Advertisement
Just who are these quacks who think that by putting the cusps of the signs around 25 degrees later you somehow get a more accurate interpretation. And more importantly- why the hell should I care? A new tribe called "Zodiac of the Stars" attempts to discuss,,, yes, discuss this system of interpretation. If you don't want to learn more about it, I suggest you don't look at the posts or links on this tribe.
You have been warned!
You have been warned!
posted by:
|
Tucson
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Fri, July 3, 2009 - 6:54 PMGutsy. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Fri, July 3, 2009 - 10:59 PMwestern vs. vedic astrology....western astrology is 'off' by 30 degrees. Vedic astrology goes by the actual position of the planets and not the position of us on earth looking at the planets.
Of course, Im a member of this astrology tribe (and not a 'vedic' one) cuz it does me just fine :) -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 1:14 AMIf use sidereal astrology on Neptune almost everything would appear to be in the same sign, as of now, Cancer. It's all a matter of perspective, so don't believe that sidereal is a more accurate placement for that reason. We're on Earth, so common sense suggests to me we ought to use a calculation based on the planet we're on. By your logic we'd need a whole new way to calculate a person's ascendant since currently the base point a person would use is based on Earth. And what about the Moon sign? From another planet's perspective the 2 are always tightly conjunct, yet even Vedic doesn't proved a way to calculate the Earth. And you must also remember Mercury and Venus' maximum elongations of less than 50 degrees are because of Earth's perspective, and yet their placements are always accurate to a competent astrologer's interpretation.
I'm not saying Vedic might not be good, but Tropical makes more sense to me and no siderealist has yet to provide a compelling argument for sidereal. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 1:23 AMOop, sorry about the typos. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 1:55 PMI won't say any school of astrology is 'right' or 'wrong' but the western sidereal school includes research on the outer planets which Vedic generally doesn't, as well as an Ayanamsa (the difference between tropical and sidereal zodiacs) which has been subjected to more rigorous testing over time.
I do love Vedic astrology for a lot of things particularly Nakshatras, and the Tropical zodiac is particularly good in calculating houses, as you always know 1 dg Aries and Lb will give you equal houses. I think the naming system is misleading as the Tropical signs drift from their Sidereal counterparts, and that the tropical system was only really adopted to resolve disputes between competing starting points, and its main scientific basis was undermined over 300 years ago. But that's my point of view.
-
-
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 2:25 PMActually I've gradually learned to call each sign by 2 names (In my head I just say "Cancer the Twins", "Leo the Crab" etc.) It's a pain in the butt but I think it's worth it to get a real understanding of what ancient astrologers were talking about, as well as take advantage of the amazing research tools we have available today.
-
-
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 10:06 AMI just could not imagine having Pisces wiped from my chart. I've always identified as my fishy self and vedic drastically changes what my chart looks like. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 10:09 AMTry it. This is something that one should not judge for face value. At the very least it will be a new experience and will either "shift" your view or cement your existing ones. Can't lose in this situation. It all works in YOUR favor.
-
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 10:40 AMI've looked at my vedic chart. It fills me with a lot of air. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 11:09 PMI'm curious. The 'classic' description of the Pisces type would be wildly imaginative, ready to cry or laugh at the drop of a hat etc. Do you feel this suits you better or would you be more the cool, emotionally detached intellectual type with firm and unshakeable opinions? -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 12:29 AM"ready to cry or laugh at the drop of a hat" sounds like prep, acting. I do cry and laugh easily. I can't control when the tears may come. Things are less drastic as I have aged. Even the imagination. I use to walk by houses with my friends and see shadows inside them and go into the odd goings on that were probably occur, perhaps something you'd read out of a true crime drama.
I was just on the phone with my Aquarius friend and he was telling me the things that irked him about me. Like how I tend to shy up while talking, stutter, mumble, change the subject 3 times in a thought without ever coming to a completion. But he's never ceased in wanting to be a friend of mine.
