Jyotish (readings and reading seekers -- the agenda)

February 20, 2006

Krishnan ji,

Great minds think alike! I was thinking of the same topic and even

thinking of posting something, but obviously you aced me!

{DISCLAIMER FOR SOME OF THE REALLY 'SERIOUS' MEMBERS: Readers,

please do not file the above away as proof that I am egoistic as I

have been perceived by some and accused at times -- I am a big

kidder, except when I am reading someone's chart, okay?}

Krishnanji, I do not think anyone here or anywhere has the

resources, time or organizational saavy to create such a regulatory

body that can oversee standards in astrology. For crying out loud,

there have arisen a whole cottage industry of academies and little

universities and foundations and so on all over the place that give

certificates in astrology and jyotish! Each is confident and claimes

brazenly that their's is the khalis ghee and all the rest

are 'margarine', bad for the heart and all three humors!

Points about 'seekers' and "recipients" as Ashutoshji so beautifully

described are undeniably true. Now, since we all are sinners (or why

else are we here in this reality, day in and day out, without that

circular tubelight shining above our heads as is seen in pictures of

prophets and saints?), frustrated as I have equally been at times

about the insensitive nature of some of the feedback that was

received -- I took that always as an exercise in detachment. My

periodic someshat passionate but sincere outlashings not to such

responses individually are proof of how well(?) I am doing in the

detachment department ;-) -- Actually, I view my outbursts as a

cumulative reaction. When the dust accumulates to visible levels,

one is tempted to use pressurized air to blow it, but really the

dust then just settles elsewhere and I don't mean other jyotish

groups {think about that analogy!}. Obviously we need a more

efficient dusting program, internet-wide!

There are many apparent reasons for "seeking" and 'receiving', some

being: genuine, out of jealousy, just for testing, skimming off of

others and sometimes, yes, just to make someone waste their time

(those who post requests but never return to collect readings -- let

alone provide feedback; mind you, there could be other reasons for

the non-return also, I admit).

When I advise someone about a remedial procedure, I remind them

often about not doing a remedial in the mindset of a 'bargain' with

God or an exchange, or a trade. That somehow reduces the spiritual

potential/karmic potential of such an activity and increases the

likelihood of failure and frustration with jyotishi and jyotish in

the mind of the nativity. However, such is the perceived reality of

most seekers that they begin to see these remedials, essentially

spiritual, as a product, with the 'consumer' mentality creeping into

even their spiritual activity. People from Indian culture, sorry to

say, tend to have that kind of approach more than westerners -- for

reasons I would not go into here. This does not apply to all

individuals from Indian and similar cultures, by the way, so no

flames please!

I have come to a slightly different stance through all these years

of good and bad feelings, frustrations and occasional triumphs

through internet readings. Something most jyotishis would shy away

from thinking and hence relegated to the subconcious. Is it altruism

that we astrologers are doing this 'seva' for? OUR collective though

generally unexpressed (suppressed) frustration indicates otherwise.

Even if we are seeing this as some sort of measure towards reducing

our own personal karma, we are guilty of the very mentality that we

advice our clients, paying or not, to guard against! This is where

the adage of "Physician -- Heal thyself!" applies.

And the way this shows, this stance of ours -- is when we are

criticised directly or more likely tangentially, subtly. If it

flusters us, whether we succumb and respond to it or not, then it is

pointing out an area of a potential for 'correction' in our

framework, in our personal selves. In this sense, the critic is

indeed turning out to be a 'friend' with a beneficial outcome for

us, if we so choose to perceive it. The individual who God (?) has

cast in that role may not realize and may even think that he or she

has just made a clever argument, but if we focus on the message and

not the messenger, and if we can -- the SOURCE of and the REASON for

the message, we can end up being so much better.

{And this consideration applies to this message too, even if not

intended so, when I began typing it!}

<<offered with nothing but love, respect, admiration to all those

human beings who take the time out to help>>

rohiniranjan

, vattem krishnan

<bursar_99 wrote:

>

> Dear Friends,

> I think personal attributes to astrologers and statements

like: "astrologers egoistic about their abilities unlike

> > doctors who never feel bad" are not good for any pallet

> Code of conduct for the seekers having problems and the soothe

sayer willing to devite time are essential .Neevr it can be one

sided.

> Secondly giving answers,calrifying issues is no doubt service

and to what extent with how much honesty on either side.The group

and the site is basically to do as much as it can.Certainly not at

the cost of basic decency.

> My experience shows,members are never satisfied with the advices

even after consulting variety of Astrologers still find that they

are not satisfied with what they are experiencing.In all such

conditions is to allege that jyotish is not scientific and jyotishis

are bad.The scales being used for measuring the strength of jyotish

as well as jyotishis becomes lopsideds and is only to humiliate the

people involved.

> For jyotish to be achieving the goals and jyotish to do their

job well statement of facts,sincerity in addressing problems and

faith are primary requisites.In most of the occassions querants pass

judgements to fulfil their own pleasures.Infact the group is

approached to test credentials but never to resolve the issues.

> If what is intended as an organsied attempt to come up:the

approach has to be simple and staight forward and the environment is

of sharing.

> Infact I was always concerned with now and here situations which

leads to "jyotish scene in flux"

> Astrology,a natural study of cosmic effects has no doubt has to

gear up with "multiple

> variables being tossed around,".These issues can be put in order

with a close perspect and effort to see" the dust has yet to

settle"is veru much possible.her mutual interest ahve to

synchronise "a bit"but not as a driver and driven to go around

> Before any such organized attempt could be contemplated like

minded people have to come together and note down the issues and

come up through analytical and practical methods.This would be

possible (as you suggest)when you are ready to look through plai

glasses.

> krishnan

>

> rohiniranjan <rrgb wrote:

> Shantala ji,

>

> You raise some very good points, and some practical and some

> impractical suggestions :-)

>

> If astrologers are so egoistic (some interpret that as being

> defensive and insecure, as in taking up challenges like that) kind

> of like medical doctors were at one point in time many years ago

> when a second opinion was not as easily accepted. I have

experienced

> that generation of doctors so I speak from first hand experience!

> The modern astrologers, particularly the younger generation (20-

40)

> are more tolerant and aware of the shortcomings and also because

> many of these are otherwise professionals, are gainfully employed

> and productive even outside of astrological area of expertise,

have

> strong educational background (and not just in karmakand and other

> priestly skills -- not that that is a disqualification of any

sort)

> and therefore less likely to have an axe to grind. Unfortunately,

> most of them do not have too much time to really build a strong

> castle for astrology. The astrology professionals, earning a

living

> from astrology, are capable but must work hard at astrology to

keep

> the lamp burning and so also have no time.

>

> That is the impractical part! Long ago, some 20 years ago, western

> tropical astrologers had many such attempts at quizzes and blind

> testing, like in the Hamilton Project and several others recorded

in

> Nias and Eysenck's masterful presentation (Astrology science or

> superstition). With the jyotish scene in flux with multiple

> variables being tossed around, the dust has yet to settle a bit

> before such an organized attempt would be possible as you suggest.

>

> Until then, let us all honestly and accurately record what we see

> and let us ask questions, even if those cause discomfort to

someone

> essentially good and even elderly. This would not be disrespectful

> in my opinion. Not asking would!

>

> RR

>

> , "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

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

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.

>

> Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, &

more on new and used cars.

>

February 20, 2006

dear friend

in your concluding paragraph you mentioned that the critics are

friends and if we take their criticism positively to improve better,

we can deliver better. well said in positive language.

one can criticise a person who is serving food freely by setting up

a bhandara or langar. can the same critic similarly questions a

restaurant where admission rights are reserved. no, because the

critic who knows the value of money pretty well (by thronging to

collect free food) dare not question the person selling the food.

you subtly mentioned that god is there in every critic or in every

human being. let me tell you and other learnt members that if a

person has realised and achieved self-realisation and god-

realisation he/she would always be in a giving position. all

persons seeking at the receiving end or the unrealised lot. here

comes the noble service. at least in my experience, i have made

more than hundred seekers turn into realised people who have started

knowing only giving.

all the givers here are to help, facilitate, share their little

knoweldge and make the seekers to realise and improve thier

positions. if the querent is intersted in realising this,it is fine

or else liberty of performing never ending karma is always there.

with best wishes

arjun

, "jyowtishi" <jyotishi

wrote:

>

> Krishnan ji,

>

> Great minds think alike! I was thinking of the same topic and even

> thinking of posting something, but obviously you aced me!

