Is it wrong to ditch Tropical for Sidreal astrology?

AspieTaurus

Well-known member
When I was a kid I loved going outside at night and look at the stars, and one of the things that struck me is that most of the zodiacal constellations were hard to identify, and did not really look like their labels, the exceptions being Taurus, Gemini, Leo, and Scorpius.

Why do I mention this? Because I suspect that the concept of the zodiac being divided into 12 equal divisions came first and were over time then imposed on the actual sky, and thus the precession of the zodiacal constellations does not matter. Evidence for this is Libra, it was originally considered the claws of Scorpius and only later became a separate constellation to fit the 12-fold division of the zodiac. Thus ever since the Western Zodiac was formalized during the Hellenistic period the "imposed" constellation labels have moved about 30 degrees from the abstract divisions of the sky relative to the spring equinox point, they were originally meant for, but that doesn't mean that the 12 divisions precede along with the constellations since they were originally conceived as set to the spring equinox point.
 

juicey J.

Banned
Problem with the theory of the signs dealing with the equinox and soltice points and the points between such and not the constellations is the fact there are constellations such as argos, pegusus and canis major whose generally affects are based on said constellation (such as canis major and attacks by wild dogs) or pegusus and over estimation and folly (pegusus was thrown into the sea with her rider when they thought they could go to mount olympus and be equal to the gods and is strong in the chart of the sinking of the titanic) and they were pictured/named as such because of having a general affect associated with said image. The tropical zodiac seems to work because the vernal equniox has an aries (the sign which likes to be in the front ahead of everyone) like function (its the start of a new season, its the start of a whole astrolgical system, and its used by many as the starting point and determining point for the astrological age) so that 29 degrees after is the whole sign of aries, 30 degrees after is Taurus, then Gemini, ect.......... It is important to note neither the tropical nor the sidereal matches exactly with the constellations although the sidereal is pretty d@mn close. The tropical zodiac works well enough and I like the idea of a sign falling on the same time of year no matter what period it is and I think this consistancy is tropical astrology's strength. In fact I think this consistany is a reason why an old Taurus with mercury Taurus like farr generally perfers tropical to sidereal. :lol:
Besides its a misconception astrology has to be based on the constellations and stars as for example popular chinese astrology (which, is FAR MORE COMPLEX then those astro dinner mats at chinese restraunts indicate) isn't based on the constellations or planets but set intervals in time. Astrology is primarly a mathmatical/time based system.
 
Last edited:

kainous

Well-known member
It's not necessary to invoke the stars as the explanation for astrology. There may be more physical characteristics, that which flows through us at any time. I'm not going to claim to know what it is, but if there is a chance that we are still missing some luminiferous aether, this may be what causes the effects. There may also be the flow of dark matter through us. I'm not sure, but we cannot guess causality without a means to test. Without causality, we cannot prove whether sidereal or tropical astrology is more correct. There are bound to be effects from the seasons (tropical "solar" astrology) which cannot be discounted at all. The other issue is if there is a medium, in which direction does it move? Does it move with the precession (this is where I have my difficulty). Why then does tropical astrology assume that Mars has a 24° offset in the direction that it activates?

Otherwise, we do have phases. Perhaps there is merit to the phase that planets are from the S.V.P.? Similar to how we define the phase of the Moon to be important in astrology, phases to the Sun of Venus and phases to the S.V.P. are important? These are questions that come to mind.

Chinese astrology uses phases quite often in consideration (phase of ascendant to Sun, phase of Moon, etc.). The only phase it doesn't look at is birth year, which is a multiplication of the Sun by the 12 years average it would take Jupiter to move around the zodiac. Deeper Chinese astrology actually looks at the locations of the planets, and agrees on concepts like the rulership of Venus in Taurus (although they don't use this moniker), etc.

It is not important that these questions be answered in order to continue using astrology. In fact, it's not important for us to have an understanding for the model in which it works. It is only important that we continue understanding the statistical nature of astrology as it mirrors the world that we see. We look for predictable hypotheses (whether psychological, game theory [mundane], weather, etc.) and verification through analysis.
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
although sidereal may not fit personality as much as tropical isn't it more accurate in predicting events?

I believe this depends upon the practitioner and not the system (or model) used. I personally have seen amazing accuracy in prediction from certain Jaimini (Vedic astrology) adepts using the lahiri-adjusted constellational zodiac; but my old teacher Pasha, following the Ankara (Ottoman) astrological tradition and using our tropical zodiac, also was at least as amazingly accurate in predictions as were the Jaimini Vedic adepts.
 

juicey J.

Banned
i feel more scorpio than libra when it comes to the asc... i hate being late for one thing... equally arian and taurean in sun sign... i'm not patient for example... definitely more venusian than arian with venus... hmm... moon definitely more leo than cancer

although sidereal may not fit personality as much as tropical isn't it more accurate in predicting events?

Reason why you feel so equal aries and Taurus is both their ruling planets are angular in your chart and the fact they are your sideral and tropical sun sign respectively only futher fuels such. Oh being puctual is capricorn not scorpio and for you its due to saturn in the 1st.
 
