PDA

View Full Version : Uranus is a malefic


sibylline
11-25-2016, 12:53 PM
I've actually seen Neptune be described as the most malefic out of the 3 outers and every time I hear stories about "outer planetary lives" Neptune always seemed to be the worst fate out of the bunch. Lies, rose coloured glasses, living in a bubble, fragility, inability to cope with reality, softly drifting into madness, hard drug addiction - a doozy. At least Pluto and Uranus seem to give their natives some toughness and agency, Neptune dissolves you into a defenseless raw nerve. No thanks Poseidon

Uranus is the most malefic of those three, on par with Saturn. Astrologers of the late 19th and early 20th centuries certainly considered Uranus malefic but all of this was forgotten somewhere down the line when Uranus became firmly associated with Aquarius, it seems.

Neptune can get better over time, becoming inspired and inspiring, though its nature is more compatible with certain planets and signs.

[Note: this thread on Uranus was created from a Chat thread at a Forum member's request - Moderator]

Bunraku
11-25-2016, 02:22 PM
Zadkiel on Uranus
(posted before on horary section)

Herschel
This is the most distant planet from the Sun his motion is very slow as he takes 83 years 151 days to go through the twelve signs. The nature of it is extremely evil. If he ascend or be with the chief significator in any figure he denotes an eccentric person far from fortunate always abrupt and often violent in his manners. If well aspected he gives sudden and unexpected benefits and if afflicted he will cause remarkable and unlooked for losses and misfortunes. He is not so powerful as Saturn or Mars yet can do much evil. Persons under his influence are partial to antiquity astrology & and all uncommon studies especially if Mercury and the Moon be in aspect to him. They are likely to strike out novelties and to be remarkable for an inventive faculty. They are generally unfortunate in marriage especially if he afflict Venus, the Moon, or the seventh house either in nativities or questions

Bunraku
11-25-2016, 02:34 PM
Jeffrey Wolf Green (evolutionary astrologer) in his pamphlet, Uranus: Freedom from the Known. Definitely more recent than Zadkiel

Uranus correlates to individuation, liberation, freedom, and deconditioning. Deconditioning from what? Deconditioning from Saturn. Saturn correlates to all the conditioning patterns of our life. the conditioning patterns of society, family, expectations of people in our lives, and the conditioning patterns relative to all the prior lives that you bring into this life....This means that Uranus is forever trying to shatter, revolutionize, liberate, or break free from all those conditioning patterns. What for? What is the intent? To what purpose? If we shatter all the conditioning patterns that define our sense of personality and identity then we can, at some point, arrive at our essential nature and identity that is unconditioned.

Limitations due to copyright

Bunraku
11-25-2016, 02:57 PM
Max Heindel, Message of the Stars.
CHAPTER XVI
URANUS, THE PLANET OF ALTRUISM
http://www.rosicrucian.com/mos/moseng06.htm

david starling
11-25-2016, 06:32 PM
Sounds interesting. Bun already spammed Zadkiel's passage on Uranus and she added some other astrologers too.

What's your personal take on Uranus?

I'm going Green on this one. On beyond Saturn! JWG stated it well [IMO]! My only disagreement with Jeffrey's assessment is with his title, "Freedom from the Known". "Freedom from the Limitations on Knowledge" is better for what he appears to have meant. Since the question was actually for sibylline, I'd like to know her opinion regarding this Uranian interpretation as well.

sibylline
11-26-2016, 02:32 PM
Sounds interesting. Bun already spammed Zadkiel's passage on Uranus and she added some other astrologers too.

What's your personal take on Uranus?

Since the question was actually for sibylline, I'd like to know her opinion regarding this Uranian interpretation as well.

My take? It's a malefic of the highest order and I'm amazed many intelligent astrologers don't see that. That doesn't mean it is all bad but acknowledging that it is malefic is pretty crucial to understanding it. "Planet of Altruism" has to be a joke.

I agree with Zadkiel except I don't know about it not being as powerful as Saturn or Mars. Possibly in transit or event charts that is true; I'm not completely sure, but natally is as powerful. The effects show up through dynamic aspects (conjunction, opposition, square). Uranus is without a doubt implicated in health problems of the brain and PNS.

Saturn correlates to all the conditioning patterns of our life. the conditioning patterns of society, family, expectations of people in our lives, and the conditioning patterns relative to all the prior lives that you bring into this life [...] Uranus is forever trying to shatter, revolutionize, liberate, or break free from all those conditioning patterns.

Let's be honest, Uranus doesn't know what it is try to break free from the vast majority of the time. It just wants to break because that's its nature. The issue is that once you destroy everything, there is nothing left.

What for? What is the intent? To what purpose?

Good questions.

Uranians can epitomize "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face" and remarkably this tendency doesn't much improve with age, IME. This is part of why Uranus proves more detrimental than Neptune or Pluto. Uranus doesn't take advice, it doesn't learn from mistakes. Uranus is stubborn and fanatical, and in the rush to do what it wants and not follow what it sees as orders or pressure from society (although the world must bend to accommodate Uranian impulses and whims) it causes harm to itself in the process.

That said, Uranians can prove to be very intelligent and/or amazingly original. It is an energy outside of the realm of normal experience, after all.

Blaze
11-26-2016, 03:19 PM
My take? It's a malefic of the highest order and I'm amazed many intelligent astrologers don't see that. That doesn't mean it is all bad but acknowledging that it is malefic is pretty crucial to understanding it. "Planet of Altruism" has to be a joke.

I agree with Zadkiel except I don't know about it not being as powerful as Saturn or Mars. Possibly in transit or event charts that is true; I'm not completely sure, but natally is as powerful. The effects show up through dynamic aspects (conjunction, opposition, square). Uranus is without a doubt implicated in health problems of the brain and PNS.



Let's be honest, Uranus doesn't know what it is try to break free from the vast majority of the time. It just wants to break because that's its nature. The issue is that once you destroy everything, there is nothing left.



Good questions.

Uranians can epitomize "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face" and remarkably this tendency doesn't much improve with age, IME. This is part of why Uranus proves more detrimental than Neptune or Pluto. Uranus doesn't take advice, it doesn't learn from mistakes. Uranus is stubborn and fanatical, and in the rush to do what it wants and not follow what it sees as orders or pressure from society (although the world must bend to accommodate Uranian impulses and whims) it causes harm to itself in the process.

That said, Uranians can prove to be very intelligent and/or amazingly original. It is an energy outside of the realm of normal experience, after all.

Interesting, Sib. Do you have any charts where Uranus would be considered Malefic like that of Saturn? Personally, I don't think any planet can touch upon Saturn's sadist like nature, but mine is so strong that it makes me bias.

I'm guessing the charts with Uranus on an angle in hard aspect to personal planets would count most? Show us a chart with an example.

sibylline
11-26-2016, 04:04 PM
Interesting, Sib. Do you have any charts where Uranus would be considered Malefic like that of Saturn? Personally, I don't think any planet can touch upon Saturn's sadist like nature, but mine is so strong that it makes me bias.

I'm guessing the charts with Uranus on an angle in hard aspect to personal planets would count most? Show us a chart with an example.

Uranus doesn't operate like Saturn. For the most part, Saturn's heavy hand is pretty clear to anyone it touches whereas Uranus shows up as impulses. Uranus on an angle isn't pleasant but Uranus rising I haven't found to be as bad as it might seem unless, yes, it is making hard aspects to personal planets. Uranus is at peak power in fire and air signs, I think, which can be a good or bad thing. Fixed signs or Earth in the chart can help in that when Uranus removes, something is put in its place.

I have many charts, obviously, it helps that I know a lot of people and most are curious to know what their charts say, lol. I wouldn't give out details of people's personal lives though. There are public figures we could look to although of course they aren't typical.

graay ghost
11-26-2016, 05:06 PM
Would Uranus be exhalted in a Earth sign, you think?

sibylline
11-26-2016, 06:09 PM
Would Uranus be exhalted in a Earth sign, you think?

Why, because it would be tempered in Earth? I like it but I don't know. Even its rulership of Aquarius can be questioned so we're a long way from exaltations.

graay ghost
11-26-2016, 06:37 PM
Why, because it would be tempered in Earth? I like it but I don't know. Even its rulership of Aquarius can be questioned so we're a long way from exaltations.

Yeah, because it would be "tempered" by Earth. In modern astrology exaltations seem to be places not like the planet but where it functions best. If Uranus really needs tempering so badly to work then that would be it.

How would you question its rulership in Aquarius?

I guess I'm just very curious about exaltations and these outer planets that don't have them. It makes me feel like something is missing.

