posted July 21, 2015 10:17 PM            

I been aware of this for some time, but the Vedic astrology match making thread inspired me to let the cat out of the bag. There are actually a few astrologers out there that use Sidereal Nakshatras and Tropical Signs. Not just because they like it better, but because there is a legitimate rational for this… There’s a Vedic astrologer called Ernst Wilhelm who has researched the issue, and astrologer Lada Duncheva is another Vedic astrologer using this method as well (she has a big presence of you tube). This totally has some interesting implications for matchmaking, and synastry using Vedic astrology.

Here’s an overview of what I’ve learned form Ernst Wilhelm’s research…

Alright, basically about a thousand years ago the beginning of tropical zodiac and the beginning of the sidereal Nakshatra Ashvini were in perfect alignment. Now as we know the vernal equinox precesses through the constellations gradually over time. However, Ernst Wilhelm studied contradictory statements in old Sanskrit texts that revealed that ancient Vedic astrologers between 00-600 AD had somehow lost the knowledge of precession.

As a result the beginning of the nakshatra Ashvini was incorrectly identified with the 0 degrees Aries, instead of 0 degrees Aries being tied to the spring equinox. Over time, because of this, 0 degrees Aries has moved farther and farther away from the spring equinox due to being tied to a constellation rather then the equinox. This in fact my have been an error that occurred on the part of Vedic astrologer in India about a thousand years ago… And Vedic astrology is much older then that.

Ernst Wilhelm is not the only one that’s noticed either. There’s a certain celebration that traditionally in India is meant to be celebrated at the solstices when the Sun goes into Capricorn. At this point the Sun appears to change direction and slowly move north which is considered auspicious. However in modern times people are now celebrating this too late. It’s now celebrated when the Sun goes into sidereal Capricorn which is 23-24 days before the actual solstice. Apparently various scholars in India have objected to this because the celebrations are not occurring on the actual solstices, but instead 23 -24 days too early. Ancient texts confirm that these celebrations are meant to occur on the actual solstices, where the Sun appears to change direction at the beginning of Winter, and moves into Capricorn.

In 1956 a law was actually passed after a big meeting of scholars to hold the celebration at the tropical solstice (when the Sun moves into tropical Capricorn). However this law has not been enforced and due to tradition people are still celebrating the northward movement of the Sun three weeks to early. The celebration has now lost it’s connection with the astronomical fact it’s meant to commemorate… The winter solstice.

Also, I’m sure most Vedic astrologers would struggle with the notion that their zodiac is askew. It’s had to admit that during your entire career you’ve be partly operating based on an error. Some would refuse to look at this idea out of pride alone. It would take a tremendous push to change centuries of tradition.

Anyway… So upon discovering all of this, the Vedic astrologer Ernst Wilhelm spent two solid years testing every Vedic astrology technique he knew of, and all of them tested out better in his experience when he used TROPICAL SIGNS. Now he uses sidereal Nakshatra and combination with tropical signs. That means that if you were born a thousand years ago, a person with a 3 degree Pisces Moon could have a different Moon Nakahatra then a person with a 3 degree Pisces Moon now. Due to precession of the equinox the nakshatras behind the signs slowly changes through the centuries. Ernst Wilhelm has now come to the conclusion that only Nakshatras are sidereal (based on the stars), while the zodiac signs may in fact be tropical.

I’ve been considering this and I’m inclined to say that I believe it. I’ve always found that tropical signs explain a person’s personality so much better then sidereal signs. Also Vedic astrologers rely a lot on house placements and nakshatras, so the this astrology could still be somewhat successful even if they are using the wrong sign divisions. In most cases the house placements would not change too much using whole signs.

So what do you think people? Personally I suspect that Vedic astrology in it’s original form really was made up of Sidereal Nakshatras and Tropical Signs. This would impact the calculation of divisional charts, including the navamsha, as well. Actually, if you use tropical signs, the navamsha turns out to be basically our 9th harmonic chart. The whole thing is really fascinating to explore and it makes so much sense to me. I never truly resonated with my sidereal sign placements, and I totally feel like a Capricorn Sun at my core, not a Sag Sun. Even though I have other planets in Sag and have some Sag-like personality traits, my core is Capricornian for sure. The Sun is our central motivation.

If you go to Ernst Wilhelm’s site VALT OF THE HEAVENS, he has a link to listen to an audio giving his explanation on this topic himself, as well as calculator for sidereal nakshatra/tropical sign natal charts and DIVSIONAL charts. He also explains how tropical signs have worked better for him. http://vaultoftheheavens.com/VOTH_ChartCreator/Welcome.aspx

Here’s a link to Lada Duncheva’s Youtube channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/lastrology?feature=watch

posted July 22, 2015 06:32 AM            

For me, Vedic techniques explain far more than any western ones could.

After reading Kapiel Raaj's books (KRS on YouTube) and watching many of his YouTube videos religiously ( I know call me obsessed but I really wanted to get to the bottom of this), I've started to see astrology and the signs through a different light.
His research and teachings have been a profound eye opener for me.

This hunger of mine for knowledge can be perfectly explained through simple Vedic techniques.
My Rahu (Indicating obsession in Vedic) is conjunct Jupiter (9th house lord). Planets in sidereal are still considered to be in conjunction as long as they're in the same sign/same house, no matter the orb.

In western you can't see this because Jupiter and Rahu would be a sign apart and too out of orb to be conjunct, plus Jupiter would be ruling a totally different house.

Then again there are also slight variations between the interpretations for let's say a western Leo and a sidereal Leo.

The western description for Leo is usually deemed as loud, bold, dramatic and gregarious.

The sidereal translation is that Leo has more of a quiet aura, yet still the attention goes to them no matter what. The don't deliberately seek attention and fame, they are given that naturally because of their presence.

Another example would be a western Sag — they are all about philosophizing, expansion, exploring new horizons, etc

The Vedic equivalent of that would be Scorpio, who wants get to the core of things, dig deep, research and attain deeper knowledge.

Same goes for other signs.

I'm not bashing western astrology by any means, but from what I've seen, whatever you find in the western chart could be explained far better and easily using Vedic techniques.

posted July 22, 2015 07:27 AM            

But now that I've discovered Ernst Wilhelm's research, that the sidereal zodiac may in fact just be an ancient error in calculations, it puts things into place in my mind. I think Vedic astrology is great, and if it is being used incorrectly, wouldn't it be so much better if there was a strong movement to correct that mistake.

posted July 22, 2015 07:08 PM            

A bit reading through that ^ now... wanna know more about it and see different views.

posted July 23, 2015 01:54 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Neptunian Venus:
There could be something to it. I can't really say much on that.

But if they did make an error, wouldn't their techniques and predictions be proven uneffective as a result?

---

posted July 23, 2015 02:44 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by mir:
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7030&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

A bit reading through that ^ now... wanna know more about it and see different views.

For myself, the reason vedic astro grabbed me by the throat was this Vasya connection with an impressive accuracy in my own life. In that, certain (seemingly random) Moon signs feel magnetically attracted to others.
So the interconnectedness or plain and simple magnetic forces between individuals took my breath away which as such doesn't leave much room for sign interpretation on a more individual level. It requires a more serious thought to give a clue on what zodiac sign fits best I guess. And as Neptunian said, there might be some difference in sign interpretation with both systems.
But switching this Vasya to a tropical sign level and it all goes up in smoke. That's the experienced reality. At least mine.

---

Yes, I think the Vasya topic is interesting. Lada Duncheva uses this and she's one of those Vedic astrologers using the tropical zodiac. She uses it not just for the Moon sign but also for comparing other planets in her and her partner's chart. She says it works for her too (and she uses tropical).

