As a followup to this post

questions are indented. they are followed by my replies.

Limitation #2: We can Misjudge Moments—We could employ classical analytical techniques to increase confidence about the outcomes and effects of a chart…

The thing is, not matter what, you always have to know that you are “out of your league” when you are trying to figure out things that even Yama Deva needs help from Citragupta to keep track of. We are just human. There is always that limitation on our ability to read the symbolisms of the universe.

Yes, if you make it systematic, thorough, etc. it is better and less likely to be misjudged. But there is a limit to how good we can be. The likelihood of misevaluating symbols is not something that can be eradicated entirely. 

Limitation 3: Beginnings are Blurry—Intuitively, it seems that one way to reduce the uncertainty around a birth date is to cast the chart with clear and focused intention.

Yes, the date that you, the actor, feels truly that you began the action is the most significant inception date. However, the fact remains that there are other inception dates happening within any action. You found a nation at Moment 1, but you wind up with some prime minister or something starting his or her segment at Moment 5. Therefore the nation during that prime minister’s term cannot be expected to be the same as they were at the outset.

What we are seeing from this and the previous point is that electional astrology (and astrology in general) can be extremely useful and very accurate, even though it cannot be flawless and perfect. 

Limitation 4: Inheritance Capacity—This limitation raises an important question: Is it preferable to cast a chart with extremely strong dignity across the board, even if the chart’s features do not directly support the entity’s goals? The expectation here is that the inherent strength of the chart will help the entity naturally manifest the intended qualities. Alternatively, would it be wiser for the chart to reflect the anticipated challenges faced by the entity, while positioning it to overcome these challenges?

The performer of the action has a destiny. The inception of the action has its own destiny. If the performer has high potential for good results and the inception has high potential for good results, be very confident that the results will be very excellent. Visa versa, if the perfomer has high liability of failure in the area, and the action performed in that area has an inception with high liability to failure and problems, be very confident that the results will be very poor.

A performer who is very strong, should therefore perform acts that require strength, and do them on inceptions that support such strength. Simiarly, a performer who is very intelligent should do intelligent activities at moments which support intellect.

Lastly, in one of your recent videos you stated—if I’m not mistaken—that electional astrology was the primary goal of early Indian astrologers. Do any primary sources exist that explicitly describe the use of electional astrology in classical times?  

The text that immediately comes to mind is Muhūrta Cintāmaṇi