Talk:Electional astrology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Astrology (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Astrology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Astrology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.


Article listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion from Apr 18 to Apr 24 2004, consensus was to keep. Discussion:

From Cleanup: Electional astrology, incomprehensible hokum

  • Delete. I'm at a loss to see how it's different from garden-variety astronomy, but I'm also at a loss to really understand what the hell it was talking about. Postdlf 18:57 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
    • know what I meant.  ; ) Postdlf 20:57 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Appears to actually be a branch of astrology. Needs heavy work - particularly needing to be relieved of a lot o fjargon, but it is in fact a branch of astrology. Should either be merged into astrology article, or, more probably, left alone until someone fixes it. Snowspinner 19:44 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • It appears to contain no unique content to merge into Astrology. Delete. If someone wants to write a better article on the subject they won't have to feel bad about replacing this content. -- Cyrius|&#9998 20:16, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete nonsense. Cribcage 20:40, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
    • I remain unconvinced that this is nonsesnse and not jargon. Yeah, it's messy, but I still think we're better served by leaving it in the hopes that Wikipedia gets a resident astrologer sometime who can clarify it. Pseudoscientific nonsense or not, astrology does have a technical language. Snowspinner 21:20, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Because I'm weirdly fond of this article, I cleaned it up a bit. There's still some jargon, but the article is at least clearer now. It's not perfect, but I think it should probably spend some time on Cleanup instead of simply being killed. Snowspinner 22:36, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
    • Note that it spent a fair bit of time on Cleanup before being posted here. - SimonP 22:49, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC)
      • Regardless, it didn't seem to get very cleaned. Now it is a bit neater. The term is mentioned in the main astrology article, and appears to be a valid astronomical term. Send it back to Cleanup, or just let it lurk around the wiki for a year or two and see if anyone fixes it more than I can.Snowspinner 23:06, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
    • I'll give it a shot. It's the type of astrology done by Joan Quigley for Ronald Reagan when he was president; a definite, distinct type of astrology which deserves its own article, but something less jargon-encrusted than it had been prior to Snowspinner's work.Doovinator 13:13, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Electional astrology is the sort of astrology you do to determine when the "stars are right" to take some action. A traditional inquiry for astrologers. Smerdis of Tlön 15:43, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep: hokum, but the Reagan connection makes it interesting. Wile E. Heresiarch 17:41, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep: There's nothing fundamentally wrong with it as a topic. I've filled it out a bit and hope I've been able to make it a bit clearer. Shantavira 20:14, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
    • Having said that, electional astrology is (IMO) a bit of an astrological backwater and I can't see this article going anywhere. It might serve Wikipedia better if this (along with horary astrology - which also needs work) was put into the main astrology article. (Not sure about Wikipedia policy here.) Shantavira 07:00, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Backwater? I totally disagree. It's one of the most commonly discussed types of astrology in just about any astrological forum--take a look!Doovinator 19:06, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
    • Well that's certainly another vote in its favor. I stand corrected and look forward to seeing this article really go places. Shantavira 06:53, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep Bensaccount
  • Improved. Keep -- Cyrius|&#9998 04:54, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Looking good, and we obviously have some enthusiasts to take care of such articles. Andrewa 11:11, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

