Confused about Pluto

Monk

Premium Member
Sorry wrong chart on members download, right one below, last one above four minutes out:-
 

Attachments

  • picture 1 35%.jpg
    picture 1 35%.jpg
    61.4 KB · Views: 28

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
It must be noted that i follow mundane astrology,
so can be rusty with birth charts, but i love Robert Hand, and always follow his links to mundane astrology,
as an overall astrologer i find him the best,
for fixed stars i follow Bernadette Brady!

With the Ingress Charts above, i find the Washington Chart fascinating
regarding the Ukrainian Crises, tap on chart on previous link thread section to make larger.

Robert Hand uses Pluto in mundane astrology,
and JupiterAsc will be interested in the parans regarding Washington DC ,
as Jupiter and Alnilam, Belt of Orion are rising at location at 12:53:06.

Obviously different ways to value mundane astrology,
but Robert Hand wouldn't have come by insight by not using Pluto!
One orbit of the sun by pluto requires 248 years approximately

therefore

no human being can experience a pluto return in one lifetime :smile:

thus the dwarf planet has nothing to add to natal astrology
since the seven classical planets already provide answers

and even for MUNDANE ASTROLOGICAL DELINEATION the seven classical planets provide more than sufficient data


pluto is only one object of many similar objects in the Kuiper Belt
many more similar objects are being discovered daily
so if dwarf planet pluto is relevant then so are all the other dwarf planets
yet no one is creating a furore and demanding that all dwarf planets form part of natal chart delineation
 

Dirius

Well-known member
For those following and reading the topic (without commenting), what konrad posted might sound a bit confusing actually, if one has never read about hyleg/alcocoden/anareta.

**just adding this for any newby readers, a short basic description of the technique :tongue:

The predominant planet in the chart, usually known as "reagent of the chart" is called the Hyleg. It is usually one of the 2 luminaries (sun or moon). Most of the life longevity predictions techniques are done by following the path from the Hyleg's initial starting point, up to a 90° arc.

For example with the hyleg at 2° Aries, it would travel up to 2° Cancer..(if not killed before by anaretas)

Essentially:

- the hyleg is the planet representing life (it is usually the predominant luminary).
- the alcocoden, the planet that acts as reagent of the hyleg.
- anareta de planets that hurt the hyleg (the malefics + the other luminary).

The hyleg falling into malefic terms, aspecting anaretas, etc through its 90° pathway will hurt or kill the hyleg. The hyleg passing through benefic terms, aspected by benefics, save the hyleg.

Basicly, the technique tries to find out if the Hyleg will die before reaching the 90° arc.

----------------------------------------

Btw I was chekcing both charts, I must ask though, in the chart posted by Konrad the moon is at gemini? (the one posted by unique_astrology is at cancer)....could any of the charts be wrong with daylight saving time or something?

In the original chart posted, pluto doesn't ever actually touch the descendant degree.
 
Last edited:

Konrad

Account Closed
For those following and reading the topic (without commenting), what konrad posted might sound a bit confusing actually, if one has never read about hyleg/alcocoden/anareta.

**just adding this for any newby readers :tongue:

Most of the life longevity predictions techniques are done assuming a path from the Hyleg's initial starting point, up to a 90°.

Essentially:

- the hyleg is the planet representing life (it is the predominant luminary).
- the alcocoden, the planet that acts as reagent of the hyleg.
- anareta de planets that hurt the hyleg (the malefics + the other luminary).

The hyleg falling into malefic terms, aspecting anaretas, etc through its 90° pathway will hurt or kill the hyleg.

----------------------------------------

Btw I was chekcing both charts, I must ask though, in the chart posted by Konrad the moon is at gemini? (the one posted by unique_astrology is at cancer)....could any of the charts be wrong with daylight saving time or something?

Btw I checked the original chart posted, pluto doesn't ever actually touch the descendant degree.

Dirius,

I use the Sidereal zodiac, Lahiri measurement. And yes, thank you for clarifying the terms. I sometimes forget that these techniques are not as common as they should be. In time, when we are better able to reconstruct the older systems and, more importantly, are better able to apply their principles to the current age then I believe more people will go to them due to their profoundness in talking of our human experience.

You know, you're right. Pluto turned Retrograde before touching the DSC, by longitude anyway. Thanks for that, I never even bothered checking. I think I'm a little too trusting. :)
 
Last edited:

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I only posted in direct response to the querent's first post,
thus I haven't followed any of the extraneous discussion that is occurring here,
but if I may intrude just to say... ?

...That the chart you posted waybread is most interesting to me personally
as I see a unique synastry beween it and my own natal chart.


...by the oddest of coincidences,
the Sun is conj. my Pluto which was at 20* Leo 48' when I was born.

In addition, Mars conj. my Part of Play, Venus trine my Mars in the 5th deg. of Gemini, Uranus conj. my Part of Nobility & Honor, Chiron conj. my natal Venus, Jupiter conj. my vertex and the I.C. conj. my Part of Libido/Energy, have certainly piqued my interest... and I use the term "piqued" most conservatively.

If the chart native is a woman and single... introduce me... I promise to be on my best behavior, trust me.:innocent:
:devil:
The 'oddest of coincidences has an obvious explanation :smile:

pluto's journey around the sun already takes 248 long years
and so
when retrograde, pluto is found at the same degree for many months

and in fact
pluto was at the same degree due to retrogradation from 1951 - 1952

so then
tens of hundreds of millions of people born 1951 - 1952 all have pluto at the same degree


so much for 'the unique synastry of pluto'

No, it's a married man. Sorry!
A married man with pluto at the same degree as tens of hundreds of millions of others born during 1951 - 1952 specifically
the married man in question also has Neptune almost at the same degree as you piercethvale

i.e.
within two degrees of all people born 1951 - 1952
and in the same sign


Konrad, since this hospital record does not appear to have been rounded, I think it's pretty close.
This person definitely comes across to me as Sagittarius rising.
He got married in late September, 2007-- I think the 29th or 30th.
born 1951 - 1952 and so got married aged approximately 56
 

Dirius

Well-known member
I was just thinking that perhaps we have some newby readers that are interested in the hot topic, and throwing words like "alcocoden" at them would be confusing. A short explanation from our part was in order :biggrin:
 
Last edited:

JUPITERASC

Well-known member

I was just thinking that perhaps we have some newby readers that are interested in the hot topic,
and throwing words like "alcocoden" at them would be confusing.
A short explanation from our part was in order
:biggrin:
Good thinking Dirius, and thank you for that ~ of course ours is an astrological learning forum
where we all learn by exchange of astrological opinion
:smile:
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member

It seems we have a different definition of inner guidance.
It seems you have misunderstood my comments

i.e.
Inner guidance = guidance from within



The way I use the term,
inner guidance means guidance coming from within
the way you use the term is the way the term is designed to be understood

we agree then that Inner guidance = guidance from within



and not guiding what is within (which I guess is how you meant it).
Your guess is incorrect :smile:

as I stated
inner guidance simply means guidance from within



In that sense, astrology is not guidance that is coming from within,
but it can be used as guidance for what is within.
obviously astrology is 'a form of guidance for what is within'

HOWEVER
keep in mind that 'inner guidance' in and of itself
is dependent on being reliable guidance
if it is to be constructive guidance as well

however
you seem to be claiming that 'inner guidance' is automatically reliable

and clearly this is patently not the case


Sure, if a new model is introduced, it should deliver consistent results before we can adapt it.
'new models' require extensive proof
rather than not unquestioning acceptance by all and sundry

And the new model doesn't have to invalidate the old model necessarily.
since your comment states that the old model remains valid
then there's no need for a new model
:smile:
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Monk, I've never been much of a rock fan (after I outgrew the Jefferson Airplane, that is;) )
but after looking at Prince's chart & bio-sketch, it seems to me that Prince is known for (10th house) being a prolific writer and performer
(which would be true of many singer-songwriters,)
but also for a bad-boy image that pushes the boundaries of "acceptable" sexuality, dress, and gender mores.

