About Astrology
by Sri Aurobindo
(A review of the book "Kalaprakasika: the Standard Book on the Election
System" by N.P. Subramania Iyer, Tanjore.)
The subject of this book is one which stands nowadays put away under
a sort of intellectual ban, placed on it some centuries ago by the scientific
and rationalistic European mind and not yet lifted. Mr. N.P. Subramania
Iyer has undertaken an astrological series which will deal with the various
parts of astrology, and the present volume contains the text and translation
of the "Kalaprakrasika", a treatise on the selection of the right times
by astrological rule for undertaking any and every action of human life.
The book is well printed and got up, the translation admirably done in
a style free enough to avoid all awkwardness, - the author has a thorough
control of the English tongue and an excellent style of his own, - but
perfectly faithful to the matter of the text. But the most interesting
part of the work for the ordinary reader is the introduction, in which
he gives amidst other matter the psychological explanation of the influence
of the planets and states for what they stand in relation to the Indian
Vedantic philosophy of existence. I have not seen elsewhere any exposition
of the subject equally original and illuminative.
Astrology is in the general mind associated with that class of subjects
which goes under the name of the occult, and along with others of its
class it has long been discredited by modern "enlightenment", one does
not quite know on what grounds or with what rational justification. It
has its psychic and mystical side, but that is not its ordinary presentation;
there it claims to be a science like any other with fixed processes and
an exact and definite system of rules which ought to be perfectly capable
of verification or of disproof by experiment and induction like any other
science. Its basis is astronomical and mathematical, its data perfectly
open and positive and in no way hidden or occult, nor does it at all shrink
back from the test or hide itself in secrecy and mystery. It does not
indeed give ordinarily the why, but only the how of the causes and effects
it professes to establish, but so it is with all other sciences; they
do not give the reason of things, but only their processes. Yet astrology
is supposed at some indefinite time in the march of human mind to have
been exploded, - along with such things as witch-craft and demonology,
not to speak of the existence of spirits and the immortality of the soul,
- and there is a sort of idea that it has been disproved and therefore
put aside as a superstition which no reasonable man can even look at except
with a lofty disdain, much less stoop to investigate with an open mind
its truth or falsity. Still the anathema of Science has not been able
to destroy it; in Europe it has revived, even though its practice as a
profession is punishable by the law, and in India it has always survived.
It is not indeed the habit of educated Indians to profess explicitly their
belief in it, they fight shy of that as a rule, but it is largely consulted
by numbers of them, as also by many Europeans. This is an anomalous position
which ought to be corrected. Either astrology is a true science and should
be investigated, proved, improved where defective and generally rehabilitated
in opinion, or else it is a pseudo science and should be investigated
and disproved so as to cut the ground away finally from all secret belief
or open credulity.
As a matter of fact astrology has never been scientifically disproved,
nor has any rational ground ever been advanced for treating it as a pseudo-science.
It simply came to be assumed at a certain period and under certain intellectual
influences that it was a childish superstition. Or if there were any grounds,
then it was left aside because astrologers were charlatans, because many,
perhaps most predictions went wrong, but most of all because it was thought
that in the nature of things, in any rational theory of the universe the
planets simply could not have any influence on our characters, lives and
actions. None of those grounds are sufficient. If many astrologers are
charlatans, so also have there been many quacks in the field of medicine;
at one time indeed not only did they pullulate; but the system of medicine
itself seemed so defective that there were plenty of clear and enlightened
minds who were inclined with Molière to denounce the whole thing
as a gross pseudo-science, an elaborate and solemn system of ignorance,
humbug and quackery. Supposing that view had prevailed, - it could not,
merely because men are too vitally interested in healing their ailments
and preserving their bodies and know no other way of doing it, - that
would not have done away with the truth underlying the science.
That many predictions go wrong, proves nothing essentially, against
astrology any more than the constant failure of doctors to heal diseases
proves anything essential against their science. The first reason of this
failure may be that a great number of practising astrologers are either
charlatans who seek to please their clients rather than predict by scientific
rule, - of that kind there are perhaps many, - or else inefficient and
ignorant men who practise only by rule of thumb, perfunctorily and with
a main eye upon their fees. But if even capable astrologers fail often,
that also only proves that either the science or their way of treating
it is largely empirical or that some of its rules or theories may be errors.
But every science has to pass through its empirical stage and some - as,
again, the science of medicine, - have hardly emerged from it, and every
science too burdens itself in its progress with false generalisations,
incorrect theories and imperfect rules which have afterwards to be discarded
or amended. As the main point in medicine is whether herbs and metals
and other remedies have or have not certain effects on the body and whether
their workings can be substantiated by experience in a sufficient number
of cases to establish a regular relation of cause and effect, so it is
in astrology with the fundamental question of planetary influences upon
earth and its creatures.
The a priori argument from the rational theory of the universe cannot
stand. There is nothing essentially irrational in the idea that in this
solar system, so closely linked together, there may be mutual influences
of all planets upon each other or that the beings of a particular planet
are powerfully influenced or even dominated by influences from the others.
The question remains, the a priori rationality being admitted or at least
not summarily dismissed, first, whether it is so in fact and, secondly,
how far those influences go and what nature they are. Astrology affirms
that they not only affect our bodies, but also our psychical being. If
matter and mind were entirely independent entities having no influence
or determining effect upon each other, then such a result could not be;
but that is not the case. According to the materialistic view of the universe
which claims to be the sole rationalistic view, mind is itself an effect
of matter and all its states and movements are determined by matter. There
is nothing then impossible, planetary influence being once admitted, in
the action of material bodies producing psychical conditions on the earth
and thereby determining our psychical states and movements. In a more
truly rationalistic view mind and matter are always influencing and determining
each other; here too, given a universal mind and matter so acting upon
individual matter and mind, the movements of the planetary system may
be one or even the first nodus of their activities, and the assertions
of astrology become at least primarily credible.
Farther, astrology affirms that these influences determine the whole
course or our lives and that the all-important element is time. That raises
the major question of the influence of Time upon human beings and events;
does Time determine the course or our lives and the states of our being
and if so, how far and in what way ? or to put the question more precisely,
as it is raised by astrology, do or can the conditions reigning at a given
critical time, in this case the moment of birth, determine our physical
and psychological conditions and the whole course of our future lives,
or determine them to any considerable extent ? and are the relative movements
and therefore the mutual positions of the sun and planets with regard
to the earth and each other either the nodus or in some way the effective
signs of these determinations ? And, secondly, do the developing time
conditions which come afterwards, by themselves or viewed in reference
to the original conditions, determine from moment to moment, from time
to time the subsequent evolution of our primary physical and psychological
conditions and the course of linked and successive circumstances which
make up the history of our lives ? and if so, again, are the relative
movements and mutual positions of the suns and planets at any given time
the nodus or the effective signs of this later determination also ? can
they therefore be taken for all practical purposes as determinants, or
at any rate as sure signs by which the determinations of our life and
being can be discovered ? That is the question which astrology raises,
and it is evidently a perfectly legitimate and rational question: nor
can we on a priori grounds condemn and put away an affirmative answer,
which is based upon past experience systematised into rules and theories,
as a superstition or a childish folly. Granted that in things here there
is a chain of cause and effect - or at least, if causality is disputed,
of antecedent condition leading up to subsequent condition - and that
if and so far as we know that chain, scientific prediction becomes in
that proportion possible, - two propositions which, unless we deny determination
altogether, it would be difficult to dispute, - there is no inherent improbability
in the clue to happenings human and other on the planets being found in
the motions of those planets. Astronomy is in a sense the primary physical
science, for the first facts which give all the others their field are
astronomical facts; it may well be that in the psycho-physical field the
same rule holds and that there the first facts may be astrological.
The a priori objections disappearing, the next step is to ask ourselves
whether there is a sufficient prima facie empirical case for inquiring
into the actual truth of astrology. This at present depends upon the experience
of isolated individuals, a very unsatisfactory basis. But if this experience
could be collected, sifted and published, I believe it would be found
that a formidable prima facie case exists in favour of astrology, much
stronger than that which encouraged the Society for Psychical Research
to carry on its work in another psycho-physical field to such important
conclusions. I may state my own experience in the matter in the belief,
justified by many instances, that it is only typical of the experience
of hundreds of others. My first accidental contact with an Indian astrologer
was not encouraging. This gentleman was the most accomplished thought-reader
I have ever seen; for he asked me to think my question without speaking
it and not only successfully named the unspoken question I had fixed on,
but three others which had crossed my mind, one of them only in the merest
flash and without leaving any impression behind: this he pretended to
do by mathematical calculation, an operation which I took leave to regard
as humbug or professional parade. For when it came to his answers, I found
that he was still doing thought-reading and not astrology; he simply echoed
the hopes or thoughts in my mind and his predictions did not come within
one hundred miles of the truth. Other practitioners I have found to belong,
a few plainly to the class of mere flattering charlatans, but most to
the inefficient who read by rule of thumb and have made no profound study
of their science. On the other hand, with capable astrologers the results
have been often of such a remarkable accuracy as to put quite aside any
possibility of chance hit, mere coincidence, intelligent prevision or
any of the current explanations. I may instance the father of a friend
of mine, a deep student of the science but not a professional, who predicted
accurately the exact year, month, day, hour and even minute of his own
death. In my own case accuracy was hampered by the inability to fix the
precise moment of my birth; still some of the results were extraordinary.
Two may be mentioned, from one and the same astrologer, which related
to my public career. One, given when I had not yet plunged into the political
vortex and my then obscure personality was quite unknown to the astrologer,
predicted as an inevitable certitude of the future a political struggle
with powerful non-Indian adversaries during which for a time even my life
would fall under the shadow of danger. The other, given at the time of
my first prosecution in the "Bande Mataram" case, predicted three successive
criminal trials in each of which the prosecution would fail. I may instance
also two predictions by the book in which Slokas from Sanskrit astrological
writings indicating the result of certain conjunctions or planetary positions
were shown to be applicable to my horoscope. One foretold specific chronic
illnesses for the body of which there was no sign at the time, but long
afterwards they put in their unexpected appearance and persisted. Another
indicated very precisely that one of my future activities would be to
found a new spiritual philosophy and its discipline; at that time I had
no knowledge of philosophy or Yoga and no turn or inclination in my mind
which could make the realisation of this prediction at all probable. These
are only the most precise examples out of a number. Supposing all well-authenticated
evidence of the kind to be collected, I am convinced there would be an
overwhelmingly strong prima facie case and even a body of sufficiently
strong empirical proof to establish at least a nucleus of truth in astrology.
That would be the first step. Fir if astrology is a science and is to
take its proper place, the first necessity is to dissipate by an appeal
to the empirical mind of the general public as well as of the sceptical
thinker the great mass of unenquiring prejudice which now exists against
it. To publish the text and translation of the best authorities, as Mr.
Iyer is now doing, with illuminating introductions is a preliminary need
in this case so that we may know what we have to go upon. The second is
to mass evidence of the empirical truth of the science, giving in each
case the prediction in all its details, the more detailed the better,
the astrological rules on which it was based and the event, each detail
of the event being compared with the corresponding detail of the prediction.
Only then would there be a clear field for the consideration of the scientific
and philosophical doubts, questions and problems which would still arise;
but this, though the most important aspect of the matter, I must leave
for future handling.
An acceptance of the truth of astrology would not necessarily carry
with it a complete determinism of Fate or mechanical law of Karma. In
the Indian theory at least there is room for a determination by human
will and endeavour, for Fate is mainly a determination by past action
and a new will and action can cancel it; only a very strong Karma is imperative
and irreducible. Even that may possibly be cancelled if one can enter
into the freedom of the spiritual consciousness. One instance at any rate
came to my knowledge in which the life had corresponded exactly with the
pre-indications of the horoscope so long as the subject remained in the
world but, as soon as he left it for a spiritual life, there was no longer
any correspondence.
Sri Aurobindo
in "The Supramental Manifestation and Other Writings"
SABCL, Volume 16
published by Sri
Aurobindo Ashram - Pondicherry
diffusion by SABDA
also pages 452-458 of the US-Edition at
Lotus Light Publications
|
[