[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > Think of this as a favor on my part. I could have
> > > > responded giving you some made-up outcome of the
> > > > test for me. I used to have fun at TM parties by 
> > > > telling people who asked "What sign are you?" the 
> > > > *wrong* astrological sign. Then I'd just kick back 
> > > > and watch them trip on how *perfect* that was for
> > > > me, and how I matched all the descriptions of a
> > > >  to a T. 
> > > 
> > > Given that we all bounce around all 16 cells at times, and
> > > descriptor COULD describe your behavior "some times". 
> > > 
> > > If one is (sadly) stuck in the notion that these are tight
> > > little boxes -- then, your game could be amusing. Amusement
> > > based on false notions.  Now that is funny.
> > 
> > Not to mention, anybody who thinks wrong guesses in
> > the "What's-my-sun-sign?" game reveal anything at
> > all about the validity or lack of same of astrology
> > doesn't have any idea of what astrology actually
> > involves. (Same applies to *right* guesses, for that
> > matter.)
> >
> 
> That's my game. I know what astrology involves, I learnt
> how to chart horoscopes many years ago. The whole process
> is rubbish from start to finish.

The sensing part of me would say "sure". The intuitive part of me
says" yeah, thats true, but Jeez why do so many correct things pop out
of my chart when I look at it once a year." The latter may just be 
tricky confirmation bias going on. But the correlations over the years
seem to have "disproved". All part of a more transparent, higher order
confirmation bias I am sure. :) 

Regardless of mapping person A to Chart X -- and chart X to destiny
X34w1 -- I find insight in just using the jyotish based
classifications and relationships as useful (fluid) descriptors. "Oh
that person looks s Saturn. Not like that Jupitarian over there".
"Or, that was a really mars thing to do". Or, "he is on a venus run".
Or rahu times anyone?"

And when you say astrology, I assume you mean one particular type of
Western astrology. Or at best, one or two particular brands of
whatever school. Hardly a definitive case to be made against all
jyotish systems (jyotish being my focus). 

And in various jyotish schools, the lagna, or other key point can be
many things, in many places. Depending on the angle of analysis. Look
at the harmonic charts, as a small subset of examples. Which means you
are not REALLY ONLY a pisces ascedent with moon in 5th -- but at
times, in some periods, in some circumstances, for some parts of your
totality -- you are also A, B C D ... Z. 

Which illustrates that the totality is within in us. Just different
parts manifest at any time. To IDENTIFY with ONLY being pisces
ascedent with moon if 5th is so anally limited and closed minded, such
a eyes-shut view, one-dimensional, well, its breath stopping. I am
everything. Only at times, I was given the script for a pisces with
moon in 5th -- and I try to play along. In other parts of my life, I
am mars ascendant with  and in other parts ... An last life I was 






 



> The originators didn't
> know of course, they were just trying to make sense of things
> and bring some order to the world. I'm not slagging them off
> as they had a sense of wonder about the night sky. They just
> didn't have our understanding, little things like the sun
> doesn't go round the earth, the knowledge of which would
> make your horoscope look pretty different. And they did give
> the heavens some pretty cool names.
> 
> People only claim sun-signs aren't a true indicator of
> anything when it doesn't work out. Astrologers see the sun
> as the biggest influence. It would be nice if there was
> any evidence for it but after this long it's firmly on my
> list of "Unproved and time to move on".
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > > Think of this as a favor on my part. I could have
> > > > > responded giving you some made-up outcome of the
> > > > > test for me. I used to have fun at TM parties by 
> > > > > telling people who asked "What sign are you?" the 
> > > > > *wrong* astrological sign. Then I'd just kick back 
> > > > > and watch them trip on how *perfect* that was for
> > > > > me, and how I matched all the descriptions of a
> > > > >  to a T. 
> > > > 
> > > > Given that we all bounce around all 16 cells at times, and
> > > > descriptor COULD describe your behavior "some times". 
> > > > 
> > > > If one is (sadly) stuck in the notion that these are tight
> > > > little boxes -- then, your game could be amusing. Amusement
> > > > based on false notions.  Now that is funny.
> > > 
> > > Not to mention, anybody who thinks wrong guesses in
> > > the "What's-my-sun-sign?" game reveal anything at
> > > all about the validity or lack of same of astrology
> > > doesn't have any idea of what astrology actually
> > > involves. (Same applies to *right* guesses, for that
> > > matter.)
> > >
> > 
> > That's my game. I know what astrology involves, I learnt
> > how to chart horoscopes many years ago. The whole process
> > is rubbish from start to finish.
> 
> The sensing part of me would say "sure". The intuitive part of me
> says" yeah, thats true, but Jeez why do so many correct things pop 
out
> of my chart when I look at it once a year." The latter may just be 
> tricky confirmation bias going on. But the correlations over the 
years
> seem to have "disproved". All part of a more transparent, higher 
order
> confirmation bias I am sure. :) 
> 
> Regardless of mapping person A to Chart X -- and chart X to destiny
> X34w1 -- I find insight in just using the jyotish based
> classifications and relationships as useful (fluid) descriptors. "Oh
> that person looks s Saturn. Not like that Jupitarian over 
there".
> "Or, that was a really mars thing to do". Or, "he is on a venus 
run".
> Or rahu times anyone?"
> 
> And when you say astrology, I assume you mean one particular type of
> Western astrology. Or at best, one or two particular brands of
> whatever school. Hardly a definitive case to be made against all
> jyotish systems (jyotish being my focus). 
> 
> And in various jyotish schools, the lagna, or other key point can be
> many things, in many places. Depending on the angle of analysis. 
Look
> at the harmonic charts, as a small subset of examples. Which means 
you
> are not REALLY ONLY a pisces ascedent with moon in 5th -- but at
> times, in some periods, in some circumstances, for some parts of 
your
> totality -- you are also A, B C D ... Z. 
> 
> Which illustrates that the totality is within in us. Just different
> parts manifest at any time. To IDENTIFY with ONLY being pisces
> ascedent with moon if 5th is so anally limited and closed minded, 
such
> a eyes-shut view, one-dimensional, well, its breath stopping. I am
> everything. Only at times, I was given the script for a pisces with
> moon in 5th -- and I try to play along. In other parts of my life, I
> am mars ascendant with  and in other parts ... An last life I 
was 
> 

Here's an interesting thing someone said about my Jyotish
chart. He assumed after knowing me for about six months 
that I had been educated to university standard, when he looked 
at my chart he said he was surprised as it said my education was
a failure. And it was, I dropped out of school at sixteen with no
qualifications at all (It's a long story).

What to make of it? All I know is the maths used to draw up
the chart are rubbish, if there is more to it I'd like to know.

Do you draw up charts yourself New Morning? I'd be happy for
you to have a go, as I say in my other rant to Feste, I'm
open minded about it, I'm just unconvinced thus far.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB  
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Think of this as a favor on my part. I could have
> > > > > > responded giving you some made-up outcome of the
> > > > > > test for me. I used to have fun at TM parties by 
> > > > > > telling people who asked "What sign are you?" the 
> > > > > > *wrong* astrological sign. Then I'd just kick back 
> > > > > > and watch them trip on how *perfect* that was for
> > > > > > me, and how I matched all the descriptions of a
> > > > > >  to a T. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Given that we all bounce around all 16 cells at times, and
> > > > > descriptor COULD describe your behavior "some times". 
> > > > > 
> > > > > If one is (sadly) stuck in the notion that these are tight
> > > > > little boxes -- then, your game could be amusing. Amusement
> > > > > based on false notions.  Now that is funny.
> > > > 
> > > > Not to mention, anybody who thinks wrong guesses in
> > > > the "What's-my-sun-sign?" game reveal anything at
> > > > all about the validity or lack of same of astrology
> > > > doesn't have any idea of what astrology actually
> > > > involves. (Same applies to *right* guesses, for that
> > > > matter.)
> > > >
> > > 
> > > That's my game. I know what astrology involves, I learnt
> > > how to chart horoscopes many years ago. The whole process
> > > is rubbish from start to finish.
> > 
> > The sensing part of me would say "sure". The intuitive part of me
> > says" yeah, thats true, but Jeez why do so many correct things pop 
> out
> > of my chart when I look at it once a year." The latter may just be 
> > tricky confirmation bias going on. But the correlations over the 
> years
> > seem to have "disproved". All part of a more transparent, higher 
> order
> > confirmation bias I am sure. :) 
> > 
> > Regardless of mapping person A to Chart X -- and chart X to destiny
> > X34w1 -- I find insight in just using the jyotish based
> > classifications and relationships as useful (fluid) descriptors. "Oh
> > that person looks s Saturn. Not like that Jupitarian over 
> there".
> > "Or, that was a really mars thing to do". Or, "he is on a venus 
> run".
> > Or rahu times anyone?"
> > 
> > And when you say astrology, I assume you mean one particular type of
> > Western astrology. Or at best, one or two particular brands of
> > whatever school. Hardly a definitive case to be made against all
> > jyotish systems (jyotish being my focus). 
> > 
> > And in various jyotish schools, the lagna, or other key point can be
> > many things, in many places. Depending on the angle of analysis. 
> Look
> > at the harmonic charts, as a small subset of examples. Which means 
> you
> > are not REALLY ONLY a pisces ascedent with moon in 5th -- but at
> > times, in some periods, in some circumstances, for some parts of 
> your
> > totality -- you are also A, B C D ... Z. 
> > 
> > Which illustrates that the totality is within in us. Just different
> > parts manifest at any time. To IDENTIFY with ONLY being pisces
> > ascedent with moon if 5th is so anally limited and closed minded, 
> such
> > a eyes-shut view, one-dimensional, well, its breath stopping. I am
> > everything. Only at times, I was given the script for a pisces with
> > moon in 5th -- and I try to play along. In other parts of my life, I
> > am mars ascendant with  and in other parts ... An last life I 
> was 
> > 
> 
> Here's an interesting thing someone said about my Jyotish
> chart. He assumed after knowing me for about six months 
> that I had been educated to university standard, when he looked 
> at my chart he said he was surprised as it said my education was
> a failure. And it was, I dropped out of school at sixteen with no
> qualifications at all (It's a long story).
> 
> What to make of it? All I know is the maths used to draw up
> the chart are rubbish, if there is more to it I'd like to know.
> 
> Do you draw up charts yourself New Morning? I'd be happy for
> you to have a go, as I say in my other rant to Feste, I'm
> open minded about it, I'm just unconvinced thus far.
>

I have software to do the calcs -- which go way beyond basic planet
positions. I am not highly skilled in reading. I am not sure anyone is
-- though a few jytoishees said some pretty amazing uncannny things.
(others um "not so much") 

As far as your chart, maybe some time later. But it would only be a
lark. I know some things, but its not comprehensive. But I know enough
to see interesting things in my own chart. 

As to your math and action at a distance issues, for me that is a
strawman, -- in that 

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"  
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning 
 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB 
 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Think of this as a favor on my part. I could have
> > > > > > > responded giving you some made-up outcome of the
> > > > > > > test for me. I used to have fun at TM parties by 
> > > > > > > telling people who asked "What sign are you?" the 
> > > > > > > *wrong* astrological sign. Then I'd just kick back 
> > > > > > > and watch them trip on how *perfect* that was for
> > > > > > > me, and how I matched all the descriptions of a
> > > > > > >  to a T. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Given that we all bounce around all 16 cells at times, and
> > > > > > descriptor COULD describe your behavior "some times". 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > If one is (sadly) stuck in the notion that these are tight
> > > > > > little boxes -- then, your game could be amusing. 
Amusement
> > > > > > based on false notions.  Now that is funny.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Not to mention, anybody who thinks wrong guesses in
> > > > > the "What's-my-sun-sign?" game reveal anything at
> > > > > all about the validity or lack of same of astrology
> > > > > doesn't have any idea of what astrology actually
> > > > > involves. (Same applies to *right* guesses, for that
> > > > > matter.)
> > > > >
> > > > 
> > > > That's my game. I know what astrology involves, I learnt
> > > > how to chart horoscopes many years ago. The whole process
> > > > is rubbish from start to finish.
> > > 
> > > The sensing part of me would say "sure". The intuitive part of 
me
> > > says" yeah, thats true, but Jeez why do so many correct things 
pop 
> > out
> > > of my chart when I look at it once a year." The latter may just 
be 
> > > tricky confirmation bias going on. But the correlations over 
the 
> > years
> > > seem to have "disproved". All part of a more transparent, 
higher 
> > order
> > > confirmation bias I am sure. :) 
> > > 
> > > Regardless of mapping person A to Chart X -- and chart X to 
destiny
> > > X34w1 -- I find insight in just using the jyotish based
> > > classifications and relationships as useful (fluid) 
descriptors. "Oh
> > > that person looks s Saturn. Not like that Jupitarian over 
> > there".
> > > "Or, that was a really mars thing to do". Or, "he is on a venus 
> > run".
> > > Or rahu times anyone?"
> > > 
> > > And when you say astrology, I assume you mean one particular 
type of
> > > Western astrology. Or at best, one or two particular brands of
> > > whatever school. Hardly a definitive case to be made against all
> > > jyotish systems (jyotish being my focus). 
> > > 
> > > And in various jyotish schools, the lagna, or other key point 
can be
> > > many things, in many places. Depending on the angle of 
analysis. 
> > Look
> > > at the harmonic charts, as a small subset of examples. Which 
means 
> > you
> > > are not REALLY ONLY a pisces ascedent with moon in 5th -- but at
> > > times, in some periods, in some circumstances, for some parts 
of 
> > your
> > > totality -- you are also A, B C D ... Z. 
> > > 
> > > Which illustrates that the totality is within in us. Just 
different
> > > parts manifest at any time. To IDENTIFY with ONLY being pisces
> > > ascedent with moon if 5th is so anally limited and closed 
minded, 
> > such
> > > a eyes-shut view, one-dimensional, well, its breath stopping. I 
am
> > > everything. Only at times, I was given the script for a pisces 
with
> > > moon in 5th -- and I try to play along. In other parts of my 
life, I
> > > am mars ascendant with  and in other parts ... An last life 
I 
> > was 
> > > 
> > 
> > Here's an interesting thing someone said about my Jyotish
> > chart. He assumed after knowing me for about six months 
> > that I had been educated to university standard, when he looked 
> > at my chart he said he was surprised as it said my education was
> > a failure. And it was, I dropped out of school at sixteen with no
> > qualifications at all (It's a long story).
> > 
> > What to make of it? All I know is the maths used to draw up
> > the chart are rubbish, if there is more to it I'd like to know.
> > 
> > Do you draw up charts yourself New Morning? I'd be happy for
> > you to have a go, as I say in my other rant to Feste, I'm
> > open minded about it, I'm just unconvinced thus far.
> >
> 
> I have software to do the calcs -- which go way beyond basic planet
> positions. I am not highly skilled in reading. I am not sure anyone 
is
> -- though a few jytoishees said some pretty amazing uncannny thin

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

And what do you know about jyotish? have you actually learned a system
and applied it across 100 + charts? I suspect not. Is there any
possibility that your assessment is uninformed, unexperienced, shoot
from the hip, backseat driving, "unmitaged shit"?

My experience is that there are lots of systems, and lot of
practicioners. To examine one or two (possibly quite shallowly) , and
then dismiss all as unmitigated shit seems well, a bit rash and shallow. 

There is a lot of crap out there. Personally, I took similar advice as
B. suggests. Actually learned it. Frankly, I cannot provide
statistical proof. And I have not much interest in doing so. But I
have seen many instances where it appears to be right on --and beyond
coincidence. I certainly don't base my life or decisions on it. I find
it "curious". And I have no interest one way or the  other if others
see no value in it. For me, absent linking people to charts to
destinies -- it has some value. To me. I offer up that you might be
surprised at some non-predictive aspects of it. 

For me its a bit of a lark. An amusing "puzzle" -- perhaps no more
significant than a cross-word puzzle -- only "more" mind stimulating
and exercising, IME. 

SSRI supports yagyas. Yagyas are closely linked to jyotish. Have you
heard SSRI comment on jyotish? 

That you have not personally seen any value in jyotish -- kewl. I am
not a proseletizer, nor a defender. What is also of interests me is
how apparently rational and educated people, you are among several
here -- today even -- who make wide sweeping claims about something
they know, apparently, nothing about. Thats both revealing and for me
 amusing. 



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Oh Please, Bhairitu! Jyotish is the biggest pile of
> unmitigated shit, if there is such a thing! No one has
> predicted anything with jyotish except
> retrospectively. I love how you call it an "inexact
> science". Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron? Don't
> insult the intellectual methodology of science by
> claiming jyotish even remotely approaches it. I would
> love for jyotish to be "true", but for now its just
> keeps a bunch of true believers weak and uncommitted
> to simply living their live base on their own lived
> experience. Weak, weak, weak and immature while I'm at
> it!
>  
> --- Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > hugheshugo wrote:
> > > I need to be convinced that there is anything to
> > it by way
> > > of a good reading that would reveal things I'd
> > never told and
> > > make accurate predictions, even if only about
> > trends. However
> > > this mechanism may function, until I can tell the
> > signal from 
> > > the noise I will doubt that my analysis is a
> > strawman.
> > The best way to test Jyotish is to learn it.  Use
> > something easy like 
> > the System's Approach which is easy to learn and
> > pretty much based on 
> > Parashara anyway.   Unlike other approaches it is a
> > distillation of the 
> > rules that Parashara laid out which I believe were a
> > compilation of the 
> > way astrology was a practiced at the time in India. 
> > My only doubts are 
> > that the planets except for the Moon and Sun have
> > little effect on our 
> > lives and that astrology is tracking natural cycles
> > that the planets 
> > provided handy markers for.  I have never found
> > someone who has given me 
> > proper birthtime to be off as far as their
> > profession and their success 
> > at it nor problems relating to bad planetary cycles.
> >  It is also not an 
> > exact science though we have a lot of jyotishis who
> > think it is (down to 
> > the minute).  Think of it more like a "weather
> > report."  But it is less 
> > abstract than the (not so) Amazing Randi would have
> > you think.  :)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > To subscribe, send a message to:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > Or go to: 
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>  

> Be a better friend, newshound, and 
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[John]

A good jyotish primer is a book by James Braha entitled, "Ancient 
Jyotish for the Modern Astrologer".  By the way, Systems Approach is 
a specific type of method which ignores many of the jyotish 
tradition.  The author of this method is very adamant in stating that 
his ideas are the best and does not accept any other techniques from 
the ancient tradition.  Because of this attitude, I'm a bit skeptical 
in accepting his pronouncemets to be gospel.

The best way to learn is to attend a jyotish class from a local 
practitioner.  This is the easiest way to experience jyotish and to 
get immersed into the tradition.

