31
Therese Hamilton wrote:
How I wish that somehow "Vedic" could be dropped, and be replaced by a more suitable term. "Vedic" is so totally wrong and inappropriate for today's hybrid eastern-western astrology.
Yes. Moreover, the term is surely an historical misnomer for the horoscopic astrology actually practised in India itself too. :wink:

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

32
Mark wrote:Therese Hamilton wrote:
How I wish that somehow "Vedic" could be dropped, and be replaced by a more suitable term. "Vedic" is so totally wrong and inappropriate for today's hybrid eastern-western astrology.
Yes. Moreover, the term is surely an historical misnomer for the horoscopic astrology actually practised in India itself too. :wink:
I am wondering if we can thank David Frawley for applying "Vedic" to India's astrology. Three books were published in 1990, two years before the first American Vedic Council symposium. David Frawley was a sponsor of that symposium along with Dennis Harness and Stephen Quong.

Ronnie Gale Dreyer's Indian Astrology: A Western approach to the ancient Hindu art, The Aquarian Press, Great Britain (No Vedic there.)

David Frawley's The Astrology of Seers: A comprehensive guide to Vedic astrology , Passage Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA (The corruption begins?)

Bepin Behari's Myths and Symbols of Vedic Astrology (Edited by David Frawley!!) Passage Press, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

Right at the top of the 1992 First Symposium program booklet it states:

"Vedic Astrology is the original system of astrology founded by the sages of India over 5000 years ago..."

There you have it. The Greek-Arabic contribution to India'a astrology has been ignored in favor of a contemporary belief system.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

33
Therese Hamilton wrote:I am wondering if we can thank David Frawley for applying "Vedic" to India's astrology.
I know that ISKCON's Shyamasundara Dasa claims 'credit' for coining the phrase in the 1980s, but as I recall, the claim is not uncontested. I'm not absolutely sure who the other contender was, but it may have been Chakrapani Ullal. In any case, the misuse of the term Vedic is rampant in certain western subcultures; it is applied to everything from Indian mathematics to Mughal cuisine. The actual traditional use of the term (vaidika in Sanskrit) is quite close to western academic usage.
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

34
when i was first exposed to astrology from india it was called 'indian' astrology.. that was the term used in the 70's or 80's.. then somewhere along the line it became 'vedic'.. not sure who was responsible for that, but i would be curious..

35
Mark wrote:Varuna 2 wrote:
I have not been involved in the astrology community, and so I do not know who won what awards or who was considered the most influential, but I have read a number of texts by various Western Jyotishi's mentioned in this thread and for the most part the texts coming out of the Western Jyotish community are sort of like Linda Goodman (Western contemporary Jyotish authors) vs Ptolemy or Valens (classical Jyotisha texts). I regret to say this, but after being introduced to jyotish through Behari, I went to the classical texts and later on when I read the texts from Westerners it was like going back to kindergarten, over and over again, either that or they wrote stories about their spiritual journey in a book about astrology - but in both cases one would want to stick to the ancient and classical texts if one was interested in learning Jyotisha to an optimal level, and not that I have a problem with stories about spiritual paths. It seems like almost everyone writes a kindergarten astrology book or two, as an introduction to Jyotish, and that is as far as it goes. I do not know what their classes are like because I only studied through texts and on my own.
I have no objection to your sentiment i.e. traditional texts over popularised introductions. Its certainly where we should probably be going after reading some more basic introductions. Still, I think you are exceptionally harsh in lumping all the western Vedic community together like this. Bear in mind too that you are describing introductions to the topic for a western readership that are completely new to the topic. The situation is quite different in India.

Moreover, we all need to start somewhere. As we are on the topic I started my own astrology interest with Linda Goodman's books myself. I may have left that approach a long way behind but it sparked an initial interest. There is a place for popular astrology too in our astrological community.

I dont dispute a lot of over-simplification of Jyotish techniques may have been promoted by several of these North American authors in their books. How authentic their approach are is something one could surely only judge by studying in depth with them. Still, you almost seem to be suggesting that there are no decent practitioners of Jyotish in the west at all.

In any case, Martin has made it clear his article is not focusing on the quality of the astrology being offered but rather what has been most influential in the west.

Mark
Mark,

I have wanted to say that for a long time, and I tried to warn Melissa about it subtly, but I did not know how to say it without being hurtful and so I kept it to myself until now. I can have an exceptionally harsh speech, but I did not mean any harm to those people personally nor to that community. Let me try to say it better. I enjoyed reading western jyotishis stories about their spiritual paths and I learned some things from them and it was good to review basics from more than one person's perspective, however, if one was interested in learning Jyotisha in more depth, then the classical texts and certain Indian authors are where that is possible, and I say this without having read every single book printed by the western jyotishis.

The reason I brought it up on this thread is because if an article was made only mentioning western jyotishis names, it would be a real shame, since the audience would not learn as much as is possible, by reading western jyotishi's works, from my limited knowledge of this matter.

I inferred that Bowser had to deal with jyotishis telling him that the Lahiri ayanamsha is the true one because it is associated with more spiritual matters and therefore the Lahiri ayanamsha is The spiritual and true zodiac. I do not know anyone in the Jyotisha community or the dynamics of those communities, but if this is what is being said, then those people deserve harsh reprimands and more education, in my opinion.



p.s. Although I offered one explanation and wrote about western jyotishis, I was not making a judgment about them nor was I implying that I know more than the entire western jyotish community, rather, I was making a judgment on the literature specifically and with a 'generally speaking' clause, after having read various classical texts and not from the perspective of someone completely new to jyotish.
Last edited by varuna2 on Tue Jul 23, 2013 6:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

36
Therese Hamilton wrote:Varuna2 wrote:
I have not been involved in the astrology community, and so I do not know who won what awards or who was considered the most influential, but I have read a number of texts by various Western Jyotishi's mentioned in this thread and for the most part the texts coming out of the Western Jyotish community are sort of like Linda Goodman (Western contemporary Jyotish authors) vs Ptolemy or Valens (classical Jyotisha texts)...It seems like almost everyone writes a kindergarten astrology book or two, as an introduction to Jyotish, and that is as far as it goes...
I understand what you are saying here, Varuna. We already had James Braha's Ancient Hindu Astrology for the Modern Western Astrologer (1986), a good introduction for tropical astrologers. Then later Hart deFouw and Robert Svoboda published their substantial Light on Life (1996). For a scholarly approach by a Sanskrit scholar we had Valerie Roebuck's Circle of Stars (1992). This quite excellent and classically accurate book was published in Britain, but I believe most astrologers in America were not aware that the book existed.

I admit to being puzzled and surprised when later (and lesser) introductory texts appeared from the 1990s on. It did seem as if every astrologer of note felt it necessary to write and publish his or her own introductory text. And as each text appeared, more and more western concepts made their way into what had become known as "Vedic" astrology. How I wish that somehow "Vedic" could be dropped, and be replaced by a more suitable term. "Vedic" is so totally wrong and inappropriate for today's hybrid eastern-western astrology.

What is the title of Behari's third book that you mentioned? I do have several of his books. Passage Press sent me his books at no cost for review in my newsletter. That is how I happened to have his books in my library. I also received David Frawley's books for review.
Therese,

I am not suggesting you read it, only that it presents techniques that are authentic Jyotisha techniques, including Tajika, and so it is not like Behari did not transmit authentic Jyotisha in his work, which is the impression I got when I read your opinion of Behari. The text is titled: The Timing of Events. He also cites Sanskrit works that present information that is nowadays regarded as New Age or Theosophical rubbish, but there is actually a basis for some of those ideas in the ancient texts.

p.s. Frawley seemed to have oversimplified things and maybe should not have used the term 'vedic', but to his credit his dating of Indian civilization is actually based on speculation regarding actual astronomy facts, and not speculation based on prejudice and ignorance.

