Can a Vedic astrologer not be a Sanatani?

Among the many things that Vedic astrology conjures up, three take the centre stage, namely, the law of Karma, rebirth or reincarnation, and Hindu practices and rituals. To most traditional Vedic astrologers, the slightest idea of separating Vedic astrology from these tenets is viscerally revolting. And such a sentiment isn’t entirely misplaced. It cannot be disputed that Vedic astrology owes its origins to the magnificent Vedas. Karma, rebirth, and rituals are Vedic astrology’s core importations from the vast corpus of the Vedas, on which rests its conceptual framework. But the question we ask here is this:  given that their roots travel deep into the foundations of Vedic astrology, how broad-based is their importance? What specifically are their contributions towards the core purport of Vedic astrology, which is to forecast events, improve lives, and ultimately help one attain liberation? Are these beliefs indispensable for Vedic astrologers?

In the interest of concision, I shall try to give a quick yet compendious treatment to this topic. Let’s take karma. Despite the credence it enjoys across continents and cultures, and notwithstanding umpteen subjective instances across our lifetimes which appear to validate it, the law of karma is yet to be backed by hard empirical evidence. Its best contribution, both in life and in astrology, is that it offers a model to understand and explain why certain things happen with certain people, and, as an extension, helps model our behaviour and action. 

For instance, an astrologer may attribute a certain planetary combination in one’s birth chart to their past life karma. This helps the astrologer explain why the said individual was bestowed with such a planetary combination at birth, which then helps estimate its present life ramifications and prescribe remedial measures if necessary. Karma‘s lack of empirical evidence is no skin off astrology’s nose, for all karma ever did was to furnish a model to explain things. Replace it with an alternative model or no model at all, and what remains unchanged are hard facts and principles. Whether or not Karma is believed to be the culprit barely changes what a certain planetary combination entails in life, which is a plain matter of fact or principle inferred and validated through repeated observations. An astrologer who doesn’t subscribe to such a model does no lesser justice with the core purport of astrology, for the model is but a mere aid to help assimilate these facts and principles. 

And the same can be extended to rebirth and rituals. Believing or disputing what you did in a previous birth does nothing to change present-life predictions or remedial prescriptions, which are inferred from planetary placements. Similarly, whether or not a certain ritual or practice helps with life’s problems is a matter of fact independent of whether its inner workings are divine or mundane. 

There is an indisputable case for cherishing traditions that are in our interest. There is none, however, for being squeamish about innocuous differences of mind or for ignoring the voice of reason. Such attitudes only embolden those who try to portray astrology as hocus-pocus, besides limiting its reach and appeal to a narrow audience. 

END OF ARTICLE