Dear Mark:

Good to see you too.

Yes, the ayanamsha is based on the Middle of Mula Galactic Center. That is what causes the change.

https://ashevillevedicastrology.wordpre ... t-wilhelm/

The article on that site, along with the referenced MP3 from Ernst Wilhelm goes into the details.

Therese:

I saw some of your comments above. I've thought for a long time about this research problem you bring up. I use the tropical zodiac with Parashara Techniques and Jaimini Techniques, and started this about 4 years ago, after I read an article by Mr. Wilhelm. At the time I was totally against it and considered he was a heretic and totally going against an established tradition. However, his logic and reasons stuck with me, and I began to experiment with his calculation settings. After about 6 months of refusing to admit what I was seeing using these different settings I finally had to concede that he was definitely on to something. Since that time I've used Tropical Zodiac with Middle of Mula Galactic Center Ayanamsha and Sidereal Nakshatras because I could not refute my personal results with it compared to the way I had been doing it for about a decade using sidereal zodiac.

Anyway, I'm not saying this to get into an internet debate with you about it. Your points are very clear above, I simply wanted to share with you my brief reasons for switching.

Now, onto the point of research. I'd genuinely like your thoughts on this. There are so many variables to assess even one area of a person's life astrologically. How would you propose to compare the efficacy of the zodiacs. Many people call for research, and say "where is the research, you can't go on your own personal experiences!" Yet when I say, "where is your research? or are you just going off of your own personal experiences? because I would like to model mine after yours." All I hear is crickets.

You statements are very articulate as I imagine your mind is too, so you sincere thoughts on how to approach this would be most welcome.

I'd thought about taking 10 or more charts and hiring a sidereal vedic astrologer and then a tropical vedic astrologer to assess both and then compare the accuracy. However, that could get expensive quick for a single individual to fund. Then I considered that no two astrologers follow a similar system (even if they use the same zodiac!), so that throws a wrench in the research. Then when I personally have compared charts using both settings, its easy to find a reason for why a person experiences one circumstance using either zodiac. For example, one person might highly identify with Leo as ascendant, and maybe in sidereal they are a Leo ascendant. Yet when you switch to tropical, we see their ascendant lord goes INTO Leo, and there Atmakaraka is the Sun! Both of these would give a solar Leonine influence.

My point is, there must be some variable and approach that can be zeroed in on and compared using similar agreed upon Parashara techniques yet comparing one angle of tropical to one of sidereal.

Once I can determine a clean method of delineation I am open to this research. As I've said many times before, I personally do not care which is correct, I care which one gives the best results. I have stuck with tropical since making the switch, because of the increased positive feedback to my accuracy from clients.

Since I know there are sidereal astrologers that have done wonderful work, and tropical astrologers who have done the same, I wonder if there might be something more to all this than just the math and dogmatic sectarianism.

Your thoughts are welcome.

Ryan Kurczak wrote:

(...) However, his logic and reasons stuck with me, and I began to experiment with his calculation settings. After about 6 months of refusing to admit what I was seeing using these different settings I finally had to concede that he was definitely on to something. Since that time I've used Tropical Zodiac with Middle of Mula Galactic Center Ayanamsha and Sidereal Nakshatras because I could not refute my personal results with it compared to the way I had been doing it for about a decade using sidereal zodiac.

Thank you for your detailed post, Ryan. Let me begin with a statement that may surprise many siderealists. I do accept that important rhythms are linked to the equinoxes and solstices, but I don?t believe those points should be used to mark zodiac signs for astrological use. I set up equinox and solstice charts myself, but I place those points in the sidereal chart.

Now, onto the point of research. I'd genuinely like your thoughts on this.

For research I?d begin with the basics. Take some charts with known factual histories, and look at the planets in signs: most especially domiciles and exaltations. Compare the sign positions in the two zodiacs. (The ascendant degree is key to important planets in the chart.) Kenneth Bowser and I have our differences, but he made a beginning with this approach on a recent Kepler College webinar. He took the charts of women who are considered to be exceptionally beautiful and compared planets-in-signs in their tropical and sidereal charts. Naturally since this is Kenneth Bowser, the sidereal charts had the well placed planets.

So I can present many similar examples. What are the planetary sign positions for those who are exceptionally successful? Or who are well known in their fields? Or who have had exceptionally tragic lives? For research we have to zero in specifics for starters.

There are so many variables to assess even one area of a person's life astrologically. How would you propose to compare the efficacy of the zodiacs.

Isn?t this up to you to provide a demonstration for even one individual horoscope of how you use techniques? I can provide plenty of research based on planets in domiciles and exaltation. That is beginning at ground zero before advancing to more complex techniques.

Also I have files of planetary and ascendant positions at sign junctions to show the change from one sidereal sign to another. I?m working on this project at the moment, and there seems to be support for Shastiyamsas. The problem is that this research is very time consuming, and there is work piled up now in several areas of my life.

I'd thought about taking 10 or more charts and hiring a sidereal vedic astrologer and then a tropical vedic astrologer to assess both and then compare the accuracy.

That is much too general an approach for astrological research. It would immediately turn into a psychological hodgepodge of useless conclusions.

Then when I personally have compared charts using both settings, its easy to find a reason for why a person experiences one circumstance using either zodiac. For example, one person might highly identify with Leo as ascendant, and maybe in sidereal they are a Leo ascendant. Yet when you switch to tropical, we see their ascendant lord goes INTO Leo, and there Atmakaraka is the Sun! Both of these would give a solar Leonine influence.

This brings up the key problem that signs are not understood correctly in the sidereal zodiac. I?ve explained this on my web site and in posts here on Skyscript. Mostly sign interpretations in the sidereal zodiac have been incorrectly copied from tropical sources. Of course these incorrect interpretations don?t appear in classical texts, but have unfortunately made their may into contemporary Jyotish texts. So sidereal sign interpretation has become a God awful mess for today's students.

My point is, there must be some variable and approach that can be zeroed in on and compared using similar agreed upon Parashara techniques yet comparing one angle of tropical to one of sidereal.

Using Parashara techniques at the onset is jumping the gun. First we have to look at planets-in-signs in relation to known life events as I suggested above. Or analyze the placement of the ascendant lord or some equally precise point of the chart. Then we have to take only one Parashara technique at a time, and examine it in a number of similar charts. (Say, charts of those with AA birth data who have accumulated vast wealth.)

Once I can determine a clean method of delineation I am open to this research. As I've said many times before, I personally do not care which is correct, I care which one gives the best results.

I agree with the concept of being neutral about results. I?ve always chosen techniques and a zodiac that give the most accurate results. Thus I spent ten years as a tropical astrologer, a year or two or three (don't remember) as a western siderealist, then changed to India's astrology. I went through three ayanamsas with testing (Fagan-Allen, Lahiri, and Krishnamurti) and have settled on Krishnamurti as the most accurate for now. Also I don't believe we can fully understand sidereal astrology without a study of recent Hellenistic and Classical translations.

I have stuck with tropical since making the switch, because of the increased positive feedback to my accuracy from clients.

It would be very helpful if you could give an example or two of this accuracy. But it would be necessary to post the birth data of the person for a comparison.

It's good that you use the tropical zodiac because for comparative zodiac research it?s necessary to have astrologers in both camps. I?ve given my thoughts above. Where would you like to start? I think, however, that if you haven?t spent time on my website, it would be helpful to do so in order to understand my perception of sidereal signs. It would be helpful if we exchanged our birth data. If you want to do this, please send a PM.

Thanks,

Therese

Therese Hamilton wrote:Ryan Kurczak wrote:

(...) However, his logic and reasons stuck with me, and I began to experiment with his calculation settings. After about 6 months of refusing to admit what I was seeing using these different settings I finally had to concede that he was definitely on to something. Since that time I've used Tropical Zodiac with Middle of Mula Galactic Center Ayanamsha and Sidereal Nakshatras because I could not refute my personal results with it compared to the way I had been doing it for about a decade using sidereal zodiac.

Thank you for your detailed post, Ryan. Let me begin with a statement that may surprise many siderealists. I do accept that important rhythms are linked to the equinoxes and solstices, but I don?t believe those points should be used to mark zodiac signs for astrological use. I set up equinox and solstice charts myself, but I place those points in the sidereal chart.

Now, onto the point of research. I'd genuinely like your thoughts on this.

For research I?d begin with the basics. Take some charts with known factual histories, and look at the planets in signs: most especially domiciles and exaltations. Compare the sign positions in the two zodiacs. (The ascendant degree is key to important planets in the chart.) Kenneth Bowser and I have our differences, but he made a beginning with this approach on a recent Kepler College webinar. He took the charts of women who are considered to be exceptionally beautiful and compared planets-in-signs in their tropical and sidereal charts. Naturally since this is Kenneth Bowser, the sidereal charts had the well placed planets.

So I can present many similar examples. What are the planetary sign positions for those who are exceptionally successful? Or who are well known in their fields? Or who have had exceptionally tragic lives? For research we have to zero in specifics for starters.

There are so many variables to assess even one area of a person's life astrologically. How would you propose to compare the efficacy of the zodiacs.

Isn?t this up to you to provide a demonstration for even one individual horoscope of how you use techniques? I can provide plenty of research based on planets in domiciles and exaltation. That is beginning at ground zero before advancing to more complex techniques.

Also I have files of planetary and ascendant positions at sign junctions to show the change from one sidereal sign to another. I?m working on this project at the moment, and there seems to be support for Shastiyamsas. The problem is that this research is very time consuming, and there is work piled up now in several areas of my life.

I'd thought about taking 10 or more charts and hiring a sidereal vedic astrologer and then a tropical vedic astrologer to assess both and then compare the accuracy.

That is much too general an approach for astrological research. It would immediately turn into a psychological hodgepodge of useless conclusions.

Then when I personally have compared charts using both settings, its easy to find a reason for why a person experiences one circumstance using either zodiac. For example, one person might highly identify with Leo as ascendant, and maybe in sidereal they are a Leo ascendant. Yet when you switch to tropical, we see their ascendant lord goes INTO Leo, and there Atmakaraka is the Sun! Both of these would give a solar Leonine influence.

This brings up the key problem that signs are not understood correctly in the sidereal zodiac. I?ve explained this on my web site and in posts here on Skyscript. Mostly sign interpretations in the sidereal zodiac have been incorrectly copied from tropical sources. Of course these incorrect interpretations don?t appear in classical texts, but have unfortunately made their may into contemporary Jyotish texts. So sidereal sign interpretation has become a God awful mess for today's students.

My point is, there must be some variable and approach that can be zeroed in on and compared using similar agreed upon Parashara techniques yet comparing one angle of tropical to one of sidereal.

Using Parashara techniques at the onset is jumping the gun. First we have to look at planets-in-signs in relation to known life events as I suggested above. Or analyze the placement of the ascendant lord or some equally precise point of the chart. Then we have to take only one Parashara technique at a time, and examine it in a number of similar charts. (Say, charts of those with AA birth data who have accumulated vast wealth.)

Once I can determine a clean method of delineation I am open to this research. As I've said many times before, I personally do not care which is correct, I care which one gives the best results.

I agree with the concept of being neutral about results. I?ve always chosen techniques and a zodiac that give the most accurate results. Thus I spent ten years as a tropical astrologer, a year or two or three (don't remember) as a western siderealist, then changed to India's astrology. I went through three ayanamsas with testing (Fagan-Allen, Lahiri, and Krishnamurti) and have settled on Krishnamurti as the most accurate for now. Also I don't believe we can fully understand sidereal astrology without a study of recent Hellenistic and Classical translations.

I have stuck with tropical since making the switch, because of the increased positive feedback to my accuracy from clients.

It would be very helpful if you could give an example or two of this accuracy. But it would be necessary to post the birth data of the person for a comparison.

It's good that you use the tropical zodiac because for comparative zodiac research it?s necessary to have astrologers in both camps. I?ve given my thoughts above. Where would you like to start? I think, however, that if you haven?t spent time on my website, it would be helpful to do so in order to understand my perception of sidereal signs. It would be helpful if we exchanged our birth data. If you want to do this, please send a PM.

Thanks,

Therese

Very good information Theresa. These are good ideas to get started. I'll also check out your website as I am interested in your description of how sidereal astrologers might be misunderstanding the rashi indications. It's interesting how astrologers can move through different methods, for example, you starting tropical then going sidereal and others starting sidereal and moving tropical. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

Really interesting thread - best one in ages.

Whether Sidereal, or Tropical - astrology is so much easier to apply in hindsight.

The true test is in prediction; portending future events.

Any astrological research simply must include this.

Ryan Kurczak wrote:

It's interesting how astrologers can move through different methods, for example, you starting tropical then going sidereal and others starting sidereal and moving tropical. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

Until Ernst Wilhelm made the switch from sidereal back to tropical (as he began with tropical years ago), the migration was almost always from tropical to sidereal....maybe always. In the early days of the Fagan school, these converts became almost fanatical in their devotion to sidereal. Their research was precise and meticulous, but they paid the most attention to calculation and return charts rather than signs of the zodiac as such.

The major problem today for those interested in India's astrology is that proponents mostly insist on staying with the square varieties of Indian charts. This is a major block to students and astrologers whose brains are trained to see sky charts as circular. At the same time Indian software and some recent books published in India are including circular diagrams. I want to say to western Jyotish astrologers: Wake up!! Here in the West start using circular charts."

Saturnhead wrote:

The true test is in prediction; portending future events.
Any astrological research simply must include this.

Saturnhead, would you include in prediction the following types of tests?

An astrologer is presented with two sets of charts and has to tell which chart(s) belong to stunningly attractive people and which belong to people considered very unattractive? (Of course value judgements enter here, but AstroDatabank does include these two categories.)

Or a set of charts where the astrologer has to tell which person is a "street person", basically living in poverty, and which person has accumulated great wealth and has been hugely successful?

As we know, India's astrology includes chart patterns for wealth and beauty.

We have three good sources for planetary yogas:

B.V. Raman's Three Hundred Important Combinations
Ernst Wilhelm's Core Yogas
Dr. K.S. Charak's Yogas in Astrology

Predicting specific future events as such is problematic because planets can manifest in so many different ways.

Yes, Therese - using Yoga?s could be a minefield.

I?d start simple; using Jaimini and the upcoming British election.

Wilhelm has correctly predicted 8/10 American elections using Yogada?s and the Vimshottari Dasa.

The D1, D3 & D9 varga charts would throw up different Rasi aspects for both the Tropical and Sidereal zodiac.

Maybe someone can think of a way to test the super accurate Kalachakra dasa against the closing poll time of 10pm, 7th May 2015.

I guess one would have to rectify the 4 main leaders birth times through the D40, D45 & D60 vargas to ensure super accurate data.

This study could then be applied to previous British election data.

Just some thoughts.

Hi to everyone

I m new to this forum, and I have switched from sidereal signs to tropical about 5 years ago, like Ryan, whom I know from the E. Wilhelm forum (Hi Ryan!)
I have been learning and practicing Jyotish since 96 or so, after about 10 years as a tropical astrologer. I also 'know' Therese, having had correspondance with her in the mid 90s, Hi Therese !

I nearly dropped astrology in 2008, 2009 because the sidereal signs presented too many problems. I was using the Systems Approach at the time. It was frustrating.

One reason for wanting to use tropical again for readings was that it was easier to feel people using tropical. My intuition invariably caught on the tropical delineations. The psychological work done in the 20th century astro in US and Europe had been and still is invaluable.

Another reason for going back to tropical, and I wanted tropical using also Jyotish, was that I was following the work of psychics and intuitives and claivoyant for years, and they only guessed tropical signs, never felt anything matching sidereal signs.

I have never seen sidereal astrologers being able to make, to my mind, accurate assesment of a chart using only the rasis. In fact Choudhry often answered to the question : what does a planet in a sign means : It does not mean anything !! Which always seemed the dumbest answer.

I am using the full PArasara teachings and Jaimini in my practice and I am just much more confident and clear headed. My own chart is also easier to read with my sun , Asc and Moon sign etc. I had been trying to convince myself that the sidereal signs had any validity for 10 years.

Parasara gives good indications for Rasis. Gender, elements, Pitta Kapha, Vata, directions, feet of Rasis, Night or Day strength, friendship of planets, guna, there is just a lot of things for comparison.

Having worked now for 5 years on things such as medical astrology, I am much more confident with tropical, using the full spectrum of methods described in Parasara, Jaimini, Vargas and so on.

There are easy things that can be checked. Venus is very important for recovery, potency, virya, regeneration. If venus is in Debilitation in the Rasi and in trimsamsa, it will invariably show a weak capacity for recovering damaged tissues and organs, slow growth, longest time for rebuilding strength and so on. It will show weak capacity for digesting and using food in the intestinal tract and gaining energy from it.
So venus is either in mulatrikona in Libra, or in debilitation in Virgo. Its an easy check. I invariably find people with strong venus having strong bodies, and vice versa with weak venus, weaker bodies. All things being equal naturally.

AStrology will still remain difficult. AS the Yukteswar quote by Therese says, there are many obstacles for mathematical and philosophical understanding using astrology.

Pierre

Hi Pierre!

Do you happen to have the dates we corresponded? I vaguely remember a "Pierre," but my sense of time has long departed. If we corresponded via email, I probably still have our correspondence on floppies somewhere.

As for zodiac signs, as I've said on my website and other places as well, the observed psychology of the tropical signs is correct for the underlying sidereal signs. So if you copy, say, tropical Aries traits to sidereal Aries, they will be totally wrong. So it may be better to use the tropical zodiac rather than make the mistake of saying that sidereal Aries is similar to tropical Aries. (And so on with the other 11 signs.)

You wrote:

So venus is either in mulatrikona in Libra, or in debilitation in Virgo. Its an easy check. I invariably find people with strong venus having strong bodies, and vice versa with weak venus, weaker bodies. All things being equal naturally.

I have Venus in Virgo (both zodiacs), and have never had much physical strength, though in my later years I don't have the usual health problems older people have. But I'm not a good example since my Venus is in the Tropical-Sidereal overlap area.

I would like to see some of your examples of the tropical zodiac working better. Can you give maybe two or three examples with birth data so we can look at the charts in both zodiacs?

Pierre, nice to see you here! I hope you will be able to provide examples that will generate some interesting discussion. Ryan said he was interested in research, but he has disappeared from the forum.

Therese

Hiello again

Hi Therese. Hope you are good ! We corresponded you and I in late 96-97. I believe you left for India around mid-97ish. and we stopped.

Ok I will try to find some charts that make it clear cut. But its something all of us can do.
We just have to be rigorous with our undertanding of technique, methodology, apply ourselves to understanding how it works. Parasara, and its something that Ernst Wilhelm has demonstrated, taught a whole system, an integrated astrology. The various ideas relate and feed on others methods. For instance some of the Shad Bala feeds SOME aspects of the avasthas, and SOME other of the Shad balas feed and appreciate SOME aspects of the Yogas quantification. Its not an easy new age thing, because it has its roots in the vedic philosophy, so working with the Bhagavad Gita for instance, and other vedic texts, has help me relate and undertand different concepts.

At this point I dont even believe its possible to have 2 zodiacs, one tropical one sidereal. Just one zodiac is enough, and its already plenty, what with the enormous quantity of methods, 16 vargas, 5 school of avasthas, Shad Balas, Ishtas, Yogas, 9 conditional dasas etc etc. Then you have Prashna astrology, which seems quite a bit like the predecessor to so called western horary astrology. WHich is why I am here on this forum because Deborah Houlding maintain this superb site.

I dont see how a sidereal zodiac can be constructed. I mean, there is no astronomy for it. Nobody agrees on the damn ayanamsa. There is nothing astronomucally significant at the beginning of the said sidereal zodiac. How on earth can you base your whole zodiac on one silly star ? Is there a fixed star anywhere that I missed ? Is there anywhere a body of lore on Spica, or Revati that justifies anchoring a zodiac on it ? Did we all drop from Spica before the Flood and came here on a crystal ship ? There is precious little lore about these stars anywhere that I know of. To this day Indians celebrate the beginining of the year on the wrong date and do spiritual purifications that should be for the northern entrance of the Sun crossing into capricorn on dec 21, but dont because their Gurus tell them its jan 14th. Sri Yukteswar told them a century ago that its wrong but they still do it.
Even worse, if you are a famous astrologer, and want to make a name for yourself, then you gotta have your own proprietary ayanamsa. Then you cant discuss anything with anyone because you got your own ayanamsa and noone will agree with it so their is no discussion possible.

I could go on and on. Therese I just visited your site and read about polarity. Its late so I would write to you about that another time. But I beelieve there is one system of polarity and not 2, and its not very complicated. I dont see how it works in the sidereal, but its really late and I gotta sleep, take care you all,
Pierre

Pierre wrote:

Ok I will try to find some charts that make it clear cut...
We just have to be rigorous with our undertanding of technique, methodology, apply ourselves to understanding how it works. Parasara, and its something that Ernst Wilhelm has demonstrated, taught a whole system, an integrated astrology. The various ideas relate and feed on others methods. For instance some of the Shad Bala feeds SOME aspects of the avasthas, and SOME other of the Shad balas feed and appreciate SOME aspects of the Yogas quantification. Its not an easy new age thing, because it has its roots in the vedic philosophy, so working with the Bhagavad Gita for instance, and other vedic texts, has help me relate and understand different concepts.

Right there in that paragraph I see major problems. When you combine so many different concepts, anything can seem to work. This is not being rigorous so much as a type of Piscean layering that can result in confusion. So for research we have to begin with simple and isolated concepts. Let?s take a particular planet in fall or exaltation and describe how that planet works in maybe three charts?? (It helps emphasis if the planet makes an aspect to the Moon or ascendant.)

How on earth can you base your whole zodiac on one silly star ? Is there a fixed star anywhere that I missed ? Is there anywhere a body of lore on Spica, or Revati that justifies anchoring a zodiac on it ?

I just discovered yesterday that a section of the Indian Calendar Reform Report is online. This is the government group that decided that zero Aries is 180 degrees from Spica (the Lahiri ayanamsa). So a great deal of research has gone into the selection of Spica as the all important star that defines the initial point of the sidereal zodiac. Here is the link to Part C of the Indian Calendar Reform Committee Report (1955, reprinted 1992):

https://archive.org/details/HistoryOfCa ... aCommittee

Choose the PDF view. I think it?s 138 pages long. I didn?t want to call it up again to save my computer from juggling memory. I printed out a number of pages that related to the nakshatras and Surya Siddhanta.

I could go on and on. Therese, I just visited your site and read about polarity. Its late so I would write to you about that another time. But I believe there is one system of polarity and not 2, and its not very complicated. I don?t see how it works in the sidereal.

Please see the Skyscript link below, Pierre. The concept of gender (polarity) is extremely important and runs through all cultures. The sidereal understanding aligns with universal symbolism. The tropical concept of polarity has been invented to go along with the odd-even arrangement of signs as astrologers have observed them to operate.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8448
Sidereal Gender and Universal Symbolism

But let?s get on with some of your concrete examples (with birth data) of how one or more planets operate in their exaltation or fall. This is only for starters. Planetary placement in rasis is about as basic as astrology can get.

Therese

Hi Therese

Oh its fantastic that you found the whole Calendar report, bravo !! Thanks for putting it up here ! I been looking for that thing forever.
Its really odd to write again to you, as if I was 18 years younger.

About technique, unfortunately, dignity is only one thing. Dignity such as exalt, fall etc gives solid information. But for predictive purposes other important matter are needed. I wish it were as simple as predicting with just one thing. Why do you think that Parasara, or Prashna, give all those techniques...
But I ll try make is simple :

case 1 : female 08-06-62, 11:23 time zone 5w00, 71w15, 46N48, Quebec City. Tropical Asc is 29 Libra.

Serious menstrual pain all her life. Stocky and overweight body

Venus rules gonads. Venus is in debilitation in D1, D7, D9.
venus is ALSO, its important the AK, in virgo, for which Atma karaka Jaimini gives overweight and intestinal fires and itches. (which are happening a lot to her)
Now I just reviewed her Sidereal chart and a case may be made for similar symptoms. Its not always simple to compare. ..

Case 2 Female 12-01-96, 9h07, Montreal, time zone 5w, 73w35, 45n35
Asc Cap 2

Physical weakness, lazy body, very little muscle tone and strength, things feel always heavy etc. She hates sport.

Jup is debilitated in Asc in Cap. The ruler Sat is also debilitated in Aries in 4th. Saturn and Capricorn rule the muscular system.
Incidentaly this girl also has serious menstrual problems and venus is weak in D30 and D7. (For D30 I use the real chart, not the Lords Chart)

Thats a start, take care,
P