Confused about Pluto

Monk

Monk

Premium Member
It is highly likely that Waybread knew my "Personal Limitations"= disablement, as i don't make a secret of it, as listed below, isn't it refreshing that Pluto involved in secrets is so open?

http://2012forum.com/forum/download/file.php?id=7174&mode=view

However i agree how she saw those limitations by astrology!

A forum is to love, but debate, i like both Waybread and JupiterAsc, but i can disagree, it doesn't stop the friendship!

Obviously i will debate on the energy of evil with Waybread in the future, however she knows i have been witness to extreme paranormal experiences, it may cloud my judgement, but at least i was there as a researcher at location and i don't lie about personal experience!

Too many hitting each other on the head on this thread for me to continue, last post!
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Monk, I had no idea you had a disability from anything I've read previously from you. I've not read or interacted with such posts from you. Ideally the chart itself indicates to the astrologer the level or direction through which to communicate with the native.

My sense of your Saturn in the first is that it can well bring a sense of limitation or "something wrong" with the body, regarding those systems (bones, for example) that Saturn rules. But it can also operate at a more intuitive, even spiritual level-- which has to do with how the native feels about himself. My sense, with your Saturn square Pluto, is that your body has been a source of limitation or disappointment to you; yet in its own way, Saturn keeps goading you to think more deeply, less superficially, to strip away any pretense that obscures the truths that you have within you to understand. Maybe if you had been more able-bodied, you wouldn't have felt the desire to probe so deeply into life's mysteries.

And one thing that all of this foofaraw about naked-eye astronomy has obfuscated is how modern astrology, ideally, deals with the inner person.
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Dirius, re: your recent post-- I have to say that your apparent efforts to change this thread into an all-out critique of modern astrology, using the pretext of Pluto, is a hijack. If people do not want to use Pluto in their own practice, all well and good; but then this thread is about understanding Pluto in the chart for people who do use it and think they have some grasp of how it operates.

Again, modern astrology does not constrain itself with the same rules as traditional astrology, any more than my children feel necessarily constrained with the rules by which their great-grandparents lived. To traditional astrologers on this thread: get over it.

If you don't want to practice modern astrology or use modern outers in your practice, then don't use them. Why should you? But your efforts to persuade (browbeat?) others to your camp with some kind-of astronomical "evidence" is not convincing. For one thing, modern astrology focuses more on the inner person than on planetary magnitudes. Our rules are somewhat different. Please respect that difference. Our aspects go by degree, not by sign or house.

So I can tell you, as an amateur modern western astrologer, what orbs I use and why. These are not related to invisible "disks of light" but to the impact (or not) of an aspect (or conjunction) on the person's life. However, modern western astrologers do not entirely agree on whether orbs need to be narrow or whether wider orbs should be used. It is putting the cart before the horse to insist on some arbitrary rules based upon what's "up in the sky" without really probing into what is going on with the person's life. Again, sometimes you have to synthesize more information: two planets that seem out-of-orb may actually be connected through a midpoint, minor aspect (might be a quintile, septile, or novile,) or parallel.

I don't practice traditional astrology, but I've read enough about it, both via recent texts and Hellenistic originals in translation, to have some sense of how it works. Again, modern astrology doesn't use most of the essential dignities. It's a different system. So there is no point in telling modern astrologers that we need to look up tables of essential dignities. I am familiar with them. I might use them in horary, but certainly not for a natal chart interpretation.

Frankly, I would love (on some other thread, not this thread on Pluto) for someone to explain the logical origin of the ancient table of essential dignities. Nobody knows where the Babylonian or Egyptian systems even came from, or why these micro-divisions of signs, which are invisible in the sky and shed no light whatsoever, should mean anything. The faces were the old Egyptian decans, which were highly significant in their star-calendars, yet these got utterly lost in a streamlined 10-degree system.

Deborah Houlding has an interesting article on the history of the terms: http://www.skyscript.co.uk/terms.html

Please stop trying to convert people like myself. How would you feel if I launched a frontal assault on traditional astrology? It would be easy enough to do so. Again, this is a thread about Pluto in the horoscope, not an opportunity for a "teaching moment" on essential dignities. (Which, by the way, was my insight as to why purist traditionalists can't use Pluto.)

