skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

will the real zodiac please stand up?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3365
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:13 pm    Post subject: will the real zodiac please stand up? Reply with quote

i have started a new thread in response to a couple of posts..

AJ wrote:
Therese Hamilton wrote:
James, I'm happy to see you posting sidereal charts here and there on Skyscirpt because I think we've reach the time in the 21st century when we need to be seriously considering the zodiac question. But many astrologers continue to misunderstand the meaning of sidereal signs. So I'm posting a reminder here.

The relationship of signs in the two zodiacs was well understood by first generation astrologers of the Fagan school. For example, Rupert Gleadow wrote in Your Character in the Zodiac (1968):

Quote:
People fail to realize that sidereal Cancer cannot possibly have the same character as the old tropical Cancer. For a person’s character is not going to change just because he is classified under a different sign. And the fact is that tropical Leo and sidereal Cancer are two different ways of referring to the same part of the sky, so obviously the character of the people born under that piece of sky must be the same, whether we label them Leo or Cancer.

More of a general observation that I think is pertinent to what you have to say here. The disparity between the zodiacs is easily observable if you have followed over the years as Western astrology has spiraled downward to become ever more "sign" oriented to the point that all of the sign descriptions become hazier and overlapping in an ever-deepening psychobabble melange that can account for almost anything. Just pick and choose.

I read a lot from contemporary western astrologers fitting planet meanings to the sign. Signs and houses do not define the planet IMO.

There are exceptions in contemporary western literature to be sure. (A bit older than contemporary actually.) Stephen Arroyo, Rob Hand, and Liz Greene come to mind, but on the whole, that's what I think for what little it is worth.

Bit of a rant I'm afraid... I could defend my POV somewhat if anyone is truly interested. On the other hand, wouldn't it actually be a waste of time?
The preacher preaching to the choir.
A voice crying in the zodiacal wilderness.
Does a sidereal tree falling in the tropical forest make a sound?
😉
🐱‍👤


Therese Hamilton wrote:
AJ wrote:
Quote:
I read a lot from contemporary western astrologers fitting planet meanings to the sign. Signs and houses do not define the planet IMO.

Using houses and signs to define a planet is (in my view) a common failing of Tropical astrology. The most obvious mis-application is that many traits of Jupiter have been given to tropical Capricorn. Why, one must ask, do successful winning coaches have an abundance of planetary positions in Saturn-ruled Capricorn?

Traditionally Saturn has been related to a melancholic disposition, solitary habits, fear, sorrow and loss. This recent research by Courtney Roberts supporting tropical Capricorn for success has been discussed in the latest edition (December 2018) of the British Correlation Journal. If the research is valid, Tropical Capricorn is the clear winner for successful American football coaches.

However, research is beginning to provide evidence for the basic energy of triplicities. For example, the Tropical “Air” signs (sidereal Taurus, Virgo, Capricorn–triplicity lords Moon and Venus) are more socially outgoing while the so-called Tropical “Water” signs (sidereal Gemini, Libra, Aquarius– triplicity lords Saturn and Mercury) are more introverted.

Note that two of these signs have links to Saturn (exaltation in Libra and Saturn’s rulership of Aquarius). AJ, you may not have read the paper I sent you which refers to this research, and the adjustments that have to be made for the sidereal zodiac?

But the main point of my earlier post is that sidereal signs of the same name as their Tropical matches cannot have similar energies since they are located in different parts of the sky. This is to counteract the tropical-to-sidereal copying that is appearing in contemporary books on India's astrology. These books are producing a whole new crop of astrologers with a corrupt view of sidereal signs. The Indian classical texts don't have these errors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

James, I have added some editing changes to my last post since you copied it. I don't know if you can re-do your post with my latest additions? No big changes if you can't. I think I just added a note that sidereal Sagittarius is in the same sky area as tropical Capricorn. Oh...I also added traditional traits for Jupiter from Ben Dykes' Introductions to Traditional Astrology (2010).
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm


Last edited by Therese Hamilton on Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:26 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3365
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Thu Jun 13, 2019 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

my response...

astrology is more art then science... i mostly think of it as a combination of the elements of astrology and how one arrives at any type of conclusion on ALL OF IT... i can personally break it down into signs, houses, planets and aspects, but that might not be how someone else would break it down...

all of the astro concepts - i call them concepts, as i think that is what they are - i try on myself.. in my case - i am still scorpio rising and the moon might still be in scorpio for me - depending on the ayanamsa.. where it differs is in the position of my sun - aries tropical and pisces sidereal.. but more importantly then all of this to my mind is the different vantage point that tropical and sidereal have with regard to it all...

tropical is our planet in relationship to the sun and all the planets within the annual cycle of earth around sun... sidereal is the sun in relation to the stars in the band that the earth follows around the sun.. they are 2 different ways of referencing it all..

i really don't see the problem, aside from the fact the tropical zodiac is not a zodiac as i understand the word, but more a way of dividing the annual cycle of the earth around the sun...

the fact that their is confusion in this area about what the true meaning of the signs are, would seem to go with it all..

in the short amount of time i have been involved in reading indian astro lit, it is my impression that their is an undue emphasis on signs... now, maybe as aj or therese see it, there is an undue emphasis on the signs in tropical...

i think everyone has to figure it out on their own.. i really don't see this conversation ever going away on some level, but it would be nice if it wasn't used as a stumbling block and interfered with some first hand astrological examples that transcend the issue from the point of view of ''this is the one correct system' sort of thinking..

show us the astro logic in an interpretation of a chart.. let it stand on its own like that.. i see so little actual demonstration of interpretations of events, or charts and a lot of talk that is secondary to this... i advocate for living by example and using examples to share with others on the astrological insights you have, as opposed to getting bogged down in technical questions like this one... i can see the relativity in it all.. i guess this means my logic is flawed!! my 2c's!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AJ



Joined: 01 Nov 2018
Posts: 152

Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2019 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

james_m wrote:
in the short amount of time i have been involved in reading indian astro lit, it is my impression that their is an undue emphasis on signs... now, maybe as aj or therese see it, there is an undue emphasis on the signs in tropical...

[quote="james_m"]
Actually traditional Indian astrology is just the opposite, there is less emphasis on signs and more on houses.

Quote:
show us the astro logic in an interpretation of a chart.. let it stand on its own like that.. i see so little actual demonstration of interpretations of events, or charts and a lot of talk that is secondary to this...


I think more than any "posters" I have done that. I think of this as an attack that is not warranted. I stand by all my statements and predictions. Note predictions, no one currently that I have read here has put ther neck on the block in this respect.

james_m wrote:
i really don't see the problem,...

If there is no argument, why start a whole new thread if it's not? Did not mean to prick a nerve. Note that my goal here is not to pursue the sidereal vs tropical debate. It's really a waste of time, better minds than mine has performed many a dropping defending both sides of the argument. I am very fine with your explanations James. I feel both zodiacs have merit just that the sidereal gives better predictive results and there are distinct real-world reasons why. Another time to talk about this perhaps, maybe when the Sa/Ke event is over.

Therese: Sorry I have not read in depth the articles you generously shared with me. Time has been short lately with the serious transit afflictions that we are currently facing. Arranging puja and yagyas for clients has been very overwhelming consuming much of my free time. Coming to the forum has been a pleasant distraction actually.

Be safe. I am taking a vacation from the forum for awhile.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been saying for years that Tropical observation of the energies of triplicities and polarities is a foundation for signs that was never part of India's astrology. But this concept has been misunderstood with the illogical copying of traits to signs of the same name. That's all.

One has to understand how the concept of polarity (male and female) was very different in ancient times than what is accepted in Tropical parlance today. Students of Jyotish don't understand this. Actually the ancient western (Aristotle) concept of male and female agrees totally with India's definition of masculine and feminine energies.