> {DISCLAIMER FOR SOME OF THE REALLY 'SERIOUS' MEMBERS: Readers,

> please do not file the above away as proof that I am egoistic as I

> have been perceived by some and accused at times -- I am a big

> kidder, except when I am reading someone's chart, okay?}

>

> Krishnanji, I do not think anyone here or anywhere has the

> resources, time or organizational saavy to create such a

regulatory

> body that can oversee standards in astrology. For crying out loud,

> there have arisen a whole cottage industry of academies and little

> universities and foundations and so on all over the place that

give

> certificates in astrology and jyotish! Each is confident and

claimes

> brazenly that their's is the khalis ghee and all the rest

> are 'margarine', bad for the heart and all three humors!

>

> Points about 'seekers' and "recipients" as Ashutoshji so

beautifully

> described are undeniably true. Now, since we all are sinners (or

why

> else are we here in this reality, day in and day out, without that

> circular tubelight shining above our heads as is seen in pictures

of

> prophets and saints?), frustrated as I have equally been at times

> about the insensitive nature of some of the feedback that was

> received -- I took that always as an exercise in detachment. My

> periodic someshat passionate but sincere outlashings not to such

> responses individually are proof of how well(?) I am doing in the

> detachment department ;-) -- Actually, I view my outbursts as a

> cumulative reaction. When the dust accumulates to visible levels,

> one is tempted to use pressurized air to blow it, but really the

> dust then just settles elsewhere and I don't mean other jyotish

> groups {think about that analogy!}. Obviously we need a more

> efficient dusting program, internet-wide!

>

> There are many apparent reasons for "seeking" and 'receiving',

some

> being: genuine, out of jealousy, just for testing, skimming off of

> others and sometimes, yes, just to make someone waste their time

> (those who post requests but never return to collect readings --

let

> alone provide feedback; mind you, there could be other reasons for

> the non-return also, I admit).

>

> When I advise someone about a remedial procedure, I remind them

> often about not doing a remedial in the mindset of a 'bargain'

with

> God or an exchange, or a trade. That somehow reduces the spiritual

> potential/karmic potential of such an activity and increases the

> likelihood of failure and frustration with jyotishi and jyotish in

> the mind of the nativity. However, such is the perceived reality

of

> most seekers that they begin to see these remedials, essentially

> spiritual, as a product, with the 'consumer' mentality creeping

into

> even their spiritual activity. People from Indian culture, sorry

to

> say, tend to have that kind of approach more than westerners --

for

> reasons I would not go into here. This does not apply to all

> individuals from Indian and similar cultures, by the way, so no

> flames please!

>

> I have come to a slightly different stance through all these years

> of good and bad feelings, frustrations and occasional triumphs

> through internet readings. Something most jyotishis would shy away

> from thinking and hence relegated to the subconcious. Is it

altruism

> that we astrologers are doing this 'seva' for? OUR collective

though

> generally unexpressed (suppressed) frustration indicates

otherwise.

> Even if we are seeing this as some sort of measure towards

reducing

> our own personal karma, we are guilty of the very mentality that

we

> advice our clients, paying or not, to guard against! This is where

> the adage of "Physician -- Heal thyself!" applies.

>

> And the way this shows, this stance of ours -- is when we are

> criticised directly or more likely tangentially, subtly. If it

> flusters us, whether we succumb and respond to it or not, then it

is

> pointing out an area of a potential for 'correction' in our

> framework, in our personal selves. In this sense, the critic is

> indeed turning out to be a 'friend' with a beneficial outcome for

> us, if we so choose to perceive it. The individual who God (?) has

> cast in that role may not realize and may even think that he or

she

> has just made a clever argument, but if we focus on the message

and

> not the messenger, and if we can -- the SOURCE of and the REASON

for

> the message, we can end up being so much better.