End discussion


I'm in disbelief that no one has yet noticed that most of this article is based on fiction, and has been used almost exclusively to promote a religious view. I understand that electional astrology is not as popular a topic as Astrology or objective validity of astrology, but there has to be someone here to keep wiki NPOV standards. 5700 BCE - Puleez! Zeusnoos 19:57, 22 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Delete nonsense --M a s 00:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The whole thing? Zeusnoos 01:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll take a look at it in a bit. Lots of people who don't recognize it by the name "electional astrology" nevertheless use it all the time, asking an astrologer "what's in my stars?" and when to do something. Doovinator 13:06, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As it stands, the whole article is a promotion of Hindu/Vedanta astrology and a belief in the mythical yugas rather than a discussion of electional astrology (Greek katarchê) as a whole and its history across cultures. Tibetan use of astrology, for instance, is strictly electional and arose from a combination of Indian and Chinese astrologies. The Mayan astronomy/astrology was also strictly electional (as an anthropologist of the Mayan culture recently told me). There's potential for this topic, but it might require original research to get it right. Zeusnoos 13:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think the article needs to be split up. The Hindu methods, yugas etc, are perfectly straightforward within their own sphere of reference and deserve their own article, but to moosh them together with the Western version makes the whole thing well-nigh incomprehensible. Also, further discussion of Indian, Chinese, Tibetan deserve their own articles too. Doovinator 01:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just added a few tags. Most if not all of the Hindu material was written by A.Shridhar who is using it to advertise her besttime astrology book. The tone is obviously POV in nearly every paragraph. I know there are a few history of astrology buffs out there, perhaps with some time to spare (i've run out), so the article shouldn't be deleted, just massively scrubbed. Splitting the two may be fine, the methods do relate more closely when you compare Hellenistic to Indian (many fundamental elements, such as house based horoscopes are post Hellenistic astrology brought to India by Yavanas). Many electional techniques were brought to India by Arab astrologers in what would be the middle ages in the West. If the history were to be outlined, this would be an interesting article. Zeusnoos 01:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, I think so too, I find all of it interesting, but WAY too confused as it is now. Doovinator 02:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To address your question of why the section fact tag in western electional - it reads: "It is a subsection of horary astrology that attempts to determine the ideal time to initiate an action." Electional is not a subset of horary. It is related (both are based on reach moments other than the nativity, but electional not a subset. I haven't rewritten this because it would be spitting in the ocean of required changes at this point. Zeusnoos 18:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, perhaps, but it seems to me splitting hairs. You elect a chart along horary principles, and precisely at the time elected, the electional chart becomes a horary chart, so "subset" isn't much of a stretch, though I don't intend to fight about it ;-) Doovinator 03:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is nothing in the additions made by me in electional astrology, which promotes a specific religion. The term “Hindu astrology’ has been widely used in the context of astrology in the Indus valley. In the main article on astrology it is termed as “Jyotisha / Vedic astrology” - which preferably be termed as “Indian astrology”. This not a forum to propagate a religion or its views. Like “Christian Astrology”- does not propagate Christianity.

There is no NPOV even in the main article of astrology; as there are different systems of astrology prevailing in different parts of the worlds. Even the zodiac followed by Western astrologers differs from the Zodiac followed by Indian astrologers. This is well known to those who have studied both the systems. Then how there can be NPOV on electional astrology, when the world have been following in different styles in different geographical locations- as observed by “ Doovinator”.

Let all the opinions about the different styles of electional astrology be produced here giving reference as per directions by Wikipedia. Let specialists in Western, Tibetan, Chinese, Mayan etc etc may contribute to this topic to make a master piece, for the benefit of humanity.

Regarding its popularity, one can gauge from the host of specialist astrologers on the subject, as found in various websites, & also the vast literature available on the subject. In fact in Vedic astrology, it is held as the most useful branch of astrology which has capability to guide an aspirant. How can one doubt that this not a popular topic.

It is pertinent to mention here that Jyotisha / Vedic / Indian / Hindu astrology has emanated from Electional astrology. Other branched were latter on developed. Further that in the article titled “history of astrology” no reference has been made about the Vedic astrology – does that mean the there was no such thing existed in the past. One may soon find additions on this aspect. “Zeusnoos” has expressed his opinion as observed by him about history of astrology. Deep study of treatises on Indian electional astrology shall reveal different picture.

Regarding material added by me in the subject topic: certainly I shall project the view of a specialist on Indian System of electional astrology. But I have also added the reference of the books available in Western Electional astrology., & have compared the two systems. I have kept original portion in the article giving details of Western system of Electional astrology & Usage by astrologers of the Western world.

I shall welcome comments from the commentators about the portions which are found as not factual, instead having general comments; so that modifications / improvements can be made, whereever required. I am thankful to get comments on this useful topic of astrology.

