http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed?format=rss Tribe.net. Local Connections http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#4d7ca634-879e-4e69-b2e5-4330de9e4b33 Claudio, Thanks for your input. The universe is not static in Vedic tradition. Isn't the whole idea of astrology that things change? The concept of karma found in the Vedas is one of cause and effect. The cycle of yugas or world ages in that tradition reflects the revolution of our solar system around the galactic center, creating different phases of consciousness on Earth. As for your other comments, I don't understand all the terms you are using. The 12-sign zodiac is really just the anatomy of a circle. Signs in Sanskrit are called rashis, and the definition of a rashi is just a 30 degree arc of a circle. So whenever the rishis discussed geometry and circles, they were talking about rashis, even if they weren't talking about astrology. And the 12 rashis were given the names Mesha (Aries), Vrishabha (Taurus), Mithuna (Gemini), etc.. I am one of those rare Vedic astrologers that uses the tropical zodiac, and as you probably know the tropical zodiac has nothing to do with the stars. It's all about the Sun/Earth relationship that creates the seasons. The importance of this cycle is clearly apparent to us earthbound observers. We see specific changes on Earth at the solstices and equinoxes, and at every 12th portion of the year (the Vedas had six seasons, each divided into two portions). Originally, the Vedas did know about precession, as ancient texts like the Rig Veda talk about the different ages. They talk about the Age of Krittika, a time when the vernal equinox Sun was in the star cluster of Krittika, which corresponds with the Pleaides and sidereal Taurus. As an aside, the very ancient texts when they mention astrology talk mostly about stars (nakshatras) and don't mention the 12-sign zodiac at all. I agree though that at some point astrologers forgot about precession. It's possible that the zodiac was always meant to be tropical, and the loss of knowledge about precession lead to Vedic astrologers attaching the zodiac to the stars. Previously, the Vedas always had both a tropical and a sidereal astrology. David Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:41:31 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#4d7ca634-879e-4e69-b2e5-4330de9e4b33 $item.owner.firstName 2007-10-25T23:41:31Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#764f4fd8-8225-487f-850d-1e492e98ad34 The Vertex is sometimes considered the secondary DESCENDANT, in that it gives insight regarding the kind of person someone is looking for. It has nothing to do with the ascendant. Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:06:53 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#764f4fd8-8225-487f-850d-1e492e98ad34 your mom 2007-10-25T17:06:53Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#319e25a8-df59-43d8-b763-e3fd6e3da707 The secodary direction has nothing to do with ascendants, as far as mathematics is involved. Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:49:07 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#319e25a8-df59-43d8-b763-e3fd6e3da707 Lord of the Zodiac 2007-10-25T13:49:07Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#ce4fc808-6103-45ab-8df7-60a22d0b9f39 The ascendant of the U.S.A. is Serpens Cauda and perchance Aquila, that is these were the rising eastern constellation at Philadelphia. The secondary for the U.S.A. are cygnux (galax) and Ophiuchus (ecliptic). http://www.lulu.com/astrology Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:48:23 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#ce4fc808-6103-45ab-8df7-60a22d0b9f39 Lord of the Zodiac 2007-10-25T13:48:23Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#2641e03f-61f6-41e8-924d-64d5d564d3a7 The Vertex is a hypothetical calculus nothing to do with ascending. e.g. when the WMAP cold spot is rising, it is probably Eridanus on the ascendant. The vertex does not exist in the real sky. http://www.lulu.com/astrology Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:47:01 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#2641e03f-61f6-41e8-924d-64d5d564d3a7 Lord of the Zodiac 2007-10-25T13:47:01Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#5d07205a-493d-4ec5-8705-18649d6a3d53 Vedic astrology assumes 12 ascendants. That was wrong and corrected by the academics. http://www.lulu.com/astrology The Vedic guys did not take precession into account, thinking the universe is static, according to the Bhagavat... Canto V... Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:45:37 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#5d07205a-493d-4ec5-8705-18649d6a3d53 Lord of the Zodiac 2007-10-25T13:45:37Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#8678ce09-5ac5-4fe2-b412-a539bbf58622 Aries does not rise in the east or west. This has been miscalculated some 3000 years ago. It rose at the time of King Arthur, though. http://www.lulu.com/astrology The professinal ascendants are 16 in number at the present epoch, according to the Academic Zodiac. Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:44:19 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#8678ce09-5ac5-4fe2-b412-a539bbf58622 Lord of the Zodiac 2007-10-25T13:44:19Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#289c15b0-0653-46df-9cea-9c8f9639a32c You are already using it, since the ecliptic ascendant is not rising at due east. The eastern ascendants are 16 in number. http://www.lulu.com/astrology Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:40:50 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#289c15b0-0653-46df-9cea-9c8f9639a32c Lord of the Zodiac 2007-10-25T13:40:50Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#a377ff2d-c8d6-4c1a-b306-78241d008cea Anyway, thanks for your responses, I will pass them on Thu, 25 Oct 2007 08:19:41 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#a377ff2d-c8d6-4c1a-b306-78241d008cea $item.owner.firstName 2007-10-25T08:19:41Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#68f5f741-9dd7-44a3-ba26-64b975f2e6fc my asc is libra venus is in capricorn asc lord 4 houses away so the pada would be aries 7th house but david's example #3 can't be 7th house so my pada is cancer 10H Sun, 14 Oct 2007 03:32:42 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#68f5f741-9dd7-44a3-ba26-64b975f2e6fc $item.owner.firstName 2007-10-14T03:32:42Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#deab7d30-1bcb-401a-8030-1f602c84217e Hi Nexus...sometimes your VERTEX is considered a secondary asc. jennifer Sun, 14 Oct 2007 03:17:35 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#deab7d30-1bcb-401a-8030-1f602c84217e Jennifer 2007-10-14T03:17:35Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#47fa883d-eb41-4e75-a94d-0426a721f50b boy that is almost confusing... Me Scorpio acs..Pluto in 10th Virgo. so...virgo 10 signs+10 signs is Cancer?? Ha ha..My Sun Mercury Venus is Cancer.. Tue, 09 Oct 2007 01:15:47 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#47fa883d-eb41-4e75-a94d-0426a721f50b Dragon-of-Q 2007-10-09T01:15:47Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#2cb5f956-007b-411f-9a5c-5b2bafcdba0b In Vedic astrology there is something called the pada. You count the same number of signs away from the ascendant lord as the lord is from the ascendant, and that's the pada. It's like a secondary ascendant. I think it's used sort of how western astrologers think of the ascendant, like your mask, how others see you, but not really your true self. One other rule is that the pada can never be in the 1st or 7th house (whole sign houses), so if it would be by the previous rule, it automatically goes to the 10th. 1st example: Gemini with Mercury in Cancer, the pada would be Leo. 2nd example: Libra with Venus in Pisces, the pada is Leo. 3rd example: Cancer with Moon in Aries, the pada would be Aries (10th house, because it can't be 7th). Maybe Sadasiva can correct me if I'm wrong about something. This is not an area of Jyotish I am very experienced with. David Mon, 08 Oct 2007 16:46:28 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#2cb5f956-007b-411f-9a5c-5b2bafcdba0b $item.owner.firstName 2007-10-08T16:46:28Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#6a67d987-5e5e-4b16-86a2-b006e9cdb99f Thanks LibraMoon, it sounds likely. This guy was also asking about where to find out about Arabian parts. Pi, right now....your guess could be as good as mine. Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:14:11 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#6a67d987-5e5e-4b16-86a2-b006e9cdb99f $item.owner.firstName 2007-10-08T09:14:11Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#307308f1-8b33-4c58-a74e-9c649cefd0c3 when I clicked on this topic I thot it was about the Ascendant of the Secondary Progressed chart -- is it something else? Mon, 08 Oct 2007 03:38:42 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#307308f1-8b33-4c58-a74e-9c649cefd0c3 libramoon 2007-10-08T03:38:42Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#cb4c1298-1ab4-4d09-aa6b-e4ecf51e2d3f Could it be related somehow to the secondary chart ruler? I actually don't know just a guess....total guess Sun, 07 Oct 2007 20:24:25 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#cb4c1298-1ab4-4d09-aa6b-e4ecf51e2d3f $item.owner.firstName 2007-10-07T20:24:25Z http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#12639fed-9aed-402b-8747-faf2eb06227a Does anyone know what this might be? Sun, 07 Oct 2007 20:12:27 GMT http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/8a673447-173a-4e88-85ae-377e459a35ed#12639fed-9aed-402b-8747-faf2eb06227a $item.owner.firstName 2007-10-07T20:12:27Z