>

> {And this consideration applies to this message too, even if not

> intended so, when I began typing it!}

>

> <<offered with nothing but love, respect, admiration to all those

> human beings who take the time out to help>>

>

> rohiniranjan

>

> , vattem krishnan

> <bursar_99@> wrote:

> >

> > Dear Friends,

> > I think personal attributes to astrologers and statements

> like: "astrologers egoistic about their abilities unlike

> > > doctors who never feel bad" are not good for any pallet

> > Code of conduct for the seekers having problems and the soothe

> sayer willing to devite time are essential .Neevr it can be one

> sided.

> > Secondly giving answers,calrifying issues is no doubt service

> and to what extent with how much honesty on either side.The group

> and the site is basically to do as much as it can.Certainly not at

> the cost of basic decency.

> > My experience shows,members are never satisfied with the

advices

> even after consulting variety of Astrologers still find that they

> are not satisfied with what they are experiencing.In all such

> conditions is to allege that jyotish is not scientific and

jyotishis

> are bad.The scales being used for measuring the strength of

jyotish

> as well as jyotishis becomes lopsideds and is only to humiliate

the

> people involved.

> > For jyotish to be achieving the goals and jyotish to do their

> job well statement of facts,sincerity in addressing problems and

> faith are primary requisites.In most of the occassions querants

pass

> judgements to fulfil their own pleasures.Infact the group is

> approached to test credentials but never to resolve the issues.

> > If what is intended as an organsied attempt to come up:the

> approach has to be simple and staight forward and the environment

is

> of sharing.

> > Infact I was always concerned with now and here situations

which

> leads to "jyotish scene in flux"

> > Astrology,a natural study of cosmic effects has no doubt has

to

> gear up with "multiple

> > variables being tossed around,".These issues can be put in order

> with a close perspect and effort to see" the dust has yet to

> settle"is veru much possible.her mutual interest ahve to

> synchronise "a bit"but not as a driver and driven to go around

> > Before any such organized attempt could be contemplated like

> minded people have to come together and note down the issues and

> come up through analytical and practical methods.This would be

> possible (as you suggest)when you are ready to look through plai

> glasses.

> > krishnan

> >

> > rohiniranjan <rrgb@> wrote:

> > Shantala ji,

> >

> > You raise some very good points, and some practical and some

> > impractical suggestions :-)

> >

> > If astrologers are so egoistic (some interpret that as being

> > defensive and insecure, as in taking up challenges like that)

kind

> > of like medical doctors were at one point in time many years ago

> > when a second opinion was not as easily accepted. I have

> experienced

> > that generation of doctors so I speak from first hand

experience!

> > The modern astrologers, particularly the younger generation (20-

> 40)

> > are more tolerant and aware of the shortcomings and also because

> > many of these are otherwise professionals, are gainfully

employed

> > and productive even outside of astrological area of expertise,

> have

> > strong educational background (and not just in karmakand and

other

> > priestly skills -- not that that is a disqualification of any

> sort)

> > and therefore less likely to have an axe to grind.

Unfortunately,

> > most of them do not have too much time to really build a strong

> > castle for astrology. The astrology professionals, earning a

> living

> > from astrology, are capable but must work hard at astrology to

> keep

> > the lamp burning and so also have no time.

> >

> > That is the impractical part! Long ago, some 20 years ago,

western

> > tropical astrologers had many such attempts at quizzes and blind

> > testing, like in the Hamilton Project and several others

recorded

> in

> > Nias and Eysenck's masterful presentation (Astrology science or

> > superstition). With the jyotish scene in flux with multiple

> > variables being tossed around, the dust has yet to settle a bit

> > before such an organized attempt would be possible as you

suggest.

> >

> > Until then, let us all honestly and accurately record what we

see

> > and let us ask questions, even if those cause discomfort to

> someone

> > essentially good and even elderly. This would not be

disrespectful

> > in my opinion. Not asking would!

> >

> > RR

> >

> > , "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

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> > 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.

> >

> > Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, &

> more on new and used cars.

