There is a difference between a horoscope, of whatever "style", being in error (not true to the facts)...
And not knowing how to read a horoscope.
It is clear from your brief post that you are far from being a skilled astrologer ("You have to calculate from the geocentric to the sidereal chart to see the exact difference by degree which it makes (in my case it was 23.77 I think)")
The sidereal chart is geocentric. Sidereal refers to a zodiac. Geocentric refers to a point of view. The "other" zodiac is called "tropical". There can't be 23 degrees and 77 minutes.....there are only 60 minutes in a degree. The difference does not vary "by case;" for any given year (or date if you want to be precise) the difference is the same for everyone. And the difference depends on the ayanamsa used in the sidereal system.
The difference as of today, in the Lahiri ayanamsa (which is the ayanamsa officially recognized by the government of India) is 23 degrees 02 minutes; in the Krishnamurti ayanamsa it is 22 degrees 56 minutes; and in the Bradley-Fagan zodiac (using an ayanamsa popular among western siderealists) it is 24 degrees 55 minutes. Take your pick. Which ayanamsa is the right one? In the Draconic it is currently 125 degrees 19 minutes (added to tropical rather than subtracted).
You are not close to being master of even the most basic and fundamental astrological knowledge, not to speak of having any skill in interpretation. If you make a judgment of the fitness of one type of chart (zodiac, system or whatever) over another based on insuffcient knowledge and lack of the most elementay skill.....Hey, have you thought of running for President?
If you take two skilled astrologers, one using western methods and the tropical zodiac, and the other using Hindu methods and the sidereal zodiac, you will find that the two readings will match very closely. Both systems of astrology "work", and by work we mean "give accurate and meaningful results." And implicitly, those results would have to be substantially the same.
To say that the western/tropical system does not work is to fly in the face of history. Because, historically, astrologers have been employed by the extremely rich and powerful -- emperors, kings, princes, pharaohs, caliphs -- who, if their astrologer failed them, would unceremoniously remove his head. If we set aside "popular" astrology, we find that even today astrologers are employed by the rich and powerful -- secretly. These people often base important decisions on astrological advice, and failure is frowned upon.
And not knowing how to read a horoscope.
It is clear from your brief post that you are far from being a skilled astrologer ("You have to calculate from the geocentric to the sidereal chart to see the exact difference by degree which it makes (in my case it was 23.77 I think)")
The sidereal chart is geocentric. Sidereal refers to a zodiac. Geocentric refers to a point of view. The "other" zodiac is called "tropical". There can't be 23 degrees and 77 minutes.....there are only 60 minutes in a degree. The difference does not vary "by case;" for any given year (or date if you want to be precise) the difference is the same for everyone. And the difference depends on the ayanamsa used in the sidereal system.
The difference as of today, in the Lahiri ayanamsa (which is the ayanamsa officially recognized by the government of India) is 23 degrees 02 minutes; in the Krishnamurti ayanamsa it is 22 degrees 56 minutes; and in the Bradley-Fagan zodiac (using an ayanamsa popular among western siderealists) it is 24 degrees 55 minutes. Take your pick. Which ayanamsa is the right one? In the Draconic it is currently 125 degrees 19 minutes (added to tropical rather than subtracted).
You are not close to being master of even the most basic and fundamental astrological knowledge, not to speak of having any skill in interpretation. If you make a judgment of the fitness of one type of chart (zodiac, system or whatever) over another based on insuffcient knowledge and lack of the most elementay skill.....Hey, have you thought of running for President?
If you take two skilled astrologers, one using western methods and the tropical zodiac, and the other using Hindu methods and the sidereal zodiac, you will find that the two readings will match very closely. Both systems of astrology "work", and by work we mean "give accurate and meaningful results." And implicitly, those results would have to be substantially the same.
To say that the western/tropical system does not work is to fly in the face of history. Because, historically, astrologers have been employed by the extremely rich and powerful -- emperors, kings, princes, pharaohs, caliphs -- who, if their astrologer failed them, would unceremoniously remove his head. If we set aside "popular" astrology, we find that even today astrologers are employed by the rich and powerful -- secretly. These people often base important decisions on astrological advice, and failure is frowned upon.
Last edited: