Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Hello Kevin and fellow sidereal fans, I had some time to browse through the archives and found some interesting posts. One question though--all of the files uploaded by Bob jan61108 are done in the tropical zodiac. Am I missing something? (I do actually find tropical transits to work fairly well, but given only one option, I'd go with sidereal, as the symbolism and orbs are usually better.) I began studying astrology back in 1978/9 in Los Angeles, joined ISAR, almost immediately began investigating sidereal techniques because I have a life long interest in astronomy so I was familiar with some of the technical terms as well as the constellations, met Thea Day who introduced me to Jim Eshelman and Anna-Kria King, (my 12H Moon is cnj Thea's natal Moon in Aqu--see previous post--and we participated in " moon feastivals " together), d to Rick Ostrander's and John Van Zandt's newsletters, presented my research results to an intimate group at the ISAR conference in June 1990 and shortly thereafter left astrology to pursue other interests. I'm finding the internet a great place to get back up to speed on what's happening in the astrology community. The " Mountain Astrologer " is a good resource, though their sidereal articles are usually vedic. The great prominence of vedic astrology is the biggest change from ten years ago, and the near disappearance of western sidereal is a bit of a shock. One thing about the egroup intro, Kevin, is that the mentioning of Jyotish may confuse some folks about your intended subject. But since the subject has been brought up--before I donated my astrology library I had a copy of Fagan's _Astrological Origins_ which I believe had a list of the original 28 (not 27) vedic lunar nakshatras in the back. My natal moon was in the house which ruled the left arm, and at the age of 9 I had an accident that sent me to the hospital for emergency surgery. Yes, it was my upper left arm that received the deepest lacerations, with a smaller wound to my lower right arm, and Moon/Mars contacts were prominent at the time. From this extensive research :-) I still think that this is a subject I might look into some day. The 28 nakshatras were developed before the Greek 12 sign zodiac was introduced, so the fact that 360 isn't divisible by 28 was not a problem. Only after the 360* zodiac was imported did it become necessary to rationalize the lunar houses to 27 so that there was some mathematical harmony. The 28 mansions have better stars marking them, including Antares and Aldebaran, so I'm inclined to think that the older method still has validity. Speaking of Antares, does anyone have information on what the " Universal Order of Antares " was that Cyril Fagan belonged to? That's it for now. " To the stars! " Best, Wayne Turner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 In a message dated 7/30/2002 6:55:14 PM Central Daylight Time, waynetmail writes: > and the near disappearance of western sidereal is a bit of > a shock. > sorely neglected. /// wing in austin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 In a message dated 7/31/2002 1:20:34 AM Central Daylight Time, jivio writes: > I think > Fagan, Bradley and others re-discovered an important > element of historical value. Without hocus-pocus, it (Fagan-Bradley's sidereal approach) has no appeal. People like to be fooled; there's one born every minute. But for position or aspect, the malefics are malefic; but for position or aspect, the benefics are benefic. Rulerships, exaltations, falls and detriments are more than just words and the study of these combinations should not be given short shrift. Further there's no " good " aspect, no " bad " aspect, except for what is being aspected and from-and-to where. In almost every case, the major aspects are what should be thoroughly examined taking into consideration the aforementioned positions, rulerships, etc. Studying the obvious IN DEPTH. It's too simple; too direct; too scientific; has no voodoo to it in support of the superstitious among us. The Fagan-Bradley style has little use for such silly aspects as the semisextilequincunx-afragalisticexpialidotious. So many things have been invented by desperate interpreters who can't explain things that are obvious in their simplicity. Charon, The Black Sun ... a host of asteroids ... have been introduced in an effort to create more smoke. There is nothing spooky or far-out about looking at the heavens today. It is full of light in all its glory. Nothing occult about it. It stupefies people when you hold them by the hand and point to the Moon in the middle of Taurus when their ephemeris puts it 24 degrees ahead. " They " just don't get it. To the tropicalist, seeing is not believing. It's too rational. You tell the person born December 21 that if there'd been a solar eclipse on that day you could've see the Sun's disc amidst the stars of Scorpio. It makes no sense to them. In 1969 I was asked my birthday by a siderealist (who ran a metaphysical book shop which offered things for every taste) i replied Jan 4, Capricorn; it was explained why, in fact, my sun was Sagittarian, and it was suggested i drop the popular scheme like a hot potato. I did, and without hocus pocus i moved along in the understanding of myself " with the kid gloves off, " and i never witheld this truth from the people for whom i read " the stars " -- thanks for listening. With undying gratitude to Fagan, Bradley, Firebrace and his partner Dr. Mary Austin; Joanne Clancy and so many others; I am: Chris in Austin. === and i to you in the -- and especially Jack Contreras whom i first found in a google-search -- I thank you for helping me to reignite my passion. Now if i only had more time to redevote to study . . . And to all others: I'm sorry we disagree. Except for some " wiseguy " fixing Zero Aries to the Vernal Equinox -- newspaper astrology is the worst thing that ever happened to the subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Yo Texas... Regarding Bob and his Tropical Charts.... Its a travesty to have tropical charts in a sidereal forum as sidereal reference material. They were cast for " tropical " forums but Bob apparently does not consider it relevant to recalculate them for this Sidereal Forum. Any disagreement with Bob is considered a confrontation so he will not respond to or acknowledge any question which is intended simply to obtain clarity and definition. Refer to threads written earlier this year and you will see that he was never attacked for his ideas only presented with challenges to his calculation methods and contrary opinions. There are more and more sidereal graybeards coming out of the internet woodwork which may mean that a " new " revolution is beginning.... A greater effort is required by all Siderealists to do research and contribute their findings. More communication is essential or the gifts which were passed to us for posterity will become a footnote