Come to think of it. I'd like to see his chart. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 6:39 AMI guess I was thinking more of some of the tropical Aries people I know who go off on wild excited tangents and are constantly being told 'that never happened' or 'earth calling X' (and get quite upset at hearing this.) I have a lot of tropical Water/ Sidereal Air in my chart and find it to be quite 'delicate': inwardly emotional but not subject to the kind of outbursts of tropical Fire/Sidereal Water. As a tropical Cancer I could never compete with a sidereal Cancer when it comes to direct emotional expression, which is really I think what cardinal Water is all about.
How you describe yourself sounds like a good Piscean friend of mine, he can be quite jumpy and while seeming very sociable will often dissapear as soon as he gets the chance. The only way you can keep him in one place is to get him into some kind of discussion, he always strikes me as very oriented towards intellecual topics (which he gets very emotional over!) -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 10:27 PMActually for some reason I constantly trip up around my Aquarius friend because I feel judged. I couldn't imagine him and I being the same sign we seem so different. His birthday is Feb 1st so I don't his Sun moving out of Aquarius in Sidereal.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
What do you think?
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 12:50 PM1. Do the constellations even work?
2. Do the sidereal signs have the same nature as the tropical? I
3. If we decide to use the constellations, should we use an approximation of say 30 degrees? Or should we use the actual amount of degrees that constellation measures in our sky? For instance, I believe I read that the constellation Virgo is the biggest at nearly 50 degrees and all others are various sizes (also, Virgo and Libra are one constellation, aren't they?)
4. What to do about signs no longer on the ecliptic? Or new constellations on it because of the Earth's orbital eccentricities?
If anyone has opinions... =) -
-
Re: What do you think?
Sat, July 4, 2009 - 2:07 PMGreat Questions Mike!
I get the impression that the signs themselves have been losing ground in western astrology in general with more of a reliance on houses and aspects, which you can interpret in different ways. Sidereal is not necessarily the answer to taking precession into account. You could argue that since the sun is now in Pisces at the equinox, that the signs keep the same meaning, but with more 'fishy' overtones. I tried working with this way of thinking but found it much simpler and more efficient to keep with the Classical western/current Vedic interpretations.
The 30 degree signs are definitely a simplification, but I think this is important in being able to compare like with like, as any division is arbitary to some extent. The constellations are really little more that pictures in the sky in themselves, and most of them have gone by a variety of associations over time, and still do. -
-
Re: What do you think?
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 7:38 PMI could never stop using the signs! Frankly I feel that the signs and the planets are first and foremost the most important parts of astrology, followed by the aspects. Not everyone has their time of birth, or is willing to share it, but I can often see a good mirroring of the person just with their planet and sign placements.
My favorite thing about Vedic is easily the decanates and dwadasamas, the 3 and 12-sign division of each sign, I usually find they're accurate as an additional "in sign" description of a planets placement. For instance a 19-degree Leo Mercury is like Mercury in Leo, but also like Mercury in Sagittarius and Mercury in Pisces, sort of a particular "personality" be degree.
Maybe sidereal astrology works, idk. I think tropical is just fine. I think I read that the Egyptian discovered and divided the Ecliptic orginally, don't know if they used the seasons or the stars though as their signs (though I know the stars were important to them).. It makes sense when you remember that tropical astrology is based on the seasons; this justifies for instance Leo, the sign in the middle of the Summer being the house of the Sun, the hottest planet, which exalts in the sign Aries, the beginning of the spring. Sidereal astrology can't justify things like this (though their are those that believe the domicile shift from sign but maintain the season of their preference). I still don't have proof, research or reason to believe that the constellations work as well as the seasonal signs and I look for a match in temperament between signs and rulers.
I've tried equal house, I didn't think it worked, maybe because no one's life is perfectly equal? I'm more partial to Placidus, I haven't had to experiment with one of the house systems for the extreme latitudes yet.
So what do you mean about the signs behaving more Piscean? Like perhaps that the sign compels planets to behave the way they do because they believe in the ideal of that goal? Sort of like Neptune being in that corresponding house? Another thing about using constellations is that, like you said, they've had different representations, groupings, names and meanings between cultures, it's all confusing but if you find a system you like, go with it I guess.. =\ -
-
Re: What do you think?
