Yes, there are *many* bad astrologers. I read an article a couple years
about by an astrologer who asserted that many beginning astrologers are
sometimes better at interpretations than experienced astrologers. Why?
Because astrologer because tangled up in the "rules.". Beginners tend to
use their intuition as they don't know the "rules" yet. But doing
astrology mechanically by the "rules" would be as bad as writing a piece
of music based entirely on the rules of music theory and composition.
Those rules are "tools" and meant to help you out of a bind when writing
a tune. Likewise astrology is a form of "divination" like palmistry.
We don't know how it works but it does work in the hands of someone with
intuition and the ability to "divine" meaning out of abstraction.
In our computer age it is now possible to examine recurring patterns
that took place over centuries. One recurring pattern that is being
studied shows an 80 year recurring cycle that expresses itself through
our global politics. Think what was taking place 80 years ago and
compare it with now. This cycle has been shown to go back about 900
years. Predictive astrology is a primitive method of mapping these
cycles. In general it is a "weather report" that provides the
propensity for events happening.
I know Chakrapani and he's also looked at my horoscope in one of his
group sessions. Blurted out that I should have been a doctor because of
the presence of Jupiter in my first house. Interesting because I have
no problem understanding medical and biochemical principles but if I had
chosen that field I would have gone the research rather than clinical
route. But I have a strong third house ruled by Jupiter which drove me
into the arts. I even regard computer programming as an artform and not
a science.
The discussion here is hilarious as we have a bunch of blind men
commenting on the elephant called astrology. :-D
On 02/28/2015 05:54 AM, feste37 wrote:
That's interesting. I have never consulted one of the MMY-approved
jyotishees, and from what I have heard they are not that great. I'm
sorry that they didn't do a good job for you. I can assure you that
the readings I am referring to did not fit your description of "feeble
character analysis." They were detailed and accurate and very useful.
I recommend Chakrapani in LA as one of them. At one point he said
something to me that was dead-on accurate and I said "I didn't think
anyone else knew that about me!" He just laughed. I wonder if the MMY
jyotishees are kind of mass produced, so to speak, not people for whom
the study of astrology is a lifetime's calling.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote :
In my experience over the past 35 years, and I have said so on this
board more than once, astrology is the best tool for
self-understanding that there is—at least, the best I have found. I'm
sorry for these scientific types whose minds are so closed. I wonder
whether any of them have ever had their natal chart done by a
competent astrologer.
Well I have. From Marshy's favourite jyotishee apparently. It was
rubbish. But then you might say he just wasn't a very competent
astrologer. The funny thing was everyone on the course I was attending
thought he was great until I started pointing out the obvious
shortcomings in what he was telling people. Most of them were being
told the same thing and it was all so India-centric, with advice to
get jobs as ticket-wallas and such like, that it was embarrassing. But
not to the devotees until I opened my mouth, they thought it was
great. I wonder what you would have said about his skills?
I only went along for the reading because my girlfriend wanted a
compatibility chart done. He said we were perfect except for
occasional disagreements (wow) and should take care communicating. He
told her she would take a journey up a great river and write a book
about science. She didn't on both counts. He told me I'd be very
wealthy in middle age. Not so far but I don't give much of a toss
anyway. I'll let you know if it comes to pass.
The rest of it was feeble character analysis such as you would get in
any 5 cent gipsy tent at the local fair "You are kind but like to say
what you think" etc... See Rorshach for further details.
The only time astrology interests me is when they make claims about
these periods in life that we supposedly go through. Things people in
the TMO say like "I'm in gurmuntha and so can't be expected to be
successful just now" this is all checkable and I was disappointed that
it didn't match up. It seems more likely that we just cherry pick
things from life to say that we agree with the planetary diagnosis and
if it doesn't work we can blame our karma. I've heard it all.
I would doubt it. Astrology does not get such high marks from me for
predicting the future, but that's not what I have used it for.