in history. I think Fagan, Bradley and others re-discovered an important element of historical value. Whatever your interest in sidereal astrology is? Remember the words of Captain Picard and " Make it so! " .... cwing is out of Austin and I'm between Austin and Houston... If you are ever in the Austin area lets get together sometime for a Texas version of a MAG meeting... and Jack, you know you're always invited..... jivio --- searcherw <waynetmail wrote: > Hello Kevin and fellow sidereal fans, > I had some time to browse through the archives and > found some > interesting posts. One question though--all of the > files uploaded by > Bob jan61108 are done in the tropical zodiac. Am I > missing something? > (I do actually find tropical transits to work fairly > well, but given > only one option, I'd go with sidereal, as the > symbolism and orbs are > usually better.) > I began studying astrology back in 1978/9 in Los > Angeles, joined > ISAR, almost immediately began investigating > sidereal techniques > because I have a life long interest in astronomy so > I was familiar > with some of the technical terms as well as the > constellations, met > Thea Day who introduced me to Jim Eshelman and > Anna-Kria King, (my > 12H Moon is cnj Thea's natal Moon in Aqu--see > previous post--and we > participated in " moon feastivals " together), > d to Rick > Ostrander's and John Van Zandt's newsletters, > presented my research > results to an intimate group at the ISAR conference > in June 1990 and > shortly thereafter left astrology to pursue other > interests. I'm > finding the internet a great place to get back up to > speed on what's > happening in the astrology community. The " Mountain > Astrologer " is a > good resource, though their sidereal articles are > usually vedic. The > great prominence of vedic astrology is the biggest > change from ten > years ago, and the near disappearance of western > sidereal is a bit of > a shock. > One thing about the egroup intro, Kevin, is that > the mentioning of > Jyotish may confuse some folks about your intended > subject. But since > the subject has been brought up--before I donated my > astrology > library I had a copy of Fagan's _Astrological > Origins_ which I > believe had a list of the original 28 (not 27) vedic > lunar nakshatras > in the back. My natal moon was in the house which > ruled the left arm, > and at the age of 9 I had an accident that sent me > to the hospital > for emergency surgery. Yes, it was my upper left arm > that received > the deepest lacerations, with a smaller wound to my > lower right arm, > and Moon/Mars contacts were prominent at the time. > From this > extensive research :-) I still think that this is a > subject I might > look into some day. The 28 nakshatras were developed > before the Greek > 12 sign zodiac was introduced, so the fact that 360 > isn't divisible > by 28 was not a problem. Only after the 360* zodiac > was imported did > it become necessary to rationalize the lunar houses > to 27 so that > there was some mathematical harmony. The 28 mansions > have better > stars marking them, including Antares and Aldebaran, > so I'm inclined > to think that the older method still has validity. > Speaking of Antares, does anyone have information > on what > the " Universal Order of Antares " was that Cyril > Fagan belonged to? > That's it for now. " To the stars! " > Best, > Wayne Turner > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 In a message dated 7/31/2002 3:09:48 AM Central Daylight Time, jan61108 writes: > My intent was to introduce a tool I have found to be more accurate in > describing events and how they are made personal than any other that > I have ever seen presented in the astrological community. > Please Read before Reacting: it's totally absurd to mix systems. have you noticed anything different about, say, Mars in Aries as opposed to it being in Libra? If not, then you have been letting your guard down. The falls, rulerships, exaltations and detriments are so crucial in personal interpretation. Mars in Libra on the ascendant is quite different from it being in Aries at the same place. Assigning any meaning to Mars in tropical Scorpio is an exercise in futility when in fact it is in sidereal Libra which is to its detriment. If you agree that Mars rules Aries and it's angular, and give it the same heft as, say, Venus in Aries, also angular (thus giving it hoarary weight), then you are falling into the same trap that under close inspection never fails to discredit thoroughly the tropoical idea. Is this what you're trying to explain to us -- a horoscope stripped of the signs or constellations or whatever you wanna call them? In that case, you should construct your wheel using RA (i think that's what i mean to say -- someone correct me otherwise). I don't think people mean to attack you personally. I gave up astrology for 30+ years because i got tired of arguing this point: there is no such thing as a tropical " zodiac " , only tropical " signs " existing as vapor along the starry ecliptic which is enscribed by the sun's apparent position amidst its stars. The ancients were no fools. They could only see what was there. To call something " Virgo " when it is actually Leo is to allow oneself to give any meaning to any thing. To say that the Sun in anything has the same meaning as the Sun anywhere else -- this is impossible in Astrological terms. Astrology from its beginning was a study of the stars in relation to the earth the sun and the moon -- that some stars (planets) appeared to move through the stars was realized a little later. If your study is planetology -- remove the signs or whatever you call them. That makes more sense in the raw. But if Venus is with Antares, don't confuse it with venus in what you might call " Sagittarius " because Antares is not in Sagittarius and thus carries no meaning as such (I hope you understand that) and don't forget that Venus with Antares has a totally different meaning than Venus with Aldeberan and likewise Mars vis-a-vis each of those stars, etc. /// chris in austin who's tired after a long night's work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 In a message dated 7/31/2002 4:30:43 AM Central Daylight Time, shamira writes: > Thanks so much for such a detailed response with so much information. That > has clarified the situation for me very well! > I tend to still use the tropical most of the time but have started > experimenting with the sidereal system just because I have an open mind and > the idea of it makes sense to me. Then, after some experimentation, I can > at least make an informed choice about which system works for me - so no > precession when using the sidereal Returns - just when using the tropical - > thanks very much - this is a good place for me to start in my comparison > work!!! > > It was good of you to help me - thanks again!!!! > > Warm regards, > > Shamira > interesting, Shamira; good luck. And remember .... benefic and malefic, as well as rulership, exaltation, detriment and fall ... these are more than just words. /// chris in austin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 In a message dated 7/31/2002 6:27:49 AM Central Daylight Time, shamira writes: > Hi Chris! > > OK - I will pay close attention to these too - thanks!!!!!! > > Warm regards, > > Shamira > yeah. I think these are covered in Taking The Kid Gloves Off Astrology by Don Bradley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Hi Bob! Might I just ask a question - I am new to sidereal astrology - you mentioned that you precess Splar and Lunar Returns?? Do you find them to be more accurate when reading for the year or month than normal returns?? I was wondering about this recently - any feedback would be appreciated!!! Shamira M - jan61108 Wednesday, July 31, 2002 5:39 PM Re: A little history and files?? , Juan Oliver <jivio> wrote: > Yo Texas... > > Regarding Bob and his Tropical Charts.... .... >... A greater effort is > required by all Siderealists to do research and > contribute their findings.... > > ... > The charts were originaly done in the Sidereal zodiac and converted to the Tropical for the reason I stated. Regardless of which zodiac is used the spatial relationships between planets and points in the charts will be the same. It is these relationships, as they are swept by the progressed angles of the charts, not the " houses " or 'signs', I consider important, so I could care less what 'signs' are shown for the planets or points in the charts. If anyone had a real interest in investigating these charts it would have been a simple matter to select the Sidereal zodiac from whatever program they were using to reconstruct the charts to their liking, or better yet, apply the technique to events of which they have firsthand knowledge in order to make an evaluation of the technique. Shame on you for fostering dissent rather than making an effort to apply the technique to some personal events in order to test its viability. I see that as being akin to those who would disavow astrology without having studied it and would never expect that kind of behavior from someone with your backround in astrology. Just because I am not a 'name' in the astrological community does not MEAN that I am incapable of making a discovery, or understanding what I see, or making a comparison of various techniques, or making valid conclusions. My intent was to introduce a tool I have found to be more accurate in describing events and how they are made personal than any other that I have ever seen presented in the astrological community. The results found by applying the technique to precessed vs unprecessed lunar returns, or Sidereal ingresses vs Tropical ingresses, leave no room for doubt about the application of precession being the correct methodology for constructing charts. But an attempt to ascertain whether this might be the case was apparently not foremost in the minds of any members of this group, rather petty egoism seems to be the norm here, not the advancement of the art. Bob > jivio > >> ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 , Juan Oliver <jivio> wrote: > Yo Texas... > > Regarding Bob and his Tropical Charts.... ..... >... A greater effort is > required by all Siderealists to do research and > contribute their findings.... > > ... > The charts were originaly done in the Sidereal zodiac and converted to the Tropical for the reason I stated. Regardless of which zodiac is used the spatial relationships between planets and points in the charts will be the same. It is these relationships, as they are swept by the progressed angles of the charts, not the " houses " or 'signs', I consider important, so I could care less what 'signs' are shown for the planets or points in the charts. If anyone had a real interest in investigating these charts it would have been a simple matter to select the Sidereal zodiac from whatever program they were using to reconstruct the charts to their liking, or better yet, apply the technique to events of which they have firsthand knowledge in order to make an evaluation of the technique. Shame on you for fostering dissent rather than making an effort to apply the technique to some personal events in order to test its viability. I see that as being akin to those who would disavow astrology without having studied it and would never expect that kind of behavior from someone with your backround in astrology. Just because I am not a 'name' in the astrological community does not MEAN that I am incapable of making a discovery, or understanding what I see, or making a comparison of various techniques, or making valid conclusions. My intent was to introduce a tool I have found to be more accurate in describing events and how they are made personal than any other that I have ever seen presented in the astrological community. The results found by applying the technique to precessed vs unprecessed lunar returns, or Sidereal ingresses vs Tropical ingresses, leave no room for doubt about the application of precession being the correct methodology for constructing charts. But an attempt to ascertain whether this might be the case was apparently not foremost in the minds of any members of this group, rather petty egoism seems to be the norm here, not the advancement of the art. Bob > jivio > >> ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 , " Shamira " <shamira@p...> wrote: > > > Hi Bob! > > Might I just ask a question - I am new to sidereal astrology - you mentioned that you precess Splar and Lunar Returns?? Do you find them to be more accurate when reading for the year or month than normal returns?? I was wondering about this recently - any feedback would be appreciated!!! > > Shamira > M > ... Hello Shamira, If you use the Sidereal zodiac to construct your charts there is no need to make a correction for precession. It is only necessary to apply this correction if using the Tropical zodiac and wanting the timing of a return or ingress to be the same as if you were using the Sidereal zodiac. If precession is corrected for the timing of the returns or ingress charts will be the same, as will the right ascension of the planets and personal points but the degrees, and in most cases the signs, occupied by the planets and personal points will be different. I find that using the Sidereal zodiac, or the precession corrected Tropical charts, to be absolutely more accurate as starting points in arriving at correct planetary placement connected to situations (material or psychological) which occur later in the life of the chart in use. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Hi again Bob! Thanks so much for such a detailed response with so much information. That has clarified the situation for me very well! I tend to still use the tropical most of the time but have started experimenting with the sidereal system just because I have an open mind and the idea of it makes sense to me. Then, after some experimentation, I can at least make an informed choice about which system works for me - so no precession when using the sidereal Returns - just when using the tropical - thanks very much - this is a good place for me to start in my comparison work!!! It was good of you to help me - thanks again!!!! Warm regards, Shamira M - jan61108 Wednesday, July 31, 2002 6:44 PM Re: A little history and files?? , " Shamira " <shamira@p...> wrote: > > > Hi Bob! > > Might I just ask a question - I am new to sidereal astrology - you mentioned that you precess Splar and Lunar Returns?? Do you find them to be more accurate when reading for the year or month than normal returns?? I was wondering about this recently - any feedback would be appreciated!!! > > Shamira > M > ... Hello Shamira, If you use the Sidereal zodiac to construct your charts there is no need to make a correction for precession. It is only necessary to apply this correction if using the Tropical zodiac and wanting the timing of a return or ingress to be the same as if you were using the Sidereal zodiac. If precession is corrected for the timing of the returns or ingress charts will be the same, as will the right ascension of the planets and personal points but the degrees, and in most cases the signs, occupied by the planets and personal points will be different. I find that using the Sidereal zodiac, or the precession corrected Tropical charts, to be absolutely more accurate as starting points in arriving at correct planetary placement connected to situations (material or psychological) which occur later in the life of the chart in use. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Bob I'm glad you haven't lost your zeal but you continue to put ego ahead of the facts. 1) IF you want your theory to be understood, YOU calculate and post your charts in a sidereal format. Calculating and posting a precessed tropical chart and assuming that siderealists would know what you are doing is ridiculous. There is no explanation of the charts in the file...only the charts! Who knows they are precessed? 2)The actual rotation of the angles is strictly a function of the Sun/Earth relationship. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the Moon in her motion. This changing relationship is expressed as the change in the RAAS over the duration of the month. Read further as I scan your comments and add replies directly to your " dissent " . --- jan61108 <jan61108 wrote: > , Juan Oliver > <jivio> wrote: > > Yo Texas... > > > > Regarding Bob and his Tropical Charts.... > .... > >... A greater effort is > > required by all Siderealists to do research and > > contribute their findings.... > > > > ... > > > The charts were originaly done in the Sidereal > zodiac and converted > to the Tropical for the reason I stated. Regardless > of which zodiac > is used the spatial relationships between planets > and points in the > charts will be the same. It is these relationships, > as they are swept > by the progressed angles of the charts, not the > " houses " or 'signs', > I consider important, so I could care less what > 'signs' are shown for > the planets or points in the charts. I do consider information (if it is to be understood) such as signs or points in the charts to be correct and valid. Your " I could care less " attitude renders your work questionable and half-way reliable. If anyone had a > real interest in > investigating these charts it would have been a > simple matter to > select the Sidereal zodiac from whatever program > they were using to > reconstruct the charts to their liking, This applies to you first. If you were " interested " you would have done the work so your audience could view the charts as correctly as possible(in the sidereal format). or better > yet, apply the > technique to events of which they have firsthand > knowledge in order > to make an evaluation of the technique. Good Idea! Provide precise technique information and see what happens. > > Shame on you for fostering dissent rather than > making an effort to > apply the technique to some personal events in order > to test its > viability. I'm not fostering dissent but when you write those words you and only you create dissent! Shame on me? My man... RA of the MOON? How do you progress the angles of a chart cast for a location on the earth without using the RA of the SUN? You make claims and then when individuals have questioned your methods you come back with Silence because you have encounterd " confrontation " . They are questions..... I see that as being akin to those who > would disavow > astrology without having studied it and would never > expect that kind > of behavior from someone with your backround in > astrology. Yea... I'm akin to those alright... Just because I refuse to buy your software programs and I don't believe your theoretical calculations demonstrate a valid technique. I've got my head in the sand. What riles me about you is your platitudes. > because I am not a 'name' in the astrological > community does not MEAN > that I am incapable of making a discovery, or > understanding what I > see, or making a comparison of various techniques, > or making valid > conclusions. > It doesn't take a " name " but it does take patience and clarity. When someone writes to you for clarification and they get hit with a sales pitch to buy software don't expect 100% appreciation for your " discovery " . You have never once provided detail information on how you progress the SLR by advancing the RA of the Moon. > My intent was to introduce a tool I have found to be > more accurate in > describing events and how they are made personal > than any other that > I have ever seen presented in the astrological > community. > Personal?... How does your " tool " describe events " personal " ? > The results found by applying the technique to > precessed vs > unprecessed lunar returns, or Sidereal ingresses vs > Tropical > ingresses, leave no room for doubt about the > application of > precession being the correct methodology for > constructing charts. We agree on precession. From when and how much may be a different issue... That needs to be explained and not assumed.... assume = ass(out of)u(and)me. But > an attempt to ascertain whether this might be the > case was apparently > not foremost in the minds of any members of this > group, rather petty > egoism seems to be the norm here, not the > advancement of the art. > Oh woe is Bob... petty egotism is all I afford you... Blame the group as well.... pity...pity... I must ascertain what Bob is thinking, without Bob advancing the tenets of his " art form " . I must see, appreciate and understand that his calculations can only work in a precessed format.... Yea Bob... that was very clear, precession works in your theory of progressing the RA of the Moon. And the Sun comes up where? On the Moon? Yet I calculate the chart for coordinates on earth. > Bob > > > jivio > > A side note.... I don't have a problem with new ideas, procedures or techniques. My way or the highway mentality does not serve communication towards understanding. Clarity and genuineness is what I seek. If you wish to be appreciated and recognized I suggest an end to innuendos and a focus on patient understanding. Put Saturn to work, for you and wisdom will be everyones reward. jivio > >> ... > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Hi Chris! OK - I will pay close attention to these too - thanks!!!!!! Warm regards, Shamira M - cpwing44 Wednesday, July 31, 2002 8:39 PM Re: Re: A little history and files?? In a message dated 7/31/2002 4:30:43 AM Central Daylight Time, shamira writes: > Thanks so much for such a detailed response with so much information. That > has clarified the situation for me very well! > I tend to still use the tropical most of the time but have started > experimenting with the sidereal system just because I have an open mind and > the idea of it makes sense to me. Then, after some experimentation, I can > at least make an informed choice about which system works for me - so no > precession when using the sidereal Returns - just when using the tropical - > thanks very much - this is a good place for me to start in my comparison > work!!! > > It was good of you to help me - thanks again!!!! > > Warm regards, > > Shamira > interesting, Shamira; good luck. And remember .... benefic and malefic, as well as rulership, exaltation, detriment and fall ... these are more than just words. /// chris in austin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 Chris, OK thanks - you know I don't have one book on sidereal - thanks for the recommendation!!!! Now I have to go looking!! I wonder what is available here in South Australia ..... can't wait to get into it! Warm regards, Shamira M - cpwing44 Wednesday, July 31, 2002 9:03 PM Re: Re: A little history and files?? In a message dated 7/31/2002 6:27:49 AM Central Daylight Time, shamira writes: > Hi Chris! > > OK - I will pay close attention to these too - thanks!!!!!! > > Warm regards, > > Shamira > yeah. I think these are covered in Taking The Kid Gloves Off Astrology by Don Bradley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 31, 2002 Report Share Posted July 31, 2002 , Juan Oliver <jivio> wrote: > Bob > > ... Your " I could care less " attitude renders > your work questionable and half-way reliable. > That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. > ... > or better > > yet, apply the > > technique to events of which they have firsthand > > knowledge in order > > to make an evaluation of the technique. > > Good Idea! Provide precise technique information and > see what happens. > The rate of progression was given to you in msg. #695. wherein it was stated that rate was the same as that used for progressing solar returns except that it was the right ascension of the moon rather than that of the sun that was used. I believe you are familiar with the formula for progressing the solar return and substituting the right ascension of the moon for that of the sun should not be that difficult a task for you. > > > >... > My man... RA of the MOON? How do you progress the > angles of a chart cast for a location on the earth > without using the RA of the SUN? > ... > Just as you cannot explain to members of the scientific community why astrology works, I cannot explain to you why progressing the angles of a lunar return or lunar ingress chart by the elapsed movement of the moon (in right ascension) against the backdrop of the constellations produces such compelling charts time after time. > >... > > > Just because I refuse to buy your software programs > ... > I have never asked you to buy my programs. > > because I am not a 'name' in the astrological > > community does not MEAN > > that I am incapable of making a discovery, or > > understanding what I > > see, or making a comparison of various techniques, > > or making valid > > conclusions. > > > It doesn't take a " name " but it does take patience and > clarity. When someone writes to you for clarification > and they get hit with a sales pitch to buy software > don't expect 100% appreciation for your " discovery " . > I mentioned my webpage one time. > > > My intent was to introduce a tool I have found to be > > more accurate in > > describing events and how they are made personal > > than any other that > > I have ever seen presented in the astrological > > community. > > > Personal?... How does your " tool " describe events > " personal " ? > This was not made clear as I did not present any examples of progressed lunar returns derived from natal charts surrounded by natal or progressed charts for individuals (of which I have many). The closest example is the progressed Caplunar for the attack on the WTC with the progressed chart for the consolidation of the 5 boroughs of New York around it. > > The results found by applying the technique to > > precessed vs > > unprecessed lunar returns, or Sidereal ingresses vs > > Tropical > > ingresses, leave no room for doubt about the > > application of > > precession being the correct methodology for > > constructing charts. > > We agree on precession. From when and how much may be > a different issue... That needs to be explained and > not assumed.... assume = ass(out of)u(and)me. > I use the Fagan-Bradley references. > > ... > > A side note.... I don't have a problem with new ideas, > procedures or techniques. My way or the highway > mentality does not serve communication towards > understanding. Clarity and genuineness is what I seek. > If you wish to be appreciated and recognized I suggest > an end to innuendos and a focus on patient > understanding. Put Saturn to work, for you and wisdom > will be everyones reward. > > jivio > > I have used my way for more than 25 years because nobody had proposed any other way when I began. In all of that quarter of a century I did not seek appreciation or recognition even though I was convinced that the technique had merit. It was only after losing everything and being forced onto the welfare rolls that I decided to see if I could present the technique in an effort to realize some sort of income. The last 3 1\2 years have been a living hell for me and at this time transiting Saturn is working for me, by an applying square to natal Neptune and the MC of my chart. Until now I have been physicaly exhausted, now I am nearly mentaly so. In order not to have my psyche sustain further traumatization (I am just recently regaining psychological strength after the aforementioned 3 1\2 year struggles) I shall withdraw from this arena of combat and continue useing the technique as it hits the bullseye every time. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 1, 2002 Report Share Posted August 1, 2002 Bob.. Imagine the humor of watching Saturday Night Live years ago when Dan Ackroyd(sp?) and Jane Curtain were doing their news segment together. We probably appear that way to many..... I'm sure you would disagree with me but I see myself a better Dan Ackroyd than you. Jane.... The devil is in the details. --- jan61108 <jan61108 wrote: > , Juan Oliver > <jivio> wrote: > > Bob > > > > ... Your " I could care less " attitude renders > > your work questionable and half-way reliable. > > > That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. > Unfortunately, your response is defensive. I can only perceive this to mean that my wordage in some way is interpreted as an attack. Since the charts were done in Sidereal originally and you converted them to tropical for the tropicalist's to understand them, doesn't it make sense to provide the siderealist's in this forum the same courtesy. When one goes to the section " files " they don't have any explanation or information regarding the charts posted there, just some tropical charts in a sidereal forum. > > ... > > or better > > > yet, apply the > > > technique to events of which they have firsthand > > > knowledge in order > > > to make an evaluation of the technique. > > > > Good Idea! Provide precise technique information > and > > see what happens. > > > The rate of progression was given to you in msg. > #695. wherein it was > stated that rate was the same as that used for > progressing solar > returns except that it was the right ascension of > the moon rather > than that of the sun that was used. #695 makes for interesting reading.... The above information is not enough for me to understand the entire process you use to calculate progression of the angles. That is why I continue to ask for definition of your method. I believe you > are familiar with > the formula for progressing the solar return and > substituting the > right ascension of the moon for that of the sun > should not be that > difficult a task for you. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh..... I'm familiar with many processes. The reason I have been asking you to provide the process is because this is your theory and not mine. There are a number of ways to progress angles. Do you use a standard rate? a neo-rate? a bija rate? is it a mean quotidian? or a neo quotidian? is it kinetic? is it True S.A. in R.A.? Naibod in R.A.? There are numerous " tools " and various techniques which can be utilized in the processing of charts. All I have ever been asking from you is detailed information so that I would know exactly how you developed your conclusion. Structure-Saturn, thats my compliment to your EGO-SUN. > > > > > >... > > My man... RA of the MOON? How do you progress the > > angles of a chart cast for a location on the earth > > without using the RA of the SUN? > > ... > > > Just as you cannot explain to members of the > scientific community why > astrology works, STOP.... right there..... Don't make another assumption! Speak for your self... You don't know that I can't explain to a scientific community why astrology works. And lets be clear on this... FYI: Astrology is a loose fitting term. Elements associated with astrology are accepted within the scientific community and not everyone that is an astrologer concerns themselves with the scientific community. I cannot explain to you why > progressing the angles > of a lunar return or lunar ingress chart by the > elapsed movement of > the moon (in right ascension) against the backdrop > of the > constellations produces such compelling charts time > after time. > I would like to see what you see but if you can't explain it, what makes you think anyone else could grasp the concept. > > >... > > > > > > Just because I refuse to buy your software > programs > > ... > > > I have never asked you to buy my programs. Never? That's why opinions are like pie-holes, everyone has one. > > > > because I am not a 'name' in the astrological > > > community does not MEAN > > > that I am incapable of making a discovery, or > > > understanding what I > > > see, or making a comparison of various > techniques, > > > or making valid > > > conclusions. > > > > > It doesn't take a " name " but it does take patience > and > > clarity. When someone writes to you for > clarification > > and they get hit with a sales pitch to buy > software > > don't expect 100% appreciation for your > " discovery " . > > > I mentioned my webpage one time. > > Besides the messages written in this forum, we have had other conversations, and you have mentioned it(webpage)more than once in pitching your software. I'm not adverse to buying software but I haven't even gotten to a place where I can even erect a chart manually to observe its rationale. > > > My intent was to introduce a tool I have found > to be > > > more accurate in > > > describing events and how they are made personal > > > than any other that > > > I have ever seen presented in the astrological > > > community. > > > > > Personal?... How does your " tool " describe events > > " personal " ? > > > This was not made clear as I did not present any > examples of > progressed lunar returns derived from natal charts > surrounded by > natal or progressed charts for individuals (of which > I have many). Those would be meaningful and helpful if information regarding the charts were included with them. > The closest example is the progressed Caplunar for > the attack on the > WTC with the progressed chart for the consolidation > of the 5 boroughs > of New York around it. > My experience with charting has been that the " stars " are never wrong, that errors come from interpretation. You wrote " The hardest thing was to lay aside Fagan and Bradley's teachings about how to read Lunar returns. But I had no doubts after seeing the Caplunar and its progression for the attack. To use their methods to read the chart would have made any astrologer look like a fool as Jupiter was the planet nearest any angle of the chart. " Every chart has a message within it. Did you ever consider or think that maybe you missed something? Do you really know how to interput the actions and properties of Jupiter in every possible fashion? I'm sure it was prevalent in the charts cast for the Crusades when so many people were killed. Why is the Caplunar such an important chart? Is progression of the angles always an accurate tool in your method? The events of 911 can be told differently depending on which natal is utilized. Compare a chart for the natal of the World Trade Center with the results found in your NYC chart. It was the WTC which was hit not NYC. Different charts with different messages. As for mid-points, yes they have a value, but what are they? Are they usually nothing more than a void in empty space? > > > The results found by applying the technique to > > > precessed vs > > > unprecessed lunar returns, or Sidereal ingresses > vs > > > Tropical > > > ingresses, leave no room for doubt about the > > > application of > > > precession being the correct methodology for > > > constructing charts. > > > > We agree on precession. From when and how much may > be > > a different issue... That needs to be explained > and > > not assumed.... assume = ass(out of)u(and)me. > > > I use the Fagan-Bradley references. I'm glad all of their methods aren't discarded... > > > > ... > > > > A side note.... I don't have a problem with new > ideas, > > procedures or techniques. My way or the highway > > mentality does not serve communication towards > > understanding. Clarity and genuineness is what I > seek. > > If you wish to be appreciated and recognized I > suggest > > an end to innuendos and a focus on patient > > understanding. Put Saturn to work, for you and > wisdom > > will be everyones reward. > > > > jivio > > > > > I have used my way for more than 25 years because > nobody had proposed > any other way when I began. In all of that quarter > of a century I did > not seek appreciation or recognition even though I > was convinced that > the technique had merit. It was only after losing > everything and > being forced onto the welfare rolls that I decided > to see if I could > present the technique in an effort to realize some > sort of income. > The last 3 1 years have been a living hell for me > and at this time > transiting Saturn is working for me, by an applying > square to natal > Neptune and the MC of my chart. Until now I have > been physicaly > exhausted, now I am nearly mentaly so. In order not > to have my psyche > sustain further traumatization (I am just recently > regaining > psychological strength after the aforementioned 3 > 1 year struggles) > I shall withdraw from this arena of combat and > continue ususinghe > technique as it hits the bullseye every time. > > Bob > > I'm very happy that it hits the bullseye everytime. Aldebaran will be happy to hear that as well. Unfortunately nobody else know that. Your withdrawing from this arena of combat would be foolish. Your psyche has a better chance of sustaining further trauma by remaining here instead of leaving. Here you are supported by your peers. We should understand you better than anyone else. Of course you're gonna run into a guy like me that has his Saturn in opposition to your Sun. I stress for details but I'm also supportive. You got influences affecting you that would anger and upset anyone. Transiting Pluto conjunct your Natal Mars. Transiting Neptune having done a number on your Natal Sun. You think this square between transiting Saturn and progressed/natal Neptune is gonna to be easy? Well, heads up, Mars hit the mid-point of that square and you're about feel the semi-square of Mars applying to Prog/Natal Neptune. And all this after a separating Transiting Saturn semi-square Natal Saturn. Like I said.... You got folks here who understand your plight better than anywhere else and after looking at your bi-solar you're gonna have a helluva time in the months ahead. Take advantage of the transiting Jupiter for the time being. Mars between your Bi-solar Sun and Mercury in opposition to Neptune. Reminds me of the packaging that they put on fireworks " Safe & Sane " . You keep remembering that and use your imagination to write. Do you play music? Watch that Mars, Neptune and Saturn connection in your Bi-Solar. You ever get up to Rocklin? jivio > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2002 Report Share Posted August 6, 2002 , Juan Oliver <jivio> wrote: > Bob.. > > ... > > > > > I use the Fagan-Bradley references. > > I'm glad all of their methods aren't discarded... > > >... While searching for information regarding a question posed in another club to which I belong I came across the following in the reprint of the Solunars series by Cyril Fagan. It is on page 27 in the April 1979 issue of American Astrology magazine. " If the solar and lunar returns could be progressed then it would be possible to foretell events, not only for every day in the year, but in the case of the lunar return for every hour of the day. But unfortunately the astronomical problems nvolved are of such a technical nature as to be beyond the ken of most students of astrology, involving as they do--in the case of the lunar return--practical know- ledge of the Lunar Therom and necessitating the use of cumbersome tables, only within reach of computative astronomers. ....But until this is achieved, I CANNOT DO BETTER than to introduce a makeshift method, HAVING NO PRETENSE TO ASTRONOMICAL JUSTIFI- CATION, invented by Donald A Bradley, a mathematical expert on positional astronomy. Bradley's method, which is extremely simple, may be expressed as follows: ADD THE DIFFERENCE IN RIGHT ASCENSION BETWEEN THE TRANSITTING AND RADICAL MOON TO THE RIGHT ASCENSION OF THE MIDHEAVEN OF THE LUNAR RETURN AND THE SUM WILL BE THE RIGHT ASCENSION OF THE PROGRESSED LUNAR RETURN. " My collection of American Astrology began in 1972, nowhere else did I see reference to, or ever use of, this method regarding progressing the lunar return, not even in Bradley's own " Solar and Lunar Returns " . I have been using the method since 1975. Call it what you will, I call it independent discovery on my part, and am indeed proud to have had this train of thought in line with someone of the stature of Mr. Bradley. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 12, 2002 Report Share Posted August 12, 2002 , Juan Oliver <jivio> wrote: > Bob.. > > ... > > Your withdrawing from this arena of combat would be > foolish. Your psyche has a better chance of sustaining > further trauma by remaining here instead of leaving. > Here you are supported by your peers. We should > understand you better than anyone else.... > Like I said.... You got folks here who understand your > plight better than anywhere else ... You ever get up to > Rocklin? > > jivio > > I am so tired of the confrontation, one-up-manship, egosim, conflict, and\or lack of interest I have found, rather than support, or at least enough interest to try the method before making conclusions about something not studied, that I am not only considering leaving the internet communities to which I belong but leaving astrology behind me forever. It certainly would leave me a great deal more time for other things in life. I am actually so tired of thinking about the conflicts I no longer care to continue this post. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 12, 2002 Report Share Posted August 12, 2002 sounds to me that someone has lost there faith in what they had believed in once.. you shouldnt let what others views affect what you " believe in " because its not right... if its right for you to believe in astology then believe it and let everyone not care.it shouldnt matter.... just because one or million of people don't open up to a more " spirtual " way of life and are stuck in the " olden days " of nothing..then so be it.. DON'T LOSE FAITH IN WHAT YOU ARE, AND YOUR BELIEFS.. Tamara , " jan61108 " <jan61108> wrote: > , Juan Oliver <jivio> wrote: > > Bob.. > > > > ... > > > > Your withdrawing from this arena of combat would be > > foolish. Your psyche has a better chance of sustaining > > further trauma by remaining here instead of leaving. > > Here you are supported by your peers. We should > > understand you better than anyone else.... > > > Like I said.... You got folks here who understand your > > plight better than anywhere else ... You ever get up to > > Rocklin? > > > > jivio > > > > > I am so tired of the confrontation, one-up-manship, egosim, conflict, > and\or lack of interest I have found, rather than support, or at > least enough interest to try the method before making conclusions > about something not studied, that I am not only considering leaving > the internet communities to which I belong but leaving astrology > behind me forever. It certainly would leave me a great deal more time > for other things in life. > > I am actually so tired of thinking about the conflicts I no longer > care to continue this post. > > Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 13, 2002 Report Share Posted August 13, 2002 , " jc_lovin_mama_76 " <jc_lovin_mama_76> wrote: > sounds to me that someone has lost there faith in what they had > believed in once.. you shouldnt let what others views affect what > you " believe in " because its not right... > if its right for you to believe in astology then believe it and let > everyone not care.it shouldnt matter.... > just because one or million of people don't open up to a > more " spirtual " way of life and are stuck in the " olden days " of > nothing..then so be it.. > > DON'T LOSE FAITH IN WHAT YOU ARE, AND YOUR BELIEFS.. > > > Tamara > > ... Dear Tamara, I have not lost 'faith' in anything. I just haven't the time or energy to waste dealing with those with feet of clay. I will share with you part of a post I wrote to someone which I hope explains how I feel. " I am just tired of the bull that is shoveled out by these egotistical Lemmings. Their readiness to challenge me when I presented the technique, then their silence when presented with evidence that astrologers, with more claim to fame than they will ever have, gave this technique high marks shows them for what they really are. Who among them can honestly lay claim to whatever astrological 'fame' they may think they have because of a string of right on predictive hits? For that matter, who in all of astrological history is famous for such a string? I daresay that all of the ancients, or astrologers from past centuries, are astrological names because something they wrote was passed down or discovered. But where in all of the astrological archives is there a list of such a string of 'hits' by any of them? The progressed lunars produce charts which are 'right on' time after time. Just because in their book the progression shouldn't be figured that way does not change the results that are achieved time after time. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. " Tamara, look at my chart. With the t-square involving the Sun with 3 of the outer planets, one of which is trine the Ascendent, while the Moon trines the conjunction of 2 of the outer planets in the t- square, and the Sun sextile the Ascendent, while another outer (Uranus) is trine the MC and in square to Mercury, and 2 other planets are in the immediate foreground of the of the MC and Ascendant, I think the case for a powerful chart is easily made. I feel blessed. The chart is mine and I am Captain of my own ship. I make the decisions. I had a very rough early life and I have had more 'big' opportunities come my way, all offered to me, none pursued, one taken, than most people in the world will ever have in their lifetimes (a movie studio contract, my own radio show, a business partnership, a management position in a Fortune 500 company, acceptance into a program that was accepting 1 of about every 300 applicants, a chance to go to Notre Dame on someone else's dime, handpicked to be on a Commanding General's staff [i couldn't turn that one down]. Surviver Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 13, 2002 Report Share Posted August 13, 2002 , " jc_lovin_mama_76 " <jc_lovin_mama_76> wrote: > sounds to me that someone has lost there faith in what they had > believed in once.. you shouldnt let what others views affect what > you " believe in " because its not right... > if its right for you to believe in astology then believe it and let > everyone not care.it shouldnt matter.... > just because one or million of people don't open up to a > more " spirtual " way of life and are stuck in the " olden days " of > nothing..then so be it.. > > DON'T LOSE FAITH IN WHAT YOU ARE, AND YOUR BELIEFS.. > > > Tamara > > ... Dear Tamara, I have not lost 'faith' in anything. I just haven't the time or energy to waste dealing with those with feet of clay. I will share with you part of a post I wrote to someone which I hope explains how I feel. " I am just tired of the bull that is shoveled out by these egotistical Lemmings. Their readiness to challenge me when I presented the technique, then their silence when presented with evidence that astrologers, with more claim to fame than they will ever have, gave this technique high marks shows them for what they really are. Who among them can honestly lay claim to whatever astrological 'fame' they may think they have because of a string of right on predictive hits? For that matter, who in all of astrological history is famous for such a string? I daresay that all of the ancients, or astrologers from past centuries, are astrological names because something they wrote was passed down or discovered. But where in all of the astrological archives is there a list of such a string of 'hits' by any of them? The progressed lunars produce charts which are 'right on' time after time. Just because in their book the progression shouldn't be figured that way does not change the results that are achieved time after time. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. " Tamara, look at my chart. With the t-square involving the Sun with 3 of the outer planets, one of which is trine the Ascendent, while the Moon trines the conjunction of 2 of the outer planets in the t- square, and the Sun sextile the Ascendent, while another outer (Uranus) is trine the MC and in square to Mercury, and 2 other planets are in the immediate foreground of the of the MC and Ascendant, I think the case for a powerful chart is easily made. I feel blessed. The chart is mine and I am Captain of my own ship. I make the decisions. I had a very rough early life and I have had more 'big' opportunities come my way, all offered to me, none pursued, one taken, than most people in the world will ever have in their lifetimes (a movie studio contract, my own radio show, a business partnership, a management position in a Fortune 500 company, acceptance into a program that was accepting 1 of about every 300 applicants, a chance to go to Notre Dame on someone else's dime, handpicked to be on a Commanding General's staff [i couldn't turn that one down]. Surviver Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.