Archive for the ‘venus’ Tag

Vedic Astrology

Image Credit: Darrell Hargett

Albert Einstein; the great physicist said, "Time is the fourth Dimension," Vedas say that "Time is the first dimension." In the beginning there was nothing. This concept of "nothing" is beyond the comprehension of ordinary human mind! It is so because before the concept of time there was absolutely nothing which is known as the "Shoonya" or ‘Zero’ or complete silence. Only the yogis who have attained "Nir Vikalpa Samadhi" state can experience this "nothing" and none else can. It is a state beyond time or "timeless state."

Vedas say that from this nothing originated vibration known as the "Pranava" or the sound ‘AUM’. From this sound there emerged five symbolic instruments of creation of universe. These were known as the Five "Tan matras". From the Tan matras came five primordial forces called Space and Time, Atmosphere, Light, Fire, Liquids, and finally the solidification of all. The mixing of these forces resulted in creation of the universes, as we know it now. It is an accepted scientific fact that even the universes are time bound. The theory of relativity; so called because all facts are related to time, speaks of speed in relation to time.

Vedas speak time as the limiting factor for all creation. Every thing is time bound. So the question came as to what is the scale of time? The Vedic seers, who are known as the Rishis, Maha Rishis, Brahma Rishis and Deva Rishis according to their knowledge of time and creation, have equated "Time" in relation to the age of Brahma the agent of creation. His age is 100 years in a special time scale. Note: Brahma is the name of the creative agent which should not be confused with "Brahman" the Timeless primordial force behind all creation.

The Rishis found that as far as the earth and the life in it are concerned the motion around the Sun is enough as a time scale for knowing the changes which would occur with the movement of the earth in relation to the Sun. They also found other celestial bodies like the Moon, Mars, Mercury; Jupiter, Venus and Saturn cast their influence on the earth. The seers also advised that every action must produce a reaction which comes back to the source of its origin in due cycle of time. The word "Karma" means action. Newton’s third law of motion is based on this concept.

The Planets were found to be the best guides as to the type of forthcoming reaction good or bad in the moving time scale. Thus was born the science of Vedic astrology, which is known as "Jyotisha" or ‘illuminator’ in Sanskrit. Vedas are knowledge taught by teacher to disciple through the medium of sound. They cannot be learnt by reading or memorizing. An ordinary example can be cited to illustrate the point. Ordinary "Yes" means I accept. "Yes? Also means what do you want? ‘Yyeess’ means I have my doubts, ‘Yus’ mean’s reluctant acceptance, Yes sir means please tell me and so on.

Astrology is a part of Veda hence it is known as Vedanga (anga means limb). We call it Vedic astrology because it is based on time schedules stipulated in Vedas according to yogic meditational observations of the planets in motion around the sun in relation to the earth and its motions.

Advertisements

Men and Women do Not Live on Different Planets


Emerson Eggerichs, best-selling author of Love and Respect, asserts Women need love. Men need respect.  It’s as simple and as complicated as that.  The foundation for his platinum-level former book-of-the-year is a theorized gender difference he identified by posing this question.  If you were forced to choose one of the following, which would you prefer to endure…to be left alone and unloved in the world, or to feel inadequate and disrespected by everyone? 

In his original sample of 400 males, 74% said that if they were forced to choose, they would prefer feeling alone and unloved rather than feeling disrespected and inadequate.  He collected data on a female sample and found that a comparable majority would rather feel disrespected and inadequate than alone and unloved.  Based on this data, Eggerichs concluded that a wife “needs love just as she needs air to breathe” and a husband “needs respect just as he needs air to breathe." 

The book begins to shape the argument that wives’ failure to show respect to their husbands is the reason that many marriages end in divorce.  As he explains, what we have missed is the husband's need for respect.  This book is about how the wife can fulfill her need to be loved by giving her husband what he needs—respect.  Later, he asserts, husbands are made to be respected, want respect, and expect respect.  Many wives fail to deliver. 

At times, I thought that Eggerichs might begin to see how disrespect is at the core of many marital problems for wives as well as for husbands.  For example, he says that a wife yearns to be honored, valued and prized as a precious equal and that wives fear being a doormat, and informs his male readers that a wife will feel esteemed when you are proud of her and all that she does and when you value her opinion in the grey areas as not wrong but just different and valid.  Why not just substitute the word “esteemed” with the word “respected?” In other words, the tendency to favor respect over love was equivalent in degree to the preference expressed among males that was used to launch a best-selling book predicated on what now seems to be an inaccurate assumption of a consistent gender difference. 

Of course, I’m not saying that all women would prefer to feel alone and unloved any more than I’m saying that all women would prefer to feel disrespected and inadequate.  Even though I would roundly criticize what I see as the sexist underpinnings of his book, I nonetheless feel that Eggerichs states some profound truths with great clarity.  He argues very persuasively that respect is a core, and absolutely necessary, element of a good marriage albeit more for males than for females, in his view and provides a number of compelling illustrations to show how a shift toward unconditional respect can give new life to a marriage. 

If he highlights a universal truth, then it is one that applies to both genders.  For example, his concept of “the crazy cycle” is the idea that without love from her husband, a wife reacts without respect, and that without respect from his wife, a husband reacts without love.  Instead of this formulation, I would suggest that the crazy-making pattern is that when one partner fails to meet the other partner’s deepest needs for both love and respect, the second partner will react defensively and fail to meet the first partner’s deepest needs for both love and respect in return. 

It may be easier to draw blanket conclusions about large groups of people, but a thoughtful approach requires assessing the unique character and qualities of each person and each close relationship.  Maybe men and women do not live on such different planets after all?

%d bloggers like this: