|
Author
|
Topic: Help! Astrological b-day OR Numerical?!
|
hutchie
Knowflake Posts: 20
From: Toronto, Ontario Canada
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted April 05, 2004 01:31 PM
 
Hi Guys! I was born just before midnight - January 28, 1974 EST. Astrologers have told me that my actual astrological birthdate is the 29th because it WAS the 29th using Greenwich mean time...you dig? So... in numerology - should I calculate my life path etc. using the 28th or 29th? Thanks gang! IP: Logged |
Aselzion
Moderator Posts: 830
From: Peabody, MA USA
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted April 05, 2004 08:35 PM
Greetings...You use you actual date of birth in the TIME ZONE in which you live. If your birth time is 11:59pm on 1/28/74 then you use the 28th. If you were born at the stroke of midnight, which is actually the first hour of the 29th then you use the 29th, but your question implies that the actual birthdate is the 28th. GMT is only used by some in calculating planetary positions for a birth chart... but your actual birthdate for Numerological reasons is what it says on your birth certificate. That applies even if you don't like the numerological interpretation for that particular day... sorry! If you were supposed to use the GMT date, you would have been born IN THAT TIME ZONE. Make sense? In the Light...
A  ------------------
"The ALL is MIND; the Universe is Mental." *** The Kybalion IP: Logged |
Eleanore
Knowflake Posts: 220
From: North Carolina
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted April 05, 2004 08:35 PM
I think the birth chart is cast for whatever date, time, and place you are born, so using only Greenwich time to me doesn't make much sense. I would use the date I was born on considering the timezone I was born in, thus in your case, I would use the number 28 for numerological analysis.
Just my thoughts on the issue. Maybe someone else will give you a better reason for or against.  IP: Logged |
hutchie
Knowflake Posts: 20
From: Toronto, Ontario Canada
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted April 06, 2004 09:54 AM
Thanks for the quick, informative responses! 28 is not so bad actually. I was supposed to be born on the 4th which is apparently a heavy number to be saddled with...I bailed early to avoid that fate It's my name number that is bad news bears - 18. Ugh. Thanks again! Susan IP: Logged |
Aselzion
Moderator Posts: 830
From: Peabody, MA USA
Registered: Nov 2002
|
posted April 06, 2004 12:30 PM
Greetings...Well.. 18 is not the most light and airy of the numerical vibrations, but it did belong to Jesus of Nazareth, so I don't think that's such a bad thing. Remember in Chaldean numerology, your name number is calculated on the MOST OFTEN USED NAME and not the one that appears on the birth certificate. So.. if people call you Suzie Smith or Sue Smith you calculate the numbers based on that. That is the name that is MOST OFTEN vibrated out into the ethers. I do believe that the BIRTH NAME is valid, but more secondary to the most often spoken name. Hope that makes sense. In the Light...
A ------------------
"The ALL is MIND; the Universe is Mental." *** The Kybalion IP: Logged |
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
