Guest guest Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 Rishi, Since you ask -- what is the biggest given, the biggest stereotype in astrology (not just jyotish!)? That there is an aries constellation all the way to pisces! And some of the constellation when we <jyotishis> care or dare to look up in the skies, from different countries and nations -- that seem the same configurationally! So they must be right and correct and celestially perfect, right? Then that idiot came and destroyed my reality! He asked me a simple question many many years ago, when I was still learning jyotish. He said/suggested/asked: But the view of the zodiacal constrellations that you see and accept are in a sense 2 dimensional and not even 3 dimensional and real! The stars that you see as forming a shape of a ram or balance or scorpion could be very different in the 3- dimensional reality if you can visualize it! I could and hence I share this with you all! RR , "rishi_2000in" <rishi_2000in wrote: > > Why did Guruji say it is my question. > For, I am not satisfied with the explanation just because Guruji said > it and just because it is written in some ancient book. > I am not even satisfied just because I see 79 charts and find this > pattern there for what about the 83 charts, I didnot see? > So why should I believe that nakshatra and rashi have any correlation? > rishi > > > > , "crystal pages" > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > When we say aries means this or that -- we are forgetting: > > Aries could be in one of 12 houses > > Aries is lorded by mars that could be in any of the 12 houses based > > on the ascendant > > Aries could be in any of the many houses in the divisional charts > > possible > > Dispositors and nakshatra dispositors and GOD knows what! > > But pay attention to nakshatra -- Guruji said! > > If an exalted or otherwise strong planet rises in the navamsha -- > pay > > attention to it, for it has not arrived there readily and just like > > that, and it would not leave you in this lifetime so readily! > > > > You need not pay attention to it, if you do not have it, obviously! > > > > RR > > > > , "rishi_2000in" > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > Stereotypes arise when we quickly jump to conclusions based on > our > > > own perceptions and limited knowledge, therefore, they should > > abound > > > in Jyotish! > > > > > > > > > > > > , "crystal pages" > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Can there be stereotypes in astrology, members? > > > > > > > > Such as: > > > > Indians are good at math, > > > > Japanese are good with hands and technical prowess > > > > Italians are volatile > > > > French are the best lovers > > > > Africans have the best rhythm > > > > <correction: Italians are the best lovers! Sorry if there are > any > > > > Italian members here :-(> > > > > > > > > Should there be stereotypes in jyotish, members?? > > > > > > > > Can there be an Indian that could be the next Rudolph Valentino? > > > > Can there be a Chinese that could be the next Einstein? > > > > Can there be a Cuban that would be the next Gandhi? > > > > Can there be a human that could be the next Deliverer, the next > > > AWATAAR? > > > > > > > > Am I asking too much, dear Historians? > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 But you should have told him that this exactly is the reality. For, if the Human thought had limited itself to the 3 dimensional reality, we would not be sitting here and not conversing so easily not even remenbering timezones and midnights. Sir, What we see in 2 or 3 dimension is perhaps not the reality, is it? It has a fourth and even a fifth dimension. Sinces ages, Human mind has thrived on creating symbols and using them positively and profitably to grow. The problems occur when we translate symbols figuratively or literally or religiously! If Jyotish is the use of symbols, continue to lead me on to it! regards rishi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 I noticed that you stopped at the fifth dimension! Kaku's Parallel Worlds goes into many other dimensions -- until it becomes difficult to understand and comprehend (These Quantum Astrophysicists!) Seriously though, we humans do have five dimensions the first 3 are easy to figure out, L, B and W/H the fourth is time and the fifth is <relationships> and I do not mean just those that we think we acquired in this lifetime and those that came to us -- indeed ALL that we have and have deserved, and many of those just came to us when we were ready! RR , "rishi_2000in" <rishi_2000in wrote: > > But you should have told him that this exactly is the reality. > For, if the Human thought had limited itself to the 3 dimensional > reality, we would not be sitting here and not conversing