Libra Sun conjunct Pisces Moon?

dr. farr said:

With your personal experiences, coupled with the concept of the Moon itself being pitted, I would attribute the Lunar-like influences to the Dragon's Head, the North Node of the Moon, in that 6th house, under Pisces; check the NN's declinations (and latitude), see if there are any P's with the Sun or other planets, and we'll take it from there...

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

dr farr's has not clarified exactly what is meant by 'as if conjunct' - however at this stage it is clear that you are assuming that 'as if conjunct' is the same in meaning as 'conjunct' - but there is a difference. Yes, because my understanding is that since conjunctions, in whole sign, wouldn't happen out of sign, typically there would be at least similar reception (it would be different depending on the degrees of the planets involved) and would affect the same house. I think perhaps dr. farr suggests that interpreting the conjunction as relates to the native (based on the literature) would be the same.

Regarding your interest in delineating reception: Yes, mutual reception only applies when the planets in question are in aspect and yes your Sun and Moon are not in aspect by Whole Sign. As you have posted, are in fact not the sun and moon in aspect...inconjunct? And, in whole sign, is there ever a time planets are not in some sort of aspect? I believe you have shared this link

http://www.librarising.com/astrology/fwa/basics2.html ?

Planets that are in aspect as well as one-way reception (that means not mutual reception) are:
Mars receives your Moon because Moon is in the terms of Mars and Mars is sextile your moon
Saturn receives your Moon because your Moon is in the terms of Saturn and sextile Saturn
Saturn receives Mars because Mars is in Saturn's Exaltation isn't Mars in Saturn's domicile and in Mars' exaltation? And, if it counts that Moon is in the exaltation of Venus (ASC ruler) does it count that, though there is no reception between Sun and Saturn, Sun is in the exaltation of Saturn?
Planets in aspect but with no reception:
Mars is in square aspect to your Sun but there is no reception This is presicely why I started with moon and not sun. Libra planets are thus: Sun, in fall, in the domicile of Venus (as mentioned, ASC ruler), in the Terms (Ptolemic) of Saturn and the face of the moon...interesting, that bit. Mercury, conjunct sun, is combust, and in the same terms and face as sun. Jupiter, conjunct by sign (though a little out of accepted interpretive degree) sun, and Mercury and ASC, is under the beams, in his own terms, and the face of Saturn. So, yes, there is no reception between any of the Libra planets and Mars. Yet, the moon is in reception with Mars by triplicty and face...interesting...

Inconjunct planets in one-way reception
Saturn receives your Sun which is in Saturn's Exaltation, Triplicity and terms but Saturn is inconjunct Sun And in describing the inconjunct aspect, I am wondering how reception would alter the description given by Cafe Astrology? I <think> an aspect without reception would play up the negative, but the amount of reception would alter one's interpretation?

There is no conjunction between you Libra Sun and Pisces Moon and judging by your later comments, it seems that you have realised that. Yes, and no, lol.

However, it seems clear to me that you seek a way to understand and synthesise your opposing Sun and Moon energies and furthermore it seems to me that dr. farr's comments regarding planets in parallel being 'as if conjunct' appear to offer you a way towards some kind of Sun/Moon synthesis in your chart and that is the reason that you are asking how the parallel could be interpreted. Have I understood your questions correctly? Yes!

I understood what dr. farr is saying when he says 'as if conjunct' but it is clear that you need more guidance on the subject therefore I think it best to clarify the 'as if conjunct' meaning with dr. farr

You are correct in saying that for Traditional Astrologers using Whole Sign Houses, the 12th House is a Cadent Sign (the other Cadent Signs are: 3rd, 6th, and 9th houses. ) As you have realised, when using Whole Sign, your Libra planets are all strong 1st House planets and your Libra Ascendant is in the first Whole Sign House. Your Virgo Venus therefore in Whole Signs is Cadent in the 12th as is your Pisces Moon in 6th Whole Sign house.

Your Sun and Moon are Inconjunct as are your Sun and Saturn
The planets and points involved in a Inconjuncts don't understand each other. It's difficult to see common ground between the signs. Inconjuncts are: redirecting, challenging, requiring adjustments, diverting. Difficult to merge the energies of the planets involved: the two cannot be merged so compartmentalization comes into play. The areas of life described by the planets conflict with each other—not in as overt a way as is commonly seen with a square or opposition, but the individual separates them either consciously or unconsciously. This is why adjustment is associated with the inconjunct—both planets/points represent distinct needs and areas of life, and it can take a lot of energy to sort them into different compartments! Source: cafeastrologyYes, I understand what you are saying...however....we have a Sun/Moon that are inconjunct by sign, yet "as if conjunct" by both lattitude and declination, as well as being almost exactly the antiscia of each other. Moon is in pitted degree, and as dr. farr has pointed out, this renders the moon completely ineffectual (not there?) in this chart? Many of the most quoted ancient (traditional) astrologers came to an understanding that certain signs "behold" each other. Of those, Pisces/Libra are one of the pairs. So, though the ruler of Pisces/6th house, in this case Jupiter, is inconjunct to the 6th, it is still able to see/behold that house, and have some influence on it's affairs? So, wild and crazy newbie idea: We have a 6th house (cadent=dead) moon, in pitted degree (=not there/dead) that is yet approaching an eclipse (swallowed?), "as if in conjunct" the sun by both lattitude and declination, and within 25" of being in exact antiscia of the sun. Meaning that the moon is only able to opperate through the sun? Found this link

http://www.astrologycom.com/livingsigns3.html

Which states:

[COLOR=#009600 !important][COLOR=#009600 !important]The [COLOR=#009600 !important]Moon[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR] is fully familiar with Leo, just as the Sun is fully familiar with Cancer. There was a mutual respect, as if they were one ruler! If we continue this logic to its natural conclusion, it's difficult to say then that the Sun is without dignity in Cancer and just as difficult to say the Moon is without dignity in Leo, as these zoidia were seen as having one ruler, a joint rulership. I'm not going to go into it here but this does raise some interesting insights into how sect should function.

Click to expand...

Since Moon in this chart rules Cancer/10th house, and Sun is "fully familiar" with Moon, could not then Sun see to the affairs of 10th, if Moon is incapable? Further, if Moon, in pitted degree and inoperative in this chart, is "the shadow/antiscia" of Sun, wouldn't then Sun of necessity need to step in for moon in 6th?

Click to expand...

tsmall said:

That sums it up nicely. I am considering the idea that my moon is fully integrated with the sun, and can only operate through the sun, as a "shadow" or influence, and that the sun must then do double duty in seeing to her own affairs/rulerships as well as those of the moon. I am still exploring how exactly this would manifest, with regard to reception and aspects, and I am MOST certainly open to anyone poking holes in this idea, as I think it's pretty far-fetched...but starting to make some sense, to me...

Click to expand...

tsmall said:

Also, could the lunar eclipse just hrs after my birth (Sept 25 1969) have any bearing on my chart? I can't remember where recently I saw a list of eclipses/signs they occured in...or would the natal eclipse revert to the one prior to birth, one month earlier (around the time of the moon walks?)

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

An apposite use of the word 'shadow' tsmall! - because at the time of a lunar eclipse, the earth being directly situated between the sun and the moon, temporaily 'eclipses' the moon with its shadow

While mulling over your discussion with dr farr regarding your Sun and Moon being 'as if conjunct' I recalled that you previously asked:


Now, you and dr. farr have focused considerably on parallels - for an eclipse to occur, (a) the Sun and Moon must be in parallel aspect to one other, i.e., when they are within one degree of the same degree of declination, i.e., the position above or below the celestial equator described in degrees and minutes north or south of the equator and (b) The Sun and Moon must also be conjunct one or both of the Moon's nodes and your 27[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]51' [/FONT]Pisces Moon is widely conjunct the Nodes at 20[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Pisces and - as has been previously discussed - is parallel your Aries Sun. Libra, but yes, I understand. [/FONT]

After you were born the Moon continued its journey towards the constellation of Aries and you were just six hours old when the shadow of the earth eclipsed the moon as it travelled towards its destined opposition to your Sun. (Viewing Fred Espenek's very useful Nasa Eclipse Page details http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot1951/LE1969Sep25N.pdf we find that the 25 September 1969 full moon eclipse began at 18:07:03 UT (Universal Time) and concluded at 22:12:12 – since your birth took place at 12:15 UT JUPITERASC, you have posted in a couple of places a link which allows one to correct birth time based on the concept of local apparent time. I have recently gotten a new computer, and lost many of the links I previously bookmarked, but have been able to "rectify" if you will, my birth time to 8:06 am and not 8:15 am. you were born six hours before the eclipse began and just ten hours before the four hour lunar eclipse ended.)

The number of lunar eclipses in a single year can range from 0 to 3. The last time that 3 total lunar eclipses occurred in one calendar year was in 1982. Partial eclipses slightly outnumber total eclipses by 7 to 6. source: http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/LEprimer.html

the number of solar eclipses in a single year can range from 2 to 5. Nearly 3/4 of the time there are 2 eclipses in a year. On the other hand, it is quite rare to have 5 solar eclipses in a single year. The last time it happened was in 1935 and the next time is 2206. Typically there is 1 total eclipse every 1 to 2 years. Although it is possible to have 2 total eclipses in a single year, it is quite rare. Examples of years containing 2 total eclipses are 1712, 1889, 2057 and 2252.
source: http://www.mreclipse.com/Special/SEprimer.html

In my opinion the apparently anomalous nature of dr.farr's interpretation of your natal Sun opposition to your Moon being somehow simultaneously 'as if conjunct' conundrum is resolved when we consider the relatively unusual aspects of your particular full moon birth.

There are thirteen full moons a year which means that one of the months has two full moons (known as a 'blue moon' month).

You, (along with any others born at that time around the world) were born six hours before a full moon lunar eclipse. A fairly unusual event when we consider that although there are thirteen full moons a year usually only two of these full moons are also lunar eclipses – (maximum three lunar eclipses - and occasionally a year has no lunar eclipses. Therefore, in my opinion, it is apparent that the eclipse conditions cause/influence your Sun and Moon to potentially act 'as if conjunct' while nevertheless being in mathematical (if not Sign) opposition Thank you! And isn't it interesting how many different ways this chart shows "as if in conjunction?" As well as how many ways it demonstrates the incorporation of moon into sun and renders the moon inconsequential? I have tried to duplicate the exact conditions of this Penumbral lunar eclipse, by finding another Penumbral eclipse that would have occured when the Sun is in the early degrees of a sign. Admittedly, I have so far only tried with a few, but have been unable to get Sun and Moon parallel in both lattitude and declination, in exact antiscia, and in the 1st and 6th houses. This has lead me to a couple of conclusions. First, that no two eclipses will ever be exactly the same, and second, there is a reason natal charts are like fingerprints...each is completely unique to the individual.


btw you have probably noticed that TMars is square the degree of the forthcoming eclipse - due to occur in just six hours - (i.e. your natal Mars, which because it is in Saturn's domicile is Exalted) squares your natal Sun and {mathematically, if not by Sign} almost exactly squares your natal Moon)

Click to expand...

dr. farr said:

Right: in your natal chart you have, in addition to the aspects in longitude, you have:

+the Sun, Moon and Uranus in P of declination AND also in P of latitude (a very interesting-and potent-combination, even when we reduce the influence of the Moon due to its pitted degree!)

+also the Moon, Jupiter and Neptune in P of latitude

+Venus and Saturn in P of declination

+Jupiter and ascendant in P of declination (another potent combination)


As mentioned previously, these P's in declination and latitude are "like" conjunctions in longitude, which means that in the books you would read the indications given under "conjunctions", in order to help delineate the P meanings.

Although there is some historical dispute, remember that my opinion is that the P of declination is "read" like a "strong-ie close-conjunction" and that the P of latitude is "read" like a "mild/moderate conjunction" (some would reverse these, but I have used this outlook of "relative strengths", to my satisfaction at least)

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

tsmall you said:
And isn't it interesting how many different ways this chart shows "as if in conjunction?" As well as how many ways it demonstrates the incorporation of moon into sun and renders the moon inconsequential? I have tried to duplicate the exact conditions of this Penumbral lunar eclipse, by finding another Penumbral eclipse that would have occured when the Sun is in the early degrees of a sign. Admittedly, I have so far only tried with a few, but have been unable to get Sun and Moon parallel in both lattitude and declination, in exact antiscia, and in the 1st and 6th houses. This has lead me to a couple of conclusions. First, that no two eclipses will ever be exactly the same, and second, there is a reason natal charts are like fingerprints...each is completely unique to the individual.


tsmall, Astrology relates to cycles of one kind or another. One of the Moon's cycles is The Metonic Cycle of the Moon

If you can look out a window and see a moon among the stars right now, you will see this Moon return to the same shape and passing the same stars in 19 tropical years, 235 synodic months, 254 tropical months. This can be uncovered visually, without the need for complex mathematics and astronomical instrumentation, and also we do not need to know the actual day counts because we can record the cycle with period counts - synodic months, tropical months and tropical years. We don't even need to know about fractions. This "Metonic Cycle" is named after a Greek, called Meton, who lived in the 5th Century BC, and who claimed he discovered the cycle on his own. It seems that simple visual observations are all that's needed to see the cycle . . . and there's plenty of evidence it was known and recorded long before Meton ever existed.
Source: http://www.mythicalireland.com/astronomy/moonmovements/metoniccycle.html


OK, we have the info... and we check our ephemeris and discover that on 26 September 1950 a full moon eclipse did indeed occur at 2 Aries 51 http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEplot/LEplot1901/LE1950Sep26T.pdf
However, you were born before an eclipse so now the question is... can we place a Libra Sun in 1st House and a Pisces Moon in 6th House while having a 14 Libra Ascendant - all on 25 September 1950 during a full moon lunar eclipse? Yes we can (Venus is in Virgo as well albeit at a much later degree) We can do that by drawing up a chart for 25 September 1950 at 07:20AM in Beaufort County
btw it was a total eclipse and also the Nodes were at a later degree plus the other planets were in other areas and/or signs nevertheless the Metonic Cycle of the Moon is confirmed mirabile dictu

Click to expand...

tsmall said:

That's seriously cool. I hadn't finished looking at that particular eclipse, as I found this link..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_1969_lunar_eclipse

as well as this one

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEcat5/LE1901-2000.html

which both show the 9/25/1969 lunar eclipse to be penumbral.

Regardless of what "type" of eclipse occured, It is wonderful that you have been able to duplicate certain conditions. I will have to look, but perhaps you can readily answer whether or not moon at the time you mentioned is also in pitted degree? Also, see my prev. response that a link you wonderfully provided helped to move ASC to 12*, not 14. I would be willing to guess that moving a chart backwards by a few minutes would also change the ASC degree, and perhaps place sun/moon in the exact position we see them in my chart? Which circles us back around to one of my original questions...should Sun/Moon always be considered "as if in conjunction" in the hours leading up to a lunar eclipse? (Because we can all see they are conjunct at a new Moon/solar eclipse.)

