Mr Malhotra on astrology

[Guest guest]

Namaste friends,

 

> night to seem to appear. But it was a truth which did not succeed in

> spreading effectively for centuries; even after Copernicus's great

> achievement, it had to await the work of Brache and Kepler and the

> experiments of Galileo's telescope predicting the moons of Jupiter, all

> combined with the invention of Gutenberg's printing press and similar

> developments, before we finally understood what out solar system really

> looked like."

>

> If Mr Malhotra or anyone else agrees to heliocentrism, and also wishes to

> believe in astrology, he will have to demand all horoscopes be

recalculated

> under heliocentric assumptions. For that matter, if heliocentric

horoscopes

> can be cast, I might send in my own data too -- but not until then!

 

If geocentric model was taken in Vedic astrology, it was not because the

sages did not understand "what our solar system really looked like". It is

because we are talking about the lives of beings born on earth that the

positions of planets with respect to earth matter. For example, Sun has the

most important influence on us and that would be lost if heliocentric

positions are taken. If we take geocentric positions in astrology, it does

not amount to assuming that planets rotate in an elliptical or circular

orbit around earth.

 

>From the elliptical orbits of all planets around Sun, ancient Indian

scholars derived simplified procedures to find the positions of planets with

respect to earth. You will realize this if you read Varahamihira's "Pancha

Siddhantika" or study "Surya Siddhanta". It is because the planets rotate

around Sun that Sun is considered in Vedic astrology as the king of the

planets.

 

It is true that the earth is going around Sun. But Sun is not stationary

either. He is also moving. So, why do you stop with heliocentric positions?

 

Not only did Indians understand that planets were moving around Sun in

elliptical orbits, but they also understood that the whole solar system was

moving in an elliptical orbit around a fixed point in the galaxy, which was

termed as "Vishnu Nabhi" (navel of Vishnu) in Vishnu Purana. This is the

basis of the sidereal zodiac used in Vedic astrology, while modern western

astrology considers the tropical zodiac. The value given by ancient Indians

for the time period of this elliptical motion - about 25800 years - has been

corroborated by modern science.

 

Vedic seers knew a lot more than some may be inclined to give them credit

for. If they still chose to use the geocentric positions of planets, they

must've had their reasons. The proof is in the pudding. If one wants to know

if Vedic astrology works or not, one should learn it properly and try it.

Instead, some people seem to be hell-bent on giving pseudo-arguments on why

astrology cannot work at all.

 

If one dismisses Vedic astrology saying that the whole premise of it is

wrong due to taking geocentric positions, one is either ignorant or has a

mischievous agenda. The most important lesson of science is that one should

have intellectual integrity. One with that quality cannot blast a subject

that one hardly understands.

 

> Subroto Roy

 

Best regards,

P.V.R. Narasimha Rao