Astrologers' Community  

Go Back   Astrologers' Community > General Astrology > Natal Astrology

Natal Astrology A place to discuss yours and others' birth charts (after you post your own birth chart interpretation). Includes psychological and relocation astrology, houses, aspects, and planetary dignity and debility.


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 06-07-2008, 12:41 AM
Pelagic87 Pelagic87 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 68
Aspects to the ascendant

This may sound like a silly question, but I have tried looking this up on the internet and haven't come up with anything, anyways, what I was wondering was this, does the sign on the cusp of the ascendant lend its 'flavor' to the planet aspecting it? I.E. If I have mars opposition the ascendant, and my ascendant is pisces, could it be similar to mars opposition neptune?

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 06-07-2008, 12:58 AM
Junke Junke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 115
Re: Aspects to the ascendant

No, and the reason is that the Ascendant is a point, not a planet. That means that it can only recieve aspects, not cast them. Planets will have an effect on the ascendant, but the ascendant will not affect the planet.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 06-07-2008, 01:58 AM
blennus's Avatar
blennus blennus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Uji, Japan
Posts: 46
Re: Aspects to the ascendant

That is very debatable. Just because it is a mathematically calculated point does not mean that it has no effect on the planet. It is a house cusp, and the houses have a definite effect on the planets and DO color them. Yet the houses are defined mathematically so that arguement just doesn't fly with me. While I have no proof as to whether or not the ascendant or the MC colors planetary influences, the fact that it is a point is a load of garbage, especially since we have no real knowledge of the mechanism behind why astrology works in the first place. I mean why does a mathematical point have any affect on our personality at all? Saying that it has no effect simply because you don't think it should is no reason at all. I mean scientifically there is no reason to think ANY of the planets affect our personality, but they do. Therefore I would personally think that it is better to see whether it does or not by chart analysis rather than personal theories as to whether or not they should or should not, as that is proned to be flawed.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 06-07-2008, 04:51 AM
NeptuneAscendant NeptuneAscendant is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 63
Send a message via AIM to NeptuneAscendant Send a message via MSN to NeptuneAscendant
Re: Aspects to the ascendant

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelagic87
This may sound like a silly question, but I have tried looking this up on the internet and haven't come up with anything, anyways, what I was wondering was this, does the sign on the cusp of the ascendant lend its 'flavor' to the planet aspecting it? I.E. If I have mars opposition the ascendant, and my ascendant is pisces, could it be similar to mars opposition neptune?
No, it would not. That's like saying "I have Mars opposition Sun in Pisces, is that like Mars opposition Neptune?" Mars opposition Ascendant can mean the best kind of romantic partner for you is one with Martian qualities-- driven, assertive, action-oriented, and sexual.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 06-07-2008, 05:47 AM
Junke Junke is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 115
Re: Aspects to the ascendant

Quote:
Originally Posted by blennus
That is very debatable. Just because it is a mathematically calculated point does not mean that it has no effect on the planet. It is a house cusp, and the houses have a definite effect on the planets and DO color them. Yet the houses are defined mathematically so that arguement just doesn't fly with me. While I have no proof as to whether or not the ascendant or the MC colors planetary influences, the fact that it is a point is a load of garbage, especially since we have no real knowledge of the mechanism behind why astrology works in the first place. I mean why does a mathematical point have any affect on our personality at all? Saying that it has no effect simply because you don't think it should is no reason at all. I mean scientifically there is no reason to think ANY of the planets affect our personality, but they do. Therefore I would personally think that it is better to see whether it does or not by chart analysis rather than personal theories as to whether or not they should or should not, as that is proned to be flawed.
...All qualified Astrologist have said the same thing. Now since I'm above arguing, on the internet especially, I'm just going to ignore the hostility and respond with an excerpt from a more Qualified Astrologer.

Kevin Burk, Astrology: Understanding the Birth Chart
Physical Bodies both make and recieve aspects from other physical bodies. When Mars Trines Jupiter, there is a flow of energy from Mars to Jupiter, and from Jupiter to Mars; both planets are affected and influenced by the aspect. Mathematical points in the chart (including the angles, the Moon's nodes, and the Arabic Parts or Greek Lots) can only recieve aspects from physical bodies; they do not make aspects. Mars trine the ascendant will influence the Ascendant, coloring how that individual appears to others, and how that individual interacts with the world. It will not, however, influence the expression of that individual's Mars....

I don't put my personal theories into anything, I have a source for everything, so maybe you shouldn't go assuming things like that...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 06-07-2008, 08:45 AM
blennus's Avatar
blennus blennus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Uji, Japan
Posts: 46
Re: Aspects to the ascendant

First off I would like to apologize for any offense taken. No hostility or offense was intended in any way, however sometimes my manner of communication can be a bit aggressive. Blame my mercury mars conjuntion.

Secondly I concede that my usage of the words “personal theories” was incorrect. I have commonly seen these same arguments, an indeed I have even read that quote before though I didn’t know who had said or written those words. Therefore the word “personal” was both inaccurate and inappropriate. For this I apologize. I will endeavor to prevent such errors in my future posts.

On the other hand I would like to say that whether it be Kevin Burk or Larry King, my arguments in the previous post still stand. So while it isn’t your personal theory it is Kevin’s personal theory that you subscribe to. Or maybe it’s the personal theory of ALL qualified astrologers without exception. In any case it doesn’t matter whose theory it is unless it is backed up with evidence. An appeal to ethos or credibility has nothing to do with the issue at hand here. Sources in and of themselves mean nothing unless those sources include solid data. In scientific lab reports those sources include all of the data that was acquired so the reader can decide for themselves. Kevin’s quote offers no such data, just a bunch of rhetoric on how it should be, without proving it using data from charts that have been cast. The source of the quote can be found here:
http://www.therealastrology.com/HTML...IN/980106.html

Now while the argument that Kevin puts forward seems to make sense, it doesn’t address why physical bodies are necessary. As I stated in an earlier post, the planets themselves should have no bearing on our lives in the first place, and yet they do. The fact that Pluto was in a certain portion of the sky affecting my life seems utterly absurd, and yet through experience and evidence seen in hundreds of charts I would have to agree that it does. Now how in the world does that happen? It is because Pluto has mass? No, the gravity exerted by Pluto is insignificant next to the doctor that handles you when you’re born. If that’s the case we’d have to chart the position, size, and mass of the doctor doing our delivery into our charts! To be honest the only answer that we can give as to why astrology works is that we don’t know for certain. No known force can account for its influence, thus it must be something other than those four basic forces. (I speak of gravity, electromagnetism, the Weak and Strong nuclear forces).

To continue, the quote provided says “there is a flow of energy from Mars to Jupiter, and from Jupiter to Mars; both planets are affected and influenced by the aspect.” I am going to take this to mean that it applies to aspects in general rather than just trines as in the original quote (I believe this is in keeping with the author’s intent). Now there is no evidence anywhere that energy from Mars is communicated to Jupiter and vice versa in any way shape or form. How are the planets affected? How do we know that they talk to one another in such fashion? I can just imagine when they are in conjunction Mars and Jupiter facing earth, and Jupiter saying to mars “Nice butt*”, to which Mars replies “Yeah, I’ve been working out lately” (* original word was filtered ). Now joking aside, neither Mars nor Jupiter are sentient beings that are aware of each other, rather the only thing that can be said is that their position in the natal chart shows how their influences interact. This is the whole point of aspects. We don’t know WHY they work that way, only that they do. It is entirely possible that Mars and Jupiter exert some form of energy that affects us. It is also entirely possible that the planets are merely a reflection of what is, not a cause and effect device. This is in the same way a clock merely reflects the time and does not cause it to be the time stated. In fact this ideology was far more accepted in ancient times. Comets were portents of doom, not the cause of them, very much in the same way other omens were observed. This is in keeping with other esoteric traditions such as reading tea leaves, palmistry and tarot card readings. Obviously the reading in question does not cause the events to happen, otherwise a Tarot card reader who predicts death could be accused of murder! In modern times the idea that everything must have a cause and effect has pushed even astrology in that direction.

Now I do not mean to say that there is no cause and effect, but rather I am saying that is merely one possibility. Again I repeat, we don’t know why astrology works. This is exactly why so many “intellectuals” discard astrology, because it doesn’t fit in their little world of what should make sense. Thus trying to force a Why, without solid evidence is mere opinion, and thus is just a load of garbage unless you have anything to back it up.

Now supposing that there is no cause and effect, but rather that our charts are a cosmic timepiece, then there is no reason to suppose that planets have any more validity than the mathematical points, such as the Ascendant, Mid Celestial, Nodes, and so forth. Since no energy is given or received, there is no reason not to think that they influence each other or rather represent influences that associate with each other in some way.

On the other hand to return again to the argument that some force or energy emanates from the planets, let us suppose that that is indeed true. However we have forgotten or neglected the closest planet of all, planet Earth. Remember that the Ascendant represents the where the ecliptic meets the horizon. This means that everything below the Ascendant and Descendant is blocked by the earth. Now if the other planets radiate this force spoken of, does not the earth too exert this same force? Does this not justify in some way that the energy from other planets affects the energy given off by the planet itself? It is entirely possible that the ascendant is a sensitive source of said energy, as well as the IC. Also remember that the force exerted on us is not a physical one, otherwise science would have detected it and demonstrated it some time ago. Can only physical objects radiate said energy? Is it not possible that there are energies associated with the ecliptic itself? Could not the MC and other points also radiate such energy? Now you may ask what is the source of such energy? It could be the plasma that is denser nearer the ecliptic or some other source. But really, does the source have to be a physical body? Could it not be an energy field, or perhaps more esoteric a spiritual one. These are all currently unanswerable, and I will not claim to have such answers without solid proof.

Now forgive me if I sound hostile, as again as stated before this is not my intention. My intention is to find out if aspects to the angles or other mathematical points do indeed color the planets that make those aspects. Personally I don’t have the answer, but I’m not going to believe that they do or not just based on a collective agreement. It used to be that prior to Newton all qualified scientists believed that physical objects would naturally come to a rest. However that has shown to be false. Thus arguments based on sources or ethos doesn’t get to the matter at hand. The fact is the only way to know for sure is to cast a large number of charts without preconceived ideas in either direction and see whether or not such an influence exists or not.

Again as I have stated, my stance is that of an acknowledgement of my ignorance and as such desire for knowledge. If by casting charts one has found or has not found such an influence, that would be the greatest evidence. Now one or two anecdotes are not sufficient nor would they constitute scientific proof, however they can point one in the right direction.

In my own experience I have had difficulty in discerning whether they do affect the planets in consideration due to the multitude of factors that already exist in a chart. Synthesizing already known data is hard enough as it is (especially since I only do this in what little spare time that I have) without complicating it by adding the possibility of aspects to mathematical points, so in general I don’t use them at this time. However I make no claims whatsoever as to whether or not there is or is not an influence on planets via mathematical points.

Last edited by blennus; 06-07-2008 at 09:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 06-07-2008, 04:19 PM
wilsontc's Avatar
wilsontc wilsontc is offline
Senior Member, Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 6,808
difference between planets and signs, to Pelagic

Pelagic,

You asked:
Quote:
If I have mars opposition the ascendant, and my ascendant is pisces, could it be similar to mars opposition neptune
You have now know that this is NOT a "silly question" but a hotly debated astrological issue. So far the posters have been focusing on the difference between a planet and a point and which one has energy and which one does not.

I want to focus on something a little more basic and which (I think) most astrologers will agree on. A SIGN is NOT a PLANET or POINT. So when you compare PLANET (Mars) opposite POINT (Ascendant) to PLANET (Mars) opposite SIGN (Pisces), you are confusing signs and planets/points. What you are doing is saying, "Since Pisces is the same as Neptune, an opposition to the sign Pisces is the same as an opposition to the planet Neptune." And since Pisces is NOT the same as Neptune, you really can't make that comparison.

In order to eliminate your confusion, ALWAYS compare Planets/Points to Planets/Points. So your focus in the situation is on Mars (Planet) opposite Ascendant (Point). Pisces has nothing to do with this opposition. Pisces affects the POINT (Ascendant) but is NOT part of the opposition to Mars.

Keeping Signs separate from Planets/Points will help a LOT in understanding the basics of astrology. For more about these astrological basics, see Steps 5 and 6 in the link below this posting.

Basically,

Tim
__________________
To learn basic astrological chart interpretation for your chart see:
http://learnaboutyourastrochart.jimdo.com/
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 06-07-2008, 11:24 PM
blennus's Avatar
blennus blennus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Uji, Japan
Posts: 46
Re: Aspects to the ascendant

Well well well. How foolish of me to forget to respond to the original question posed in the post. I believe that wilsontc has hit the nail on the head. Well said.

As he has stated signs and chart points are very different animals and cannot be used interchangably. Aspects between chart points indicate how they interact, but even in interaction they don't replace anything. Mars in Capricorn Opposition Venus in Cancer does not appear as mars in libra or venus in aries. Nor can you replace Venus with the Moon nor Mars with Saturn. Rather it shows how Venus' cardinal watery nature and Mars' cardinal earthy nature relate to each other in your chart. So the above example of an opposition represent the need for balance between the Martian drive that manifests itself in a practical manner and the Venusian desire for harmony and beauty that manifests itself in an emotional manner. Ultimately it is about balancing Mars and Venus, not about balancing Capricorn and Cancer.

Thus if we apply this to Mars opposition Ascendant the same can be said to a certain point. It is not about balancing Pisces and Virgo, but rather about how the ascendant and Mars interacts. This is where the contention lies. In what manner do mathematical points in the chart interact with physical planets? We don't know for certain, is the only answer I can give.

Edit: Actually that last sentence is incorrect. There are certain things that we can say, for example since mars is in opposition to the ascendant it is naturally conjunct the descendant, and thus the 7th house or, the house of partnerships is affected by a martian influence. On the other hand what is unclear is how mars itself is affected.

Last edited by blennus; 06-08-2008 at 12:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 06-08-2008, 11:23 PM
Pelagic87 Pelagic87 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 68
Re: Aspects to the ascendant

well, I got a pretty good idea of how it works, and the nature of the ascendant. Thanks for all your replies
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 06-09-2008, 07:10 AM
Double Leo Double Leo is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 15
Re: Aspects to the ascendant

Hey i'm new on these boards. I've been into astrology for about a year and a half now and i was wondering, since the points don't effect what they are aspected to, what happens when the ascendant trines the north node? I know the interpretation on this site, but is it right? Any thoughts?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ascendant, aspects

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Calling all Vedic astrologers..... freedomlover Vedic Astrology 38 12-13-2011 12:14 PM
Gemini Sun / Pisces Ascendant angelfire2006 Houses & cusps 10 08-12-2010 09:27 PM
Arabic Parts Ihatelawschool Other Astrology 14 04-09-2010 06:33 AM
Planets in my chart 0WinN0 Aspects & configurations 10 03-17-2007 02:26 AM
The beginner's guide to remembering the commonly used aspects Summery Joy Aspects & configurations 4 10-28-2006 10:51 AM



All times are GMT. The time now is 08:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005-2018, AstrologyWeekly.com. Boards' structure and all posts are property of AstrologyWeekly.com and their respective creators. No part of the messages sent on these boards may be copied without their owners' explicit consent.