The true origins of western/tropical astrology

When I first read that Western astrology was derived from Babylonian tradition, entirely separate from Vedic tradition, I was not satisfied with that answer. I knew there were way too many similarities between these systems for them to have evolved independently. There is no way that Western astrology, which is only 2,000 years old, was not derived from Eastern astrology, which is… so much older. There's no way that Vedic astrology did not influence the creation of Babylonian astrology in some way.

If we dig a little bit deeper, we can find evidence that supports that. This is an article from the Times of India. It's an opinion piece talking about the connections between ancient India and Mesopotamia by Nikhil Chandwani.

He talks about the knowledge sharing that happened between ancient India and ancient Mesopotamia.

“Some of the oldest forms of astronomy can be recorded to Indus Valley civilization. Numerous cosmological concepts are present in the Vedas as are notions of the course of the year and the movement of heavenly bodies.

Vedanga Jyotisha, the earliest known text on astrology, that rose from India. There is evidence of form astrology in the Sumerian period, which was quite similar to the Vedanga Jyotisha. Astronomy in both Mesopotamia and ancient India dates back to the period of Indus Valley civilization during the third millennium BCE, when it was used to make calendars.”

This is an article from Sanskriti magazine by Steven Knapp, and he actually has his own website full of Vedic astrology content. I visit it quite often. It's very, very good. But this article is on the history of Vedic culture in the Middle East. This article goes into Vedic culture and its influence on a lot of different Middle Eastern civilizations, but let's take a look at what they have to say about Sumeria specifically.

“The Sumerians were considered some of the earliest residents of the Middle East, namely Mesopotamia, who originally came from or had been part of Bharatvarsha. The Sumerians also claimed to have originally entered the valley of the rivers Euphrates and Tigris some 4,000 or so years BCE. Bringing with them some basic elements of civilization already developed to its final form, such as a script and a code of law. The original homeland has not been positively identified, yet many researchers have stated that the Sumerians were part of Vedic Aryan culture, meaning that they had to have come from the land of Bharatvarsha.

“After extensive research, Sir Arthur Keith concluded that one can still trace ancient Sumerians eastwards among the inhabitants of Afghanistan and Baluchistan until the Valley of Indus is reached some 1,500 miles distant from Mesopotamia. L. A. Waddell has also expressed that the Sumerians were part of the Vedic tradition, as was discussed in Proof of Vedic Culture's Global Existence.

“But there was also the discovery of inscribed tablets that are said to be from a period before 3000 BCE that bore the names in Sanskrit of the Sumerian kings in Babylonia. Some of these names coincide with the names of Puranic personages who were either kings or great sages. This would also further indicate that the Sumerians were of the Indo Aryan sub tribe stock, immigrating from the area of ancient Bharatvarsha into Babylonia. This is why names like the list of names are found on these tablets in Sumer. The book called The Sumerians, an Oxford publication, also says, quote, “we find that the Sumerian civilization was an offshoot of the Vedic Arian civilization archeological evidence in the form of relics of the past.”

“Sumerian language still exists. This leaves no doubt as to the real incentive behind the origin of the Sumerian language.”

Now, I think ‘leaves no doubt’ is a very strong statement to make there, but finding tablets with the names of Sumerian Kings written in Sanskrit very clearly shows a transfer or exchange of culture between Vedic, you know, Indus River Valley civilization and the Middle Eastern Babylonian and Mesopotamian civilization.

It's just crazy because there are Western astrologers who say that Western astrology is better and that Eastern or Vedic astrology is wrong. Meanwhile, The Western astrology system is derived from the Eastern system. So if you think Eastern astrology is wrong, guess how wrong you are? The call is coming from within the house.

I think that both systems have value. Both systems look at things from a different perspective and they both bring accurate readings and predictions. So, to discount one or the other is incredibly ignorant. And I'll leave it at that. But normally I see Western astrologers shitting on Vedic astrology. I don't often see Vedic astrologers talking shit about Western astrologers, unless they have a really huge ego and a huge following on Twitter and are obnoxious Vedic supremacists. But that is not as common as Western astrologers talking shit about Vedic astrology– a lot of pretentious white people who think that they know everything, and that Western astrology reigns supreme, when they are both very, very functional, depending on what your usage of astrology is.

I'm going to make a whole other video where I talk in detail about the mechanism of these two astrology systems. We'll talk about how Vedic astrology works functionally, and then we'll talk about how Western astrology works, why they're different, and how these two systems, despite their different functions, can still show the same message, because we're looking at the same sky and the same planets.