Bluebell87
11-26-2016, 11:50 PM
I think it will be natural for some people to be wary of Uranus' sometimes erratic behaviour, it is associated with earthquakes after all. But to see it as a 'malefic of the highest order' I think is completely missing the nature and beauty that Uranus has to offer. But it is to be empathised that those who prefer a more tangible, controlled environment, would be naturally repulsed by its energy. The secret in understanding it lies in removing that instinctive urge sometimes people get, in order to understand that the very energy of breaking away opens itself to create completely new elements of brain and creation. I like it to Aries in that it's nature is to change and break. After all, how is glass created? And go transfer it to a more human, personal level - wouldn't life be boring if it consistently followed a pattern, without the need for completely new concepts?

The ultimate human example I can give is the artist Daniel Johnston. Saturn is heavy in his chart, but so is Aquarius. I watched a documentary a few weeks ago which introduced me to him, 'The devil and Daniel Johnston.' I highly recommend it btw. Anyway, after watching it I can intuitively see that the dominance of Saturn in his hart is tied in with his Mum's authoritarian, religious response to him. He was later diagnosed with having skitzophrenia (Uranus probably governs mental health right?), but basically his sole, true nature and purpose in this life was to CREATE. This naturally contradicted with his Mum's fanatical, fixed religious views and the juxtaposition this caused can be seen in his songs.

But he had to 'break free' and moved to Austin, Texas to follow his need to create and be a musician. He was so creative, he was in control of music, not music giving him ambitions and opportunities. He did art-work too. And perhaps Saturn caused the mental health to catch up on him, but the pure nature of Uranus caused him to be vulnerable and through motivations of jealousy, the lead singer of The Butthole Surfers overloaded him with a concoction of upper drugs and hallucinogenics, and his mental health detoriated. He still created though. The effects of Uranus and Saturn can be seen through this chart, whether it's people blocking his energy, or himself blocking the right path through inner confusion.

Anyway, to sum up - the Uranian energy is impersonal, and its need to destruct should be taken that way too. Destruction is necessary to create. To see it as a malefic is the equivalent to assigning blame to an earthquake, and failing to see the beauty of Mother Nature, from natural disasters to the pure beauty of the seasons. I also liken it to Autism - to expect it to act according to the norm or to try to set t by the same standards as someone not having Autism, or a planet that doesn't need to create to give birth. It cannot and should not be tamed. It would destroy its very purpose it exists. Similarly, artists like Daniel Johnston would not exist, but will always certainly be misunderstood along the way.

https://youtu.be/PgIkVW--62o - trailer for 'The Devil and Daniel Johnston.'

https://youtu.be/FKW2H0WBqW8 song - Story of an Artist

"Everyone in friends and family
Sayin' "hey get a job
Why do you only do that only
Why are you so odd?

"We don't really like what you do
We don't think anyone ever will
It's a problem that you have
And this problem's made you ill"

david starling
11-27-2016, 02:00 AM
Planets have essential natures before we take into account other factors and that is the discussion I thought we were all having. Again, would you prefer Uranus to Jupiter, all factors being equal?

I'd prefer Urania (as I personally call :uranus:) in Aquarius, for example, to , say, Jupiter in Capricorn. I don't like Urania in Aries, or Pluto in Capricorn. Is that what you meant? Quality of expression? Saturn's a problem for me regardless of where it is, but it can still have a silver lining--having it in Leo in H6 helps me survive.

david starling
11-27-2016, 02:18 AM
Maybe I need to star bah-humbuging about Uranus, too. I find people give a lot of lip service to "creativity" and "originality" while most people can't seem to recognize either of them if they bit them in the ***.

I have :uranus: In Gemini, and I'm naturally creative and original. Most people seem to prefer some version of Consensus Opinion, with no changes. I do respect Consensus Opinion as the "envelope"--I just push it when I see a need for that. [IMO], if you're going to think outside the box, have a good reason for it. And, don't expect agreement from those who like it inside, just as it is.

graay ghost
11-27-2016, 02:32 AM
I have :uranus: In Gemini, and I'm naturally creative and original. Most people seem to prefer some version of Consensus Opinion, with no changes. I do respect Consensus Opinion as the "envelope"--I just push it when I see a need for that. [IMO], if you're going to think outside the box, have a good reason for it. And, don't expect agreement from those who like it inside, just as it is.

Are you naturally creative and original? Really.

I've never had an original or creative thought in my life. Nobody's ever caught onto this because they are uninterested in the world around them and somehow think what I say is new. :unsure: A pity, really.

Save

sibylline
11-27-2016, 04:01 AM
How would you question its rulership in Aquarius?

I guess I'm just very curious about exaltations and these outer planets that don't have them. It makes me feel like something is missing.

Sorry, I missed this post.

I was referring to the longstanding debate over Uranus' rulership of Aquarius, not referring to whether I personally question it...I don't. Uranus doesn't rule Aquarius. :)

Kidding, I don't know but I don't see why Uranus has any more in common with Aquarius than it does with Aries. Not that rulerships were ever based on similarity.

I get what you're saying but just think of it this way: otherworldly planets don't have to rule over mundane experience.

david starling
11-27-2016, 06:38 AM
I was referring to the definition which relates to these words:



But as usual, you knew that.

Were you going to answer my question above yours? Because I'm going to get tired of this thread in 2.5 seconds.

Had to leave right after my tongue-in-cheek post. All right, I'd rather it was Jupiter under those conditions. I have :uranus: Trine the Moon in H4, which is quite stimulating in a good way--Square would be too aggravating. It does Square my Asc though, which IS aggravating. Anything Squaring the Asc is problematic, but Jupiter relates the Asc quite well. I'd also rather have Jup than :uranus:Squaring the Asc in H4. But you asked about the Moon. Jupiter is more of a calming vibration. :uranus: amps up the mind. Btw, for me, :uranus: is a Yin vibration--hence, "Urania", GODDESS of the Heavens, and Muse of Atrology. Astrology includes Astronomy, but not vice versa. [IMO] They named it wrong--"Urania" is more fitting for Astrological purposes.

david starling
11-27-2016, 08:43 AM
Sorry, I missed this post.

I was referring to the longstanding debate over Uranus' rulership of Aquarius, not referring to whether I personally question it...I don't. Uranus doesn't rule Aquarius. :)

Kidding, I don't know but I don't see why Uranus has any more in common with Aquarius than it does with Aries. Not that rulerships were ever based on similarity.

I get what you're saying but just think of it this way: otherworldly planets don't have to rule over mundane experience.

I see a Yin version of :uranus: which charges up the Mind--a Yin ruler for a Yang sign, like Venus and Libra. And, a mental stimulator for an Air-sign. Mars energizes the ego, which is perfect for Aries. As for Neptune, talk about a calming influence! :sleeping:

graay ghost
11-27-2016, 06:03 PM
Sorry, I missed this post.

I was referring to the longstanding debate over Uranus' rulership of Aquarius, not referring to whether I personally question it...I don't. Uranus doesn't rule Aquarius. :)

Kidding, I don't know but I don't see why Uranus has any more in common with Aquarius than it does with Aries. Not that rulerships were ever based on similarity.

I get what you're saying but just think of it this way: otherworldly planets don't have to rule over mundane experience.

Just because they don't "have to" doesn't mean that they explicitly don't.

And why can't Uranus rule both Aquarius and Aries? It can do two things at once. Lots of planets do. It could be exalted in Virgo or something. Though more research would need to be done aside from just declaring it to be true. :unsure:
Save

conspiracy theorist
11-28-2016, 12:42 AM
Out of all the signs, I can see Uranus having the most affinity with Aries. Severing, individuation, quick fast and dry, totally unconcerned with image, lightning etc.

AppLeo
11-28-2016, 03:36 AM
Out of all the signs, I can see Uranus having the most affinity with Aries. Severing, individuation, quick fast and dry, totally unconcerned with image, lightning etc.

Uranus in Scorpio is better, I think.

Uranus symbolizes change; what better than in the sign of transformation. Plus, Scorpio is also ruled by Mars.

Rawiri
11-28-2016, 04:38 AM
Uranus is on my ascendant and I am triggered by your attempting to fit Uranus into any of your boxes.

I think Taurus is a good sign for Uranus. They have almost the same sounding name so there must be something there.

david starling
11-28-2016, 04:52 AM
Going on strictly affinity, it's the fixed modality that is most incongruent with Uranus.

As I see it, those are "Mind-waves" in the Aquarian glyph, not lightning bolts. And, the Uranian vibration affects the Mind in a intense, constant ("Fixed") way. It's currently unlocking vital, mental abilities, which Saturn has been preventing us from utilizing. This is "radical" and "disruptive" to the Saturnian paradigm, but in and of itself is orderly and beneficial. :uranus: affects Taurus tremendously, helping it to accept its transition into the next Sign, Gemini.

