Thoughts on Dane Rudhyar?

[david starling]

If a correct Chart depends on the exact moment of birth, then there are very few correct Charts.

[petosiris]

Originally Posted by david starling

If a correct Chart depends on the exact moment of birth, then there are very few correct Charts.

It depends on your practice. Some techniques are applicable in a given time span and do not require extreme precision. But obviously yes, there is no 100% certain chart.

[greybeard]

I keep getting the impression -- I don't know why -- that you are a very young person who has not yet had the time to accumulate life experience.

A person who faces chronic degenerative disease, who has had a leg blown off in some war, who is addicted to opioids has no choice but to face the situation. No choice is compulsion. It isn't that he "is inclined" (impelled) to act a certain way; he "must", which is compulsion.

[greybeard]

As long as "my problem" remains in the realm of the unconscious it is beyond remedy and therefore compulsive in nature.

There are many things in life, both external and internal, that we cannot change. We are therefore compelled to deal with these things in one fashion or another according to the dictates of our individual being.

[david starling]

Originally Posted by petosiris

It depends on your practice. Some techniques are applicable in a given time span and do not require extreme precision. But obviously yes, there is no 100% certain chart.

I saw an argument among Vedics as to whether the problem with unsatisfactory readings was due to incorrect ayanamsa versus incorrect birth-time.

[david starling]

Originally Posted by greybeard

As long as "my problem" remains in the realm of the unconscious it is beyond remedy and therefore compulsive in nature.

Jung's take on the Age of Aquarius, for which he risked his reputation to promote, was that the Age of Aquarius will bring the Collective Unconscious into the Collective Consciousness.

[petosiris]

Originally Posted by david starling

I saw an argument among Vedics as to whether the problem with unsatisfactory readings was due to incorrect ayanamsa versus incorrect birth-time.

Our astrology is most often the case probably.

[greybeard]

Although I mentioned Jung, I am not referring to what he said but to personal life experience. There are things within us over which we have no control, and those things often compel us to act in ways we would not desire if we had a choice.

[conspiracy theorist]

Which sounds more in line with my understanding of what Jung said regarding the archetypes. One cannot "heal" an archetype seeing as how these structures are much more fundamental and intrinsic to our being, than the part of us that we believe is the prime mover of our being. Rather, one can only hope to come to terms with them, giving them space in your life for their manifestation and a shift in perspective that allows one to get on with life, in spite of the archetypal forces in one's life.

[david starling]

May Zeus be with you!

[petosiris]

Originally Posted by david starling

May Zeus be with you!

https://books.google.bg/books?id=Zg5...page&q&f=false

It can be found in the anthology of Vettius Valens 6.9.

[greybeard]

The "problem" with Rudhyar, as I see it, is that he over-reacted to the fatalistic astrology of his times and offered us a philosophy in which "free will" reigns supreme. It seems strange to me that among all of the creations of the universe only the human being has been blessed with the gift of free will. The conceit of humankind is boundless.

[AppLeo]

Originally Posted by greybeard

The "problem" with Rudhyar, as I see it, is that he over-reacted to the fatalistic astrology of his times and offered us a philosophy in which "free will" reigns supreme. It seems strange to me that among all of the creations of the universe only the human being has been blessed with the gift of free will. The conceit of humankind is boundless.

But animals don't have free will. lol

[conspiracy theorist]

Read what he said again

[AppLeo]

Originally Posted by conspiracy theorist

Read what he said again

Why
.......

[conspiracy theorist]

He's saying the opposite of what you think he meant

[david starling]

Originally Posted by greybeard

The "problem" with Rudhyar, as I see it, is that he over-reacted to the fatalistic astrology of his times and offered us a philosophy in which "free will" reigns supreme. It seems strange to me that among all of the creations of the universe only the human being has been blessed with the gift of free will. The conceit of humankind is boundless.

We're the only species clueless enough to need it.

[waybread]

Originally Posted by david starling

I get very uncomfortable reading the "Authorities", although they usually have some good insights. So much is coming from their own, personal viewing-angle. I read something The Great Dane wrote about the 12th House that sounded like he believed you can "take the lemons and make lemonade".

It must be hard for you to discuss Dane Rudhyar without actually reading what he wrote.

I don't take him as an "authority" although he was extremely influential among modern astrologers of a more spiritual persuasion, such as Alan Oken. Rudhar was also taken with planetary orbits as astrologically meaningful cycles. See, for example, Alexander Ruperti, Cycles of Becoming.

[greybeard]

Every single thing we do, think or create is nothing more or less than the projection of our inner self. Rudhyar couldn't help himself anymore than you or I can.

I am my own authority. But that doesn't stop me from listening to others who may have something I need. Rejection -- or blind acceptance -- of "authority" simply because they do not wholly agree with the way I think things ought to be is foolish.

[david starling]

I have my own template, and some input fits and some doesn't. If something seems right intuitively and/or empirically, and doesn't fit my template, I adjust the template accordingly. So much is solely personal opinion-based though, I can't use it, and that much screening wears me out. I need comprehensive patterns and an overview.

[greybeard]

Example of projection of inner self:

Some years ago I read a little book called "Think on These Things" (a worthwhile read) by Jeddu Krishnamurti. I told a friend, not an astrologer, that I thought the man must have a very potent Uranus in his chart.

About a year later I bumped into his horoscope. Lo and behold -- Aquarius rising with Uranus rx as most elevated planet, conjunct MC in the 9th, the house of philosophy, opp Sun.

Krishnamurti's primary thesis is "internal revolution". Uranus retrograde. A secondary feature of his teachings he calls "The Mirror of Relationships". And there is the Moon (mirrors) opposing Venus (relationships), the opposition bringing the mirror of relationships to full awareness.

Everything we do, think or create is simply the projection of our inner self.

[david starling]

Originally Posted by greybeard

Example of projection of inner self:

Some years ago I read a little book called "Think on These Things" (a worthwhile read) by Jeddu Krishnamurti. I told a friend, not an astrologer, that I thought the man must have a very potent Uranus in his chart.

About a year later I bumped into his horoscope. Lo and behold -- Aquarius rising with Uranus rx as most elevated planet, conjunct MC in the 9th, the house of philosophy, opp Sun.

Krishnamurti's primary thesis is "internal revolution". Uranus retrograde. A secondary feature of his teachings he calls "The Mirror of Relationships". And there is the Moon (mirrors) opposing Venus (relationships), the opposition bringing the mirror of relationships to full awareness.

Everything we do, think or create is simply the projection of our inner self.

I thought you weren't using the outermost Planets.

[greybeard]

I never said that. In 46 years of studying astrology, with the exception of 2 or 3 years when I experimented with using only the Chaldean planets, I have always used the outers. They add depth and detail.

I do give rulership to the old rulers, except when I think the chart asks for the modern planet to take the rulership.

Example of this, from a chart I looked at recently:

Saturn is lord of the horoscope with Capricorn rising and he is closely conjunct the IC. So he's powerful and I would normally give him rulership of Aquarius. But Uranus is posited in Aquarius. Therefore he holds dominion of that sign.

Saturn, clearly a powerful figure in the chart, still influences Aquarius but his influence is less direct, more "back-door". This idea, or situation will influence the way I interpret the chart.

[david starling]

So when you wrote "seven planets is sufficient" , you meant unless there are extenuating circumstances. Understood!

[greybeard]

I meant that before 1781 the astrogers did just fine with 7 planets. Kepler predicted Wallenstein's death 30 years before it ocurred within the month.

Modern Hindu astrologers still use only 7 planets.