Sei sulla pagina 1di 5

Research in Astrology: Pondering Upon Some Issues

by
Rohiniranjan, Crystal Pages, Ottawa

There definitely has been a significant change in the types of articles and books that are being
published recently and the kind of exploratory work that is being done in astrology. With a larger
number of individuals demanding more streamlined reports and with automated tools for
calculating and presenting the astrological data and information as well as for writing reports
becoming increasingly available, a new degree of approach towards astrology is emerging. It is
also notable that people from many disciplines, including the sciences are being increasingly drawn
towards astrology, though some of these are arguably individuals that have been long-term
practitioners/students who have only recently started coming out of their closets, encouraged by
evolution as society continues to open its collective mind wider.

Jyotish, the Indian system of astrology, has experienced this renaissance somewhat more
vigorously in recent times than its western counterpart and this is noticeable through the type of
material that is currently pouring forth from pens across the globe, with a larger variety of
techniques being tested, utilized and presented than was the case earlier. Research is not a dirty
word any longer! As one browses through material that is available, one might encounter
hopefully feeble voices that are raised against any change with fundamentalist opinions unwilling
to accept anything new without seeking confirmation for it in ancient and to a large extent
fragmentary texts (which is somewhat oxymoronic!).

Some of these voices that were confusing validity of a tenet with its ability to survive through
times (in hiding or overtly) are increasingly growing marasmic and despite their ominous finger-
shaking eventually are going to fade due to the influx of new blood into the current jyotish scene.
However, a cautious and conservative note must continue to be sounded that not all that is new
and glittering is necessarily of a higher quality. Prudence and discretion in one’s acceptance of
novel or traditional material remains essential in astrology. The proverbial baby is still wet behind
its ears and not entirely out of the bathwater.

Typically, traditional texts in jyotish (Vedic astrology, Hindu astrology or "joytish" as some call
it) represent collections of Sanskrit (and sometimes even vernacular) verses, which define
astrological tenets or planetary combinations and describe their effects. These tomes of inherited
knowledge are nearly devoid of any illustrative material, in the form of actual horoscopes or
charts. Often considered to be extremely concise, precise and highly organized enough to be able
to express very complex thoughts into language, these giants of yore who penned the available
texts have left nearly no specific trace of their times and estimates vary considerably regarding the
historical periods during which these words were written in.

Further complicating the issue is the fact that most of these astrological gems were probably
originally transmitted through oral tradition (teacher to disciple, father to son) for generations
before they were written down. It perplexes me considerably to think that a people who were so
advanced as is evident from the complexity of their thought processes and literature and who had
the ability to scribe and record thoughts on media that has survived centuries did not leave behind
any trace of the horoscopes that they utilized as jyotish evolved, was practised and taught to
students. Where are these horoscopes, these workbooks and examples of the yogas that are
outlined in the texts most of us learn jyotish from? The only horoscopes that we see are the ones
that form the small branch of jyotish known as nadis; in many ways quite removed from the
mainstream traditional jyotish. Paradoxically, the principles underlying nadi astrology are obscure
for the most part but the horoscopes are there. On the other hand, the principles of the
mainstream astrology, the tenets of Parashari and Jaimini traditions are recorded in impeccable
details but the horoscopes are missing in toto. This creates a rather intriguing enigma for the
contemporary learner.

The stage is therefore set in the discipline of jyotish for conducting re-search in the true literal
sense of the term. The need for re-testing principles that seemingly have survived the ravages of
time in a country and culture that had been repeatedly overcome and plundered by centuries of
alien rule is a no-brainer. This coupled with a general absence of significant indigenous efforts or
resources to preserve what has survived through times, all for well-justified reasons and
circumstances, does not make matters any better. This situation raises the urgency that all citizens
of this world who feel drawn towards jyotish and who think that jyotish is a noble cause to be
preserved must approach this body of knowledge in the spirit of scientific curiosity and cautiously
proceed to test the tenets. Cautiously, because many of the rules and links between islands of
knowledge have become somewhat loose or even may be already lost, perhaps driven into
wilderness and paramparaic (family traditions shrouded in secrecy) mystery through pragmatic
reasons, making it likely for a hasty and superficial researcher to be tempted to throw the baby out
with the bathwater. And, there are a lot of babies and quite a lot of bathwater there!