AppLeo
11-28-2016, 04:52 AM
Uranus is on my ascendant and I am triggered by your attempting to fit Uranus into any of your boxes.

I think Taurus is a good sign for Uranus. They have almost the same sounding name so there must be something there.

Uranus in Taurus is probably the worst placement for Uranus. :lol:

I'm assuming you're joking, but still.

Taurus is traditional, conservative, and doesn't ever change. Uranus is none of those.

conspiracy theorist
11-28-2016, 05:00 AM
As I see it, those are "Mind-waves" in the Aquarian glyph, not lightning bolts. And, the Uranian vibration affects the Mind in a intense, constant ("Fixed") way. It's currently unlocking vital, mental abilities, which Saturn has been preventing us from utilizing. This is "radical" and "disruptive" to the Saturnian paradigm, but in and of itself is orderly and beneficial. :uranus: affects Taurus tremendously, helping it to accept its transition into the next Sign, Gemini.

Hmm, how do square that with the fact that Uranus goes out of its way to destroy enduring structures?

david starling
11-28-2016, 05:02 AM
Uranus in Taurus is probably the worst placement for Uranus. :lol:

I'm assuming you're joking, but still.

Taurus is traditional, conservative, and doesn't ever change. Uranus is none of those.

It helps Taurus changeover to the next Sign, which is from most Fixed (Taurus) to second-most Mutable, Gemini. It's so important in this regard, I consider it to have secondary-rulership authority over Taurus. Remember, each Sign is in a constant state of transition into the next, in a process of transformation.

AppLeo
11-28-2016, 05:04 AM
Why do you think so?

Uranus in Aquarius is literally perfect.

Uranus in Aries is good, but Aries is way too selfish and not humanitarian at all.

david starling
11-28-2016, 05:10 AM
Hmm, how do square that with the fact that Uranus goes out of its way to destroy enduring structures?

Any structures that get in the way of unlocking our mental abilities, and freeing our Minds, are currently under pressure from the "Uranian-effect". Those who feel the need to protect those structures are reacting violently and destructively. Which is why the current Transit through Aries is problematic.

conspiracy theorist
11-28-2016, 05:11 AM
Uranus in Aquarius is literally perfect.

Yes, I get that. But WHY?

Uranus in Aries is good, but Aries is way too selfish and not humanitarian at all.


Ahh, now I'm seeing what you're getting at. So you think Uranus = Aquarius and therefore Uranus = humanitarian and unselfish?

david starling
11-28-2016, 05:16 AM
Yes, I get that. But WHY?




Ahh, now I'm seeing what you're getting at. So you think Uranus = Aquarius and therefore Uranus = humanitarian and unselfish?

I think human beings will be humanitarian and unselfish once our Minds are free. Similar to the Gnostic view, actually. Uranian influence DISSOLVES impeding structures, in a non-violent way. It's the OPPOSITION to this process that uses every means available to prevent it from proceeding, including violence. (I'm obviously labeling :uranus: as a Benefic.)

david starling
11-28-2016, 07:21 AM
There's another category of Sign/rulership pairing based on the Sign transitions, which I'm still not sure what to call. It's a partnership situation, so maybe "Functional-rulership"(?) The Functional-ruler has influence over a Sign as well. For Taurus, the Functional-ruler is Venus, which is in partnership with the Native-ruler of Taurus, (actually the Earth itself, which is in fixed position in the center of the Zodiacal-circle, and has its Zodiacal position located by the Age-Indicator); AND, (in this special case), the Co-ruler, :uranus:. For Sagittarius, the Native-ruler is the Asc (which is where the Sun's apparent orbit intersects the Eastern horizon, and is the origin of the word "Horoscope", "Watcher of the Hour"); and, Regulator and in this special case Co-ruler, Jupiter. The Functional-rulers of Sagittarius are the Zodiacal representatives of the Earth and Heaven, the Age-Indicator and :uranus:. Sagittarius is therefore "in service" to both, just as Taurus is "in service" to Venus, Native-ruler of Libra.

david starling
11-28-2016, 08:08 AM
There's another category of Sign/rulership pairing based on the Sign transitions, which I'm still not sure what to call. It's a partnership situation, so maybe "Functional-rulership"(?) The Functional-ruler has influence over a Sign as well. For Taurus, the Functional-ruler is Venus, which is in partnership with the Native-ruler of Taurus, (actually the Earth itself, which is in fixed position in the center of the Zodiacal-circle, and has its Zodiacal position located by the Age-Indicator); AND, (in this special case), the Co-ruler, :uranus:. For Sagittarius, the Native-ruler is the Asc (which is where the Sun's apparent orbit intersects the Eastern horizon, and is the origin of the word "Horoscope", "Watcher of the Hour"); and, Regulator and in this special case Co-ruler, Jupiter. The Functional-rulers of Sagittarius are the Zodiacal representatives of the Earth and Heaven, the Age-Indicator and :uranus:. Sagittarius is therefore "in service" to both, just as Taurus is "in service" to Venus, Native-ruler of Libra.

Needs simplifying--
{Taurus}Native-ruler: The Earth through its Zodiacal representative the Age-Indicator.
Regulator, and in this special case, Co-ruler: :uranus:
Functional-ruler: Venus

{Sagittarius}Native-ruler: The Sun, through the point where the Sun's apparent orbit crosses the Eastern Horizon--the Ascendant.
Regulator, and in this special case, Co-ruler: Jupiter.
Functional-rulers: The Earth, through the Age-Indicator, and the Heavens, through the position of :uranus:.

The term "in service" applies to the relationship between a Sign and its Functional-ruler(s).

AppLeo
11-28-2016, 12:16 PM
Yes, I get that. But WHY?




Ahh, now I'm seeing what you're getting at. So you think Uranus = Aquarius and therefore Uranus = humanitarian and unselfish?

Yeah pretty much. All of the Uranus concepts are expressed through the Aquarius sign. The only difference is that Uranus represents sudden change of events while Aquarius doesn't really seem to be sudden.

graay ghost
11-28-2016, 12:18 PM
Uranus is on my ascendant and I am triggered by your attempting to fit Uranus into any of your boxes.

I think Taurus is a good sign for Uranus. They have almost the same sounding name so there must be something there.

Taurus and not Virgo?

I guess it just seems to me that Virgo would be the most likelly to actually implement Uranus in a real, meaningful way. Taurus actually seems a bit, I don't know. Complacent for that.

sibylline
11-28-2016, 04:41 PM
I've never seen any evidence of Uranus being humanitarian. Uranus seems as selfish as Mars or Pluto. The humanitarian ideas about Uranus resulted from its being named as ruler of Aquarius. However, unlike Aquarius, Uranus has no ties or concerns with others. This is why Uranus can be particularly difficult in connection with affiliative planets like Venus.

In The Art of Predictive Astrology Carol Rushman wrote that Uranus, natally or in transit, is associated with divorce: "Uranus is a selfish planet. It wants things on its own terms [...]"

AppLeo
11-28-2016, 04:55 PM
I've never seen any evidence of Uranus being humanitarian. Uranus seems as selfish as Mars or Pluto. The humanitarian ideas about Uranus resulted from its being named as ruler of Aquarius. However, unlike Aquarius, Uranus has no ties or concerns with others. This is why Uranus can be particularly difficult in connection with affiliative planets like Venus.

In The Art of Predictive Astrology Carol Rushman wrote that Uranus, natally or in transit, is associated with divorce: "Uranus is a selfish planet. It wants things on its own terms [...]"

Many modern websites view Uranus as a humanitarian planet, so i guess I can see how it's been warped.

And if Uranus isn't a humanitarian planet then the Aries sign would be perfect. The most non selfish sign is Libra. Libra is indecisive and rather slow. Same with Taurus. Both signs are ruled by Venus.

Uranus is also of the higher intellect. I find Mercury in Aries to be really good because it results in quick thinking. Uranus in Aries probably does just as well.

What about Uranus in Leo?? That would be a really good placement.

david starling
11-28-2016, 05:59 PM
Taurus and not Virgo?

I guess it just seems to me that Virgo would be the most likelly to actually implement Uranus in a real, meaningful way. Taurus actually seems a bit, I don't know. Complacent for that.

In the pattern I've been presenting, you're correct: Virgo is the "in-service" Sign for :uranus:.

david starling
11-28-2016, 06:28 PM
I've never seen any evidence of Uranus being humanitarian. Uranus seems as selfish as Mars or Pluto. The humanitarian ideas about Uranus resulted from its being named as ruler of Aquarius. However, unlike Aquarius, Uranus has no ties or concerns with others. This is why Uranus can be particularly difficult in connection with affiliative planets like Venus.

In The Art of Predictive Astrology Carol Rushman wrote that Uranus, natally or in transit, is associated with divorce: "Uranus is a selfish planet. It wants things on its own terms [...]"

The slower Planets ARE more impersonal than the faster ones. The "Uranian-Effect" is about freeing the mind , and dissolving restrictions that prevent us from accessing our full mental potential. It's not just about "getting in touch" with our Higher Self, but actually becoming it. So, impersonal in a good way, but not without conflicting with obstacles to that end. If a marriage is impeding the process of freeing the mind, it's an obstacle in that regard.

david starling
11-28-2016, 06:54 PM
http://www.astro.com/tmpd/cbvnfileCNGI4w-u1335037030/astro_2gw_788_fakir.61386.25659.gif?25773

How would you delineate the Sagittarius and Taurus in this chart?

I consider Traditional-astrology to be a stand-alone system at the roots. This Modern system is a branch which I believe bears fruit, but using Traditional terms can be misleading. That said, :uranus: In Leo is "weakened", since it's the Native-ruler of Leo's opposite Sign, Aquarius. Saturn on the Ascendant, Native-ruler of Sagittarius, which is the Sign they're in, is very problematic. Sun and Mercury in Taurus, together with Jupiter in Virgo on the M.C. cause a good outward appearance, but I'm seeing a powder keg ready to explode, especially with Moon in Cap, ruled by Saturn, and that emotional Mars opposing level-headed Capricorn. I see "Important person" (never heard of him, haven't looked him up yet), but not a Peacemaker.

conspiracy theorist
11-28-2016, 08:11 PM
I consider Traditional-astrology to be a stand-alone system at the roots. This Modern system is a branch which I believe bears fruit, but using Traditional terms can be misleading. That said, :uranus: In Leo is "weakened", since it's the Native-ruler of Leo's opposite Sign, Aquarius. Saturn on the Ascendant, Native-ruler of Sagittarius, which is the Sign they're in, is very problematic. Sun and Mercury in Taurus, together with Jupiter in Virgo on the M.C. cause a good outward appearance, but I'm seeing a powder keg ready to explode, especially with Moon in Cap, ruled by Saturn, and that emotional Mars opposing level-headed Capricorn. I see "Important person" (never heard of him, haven't looked him up yet), but not a Peacemaker.

No need to look him up; it's a hypothetical. Instead of giving it the name "fake" I decided to get creative and name it Fakir. I'm surprised how applicable that title is for a chart like this.

I was hoping you would use some of your more idiosyncratic techniques on the chart. I do see that you emphasized Saturn afflicting the "native ruler" of Sagittarius. What does that mean for the ascendant/Sagittarius?

sibylline
11-28-2016, 08:23 PM
Many modern websites view Uranus as a humanitarian planet, so i guess I can see how it's been warped.

This comes from too much theory and not enough application, methinks. Some astrologers are long on theories which they haven't tested thoroughly or at all.

And if Uranus isn't a humanitarian planet then the Aries sign would be perfect. The most non selfish sign is Libra.

Well, that's debatable. Not super interested in debating it though.

Uranus is also of the higher intellect. I find Mercury in Aries to be really good because it results in quick thinking. Uranus in Aries probably does just as well.

Merc in Aries is quick on the draw but this can also lead to many errors due to not having considered all information.

What about Uranus in Leo?? That would be a really good placement.

What about it? I tend to pay more attention to the aspects and placements with the outer planets. Leo is a self-focused sign though, so doesn't help re: Uranus selfishness.

conspiracy theorist
11-28-2016, 08:32 PM
Most of the people I know with an emphasized Uranus have less to do with outright humanitarianism and more with there own idiosyncratic ventures. One girl I know with Uranus conjunct the ascendant was interested in empowering women with PCOS as she suffers from it. But then I can attribute that to her having Aquarius ascendant instead with her ASC ruler located in Pisces.

Bluebell87
11-29-2016, 03:27 PM
Uranus is on my ascendant and I am triggered by your attempting to fit Uranus into any of your boxes.

I think Taurus is a good sign for Uranus. They have almost the same sounding name so there must be something there.

I am triggered by all this box-fitting of Urania as well. It's so partially sighted to see it as a malefic.

And I just wrote a whole reply on this before noticing this thread had been created.

AppLeo
11-29-2016, 04:59 PM
You have a dirty mind, and yet, I can't unsee it...

I'm sorry! ):

^LMAO (pun intended).

I can't even begin to respond to either of the above. Lol.

:lol:

So, more appropriately... @AppLeo, since you have a wide orb Uranus opposition to your Sun, how well do you relate to the aspect?

I kind of agree with it. I guess I seem pretty unconventional as a person and there are many sudden events in my life.

But I'm usually quiet and alone without the craziness of Uranus.

I identify way more with my Neptune-Sun aspect and North Node conjunct Moon and Mercury living in my own little world.

graay ghost
11-29-2016, 05:05 PM
What is one "supposed" to be like with Uranus opposite sun?

AppLeo
11-29-2016, 05:15 PM
What is one "supposed" to be like with Uranus opposite sun?

Erratic and crazy.

sibylline
11-29-2016, 05:16 PM
^Not necessarily...It depends.

graay ghost
11-29-2016, 05:18 PM
^Not necessarily...It depends.


Depends on what? I'm not sure most people would admit that their lives are "erratic and crazy" offhand.

AppLeo
11-29-2016, 05:28 PM
^Not necessarily...It depends.

Depends on what?

graay ghost
11-29-2016, 05:30 PM
I've mostly read about sun opposite Uranus as being rigidly conventional. I don't even know what these words mean anymore.

sibylline
11-29-2016, 05:31 PM
Depends on what? I'm not sure most people would admit that their lives are "erratic and crazy" offhand.

Depends on what?

Depends on the rest of the chart, as always.

Uranus does tend to disorganize but if a person has an Earthy fixed chart, for example, it's not likely they would come across as erratic even though they have Sun opposite Uranus. They'd still be very willful, overly concerned with living life on their own terms and not being controlled by "authority", have an abrupt manner, and a tendency to contrarianism for its sake...to start with. These traits are dialed up or down depending on other factors, like all aspects.

graay ghost
11-29-2016, 05:38 PM
Depends on the rest of the chart, as always.

Uranus does tend to disorganize but if a person has an Earthy fixed chart, for example, it's not likely they would come across as erratic even though they have Sun opposite Uranus. They'd still be very willful, overly concerned with living life on their own terms and not being controlled by "authority", have an abrupt manner, and a tendency to contrarianism for its sake...to start with. These traits are dialed up or down depending on other factors, like all aspects.

Oh, well, yes, I'm exactly like that. At least that last part.

AppLeo
11-29-2016, 06:07 PM
Depends on the rest of the chart, as always.

Uranus does tend to disorganize but if a person has an Earthy fixed chart, for example, it's not likely they would come across as erratic even though they have Sun opposite Uranus. They'd still be very willful, overly concerned with living life on their own terms and not being controlled by "authority", have an abrupt manner, and a tendency to contrarianism for its sake...to start with. These traits are dialed up or down depending on other factors, like all aspects.

Oh, I hate authority figures and following the rules :3

Blaze
11-29-2016, 06:18 PM
I've got Blue Saturn smelling up my ninth house something foul. It's also trine my ascendant but.....that's it.

Pretty sure I'm sanely-insane, though it has naught to do with doggy style Saturn.

waybread
11-29-2016, 10:31 PM
A truism of modern astrology is that planets symbolize various energies or life-themes. When a natal aspect or transit goes well for us, we've probably mastered, more or less, what that planet represents. When we hate it or struggle with it, we have a lot to learn from it. We need to turn that planet into our teacher, not the trickster, to paraphrase Steven Forrest.

Uranus rules sudden upsets of various kinds, but it is also the great liberator. If we are open to change and new ways of experiencing and thinking about life, it will go a whole lot better for us.

People who have difficulty with Uranus generally do not welcome change. Possibly thinking that, "The devil you know is better than the devil you don't know." But sometimes a comfortable rut isn't what we need in life. Challenge and uncertainty may prove to be our allies, once we adjust to a new scenario.

People with Uranus square sun or Mars tend to be the **** kickers and disturbers of their group. Generally it is beneficial if they can recognize their need for rapid inner growth, rather than pasting disruption on other people who may have very different life-maps.

p.s. I have Uranus conjunct MC, trine sun and Mars and square ascendant. My sun, Mercury, and Venus are in Aquarius. I don't find Uranus to be compassionate (David) but it does question old, stultifying, and harmful ways of doing things.

You know the saying, "You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet." Some of us would rather make the omelet.

waybread
11-29-2016, 10:48 PM
I've never seen any evidence of Uranus being humanitarian. Uranus seems as selfish as Mars or Pluto. The humanitarian ideas about Uranus resulted from its being named as ruler of Aquarius. However, unlike Aquarius, Uranus has no ties or concerns with others. This is why Uranus can be particularly difficult in connection with affiliative planets like Venus.

In The Art of Predictive Astrology Carol Rushman wrote that Uranus, natally or in transit, is associated with divorce: "Uranus is a selfish planet. It wants things on its own terms [...]"

Why call a planet "selfish"? This poor woman must have had a particularly nasty divorce.

Uranus transiting the seventh house can deal with sudden change (Uranus) in a marriage (7th house.) But I've had Uranus in my 7th house for a bit, and I've been married for 20 years. On the other hand, my husband and I enjoy RVing, hiking in remote places, and canoeing, so we introduce a lot of novelty into our lifestyle without having to turf out the marriage.

A planet cannot be selfish. People can be selfish.

A planet is impersonal.

To a committed Capricorn or Taurus, I can see Uranus rolling up as a Heap of Bad News. But to those of us who do not fear the future, Uranus can be liberating.

Again (David) Uranus is impersonal. But it will break up old structures that harm or enslave people in some way. It may seem compassionate to liberate people, but Uranus and Aquarius are not watery or emotional in their essence.

Venus can be horribly jealous, polyamorous, luxury-loving, indolent, and other un-wonderful traits. Again, she's impersonal. What you do with Venus is different.

AppLeo
11-29-2016, 11:17 PM
You make an excellent point Waybread.

sibylline
11-30-2016, 12:15 AM
People who have difficulty with Uranus generally do not welcome change. Possibly thinking that, "The devil you know is better than the devil you don't know."

Is it possible that a person just sees Uranus as malefic, meaning not benefic or neutral?

Why call a planet "selfish"? This poor woman must have had a particularly nasty divorce.

I have no idea if she did but I don't think that matters. She is hardly the only astrologer to use the word selfish in relation to Uranus. Some people just observe and describe astrology, without feeling the need for euphemisms.

It's clear planets don't actually have human characteristics; planets have been described using human traits for a very long time, if not always.

waybread
11-30-2016, 01:12 AM
Is it possible that a person just sees Uranus as malefic, meaning not benefic or neutral?

Absolutely. In traditional astrology there are malefics and benefics. Modern astrology tends not to divide planets in that way, but to see each planet as having potentially beneficial and negative influences. But how these play out is up to us in a "choice centered" vs. in a fatalistic sort of astrology.

What if disruption of your status quo were actually beneficial? Uranus might just be the unexpected windfall or serendipity. It might be the sudden release of a big burden off your shoulders.

I have to ask how you personally interpret Uranus key words like "sudden change"?

I have no idea if she did but I don't think that matters. She is hardly the only astrologer to use the word selfish in relation to Uranus. Some people just observe and describe astrology, without feeling the need for euphemisms.

It's clear planets don't actually have human characteristics; planets have been described using human traits for a very long time, if not always.

The word "selfish" is highly subjective and situational. To you, your actions might feel liberating. To me, they might appear selfish. If we unpack the word "selfish" its deployment might be very self-serving. For example, we could imagine a very controlling, soul-destroying spouse who describes her husband's decision to leave her as "selfish," without her considering how her own disrespectful, domineering behaviour became intolerable.

I am not talking about euphemisms. Uranus is impersonal. It is not watery or relational. Hard luck.

Maybe Uranus is a tough planet for needy Cancers, domineering Scorpios, tradition-bound Capricorns, or stability-craving Taureans. That doesn't make Uranus inherently "selfish."

Planets rule human traits. As you know, Mercury=communication, Mars=aggression. But how these planets operate depends on their sign (Cancer or Aries??) and aspects, and the domain of life in which they operate depends on the house. No planet is inherently selfish or loving and giving.

You might also consider the placement of Uranus in your chart or those of persons of interest. For example, a planet opposite one's sun is probably difficult, disowned, and may appear as a dread of disruptive individuals. Sounds malefic, no? But really, it is showing the individual's need to incorporate more out-of-character, novel people and activities in her life.

Another point about choice-centered astrology is that we can deliberately incorporate more Uranian activities in our lives in order to engage more productively with Uranus. For example, tomorrow, plan an activity that seems completely out-of-character for you!

graay ghost
11-30-2016, 01:22 AM
https://pics.onsizzle.com/different-i-want-things-to-be-different-oh-no-web-6297463.png

waybread
11-30-2016, 01:35 AM
One other point about Uranus as the modern ruler of Aquarius. (Saturn is the traditional ruler.)

Astrology was pretty much moribund in Europe by the early 1800s, but among the English-speaking astrologers still practicing, one proposed Uranus for Aquarius according to the following logic, based upon (a) planets' distance from the earth related to traditional sign rulerships, and (b) Greek mythology on the gods' parents and offspring (theogeny.)

Accordingly:

Mars=Scorpio Mars was the son of Jupiter.
Jupiter=Sagittarius Jupiter was the son of Saturn
Saturn= Capricorn Saturn was the son of Uranus.
Saturn=Aquarius. (ditto)

(Then you go back down the other side, with Jupiter traditionally ruling Pisces, and Mars ruling Aries.)

So if we have a planet beyond Saturn, Uranus with Aquarius is a logical fit.

Initially, it was hard for early 19th astrologers to determine how Uranus worked in a chart, and it couldn't shoehorn into the traditional table of essential dignities. They proposed that Uranus worked like Saturn, which did fit into the traditional scheme of essential dignities..

(For anyone who wants to track this history, there is an old thread on Uranus and Aries over at the Skyscript forum.)

Roll the clock forward, and modern astrologers were less taken with the doomy and gloomy notion of malefics. The discovery of Uranus seemed to coincide with the American and early European revolutions. In looking at event charts, Uranus seem to coincide with aviation and scientists and scientific discoveries.

There isn't anything specifically compassionate about political revolutions, other than that if you're an oppressed French peasant, overthrowing the monarchy, who taxes you heavily to amuse themselves at an opulent scale, probably seems like a good idea.

Aquarius is the fixed air sign. Its orientation is therefore primarily mental, and, well, fixed.

graay ghost
11-30-2016, 01:50 AM
You might also consider the placement of Uranus in your chart or those of persons of interest. For example, a planet opposite one's sun is probably difficult, disowned, and may appear as a dread of disruptive individuals. Sounds malefic, no? But really, it is showing the individual's need to incorporate more out-of-character, novel people and activities in her life.


I don't think that's necessarily true of a planet opposite one's sun.

tsmall
11-30-2016, 02:25 AM
My take? It's a malefic of the highest order and I'm amazed many intelligent astrologers don't see that. That doesn't mean it is all bad but acknowledging that it is malefic is pretty crucial to understanding it. "Planet of Altruism" has to be a joke.

My take? The planets get their natures by/because of their proximity to the Sun. Understand, there are 4 qualities, hot, cold, moist and dry. Of these two are active (that is produce) and two are resultive (as in occur because of.) In the model of the planetary spheres, the Sun produces heat and the Earth produces moisture. Heat expands, cold condenses, dryness separates and moisture unifies.

Saturn resides in the furthermost planetary sphere, and is a malefic because it is excessively cold and dry. The outer planets, if we include them in the spherical model, lie in the realm of the fixed stars, and because they cast no rays are extremely cold and dry. To me, that's proof enough that they should all be classified as malefic.

I agree with Zadkiel except I don't know about it not being as powerful as Saturn or Mars. Possibly in transit or event charts that is true; I'm not completely sure, but natally is as powerful. The effects show up through dynamic aspects (conjunction, opposition, square). Uranus is without a doubt implicated in health problems of the brain and PNS.

Ah, see, this is why I have very little use for Uranus. I have it natally conjunct my Sun in lattitude, longitude and declination. As far as I can tell, it has done little or nothing for nor against me. Just as I have Pluto exactly opposed my Moon, and Neptune exactly trine my Moon. Honestly, I can classify all of them as malefic in some way logically, but then logically Saturn has his uses even though he is a malefic by nature. The outer planets emperically, to me, have zero effect that can't be explained another way in the chart, but if you are going to use them, understand that the traditional malefics, Saturn and Mars, have their uses. Sometimes a dose of nasty is exactly what you need.

david starling
11-30-2016, 03:41 AM
My take? The planets get their natures by/because of their proximity to the Sun. Understand, there are 4 qualities, hot, cold, moist and dry. Of these two are active (that is produce) and two are resultive (as in occur because of.) In the model of the planetary spheres, the Sun produces heat and the Earth produces moisture. Heat expands, cold condenses, dryness separates and moisture unifies.

