Which is more significant, planets or signs?

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Of course Planets
And then some sensitive points and stars.

Signs get there characteristics from stars. Every year, tropical sign moves away from sidereal and there has been so many discussions, which one is more accurate. Refer to books/articles on stars: such as http://www.amazon.com/The-Fixed-Sta...=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1331190887&sr=1-2

Vedic Astrology has sign significant, but astrims (nakshatra) are more significant for transit. A child gets astrological name based in astrim in which Moon is located. Astrim is finer division of sky (27 divisions) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakshatra

Hope it helps.
===

An example of star: β (Beta) Arietis is located at 3° Tau 50. It is unfortunate, and signifies violence, accidents, injury, defeat. Now some one has Sun there. Do you expect Sun to take characteristic of
Taurus or β (Beta) Arietis? This is an example, where conventional Astrology is likely to fail.

There are about 15 significant stars in Taurus and characteristic of Sun in Taurus is a generalization.

However each star can act differently and sometime giving quite opposite results compared to what you expect.
Thanks for mentioning this factor Dhundhun, I found this helpful as well as interesting, particularly in relation to the intriguing question of whether a Sign is more significant than a planet:smile:
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
Sheratan (B Arietas), fiducal star for the 1st Lunar Mansion (and for the first nakshatra Aswini) is now (longitudinally) posited at tropical Taurus 4degrees08; those of us (those very few of us!) who use both the tropical zodiac and also take fixed stars and constellations and nakshatras/Lunar Mansions into account as well, have no problem in combining, contrasting and then synthesizing the indications from each consideration, in coming to our delineative determinations...relative to the hypothetical example of Sun in tropical Taurus conjunct Sheratan, we would say: a basically Taurus underlying quality to the Sun, greatly modified by conjunction with Sheratan (and thus affected by Aries constellational qualities as well, which are channeled into the Sun via Sun's conjunction with B Arietis), modified further by the qualities of the Aswini nakshatra = the net Solar influence in this specific chart example.
 

Rebel Uranian

Well-known member
thank you, sandstone! The fact that even within a single "school" of astrology we can get astrologers using different techniques yet stll getting valid results suggests that there is no single "right way" to read a chart. This isn't to ignore astrology's "deposit of faith" from the past 2500 years.

Something else has to be afoot. I suspect it has more to do with astrology as a type of divination.

I think it's mostly cold reading. Most (but definitely not all) of the chart reading I've seen done here is cold reading. Otherwise we all have sixth sense blindsight, which is a slightly terrifying concept.

Cold reading: "You can be sensitive sometimes." "You like to get recongnition, but sometimes you just want to be left alone."
Not cold reading: "You are hypersensitive." "You like attention."
See the difference? The first statements are basically "a or not a," which is always true, but people get caught interpreting them more than they read them. The second are just "a," which is just a random statement that has to be proven by other means.
 
Last edited:

sandstone

Banned
rebel u - i think there is a lot of that going on but i think you are mistaken if you want to discount astrology on the basis of it all being cold reading..

interaction has to happen on some level, and it is missing on internet forums to a large extent. sure people converse via a typewriter, (or even a chat thing which i am not involved in) but many of the cues that astrologer s work with require an exchange and openness of the person who wants to get something from astrology.. without that, the chart could be a chart for a table or some inanimate object for all the person on the other end of the typewriter/internet knows...

perhaps some 6th sense is at work, or divination of a sort, but i think there is also a method to astrology which transcends all of this and works best in the hands of someone who has a clearly defined technique for doing astrology.. one needs a system with rules and to be able to follow and trust in the system they have.. the idea of 10 or more house systems all working doesn't appeal to me.. the idea of 2 systems of signs - tropical or sidereal doesn't appeal to me either... the idea of a set of aspects that are not changeable, or the idea of a group of planets that will always remain the same planets that i can work with symbolically very much appeals to me.. thus i have found myself more drawn to the cosmobiologist approach - working with planets and aspects, while including sign and house position as a 2ndary level to understanding the chart better, especially if the time is in question as it really ruins the house system part for getting any insight..
 

waybread

Well-known member
Rebel U., I think the situation is different for professional astrologers, who often have face-to-face consultations with their clients. I would find this extremely valuable, as you could then see how the person looks and acts, plus get a bit more conversation from them.