My Cancer Moon is supposed to be attracted to Scorpio and Taurus Moons (or planets) but it hasn't happened yet. My Cap Sun is theoretically attracted to Pisces and Libra, and my Sag Asc is theoretically attracted to Cancer. Haven't been significantly drawn to any of these yet either. That doesn't mean that Vasya doesn't work. I like the idea of it. And I can see how some of these signs could appeal to me under certain circumstances, especially in relation to my 5th, 7th, and 8th house symbolism. Perhaps Vasya is less about liking someone's style (which is a 5th, 7th, and 8th house thing), and more about how a certain person make us feel.

I looked up a rational for choosing Vasya signs once. The signs we attract are determined by what sign our sign's ruler is debilitated in, what sign's ruler is exalted in our sign, and what other signs share our ruler...

posted July 23, 2015 03:53 AM            

I can't say why it 'worked', but the marriage of eastern philosophy to western design felt somehow right to me.

posted July 23, 2015 06:37 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lotis White:
Not completely, Ernst makes the point that Vedic astrology is a system the places a lot of emphasis on house placements, and Nakshatras. Nakshatras are sidereal in the first place, and the gap between the zodiacs has not always been as large as it is now. It's only in the last few hundred years that the tropical and sidereal zodiacs have been largely out of alignment. My understanding is that most Vedic interpretation techniques are older then this. One point that Ernst Wilhelm made in his audio talk on this is that the Vedic emphasis on house placements and Nakahatras has made it still relatively accurate even if they are incorrectly calculating the signs.

---

posted July 23, 2015 09:29 PM            

quote:

---

Yes, I think the Vasya topic is interesting. Lada Duncheva uses this and she's one of those Vedic astrologers using the tropical zodiac. She uses it not just for the Moon sign but also for comparing other planets in her and her partner's chart. She says it works for her too (and she uses tropical).

---

Ah, that is probably from the video I once found on YouTube. Vasya here was used with the tropical zodiac and I remember thinking; 'wow that's NOT the sideral one, so probably from a girl without much vedic astro knowlegde taking just one part out of their kuta system' lol. (I see the link now you gave / and yes, must be her).

Interesting that it seems to work for her (and others I guess). Taking other planets (such as both Suns etc.) for this to check would also be an option indeed. I will keep an eye on the 'tropical variant' also now.

I see Vasya as a power imbalance between 2 people (which ofcourse doesn't necessarily have to be bad). In fact it's interesting that we can find this vibe when we keep our view restricted to both Moons only (compatibility in vedic is all about the Moons). Not something we can find in our western realm as that's where for example Pluto comes into the pic (I take Pluto with a grain of salt nowadays / feels as: meaningless dot in the sky).

When we look a bit further we find another VASYA variant as part of their kuta system for which even 2 points can be earned (my take: well, if 'vasya magnetic' already proves itself so accurate / then what about the variant for which we even can obtain points!).

Ok, so there are 2 Vasya variants / which both all to do with the Signs and how they relate to each other;

1) Vasya 'Magnetic Attraction' (no points / the one it all started with here)
2) Vasya kuta / Innate Giving (earned points 0,5 - 1 - or max 2)

(the word Vasya means globally 'subjected to' / dutiful)

So, they're globally the same, let's now keep it simple hehe.

So these ^ are the first things I look for when it comes to "power balance".

I'm a vedic libra moon. Virgo/Cap is Vasya (magnetic one) TO mine..

So there are different options that can arise. I first thought about it when I saw the theory behind 'vasya magnetic' from the link you gave. I thought; ok, so the vibe between me and Cap might me a bit different than the one between me and Virgo.

BUT... this ^ (I thought) is all noticeable when we take the OTHER vasya variant into account.

Namely, I already noticed a difference in vibe-experience between me and Virgo and me and Cap. With Virgo it's more a sweet/caring vibe (besides ofcourse the feeling basic fact that they're "subjected to" ). While with Cap it's inclined to go into a more unpleasant fated direction.

