Tempering the information on this topic

[Guest guest]

Das It is possible to admit that the sidereal zodiac based on fixed stars has

profound influence and that the sun is also a star and the planetary

symbolism of the tropical zodiac may also have meaning for a certain level

of identity(eg personality),but the personality is not the soul,and spiritual

guidance congruent with the moksha aims of Hindu culture may be better served

by the sidereal zodiac,the reincarnation reserarch that I have reviewed tends

to support the value of the sidereal zodiac over the tropical zodiac for

purpose of understanding dimensions of soul.My own experience as an astologer

also supports the superiority of sidereal for spiritual understanding,and the

value of tropical for personality analysis.For some people who function

consciously as souls,their tropical personality profile may be almost

irrelevant.However,in my experience these people are few in number.I will

leave it to you all to evaluate my post as to what level of my being I speak

from,soul or personality.I am a cancer sun(sidereal):leo sun (tropical):aries

moon in both:Pisces lagna(sidereal),aries lagna(tropical).Regards Dave Birr

[Guest guest]

Hello everyone,

 

Please note that I am trying to explain how, scientifically speaking,

the moving Tropical zodiac is not as able to stand up the principles of

Astrology as well as the fixed Sidereal zodiac. I'm not presenting a

religious argument, nor am I discounting the "good" people have done.

 

Remember that many Western techniques are about relationships between

the planets distances, which are the same in both, or the houses, which

are roughly the same in both.

 

This discussion is only about the issue of zodiacs, not the other

elements of astrology. I am saying that the Zodiac has energy which is

beaming at us always. I am saying the Zodiac is fixed stars. The

Tropical Zodiac is no longer even close to the fixed stars and continues

to digress from them.

 

My point is about waves, or physics, not religion.

 

Yesterday on TV I saw Pat Robertson say that all "Oriental Religions"

are FALSE. I am not like that. Astrology is not religion, so what I'm

talking about doesn't fall into that category.

 

Again, many Western techniques will work because much of that system is

about true things, like houses, aspects, etc., which are not relative to

the Zodiacs in question. Please keep in mind the details about what is

being discusses here. It's not necessary to attach other matters to what

I'm talking about.

 

I presented a scientific reasoning as to why the Sidereal Zodiac makes

more sense. Can someone refute it with a similar explanation for the

Tropical Zodiac, or not. That is a question of importance here.

 

If you know how the Tropical Zodiac is calculated, you will know that it

is a result of the Sun's relationship to the Earth, not the fixed stars.

That being the case, it DISCOUNTS the importance of the fixed stars, or

Sidereal Zodiac, which is the same as saying that the Stars have no

power. It is like saying the relationship of the Sun and Earth is the

Signs. Then the signs themselves, the real ones, are meaningless to

Tropical Astrologers. First admit this, then explain to me why this is

so. I will differ. I will say the Stars, which are bodies of varying

types, have power just as the planets do, because they too are bodies. I

will say it has scientific (yet undiscovered) basis in varying types of

waves.

 

Thanks,

 

Das Goravani