Confused about Pluto

Monk said:

Ancient Text about Paranatellonta below:-

Obviously the most ancient of all astrology:-

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10705808

Now this is interesting, as Brady's parans explains most terrorist attacks that are meaningful in the West, most important dates regarding a democratic process in most countries, a great deal of assassinations, many aspects of war during the last 2000 years, many aspects of religion, and calendars, however i'm not completely sure this is electional astrology or synchronicity, however if it was synchronicity it would prove astrology beyond doubt!

Obviously my parans can be found on link #9 on link below:-

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44021

It must be noted that i'm trying to find other measures other than Pluto for my own threads regarding birth chart, thus in effect trying to make traditional astrologers job easier to find something else, however i don't see why i should try regarding my threads about electional mundane astrology Ha Ha!

Click to expand...

Monk - screenshot of your natal paranatellonata
as noted by Kolev's PORPHYRIUS MAGUS

As JupiterAsc knows, the ecliptic measure is called Projected and isn't accurate with fixed stars, parans use location and use angles, projected measure will only show the same as parans if a star is actually sitting on the ecliptic.

Most stars don't sit on the ecliptic so isn't accurate to parans or astronomy, example would be using projected, then all stars would be on the line of the apparent path of the Sun, thus in a line, which they are not.

Actually as my M.C. is aligned to Regulus, it is the same for projected or paran, only because Regulus sits on ecliptic or apparent path of the Sun through the Constellations in a course of a year!

Monk said:

Ancient Text about Paranatellonta below:-

Obviously the most ancient of all astrology:-

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10705808

Now this is interesting, as Brady's parans explains most terrorist attacks that are meaningful in the West, most important dates regarding a democratic process in most countries, a great deal of assassinations, many aspects of war during the last 2000 years, many aspects of religion, and calendars, however i'm not completely sure this is electional astrology or synchronicity, however if it was synchronicity it would prove astrology beyond doubt!

Obviously my parans can be found on link #9 on link below:-

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44021

It must be noted that i'm trying to find other measures other than Pluto for my own threads regarding birth chart, thus in effect trying to make traditional astrologers job easier to find something else, however i don't see why i should try regarding my threads about electional mundane astrology Ha Ha!

Click to expand...

Right, Monk. Do you have access to the article and can you read German? The abstract doesn't prove anything in itself. That the ancient cultures used the appearance and disappearance of stars as markers of time is not in doubt, but that is a little bit away from attaching astrological significance to the planets rising, setting and culminating with stars. I don't know your research, and I am not an mundane astrologer, so I am not doubting your findings, just that the practice as Brady presents it is not really ancient. Of course, this doesn't validate it or invalidate it in anyway. When I firt heard what she was doing, I was reminded of the Mesopotamians' ziqpu stars which were used to measure time.

Paranatellonta as listed in the Brill Online Reference:

"(παρανατέλλοντα; paranatéllonta), stars 'rising alongside' (or συνανατέλλοντα/synanatéllonta, 'rising simultaneously') are constellations, parts thereof (also of the signs of the zodiac) or especially bright individual stars, which become visible or invisible at the same time as certain degrees or decanal sections (segments of 10 degrees) of the ecliptic. They were first described by Aratus [4] who was criticized by Hipparchus [6]. In antiquity, they were used for determining the seasons and for distinguishing zodiacal prognoses by astrologers. In addition to the four basic types (acronycal and heliacal (= cosmic) rise or descent: i.e. evening's first, evening's last, morning's first, and morning's last visibility), there are the constant ecliptic lengths, which are dependent on latitude, and, especially for the circumpolar constellations, also the two culminations. Teucer of Babylon created speculative links between the signs of the zodiac and the paranatellonta, with specific annual dates of particular importance [1; 2]. He was followed by Manilius [III 1], Firmicus Maternus, Rhetorius and others who also personified the paranatellonta (e.g. as stellar deities). A rich iconography (illuminations in manuscripts as well as descriptive texts) developed from this, which continued into the 16th cent."

http://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/brill-s-new-pauly/paranatellonta-e907920

Hi JupiterAsc,

Yes a lot is the same, but very confusing without star pictures that show stars on angles, i can only think you have been confused by readout, or you would have agreed to my many mundane postings regarding countries!