JR





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> hugheshugo wrote:
> > I need to be convinced that there is anything to it by way
> > of a good reading that would reveal things I'd never told and
> > make accurate predictions, even if only about trends. However
> > this mechanism may function, until I can tell the signal from 
> > the noise I will doubt that my analysis is a strawman.
> The best way to test Jyotish is to learn it.  Use something easy 
like 
> the System's Approach which is easy to learn and pretty much based 
on 
> Parashara anyway.   Unlike other approaches it is a distillation of 
the 
> rules that Parashara laid out which I believe were a compilation of 
the 
> way astrology was a practiced at the time in India.  My only doubts 
are 
> that the planets except for the Moon and Sun have little effect on 
our 
> lives and that astrology is tracking natural cycles that the 
planets 
> provided handy markers for.  I have never found someone who has 
given me 
> proper birthtime to be off as far as their profession and their 
success 
> at it nor problems relating to bad planetary cycles.  It is also 
not an 
> exact science though we have a lot of jyotishis who think it is 
(down to 
> the minute).  Think of it more like a "weather report."  But it is 
less 
> abstract than the (not so) Amazing Randi would have you think.  :)
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Oh Please, Bhairitu! Jyotish is the biggest pile of
> unmitigated shit, if there is such a thing! No one has
> predicted anything with jyotish except
> retrospectively. I love how you call it an "inexact
> science". Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron? 

I think that the belief in Jyotish and
astrology is related to the belief in
"techniques" (of meditation, performing
siddhis, etc.) that work for everyone.
Such a belief is based upon the idea 
that there *can* be such a thing as an
"exact science," and that following a
bunch of prescribed steps can lead you 
to a predicted goal.

I don't buy it. I'm not convinced that
the statements "Jyotish is accurate" or
that "My technique for  is better than your technique"
are that much different than the state-
ment, "Jesus is the only way." They are
statements that reinforce the idea of
exclusivity -- "We (who believe this)
know stuff that you peons don't."

I could be wrong, but that's really what
I tend to believe. I have not encountered
even *one* technique in the realm of self
discovery that works "as advertised" for 
everyone. Not one. And I don't ever expect 
to. Especially if there is a price tag
attached...

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> hugheshugo wrote:
> > I need to be convinced that there is anything to it by way
> > of a good reading that would reveal things I'd never told and
> > make accurate predictions, even if only about trends. However
> > this mechanism may function, until I can tell the signal from 
> > the noise I will doubt that my analysis is a strawman.
> The best way to test Jyotish is to learn it.  Use something easy 
like 
> the System's Approach which is easy to learn and pretty much based 
on 
> Parashara anyway.   Unlike other approaches it is a distillation of 
the 
> rules that Parashara laid out which I believe were a compilation of 
the 
> way astrology was a practiced at the time in India.  My only doubts 
are 
> that the planets except for the Moon and Sun have little effect on 
our 
> lives and that astrology is tracking natural cycles that the 
planets 
> provided handy markers for.  I have never found someone who has 
given me 
> proper birthtime to be off as far as their profession and their 
success 
> at it nor problems relating to bad planetary cycles.  It is also 
not an 
> exact science though we have a lot of jyotishis who think it is 
(down to 
> the minute).  Think of it more like a "weather report."  But it is 
less 
> abstract than the (not so) Amazing Randi would have you think.  :)
>

So far, I wouldn't say it was science at all. But if you
have some software and enough experience to be confident
I'll send you my birth details and we can do an experiment.

I'm not convinced anything has happened to me emotionally
or career wise that I couldn't account for just by looking
at myself and what's happened, influences from parents, school
etc. So the idea that planets can act as markers would mean
someone with my birth chart could have predicted all of it,
otherwise things wouldn't match up; I'd be able to look
back and see things that came out of nowhere. In short, 
it should be obvious that I've been dancing on the strings
of unseen powers rather than subject to the cause and effect
of a life lived among other people just making it up as they
go along.

I'm up for the experiment, sounds like fun. Whaddya think?


I've always been a fan of Randi, he put his money where his
mouth is, $1,000,000 to be precise, and never had anyone
convince him there is anything supernatural going on. 
Could've been a money spinner for the TMO I always thought.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

In various ares of life, people seem to imagine such big things. Then
knock something down because it does not meet their inflated
expectations. Spouse or guru on a pedestal perhaps. Or, for example,
"They said I have high blood pressure and yet they couldn't even
predict what would happen to me on May 3rd and what my bank account
balance would be." or, "That charlatan weatherman, he said there was
60% chance of rain, but didn't even predict that my cat would get
sick, and my kid would lose his softball game."   These are odd
expectations that do not follow. And such crazy expectations are sure
to disappoint.  

IMV, Jyotish, if it does anything (which is not established that it
does -- but there are interesting antecdotal evidence) says things
like, "The next few years will likely have some pot holes in the
roads." It doesn't say that you will hit one and break your axle. Or
that you will run over one filled with water and splash the mayor when
he is walking his dog." These and a billion other things may be more
likely during this period. 

But trying to present you with detailed "film into the future" that
you can watch clip by clip, detail by detail, is not what jyotish
does. Though thats what people seem to expect. And when such a
detailed film is not presented, they get all bent out of shape and say
"Jyotish is full of shit". In that case, something may be full of
shit, but I don't believe its jyotish.

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > hugheshugo wrote:
> > > I need to be convinced that there is anything to it by way
> > > of a good reading that would reveal things I'd never told and
> > > make accurate predictions, even if only about trends. However
> > > this mechanism may function, until I can tell the signal from 
> > > the noise I will doubt that my analysis is a strawman.
> > The best way to test Jyotish is to learn it.  Use something easy 
> like 
> > the System's Approach which is easy to learn and pretty much based 
> on 
> > Parashara anyway.   Unlike other approaches it is a distillation of 
> the 
> > rules that Parashara laid out which I believe were a compilation of 
> the 
> > way astrology was a practiced at the time in India.  My only doubts 
> are 
> > that the planets except for the Moon and Sun have little effect on 
> our 
> > lives and that astrology is tracking natural cycles that the 
> planets 
> > provided handy markers for.  I have never found someone who has 
> given me 
> > proper birthtime to be off as far as their profession and their 
> success 
> > at it nor problems relating to bad planetary cycles.  It is also 
> not an 
> > exact science though we have a lot of jyotishis who think it is 
> (down to 
> > the minute).  Think of it more like a "weather report."  But it is 
> less 
> > abstract than the (not so) Amazing Randi would have you think.  :)
> >
> 
> So far, I wouldn't say it was science at all. But if you
> have some software and enough experience to be confident
> I'll send you my birth details and we can do an experiment.
> 
> I'm not convinced anything has happened to me emotionally
> or career wise that I couldn't account for just by looking
> at myself and what's happened, influences from parents, school
> etc. So the idea that planets can act as markers would mean
> someone with my birth chart could have predicted all of it,
> otherwise things wouldn't match up; I'd be able to look
> back and see things that came out of nowhere. In short, 
> it should be obvious that I've been dancing on the strings
> of unseen powers rather than subject to the cause and effect
> of a life lived among other people just making it up as they
> go along.
> 
> I'm up for the experiment, sounds like fun. Whaddya think?
> 
> 
> I've always been a fan of Randi, he put his money where his
> mouth is, $1,000,000 to be precise, and never had anyone
> convince him there is anything supernatural going on. 
> Could've been a money spinner for the TMO I always thought.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Richard J. Williams]

TurquoiseB wrote:
> I have not encountered even *one* technique 
> in the realm of self discovery that works 
> "as advertised" for everyone. Not one. And 
> I don't ever expect to. Especially if there 
> is a price tag attached...
>
This would assume that you've tried every
technique known to man, which obviously you 
have not. In fact, from what I've read of from
your writings, you've tried only a few. And
I don't understand how you think you'd be able
to find out if any worked on anyone else at 
all.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not convinced anything has happened to me emotionally
> or career wise that I couldn't account for just by looking
> at myself and what's happened, influences from parents, school
> etc In short, 
> it should be obvious that I've been dancing on the strings
> of unseen powers rather than subject to the cause and effect
> of a life lived among other people just making it up as they
> go along.

You perhaps are mistaking cause and correlation. I can understand how
some in the past 1000 years took the notion of planets correlate to
events with "the planets cause events". But jyotish never said that
(that I have ever read or heard. Its been 10 years since I have done
anything with jyotish, but back then I read 10 or so books, saw maybe
8 or so jyotishees. Went to a national convention that happened to be
in my home town. I never hard any claim of causality.)

 Your watch may be able to tell when its five o'clock, and someone may
tell you that the train comes at 5, but in no way does the watch
striking 5 CAUSE the train to come. And no one claims that it does. 

Wristwatch, jytoish clock, no one claims causality. Why then expect or
look for causality?

And people may be acting "randomly" but collectively are certain
trends more apparent when the temperature rises? Higher crime? More
bar fights? More road rage? I see jyotish (if there is anything to it
-- jury still is out) as something like that. "Its going to be hot for
a while, and we can expect more events that occur when its hot to
actually occur." Not a lot of woo woo rays in that. 

(Or , "Its going to be a bumpy ride .. fasten your seatbelt")

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> TurquoiseB wrote:
> > I have not encountered even *one* technique 
> > in the realm of self discovery that works 
> > "as advertised" for everyone. Not one. And 
> > I don't ever expect to. Especially if there 
> > is a price tag attached...
> >
> This would assume that you've tried every
> technique known to man, which obviously you 
> have not. In fact, from what I've read of from
> your writings, you've tried only a few. And
> I don't understand how you think you'd be able
> to find out if any worked on anyone else at 
> all.
>

Yes. Its as valid as saying, "I saw two films. They were terrible.
THEREFORE, all films are terrible." Jeeesh

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

> And people may be acting "randomly" but collectively are certain
> trends more apparent when the temperature rises? Higher crime? More
> bar fights? More road rage? I see jyotish (if there is anything to it
> -- jury still is out) as something like that. "Its going to be hot for
> a while, and we can expect more events that occur when its hot to
> actually occur." Not a lot of woo woo rays in that. 


In this example heat is a cause for people to lose their tempers.  It
is a physical effect.  I don't know if it is a urban myth or not but
is sounds plausible.  In the your case for Joitish not describing
causation, you invoke an equally woo woo principle of correlation
between objects in space and in our life's events. This doesn't help
in making the claim less fantastic.  The final woo woo aspect is the
claim that humans could know about such a connection using ancient
scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who believed in many forms of
divination.  Do people with big ears really have a better chance to
become wealthy?  

Finally, the use of gems to magically mitigate the influence of plants
seems to throw the whole claim of causation back into play doesn't it?

Humans naturally desire to know about and control future events. But
one thing seems to jump out from studying history: we totally suck at
this.  We always have, and that includes the Vedic era in India.



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
>  wrote:
> > I'm not convinced anything has happened to me emotionally
> > or career wise that I couldn't account for just by looking
> > at myself and what's happened, influences from parents, school
> > etc In short, 
> > it should be obvious that I've been dancing on the strings
> > of unseen powers rather than subject to the cause and effect
> > of a life lived among other people just making it up as they
> > go along.
> 
> You perhaps are mistaking cause and correlation. I can understand how
> some in the past 1000 years took the notion of planets correlate to
> events with "the planets cause events". But jyotish never said that
> (that I have ever read or heard. Its been 10 years since I have done
> anything with jyotish, but back then I read 10 or so books, saw maybe
> 8 or so jyotishees. Went to a national convention that happened to be
> in my home town. I never hard any claim of causality.)
> 
>  Your watch may be able to tell when its five o'clock, and someone may
> tell you that the train comes at 5, but in no way does the watch
> striking 5 CAUSE the train to come. And no one claims that it does. 
> 
> Wristwatch, jytoish clock, no one claims causality. Why then expect or
> look for causality?
> 
> And people may be acting "randomly" but collectively are certain
> trends more apparent when the temperature rises? Higher crime? More
> bar fights? More road rage? I see jyotish (if there is anything to it
> -- jury still is out) as something like that. "Its going to be hot for
> a while, and we can expect more events that occur when its hot to
> actually occur." Not a lot of woo woo rays in that. 
> 
> (Or , "Its going to be a bumpy ride .. fasten your seatbelt")
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

You bring a lot of nice side-shows to the table. Not much to do with
the premise I suggested, but entertaining. Dancing bears and all.

> > And people may be acting "randomly" but collectively are certain
> > trends more apparent when the temperature rises? Higher crime? More
> > bar fights? More road rage? I see jyotish (if there is anything to it
> > -- jury still is out) as something like that. "Its going to be hot for
> > a while, and we can expect more events that occur when its hot to
> > actually occur." Not a lot of woo woo rays in that. 
> 
> 
> In this example heat is a cause for people to lose their tempers.  It
> is a physical effect.  I don't know if it is a urban myth or not but
> is sounds plausible.  

>In the your case for Joitish not describing
> causation, you invoke an equally woo woo principle of correlation
> between objects in space and in our life's events.

It just as woo woo as the watch "predicting" the train coming. These
are two independent events. No woo woo rays. But they do corrleate.

> This doesn't help
> in making the claim less fantastic.  

Not sure I agree. But lets explore other examples that support or dis
the case.

>The final woo woo aspect is the
> claim that humans could know about such a connection using ancient
> scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who believed in many forms of
> divination. 

Huh? Are you suggesting that ancient cultures bring absolutely nothing
to the table? No valid knowledge of ANYTHING? Whew. We have different
views there.


> Do people with big ears really have a better chance to
> become wealthy?  

Is the term strawman in your vocabulary?
 
> Finally, the use of gems to magically mitigate the influence of plants
> seems to throw the whole claim of causation back into play doesn't it?

Um where did I say anything about gems? I have said there may be lots
of mud around the um, "gems" of insight from ancient cultures. There
is a need to wash off the mud. 

 By the way, I saw a recording of a recent ER. The new doc, apparently
ER's answer to McSteamy on Gray's Anatomy, said to a patient, "Oh, is
that a ruby? (on a necklace). In ancient vedic culture, rubies were a
sign of " Interesting he said vedic as if it was  'common" lingo.
 
> Humans naturally desire to know about and control future events. 

Perhaps. But what does that have to do with this discussion? O you
are still stuck in the same misconception as HUGO that this is about
casuation. Neti Neti.


>But
> one thing seems to jump out from studying history: we totally suck at
> this.  We always have, and that includes the Vedic era in India.

You can "rant" on about whole civilizations. I was talking about
jyotish. But why we are talking non-sequiturs, sportscasters suck at
predicting who is going to win Wimbledon. Should we line em all up and
shoot them?




 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
> >  wrote:
> > > I'm not convinced anything has happened to me emotionally
> > > or career wise that I couldn't account for just by looking
> > > at myself and what's happened, influences from parents, school
> > > etc In short, 
> > > it should be obvious that I've been dancing on the strings
> > > of unseen powers rather than subject to the cause and effect
> > > of a life lived among other people just making it up as they
> > > go along.
> > 
> > You perhaps are mistaking cause and correlation. I can understand how
> > some in the past 1000 years took the notion of planets correlate to
> > events with "the planets cause events". But jyotish never said that
> > (that I have ever read or heard. Its been 10 years since I have done
> > anything with jyotish, but back then I read 10 or so books, saw maybe
> > 8 or so jyotishees. Went to a national convention that happened to be
> > in my home town. I never hard any claim of causality.)
> > 
> >  Your watch may be able to tell when its five o'clock, and someone may
> > tell you that the train comes at 5, but in no way does the watch
> > striking 5 CAUSE the train to come. And no one claims that it does. 
> > 
> > Wristwatch, jytoish clock, no one claims causality. Why then expect or
> > look for causality?
> > 
> > And people may be acting "randomly" but collectively are certain
> > trends more apparent when the temperature rises? Higher crime? More
> > bar fights? More road rage? I see jyotish (if there is anything to it
> > -- jury still is out) as something like that. "Its going to be hot for
> > a while, and we can expect more events that occur when its hot to
> > actually occur." Not a lot of woo woo rays in that. 
> > 
> > (Or , "Its going to be a bumpy ride .. fasten your seatbelt")
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>

> 
> >The final woo woo aspect is the
> > claim that humans could know about such a connection using ancient
> > scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who believed in many forms of
> > divination. 
> 
> Huh? Are you suggesting that ancient cultures bring absolutely
nothing > to the table? No valid knowledge of ANYTHING? Whew. We have
different > views there.

I was putting my finger on the epistemological basis for the claims of
Joitish.  They come from ancient scriptures, not from any empirical
basis.  I was challenging that people can know about such a mechanism
and proposing that pre-scientific cultures tended to believe
assertions from priestly classes without any verification required.

There is plenty of stuff from pre-scientific cultures that has passed
modern standards of proof. Joitish is not one of them.
 
> 
> > Do people with big ears really have a better chance to
> > become wealthy?  
> 
> Is the term strawman in your vocabulary?

Physiognomy is a branch of Joitish.  This claim came from one of
Maharishi's favorite Joitishis.  I am pointing out that there is a
cluster of beliefs that need to be examined through some testing
rather than accepted on face value. 

>  
> > Finally, the use of gems to magically mitigate the influence of plants
> > seems to throw the whole claim of causation back into play doesn't it?
> 
> Um where did I say anything about gems? I have said there may be
lots> of mud around the um, "gems" of insight from ancient cultures.
There > is a need to wash off the mud. 

It is in the system.  You don't need to mention it for me to bring it
up.  I agree that there is a lot of mud to wash off in human knowledge
of all eras of our history.
>  
> > Humans naturally desire to know about and control future events. 
> 
> Perhaps. But what does that have to do with this discussion? O
you> are still stuck in the same misconception as HUGO that this is
about> casuation. Neti Neti.
> 
<


And you seem to be stuck in the misconception that a claim of
causation is somehow more fantastic than the claim that there is a
correlation in Vedic astrology. They are equally baseless as
assertions of unproven claims from an ancient culture.  This doesn't
mean that they didn't know anything, just that we shouldn't assume
they had the whole mechanics of creation figured out to such a precise
degree that they can accurately predict future events. 

> 
> 
> >But
> > one thing seems to jump out from studying history: we totally suck
at > > this.  We always have, and that includes the Vedic era in India.
> 
> You can "rant" on about whole civilizations. I was talking about
> jyotish. But why we are talking non-sequiturs, sportscasters suck at
> predicting who is going to win Wimbledon. Should we line em all up
and > shoot them?

"rant"  ummm  And I said we should shoot Joitish guys where?







> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> > 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
> > >  wrote:
> > > > I'm not convinced anything has happened to me emotionally
> > > > or career wise that I couldn't account for just by looking
> > > > at myself and what's happened, influences from parents, school
> > > > etc In short, 
> > > > it should be obvious that I've been dancing on the strings
> > > > of unseen powers rather than subject to the cause and effect
> > > > of a life lived among other people just making it up as they
> > > > go along.
> > > 
> > > You perhaps are mistaking cause and correlation. I can
understand how
> > > some in the past 1000 years took the notion of planets correlate to
> > > events with "the planets cause events". But jyotish never said that
> > > (that I have ever read or heard. Its been 10 years since I have done
> > > anything with jyotish, but back then I read 10 or so books, saw
maybe
> > > 8 or so jyotishees. Went to a national convention that happened
to be
> > > in my home town. I never hard any claim of causality.)
> > > 
> > >  Your watch may be able to tell when its five o'clock, and
someone may
> > > tell you that the train comes at 5, but in no way does the watch
> > > striking 5 CAUSE the train to come. And no one claims that it does. 
> > > 
> > > Wristwatch, jytoish clock, no one claims causality. Why then
expect or
> > > look for causality?
> > > 
> > > And people may be acting "randomly" but collectively are certain
> > > trends more apparent when the temperature rises? Higher crime? More
> > > bar fights? More road rage? I see jyotish (if there is anything
to it
> > > -- jury still is out) as something like that. "Its going to be
hot for
> > > a while, and we can expect more events that occur when its hot to
> > > actually occur." Not a lot of woo woo rays in that. 
> > > 
> > > (Or , "Its going to be a bumpy ride .. fasten your seatbelt")
> > >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> In various ares of life, people seem to imagine such big things. 
Then
> knock something down because it does not meet their inflated
> expectations. Spouse or guru on a pedestal perhaps. Or, for example,
> "They said I have high blood pressure and yet they couldn't even
> predict what would happen to me on May 3rd and what my bank account
> balance would be." or, "That charlatan weatherman, he said there was
> 60% chance of rain, but didn't even predict that my cat would get
> sick, and my kid would lose his softball game."   These are odd
> expectations that do not follow. And such crazy expectations are 
sure
> to disappoint.  
> 
> IMV, Jyotish, if it does anything (which is not established that it
> does -- but there are interesting antecdotal evidence) says things
> like, "The next few years will likely have some pot holes in the
> roads." It doesn't say that you will hit one and break your axle. Or
> that you will run over one filled with water and splash the mayor 
when
> he is walking his dog." These and a billion other things may be more
> likely during this period. 
> 
> But trying to present you with detailed "film into the future" that
> you can watch clip by clip, detail by detail, is not what jyotish
> does. Though thats what people seem to expect. And when such a
> detailed film is not presented, they get all bent out of shape and 
say
> "Jyotish is full of shit". In that case, something may be full of
> shit, but I don't believe its jyotish.

