Why western astrology is no longer relevant

[Guest guest]

I don't know if it is true, but surely an interesting thing to

discuss. I found this on http://www.osfa.org.uk/axis.htm

 

 

WESTERN ASTROLOGY - WHY IT IS NO LONGER RELEVANT!

 

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE VEDIC (SIDEREAL) ZODIAC AND THE WESTERN

(TROPICAL) ZODIAC

 

by Prash & Vela

 

 

Home

Founders

Readings

Online Course

Bookstore

 

 

 

 

 

It is important to know what differentiates Vedic Astrology from the

more well known Western Astrology.

 

Vedic Astrology or Jyotish (its Sanskrit name meaning Jyoti - Light

and Isha - Lord) is based upon the Sidereal Zodiac as opposed to the

Tropical Zodiac used in Western Astrology.

 

Although the Sidereal Zodiac was used by Western Astrologers like

Ptolemy in the beginning, over the course of time a more symbolic

zodiac was adopted which is astronomically inaccurate.

 

This difference between the two zodiacs is called the " Ayanamsha " .

The Ayanamsha takes into account the revolution of the earth's axis,

a phenomenon in Astrology known as the " precession of the

equinoxes " .

 

To explain this in the simplest way possible the earth spins(wobbles

to be more precise) on its own axis in a conical motion and takes

approximately 25,800 years to complete one revolution. It means that

every 2000 years the position of the vernal or spring equinox, which

marks the beginning point of the first sign of the zodiac Aries is

always changing and moving forwards in time.

 

Consequently the pole star also changes every few thousand years as

seen in the figure below.

 

 

 

When a person born today has the Sun at 10 degrees in Aries using

the Tropical Zodiac, in actual astronomical reality the Sun will be

23 degrees backwards placed in the sign of Pisces.

 

For example when the Sun used to move into Aries on the 21st of

March at 200 A.D. today it will enter the sign of Aries around the

14th of April. When the Sun moved into the sign of Scorpio on the

22nd October at 200 A.D. today it will enter the sign of Scorpio

around the 14th of November.

 

This the reason why the present day

SUN-SIGN ASTROLOGY is COMPLETELY WRONG.

It is a complete joke in more ways than one - it has very little to

do with Real Astrology. It is time that it was erased from

public/media consciousness.

 

The Sidereal Zodiac used in Vedic Astrology is astronomically

accurate because it takes the shifting of the earth's axis into

account when calculating the longitudes of the planets and

constellations.

 

The Tropical Zodiac used in Western Astrology is a Symbolic Zodiac

based upon the position of the planets and constellations as they

were in the sky 2000 years ago.

 

The Sidereal zodiac is the real zodiac as it actually appears in the

sky at any given moment.

 

In order to convert a Western (tropical) horoscope into a Vedic

(sidereal) horoscope one needs to subtract the current ayanamsa from

the Tropical longitudes of the planets and signs to get their

Sidereal positions. Because the earth's axis is always changing its

position the ayanamsa changes slightly every year.

 

In January 1, 1900 the ayanamsa was 22 degrees 27 minutes 59

seconds.

 

Today the ayanamsa is 23º 52' degrees.

 

There are various ayanamsas in use today. There are some

disagreements on the actual measurement of the ayanamsa or

longitudinal difference between the two zodiacs. The most popular

and widely accepted ayanamsa in India was introduced by N.C. Lahiri.

He calculates the precessional rate to be around 48 seconds per

year.

[Guest guest]

Re the web-site article by Prash and Vela

 

Well, it is accurate according to the current understanding of Indian astrology and it is not inaccurate astronomically, but there are still some controversial matters here, such as how long this cycle actually takes and if it is a cycle at all, or if it is rather an oscillation.

 

So if you want to know if it is true, then technically yes as far as we know..

 

The difficulty is first that the authors seem to have no understanding whatever of the viewpoint of Western astrologers and to deliberately polarize this situation and create anger is basically foolish.

 

I only practice Indian or Vedic astrology myself, but I know numerous Western astrologers and it is very clear to me that astrology means something different to them. If they want to use Vedic or Indian techniques and appreciate the benefits of the science then I encourage their interest.

 

Western Astrology and traditional Indian astrology are two different appproaches to dealing with human problems. To say one or the other is wrong will not help any common understanding to grow.

 

Regards

 

Gordon

[Guest guest]

Dear All:

 

I'd like to say a few words about this discussion.

 

Though I don't believe in the expression: 'no longer relevant', I do

believe that Western Astrology should come to revise it's method

of calculations.

 

Right now, the 2 systems are only 23 degrees apart, so in many

people's cases, the 2 systems do kind of speak to the real

person.

 

But in another 1400 years, or so, when the Western system is

another 23 degrees different, there will be no longer even, any

close resemblance between one's Western & Eastern charts.

 

There are, however, several qualities of Western Astrology that I

believe are very important.

 

#1, the most important benefit of Western Astrology, is the

believe in growth, transformation and improvement.

 

Western Astrology believes in improving one's situation and life,

and the Eastern system has a lot to learn from this 'progressive'

principle.

 

Also, Western Astrology has kept the ideas of 'astrology' alive

and well, in the minds of literally millions of people, and because

the Western calculations have been close enough that in many

cases, people really do 'relate' to their Western charts, then, to

that extent, Western Astrology has indeed, been very helpful.

 

Ultimately, a new and improved, even modern, truely modern

science of Astrology has to be evolved....

 

and my guess is...

that it will include what we'll eventually come to think of as really

the Best of the West & East....

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Mark Kincaid

 

 

founder 'Nature's Astrology'......

 

 

 

In , GWBrennan@a...

wrote:

> Re the web-site article by Prash and Vela

>

> Well, it is accurate according to the current understanding of

Indian

> astrology and it is not inaccurate astronomically, but there are

still some

> controversial matters here, such as how long this cycle actually

takes and if it is

> a cycle at all, or if it is rather an oscillation.

>

> So if you want to know if it is true, then technically yes as far as

we

> know..

>

> The difficulty is first that the authors seem to have no

understanding

> whatever of the viewpoint of Western astrologers and to

deliberately polarize this

> situation and create anger is basically foolish.

>

> I only practice Indian or Vedic astrology myself, but I know

numerous

> Western astrologers and it is very clear to me that astrology

means something

> different to them. If they want to use Vedic or Indian techniques

and appreciate

> the benefits of the science then I encourage their interest.

>

> Western Astrology and traditional Indian astrology are two

different

> appproaches to dealing with human problems. To say one or

the other is wrong will

> not help any common understanding to grow.

>

> Regards

>

> Gordon