Guest guest Posted September 10, 2003 Report Share Posted September 10, 2003 Hi Therese! How is possible to unsubcribe from Magi-astrotopics? It is quite difficult. 3 times I tried as is advised but my email is refused and returned. I am quite grateful to any one of you who is able to help me. Regards Anny -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: Verzonden: zondag 7 september 2003 3:04 Aan: Onderwerp: Digest Number 611 " How can Pluto be in Sagittarius when it's so close to Antares? " ----- Post message: Subscribe: - Un: - List owner: -owner Shortcut URL to this page: / ------ There are 3 messages in this issue. Topics in this digest: 1. Re: no unified zodiac StarTiming 2. Re: no unified zodiac " jivio " <jivio 3. Re: Clarifying Question #2: No unified zodiac " jivio " <jivio ______________________ ______________________ Message: 1 Sat, 06 Sep 2003 15:58:12 -0400 StarTiming Re: no unified zodiac In a message dated 9/6/2003 1:09:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, zqhelisabeth <zqh_elisabeth writes: > 4. So it seems to me that when Tropical > astrologers, whose " zodiac " is centered on the > Sun's path and the seasons, say the " Moon is in > Aries " , they can only be saying something > meaningless -- unless they call a specific stage > in the Moon's cylce " Aries " . They might also do > the same with the other planets. But what we > would end up with by doing this is a separate > " zodiac " for each planet, since they each follow > a different cycle/path. Yah. That's exactly what i do by approximation. Further help for this is in the Interface material at the Matrix website. The tropical zodiac is about our local situation pressured by seasons and that division of labor and responsibility created by solar necessities. The stellar zodiacs (Stahl-Allan is only one of them) work very differently but are less social, and its the social where pressures on clients tend to be most felt. Some very competent and unique people do order their lives according to the true unequal constellatons, either at their own latitudes or at the equator. Each of these layers of operation has advantages which differ from birthchart to birthchart. Other than using a device such as the 22 system sorter i've never managed to computerize, its nearly impossible to consider all the layers coherently. And even with the additional information much escapes us -- a result of the overload. We begin to see that competent professional astrologers are selectors of information. Those at the leading edge of PROFESSIONAL practice are beginning to use good software to produce quantities of information in a few minutes most of which is discarded. Not everything true is relevant all the time. For core personal use, sidereal and tropical are probably first choices, unless you are someone whose chart strongly resists these levels. Jane A. http://www.startiming.net ______________________ ______________________ Message: 2 Sat, 06 Sep 2003 22:13:33 -0000 " jivio " <jivio Re: no unified zodiac , StarTiming@a... wrote: > > The tropical zodiac is about our local situation > pressured by seasons and that division of labor and > responsibility created by solar necessities. > I have no idea what you are talking about? Speak English woman or I'll have every javalina knocking on your door. Tropical is a process based on a fiducial of seasonal changes. It is a cyclical pattern based on 1 realationship between the Sun and Earth. It is an overworked and rapidly losing reality. Is a Gemini(Tropical) described the same way as it was a thousand years ago? > The stellar zodiacs (Stahl-Allan is only one of them) > work very differently but are less social, and its > the social where pressures on clients tend to be > most felt. > Sidereal is no less or more social yet more accurate a tool than Tropical for predictive purposes. > Some very competent and unique people do order their > lives according to the true unequal constellatons, > either at their own latitudes or at the equator. I suppose thats true.... The unfortunate thing for tropicalists is their refusual or inability to understand/grasp sidereal. > > For core personal use, sidereal and tropical are probably > first choices, unless you are someone whose chart > strongly resists these levels. > > Jane A. > http://www.startiming.net The common ground between tropicalists and siderealists are the planets and their relationships... The communication regarding cycles and aspects creates a greater appreciation of what each has to offer. Fiducials aside... Do Solar winds carry with them a " sign " ? Does Sun Spot Activity create a psychological cause and effect here on earth? The answer to both those questions are in the next session of jeapordy... Juan ______________________ ______________________ Message: 3 Sat, 06 Sep 2003 22:48:48 -0000 " jivio " <jivio Re: Clarifying Question #2: No unified zodiac , zqhelisabeth <zqh_elisabeth> wrote: I wanted to ask about. What I wanted to > know is whether those who know more about > astrology (and astronomy) than I do see any holes > in my reasoning and conclusion: > > My *reason* seems to tell me that the standard > Tropical " zodiac " cannot exist for any planet > other than the