One thing I often do in a chart reading is to say something like, "You have Pluto square sun. People with this placement often..... "
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
How can a cold reading predict the future (statistically accurately above chance expectations)? Non-predictive natal chart reading (character/personality analysis) is one thing: predicting what will happen (sometimes even when it will happen) in the person's life, or getting correct answers about the direction and outcome of events or future happenings in horary or katarchic (event) astrology, is quite another thing.
Ok, let's go ahead and say, natal chart analysis is cold reading: then-what about predictive astrology, obtaining 75-85% correct results over a large number (hundreds) of samples, doing so consistently over years of testing? What causes such results? Certainly not cold reading-something else is operative here: 6th sense intuition on the practitioner's part? OR, the actual operation of macrocosmic factors (what we call "astrological influences')? OR, some of both?
 

Rebel Uranian

Well-known member
I never said that all natal chart reading was cold reading, just that most of what I've seen was. Also, there is a subtle difference between "6th sense intuition" and "6th sense blindsight," but the latter is such a complicated and unsettling idea that we can ignore it.

I haven't actually seen predictive astrology work, or even seen it done much. I tried learning it but didn't know where to start since there was so much stuff and a lot of it was contradictory.
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
There are hundreds of examples of correct predictive astrology here on AW, hundreds more examples on skyscript; that figure I referenced in my post (ie, "75-85% correct results over a large number...of samples"), that refers to my own results (not to some speculation or to what some "expert" claimed)...check out particularly the horary forums here and on skyscript; also, Vedic astrology sites are almost entirely concerned with predictive astrology (rather than character/personality analysis astrology)...
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
There are hundreds of examples of correct predictive astrology here on AW, hundreds more examples on skyscript; that figure I referenced in my post (ie, "75-85% correct results over a large number...of samples"), that refers to my own results (not to some speculation or to what some "expert" claimed)...check out particularly the horary forums here and on skyscript
Horary question outcomes are checkable if there is an update from the questioner, so - either way the evidence is there... interestingly, Horary as practised on this forum is from the Tropical perspective
...also, Vedic astrology sites are almost entirely concerned with predictive astrology (rather than character/personality analysis astrology)...
Equally interestingly dr. farr, Vedic astrology is traditionally sidereal and has a reputation for consistently accurate prediction

Following many forum discussions on this subject - such as for example "What sign was "actually" breaking the horizon at the time of my birth?" at this link http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=41281 it is common knowledge that:

(a) Sidereal Zodiac signs are aligned to corresponding constellations/groups of stars and adjust - using an “ayanamsa” - to account for a gradually precessing vernal equinox (shift in orientation of Earth's axis of rotation).

(b) Tropical Zodiac signs do not make this adjustment but are solely aligned to points where Sun's position on the ecliptic creates seasonal changes.

(c ) Sidereal and Tropical differ on the Zodiacal Degree where their astrological year begins.

(d) Although both systems begin the astrological year with the Spring/Vernal Equinox, the Sidereal Equinox occurs when Sun is at 6[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT] Pisces.

(e) Tropical Equinox occurs when Sun is at 0[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º Aries[/FONT] – i.e. approximately 23 degrees after the Sidereal equinox. :smile:
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
Well, to me the whole sidereal/tropical debate is simply more evidence that signs are less important than planetary aspects. If both Vedic and western astrologers produce good results, that isn't really an argument for one system over another.
 

sandstone

Banned
waybread,

the same can be said for house systems while we are discussing it from this angle..

i was disappointed in 'the heavenly sphere' book where they have essentially rendered houses as ''boxes'' to put things in with the 5 degree rule latched on for good measure... to me the chapter was a disappointment in a book designed for beginners..

really one is faced with what do you put on a higher footing - signs or houses, which could be a separate chapter to this thread title.. - in other words - 'which is more significant - signs or houses?'

one only has to contemplate for a moment the profusion of house systems to know the quagmire one is headed into..
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Vedic sidereal astrology, famed for its predictive accuracy is based on only one house system - whole sign houses - i.e. one whole sign = one whole house :smile:
 

waybread

Well-known member
We know that, JA. So how do you account for accuracy achieved by western astrologers using the tropical zodiac and other house systems?
 
Top