Okay -- this forum is getting too serious and needs some acid meeting some alkali (nothing more dangerous than adding lime juice to baking powder (sodii bi carb)!

Both of you, Rishi and Hemal have called Astrology/Jyotish as SCIENCE.

Can you (without feeling offended and personally attacked!) explain to me why or how Jyotish can be justified as being a science. Use comparisons with other accepted sciences, if you wish.

And one clear indication of neither of you taking personal offense to my mild challenge in this posting would be: You would not question me back and ask what I think Jyotish is!

I think I have already written that very elaborately in many places, including this board!

This is not an exam and certainly not an open book exam! No exam where soul-searching is involved ever is!

Regards

RR



[quote="RishiRahul"][quote="hemal_bhach"][quote="RishiRahul"][quote="hemal_bhach"][quote="RishiRahul"]The only thing where moon with Rahu Ketu axis helps to contribute/act as a catalyst in regard to foriegn travels is that:=

Rahu= foreign influence. Moon=mind.

A thought.

RishiRahul[/quote]

Rahulji,

Yes I agree to your logic, but personally I feel that its the foreign influence or craze on the mind of jatak, whcih is of dominance if there is Rahu-moon conjunction, howveer, if there are other right combinations related to right houses, of foreign travel/residence, it becomes fulfilment of wish, or else would lead to great frustration/depression..because as such those with rahu-moon conjunct, areprone to depressive tendencies.[/quote]


Dear Hemal,

That is precisely what I meant and was tryng all the way to mean. It is great to know that there are some serious astrologers around willing to accept and give.

RishiRahul
Thank you[/quote]

Thanks Rahulji,

At times I ahev noted that, two persons think same way, but expression is different, and takes time to actually know the mind..

I love and accept Astrology as a science and is my great hobby too, learning and analysing this amazing science.  As such, its not my profession, because I am a chemical engr with management degree, and have my own business/factory with worldwide exports...

Best regard.

Hemal[/quote]



Hello Hemal,

The difference.

I love and accept Astrology as a science and is my great hobby too over 26 years, learning and analysing this amazing science.

I have my career too (not astrology), a full time one, where I am involved in man management and public relations, dealing with the elite, and also the lowest levels... which aids my learning of humans.

Astrollogy study even as a profession is my pasion.

RishiRahul[/quote]

[quote="hemal_bhach"]Dear RR,

a small presentation of logic.  Its a well known and accepted fact that there are nigh tide and low tide seen all over, during full moon/no moon periods, respectively. Moon which is just a satellite of earth, influences so such an extent on water.  Our human body constitues , maximum of water, so definitely, all these grahs , would have some influence on our body/mind, which is just matter?....The movemnts of these grahs, is studies, and mathematically fixed.  Various predictions are also made climatically based on this movements...Hence this is definitely a science.

Now analysis, and prediction based analysis, is based on knowledge of this science, and certain fixed concepts/postulates, whcih have come from our rishis, ..

I invite all learned forum here, to just not go into acid/alkali/salt...or litmus test...But prove that this is a science...and analysis is based on this science.

Hemal
/quote]

Dear Respondants/Participants,

First thing I learned in my chemistry lab on day one! Keep your workbench clean and uncluttered! So, I removed all the other messages from Hemal Bhach's response so that we can focus on what he provided as the starter thought/response to my question to him and Rishi: Please elaborate why you call astrology/jyotish a science?

His response was Moon and Tides (well known and often misused as a logical explanation to prove astrology's mechanistic underpinnings). My rebuttal to why the *logic* is flawed, follows!

Unlike the OCEAN which is one large confluent body of water and salts, the human (or animal or plant) body is not confluent! It is divided into billions and billions of cells! Visualize this: If the OCEAN were compartmentalized into similiar billions and trillions and quadrillions (given the relative size difference between say a human body and the OCEAN!) of cells with membranes separating the packets of water and salt, do you really accept and expect that the compartmentalized ocean would have had such huge tides?

I am sorry but this moon-ocean-water theory that has been flaunted around for some decades <just> DOES NOT HOLD WATER!

Two good 'scientific' books that one must read are the one by Eysenck and Nias (Astrology, science or superstition) and Percy Seymore's book that describes his switching/trigger magnetic theory! <www.google.com> or ask me if you are really interested)

In these books are described the evidence and data which indicate that the cumulative gravitational force of the birthing team is magnitudes higher than that of all planets combined (including the transsaturnines!)! And quite frankly that seems to make sense at least in cases of caesarian births where the modern surgeon's golf game sessions often dictates the birth times of planned C-sections! THINK about that, very scientifically! The good old inverse square law that Namjoshiji tried to hammer into my class! This LAW is why moon which is just a small satellite of the earth (compared to the masses of jupiter or saturn for instance) exerts more influence on the OCEAN because of its proximity, but no match for the birthing team that is smaller but so much closer!

By the above tokens, moon (which exerts the tangible tidal effect!) should ALONE be significant in jyotish charts for consideration and not the other planets which are magnitudes weaker! Why do we still need them for our jyotish work? I have tried using moon and lagna alone and over a large sample it just turns into an eclipsed hypothesis!

And if anyone is claiming that the tidal effect is the most significant indicator, since it is gravitation-based, then the weak gravitational pull of other planets just does not cut the mustard!

Perhaps as the discussion gets deeper and more serious we will get into the important sine qua non for Scientific observations: Reproducibility, Validity and so on!

RR

[quote="rohiniranjan"]Okay -- this forum is getting too serious and needs some acid meeting some alkali (nothing more dangerous than adding lime juice to baking powder (sodii bi carb)!

Both of you, Rishi and Hemal have called Astrology/Jyotish as SCIENCE.

Can you (without feeling offended and personally attacked!) explain to me why or how Jyotish can be justified as being a science. Use comparisons with other accepted sciences, if you wish.

And one clear indication of neither of you taking personal offense to my mild challenge in this posting would be: You would not question me back and ask what I think Jyotish is!

I think I have already written that very elaborately in many places, including this board!

This is not an exam and certainly not an open book exam! No exam where soul-searching is involved ever is!

Regards

RR



To Dada,

Before we venture forth to debate whether Jyotish is a science or not, let us agree on the definition of Science.

A definition of the above is pasted here from Wikipedia:

Science (from the Latin scientia, 'knowledge'), in the broadest sense, refers to any systematic knowledge or practice.[1] In a more restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the scientific method, as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research.

Do we agree on this definition or is there another which could be considered mor apt.

RishiRahul

Dear Rohiniranjan ji
I agree with your saying in earlier posts that movement of planets in different signs/houses are just like arms of a wall clock and they tells about the time in terms of bad/good period for a native. Though considering Mars as aggressive, Jupiter as wisdom giver or relying on other mythological stories to explain behaviour or events, seems irrational as mars/jupiter etc.  are just dead planets and too far away from earth to effect but if most of behavioural patterns or events predicted for a horoscope with the help of Jyotish comes true then definately this subject is fit to be called as "Science," though the very basic fundamental appears irrational to some people or scientists. I believe that the mythological stories to explain the behaviour of these planets were cooked up by great rishis for explaining the complex natural phenomenons in simple language and ultimately, one day, Science will accept those phenomenons too.