I read several books and articles written by 19th century Orientalists, and the prejudice towards Indians is rampant. I also read who and how the dating of Indian history was invented by these Orientalists. They arbitrarily decided that each stage of literature took about 500 years, and one of them disagreed and thought each stage of Hindu philosophy/scriptures took a little bit longer. So they "established" the age of the rg veda, the first text according to them, at 1200-1900 bce. This "historical fact" is still taught today and has no basis for it.

Also, the Fagan octoscope is based on the Varuna octoscope as far as I can tell, so I do not blame Indians nor Frawley for their ignoring the Western stories of history including the history of astrology, since this is what happened to the Indians, when the original Orientalists invented Indian history for them and said India owes everything to the so-called "cradle of civilization" of Mesopotamia and the Hellenists.

Many Indians reject the speculations of Western versions of their history including astrology, and I do not blame them after what has happened to them. They also received cultural genocide and ethnic genocide in the exact same manner as the European peoples.

37
James wrote:
when i was first exposed to astrology from india it was called 'indian' astrology.. that was the term used in the 70's or 80's.. then somewhere along the line it became 'vedic'.. not sure who was responsible for that, but i would be curious..
Hi James,

On the subject of taking the 'Vedic' out of Jyotish this article by Dieter Koch challenges the basic idea very directly.

http://www.astro.com/astrologie/in_vedic2_e.htm

I personally always avoid the term 'Vedic astrology'. Indian astrology, Jyotish or Hindu astrology all seem infinitely preferable.

Maybe the use of the label 'Vedic astrology' is tied to the widespread popularity of the term 'Ayurvedic' in the west as a a complementary medicine approach?

In India there are also the Hindu supremacists who want to attribute all cultural developments as indigenous rather than a result of any outside influence. Dating all astrology as indigenous and originating in the Vedic texts fits in with that kind of chauvanist mind set.

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

38
Varuna2 wrote:
Therese,
I am not suggesting you read it, only that it presents techniques that are authentic Jyotisha techniques, including Tajika, and so it is not like Behari did not transmit authentic Jyotisha in his work, which is the impression I got when I read your opinion of Behari. The text is titled: The Timing of Events. He also cites Sanskrit works that present information that is nowadays regarded as New Age or Theosophical rubbish, but there is actually a basis for some of those ideas in the ancient texts.
Varuna, based on these remarks, I found a copy of The Timing of Events on Amazon. I see that the book was published in India unlike Behari's other books that were published in America.
p.s. Frawley seemed to have oversimplified things and maybe should not have used the term 'vedic', but to his credit his dating of Indian civilization is actually based on speculation regarding actual astronomy facts, and not speculation based on prejudice and ignorance.
Well, we are discussing horoscopic astrology here, and not the dating of Indian civilization. There is no doubt about the Persian-Arabic-Greek influence on India's astrology.
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm

39
Mark wrote:
Hi James,

On the subject of taking the 'Vedic' out of Jyotish this article by Dieter Koch challenges the basic idea very directly.

http://www.astro.com/astrologie/in_vedic2_e.htm

I personally always avoid the term 'Vedic astrology'. Indian astrology, Jyotish or Hindu astrology all seem infinitely preferable.

Mark
hi mark. i suppose this is 'off' topic, but very interesting article! i didn't read it all the way down but some of the quotes below i really liked! i am glad the forum here is called 'indian and asian astrology'. someone appears to have had some insight into all of this prior to making this forum!


"At the same time, it must be stated that some Indian gurus live in parallel universes, within which even the most obvious philological, historical and astronomical facts have no validity. To a western outsider, this is really difficult to understand because all these traditions believe that they teach the knowledge of the truth and the divine."