so easily > not even remenbering timezones and midnights. > Sir, What we see in 2 or 3 dimension is perhaps not the reality, is > it? > It has a fourth and even a fifth dimension. > Sinces ages, Human mind has thrived on creating symbols and using > them positively and profitably to grow. The problems occur when we > translate symbols figuratively or literally or religiously! > If Jyotish is the use of symbols, continue to lead me on to it! > regards > > rishi > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 Always the final word, sir,in this cosmic drama then one waits and learns. rishi , "crystal pages" <jyotish_vani wrote: > > I noticed that you stopped at the fifth dimension! > Kaku's Parallel Worlds goes into many other dimensions -- until it > becomes difficult to understand and comprehend (These Quantum > Astrophysicists!) > > Seriously though, we humans do have five dimensions > the first 3 are easy to figure out, L, B and W/H > the fourth is time > and the fifth is <relationships> > and I do not mean just those that we think we acquired in this > lifetime and those that came to us -- indeed ALL that we have and > have deserved, and many of those just came to us when we were ready! > > RR > > > > , "rishi_2000in" > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > But you should have told him that this exactly is the reality. > > For, if the Human thought had limited itself to the 3 dimensional > > reality, we would not be sitting here and not conversing so easily > > not even remenbering timezones and midnights. > > Sir, What we see in 2 or 3 dimension is perhaps not the reality, is > > it? > > It has a fourth and even a fifth dimension. > > Sinces ages, Human mind has thrived on creating symbols and using > > them positively and profitably to grow. The problems occur when we > > translate symbols figuratively or literally or religiously! > > If Jyotish is the use of symbols, continue to lead me on to it! > > regards > > > > rishi > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 Hopefully not Rishi ji! The term "FINAL" truly scares me! Remember that I arrived on this earthly scene so close to the ultimate show of power that MODERN times and accepted civilizations have had the gumption to BRAZENLY Flaunt about, accept and Extoll -- and continue to accept, like it or not, as The Conscience for planet earth as it exists, today! , "rishi_2000in" <rishi_2000in wrote: > > Always the final word, sir,in this cosmic drama then one waits and > learns. > rishi > > > > , "crystal pages" > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > I noticed that you stopped at the fifth dimension! > > Kaku's Parallel Worlds goes into many other dimensions -- until it > > becomes difficult to understand and comprehend (These Quantum > > Astrophysicists!) > > > > Seriously though, we humans do have five dimensions > > the first 3 are easy to figure out, L, B and W/H > > the fourth is time > > and the fifth is <relationships> > > and I do not mean just those that we think we acquired in this > > lifetime and those that came to us -- indeed ALL that we have and > > have deserved, and many of those just came to us when we were ready! > > > > RR > > > > > > > > , "rishi_2000in" > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > But you should have told him that this exactly is the reality. > > > For, if the Human thought had limited itself to the 3 dimensional > > > reality, we would not be sitting here and not conversing so > easily > > > not even remenbering timezones and midnights. > > > Sir, What we see in 2 or 3 dimension is perhaps not the reality, > is > > > it? > > > It has a fourth and even a fifth dimension. > > > Sinces ages, Human mind has thrived on creating symbols and using > > > them positively and profitably to grow. The problems occur when > we > > > translate symbols figuratively or literally or religiously! > > > If Jyotish is the use of symbols, continue to lead me on to it! > > > regards > > > > > > rishi > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 Hi RR, Just a thought, but I never felt that the constellations had anything whatsoever to do with their shapes. I viewed them being named that way by the ancients because the constellations carried the _energy_ of the Ram, Bull, Crab, etc., and radiate those _qualities_ of courage, determination, and sensitivity, and so forth from the different parts of the sky. This is what the astrologers knew that the astronomers didn't, except when astrology and astronomy were one and the same. One would have to have the eyes of a contortionist to see any of these so-called stick figures as representing its label. I never thought there was any actual shape of the Ram whether in 2 or 3 dimensions, and yet most people think they are nuts if they can't see them. What is there to see? Nothing. But the energy can be felt because we're part of it. One day I'd love to see the constellations described this way by the astronomers. I'd have more respect for them beyond the number crunching they do. They are such literalists. Nevertheless as an astrologer, I do appreciate their ability to measure, and astrology and astronomy may someday be united again. The best to you.