--shridharvk , 2 June, 2006 (UTC)

preliminary response[edit]

The primary issue is not with the material describing what muhurta is , as perceived by astrologers and believers, nor how it is done, but with both historical errors and the non-neutral point of view tone used to describe the topic. The following are example of a religious statements:

"It is gifted by Hindu sages for evolution of humanity. It has with stood the test of time for the last 5 millenniums."

"Hindu /Vedic system of Indian electional astrology, refers to a large number of treatises gifted by Hindu sages who were blessed with vision to foresee the past, present & future through their devine [sic] vision."

Besides the unverifiable history (the Vedics are soberly dated by historians no earlier than 1600 BCE for the oldest Rg Veda), these statements 1) assume that electional astrology works 2) assume that it is a good thing to practice electional astrology and consult with an astrologer. While this may be a popular opinion, it is not neutral and not appropriate for an encyclopedia. I don't expect wikipedia will ever come close to being academic since anyone of any educational level or belief system can edit, but articles should still be called out when they are uniformly favorably presented by those holding the beliefs discussed in the article. The language could be cleaned up with clauses such as "It is believed by Vedic astrologers that....". To do so would take a lot of work and time that I don't have to commit to this project. The grammar, syntax and spelling should be cleaned as well.

To this comment: "One may soon find additions on this aspect. “Zeusnoos” has expressed his opinion as observed by him about history of astrology". My so-called opinion is formed on the basis of academic works. I can only hope this is not too high a standard for wiki.

I will provide sources and call out disputed factual errors when I can. I also have some knowledge about Greek electional astrology that I might provide. I've added two sources to the list of works. However, I'm under time constraints and cannot dedicate much time to this project until perhaps July or August. The problem, as I see it, is that there is no single work about the history of this topic that covers the history of electional astrology in various times and places. Therefore, to write this article the way it should be written might require some original research. It would certainly require digging through a number of academic books and journal articles. Zeusnoos 13:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Zeusnoos said: "Besides the unverifiable history (the Vedics [sic] are soberly dated by historians no earlier than 1600 BCE for the oldest Rg Veda)" Since you like to read books perhaps you should delve deeper, there was nothing "sober" about the academic dating of the Vedas, it was all politically motivated. Early Indologists like Max Mueller were Christian evangelists who believed that the world was created in 4004 BC so in there mind it was impossible for India to have a long history so the chopped down the history to fit their mythology and that is what has come to be the accepted truth long after the West stopped being Christian. It was also an excuse for the imperialist colonial powers to shorten the history of India and make it seem as barbaric as possible as an excuse to continue their exploitation of the country and denigration of the culture. A tradition that you are carrying on. These are the same people who made up the Aryan invasion myth. Chandraputra (talk) 09:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Response - 1[edit]

I have addes 10 numbers of references under " Notes and references" to cite the sources of information. More references shall be culled out and added in due course of time. Thereafter the matter shall be modified /corrected, if need be. --shridharvk , 29 June, 2006 (UTC)

Response - 2[edit]

I have given my first response on 2 June, 2006 & another on 29 June 2006 to issues raised above. I have earlier added some references under “Notes & Reference” and have also modified first paragraph under “Hindu Vs Western electional astrology” to meet NPOV requirements. Hope reader can themselves come to the conclusions.

It shall indeed a wonderful article on electional astrology when specialists in Tibetan, Mayan, Greek, & Western electional astrology shall contribute in it; and the aspirant users shall get benefit of various systems, & use after selecting the best one. This best known branch of astrology has predictive, preventive & prescriptive ingredients built in it – provided that consulting astrologer is a specialist in the field & is capable to guide the aspirants.

Electional astrology is one of the most used branch of astrology, otherwise there would not have been over 1,500,000 sites registered only in How one can think that this article is not worthy of inclusion in wikipedia.

I have no intentions to prove superiority of one system over the other, but have made an effort to put subtleties of Hindu electional system. Perhaps only one paragraph wherein comparison with Western system has been discussed has brought criticism. It would have been better if someone would have added Western or point of view another established system.

