posted March 25, 2016 10:00 PM            

I still cannot believe there is such a drastic rift.

Most of these articles stress the astronomical differences, and the contest for supremacy is often counched in these terms (that the sidereal or tropical is more "real") but to me that is almost besides the point. To me, it should be a simple matter of observation: how do people behave when they are born at a certain time? And how do the transits FEEL to us?

Why is it so hard to get our observations in alignment about this?

I've heard that the tropical/Western zodiac is more fixed to our own solar system, consistent with the equinoxes and seasons, while the sidereal/Vedic/Jyotish is more about the stars billions of light years away.

So, it seems tropical would be more "here and now" tangible while Vedic would be more...cosmic? Yet, Vedic seems to dig more into every particular of one's life, and it's not abstract at all.

I'm surprised that I haven't found what I'm looking for yet: a scholarly work on how the two systems can be integrated or at least separated under different context umbrellas, such as "Use Western for personality analysis and Vedic for predictions." Something like that.

I might add more links, and of course I'm open to hearing everyone's thoughts on the matter.

posted March 26, 2016 11:32 AM            

the main difference is that western astrology fixes 21st march as the day when sun enters 0 deg aries, but on that day when u view from the earth, the sun is at 6 deg pisces,

infact any tropical planet at any given point of time if try to locate in space with a telescope will not be seen in the sky in the tropical position, but it will be seen in the sidereal position

i still havent got a logical explanation to wrap my head around, but having said that i respect both systems

vedic astrology needs a more holistic approach, whereas western astrology needs a good mathematical and scientific approach

maybe if any forum member gets a chance to travel to london, they can go to greenwich which has the observatory which records planetary positions for the ephemeris and ask some experts out there to give a logical easy to understand explanation of this astronomical school of though- tropical zodiac and then share it on the forum

posted March 26, 2016 01:49 PM            

Vedic is a lot more concrete and accurate (IMO) in showing actual life events, including details. Ie, Vedic can show you that you'll likely marry a tall, tanned man from a different ethnic background who is poor and has issues with his family! LOL

I DO, personally, think that there are few people that can read vedic charts totally accurately. I think that the science of Vedic astrology in particular is so vast, that it takes someone of a very advanced spiritual stature to be able to see how all of the aspects come into play.

Another thing, is that most charts are not rectified. I have read through some very prominent Western and Vedic astrologers alike, that the "physical" birth time, even if accurately recorded, does not always show the "soul" birth time, Ie, the time that will show correct events on the chart.

The truth of the matter is, that even with all of it's details, my original Vedic chart showed some things that were just plain wrong. It also neglected to show very huge parts of my life. I feel that my rectified time really paints an accurate picture of me.

posted March 26, 2016 06:08 PM            

I don't mean to sound argumentative below, I'm just trying to study the facts about these systems.

quote:

---

Originally posted by anekksadh:
the main difference is that western astrology fixes 21st march as the day when sun enters 0 deg aries, but on that day when u view from the earth, the sun is at 6 deg pisces,

---

It's not exactly fixed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_equinox

quote:

---

Originally posted by anekksadh:
infact any tropical planet at any given point of time if try to locate in space with a telescope will not be seen in the sky in the tropical position, but it will be seen in the sidereal position

---

Yes, true.

Astro.com has argued that Vedic astrology was formed back when the constellations were more in alignment with the seasons...back when the constellation of Aries actually did correspond to the Western sign of Aries...and that we are missing the point if we think the constellations are the key, not the seasons.

I dislike the tone of this article but it's affected my thinking, regardless...so I'll share it:

quote:

---

Today’s “Vedic” astrology and calendar calculation are purely sidereal, i.e. they ignore the seasons, equinoxes, and solstices. In contrast, the Vedic texts attribute great importance to the seasons-based tropical year and its cardinal points.[20] Śatapathabrāhmaṇa 6.7.1.18 says that the year is based on the seasons.[21] According to Aitareyabrāhmaṇa 18.18, the summer solstice is the midpoint of the year. The text describes a method for determining the date of the solstice by Sun observations.[22] From Kauṣītakibrāhmaṇa 19.3 we learn that the winter solstice ideally occurred on the new moon of the month of Māgha. On both solstices sacrifices were offered to the gods.[23] The oldest astronomical text book of India, Vedāṅgajyotiṣa 5ff., teaches that the beginning of the month of Māgha ideally coincides with the winter solstice and a new moon at the beginning of the lunar mansion Dhaniṣṭhā.

Today’s Vedic tradition ignores all these statements, with grotesque consequences. They do not celebrate the “northward path” (uttarāyanam) of the Sun on its correct date around 21 December, but in mid-January on the day of the Sun’s ingress into sidereal Capricorn (makarasaṃkrāntiḥ . Nowadays, the month of Māgha falls into January and February and has nothing to do with the solstice anymore. As a result, from the point of view ancient Vedic religion, all religious holidays, rituals, and sacrifices that are bound to a calendar date are celebrated on “wrong” days. This is actually a catastrophe, because the rituals must be performed on their correct dates in order to become efficient. Some Indian scholars, such as Avtar Krishen Kaul and Darshaney Lokesh, are well aware of this problem and fight for a tropical reform of the Vedic calendar.[24]

Also interesting to note: According to current Indian astrology the zodiac begins with Aries and the lunar mansion Aśvinī. But in Vedic texts, lists of the lunar mansions always start with Kṛttikā, which corresponds to the Pleiades in sidereal Taurus. Besides, Kṛttikā is the most often mentioned lunar mansion in the Vedas, whereas Aśvinī hardly ever appears. The reason for this prominence of Kṛttikā in the Vedas lies in the fact that, in ancient times, approximately from 2500 BC on, the vernal equinox was located in this lunar motion.[25] In astronomical and astrological texts of Late Antiquity, the lunar mansion Aśvinī (and Aries) became the starting point of the ecliptic, and the reason was, again, that the vernal equinox by that time had moved on into this lunar mansion. The equinoxes and solstices were placed at the beginnings of Aries, Cancer, Libra, and Capricorn.[26] Incidentally, the vernal point has since crossed the whole lunar mansion of Revatī and is currently in Uttarabhādrā. Nowadays’ “Vedic” astrology therefore works with a zodiac that was defined by the equinoctial points of more than 1500 years ago and never updated.

From all this it becomes clear that even though we do not know much about the “astrology” of the Vedic period, it must have been radically different from so-called “Vedic” astrology as we know it today.

---

However, maybe it HAS been updated...I'm sure it has...astrologers must have been paying attention to how people are, and weaving that into their understanding of the Nakshatras.

Some, at least, must be doing that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by anekksadh:
vedic astrology needs a more holistic approach, whereas western astrology needs a good mathematical and scientific approach

---

posted March 26, 2016 06:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by missblyss:
I started studying Western Astrology around the age of 18 an Vedic around the age of 20. To me, Western is SO telling of the psychology of someone, their innate, underlying thought patterns and how they process and view the world.

Vedic is a lot more concrete and accurate (IMO) in showing actual life events, including details. Ie, Vedic can show you that you'll likely marry a tall, tanned man from a different ethnic background who is poor and has issues with his family! LOL

I DO, personally, think that there are few people that can read vedic charts totally accurately. I think that the science of Vedic astrology in particular is so vast, that it takes someone of a very advanced spiritual stature to be able to see how all of the aspects come into play.

---

I actually listened to part of Kapiel's (is that his name?) career reading for you that you posted, and I LOVE his logic and how he ties everything together. So clear and impressive.

quote:

---

Originally posted by missblyss:
Another thing, is that most charts are not rectified. I have read through some very prominent Western and Vedic astrologers alike, that the "physical" birth time, even if accurately recorded, does not always show the "soul" birth time, Ie, the time that will show correct events on the chart.