Saturn resides in the furthermost planetary sphere, and is a malefic because it is excessively cold and dry. The outer planets, if we include them in the spherical model, lie in the realm of the fixed stars, and because they cast no rays are extremely cold and dry. To me, that's proof enough that they should all be classified as malefic.



Ah, see, this is why I have very little use for Uranus. I have it natally conjunct my Sun in lattitude, longitude and declination. As far as I can tell, it has done little or nothing for nor against me. Just as I have Pluto exactly opposed my Moon, and Neptune exactly trine my Moon. Honestly, I can classify all of them as malefic in some way logically, but then logically Saturn has his uses even though he is a malefic by nature. The outer planets emperically, to me, have zero effect that can't be explained another way in the chart, but if you are going to use them, understand that the traditional malefics, Saturn and Mars, have their uses. Sometimes a dose of nasty is exactly what you need.

If it's about proximity to the Sun, Mars would be a Benefic and Jupiter would join Saturn as a Malefic, as the two outermost Traditional Planets. There is no "logic" being employed here, only some sort of prejudiced dislike. If you view Aquarius as an "altruistic" Sign (I said "if") how can you explain its rulership by Saturn, which Traditionalists consider the "Greater Malefic" in both its day and night versions?

waybread
11-30-2016, 04:58 AM
The 4 qualities of temperature and moisture come to us via Aristotle and Ptolemy (ca. 150 CE.) The real reason why Mars and Saturn are malefics is because these planetary gods ruled warfare and drought in ancient Babylon. Their astrology pre-dated the Greeks', and much of the foundations of astrology are Babylonian in origin. Ptolemy's big project was to make astrology more scientific, according to the science of his day, and to strip out the mythology and magic from contemporary astrological beliefs and practices.

The traditional belief in malefics is a lot of the reason why I prefer modern western astrology. Yes, bad things happen to good people. But Saturn and Mars have as many positive and negative attributes as the other planets. If we think about Olympic athletes, Mars gives energy and ability, but Saturn teaches persistence, self-discipline, and the hard training.

david starling
11-30-2016, 05:59 AM
Given my warm feelings for the Uranian-Effect, which I believe increases mental abilities, I have mixed feelings about the terms "Malefic" and "Benefic". I actually DO think Saturn + a Saturnian-influenced Mars are the primary cause of cruelty and warfare. It's the most difficult combination to deal with, yet the great majority of people are able to do so--it's those who CAN'T who cause the trouble for everyone else. The question here is whether the Uranian-Effect is a force for good or evil. If increasing mental abilities is EVIL, then we should expect Aquarius, the Sign ruled by the Uranian-Effect, to be seen as an evil Sign. But for most of us, that isn't the case. Any Aquarius haters out there to go along with those who think its Ruler is an evil influence? :wink: Btw, the glyph for the Planet is obviously a parabolic antenna. It increases the ability to send and receive Mind-waves, which is what the :aquarius: glyph signifies.

muchacho
11-30-2016, 06:27 AM
If it's about proximity to the Sun, Mars would be a Benefic and Jupiter would join Saturn as a Malefic, as the two outermost Traditional Planets. There is no "logic" being employed here, only some sort of prejudiced dislike. If you view Aquarius as an "altruistic" Sign (I said "if") how can you explain its rulership by Saturn, which Traditionalists consider the "Greater Malefic" in both its day and night versions?
Those purely mechanical models can't really explain astrology. We've seen that in the Pluto threads already.

Given my warm feelings for the Uranian-Effect, which I believe increases mental abilities, I have mixed feelings about the terms "Malefic" and "Benefic". I actually DO think Saturn + a Saturnian-influenced Mars are the primary cause of cruelty and warfare. It's the most difficult combination to deal with, yet the great majority of people are able to do so--it's those who CAN'T who cause the trouble for everyone else. The question here is whether the Uranian-Effect is a force for good or evil. If increasing mental abilities is EVIL, then we should expect Aquarius, the Sign ruled by the Uranian-Effect, to be seen as an evil Sign. But for most of us, that isn't the case. Any Aquarius haters out there to go along with those who think its Ruler is an evil influence? :wink: Btw, the glyph for the Planet is obviously a parabolic antenna. It increases the ability to send and receive Mind-waves, which is what the :aquarius: glyph signifies.

You are reading too much into this. That glyph signifies two flying birds. Keep it simple! :tongue:

muchacho
11-30-2016, 06:33 AM
The 4 qualities of temperature and moisture come to us via Aristotle and Ptolemy (ca. 150 CE.) The real reason why Mars and Saturn are malefics is because these planetary gods ruled warfare and drought in ancient Babylon. Their astrology pre-dated the Greeks', and much of the foundations of astrology are Babylonian in origin. Ptolemy's big project was to make astrology more scientific, according to the science of his day, and to strip out the mythology and magic from contemporary astrological beliefs and practices.

The traditional belief in malefics is a lot of the reason why I prefer modern western astrology. Yes, bad things happen to good people. But Saturn and Mars have as many positive and negative attributes as the other planets. If we think about Olympic athletes, Mars gives energy and ability, but Saturn teaches persistence, self-discipline, and the hard training.
I guess it all depends on what your actual definition of malefc/benefic is. If you go with the dictionary definition then of course that's a bit archaic and therefore difficult to accept in this day and age.

david starling
11-30-2016, 06:39 AM
Those purely mechanical models can't really explain astrology. We've seen that in the Pluto threads already.



You are reading too much into this. That glyph signifies two flying birds. Keep it simple! :tongue:

I LIKE it: Two Seagulls! Never heard that one, although I used it in a painting that way MANY years ago. Seems like everyone thinks they're bolts of lightning. :andy:

muchacho
11-30-2016, 07:04 AM
Glad we've finally settled this, hehe.

sibylline
11-30-2016, 04:38 PM
I have to ask how you personally interpret Uranus key words like "sudden change"?

I think it's accurate. Incomplete, but fairly accurate.

We'll just agree to disagree on the selfish bit.

My take? The planets get their natures by/because of their proximity to the Sun. Understand, there are 4 qualities, hot, cold, moist and dry. Of these two are active (that is produce) and two are resultive (as in occur because of.) In the model of the planetary spheres, the Sun produces heat and the Earth produces moisture. Heat expands, cold condenses, dryness separates and moisture unifies.

The outer planets emperically, to me, have zero effect that can't be explained another way in the chart, but if you are going to use them, understand that the traditional malefics, Saturn and Mars, have their uses. Sometimes a dose of nasty is exactly what you need.

Natally I've found plenty of evidence for the outer planets but that's another thread for another day. :)

[...]if you are going to use them, understand that the traditional malefics, Saturn and Mars, have their uses. Sometimes a dose of nasty is exactly what you need.

I absolutely agree with this. People have a knee-jerk reaction to the word malefic. It doesn't mean always bad. I think we lose meaning when we try to give everything a positive spin or refuse to look at the negatives.

Also, I've considered it before and I'm thinking very hot and dry for Uranus.

sibylline
11-30-2016, 04:46 PM
If it's about proximity to the Sun, Mars would be a Benefic and Jupiter would join Saturn as a Malefic, as the two outermost Traditional Planets. There is no "logic" being employed here, only some sort of prejudiced dislike.

David, I don't think tsmall actively dislikes Uranus (I could be wrong on that) since she doesn't employ it at all in her astrology. If she does, I'm sure Uranus can deal with that. It won't run to the corner of the room and cry big baby tears.

Although whether someone likes a planet or not seems entirely irrelevant to me. Just about the only thing I concern myself with regarding any astrologer's views is whether I can find evidence for them in reality. In any case, dislike could lead to deeper scrutiny, which would lead to sharper and more in-depth analysis. Not a bad thing, in my view.

sibylline
11-30-2016, 04:48 PM
https://pics.onsizzle.com/different-i-want-things-to-be-different-oh-no-web-6297463.png

Fixed Mars square Uranus in the 4th house. Aha.

waybread
11-30-2016, 05:42 PM
Those purely mechanical models can't really explain astrology. We've seen that in the Pluto threads already.