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 10:20 PMMaybe it does make sense to base the signs on seasons, but this could really only work one hemisphere, and would be very confusing close to the equator. The method I tried for taking in precession involved something like you described adding in a Neptune like piscean overtone to give the signs a less direct kind of impact, but I quickly found that a little too convoluted to work with. Of course once you reach an understanding of a sign by observation it will work fine for you, I just don't think they fit with the classical -or older- symbolism, like Aries being the "warlike" of assertive and physically competitive sign or Leo being haughty and regal, from what I see.
Dwads, navamsas etc are perfectly workable in sidereal astrology, only more accurate I find.
-
-
-
Unsu...
Re: What do you think?
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 9:20 PMI like questions Mike!
Here are a few more:
5. Are the signs exclusively and originally defined by constellations - or did the constellations falling within the signs at a specific time become integrated in their applications over time?
6. What is the significance of 12 when we are considering the patterns motion of celestial bodies? Why not any other number? At one time were there only 12 significant constellations visible in the sky? -
-
Re: What do you think?
Sun, July 5, 2009 - 10:25 PMHere's a few links which I think help give a good overview of the system, which is in ways a mixture of both western and eastern systems and largely based the research of Cyril Fagan and Donald Bradley.
www.westernsiderealastro.com/
www.solunars.com/viewforum.php
www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm -
-
Re: What do you think?
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 8:36 AMO Ryan
My personal problem with the sidereal zodiac system is that I don't recognise my being a Taurus Sun, I DO recognise my being a Gemini. If I use the sidereal zodiac then 90percent of the time astrology does not accurately describe me.
I would be persuaded away from this notion if it was such that using my western understanding of astrology was seen to be incompatible with using the sidereal zodiac. If you were to accurately describe my personality (in as much as western astrology does) then I would accept that my methods need to be reconsidered. If youw ant to take up the offer, my birth time is June 8th 1985 in Dublin, Ireland. My chart using the tropical zodiac is in my pics either if that helps. -
-
Re: What do you think?
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 8:41 AMO Ryan
"If youw ant to take up the offer, my birth time is June 8th 1985 in Dublin, Ireland. My chart using the tropical zodiac is in my pics either if that helps."
Better yet, I've uploaded a sidereal copy of my chart found here:
people.tribe.net/d86a9803-...835cd93638
I am genuinely open to a paradigm shift on this but so far sidereal zodiac just hasn't seemed to accurately describe me. -
-
Re: What do you think?
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 9:29 PMChallenge accepted!
By the way, congratulations on getting the sidereal chart online, I still haven't figured that out and have to use my own software. -
-
Re: What do you think?
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 3:21 AM"By the way, congratulations on getting the sidereal chart online, I still haven't figured that out and have to use my own software."
O Ryan
I admire your conviction! I'm just going through it now and reading through the external links too!
Btw you can get a sidereal chart by going to astro.com
www.astro.com/cgi/genchart.cgi
Scroll down to the 'Zodiac:' drop-down in the 'Options' section and you can choose from a number of different Zodiacs inculding the Fagan/Bradley (Sidereal) Zodiac or a couple of others including Draconic! -
-
Re: What do you think?
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 10:31 PMThanks for the advice. Any comments on the interpretation? Wasn't sure if you wanted me to post it or not?
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: What do you think?
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 6:47 AMOh, and there's no particular reason to use 12 signs other than that it's easy to divide by 3 and 4 and its been used for a long time. The 27 vedic Nakshatras or Moon constellations are another kind of equal division that work great in interpretation. -
-
Unsu...
Re: What do you think?
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 8:16 AMAt one point I found myself flooded with these sorts of questions. I imagine that many people who get involved with astrology eventually come to a similar point of questioning.
When it hit me hard about a year ago (a little more than a year) I became aware of how much our chart systems reflect patterns in the moon. The moon goes through roughly 12 cycles (sometimes 13) (of roughly 30 days ... actually a little less I think) in the time it takes the sun to complete one cycle.
Although there are other significant nodes, the lunar nodes are the ones that are most commonly used.
I find coincident cycles to be the most interesting and plausible reasoning behind astrological patterns in my own case. The strongest evidence of this to me is the coincidence of human biological cycles with lunar cycles.
When it comes to constellations - different people might group stars slightly differently and give slightly different stories and characterizations to them.
When it comes to distant stars and asteroids and things that are recently being discovered - it seems like our knowledge of these is constantly changing and any patterns attributed to their motion would be based on decades of data at best and any patterns connected to them in human experience would be based on either very long range extrapolations or a very small number of incidents (or on some form of supernatural revelation). It isn't something to ignore but it is still in development and testing stages (I'd expect).
The same argument about seasons being different between the northern and southern hemisphere can be made for the view of constellations between the northern and southern hemisphere.
-
Re: What do you think?
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 10:45 PM27's not easy to divide by, they use 27 Lunar mansions because when you divide 360 by the Moon's mean motion you get roughly 27. As the Moon moves away from the Earth (in millions, billions of years!) there'll theoretically be fewer Lunar mansions, if it's based on the Moon's average monthly speed which'll probably slow down.
-
Re: What do you think?
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 10:49 PMThis is an interesting link, the author uses 14 signs (beased on an additional 2 that'll be added to the ecliptic soon)! Not too sure if it works, but it's still interesting and original.
micronations.wikia.com/wiki/B...trology -
-
Re: What do you think?
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 6:42 AMSeems pretty reasonable, excapt that I can't see how you can throw in 2 extra signs without changing the meaning of every other sign- if only slightly. In China they use 28 (14x2) lunar mansions to divide the ecliptic
dornqdayc.com/Documents/Astro.htm,
I don't know what point they begin from and I have no idea what interpretions they have been given in astrology, if any. -
-
Re: What do you think?
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 6:54 AMI was just thinking. I have 3 tattoos that symbolize Pisces so I'd be totally screwed. ::snickers:: -
-
Re: What do you think?
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 7:29 AM"I was just thinking. I have 3 tattoos that symbolize Pisces so I'd be totally screwed. ::snickers:: "
LOL
you really would. Imagine waking up one morning only to find out you've been an aquarius all this time! No day-dreaming and poetry for you! Take out those calculus and science books! -
-
Re: What do you think?
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 7:41 AM*twitches*
I only got as far as algebra in high school and I had to go to summer school to get past that. In college I didn't pass the math test and had to take the stupid course. Thank goodness they allowed a course called "Physics for the Artist" that involved no math but passed for a physics credits.
-
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: What do you think?
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 8:00 AM"Thank goodness they allowed a course called "Physics for the Artist" that involved no math but passed for a physics credits. "
lol
We certianly did NOT get to that. I did pretty ok with Maths tho, got a B in Higher Level which I was pretty happy with.
Sun opposition Uranus and Moon in Aquarius anyone?
-
-
Re: What do you think?
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 8:42 AMThat's rough alright. I love the Cancer glyph myself and was seriously thinking of getting a tattoo of this before. You might want to think of yourself as a Pisces/Kumbha as Kumbha (Vedic version of sidereal Aquarius) shares a lot of the qualities of Tropical pisces like the Sensitivity, psychic tendencies etc. Or just pretend you never heard of all that stuff.
Me I grew up in Ireland and rarely saw the stars, moving to Arizona really allowed me to look up at a constellation like Leo and think "how on earth can that be called Virgo?!" -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: What do you think?
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 8:59 AMThey really are two different systems, it's just unfortunate that the signs share the same names. You can use the Sankrit/Vedic names (although I have issues with some areas of Vedic astrology) or just call them "The Ram" "The Bull" etc. That of course puts you at odds with the scientific community in a way, but at least you're not pretending to keep to the astronically defined constellations. It's a minefield *grimaces*
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 1:48 PMI've tried to cover all the basics on the Western Sidereal Astrology system on
tribes.tribe.net/zodiacofthestars
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 11:38 PMMy Personal planets in Sidereal:
Sun in Aries: Same
Moon in Sagittarius: This actually sounds a bit like me, but then I have a Moon square Jupiter.
Mercury in Pisces: This does too sound like me, but then I have a Mercury square Neptune.
Venus in Pisces: Same
Mars in Taurus: This is nothing like me. I'm extremely flighty, and have a hard time concentrating for a long time.
How would you view that person, in comparison with my Western chart?
Sun in Aries
Moon in Capricorn
Mercury in Aries
Venus in Pisces
Mars in Gemini? -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Thu, July 9, 2009 - 7:03 AMSidereal Taurus is very tranquil and easygoing -hence its association with Venus- and takes things at face value. Think of a bull laying in the grass, chewing the cud rather than the charging bull of Tropical Taurus.
Take a look at this post:
tribes.tribe.net/zodiacoft...c602cccf64 -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Thu, July 9, 2009 - 9:50 AMI'd say moon conjunct neptune in the 3rd would account for flightiness, along with sid Aries sun which is pretty jumpy. Add to that that they are in the 3rd and 6th houses and I think this more than accounts for it. Do you read a lot about foreign cultures, or travel back and forth a lot between culturally different places? Would seem very appropriate to your moon placement. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Thu, July 9, 2009 - 11:00 PMYes, I like to travel. Some days I can just walk for 2 hours straight without a destination. It helps me think and clear my mind.
I feel very detached towards my native country and language. Culturally, I feel a bigger attachment towards the UK and USA, and the english language in general. Sometimes I even think in english. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Fri, July 10, 2009 - 6:57 AM3rd house is definitely communication and with Neptune in Sidereal Sagittarius I figured would mean far off places and cultures. Capricorn wouldn't really describe this. The disconnectedness and lack of destination here definitely sounds like Neptune -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 11, 2009 - 1:08 PMHow about a 3rd house in late Sagittarius with Capricorn Moon and Neptune, in the 3rd house?
Well it seems interesting enough that you can explain some of the things with Sidereal, but where it really breaks for me is the lack of moon in Capricorn which I relate to immensely, and it's not only that I have the traits of Capricorn Moon, I can also relate to celebrities with the same moon sign. Well, maybe all of them are Sidereal Sag moons as well, but that would mean that Sidereal Sagittarius is waaay more "Capricorny" than people give them credit for. When I think of Capricorn Moon and my experience with it, I think of Edward Scissorhands. Both the director/writer, Tim Burton, and the actor, Johnny Depp share my Capricorn Moon. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sat, July 11, 2009 - 2:29 PMInteresting concept O'ryan, "I've gradually learned to call each sign by 2 names (In my head I just say "Cancer the Twins", "Leo the Crab" etc.)" My take is that the Constellation signs energy blend together somewhat during thier travel many light years. I'm not saying calling Cancer the Constellation Gemini makes any sense at all but that them being neighbors needs to be taken into consideration. For example I'm a Gemini Sun but do display the Cancer characteristic of "withdrawing into my shell" - the Gemini is must more pronouned though.
I've studied alot abot this but in no way are an expert, just an amature leaning. My opinion is Tropical and Sidereal Aspects works well, the starting point of thier system does not change Aspects from my reasearch. Something I'm beginning to question is dividing the 12 constellation into 30 degrees evenly - the Tropical and Sidereal I'm familiar with do this. The fact is the Constellation vary in length - Virgo is the longest and the Sun spends 45 days there : Taurus, Pisces and Leo has the Sun for 37 to 38 days. Ophiuchus has the Sun for 18 days while Scorpio only 7. Sidereal means Star Time, this tribe ( or other moderated ones) can find better words than the condemning a particular school of thought.
There are issues we need to figure out in this reguards but putting others down achieves nothing whereas a work together to find the truth is much more desirable and productive. Sure we're going to disagree upon certian things - but a pool of knowledge concerning Astrology goes a long way to clarify the Art, instead of throwing insults and condemning a particular school of thought. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 1:09 AMI didn't put anyone down, atleast this wasn't my intention. I believe in western astrology because it works, based on my own experience. I only started looking into astrology a year ago, so I am by no means trying to live my chart. Capricorn Moon made sense to me instantly.
Maybe Sidereal makes more sense astronomically, but that's not enough to convince me. No one knows for sure how "the real system" works, so the best thing we can do is follow the system that feels right. If Sidereal is true, then half of those cocky Leo Sun and Moon's would be Cancer Sun and Moon's. And in that case, we would have to reinvent what the signs really mean. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 1:30 AM<If Sidereal is true, then half of those cocky Leo Sun and Moon's would be Cancer Sun and Moon's. And in that case, we would have to reinvent what the signs really mean. >
LOL! Brilliant! So true!
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 5:07 AMI wasn't refering to you Alex.
I left this tribe for a long while not wanting to waste my time with name calling and insults - which the moderator does nothing about. Maybe with her background from her profile she is the one generating all the alts ect. for research.
The way Amiablehermit is spoke to by some needs to be stopped imediately and the crazy alts. as well as the old english witch burnig nut who comes to an astrology tribe to tell us how we are wrong and others like like.
Anyone can start any kind of tribe - even an anti astrology one. The combination of all this taking away from a group effeort to learn ( not that we always agree) is a big put off to me. -
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 5:10 AMThe way Amiablehermit is spoke to by some needs to be stopped imediately and the crazy alts. as well as the old english witch burnig nut who comes to an astrology tribe to tell us how we are wrong and others like like.""
Well said.
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 5:19 AMBack to the subject of the topic!
I think O'ryan has came up with a way that the Tropical, Sidereal and Real sky can understand each other -
"I've gradually learned to call each sign by 2 names (In my head I just say "Cancer the Twins", "Leo the Crab" etc.)"
- by the way, alot of the real sky stuff is just man made boundaries close to the original 12 Constellations. Why not say the moon is conjunct with Virgo than it's in "Corvus"? Same thing minus a boundary which just causes more confusion.
Much better to fellowship and learn from each other than one school of thought condemning the others - after all we are all just students learning - astrology is so deep one can devote and learn a whole lifetime from it.
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 6:30 AM>>
I wasn't refering to you Alex.
<<
That's good to know.
-
-
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 9:04 PMThis should help explain the sign cusps used in Western Sidereal:
tribes.tribe.net/zodiacoft...d0d89c7f89
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: "Now, if you'll just shift everything back a sign or so..."
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 7:28 AM"Anyone can start any kind of tribe - even an anti astrology one. The combination of all this taking away from a group effeort to learn ( not that we always agree) is a big put off to me."
Thank you Z-star for your comments, I fully agree with you.
At a fundamental level, mathematics and mysticism are very much two sides of
the same coin. In order to 'understand' the mysteries of the universe,
numerology, physics, astrology should be investigated side by side.
A variety of belief systems and sciences are talking about the same thing,
albeit in a different dialect, subject to the contingency of time and space.
So, why don't so many things add up? Why are the different proponents of
'systems', although these systems all have universal ambitions, fighting?
First of all, they all make sense; dependent on the part of reality they are describing,
they seem to work. Empirical proof is abundantly present, as the perspective is
highly coloured by the observers' 'preferences'.
We all have preferences, this has nothing to do with objectivity. We believe things
'work' and are 'real', because their experience was parallel to more subjective,
internal experiences that made us feel 'good', subsequently it seemed as if we finally
started to control our enviroment. Pluto's greatest seduction.
For example: My introduction to astrology heralded a number of 'beyond belief experiences'
triggered by A stellium consisting of Neptune, Uranus, Jupiter, Mars, Mercury
and the Sun hitting my NN Asc conjunction. "When the Student is Ready, the Teacher will appear. "
Now what about astrology?, what works better Sidereal or Tropical? Without
getting into summing up arguments why the one is true and the other is false,
I would like to offer here, that it's just depends on your perspective...
Reality is of such a complex, intricate and infinite nature - they both work,
independent of each other and hierarchically, they are patterns in the same
weave...albeit referring to different planes of 'reality'.
Ignorance, is not a lack of knowledge, but a tendency to project your own insecurity onto others...
If you are really omniscient, why still have the urge to convince others of your version of reality?
Same goes for 12-based, 10 based, 7 based or even 27 based systems, they are
just different wheels turning on the same axis. Ask the Vedic people they, have
been working with it for aeons.
The confusion really starts with the notion that the physical position of the constellations
has something to do with the meaning of the signs, that would be same as saying that
your brain is your mind and your thoughts are all cascading against your skull all the time,
sorta like a pinnaballa machina.