I think that's a bit disengenious, it isn't me inflating the
claims of jyotish, I get them from here;

"The Maharishi Vedic Astrology program -- Maharishi Jyotish program --
 is the science of transformation and technology of prediction. It 
reveals the relationship of individual life with cosmic life and 
enlivens their fundamental basis in consciousness. It is a practical 
program which helps one to "avert the danger that has not yet come" 
and to take maximum advantage of the fortunate periods coming in 
one's life.

According to this traditional knowledge, prediction of future events 
is possible because the same orderly and sequential Laws of Nature 
which govern the evolution of the universe also govern the life of 
the individual. Knowing any one point in the sequence, such as the 
time and place of birth, an expert can mathematically calculate 
forwards and backwards in time. In this way the Maharishi Vedic 
Astrology program offers valuable predictive insights concerning 
tendencies in all areas of life -- health, partnerships, finances, 
education, career and family relationships"

See that line = *an expert can mathematically calculate forwards
and backwards in time*. 

This is what I'm asking, and I don't think it's being full
of shit to want to put that to the test. To someone who has
lived a full and varied life, such as myself, certain things
should stand out and be obvious to any casual observer.

I don't think it's asking too much of the "science of
transformation and technology of prediction" to demonstrate
it's effectiveness.

Here's a true story;

I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has
stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any questions.
One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her health.
She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
scepticism.

I didn't get bent out of shape about it, I just take the attitude
that I won't believe something until it has demonstrated it's worth.
Looks like that day aint coming soon.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Richard M]

> But what does that have to do with this discussion? O you
> are still stuck in the same misconception as HUGO that this is about
> casuation. 

I am very much with you on this. It is so common to hear the argument
"astrology cannot work 'cos there is no known causal and physical
mechanism between the planets and our lives etc etc". I think I am
right in saying this was a favourite tack of the rabidly
anti-astrology British astronomer Patrick Moore (who is otherwise
wonderful of course).

A very long time ago I seem to remember reading Karl Jung's
"Synchronicity" which spelt out the alternative position that you are
giving here. It seems a perfectly reasonable view to me (and may be
true!). The fact that it is difficult to test (falsify) need not make
it irrational. Is String theory or the "multiverse" of Quantum
Mechanics any better off?

Another misconception it seems to me is that if Astrology is
"knowledge" it must be certain knowledge (the old joke about the
astrologer who gets run over by a bus and "didn't see that coming"). I
think all our knowledge is "fallible" knowledge, and so astrology
should not be faulted for that alone. 

I know little about Jytotish - but  spent a lot of time studying the I
Ching at one time. I was deeply convinced that it WAS revealing
something. Something was definitely going on. It's just that I
couldn't figure out what exactly! So I came around to the ironic view
 that Astrology can probably work, but is hardly a practical pastime
nevertheless.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

> 
> What you're missing here is that these scriptures come from direct  
> empirical insight from the sages who wrote them.

This just adds another layer of assertion that "sages" can have
extrasensory experiences about how the world works doesn't it?

 And some of these  
> are (allegedly) insights into people who would visit a particular  
> Jyotishi 

I have to put your experiences with Jotishis in the same box with
Turq's experiences with Rama.  They are fascinating, but so far out of
my personal experience that I can't really comment. It all sounds
interesting and I wish I was there!  I would love to see a video of
the guy you are speaking about with great cold reading powers.  That
would be my best chance of determining if he was actually coming up
with new accurate information.  The read would have to be on a
randomly selected person who had not spent hours in line speaking with
other people about themselves.

I'm not claiming to know that there aren't such people.  I really
don't know this.  I just haven't seen proof myself.  Fair enough?




( I'm speaking of the Surya or Brighu samhita style  
> Jyotishis here). For example I know a woman who was recognized as a  
> reincarnation in the Shankaracharya order who presented herself to a  
> reader of this type using her ordained name (a Sanskrit name), and  
> after they figured out which palm leaf related to her life, the  
> Jyotishi read it off and the palm leaf actually contained her birth  
> name in English. The palms leaves were hundreds of years old.
> 
> Also consider the following--I've had readings from a yogi who goes  
> into brief samadhis and was able to read off my entire chart and  
> birth time without ever having any details. He was also able to read  
> my life in shocking, really breathtaking detail. Any person can, and  
> I know of dozens who have, go visit this guy and he'll through his  
> direct empirical insight, tell you the moment of your birth to the  
> minute. He actually "sees" the moment of your birth like a hologram.
> 
> Now take this one step further, if there is a sage today who can do  
> this, isn't it also possible sages in the past could have similarly  
> grokked the planetary machinery as mirror of karmic weather as a set  
> of rules and techniques? The difference of course is that these texts  
> rely on sophisticated rules and adherence to these rules to get some  
> benefit, whereas the Jyotishi-sage has direct insight. There would  
> clearly be more room for error in a Jyotishi who merely is attempting  
> to apply rules grokked by an ancient rishi.
> 
> I would challenge anyone who's interested to meet this sage on his  
> next tour and see how you feel after that experience. How could you  
> explain that someone could just, from scratch, cognize the moment of  
> your birth and the precise position of planets in the sky?
> 
> 
> >   I was challenging that people can know about such a mechanism
> > and proposing that pre-scientific cultures tended to believe
> > assertions from priestly classes without any verification required.
> >
> > There is plenty of stuff from pre-scientific cultures that has passed
> > modern standards of proof. Joitish is not one of them.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly had no value it 
> would have disappeared long ago. 

It's value may be psychological for people who want life to make sense
in an orderly way.  This criteria has nothing to do with the
confidence we should place in its claims.

 As for the naysayers, most are talking 
> out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)

I wondered how long it would take for this type of argument to emerge.  

> 
> Westerners always look to specifics out of astrology but Indians want 
> more general answers to things like "will I get married", "will I have 
> children"or  "will I get a job?" 

In my experience Western astrology focuses more on personality traits
and Indians are the ones who want specific practical information.  YOu
can't get more specific than the claim for a specific time as
"auspicious' for weddings or business ventures.


These are things that can be answered 
> by looking at the status of the planetary indicators for these things.  
> I've done charts for people where I could just about guess from the 
> chart what their main question was going to be and often that was "why 
> am I not married?"  Well the 7th lord or other planets associated with 
> marriage were just trashed in the chart.  I've even seen very saintly 
> Indian astrologers tell someone with that configuration to just have 
> "flings." :-)

Would you care to test this ability on someone here?  This should be
fun.  Not someone with as much personal information online as I have
but someone who doesn't post her often?


 reading once for a friend's wife>


Duude!




> 
> I can also about guess that the person who comes to me who says "why is 
> everything going bad for me right noew" has about a 80-90% of a Rahu 
> transit affliction going on in their horoscope.  The great thing is you 
> can often tell people that things are going to get better because these 
> things only last for a while.   Of course there are those who have such 
> dreadful charts that it  may be years before anything gets better.  For 
> those people remedial measures and things like meditation help them
rise 
> about the influence of the planets.  If find that people who have been 
> meditating a long time find the planetary events to be "like lines
drawn 
> on water" happening around them but not directly to them in any strong 
> sense.
> 
> I did once do a reading where the person thought it wasn't very good 
> because I didn't pick up that she was pregnant which was something that 
> is not easy to pick up from a chart.  OTOH, I did a casual palmistry 
> reading once for a friend's wife and mentioned that there appeared
to be 
> some health issues coming up.  In that case those health were her 
> getting pregnant a few months later.  :-D
> 
> 
> new.morning wrote:
> > In various ares of life, people seem to imagine such big things. Then
> > knock something down because it does not meet their inflated
> > expectations. Spouse or guru on a pedestal perhaps. Or, for example,
> > "They said I have high blood pressure and yet they couldn't even
> > predict what would happen to me on May 3rd and what my bank account
> > balance would be." or, "That charlatan weatherman, he said there was
> > 60% chance of rain, but didn't even predict that my cat would get
> > sick, and my kid would lose his softball game."   These are odd
> > expectations that do not follow. And such crazy expectations are sure
> > to disappoint.  
> >
> > IMV, Jyotish, if it does anything (which is not established that it
> > does -- but there are interesting antecdotal evidence) says things
> > like, "The next few years will likely have some pot holes in the
> > roads." It doesn't say that you will hit one and break your axle. Or
> > that you will run over one filled with water and splash the mayor when
> > he is walking his dog." These and a billion other things may be more
> > likely during this period. 
> >
> > But trying to present you with detailed "film into the future" that
> > you can watch clip by clip, detail by detail, is not what jyotish
> > does. Though thats what people seem to expect. And when such a
> > detailed film is not presented, they get all bent out of shape and say
> > "Jyotish is full of shit". In that case, something may be full of
> > shit, but I don't believe its jyotish.
> >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly 
> had no value it would have disappeared long ago.  

Belief in God has no proven value, and it's
still around. People *like* to believe in
fantasies.

> As for the naysayers, most are talking out of their 
> butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)

And, quite honestly, it seems to me that a 
few of the yea-sayers are talking out of
attachment TO having done their homework,
and having "invested" a great deal of 
belief and time and effort into something 
they can't prove has value, any more than 
they can prove the existence of or the 
value of God.

What's fascinating is that the same folks
who occasionally poke fun at the TB TMers
for holding onto beliefs that they can't
prove are acting remarkably *like* those 
TB TMers now that a few of the things that 
*they* believe in have been challenged.

Attachment is attachment in my book. 

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[John]

Barry,

We've gone through this before.  If you don't believe in a God, which 
is to say the Answer to all answers, how do you know what you're 
saying is correct?  In fact, why should we listen to your 
speculations?  For all we know, your ideas could just be noise from a 
distant galaxy.

Here's another anomaly about your ideas.  You say that you're an 
atheist, which means that you don't believe in anything.  Then, why 
do you believe in reincarnation?  It appears to me that you are 
afraid of disappearing into oblivion.  In other words, you can't have 
your cake and eat it too.

JR





--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu  wrote:
> >
> > Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly 
> > had no value it would have disappeared long ago.  
> 
> Belief in God has no proven value, and it's
> still around. People *like* to believe in
> fantasies.
> 
> > As for the naysayers, most are talking out of their 
> > butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)
> 
> And, quite honestly, it seems to me that a 
> few of the yea-sayers are talking out of
> attachment TO having done their homework,
> and having "invested" a great deal of 
> belief and time and effort into something 
> they can't prove has value, any more than 
> they can prove the existence of or the 
> value of God.
> 
> What's fascinating is that the same folks
> who occasionally poke fun at the TB TMers
> for holding onto beliefs that they can't
> prove are acting remarkably *like* those 
> TB TMers now that a few of the things that 
> *they* believe in have been challenged.
> 
> Attachment is attachment in my book.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 11:44 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> 
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning   
> > wrote:
> >>
> > 
> >>
> >>> The final woo woo aspect is the
> >>> claim that humans could know about such a connection using 
ancient
> >>> scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who believed in many  
> >>> forms of
> >>> divination.
> >>
> >> Huh? Are you suggesting that ancient cultures bring absolutely
> > nothing > to the table? No valid knowledge of ANYTHING? Whew. We 
have
> > different > views there.
> >
> > I was putting my finger on the epistemological basis for the 
claims of
> > Joitish.  They come from ancient scriptures, not from any 
empirical
> > basis.
> 
> What you're missing here is that these scriptures come from direct  
> empirical insight from the sages who wrote them. And some of these  
> are (allegedly) insights into people who would visit a particular  
> Jyotishi ( I'm speaking of the Surya or Brighu samhita style  
> Jyotishis here). For example I know a woman who was recognized as 
a  
> reincarnation in the Shankaracharya order who presented herself to 
a  
> reader of this type using her ordained name (a Sanskrit name), and  
> after they figured out which palm leaf related to her life, the  
> Jyotishi read it off and the palm leaf actually contained her 
birth  
> name in English. The palms leaves were hundreds of years old.
> 
> Also consider the following--I've had readings from a yogi who 
goes  
> into brief samadhis and was able to read off my entire chart and  
> birth time without ever having any details. He was also able to 
read  
> my life in shocking, really breathtaking detail. Any person can, 
and  
> I know of dozens who have, go visit this guy and he'll through his  
> direct empirical insight, tell you the moment of your birth to the  
> minute. He actually "sees" the moment of your birth like a hologram.
> 
> Now take this one step further, if there is a sage today who can 
do  
> this, isn't it also possible sages in the past could have 
similarly  
> grokked the planetary machinery as mirror of karmic weather as a 
set  
> of rules and techniques? The difference of course is that these 
texts  
> rely on sophisticated rules and adherence to these rules to get 
some  
> benefit, whereas the Jyotishi-sage has direct insight. There would  
> clearly be more room for error in a Jyotishi who merely is 
attempting  
> to apply rules grokked by an ancient rishi.
> 
> I would challenge anyone who's interested to meet this sage on his  
> next tour and see how you feel after that experience. How could 
you  
> explain that someone could just, from scratch, cognize the moment 
of  
> your birth and the precise position of planets in the sky?
> 


It would convince me that something was going on, can you
post who he is and if he ever visits England.



> >   I was challenging that people can know about such a mechanism
> > and proposing that pre-scientific cultures tended to believe
> > assertions from priestly classes without any verification 
required.
> >
> > There is plenty of stuff from pre-scientific cultures that has 
passed
> > modern standards of proof. Joitish is not one of them.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Barry,
> 
> We've gone through this before.  If you don't believe 
> in a God, which is to say the Answer to all answers, 
> how do you know what you're saying is correct?  

I don't. Did I suggest I did?

> In fact, why should we listen to your speculations?  

Indeed. Why should you?

> For all we know, your ideas could just be noise from a 
> distant galaxy.

Yes, they could. 

And I did NOT try to sell them to you.

You are reacting as if I did.

> Here's another anomaly about your ideas. You say that 
> you're an atheist...

Actually, I think I have said many times that
I prefer the term non-theist. 'Atheist' has
too much baggage, some of it you are about
to shoulder.

> ...which means that you don't believe in anything.  

Baggage. Ignorant baggage. 

I believe in many things, the transcendent and
enlightenment among them. But there is no need
for a sentient God in my model for how those
things happen.

> Then, why do you believe in reincarnation?  

Because I remember the process. But do you hon-
estly believe that having a belief in reincarn-
ation requires a belief in God? I certainly don't.

> It appears to me that you are afraid of disappearing 
> into oblivion.  

I'm a Buddhist. I *like* disappearing into 
oblivion. I *get off* on disappearing into 
oblivion. :-)

> In other words, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

And possibly you shouldn't eat so much cake
before posting. It makes you come across like
someone who got his God button pushed, and 
lost his ability to reason. Have you been
tested for hypoglycemia?

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> wrote:
> >
> > In various ares of life, people seem to imagine such big things. 
> Then
> > knock something down because it does not meet their inflated
> > expectations. Spouse or guru on a pedestal perhaps. Or, for 
example,
> > "They said I have high blood pressure and yet they couldn't even
> > predict what would happen to me on May 3rd and what my bank 
account
> > balance would be." or, "That charlatan weatherman, he said there 
was
> > 60% chance of rain, but didn't even predict that my cat would get
> > sick, and my kid would lose his softball game."   These are odd
> > expectations that do not follow. And such crazy expectations are 
> sure
> > to disappoint.  
> > 
> > IMV, Jyotish, if it does anything (which is not established that 
it
> > does -- but there are interesting antecdotal evidence) says things
> > like, "The next few years will likely have some pot holes in the
> > roads." It doesn't say that you will hit one and break your axle. 
Or
> > that you will run over one filled with water and splash the mayor 
> when
> > he is walking his dog." These and a billion other things may be 
more
> > likely during this period. 
> > 
> > But trying to present you with detailed "film into the future" 
that
> > you can watch clip by clip, detail by detail, is not what jyotish
> > does. Though thats what people seem to expect. And when such a
> > detailed film is not presented, they get all bent out of shape 
and 
> say
> > "Jyotish is full of shit". In that case, something may be full of
> > shit, but I don't believe its jyotish.
> 
> I think that's a bit disengenious, it isn't me inflating the
> claims of jyotish, I get them from here;
> 
> "The Maharishi Vedic Astrology program -- Maharishi Jyotish 
program --
>  is the science of transformation and technology of prediction. It 
> reveals the relationship of individual life with cosmic life and 
> enlivens their fundamental basis in consciousness. It is a 
practical 
> program which helps one to "avert the danger that has not yet come" 
> and to take maximum advantage of the fortunate periods coming in 
> one's life.
> 
> According to this traditional knowledge, prediction of future 
events 
> is possible because the same orderly and sequential Laws of Nature 
> which govern the evolution of the universe also govern the life of 
> the individual. Knowing any one point in the sequence, such as the 
> time and place of birth, an expert can mathematically calculate 
> forwards and backwards in time. In this way the Maharishi Vedic 
> Astrology program offers valuable predictive insights concerning 
> tendencies in all areas of life -- health, partnerships, finances, 
> education, career and family relationships"
> 
> See that line = *an expert can mathematically calculate forwards
> and backwards in time*. 
> 
> This is what I'm asking, and I don't think it's being full
> of shit to want to put that to the test. To someone who has
> lived a full and varied life, such as myself, certain things
> should stand out and be obvious to any casual observer.
> 
> I don't think it's asking too much of the "science of
> transformation and technology of prediction" to demonstrate
> it's effectiveness.
> 
> Here's a true story;
> 
> I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
> for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has
> stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
> is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
> she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
> would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
> personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any questions.
> One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
> checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her health.
> She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
> scepticism.
> 
> I didn't get bent out of shape about it, I just take the attitude
> that I won't believe something until it has demonstrated it's worth.
> Looks like that day aint coming soon.