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

Your natal moon is at 27 Pisces 51 whereas the Moon on 25 September 1950 (even when we re-adjust the Ascendant to 12 Libra) has only got as far as 24 Pisces 0' 58" just three degrees away from the position of your natal moon. However, always remember clock and/or calender time differs from 'star time'... 'star time' is far more accurate in terms of astrological cycles. Where can we find 'star time?'

1, The Moon has literally just passed from the pitted degree of 23 Pisces again, most interesting, and meaning that I am not the only person who would ever face this "configuration" in a natal chart. I find that comforting.
and
2 In the hours preceding a lunar eclipse the moon is approaching closer and closer to a parallel with the Sun until the parallel is exact at the exact opposition (yet 'as if conjunction' caused by the eclipse situation) of the Sun and Moon.

Click to expand...

tsmall said:

Can we name this aspect?

Click to expand...

dr. farr said:

JUPITERASC has rendered an exceptional explanation of the factors involved here relative to this natal Sun/Moon situation!!

TSMAIL:
I mentioned that the SUN/MOON/URANUS was so potent (even though it involves a pitted Moon) because it is a "double Parallel", that is, it is P in declination AND ALSO P in latitude; also, while the Moon is pitted, it is also blended (with Sun and Uranus) by this "double Parallel", and, for me, in delineation, I would not look at, say, the Sun and the Moon and Uranus as "seperate", discrete individual influences, but for each component I would look at A BLEND OF ALL THREE, for delineations (just as in the case of a close conjunction of 2 or 3 planets in longitude, I would consider A BLEND of those planets, for delineative purposes)

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

No need to name this aspect because the aspect you refer to is already named an opposition and/or parallel. In this particular case, your Pisces Moon is applying to an opposition and/or parallel of your Libra Sun.

(cookbook) Sun Parallel Moon: The foundations of the early life experiences and the nature of the family of origin play a large role in your life. There is great restlessness and need for emotional foundations in order to accomplish much else in life. You eventually figure this out and get what you need as you have great untapped capacity for emotional integration. With the acquisition of positive habits and home life, all else is good. This, I think, makes your point regarding the obfuscation of "cookbook" interpretations. The description here "sort of" applies to me (and probably everyone else in the known universe) and mostly does not.

As ever, Deborah Houlding provides a comprehensive table of Traditional Degree Influences, including Pitted or deep at this link http://www.skyscript.co.uk/deginf1.html

Degrees deep or pitted … have this signification, that if either the Moon or the degree ascending or lord of the Ascendant be in any of them, it shows the man at a stand in the question he asks, not knowing which way to turn himself and that he had need of help to bring him into a better condition; for as a man cast into a ditch doth not easily get out without help, so no more can this querent in the case he is without assistance. (CA., p.118)

Click to expand...

Your Sun and Moon are Inconjunct as are your Sun and Saturn

Click to expand...

tsmall said:

I want to take a second to say that this thread has introduced more advanced concepts and interpretations, as well as a wealth of familiarity (not quite comprehension...but getting there) that I don't think I would have gotten this early in the game without it. Thanks, to everyone who has been helping me. I appreciate the fact that all time invested here is purely voluntary and comes from wanting to help. I hope someone other than I can also get something from this discussion.
JUPITERASC,
I had previously read the Lilly quote on Skyscript, but thought it would mostly apply in horary? Though, as we consider this Moon, in pitted degree, in need of Sun to "bring him into better condition," that is a more apt description than the one about parallels.
I am curious. You at one point posted this
Yet above you aver "your Pisces Moon is applying to an opposition and/or parallel of your Libra Sun." In the specific placement we find Sun and Moon at birth, the parallel occurs within orb, though not prescisely exact. The actual opposition won't occur until the Moon changes signs. So, at the moment of birth, we have an inconjunction? We also have Moon sextile by sign with Mars, yet applying also to a square with Mars? So, which is it? Can we pick one, or is it both? I have a couple of radical ideas about this, but am still developing them. Can you elucidate?

Click to expand...

JUPITERASC said:

2. When using Sidereal Zodiac your Sun and Moon are

(a) parallel

(b) in opposition mathematically

(c) in opposition by Sign.

Click to expand...

how to interpret the astrological significance of eclipses

dr. farr said:

JUPITERASC has rendered an exceptional explanation of the factors involved here relative to this natal Sun/Moon situation!!

Click to expand...

tsmall said:

I want to take a second to say that this thread has introduced more advanced concepts and interpretations, as well as a wealth of familiarity (not quite comprehension...but getting there) that I don't think I would have gotten this early in the game without it. Thanks, to everyone who has been helping me. I appreciate the fact that all time invested here is purely voluntary and comes from wanting to help. I hope someone other than I can also get something from this discussion.
JUPITERASC,
I had previously read the Lilly quote on Skyscript, but thought it would mostly apply in horary? Though, as we consider this Moon, in pitted degree, in need of Sun to "bring him into better condition," that is a more apt description than the one about parallels.
I am curious. You at one point posted this
Yet above you aver "your Pisces Moon is applying to an opposition and/or parallel of your Libra Sun." In the specific placement we find Sun and Moon at birth, the parallel occurs within orb, though not prescisely exact. The actual opposition won't occur until the Moon changes signs. So, at the moment of birth, we have an inconjunction? We also have Moon sextile by sign with Mars, yet applying also to a square with Mars? So, which is it? Can we pick one, or is it both? I have a couple of radical ideas about this, but am still developing them. Can you elucidate?

Click to expand...

ELUCIDATION
Moon is in applying opposition to Sun (while parallel to Sun due to eclipse conditions).

Moon (whether using Sidereal Zodiac or Tropical Zodiac) must travel another four degrees to complete the opposition

Tropically at 08:06AM in order to complete the opposition to Sun Libra by Sign, the Moon must continue travelling until changing signs from Pisces to Aries.

In contrast, your sidereal chart for 08:06AM shows Sun at 8[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT] Virgo 48' and Moon at 4[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT] Pisces 20' in opposition by Sign

Sidereal zodiac: Full moon occurs at 16:06PM when 9[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT] Virgo Sun is directly opposed by 9[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT] Pisces Moon

1. When using Tropical Zodiac your Sun and Moon are

(a) in mathematical opposition

(b) parallel

(c) Inconjunct (Disjunct)

2. When using Sidereal Zodiac your Sun and Moon are

(a) parallel

(b) in opposition mathematically

(c) in opposition by Sign.

As you have said Moon is both Sextile by Sign with Mars and in applying square to Mars

can help to enhance or improve one’s understanding of astrology

dr. farr said:

JUPITERASC has rendered an exceptional explanation of the factors involved here relative to this natal Sun/Moon situation!!

Click to expand...

petosiris said:

Stars that precede are superior to those that follow
thus it is better for benefics to be on the right of malefics
and we say this for all assemblies, configurations and like-principles.

In every case it is necessary to

examine the assemblies and configurations with degree
for they become stronger the closer they are to their figures.

Like-principles of daylight, rising times and houserulers
cause harmonious affinity
but it will be very weak if the images are turned away.
It will be necessary to accurately measure
the distances between powerful stars
then measure the same or reverse from the Hour-Marker,
in order that
whatever relations the stars bear to each other
the Hour-Marker may bear to the Lots
and that they may be as they were Hour-Markers.

Click to expand...

tsmall said:

And so far none of this has helped with understanding how a parallel conjucntion should be interpreted

Click to expand...

tsmall said:

Everything I have read only says "as if" in conjunction.

Click to expand...

That's because the planets in question are not in conjunction. The planets in question are in parallel. A planet in Libra cannot be conjunct a planet in Pisces. However, due to the nature of this particular opposition in your natal chart which occurs at the time of a full moon lunar eclipse, your Libra Sun and your Pisces Moon being parallel are described "as if conjunct" Not conjunct - but "as if conjunct"