Astrology can tell you a huge amount about who you are. The first
reading I ever had was from an American astrologer named Howard
Sasportas. He also happened to be a TM teacher. He was absolutely
brilliant. I will always be grateful to him for the way he gave me an
understanding of myself through astrology. (And as it happens, his
predictions for the future were pretty spot on too.)
So his predictions of the future were good but you don't think it gets
high marks generally? I don't get it, it either is or it isn't good at
something. How can it be good for you but not me? I'll tell you, I
think it depends rather more on the intuition of the astrologer than
it does on any planetary influence - not that there is any - It's just
pot luck if something ties up. And it depends what it is, something
that's quite likely to happen like getting a new job if you've been
looking for one.
Out of the blue stuff is impossible to predict but it doesn't stop the
TMO claiming that it can. I remember they used to publish a list of
predictions for the year but abandoned it after 9/11. I used to keep
them and check them at the end of the year,I once asked a "higher-up"
how come none of it ever came true and he claimed that our meditation
affected world events through the unified field so it was bound to be
inaccurate. I further pondered why they didn't just include the
revised events as part of the original prediction but that met with a
stony look.
This is my point, if you accept it you tend not to ask too much of it
- certainly not how it might work. If you want to get to the bottom of
it you find it all unravels pretty quickly under scrutiny and that's
before we get to the actual behaviour of bodies in the solar system
and how our knowledge of what they are has changed over the years.
I also remember the TMO changed the birthchart requirements for a
while so you had to include both your parents and grandparents birth
details before they'd attempt a reading because it was too inaccurate
otherwise. What sort of sussed, time-tested science has to do things
like this? Why are there so many different types that each get a
poo-pooing from each other? It was sstill inaccurate BTW and they went
back to the old method because there's more money in it.
Far from being closed minded I know how to draw up birthcharts - or I
used to anyway, probably still got the book somewhere - but I
dismissed it almost immediately as it's much more about the intuition
of the person reading the chart than it is about planets and stuff.
Marshy always said that a computer would make the best astrologer as
there would be no misinterpretation of physical principles. But he
came out with more crap per day than most of us manage in a lifetime,
but it was cool sounding crap so he got away with it because no one
ever asked difficult questions.
The guy you saw was probably sincere, the guy on the TMO course was
too but he was crap and didn't know enough about western lifestyles to
be able to give us enough soft soap to make us think he was getting
some profound insight via existential means.
But that doesn't mean astrology doesn't tell us something about
ourselves at all, I think it's fascinating that the positions of
planets - the word means "little wanderer" - could ever have been a
contributing factor in human life. I find it even more fascinating
that people still believe it considering what we know about what they
really are and where we really are. To hold onto that ancient belief
of connection between lights in the sky that move in a different way
to the other lights in the sky is actually kinda sweet. I think we are
pattern making creatures that look out for connections between
unrelated events - star movements, sheep entrails, where the cow
decides to sleep - and assume a link that doesn't exist so that next
time one event happens we assume the other will too.
Astrology is as human as it comes really but, like all attempts at
soothsaying, it's a thought error due to some superstitious and
insecure need for certainty or to know that what happens in life isn't
our fault but part of some great cosmic dance of the planets. Or even
that we can change it with a prayer or some good deeds if we know it's
coming.
I suspect that the overriding principle of the universe is really a
process called "Shit Happens" but I convert for evidence.
As for the sceptics, I am reminded of the remark attributed to Isaac
Newton when the astronomer Halley tweaked him about his belief in
astrology. "Sir, I have studied it; you have not."
Make of it what you will:
Isaac Newton and Astrology
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/%7Egent0113/astrology/newton.htm>
Isaac Newton and Astrology
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/%7Egent0113/astrology/newton.htm>
View on www.staff.science.uu.nl
<http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/%7Egent0113/astrology/newton.htm>
Preview by Yahoo