Jyotish has many specialties, which includes medical astrology.  It 
requires a fully trained doctor to know all the subtleties of 
health.  In spite of their training, not all of them can treat all 
the diseases known to man.  IMO, medical astrology should be 
performed by people with medical backgrounds.  Nonetheless, general 
jyotish practitioners should generally know the onset of health 
problems, but not the details.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly had no value 
it 
> would have disappeared long ago.  As for the naysayers, most are 
talking 
> out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)
> 
> Westerners always look to specifics out of astrology but Indians 
want 
> more general answers to things like "will I get married", "will I 
have 
> children"or  "will I get a job?" These are things that can be 
answered 
> by looking at the status of the planetary indicators for these 
things.  
> I've done charts for people where I could just about guess from the 
> chart what their main question was going to be and often that 
was "why 
> am I not married?"  Well the 7th lord or other planets associated 
with 
> marriage were just trashed in the chart.  I've even seen very 
saintly 
> Indian astrologers tell someone with that configuration to just 
have 
> "flings." :-)
> 
> I can also about guess that the person who comes to me who 
says "why is 
> everything going bad for me right noew" has about a 80-90% of a 
Rahu 
> transit affliction going on in their horoscope.  The great thing is 
you 
> can often tell people that things are going to get better because 
these 
> things only last for a while.   Of course there are those who have 
such 
> dreadful charts that it  may be years before anything gets better.  
For 
> those people remedial measures and things like meditation help them 
rise 
> about the influence of the planets.  If find that people who have 
been 
> meditating a long time find the planetary events to be "like lines 
drawn 
> on water" happening around them but not directly to them in any 
strong 
> sense.

So, could you do mine and post it here? I'm interested, really.
I'll be honest if I think it's a match for how things are for
me right now. If you have time it would be fun.





> I did once do a reading where the person thought it wasn't very 
good 
> because I didn't pick up that she was pregnant which was something 
that 
> is not easy to pick up from a chart.  OTOH, I did a casual 
palmistry 
> reading once for a friend's wife and mentioned that there appeared 
to be 
> some health issues coming up.  In that case those health were her 
> getting pregnant a few months later.  :-D
> 
> 
> new.morning wrote:
> > In various ares of life, people seem to imagine such big things. 
Then
> > knock something down because it does not meet their inflated
> > expectations. Spouse or guru on a pedestal perhaps. Or, for 
example,
> > "They said I have high blood pressure and yet they couldn't even
> > predict what would happen to me on May 3rd and what my bank 
account
> > balance would be." or, "That charlatan weatherman, he said there 
was
> > 60% chance of rain, but didn't even predict that my cat would get
> > sick, and my kid would lose his softball game."   These are odd
> > expectations that do not follow. And such crazy expectations are 
sure
> > to disappoint.  
> >
> > IMV, Jyotish, if it does anything (which is not established that 
it
> > does -- but there are interesting antecdotal evidence) says things
> > like, "The next few years will likely have some pot holes in the
> > roads." It doesn't say that you will hit one and break your axle. 
Or
> > that you will run over one filled with water and splash the mayor 
when
> > he is walking his dog." These and a billion other things may be 
more
> > likely during this period. 
> >
> > But trying to present you with detailed "film into the future" 
that
> > you can watch clip by clip, detail by detail, is not what jyotish
> > does. Though thats what people seem to expect. And when such a
> > detailed film is not presented, they get all bent out of shape 
and say
> > "Jyotish is full of shit". In that case, something may be full of
> > shit, but I don't believe its jyotish.
> >
> >
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's a true story;
> 
> I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
> for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has
> stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
> is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
> she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
> would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
> personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any questions.
> One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
> checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her health.
> She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
> scepticism.
> 


Your story proves nothing. 

The experts doing Jyotish must master it completely otherwise it is 
of limited practical value. They should be from a long line of 
generations of professional Jyotishjis so that the many difficult 
levels of intellect have been transcended by their forefathers. This 
is Jyotish MahaPragya - to own the knowledge. Like a carpenter whos 
father and father before him passed on all those small details that 
makes the work easy, more effective. It becomes automatic, like for 
example when you entered the room of Triguna; he did not have to take 
your pulse because he felt every detail in your bloodstream once you 
entered the room. That is the result of generations of Vedic 
tradition. 

I have many excellent artists in my family, but no photographers, I 
wish I had. Perhaps I will start my own tradition :-)

To be chronically tired is something a good Jyotishji certainly 
should have been able to see. 

The first wave of Jyotishjis that was going on Global Tours spent 
months in Vlodrop being tested by Purusha. Whats that word, flunked ? 
Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless Maharishi in 
his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail no 
doubt long before they arrived, invited them to Holland and payed all 
the expenses. Some cried in joy when the left for home having so 
freely being given the Darshan, inspiration and upliftment of their 
lifetime.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > In various ares of life, people seem to imagine such big 
things. 
> > Then
> > > knock something down because it does not meet their inflated
> > > expectations. Spouse or guru on a pedestal perhaps. Or, for 
> example,
> > > "They said I have high blood pressure and yet they couldn't even
> > > predict what would happen to me on May 3rd and what my bank 
> account
> > > balance would be." or, "That charlatan weatherman, he said 
there 
> was
> > > 60% chance of rain, but didn't even predict that my cat would 
get
> > > sick, and my kid would lose his softball game."   These are odd
> > > expectations that do not follow. And such crazy expectations 
are 
> > sure
> > > to disappoint.  
> > > 
> > > IMV, Jyotish, if it does anything (which is not established 
that 
> it
> > > does -- but there are interesting antecdotal evidence) says 
things
> > > like, "The next few years will likely have some pot holes in the
> > > roads." It doesn't say that you will hit one and break your 
axle. 
> Or
> > > that you will run over one filled with water and splash the 
mayor 
> > when
> > > he is walking his dog." These and a billion other things may be 
> more
> > > likely during this period. 
> > > 
> > > But trying to present you with detailed "film into the future" 
> that
> > > you can watch clip by clip, detail by detail, is not what 
jyotish
> > > does. Though thats what people seem to expect. And when such a
> > > detailed film is not presented, they get all bent out of shape 
> and 
> > say
> > > "Jyotish is full of shit". In that case, something may be full 
of
> > > shit, but I don't believe its jyotish.
> > 
> > I think that's a bit disengenious, it isn't me inflating the
> > claims of jyotish, I get them from here;
> > 
> > "The Maharishi Vedic Astrology program -- Maharishi Jyotish 
> program --
> >  is the science of transformation and technology of prediction. 
It 
> > reveals the relationship of individual life with cosmic life and 
> > enlivens their fundamental basis in consciousness. It is a 
> practical 
> > program which helps one to "avert the danger that has not yet 
come" 
> > and to take maximum advantage of the fortunate periods coming in 
> > one's life.
> > 
> > According to this traditional knowledge, prediction of future 
> events 
> > is possible because the same orderly and sequential Laws of 
Nature 
> > which govern the evolution of the universe also govern the life 
of 
> > the individual. Knowing any one point in the sequence, such as 
the 
> > time and place of birth, an expert can mathematically calculate 
> > forwards and backwards in time. In this way the Maharishi Vedic 
> > Astrology program offers valuable predictive insights concerning 
> > tendencies in all areas of life -- health, partnerships, 
finances, 
> > education, career and family relationships"
> > 
> > See that line = *an expert can mathematically calculate forwards
> > and backwards in time*. 
> > 
> > This is what I'm asking, and I don't think it's being full
> > of shit to want to put that to the test. To someone who has
> > lived a full and varied life, such as myself, certain things
> > should stand out and be obvious to any casual observer.
> > 
> > I don't think it's asking too much of the "science of
> > transformation and technology of prediction" to demonstrate
> > it's effectiveness.
> > 
> > Here's a true story;
> > 
> > I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
> > for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has
> > stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
> > is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
> > she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
> > would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
> > personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any questions.
> > One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
> > checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her 
health.
> > She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
> > scepticism.
> > 
> > I didn't get bent out of shape about it, I just take the attitude
> > that I won't believe something until it has demonstrated it's 
worth.
> > Looks like that day aint coming soon.
> 
> Jyotish has many specialties, which includes medical astrology.  It 
> requires a fully trained doctor to know all the subtleties of 
> health.  In spite of their training, not all of them can treat all 
> the diseases known to man.  IMO, medical astrology should be 
> performed by people with medical backgrounds.  Nonetheless, general 
> jyotish practitioners should generally know the onset of health 
> problems, but not the details.
>

No, you're ducking and diving here. If jyotish can spot trends or 
'

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

> Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless Maharishi
in > his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail no 
> doubt long before they arrived,

Good ol' "no doubt" Nabby!

BTW I spent plenty of time with Triguna and he couldn't even cure my
heart burn on repeated visits and taking all his foul "medicines."



--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
>  wrote:
> > Here's a true story;
> > 
> > I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
> > for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has
> > stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
> > is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
> > she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
> > would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
> > personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any questions.
> > One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
> > checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her health.
> > She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
> > scepticism.
> > 
> 
> 
> Your story proves nothing. 
> 
> The experts doing Jyotish must master it completely otherwise it is 
> of limited practical value. They should be from a long line of 
> generations of professional Jyotishjis so that the many difficult 
> levels of intellect have been transcended by their forefathers. This 
> is Jyotish MahaPragya - to own the knowledge. Like a carpenter whos 
> father and father before him passed on all those small details that 
> makes the work easy, more effective. It becomes automatic, like for 
> example when you entered the room of Triguna; he did not have to take 
> your pulse because he felt every detail in your bloodstream once you 
> entered the room. That is the result of generations of Vedic 
> tradition. 
> 
> I have many excellent artists in my family, but no photographers, I 
> wish I had. Perhaps I will start my own tradition :-)
> 
> To be chronically tired is something a good Jyotishji certainly 
> should have been able to see. 
> 
> The first wave of Jyotishjis that was going on Global Tours spent 
> months in Vlodrop being tested by Purusha. Whats that word, flunked ? 
> Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless Maharishi in 
> his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail no 
> doubt long before they arrived, invited them to Holland and payed all 
> the expenses. Some cried in joy when the left for home having so 
> freely being given the Darshan, inspiration and upliftment of their 
> lifetime.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Bhairitu wrote:
> 
> > As for the naysayers, most are talking
> > out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)
> 
> Physician, heal thyself.
> 
> Why is the idea that the universe is a random place
> where stuff can just happen so threatening to some?

Why indeed?

This has been an interesting discussion to
watch. A few voices who usually come across
as reasonable seem to have gotten their 
buttons pushed. It was OK as long as we were 
only disbelieving in the claims of the TMO, 
but we *crossed the line*, man...we started 
disbelieving in Jyotish and MBTI and God. 

And suddenly we've got trouble, with a capital
T, right here in River City.  :-)

I think you nailed it. It's about chaos, and
one's comfort level with that concept.

Some, like me and seemingly you, just have 
NO PROBLEM with the concept of a chaotic 
universe. We don't know for sure that it 
IS a chaotic universe, but if it is, cool. 

Others seem to need a SYSTEM of some kind to
keep the concept of chaos out of sight and 
out of mind. Astrology and Jyotish are systems
that believe that they have made chaos under-
standable and predictable. The MBTI is a sys-
tem for reducing the chaos of possible person-
ality types down to an even 16, and thus again
rendering chaos understandable and predictable.
A belief in God is probably the biggest system
for believing that the universe is not chaotic.

What I'm noticing in a lot of this discussion 
is that if you scratch the surface of a habitual 
skeptic about one system, what you just might 
find is a prosyletute for another system.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 1:27 PM, hugheshugo wrote:
> 
> > It would convince me that something was going on, can you
> > post who he is and if he ever visits England.
> 
> 
> His name is Yogi Karve and he has a tour email list on Yahoo! at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Yogi_Karve
>

Cheers Vaj, it's probably me but the site appears to have
no tour dates or anything really and the link to the
universal society is a page of building society ads, have I done 
something wrong?

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
>  wrote:
> > Here's a true story;
> > 
> > I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
> > for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has
> > stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
> > is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
> > she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
> > would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
> > personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any questions.
> > One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
> > checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her 
health.
> > She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
> > scepticism.
> > 
> 
> 
> Your story proves nothing. 

At the very least it proves that this Maharishi trained jyotishee
was a charlatan.

> 
> The experts doing Jyotish must master it completely otherwise it is 
> of limited practical value. They should be from a long line of 
> generations of professional Jyotishjis so that the many difficult 
> levels of intellect have been transcended by their forefathers. 
This 
> is Jyotish MahaPragya - to own the knowledge. Like a carpenter whos 
> father and father before him passed on all those small details that 
> makes the work easy, more effective. It becomes automatic, like for 
> example when you entered the room of Triguna; he did not have to 
take 
> your pulse because he felt every detail in your bloodstream once 
you 
> entered the room. That is the result of generations of Vedic 
> tradition. 
> 
> I have many excellent artists in my family, but no photographers, I 
> wish I had. Perhaps I will start my own tradition :-)
> 
> To be chronically tired is something a good Jyotishji certainly 
> should have been able to see. 
> 
> The first wave of Jyotishjis that was going on Global Tours spent 
> months in Vlodrop being tested by Purusha. Whats that word, 
flunked ? 
> Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless Maharishi 
in 
> his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail no 
> doubt long before they arrived, invited them to Holland and payed 
all 
> the expenses. Some cried in joy when the left for home having so 
> freely being given the Darshan, inspiration and upliftment of their 
> lifetime.


So presumably, the jyotishee my friend saw passed the test.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[matrixmonitor]

--Chaos, as the term is used in dynamical systems, originated with 
the work of climatologist Edward Lorenz - died a few days ago ("the 
Butterfly effect"); and is an inherent property of some natural 
systems. However, the term chaos has a different connotation than 
used traditonally. Chaos simply means what especially in the presence 
of very slight changes in the original parameters (the metaphorical 
flapping of a butterfly's wing); down the road - the outcome will be 
virtually unpredictable. That's chaos, for example: weather patterns.
 Chaos does not imply lack of causation. Perhaps with a super-super 
computer, we may eventually be able to make more reliable predictions.
 Due to the unfathomable nature of karma, it's often virtually 
impossible to trace vast chains of  causes  and effects to their 
origin; but more importantly, even the wisest of Sages are dunces 
when it comes to prediction.  There are rare exceptions. These are 
the Jyotish psychics. Find one and don't let him go.


- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 28, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Bhairitu wrote:
> > 
> > > As for the naysayers, most are talking
> > > out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-
)
> > 
> > Physician, heal thyself.
> > 
> > Why is the idea that the universe is a random place
> > where stuff can just happen so threatening to some?
> 
> Why indeed?
> 
> This has been an interesting discussion to
> watch. A few voices who usually come across
> as reasonable seem to have gotten their 
> buttons pushed. It was OK as long as we were 
> only disbelieving in the claims of the TMO, 
> but we *crossed the line*, man...we started 
> disbelieving in Jyotish and MBTI and God. 
> 
> And suddenly we've got trouble, with a capital
> T, right here in River City.  :-)
> 
> I think you nailed it. It's about chaos, and
> one's comfort level with that concept.
> 
> Some, like me and seemingly you, just have 
> NO PROBLEM with the concept of a chaotic 
> universe. We don't know for sure that it 
> IS a chaotic universe, but if it is, cool. 
> 
> Others seem to need a SYSTEM of some kind to
> keep the concept of chaos out of sight and 
> out of mind. Astrology and Jyotish are systems
> that believe that they have made chaos under-
> standable and predictable. The MBTI is a sys-
> tem for reducing the chaos of possible person-
> ality types down to an even 16, and thus again
> rendering chaos understandable and predictable.
> A belief in God is probably the biggest system
> for believing that the universe is not chaotic.
> 
> What I'm noticing in a lot of this discussion 
> is that if you scratch the surface of a habitual 
> skeptic about one system, what you just might 
> find is a prosyletute for another system.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

Vaj,

Thanks for the link on Michel Gauquelin.  I'll check it out.

As far as your fascinating encounter with Yogi Karve, thats sounds
like a blast.  I would enjoy having my own pre-conceptions shaken. 
I'm more inclined to believe in people with exceptional intuitive
powers than the system of astrology.  There are some great therapist
who exhibit great insight on little information.  The NLP guys were
big on modeling some of their techniques to see if it could be taught,
like their work with Virginia Satir.


> Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless Maharishi in 
> his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail no 
> doubt long before they arrived,a


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 12:44 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
> 
> > 
> >>
> >> What you're missing here is that these scriptures come from direct
> >> empirical insight from the sages who wrote them.
> >
> > This just adds another layer of assertion that "sages" can have
> > extrasensory experiences about how the world works doesn't it?
> 
> Well, my overall point is that if there exists people alive today who  
> do have that direct insight, it could have also occurred in the past.  
> In extenso it is also possible then that these insights could have  
> been codified into set of rules for those who lack such insight. This  
> would, by it's very nature, be more prone to error and more user  
> dependent.
> 
> >  And some of these
> >> are (allegedly) insights into people who would visit a particular
> >> Jyotishi
> >
> > I have to put your experiences with Jotishis in the same box with
> > Turq's experiences with Rama.  They are fascinating, but so far out of
> > my personal experience that I can't really comment. It all sounds
> > interesting and I wish I was there!  I would love to see a video of
> > the guy you are speaking about with great cold reading powers.  That
> > would be my best chance of determining if he was actually coming up
> > with new accurate information.
> 
> Yes, I agree.
> 
> >   The read would have to be on a
> > randomly selected person who had not spent hours in line speaking with
> > other people about themselves.
> 
> Of course. It should be blinded. In my case, it was.
> 
> I say that as someone who used to think Astrology was total BS. After  
> meeting this guy (Yogi Karve) I can now understand how it is possible  
> to project answers onto any pattern in nature really.
> 
> >
> > I'm not claiming to know that there aren't such people.  I really
> > don't know this.  I just haven't seen proof myself.  Fair enough?
> 
> 
> Sure.
> 
> Have you read any on Michel Gauquelin and his statistical analyses?
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[John]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Bhairitu wrote:
> 
> > Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly had no 
value it
> > would have disappeared long ago.
> 
> Religion's been around for centuries too.  So have war and
> murder and all sorts of things that have very little
> or no value to most people.
> 
> > As for the naysayers, most are talking
> > out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)
> 
> Physician, heal thyself.
> 
> Why is the idea that the universe is a random place
> where stuff can just happen so threatening to some?
> 
> Sal

You're assuming that you know the answer, Sal.  Who told you that the 
universe is random?  If you have convinced yourself this 
generalization, how do you know you're right?  Did someone from the 
cosmos reveal this secret to you?

JR

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "matrixmonitor"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --Chaos, as the term is used in dynamical systems, originated with 
> the work of climatologist Edward Lorenz - died a few days ago ("the 
> Butterfly effect"); and is an inherent property of some natural 
> systems. However, the term chaos has a different connotation than 
> used traditonally. Chaos simply means what especially in the 
> presence of very slight changes in the original parameters (the 
> metaphorical flapping of a butterfly's wing); down the road - the 
> outcome will be virtually unpredictable. That's chaos, for example: 
> weather patterns. Chaos does not imply lack of causation. Perhaps 
> with a super-super computer, we may eventually be able to make 
> more reliable predictions.

Just checking...wouldn't a belief that we may
eventually be able to make more reliable predic-
tions imply a belief that it's possible? And 
wouldn't that imply a belief that there might 
possibly be a system?

> Due to the unfathomable nature of karma, it's often virtually 
> impossible to trace vast chains of causes and effects to their 
> origin; ...

