RE: Sidereal/Tropical, By Their Fruits.....

[Guest guest]

Hey Curt,

 

I have a question -

 

who would you consider a Neo-Traditionalist? Please,

name names?

 

 

Okay, Robert Hand, Lee Lehman, Joseph Crane, Robert Zollar......Greats, but

stuck in the tropical miasma, trying to prove to each other its validity.

Make no doubt about it, the tropical zodiac works, but it works only good

enough to get by.

 

However, all during the "dark ages" of western astrology the flame of

Jyotish burned brightly in the east. Jyotish is an unbroken tradition from

time immemorial, which is about as good as one can ask for. Why stick with

such a hobbled (western) system? Just don't want to give the security of

one's roots? If those roots were in error, I, for one, would pick up and

seek the truth elsewhere. This is why I have jumped ship, as it were.

 

I have for about the last 7 years tried to work with the new

neo-traditionalist movement. They are just so slow. To be frank, it just

seems they can't get their act together. Would co-dependent people stick

with a system that is inferior.

 

I, obviously, am painting in emotionally tinged broad brushes, and being not

a little bit judgmental. As I have said, there is gold to be mined from the

astrologers of the ancient west....but, is it all worth it?

 

The point of astrology is not to make a sound intellectual point. The point

of astrology is to use techniques that WORK to help people with their pain

now. It is a no-brainer that if Jyotish has the unbroken clean tradition

(more or less) and has a better track record, and is SPIRITUAL, that one

should go with it and drop the old hopeless past.

 

It is EXACTLY like orthodox religion compared with real spiritual

disciplines. Western-tropical is the former and Vedic-Jyotish is the later.

I do not want to go on and on with this because I seem to get a little

"emotional" about this.

 

But, just as if to illustrate itself, the other day I received a shipment of

astrological journals about western traditional astrology. It was 3 months

late! Not only that, but they were the wrong items! Do they have their act

together? Does this episode belie even greater problems with the whole

western tropical tradition?

 

I do wax Biblical a lot, and it says there that we will know who the true

and untrue are: "...By their fruits ye shall know them."

 

 

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!

/

 

------

Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds!

1. Fill in the brief application

2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds

3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR

http://click./1/6628/1/_/913692/_/963339847/

------

 

 

gjlist-

[Guest guest]

Some years ago, Hand himself or some in his group went as far as claiming

that Jyotish came from Babylonian astrology, and dated Varahmihira as an

early AD individual or somewhere there. I recall reading some understandably

strong opinions against such "views" from some Indian astrologers. Has that

rumor died down, yet?

 

MK

 

 

 

 

 

 

>"Curtis Burns" <curtisburns

>gjlist

><gjlist >

>RE: [gjlist] RE: Sidereal/Tropical, "By Their Fruits....."

>Wed, 12 Jul 2000 21:34:16 -0500

>

>Just out of curiosity, Curt, at what point did you start to realize that

>the tropical zodiac may not be all it was cracked up to be and that Jyotish

>maybe offered something 'new and improved'?

>

>Well it has been relatively recently. I can't pinpoint one definitive

>event

>that broke the camel's back as it were. I could only say my continually

>building frustration with the neo-traditionalists, my finally being able to

>"get" how to interpret planetary periods (using initially ancient western

>firdaria), and my testing out on some friends and myself to issues which

>were never really adequately explained by western tropical.

>

>It was also a discussion about the virtues of Jyotish by Robert Hand and

>Robert Zollar themselves. My initial thought was "Duh?!, If the system is

>so good, why not just go with it?"

>

>Apparently they have to resurrect western astrology back to its initial

>glories--then figure out what REALLY DOES WORK of the old systems and

>modernize them. I believe that in itself is hopeless because most of the

>ancient texts themselves are irretrievably destroyed and one could only

>perhaps resurrect a part of the glory. Then it would take hundreds

>possibly

>thousands of years to reestablish a lore and tradition like Jyotish. But

>Jyotish and western tropical are the same thing anyway!!--basically.

>

>So it must have been that I have reached the point in my life where I need

>to make the real real. The western tropicallists are seeking to validate

>historical values at the expense of being able to adequately help real

>people now.

>

>I am sure I am making a point somehow here, and I just can't condemn

>western

>tropicalists so absolutely but I am making a distinction between

>intellectualism and the more truly spiritual roots (as I see it) of

>astrology. One makes the transition to Jyotish because of inner conviction

>to the truth of his or her findings, and not because it will conflict with

>the western paradigm and subsequently put one at a distance with one's

>friends on the points of astrology. I suppose a lot of astrologers fear to

>make that changeover because then they will not be able to contribute to

>magazines and contribute to the popular steam that is astrology in the

>west.

>

>I always find myself going back to the analogy of orthodox religion and

>more

>serious spiritual disciplines: when you make the changeover, as we all

>have,

>one puts oneself at odds with what is popular. Some people are not that

>secure in their convictions to do that -- including some western

>astrologers -- who are human, after all.

>

>Curtis Burns Aries Astrologer, but now Pisces

>(well at least my Moon is in Aries now!!)

>

 

______________________

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