Basically it's Sun/Jupiter (internal self-motivation) as opposed to Moon/Venus (external focus and relationships). So when these planetary factors are matched with signs, polarity in the sidereal zodiac is reversed as far as internal/external expression is concerned. Male (odd) signs are more internally focused, female (even) signs are more comfortable interacting and relating to others.

Work out the numerology for odd/even numbers to see the connection. One = unity, the whole; Two = division, relationship...and so forth. The Sun is complete within itself. The Moon has to rely on the light of the Sun to be visible. So the Moon performs and relates, looking for reactions.

It's not a contest. It's different explanations for basic energies. One modern tropical; the other ancient western/Eastern sidereal.
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3365
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2019 2:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AJ wrote:
If there is no argument, why start a whole new thread if it's not?


aj - the other thread topic was on a decan system and was clearly getting derailed as i perceived it...

AJ wrote:
Actually traditional Indian astrology is just the opposite, there is less emphasis on signs and more on houses.


they are bundled together so very closely as i understand it... whole sign houses is a good name for it as it captures both.. but maybe this is not the only way it is done with indian astrology and just a beginners look at it.


AJ wrote:
I think more than any "posters" I have done that. I think of this as an attack that is not warranted. I stand by all my statements and predictions. Note predictions, no one currently that I have read here has put ther neck on the block in this respect.


aj - you are correct in your first sentence, but not in the 2nd one... i continue to express my gratitude for your comments. i am sorry you were so easily offended as that wasn't my intent... enjoy your break from the forum..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Fri Jun 14, 2019 4:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

James wrote:
Quote:
Show us the astro logic in an interpretation of a chart.. let it stand on its own like that.. i see so little actual demonstration of interpretations of events, or charts and a lot of talk that is secondary to this... i advocate for living by example and using examples to share with others on the astrological insights you have,

Courtney Roberts has clearly demonstrated by a study of champion football coaches that tropical Capricorn is the dominant sign. (But this hasn't been replicated yet.) She didn't offer a logical explanation for her findings. Logic isn't a strong point among astrologers. If astrologers had to support predictions with logic, astrology would be a different kind of animal. (This comment isn't directed to any astrologer in particular.)
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AJ wrote:
Quote:
[Replying to James] If there is no argument, why start a whole new thread if it's not?

Reading over posts on this thread it seems obvious that James wrote his initial post in haste with strong feelings, which has resulted in a confusion of his thoughts as I read it. The problem with this topic is the title which is contentious: “Will the real zodiac please stand up?”

Right away this title is setting up a contest rather than providing a platform to courteously discuss differences in the expression of signs in the two zodiacs. (Actually, James, I have trouble grasping what you were trying to say in your initial post. It sounds confusing to me like you really didn’t re-read what your wrote, checking for logical flow.)

James if you are reading Jyotish books that emphasize signs of the zodiac, than this is definitely the nouveau (new) western Jyotish. Traditional texts in India have little or no interpretation of signs. Emphasis is placed on planetary lords of signs rather than characteristics of signs themselves, which has become so popular in western astrology.

As I’ve said before, even Indian authors of contemporary texts are copying meanings of zodiac signs from tropical astrology. The result is that students of Jyotish are learning a corrupted version of India’s traditional astrology and the sidereal zodiac, unless they take time to study older traditional texts. This can take years of effort and concentration.
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3365
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Sat Jun 15, 2019 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hi therese,

i have basically stated all the indian astro books i am reading.. i am usually pretty vocal about it for the reason i like sharing it for others to know about.. sometimes it solicits feedback which i always appreciate...

i don't really see any mileage in arguing the merits of either zodiac personally and my thread title was a quick way of making a joke about that..smarter posters probably just ignore stuff and i would always benefit from doing this too, but i am a slow learner!

i didn't really articulate myself all that well, but i am okay with that.. accidents happen and one either trusts they are in company with others who will offer some slack or they will never say anything! specifically i tried quickly to articulate what i see as some of the limitations in my reading of indian astro literature by saying there is an extreme focus on signs, while it might have been more accurate to say houses.. they overlap given the fact that whole sign houses are what are being used mostly in everything i read..