Perhaps no useful purpose shall be served by culling out history & claiming superiority of a system merely on that basis. Specialist may put salient features of their systems for the ‘good of all, for the gain of all’.

However it will be interesting if “Zeusnoos” brings out a paragraph on the history of electional astrology in the world. Readers shall eagerly wait that & shall be delighted.

Since tags in the article have been put by “Zeusnoos” he may kindly remove the same. Should he require more information to be added / modified in the article, I shall provide readily.

--shridharvk , 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Seek Truth[edit]

The above comments are shocking to all the lovers of electional astrology, irrespect of having faith in Western or other systems of electional astrologies. Astrology emanates from spiritualism. Here adovation of a specific religion does not arise, but dictums in the Vedic treatises can never be overlooked while dealing with Jyoitsha / Vedic astrology.

It has been held that electional astrology is one of the best known branch of astrology, which has buit in features of predictive, preventive & prescriptive ingredients. Does any branch of knowledge has these facets?

Comments from specialists in electional astrology are most welcome, but should give / quote facts & refrences from the ancient treatises.

Please go through discussion on " Need for specialist astrologers" in the main article on astrology - just find out why there are no comments on this vital aspect.

Lovers of electional astrology are requested to go through blogs under  :

Oh, no you didn't

shridharvk , 26 May 2006 (UTC)

my comments on talk page of main article Doovinator 01:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is not surprising that there are no comments / discussions on this topic for the last one month. Astrologers shun, rather fear to talk on this topic for the reasons best known to them.

I invite astrologers to have frank discussion on this topic.

--shridharvk , 4, April 2006 (UTC)

  • With all due respect, your discussion wildly inappropriate for this setting. If you want to debate the merits of various forms of astrology, please go to a Wiki or other website based on that form of discussion. Wikipedia is for factual, verifiable information and is not meant to be a discussion forum for your personal religious beliefs. --Falsetto (talk) 21:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

=Works which fructifiy on specific weekdays - Hindu / Vedic astrological guidance=[edit]

Please clean up the title (I've tagged the section). Thanks.100110100 08:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I worked it, wow- I lived in India for 6 years so I understand Indian English. Sometimes untraveled Indians will write with English words and still be thinking in their language (without realizing the cultural box)- there is also a tendency to use an older form of English than American English which adds to making the wording hard to understand. --Freedomji (talk) 03:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Likely too many templates[edit]

This article likely contains too much templates on the beginning. Audriusa 20:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why don't you address the concerns of the templates? `'Míkka 23:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Addition of Planetary Hours Ref[edit]

I added a mention of the Planetary Hours to the text and a link to a free downloadable calculator since this is the most important traditional western method of choosing favorable times to act. What research I personally have done on electional astrology (see e.g. Of War, Considerations Magazine XVII: 4 which is an analysis of 13 horoscopes for the first shots fired in wars) indicates that the traditional rules of western horary astrology aren't valid. SamMart 15:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC) BobMakReply[reply]

Break up article[edit]

This article needs to be broken up and separated into separate articles on electional astrology in difference traditions. The main article on electional astrology should be a short overview on electional astrology that is applicable to all traditions, and then it should point to different articles that go into more depth regarding electional astrology in the specific traditions (ie. Indian, Hellenistic, Medieval, etc). Most of the material in this article on Indian electional astrology should be in an article of its own. --Chris Brennan 18:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article needs to be broken up into a verifiable, referenced part and the rest which must be deleted from the text per wikipedia's most funtamental policy wikipedia:Verifiability. I will do this in 5 days. `'Míkka 23:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think it would be too much to break the article up (have elctional astrology western, electional astrology vedic, electional astrology chinese?)- I vote to keep it one artcle but add in the view points of other traditions more fully. The Vedic astrology sections need a lot of clean up- I just finished working on the weekday section- easier to clean than right anew.dec 2007 --Freedomji (talk) 03:07, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]