ILLUSIONS, EXPECTATIONS, ILLUSIVE EXPECTATIONS!

THE JYOTISH JOURNEY CONTINUES ...!

by
Rohiniranjan
© Crystal Pages, June 2004

Despite numerous cyber-postings, articles and wagon-loads of regurgitated information that

already exist on the WorldWideWeb, as well as in print and transmitted by word-of-mouth (yes
folks, that mode still exists and quite effectively, I may add!), the confusion that smoulders in
otherwise brilliantly-lit minds and their unrealistic expectations about what astrology represents
or can do, is mind-boggling! There still prevails the magical attraction towards the aura of
mysticism and divinatory aggrandisement around what to many has now become an organized,
‘logical’ and almost cerebral pursuit – neojyotish! People apply logic to the deductions and
symbolism prevailing in astrology; they try to seek and often successfully draw rational links
between astroindicators and their influences in our lives, using common day logic and sometimes
logical constructs leaning precariously on mythological symbolism. There are some individuals
that are really convinced that there is no room for anything but the left-brained thinking in
astrology, at least that is what they claim publicly, as they tout about astrology being a science;
others are not so sure, and a few even admit that openly. On the other hand, a few who claim to
be curious about astrology but are in the wait and watch mode, and are really closet-sceptics
revealing themselves at times when their ‘expectations’ are not met. Others, who though
sympathetic to astrology and astrologers, have a very unrealistic view about its capabilities, or are
too hasty about absorbing the entire construct. These are individuals who have the potential to
learn but lack the patience to do so.

To some extent, prominent astrologers, old and new, paid or volunteers, bear some of the
responsibility underlying this miasma of misunderstanding and misinformation. Nearly all
astrologers admit that no one they know of who is using astrology is right all the time. Nor are
scientists and technicians (epidemiologists, psychologists, sociologists, medical scientists,
meteorologists, heck – even space scientists and physicists and engineers, for that matter!).
Claimed percentages of success for astrologers/jyotishis vary from 70-82% (how did they figure
out the 2% difference (!) – I don’t know and am just quoting what I have read in postings!).
These are anecdotal accounts and no systematic study has really been conducted or reported, lest
I be misunderstood or worse – misquoted in fragments of what I write! Quizzes here, predictions
on the web there, or in newspapers that no one reads until the astrologer quotes his successes,
evidence lies here, there and elsewhere in bits and pieces. A reasonably well-organized study in
Canada known as the Hamilton Project, carried out a couple of decades ago with western
astrologers doing cold reading (only birthdata) showed miserable results (Astrology Science or
Superstition: Eysenck and Nias). The same happened when they did the studies that led to the
identification of the Barnum effect using psychological profiles and university students.
Everything and anything fit all! No comparable jyotish study of that caliber has ever been
conceived, or conducted, although stray challenges from one jyotishi to another have floated in
cyberspace from time to time, with little or no response presumably due to technical reasons from
what I can surmise! Absence of evidence must not be hastily be accepted for evidence of
absence! Further complicating the claimed 75-82% success is that it does not use any kind of
weighting about the significance of what was predicted. Surely, something as significant as
losing a loved one in an accident or during a child-birth, or a professional success or failure
would be a lot more important than predicting a minor illness, a minor escape from an accident
or a minor windfall, I hope? This kind of examination has never been carried out in a significant
or meaningful manner, to my knowledge. Recently a jyotish site, with at that time 1500 to 1600
members, has carried out some attempts at having members, mostly new to intermediate students
of astrology (they are generally the only daring kind on the scene for challenges such as these!)
respond to nearly-cold reading quizzes for retroactive readings (e.g., Find what happened on June
26, 2003 to this nativity?). Only five to ten individuals (usually the same ones!) respond to such
challenges. Similar challenges have been posted at many sites over the last ten years or so.
Same level of response! Even during the 5-7 years from the mid-90s, when the growth of jyotish
information and its dissemination was at its peak and a lot of truly brilliant intellectual energy
was flowing in at least in the realm of cyberjyotish, there was very little of the experimental and
research attitude, let alone research attempts. Attempts were dowsed by religious fanaticism or
similar mumbo-jumbo and basically anything goes, we are too feeble-minded to even attempt or
try to examine this wonderful, cosmic reality kind of attitudes! Then came the period when
people got really protective of territories created thence and despite the plethora of techniques
and complex skeins of logical matrix – the main stream remained/remains apathetic and peri-
meteric in their approach (sounds less condescending than ‘superficial’). It is hard to separate the
factual from the fictional (or in some cases perhaps imaginatively hypothetical) species of
astrology.

The apathy and lack of a large number of intense minds applying themselves to jyotish is not
surprising. There still exists a significant stigma in society about astrology in general. Very few
bright individuals are drawn to its light out of a genuine, consuming and lasting interest.
Astrology in its many variations still has the ‘gypsy’ aura of black magic, of mumbo-jumbo and I
don’t blame the general public – but even amongst the practitioners of the Grand Craft. A large
amount of what is written – what with the sun-sign and moon-sign columns in prestigious
research journals of astrology, and also in pioneering beacons of jyotish research writing media
such as Late B.V. Raman’s Astrological Magazine from Bangalore, and the entertaining but
vacuous books and booklets by authorities (with less nutritious value than pop-corn for the
already well-read enthusiast) – who is to blame the casual reader regarding their poor impression
about the field of astrology that we are so convinced of and dedicated to.

In contrast to the 60s and 70s when some of us were learning astrology, I find a lot more
impatient expectation in current day students (regardless of age) in getting and following a cook-
book approach to astrology. They are convinced that there *is* (some of you old-timers can tell,
I cyber-teethed on CIS!) a sacred and secret set of principles that if followed will lead to a bomb-
proof reading. They lazily expect others to first prove that astrology is worth their time and
attention! Imagine if that were the case for other disciplines, engineering and medicine and law
and political science and by Jove, paleontology would probably have chaired really marasmic
professors waiting for a student to come by! What dedication amongst the neophytes so eager to
learn!

There have been more than a few attempts at repackaging astrology, and jyotish – whatever is
available about the discipline – in that kind of packaged framework and with some success. But,
over time, as experience of the revved-up learners grows, they run into road-blocks and speed-
bumps which make them wonder, ponder, even stumble and some sadly eventually give up. It is
this ‘natural selection’ aspect of the business of astrology that, I have always instinctively felt,
has protected astrology from falling into wrong hands for all these eons! Some very revered
modern jyotishis have openly and in a somewhat elitist manner worried about this and have often
quoted Varahamihira and Parashara and others of having cautioned about giving the gift of
astrological knowledge to the unworthy, spiritually-inadequate students and seekers, but I have
always been very secure about this being a somewhat paranoid territorial human folly for
maintaining possession, control and power, what little can be exercised on the thin sliver of the
converted (of the 6 billion that inhabit this earth)! There is nothing that is more dangerous in this
world than the formula for the nuclear bomb, and that all will admit is more readily available to
the populace than are jyotish secrets. Hark! The world is still here is all I want to remind you,
despite our fears voiced in the daily press or elsewhere for decades and decades! Share freely,
you Jyotish gurus and teachers and trust not just in the power of jyotish but also in its purifying
properties as its follower practices and matures, which I hope you have personally experienced?
The practice of jyotish can change one gradually, only in a positive way. In some cases it takes
longer if too many malefic planets are influencing the personal indicators, but ultimately ... it is
probably going to be the nuclear bomb rather than jyotish and its secret powers that could
potentially take out this world and its “civilization” !

