Spiritual Portal

Are we bound by the zodiac- can we break the expectations of our sign?

For example... When a girl ask, "what's your sign?" and in her research finds you're compatible or not compatible... Something about that seems absurd to me.

While it is possible to find compatibility between people it is not so simple as to do it by 'sign' alone. What is meant by 'sign' is a misnomer because it can only tell us one thing; that is whether the Sun signs are compatible. There is much more to comparing people by using Sun signs alone. We must look at all the planets and important areas of two charts to see the dynamics and compatibilities or liabilities they may share.

Two people may not be compatible by Sun signs but may share compatibility in every other way or they may be compatible by Sun sign and show no compatibility in the rest of the astrological charts.

I would not let a google search for zodiac compatibility halt the pursuits of a relationship. I'd rather defy those odds. :D Whatever the sign, if it's going to happen- it will. I've met one to many take caution in pursuing their feelings because someone who doesn't know them would tell them what's best for them. We are not bound by a Zodiac sign. I do have respects for yours and Little Hoot's insights and I do not mean to belittle your research and understanding. I agree with your response that there are many variables to a person and I believe in the power of alchemy.

 

Astrology is generally considered to have been replaced by astronomy. Similarly, alchemy is also considered to have given way to chemistry. Neither has proved acceptable to modern scientific standards. There is no Chair for Astrology at Harvard, for example, and no serious studies underway. Both are generally understood to be a superstitious, pseudo-science. I imagine you all know this, and I say this knowing that Steve practices astrology. So, I expect him to disagree.

If I met a girl who said that she couldn't date me due to our signs I would accept it. Because the truth is, she would probably be right.

Of course, this view contradicts the view of those who follow Yogananda. Sri Yukteswar is presented as an expert astrologist, and the stories from the autobiography, if accurately portrayed, would make a strong case that he was. Would it mar the reputation of Sri Yukteswar if it were admitted that astrology is an outdated subject? The SRF path seems based largely on the belief in astrology. Would it even be possible for someone to be a SRFer if they didn't believe in astrology? These are questions that I don't often hear asks in these circles.

And I too mean no disrespect. It seems to me that it would be perfectly understandable for people in early 20th century India to believe in astrology. Ramana too gave it a passing endorsement somewhere. It is deeply ingrained in Indian culture. The question extends to do people have to be infallible to have our respect? I don't think so. Isaac Newton is respected, and he practiced a whole lot of alchemy and religion. Scientists respect him, but they don't believe in alchemy.

Hi Brock,

I'm not smart- I simply meant I believe in transmutation! Personally, if a girl needs to research whether or not we'd work through google and then deny my advances because of it- I'd say she isn't worth it. On to the next one! lol  ;D

Yeah, you are.

----

Sometimes people get this stuff from newspapers and magazines, or, as you say, a google search. It's natural for us to believe in this kind of stuff. My mom, for example, went to see a psychic who she believes predicted that she would be with her current fiance. This is something I was not aware of until my sister recently told me. She admitted that she had gone to him also, but didn't want to tell me or my dad because she was afraid we would cast doubts on it. And she "wanted to believe it" she said, so didn't tell us. It turns out his prediction didn't pan out for her, though, after all. 

Interesting that you would bring up Sri Yukteswar Brock. These views below reflect my own although I had them before reading this material. As you know Eric I was able to predict the great changes in your life recently. Would it have helped you more for me to tell who I thought would specifically be leaving your life? No I do not think so; nor do astrologers always say such things. Why? Because they themselves are looked at as generating such negativity. It was best for you yourself to assess the changes which I spoke to you of many times in the last couple years. It is not a 'bad' thing. Your life has and will encounter much transformation thru this-once in a life time-metamorphosis. It is not so much the events that are important as the reaction and wisdom we gain from them that matters.

Sri Yukteswar Sri Yukteswar
STORIES AND TEACHINGS OF SRI YUKTESWAR
from Autobiography of a Yogi by Paramhansa Yogananda

Is Astrology a Real Science?
It is never a question of belief; the only scientific attitude one can take on any subject is whether it is true. The law of gravitation worked as efficiently before Newton as after him. The cosmos would be fairly chaotic if its laws could not operate without the sanction of human belief.

Charlatans have brought the stellar science to its present state of disrepute. Astrology is too vast, both mathematically and philosophically, to be rightly grasped except by men of profound understanding. If ignoramuses misread the heavens, and see there a scrawl instead of a script, that is to be expected in this imperfect world. One should not dismiss the wisdom with the ‘wise.’

All parts of creation are linked together and interchange their influences. The balanced rhythm of the universe is rooted in reciprocity. Man, in his human aspect, has to combat two sets of forces — first, the tumults within his being, caused by the admixture of earth, water, fire, air, and ethereal elements; second, the outer disintegrating powers of nature. So long as man struggles with his mortality, he is affected by the myriad mutations of heaven and earth.

Astrology is the study of man’s response to planetary stimuli. The stars have no conscious benevolence or animosity; they merely send forth positive and negative radiations. Of themselves, these do not help or harm humanity, but offer a lawful channel for the outward operation of cause-effect equilibriums which each man has set into motion in the past.

A child is born on that day and at that hour when the celestial rays are in mathematical harmony with his individual karma.

His horoscope is a challenging portrait, revealing his unalterable past and its probable future results. But the natal chart can be rightly interpreted only by men of intuitive wisdom: these are few.

The message boldly blazoned across the heavens at the moment of birth is not meant to emphasize fate — the result of past good and evil — but to arouse man’s will to escape from his universal thralldom. What he has done, he can undo. None other than himself was the instigator of the causes of whatever effects are now prevalent in his life. He can overcome any limitation, because he created it by his own actions in the first place, and because he has spiritual resources which are not subject to planetary pressure.

Superstitious awe of astrology makes one an automaton, slavishly dependent on mechanical guidance. The wise man defeats his planets — which is to say, his past — by transferring his allegiance from the creation to the Creator.

The more he realizes his unity with Spirit, the less he can be dominated by matter. The soul is ever-free; it is deathless because birthless. It cannot be regimented by stars.

Man is a soul, and has a body. When he properly places his sense of identity, he leaves behind all compulsive patterns. So long as he remains confused in his ordinary state of spiritual amnesia, he will know the subtle fetters of environmental law.

God is harmony; the devotee who attunes himself will never perform any action amiss. His activities will be correctly and naturally timed to accord with astrological law. After deep prayer and meditation he is in touch with his divine consciousness; there is no greater power than that inward protection.

 Previous Next

Search

EXCERPTED FROM


By Paramhansa Yogananda

I've read those passages many times from Yogananda's autobiography. He is simply saying that there are good astrologers and there are bad ones. This is what you'd expect in any field I guess. But still you must realize that those reassuring words are not proof of astrology. It may in fact be that astrology has fallen into disrepute because of the lack of skilled practitioners. Yet, it seems there are plenty of people who would have the aptitude for it. An Einstein for example, or a Newton, or the like, would be totally capable of reviving the lost art - wouldn't you think?

It almost becomes a circular argument when you consider that it might be the other way around; the worlds mathematicians and scientists might not be studying it because it is doesn't measure up to modern scientific standards, rather than vice versa.

You must admire the fact that he admits, "it's not a matter of faith." Well, one should take up that mantle. But for most that I see, it seems it is precisely a matter of faith.

No more then science is matter of faith. As a point in fact science changes and evolves over the years much more then astrology does. So can we really have faith in scientific findings when many of them become outdated with time or at the very least they are found to be unusable in the face of new discoveries. Are we bound by the discoveries of  science? Only the foolish are. There is little if no lasting evidence of the proof of science. A Newton or Einstein helping astrology may be like putting physicists in charge of the gym or psychology department at a university​. Leave them to their own fields and leave Carl Jung to his. We have seen the remarkable achievements of science in the atomic and hydrogen bombs. It is fortunate that astrology cannot be used in such a menacing way.

