore the required

effort to learn

> > does not go in.

> >

> > Why is astrology in rise?

> > 1. There is a raise of fatalism in Hindus. That is a general trend.

> > Astrology is not the reason for it, it is an indicator.

> > 2. Dharma cintana is replaced by papa bheeti. The general Hindu

approach of

> > doing karma and following dharma is suffering. Therefore the

tendency to

> > escape karma phala is on the rise. However this is a consequence

of the

> > former and not the cause.

> > 3. Most of the brahmins whose traditional profession is

invalidated in the

> > recent times, see " astrology, performing santi and japa " as an

alternate

> > profession (And this is how for reasons not debated so far, the

attack on

> > " astrology " is a subtle attack on brahmins too. We might not see

it, but the

> > enemy does). Added to this is the general response of people. You

go to

> > someone and talk of a punya karya or service to vedic knowledge,

you get a

> > shoe. You threaten him he has a bad grahacara, he will shell

down any

> > amount for santi. So why pursue any veda, why spend your life on

something

> > that does not fetch you livelihood! Thrive on people's weakness,

fulfill

> > your swartha by appealing to their swartha. Not an " evil " , the

" order of the

> > day " . However it is similar to any other so called profession (Of

course, it

> > is no more limited to brahmins and is seen as a money generation

by many.).

> > There are doctors who care about patient's health, there are

doctors who

> > care more about their pockets. Same with astrologers. And same

with the

> > client's mentality too. There are paranoids who insist on tests and

> > medication, and so are people who insist on santis or whatever.

The way it

> > does not make medicine a bad profession, it does not make

astrology bad

> > either. It is all about the sense of proportion and relevance.

> >

> > For this reason, people attacking astrology should see why it is

becoming a

> > profession when it had never been. If genuinely interested in

helping they

> > should put their efforts on restoring the economic and social

validity of

> > pursuit of those knowledge forms whose invalidation is resulting

in this.

> > Attacking the symptom is not going to really help. On top of it,

they are

> > basically attacking someone's occupation - and its result is not

pleasant as

> > we can see on our forum. Bhukti is more important than scholarship or

> > dispassionate search of truth after all!

> >

> > Validity and Refutation

> > Most astrologers are not Vedic scholars. Anyone who learns

jyotisha learns

> > from a learned man, and gains the functional knowledge. He

basically gets

> > initiated into mula mantras of adhisthana devatas of grahas,

lokapalakas and

> > grahas. And he will, along with doing predictions, do santis and

so on. You

> > go to him and say his graha mantra is not vedic, he will tell you

" This is

> > vedic - that is what my guru told me and I am doing it. " He cannot

tell you

> > that they are found in Aruna patha or somewhere else. So the debate of

> > " Vedic authenticity " is out of place with an astrologer. And those

who are

> > of scholarly temperament usually abstain from talking over the fluid

> > practical side of it.

> >

> > This fact is used to the hilt by many for various reasons - either to

> > invalidate the subject or with some other motive.

> >

> > Why astrology alone?

> > If the whole point is about papa bheeti and not developing ruju

vartana or

> > daiva cintana, then why speak of astrology alone? Worship of

siddha purushas

> > as a short-cut for ista purti instead of pradhana devatas, graha

japas, all

> > these fall in the same category. Surprisingly, when it comes to

that, people

> > actually second such efforts and not call them undesirable. It is

called

> > undesirable only when it is about driven by astrology. The way the

required

> > stress on niyama and tapas is diluted through the semi and pseudo

cults, and

> > its larger impact on Hinduism is rarely discussed and seldom

criticized.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>