If, like me, you have followed for some time the astrology scene in the cyberreality as well as the
paper-reality, I see more stability on the western astrology scene than on the jyotish side of
things. Sure, individual mortals move on, as they make room for others and so on, but the
significant mainstream of teachers has been more constant on the western side than on the eastern
side. Just an observation! Perhaps the jyotish scene is evolving as technology is improving its
dissemination and perhaps that could be the reason. There is also the esoteric, mystical,
religious, everything-can-be-fixed remedial shadow that keeps dogging jyotish – a shadow that
has or perhaps cannot be questioned or confronted readily or openly, yet. The hypocrisy is
obvious! Pick either the religious, faith-based almost superstitious thinking OR stick with the
slightly more realistic and logical framework. One cannot have it both ways. Jyotish literature is
freely available and nowhere in the astrology classics is there a mention of “wearing” gemstones
as being capable of remedying karma! In the past, rich landlords and kings used to make gifts of
gemstones to priests and other perhaps more worthy causes. Gemstones had been associated
with planets to promote that sattwik, supportive practice. Pray tell me: How does giving a chunk
of ruby in gift to a poor monastic and pure priestly being – if I wish to improve my sun – equate
with wearing the same chunk of ruby on my third finger in all pomp and glory to accompany the
other three rings I am adorning my body with, at the same time? Is karma or Whoever represents
the Hindu counterpart of the Saint of the Pearly Gates fame, that inane? I suppose there is some
good karma in sustaining and providing for the livelihood of the internet gem-dealer, and as a
secondary good karma, supporting your credit card dealer or paypal, but, come-on people,
honestly! And, tell that to the hoards of eager karma-fixers who want a remedial gem
prescription, including science-heads, engineers, doctors, teachers, even jyotishis of many years
who should by now really know better! A doctor friend of mine once told me long ago, how
disappointed his rural patients used to get unless he prescribed at least a vitamin to them or some
medicine even if they did not really need that – probably to make up for that long arduous bus
ride they took from their village to the city hospital, only to find out that they simply had a case
of *nerves* or no life-threatening organic disease and that no chemical remedy was really
necessary!

Over the last ten to fifteen years, the cyberrealm of internet has literally exploded with some
overheated, overworked computer hard-drives serving as reminders of there not being any
unmixed good! Jyotish lists and websites and creative expressions of sharing have sprung up all
over the place. While many sites are for business and promotional in nature, there are in this
desert of commercialism, a few oases of knowledge and research. Charts get discussed,
sometimes properly and thoroughly but even at other times, you can at least walk away with one
or more charts to study and examine, sometimes with an associated email address for follow-up
if such is entertained or welcome. But, by far, most of these discussions are carried out by
explorers, beginners or intermediate students of jyotish. Some of these are well-versed in
technical knowledge but haven’t had the drive, chance or patience to sit down and study charts,
enough number of charts anyway to really count as experience. Brilliant otherwise, their
questioning and expression of problems in jyotish are wonderful, and jyotish is a good ground for
such questions, but little true knowledge emerges without the practical focus or resources.
Rather than replay or rehash some brilliant or rare technique or epithet, or an entire review on
ancient books of questionable vintage or purity, it would be more educational if just charts were
discussed, against the backdrop of tenets. Howsoever obvious or logical sounding, if the
combination does not pan out in a chart then of what value is it to the learner in the next
astrological adventure that they face when someone draws their chart in front of them and asks
for instructions and guidance through the rest of his or her life, in fifteen minutes or less? It is
naive to assume, and many do, that what is given – in astrological books, original, translated
modern versions and rehashed accounts borrowing unabashedly from original sources and
generous others – may not consistently come through in real slices of life, the charts that are not
often discussed in modern exchanges and almost never showed up in so called classical texts!
Somebody, please go figure this, already!