Um, I think you're mistaken. You just contradicted the person you quoted from who said "the stellar science" was "never a question of belief; the only scientific attitude one can take on any subject is whether it is true." So is science faith, or not? According to you science is a matter of faith. This is only according to you, though, and people who are averse to science mainly for religious reasons. Climate change, for example, is not understood to be a matter of faith by most people who are concerned about it. It is however, considered precisely that by those who would brush it off as a new age, hippy, pagan religious concern.

Science itself is a process of testing theories, noting the results, and refining theoretical models until predictions can be made reliably based on those models to account for the data.


That's kind of the point of science. Science is not a thing, but an approach to truth claims and testing theoretical models experimentally. The fact that a field is open to revision, itself is one of the things that makes it a science. Distinctions between a scientific discipline and a religion or superstitious belief-system can definitely be seen in how amenable they are to new information, discoveries, and so on. Also, it seems pretty misleading to say that that we can't "have faith in scientific findings when many of them become outdated with time." If that were the case, our daily lives would be pretty unrecognizable. Your lights are going to go off tomorrow because science suddenly became "unusable."

I don't think you'll have much luck the debating tricks from religious apologists here. I'm pretty familiar with them. Let's just have a real discussion. So, I leave you with this. Is Astrology a science or not? If not, what would you say it is?

I am not getting your view that I have contradicted anything. Sorry Brock it is not registering.
I agree with Sri  Yukteswar that the only way we can believes something is if it is true. Science is based on empiracal knowledge which is derived from the senses. Do you always trust your senses? Thus there is a matter of speculation. Truth is gained by inner realization not by outer confirmation. But alas the only truth that you and i can have some consenses on is that derived by our senses as long as one of us refuses to look into 'truth' as a empiracal study of their own. Since you or someone may be unwilling to look into the truth of astrology how can one know about its authenticity? It is mere speculation.

Yes science does change as you mentioned. It's truth is different tomorrow then today. And yes I believe there will come a day that even our lights will not be usable because there will be a much different source of light. Life will be quite unrecognizable as you have suggested. In this sense the DISCOVERIES will be unusable. I did not say that the word you appear to make sacred is unusable. Especially to people as yourself. It may be still be used as much as you like it and want to use it as part of your reality. Science is one reality just as the Bible is a reality for others. It is important to recognize this when encountering the realities of other people. Yet there are many people who refuse to talk from any place but their reality. So I say let them join a club...Become members and pay their dues. Just remember that not everyone wants to join those clubs pay the dues and accept the rules that their club has dictated.

Okay, well since according to you "science does change" should we expect astrology to change also, if it's a science? But wasn't your original assertion that "science changes and evolves over the years much more then astrology does." You seem to compare astrology to science in one sentence and then claim that it is itself a science in another. I am just trying to make sense of what you are saying.

Another thing to point out is that science doesn't claim to be able to give capital T Truth. It may not even be possible for humans to know the truth about the universe in any ultimate metaphysical sense. Rather it is just a simple pragmatic approach to confirming theoretical models and making predictions based on those models which...I've said that already.

Finally, you should notice that I haven't said astrology isn't true or doesn't work. I have said that it is not considered to be a science by professional scientists in general. It is a fact that there is no astrology department at your local college or highschool. You can't dismiss that observation by saying that I haven't looked into it enough for myself. There are any number of things that I haven't bothered to "look into the truth of" because they simply aren't compelling enough for me to devote the time to it. For example, I have no interest desire to "look into the truth of" remote viewing. It sounds like psuedo-science but it's not impossible to conceive that it's real. So just try to understand that I'm not saying I know for a fact astrology isn't real or doesn't work I am only saying it is not considered a respectable science at the present time.

And frankly, if it is ever going to be considered one, it's going to need a lot better support than the arguments you have so far provided. Because you really haven't provided much of anything at all. I feel more doubtful about it being a science after reading your comments than I was before we even started.