You are reading too much into this. That glyph signifies two flying birds. Keep it simple! :tongue:

Actually, the glyph for Aquarius probably originated in ancient Egypt as their symbol for water. In Babylon, the constellation Aquarius was called "the great one," responsible for bringing winter rains, on which their agriculture depended.

http://www.dkfindout.com/us/history/ancient-egypt/reading-hieroglyphs/

It wasn't always shown with two wavy lines: sometimes there were 3, sometimes they were joined. It look a while for astrological symbolism to standardize.

A fun factoid is that the constellation Aquarius is generally depicted as a man holding a vase or urn of water. The water he pours is actually the Aquarid meteor shower.

david starling
11-30-2016, 06:28 PM
Actually, the glyph for Aquarius probably originated in ancient Egypt as their symbol for water. In Babylon, the constellation Aquarius was called "the great one," responsible for bringing winter rains, on which their agriculture depended.

http://www.dkfindout.com/us/history/ancient-egypt/reading-hieroglyphs/

It wasn't always shown with two wavy lines: sometimes there were 3, sometimes they were joined. It look a while for astrological symbolism to standardize.

A fun factoid is that the constellation Aquarius is generally depicted as a man holding a vase or urn of water. The water he pours is actually the Aquarid meteor shower.

Yeah, the "Aqua" part is unequivocal. I see it as the ability to hold emotions and deal with them without being unduly affected. Water is the "ultimate solvent", and Aquarius is good at solving problems. Capricorn is good at pointing them out, and Pisces is good at ignoring them! :lol: The Ryder-Waite Tarot card, "The Star" feminized it, with a female figure pouring out water. It was originally just an overflowing basin corresponding to the ancient-Babylonian "Month of Rain" in the middle portion of Winter. (Helical placement--last Zodiacal constellation visible ABOVE the Eastern Horizon at Sunrise, that time of the seasonal year.)

AppLeo
11-30-2016, 06:45 PM
Aquarius is actually a water sign! :O

david starling
11-30-2016, 07:17 PM
Aquarius is actually a water sign! :O

It's a Sky-sign like Virgo--atmospheric. But Aquarius is about the clouds that hold the water-vapor that condenses into rain. As an Earth-sign, Virgo is about the entire atmosphere as one of the three terrestrial Realms; Capricorn--Earth's waters, and Taurus, Earth's solid land. Virgo is Earth/Air, and Capricorn is Earth/Water. Winged Maiden (Athena-Nike) symbolizes Virgo; and the Goatfish, Capricorn; solid, land dweller, originally the Ox, for Taurus.

waybread
11-30-2016, 07:17 PM
Well, a "dose of nasty" doesn't exactly sound like a heap of wonderfulness.

tsmall, I submit that you do experience Uranus. You are aware that it is the modern ruler of astrology, and that in modern astrology a planet conjunct the sun (identity) is not weakened by being combust. Rather, it shows what we identify (sun) with. When you've broken with convention out of a strong gut-level knowledge that, "I gotta to be me!"*-- that impetus is sun-Uranus. I would venture to suggest that with sun-Uranus in Libra, equality and a certain amount of freedom in twosome relationships is very important to you.

* You recall this song by Sammy Davis, Jr.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbLlCxK0pHY

Davis had sun square Uranus. Seniors may recall him as part of a "hip" 1960s/70s group of actors and singers called the "rat pack," known as a group of celebrity Bad Boys.

I am thankful that one of the first astrology books I got my hands on when I first started studying astrology around 1990 was Steven Forrest, The Inner Sky. A modern astrologer, Forrest took a very dynamic, choice-centered approach to planets, signs, and houses.

In Forrest's astrology, planets have two natures, which he terms "functional" or planets as "teachers;" and dysfunctional, or planets as "tricksters." We might question the binary, but it's no more binary than "benefic" and "malefic."

As teacher, Uranus encourages us to throw off the yoke of arbitrary traditions, established primarily to benefit people who don't care about our happiness. A name for this process is "liberation.

As trickster, Uranus gets our car totaled in the Safeway parking lot--when we were too preoccupied with our thoughts to look both ways. But after the insurance dust settles, maybe we've gotten the new car we really wanted. Maybe we did land in the hospital in traction, but that sojourn gave us time to rethink our direction in life, when we were too busy to make positive change before.

I don't want to paste a happy smiley face on this. Sudden upsets can be horrible, indeed. But in choice-centered astrology, if you foresee a tough Uranus transit or progression coming up, implement into your life some of the more positive attributes of Uranus. Resistance is futile, but what would some constructive change in your life look like?

The "I gotta be me" feeling can appear selfish to others, and may even become so as the trickster. But for a true Uranian to just squelch her true feelings in the name of peace, domesticity, convention, or deference can feel horribly soul-destroying.

And that's not good, either.

waybread
11-30-2016, 07:22 PM
Aquarius is actually a water sign! :O

No, it's an air sign. But the sun is in Aquarius during the winter, which in the Near East and Mediterranean regions where astrology got its start, is their rainy season.

Rain can be construed as atmospheric (air.)

AppLeo
11-30-2016, 09:11 PM
It's a Sky-sign like Virgo--atmospheric. But Aquarius is about the clouds that hold the water-vapor that condenses into rain. As an Earth-sign, Virgo is about the entire atmosphere as one of the three terrestrial Realms; Capricorn--Earth's waters, and Taurus, Earth's solid land. Virgo is Earth/Air, and Capricorn is Earth/Water. Winged Maiden (Athena-Nike) symbolizes Virgo; and the Goatfish, Capricorn; solid, land dweller, originally the Ox, for Taurus.

So which earth sign is Earth-fire??

What's Leo?? Fire-water? Sagittarius is Fire-Air, Aries is fire-earth, and Leo is Fire-Water.

david starling
11-30-2016, 09:33 PM
So which earth sign is Earth-fire??

What's Leo?? Fire-water? Sagittarius is Fire-Air, Aries is fire-earth, and Leo is Fire-Water.

I actually agree! Don't drink too much fire-water though! :lol:

AppLeo
11-30-2016, 10:52 PM
I actually agree! Don't drink too much fire-water though! :lol:

Dude, I drink fire-water for breakfast, lunch, and dinner!

tsmall
11-30-2016, 10:58 PM
If it's about proximity to the Sun, Mars would be a Benefic and Jupiter would join Saturn as a Malefic, as the two outermost Traditional Planets. There is no "logic" being employed here, only some sort of prejudiced dislike. If you view Aquarius as an "altruistic" Sign (I said "if") how can you explain its rulership by Saturn, which Traditionalists consider the "Greater Malefic" in both its day and night versions?

Sometimes I wonder if you purposefully misunderstand, since I know you to be pretty smart. :wink:

Mars is too close to the Sun, which is why he is excessively hot and dry. Jupiter is a hot and moist planet, hot due to proximity to the Sun, moist because his heat is temperate as his orbit is further away than that of Mars (don't take the ancients' word for it, check it out for yourself) and the cooling produces moisture. I do not view Aquarius as an "altruistic" sign; I view Aquarius as a fixed air sign, and I happen to know that the reason Saturn was granted rulership of it is because it opposes Leo. The Thema Mundi is a wondrous thing.

Further, please don't speak for the traditionalists until you understand the traditional point of view. Saturn is the greater malefic, and there are reasons he was assigned to the sect to which he belongs. Same goes for Mars. Not only do people need a little "nasty" to evolve, there is a lot of "nasty" in the world. This is fact, and all the wishing away (or even altruism) cannot change that fact.

tsmall
11-30-2016, 11:11 PM
The 4 qualities of temperature and moisture come to us via Aristotle and Ptolemy (ca. 150 CE.) The real reason why Mars and Saturn are malefics is because these planetary gods ruled warfare and drought in ancient Babylon. Their astrology pre-dated the Greeks', and much of the foundations of astrology are Babylonian in origin. Ptolemy's big project was to make astrology more scientific, according to the science of his day, and to strip out the mythology and magic from contemporary astrological beliefs and practices.

The traditional belief in malefics is a lot of the reason why I prefer modern western astrology. Yes, bad things happen to good people. But Saturn and Mars have as many positive and negative attributes as the other planets. If we think about Olympic athletes, Mars gives energy and ability, but Saturn teaches persistence, self-discipline, and the hard training.

Almost. What is missing is that the gods and mythology of the Greeks was really just a reinforcement of astrological themes, a way of cementing them in the lives of the Hellenists, and then later the Romans. It's a case of chicken and egg.