Your "concept of Pluto" does not grasp Pluto in the horoscope. Yes, there is schlock modern astrology about Pluto, just as there was schlock traditional astrology. What you have presented is a classic straw man. I do recommend to you Steven Forrest, The Book of Pluto; and Robert Hand, Planets in Transit and Planets in Youth.

What your "concepts of Pluto" demonstrate to me is that you have yet to gain a working understanding of Pluto in the horoscope--as reflected in human personalities and lives.

Would you like me to spell these out for you?
 
Last edited:
M

muchacho

Well-known member
HYS said:
I didn't say few thousand. Modern pace of acquiring knowledge is multiple times faster then in ancient times .. I don't dismiss traditional astrology at all, but ignoring new inventions is not the way to go for my :uranus: :conjunct: MC. Clearly there is more then the old system knew, why leaving it out?
Click to expand...
Yeah, the approach 'this is how we've done it for the last 5000 years, so this is how we are going to do it for the next 5000 years too' doesn't work for me either.
 
Oddity

Oddity

Well-known member
waybread said:
I think you would like to be known as a deep and penetrating thinker. I see you as someone with the soul of the philosopher-- regardless of where your formal education took you. You don't like to settle for sloppy thinking, either. In your quest, you do suffer from a sense of personal limitations, yet you can use your innate sense of self discipline to make the progress you desire. As a "boomer" in the Pluto in Leo sextile Neptune generation, you have got a sense of self-transformation. (Pluto conjunct Mercury/MC, Pluto in the 9th ruled by the moon (conjunct Jupiter) in the 10th, Mercury strong in Virgo, Saturn in the first square Pluto.)
Click to expand...

This isn't an in-depth delineation, which is fair, as that's difficult to do both on the fly and over the Internet. Such is the nature of forums.

But what are you seeing that can only be discerned by delineating Pluto? Deep and penetrating thought, philosophy can be seen by Merc exalted conjunct the MC and Jupiter, backed up by Sun in rulership in 9.

As for the sense of personal limitation, JupiterASC is correct that many, many people have that. I'll add that a peregrine Saturn in the first house could certainly lead to a conclusion like this as well.

'Self-transformation' is - every planet ever? One of the things we can discern by astrological means, or that we attempt to discern, is change, either by circumstance, or by self-direction. Is self-transformation, however you define it, exclusive to those born with Pluto in Leo, or only under the Neptune-Pluto sextile that took place during much of Pluto's stay in Leo? Is there some specific meaning to the term that I am not understanding?

I don't mean to dismiss what you say. It's just I can't see anything in it that requires outer planets to explain.
 
M

muchacho

Well-known member
Monk said:
It is highly likely that Waybread knew my "Personal Limitations"= disablement, as i don't make a secret of it, as listed below, isn't it refreshing that Pluto involved in secrets is so open?

http://2012forum.com/forum/download/file.php?id=7174&mode=view

However i agree how she saw those limitations by astrology!

A forum is to love, but debate, i like both Waybread and JupiterAsc, but i can disagree, it doesn't stop the friendship!

Obviously i will debate on the energy of evil with Waybread in the future, however she knows i have been witness to extreme paranormal experiences, it may cloud my judgement, but at least i was there as a researcher at location and i don't lie about personal experience!

Too many hitting each other on the head on this thread for me to continue, last post!
Click to expand...
It's an interesting thread, for sure. And I think the reason why it is getting a little heated is because the more recently discovered planets point at the astrologer's sore spot. Both the modern astrologer and the traditional astrologer don't actually know why astrology works. If they knew, they would have no problem dealing with those newly discovered objects. The new discoveries force the astrologers to rethink their models.
 
Oddity

Oddity

Well-known member
waybread said:
What your "concepts of Pluto" demonstrate to me is that you have yet to gain a working understanding of Pluto in the horoscope--as reflected in human personalities and lives.

Would you like me to spell these out for you?
Click to expand...

I'd like you to spell it out. No snark intended at all. This, I think, is the thing we've been going round and round about, and also it's the concern of the OP - what to do with Pluto?