Now let me just answer your question, "Do you always trust your senses?" I can't for the life of me figure out what this has to do with the conversation about astrology. This kind of doubt, sometimes called Cartesian doubt in philosophical discussion, is not new or something only people who believe in astrology think about. In philosophical discussion it also takes the form of "brain in a vat" thought experiments, and so forth.

I am just trying to show you that this is off-topic right now. For one thing, astrology itself relies on the senses. You have to observe the stars, do the calculations, and so on. Do you do this with no senses? You are using your senses every step of the way. Distinctions between inner and outer themselves rely on a spatial sense which would be impossible without the proper brain function.

You seem to be implying that astrology is a senseless activity. Anyway, let's leave the Cartesian doubt for another thread if you don't mind.

* Your post was updated while I was writing this.

I think we can be grateful that somethings are not science. I am grateful that music is not a science yet it is obviously effective and probably will be around much longer then science and has been here way before it. So you see even though something may have varifiable data (as astrology does) does not make it wonderful. In many ways science gives things a dirty name. So I need not prove anything. Quite frankly being indoctrinated in science in college was one of the worst experiences I had. I have never met more stubbornly obstinate, dogmatic and ignorant people as I have scientists and fanatical Christians. Most of the ones I have met refuse to consider anything outside their circle of their clubs bias based on the way they choose to check or conduct all their examinations. Let us see....'We cannot accept anything that lies outside of the Bible'....Or; 'we cannot consider anything that is a psuedo science' or based on 'superstitious behaviors'. That's the kind of smugness and self indulgence I have witnessed.

It may be of interest to you that astrology classes are taught at universities and schools. One of my best friend's taught in that capacity. It may also be of more interest to you that the people who have tried to start programs on, for instance, parapsychological research have been stopped in universities by who would you think? Ah yes; our prejudicial scientists came to the rescue. They would not have 'psuedo science' at their universities...Even though the interest and backing has been strong.

If this had been a thread about science I may have given a more erudite response. Since it is not and many scientists like to apply their experiments on everything but themselves I will say this; the music I make is profoundly scientific and varifiable on all levels. Now would you like to listen....Ha ha!

You seem to be having a conversation, not with me, but with every person you've ever talked to on the subject. You also think I "appear to make sacred" the word science. I have done no such thing. Also, I have not written books called "The Holy Science", "The Science of Religion", etc. Do your teachers "appear to make sacred" the word science? It sure does get used in a lot of their book titles. Yogananda's whole selling point in the west had to do with making religion scientific. Are you really trying to give me a lecture on glorifying science?

Yes, it is interesting that astrology is taught in universities and schools. Can you share some links or more information about that? Thanks.


 

LOL

You really make me laugh sometimes ***** LOL. I think the times we are funniest is when we do not even try. I do not know if you know how much I am actually laughing.

O.K. here we go. Do you really think I am here to defend Paramahansa Yogananda and Sri Yukteswar or for that matter they even need my defense? Do I look like a candidate for guru cult worship as you would put it? I am merely telling you my experiences with scientists. Someone else may have very different experiences. What is wonderful about this type of communicating is that it is not all personal in nature. We can and are communicating with a larger audience. You don't like my lectures? LOL I feel quite the same about yours 😅 i suppose we must both endure one another! 😂 It could be quite a trial for both of us. Don't you think? 😋 By the way it is a shame that you are not the author of such books as the Holy Science and the Science of Religion because if you had been I would have been following you and not the author's that wrote those books. But alas you did not write them so I am getting quite a kick out of this....  our conversation. 😁 Go ahead feed me more chicken feed. Cock a doodle doooo. 😆

If you guys need a referee kindly accept my services.

               The 10 or so coooookie things about the kook

There are only two types of computers in the world. Those that waste your precious time and those that waste your precious time faster.

If you find my posts something to "endure" or "chicken feed," whatever that means, then I simply will stop wasting our time by posting. It is pretty simple.

As you plainly saw, I prefer not to have my name being used on here a lot. Rather than bother everyone about it, I added some code to change it to my username whenever it is used. You then decided to spell it out with spaces, which I think is pretty rude of you.

I was laughing with you for a minute, but I think I'm done here.
 

If you really think I am lecturing you maybe I should stop posting. I really have no lecture to give. Just observations in my life.  I also remember many other things that you've said about me that were not friendly. If I were to take them seriously would I still be posting after your responses? The fact is I have never even been mad at you and blown up over anything you have said whereas you have and simply told me that you were mad and having once expressed it you let it go. I am glad you told me that when it does not appear you have....to someone else that has left. Now I can't joke around with you without your threatening to stop posting? One thing is very important about joking around or getting mad about anything; not to take it personally. We have already seen that happen with other members. But I thought you were above that! That is one of the most important lessons of meditation: not to take things personally. It is something you and i and everyone needs to be mindful of. Once we no longer can laugh then we have lost our sense of humor. When we cannot laugh at ourselves we have really lost the lightness and joy of life. You and I have seen people loose this. It is sad indeed! When we are having fun and we must constantly check what we are about to say because it might be taken seriously by another then the spontaneity is taken out of relationships. I have seen it my life. So you see I was just having fun and thought you were as well as we have many times in the past.

That is the best part of our friendship ding dong. You have much to contribute but we will never know who to ascribe it too if you change your name again. Should that be what you want just tell us. You need not go into other people's posts and change words around to do so.....However your methods may be to change other peoples posts.  Since you never told me I had no way of knowing your intentions. In fact Eric once suggested to me that I call you by name. So I am not the only one who isn't psychic and I started calling him and you by name regularly after that. I may seem to be psychic but I am not privy to reading your mind. In fact I interpreted it quite differently which made me laugh. Sorry that there was no joke to find. Altough you can clearly see by the faces I put in my posts that I was laughing. Still you must remember I have been smiling and laughing up till the time that I see you are taking things seriously. So what choice have I? If I need to be careful of everything I say with you. So be it. From this moment on no more joking? This is serious business. This is what I  had to explain to Si when he took you seriously but he stopped posting. Sound familiar? At any rate it seems like there is a lot of effort I have put in this post to understand and I have in the past. I never realized that starting a free forum to inspire others towards meditation would require so much explanation to avoid possible misunderstanding.

It is a curious thing--- the focus of this topic. Are we bounded by the stars? You and I  both were both born with difficult natal configurations involving Mercury-- the planet of communication. It is all in how people deal with the zodiacs influence.

Guys, I really forgot about the original point.

Bro...Ahem, ding-dong (which I'm going hereafter to abbreviate to dd), you have a way to be too serious with things and to clash with other people who have a likewise serious way. I suggest that you relax in this forum, relaxing is what a forum should be about, beyond discussing constructively.

Of course astrology is not a physical science. If it were a science like chemistry or physics, we could make verifiable and repeatable experiments.

That means, we could take chemicals in the right doses and the right procedures and by following that we may end up with the same final compound.

Also, the goodness of a theory or a method may be measured by the correctness of the forecasts.

Is an algorithm forecasting the weather working? How good? That's immediately verifiable from the real weather.

I don't know if there have been such evaluations for astrological forecasts. Maybe the only study on such an evalutaion has been negative (no accurate forecasts as a whole).

So we should first determine the accuracy of various forecasts. Then determine the reliability of them by statistical methods, then ascertain whether the inaccuracies are due to individual lack of skills or biased method and so on.

There is no definitive verdict on that.

I agree with b...ahem, dd, that astrology is not a conventional science. It is simply a forecast method, or it maybe regarded as a niche of behavioural psycology, where individual behaviour is analyzed from a signature of alleged former lives. Such an analysis may provide help and support. And the forecasts are based upon that karmic signature and they also can be of psycological support.

I have no sufficient data to judge the goodness of forecast of astrology. On the whole, maybe it's not favourable.
Whereas determining the psycological signature is probably more accurate.

Mccoy

I would suggest the countless studies in varifiable evidence of Carl Jung on astrology. With evidence pointing to more then statistical coincidence for the incidence of Sun, Moon relationships with the ascendent for marriage partners. No doubt there are others as well...These are the ones I am familiar with.

It is also important to recognize that psychology is not a science. There just is too many variables to come up with consistent results in so many areas. This does not take away from its importance in understanding human interaction and mental disorders. As a matter of fact accept for biological psychology astrology has much more consistency because it is based on geometrical patterns that coincide with some varifiable data in human relations as shown by the works of Carl Jung. This is my take on evidence. However I have been leaking evidence of my own ever since this forum was started. I do not claim anything near to infallibility. However when people do not care to investigate something and judge it with there own disbelief and prejudice there is no reason to try to convince them. They already believe they 'know'.

It is important to recognize that astrology is much more then forecasting. It is about understanding relationships, ourselves and karmic release. Most astrologers feel no need to prove their authenticity. If I did not have people recognizing it's help in their life I would discontinue it's use. As you see I have not done this. Quite frankly the business of proof is someone else's concern. Just as a musician who plays regularly may not be interested in being a musicologist.

I'm pretty sure if a girl says you're astrologically incompatible that is likely to become a self-fulfilling prophecy, if nothing else. It also might suggest that she is looking for confirmations about how she already feels, i.e., that you're incompatible. That's pretty obvious, but I just thought I'd go ahead and say it.

Per usual our discussions take an entertaining direction, one I'm sure would turn most away from indulging  :D

Yes DD, it is quite obvious lol. An easy out for the lady making such claim! One I would gladly grant in pursuits of more fulfilling desires.  :) :) :)

Where compatibility is concerned, one needn't a Google Search to determine such!! Hahaha

I would add that it's not impossible to exceed expectations, even when shaped by the stars.

Not necessarily because most likely she does not know enough about astrology to make such a claim. If someone is truly looking for confirmation for the way they feel they would have to do chart comparisons. There would be no other way to find out astrologically.

Contrawise it possible to limit expectations due to not knowing the shape of the 'stars'.

Then we agree that a general reference of ones astrological sign is not enough to determine the full extent of a persons qualities. 

Yea... It's just a jump starter for a conversation. But if somebody holds your Sun sign against you it does not help socialization skills. They may have difficult communication and value lessons this life. Which is determined by other factors in someone's astrological profile. Difficult Mercury (communication) configurations and value judgements.... 2nd and 8th houses of values.

Very generally speaking though there are Sun signs that are more compatible. For example you and I both have Cancer Suns. That gives us more emotion and sensitvity on the other hand we must be careful that we are not wet blankets and too sensitive. But we do try to understand and appreciate sensitivity to other peoples' feelings. This would be true for Cancer Suns in general but their are always exceptions shown by other factors. For instance difficult moon configurations make it harder to understand the feelings of others.

This question comes to mind: what comes first the chicken or the egg? Self fulfilling prophecy often plays out in the map of the stars and ability to effectively and positively deal with challenging people and situations also can play out in a diagram of the heavens. She will probably find confirmation if she is determined that something will not work out. On the contrary an open heart and mind also has its confirmation in physical and astrological phenomena. So you see the hand of destiny plays out it's cards either way. If we so choose we may use difficult aspects and their energy to transform our challenges into victories. But almost all people with few exceptions remain pawns to the events of the heavens hardly looking towards  the transformation of energies that have the capability and potential of manifesting in different ways because of the impetus of those intense energy interplays.
Difficult solar patterns between charts is shown by tight squares and opposition's to ones partners solar energies.
There can be mitigating features from other planetary influences which could help bring understanding to work out these forces.

The only thingy we can agree on is that man, yo mamma is so fat she got her own zip code!

beady yu ole lady! r u makin fun'ofme infronta me?  ;D

big girl yu aint neva talk about my momma like dis befoe, you bein' colder den a mother-n law's luv

get yer ass back inde kitchen, always talkin bout cookin sometin nice! better yur kind deeds den yur wicked tongue!

 :D

Honey I'll be a fetchen some crawdads up stream in da mornin' Iza make ya'll some of dat der barbecue crawdad stew.

Well bless yer Heart  :D