And there is no single traditional astrologer I know (and the number of them is growing daily) who disagree with the idea that there are both postive and negative expressions of these planets. After, the entire cosmos is set to neutral. It's the human component that manifests the energy.

david starling
11-30-2016, 11:36 PM
Sometimes I wonder if you purposefully misunderstand, since I know you to be pretty smart. :wink:

Mars is too close to the Sun, which is why he is excessively hot and dry. Jupiter is a hot and moist planet, hot due to proximity to the Sun, moist because his heat is temperate as his orbit is further away than that of Mars (don't take the ancients' word for it, check it out for yourself) and the cooling produces moisture. I do not view Aquarius as an "altruistic" sign; I view Aquarius as a fixed air sign, and I happen to know that the reason Saturn was granted rulership of it is because it opposes Leo. The Thema Mundi is a wondrous thing.

Further, please don't speak for the traditionalists until you understand the traditional point of view. Saturn is the greater malefic, and there are reasons he was assigned to the sect to which he belongs. Same goes for Mars. Not only do people need a little "nasty" to evolve, there is a lot of "nasty" in the world. This is fact, and all the wishing away (or even altruism) cannot change that fact.

How does the hot/moist factor apply to Venus? (Sorry, Traditional-astrology really doesn't come naturally to me. Little by little though--it's like a different mindset!)

tsmall
11-30-2016, 11:51 PM
How does the hot/moist factor apply to Venus? (Sorry, Traditional-astrology really doesn't come naturally to me. Little by little though--it's like a different mindset!)

Venus is considered "cool" in that her participation in the nocturnal sect makes her cold, but her proximity to the Sun warms her. Some authors called her hot, some cold, but all say it's a temperate coolness.

It's actually easier to backfill the planets in their spheres if you start with understanding the planetary natures.

Saturn, excessively cold and dry (think "Hoth.") The nature of Saturn is to reject and exclude. Cold condenses, dryness separates

Jupiter, hot/warm and moist (think greater benefic, and why.) Heat expands and moisture unifies. The nature of Jupiter is to confirm, and stabalize.

Mars, excessively hot and dry. Heat expands, dryness separates. The nature of Mars is to sever and to separate.

Sun, hot and dry, benefic by aspect, malefic by conjunction. The nature of the Sun is to select.

Venus, warm and moist. Heat expands, moisture unifies. The nature of Venues is to reconcile and unify.

Mercury, alone hot and dry, but takes on the nature of the planets he aspects. The nature of Mercury is to contest and destabalize.

Moon, cold and moist. Cold condenses, moisture unifies. The nature of the Moon is to gather and include. This includes gathering the things of the world unto us.

david starling
12-01-2016, 12:07 AM
Thanks, tsmall, great explanation! :happy:

waybread
12-01-2016, 02:49 AM
Almost. What is missing is that the gods and mythology of the Greeks was really just a reinforcement of astrological themes, a way of cementing them in the lives of the Hellenists, and then later the Romans. It's a case of chicken and egg.

And there is no single traditional astrologer I know (and the number of them is growing daily) who disagree with the idea that there are both postive and negative expressions of these planets. After, the entire cosmos is set to neutral. It's the human component that manifests the energy.

If you look at chronology in the history of astrology (Nicholas Campion's 2 volume histories, to take but one source,) we first get:

1, Sumerians identify planets as gods.

2. Subsequent Mesopotamian civilizations, like the Babylonians (Chaldeans, &c) adopt and adapt a lot of the Sumerians' pantheism, and further develop ephemerides and predictions based upon planetary motion. To them, the planets are either gods or manifestations of gods in the form of omens. (See Francesca Rochberg, Erica Reiner.)

3. Anciently, the Greeks did not seem to have a well-developed mythology until they adopted and adapted a lot from the Mesopotamians. (Cf. the Oxford Classical Dictionary.) With this mythology came a lot of the Mesopotamian lore about the planetary gods. (Cf. the myth of Venus and Adonis.)

4. The Greeks had a fair bit of star lore prior to the introduction of Babylonian astrology ca. 300 BCE, much of it in the form of a stellar calendar useful for phenology for agriculture and Mediterranean shipping. (Cf. Herodotus, Aratus, the scholarship of Daryn Lehoux.)

The Greeks had no astrology prior to ca. 300 BC, even though they previously had a well-developed pantheon and set of religious beliefs and practices. Cf. not only the works of Homer and Herodotus, but archaeological evidence from temples and textual evidence from early Greek authors.

5. The Greeks made other contributions to astrology, once it was up and running, notably in spherical geometry. Aristotle's proto-science was in vogue in the 4th century BCE. Ptolemy's signal contribution was to attempt to strip out the mythology and explain astrology through Hellenistic proto-science.

Mythology of planetary gods predated astrology-- by a long shot. These meanings were established long before Hellenistic astrologers decided to clean up astrology and try to systematize it.

I decided to learn some traditional astrology by studying the Hellenistic texts, specifically because of my interest in the historical origins of astrology. Much of this material is very much into a bad malefic/good benefic mode. See, for example, Ptolemy on people with my configuration of Saturn opposite Mars in the 12th and 6th houses. Valens isn't much better. See his opening remarks on the signs of Saturn-ruled Capricorn and Aquarius.

Today it is popular to say that the classical astrologers were only being metaphorical, but this certainly is not how they described themselves.

Talk about putting a happy face on a pile of nastiness!

I have many more academic references on the above chronology, which I can cite at length if anyone is interested.

waybread
12-01-2016, 03:00 AM
tsmall, how does Mars get too close to the sun? It is further away from the sun than Mercury, Venus, and the earth. This was something that Ptolemy had worked out, hence his scheme of sign rulership.

I suspect that the Greek identification of Mars with excessive heat and dryness comes from its apparent flame colour. Before this planet picked up its astrological associations and Babylonian mythological associations, the Greeks simply called it, Pyroeis, or "firey one."

david starling
12-01-2016, 04:05 AM
If you look at chronology in the history of astrology (Nicholas Campion's 2 volume histories, to take but one source,) we first get:

1, Sumerians identify planets as gods.

2. Subsequent Mesopotamian civilizations, like the Babylonians (Chaldeans, &c) adopt and adapt a lot of the Sumerians' pantheism, and further develop ephemerides and predictions based upon planetary motion. To them, the planets are either gods or manifestations of gods in the form of omens. (See Francesca Rochberg, Erica Reiner.)

3. Anciently, the Greeks did not seem to have a well-developed mythology until they adopted and adapted a lot from the Mesopotamians. (Cf. the Oxford Classical Dictionary.) With this mythology came a lot of the Mesopotamian lore about the planetary gods. (Cf. the myth of Venus and Adonis.)

4. The Greeks had a fair bit of star lore prior to the introduction of Babylonian astrology ca. 300 BCE, much of it in the form of a stellar calendar useful for phenology for agriculture and Mediterranean shipping. (Cf. Herodotus, Aratus, the scholarship of Daryn Lehoux.)

The Greeks had no astrology prior to ca. 300 BC, even though they previously had a well-developed pantheon and set of religious beliefs and practices. Cf. not only the works of Homer and Herodotus, but archaeological evidence from temples and textual evidence from early Greek authors.

5. The Greeks made other contributions to astrology, once it was up and running, notably in spherical geometry. Aristotle's proto-science was in vogue in the 4th century BCE. Ptolemy's signal contribution was to attempt to strip out the mythology and explain astrology through Hellenistic proto-science.

Mythology of planetary gods predated astrology-- by a long shot. These meanings were established long before Hellenistic astrologers decided to clean up astrology and try to systematize it.

I decided to learn some traditional astrology by studying the Hellenistic texts, specifically because of my interest in the historical origins of astrology. Much of this material is very much into a bad malefic/good benefic mode. See, for example, Ptolemy on people with my configuration of Saturn opposite Mars in the 12th and 6th houses. Valens isn't much better. See his opening remarks on the signs of Saturn-ruled Capricorn and Aquarius.

Today it is popular to say that the classical astrologers were only being metaphorical, but this certainly is not how they described themselves.

Talk about putting a happy face on a pile of nastiness!

I have many more academic references on the above chronology, which I can cite at length if anyone is interested.

I see a clear line running from Ancient-Sumeria/Babylonia through Ancient-Egypt to Ancient-Greece: Apollo, "most Greek of the gods" from Horus; and Hades, one of the three gods with "Earthly Authority" from Osirus. The Babylonians were also attuned to Egypt--their constellations for Leo and Scorpio both had connections to the Nile. The Egyptians borrowed heavily from Ancient-Sumeria to begin with, so these three cultures (Babylonians included as a continuation of Sumeria) were intertwined when it came to religious beliefs. The Greeks were the synthesizers and clarifiers, and [IMO] the most useful for Astrology when it comes to symbolism and classification. I also think ancient Astrologers should have gone more with the Greek versions of the deities than the Roman, although not entirely--Saturn, for example. It would be confusing using the Greek "Ares" for Mars, ruling Aries! :lol: