Traditional Astrology Thread

Thank you for the reading!

Yes, it's Sept 2nd, and I don't really care if my chart is posted... I've posted it elsewhere, so it's no biggie.

Oh, I can probably tell you that. My "rank" is extremely low. I tend to be very reclusive and prefer a more hermit-like existence. Unless there's some sudden twist of fate, I'd expect more of the same for the remainder of my life, and I'd like to keep it that way. Fame is something I've never desired.

What house system do you use? I've always considered my Saturn to be in the 1st house.

Just to let you know a bit about my background... I've held many different jobs over the years, some quite low paid, others quite high paid. One of those high paid jobs was where I had regular raises about every 6 months or so that were in the double digits and more than doubled my income in 2 yrs... so it all happened quickly. Other jobs too... the raises came quickly. I'd say my employment history could best be described as influenced by Uranus... I was either brilliant at my job, earning praise & high rewards, or job hopped like mad. Often it was both. I've always thought that Uranus in Libra in 6th house spoke to this effect. Right now I've been unemployed for the past year as I quit to homeschool my daughter, and I'm thinking of returning to work sometime in the next year or so, possibly in a whole new career field.. which is why I'm inquiring about this.

Ok, the nature of the work I've always done has been business oriented, administrative, analytical. I'm a frigging Virgo 10 times over with a loaded 6th house. I also have strong leanings toward psychology and even began pursuing a degree in psychotherapy. And I dabble in alternative healing techniques on the side, although I don't charge for them. All very Virgo, wouldn't you say? Also, how do you figure that Jupiter is afflicted?

Well I immigrated to the US when I was a child, I've always been a bit of a gypsy and moved around a lot, and I've always been spiritually-inclined.

Although I must say I really don't have enemies, unless they're so secret that I have no idea they exist. I also have what I call a guardian angel when I travel. I've experienced too many unexplained miraculous situations while I was travelling, to chalk it up to pure coincidence.

The business partnership thing may be a possibility for the future, I don't know, but I'd be very surprised if it was with a woman. I tend to have difficulties with women... my Moon is conjunct Pluto, Mercury, and Uranus... a very potent combination. But yes, my Venus is very well placed and very strong, giving me a soul-mate type bond with my husband, and general ability and ease in attracting men.

I'd like to give you my honest feedback and impression of this reading. I must say that the interpretation you've given me has felt more out of tune with my experience than the "modern" astrology interpretation that was given me, and which I use as well. I find myself having to stretch in order to make it fit, and I don't think this is something that should happen during a reading. To me a sign of a good reading is that sense of "yeah that really makes sense and it resonates", and I didn't experience that this time.

Of course, to be fair I'd say that many "modern" astrologers don't do astrology justice either, especially those that piece together an interpretation from bits found in various books. As a side rant I want to add that Virgos are largely misunderstood in Astrological circles. Grrrr. I swear, we get no respect at all! Not to say you contributed to the misunderstanding, as you didn't really mention the Virgo sign at all in your reading, which I must say I found unusual when discussing work and career, especially given the huge stellium I have in it.

Anyway, I realized this reading was done quickly so I don't want to discount traditional astrology because of that... but for now I remain skeptical.

 

No worries.

This actually fits with some experiments I'm doing with house systems. Medieval astrology started out in whole signs, but then went mostly into Alchabitius, and then to other systems. I did yours with Alchabitius.

What's interesting, is that when I changed your chart into whole signs, Venus is still angular, but Mercury is closer to an angle than Venus. That fits more into what you are saying. Right now Alchabitius is still my default system, but I'm gradually leaning more into whole signs. Things like what you are saying seem to be cropping up more and more in my observations. So, if things are off, I tend to think it's the house system.

So basically I think house systems are the weakest link right now. Other traditional astrologers are starting to move to whole signs too.

So basically if I used whole signs, I'd probably use Mercury. That changes quite a bit.

By the way, if there's an especially populated stellum, it doesn't necessarily change the method. If I'm looking for certain factors, then then I'm pretty focused on one thing. Your Virgo is primarily in the 6th house depending on house systems. So, again depending on house system, your Mercury is either conjunct the 7th and strong, or in the middle of the 6th and weak. In Alchabitius, there is no way I could use your Mercury for career. In whole signs, it makes sense to use Mercury.

