Painter D of the dispersed "Bhagavata Purana", India, probably Delhi-Agra region

the cowherd women of Vraja observe the vow of Katyayani, c. 1520-1530

http://www.virginia.edu/artmuseum/collections_NEW/the_collections/Asian/India.htm

Comments on Assessment Methods

for Marriage Compatibility

Judicious use of Guna Points = Bindu and other Scores

Q:

Namaskar,

I was studying match-making, in Hindu astrology much emphasis is given to Points/Gunas. I.e., more than 18 points and less than 36 points. How much important is such concept? Also, is only Light on Relationship sufficient for making marriage choice?

Please guide.

Jai Ganesha.

Namaste,

Thanks for an excellent question and thanks as always for your sincere interest in the vidya of Jyotisha. Below please find my response.

Multiple Jyotisha indicators always required

IMO a Points/Gunas assessment is only one tool in a large toolkit of Jyotisha marriage-evaluation techniques.

It is wise to avoid over-use of any one tool. It is especially unwise to use interpretive tools that one does not understand!

Guna = sense-detector, behavior, characteristic

What is the concept = Guna? The Sanskrit term has acquired a variety of meanings over time. One place to start learning could be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guna

Guna = normal manifestations of every-day life. The scoring system is a bit artificial.

Find out something about the traditional Guna marriage-compatibility assessment and what it means behaviorally in real life, then do the traditional measuring and see if you get a reasonable score.

Guna = "fixed" in the personality. Most philosophical systems and certainly Sankhya philosophy considers the universe to be a fixed and closed system. However, in the realm of normal human perception, marriage is a real-life human interaction. Marriage behavior fluctuates and accommodates changes in the two spouses over time.

So how does the traditional philosophy of fixed personal guna help us to make decisions in the real world of changing behaviors, cultural standards, and roles?

Critical Awareness in Jyotisha

I am mainly posing these questions to stimulate critical awarenessof the traditional Jyotisha marriage compatibility indicators.

The traditional assessments are not wrong or outdated, but they need to be *understood* in the modern context. Otherwise they are potentially false and misleading.

Not to mention, the evil caused by perpetuating ignorance through superstition.

The insights of Sankhya and other ancient philosophies are as valid today as they were thousands of years ago. However in order to apply a concept like "Guna" in modern Jyotisha marriage analysis, we absolutely must use the modern vocabulary to explain the guna dynamics. Else we are victims of crippling superstition: making critically important life choices from the basis of a mysterious, irrational "score".

A modern explanation, in Light on Relationships

As a highly accessible first text-book for learning Jyotisha compatibility analysis, Light on Relationships by Robert Svoboda and Hart deFouw is recommended. The book's main virtue IMO is its use of modern interpretive explanatory language.

While remaining loyal to the ancient Jyotisha calculation techniques, the authors guide the reader through Jyotisha relationship analysis using modern psychological vocabulary and case studies of prominent public figures who are equal-status married couples.

Male and female personalities are treated with equal complexity in the case studies.

Practical applications of the scores:

In practice, compatibility cannot be predicted by super-high scores for any one single indicator. Several different measurements should be used to assess prospect for wedded harmony, and a range of results should be considered.

However, if there is a super-low score, it is likely that real-life compatibility may fail along one particular relationship-interactive dimension. Super-low scores may be signaling a specific and narrow but socially burdensome behavioral incompatibility.

It is wise to explore the psychological and physical meanings of that indicator as one currently understands the philosophy behind it, then apply the philosophy to real life. Philosophies are sets of theoretical claims about the structure of reality. It is not wise to take these claims on faith, or even at face value.

Critical Thinking

Reflect on the philosophical claims. Does it seem to you that human beings have natural "guna" characteristics? What is your own incarnate "guna" composition? Does the Jyotisha assessment of your own guna nature seem intuitively correct to you?

It will be necessary to use critical thinking in these Jyotisha marriage-compatibility assessment. The practice of Jyotisha requires making your own claims about the structure of the natural and supernatural worlds.

After deciding whether that guna profile accurately describes you, one may hold have a much clearer idea of whether a low score on a particular indicator shows a real-life difference of emotional expectations . If there is a significant difference in the views and behaviors that the two parties bring into the marriage contract, there still may be a full opportunity to bridg the gap with intelligent skillful awareness of the Other's diverse preferences. Or one might choose to accept, and skillfully work around, that behaviors which is fixed in the person's nature, on the assertion that the partner could not change this behavior even with intentional consciousness.

Guna profile does not predict a good or bad marriage. But it can indicate a need for partnership skills.

No marriage is free of tension and conflict. Marriage is the great yoga. Partners constantly work at maintaining harmony. It is not a fixed result. Marriage communication changes and evolves as the partners mature and settle.

Try to use modern relationship language to explain what these measurements mean.

Perhaps a low score in the ancient theory of Guna could be interpreted in the modern view to mean that the potential spouse has a very deep personal compulsion that is really offensive to the native and one's family, and this behavior would not be acceptable under any circumstances.

But perhaps it is saying something more superficial and trivial, for example that one person is more social than another, or one is more reflective than another. These differences are not "show-stoppers" in human relationships. Yet this type of a gap could produce a super-low score.