So perhaps its the sexual provocation of Prince's music where we might expect to see a Plutonian influence.
Rock music has 'a bad-boy image' since its inception
for example
'The Warden threw a party in the County Jail'
tut tut, bad Warden
:smile:

furthermore popular music thrives on sexual provocation in one form or another



Jailhouse-Rock-Elvis-Presley-LaserDisc-ML102564-N.jpg


This doesn't deny Mars as the "guy" planet, or Venus as the attractant.
With Pluto, however, we'd expect to see more upheaval, and perhaps even a transpersonal kind of influence.


In fact, the sexual lyrics to some of Prince's songs led to the following, excerpted from Wikipedia:

"After Tipper Gore heard her 12-year-old daughter Karenna listening to Prince's song "Darling Nikki", she founded the Parents Music Resource Center.The center advocates the mandatory use of a warning label ("Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics") on the covers of records that have been judged to contain language or lyrical content unsuitable for minors. The recording industry later voluntarily complied with this request.[Of what is considered the Filthy Fifteen Prince's compositions appear no. 1 and no. 2, with the fourth position occupied by his protégée Vanity."
Parents protesting against sexuality in music is nothing new
and may be explained by the seven visible planets rather than blaming everything on pluto


When Elvis Presley performed on the Ed Sullivan Show 1956,
the cameras only showed him from the waist up because of the hip-shaking

In the mid 1960’s, parents were shocked by the mop-top haircuts..... how plutonian is a mop-top haircut?

'....More shocks were in store as groups like the Rolling Stones and the Animals
popularized a more coarse, gritty, and vulgar style of blues-influenced rock.
The psychedelic explosion brought new controversy to the world of rock.
Bands such as the Jefferson Airplane and the Grateful Dead
openly lived a hippie lifestyle and freely admitted to the use of drugs like marijuana and LSD...'


This was a new source of alarm for parents as young people adopted hippie ways and the abuse of drugs became epidemic.
Rock ‘n’ rollers have continued to try to keep the shock waves coming with the violent aggressiveness of “heavy metal” rock,
the open rebellion of “punk” rock, and music advocating sexual promiscuity, homosexuality, drug abuse,
and finally, Satanism, the worship of the devil
http://www.orthodoxresearchinstitute.org/articles/family/ocallaghan_rock_n_roll.htm
Modernly, Pluto has a lot to do with sexuality,
because of its (shared) rulership of Scorpio.
so shared rulership of Scorpio is the sole reason for pluto conenction with sexuality then
And yet the explanation of why pluto is modernly associated with Scorpio
is simply as Paul_ commented

Just as an historical interlude that some people may find interesting,
it's note worthy that modern rulerships were assigned not because of some arduous research and investigation
- as you often hear from many modern astrologers, but instead
by astrologers of the time, cogniscant of the tradition of rulership,
basically went ahead and followed Ptolemy's logic, by assigning the next planet out with the next sign out. So flowing from the Sun is the rulership scheme which normally reflects back to the Moon, but breaking this they just carried on projecting out from the sun. So the next out from the Sun is Mercury, then Venus, then Mars, then Jupiter and then Saturn, and then when Uranus was discovered we see astrologers explicitly invent the rulership to Aquarius because Aquarius is the next sign out after Capricorn, then when Neptune comes along it's assigned the next one out which is Pisces.

This is explicitly stated in the very earliest sources we have for modern rulership.

So the outer planetary rulerships came about by trying to stay true to the tradition at large, and absolutely not by channelling or study of numerous charts.

Then Pluto was discovered and by this stage in the history our understanding of astrology, already getting watered down by the time of Uranus' discovery, find itself in a time where astrology is no longer in the hands of the educated as it once was, but in the hands of the masses, during a time when it was already simplified and watered down and projected through a pseudo-religious lens of the Theosophical movement.

Pluto is discovered and the pattern continues.
It is assigned to Aries
and
there is a conference in Germany to discuss the matter more fully.
UNANIMOUS agreement dictates that Pluto rules Aries,
and the counter idea, that some were positing at the time, that it should rule Scorpio are squashed.


