Is Astrology Vedic?

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

I am posting this after the moderator has given his approval on

posting on a deviating thread. I have followed the above thread to

some extent. I had following observations. I would like to know your

response. Do you think it is any use forwarding it to list so that

Rajeev can reply?

 

****

There are enough verses in the Vedic literature (i.e., Vedas,

Brahmanas, Aranyakas and Upanishads) that talk of 'nakShatra-vidyA' or

'jyotirvidyA'. Take, for instance, the chhAndogya Upanishad (7.1.2),

where Sage Narada speaks of his having learnt the nakShatravidya.

There is no basis, save prejudice, in saying that this refers to

astronomy only and not to astrology (or vice-versa). The same sage

speaks of 'rAshi' as another branch of study. Since 'rAshi'

and 'naxatravidyA' are enumerated separately, would one of them refer

to astrology? I can't say. Rajeev also can't.

 

Rajeev's rejection of astrology as non-vedic is based on frivolous

grounds. What exactly is the non-vedic in astrology? That the Vedas

did not have a notion of praying to a deity to get succor? That is

wrong. The atharva-veda is full of such mantras that are meant to

alleviate the problems of a suffering soul. The nakShatra-sUkta in

taittarIya araNyaka is another proof. Or is the problem that

astrology encourages one to pray to non-God to obtain succor? Why

doesn't he apply his approach of 'Indra, Varuna are only names of the

same God' here as well?

 

If it be objected on the ground that there never is an instance in the

Vedas where planets or heavenly bodies are treated as 'benefic' or

'malefic', that too is wrong. The Kaushitaki Brahmana speaks of

sacrificing when the 'auspicious star' is on: 'yasmin kalyANe nakSatre

kAmayeta tasmin yajeta'. Note that the 'auspiciousness' is related to

the yajamAna (sacrificer) and is not applicable to everybody. Had it

been universally applicable, the text would have specifically named

the star (the way these brAhmaNAs do in such instances). The Rgveda-

khila (non-compiled or lost portions of RgVeda) has a prayer for

Goddess Durga, seeking protection from 'malefic grahas': duShTa graha

nivAraNe duShTa graha nivAraNI OM namaH.

 

This acutally brings up another point. How does Rajeev or anybody know

that astrology is absent in Vedic shAkhAs that are lost to us? It

cannot be contended that there is no such loss recorded anywhere. The

commentaries on the Kalpasutras quote many vedic passages that are

lost to us. Our Sri Madhvacharya quotes shAkhAs such as, bhAllaveya,

barka, paingI, indradyumna, bhAShkala, AyAsya, chaturvedashikhA that

are not available. Shankara quotes bhAShkala, bhAllavey,

paingIrahasya and others that are not available to us. Without seeing

or knowing them, how can any sane person decide that there is no

astrology in Vedas? A skeptical person would understand the

limitation of non-verification, instead of proffering profane

opinions.

 

And Puranas are rejected for no reason at all. Actually, that problem

is with the school mentioned in the site. The Vedas themselves speak

of Puranas and itihAsa as the fifth veda. Dayanand Saraswati's school

interprets that this refers to the Brahmanas and araNyakas and not to

the purANAs that we know. His school holds that these purANAs are

'naviina purANAs'. There is really no basis for that theory. I have

seen an English translation of his 'Rgveda bhashya'. They curiously

hold on to the apaurusheyatva (non-authoredness) of samhitA portion,

but not that of brAhmaNas and araNyakas. Yaskacharya (who actually

showed no such difference in his nirukta) is quoted as proof. There

are more points that are, but, irrelevant.

 

So why should there be a problem in accepting purANas, more so if

'AptavAkya' is considered a pramana and test of truth? Sri Vedavyasa

is an Apta, but not his purANAs? Or is it that these purANAs have been

corrupted (because they don't suit your thesis)? In fact, this line of

reasoning is ubiquitous on that website. Any text that supports

astrology (or the idea of chanting names of Lord or being devoted to

Lord) is corrupted.

 

Regards

NDS