Why "virtually impossible?" Again, what's wrong
with impossible? 

> ...but more importantly, even the wisest of Sages are dunces 
> when it comes to prediction. There are rare exceptions. These are 
> the Jyotish psychics. Find one and don't let him go.

You're not suggesting a kidnapping, are you? I
just don't believe in Jyotish...I don't desire
any Jyotishi harm or want to "not let them go"
or anything like that. If you get off on that 
sorta thing, go for it...just be careful,
so that we don't see any articles in the 
Enquirer about Jyotishi In Bondage.  :-)

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
> >  wrote:
> > > Here's a true story;
> > > 
> > > I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
> > > for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has
> > > stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
> > > is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
> > > she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
> > > would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
> > > personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any 
questions.
> > > One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
> > > checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her 
> health.
> > > She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
> > > scepticism.
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > Your story proves nothing. 
> 
> At the very least it proves that this Maharishi trained jyotishee
> was a charlatan.
> 
> > 
> > The experts doing Jyotish must master it completely otherwise it 
is 
> > of limited practical value. They should be from a long line of 
> > generations of professional Jyotishjis so that the many difficult 
> > levels of intellect have been transcended by their forefathers. 
> This 
> > is Jyotish MahaPragya - to own the knowledge. Like a carpenter 
whos 
> > father and father before him passed on all those small details 
that 
> > makes the work easy, more effective. It becomes automatic, like 
for 
> > example when you entered the room of Triguna; he did not have to 
> take 
> > your pulse because he felt every detail in your bloodstream once 
> you 
> > entered the room. That is the result of generations of Vedic 
> > tradition. 
> > 
> > I have many excellent artists in my family, but no photographers, 
I 
> > wish I had. Perhaps I will start my own tradition :-)
> > 
> > To be chronically tired is something a good Jyotishji certainly 
> > should have been able to see. 
> > 
> > The first wave of Jyotishjis that was going on Global Tours spent 
> > months in Vlodrop being tested by Purusha. Whats that word, 
> flunked ? 
> > Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless 
Maharishi 
> in 
> > his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail no 
> > doubt long before they arrived, invited them to Holland and payed 
> all 
> > the expenses. Some cried in joy when the left for home having so 
> > freely being given the Darshan, inspiration and upliftment of 
their 
> > lifetime.
> 
> 
> So presumably, the jyotishee my friend saw passed the test.

Most probably not.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 2:05 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> 
> > Some, like me and seemingly you, just have
> > NO PROBLEM with the concept of a chaotic
> > universe. We don't know for sure that it
> > IS a chaotic universe, but if it is, cool.
> >
> > Others seem to need a SYSTEM of some kind to
> > keep the concept of chaos out of sight and
> > out of mind. Astrology and Jyotish are systems
> > that believe that they have made chaos under-
> > standable and predictable. The MBTI is a sys-
> > tem for reducing the chaos of possible person-
> > ality types down to an even 16, and thus again
> > rendering chaos understandable and predictable.
> > A belief in God is probably the biggest system
> > for believing that the universe is not chaotic.
> >
> > What I'm noticing in a lot of this discussion
> > is that if you scratch the surface of a habitual
> > skeptic about one system, what you just might
> > find is a prosyletute for another system.
> 
> One can believe the universe is chaotic and still have an 
> interest in prediction and trend analysis. 

Tell me about it. I work in the field.

> For example, weather prediction and  
> global climate change are best modeled on Chaos and Complexity  
> mathematics as it gives the best predictions! 

Only in that case. Other algorithms work 
better in other cases. The same engine
that solves effectively for MP problems
wouldn't solve as effectively for CP 
problems. 

> Chaos is an important  
> basis for weather patterns, but we do use it quite successfully 
> in weather prediction. However since it is chaotic, predictions 
> are not absolute but follow a certain probability.

And I have NO PROBLEM with probability.
My issue is simply with the belief in
the possibility of 100% accuracy, in an
infallible system. That just doesn't 
seem to give the universe enough credit 
in my book. 

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless Maharishi
> in > his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail 
no 
> > doubt long before they arrived,
> 
> Good ol' "no doubt" Nabby!
> 
> BTW I spent plenty of time with Triguna and he couldn't even cure my
> heart burn on repeated visits and taking all his foul "medicines."

Your heart burn ? How could anyone in the universe possible cure that 
but yourself ?

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Richard J. Williams]

Bhairitu wrote:
> His astrology research was very lame, based 
> on newspaper horoscopes.
>
Most astrologers don't generally consider 
astrology to be particularly paranormal, so 
they probably wouldn't be interesting in having
James Randi test any of their theories. 

Question: 

Why is it that most people, when discussing 
astrology, seem to always go to the extreme of 
trying to introduce conspiracy theories in 
their efforts to prove astrology?

'Flim-Flam!' 
Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions
by James Randi 
Prometheus Books, 1982
http://tinyurl.com/3ut3xf

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[yifuxero]

---on 100% predictability:  This is related to the "Laplacean Deity" 
conversation between Napoleon and the mathematician Laplace.  But 
before getting into that, science as a whole discounts 100% 
prediction as  an impossibility, a literal impossibility - not simply 
due to the lack of refinement of measurement tools. This is due to 
Heinsenberg's Uncertainty principle on a finely-grained quantum 
level.  Given that one can posit an infinite level of precision in 
one "conjugate variable" (say momentum); then there's a tradeoff with 
position.
 Thus, the standard orthodox position is that 100% prediction on all 
levels is an impossibility.  However, this in no way prevents 
experimental setups in which there is a constant improvement in 
predictive power.  It's just that in most cases one will not reach 
100% depending upon the experiment; since such predictions would 
require an infinite amount of information about all quantum particles.
In chaotic systems, predictions at most "work" in a two-body system, 
say - predicting the positions of the earth vs the moon after x 
amount of time.
 But as soon as you create a 3-body problem (say earth, moon, and 
some other body); predictions become intractable after a few 
iterations.
 Now back to Laplace.  Napoleon asked Laplace if he "believed" 
in "God" (i.e. the Judaeo-Christian Deity - given his knowledge of 
mathematics (Laplace also delved into physics).  Laplace told 
Napoleon: "I have no need of that hypothesis".
 What Laplace was getting is that in theory, an Omniscient Deity 
supposedly would have an infinite amount of knowledge concerning 
every particle in the universe and a perfect prophetic wisdom 
resulting from a perfect knowledge of the present and past.
 But Laplace new that was improbable (even way before the quantum 
revolution of the 1920's) - and without any knowledge of 
Heibsenberg's Uncertainty Principle.
 Laplace believed that the existence of such an all-knowing Being was 
contrary to what he already knew about natural laws and math.
 Thus, there is no evidence to this day, of a "Laplacean Deity" - an 
entity who has total knowledge of every particle in the universe (and 
who consequently could make 100% certain predictions). 

 In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj  wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 28, 2008, at 2:05 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:
> > 
> > > Some, like me and seemingly you, just have
> > > NO PROBLEM with the concept of a chaotic
> > > universe. We don't know for sure that it
> > > IS a chaotic universe, but if it is, cool.
> > >
> > > Others seem to need a SYSTEM of some kind to
> > > keep the concept of chaos out of sight and
> > > out of mind. Astrology and Jyotish are systems
> > > that believe that they have made chaos under-
> > > standable and predictable. The MBTI is a sys-
> > > tem for reducing the chaos of possible person-
> > > ality types down to an even 16, and thus again
> > > rendering chaos understandable and predictable.
> > > A belief in God is probably the biggest system
> > > for believing that the universe is not chaotic.
> > >
> > > What I'm noticing in a lot of this discussion
> > > is that if you scratch the surface of a habitual
> > > skeptic about one system, what you just might
> > > find is a prosyletute for another system.
> > 
> > One can believe the universe is chaotic and still have an 
> > interest in prediction and trend analysis. 
> 
> Tell me about it. I work in the field.
> 
> > For example, weather prediction and  
> > global climate change are best modeled on Chaos and Complexity  
> > mathematics as it gives the best predictions! 
> 
> Only in that case. Other algorithms work 
> better in other cases. The same engine
> that solves effectively for MP problems
> wouldn't solve as effectively for CP 
> problems. 
> 
> > Chaos is an important  
> > basis for weather patterns, but we do use it quite successfully 
> > in weather prediction. However since it is chaotic, predictions 
> > are not absolute but follow a certain probability.
> 
> And I have NO PROBLEM with probability.
> My issue is simply with the belief in
> the possibility of 100% accuracy, in an
> infallible system. That just doesn't 
> seem to give the universe enough credit 
> in my book.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

> > 
> > BTW I spent plenty of time with Triguna and he couldn't even cure my
> > heart burn on repeated visits and taking all his foul "medicines."
> 
> Your heart burn ? How could anyone in the universe possible cure that 
> but yourself ?

My self and a little Prilosec OTC baby!

>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[nablusoss1008]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

  I totally spooked someone by inversely telling them 
> what time of day they were born from looking at them.

Good. You're a good beginner.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[ispiritkin]

--- Bhairitu wrote:
> I actually started out doing astrology reading 
> via intuition which I still do today.  
> I learned the rules of astrology so I could 
> explain in those terms what 
> was happening.

This is exactly what I have found so far to be THE most useful and fun 
application of astrology.  

Astro charts are fun to look at and I have collected a mass of 
interesting facts about astrology.  What I like most is when I have an 
intuition about something, say, "the coming year will be about 
expansion".  Then I looked on my chart to find "expansion" there 
somewhere.  I didn't, and that was disappointing.  The year actually 
WAS about expansion but at that time I couldn't find any astrological 
indicator.

My point is it would have been fun to find a symbol to slap onto that 
experience.  Or not.  Symbols can also limit one's awareness and 
receptivity to the limits of the symbol's meaning, so other meanings or 
signals might be missed.  

Another place I like to use these symbols is to decorate my impression 
of a personality as I am getting to know someone.  It's like dropping 
pebbles along a path so I can remember the insights I've had about that 
person.

P.S.  Aha!  It's as I suspected-- Saturn is my planet of expansion, not 
Jupiter.  I just looked back to that year of expansion to see if Saturn 
had anything to do with it.  Sittin' right there in living color.  

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

"the coming year will be about > expansion". 

But doesn't this type of language kind of load the deck?  I mean what
year of anyones life doesn't include such a generalized value?

So much of what I had seen from divination arts are in the language
used and the willingness of the person the descriptions are about to
come up with specific examples.  Both sides so eager to prove the
system right even while the client sometimes feigns skepticism...

And guess what will happen next year, you will also experience
contractions!




--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ispiritkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Bhairitu wrote:
> > I actually started out doing astrology reading 
> > via intuition which I still do today.  
> > I learned the rules of astrology so I could 
> > explain in those terms what 
> > was happening.
> 
> This is exactly what I have found so far to be THE most useful and fun 
> application of astrology.  
> 
> Astro charts are fun to look at and I have collected a mass of 
> interesting facts about astrology.  What I like most is when I have an 
> intuition about something, say, "the coming year will be about 
> expansion".  Then I looked on my chart to find "expansion" there 
> somewhere.  I didn't, and that was disappointing.  The year actually 
> WAS about expansion but at that time I couldn't find any astrological 
> indicator.
> 
> My point is it would have been fun to find a symbol to slap onto that 
> experience.  Or not.  Symbols can also limit one's awareness and 
> receptivity to the limits of the symbol's meaning, so other meanings or 
> signals might be missed.  
> 
> Another place I like to use these symbols is to decorate my impression 
> of a personality as I am getting to know someone.  It's like dropping 
> pebbles along a path so I can remember the insights I've had about that 
> person.
> 
> P.S.  Aha!  It's as I suspected-- Saturn is my planet of expansion, not 
> Jupiter.  I just looked back to that year of expansion to see if Saturn 
> had anything to do with it.  Sittin' right there in living color.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[ispiritkin]

I guess I'd say expansion was the theme of the year.  The theme for the 
year before that had been "clarity".  I had sensed that one before the 
year started also.  And, yes, there was a lot of clarity for the year.

Of course there's a loading effect.  I sense a green theme, and then I 
see pebbles along the road that are green, so I pick them up and put 
them in my pocket.  Were there other colors of pebbles?  Yes.  Were 
there more blue pebbles than green?  I don't know.  

When I described events of the year as they happened, the summary words 
ended up relating to clarity, and it wasn't because I walked around 
chanting, "this year is about clarity".  I thought about the forecast  
at beginning the year, then let it go.  It was the first time I'd 
sensed a forecast like that, so I didn't think much of it.  At the end 
of the year, I noticed that, yeah, my forecast had been accurate.  So 
when I had the next intuition about expansion, I was excited about it.  

The expansion feeling has been subtle.  If not for the forecast, I may 
not have characterized it like that.  But there was definitely an 
expansive feeling.  That was the year when, in light of the forecast, I 
explored TM and marjuana as options to support expansion.  I ended up 
not going there, but expansion continued anyway. 

I used to be so skeptical of anything like what I describe above that I 
instantly dismissed it all.  But then I had an extreme life crisis.  
After analyzing the build-up to the crisis, I found that if I had given 
more attention to my subtle perceptions, I would have had a much better 
grasp of reality.  As it was, I'd been in a fog of unreality, all the 
while thinking that I was so clear because I never gave heed to what 
couldn't be scientifically dissected and identified.

It was a major life lesson to give some attention to things that can't 
be proved to other people.  At the same time, it's also important to 
keep checking back on my perceptions to see how valid they seem in 
varying lights and shadows.


--- "curtisdeltablues" wrote:
>
> "the coming year will be about > expansion". 
> 
> But doesn't this type of language kind of load 
> the deck?  I mean what year of anyones life 
> doesn't include such a generalized value?
> 
> So much of what I had seen from divination arts 
> are in the language used and the willingness of 
> the person the descriptions are about to
> come up with specific examples.  Both sides so 
> eager to prove the system right even while the 
> client sometimes feigns skepticism...
> 
> And guess what will happen next year, you will 
> also experience contractions!

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

I wasn't dogging you out for living with an artistic sense of how
these words relate to your life as a theme. I can understand that. I
am not skeptical about the way you are relating to these words. They
are poetic words and contemplating them in the context of your life
could be useful in lots of ways.  The way you seem to be relating to
them doesn't require any proof since you are not expressing them in a
falsifiable way.  It seems to me like a creative muse for you. I've
got plenty of my own versions of that in my creative life.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ispiritkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I guess I'd say expansion was the theme of the year.  The theme for the 
> year before that had been "clarity".  I had sensed that one before the 
> year started also.  And, yes, there was a lot of clarity for the year.
> 
> Of course there's a loading effect.  I sense a green theme, and then I 
> see pebbles along the road that are green, so I pick them up and put 
> them in my pocket.  Were there other colors of pebbles?  Yes.  Were 
> there more blue pebbles than green?  I don't know.  
> 
> When I described events of the year as they happened, the summary words 
> ended up relating to clarity, and it wasn't because I walked around 
> chanting, "this year is about clarity".  I thought about the forecast  
> at beginning the year, then let it go.  It was the first time I'd 
> sensed a forecast like that, so I didn't think much of it.  At the end 
> of the year, I noticed that, yeah, my forecast had been accurate.  So 
> when I had the next intuition about expansion, I was excited about it.  
> 
> The expansion feeling has been subtle.  If not for the forecast, I may 
> not have characterized it like that.  But there was definitely an 
> expansive feeling.  That was the year when, in light of the forecast, I 
> explored TM and marjuana as options to support expansion.  I ended up 
> not going there, but expansion continued anyway. 
> 
> I used to be so skeptical of anything like what I describe above that I 
> instantly dismissed it all.  But then I had an extreme life crisis.  
> After analyzing the build-up to the crisis, I found that if I had given 
> more attention to my subtle perceptions, I would have had a much better 
> grasp of reality.  As it was, I'd been in a fog of unreality, all the 
> while thinking that I was so clear because I never gave heed to what 
> couldn't be scientifically dissected and identified.
> 
> It was a major life lesson to give some attention to things that can't 
> be proved to other people.  At the same time, it's also important to 
> keep checking back on my perceptions to see how valid they seem in 
> varying lights and shadows.
> 
> 
> --- "curtisdeltablues" wrote:
> >
> > "the coming year will be about > expansion". 
> > 
> > But doesn't this type of language kind of load 
> > the deck?  I mean what year of anyones life 
> > doesn't include such a generalized value?
> > 
> > So much of what I had seen from divination arts 
> > are in the language used and the willingness of 
> > the person the descriptions are about to
> > come up with specific examples.  Both sides so 
> > eager to prove the system right even while the 
> > client sometimes feigns skepticism...
> > 
> > And guess what will happen next year, you will 
> > also experience contractions!
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[ispiritkin]

--- new.morning wrote:
> --- "Richard J. Williams" wrote:
> > TurquoiseB wrote:
> > > I have not encountered even *one* technique 
> > > in the realm of self discovery that works 
> > > "as advertised" for everyone. Not one. And 
> > > I don't ever expect to. Especially if there 
> > > is a price tag attached...
> > >
> > This would assume that you've tried every
> > technique known to man, which obviously you 
> > have not. In fact, from what I've read of from
> > your writings, you've tried only a few. And
> > I don't understand how you think you'd be able
> > to find out if any worked on anyone else at 
> > all.
> >
> Yes. Its as valid as saying, "I saw two films. They were terrible.
> THEREFORE, all films are terrible." Jeeesh
>
That's not how I read Turq's statement at all.  He never said 
THEREFORE anything.  He said he never expected to encounter a 
technique that works as advertised for EVERYONE.  By golly, even 
without testing as many as he's tested, I'd say just on the surface 
of it that no technique will have the SAME effect on EVERYONE.  I 
don't think there is a food or a drug in existence that has the same 
effect on EVERYONE.

But then one is left with the notion that Turq's statement really 
didn't say much except something obvious, like "It doesn't rain EVERY 
day in Seattle."

I think there is some validity in testing a few samples and making a 
conclusion.  In parallel to New Morning's example, I have a 
counterexample:  "I looked at 8 fashion magazines.  They were 
unhealthy exposure as a steady diet for the mind.  THEREFORE ..." and 
here is where New Morning departed from Turq's line, "THEREFORE I 
don't expect to see a fashion magazine that is good mindfood." 

I didn't conclude that all fashion magazines were unhealthy.  It is 
close to that, but not closed of mind, to say I don't *expect* to see 
a healthy fashion mag. 

Probably has to do with the definition of a fashion magazine, just as 
it has to do with self-discovery techniques that advertise (define) 
ANYTHING about themselves.  

If I saw a mag about fashion that was healthy, I probably wouldn't 
call it a fashion mag -- I'd call it an art mag or a catalog or an 
industry publication.  The problem with self-discovery techniques is 
that they do make any promises at all.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[ispiritkin]

Yeah, "muse" says it perfectly.


--- "curtisdeltablues" wrote:
>
> I wasn't dogging you out for living with an artistic sense of how
> these words relate to your life as a theme. I can understand that. I
> am not skeptical about the way you are relating to these words. They
> are poetic words and contemplating them in the context of your life
> could be useful in lots of ways.  The way you seem to be relating to
> them doesn't require any proof since you are not expressing them in a
> falsifiable way.  It seems to me like a creative muse for you. I've
> got plenty of my own versions of that in my creative life.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> >
> 
> > 
> > >The final woo woo aspect is the
> > > claim that humans could know about such a connection using ancient
> > > scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who believed in many
forms of
> > > divination. 
> > 
> > Huh? Are you suggesting that ancient cultures bring absolutely
> nothing > to the table? No valid knowledge of ANYTHING? Whew. We have
> different > views there.
> 
> I was putting my finger on the epistemological basis for the claims of
> Joitish.  

Thats cool. I mistakenly thought yuo were addressing my post. I have
made no such claims about epistemological basis for the claims of
Joytish. All I have said is, basically, i have seen enough interesting
things in my cahrt an others from jyotish, that I personally question,
a little, if its just coincidence. It may be. But I have had this
experience. Others report it too. As far as having a coherent theory
to expalin it-- nope. Don't have. But as a parallel analogy, science
observes a lot of stuff it can't explain yet. How are those  dark
matter and anti-matter things coming along?

>They come from ancient scriptures, not from any empirical
> basis.  I was challenging that people can know about such a mechanism
> and proposing that pre-scientific cultures tended to believe
> assertions from priestly classes without any verification required.
 
> There is plenty of stuff from pre-scientific cultures that has passed
> modern standards of proof. Joitish is not one of them.

And yet I find "beyond coincidence stuff". I am not trying to prove
tht to you. I am just sharing an observation. That you may think I am
bonkers, no problem.  (hey, I am sure it didn't start with this. :)) 
  
> > 
> > > Do people with big ears really have a better chance to
> > > become wealthy?  
> > 
> > Is the term strawman in your vocabulary?
> 
> Physiognomy is a branch of Joitish.  This claim came from one of
> Maharishi's favorite Joitishis.  I am pointing out that there is a
> cluster of beliefs that need to be examined through some testing
> rather than accepted on face value. 

Okie dokie. Slam all things jyotish you don't like. I think a lot of
it is hokey too. I only offer up my observations for discussion.

 
> >  
> > > Finally, the use of gems to magically mitigate the influence of
plants
> > > seems to throw the whole claim of causation back into play
doesn't it?
> > 
> > Um where did I say anything about gems? I have said there may be
> lots> of mud around the um, "gems" of insight from ancient cultures.
> There > is a need to wash off the mud. 

> It is in the system.  You don't need to mention it for me to bring it
> up. 

Its not in my observations. 

 I agree that there is a lot of mud to wash off in human knowledge
> of all eras of our history.
> >  
> > > Humans naturally desire to know about and control future events. 
> > 
> > Perhaps. But what does that have to do with this discussion? O
> you> are still stuck in the same misconception as HUGO that this is
> about> casuation. Neti Neti.
> > 
> <
> 
> 
> And you seem to be stuck in the misconception that a claim of
> causation is somehow more fantastic than the claim that there is a
> correlation in Vedic astrology. 

Do you think its fantastic that trains come when the clock says 5 pm? 


> They are equally baseless as
> assertions of unproven claims from an ancient culture.  This doesn't
> mean that they didn't know anything, just that we shouldn't assume
> they had the whole mechanics of creation figured out to such a precise
> degree that they can accurately predict future events. 

Find and good. I am not doing that in the least. But I am glad you
have taken this as a springboard to share.
> 
> > 
> > 
> > >But
> > > one thing seems to jump out from studying history: we totally suck
> at > > this.  We always have, and that includes the Vedic era in India.
> > 
> > You can "rant" on about whole civilizations. I was talking about
> > jyotish. But why we are talking non-sequiturs, sportscasters suck at
> > predicting who is going to win Wimbledon. Should we line em all up
> and > shoot them?
> 
> "rant"  ummm  And I said we should shoot Joitish guys where?

I was loosely thinking about your "joke" from last night. But I digressed.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  
> wrote:
> >
> > In various ares of life, people seem to imagine such big things. 
> Then
> > knock something down because it does not meet their inflated
> > expectations. Spouse or guru on a pedestal perhaps. Or, for example,
> > "They said I have high blood pressure and yet they couldn't even
> > predict what would happen to me on May 3rd and what my bank account
> > balance would be." or, "That charlatan weatherman, he said there was
> > 60% chance of rain, but didn't even predict that my cat would get
> > sick, and my kid would lose his softball game."   These are odd
> > expectations that do not follow. And such crazy expectations are 
> sure
> > to disappoint.  
> > 
> > IMV, Jyotish, if it does anything (which is not established that it
> > does -- but there are interesting antecdotal evidence) says things
> > like, "The next few years will likely have some pot holes in the
> > roads." It doesn't say that you will hit one and break your axle. Or
> > that you will run over one filled with water and splash the mayor 
> when
> > he is walking his dog." These and a billion other things may be more
> > likely during this period. 
> > 
> > But trying to present you with detailed "film into the future" that
> > you can watch clip by clip, detail by detail, is not what jyotish
> > does. Though thats what people seem to expect. And when such a
> > detailed film is not presented, they get all bent out of shape and 
> say
> > "Jyotish is full of shit". In that case, something may be full of
> > shit, but I don't believe its jyotish.
> 
> I think that's a bit disengenious, it isn't me inflating the
> claims of jyotish, I get them from here;
> 
> "The Maharishi Vedic Astrology program -- Maharishi Jyotish program --
>  is the science of transformation and technology of prediction. It 
> reveals the relationship of individual life with cosmic life and 
> enlivens their fundamental basis in consciousness. It is a practical 
> program which helps one to "avert the danger that has not yet come" 
> and to take maximum advantage of the fortunate periods coming in 
> one's life.
> 
> According to this traditional knowledge, prediction of future events 
> is possible because the same orderly and sequential Laws of Nature 
> which govern the evolution of the universe also govern the life of 
> the individual. Knowing any one point in the sequence, such as the 
> time and place of birth, an expert can mathematically calculate 
> forwards and backwards in time. In this way the Maharishi Vedic 
> Astrology program offers valuable predictive insights concerning 
> tendencies in all areas of life -- health, partnerships, finances, 
> education, career and family relationships"

I am happy to bash MJ too. It has nothing to do with my observations
about what has "worked" for me -- nor my quite simple view of jyotish. 
Others have different views. I am not defending all views. Simply
presenting my own.



> See that line = *an expert can mathematically calculate forwards
> and backwards in time*. 
> 
> This is what I'm asking, and I don't think it's being full
> of shit to want to put that to the test. To someone who has
> lived a full and varied life, such as myself, certain things
> should stand out and be obvious to any casual observer.
> 
> I don't think it's asking too much of the "science of
> transformation and technology of prediction" to demonstrate
> it's effectiveness.
> 
> Here's a true story;
> 
> I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
> for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and has
> stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
> is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
> she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
> would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
> personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any questions.
> One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
> checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her health.
> She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
> scepticism.
> 
> I didn't get bent out of shape about it, I just take the attitude
> that I won't believe something until it has demonstrated it's worth.
> Looks like that day aint coming soon.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[curtisdeltablues]

I believe that we are running a similar mental process as I would on
different data than I have seen. I respect your process.  If you say
you have seen some cool correlations, that is good enough for me.  You
seem every bit as clear on the limits of our knowledge as I try to be.
 This was a fun day discussing Joitish with everyone.  Thanks for that.


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> > >
> > 
> > > 
> > > >The final woo woo aspect is the
> > > > claim that humans could know about such a connection using ancient
> > > > scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who believed in many
> forms of
> > > > divination. 
> > > 
> > > Huh? Are you suggesting that ancient cultures bring absolutely
> > nothing > to the table? No valid knowledge of ANYTHING? Whew. We have
> > different > views there.
> > 
> > I was putting my finger on the epistemological basis for the claims of
> > Joitish.  
> 
> Thats cool. I mistakenly thought yuo were addressing my post. I have
> made no such claims about epistemological basis for the claims of
> Joytish. All I have said is, basically, i have seen enough interesting
> things in my cahrt an others from jyotish, that I personally question,
> a little, if its just coincidence. It may be. But I have had this
> experience. Others report it too. As far as having a coherent theory
> to expalin it-- nope. Don't have. But as a parallel analogy, science
> observes a lot of stuff it can't explain yet. How are those  dark
> matter and anti-matter things coming along?
> 
> >They come from ancient scriptures, not from any empirical
> > basis.  I was challenging that people can know about such a mechanism
> > and proposing that pre-scientific cultures tended to believe
> > assertions from priestly classes without any verification required.
>  
> > There is plenty of stuff from pre-scientific cultures that has passed
> > modern standards of proof. Joitish is not one of them.
> 
> And yet I find "beyond coincidence stuff". I am not trying to prove
> tht to you. I am just sharing an observation. That you may think I am
> bonkers, no problem.  (hey, I am sure it didn't start with this. :)) 
>   
> > > 
> > > > Do people with big ears really have a better chance to
> > > > become wealthy?  
> > > 
> > > Is the term strawman in your vocabulary?
> > 
> > Physiognomy is a branch of Joitish.  This claim came from one of
> > Maharishi's favorite Joitishis.  I am pointing out that there is a
> > cluster of beliefs that need to be examined through some testing
> > rather than accepted on face value. 
> 
> Okie dokie. Slam all things jyotish you don't like. I think a lot of
> it is hokey too. I only offer up my observations for discussion.
> 
>  
> > >  
> > > > Finally, the use of gems to magically mitigate the influence of
> plants
> > > > seems to throw the whole claim of causation back into play
> doesn't it?
> > > 
> > > Um where did I say anything about gems? I have said there may be
> > lots> of mud around the um, "gems" of insight from ancient cultures.
> > There > is a need to wash off the mud. 
> 
> > It is in the system.  You don't need to mention it for me to bring it
> > up. 
> 
> Its not in my observations. 
> 
>  I agree that there is a lot of mud to wash off in human knowledge
> > of all eras of our history.
> > >  
> > > > Humans naturally desire to know about and control future events. 
> > > 
> > > Perhaps. But what does that have to do with this discussion? O
> > you> are still stuck in the same misconception as HUGO that this is
> > about> casuation. Neti Neti.
> > > 
> > <
> > 
> > 
> > And you seem to be stuck in the misconception that a claim of
> > causation is somehow more fantastic than the claim that there is a
> > correlation in Vedic astrology. 
> 
> Do you think its fantastic that trains come when the clock says 5 pm? 
> 
> 
> > They are equally baseless as
> > assertions of unproven claims from an ancient culture.  This doesn't
> > mean that they didn't know anything, just that we shouldn't assume
> > they had the whole mechanics of creation figured out to such a precise
> > degree that they can accurately predict future events. 
> 
> Find and good. I am not doing that in the least. But I am glad you
> have taken this as a springboard to share.
> > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >But
> > > > one thing seems to jump out from studying history: we totally suck
> > at > > this.  We always have, and that includes the Vedic era in
India.
> > > 
> > > You can "rant" on about whole civilizations. I was talking about
> > > jyotish. But why we are talking non-sequiturs, sportscasters suck at
> > > predicting who is going to win Wimbledon. Should we line em all up
> > and > shoot them?
> > 
> > "rant"  ummm  And I said we should shoot Joitish guys where?
> 
> I was loosely thinking about your "joke" from last night

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine  
> wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 28, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Bhairitu wrote:
> > 
> > > Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly had no 
> value it
> > > would have disappeared long ago.
> > 
> > Religion's been around for centuries too.  So have war and
> > murder and all sorts of things that have very little
> > or no value to most people.
> > 
> > > As for the naysayers, most are talking
> > > out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)
> > 
> > Physician, heal thyself.
> > 
> > Why is the idea that the universe is a random place
> > where stuff can just happen so threatening to some?
> > 
> > Sal
> 
> You're assuming that you know the answer, Sal.  Who told you that the 
> universe is random?  If you have convinced yourself this 
> generalization, how do you know you're right?  Did someone from the 
> cosmos reveal this secret to you?
> 
> JR


Event A can have a correlation to random event B. 

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I believe that we are running a similar mental process as I would on
> different data than I have seen. I respect your process.  If you say
> you have seen some cool correlations, that is good enough for me. 

Thanks. I respect your view too. I get your points (i think). and
generally agree.  

And I have seen a lot of bogus predictions. Long ago, when i was
intersted in jyotish (not much now), I would calculate the 'rareness"
of a prediction. As a crude (and made up bogus) example, if a "reader"
predicted that someone was going to get rich soon because the sun was
transiting his natal jupiter -- I would shoot back "so 1/12 of the
world populations is going to get rich soon huh". Because at anyone
time, the sun is transiting a sign and (assuming a uniform
distribution) 1/12 people have jupiter in that sign. So if the
prediction did not fit common sense and experience -- it is
implausible that 1/12 of the world would get rich "soon".  Same with
readings of say, Bill Gates chart. Some explanation that would occur
in maybe 1/100 charts. So WHY aren't  1/100 people as rich as Gates?
While there MAY be good jyotish theory reasons if one goes into the
harmonic charts or something, if the reader is not making distinctions
based on something like that, he is bogus. And usually doesn't even
get why.

I do the same with my chart. If a Jyotish  event occurs only once in
60 years in my chart, and the thing(s) happen as J theory predicts,
hmm, reason to ponder. If on the other hand, the jyotish event happens
twice a year, and the predicted thing happens once every five years --
then the prediction is all wet. 

What keeps me curious is that I have had some quire rare / infrequent
jyotish events in my chart -- and during that time -- and ONLY during
that time, the predicted things happened. And not in 30-50 years when
the j event wa not happening. It may be coincidence -- but the odds
are diminishing -- given repeated examples.

Why it works (if it does)-- I only can speculate. No distant effects,
no casuation for me. I am a fan of the "clock" analogy. Some things
wake up in spring, some things wake up when x does y in jyotish. Why
-- don't know. In either case. Spring or jyotish.




   

 You
> seem every bit as clear on the limits of our knowledge as I try to be.
>  This was a fun day discussing Joitish with everyone.  Thanks for that.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning  wrote:
> > > >
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >The final woo woo aspect is the
> > > > > claim that humans could know about such a connection using
ancient
> > > > > scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who believed in many
> > forms of
> > > > > divination. 
> > > > 
> > > > Huh? Are you suggesting that ancient cultures bring absolutely
> > > nothing > to the table? No valid knowledge of ANYTHING? Whew. We
have
> > > different > views there.
> > > 
> > > I was putting my finger on the epistemological basis for the
claims of
> > > Joitish.  
> > 
> > Thats cool. I mistakenly thought yuo were addressing my post. I have
> > made no such claims about epistemological basis for the claims of
> > Joytish. All I have said is, basically, i have seen enough interesting
> > things in my cahrt an others from jyotish, that I personally question,
> > a little, if its just coincidence. It may be. But I have had this
> > experience. Others report it too. As far as having a coherent theory
> > to expalin it-- nope. Don't have. But as a parallel analogy, science
> > observes a lot of stuff it can't explain yet. How are those  dark
> > matter and anti-matter things coming along?
> > 
> > >They come from ancient scriptures, not from any empirical
> > > basis.  I was challenging that people can know about such a
mechanism
> > > and proposing that pre-scientific cultures tended to believe
> > > assertions from priestly classes without any verification required.
> >  
> > > There is plenty of stuff from pre-scientific cultures that has
passed
> > > modern standards of proof. Joitish is not one of them.
> > 
> > And yet I find "beyond coincidence stuff". I am not trying to prove
> > tht to you. I am just sharing an observation. That you may think I am
> > bonkers, no problem.  (hey, I am sure it didn't start with this. :)) 
> >   
> > > > 
> > > > > Do people with big ears really have a better chance to
> > > > > become wealthy?  
> > > > 
> > > > Is the term strawman in your vocabulary?
> > > 
> > > Physiognomy is a branch of Joitish.  This claim came from one of
> > > Maharishi's favorite Joitishis.  I am pointing out that there is a
> > > cluster of beliefs that need to be examined through some testing
> > > rather than accepted on face value. 
> > 
> > Okie dokie. Slam all things jyotish you don't like. I think a lot o

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ispiritkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- new.morning wrote:
> > --- "Richard J. Williams" wrote:
> > > TurquoiseB wrote:
> > > > I have not encountered even *one* technique 
> > > > in the realm of self discovery that works 
> > > > "as advertised" for everyone. Not one. And 
> > > > I don't ever expect to. Especially if there 
> > > > is a price tag attached...
> > >
> > > This would assume that you've tried every
> > > technique known to man, which obviously you 
> > > have not. In fact, from what I've read of from
> > > your writings, you've tried only a few. And
> > > I don't understand how you think you'd be able
> > > to find out if any worked on anyone else at 
> > > all.
> > 
> > Yes. Its as valid as saying, "I saw two films. They were terrible.
> > THEREFORE, all films are terrible." Jeeesh
> 
> That's not how I read Turq's statement at all.  He never said 
> THEREFORE anything.  He said he never expected to encounter a 
> technique that works as advertised for EVERYONE.  By golly, even 
> without testing as many as he's tested, I'd say just on the surface 
> of it that no technique will have the SAME effect on EVERYONE.  I 
> don't think there is a food or a drug in existence that has the same 
> effect on EVERYONE.

I said it because a number of people were displaying
attachment to systems that they personally believe
"work" for everyone. I do not share that belief. 

> But then one is left with the notion that Turq's statement really 
> didn't say much except something obvious, like "It doesn't rain 
> EVERY day in Seattle."

No, it was quite specific; it was about techniques
and systems. I quite honestly don't believe that
they work as advertised. I suspect that the reason
that people believe they work is that 1) as Curtis
said, there is a kind of codependent relationship
going on, in which the seekers *want* to believe in
a system, and thus project onto vague descriptions
of predictions or results from a technique what
they have been told to expect from them, and 2) the
techniques or systems sometimes *do* "work" to
trigger their own latent abilities. The techniques
don't *cause* these latent abilities to appear, in
my opinion; they just trick the practitioner into
the state of attention from which intuition about
the future or someone else's past is possible, or
from which the particular siddhi or other supposed
benefit happens. 

In other words, I see systems of any kind as being
kinda like Dumbo's feather. The feather didn't
"make" Dumbo fly; he could fly all along. The
feather was a placebo that tricked Dumbo into
doing what he had been able to do all along.

> I think there is some validity in testing a few samples and making a 
> conclusion.  In parallel to New Morning's example, I have a 
> counterexample:  "I looked at 8 fashion magazines.  They were 
> unhealthy exposure as a steady diet for the mind.  THEREFORE ..." 
> and here is where New Morning departed from Turq's line, "THEREFORE 
> I don't expect to see a fashion magazine that is good mindfood." 

Bad example. Vanity Fair can be considered a fashion
magazine, and it prints some of the best mindfood in
the publishing industry. 

> I didn't conclude that all fashion magazines were unhealthy.  It is 
> close to that, but not closed of mind, to say I don't *expect* to 
> see a healthy fashion mag. 

No, not at all. I clarified above what I meant. Deal
with it however you want. 

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bhairitu wrote:
> > His astrology research was very lame, based 
> > on newspaper horoscopes.
> >
> Most astrologers don't generally consider 
> astrology to be particularly paranormal, so 
> they probably wouldn't be interesting in having
> James Randi test any of their theories. 

That just goes to show they don't really get
what they are claiming, if there is ANY way
you can get an idea about human affairs from looking
at planets, tea leaves, goat entrails etc then you
are dealing with something beyond that which is currently
understood - paranormal.

