Guest guest Posted December 12, 2004 Report Share Posted December 12, 2004 hi my name is Ronan... and i have been an astrology student now for several years (western/tropical)... only this year realized the significance of the sidereal zodiac/PRECESSION... as well as taken an interest in vedic astro (which i am only just beginning my studies in)... i am completely a convert to SA to the extent that i no longer use tropical in any of the charts i analyze... its hard for me to imagine that i followed the non precessed return charts for so long... the picture is much more clearer now and profoundly accurate using the precessed methods... but i do feel that there is significance to the tropical zodiac... which is where i am trying to find a point of resolution concerning this issue... and i dont know that one can be found... is it one or the other... or a combination of both? i read in (recent) mountain astrologer magazine (an SA author.. cannot remember name)... who mentioned that 2 zodiacs simply cannot exist... and that it one or the other... and of course SA is it... i am certainly leaning in that direction by far... but i cannot be (((certain))) that this is so... thanks for any input on this issue... and i look forward to becoming an active member in this sidereal group. Ronan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 13, 2004 Report Share Posted December 13, 2004 Hi Ronan and welcome to the group. A good number of us have followed the route you have taken to the sidereal zodiac. However there are a variety of opinions about what then the tropical zodiac represents. Some dismiss it entirely, others may use it as a supplementary source of information and still others see it on equal footing with the sidereal zodiac. I have no problems with using more than one parameter like a zodiac, nodal position, or year length or whatever. While I don't refer to the tropical zodiac much these days, I know that it has some sort of " reality " . As for proving once and for all which zodiac is the one and only correct zodiac, well, I'm not holding my breathe on that one. So called tests that focus on planetary sign placements are probably a bad way of going abou this. Tropical ingresses may be better. see you, Chris --- siderealstars <siderealstars wrote: > > > hi my name is Ronan... > > and i have been an astrology student now for several years > (western/tropical)... only this year realized the significance of > the sidereal zodiac/PRECESSION... as well as taken an interest in > vedic astro (which i am only just beginning my studies in)... > > i am completely a convert to SA > to the extent that i no longer use tropical in any of the charts i > analyze... its hard for me to imagine that i followed the non > precessed return charts for so long... the picture is much more > clearer now and profoundly accurate using the precessed methods... > > but i do feel that there is significance to the tropical zodiac... > which is where i am trying to find a point of resolution concerning > this issue... and i dont know that one can be found... > > is it one or the other... or a combination of both? > > i read in (recent) mountain astrologer magazine (an SA author.. > cannot remember name)... who mentioned that 2 zodiacs simply cannot > exist... and that it one or the other... and of course SA is it... > > i am certainly leaning in that direction by far... but i cannot be > (((certain))) that this is so... > > > thanks for any input on this issue... and i look forward to becoming > an active member in this sidereal group. > > Ronan > > > > > > > The all-new My - Get yours free! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 14, 2004 Report Share Posted December 14, 2004 hi Chris... thank you for the welcome and for your reply to my post... after someone has followed something and 'thought' they understood it (re tropical)... then its never easy to let go of (or denounce)... so myself (as i am sure many others) i am just trying to reconcile these 2 diff ways of looking at things... again thank you for your thoughts... i realize there is no definitive answer to this question... Ronan , Christopher Kevill <ckevill> wrote: > Hi Ronan and welcome to the group. > > A good number of us have followed the route you have taken to the sidereal > zodiac. However there are a variety of opinions about what then the > tropical zodiac represents. Some dismiss it entirely, others may use it > as a supplementary source of information and still others see it on equal > footing with the sidereal zodiac. > > I have no problems with using more than one parameter like a zodiac, nodal > position, or year length or whatever. While I don't refer to the tropical > zodiac much these days, I know that it has some sort of " reality " . > > As for proving once and for all which zodiac is the one and only correct > zodiac, well, I'm not holding my breathe on that one. So called tests > that focus on planetary sign placements are probably a bad way of going > abou this. Tropical ingresses may be better. > > see you, > Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2004 Report Share Posted December 15, 2004 Ronan, I hear you loud and clear. This inability to denounce or renounce previously believed in paradigms is one reason why so many tropicalists long in the tooth can bring themselves to look at jyotish or western siderealism. Shame really but people get invested. As for how to reconcile the two, maybe its like stereoscopic vision. We do have two eyes, right? :-) Or like listening to two radios tuned in to different stations or two cd players playing different songs at the same time. sometimes it's noise, but sometimes there can be great harmonies, however unintended. both stations are there, no matter which one we're tuned into. Both are perspectives or windows on reality. Tune in, turn on,...cast a chart. you have to let go of the aristotilean rational mind and be open to randomness. Chris --- siderealstars <siderealstars wrote: > > hi Chris... > thank you for the welcome and for your reply to my post... after > someone has followed something and 'thought' they understood it (re > tropical)... then its never easy to let go of (or denounce)... so > myself (as i am sure many others) i am just trying to reconcile > these 2 diff ways of looking at things... > > again thank you for your thoughts... i realize there is no > definitive answer to this question... > > Ronan > > > , Christopher Kevill > <ckevill> wrote: > > Hi Ronan and welcome to the group. > > > > A good number of us have followed the route you have taken to the > sidereal > > zodiac. However there are a variety of opinions about what then > the > > tropical zodiac represents. Some dismiss it entirely, others may > use it > > as a supplementary source of information and still others see it > on equal > > footing with the sidereal zodiac. > > > > I have no problems with using more than one parameter like a > zodiac, nodal > > position, or year length or whatever. While I don't refer to the > tropical > > zodiac much these days, I know that it has some sort > of " reality " . > > > > As for proving once and for all which zodiac is the one and only > correct > > zodiac, well, I'm not holding my breathe on that one. So called > tests > > that focus on planetary sign placements are probably a bad way of > going > > abou this. Tropical ingresses may be better. > > > > see you, > > Chris > > > > > Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail./mail_250 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.