Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 At 11:16 PM 6/19/07 -0000, Dave wrote: >Therese, I don't use signs. I know, Dave. I meant to suggest that you'll lose a lot of people along the way who can't really 'see' the horoscope without signs. Signs are just part of the normal astrological mindset. >...If you really don't want to use my " signless " (except for the >convenience of placement and measuring) form of Sidereal Astrology >techniques I'll be happy to desist. Dave, of course you're welcome to use your own methods on this forum. You're a professional, after all! Thanks for your contributions. Therese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Hi Therese Once I witnessed the sidereal zodiac in action I never looked back. When you must have precise details the sidereal zodiac blows away anything else. I'm glad there are herds of tropical astrologers practicing and preaching it's value. It makes the sidereal all that more sacred for me. When you write about vedic methods, I wish you would add a brief description of what that method means. For example, what is a varga chart specifically? And a dasa date? Consulting for a small corp last winter I ran some basic vedic charts to compare with my other work. They were totally accurate as to special events, to the minute almost. I only employed the major dasa, and bhutki elements in a limited field. Hope all is well. Kit therese hamilton <eastwest wrote: At 11:16 PM 6/19/07 -0000, Dave wrote: >Therese, I don't use signs. I know, Dave. I meant to suggest that you'll lose a lot of people along the way who can't really 'see' the horoscope without signs. Signs are just part of the normal astrological mindset. >...If you really don't want to use my " signless " (except for the >convenience of placement and measuring) form of Sidereal Astrology >techniques I'll be happy to desist. Dave, of course you're welcome to use your own methods on this forum. You're a professional, after all! Thanks for your contributions. Therese Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Answers - Check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 At 05:05 PM 6/20/07 -0700, Kit Karson wrote: >Once I witnessed the sidereal zodiac in action I never looked back. When you must have precise details the sidereal zodiac blows away anything else. I'm glad there are herds of tropical astrologers practicing and preaching it's value. It makes the sidereal all that more sacred for me. Hi Kit, Nice to know that you're still around! I agree with your observations of the sidereal zodiac. If more astrologers would try it out even for a short time, they'd be very surprised at how well it works. >[Kit:] When you write about vedic methods, I wish you would add a brief description of what that method means. For example, what is a varga chart specifically? And a dasa date? Thanks for the reminder. I'll try to remember to give definitions from now on. For anyone who wonders, 'varga' means a harmonic or divisional chart which divides each natal sign into (usually) equal sectors. So the navamsa is the 9th harmonic which divides each sign into nine segments or nine little zodiac signs which reflect the planetary symbolism of each natal sign. 'Dasa' is the system of Indian planetary periods. Based on the Moon's sign and degree at birth, the entire life is laid out in periods ruled by the planets. Each period has sub-divisions (bhuktis) and even these sub-divisions have their own smaller divisions. The astrologer checks the natal position of the planetary lords of these divisions to predict life patterns. These are used along with transits. Kit, what ayanamsa do you use? (If I knew, I don't remember.) Therese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 Therese I try and stay true to the Western Sidereal godfathers, but psychially I feel Krishnamurti is the best. Thanks for the clarifications, it really does help. I also placed the other planets and applied the major dasa and bhutki progressions which i know is incorrect. But the results were too strong to ignore. Kit therese hamilton <eastwest wrote: At 05:05 PM 6/20/07 -0700, Kit Karson wrote: >Once I witnessed the sidereal zodiac in action I never looked back. When you must have precise details the sidereal zodiac blows away anything else. I'm glad there are herds of tropical astrologers practicing and preaching it's value. It makes the sidereal all that more sacred for me. Hi Kit, Nice to know that you're still around! I agree with your observations of the sidereal zodiac. If more astrologers would try it out even for a short time, they'd be very surprised at how well it works. >[Kit:] When you write about vedic methods, I wish you would add a brief description of what that method means. For example, what is a varga chart specifically? And a dasa date? Thanks for the reminder. I'll try to remember to give definitions from now on. For anyone who wonders, 'varga' means a harmonic or divisional chart which divides each natal sign into (usually) equal sectors. So the navamsa is the 9th harmonic which divides each sign into nine segments or nine little zodiac signs which reflect the planetary symbolism of each natal sign. 'Dasa' is the system of Indian planetary periods. Based on the Moon's sign and degree at birth, the entire life is laid out in periods ruled by the planets. Each period has sub-divisions (bhuktis) and even these sub-divisions have their own smaller divisions. The astrologer checks the natal position of the planetary lords of these divisions to predict life patterns. These are used along with transits. Kit, what ayanamsa do you use? (If I knew, I don't remember.) Therese Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Answers - Check it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 At 04:56 PM 6/21/07 -0700, Kit Karson wrote: >>Therese I try and stay true to the Western Sidereal godfathers, but psychially I feel Krishnamurti is the best. Kit, do you mean you have an intuitive feeling that K is correct, but you haven't really used that ayanamsa? But you use the Fagan ayanamsa? >>I also placed the other planets and applied the major dasa and bhutki progressions which i know is incorrect. I'm not sure what you mean by that sentence. Can you explain? thanks, Therese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2007 Report Share Posted June 23, 2007 Therese Sorry for the confusion. I primarily use Fagan/Bradley. But when you asked the question of which one is better, I " Saw " that Krishna was more powerful. To explain how a person " Sees " the best definition is one from Don Juan, the books by Carlos Castenada. Astrology is my passion, my astro mentor thinks I " see " more than I read a chart. Instead of using the moon for it's position and mansion, I substituted Jupiter who rules my chart into the major/minor period etc. Angular Uranus setting with Mars conjunct Chiron in Sag rising. Rules/laws? I just avoid them. Kit therese hamilton <eastwest wrote: At 04:56 PM 6/21/07 -0700, Kit Karson wrote: >>Therese I try and stay true to the Western Sidereal godfathers, but psychially I feel Krishnamurti is the best. Kit, do you mean you have an intuitive feeling that K is correct, but you haven't really used that ayanamsa? But you use the Fagan ayanamsa? >>I also placed the other planets and applied the major dasa and bhutki progressions which i know is incorrect. I'm not sure what you mean by that sentence. Can you explain? thanks, Therese Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join 's user panel and lay it on us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2007 Report Share Posted June 23, 2007 At 04:26 PM 6/22/07 -0700, Kit Karson wrote: >...I primarily use Fagan/Bradley. But when you asked the question of which one is better, I " Saw " that Krishna was more powerful. To explain how a person " Sees " the best definition is one from Don Juan, the books by Carlos Castenada... Kit, I'll trust your 'seeing' since I've found the K ayanamsa to be the most accurate. I suppose that's what you mean by 'more powerful.' It's more accurate. >... I substituted Jupiter who rules my chart into the major/minor period etc. How to you get an astrological software program to accept that position? or do you do it by hand? Therese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 Therese Yes I know. If you hadn't asked the question, then I would have never " looked " . I think all astrologers are psychic. Some more than others, I studied with a psychic for 20 years and there are tricks if you will. By using the book " Astrology of the Seers " , I constructed the data manually. I plugged in all the major 7 planet's. Later after more careful reading I knew what I did was incorrect. Try it on some event in your life, let me know results. Kit therese hamilton <eastwest wrote: At 04:26 PM 6/22/07 -0700, Kit Karson wrote: >...I primarily use Fagan/Bradley. But when you asked the question of which one is better, I " Saw " that Krishna was more powerful. To explain how a person " Sees " the best definition is one from Don Juan, the books by Carlos Castenada... Kit, I'll trust your 'seeing' since I've found the K ayanamsa to be the most accurate. I suppose that's what you mean by 'more powerful.' It's more accurate. >... I substituted Jupiter who rules my chart into the major/minor period etc. How to you get an astrological software program to accept that position? or do you do it by hand? Therese Take the Internet to Go: Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 27, 2007 Report Share Posted June 27, 2007 Hi, All, I'd like to share this pearl re constellational astrology I ran across tonight: <http://www.blavatsky.net/theosophy/judge/articles/astrological.htm> Here is the text: " ASTROLOGICAL Over the ambitious signature of " Magus " a correspondent asks in your July issue, " What is planetary influence and how does it act on man? " " Nemo " in his reply answers other questions but fails to answer this one. Not being myself a Magus I will not assume to fully describe planetary influence, since to do so would lead us into realms quite beyond our comprehension. But we will get a better idea of the subject by recollecting that the ancients always considered the " ambient " - or entire heaven - at birth, as being that which affected man, and that planets were only the pointers or indices showing when and where the influence of the " ambient " would be felt. The modern astrologers, following those great leaders, but unable to grasp the enormous subject, reduced the scheme to the influences of planets. They have thus come to leave out, to a great extent, influences cast by powerful stars, which often produce effects not to be sought for under planets: " When such stars have rule nor wise nor fool can stay their influence. " The planets were held, rightly as I think, to be only foci for " the influence of the whole ambient, " having however a power of their own of a secondary nature exercisable when the ambient influence was weak. When London was burnt a mighty star - not a planet - had rule, and Napoleon was prefigured by a star also, his fall being due in fact to the aspect of the heavens as a whole, and not to the ruling of Wellington's significator. A slight accident might have thrown the power of the latter out of the horary field. Similarly, the cyclic vicissitudes of this globe will not be show by any planetary scheme, but by certain stars that fix the destiny of poor Earth. When they have their day and term the wise man will be unable to rule his own stars or any others. William Q. Judge Lucifer, September, 1888 " Best, Don Ridgway , therese hamilton <eastwest wrote: > > At 04:26 PM 6/22/07 -0700, Kit Karson wrote: > >...I primarily use Fagan/Bradley. But when you asked the question of which > one is better, I " Saw " that Krishna was more powerful. To explain how a > person " Sees " the best definition is one from Don Juan, the books by Carlos > Castenada... > > Kit, I'll trust your 'seeing' since I've found the K ayanamsa to be the > most accurate. I suppose that's what you mean by 'more powerful.' It's more > accurate. > > >... I substituted Jupiter who rules my chart into the major/minor period > etc. > > How to you get an astrological software program to accept that position? or > do you do it by hand? > > Therese > 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.