Last edited:

BWDs

Active member
If the Sideral system were in affect I would be an Aries with a Libra asc. and I can most definitely state that is not even slightly plausible or of even any such minuscule possibility as to make me to have any degree of doubt that the Tropical method is the correct application.
Unless the mannerisms,traits, attitudes, actions, reactions and appearances of the signs, of what till now, have been ascribed to be the certified qualification of determining the positive identification of those that are Taurean or a Scorpio and now is being confessed to have had been erroneously stated, attested to and written of repeatedly all along and now, in all certain reality, all of that should have been ascribed all along to be that of those identifiable, conclusive characteristics and traits of the afore mentioned 'Cardinal Signs''.
Sarcasm aside, there is hardly any cause or imaginable conjecture of any possibility as to mis-identify the traits, habits and known profile signatures of the signs of Taurus and Scorpio as to be those of the signs of Libra and Aries...don't try to tell me after 30 years of observational study, analysis, evidence and repeated review and devoted chronicling that all aalong I've been using the wrong set of criteria and traits of certification, identification and authenticity....There's just no freakin way I'm going to be remotely convinced of any but the most remote possibility of that and certainly not to even the remotest degree of probability...I know myself and I also know and have studied and practiced Astrology well enough and long enough as to not have doubts as to my abilities of astrological analysis, evaluation and conclusions as to regarding my skills to evaluate, identify and conclude as to what the traits and characteristics of the Signs of the Zodiac are of conclusive determination...I might admit to about a margin of error of 2 to 5 % but no more than that.
Either I was repeatedly given the wrong instructional informational over the last 30 years or there is some very obscure and irreproachable authority and source of Astrological truths of heretofore unknown existence or of previously unattainable accessibility, to myself and to a multitude of other Astrologers, of whom has now suddenly made themself and said knowledge known ...in which case I most humbly apologize for my ignorance and my delusion of being adequately and correctly educated and now humbly beg to be so privy to the true knowledge and become most benevolently enlightened by your gracious approval and charity.


Your warring posts are definitely Sun in S. Aries, your attitude "I have it all figured out", "I have it all balanced out", definitely Asc S. Libra. Perhaps your aversion towards Sidereal comes from the fact that your S. Sun is exalted in Aries, which would mean that you gravitate more toward the Sun, so you would have a preference for the Tropical conception of Astrology.

As our Sun shares the space with all the Stars, Sidereal astrology should enrich the Tropical and vice versa. As Leo (the Star, Tropical) opposes Aquarius (all the Stars, Sidereal), they complement each other.

Sabian symbols work in the Sidereal scheme as well.
 
Last edited:

nuthatch

Well-known member
For my part, I'm pretty sure I'm not a Cancer at all. I might not fit what some Internet blurbs say about a Leo, but from what I've observed about Leos combined with what I've read, it's pretty accurate. I have the world-building, God-playing impulse; the grandiose fantasies; the dramatic and flamboyant streak. I can be a little pompous and snooty. I care a lot about my appearance. My ego is on the fragile side. And I am DEFINITELY not a Sag rising. I'm, like, painfully, archetypally Capricorn Rising.

I'm with Kainous that it may not necessarily be the stars that determine astrology.

Re. the Virgo examples--that may just be other chart influences, or it may be a Virgo trait that doesn't show up in the description. It's also important, I think, to consider about motivations; the reason a Virgo has for acting wild and extroverted might be quite different from a Leo's reasons.
I've noticed that "unhinged" Virgos tend to be a lot more verbose (Mercury) about it, to provide a lot more self-analysis and justification. And they use the public eye almost to defend themselves, not just for the sake of attention. It also might be a reaction against a feeling of failure or loss of control; one Virgo girl I know said that she felt she'd ****** up so much (by her standards) that she might as well let it all go to hell and stop caring about her image.
Not to say that all extroverted Virgos are unhealthy--not in the least! Some are extremely confident and purpose-driven and believe that they're justified in their world-perfecting missions; they are extroverted because they are unashamed of themselves and want to share their goals with the world. But a Virgo's extraversion is not necessarily a sign of secret Leo-ness.
 

kainous

Well-known member
Nuthatch, you had me until you claimed your ego on the fragile side. That's more of a Cancer quality, instead of Leo, but nonetheless I think that there are differences with the zodiac interpretations that you have to look into when going from Tropical to Sidereal. For instance, Sagittarius has a quality, like Jupiter and like Cancer (exhalation of Jupiter), in which the person cares a whole lot what other's think of them. This is just ONE example that changes when going into sidereal. For tropical to have worked, some of the qualities had to start to blend over the years.

I suppose the one thing that you should ask yourself, and the same was true for me when I was finally coming to the sidereal conclusion, is are you more emotionally sensitive on the inside, or do you straight up think to yourself that "oh, I don't care what they think, they are just jealous!"

P.S. pompous and snooty is a Sag Rising quality.
 
Last edited:

juicey J.

Banned
Leo and Cancer both have fragile egos. Leo has a fragile ego in the sense of they can fall into the trap of putting themselves on such a high horse that when you knock them off it.................... Also, being uppty and convinced of one's superiority is leo not cancer. My leo, leo rising and dominate in leo father can have quite the pompous ego. I once again believe firmly both systems work but reveal either different things or say the same things in different ways. You have to look at the aspects to a position as well as the position and aspects to its ruler. Also, Sag rising will give one a few leo like qualities being fire (competition/ego). Also, is saturn in tight stress aspect to your rising as such will give a strong cappy like influence to the rising, saturn in stress aspect to the ruler of the rising does such as well.

Kainous part of the reason why you not as confident as many other tropical leos is due to the fact your sun is in the 12th ruling the 12th (trapped).
 
Last edited:

kainous

Well-known member
@Juicey J., I absolutely agree, but I'm not the only (tropical) Leo I know. All but one of them have been moody and clingy, much like one of my friends with Moon Rising. However, I'm well aware of my 12th house nature. However, I also recognize that if sidereal is right, then I'm Leo rising still, giving me a bit of an "I know better than you" attitude sometimes (which, unfortunately, I'm sure has breached it's way into conversation once or twice).

More than anything, it feels as if I HAVE an ego, just I keep trying to suppress it (put it in prison).
 

juicey J.

Banned
Both leo and cancer strongly need attention. Aries needs NONE!!!!!!!!!! Aries and leo have in common being ego and competition driven but one needs the world to praise them the other is an island on to itself. Aries like to win and be recognized for it but other then this Aries wants everyone to get out of its way. Also, Leo sun and rising have a strong influence on the overall personality no matter how you shake it. Everyone who has ever annoyed me with how much attention they need was either a rising and/or sun in Cancer or leo.
 
Last edited:

juicey J.

Banned
The reason why cancer and leo have a few things in common is due to the fact the moon (ruler of cancer) reflects the light of the sun (ruler of leo).
 

kainous

Well-known member
The signs have their antiscia points. They are reflections of the other point. Cancer and Leo are antiscia of each other too. Even if traditionally, there were individual "lights" to rule each Cancer and Leo, they were still bound to the same relationship that Aries/Scorpio would have been. Your "reflection of the light" has a lot of grounds to it.
 

BWDs

Active member
Your problem is that "you can't see the forest for the trees".
If Sideral were the correct app. I would be a compilation of Mutable signs...Asc. Sun and Moon...but I'm most definitely of a Fixed nature...and especially Taurean stubborn. I most definitely have the emotional make up of the characteristics of an Aquarian Moon...nothing at all like that of a Piscean.
I also see the world and analyze and interpret it from a sexual standpoint...as is the known nature of one with a Scorpio Asc. [I was born a Taurus with a Scorpio Asc. the same day of May as Sigmund Freud....whom also,, not only, saw the world from a sexual standpoint of interpretation...He wrote "The Book on it"!!!]
As my Sun and Moon are conjunct the 4th and 7th house cusps their strength of affect is particularly strong...in fact exponentially so as compared to someone that doesn't. thus I'm am most acutely aware of their influence and effect upon my being.
I believe it was Rudhyar that once said, that it would take someone with an exceptionally distinct chart, one of notable angular placements and distinct matrix patterns to define and establish the understandings of the effects and the verity of the principles of natal Astrology..and that is exactly what I have in my natal chart..
Lo siento...Nada mas...no sale here!


According to the Sefer Yetzirah, sex has to do with libra, not with scorpio
 

BWDs

Active member
@Olivia, tropical astrology has CHANGED Leo into being someone generous who cares what people think of them. Traditionally (I meant, "in antiquity"), Leo doesn't care what people think of them. You can see that in the people who have Sun angular.

@Pierce, I'd argue that you aren't seeing the forest through the trees. You have a stubborn nature associated with a Sun that has a Martian/Sun influence wanting to go to war for your causes and outlooks. Your Moon (which sidereally would be Capricornian, not Piscean) has a Saturn/Mars influence, putting your Moon in debility, and making it difficult to actually express emotion. My brother has this placement, and I'm very aware of what it does. Many people consider him to be a robot, but I know very well what he's feeling inside. It is actually your stubborn nature that tells me that you are more Arian. A Taurean person is fixed not due to stubbornness but due to trying to keep things "well" around them.

Fixed signs focus on maintenance. For a Taurus, it's their environment. For a Leo, it's their status. For a Scorpio, it's their extremism. Finally, for Aquarius, it's just accepting that things are "just how it is".

What you need to understand is the signs from the dignity and exaltation of the planets that they have. Taurus is Venus and Moon, and should be sexual (like Libra), social (like Libra), and nurturing (like the Moon).


Love this post.
 

cowtreat

Well-known member
This debate is so discouraging. I can't accept that they are both right. What exactly are the mechanisms at work here? Trying to figure out by what suits you better is a really bad way to go about it. You may just be fooling yourself.
The fact that the vast majority of Astrology is not Sidereal is really making me question Astrology in general. I'm starting to think that I have just made things fit because I want them to.
 
Top