Guest guest Posted February 18, 2001 Report Share Posted February 18, 2001 Okay, folks. Yes, there are a variety of ayanamsas one can choose from. The leading choices (Fagan-Bradley and Lahiri) are less than one degree apart. I don't know of any other choice that has as many adherents as these two. Fagan-Bradley fixes Spica at 29Vir06'05 " , while Lahiri fixes it at 00Lib00. The Tropical Zodiac is roughly 24 or 25 degrees " off " from the Sidereal. Despite the choices of ayanamsas and interpretation techniques, all Siderealists do agree on one thing: the stars, and not the equinox points, are the " landmarks " for measuring Zodiacal longitude. Later, Kevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2001 Report Share Posted February 18, 2001 A Layman speaks : Fagan was of the opinion that the sign characteristics of Sidereal and Tropical Zodiacs were not the same i.e. even if , say , your Sun was in the same sign in both zodiacs the meaning for a person would be different for each ( the problem being that modern tropical astrology still has sidereally-derived information strongly intermingled with its own observations . I believe that this same fellow with his thirty degree applications has been bothersome on another list previously , where the disagreement with him was not the amount of ayanamsa being so large but that it did not follow any proper astrologic as all others do but was the amazingly arbritrary result of his own personal philosophy . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2001 Report Share Posted February 18, 2001 Kevin What is your Definition of Sidereal Astrology? If you're trying to imply that Sidereal Astrology and Vedic Astrology are the same then you are diminishing Sidereal Astrology.... They are two distinct forms of astrology which share a commonality. They measure their individual brand of charting utilizing " ayanamsas " to determine definition of constellations. Ayanamsa is a sanscrit word but its use to define how sidereal astrologists mark the beginning of constellations does not make Sidereal Astrology Vedic Astrology or vice versa. The " Primer of Sidereal Astrology " written by Fagan and Firebrace is not about Vedic Astrology.... The Egyptians and Babylonians measured their longitudes from the Pleiades in Taurus 5d, Aldebaran in Taurus 15d, Regulus in Leo 5d, Spica in Virgo 29d and Antares in Scorpio 15d. It's from these roots that Sidereal Astrology is based. Sidereal Astrology shares commonality with Tropical Astrology as it does with Vedic Astrology.... How is anybody that wants to learn about Sidereal Astrology and understand its tenets and principles going to understand what it is when you confuse it with being Vedic. There are plenty of Vedic resources on the Web.... They do not have an Identity problem.... From the little that I have read in this egroup I feel clarification is in order. I think a definition is a beginning. The term Western has been added by many because they did not want to confuse Sidereal Astrology(practiced in Europe/USA) with astrologies that are practiced in India and China. I could never understand why the need. I think the difference is very clear... Sidereal Astrology(call it " Western " if you need to) utilizes one ayanamsa..... (Click Fagan/Allen on your software program) I have never heard of moving a constellation back 30 degrees and that if you think you are a Capricorn you are really a Sag.... That is not Sidereal Astrology and I take great exception to the idea and concept.... Hanni, I strongly disagree with your opinion. I find it so obvious... A Vedic Astrologer does not erect or read charts like a Siderealist. Sidereal Astrology is a study of a particular cyclical process. So is Vedic and so is Tropical... There are good and bad practitioners in each.... There is definition.... There is a difference between them.... jivio aumgn93 [sMTP:aumgn93] Sunday, February 18, 2001 11:12 AM Ayanamsas (was Re: Vs: New Member) Okay, folks. Yes, there are a variety of ayanamsas one can choose from. The leading choices (Fagan-Bradley and Lahiri) are less than one degree apart. I don't know of any other choice that has as many adherents as these two. Fagan-Bradley fixes Spica at 29Vir06'05 " , while Lahiri fixes it at 00Lib00. The Tropical Zodiac is roughly 24 or 25 degrees " off " from the Sidereal. Despite the choices of ayanamsas and interpretation techniques, all Siderealists do agree on one thing: the stars, and not the equinox points, are the " landmarks " for measuring Zodiacal longitude. Later, Kevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2001 Report Share Posted February 19, 2001 In a message dated 2/18/2001 2:18:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, jivio writes: > What is your Definition of Sidereal Astrology? Sidereal astrology calibrates the zodiac according to the stars rather than according to the equinox points. > If you're trying to imply that Sidereal Astrology and Vedic Astrology are > the same > Actually, I'm not -- although they do have a lot in common. For instance, geometry and trigonometry are both schools of mathematics that use algebra, but geometry and trigonometry are two distinct branches of mathematics. Likewise, Western and Vedic astrologies are two different branches of sidereal astrology. Both have a lot to learn from each other. Later, Kevin/Baraka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 19, 2001 Report Share Posted February 19, 2001 In a message dated 2/18/2001 7:04:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, Erra3210 writes: > Fagan was of the opinion that the sign characteristics of Sidereal and > Tropical Zodiacs were not the same i.e. even if , say , your Sun was in the > same sign in both zodiacs the meaning for a person would be different for > each ( the problem being that modern tropical astrology still has > sidereally-derived information strongly intermingled with its own > observations . Quite right -- it's good to see you've done your homework! > I believe that this same fellow with his thirty degree applications has been > bothersome on another list previously , where the disagreement with him was > not the amount of ayanamsa being so large but that it did not follow any > proper astrologic as all others do but was the amazingly arbritrary result > of > his own personal philosophy . > Closed minds aren't always bad things. I'm very closed minded about needing oxygen, food, and water, for example. The problems start when a) a person can't adequately explain why he thinks the proverbial jury is in, or b) the other side refuses to believe that an adequate explanation of the opponent's opinion is possible. I'm proud to say that I've only kicked one person off this list in the year & a few months it's been going, because that individual had resorted to personal insults, in addition to having no evidence to back up his, uh, " point. " (I've also been on lists where the person who started the flame war got to stay on the list while his or her victim got booted. Go figure! The clout that some whiners have on some lists is truly scary.) Later, Kevin 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.