"While Indian astrology may be "Vedic" in that it is part of today's Vedic tradition, it is in fact a lot younger than the Vedas and has many elements which were not developed in India but in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and Greece."

"Another point deserves attention: Today's "Vedic" astrology and calendar calculation are purely sidereal, i.e. they ignore the seasons, equinoxes, and solstices. In contrast, the Vedic texts attribute great importance to the season-based tropical year and its cardinal points. 9 ?atapathabr?hma?a 6.7.1.18 says that the year is based on the seasons."

"The oldest astronomical text book of India, Ved??gajyoti?a 5ff., teaches that the beginning of the month of M?gha ideally coincides with the winter solstice and a new moon at the beginning of the lunar mansion Dhani??h?."

40
"Another point deserves attention: Today's "Vedic" astrology and calendar calculation are purely sidereal, i.e. they ignore the seasons, equinoxes, and solstices. In contrast, the Vedic texts attribute great importance to the season-based tropical year and its cardinal points. 9 ?atapathabr?hma?a 6.7.1.18 says that the year is based on the seasons."

"The oldest astronomical text book of India, Ved??gajyoti?a 5ff., teaches that the beginning of the month of M?gha ideally coincides with the winter solstice and a new moon at the beginning of the lunar mansion Dhani??h?."
While I am in agreement with Dieter Koch on the non-Indian origins of horoscopic astrology, and recognize the frustration he feels at the unreasonable attitudes of some Indian teachers,* the above paragraphs are partly wrong and wholly beside the point. The Hindu calendar used today is as connected to the seasons as it ever was; the seasonal elements are just not seen as relevant to the zodiac issue. And really, there is no reason to assume such relevance unless you are a tropicalist of some sort -- which means that Indian siderealists are being criticized simply for not being tropicalists.

*(Not that such attitudes are unique to India; most people would feel the same way about, say, American creationist views.)
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

42
As one who, like Therese, remembers those early Bay Area conferences and attended many of K. N. Rao's caffeinated all-night discussions, I will add my two cents worth.

The term "Vedic astrology" probably does predate David Frawley, as some here have mentioned, but it was David who turned it into the "dominant paradigm" re: describing the astrology of India.

And yes, there was a great deal of nationalistic, even Hindu right-wing influence on all of this, dedicated to "proving" that everything originated thousands of years ago in India -- despite the fact that its proponents need to make their case by arguing that mythology ought to be taken literally as history and that almost all historical records are lies invented to discredit India (yes, I really have heard any number of individuals go so far as to make that statement).

As an example of how intense the advocates of the "India first" school can be, most of this crowd has what I can only describe as a fierce hatred for the work of David Pingree and regard him as an "enemy" of "true" Jyotish. Most seem unaware that he taught himself Sanskrit at the age of 15, studied in India, that Sanskrit was his first love among his many languages, and that he wrote on many occasions that no one could understand the history of science unless they were familiar with ancient India. I also know many people who visited him in hopes of discussing Hellenistic astrology, but he kept wandering off topic and back to India. All the same, he is perceived as an antagonist because he doesn't support the "India first in all things" theory propounded by Feuerstein, Kak and Frawley.

As for the title of Behari's third volume.... Originally, there wasn't one. Passage Press received a large box, all beat up and in bad shape because it had been mailed from India. Inside it were about 1200 pages, on thin rice paper, typed on an ancient machine with several letters broken, and written in very poor English. It was all a single work, not three separate ones. By that time Passage had already published "Myths and Symbols" under Frawley's editorship, but he didn't have the time to edit Behari's magnum opus, so the job was given to me, with David acting in an advisory capacity (he lived about a mile away from me at the time). It was clear that the work was so long that we would have to publish in multiple volumes. The titles of the first two volumes were chosen by Robben Hixson of Passage Press, David, and me. I had already fully edited and type-set the third volume, which was ready to go to press when Passage collapsed. Behari got the copyright back and brought Vol III out in India, under the title you have indicated above (can't remember it at the moment).