Much of the research conducted in jyotish, to date, has been less than rigorous, or perhaps more
truly, is characterized by varying degrees of rigour. Claims, sometimes rather strong ones are
made and without questioning their validity one must acknowledge that most of these astrogems
have not really been subject to peer review or to public scrutiny. This has been for a variety of
reasons, including, territoriality and turf-related issues, fear of plagiarism, lack of resources, lack
of adequate knowledge of research techniques and tools or of relevant background, scholarship or
experience in astrology or research methodology and in many cases also a near-total absence of
pooling of intellectual resources and sharing of information between individual researchers or
groups of researchers. Obviously many a wheel had been reinvented and some in more ways than
one. And then there is the 'large' body of anecdotal research dangled tantalizingly before us from
time to time. Very little of substance, if any emanating from such, in terms of solid techniques or
clearly demonstrated principles has been placed out in the public domain under real or imagined
pretexts of the tamasic world of scoundrels running off with jyotish secrets and the Devil ruling
this world of ours through jyotish (as if that is not already happening without the help of stolen
astrology secrets, thank you!).

The fundamental differences existing in some of the basic parameters used in jyotish, namely, the
precessional corrections (ayanamshas), different ways of calculating the divisional charts, use of
house divisions, etc. do not make things simpler. Furthermore, while individual elements and tools
that are in use in much of jyotish seem to be quite specific and surgically-discrete, the end-
product, namely the reading and predictive output emerge from a synthetic process that involves a
certain amount of art or at least is not entirely well-understood, even by the jyotishis that generate
some of these brilliant readings. The gap or inadequately understood link that exists between the
logical and paralogical domains in the jyotish process is intriguing but essential. Over the last few
decades, research has almost become the siren-song in the academic jyotish scene these days and
comprises a range of generally well-meaning individuals that includes weekend explorers who
love to test existing tenets coming down the line of tradition against contemporary real charts, as
well as the rare pioneers who are out there to discover new grounds or to find a new application
for something that already exists in the known body of jyotish. Neither of these is superior to
another, it must be emphasized, as there is plenty of territory that needs to be cultivated and some
that could use a bit of judicious surgical debridement, as well. It is good to see at least one
surgeon who is interested in jyotish (Dr. Charak from Delhi)!

When I was starting out on my jyotish path a few decades ago, even the relatively simple task of
calculating charts could prove to be a major speed bump. In the 60s and early 70s, all I had were
ephemeris and tables of proportional logarithms as well as a table of ascendants. Even a calculator
would have been appreciated while I juggled time between a study of astrology and other pursuits
that would eventually keep me fed and sheltered. The scene is very different now for the beginner
in jyotish, with many choices available in terms of programs that can calculate in the batting of an
eyelid what used to take almost an entire day of hard work. All persnickety griping about
inaccuracies and variations between the software aside, one would have to be extremely
ungrateful not to recognize the wonderful boost of life injected into astrology by the fine software
introduced since early 80's, that we take for granted now and some that we even banter against
(please read on!).

The accolade aside, some of the available jyotish software have made available 'research' options,
all of which depend on "pattern recognition". This is essentially the basis of the types of searches
that are possible in Parashara's Light, Astrodatabank Astrosignatures, and other similar software.
Almost all of these generally lack truly essential research tools that permit statistical testing and
even fail to provide a robust interface between the software and a spreadsheet or an independent
statistical package (through exporting of output, for instance). Use of statistical software without
understanding why the remark was made caustically by someone on the similarities between
statistics and bikinis (“both reveal what seems to be very interesting while hiding what is vital!”).
Perhaps as more statistically- and research-oriented astrologers/programmers enter the scene,
appropriate products could emerge. Developmental costs are also a problem that might be holding
back those who are already in the field and quite capable of developing these products from the
point of view of knowledge of research statistics and programming skill. I can only hope that the
future holds some promise in this area. While recognizing patterns and frequencies of parameters
such as planets in a given sign, house, or star and combinations, associations, aspects between
astro-variables are all very good first steps; however, much of the jyotish delineative process deals
with looking at complex combinations and connections between different planets in a horoscope.
A planet can have a variety of roles assigned to it in the same horoscope, for instance by virtue of
its rulership over a house, or by its being an intrinsic significator of an area in life or an individual
in life, as well as it being a temporary or chart-specific significator. Putting together all of these
different 'roles' together, quite an intricate interpretive skein can be weaved out of the minimum
and limited number of houses and astrofactors that a neophyte astrologer has access to in an
individual's horoscope. The most useful way in which astrological data-providers and
programmers can serve the need for research is to make available not only the above mentioned
processing tools, but also by allowing significant flexibility and open-endedness in their search
engines, as opposed to imposing their somewhat limited paradigms and parameters on the
research user.

To cite a specific example, Parashara's Light from Geovision, my personal favourite – a fairly
hefty package in its own right allows one to create search strings from a list of possibilities that
can then be applied to a collection of charts to discern similar patterns existing in the set. For
doing this, it uses a coding system that is used by the program for the pattern-searches and
elsewhere in the software to identify classical yogas or combinations in a single chart. How
difficult would it be for the program to allow the user to define a search string using these very
codes (rather than a simplistic pull down menu of limited options). This would allow one to
customize a search that can be a lot more comprehensive than the keywords provided by the
program in the multi- chart search mode. Such a user-defined search strategy would be definitely
more sophisticated (and seriously useful!) than the two level search now allowed.

