Guest guest Posted December 12, 2005 Report Share Posted December 12, 2005 Hi, new to the group here. I definitely think that sidereal is the way to go but I have a question regarding signs. Most vedic astrologers state that the ascendant is the true sign of the individual, others the moon sign, while western astrologers say it's the sun sign. I'm a sidereal Sun in Gemini, Moon in Leo with Scorpio ascendant. Some astrologers say I'm a Gemini, others a Leo, and others a Scorpio. Who's got it right and why? Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 13, 2005 Report Share Posted December 13, 2005 , " trjrpr " <trjrpr> wrote: Hi, new to the group here. Some astrologers say I'm a Gemini, others a Leo, and others a Scorpio. Who's got it right and why? Tom > REPLY: Your answers from this list may also be as varied as from your other sources. As a general rule, I do not use signs -- just angular planets as a primary focus, all planets and their aspects, the angles. If doing a natal chart I include houses. I also use mid- points. For me, seeing both tropicalists and siderealists using the same definitions just put me off. I haven't read or satisfactorily tested a difference in the signs/zones to suggest one being right, one being wrong. For me, the tropical zodiac is a seasonal/cultural phenomena and would have to be interpreted in terms of one's environment and not as ones personal style or expression. The sidereal zodiac, being star based, imples a " sense of place within the universe " and would perhaps need to be interpreted in something akin to a " spiritual " or higher-self imperative of expression. Again, I have nothing conclusive to yet point to -- its just my sense of what may be. Dave 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.