tsmall
Premium Member
Hi tsmall. Good luck with your endeavours. Perhaps it would be relevant which way round the Nodal axis was too - i.e. North Node conjunct the Sun or North Node conjunct the Moon. Some people associate the South Node with habits remaining from the past (sounds very lunar) and the North Node with qualities needing to be developed in order for consciousness to increase (sounds very solar). So perhaps if the South Node is conjunct the Sun, and the North Node conjunct the Moon, there would be a merging of Sun and Moon energies.
Taking the Nodal axis to mean the kinds of associations you will make with others, having both the Sun and the Moon on the axis may bring them together through these associations, too.
However, without wanting to challenge your own perceptions of how your chart manifests, I would point out that your case is far from a straightforward example of a lunar eclipse. I didn't register it fully before but your Sun Moon opposition is part of a very large T-square, involving Sun, Moon, Mars, Chiron, Uranus and Pluto, as well as the Nodal axis. Some of the aspects involved in this are very close.
Although you said you could identify with the part about not feeling comfortable with asserting your own desires, this T-square suggests that nonetheless you are capable of being single minded - Sun square Mars, conjunct Uranus, conjunct Pluto - despite the sensitivities to others shown by the Libra and Pisces prominence.
I would also point out that in this case, the opposition of Sun and moon does not fall particularly close to the Nodal axis, and indeed the Sun is already over ten degrees separating from its conjunction to the South Node.
I'm inclined to tentatively speculate that the part of you that identifies with the Sun conjunct Moon quote that you posted is actually reflected in parts of your chart other than the Pisces Moon, and not in a merging of Sun and Moon through their contact with the Nodal axis. Do you feel in touch with your Pisces Moon? - whatever else is happening in the chart, you should look to cultivate the qualities associated with that planet sign placement. Even someone with Sun at one degree Aries and Moon at 29 degrees Pisces would need to do this - despite the 'New Moon' general interpretations telling them that they are single minded and decisive, they still have that rather diffuse and malleable Pisces Moon to feed!
I would urge anyone looking at their chart to keep a sense of proportion between the factors - to look for the prominent themes in one's life in the prominent chart factors before looking to more obscure and hypothetical to explain things. But I also respect your need to question and explore.
Hi miquar. I truly understand your caution to keep a sense of proportion about what may or may not be happening in a chart. I also do not mind at all if any experienced astrologer is willing to take the time to help me see where I am wrong in interpretations. Everyone was new at one time, and the only way we can learn to correctly understand is to try, and to have others show us where we are correct or incorrect in our thinking.
For a little history on how I came to ask the original question, in exploring my chart I was able to find much information about the aspects, and houses, some of which resonated, and a lot of which did not. Based on further study, I realized that what was missing was an indepth description of how planets behave in signs, as opposed to houses. This led me to look into more traditional interpretations of planets in signs, which then led to a "kinship" with whole sign. So I set about to understand each of my planets by sign, degree, rulership, terms, bounds, et. al. In my learning, I believe that though planets might be in aspect by mathematical degree, their sign and house position could or would negate the aspect. Some astrologers state unequivocally that out of sign aspects can happen, while others say just as strongly that they in fact cannot. The jury is still out for me on which to follow, but one needs to start somewhere.
Further, when using whole sign, and again after only two months I may have this incorrectly, planets are in their houses/signs. Period. Meaning that Moon in Pisces in 6th is in 6th, not 7th. This makes sense when one considers that in either Placidus or Equal house (both of the currently most used house systems) the "cusp" of the 7th would fall at 12* Aries in my chart, placing it approx. 15* away from my moon. If you looked at the chart in your preferred house system, you likely wouldn't describe the opposition as being between the 1st/7th houses?
Going back to the idea (just consider?) that out of sign aspects don't occur, we are looking at a Perigrine moon in Pisces in 6th house (house of servants/service to others,) cadent, whose traditional ruler is Jupiter, in detriment in Libra, (though accidentally dignified in the 1st house,) but inconjunct by sign with it's ruler, as well as inconjunct by sign and house with the Sun. Okaaayyy...but, that would mean Sun and Moon can't "see" each other. As you asked above, "Do I feel 'in touch' with" my Pisces Moon? Um, yes, so "in touch" it's almost scary, lol. So, sun and moon not seeing each other also doesn't work for me. Buuuttt...
I randomly found this thread here on AW,
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=277161#post277161
with this post by dr. farr
There are a couple of other ways (beside Cazimi) a planet can be "conjunct" the Sun yet free from combustion:
1) when the planet and the Sun are "conjunct by latitude" as the oldtimers called it (Al-Biruni, etc): that is, when the Sun and the planet are within about 1 degree (to 1.5 degrees) of declination (both either North or South of the ecliptic) In this circumstance the planet and the Sun might well be quite distant in longidtude and not necessarily either combust nor even under the sunbeams...
2) when the planet and the Sun are "conjunct by nature", a type of conjunction fully recognized as such by the ancients (and even as late as the Renaissance period) in which the Sun and the planet each occupy the exact degree in equipollent signs: for example, say Sun is @ 20 Aries and Jupiter is @ 10 Pisces: they are "conjunct by nature" because each planet is exactly the same distance from the "Line of Truth" (the Aries/Libra line); the Sun and Jupiter in this example are in fact the same as being either longitudinally conjunct or conjunct in latitude (Parallel in Declination), but, of course, Jupiter is nowhere near combust or under the sunbeams.
These concepts go back a long time:
-conjunct in latitude to at least 400 AD
-equipollent conjunction (conjunct by nature) to even earlier Greco/Roman times
Parallel of Declination is applied, strangely enough, more in Modernist astrology than in Traditionalist practice...Conjunct by nature (equipollent conjunction) has been forgotten by almost all practitioners, except perhaps a few of the neo-Hellenistic school.
So, wow, that applies, within 1/2* degree, both planets (Sun and Moon) below the horizon. A look at the tables, and parallel declination also applies, again within 1/2*. Parallel lattitude, and declination, led me to the OP, which is..are Libra Sun and Pisces Moon conjunct in this chart?