…Haizen , "crystal pages" <jyotish_vani wrote: > > Rishi, > > Since you ask -- what is the biggest given, the biggest stereotype in > astrology (not just jyotish!)? > > That there is an aries constellation all the way to pisces! And some > of the constellation when we <jyotishis> care or dare to look up in > the skies, from different countries and nations -- that seem the same > configurationally! So they must be right and correct and celestially > perfect, right? > > Then that idiot came and destroyed my reality! He asked me a simple > question many many years ago, when I was still learning jyotish. He > said/suggested/asked: But the view of the zodiacal constrellations > that you see and accept are in a sense 2 dimensional and not even 3 > dimensional and real! The stars that you see as forming a shape of a > ram or balance or scorpion could be very different in the 3- > dimensional reality if you can visualize it! > > I could and hence I share this with you all! > > > RR > > > , "rishi_2000in" > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > Why did Guruji say it is my question. > > For, I am not satisfied with the explanation just because Guruji > said > > it and just because it is written in some ancient book. > > I am not even satisfied just because I see 79 charts and find this > > pattern there for what about the 83 charts, I didnot see? > > So why should I believe that nakshatra and rashi have any > correlation? > > rishi > > > > > > > > , "crystal pages" > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > When we say aries means this or that -- we are forgetting: > > > Aries could be in one of 12 houses > > > Aries is lorded by mars that could be in any of the 12 houses > based > > > on the ascendant > > > Aries could be in any of the many houses in the divisional charts > > > possible > > > Dispositors and nakshatra dispositors and GOD knows what! > > > But pay attention to nakshatra -- Guruji said! > > > If an exalted or otherwise strong planet rises in the navamsha -- > > pay > > > attention to it, for it has not arrived there readily and just > like > > > that, and it would not leave you in this lifetime so readily! > > > > > > You need not pay attention to it, if you do not have it, > obviously! > > > > > > RR > > > > > > , "rishi_2000in" > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Stereotypes arise when we quickly jump to conclusions based on > > our > > > > own perceptions and limited knowledge, therefore, they should > > > abound > > > > in Jyotish! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "crystal pages" > > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Can there be stereotypes in astrology, members? > > > > > > > > > > Such as: > > > > > Indians are good at math, > > > > > Japanese are good with hands and technical prowess > > > > > Italians are volatile > > > > > French are the best lovers > > > > > Africans have the best rhythm > > > > > <correction: Italians are the best lovers! Sorry if there are > > any > > > > > Italian members here :-(> > > > > > > > > > > Should there be stereotypes in jyotish, members?? > > > > > > > > > > Can there be an Indian that could be the next Rudolph > Valentino? > > > > > Can there be a Chinese that could be the next Einstein? > > > > > Can there be a Cuban that would be the next Gandhi? > > > > > Can there be a human that could be the next Deliverer, the > next > > > > AWATAAR? > > > > > > > > > > Am I asking too much, dear Historians? > > > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2006 Report Share Posted September 10, 2006 Dear Haizen, I just can wish at this time decades thence that you were by my side fighting that Dennis M. (a real person and not Dennis the Menace of Mr. Wilson's putrid imagination! ;-) Yes it is not about what we view or think what we view -- OR IS IT? Actually I have tried hard to see the shapes and I have managed to see most of those, as described, honestly and publicly stated! Maybe I do have that extra imagination that is needed for astrologie and what does that make me, again? :-( RR , "haizen" <haizen wrote: > > Hi RR, > > Just a thought, but I never felt that the > constellations had anything whatsoever > to do with their shapes. I viewed them > being named that way by the ancients > because the constellations carried the > _energy_ of the Ram, Bull, Crab, etc., > and