Buy Brady's Starlight, it will clarify, then you will see how silly projected measure is with fixed stars especially on asc/desc!

Hi Konrad,

Actually if Sirius rose with the Sun too far back regarding Egyptians or Greeks, they would look towards an amber light in the East, while they could still see Sirius along horizon, however when the Greeks invaded Egypt, they set mathematics in place and leading up to 0045BC they were, i'm sure being able to set Sirius and Sun together on horizon however they couldn't see it, the sky was too bright on date!

This exact process has followed us down the ages regarding mundane astrology in a great deal of charts up to modern times, JupiterAsc can lead you to many of my threads, ask him, it is fascinating, however although i think it is electional mundane paran astrology, i could be wrong and being synchronicity! It would be very exciting if it was synchronicity for proving astrology!

Obviously my intention regarding my birthchart was to find many observations regarding why i make posts regarding my area of interest, pushing away from Pluto influence.

After all, one that makes a lot of posts regarding mundane astrology and i'm a good investigator, we must see why by birthchart!

Hi Konrad,

Keep your eye on thread below, all modern Olympics from 1896 have a connection to either Sirius or Alnilam up to 2012, it will take me time to complete, but i will, it will fascinate JupiterAsc as well!

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=81618

Monk said:

Hi Konrad,

Actually if Sirius rose with the Sun too far back regarding Egyptians or Greeks, they would look towards an amber light in the East, while they could still see Sirius along horizon, however when the Greeks invaded Egypt, they set mathematics in place and leading up to 0045BC they were, i'm sure being able to set Sirius and Sun together on horizon however they couldn't see it, the sky was too bright on date!

This exact process has followed us down the ages regarding mundane astrology in a great deal of charts up to modern times, JupiterAsc can lead you to many of my threads, ask him, it is fascinating, however although i think it is electional mundane paran astrology, i could be wrong and being synchronicity! It would be very exciting if it was synchronicity for proving astrology!

Obviously my intention regarding my birthchart was to find many observations
regarding why i make posts regarding my area of interest,
pushing away from Pluto influence.

After all, one that makes a lot of posts regarding mundane astrology
and i'm a good investigator,
we must see why by birthchart!

Click to expand...

Hi Monk, keep in mind Konrad said earlier on

Konrad said:

As for Monk's chart, JupiterASC, I don't really have the time to delineate it,

but I am very interested in his Mercury ruling Spirit while in the bounds of Saturn

- always a good sign of one able for deep research, especially in this sort of subject.

Click to expand...

and also

Konrad said:

For what it's worth, I have noted that planets on the angles which have stars conjoined tend to colour the manifestations of the star involved. With Jupiter, Mercury and the Moon there, Mars in aversion and cadent I would expect less pronounced Martial traits in Monk's life. This sort of thing is definitely a good research project, one for the future as far as I personally am concerned. I'm not too fond of Ecliptial degree conjunctions of stars though unless the star is on the Ecliptic, so even if I saw some use in Pluto, I doubt I would use it with stars as it is so far from the Ecliptic a lot of the time.

In Monk's case, Pluto is over 10 degrees north of the Ecliptic, the Moon around 4 south of it,
so even she I wouldn't consider as modifying Regulus too much.
Mercury and Jupiter though, for sure.
In fact, looking at that conjunction in Porpyhrius Magus, if it wasn't for both being under the beams,
it would have been a very powerful sign in a nativity.

Click to expand...

Please note Konrad, links that appear in different countries can come up in a different lanquage, as in German, however the link i gave should come up in English in the U.K.

JupiterAsc had trouble with an H.R. Giger link i gave, but i don't have any trouble bringing it up, i'm afraid with members from different countries, links may not be in synch?

I'm rusty with German although i worked there for several years, many years ago!

Please Note JupiterAsc, i was born on 08/08/1956, at 13:59pm, in London, M.C. is 29*:32' Leo, and Regulus is conjunct M.C., Pluto is 27*53' Leo, thus approx. 1 Degree 39' from M.C., you are at fault with calcalation

How can you with planets regarding astrology think of Pluto not being close to M.C. whether or not it has influence?