I think some of the biggest modern gifts to astrology and jyotish in particular have come from the
software savvy astrologers. Nearly all astrology calculation software came about because the
individual had a love for or knowledge of astrology and had the necessary programming skills.
Many different flavours show up in the software and though none of them is perfect, but then,
nor is this world! Add to those ventures and attempts to help out, the few databases that exist
and at least one of which has serious potential for research applications, namely AstroDatabank,
these are all very exciting developments, something that was hard to imagine as recently as 30
years ago! While we drive these folks crazy with our demands for more and more improvements,
all of us astrologers of any and all cloths should take a moment to thank individuals like Michael
Erlewine, John Halloran, Michael Boender, Andrew Foss, Andrew Haydn, Das Goravani, Lois
Rodden and Mark McDonough and many others.

The tools are pretty much all there, but my general feeling is that the research component from
the calculation software is not really improving as much as the horoscope calculation routines! I
think this is driven by user demand and what is lacking from the research scene is user
participation! If the relatively small user-base actually begins to use these tools and tries to push
these to their limits, inadequacies would emerge glaringly and programmers will be motivated to
focus on improving those areas of their products and as a happy corollary, the days of ‘cheesy’
reviews would be over. Cheesy reviews that indicate that the reviewer has not really tested the
product hard and probably does not have the know-how of what is really needed in terms of
calculations or research. Sad is the day when product reviews begin to sound suspiciously like a
reworked promotional flyer that is taken off the programmer’s website! People bitch about the
inadequacy of research features in available commercial software. It is because they do not
provide feedback. And the feedback needs to come in large numbers because if it is only one or
two users pestering the software programmer, he or she cannot be faulted for thinking that it is
not a popular ‘need’ and so he cannot be blamed for making a business decision about how much
time to spend into that part of the project, as he or she turns a deaf ear to the ‘nag’ who just won’t
go away! And, if the silence of the users indicates that there is not really any interest in
improving the research capabilities of these software, then what could be sadder for the future of
astrology?

Some Interesting Data on Retrograde planets

On asking several individuals, it seemed to be the general impression that mercury would be one
of the commonest retrograde planet in horoscopes. On the other hand, I had the feeling that
slower planets overall probably clocked in more days of retrograde motion than inner and faster
planets, Venus and mercury, but never really looked into it. Just to fulfil my curiosity, I decided
to look this up in the Astrodatabank software (newer versions like 2 and 3 have a Vedic version
of the databank too.). For quick explorations like these, I use the Rodden database with data
quality A and up. Using that filter, I got 19192 charts (private individuals, celebrities, pretty
much all walks of life the good, bad and the ugly, with the following distribution:
mercury 6.4% times retrograde in these charts
Venus 5.2% times retrograde in these charts
mars 7.5% times
jupiter 22.4% times
Saturn 26.1% times
charts with at least one planet retrograde = 52.3%

One can assume that in half of the charts seen, at least one of the planet would be retrograde with
the likelihood of the planet being Saturn>Jupiter>Mars>Mercury>Venus.

Looking at the percent of times that the ruler of a house was retrograde, I got a range from 8.8%
to 13.3% (Ruler of XII least likely, ruler of VII most likely and ascendant clocking in at 9.5%
times)

Benefics (Venus, well associated mercury and jupiter as per the software which is rigid in this
respect!) were 17.5% times retrograde, malefics (nodes, mars, Saturn, ill associated mercury,
sun) were 8.4% times retrograde in the 19192 charts examined.
Just to cream the software a bit more, I looked at the percentage of charts with one of the inner
planets retrograde (12.6%) or one of the outer planets retrograde (46.7%), Situations where one
of the inner or one of the outer planets was retrograde brought the percentage to close to 50%
(not surprisingly).

I looked at the situations where a planet was in its own sign and retrograde. The following
pattern emerged:
Mercury Gemini 0% Virgo 100%
Venus Taurus 30% Libra 70%
Mars Aries 42% Scorpio 58%
Jupiter Saggit 55% Pisces 45%
Saturn Capri 52% Aqua 48%

As you can see it is not uniformly distributed with something very interesting going on with
mercury in this sample of 19192 charts! I don’t know why mercury was never retrograde in
sidereal gemini!

© Rohiniranjan 2004-07-25