---

For what it's worth, Kannon McAfee from this site does professional rectifications with that same philosophy

I'll add in the link later (can't find it at the moment.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by missblyss:
The truth of the matter is, that even with all of it's details, my original Vedic chart showed some things that were just plain wrong. It also neglected to show very huge parts of my life. I feel that my rectified time really paints an accurate picture of me.

---

I feel the same with my Western chart though I've only ever had an anecdotal birth time. It just works so well, with a certain time (about ten minutes off from when I was told I was born.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by missblyss:
I tend to resonate most with Ernst Willhelm's views on astrology, using Western degrees with the Vedic nakshatras, also read like a traditional Vedic chart. I use my rectified time, but it may be fun for you to check it out. I know it is not a method used by many Vedic astrologers, but just simply looking by what was most accurate for ME- I definitely believe this was!
http://vaultoftheheavens.com/VOTH_ChartCreator/Welcome.aspx

---

Will definitely check it out! Thank you!

Edit: I just finished his essay, The Mystery of the Zodiac, where he encourages astrologers to learn both Tropical and Sidereal Astrology and help figure out what is accurate:

quote:

---

We cannot, unfortunately, rely on the available ancient texts, as there are too many ambiguities present in them. The ancient texts can only be relied upon to encourage us to test the Zodiacs ourselves and make up our own minds. With computers being available to us, we can test this better than any astrologers of the
past 2000 years, better than any astrologers existing from the time that this problem of the Zodiacs originated.

---

posted March 26, 2016 06:42 PM            

quote:

---

There are a number of issues with birth chart accuracy which relate to the assumptions often made, that a recorded birth time with a specific minute is synonymous with accuracy (it is not), or that a parent using their watch to exactly time the birth guarantees an accurate birth chart (it does not). These assumptions are based on other underlying assumptions, that birth happens in an exact moment (instead it is a process), and that the moment the baby is delivered (pushed fully from the mother’s womb) guarantees an accurate birth chart (again, it does not).

All such practices for timing birth exactly and recording it are good practices. However, these are starting places. The correct Asc sign and degree is not determined by a biological process of the mother’s body but by the incoming soul’s moment of decision which occurs within a 5-hour time window around the delivery moment (from about 4.5 hour pre- to 1/2 hour post-delivery).

So the Ascendant as conventionally calculated for birth charts is a provisional one until the exact Asc for the person can be determined.

You will express yourself, function, and become what you intended, not what standard astrological practice says you ‘should’ be.

---

posted March 27, 2016 12:34 AM            

"Does the Tropical or Sidereal Zodiac Work Better for Vedic Astrology"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4W3r9qoHtE

And David Cochrane, harder for me to listen to because he babbles and goes off on tangents...but I'm trying:

posted March 27, 2016 09:56 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
This man is articulate and watchable ~ Ryan Kurczak:

"Does the Tropical or Sidereal Zodiac Work Better for Vedic Astrology"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4W3r9qoHtE

[/URL]

---

posted March 27, 2016 10:10 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by missblyss:

I tend to resonate most with Ernst Willhelm's views on astrology, using Western degrees with the Vedic nakshatras, also read like a traditional Vedic chart. I use my rectified time, but it may be fun for you to check it out. I know it is not a method used by many Vedic astrologers, but just simply looking by what was most accurate for ME- I definitely believe this was!
http://vaultoftheheavens.com/VOTH_ChartCreator/Welcome.aspx

---

posted March 30, 2016 12:27 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by missblyss:
I got my rectification done by Kannon!

---

posted April 03, 2016 02:44 PM            

That makes sense, because Vedic astrology developed organically, based on its own preliminary assumptions. It was all the sophisticated outgrowth of the original sidereal observations.

Further observations were built upon that: when this happens (sidereally), then that will happen (sidereally.)

In that sense I can see the limitations of substituting tropical.

Yet at the beginning of all this, weren't the sidereal and tropical merged? Before precession started dividing the two. So I think SOME of the original sidereal assumptions may apply better to the tropical, because they were tropical phenomena originally...