> >

>

February 20, 2006

Dear Arjunji and list members,

This thread has been an eye opener in itself and

forces me to think that there is definitely something

wrong somewhere. Unfortunately I could not voice my

veiws on the same earlier.

But as I think more deeply into it, I realise that

infact there is no problem at all!! As a person

pursuing astrology as a serious hobby only and not as

a profession with a clear conscience, I had always

felt that giving astrlogical advise free of cost had

always been much more difficult than advising with a

fees charged.

What actually happens is that the member here give

free readings, spending all their time, money &

energy. Thier intention is very clear & noble and that

is to give the honest suggestion/advise. They do it in

laguage that is as straight forward as thier intention

is, whereas if a person goes to an astrologer who has

vested interests also will always try to please his

client. And that is treally hurting the astrology. If

you give an honest advise to the seeker (which is not

to his liking), he will go to all astrologers he know

untill he ends up getting the advise he wanted to hear

and then create a hue & cry that they have been duped.

Its my request not to infer above as I am critising

the professional astrologers, but yes I am criticising

the astrlogers who use this state of mind of seeketrs

for thier personal gains and thereby denigerating this

divine science.

As every noble cause has its own associated perils, so

is the cause of the august astrologers of this group

by helping the seekers free of cost and most

importantly sincere & hones advise.

As Arjunji rightly said that the person who tries to

give is a realised person, but shouldnt we then

forgive the mistakes of seekers as they are not as

realised as the person who is giving him advise and

also pray GOD to give him "Sudbuddhi"

Best Regards,

Akhil Jain

--- panditarjun2004 <panditarjun2004 wrote:

> dear friend

>

> in your concluding paragraph you mentioned that the

> critics are

> friends and if we take their criticism positively to

> improve better,

> we can deliver better. well said in positive

> language.

>

> one can criticise a person who is serving food

> freely by setting up

> a bhandara or langar. can the same critic similarly

> questions a

> restaurant where admission rights are reserved. no,

> because the

> critic who knows the value of money pretty well (by

> thronging to

> collect free food) dare not question the person

> selling the food.

>

> you subtly mentioned that god is there in every

> critic or in every

> human being. let me tell you and other learnt

> members that if a

> person has realised and achieved self-realisation

> and god-

> realisation he/she would always be in a giving

> position. all

> persons seeking at the receiving end or the

> unrealised lot. here

> comes the noble service. at least in my experience,

> i have made

> more than hundred seekers turn into realised people

> who have started

> knowing only giving.

>

> all the givers here are to help, facilitate, share

> their little

> knoweldge and make the seekers to realise and

> improve thier

> positions. if the querent is intersted in realising

> this,it is fine

> or else liberty of performing never ending karma is

> always there.

>

> with best wishes

> arjun

>

> , "jyowtishi"

> <jyotishi

> wrote:

> >

> > Krishnan ji,

> >

> > Great minds think alike! I was thinking of the

> same topic and even

> > thinking of posting something, but obviously you

> aced me!

> > {DISCLAIMER FOR SOME OF THE REALLY 'SERIOUS'

> MEMBERS: Readers,

> > please do not file the above away as proof that I

> am egoistic as I

> > have been perceived by some and accused at times

> -- I am a big

> > kidder, except when I am reading someone's chart,

> okay?}

> >

> > Krishnanji, I do not think anyone here or anywhere

> has the

> > resources, time or organizational saavy to create

> such a

> regulatory

> > body that can oversee standards in astrology. For

> crying out loud,

> > there have arisen a whole cottage industry of

> academies and little

> > universities and foundations and so on all over

> the place that

> give

> > certificates in astrology and jyotish! Each is

> confident and

> claimes

> > brazenly that their's is the khalis ghee and all

> the rest

> > are 'margarine', bad for the heart and all three

> humors!