As far as I know there is no correlation with anything
astrological, if it turns out that jyotish is a better
description of reality then fine, I need to update my
view of the world. Empiricism, dear boy.





> Question: 
> 
> Why is it that most people, when discussing 
> astrology, seem to always go to the extreme of 
> trying to introduce conspiracy theories in 
> their efforts to prove astrology?

Conspiracy theories? explain.

I haven't read the book but I'm familiar with Randi,
I think it's perfectly reasonable to get people to
demonstrate amazing powers, no one managed to convince
him. But the guy has never claimed that there is no more 
waiting to be discovered, he tried to engage with people
but there isn't enough evidence, or any come to think of it.
Where me and Randi part company is his insitence that
if he can fake something other people must be faking it too.
I disagree, you could be missing a lot.



 
> 'Flim-Flam!' 
> Psychics, ESP, Unicorns, and Other Delusions
> by James Randi 
> Prometheus Books, 1982
> http://tinyurl.com/3ut3xf
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[hugheshugo]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
>  wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008  
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" 
> > >  wrote:
> > > > Here's a true story;
> > > > 
> > > > I know a girl who has suffered from chronic fatigue syndrome
> > > > for twenty years, this is a serious auto-immune disorder and 
has
> > > > stopped her ever having a job or doing what she wants, and she
> > > > is very bright and motivated. When she went to see a jyotishee
> > > > she obviously expected some sort of news about when (if) she
> > > > would make a recovery. After an hour of generalities and glib
> > > > personality analysis the jyotishee asked if she had any 
> questions.
> > > > One, she said, when is my health going to improve? The chap
> > > > checked his chart and said there was nothing wrong with her 
> > health.
> > > > She got her money back. And I just felt more justified in my 
> > > > scepticism.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Your story proves nothing. 
> > 
> > At the very least it proves that this Maharishi trained jyotishee
> > was a charlatan.
> > 
> > > 
> > > The experts doing Jyotish must master it completely otherwise 
it 
> is 
> > > of limited practical value. They should be from a long line of 
> > > generations of professional Jyotishjis so that the many 
difficult 
> > > levels of intellect have been transcended by their forefathers. 
> > This 
> > > is Jyotish MahaPragya - to own the knowledge. Like a carpenter 
> whos 
> > > father and father before him passed on all those small details 
> that 
> > > makes the work easy, more effective. It becomes automatic, like 
> for 
> > > example when you entered the room of Triguna; he did not have 
to 
> > take 
> > > your pulse because he felt every detail in your bloodstream 
once 
> > you 
> > > entered the room. That is the result of generations of Vedic 
> > > tradition. 
> > > 
> > > I have many excellent artists in my family, but no 
photographers, 
> I 
> > > wish I had. Perhaps I will start my own tradition :-)
> > > 
> > > To be chronically tired is something a good Jyotishji certainly 
> > > should have been able to see. 
> > > 
> > > The first wave of Jyotishjis that was going on Global Tours 
spent 
> > > months in Vlodrop being tested by Purusha. Whats that word, 
> > flunked ? 
> > > Probably 30% were simply returned to India. Nevertheless 
> Maharishi 
> > in 
> > > his boundless generosity, knowing their shortcomings in detail 
no 
> > > doubt long before they arrived, invited them to Holland and 
payed 
> > all 
> > > the expenses. Some cried in joy when the left for home having 
so 
> > > freely being given the Darshan, inspiration and upliftment of 
> their 
> > > lifetime.
> > 
> > 
> > So presumably, the jyotishee my friend saw passed the test.
> 
> Most probably not.
>

This is a problem for me because this guy was sent by MMY
to offer expensive services, including chart readings, gem
recomendations, yagyas and it was rubbish. He even told
someone that tuesday is a bad day to be stung by bees!
To a bunch of people who already believed he was probbaly
great but to a sceptic who needs abit of convincing
it was a dreadfulparlour act, Randi would have loved him.

I was the only dissenting voice too, until my friend
with the health problem got her maonmey back. And it was
me who pointed out that he was saying broadly the same 
stuff to everyone. The whole thing was shameless.
Mind you, that was the course I found out that saying
grace before eating cancels out the negative effects of
GM foods. Snake oil from start to finish.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[ispiritkin]

Thanks for clarifying, Turq.  Your emphasis is on the "working" part of
the deal, not the "everyone" part.  Got it.

Vanity Fair was not one of the 8 fashion magazines I looked at.  Since I
value your perspective, I browsed around online.  Please understand that
in order to make a real judgment I'd have to hold the mag in my hand. 
There are some subtle things about magazine styling that I look for as
far as good mindfood, and it goes beyond individual articles or columns.
It has to do with the overall feel of "is this mag a tool of information
or of manipulation?"  The mag Forbes FYI, not a fashion mag at all, is
on my anti-mind list because the overall presentation is manipulative
and destructive to the reader (imo).

So, looking at Vanity Fair:  their "About Us" page says, "From world
affairs to entertainment, business to fashion, crime to society, Vanity
Fair is a cultural catalyst that drives the popular dialogue globally." 
So fashion is at best 1/6 of their emphasis.  They consider themselves
to be a "cultural catalyst."  Their 2 topic tabs on the home page are
Culture; Politics & Power.

I compared this to what I call fashion magazines.  These are the first 3
I looked up.  None of these had an "About Us" page, so I used their
subscribe page instead.

Allure: "Allure is the beauty expert." ~ from the subscribe page.  Their
5 topic tabs are Beauty reporter; Trends; How-to's; Salon & spa
directory; Makeovers.

Vogue: Their web address is www.style.com  , which
says a lot about their emphasis.  Their first 5 topic tabs are Fashion
show; News & trends; People & parties; Shopping; Beauty.

Cosmopolitan: "Fun Fearless Female" is their subtitle on the subscribe
page. Their 7 topic tabs are Sex & love; Style & beauty; Hot guys;
Celebs & gossip; You, you, you; Fun & games; Cosmolicious.


>From this, I might classify Vanity Fair as a news magazine, the same
topical classification as People magazine or Time.  I still don't know
if I'd consider it healthy mindfood, but it's not a fashion magazine.



--- TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> --- "ispiritkin" wrote:
> >
> I said it because a number of people were displaying
> attachment to systems that they personally believe
> "work" for everyone. I do not share that belief.
> 
> No, it was quite specific; it was about techniques
> and systems. I quite honestly don't believe that
> they work as advertised.

> > I have a
> > counterexample:  "I looked at 8 fashion magazines.
> > They were unhealthy exposure as a steady diet for
> > the mind.  THEREFORE ..."
> > I don't expect to see a fashion magazine that is
> > good mindfood."
>
> Bad example. Vanity Fair can be considered a fashion
> magazine, and it prints some of the best mindfood in
> the publishing industry.

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[new . morning]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ispiritkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> Thanks for clarifying, Turq.  .. Since I
> value your perspective, 

Its OK. The bad transit on your natal mercury and sun will pass.
Clarity will return. :)

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[matrixmonitor]

-Right - I've found astrology to be very useful. I've been consulting 
my charts for 30 years and know what to expect.
For example, today my transits are:
1. Jupiter opp Sun
2. Juper trine Asc.
3. Uranus Sq. Midheaven
4. Uranus trine Sun
5. Venus trine Jupiter
6. Mercury Trine Asc.

For those unknowledgeable in the subject (even though I've been at it 
for decades, I'm still a novice)...we can imagine a clock with THREE 
types of hands: 1. very slow moving (outer planets).  2. Moderately 
slow moving (Saturn and Jupiter).  and 3. Inner planets.
We can add a 4-th "influence" : extremely fast moving clock hand: The 
Moon.  But this is so fast that I disregard it.
 In a nutshell, the one to watch out for is MARS.  But the real 
powerhouse and karmic storage planet is SATURN.  Don't ever mess 
around with Saturn!
At any rate, concerning the above 6 transits, two are outer, two are 
middle, and two are inner (Venus and Mercury).  On a daily basis for 
predicting the general trend of activities, by experience I know that 
today will be basically a "slam dunk" - green lights all the way.  
But I take nothing for granted since there still is the Uranus square 
Midheaven.   

- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> TurquoiseB wrote:
> >
> > I said it because a number of people were displaying
> > attachment to systems that they personally believe
> > "work" for everyone. I do not share that belief. 
> >
> >   
> >> But then one is left with the notion that Turq's statement 
really 
> >> didn't say much except something obvious, like "It doesn't rain 
> >> EVERY day in Seattle."
> >> 
> >
> > No, it was quite specific; it was about techniques
> > and systems. I quite honestly don't believe that
> > they work as advertised. I suspect that the reason
> > that people believe they work is that 1) as Curtis
> > said, there is a kind of codependent relationship
> > going on, in which the seekers *want* to believe in
> > a system, and thus project onto vague descriptions
> > of predictions or results from a technique what
> > they have been told to expect from them, and 2) the
> > techniques or systems sometimes *do* "work" to
> > trigger their own latent abilities. The techniques
> > don't *cause* these latent abilities to appear, in
> > my opinion; they just trick the practitioner into
> > the state of attention from which intuition about
> > the future or someone else's past is possible, or
> > from which the particular siddhi or other supposed
> > benefit happens. 
> >   
> You're doing the same thing as Judy reviewing "Apocalypto".  She 
> commented without ever seeing the movie and you've never done 
> astrology.  Your ignorance is showing as there are MANY schools and 
> systems of jyotish, not just one.  You will often get errors from 
the 
> novices who for some reason after having a couple of workshops on 
the 
> subject and set up shop charging for readings while many Indian 
> astrologers went for years just practicing for nothing to craft 
their 
> skills before hanging out a shingle.
> 
> A wiser person would have said "I haven't studied jyotish so I 
can't 
> comment on its veracity."  Likewise I haven't studied Buddhist 
Tantra so 
> can't comment on its veracity.
>

[FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[TurquoiseB]

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's pretty hard to be a Buddha and not be omniscient...

I would say instead that it's fairly easy.
Omniscience is a fantasy that does not exist
in real life. And I suspect that the original
Buddha would be the first to agree with this. 

Not that that makes him omniscient or anything...  :-)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

hugheshugo wrote:
> I need to be convinced that there is anything to it by way
> of a good reading that would reveal things I'd never told and
> make accurate predictions, even if only about trends. However
> this mechanism may function, until I can tell the signal from 
> the noise I will doubt that my analysis is a strawman.
The best way to test Jyotish is to learn it.  Use something easy like 
the System's Approach which is easy to learn and pretty much based on 
Parashara anyway.   Unlike other approaches it is a distillation of the 
rules that Parashara laid out which I believe were a compilation of the 
way astrology was a practiced at the time in India.  My only doubts are 
that the planets except for the Moon and Sun have little effect on our 
lives and that astrology is tracking natural cycles that the planets 
provided handy markers for.  I have never found someone who has given me 
proper birthtime to be off as far as their profession and their success 
at it nor problems relating to bad planetary cycles.  It is also not an 
exact science though we have a lot of jyotishis who think it is (down to 
the minute).  Think of it more like a "weather report."  But it is less 
abstract than the (not so) Amazing Randi would have you think.  :)

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Peter]

Oh Please, Bhairitu! Jyotish is the biggest pile of
unmitigated shit, if there is such a thing! No one has
predicted anything with jyotish except
retrospectively. I love how you call it an "inexact
science". Isn't that a bit of an oxymoron? Don't
insult the intellectual methodology of science by
claiming jyotish even remotely approaches it. I would
love for jyotish to be "true", but for now its just
keeps a bunch of true believers weak and uncommitted
to simply living their live base on their own lived
experience. Weak, weak, weak and immature while I'm at
it!
 
--- Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> hugheshugo wrote:
> > I need to be convinced that there is anything to
> it by way
> > of a good reading that would reveal things I'd
> never told and
> > make accurate predictions, even if only about
> trends. However
> > this mechanism may function, until I can tell the
> signal from 
> > the noise I will doubt that my analysis is a
> strawman.
> The best way to test Jyotish is to learn it.  Use
> something easy like 
> the System's Approach which is easy to learn and
> pretty much based on 
> Parashara anyway.   Unlike other approaches it is a
> distillation of the 
> rules that Parashara laid out which I believe were a
> compilation of the 
> way astrology was a practiced at the time in India. 
> My only doubts are 
> that the planets except for the Moon and Sun have
> little effect on our 
> lives and that astrology is tracking natural cycles
> that the planets 
> provided handy markers for.  I have never found
> someone who has given me 
> proper birthtime to be off as far as their
> profession and their success 
> at it nor problems relating to bad planetary cycles.
>  It is also not an 
> exact science though we have a lot of jyotishis who
> think it is (down to 
> the minute).  Think of it more like a "weather
> report."  But it is less 
> abstract than the (not so) Amazing Randi would have
> you think.  :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To subscribe, send a message to:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Or go to: 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
> and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 



  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

Peter wrote:
> Oh Please, Bhairitu! Jyotish is the biggest pile of
> unmitigated shit, if there is such a thing! No one has
> predicted anything with jyotish except
> retrospectively. I love how you call it an "inexact
> science". 
So are weather reports and probably psychology while we're at it.  :D

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

John wrote:
> A good jyotish primer is a book by James Braha entitled, "Ancient 
> Jyotish for the Modern Astrologer".  By the way, Systems Approach is 
> a specific type of method which ignores many of the jyotish 
> tradition.  The author of this method is very adamant in stating that 
> his ideas are the best and does not accept any other techniques from 
> the ancient tradition.  Because of this attitude, I'm a bit skeptical 
> in accepting his pronouncemets to be gospel.
>   
Braha is also an ex-TM teacher.  I've been on one of his workshops and 
he ticked some people off by the way he was heavy handed.  One of my 
teachers pointed out that many village astrologers in India use very 
simple methods, not all the icing on cake that so many western jyotishis 
love and throw off their readings, and get very good predictions.

I also liked Tom Hopke's (Nalini Kantha Das) book "How to Read Your 
Horoscope" and an Indian book "Learn Astrology the Easy Way" by Dr. 
Gauri Kapoor.
> The best way to learn is to attend a jyotish class from a local 
> practitioner.  This is the easiest way to experience jyotish and to 
> get immersed into the tradition.
>
> JR
>   
Yup, always if you can a personal instructor the better.  I've studied 
with a number of instructors.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Vaj]

On Apr 28, 2008, at 11:44 AM, curtisdeltablues wrote:

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:







The final woo woo aspect is the
claim that humans could know about such a connection using ancient
scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who believed in many  
forms of

divination.


Huh? Are you suggesting that ancient cultures bring absolutely

nothing > to the table? No valid knowledge of ANYTHING? Whew. We have
different > views there.

I was putting my finger on the epistemological basis for the claims of
Joitish.  They come from ancient scriptures, not from any empirical
basis.


What you're missing here is that these scriptures come from direct  
empirical insight from the sages who wrote them. And some of these  
are (allegedly) insights into people who would visit a particular  
Jyotishi ( I'm speaking of the Surya or Brighu samhita style  
Jyotishis here). For example I know a woman who was recognized as a  
reincarnation in the Shankaracharya order who presented herself to a  
reader of this type using her ordained name (a Sanskrit name), and  
after they figured out which palm leaf related to her life, the  
Jyotishi read it off and the palm leaf actually contained her birth  
name in English. The palms leaves were hundreds of years old.


Also consider the following--I've had readings from a yogi who goes  
into brief samadhis and was able to read off my entire chart and  
birth time without ever having any details. He was also able to read  
my life in shocking, really breathtaking detail. Any person can, and  
I know of dozens who have, go visit this guy and he'll through his  
direct empirical insight, tell you the moment of your birth to the  
minute. He actually "sees" the moment of your birth like a hologram.


Now take this one step further, if there is a sage today who can do  
this, isn't it also possible sages in the past could have similarly  
grokked the planetary machinery as mirror of karmic weather as a set  
of rules and techniques? The difference of course is that these texts  
rely on sophisticated rules and adherence to these rules to get some  
benefit, whereas the Jyotishi-sage has direct insight. There would  
clearly be more room for error in a Jyotishi who merely is attempting  
to apply rules grokked by an ancient rishi.


I would challenge anyone who's interested to meet this sage on his  
next tour and see how you feel after that experience. How could you  
explain that someone could just, from scratch, cognize the moment of  
your birth and the precise position of planets in the sky?




  I was challenging that people can know about such a mechanism
and proposing that pre-scientific cultures tended to believe
assertions from priestly classes without any verification required.

There is plenty of stuff from pre-scientific cultures that has passed
modern standards of proof. Joitish is not one of them.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly had no value it 
would have disappeared long ago.  As for the naysayers, most are talking 
out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)

Westerners always look to specifics out of astrology but Indians want 
more general answers to things like "will I get married", "will I have 
children"or  "will I get a job?" These are things that can be answered 
by looking at the status of the planetary indicators for these things.  
I've done charts for people where I could just about guess from the 
chart what their main question was going to be and often that was "why 
am I not married?"  Well the 7th lord or other planets associated with 
marriage were just trashed in the chart.  I've even seen very saintly 
Indian astrologers tell someone with that configuration to just have 
"flings." :-)

I can also about guess that the person who comes to me who says "why is 
everything going bad for me right noew" has about a 80-90% of a Rahu 
transit affliction going on in their horoscope.  The great thing is you 
can often tell people that things are going to get better because these 
things only last for a while.   Of course there are those who have such 
dreadful charts that it  may be years before anything gets better.  For 
those people remedial measures and things like meditation help them rise 
about the influence of the planets.  If find that people who have been 
meditating a long time find the planetary events to be "like lines drawn 
on water" happening around them but not directly to them in any strong 
sense.

I did once do a reading where the person thought it wasn't very good 
because I didn't pick up that she was pregnant which was something that 
is not easy to pick up from a chart.  OTOH, I did a casual palmistry 
reading once for a friend's wife and mentioned that there appeared to be 
some health issues coming up.  In that case those health were her 
getting pregnant a few months later.  :-D


new.morning wrote:
> In various ares of life, people seem to imagine such big things. Then
> knock something down because it does not meet their inflated
> expectations. Spouse or guru on a pedestal perhaps. Or, for example,
> "They said I have high blood pressure and yet they couldn't even
> predict what would happen to me on May 3rd and what my bank account
> balance would be." or, "That charlatan weatherman, he said there was
> 60% chance of rain, but didn't even predict that my cat would get
> sick, and my kid would lose his softball game."   These are odd
> expectations that do not follow. And such crazy expectations are sure
> to disappoint.  
>
> IMV, Jyotish, if it does anything (which is not established that it
> does -- but there are interesting antecdotal evidence) says things
> like, "The next few years will likely have some pot holes in the
> roads." It doesn't say that you will hit one and break your axle. Or
> that you will run over one filled with water and splash the mayor when
> he is walking his dog." These and a billion other things may be more
> likely during this period. 
>
> But trying to present you with detailed "film into the future" that
> you can watch clip by clip, detail by detail, is not what jyotish
> does. Though thats what people seem to expect. And when such a
> detailed film is not presented, they get all bent out of shape and say
> "Jyotish is full of shit". In that case, something may be full of
> shit, but I don't believe its jyotish.
>
>   

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Vaj]

On Apr 28, 2008, at 12:44 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:





What you're missing here is that these scriptures come from direct
empirical insight from the sages who wrote them.


This just adds another layer of assertion that "sages" can have
extrasensory experiences about how the world works doesn't it?


Well, my overall point is that if there exists people alive today who  
do have that direct insight, it could have also occurred in the past.  
In extenso it is also possible then that these insights could have  
been codified into set of rules for those who lack such insight. This  
would, by it's very nature, be more prone to error and more user  
dependent.



 And some of these

are (allegedly) insights into people who would visit a particular
Jyotishi


I have to put your experiences with Jotishis in the same box with
Turq's experiences with Rama.  They are fascinating, but so far out of
my personal experience that I can't really comment. It all sounds
interesting and I wish I was there!  I would love to see a video of
the guy you are speaking about with great cold reading powers.  That
would be my best chance of determining if he was actually coming up
with new accurate information.


Yes, I agree.


  The read would have to be on a
randomly selected person who had not spent hours in line speaking with
other people about themselves.


Of course. It should be blinded. In my case, it was.

I say that as someone who used to think Astrology was total BS. After  
meeting this guy (Yogi Karve) I can now understand how it is possible  
to project answers onto any pattern in nature really.




I'm not claiming to know that there aren't such people.  I really
don't know this.  I just haven't seen proof myself.  Fair enough?



Sure.

Have you read any on Michel Gauquelin and his statistical analyses?

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Sal Sunshine]

On Apr 28, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Bhairitu wrote:


Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly had no value it
would have disappeared long ago.


Religion's been around for centuries too.  So have war and
murder and all sorts of things that have very little
or no value to most people.


As for the naysayers, most are talking
out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)


Physician, heal thyself.

Why is the idea that the universe is a random place
where stuff can just happen so threatening to some?

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Vaj]

On Apr 28, 2008, at 1:27 PM, hugheshugo wrote:


It would convince me that something was going on, can you
post who he is and if he ever visits England.



His name is Yogi Karve and he has a tour email list on Yahoo! at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Yogi_Karve

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Vaj]

On Apr 28, 2008, at 2:05 PM, TurquoiseB wrote:


Some, like me and seemingly you, just have
NO PROBLEM with the concept of a chaotic
universe. We don't know for sure that it
IS a chaotic universe, but if it is, cool.

Others seem to need a SYSTEM of some kind to
keep the concept of chaos out of sight and
out of mind. Astrology and Jyotish are systems
that believe that they have made chaos under-
standable and predictable. The MBTI is a sys-
tem for reducing the chaos of possible person-
ality types down to an even 16, and thus again
rendering chaos understandable and predictable.
A belief in God is probably the biggest system
for believing that the universe is not chaotic.

What I'm noticing in a lot of this discussion
is that if you scratch the surface of a habitual
skeptic about one system, what you just might
find is a prosyletute for another system.


One can believe the universe is chaotic and still have an interest in  
prediction and trend analysis. For example, weather prediction and  
global climate change are best modeled on Chaos and Complexity  
mathematics as it gives the best predictions! Chaos is an important  
basis for weather patterns, but we do use it quite successfully in  
weather prediction. However since it is chaotic, predictions are not  
absolute but follow a certain probability.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

TurquoiseB wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly 
>> had no value it would have disappeared long ago.  
>> 
>
> Belief in God has no proven value, and it's
> still around. People *like* to believe in
> fantasies.
>   
Unless you define "God" as everything that is, was and will be, right?
>   
>> As for the naysayers, most are talking out of their 
>> butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)
>> 
>
> And, quite honestly, it seems to me that a 
> few of the yea-sayers are talking out of
> attachment TO having done their homework,
> and having "invested" a great deal of 
> belief and time and effort into something 
> they can't prove has value, any more than 
> they can prove the existence of or the 
> value of God.
>
> What's fascinating is that the same folks
> who occasionally poke fun at the TB TMers
> for holding onto beliefs that they can't
> prove are acting remarkably *like* those 
> TB TMers now that a few of the things that 
> *they* believe in have been challenged.
>
>   
We''re not talking Maharishi Jyotish here, are we?  When TB TM'ers are 
poked fun at those poking fun are not poking fun at meditation in 
general, are they?

> Attachment is attachment in my book. 
>   
You're attached to your book? 

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Vaj]

On Apr 28, 2008, at 2:11 PM, hugheshugo wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



On Apr 28, 2008, at 1:27 PM, hugheshugo wrote:


It would convince me that something was going on, can you
post who he is and if he ever visits England.



His name is Yogi Karve and he has a tour email list on Yahoo! at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Yogi_Karve



Cheers Vaj, it's probably me but the site appears to have
no tour dates or anything really and the link to the
universal society is a page of building society ads, have I done
something wrong?



The latter site does seem obsolete. As far as I can tell there are no  
current tour plans.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

Vaj wrote:
>
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 12:44 PM, curtisdeltablues wrote:
>
>> 
>>>
>>> What you're missing here is that these scriptures come from direct
>>> empirical insight from the sages who wrote them.
>>
>> This just adds another layer of assertion that "sages" can have
>> extrasensory experiences about how the world works doesn't it?
>
> Well, my overall point is that if there exists people alive today who 
> do have that direct insight, it could have also occurred in the past. 
> In extenso it is also possible then that these insights could have 
> been codified into set of rules for those who lack such insight. This 
> would, by it's very nature, be more prone to error and more user 
> dependent.
I actually started out doing astrology reading via intuition which I 
still do today.  My first astrology class was with a noted Indian 
astrologer and it an advanced class filled when most of the notable 
American jyotishis.  It was quite a baptism of fire to say the least. :-D

I learned the rules of astrology so I could explain in those terms what 
was happening.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

hugheshugo wrote:
> I'll be honest if I think it's a match for how things are for
> me right now. If you have time it would be fun.
>   
> So, could you do mine and post it here? I'm interested, really.
You can post your birth details to FFL and those here who are 
astrologers including myself will take a look at it.  Problem is we know 
some things about you already so the best we can do is make predictions 
for your future and wait to see if they manifest.

However let's not turn FFL into just another astrology group.  There are 
already plenty of those on Yahoo.  Most that teach a school where you 
should at least pretend you know some astrology and want some help 
understanding your chart otherwise most will think you're trying to get 
a free reading that many charge for (I don't it's more a hobby for me).

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

Sal Sunshine wrote:
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Bhairitu wrote:
>
>> Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly had no value it
>> would have disappeared long ago.
>
> Religion's been around for centuries too.  So have war and
> murder and all sorts of things that have very little
> or no value to most people.
>
>> As for the naysayers, most are talking
>> out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)
>
> Physician, heal thyself.
>
> Why is the idea that the universe is a random place
> where stuff can just happen so threatening to some?
>
> Sal
Well perhaps because some of us do see a pattern in that random chaos?  
I love discussing predestiny to people who usually wind up one 
dimensional in their argument usually "then I don't need to do anything 
anymore according to you."  To which I respond, "yes, if that is your 
destiny." :-D

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

curtisdeltablues wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>   
>> Astrology has been around for centuries so if it truly had no value it 
>> would have disappeared long ago. 
>> 
>
> It's value may be psychological for people who want life to make sense
> in an orderly way.  This criteria has nothing to do with the
> confidence we should place in its claims.
>   
I got reading to see if I had selected the right career path in life.  
Not only did I select the proper career path but I couldn't help but do 
it.   I have three planets in the third house including the income and 
career planets.  The third house is the house of communications.  
Everything I've done career wise has been related to that.   Not only 
that my ascendant lends itself to that too.  I've seen this pattern with 
others.  They often don't stray from the career path in the chart and 
when they do disaster arises unless it is some temporary job.
>  As for the naysayers, most are talking 
>   
>> out of their butt because they've never done their homework.  ;-)
>> 
>
> I wondered how long it would take for this type of argument to emerge.
>   
Well if I said that the MPEG-4 codec uses long GOP frames and  MPEG-2 
usually doesn't you could claim I was speaking baloney when I would 
certainly think you haven't done your homework.  :-D
>   
>> Westerners always look to specifics out of astrology but Indians want 
>> more general answers to things like "will I get married", "will I have 
>> children"or  "will I get a job?" 
>> 
>
> In my experience Western astrology focuses more on personality traits
> and Indians are the ones who want specific practical information.  YOu
> can't get more specific than the claim for a specific time as
> "auspicious' for weddings or business ventures.
>   
But even those recommendations called "Muhurtas" have some latitude to 
them.  It has been the centuries long experience that choosing the wrong 
Muhurta can be disastrous.   Note too that  Indians often just use a  
Panchang which has more to do with the Moon than other planets.  My 
introduction to astrology was watching what was auspicious in a Moon 
calendar that a girlfriend gave me.  It was remarkably insightful.
>
> These are things that can be answered 
>   
>> by looking at the status of the planetary indicators for these things.  
>> I've done charts for people where I could just about guess from the 
>> chart what their main question was going to be and often that was "why 
>> am I not married?"  Well the 7th lord or other planets associated with 
>> marriage were just trashed in the chart.  I've even seen very saintly 
>> Indian astrologers tell someone with that configuration to just have 
>> "flings." :-)
>> 
>
> Would you care to test this ability on someone here?  This should be
> fun.  Not someone with as much personal information online as I have
> but someone who doesn't post her often?
>   
Like I said let's not turn FFL into another Yahoo astrology group.  
There are plenty of those.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

hugheshugo wrote:
> I've always been a fan of Randi, he put his money where his
> mouth is, $1,000,000 to be precise, and never had anyone
> convince him there is anything supernatural going on. 
> Could've been a money spinner for the TMO I always thought.
>   
Randi is an entertainer.  It's not his money BTW, it is from backers who 
have in the past quickly pulled the offer when someone who has a good 
track record takes them on.  His astrology research was very lame, based 
on newspaper horoscopes.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

Vaj wrote:
>
> On Apr 28, 2008, at 2:11 PM, hugheshugo wrote:
>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 28, 2008, at 1:27 PM, hugheshugo wrote:
>>>
 It would convince me that something was going on, can you
 post who he is and if he ever visits England.
>>>
>>>
>>> His name is Yogi Karve and he has a tour email list on Yahoo! at:
>>>
>>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Yogi_Karve
>>>
>>
>> Cheers Vaj, it's probably me but the site appears to have
>> no tour dates or anything really and the link to the
>> universal society is a page of building society ads, have I done
>> something wrong?
>
>
> The latter site does seem obsolete. As far as I can tell there are no 
> current tour plans.
I've had a reading from him.  What he has done is memorize some charts 
that give him an anchor to where the planets were at the time.  I 
learned to do this myself from one of my teachers.  I can usually figure 
out mentally where the slow moving planets were during a year.  The 
moon, mars, venus and mercury, forget it they move too fast.   
Ascendants can be approximated from the birth time because the Sun rises 
in the Sun sign of date.  You can more or less add or subtract a sign 
every two hours maybe adjusting for the time of year and location for 
the earth's tilt.  Then looking at the person to see if their features 
fit that ascendant.  I totally spooked someone by inversely telling them 
what time of day they were born from looking at them.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Sal Sunshine]

On Apr 28, 2008, at 1:34 PM, John wrote:


Why is the idea that the universe is a random place
where stuff can just happen so threatening to some?

Sal


You're assuming that you know the answer, Sal.


Not at all.


Who told you that the universe is random?


Nobody.  It's just personal observation.


If you have convinced yourself this generalization,
how do you know you're right?


I have not convinced myself of it, nor do I have any
particular stake in being right.  I'd like to be
wrong, in fact.  It's just that personal observation
and a lifetime of experience tell me I'm probably not.


Did someone from the
cosmos reveal this secret to you?


No.

Sal

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Angela Mailander]

Yes, thanks, all.  I've not had much to say, cause,
really, I know nothing about it other than the usual
Western prejudices against it, and then, that more
than interesting experience of corresponding with
Pundit Sharma, Guru Dev's Jyotishi.  He, incidentally,
once told me that the longer he practices it (he was
in his eighties when we "met") the less he knew about
it.  

And, well, that's my experience with everything else I
"know" also.  Young Dove may have a clue when he says
the aliens may already be here in ways we can't even
imagine.  For all we know, we could be bio-pixels in
some space alien's computer game.  And that insight,
by the way, had it's own amazing history.  I wrote
that notion to a friend, and he sent me a link to an
essay by some mathematician at some famous university
who said the odds are really good that something like
that is, in fact, the case.  More things between
heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your
philosophy



--- curtisdeltablues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> I believe that we are running a similar mental
> process as I would on
> different data than I have seen. I respect your
> process.  If you say
> you have seen some cool correlations, that is good
> enough for me.  You
> seem every bit as clear on the limits of our
> knowledge as I try to be.
>  This was a fun day discussing Joitish with
> everyone.  Thanks for that.
> 
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> "curtisdeltablues"
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> new.morning  wrote:
> > > >
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >The final woo woo aspect is the
> > > > > claim that humans could know about such a
> connection using ancient
> > > > > scriptures from a pre-scientific culture who
> believed in many
> > forms of
> > > > > divination. 
> > > > 
> > > > Huh? Are you suggesting that ancient cultures
> bring absolutely
> > > nothing > to the table? No valid knowledge of
> ANYTHING? Whew. We have
> > > different > views there.
> > > 
> > > I was putting my finger on the epistemological
> basis for the claims of
> > > Joitish.  
> > 
> > Thats cool. I mistakenly thought yuo were
> addressing my post. I have
> > made no such claims about epistemological basis
> for the claims of
> > Joytish. All I have said is, basically, i have
> seen enough interesting
> > things in my cahrt an others from jyotish, that I
> personally question,
> > a little, if its just coincidence. It may be. But
> I have had this
> > experience. Others report it too. As far as having
> a coherent theory
> > to expalin it-- nope. Don't have. But as a
> parallel analogy, science
> > observes a lot of stuff it can't explain yet. How
> are those  dark
> > matter and anti-matter things coming along?
> > 
> > >They come from ancient scriptures, not from any
> empirical
> > > basis.  I was challenging that people can know
> about such a mechanism
> > > and proposing that pre-scientific cultures
> tended to believe
> > > assertions from priestly classes without any
> verification required.
> >  
> > > There is plenty of stuff from pre-scientific
> cultures that has passed
> > > modern standards of proof. Joitish is not one of
> them.
> > 
> > And yet I find "beyond coincidence stuff". I am
> not trying to prove
> > tht to you. I am just sharing an observation. That
> you may think I am
> > bonkers, no problem.  (hey, I am sure it didn't
> start with this. :)) 
> >   
> > > > 
> > > > > Do people with big ears really have a better
> chance to
> > > > > become wealthy?  
> > > > 
> > > > Is the term strawman in your vocabulary?
> > > 
> > > Physiognomy is a branch of Joitish.  This claim
> came from one of
> > > Maharishi's favorite Joitishis.  I am pointing
> out that there is a
> > > cluster of beliefs that need to be examined
> through some testing
> > > rather than accepted on face value. 
> > 
> > Okie dokie. Slam all things jyotish you don't
> like. I think a lot of
> > it is hokey too. I only offer up my observations
> for discussion.
> > 
> >  
> > > >  
> > > > > Finally, the use of gems to magically
> mitigate the influence of
> > plants
> > > > > seems to throw the whole claim of causation
> back into play
> > doesn't it?
> > > > 
> > > > Um where did I say anything about gems? I have
> said there may be
> > > lots> of mud around the um, "gems" of insight
> from ancient cultures.
> > > There > is a need to wash off the mud. 
> > 
> > > It is in the system.  You don't need to mention
> it for me to bring it
> > > up. 
> > 
> > Its not in my observations. 
> > 
> >  I agree that there is a lot of mud to wash off in
> human knowledge
> > > of all eras of our history.
> > > >  
> > > > > Humans naturally desire to know about and
> control future events. 
> > > > 
> > > > Perhaps. But what does that have to do with
> this discussion? O
> > > you> are still stuck in the same misconception
> as HUGO that this is
> > > about> casuati

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Bhairitu]

TurquoiseB wrote:
>
> I said it because a number of people were displaying
> attachment to systems that they personally believe
> "work" for everyone. I do not share that belief. 
>
>   
>> But then one is left with the notion that Turq's statement really 
>> didn't say much except something obvious, like "It doesn't rain 
>> EVERY day in Seattle."
>> 
>
> No, it was quite specific; it was about techniques
> and systems. I quite honestly don't believe that
> they work as advertised. I suspect that the reason
> that people believe they work is that 1) as Curtis
> said, there is a kind of codependent relationship
> going on, in which the seekers *want* to believe in
> a system, and thus project onto vague descriptions
> of predictions or results from a technique what
> they have been told to expect from them, and 2) the
> techniques or systems sometimes *do* "work" to
> trigger their own latent abilities. The techniques
> don't *cause* these latent abilities to appear, in
> my opinion; they just trick the practitioner into
> the state of attention from which intuition about
> the future or someone else's past is possible, or
> from which the particular siddhi or other supposed
> benefit happens. 
>   
You're doing the same thing as Judy reviewing "Apocalypto".  She 
commented without ever seeing the movie and you've never done 
astrology.  Your ignorance is showing as there are MANY schools and 
systems of jyotish, not just one.  You will often get errors from the 
novices who for some reason after having a couple of workshops on the 
subject and set up shop charging for readings while many Indian 
astrologers went for years just practicing for nothing to craft their 
skills before hanging out a shingle.

A wiser person would have said "I haven't studied jyotish so I can't 
comment on its veracity."  Likewise I haven't studied Buddhist Tantra so 
can't comment on its veracity.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Vaj]

On Apr 29, 2008, at 2:47 PM, Bhairitu wrote:

> You're doing the same thing as Judy reviewing "Apocalypto".  She
> commented without ever seeing the movie and you've never done
> astrology.  Your ignorance is showing as there are MANY schools and
> systems of jyotish, not just one.  You will often get errors from the
> novices who for some reason after having a couple of workshops on the
> subject and set up shop charging for readings while many Indian
> astrologers went for years just practicing for nothing to craft their
> skills before hanging out a shingle.
>
> A wiser person would have said "I haven't studied jyotish so I can't
> comment on its veracity."  Likewise I haven't studied Buddhist  
> Tantra so
> can't comment on its veracity.


Interestingly, Jyotish figures prominently in several Buddhist  
anuttara tantras, like the Great Cycle of Time tantra (kalachakra- 
tantra). Buddhahood is likened to the mastery of various cycles of  
time, inner, outer and secret. You see the same thing in Hindu agamas  
like the Shiva-swarodaya. When yogis of these systems are really  
finely attuned to kosmos, they can even tell the rising sign of a  
person by feeling their normal breathing patterns. Swami Rama had this  
siddhi. But ultimately, they go beyond time--and can see the cycles in  
everything from the breath to the changing landscape.

It's pretty hard to be a Buddha and not be omniscient, and mastering  
time is a central point of unimpeded omniscience.

Re: [FairfieldLife] Jytotish is one man's rubbish, another's man's playground ( Re: Hillary the

[Vaj]

On Apr 30, 2008, at 2:12 AM, TurquoiseB wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


It's pretty hard to be a Buddha and not be omniscient...


I would say instead that it's fairly easy.
Omniscience is a fantasy that does not exist
in real life. And I suspect that the original
Buddha would be the first to agree with this.

Not that that makes him omniscient or anything...  :-)



Who is this original Buddha who is not unimpeded?