Let's look at the difference when we take the other Vasya variant into account;

With Cap - we come to a 0,5 point.
Cap is also vasya to Libra there that would make it 1 point. BUT since Cap is at-the-same-time ALSO "food" for Libra we have to substract 0,5 from 1 which then comes to a 0,5 score (low).

(I think that's ^ all-together the worst scenario you can have / ofcourse if the rest of the charts aren't exactly compatible)

With Virgo - we come to a score of 2. Which means that we're both Vasya TO each others Moon sign.

(definitely more balance ^).

posted July 24, 2015 01:51 AM            

About Pluto,

posted July 24, 2015 06:25 AM            

Nevertheless I can`t support that Vasya theory from own experience neither from the couples I know. Well, it seems to be a bit of "hit-and-miss" but not a reliable factor for me and my database.

Having a Capricorn Moon (sidereally) I SHOULD be attracted to Pisces and Libra.
Doesn´t hold true for me though, at least not in terms of MAGNETIC attraction. I do have a certain liking there, but hardly anything extraordinary.
I seem to be much more attracted to Aries and Sagittarius. even sidereally. lol
#

(The Aries one might be explained by my Navamsa Moon in Leo though. and my navamsa Jupiter in Pisces maybe the Sagittarius-attraction, especially with Jupiter being the karaka of husband, and lord of the 5th house in navamsa)

My parents are definitely of the magnetic attraction sort yet,

Mum`s Moon in Virgo should be attracted to Gemini/ Libra - my Dad has Aries Moon though
his Navamsa Moon is in gemini though - hu? Can it be that our family responds more to the interconnection between the natal and Navamsa than cross connections within the Rasi itself?

my Dad`s Moon in Aries - should be attracted to Aquarius - Capricorn
my Mums moon in Virgo - no hit, BUT her Navamsa Moon in Aquarius!
Now THAT is interesting to me!

-----------------------
No Rasi hit for my brother and his girlfriend either.

No hit in RAsi-Navamsa either, though they have a link via opposition, which is probably not valid but interesting

-------------------------------------------

There is a hit for my friend and her husband
his Capricorn Moon attracted to her Pisces Moon. which makes sense

She has a Capricorn Moon in Navamsa as well.

--------------------------------------------

for another of my friends

no hit, but again the opposition reappears

posted July 24, 2015 02:41 PM            

But now I'm curious... what happens if you take those couples' Vasya to a TROPICAL level?

posted July 24, 2015 03:10 PM            

my Dad has Taurus-Moon, my Mum has Virgo-Moon.
doesn`t match either.

in the 9th harmonic my Dad`s Moon in Capricorn - not a direct match but again the opposition comes up

posted July 25, 2015 05:49 AM            

A few of the main things that do change is compatibility between the lords of the Moon, and Vasya based on sign matching.

posted August 02, 2015 07:14 AM            

Part of the idea here is that the 27 Nakshatras are the true sidereal zodiac.

The constellations that are named Aries, Taurus, Gemini, and even Ophiuchus, are just labels artificially projected onto star configurations. These labels actually don't symbolize anything intrinsic about these star constellations. Meaning, the constellations named after the western zodiac signs are not a real astrological force… The sidereal influence in astrology falls to the 27 nakshatras alone.

The zodiac signs Aries, Taurus, Gemini, etc are not sidereal but tropical. They are created in relation to the earth's rotation cycle around the Sun, and not in relation to constellations. Other planets are placed in signs according to where they fall in relation to Earth’s path around the Sun. So the signs are connected with the astronomical path of planets around the Sun, and how this cycle is divided. The changing of seasons on Earth are a symptom of this cycle.

Nakshatras = Constellations
Zodiac signs = The division of Earth’s cycle around the Sun.

posted August 04, 2015 06:37 PM            

- Using the Sideral zodiac we determine the true place of the Sun/Planets according to the FIXED STARS or CONSTELLATIONS.
- Using the Tropical zodiac we determine the true place of the Sun/Planets according to the 12 tropical zodiac parts.

But doesn't the Vedic way here ^ sound more universal somehow?

And so, can we say that one would be more valid than another? And if yes, in what form?

I also read an interesting page on the site of (not the least) Martin Gansten which got me thinking (below one part of this page / but the whole page reading is a must!);

*****

As late as 1573, Francesco Giuntini (known in Latin as Junctinus) in his Speculum Astrologiae advocated the use of sidereal positions in annual revolutions, ascribing the idea, ironically enough, to Ptolemy:

Moreover, there are some astrologers who, in order rightly to adopt Ptolemy’s precepts in astrological predictions, prepare the figures of the heavens and the places of the planets according to the motion of the eighth sphere, and indeed by this method: The true place of the Sun is to be sought, which at the day of completion [of the year] is taken from the ephemerides; next, the apparent precession of the vernal equinox is to be subtracted from that [place]. Thus remains the true place of the Sun reckoned from the first star of Aries, and not from the intersection [of the ecliptic] with the vernal point, which place of the Sun the ephemerides verily do not display by the common [mode of] calculation. All remaining [places] are completed by the customary method for fashioning a figure of the houses. The places of the planets having been calculated from the ephemerides in this way, the true precession is likewise to be subtracted from the same, at the time duly fixed, and what results constitutes the true place of the planet according to the fixed stars or constellations, not according to the twelfth-parts [of the tropical zodiac], which we commonly use. This method in judgments, moreover, which agrees in the highest degree with experience, we have defined in our treatise on the judgments of nativities.
http://www.martingansten.com/ts.php

What do u think of that ^ ? As I said I don't fully get it all (the big pic) but it does sound convincing somehow.

posted August 05, 2015 03:35 AM            

Here's David Cochrane's take on this topic...

posted August 06, 2015 07:09 PM            

The right link here;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHGPCUogn-w

(ow well ^ that isn't any better ;D )

posted August 08, 2015 08:23 PM            

quote:

---

If you go to Ernst Wilhelm’s site VALT OF THE HEAVENS, he has a link to listen to an audio giving his explanation on this topic himself, as well as calculator for sidereal nakshatra/tropical sign natal charts and DIVSIONAL charts. He also explains how tropical signs have worked better for http://vaultoftheheavens.com/VOTH_ChartCreator/Welcome.aspx

---

So I thought, let's calculate the nakshatras and see if they correspond with the usual results I get all-over-the-place.

But that's NOT the case. And I listened a bit (just a bit - I wish I could READ that audio on his site! - not my mommy language u know) to what he had so say and if I'm not mistaken then the nakshatra degrees might differ a bit? Some degrees??

Well, I thought my ASC (in the Sideral 9,5 Leo) would fall in the nakshatra of MAGHA as Magha everywhere is given from 0'00 Leo to 13'20 Leo. And from 13,20 Leo it would be the nakshatra PURVA PHALGUNI. But his calculation gives my ASC in the latter Purva P. Can it really be SUCH a difference of almost 4 degrees?

And my friend has his Sideral Moon in 17'05 Aqua. So that should be in the nakshatra of SHATABHISAJ as that ones given from 6'40 Aqua to 20'00 Aqua everywhere. But he suddenly gets a PURVABHADRAPADA nakshatra (which starts at 20'00 Aqua)!

Wow! And so there are many other changes, also when it comes to the padas! This is really confusing!

[At least my Moon nakshatra stays the exact same with Vishakha pada 1. - every pada covers 3'20 deg]

What do I have to believe now? Are all the rest of the calculators online just one big calculated mess? Or is HIS way of calculating completely dependable in relation to the tropical zodiac only? Also: You won't notice any consistency in naks. degree shiftings.