Western Astrologers Wacko?

[Guest guest]

Well, it is not out of the realm of possibility? If anything I am guilty of

a little humor.

 

Just as Das suggested about tropical zodiacs pertains to the world of

apparent truths and, by definition, its inadequacy. Westerners could be

kind of all wrong about their zodiacs and therefore their astrology will

suffer.

 

My opinions about Vedic these days are that it is a more real and

realistically relevant astrology than western. Why would I say that? I

have done a somewhat rigorous study of western for the last 12 years and I

find immediately better results with Vedic--and more suited to my spiritual

inclinations.

 

If I am critical of western astrologers in general (saying at the same time

there are always exceptions to the rule), might I be saying something

important instead of just immature? I try to always speak or express myself

not without being careful. Sometimes you got to call a spade a spade.

 

__________

Curtis Burns

3800 Elliot Ave

Minneapolis, MN 55407

PH/FX 612-823-9104

 

Website:

http://www.globalpersonalvictory.com

 

webmaster

or,

curtisburns

[Guest guest]

>"Curtis Burns" <curtisburns

>gjlist

><gjlist >

>[gjlist] Western Astrologers Wacko?

>Wed, 28 Jun 2000 21:47:57 -0500

>I

>have done a somewhat rigorous study of western for the last 12 years and I

>find immediately better results with Vedic--and more suited to my spiritual

>inclinations.

>

 

 

 

This latter part (about being more suited to [your] spiritual inclinations

sounds like the real key. As they say, the prepared [to see] mind sees

action. Perhaps different schools of astrology, different coordinates,

different ayanamshas etc all are capable of revealing the truth, because

these are symbols of truth and not truth itself.

 

MK

 

 

______________________

Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com