but there are some really interesting aspects to indian astrology that tropical astrology doesn't have - yogas being one obvious one... at the same time i see indian astrology - as i have so far witnessed it - as completely ignoring aspects, or at least their is little to no mention of it.. on the other hand - rulerships of signs/houses and nakshatras and etc. etc. is very pronounced...

the relationship between planets - friends, enemies and neutrals is very interesting and a challenge to completely understand.. i think of the simplicity of thinking all air signs have something in common getting upended with the rulership concepts.. gemini is ruled by mercury and aquarius is ruled by saturn - all good... and libra is ruled by venus - saturn exalted - and is trine aquarius - again all good... as i look at it closer - these 3 air signs and the 3 rulers - mercury-venus-saturn - all seem to be on good terms with one another, so maybe the concept of the 3 air signs sharing something in common and having an affinity with one another holds up with the friends-enemies and neutrals concept applied to the planets as well...

in this book i am reading - light on relationships - by the same authors of the book - light on life - robert svoboda and hart de fouw - they make many interesting things on the nature of indian astrology, too much for me to go into here...but what i notice is in trying to incorporate data off the nakshatras, it gets very messy very quickly... this is what i pick up from reading this book.. again - there are rulers inside of rulers in the nakshatras which sometimes do or don't align with the '''signs'' they are in.. which is given greater consideration? questions like this might become more apparent to me the more time i spend with it all.. on the other hand, maybe i am going too deep into it...

what is obvious though is that the thought of incorporating aspects is very low on the totem poll.. i find this very interesting especially in light of the emphasis on divisional charts!!! whether one wants to look at 40 degree aspects - noviles - or a navamsha chart - and they want to draw conclusions off of them - what exactly is the difference?? so maybe this is the way indian astrology has of utilizing aspects - in a less obvious way... i am not sure about this.. what i do note from reading this book, is an aspect like a trine 120 is completely over-ridden by rulerships of nakshatras as i read this book.. that is how i am reading it anyway....

but back to the issue of which zodiac... i really think it is a distraction myself, but obviously one that engages a lot of minds and definitely is like honey to a fanatic... if i knew how to take the honey away, or change someone from being a fanatic to being more receptive to letting some fresh insight blow in, i know what i would choose! that is probably the ultimate goal in all this - releasing myself from the wheel of karma is also a part of it... some people are given over to silence and others like myself are more inclined to talk - thus the many posts from me.. i don't think one way is better then the other, but there are many times in my life where i might have benefited from keeping my mouth shut! cheers james
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

James wrote:
Quote:
I don't really see any mileage in arguing the merits of either zodiac..

It shouldn’t be an argument, only an explanation of how signs are understood and used in either zodiac: to promote understanding such as is done in academic circles. Especially now, mutual understanding is necessary when many conferences have tropical, Joytish and western sidereal speakers. This could never have happened before the western classical revival and re-birth of India’s astrology in the west in the 1990s.

Quote:
...and my thread title was a quick way of making a joke about that..

The problem with only the printed word is that we often miss nuances that would be totally obvious in speech.

Quote:
...specifically i tried quickly to articulate what i see as some of the limitations in my reading of indian astro literature by saying there is an extreme focus on signs, while it might have been more accurate to say houses..

I think you might have meant emphasis on house rulerships and planets in houses.

Quote:
but there are some really interesting aspects to indian astrology that tropical astrology doesn't have - yogas being one obvious one... at the same time i see indian astrology - as i have so far witnessed it - as completely ignoring aspects, or at least their is little to no mention of it..

This is something to discuss sometime on the sidereal (Indian) forum.

Quote:
the relationship between planets - friends, enemies and neutrals is very interesting and a challenge to completely understand.. gemini is ruled by mercury and aquarius is ruled by saturn - all good... and libra is ruled by venus - saturn exalted - and is trine aquarius - again all good... as i look at it closer - these 3 air signs and the 3 rulers - mercury-venus-saturn - all seem to be on good terms with one another, so maybe the concept of the 3 air signs sharing something in common and having an affinity with one another holds up with the friends-enemies and neutrals concept applied to the planets as well...