So I'll have to chalk that one up to the whole signs camp. That also changes some of the other things I said.

 

fair 'nuff

 

what about children/grandchildren/relatives significators? Isn't there a way to "see" them?

 

I'm still learning children's significator. I do know if Jupiter, Venus, Mercury, Moon, and the lord of the 5th house are in the 1st, 7th, 10th, or 11th houses, it leans toward there being children. If Mars, the Sun, or Saturn are there, they work in the opposite way. There's more to it though, and I haven't figured out number or that kind of thing yet. The 5th's sign will also contribute.

Siblings are 3rd house
Grandparents are based on counting houses from your parents' houses. These are switched in traditional astrology.

Mother is the 10th, and father is the 4th.

Your father's father will be the 4th from the 4th, so it's the 7th. His mother will be the 10th from the 4th, so it's the 1st.

Your mother's father is the 4th from the 10th, so it's the 1st, and her mother will be the 10th from the 10th, so it's the 7th.

Granparents don't have special significators, though Saturn naturally represents ancestors and older people, and the Moon is older women in general.

 

This is one of the most common misinterpretations of dignified and/or debilitated placements. A "strong" or dignified placement simply signifies that the energy represented by the planet is congruent or complemented by the energy represented by the sign. The Sun is in its position of rulership in Leo, but to claim that things "generally come easier" for all Leos is an incredibely generalized and one-dimensional statement, particularly coming from someone who is taking issue with "cut-and-dry" approaches to astrology. The Sun is dignified in Leo because it is Leo that exemplifies many of the Sun's characteristics -- willpower, self-expression, and magnanimity. If a Leo chooses to abuse the power inherent in this placement by allowing ego-aggrandizement and dictatorial tendencies to take precedence over the life force that they embody, then they are in for a rough ride indeed.

Sun signs came from the realization that the Sun is the sustainer of life. Just as the Sun is at the heart of the solar system, so too is one's Sun sign at the heart of their natal chart.

A testament to the amount of misinformation surrounding astrology. Although somehow I don't think you have a comprehensive understanding of how Sun signs are used today, as exemplified by this statement:

You don't actually believe that the vast majority of "modern" astrologers don't take the whole chart into consideration, do you?

Your Sun occupies the Pisces/Aries cusp. In fact, you're almost exactly on the cusp itself. This significantly alters the manifest form of your Sun, and probably accounts for some of your confusion regarding the significance of the Sun in the natal chart.

Says more than what? An interpretation exclusive to one's Sun sign? Of course it does. The question isn't whether or not one's entire chart should be taken into account -- any reasonably informed amateur astrology would tell you that it should be as a matter or course. The question is in what manner should the chart be taken into account. One can get results that are marginally accurate using pure technique, but in order capture the essence of any given chart, one's intuitive faculties must always be employed. That is the astrology that has the capacity to facilitate the upliftment of consciousness. And ultimately, what other application of astrology could be more important?

Travis

 

As I've mentioned before, the purpose of this thread is to talk about traditional astrological techniques, not to convince you that I am right or wrong. So far it seems you just want to argue, so I can only assume that's all you want to do. It also looks like you are doing a form of astrology that you are satisfied with. I suggest you continue doing so.

 

I never got the impression that you were attempting to convince anyone that you are right. I'm primarily interested in dispelling misconceptions about astrology, of which there are many. You happen to be perpetuating some of those misconceptions. If you do not wish or feel incapable of engaging with me in a debate format regarding your "traditional techniques" you of course have every right in the world not to. However, there are others reading this thread, many of whom aren't particulary well-informed as to the nature of astrology. My posts are more for their benefit then they are an attempt to provoke some type of altercation between you and me -- though I can understand how you may have interpreted them as such.

And yes, I most certainly will continue to approach astrology with energetic attunement as my primary means of interpretation -- not so much because I'm "satisfied" with it, but because to do otherwise would render astrology incapable of providing the spiritual insight that it's intended to provide.

Travis

 

I'll respond to a couple of things:

I never said Leos have it easier. First of all I don't even use that kind of terminology.

Second, there are several ways a planet can be dignified in traditional - one of which IS its ruling sign(s).