Until someone beats them to print, and writes up the attributions of Pluto and that it rules Scorpio.
The author beat them to print and published a successful book and the rest is history.
It stuck, and from that day forth Pluto magically started ruling Scorpio.


I point this out because in the context of rulership even the modern rulership scheme bows to the traditional logic as much as it can. It does not reinvent anything, instead it recognises the superiority of the traditional schema and tries to accommodate itself into it as much as it can.

The only exception is that the general lack of understanding of the broader tradition by the time of Pluto amongst the basic astrologer, thanks to a deliberate watering down of astrological technique coupled with the unlucky timing of Pluto coming out when the astrological world was still struggling to emerge from the mini-dark period it underwent meant that one of the outers went to another sign.
So the fact that pluto is 'modernly connected with Scorpio'
is because one author beat another author to the print

If we extend this a bit further, medical/anatomical astrology is one area where signs and houses do overlap.
When you see someone with Scorpio rising, Pluto conjunct the MC, and the sun in the 8th house,
I think it is fair enough to consider him to be an "8th chord" (8th key) type of person.
Scorpio and the 8th house rule the sexual organs
So for you the sexual connection of pluto is entirely dependent on pluto being co-ruler of Scorpio
and yet
pluto unanimously ruled Aries
until one author beat another to the print

Pluto has a ruthless quality to it that I wouldn't get from Prince's Mars in Aries alone.
An Aries Mars is an aggressive, independent kind of guy,
but other factors in the chart might suggest some concern about the impact of his music on little kids.
Whereas a domineering Pluto is more, "I am going to be me regardless of what you think, or who gets damaged in the process."

We get some cross-currents, as well with Prince's late-degree MC and Pluto in Leo, ruled by an 8th house sun;
the sun's house ruled by a domiciled Mercury square Pluto; and Pluto aspecting a domiciled Venus (trine,) Mars (quincunx,) moon (opposition,) and Saturn (trine.) He's also got the generational Pluto-Neptune sextile. Pluto is a big focalizer in Prince's chart. Pluto/MC quintile sun confers a huge amount of ambition.

If we look at Mars as the traditional ruler of Scorpio (rising sign) we see it domiciled and as the tip of a yod, and also as aspecting multiple planets.

Certainly there's more in Prince's chart that relates to his life that I could discuss, but it does seem to me to be a good illustration of how Pluto functions.
The flaw in your argument is that Prince is only one of many popular 'rock stars'
and
even if some rock stars do have pluto in Leo with an Aries Mars
not all rock stars have Mars in Aries and Pluto in Leo

King of Rock and Roll Elvis Presley has pluto in Cancer :smile:
by the way King of Rock and Roll's Moon is Pisces
and
Mars is in Libra
the flaw of your argument is that it is far too generalised


 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
So perhaps its the sexual provocation of Prince's music where we might expect to see a Plutonian influence.

In fact, the sexual lyrics to some of Prince's songs led to the following, excerpted from Wikipedia:

"After Tipper Gore heard her 12-year-old daughter Karenna listening to Prince's song "Darling Nikki", she founded the Parents Music Resource Center.The center advocates the mandatory use of a warning label ("Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics") on the covers of records that have been judged to contain language or lyrical content unsuitable for minors. The recording industry later voluntarily complied with this request.[Of what is considered the Filthy Fifteen Prince's compositions appear no. 1 and no. 2, with the fourth position occupied by his protégée Vanity."
Modernly, Pluto has a lot to do with sexuality, because of its (shared) rulership of Scorpio
.
by the way, there are 'bad girls' as well as 'bad boys' :smile:

In 2009 The Parents Television Council, a non-profit organisation with a mission
"to promote and restore responsibility to the entertainment industry"
said airing Britney Spears song 'IF YOU SEEK AMY 'between 6:00am and 10:00pm
"would violate the broadcast indecency law."
http://www.nme.com/news/britney-spears/42250

Britney Spears Pluto is in Venus-ruled Libra

The claim that pluto's sexual connection is due to co-rulership of Scorpio with Mars
is based on unconfirmed assertions that pluto co-rules Scorpio


 
Last edited:

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Re: the recent Dirius-Muchacho debate:

Sadly, people do not always understand themselves very well.
And probably you see this with a few people you know.
Maybe they tend to act badly or strangely around other people, then wonder why they have few friends.
The abusive alcoholic who doesn't understand why his wife left him.