Such as, the observation of what happens seasonally, here on earth. The tropical emphasis on equinoxes and solstices is important but so far I don't see how that is incorporated into Vedic whatsoever (and while I'm VERY new to Vedic, I've listened to other more advanced practitioners who are saying this, so I'm going by trust.)

I agree that each astrologer needs to develop their own way of reading, using their own systems...whatever works best for them. After all, we have different minds and will be stronger with juggling certain concepts than others.

But philosophically I also like to think there has to be a way to forge a unified Truth, to make astrology more scientific. Yes, I agree with you, that's important and could be of such tremendous value to this planet, if used properly. Perhaps we need to establish more basic spiritual harmony before such a powerful tool comes into existence, or else it could be used too negatively.

posted April 04, 2016 05:11 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
@nikki

That makes sense, because Vedic astrology developed organically, based on its own preliminary assumptions. It was all the sophisticated outgrowth of the original sidereal observations.

Further observations were built upon that: when this happens (sidereally), then that will happen (sidereally.)

In that sense I can see the limitations of substituting tropical.

Yet at the beginning of all this, weren't the sidereal and tropical merged? Before precession started dividing the two. So I think SOME of the original sidereal assumptions may apply better to the tropical, because they were tropical phenomena originally...

Such as, the observation of what happens seasonally, here on earth. The tropical emphasis on equinoxes and solstices is important but so far I don't see how that is incorporated into Vedic whatsoever (and while I'm VERY new to Vedic, I've listened to other more advanced practitioners who are saying this, so I'm going by trust.)

I agree that each astrologer needs to develop their own way of reading, using their own systems...whatever works best for them. After all, we have different minds and will be stronger with juggling certain concepts than others.

But philosophically I also like to think there has to be a way to forge a unified Truth, to make astrology more scientific. Yes, I agree with you, that's important and could be of such tremendous value to this planet, if used properly. Perhaps we need to establish more basic spiritual harmony before such a powerful tool comes into existence, or else it could be used too negatively.

@Randall,
Thank you

---

there was i time i dint know my accurate time of birth. i was drawing charts based on an incorrect time using western astrology (tropical) i felt that is was accuarate because i fell under aquarius asc everything applied.
eventually i managed to get my accurate time of birth from the hospital, i was disappointed because according to my correct time i was pisces asc.
however a few years later i rediscovered vedic astrology and according to vedic astrology i was aquarius asc i was happy again haha. i dont match my tropical chart at all.

however we cant judge by ascendant alone there are nakshatras as well.

i normally read western horoscopes for my vedic moon and ascendant and find it accurate esp julianne victoria from youtube.

posted April 04, 2016 06:15 AM            

what i have noticed is that vedic astrology tradition has been preserved well in books before the common era, books like brihat parashar hora shastra, jaimini updesh sutras, vishnu purana, shiva purana are books written before the common era and used by students of vedic astrology today to study

shiva purana and vishnu purana are actually more to do with mythology but almost every method/teaching of vedic astrology comes from these books, comes from the mythological/spiritual principles written in these books, thats what i have discovered after studying under my guru for the past few months,

there are exhaustive books on the astronomical/mathematical calculations of astrology in books like surya siddhanta

but when it comes to western astrology i maybe wrong but i dont find any iconic book written before the common era which are being followed by western astrologers today, i think most of the books/concepts of western astrology have been written by famous authors and astronomers in the past 200-300 years, i feel western astrology principles which are said to have originated in the hellenstic period in egypt have not been preserved and the knowledge has been scattered and unlike vedic astrology scriptures they havent been compiled together,

the books on vedic astrology have calculations for just about every aspect/event of life and its all mind boggling and drains your mind if u sit to study them,

it is difficult to understand how these 2 systems began to differ from each other, the confusion of the ayanamshas/precession of equinox etc, but i dont let that come in the way of me exploring both these systems even deeper,