Friday, 2 September 2016

SC Asks Karnataka To Release Cauvery Water To Tamil Nadu






NEW DELHI -- The Karnataka Government on Friday filed its reply in the Supreme Court to the Tamil Nadu Government's plea for an urgent judicial direction to Bengaluru to release 50.052 tmcft (thousand million cubic feet) of Cauvery water from its reservoirs to feed the agricultural lands of the neighbouring state. The Karnataka Government said it is in deficit of 80 tmcft water and hence cannot give water to Tamil Nadu. During the hearing, Justice Dipak Mishra observed, "Live and Let Live principle should be kept in mind. Both states should live in harmony." The hearing in the case has been adjourned till Monday.



The sharing of waters of the Cauvery river has been the source of serious conflict between the Indian states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. The genesis of this conflict rests in two agreements  during the British Raj that Karnataka claims were skewed heavily in favour of Tamil Nadu. Karnataka contends that it does not receive its due share of water from the river. Tamil Nadu, on the other hand, pleads that it has already developed large tracts of land and as a result has come to depend very heavily on the existing pattern of usage. Any change in this pattern, it says, will adversely affect the livelihood of millions of farmers in the state.  But since the river Cauvery originates in Karnataka, the state has constructed dams that can hold the water to provide for its agricultural needs especially during droughts.

The use of the Sun’s ingresses  into sidereal “cardinal” constellations was popularized by Garth Allen, the brilliant American astrologer and amateur astronomer. He discovered that these charts, in a most astonishing and convincing way, accounted for most of major events that had occurred during their operation.







In this post we shall use the sidereal Cancer Ingress of the Sun progressed to September 2 to explain the court’s  ruling. Notice that the progressed chart brings the Sun to MC and thereby triggers the complex configuration containing  Saturn-Neptune and Uranus.

The ongoing square between  Saturn and Neptune is asking us to consider the value of each planet's distinct symbolic voice in addressing moral questions… and also accentuating the need to incorporate reasonable amounts of both voices (as we're pressured to do whenever planets square each other), understanding the outright victory of either, at the total expense of the other, would represent a failure in essential integration.

Neptune always appeals to our 'spiritual' side. It asks us to recognize the indivisible whole we comprise, as interdependent life-forces aiming to thrive in this shared dimension.  From Neptune's perspective, we ought to do whatever we can, in every moment, to immediately ease others' suffering.  Saturn, as the planet-symbol of reasonable limits and intentional self-restraint, would warn us about the excesses of such thinking. Indiscriminately pouring our caring energies down whichever stream-of-need happens to pull us in, we'd begin to notice ourselves becoming depleted. We might wonder whether this unconditional investment of care is worth the potential costs to our own well-being.

Having understood the moral questions that the Saturn-Neptune square raises, let us turn our attention to  the stars that form the backdrop to Sun, Uranus and Neptune since they add further details from which the news story can be built.


Neptune [12pi] aligns with lambda Aquarii [12pi], in the stream of water from the Water Pourer’s Urn. The Sun [25cn05] is conjunct alpha (α Canis Minor), Procyon [26cn]  a star on the body of the Lesser Dog which was part of the ancient Chinese asterism Nan-Ho, the Southern River. Forming a square aspect to the Sun is Uranus [24ar] which is conjunct the star Acamar [23ar]. Theta (θ) Eridanus, Acamar, is a star in the River Eridanus which Nick Fiorenza associates with a dam. If we remember the fact that Uranus’ action is often likened to a sledge hammer that breaks down Saturnian walls of resistance, is it too difficult  to see why the Supreme Court’s  is asking the parties concerned to live and let live!

No comments:

Post a Comment