The Sun and Moon don't rule any terms, but they rule several decans. In fact usually the most powerful planet for any degrees in Aries (i.e. an ascendant or other house cusp) isn't Mars but the Sun - especially if the Sun is within the first 10 degrees of Aries.

That's the thing. In traditional, it's not enough to look at the sign the Sun is in. Yes traditional still has the idea that the planet carries the significations of the sign its in, but the Sun being at 5 degrees Aries is going to be a little different than 16 degrees Aries. The Sun in night charts will be a bit weaker. The house placement also contributes, as the Sun being in the 6th house is far weaker than if it was in the 10th, which is stronger.

Here's a more dramatic example:

In the traditional system, let's say Jupiter is at 25 degrees Cancer. We all know the Moon rules Cancer, so Jupiter can't be the ruler. Jupiter isn't the exalted ruler nor is a triplicity ruler. However, at 25 degrees, Jupiter is a term ruler. In that degree, Jupiter has some dignity. However, let's say Jupiter is at 13 degrees Cancer. Jupiter has no dignity whatsoever there.

So here we have one planet in one sign. However one placement is better than the other. That's what I'm talking about fine-tuning. In both cases, Jupiter will carry some Cancerian significations, but at 13 degrees he is afflicted (no dignity), but at 25 degrees he isn't. It's a big difference.

When you are talking about the Sun, yes the Sun is always important, but it also depends on what you are doing. The Sun in traditional doesn't inherently govern personality (though it can), but it WILL govern other areas such as possibly being the signifier of the native's life. There are a lot of exceptions though. If the chart is a night birth, the Sun will automatically be slightly muted, whereas the Moon will be amplified. Day charts are the opposite.

The thing is, is that the Sun is both malefic and benefic. If a planet is in the same degree and minute of the Sun (actually between 0 and 17 minutes), it's a very good thing. The Sun helps in that case. If a planet moves further away, between 17 minutes and 8.5 degrees, it becomes combust. The Sun is acting as a malefic to that planet, and that planet will not perform. Between 8.5 degrees and 17 degrees, it's slightly less of a debility. I think this carries over in Vedic as well. So, the Sun isn't simply just a live giver.

 

Just for the record, I certainly could do without all of your spouting off. I have studied modern, not traditional techniques, but I am INTERESTED in reading about Enlil's approach, and varying techniques to find the same (or close to same) answers.
She has made it ultimately clear, even to a "regular" person such as I, that there are OTHER ways to approach astrology. All of this incessant blather of yours really takes away from what could be an informative thread.

 

I've found this thread very informative so far.

What he is saying actually has a great deal of merit, Lynn.

 

Hmmm...you sure about that?

You're obscuring the essence of the placements with superfluous adherence to technique. Unless you have energetically aligned yourself with the energetic signatures of the planets and signs as well as the numerology of the terms and decans, simply regurgitating second-hand knowledge derived through rote memorization accomplishes exactly nothing in the grand scheme of things. To use an old expression, you've put yourself in a situation where you can't see the forest for the trees. In this case, the forest is the fundamental nature of astrology. Let's put it this way -- where do you think the authors of all the 150 plus astrology books in your possession acquired their information? Until you can truthfully (not conjecturally) answer that question, the essence of astrology will always remain beyond your grasp.

If you really want to develop your astrological insight, I would strongly suggest that you investigate the origins of astrology. Get back to basics. Don't take the knowledge in your books at face value. Otherwise, you're going to have a difficult time applying astrological concepts in a way that reflects the true nature of the charts that you interpret.

Travis

 

If this were a thread to argue and debate the differences between the various schools of astrology, then yes, I'd want to read through all the rhetoric b/c I'm actually familiar with some of it.
However, I am interested in hearing more about specific way(s) to find out specific
questions, (but not yes/no questions - that's inane); not to read why or why not one should listen to traditional methodology.
I guess I should just have more patience, and eventually Enlil will be able to answer the specific questions (such as she requested). I believe there is more than one way to find something out. And This approach allows one to apply more math to answer things rather than have to go through transits, progressions, etc. - if I understand correctly.
Is that right, Enlil?

 

I guess I just can't "shut up" tonight . Nothing like insomnia. Anyway...
I think Enlil's type of astrology is good to answer specific type questions such as the one I've already asked - basically about any children my son may have (11/21/83 @ 1:26pm in Laurinburg, NC). There are other things, too - like the other poster wanted to know about career things.
I also think that there is Other knowledge that one can find the best answers in what I consider "regular" astrology...still, I cannot help but be interested in astrology dating Waaay back. The name of the book "Christian Astrology" by William Lily (which I have ordered through BooksAMillion here in town) intrigues me greatly, and was recommended by Enlil.

 

Yeah I'm not going to argue back and forth like this. My first instinct about Radareyes that he just wants to argue seems to be correct.

When I was talking about the Sun being dignified, he just skipped everything I said and made mean what he wanted to mean, even though I said otherwise. I won't continue doing that, and any future posts in that nature will be ignored.

The basic difference in approach from what I can tell, is that Radareyes feels his own experience is more important. I personally like to take advantage of many lifetimes' worth of experience.

Later today I'll try to write up something about the Hyleg. It's one confusing technique.

Then you'll get your Sun my pretties!

 

Ah, the old relegation of your perceived adversary to third person reference technique in order to avoid facing the issues at hand. Now there's a technique that's worth understanding.

I skipped over everything you said because none of it pertained to the issues I had raised.

Personal experience as well as the experience of others (even many lifetimes of it) is almost entirely irrelevent when approaching astrology from an energetic perspective. My objective, as is the objective of any true astrologer, is to determine the true nature of the planets and signs. This cannot be done with the conceptual knowledge that one would accumulate from studying techniques. It can only be accomplished by establishing an energetic attunement with the planets and signs.

Travis

 

Sorry Travis but you're full of shit. This supposed motivation of yours to help further the understanding of Astrology is just a cover up for the need to argue and get a one-up, and perhaps to show off some sort of intellectual superiority. Apparently several others can see this clearly, but you can't. THIS is the issue at hand, which you seem to avoid facing.

You may have a good contribution to make about Astrology overall, but in this context and in the manner in which you've chosen to go about it, any helpfulness is greatly diminished.

Get over yourself!

 

Your assessment of my motivations couldn't be further from the truth. If Enlil6 had said anything that legitimately refuted my assertions I would easily concede my "defeat". So far, all of Enlil's responses have been exercises in missing the point.

What's far more interesting than my supposed need to argue and "get a one-up", however, is your need to "put me in my place". If my posts didn't represent a threat to your worldview in some form, you would feel no impulse towards retaliation. I'd suggest asking yourself what it is about my posts that you find so provocative. My guess would be that I represent an unredeemed aspect of yourself -- a subconscious acknowledgment of a degree of commitment to universal truth that you aspire to attain but are currently unable to embody. As a result, you resort to personal attacks in order to create a sense of separation between your current state and your unrealized ideal.

Interesting how people who tell others to "get over themselves" are often the ones most in need of expanded perspective.

Travis

 

No, you're the one missing the point. This thread isn't about a debate between different astrological methods. Enlil has stated she didn't wish to debate with you but you persisted anyway. She had absolutely no reason to refute your "assertions" and your insistence that she does so comes from your own agenda.

More psychobabble bullshit. You can call it "putting you in your place" if you want to, which isn't a problem for me. I call it as I see it and I smell bullshit here and am saying so. If you can't accept feedback without deflecting it, that's your problem. Just know you ain't fooling anyone but yourself.

LOL! You're more full of shit than I previously thought. A personal attack? What I see is a particular character trait that has shown itself and I'm calling you on it because you don't see it and are pretending that something else is going on instead. It's up to you what you do with this information I've given you. If you have a grain of humility you'll take a closer look, if not you'll make it all about "me".

That may be true... and often I'm the first to admit I'm full of shit. And it so happens that I'm open and ready to see that.

Are you?

 

I've never even remotely insisted that she engage in a debate with me. On the contrary, actually:

More one-dimensional compartmentalization.

Obviously. The issue isn't whether or not you think you've "smelled bullshit" and are calling me on it. The issue is why you feel so compelled to do so.

Project much?

Oh, but it is all about you. It's about your need to "fix" other people. It's about your narrow-minded value systems. And it's about your using this interchange as an opportunity to vent your repressed anger and frustration. Oh wait let me guess, more "psychobabble bullshit", right?

Or perhaps you're just not getting it.

Absolutely. And on the day I'm full of shit, I'll make sure you're the first to know.

Travis