radiate those _qualities_ of courage, > determination, and sensitivity, and so > forth from the different parts of the sky. > This is what the astrologers knew > that the astronomers didn't, except when > astrology and astronomy were one and > the same. One would have to have the > eyes of a contortionist to see any of these > so-called stick figures as representing its > label. I never thought there was any actual > shape of the Ram whether in 2 or 3 > dimensions, and yet most people think > they are nuts if they can't see them. What > is there to see? Nothing. But the energy > can be felt because we're part of it. One > day I'd love to see the constellations > described this way by the astronomers. > I'd have more respect for them beyond > the number crunching they do. They are > such literalists. Nevertheless as an > astrologer, I do appreciate their ability > to measure, and astrology and astronomy > may someday be united again. > > The best to you.…Haizen > > > , "crystal pages" <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > Rishi, > > > > Since you ask -- what is the biggest given, the biggest stereotype in > > astrology (not just jyotish!)? > > > > That there is an aries constellation all the way to pisces! And some > > of the constellation when we <jyotishis> care or dare to look up in > > the skies, from different countries and nations -- that seem the same > > configurationally! So they must be right and correct and celestially > > perfect, right? > > > > Then that idiot came and destroyed my reality! He asked me a simple > > question many many years ago, when I was still learning jyotish. He > > said/suggested/asked: But the view of the zodiacal constrellations > > that you see and accept are in a sense 2 dimensional and not even 3 > > dimensional and real! The stars that you see as forming a shape of a > > ram or balance or scorpion could be very different in the 3- > > dimensional reality if you can visualize it! > > > > I could and hence I share this with you all! > > > > > > RR > > > > > > , "rishi_2000in" > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > Why did Guruji say it is my question. > > > For, I am not satisfied with the explanation just because Guruji > > said > > > it and just because it is written in some ancient book. > > > I am not even satisfied just because I see 79 charts and find this > > > pattern there for what about the 83 charts, I didnot see? > > > So why should I believe that nakshatra and rashi have any > > correlation? > > > rishi > > > > > > > > > > > > , "crystal pages" > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > When we say aries means this or that -- we are forgetting: > > > > Aries could be in one of 12 houses > > > > Aries is lorded by mars that could be in any of the 12 houses > > based > > > > on the ascendant > > > > Aries could be in any of the many houses in the divisional charts > > > > possible > > > > Dispositors and nakshatra dispositors and GOD knows what! > > > > But pay attention to nakshatra -- Guruji said! > > > > If an exalted or otherwise strong planet rises in the navamsha -- > > > pay > > > > attention to it, for it has not arrived there readily and just > > like > > > > that, and it would not leave you in this lifetime so readily! > > > > > > > > You need not pay attention to it, if you do not have it, > > obviously! > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > , "rishi_2000in" > > > > <rishi_2000in@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Stereotypes arise when we quickly jump to conclusions based on > > > our > > > > > own perceptions and limited knowledge, therefore, they should > > > > abound > > > > > in Jyotish! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > , "crystal pages" > > > > > <jyotish_vani@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Can there be stereotypes in astrology, members? > > > > > > > > > > > > Such as: > > > > > > Indians are good at math, > > > > > > Japanese are good with hands and technical prowess > > > > > > Italians are volatile > > > > > > French are the best lovers > > > > > > Africans have the best rhythm > > > > > > <correction: Italians are the best lovers! Sorry if there are > > > any > > > > > > Italian members here :-(> > > > > > > > > > > > > Should there be stereotypes in jyotish, members?? > > > > > > > > > > > > Can there be an Indian that could be the next Rudolph > > Valentino? > > > > > > Can there be a Chinese that could be the next Einstein? > > > > > > Can there be a Cuban that would be the next Gandhi? > > > > > > Can there be a human that could be the next Deliverer, the > > next > > > > > AWATAAR? > > > > > > > > > > > > Am I asking too much, dear Historians? > > > > > > > > > > > > RR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.