Sun... > Makes sense to me... Like Clinton said.. " It all depends on what is is " ... > 1. Tropical is the astrology of *time* and is > based on the *sun's* cycle (or, rather, the > earth's cycle around the sun); in this astrology, > the sun is not really " in " any sign. Tropical > " Aries " is just a convenient name for a specific > *time* -- the beginning of spring, and has > nothing to do with the *constellation* of Aries. > time slime... its all the same.... The earth tilts and moves back and forth in this tilt in relationship to the Sun... the cyclical pattern to this has a fiducial(starting point) which is the spring equinox... of course in the southern hemisphere its the autumn equinox(Make sense?) We have a cyclical pattern divided into 12 signs equally with 30 degrees each. These Signs just happen to be named the same as the constellations which rim the earth at the ecliptic. > 2. This being the case, tropical astrology > therefore has nothing to do with the > constellations. It is not an astrology of *space* > like sidereal. > You can differ between space and time but I figure why... > 3. It then seems to follow that in tropical > astrology, just as the Sun " in " a particular sign > is *not* really " in " it, but only refers to the > stage in the sun's own cycle, then the other > planets (e.g. the Moon, mercury, venus, etc) also > cannot really be " in " any sign. > I've got a sign that sez... " Dip " It helps direct folks to the chips n dip when I have a party. > 4. So it seems to me that when Tropical > astrologers, whose " zodiac " is centered on the > Sun's path and the seasons, say the " Moon is in > Aries " , they can only be saying something > meaningless -- unless they call a specific stage > in the Moon's cylce " Aries " . They might also do > the same with the other planets. But what we > would end up with by doing this is a separate > " zodiac " for each planet, since they each follow > a different cycle/path. > I love your grasp of the confusion.. Quick go for more signs! and another thing... We just might find that the astrology section of the newspaper is best for wraping fish. > 5. So, unlike sidereal astrology which uses the > fixed stars and constellations, tropical > astrology cannot have just *one* zodiac that > works for all the planets. The result is that, in > tropical astrology, the Moon in Aries would be a > *different* Aries than, say, the Sun or Mercury > in Aries. > Yes more of the confusion of signs to which I say(as I said before) That is an argument best expressed by a tropicalist. I tend to let it go with one zodiac misalinged but if your perception creates questions for you, I will not be the one to disavow its merits. What world do you wish to operate from .. The heliocentric or the geocentric? Do the planets and sun revolve around the earth or do the planets and earth revolve around the sun. For the purpose of person look to the geocentric. > 6. All of this seems to me to be a major point > against the validity of the tropical zodiac. It > seems to me that even if tropical astrology works > in its own way, it should reinvent its rules > since the ones it still uses would, as far as I > can see, only work for an astrology that uses > *one* common zodiac for all planets, i.e., > sidereal astrology. > No worries... Thats why we have politicians. > Does anyone see what I mean? I hope I haven't > made this too confusing. What I want to know is > if anyone sees any flaws with my argument, or > whether I'm missing any relevant facts > (astromical or whatever) that would change the > whole picture. But since my *knowledge* of the > technical side of astrology and of astronomy is > so limited, I thought that there is a chance that > I've come to this conclusion only because there > is some *facts* that I'm ignorant about. After > all, such great astrologers like Robert Hand, who > is much more informed than I am and who seems to > have analyzed both the tropical and sidereal > zodiac still seem to think that the tropical one > could work. > > Elisabeth What do you bring away from this current Jupiter Uranus opposition we are currently experiencing? Is Dr. Phil putting his name on an osophy and breaking away from the " norm " ? Lets get all of the " truths " on the table and examine them.... Scary!!!!! Mars is just around the corner.... Careful Mr. Bush! As for Robert Hand... I bet he's a " closet " siderealist. ____________________ > Post your free ad now! http://personals..ca ______________________ ______________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 26, 2006 Report Share Posted December 26, 2006 Dear Swee, I found it from notes my Guru. Exact Ref. I will search and give. Hariram Re: 8 Dhatu Posted by: " Swee Chan " sweechan swee10101 Sat Dec 23, 2006 7:33 am (PST) Jaya Jagannatha> > Dear Hariram,> Namaste> > I can´t find my other version of Caraka samhita, but I do have the Chowkhaba> publication. Elixirs are found in Vol III and from the index, I have also > checked the slokas you´ve given me. I can´t find the first sloka nor the> second one.> > svarNa rUShyaM ca raMgaM yashadamevaca|> shIsam ......||> > Where did you get the slokas from? Anyone? 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.