Astrologers' Community  

Go Back   Astrologers' Community > General Astrology > Other Astrology > Research and Development

Research and Development This is a forum designed for applying scientific methods and understanding to all approaches of astrology, cooperative formulation and testing of new ideas, re-examination of known methods of delineation and interpretation, and the exploration of new astrological methods of all kinds (e.g. heliocentric models, planetary nodes and apogees, etc.).


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76  
Unread 01-27-2015, 08:16 AM
Monk's Avatar
Monk Monk is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,953
Re: Confused about Pluto

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!

Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Monk For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #77  
Unread 01-27-2015, 08:29 AM
Monk's Avatar
Monk Monk is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London
Posts: 2,953
Re: Confused about Pluto

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.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Monk For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #78  
Unread 01-27-2015, 09:23 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,779
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk View Post

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!
Interesting comments regarding MUNDANE ASTROLOGY Monk

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
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Unread 01-27-2015, 09:57 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,779
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post

Robert Hand, Planets in Transit and Planets in Youth.
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/...nal-astrology/

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissScorpio View Post
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?
from discussion on this issue http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum...058#post494058

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul_ View Post

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.
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JUPITERASC For This Useful Post:
Dirius (01-27-2015)
  #80  
Unread 01-27-2015, 11:25 AM
Konrad Konrad is offline
Account Closed
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 659
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk View Post
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.
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.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Konrad For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #81  
Unread 01-27-2015, 11:00 PM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 15,408
Re: Confused about Pluto

Dirius, in response to your post of 7:02 this morning.

Most of the people at Astrologers Community are modern astrologers, but there is room for everyone, including traditional western, Vedic/jyotish, Chinese, or Uranian practitioners. We can all have friendly debates about which system works best. But just because you or I practice one form of astrology doesn't mean that we are entitled to trash another form of astrology, or to insist that we have found the only way that will ever work for anyone.

Please keep the necessary sense of respect for other members' preferred systems in mind. It's OK with me if you prefer traditional astrology, just as I am OK with drivers who prefer manual transmissions or antique cars, even though I like my automatic transmission.

In modern western astrology, subset English-language, Pluto is the modern ruler of Scorpio. If you don't practice modern western astrology, that's fine: apparently you get super results using Mars as the traditional ruler. I consider both Pluto and Mars as rulers of Scorpio in a natal chart reading. In horary astrology, I look at Mars; but with Pluto as potentially adding supplementary information.

The assignment of Pluto to Scorpio was not random. Initially following the Uranus/Aquarius and Neptune/Pisces assignments, some astrologers thought Pluto should belong to the next sign, Aries. But many modern astrologers did some research, and concluded that Pluto worked much better as the modern ruler of Scorpio. And I have to agree, based on my own readings of a few thousand charts.

I work extensively with house cusp rulers (lords) in natal chart interpretation, and Pluto works really well in this context. And again, if a house with Scorpio on the cusp is important for the reading at hand, I look at both Pluto's and Mars's situations.

Your wrote:
Quote:
I said that pluto, according to traditional astrology, is meaningless.
I have no disagreement with this statement. But indeed, you said a whole lot more than this about Pluto, in order to discourage anybody from using Pluto, even if they don't practice traditional astrology.

Dirius, I will happily debate you (with one hand tied behind my back) on Pluto for as long as this thread lasts. But notice how you framed the discussion in your bold type: modern vs. traditional astrology. Believe it or not, at something over 6000 posts here and on other forums, I have been through several of these "trads vs. mods" debates, and they can get pretty nasty. Typically the threads run like this thread does, with a trad taking potshots at a modern astrology he seemingly doesn't understand very well; and being largely unwilling to reconsider the rationale for his "evidence."

I have to stress, lest you run to your astrology collection and draw out some reasonably idiotic works in modern astrology; that yes-- they're out there. But traditional astrology has its share of idiotic works, as well; just as modern astrology has some really thoughtful authors.

To each her/his own? Or is so much diversity not good enough for you?

Thankfully, the tone of your post changes near the end to a more helpful position.

I am so delighted that you are finally clarifying your commitment to the traditional camp-- as such. Not simply as the way astrology works globally. Which is how your previous posts come across.

For anyone else unclear on traditional western astrology: I have in my collection and highly recommend Avelar and Ribeiro's primer on traditional astrology On the Heavenly Spheres. They give an easy-to-follow explanation of essential dignities and other methods sloughed off by modern astrology-- and without John Frawley's offensive sarcasm. Another good primer is J. Lee Lehman's Classical Astrology for Modern Living. For people who like to read works in the original, Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos (ca. 150 CE) is readable, still, and it influenced so much of the astrology that came after him in subsequent periods. The Skyscript website http://www.skyscript.co.uk/ managed by and for traditional astrologers has many helpful articles, threads, definitions, and lessons. Some of the prominent traditional astrologers like Chris Brennan and Benjamin Dykes, have their own websites. Kevin Burk's Understanding the Birth Chart is a blend of traditional and modern.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we値l change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.

Last edited by waybread; 01-27-2015 at 11:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to waybread For This Useful Post:
StillOne (02-10-2015), unique_astrology (01-27-2015)
  #82  
Unread 01-27-2015, 11:27 PM
Dirius's Avatar
Dirius Dirius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,494
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post

Please keep the necessary sense of respect for other members' preferred systems in mind. It's OK with me if you prefer traditional astrology, just as I am OK with drivers who prefer manual transmissions or antique cars, even though I like my automatic transmission.
I agree one is to be respectful of other's technique or beliefs, but given a debate regarding a controversial topic that separates 2 schools of thought, some measure of confrontation is to be expected regarding it.

Unfortunatly, both points of view can't exactly co-exists in each others thought, some things that might hurt some feelings will have to be said.

And of course, this topics always sort of end up like this, that we agree

I understand that, I did talk a lot about pluto, but that is the purpose of the post. While I do agree that at some point my posts become lengthy paragraphs of what could be considered "full on pluto bashing", understand that the opinion given has and will always be from traditional evidence.

Obviously I'm not adding "...and this is just my traditional view" at the end of every sentence, but I think that I mentioned it enough for you guys.

To be honest, I'm not trying to enter into conflict with anyone who would rather use pluto instead of mars, that is your business not mine.

But bare in mind that the OP was the one who created a post regarding pluto and scorpio, and while the original aim would be to try to segment the correlation between pluto and scorpio, the mars argument becomes a fair solution and answer for her problem. And the rest of the evidence presented (we can call it the "pluto bashing"), merely reinforces the mars as ruler of scorpio perspective.
__________________
If you'd like a private Horary or Natal consultation, please visit me at:

https://antiqueastrology.wordpress.com/

You'll also find some tips for horary practice!

Last edited by Dirius; 01-27-2015 at 11:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dirius For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #83  
Unread 01-27-2015, 11:39 PM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 15,408
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddity View Post
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.
Monk, I was traveling for a day and a half, and am just now back home and trying to catch up.

Two things about whether we need Pluto to explain anything.

(1) Astrologers look for patterns in a natal chart reading.

Rather than saying, "'Placement A' tells me everything"; I would look to see whether placements "B" and "C" reinforce what I think Placement A is telling. Because a lone or small number of horoscope clues can lead us astray.

Just for example, suppose we see someone with Aries and Mars looking extra strong in the third house of short-distinace travel, suggesting an "I gotta be me" kind of guy, ready to go off on his Harley. But then we notice Pisces rising, the moon in Taurus in the 4th, and Saturn opposite those martial placements. Suppose Pluto is in the 8th. So now we wonder whether his motorcycle gathers dust in the garage, and his martial nature expresses itself through violent video games or murder mysteries.

Pluto, whether one thinks it "necessary or not" is another bit of information that either reinforces or modifies an existing pattern.

(2) Pluto gives a depth to what I see as your quest for life's secrets that the traditional planets do not do so well. Mercury in Virgo on its own is extra-strong (domiciled/exalted,) but Virgo as a sign is on a quest for perfection. Its eyes are heaven-set. Mercury in Virgo gives a lot of discernment, but with an earth sign, this can be in a more pragmatic, hands-on way. Pluto, in contrast, gives us the depth-charge.

Pluto isn't OK with simple platitudes, the classics as given by Cliff's Notes, or "current wisdom." It needs to probe beneath the surface, and to strip away pretense and superficiality.

More generally, if we focus on Pluto in the horoscope, we can often find information that is hard to get in other ways. Pluto opposite sun people (as I learned in several threads,) often had a dysfunctional relationship with their father. With Pluto conjunct moon, oftentimes the mother relationship was toxic. People with Pluto quintile the sun or AC are often extraordinarily ambitious. I once read a chart with Pluto quintile sun in the second for a young man obsessed with making vast sums of money. A Pluto-Venus woman can attract all kinds of unwanted attention from men, including stalkers.

The sun in the 9th might just be the world traveller happy to post his latest photos from Thailand on his Facebook page.

There is often an obsessive, transgressive quality with Pluto: either we acknowledge it in ourselves and deal with it responsibly, or we wonder why we attract obsessed people.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we値l change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to waybread For This Useful Post:
StillOne (02-10-2015)
  #84  
Unread 01-28-2015, 12:07 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,779
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post

In modern western astrology, subset English-language, Pluto is the modern ruler of Scorpio.....

....The assignment of Pluto to Scorpio was not random. Initially following the Uranus/Aquarius and Neptune/Pisces assignments, some astrologers thought Pluto should belong to the next sign, Aries.

But many modern astrologers did some research,
and concluded that Pluto worked much better as the modern ruler of Scorpio.


And I have to agree, based on my own readings of a few thousand charts.

Research?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul_ View Post

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.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Unread 01-28-2015, 12:17 AM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 15,408
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirius View Post
.....To sum up:

- Pluto doesn't fit with almost NONE of the astrological beliefs
- Each meaning pluto has can be assigned to another reason, established 2000 years ago

Of course, here the modern astrologer comes and claims:

"-But I don't believe in the triplicity system, or the concept of sect, or that aspects are because of signs. So I will use Pluito regardless."

Well, going by that, then we can question everything, then:

- why does the sun rules Leo?
- why are squares "bad" aspects and trines "good"?
- why is uranus malefic?
- why does venus represent love?
- why does the moon represent feelings?
- why is the 9th house, the one of higher learning?
- why is the 7th house the one of the spouse?

Why?

Modern astrology disregards a lot of astrological teachings, only for the sake of preference.

If one is to disregard a lot of this things, why not the rest? why keep some, and throw away the others?

I've actually said in many posts, what hurts the Pluto argument the most is the lack of reasoning on modern astrology.

I must say waybread, that by far, you are the most convincing and logical with the Pluto argument. I do give you that.

But the problem, at least for me, is that still the dissection of the astrological system ir order to make room for pluto, still lacks a logical perspective.

PS: I'm not trying to offend anyone with this post, just trying to put the argument together, and trying to show the reasoning behind the well established classical principles.

EDIT: just fixed a few things on the post, was pretty long and I missplaced some words/sentences.
Dirius, I am just now going over some posts from the past two days, and thought I would give your quote some feedback.

Do you mind saying what is your background in modern astrology? You've made some sweeping assertions that just don't hold up.

I started studying astrology around 1990. Back then, there just wasn't any traditional astrology to choose from in the bookstores I haunted. Nouveau traditional astrology and astrological sites on the Internet were just barely getting started. However, when I started reading traditional astrology several years ago, I was pleased to see how much of it I already knew. Easily a third of the material overlapped. So material like the sun ruling Leo or Venus representing love are common to both. No problem.

You probably know the following, but for readers who don't:

After traditional western astrology died in the early 1700s, modern astrology in the late 19th century resurrected astrology from the rubbish heap of history. But it did so with a dramatically different focus. In the hands of the theosophists and members of esoteric lodges like the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, astrology's focus turned to human perfectibility and character delineation as explained by the incipient new fields of psychology and the human potential movement. (For a more detailed history, see Nicholas Campion's History of Astrology vol. 2.)

By this time, too, Britain and many US jurisdictions outlawed "fortune telling." Both Alan Leo (UK) and Evangeline Adams (US) were charged under these laws. Even though the charges didn't stick, it was clearly safer to restrict astrology to character analysis than it was to predict future events. By ca. 1900, as well, the old doom-and-gloom fatalism of a lot of traditional astrology texts was out of favour with modernity. Two new planets might not fit essential dignities, but esotericists like Alice Bailey were prepared to take them on.

With the new spirit of the times, astrology simply evolved. Patrons wanted to know how to better their lives, a concept nearly unthinkable prior to modernity's upward mobility. The old essential dignities just didn't suggest much of a way forward.

Uranus, as symbolizing liberation and new technologies, fit in with the new spirit. Neptune, discovered during the Romantic era, has something to say about mysticism and some of the arts. Pluto, discovered on the eve of Nazi conquest of Germany, discoveries in nuclear fission and increasing awareness of genocide, opened astrologer's eyes to a world beyond the simple meanings of Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars.

Why keep some traditions and not throw out the rest? Well, some of us base our decisions on what we think produces results in the type of astrology we practice.

I, for one, can think of no logical reason why triplicities, terms, and faces should matter. They aren't up in the sky. Their original rationale is lost in the mists of ancient history. As Houlding (cited above) showed, there were probably errors in transcriptions of the terms that got handed down to us.

If they work for you, however, no problem: but then that is a pragmatic decision.

There is an whole lot more rationale to modern astrology, but without knowing precisely what puzzles you, it is hard to continue with efficient explanations.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we値l change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to waybread For This Useful Post:
HYS (02-10-2015), StillOne (02-10-2015)
  #86  
Unread 01-28-2015, 12:30 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,779
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddity View Post

I don't find Pluto useful, but a lot of people do, and include it in their astrology.
That it's no longer a planet by astronomy's current standard really doesn't matter, it's a different field of endeavour to astrology in the modern world.

Where you may want to consider compromising is using Pluto as a planet,
but retaining traditional rulerships: Mars rules Scorpio.

Or not - it's up to you.
At the end of the day, the astrology police aren't going to bust your door down because 'you're doing it wrong' whichever way you go.
Exactly
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Unread 01-28-2015, 12:35 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,779
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
Dirius, I am just now going over some posts from the past two days, and thought I would give your quote some feedback.

Do you mind saying what is your background in modern astrology? You've made some sweeping assertions that just don't hold up.

There is an whole lot more rationale to modern astrology,
but without knowing precisely what puzzles you,
it is hard to continue with efficient explanations.
Clearly it is the OP who is puzzled, not Dirius ~ hence the thread title 'confused about pluto'
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Unread 01-28-2015, 01:46 AM
Dirius's Avatar
Dirius Dirius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,494
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
By this time, too, Britain and many US jurisdictions outlawed "fortune telling." Both Alan Leo (UK) and Evangeline Adams (US) were charged under these laws. Even though the charges didn't stick, it was clearly safer to restrict astrology to character analysis than it was to predict future events. By ca. 1900, as well, the old doom-and-gloom fatalism of a lot of traditional astrology texts was out of favour with modernity. Two new planets might not fit essential dignities, but esotericists like Alice Bailey were prepared to take them on.

With the new spirit of the times, astrology simply evolved. Patrons wanted to know how to better their lives, a concept nearly unthinkable prior to modernity's upward mobility. The old essential dignities just didn't suggest much of a way forward.
I'm well aware of the events surrounding the creation of modern psychological astrology, but it is a fair point to comment on, because many people don't know about it.

Clearly the tendencies of astrology as a psychological tool have been around since the Hellenic days, as many astrologers including the most famous (like Ptolomy) did write substantially on personality. So I don't disregard its ussage as an internal self help tool, instead of the solely purpose of prediction.

Yet I must disagree on saying that astrology "evolved". Certainly psycological aspects of astrology gained more importance for the general public, but clearly many of the relevant stuff was abandoned.

When I mentioned the light, the helical cycles, the essential dignities, they actually all play a part in molding a person's character and temperament.

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
Uranus, as symbolizing liberation and new technologies, fit in with the new spirit. Neptune, discovered during the Romantic era, has something to say about mysticism and some of the arts. Pluto, discovered on the eve of Nazi conquest of Germany, discoveries in nuclear fission and increasing awareness of genocide, opened astrologer's eyes to a world beyond the simple meanings of Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars.
The problem is those meanings seem a little bit over complicated mixtures of different things, that could be explained with simpler words. The words used to describe the outer planets mostly describe abstract things that could refer to a lot of different subjects, rather than stating something in particular.

It would seem that the meaning given to the outer planets, can be changed according to the will of the person doing his or her interpretation, and thus making an unclear statement regarding it.

let me take the look on neptune: "mysticism and arts".

What is "mysticism" exactly?

It is a word that can be used to describe many, many things, such as (taken from wikipedia) "extraordinary experiences and states of mind". What is an extraordinary state of mind? Can be pretty much applied to anything.

Eventually you can simplify the terms given to the outers and realise those meanings are already the property of other planets. Like in this case, mercury. The planet that represents the mind, thinking, that is considered treacherous and tricky. Mercury pretty much already has most of the so called atributes given to neptune.


Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
Why keep some traditions and not throw out the rest? Well, some of us base our decisions on what we think produces results in the type of astrology we practice.

I, for one, can think of no logical reason why triplicities, terms, and faces should matter. They aren't up in the sky. Their original rationale is lost in the mists of ancient history. As Houlding (cited above) showed, there were probably errors in transcriptions of the terms that got handed down to us.
From the perspective of psychology, a planet in a sign of its own triplicity shows tendencies more according to its specific nature.

And actually modern astrology does indeed use triplicities. In fact, you've yourself, have used an example of triplicity in this very topic.

I'll quote you: "but Virgo as a sign is on a quest for perfection"

Many of virgo's traits, are the result of being a sign of the Earth triplicity. It easy to verify that people with Taurus, Capricorn or Virgo ascendants, or similar planets in the same positions, do share similar psycological traits with similar positions.

Triplicities are nothing more that a category among the signs, when used for psychology.

So, most modern astrologers, actually do use triplicities, they just don't know about them, and don't understand them in full.

In fact in the Hellenic system, triplicities are much more important than sign rulership.

Regarding Term and Face:

Here, most of us traditionals, rarely use this 2 type of dignities on their own, except for very particular situations. There are many techniques that actually employ terms and faces a lot.

Some hermetic texts actually pay a lot of attention to them. As minor regency's for the planets, they are assumed to provide some level of dignity for when the planet resides in them, but this is considered a very minor position, yet, better than nothing else.

But here now, I'll explain what they actually are:

Faces are actually known as "decans" (because they each take 10 degrees). It goes back to the old egyptian calendar, and the egyptian belief that every brief period of time must have its own personal "protector or regeant".

The decans correspond to the 36 egyptian deities, divided among the 7 classical planets. Each deity acts as a "protector" of that specific point in time. In essence, the deity acts as a mask for that particular period of time (and were represented in caldendars by such mask). Thus, they are called "faces" (the mask of the deity).

Terms are less clear onto why they have those divisions, thus the 4 different tables of terms. But act in a similar way, and are related to egyptian/babylonian time keeping.

This is because, according to some researchers, they act as subdivisions of the month in terms of each "week" belonging to specific planets.
It is easy to notice that, for example there are NO terms for the Sun and Moon, and only include the 5 wandering stars. This is because Sun rules the day, Moon rules the night, and thus the planets rule (sort of evenly) the rest of the days of the week. You can also notice that terms vary from 6 degrees to like 10 degrees, depending on the planet and sign.

Egyptians merely classified time in a similar way to our modern concept of "weeks". We call 7 days in a row a "week", and 28-31 days a "month", and so on. Terms are merely an egyptian category, similar to this.

It is not clear why they did exactly have such uneven divitions for terms, but it is similar to us having months that vary from 28 to 31 days. The general assumption is that, they would rather have each "week" belong to a "month" (or sign), rather than having overlapping weeks among each month, like we do.

This is why there is an egyptyan table, a caldean, and a babylonian one. Each one used their own system for week tracking.

The point in question is that terms and faces, are more related to sub divisions of time (just like the 12 signs represent roughly the 12 months).
__________________
If you'd like a private Horary or Natal consultation, please visit me at:

https://antiqueastrology.wordpress.com/

You'll also find some tips for horary practice!

Last edited by Dirius; 01-28-2015 at 04:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dirius For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #89  
Unread 01-28-2015, 02:14 AM
Oddity's Avatar
Oddity Oddity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,982
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post

Pluto, whether one thinks it "necessary or not" is another bit of information that either reinforces or modifies an existing pattern ...

(2) Pluto gives a depth to what I see as your quest for life's secrets that the traditional planets do not do so well. Mercury in Virgo on its own is extra-strong (domiciled/exalted,) but Virgo as a sign is on a quest for perfection. Its eyes are heaven-set. Mercury in Virgo gives a lot of discernment, but with an earth sign, this can be in a more pragmatic, hands-on way. Pluto, in contrast, gives us the depth-charge.

Pluto isn't OK with simple platitudes, the classics as given by Cliff's Notes, or "current wisdom." It needs to probe beneath the surface, and to strip away pretense and superficiality...
Lots of snips for brevity, but I think I see where the problem is, or at least where one of them is.

Modern astrology, Alan Leo specifically, redesigned zodiac signs. That's how we got sun-sign astrology amongst other things.

You're looking at Virgo as pretty dull. I'm looking at is as an earth sign, earth signs are by nature melancholic, and melancholics (in the traditional sense of the term) are the profound thinkers of the world. I never quite grasped the idea in modern astrology, though a lot of people put it forth, that earth signs are so driven by practicality that they lack in abstract thinking, because I've seen so many people with 'earth-heavy' or melancholic charts who are profound thinkers.

I'm generalising a bit, but I have to or this post will be pages long. And I do agree with you that some planetary placements will out in far more obvious ways than others.

Modernists might find the classical planets a bit more worthy of note if so many of their rulerships hadn't been hijacked to the outer planets - that, I think, is what makes them relatively 'pallid' to so many people.

But ultimately it comes down to choice, and if you're happy with it, and your clients are happy with it, I'm certainly not going to say don't do it.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Oddity For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #90  
Unread 01-28-2015, 02:36 AM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 15,408
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddity View Post
Lots of snips for brevity, but I think I see where the problem is, or at least where one of them is.

Modern astrology, Alan Leo specifically, redesigned zodiac signs. That's how we got sun-sign astrology amongst other things.
Who is doing sun sign astrology? Not the good modern astrologers! I have two of Leo's books, on general chart delineation and progressions. They're not sun sign astrology.

Quote:
You're looking at Virgo as pretty dull
Absolutely not. With Virgo rising, I don't see it as dull at all. What I wrote was that the sign has a quest for perfection, and that as an earth sign, its orientation is typically practical. What Virgo does not have, but Pluto and Scorpio do, is that sense that "the way out is the way through." They are unafraid to plumb depths that the sign Virgo would find morbid or distasteful (unless it has been "Plutonized" with Pluto in Virgo or Pluto aspecting a Virgo personal planet.)

Quote:
I'm looking at is as an earth sign, earth signs are by nature melancholic, and melancholics (in the traditional sense of the term) are the profound thinkers of the world. I never quite grasped the idea in modern astrology, though a lot of people put it forth, that earth signs are so driven by practicality that they lack in abstract thinking, because I've seen so many people with 'earth-heavy' or melancholic charts who are profound thinkers.
As a modern astrologer, I wouldn't do temperaments in the traditional way. Rather, I like Stephen Arroyo's approach, which is to look closely at the 4 elements, and to consider what seems very real to each of them.

earth: material things are very real
air: ideas are very real
fire: actions, initiative ditto
water: feelings ditto

If we look at Virgo as the mutable earth sign, we get a sense of its innate adaptability and helpfulness.

Quote:
I'm generalising a bit, but I have to or this post will be pages long. And I do agree with you that some planetary placements will out in far more obvious ways than others.

Modernists might find the classical planets a bit more worthy of note if so many of their rulerships hadn't been hijacked to the outer planets - that, I think, is what makes them relatively 'pallid' to so many people.

But ultimately it comes down to choice, and if you're happy with it, and your clients are happy with it, I'm certainly not going to say don't do it.
I am a happy amateur: I have read hundreds of charts for people, mostly on-line in astrology forums, and I never charged a penny for any of them.

In terms of rulerships, again, it is valuable to consider both traditional and modern rulerships. This doesn't have to be an either/or proposition.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we値l change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Unread 01-28-2015, 04:00 AM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 15,408
Re: Confused about Pluto

Dirius, re: your post of 1:46 am (yikes! GMT?)

I do want to stress the distinction between modern western astrology and "modern psychological astrology." The latter is just one school of thought of the former; in the same way that Hellenistic astrology isn't the sum total of traditional western astrology.

In retrospect, a lot of the psychological material in modern astrology does not age well. For one thing, Liz Greene, the doyenne of this field, had and has only a very superficial background in psychology (aka behavioural science) as it was and is taught in universities and practiced with clients. Astrologers claiming credentials in astrology usually (not entirely) studied the humanistic side of psychology; and sometimes at more experimental or even unaccredited campuses. A lot of the psychology in psychological astrology is restricted to the work of Carl Jung.

So while Greene and her associates have some good insights about human nature, it isn't what a registered psychologist in practice would recognize.

I would also like to clarify the definition of evolution, from a biological perspective. It simply describes the process whereby a species becomes better adapted to its environment. If the environment changes, then adaptations that worked well in previous eras may lead to extinctions under the new normal.

To some extent we can see knowledge systems operating in the same way. Why did traditional astrology disappear in Europe by the mid-1700s, if it were so wonderful? We can't blame it on the church, which had an on-again, off-again relationship with astrology since its inception. We might blame Cromwell and the civil war in Britain, but then this doesn't explain why traditional astrology fizzled out on the continent.

To me, this is traditional astrology's elephant in the room. If traditional astrology worked so well, why did it die out? And why did it take until 1990 for astrologers to try to get it back?

I agree that traditional astrology had lots to say about human character, but (to quote Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos 2:13) some of it is gosh-awful. Heaven help you if you have Mars and Saturn in dishonourable positions:

"[Saturn] makes his subjects robbers, pirates, adulterators, submissive to disgraceful treatment, takers of base profits, godless, without affection, insulting, crafty, thieves, perjurers, murderers, eaters of forbidden foods, evildoers, homicides, poisoners, impious, robbers of temples and of tombs, and utterly depraved."

There's lots more where this came from, throughout traditional astrology's pre-modern history. If this is traditional astrology's notion of character analysis, no thank you.

You wrote:

Quote:
The problem is those meanings seem a little bit over complicated mixtures of different things, that could be explained with simpler words. The words used to describe the outer planets mostly describe abstract things that could refer to a lot of different subjects, rather than stating something in particular.

It would seem that the meaning given to the outer planets, can be changed according to the will of the person doing his or her interpretation, and thus making an unclear statement regarding it.
I am sure I could find wildly different interpretations of Uranus, from malefic spoiler to beneficial liberator. But the same is true of planets in traditional astrology. OK, we can classify planets as wet, dry, cold, or hot. Now what?

I find Venus especially interesting in traditional astrology. She is supposedly the lesser benefic. Nevertheless, she tends to make men lazy, overly fond of luxuries, effeminate, or lecherous. (Paraphrasing Ptolemy here.)

I don't know about you, but I don't find these types of delineations to be very helpful.

Mysticism has a more concise religious definition. Obviously in an encyclopedia entry you are going to get all kinds of attributes. My Google search turned up the following definition:

"belief that union with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender."

And it isn't as though traditional word usages are more concise! What does it mean to be "utterly depraved" or "effeminate" in today's permissive world, where LGTB people have redefined sexual mores?

Neptune has some overlap with Mercury. But we find overlap between traditional planets, as well (like the moon and Venus both concerned with women,) plus many topics where Neptune has no overlap with Mercury whatsoever. Mercury rules trade. Neptune doesn't. Neptune relates to drug addictions. Mercury doesn't. Mercury relates to writing. Neptune doesn't.

In fact, the Neptune-Mercury connection is pretty poor, the more I think about it. Neptune has closer affinities to Jupiter and Venus, but the overlap isn't 100%.

Neptune primarily is a planet of illusion-- and its flip side, disillusionment. Now you see it, now you don't. Neptune gives us beautiful ideas as well as horrible disappointment, somehow skipping the grounded reality in between. I think it rules film/cinema, based on charts I've seen of film-makers or film studies students. (Not actors, who are all over the map.) Film wasn't an artistic medium available during traditional astrology's heyday.

Again, if we're talking about an area where Neptune might overlap with the moon (the sea, for example,) I'd look at both.

On triplicities, I'm delighted that you've acknowledged some areas of similarity between traditional and modern astrology. I tend not to use the word triplicity, but "element." But here we are talking semantics.

Thanks for the primer on terms and faces. I am familiar with their meanings and know something about their history in ancient times. I just don't use them, for the most part. Sometimes I will spend time with them in a tricky horary chart as a means of taking a deeper cut at it.

The history of decans (faces) is a fascinating one, because it takes us way back into ancient Egyptian star calendars. Sadly, the Hellenistic astrologers grossly over-simplified the decans into mere 10-degree segments of signs, and now a lot of their historical origins and uses are lost.

Oh, well. I suppose the Hellenists simply invented the new modern astrology of their day.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we値l change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to waybread For This Useful Post:
StillOne (02-10-2015)
  #92  
Unread 01-28-2015, 07:08 AM
Dirius's Avatar
Dirius Dirius is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,494
Re: Confused about Pluto

I apologise if my posts are getting too long :laugh: , its just that in order to explain the point in question, I must explain the argument behind it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
I would also like to clarify the definition of evolution, from a biological perspective. It simply describes the process whereby a species becomes better adapted to its environment. If the environment changes, then adaptations that worked well in previous eras may lead to extinctions under the new normal.

To some extent we can see knowledge systems operating in the same way. Why did traditional astrology disappear in Europe by the mid-1700s, if it were so wonderful? We can't blame it on the church, which had an on-again, off-again relationship with astrology since its inception. We might blame Cromwell and the civil war in Britain, but then this doesn't explain why traditional astrology fizzled out on the continent.

To me, this is traditional astrology's elephant in the room. If traditional astrology worked so well, why did it die out? And why did it take until 1990 for astrologers to try to get it back?
Well, the explanation is quite simple really

Astrology dissapeared, along with many of the "serious" religious dogmas of the time. While people are still religious today, in for example europe, christian dogmas stopped being that important after the age of enlightment. Of course there were still believers, but how many of them follow the bible 100% today? Most people "believe" in god, follow 2 or 3 of the christian dogmas...and that is it.

Obviously astrology was never as popular as christianity, but certainly around the same time, most of the "mystic" beliefs began to be taken less seriously. People became less keen on religion in general, and while still believers, they barely behaved as christians 500 years before them.

For instance, the american revolution gave birth to the first country not bound to any type of religion in the world. The first secular state.

It was more of a general downfall of beliefs, rather than the fall of astrology. Alan leo was able to revive astrology as a watered down version of what it truly was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
I agree that traditional astrology had lots to say about human character, but (to quote Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos 2:13) some of it is gosh-awful. Heaven help you if you have Mars and Saturn in dishonourable positions:

"[Saturn] makes his subjects robbers, pirates, adulterators, submissive to disgraceful treatment, takers of base profits, godless, without affection, insulting, crafty, thieves, perjurers, murderers, eaters of forbidden foods, evildoers, homicides, poisoners, impious, robbers of temples and of tombs, and utterly depraved."

I am sure I could find wildly different interpretations of Uranus, from malefic spoiler to beneficial liberator. But the same is true of planets in traditional astrology. OK, we can classify planets as wet, dry, cold, or hot. Now what?

I find Venus especially interesting in traditional astrology. She is supposedly the lesser benefic. Nevertheless, she tends to make men lazy, overly fond of luxuries, effeminate, or lecherous. (Paraphrasing Ptolemy here.)

I don't know about you, but I don't find these types of delineations to be very helpful.

Mysticism has a more concise religious definition.

"belief that union with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or the spiritual apprehension of knowledge inaccessible to the intellect, may be attained through contemplation and self-surrender."

And it isn't as though traditional word usages are more concise! What does it mean to be "utterly depraved" or "effeminate" in today's permissive world, where LGTB people have redefined sexual mores?

Neptune has some overlap with Mercury. But we find overlap between traditional planets, as well (like the moon and Venus both concerned with women,) plus many topics where Neptune has no overlap with Mercury whatsoever. Mercury rules trade. Neptune doesn't. Neptune relates to drug addictions. Mercury doesn't. Mercury relates to writing. Neptune doesn't.

In fact, the Neptune-Mercury connection is pretty poor, the more I think about it. Neptune has closer affinities to Jupiter and Venus, but the overlap isn't 100%.

Neptune primarily is a planet of illusion-- and its flip side, disillusionment. Now you see it, now you don't. Neptune gives us beautiful ideas as well as horrible disappointment, somehow skipping the grounded reality in between. I think it rules film/cinema, based on charts I've seen of film-makers or film studies students. (Not actors, who are all over the map.) Film wasn't an artistic medium available during traditional astrology's heyday.

Again, if we're talking about an area where Neptune might overlap with the moon (the sea, for example,) I'd look at both.
Here the problem arises in technique, not concept, which are very different things. And perhaps is the area in which we traditionals debate among ourselves.

If you read any traditional astrologers, most will differ on the subject of technique, but rarely will differ on concept.

The concept of benefic and malefic, comes from the influence of planets among other planets. And the concept of a benefic acting in a wrong way, or a malefic behaving well comes from the essential dignities, sect, and aspects from other planets.

The way venus behaves and expresses its nature is due to its placement of sect (being a nocturnal planet, should be below the ground at day, or up in the sky at night), and in the correct position regarding the sun (oriental behaving masculine, occidental behaving femenine). Then the influence it carries is given by the essential weakness or strenght (regency, fall, etc).

The way venus is configured in the chart, will affect how the planet will influence other planets. Venus is merely a benefic planet, in nature. Sort of how he generally behaves. Badly configured, will do more harm than good. The same is true for the other planets.

The semantics of the ancient shouldn't be taken much into consideration.

Now regarding the interchangable nature of planets, this is one of the biggest missconceptions there is in astrological history.

Going to take the example of Moon and Venus, both representing mother, wife, etc. Remember that this is from Hellenic astrology and before, not medieval.

The reason is this:

- Venus and Mars represent the sexual interest (along with the 7th house)

- Sun and Moon have always represented the father and mother (along with 4th/10th axis), along with Kings and Queens (which in a way, are your king and queen until adulthood), the Masculine and Femenine wills.

In charts, each of these planets represent specific things. When looking at a man's chart you'll always look for the 7th and Venus for the wife, rather than the Moon. For a woman, the same goes for the 7th and Mars, rather than the Sun. This is how it was used in the beginning.

The missconceptions begins with the misunderstanding of the concept on why one needs to look for venus and mars specifically: because this express how the native relates to the opposite sex.

Then, the problem arises from technique itself:

-"what to do if you are a man, and for example, you have Taurus rising, and the ruler of the ascendant (the planet representing you) is venus?"

The technique used by the ancients was very simple. Since you can't use Venus to delineate the wife, you would look for other "femenine" planet to represent women in general...and the only available option would be the Moon. The same goes for a woman's chart with, for example, Aries rising. One would use the sun. Both Sun and Moon have an analogy of man/women stuff.

This is why some planets have overlapping natures, but in reality they were mostly used as "back up significations", in a logical perspective. Saturn can also represent the father (in case of leo rising), or Venus can represent the mother (in case of cancer rising), for a given matter.

Obviously, this sparked discussion regarding the technique and on how to apply the rulerships, in which Sun ends up being considered the natural ruler for everything that is man (including relating to the opposite sex), Saturn ends up being the ruler of fathers in night charts, etc, sparking debate among different schools of thought. Eventually, each astrologer devised their own technique: some recommend looking at Venus, Moon and 7th lord. Others at lord 7th and Venus. Others just at lord 7th.

The qualities of planets overlapping their significations is based, in the traditional way, for the sake of technique, not preference. This is what makes the pluto/neptune/uranus significations a bit redundant, because they seem to be chosen on preference rather than necessity, in comparison with the other classical planets and their natural rulerships.

Neptune's most common significance is that of mistery and secrets. This is actually the same one that has Mercury (do to its interchangeable nature, and fame of trickster). Obviously some significations given to neptune are not shared by Mercury, but again, because many significations given to the outers were done so on preference, rather than on necessesity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
On triplicities, I'm delighted that you've acknowledged some areas of similarity between traditional and modern astrology. I tend not to use the word triplicity, but "element." But here we are talking semantics.

Thanks for the primer on terms and faces. I am familiar with their meanings and know something about their history in ancient times. I just don't use them, for the most part. Sometimes I will spend time with them in a tricky horary chart as a means of taking a deeper cut at it.

The history of decans (faces) is a fascinating one, because it takes us way back into ancient Egyptian star calendars. Sadly, the Hellenistic astrologers grossly over-simplified the decans into mere 10-degree segments of signs, and now a lot of their historical origins and uses are lost.

Oh, well. I suppose the Hellenists simply invented the new modern astrology of their day.
This is actually true, because Hellens invented horoscopic astrology.

But the difference is that they didn't change the babylonian/egyptian concepts, they merely adopted a different technique (horoscopic astrology).
__________________
If you'd like a private Horary or Natal consultation, please visit me at:

https://antiqueastrology.wordpress.com/

You'll also find some tips for horary practice!

Last edited by Dirius; 01-28-2015 at 08:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dirius For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #93  
Unread 01-28-2015, 08:50 AM
Konrad Konrad is offline
Account Closed
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 659
Re: Confused about Pluto

It is getting to the point where this thread is endless opinion and theory, I believe the proof in the pudding is in the eating. There is a chart there I have left on p3 that should be able to be read as significant by all parties in regard to the father and the native himself in his manner and appearance. Waybread already made some comments about Sun/Pluto combinations and without knowing the orbs she uses, even without the conjunction if the two, I'm sure Pluto on a solar-ruled ASC would still be considered significant. There is also plenty there for the Traditionalist. If there is interest, I will be as candid as possible.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Konrad For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #94  
Unread 01-28-2015, 09:35 AM
MissScorpio MissScorpio is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 697
Re: Confused about Pluto

I understand and appreciate all of these posts.. but something that intrigues me is the "feeling " and uncanny knowing that sometimes after major disruptions and disturbances I look back at natal charts and see the workings of Pluto..there is also evidence through other people's transits, after undergoing sheer loss and not knowing why again, I see a Pluto transit..
Also I know we are not suppose to use Neptune in horary but almost, always, whenever I see Neptune in 1st house and a client is asking about a relationship they are often under a veil of illusion or there is something about the situation that never quite adds up when Neptune is in the 1st.
So I quite appreciate these planets are invisible, but still, it's rather interesting that these descriptions of life changes coincide with the outers and the natures they represent.

Last edited by MissScorpio; 01-28-2015 at 09:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MissScorpio For This Useful Post:
StillOne (02-10-2015), waybread (01-28-2015)
  #95  
Unread 01-28-2015, 09:52 AM
Oddity's Avatar
Oddity Oddity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 2,982
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
(to quote Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos 2:13) some of it is gosh-awful. Heaven help you if you have Mars and Saturn in dishonourable positions:

"[Saturn] makes his subjects robbers, pirates, adulterators, submissive to disgraceful treatment, takers of base profits, godless, without affection, insulting, crafty, thieves, perjurers, murderers, eaters of forbidden foods, evildoers, homicides, poisoners, impious, robbers of temples and of tombs, and utterly depraved."

There's lots more where this came from, throughout traditional astrology's pre-modern history. If this is traditional astrology's notion of character analysis, no thank you.
It's actually in 3:13, and it's about Saturn-Mars aspects, not Saturn alone. Granted, Saturn-Mars conjunctions, squares, and oppositions can be nasty things, but you only get the worst interpretation in the worst dignities and house positions. The 'good' side of the interpretation isn't so great, either, happily granted, but I think it comes down to the astrologer's judgement, as it did in Ptolemy's day, just how bad or good the individual chart is.

Saturn, allied with Mars, in honourable positions makes his subjects neither good nor bad, industrious, outspoken, nuisances, cowardly braggarts, harsh in conduct, without pity, contemptuous, rough, contentious, rash, disorderly, deceitful, layers of ambushes, tenacious of anger, unmoved by pleading, courting the mob, tyrannical, grasping, haters of the citizenry, fond of strife, malignant, evil through and through, active, impatient, blustering, vulgar, boastful, injurious, unjust, not to be despised, haters of mankind, inflexible, unchangeable, busy-bodies, but at the same time adroit and practical, not to be overborne by rivals, and in general successful in achieving their ends. In the opposite positions he makes his subjects robbers, pirates, adulterators, submissive to disgraceful treatment, takers of base profits, godless, without
affection, insulting, crafty, thieves, perjurers, murderers, eaters of forbidden foods, evildoers, homicides, poisoners, impious, robbers of temples and of tombs, and utterly depraved.


If you look through the actual delineations in texts by people like Dorotheus and Valens, you'll probably notice a few with Mars and Saturn aspecting in bad dignity, yet no notes about the native being a bloodthirsty graverobber, necromancer, or murderer.

If you are of the belief that astrologers write or wrote only of average cases instead of extreme ones, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. The extremes make it easier to remember principles - whether they're extremely bad ones or extremely good ones.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Oddity For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #96  
Unread 01-28-2015, 09:56 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,779
Re: Confused about Pluto

Monk said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monk View Post
Hi Konrad,

Please note i'm being nice, but you have a few charts, and
i'm looking for Pluto on an angle pretty tight for a birth chart, so charts that have Pluto on an angle within one and a half degree's.

Can we say you have one?


Please note i am known for research with tight orbs regarding fixed stars, and parans, that is traditional astrology and older than anything else!

However i'm only looking for tight orbs on angles for Pluto, for research thus looking for anyone that has this, unconnected to wide orbs!
so when you say
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad View Post

It is getting to the point where this thread is endless opinion and theory,

I believe the proof in the pudding is in the eating.


There is a chart there I have left on p3 that should be able to be read as significant by all parties

in regard to the father and the native himself in his manner and appearance.

Waybread already made some comments about Sun/Pluto combinations
and
without knowing the orbs she uses, even without the conjunction if the two,
I'm sure Pluto on a solar-ruled ASC would still be considered significant.

There is also plenty there for the Traditionalist.
If there is interest, I will be as candid as possible
.

Would you clarify that the following
is offered to modern astrologers for delineation of pluto on a solar ruled ascendant?

As it seems to have been overlooked in preference to stating opinion and theory


Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad View Post

Yes, we can say I have one.

Here is the chart anyway, in the Tropical zodiac and Placidus houses:


OP did post their query on the RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT board
and now states:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissScorpio View Post

I understand and appreciate all of these posts.. but something that intrigues me is the "feeling " and uncanny knowing that sometimes after major disruptions and disturbances I look back at natal charts and see the workings of Pluto..there is also evidence through other people's transits, after undergoing sheer loss and not knowing why again, I see a Pluto transit..
Also I know we are not suppose to use Neptune in horary but almost, always, whenever I see Neptune in 1st house and a client is asking about a relationship they are often under a veil of illusion or there is something about the situation that never quite adds up when Neptune is in the 1st.
So I quite appreciate these planets are invisible, but still, it's rather interesting that these descriptions of life changes coincide with the outers and the natures they represent.
as you have highlighted
this thread is now endless opinion and theory
with varying opinions and varying theories being posted
without being applied to any particular chart
clearly
some 'proof of the pudding' is now indicated

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Unread 01-28-2015, 10:25 AM
Konrad Konrad is offline
Account Closed
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 659
Re: Confused about Pluto

Well the truth is that the chart is open to anyone who wants to look at it. I realise I may have posed it as a challenge which was not my intention. Reading charts blind is not natural, we usually have an interactive process when reading a nativity, so no-one should be afraid of getting it wrong. It is just my belief that theory is fine, but there comes a time when one has to apply that theory or it is just hot air. It is interesting to me to see how different people look at the same thing. I don't use outers, as I have said, but that is ultimately down to not seeing them work at all how they are said to and also, from others who do use them, not seeing the precision I would like in prediciton. It is my belief that it is in timing happenings that techniques either stand or fall as that is about as precise as one can get. This is not only limited to modern techniques however, I do not use the triplicities as a dignity as I do not understand them and I am not happy with the current reconstruction of their usage. In the end, I am interested in furthering astrology as a serious practice and that means getting to the point where we make accurate predictions and actually apply that theory we have spent so long forming.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Konrad For This Useful Post:
JUPITERASC (01-28-2015)
  #98  
Unread 01-28-2015, 10:30 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,779
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konrad View Post

Well the truth is that the chart is open to anyone who wants to look at it. I realise I may have posed it as a challenge which was not my intention. Reading charts blind is not natural, we usually have an interactive process when reading a nativity, so no-one should be afraid of getting it wrong. It is just my belief that theory is fine, but there comes a time when one has to apply that theory or it is just hot air. It is interesting to me to see how different people look at the same thing. I don't use outers, as I have said, but that is ultimately down to not seeing them work at all how they are said to and also, from others who do use them, not seeing the precision I would like in prediciton. It is my belief that it is in timing happenings that techniques either stand or fall as that is about as precise as one can get. This is not only limited to modern techniques however, I do not use the triplicities as a dignity as I do not understand them and I am not happy with the current reconstruction of their usage. In the end, I am interested in furthering astrology as a serious practice and that means getting to the point where we make accurate predictions and actually apply that theory we have spent so long forming.
Certainly this is RESEARCH area of the forum
so delineating charts is clearly a potentially useful exercise
Monk has stated an interest in researching pluto on angles of natal charts
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Unread 01-28-2015, 10:46 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 62,779
Re: Confused about Pluto

Quote:
Originally Posted by MissScorpio View Post

I understand and appreciate all of these posts..
but something that intrigues me is the "feeling " and uncanny knowing that sometimes
after major disruptions and disturbances
I look back at natal charts and see the workings of Pluto..
there is also evidence through other people's transits,
after undergoing sheer loss and not knowing why again, I see a Pluto transit..

Also I know we are not suppose to use Neptune in horary but almost, always,
whenever I see Neptune in 1st house and a client is asking about a relationship
they are often under a veil of illusion or there is something about the situation that never quite adds up when Neptune is in the 1st.
So I quite appreciate these planets are invisible, but still, it's rather interesting that these descriptions of life changes coincide with the outers and the natures they represent.
Konrad has posted the following chart in Tropical Zodiac and Placidus Houses
for anyone interested to provide a modern astrological interpretation/prediction
relevant to pluto on a solar-ruled ascendant

since the OP has stated an ability to 'see the workings of pluto in natal charts'
then in the interests of the RESEARCH and DEVELOPMENT of their query concerning being confused about pluto
the OP would care to share their modern astrological interpretation of the workings of pluto in the following chart


__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Unread 01-28-2015, 08:19 PM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 15,408
Re: Confused about Pluto

Hi, Dirius-- re: your post of 7:08 am. I'm not sure that your correct on the loss of astrology's stature being linked to the loss of belief in religious dogmas, but suppose I take your point! If a dogmatic or magical worldview was the domain in which traditional astrology was able to sustain a case for itself, that's not a recommendation for the superior accuracy and helpfulness of its methods at the time; and not a compelling reason to take it up in today's even more secular western society.

The US was established as a secular state because the majority of its colonies had been established as havens for religious refugees. (Puritans in Massachusetts, Quakers in Pennsylvania, Catholics in Maryland, less puritanical Puritans in Connecticut, and so on.) It wasn't because the colonists were inherently secular, but because they needed freedom of religion to form a union between faiths with a rather bloody history of mistrust. My husband is now reading up on the original Tea Party, and learned that Massachusetts executed Quakers as heretics, for example.

Dirius, with your discussion of technique vs. concept, aren't you actually demonstrating that traditional western astrology is no more logically consistent than you believe modern astrology to be? Venus is a benefic except when it isn't, apparently.

Incidentally, in addition to my on-the-shelf sources on traditional astrology that I listed previously, I have a lot of interest in the historical origins of western astrology. In addition to Ptolemy, I also have in English translation and have read Valens, Dorotheus, Manilius, Firmicus Maternus, Rhetorius, and Al-Biruni, plus some shorter and secondary sources. So go ahead and cite chapter and verse if you like. I believe Lilly and Bonatti are on line-- anyway, I've got Barbara Bunn's compendium on how different historical horary authors treated different topics.

I don't think this thread, however, is intended as a primer on traditional astrology, except insofar as it concerns Pluto. You might wish to start new threads on other topics of interest.

Gotta run now: more later.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we値l change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to waybread For This Useful Post:
unique_astrology (01-28-2015)
Reply

Tags
confused, pluto

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



All times are GMT. The time now is 02:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ゥ 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.