A common type of question in "read my chart" threads is, "What career am I best suited for?"
or "What would be a good major for me in college?"
Periodically you see OPs from women saying, "Why am I 40 and still single?"
Or from anyone, "Why doesn't my money work out?"
They might be perplexed about their romantic or parent-child relationship, and hope for some insights.
I could go on in this fashion
-- but, no--
many people do not understand themselves very well
and they hope that astrology will help them with some answers.
A lack of self-understanding is not-unusual
however
astrology is not necessarily the most effective way to gain self-understanding
meditation for example
is a proven way to gain better understanding of oneself
:smile:
 

unique_astrology

Well-known member
In the original chart posted, pluto doesn't ever actually touch the descendant degree.

In case you don't know the angles of a horoscope are computed in right ascension, as are all bodies or points in space located. The speculum's for Farah Fawcett's passing showing the true body positions of points in her natal chart and of the transits at the time of her death clearly show that transit Pluto occupied the same astronomical lune within 2 arcminutes as the computed Descendant of her natal chart. Read attached speculum.

Astrologers' would do well to try and find Jeff Mayo's THE ASTROLOGER'S ASTRONOMICAL HANDBOOK, c) 1965 by author, L.N. Fowler & Co. Ltd., London or a similar work. For now I post excerpts from another to save myself much time.

FYI.

From notes by Kay Cavender

"A simplification: To put up an astrological chart: when you find the longitude (zodiacal) placements of planets and lights (and their aspects)--that's the Ecliptic System. When you calculate the angles(ASC-DSC and MC-IC), and the planetary positions in relation to the angles, that involves a combination of the Equatorial and Horizon Systems in relation to the Ecliptic.

The Ecliptic (longitudinal) degrees of a planet alone will not necessarily indicate if it is really "ON" the horizon (ASC-DSC) or "ON" the meridian (MC-IC) - BECAUSE the Ecliptic longitude positions also have latitude, and BECAUSE the Earth (and its Equatorial plane) is tipped 23.5 degrees to the Ecliptic plane, and BECAUSE we live on
different latitudes (Horizon System). These three systems (Ecliptic, Equatorial, Horizon) have to be coordinated.

HORIZON SYSTEM (Azimuth & Altitude): Because planets have Declination (see Equatorial System) and Altitude, they are not necessarily bodily or literally (i.e., "mundanely") on the Horizontal angles (ASC-DSC) even though their ecliptic longitude is. Altitude (up or down from horizon) is key to rising & setting planets. What's on the horizon is
0 degrees Altitude, therefore actually "mundanely" angular rather than just ecliptically the same degree on the horizon (ASC-DSC). ASC = ecliptic degree crossing the eastern horizon."

and

". . . Planets must be BODILY "on" the angles (their 'MUNDANE' position) to have a relationship to the angles.

However, the Right Ascension of the lights and/or planets, when compared to the RAMC of the culminating angles & when calculated with Horizon coordinates, does indicate when a celestial body is angular on MC or IC. Most critical to measure is Pluto, which because of its extreme ecliptic latitude (up to 17 degrees) is generally not anywhere
near its ecliptic longitude. Measuring Pluto especially in terms of spherical astronomy is complex mathematically because it involves these overlapping astronomical systems of measurement."
 

Attachments

  • FFN&TSpec.gif
    FFN&TSpec.gif
    14.2 KB · Views: 33
Last edited:

unique_astrology

Well-known member
[deleted quote of attacking comment - Moderator]

Pluto on the Desc. does not always indicate death any more nor less than all of what you had to dig for but in this case it was an appropriate aspect.

From Robert Hand's "Planets In Transit" on the significance of transiting Pluto:

"You can always see its effects very clearly - ranging from machines breaking down and needing repair to full scale destruction and death."

From a prior posting by me elsewhere:

Even with such exactness of planetary placements in relationship with the angles or other planets in a chart there is no exact prediction of what will come to pass. If anybody believes otherwise, I have a life span of almost 70 years, a timed birth chart, and have lived through the conjunctions, sextiles, squares, trines, and oppostions of all of the outer planets to all of my natal planets and angles and would enjoy their interpretations detailing the experiences of any 1 of those transits. A ballpark of positive or negative, easy or difficult, is all that may be forecast without intuition or a 'sixth sense' playing a role. How could it be otherwise when you have but 2 luminaries and 8 planets with which to describe the countless experiences which occur every moment in the world?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Konrad

Account Closed
Well I agree with one thing, Pluto's Ecliptical co-ordinates should not be used if one is insists on using it. My reference to the ASC was merely to highlight that the ASC is the thing that everything in the chart is related to, just as it is the being of the native that joins the various parts of their life together. I was trying to be concise, but I see it didn't work. You did say "...whether they are measured in longitude or Right Ascension" though hence the use of my "apparently...". I apologise if I have misunderstood your meaning in "longitude".

[deleted attacking comments - Moderator]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

waybread

Well-known member
Waybread, a few minutes difference would change the sign, and no offence, but your definition of Sagittarius rising would be different to mine. I can't do any rectification so the dates are not of use.

I am curious to learn your definition of Sagittarius rising. I'd say that a mutable fire sign ruled by Jupiter in either Leo (tropical) or Cancer (sidereal) comes across very differently from Scorpio or Capricorn rising.. Further, that the ascendant indicates something about the person's outward personality and body. (And this is straight out of a traditional astrology textbook.)

Incidentally, star-fans, I read an article about the night sky in February. Apparently under good viewing conditions, there will be some times when you can see Neptune with a good pair of binoculars. It's not in this site, but it might be of interest for the naked-eye star gazers here: http://www.nakedeyeplanets.com/#neptune
 
Last edited:

AstroLogical

Well-known member
A lack of self-understanding is not-unusual
however
astrology is not necessarily the most effective way to gain self-understanding
meditation for example
is a proven way to gain better understanding of oneself
:smile:

I agree with this and would include; any interest in "Self" as a spiritual being, rather than an ego driven programmed social machine, often begin with simple self serving questions about "self." If their time is ripe these questions potentially lead one's attention inward toward Self discovery. For many, even the sun sign columns we all know and love :wink: are often the first little steps along the journey of awakening. Little steps... on a very long journey.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
[deleted quote of attacking comment - Moderator]

Pluto on the Desc. does not always indicate death any more nor less than all of what you had to dig for
but in this case it was an appropriate aspect.

From Robert Hand's "Planets In Transit"
on the significance of transiting Pluto: "You can always see its effects very clearly
- ranging from machines breaking down and needing repair to full scale destruction and death."


From a prior posting by me elsewhere:

Even with such exactness of planetary placements in relationship with the angles or other planets in a chart there is no exact prediction of what will come to pass. If anybody believes otherwise, I have a life span of almost 70 years, a timed birth chart, and have lived through the conjunctions, sextiles, squares, trines, and oppostions of all of the outer planets to all of my natal planets and angles and would enjoy their interpretations detailing the experiences of any 1 of those transits. A ballpark of positive or negative, easy or difficult, is all that may be forecast without intuition or a 'sixth sense' playing a role. How could it be otherwise when you have but 2 luminaries and 8 planets with which to describe the countless experiences which occur every moment in the world?
Robert Hand wrote Planets in Transits as a computer program :smile:
then sold it to astro.com and states during this interview
that he no longer recognises it much since it has been 're-written'
http://theastrologypodcast.com/2013/12/09/robert-hand-reconciling-modern-traditional-astrology/
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Well I agree with one thing, Pluto's Ecliptical co-ordinates should not be used if one is insists on using it.
My reference to the ASC was merely to highlight that the ASC is the thing that everything in the chart is related to,
just as it is the being of the native that joins the various parts of their life together.
I was trying to be concise, but I see it didn't work.
You did say "...whether they are measured in longitude or Right Ascension" though hence the use of my "apparently...". I apologise if I have misunderstood your meaning in "longitude".

[deleted attacking comments - Moderator]
The practice of HOROSCOPIC ASTROLOGY is indeed entirely dependent on there being 'an hour marker'
i.e. the Ascendant
:smile:
No time of birth = no reliable ascendant
 

AstroLogical

Well-known member
So do we continue to believe in Pluto's force? Personally, everything I read about from an astrological point of view on Pluto I relate to, notoriously so.

What did you get started here?
Trouble maker! :wink:


Back to your post (and thank you for stirring the pot):

I agree in the sense that those archetypal principals that have been assign to Pluto are at work on every level. The assignment of these principals to Pluto or any planet seem to be the sticking point for so many. The fact that this debate turns into a battle of "Traditionalists" vs. "Modernists" is kind of a sad thing in a way...IMHO although it can eventually be productive...

In about any trade or art that I can think of the same friction exists. Old ways hold on for dear life while new ideas struggle to find their place. And at the end of the day, when the house is built or the song has been written and recorded, it only seems to matter to those who need to make an issue out if it whether the walls were constructed using modern power tools vs. traditional hand tools or whether the guitar was an old Martin acoustic vs. a Fender electric... in the end the results are what matters—to most of us.

In the end it may come down to the classic debate of the tree falling in the forest... Traditionally the debate was a loop without proof either way. Now, if you/we accept the growing understanding of quantum science (which not so remarkably sounds a lot like traditional metaphysical principals) then we must consider the importance of the "observer" in the discussion.

Thus, if you use Pluto and find useful insight it may simply mean that you have inserted yourself into the forest as the observer and find there is a sound. If you do not use Pluto and find the same or similar insight it may simply mean your attention is focused elsewhere and the power of this observation is "mutually entangled"—in a quantum sort of way—to the focus on the individual and chart being examined—Pluto or not!
In other words it's like the two blind men examining the same elephant from opposite ends. Argument and debate ensue but if they continue to examine and learn to cooperate and share info they just might find they are observing the same thing.

I know this is like—weird!

On a couple occasions, once in the 70's and again in the 80's, I provided some highly accurate chart readings (according to the Natives), only to find out later the basis for the chart calculations given to me were quite wrong.
So, what's that all about?
Something else is going on here on other levels of consciousness. This art/science of astrology is not only just a matter of matter—examining physical objects out there in space and insisting they fit into a scheme of study. It also has to do with our interconnectivity to each other and the universe we "observe."
Could it all actually be ONE as the phrase is so often coined?
And as we "log on" to the Internet with focus on this forum, perhaps when we focus our attention on a chart we are logging on to a sort of Cosmic Internet of information that we have only began to understand. It would explain a lot...

So if Pluto "speaks to you," listen and analyze it's message.
Is it relevant or not to your overall observation?
If Pluto flips you off, ignore it and use whatever tools are comfortable for you.
The energy lost in debating this Traditional vs. Modernist issue could power a small community :biggrin:

Love you all... in some way or another.
A*L
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Incidentally, star-fans, I read an article about the night sky in February.
Apparently under good viewing conditions, there will be some times when you can see Neptune with a good pair of binoculars.
It's not in this site, but it might be of interest for the naked-eye star gazers here: http://www.nakedeyeplanets.com/#neptune
viewing Neptune with the use of binoculars is not naked-eye star gazing :smile:
the link provided clearly states:

'...[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Neptune is beyond naked eye visiblilty,
but it is just within range of good binoculars
when seen from fully dark locations,
preferably in the absence of moonlight.
A good star map is required to find it.
Medium to large telescopes show it as a tiny pale blue-grey disk....'


Furthermore

Neptune can only be seen from fully dark locations
so if you are resident in a town, city or well-lit village
then Neptune is not visible
even with the assistance of good binoculars

You'll need a good star map

[/FONT]

m fully dark locations, preferably in the absence of moonlight. A good star map is required to find it. Medium to large telescopes show it as a tiny pale blue-grey disk.
 
Top