Nothing is ridiculous about astrology — only our perception about it is ridiculous

The fact is — the people who are disenchanted about the usefulness of astrology are not aware that astrology is not geared to tell all sort of events that may happen in our life by the simple logic that it, first, calculates which planets shall occupy which House (any of the twelve 30° wide divisions of the zodiac) at what age of the person who approaches an astrologer (referred to as “Native” in the astrological language).

Astrologer is able to calculate which planets shall occupy which Houses since it is prescheduled (based on the orbital periods of all the planets).

Since what may happen in the life of the native on any date depends on which planets would be occupying which Houses, which is something that is “pre-scheduled”; obviously, an astrologer can tell about only such events that may be also prescheduled.

We have to remember that all events that take place in our life, are not of the “pre-scheduled category” as is shown in the following diagram.

This Pie Chart displays the type of things it is possible to foresee through astrology and the type of things it is not possible to foresee through it.

Only the things shown in the green colour can be predicted through astrology.

The other things such people feel disturbed about is why Vedic Astrology dwells on such absurd ideas that things such as the Lunar Nodes may be also treated as planets and the things such as though the Sun, the Mars and Jupiter may be Beneficent Planets; but the Venus, the Mercury and Saturn may be Maleficent Planets for the people whose Zodiac Sign may be Aeries since we have nothing to substantiate such things.

So, they hold the view that since astrology dwells on the things that can’t be substantiated we should not trust any results that are derived through it, even though it is not at all so.

For instance, in this particular case to treat the Lunar Nodes as planets or to treat some of the planets as maleficent and some of the planets as beneficent is actually fully justified as explained below.

The reason why to treat the Lunar Nodes as planets or to treat some of the planets as maleficent and some of the planets as beneficent is not at all absurd

Is it not true that many a time, we are not able to even guess why we have to surmount so many obstacles in our life and so many times, we get through every obstacle without any hassle?

It implies that there have to be some invisible and un-perceptible malefic elements that create obstacles in our life; and some invisible and un-perceptible beneficent elements that help us in our life.

It is due to this reason why Vedic Astrology has treated two invisible and some un-perceptible points — the “Ascending lunar node” as a maleficent planet “Raahu” and the “Descending lunar node” as a beneficent planet “Ketu”.

Unless the astrologers would have attributed maleficence and beneficence to some planets how else astrology could have explained the sources of such harmful and helpful elements that engage with us in our life?

Why both types of elements act in a tug-of-war type of situation can be best understood only by understanding how astrology works.

Can astronomy explain why we sometimes face problems and sometimes we don’t face problems in our life?

If not — why do they poke their nose in astrology?

Both of them are different branches of science.

There are also valid reasons that explain why we, sometimes, get 100% correct predictions and, sometimes, 100% absurd predictions also through astrology.

The reasons why we, sometimes, get 100% correct results and, sometimes, 100% absurd results through astrology

In astrology all predictions are made based on what had been observed to have happened when which planets should have occupied which Houses in the life of the people depending on their Zodiac Sign (The constellation that may have been rising into the sky at the time of the sunrise on the day he or she should have born).

If we look back at how such database should have been developed — let us assume that those people who should have collected such data may have collected the data from about 100 sources; it could not have been possible that same thing should have happened in the case of all of them.

If we assume that they should have picked up the details of what should have happened at that time in most of the cases, say, in at least 75% cases, don’t you agree — such data can lead us, at the best, to have correct predictions, not in more than 75% cases?

Well, you have guessed it right.

It explains why we are never sure — which prediction may be accurate and which prediction may be inaccurate.

But that is not the only reason why we get wrong predictions so often.

There are lots of other reasons, as well.

This technique worked very fine for thousands of years in the past because the lifestyle of the people did not change as significantly as it has changed, particularly, during the last century.

Though, even in the past, all astrological predictions have never been right in all cases due to the above reason yet the situation was not so much deplorable as it has turned out to be, nowadays.