The ecliptic because planets are close to the Sun, are how we value them on any astrology programme, no reason to mention ecliptic with planets that revolve around the Sun???

I'm confused by your statement.

The problem arises when we use the ecliptic for stars that don't orbit the Sun!

Obviously my Moon is approx. 15 degrees off M.C. in Virgo, i have no idea what chart you are looking at, if you quote people make sure the research is correct, rule No.1.

Sorry for being brutal JupiterAsc, but i don't like sloppy thinking or research especially with my own chart!

I hope we are still talking?....humour?

I hate being brutal, i lose friends, but honestly i can't help giving a Scorpio sting, sometimes, obviously it is my nature, i was asked to post my birth details, mess with me too much, i go for it!

Anyone still "confused about Pluto"?

waybread said:

Oh, gosh, Monk-- I would never think that an interest in fixed stars is about ego!

I think we get bitten by an astrology bug, but it's not the same bug for everyone. I wish you all the best, wherever your studies may take you.

Speaking of which, Dirius, maybe I'll switch to sidereal astrology. Jupiter, no longer in its fall, will be domiciled in Sagittarius; and then my moon picks up a Cancer domicile, as well.

This is part of the reason why I don't have a "one size fits all" belief bout astrological schools of thought.

Click to expand...

I can only recommend using sidereal and whole sign houses. If you should switch to sidereal, however, there's the problem of what is the 'correct' Ayanamsa to be solved.

waybread said:

Anyone still "confused about Pluto"?

Click to expand...

Personally, I'm not quite sure what this thread has actually accomplished apart from making clear who's a traditionalist and who's a modernist. If I remember correctly (I can't find that post anymore), someone suggested somewhere that Pluto was just a combination of Mars and Saturn, which I think is an interesting but not actually valid statement. So, maybe you can tell us how you see Pluto influences differing from Mars and Saturn influences. I think this would actually get us ahead a bit in the discussion about the 'usefulness' of Pluto in a chart.

Muchacho, I've previously discussed Pluto in a way that distinguishes it from Mars and Saturn, particularly with my post of 1/27 on page 3, and of 1/29 on p. 4.

I think it's incumbent upon the doubters to show how Mars and Saturn precisely replicate Pluto.

waybread said:

Muchacho, I've previously discussed Pluto in a way that distinguishes it from Mars and Saturn, particularly with my post of 1/27 on page 3, and of 1/29 on p. 4.

I think it's incumbent upon the doubters to show how Mars and Saturn precisely replicate Pluto.

Click to expand...

Not really. The established planets are the seven visible ones - it is one aspect of practice that both camps use - if you want to add more bodies to the rulership system and in general practice, the onus of proof is actually on the person proposing the modification.

I am willing to look at charts where some think Pluto is doing something and showing how I would read it, but it would have to be AA rated charts that are able to be made public and the happenings being shown would have to be more substantial than inner-transformation. The timing of events is particularly interesting because there is no ambiguity there, Traditional astrology is very able to pinpoint which planet is doing what at what time. Bearing in mind your claims about criminals and more external factors, I think it is possible to do something like that. Since I don't use Pluto, I would only be able to participate not offer any charts myself.

Monk said:

Please Note JupiterAsc, i was born on 08/08/1956, at 13:59pm, in London, M.C. is 29*:32' Leo, and Regulus is conjunct M.C.,

Pluto is 27*53' Leo,
thus approx. 1 Degree 39' from M.C., you are at fault with calcalation

How can you with planets regarding astrology think of Pluto not being close to M.C. whether or not it has influence?

The ecliptic because planets are close to the Sun, are how we value them on any astrology programme, no reason to mention ecliptic with planets that revolve around the Sun???

I'm confused by your statement.

The problem arises when we use the ecliptic for stars that don't orbit the Sun!

Click to expand...

Monk, confusion appears to have been caused by a comment on your chart that was made by Konrad

i.e.
I did not make the comment, Konrad did

Konrad said:

For what it's worth, I have noted that planets on the angles which have stars conjoined tend to colour the manifestations of the star involved. With Jupiter, Mercury and the Moon there, Mars in aversion and cadent I would expect less pronounced Martial traits in Monk's life. This sort of thing is definitely a good research project, one for the future as far as I personally am concerned. I'm not too fond of Ecliptial degree conjunctions of stars though unless the star is on the Ecliptic, so even if I saw some use in Pluto, I doubt I would use it with stars as it is so far from the Ecliptic a lot of the time.

In Monk's case, Pluto is over 10 degrees north of the Ecliptic,
the Moon around 4 south of it,
so even she I wouldn't consider as modifying Regulus too much.

Mercury and Jupiter though, for sure. In fact, looking at that conjunction in Porpyhrius Magus,
if it wasn't for both being under the beams, it would have been a very powerful sign in a nativity.

Click to expand...

Monk said:

Obviously my Moon is approx. 15 degrees off M.C. in Virgo, i have no idea what chart you are looking at, if you quote people make sure the research is correct, rule No.1.

Sorry for being brutal JupiterAsc, but i don't like sloppy thinking or research especially with my own chart!

I hope we are still talking?....humour?

Click to expand...

Monk I appreciate the humour of this confusion
caused due to the fact Konrad made a comment
and then I simply quoted it

Monk said:

I hate being brutal, i lose friends, but honestly i can't help giving a Scorpio sting,
sometimes, obviously it is my nature, i was asked to post my birth details, mess with me too much, i go for it!

Click to expand...

Nothing you have posted is brutal in any way Monk
instead there is confusion
regarding the comment
which you need to discuss with Konrad
because the comment is made originally by Konrad

There really is nothing to discuss about it, at least not in this thread anyway. Monk and I look at charts differently, that's all. I agree that nothing is brutal, I have been called worse than a "sloppy thinker", but I wouldn't expect a Libra rising capable of being very offensive anyway!

Konrad said:

Not really. The established planets are the seven visible ones - it is one aspect of practice that both camps use - if you want to add more bodies to the rulership system and in general practice, the onus of proof is actually on the person proposing the modification.

I am willing to look at charts where some think Pluto is doing something and showing how I would read it, but it would have to be AA rated charts that are able to be made public and the happenings being shown would have to be more substantial than inner-transformation. The timing of events is particularly interesting because there is no ambiguity there, Traditional astrology is very able to pinpoint which planet is doing what at what time. Bearing in mind your claims about criminals and more external factors, I think it is possible to do something like that. Since I don't use Pluto, I would only be able to participate not offer any charts myself.

Click to expand...

Konrad, this debate has been over for decades for modern astrologers. If you or other orthodox neo-traditionalists do not wish to use Pluto, nobody insists that you should.

But you will do better to make a strong case for the accuracy of your own methods, rather than attempting to discredit astrologers who use Pluto, by inference. And also, please explain why many astrologers who essentially use traditional techniques will nevertheless use the modern outers as supplementary data points.

Your challenge is patently unequal. You gave a completely blind chart for us to read, yet you are unwilling to take up the same challenge yourself. Obviously the chart of a public figure, replete with biographical information on-line, can be read as an exercise in confirmation bias. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias Are you willing to take up the same challenge that I accepted from you?

And why couldn't a good orthodox neo-traditional astrologer say something about the native's inner state? Surely with a public figure, you will find interviews and autobiographical materials to consider. Or is this something orthodox neo-traditional astrology doesn't do very well because it precisely lacks the modern outers?

I am beginning to sense a trick in the chart that you posted: did you deliberately post the most un-Plutonian Plutonian chart you could locate because you knew you could shoot down any interpretations focusing on that Pluto conjunct ASC? Is the birth time an AA rating? (See Astrodienst Astro-DataBankfor the definition.) Say that I am merely imagining things, Konrad.

And then, please tell us more about the man behind your mystery chart, and your relationship to him. For example, what was his occupation, socio-economic class, and education level? How well do/did you know him? I say this because I would like to see more convincing evidence that Pluto is inoperative in his chart than I see in your laconic responses.

I'd be happy to have you read my father's chart, posted above. I will be as honest and as accepting as I can be about your interpretation. Unlike your "blind" chart, I've already dropped a few clues in previous posts. Unfortunately I don't have a birth time, but IMO a good astrologer can read a chart without one; or use one of the rectification methods espoused by Valens or other astrologers.