Guest guest Report post Posted June 28, 2000 In a message dated 06/28/2000 4:50:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time, curtisburns writes: << SO, are the western astrologer screwed up? Yes! Will the neo-traditionalists get their act together? Don't hold your breath waiting. Have the sidereals got it right since the beginning? I would say, YES!! >> Hmm. Well, to me this is culture bashing. Not all Amerians are materialistic and shallow and centered on their own egos. This is a cliched elitism that has funneled down through collective consciousness from back in the days when only the rich could go to Europe, thereby affording themselves just enough knowledge to come home above it all. Real people live in America, who are just as confused and sometimes even as oppressed as human beings anywhere else. They are not books or television shows. If I were to say to you, oh, Curtis, it's really the entire of India who are screwed up, always mooning about God and hardship and death, you'd think I was a bigoted lunatic with an extremely narrow point of view. Octavio Paz once wrote a series of essays about the way language forms our reality. He talked about the Tower of Babel and how, at the beginning of time, the Bible says, all people spoke one language. Underpinning that idea was that all people had one point of view, one point of reference for each concept their language encompassed, and that these concepts comprised Ultimate Truth. The Pure. It was the schism of language that broke apart the human family. He wonders if the Truth, or the Way, is not in one or two concepts from one culture, but from a great sea of All ideas, all concepts, all cultures. He says that maybe if we had minds large enough to see every point of view, we would know the Absolute. It's not the knowledge that is faulty, he thinks. It's the capacity of its reciever, which can only absorb splinters of the source. This is true of any lens. Imagine, then, a broadcast signal of all information from all sources through all recieving minds. If we could put language back together again, imagine how intelligent we would be. Love, Vox Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 28, 2000 Here is my thoughts at the present time. Firstly, I have been a tropicalist determined mostly by my cultural upbringing, that is, tropical/western was all I had. I worked it pretty good. I worked mostly with aspects and midpoints, signs and houses came in later as I followed the finding of Project Hindsight and began to delve into horary. I found it (tropical signs and rulerships) worked, but never as brilliantly as when I seriously started to consider sidereal placements. I find myself now caught between two worlds: tropical/western and sidereal/vedic. Seeing as I am now embarking on a major internet astrology magazine/newspaper, it will be interesting to see how I deal with this seeming dichotomy of astrologies. In delving into the lore of ancient western I find an art very much alive with symbolism unique and deeply true. However, it is still of a house perspective and not signs. The point I really want to get to here is: IS THE WEST SCREWED UP OR WHAT!? The neo-traditionalists are going places but they are seemingly a handicapped bunch. They party, they drink, they argue. They are more or less just intellectualists which says almost nothing as far as the ability to perceive truth. They have a lot of baggage and are like blind men with very dark colored rose-colored glasses (I just did a 'Das-ism' So are they screwed up? Well yes. They are not truly spiritually disciplined. There are exceptions to every rule of course. Still, there is no strong spiritual hard work--giving up of the ego and the ego's pet wounds and "bags". Western astrology is good but it is very materialistic. Why? There is no clearly defined difference between good and bad or illusion and truth. To the west the 8th, 12th and 6th house could be viewed as entirely "okay", whereas in the east those houses are clearly "bad" Why? because they are the houses of KARMA, wrong sowings. To a materialist, because everything is defined by what one sees, anything goes. There is no higher authority, no higher perspective changing the equation, that calls upon one to exercise spiritual strength or character in the face of seeming good mayic things or situations. One needs to be very devout to God in order to be an astrologer, otherwise you are just babbling. Being devout to God cannot be a just a well intentioned optimistic outlook on things, it requires hard choices and in many ways being in enmity with the ways of the world. SO, are the western astrologer screwed up? Yes! Will the neo-traditionalists get their act together? Don't hold your breath waiting. Have the sidereals got it right since the beginning? I would say, YES!! __________ Curtis Burns 3800 Elliot Ave Minneapolis, MN 55407 PH/FX 612-823-9104 Website: http://www.globalpersonalvictory.com webmaster or, curtisburns Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 29, 2000 In a message dated 29 Jun 2000 10:56:59 IST, "Manoj Pathak" <manojpathak writes: > Have been watching this debate for a quite long time. Why dont we just > forget it ? Use any zodiac, but read charts and then prove, which is the > correct zodiac. This to me, with due regards to all who participated or are > participating in this debate, looks like a meaningless debate. Go to Lois Rodden's website (www.astrodatabank.com) where this is happening more frequently. Most recently, there was a comparison of Tropical and Sidereal Solar Returns for former pop-star M.C. Hammer. Later, Kevin/Baraka Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 29, 2000 Have been watching this debate for a quite long time. Why dont we just forget it ? Use any zodiac, but read charts and then prove, which is the correct zodiac. This to me, with due regards to all who participated or are participating in this debate, looks like a meaningless debate. there is a song in hindi, let me sing it here for all of you : Woh afsaana jise anjaam tak lana na ho mumkin, use ek khoobsoorat mod dekar chodna acchha. (The issue which cannot be resolved amicably, should be left without any rancour). regards to all Manoj ______________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted July 11, 2000 Hey Curt, I have a question - who would you consider a Neo-Traditionalist? Please, name names? Mu --- Curtis Burns <curtisburns wrote: > Here is my thoughts at the present time. Firstly, I > have been a tropicalist > determined mostly by my cultural upbringing, that > is, tropical/western was > all I had. I worked it pretty good. I worked > mostly with aspects and > midpoints, signs and houses came in later as I > followed the finding of > Project Hindsight and began to delve into horary. > > I found it (tropical signs and rulerships) worked, > but never as brilliantly > as when I seriously started to consider sidereal > placements. I find myself > now caught between two worlds: tropical/western and > sidereal/vedic. > > Seeing as I am now embarking on a major internet > astrology > magazine/newspaper, it will be interesting to see > how I deal with this > seeming dichotomy of astrologies. In delving into > the lore of ancient > western I find an art very much alive with symbolism > unique and deeply true. > However, it is still of a house perspective and not > signs. > > The point I really want to get to here is: IS THE > WEST SCREWED UP OR WHAT!? > > The neo-traditionalists are going places but they > are seemingly a > handicapped bunch. They party, they drink, they > argue. They are more or > less just intellectualists which says almost nothing > as far as the ability > to perceive truth. They have a lot of baggage and > are like blind men with > very dark colored rose-colored glasses (I just did a > 'Das-ism' > > So are they screwed up? Well yes. They are not > truly spiritually > disciplined. There are exceptions to every rule of > course. Still, there is > no strong spiritual hard work--giving up of the ego > and the ego's pet wounds > and "bags". > > Western astrology is good but it is very > materialistic. Why? There is no > clearly defined difference between good and bad or > illusion and truth. To > the west the 8th, 12th and 6th house could be viewed > as entirely "okay", > whereas in the east those houses are clearly "bad" > Why? because they are the > houses of KARMA, wrong sowings. > > To a materialist, because everything is defined by > what one sees, anything > goes. There is no higher authority, no higher > perspective changing the > equation, that calls upon one to exercise spiritual > strength or character in > the face of seeming good mayic things or situations. > > One needs to be very devout to God in order to be an > astrologer, otherwise > you are just babbling. Being devout to God cannot > be a just a well > intentioned optimistic outlook on things, it > requires hard choices and in > many ways being in enmity with the ways of the > world. > > SO, are the western astrologer screwed up? Yes! > Will the > neo-traditionalists get their act together? Don't > hold your breath waiting. > Have the sidereals got it right since the beginning? > I would say, YES!! > > __________ > Curtis Burns > 3800 Elliot Ave > Minneapolis, MN 55407 > PH/FX 612-823-9104 > > Website: > http://www.globalpersonalvictory.com > > webmaster > or, > curtisburns > > > Get Mail – Free email you can access from anywhere! / Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