The fact is the rate at which the lifestyles have changed has been very fast particularly during the past century, which has made the original database obsolete and the astrologers are using still the old database only.

We don’t get correct results since people did not use to travel by such modes as cars racing at a speed as high as 200 km per hr on the roads amidst other vehicles also running at more or less at such high speeds only when the people who had collected data relating to the things that happen, could not have collected the data related to the casualties that occur when we use such modes of transport or the data related to all other things of the same nature.

The same way, every citizen of a country used to follow only one type of religion all over a country in the past while, nowadays, many new religions have been floated across the world — some of which are very flippant.

The other thing, that rakes the mind of the most of the people is there is no way how anybody may substantiate, say, what should have led them to presume that the first House only should relate to the things concerning a native’s facial looks, character, temperament and personality — not any other House?

Or, why the second House only should have to relate to the things concerning financial prosperity, material resources; the ability to earn money and the self-worth say — why not the seventh House or the eighth House or any other House?

Is it not a fact that sometimes the astrologers can make razor-sharp predictions and if so, it should be enough of a reason why we should believe that it hardly matters which Houses cover which aspects of life as long as the data collected by them to prepare the database that tells what can be expected to happen depending on the position of the planets is accurate despite all such presumptuous — right or wrong?

Of course, if we want — we may represent the Natal Charts even in the form of a string of variables, as follows.

The manner, in which, we may replace a graphic Natal Chart with a String of Variables

At present, we refer to various astrological planets only by their names.

To cast the charts in the form of a string of variables it would be necessary to call them as P1 (First Planet), P2 (Second Planet) and so on by serializing them, say, in the ascending order of their distance from the Earth, in the following manner.

P1 … Moon — the nearest planet (At an average distance of 0.00256 AU only)

P2 … Venus — At an average distance of 0.272 AU

P3 … Mars — At an average distance of 0.52 AU

P4 … Mercury — At an average distance of 0.61 AU

P5 … Sun — At an average distance of 1.0 AU

P6 … Jupiter — At an average distance of 4.2 AU

P7 … Saturn — At an average distance of 8.58 AU

P8 … Uranus — At an average distance of 18.2 AU

P9 … Neptune — At an average distance of 29.1 AU

Thus if a planet P(m) may be occupying the House H(n), we may represent such occurrence through a variable “P(m)-H(n)”.

This concept may be best understood through the following diagram.

The potency of the planets in term of the angle of their ingress (Θ°) into any particular House may be also treated as one of the vectors of these variables, as explained through the following diagram making the radical look like {(P(1),Θ(1)°,H(m); P(2),Θ(2)°,H(m);P(3), Θ(3)°,H(m); … ; P(9),Θ(9)°,H(m)}

The Zodiac Sign (ZS) of an individual may be also treated as one of the variables of this radical by making it the tenth variable which may make the radical look like [{(P(1),Θ(1)°,H(m); P(2),Θ(2)°,H(m);P(3), Θ(3)°,H(m); … ; P(9),Θ(9)°,H(m)}, ZS].

Though the longitude and the latitude of the place where a person may be living do not form a part of this radical the values of the variables P(m)-H(n) depend on the longitude and the latitude of the place.

What may be the value of the radical on any future date at a place having Latitude Lt and Longitude Lg, can be calculated only if the Lt and the Lg of the place of the Birth are known.

So it makes it necessary to make the Lt and Lg also a part of the radical, in the following manner.

[{(P(1),Θ(1)°,H(m); P(2),Θ(2)°,H(m);P(3), Θ(3)°,H(m); … ; P(9),Θ(9)°,H(m)}, ZS, Lt, Lg], which is a string of twelve variables.

Once we switch over to such a system, it would be much more convenient to develop suitable software of astrology than it is — at present.

Of course, it raises a query in mind.

If so, why has astrology not been scrapped as yet?

Obviously, there has to be some reason for it.

The reason is — normally, we discard something only when we find out something better with which we may have replaced it.

In the case of astrology, as we know, it has not been possible to find out anything better than it so far, which could have replaced it.