The futility of the astrological lists-Hindu

[Guest guest]

To Therese and Anny:

 

 

 

In my case, I want to confess you that I am so disappointed of the

astrological lists, that I have started quitting them in a gradually

but sustained way.

 

 

I abandoned first the tropical lists,than the jyotish, the other

sidereal,lately astromundi and now I am in the verge of unsubscribing

to this one.

 

 

 

There are many flaws in all those lists, starting with the low

astrological level showed, and mainly, by the loose connections that

are often made by the astrologers in their efforts to find

correspondance between their concepts and the events.

 

 

 

 

It surprises me to read that an aspect with even 3 degrees of orb of

a secondary progression to a natal planet is oftenly seen as a proof

of the validity of a chart(?). The contacts of the inner planets is

also shown as an evidence forgetting that they had aspected

frequently the same points but without producing the same kind of

event before.

 

 

 

The other flaw is that nobody gives predictions but run to explain

the events once they have happened! And finally there is an

increasing trend to incorporate more and more asteroids, like if 10

planets were not enough.(And to Anny, you don't realize the damage it

makes to astrology the inclusion of the asteroids. If you could just

try to read and decipher the message given by a chart with the use of

just 7 planets, you would find a job capable of producing really

intellectual satisfaction.)

 

 

 

What is ironical is that I should have started quitting this list

first, because this one is the epytome of the little usefulness an

astrological list can offer.

 

 

 

In this list anarchy is what reigns here. Nobody knows what are the

purposes and objectives of this list and what is worst, nobody

analyzes charts and when they refer to them, they do it about the

tropical zodiac. Why did they choose the name of sidereal-astrology?

 

 

 

 

It mesmerizes me to find that the persons who participate more, are

the ones who do not use the sidereal zodiac and alsolack a solid

formation on the different astrological branches and concepts.

 

And it surprises me more to learn the passivity shown by those who

apparently already have chosen the sidereal but are still trying to

justify to others their decision.

 

 

 

This list, like all other astrological list, should have the only

purpose of analyzing charts and exchanging views about how events

could be foreseen through the lens of the sidereal zodiac. The only

rule should be this one: to work with a sidereal zodiac. From there

on, there should be freedom in choosing the ayanamsa, the

domification and the way aspects should be graduated,etc,etc.

 

 

 

 

 

And for those who do not believe in the sidereal zodiac,there

should be 2 alternatives: to quit or to remain quiet.

 

 

 

 

The only and valid way to see if astrology works is confronting the

theoretic principles with what happens in the real world. And daily

there are happening so many things for persons and nations for which

we have the chart, that it is incredible you waste your time

discussing so such silly things, as it is done in this list.

 

 

Hindu Astrology:

 

Of course it is a painstaking task to learn hindu astrology. The

approach is completely different, it is more exhaustive and complex

than the western.

 

They have new and completely different methods for determining the

planetary strength, for evaluating the aspects, for domificating the

zodiac, for how the planets can combine between them in order to

suggest an event and finally, they have more refined and elaborated

methods for making predictions.

 

 

But the fact that it is a lengthy and costly intellectual journal can

not be the excuse for not studying it. When you are really interested

in finding the truth, if there is anyone behind astrology, you must

dwelve in studying it and avoid to stop when you find the first

obstacles. Of course it is simplier, instead of stuying it, to

disqualify it and to try to discredit it, without having the minimum

basis to do that. This is an example of rampant intellectual

dishonesty.

 

 

 

 

And since the hindu astrology was taught and written in sanskrit,

there is the need to learn and to incorporate to your language some

sanskrit terms, which give the false impression that there is some

snobbery amongst hindu astrologers.

 

 

 

Alfonso Osorio

 

 

 

 

>

> > It is quite obvious that Ed Kohout hasn`t take the time to study

in

> >depth the Hindu astrology and not even the sidereal approach.

>

> Probably not. He can't be blamed, as here in American there is so

much

> snobbery and cult language among the Hindu/Vedic astrologers. When

students

> ask me where they can learn Hindu astrology, I recommend two or

three

> books, but tell them to draw up the charts in the Western style with

> glyphs. It makes the study much easier.

>

> >Just in time I discovered the sidereal approach to astrology.

>

> It's been said many times that when an astrologer changes from the

Tropical

> to the Sidereal zodiac, they never switch back, but no one has ever

heard

> of a Sidereal astrologer changing to the Tropical system.

>

> I bought once a book of Hindu astrology;for me I like that better.

It is

> quite a long study....One needs to grow into the stuff. A study for

many

> years it is.

>

> Yes, it takes a lot of time and the student must wade through all

the

> unfamiliar terminology and mentally change it to English. A lot of

trouble.

>

>

>

> Sincerely,

> Therese