I studied modern psychological astrology for twenty years, as that was all that was on offer back when I learned, so I do have some famiiarity with the subject. I found it dissatisfying for a number of reasons, most of them philosophical. The incredibly nebulous 'definitions' given to the outer planets were part of that, and I don't see that that has changed much in the past twenty years or so. If anything, it seems to have got even fuzzier.
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
For anyone who needs a primer on Pluto in the natal horoscope, here is my synthesis: other sources may vary.

First, Pluto often operates as a planet of the subconscious, sort of like the moon. We can talk about the moon, but fundamentally our emotional nature is different than the domain of words and intellect (Mercury.) Mercury can talk all around the moon, but it doesn't operate in the domain of deep-seated feelings. So we cannot draw a precise verbal, mental bead on a planet like Pluto that operates more on the level of a primal scream.

I like some of the early books by Steven Forrest, in which he explains planets as symbolising two personalities: the teacher and the trickster.

As teacher, Pluto can be a powerful stand for self-transformation. This is the energy of the phoenix, the survivor, the catharsis in a Greek tragedy, the poem Invictus, the rugby player at the bottom of the scrum, or circular time in which death is followed by resurrection or new life. Pluto can test us to the limits of endurance, but when we have no escape-pod, we learn that all along we were far stronger than we knew. If Pluto strips away our innocence, it also unmasks us, and strips away our pretenses, and our shallow goals.

I don't follow the notion that the modern outers are "higher octaves" of traditional planets, but for what it's worth, Mars rules our innate aggression and assertiveness; as well as people like warriors and athletes. Mars is to warfare as Pluto is to holocausts or Hiroshima. One might counter someone else's aggressive Mars with a bigger, stronger Mars; but Pluto (like death) carries with it the certainty of inevitability.

Saturn rules old age and decay. Pluto is about the energy of old-into-new, death into rebirth, the bottoming-out despair into new options.

Pluto deals with power-relations. Not Martial, "Agree with me, or I'll bash your head in" talk, but high-stakes jockeying for power; and the type of alpha male who ages into the immoveable object. Plutonian people often see life as a zero-sum game, in which "A's" win necessarily indicates "B's" loss. As trickster, Pluto becomes the ruthless bully or victim of the ruthless bully; the underworld figure, or the victim of the underworld figure.

(If we suppress Pluto, he tends to show up as other people who embody his negative traits.)

Pluto carries with it a much stronger sense of fate or destiny than the traditional inner planets.

If we consider the Roman god Pluto as ruler of the underworld and inevitability of death, Pluto carries some of these qualities. Mars might fight passionately for what it wants, but Pluto must have it. Wanting to hide from public view (metaphorically going underground) is a feature of hard Pluto transits.

When we find Pluto in association with Jupiter or the 9th house, the person needs to dig deeply for the truth that lies beneath superficial materiality.

The association of Pluto with wealth is not with wealth per se, but riches that come from under the earth's surface, such as minerals.

The association of Venus with sexuality has to do with its pleasurable and affectionate, romantic nature. Mars is more the go-getter principle. To the extent that Pluto is involved in sexuality, it is more in its attunement to life's profound mysteries. Jupiter teaches faith and optimism: Pluto says, "Your house was bombed and your family is now dead. You will never see them again. Yet you are stronger than you know."

I am traveling tonight and away from the books that might have enabled me to structure this post better-- but then, Pluto laughs at our ephemeral structures.

In dwarf planet Pluto's outer realm of the dark solar system, our little structures and logic do not mean very much. Pluto asks, "Who are you, really, when all that superficiality is stripped away?"
 
Last edited:
Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
Actually the reason I'm posting this is because of the OP's original post:

I am very confused about Pluto after reading the following... and what I can't understand or grasp is why Pluto was assigned as ruler of Scorpio? Obviously in Greek myth he is known as God of the Underworld and is dark and destructive in nature like Scorpio, but what appears to be misleading for me is that many scientists have debated over whether or not Pluto is even a planet, and from my understanding, a decision was actually cast that Pluto is not in fact a planet as there are other objects that are known to be bigger that have also been discovered.
Click to expand...
So everything I say about pluto not being the ruler of Scorpio, and the proof it carries, fits perfectly for the post. The OP herself casts doubts about why Pluto would supposedly rule scorpio. I'm merely answering her the truth> it doesn't, and there is no explanation to why he should.

And with my posts I'm merely trying to explain to her, why Pluto doesn't rule scorpio, since this is the original argument.

MissScorpio: "Why does pluto supposedly rule Scorpio?"

Dirius: "It was a random asignment, for no reason. Here, you have 30 reasons to why pluto doesn't fit into astrology, and thus, doesn't rule scorpio."

I'm not saying you shouldn't use pluto. I never actually said that.

I said that pluto, according to traditional astrology, is meaningless. And this point is directed to the op. If I give logical proof of it, is to further reinforce my statement of pluto for the OP's sake. It wasn't me the one who casted the doubts.

PS: seriously, can you guys stop doing that?

every time a thread like this is created, and we post the polarizing views, at some point the modern side stops debating, says they like their method, and play the victim card of "OMG YOU ATTACK MY VIEWS!"

We are not attacking your views. We are explaining ours. I'm sorry that our views regard a concept of yours as an inexsistant thing, but that is what it is to us. Just like to you, triplicity's are inexistant.

If I use words like "meaningless" or "irrelevant", I say it in the traditional perspective (and I think, or at least tried, to made that clear). The reason I use those words...its because in all honesty, that is what pluto means in tradition. And I apologise, but those are the most polite words to describe pluto in the classical scene.

If you don not wish to have a debate, then stop posting please. But don't come playing the victim. No one is attacking you.

Op made a question. We answered. She posted about doubts of Pluto ruling Scorpio. Saying Mars rules scorpio, is actually a fair thing to say. If we then give proof of that, what is wrong with that?

The purpose of the forum is to learn and debate. This is actually called the "research and development" section.

PS2: Oh and I would gladly explain the concept of face and term, if you want on another post, or this one. your choice :joyful:

waybread said:
Dirius, re: your recent post-- I have to say that your apparent efforts to change this thread into an all-out critique of modern astrology, using the pretext of Pluto, is a hijack. If people do not want to use Pluto in their own practice, all well and good; but then this thread is about understanding Pluto in the chart for people who do use it and think they have some grasp of how it operates.

Again, modern astrology does not constrain itself with the same rules as traditional astrology, any more than my children feel necessarily constrained with the rules by which their great-grandparents lived. To traditional astrologers on this thread: get over it.

If you don't want to practice modern astrology or use modern outers in your practice, then don't use them. Why should you? But your efforts to persuade (browbeat?) others to your camp with some kind-of astronomical "evidence" is not convincing. For one thing, modern astrology focuses more on the inner person than on planetary magnitudes. Our rules are somewhat different. Please respect that difference. Our aspects go by degree, not by sign or house.

So I can tell you, as an amateur modern western astrologer, what orbs I use and why. These are not related to invisible "disks of light" but to the impact (or not) of an aspect (or conjunction) on the person's life. However, modern western astrologers do not entirely agree on whether orbs need to be narrow or whether wider orbs should be used. It is putting the cart before the horse to insist on some arbitrary rules based upon what's "up in the sky" without really probing into what is going on with the person's life. Again, sometimes you have to synthesize more information: two planets that seem out-of-orb may actually be connected through a midpoint, minor aspect (might be a quintile, septile, or novile,) or parallel.

I don't practice traditional astrology, but I've read enough about it, both via recent texts and Hellenistic originals in translation, to have some sense of how it works. Again, modern astrology doesn't use most of the essential dignities. It's a different system. So there is no point in telling modern astrologers that we need to look up tables of essential dignities. I am familiar with them. I might use them in horary, but certainly not for a natal chart interpretation.

Frankly, I would love (on some other thread, not this thread on Pluto) for someone to explain the logical origin of the ancient table of essential dignities. Nobody knows where the Babylonian or Egyptian systems even came from, or why these micro-divisions of signs, which are invisible in the sky and shed no light whatsoever, should mean anything. The faces were the old Egyptian decans, which were highly significant in their star-calendars, yet these got utterly lost in a streamlined 10-degree system.

Deborah Houlding has an interesting article on the history of the terms: http://www.skyscript.co.uk/terms.html

Please stop trying to convert people like myself. How would you feel if I launched a frontal assault on traditional astrology? It would be easy enough to do so. Again, this is a thread about Pluto in the horoscope, not an opportunity for a "teaching moment" on essential dignities. (Which, by the way, was my insight as to why purist traditionalists can't use Pluto.)

Your "concept of Pluto" does not grasp Pluto in the horoscope. Yes, there is schlock modern astrology about Pluto, just as there was schlock traditional astrology. What you have presented is a classic straw man. I do recommend to you Steven Forrest, The Book of Pluto; and Robert Hand, Planets in Transit and Planets in Youth.

What your "concepts of Pluto" demonstrate to me is that you have yet to gain a working understanding of Pluto in the horoscope--as reflected in human personalities and lives.

Would you like me to spell these out for you?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
waybread said:
Dirius, re: your recent post--
I have to say that your apparent efforts to change this thread into an all-out critique of modern astrology,
using the pretext of Pluto, is a hijack.
If people do not want to use Pluto in their own practice, all well and good;
but then this thread is about understanding Pluto in the chart for people who do use it and think they have some grasp of how it operates.
Click to expand...
That's a misleading critique on Dirius
keep in mind that the OP clearly stated
MissScorpio said:
Hi everyone,

I am very confused about Pluto after reading the following...
and what I can't understand or grasp is why Pluto was assigned as ruler of Scorpio?
Obviously in Greek myth he is known as God of the Underworld
and is dark and destructive in nature like Scorpio,
but what appears to be misleading for me is that many scientists have debated over whether or not Pluto is even a planet,
and from my understanding, a decision was actually cast that Pluto is not in fact a planet as there are other objects that are known to be bigger that have also been discovered.

I also read the following:

Due to the extremely slow and eccentric orbit of Pluto, its effect on the individual personality has yet to be fully determined by astrologers.
It takes approximately 248 years to make one complete round throughout the zodiac and can spend between 15 and 20 years in a sign.
This is why those who argue against its use in delineating the personal horoscope, will say it is more generational than personal,
as literally millions of people are born during its transit through one sign.
We observe however, in practice, that Pluto does in fact have a tangible and long lasting impact on us.

So we know it has an impact on us, and I myself have experienced uncanny changes when Pluto conjunct my Venus, all typical , classical cases of transformation..
So I am bemused, as clearly Pluto's energy is integrating and formulating in some way , causing profound impacts on our life journeys..
But I also vastly aware that there must be unrecoginsed sources and bodies that we have not yet even discovered that are also unwittingly affecting our soul path.

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.
Click to expand...
Clearly the OP invites elucidation
and is interested to discuss reasons why dwarf planet pluto is considered by modern astrologers to 'rule Scorpio'

obviously Dirius very apposite discussion of the traditional perspctive is helpful
and required in order to find potential answers to such a question

i.e.
the OP is clearly aware that
traditionally Mars rules Scorpio
so
far from 'hi-acking'
Dirius has provided useful comment in that regard
waybread said:

Again, modern astrology does not constrain itself with the same rules as traditional astrology,
any more than my children feel necessarily constrained with the rules by which their great-grandparents lived.
To traditional astrologers on this thread: get over it.

If you don't want to practice modern astrology or use modern outers in your practice, then don't use them.
Why should you? But your efforts to persuade (browbeat?) others to your camp with some kind-of astronomical "evidence" is not convincing.
Click to expand...
This is a discussion
Discussions include different opinions
furthermore
the OP has invited the astronomical "evidence" you deride

i.e.
the originator of this thread has clarified
that their interest includes a discussion that considers science/scientific thought
therefore all of Dirius posts are clearly very much on topic
so far as the OP is concerned :smile:
if you would prefer to focus on your own personal modern astrological opinion
to the exclusion of all traditional astrological opinion
then you have the option of commencing your own thread elsewhere on the forum
MissScorpio said:
Bunraku
- I think it is important to leave your ears open to science
- this is the issue, it's augmenting a blend of the two together as astrology is an empirical science.
Click to expand...
Dirius has made useful comments that are clearly very much on-topic regardig various scientific aspects of this discussion
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
waybread said:

Frankly, I would love
(on some other thread, not this thread on Pluto)
for someone to explain the logical origin of the ancient table of essential dignities.

Nobody knows where the Babylonian or Egyptian systems even came from, or why these micro-divisions of signs,
which are invisible in the sky and shed no light whatsoever, should mean anything.
The faces were the old Egyptian decans,
which were highly significant in their star-calendars, yet these got utterly lost in a streamlined 10-degree system.

Deborah Houlding has an interesting article on the history of the terms: http://www.skyscript.co.uk/terms.html
Click to expand...
Nothing prevents you from commencing such a thread :smile:

by the way
THE FOLLOWING IS A QUOTE from an article by Russian Astrologer Albert Timashev, which he wrote in 2000:

"Many fundamental techniques and methods of ancient astrology are generally unknown to modern astrologers
because they were lost as a result of a scientific revolution of the 17th century
which claimed astrology was a pseudo-science.​

One fundamental basis of astrology is the system of terms
- the division of the ecliptic into 60 unequal sectors by 5 sectors per each sign of the zodiac
- and the major Egyptian years directly following from terms" :smile:

SOURCE: http://astrologer.ru/article/mey.html.en
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Monk said:
Hi Waybread,

I will only come back for humour, please note i'm stronger than i look Ha Ha!

You are a bad girl, you will give me nightmares regarding H.R. Giger ha ha!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1Nyg03z0pQ
Click to expand...
The link says that video 'does not exist' Monk :smile:

Here's more on Giger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83kJOl06ikk

by the way just last year H R Giger 'died from injuries sustained in a fall' http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/13/hr-giger-dead-alien-artist_n_5314408.html
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Monk said:
Hi JupiterAsc,

To be fair, i only posted my chart to show i had a tight alignment to Pluto on the M.C.,
thus a person that has the aspect is allowed to speak.

Obviously with Scorpio rising, i would have Scorpio features, picture below from the mid-seventies,
sorry about the moustache, but they were in then ha ha!

http://2012forum.com/forum/download/file.php?id=7068&mode=view
Click to expand...
Hi Monk
'Scorpio features' is a broad generalisation :smile:

i.e.
It's possible your features are similar to those of others with an ascendant other than Scorpio

because

planets conjunct the ascendant have an influence on appearance
as do planets aspecting the ascendant by square, opposition, sextile and trine as well

Ron Bippus 40 years of research on Physical appearance indicatiors
may be of interest to you as well http://reocities.com/athens/delphi/1601/physical.html
Monk said:
I don't see anything wrong with Waybread's interpretation,
it was how i was taught at the Faculty of Astrological Studies, link below, obviously only one school of many:-

http://www.astrology.org.uk/

I make no secret that i'm disabled, but i can see why waybread would think that!

I have studied Hellenistic and traditional methods,
however i now specialise in fixed stars, parans and mundane electional astrology,
however i could be wrong, it may be synchronicity, parans are the oldest of astrology techniques
and can be followed back to at least the 13th Century BC

Everything in my life/soul that isn't needed gets burnt off!

Obviously as parans have tight orbs to angles,
my research is geared to studying tight Pluto orbs,
however i think i will start a new thread regarding planets tight on angles when i can get to it!

I find it strange that Vesta hasn't been mentioned in traditional astrology,
for it must have been visible to the ancients when there wasn't any light pollution,
it is only 326 miles in mean radius,
but under some conditions is visible to the naked eye, link below please scroll down to "Visibility":-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Vesta
Click to expand...
Being 'visible to the naked eye only under some conditions'
is clearly the reason Vesta was not noticed even in modern times until 1807

Obviously, poweful telescopes with cameras attached
make the finding of asteroids and dwarf planets childsplay
and as an astronomer
you would be aware of that

HOWEVER

that does not mean these objects were clearly visible in night skies around the world at all times
as were fixed stars, Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn
 
Last edited:
K

Konrad

Account Closed
Monk said:
It is highly likely that Waybread knew my "Personal Limitations"= disablement, as i don't make a secret of it, as listed below, isn't it refreshing that Pluto involved in secrets is so open?

http://2012forum.com/forum/download/file.php?id=7174&mode=view

However i agree how she saw those limitations by astrology!

A forum is to love, but debate, i like both Waybread and JupiterAsc, but i can disagree, it doesn't stop the friendship!

Obviously i will debate on the energy of evil with Waybread in the future, however she knows i have been witness to extreme paranormal experiences, it may cloud my judgement, but at least i was there as a researcher at location and i don't lie about personal experience!

Too many hitting each other on the head on this thread for me to continue, last post!
Click to expand...

Monk,

when did you begin to be affected by your illness, and when was it diagnosed? I ask because charts such as yours (Moon culminating, Sun in 10th whole-sign yet retreating from an the angle) often prove difficult for me to identify the Hyleg and those dates would help my own research.
 
Monk

Monk

Premium Member
Humour again but not related to Pluto!

Brady's Parans cost over £200:00

Solar Fire costs over £200:00

In fact Solar Fire is at fault over paran, however good in most things!

Then you have to buy several astronomy expensive programmes to see who is right!

It may cost over £1000:00 in the end, thats so funny if you are an astronomer!

Many here just go to a link, very funny, as you have the ability to switch house techniques, which there are many, etc when you have actually bought programme, whatever links can give something different, that isn't accurate to actually buying programme!

Many buy a programme to earn money, however there is no money in Mundane astrology, it is all in birth charts.

Actually i'm not so interested in Birth charts as you know, and i will admit that i can be rusty, however i look to mundane astrology where no money exists, however i buy all programmes including astronomy programmes to compare, perhaps people interested in making money by birth charts should at least buy a programme, please note this isn't directed to all here by humour, i know some have bought a programme, but stop going to the world wide web for information, buy it!
 
Monk

Monk

Premium Member
Hi Konrad,

Sadly i had troubles in the early 20's, however Ankylosing Spondylitis in extreme wasn't really known about in the 1970's so it was missed by hospital, i have Bamboo Spine, it was thought it was never carried forward by DNA, however my daughter has been found to have it, however as she is only 25, many of the effects i have can be controlled in her, being young by medication.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Monk said:
Humour again but not related to Pluto!

Brady's Parans cost over £200:00

Solar Fire costs over £200:00

In fact Solar Fire is at fault over paran, however good in most things!

Then you have to buy several astronomy expensive programmes to see who is right!

It may cost over £1000:00 in the end, thats so funny if you are an astronomer!

Many here just go to a link, very funny, as you have the ability to switch house techniques, which there are many, etc when you have actually bought programme, whatever links can give something different, that isn't accurate to actually buying programme!

Many buy a programme to earn money, however there is no money in Mundane astrology, it is all in birth charts.

Actually i'm not so interested in Birth charts as you know, and i will admit that i can be rusty,
however i look to mundane astrology where no money exists, however i buy all programmes including astronomy programmes to compare,
perhaps people interested in making money by birth charts should at least buy a programme,
please note this isn't directed to all here by humour, i know some have bought a programme, but stop going to the world wide web for information, buy it!
Click to expand...
Interesting comments regarding MUNDANE ASTROLOGY Monk :smile:

because some are of the opinion that due to dwarf planet pluto's ultra-slow orbit of the sun
i.e.
approximately 248 years

that any purported influence is likely to be more apposite when considering HISTORICAL CYCLES of Nations et al
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
waybread said:
Robert Hand, Planets in Transit and Planets in Youth.
Click to expand...
recent podcast ROBERT HAND interviewed by Chris Brennan
Robert Hand states that he originally wrote Planets in Transit decades ago as a computer program
and in fact since he sold it to astro.com to use freely
his current thinking on the topic has changed
http://theastrologypodcast.com/2013/12/09/robert-hand-reconciling-modern-traditional-astrology/

MissScorpio said:
Hi everyone,

I am very confused about Pluto after reading the following... and what I can't understand or grasp is why Pluto was assigned as ruler of Scorpio?
Click to expand...

from discussion on this issue http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=494058#post494058

Paul_ said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
K

Konrad

Account Closed
Monk said:
Hi Konrad,

Sadly i had troubles in the early 20's, however Ankylosing Spondylitis in extreme wasn't really known about in the 1970's so it was missed by hospital, i have Bamboo Spine, it was thought it was never carried forward by DNA, however my daughter has been found to have it, however as she is only 25, many of the effects i have can be controlled in her, being young by medication.
Click to expand...

Well I'm sorry to hear both about you and your daughter, it really is no surprise considering the Lot of Children in your chart and your own Lot of Fortune.

For what it is worth, I would see the Moon as Hyleg based upon your time-line.
 
Top