This concept in Indian astrology seems to have a clear relationship to the concept of triplicity lords in Hellenistic astrology. I’ve always believed that western triplcities are the foundation for this particular friend-enemy concept in India’s astrology. India modified the concept somewhat, but the relationship to western triplilcities is clear.

Quote:
but back to the issue of which zodiac... i really think it is a distraction myself,

No, it’s not a distraction. It’s important to understand the foundation and logic of the 12 signs of the zodiac. These was well understood in Hellenistic times, but the logic and meaning of signs have mostly been lost in contemporary astrology.

Other topics you mentioned are better discussed on the sidereal forum. If I’m able sometime, I’ll copy parts of your post to that forum. But right now I don’t have time to get into more discussion.
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3365
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 1:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks therese,

i think you need to get beyond the words unless you want to hook me up on them! there is nothing academic about my approach or thinking... my view is from the street - not an institution! and you do say this - "The problem with only the printed word is that we often miss nuances that would be totally obvious in speech." - YES!

i don't know how another persons imagination works.. i try to keep track of my own... language is very subjective and personal in spite of our attempt to be objective and meet others in some sort of objective universe..

rulerships is a big thing in both tropical and sidereal.. it is fun seeing how it totally changes most of the time if you switch from tropical to sidereal... again it reinforces the artistic as opposed to scientific nature of astrology..

start any thread you want.. i will participate if i feel i can add to it, or feel like saying something! cheers james
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

James wrote:
Quote:
There is nothing academic about my approach or thinking... my view is from the street - not an institution!

I know that James, and this is contrary to my own approach, and what I believe to be the sacred science of astrology....discipline and structure are needed, and a solid foundation in history. This is one of the big questions as to what astrology is which I thnk has been discussed previously on Skyscript. (I didn't think I suggested that your approach was academic.)
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 3365
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 3:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

thanks therese,

it was in reference to this comment you made which i'm at a polar opposite position to -
Therese Hamilton wrote:
to promote understanding such as is done in academic circles.


i really am not into that myself.. but we all have to find our way for ourselves as i see it..

i use my experience in music and how it pertains to academics and their learning... it is very different then actually playing music.. that is why i say this.. from first hand experience playing music and listening to academics pontificating on it... it just doesn't work for me!! i feel the same with astrology... this can be perceived as having blinders on!!

cheers james
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1366
Location: California, USA

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 6:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

James wrote:
Quote:
I use my experience in music and how it pertains to academics and their learning... it is very different then actually playing music.. that is why i say this.. from first hand experience playing music and listening to academics pontificating on it...

This is not the same thing. Could you play music if you knew nothing about the musical scale, notes, rhythm, beat, tone, harmony? Could you know anything about astrology if you had never learned about signs, houses aspects? These are all foundations from our study of astrology.

Suppose as a five year old child you were put in a big room with elementary readers all the way to post graduate text books. Would you know what to do without some instructions in basic reading? I doubt it. Every subject needs a disciplined foundation. Knowledge can't be built on hit-or-miss, amoeba style. Maybe this is something we only come to fully understand in universities. Which returns again to the topic of formal astrological education. In India this often comes from the Guru or dedicated schools. In the west we have certification programs.

And back to the basic question again: Exactly what is astrology??

James, you have made your chart public on forums. Indian astrology works very well for you: Uranus, the rebel or rogue influence, on a navamsa Leo (the King) ascendant. "I go my own way. I don't follow rules made by others."
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Fadi Mazboudi



Joined: 16 Oct 2017
Posts: 40

Posted: Mon Jun 17, 2019 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's the western zodiac!

https://juanestadella.com/Predictive_Astrology_Juan-Estadella_3rd_edition.pdf
_________________
www.FadiMazboudi.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated