Our friend Paulo regularly sends me links to a website by some mr Ong. In his latest articles he argues that Four Pillars is a ‘fake’ inferior form of astrology. Let’s take a look at it.

Here is the article:

http://www.guiculture.com/fs10zwbazi5.htm

***

While I always favor research and skepticism over just blindly believing what is found in books or said by ‘experts’, we shouldn’t blindly accept what some skeptic or researcher has found either. Just because something appears to be logical doesn’t mean it is also true. I notice more than a bit of flawed logic in mr Ong’s line of reasoning. I guess that’s because I wasn’t born in China.

***

First of all. There is no doubt that several forms of astrology have common origins, and at some point or other different forms of astrology have ‘borrowed’ concepts from each other. The so-called ‘Silk Route’ has been used for at least 3000 years, and no doubt a lot of ideas have been exchanged in both directions.

But, does this mean later forms of astrology are ‘fake’, and only the older ones are ‘authentic’?

Well, it is not that simple.

For example the automobile can be traced back to the bullock cart. It still has a few things in common, e.g. four wheels… But, does that mean the automobile is ‘fake’?

Carl Gustav Jung started out as a student of Freud, but soon there were areas of disagreement and Jung went in his own direction. Does that mean Jung is ‘fake’ and only Freud is the real deal?

Of course not.

The second argument in the article is that Four Pillars was started as a half truth system to deceive the public. Even if mr Ong is right, and Four Pillars was indeed introduced as kind of ‘half truth’ to deceive the masses, that doesn’t mean anything. Because you can take even a very bad idea, and if you go on improving it for centuries, eliminating the parts that don’t work and trying new ones instead, you are eventually going to end up with good ideas that work. If you can start out with half truths it is going to be even quicker, because even half truths are already a head start.

E.g. Edison got the idea of making a light bulb, but his first 100+ attempts all failed. Most people would have concluded that it is a bad idea. But Edison continued and eventually got all parameters right to create a working light bulb. He improved the idea till it worked. The same may have happened in 4P, even if it may have started out from half truth premises.

***

Mr Ong talks about the symbolic stars in 4P, which could well be similar to some stars in Zi Wei. But Four Pillars has not stopped at the symbolic stars, it has developped other concepts and moved on. Just like cars now have motors and brakes and suspension, things that were not found on the first bullock cart.

It is also not true that Four Pillars (Ba Zi - Eight characters) does not use the Hour, because then there would only be 3 pillars (or 6 characters).

***

So, on the one hand we have a form of astrology that was assumed to be nearly perfect and kept secret for emperors only: Zi Wei. As a result it was only used and tested on a handful of people: the royalty. On the other hand there is a form of astrology, Four Pillars, which may have been introduced as a half truth, but got used and improved on a large number of people, the common masses.

Which form of astrology will be better 10 centuries down the road? The answer is simple: the astrology that started from half truth but was tested and improved on many more people.

And the proof is in the pudding. All these dynasties of royalty using the secret ‘superior’ Zi Wei got killed , overthrown, invaded, and disappeared completely 100 years ago. Why did that happen if their astrology was so much better, too perfect to share with the common masses?

It’s like a secret super medicine, but all the kings who used it, somehow died. Would you be in a hurry to take such medicine?

***

A good cook will manage to make something good, even from mediocre of bad ingredients. A bad cook will manage to spoil even the best of ingredients.

It doesn’t matter how and when various forms of astrology were introduced. What matters is what happened since they were introduced. Was it improved upon? Was it questioned and tested? Or was it considered a sacred cow that shouldn’t be changed or tested? That’s what makes all the difference in the long run.

I have never seen a Zi Wei reading that didn’t make me laugh. It really looks as if it hasn’t been improved upon for centuries.

Danny