What I described is perhaps a case of a potentially powerful but hobbled software, in so far as
research is concerned. Unholy Kaliyuga! (Speaking of kaliyuga, Parashara's Light finally in its
version 6 has added the prastarashtakavarga, a crucially vital view in the drama of human karma
reflected in the cosmic patterns, now if it only allowed one to select a bunch of charts for
comparison in one keystroke instead of loading them one by one, had the upgraded user-
customized search I’ve been pestering them about since the time when I had a head full of hair,
ya-di-ya-da-yada...!). Other jyotish software has similar and other additional problems and all
suffer from an inability to output data in a more useful or user-friendly way (which can be
imported into standard spreadsheets, databases). It is unfortunate that less resources and energy
are devoted to the research area when developing astrological software because the consumer
base rarely uses it and so it is not a high priority area for the programmer during updates. In their
defence, there are only so many resources available to the programmers in the relatively limited
area of astrological (even more so in the case of jyotish) software. The Astrodatabank software
(Vedic version) from what I have heard holds some promise, although quite frankly its cost (not
value!) is going to reduce its accessibility for many research astrologers. Development costs of
such programs tend to be quite high so the authors cannot be really blamed for charging enough
to at least break even. Many astrologers have their own personal collection of data and charts,
often in thousands. If an efficient search engine could become available to them, it would help
research quite a bit. Using existing database managers is an option, although a lot of extra effort
would be required in setting up these. Importing data from existing horoscope formats could be a
minor challenge too since different programs use different formats and these may change over
versions as well.

Talking of research, I think it is premature to even worry about ... let alone claim callously
whether astrology can measure up to be a science, soft, hard, medium, quasi- or otherwise. In
order for it to even be considered a soft-science, techniques of astrology would have to pass the
tests of validity, consistent and measurable reproducibility and technical rigour; the
inter-astrologer variability would need to be tested and quantified, then reduced. It is simply not
adequate to point at a few successful predictors and to use them as proof of astrology being
scientific, particularly when half of them aren’t even interested in (or capable of) revealing their
true sequence of thinking that led to the prediction. Unless these divinators/predictors allow
themselves to be transparently scrutinized as to how exactly they derived their astro-deductive
bottom lines in readings, there is no progress on this campaign. Many of these brilliant predictors
when questioned about the specifics of their techniques become tongue-tied or try to sound
mysterious and hide behind some wall of paranoia against reckless sharing of their profoundly
secret technique. That they are doing a whole world of good through their predictions is not being
denied but their unwillingness or inability to share their techniques in full light and to transfer
them to a large number of astrologers is only going to hurt astrology in the long run. With the
relatively small numbers of astrologers and believers in astrology being crowded on a small island,
if they do not hold on to and support each other, instead of clawing at each other, the island will
gradually fall in pieces into the surrounding ocean and with the crumbs of the island will fall the
astrologers and astrologophiles, as well.

In all fairness, though, the difficulty in sharing and transferring the techniques could lie in two
areas: firstly, in discerning clearly how much of the astro-delineative process is conscious (and
rational or logical) and what fraction of the 'reading' process is para-conscious or sub-conscious;
secondly, it must be kept in mind that the process of generating a reading demands concentration
and centering and is itself susceptible to interference by the very process of observation, in a
Heisenbergian manner (the act of observation changing the course of what is being observed).
This is accepted by many astrologers as being true in their experience but causes problems in the
process of validating astrological process as being scientific in nature.

There is also the issue of the scope of a reading. Many, perhaps most astrologers tend to use
certain basic techniques and have a certain way of approaching a chart or the areas in the
individual's life during a reading. However, the stream or flow of the reading can vary quite a bit
from one nativity to another, and the rigid and uniform ‘test’ protocols and paths often preferred
in scientific testing and reporting may actually adversely influence the usefulness of the
astrological reading during the 'test' situation. These are relatively significant problems and require
consciously directed approaches while justifying and testing the scientific rigour of astrology (and
astrologers). Little wonder, then, that many astrologers in order to remain effective pay little
attention to these scientific observational factors, which is fine as long as they do not fall prey to
the need of claiming what they do as being scientific (without testing) or of astrology as being a
science (without being tested or demonstrated to be so). Endeavours such as the "Hamilton
Project" or other repeated public blind testing paradigms may need to be carefully employed and
the resources or the will and energy for doing so on a wide and long scale seem to be missing, at
present. The personality of the individual astrologer also plays a significant role, obviously. There
is always something that remains for future exploration, of course.

Rohiniranjan
first written on May 8, 2000/modified a few times afterwards

www.boloji.com/astro

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jyotish-vani/
(discuss jyotish with friends)

Potrebbero piacerti anche