> >

> > Points about 'seekers' and "recipients" as

> Ashutoshji so

> beautifully

> > described are undeniably true. Now, since we all

> are sinners (or

> why

> > else are we here in this reality, day in and day

> out, without that

> > circular tubelight shining above our heads as is

> seen in pictures

> of

> > prophets and saints?), frustrated as I have

> equally been at times

> > about the insensitive nature of some of the

> feedback that was

> > received -- I took that always as an exercise in

> detachment. My

> > periodic someshat passionate but sincere

> outlashings not to such

> > responses individually are proof of how well(?) I

> am doing in the

> > detachment department ;-) -- Actually, I view my

> outbursts as a

> > cumulative reaction. When the dust accumulates to

> visible levels,

> > one is tempted to use pressurized air to blow it,

> but really the

> > dust then just settles elsewhere and I don't mean

> other jyotish

> > groups {think about that analogy!}. Obviously we

> need a more

> > efficient dusting program, internet-wide!

> >

> > There are many apparent reasons for "seeking" and

> 'receiving',

> some

> > being: genuine, out of jealousy, just for testing,

> skimming off of

> > others and sometimes, yes, just to make someone

> waste their time

> > (those who post requests but never return to

> collect readings --

> let

> > alone provide feedback; mind you, there could be

> other reasons for

> > the non-return also, I admit).

> >

> > When I advise someone about a remedial procedure,

> I remind them

> > often about not doing a remedial in the mindset of

> a 'bargain'

> with

> > God or an exchange, or a trade. That somehow

> reduces the spiritual

> > potential/karmic potential of such an activity and

> increases the

> > likelihood of failure and frustration with

> jyotishi and jyotish in

> > the mind of the nativity. However, such is the

> perceived reality

> of

> > most seekers that they begin to see these

> remedials, essentially

> > spiritual, as a product, with the 'consumer'

> mentality creeping

> into

> > even their spiritual activity. People from Indian

> culture, sorry

> to

> > say, tend to have that kind of approach more than

> westerners --

> for

> > reasons I would not go into here. This does not

> apply to all

> > individuals from Indian and similar cultures, by

> the way, so no

> > flames please!

> >

> > I have come to a slightly different stance through

> all these years

> > of good and bad feelings, frustrations and

> occasional triumphs

> > through internet readings. Something most

> jyotishis would shy away

> > from thinking and hence relegated to the

> subconcious. Is it

> altruism

> > that we astrologers are doing this 'seva' for? OUR

> collective

> though

> > generally unexpressed (suppressed) frustration

> indicates

> otherwise.

> > Even if we are seeing this as some sort of measure

> towards

> reducing

> > our own personal karma, we are guilty of the very

> mentality that

> we

> > advice our clients, paying or not, to guard

> against! This is where

> > the adage of "Physician -- Heal thyself!" applies.

> >

> > And the way this shows, this stance of ours -- is

> when we are

> > criticised directly or more likely tangentially,

> subtly. If it

> > flusters us, whether we succumb and respond to it

> or not, then it

> is

> > pointing out an area of a potential for

> 'correction'

=== message truncated ===

February 21, 2006

Dear Sir

With various kinds of cat calls and disclaimers and claimers around, the

effort to be put in for dusting certainly needs bettter enduarance.

Vocational aspects of cottage industries may induce better competitiveness but

we need to apply ring tones for some quality too.ofcourse this to has to be part

ofdusting exercise:"Obviously we need a more efficient dusting program,

internet-wide!"As a fall out of serious and non serious issues made out for the

sake of jyotishis will be giagantic task,no doubt and is no less involving

risk/wrath of atleast some passers

It is not far from true to think:somehow reduces the spiritual

potential/karmic potential of such an activity"as long as we are mislead by

bouncers and exposed to seek some fees(contending that increases relabilty

)than free sale/discounted astrology we are certainly are subjected to the risk

: "increases the likelihood of failure and frustration with jyotishi and

jyotish"

However Iam really not hopeful to expect:"but if we focus on the message and

not the messenger, and if we can -- the SOURCE of and the REASON for the

message,

Having been ready to volunteer for the good or bad that may come due to

"acclaimed part of sin" and as remedy to wash of this dust through "bonus

serivice at no cost" I feel that better we bow down and serve before the

curtains are put.In this cosmic drama, as players the performance has a price.In

the process we may gain or loose depending on our destinies.There is not much to

choose and I appreciate your stand once made out....................sorry I will

not change(my stand)

krishnan

jyowtishi <jyotishi wrote: