celestial occurrence

[Guest guest]

On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 16:14:28 Dharma wrote:

>As I said, I haven't been using these four asteroids. I know nothing about

>them, except that some people have been using them and apparently find

>their movements meaningful. Once in a while, as I look at the list of

>positions, I do notice something interesting in their positions... so

>maybe one of these days, I'll look into them more.

 

Thanks for all that thorough and clear information on

astrology, Dharma.

 

I can see why some would choose not to pay too much

attention on these asteroids. Interpretation would

probably vary a lot from person to person.

 

What about this "new" sign that IIRC was introduced

some years ago, called the snake holder (?) ?

Is this something that is used by astrologers much,

I can't say I have seen anything to it in the (few)

books I have read.

 

Love,

 

Amanda.

 

 

 

 

Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com

[Guest guest]

Hi Amanda,

>>As I said, I haven't been using these four asteroids. I know nothing about

>>them, except that some people have been using them and apparently find

>>their movements meaningful. Once in a while, as I look at the list of

>>positions, I do notice something interesting in their positions... so

>>maybe one of these days, I'll look into them more.

>

>Thanks for all that thorough and clear information on

>astrology, Dharma.

>

>I can see why some would choose not to pay too much

>attention on these asteroids. Interpretation would

>probably vary a lot from person to person.

 

Well, astrology is a science, and the interpretation of the influence or

significance of the various elements is not arbitrary. Professional

psychics have bad days, when they are tired or something and just can't

"get" much... the honest ones will tell you if they're just not cooking on

all burners and give you your money back. Professional astrologers don't

have that problem. You don't have to be psychic to do astrology.

 

When I look at someone's natal horoscope, it's like having a battery of

psychological tests. Psychology is a science too, but not a "hard" or

"exact" science like chemistry or physics. Where do you start with a

battery of psychological tests? Will several psychologists/psychiatrists

see the same things there? Yes and no... It helps if the psychologist is

brilliant and intuitive. But the basic information is there for anyone

to see.

 

In recent centuries some new planets have been discovered. Right away, the

astrologers begin to look for how a new planet is working, what its

influence actually is. And they share information, and gradually a picture

forms of what kind of energy and influence can be associated with the

planet. And what sign it rules. So by now Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are

discussed in most of the books, and their rulership of certain signs is a

matter of general agreement, though some still hold onto the old rulers as

"also influential."

 

The planet or planetoid Chiron is the latest addition, and you'll find it

discussed in some books but not in others. Of the planets, we know the

least about Chiron, because we haven't been studying its influence or

significance for very long.

 

Speaking scientifically, we know that everything in the universe influences

everything else... so we could say: of course, these four asteroids have

some significance, some influence. The question is, is their influence

meaningful or significant enough to us to spend time working with them?

 

I have seen a number of things that do work... that is, they clearly have

some significance... and could be used in astrology and are used by some...

I've spent time testing them out. And I had to decide that I just don't

have time to use everything I could on every chart. I have to stick with

what seems _most_ significant.

 

We mark the Moon's Nodes in horoscopes... we _could_ mark in the nodes of

every planet! This begins to get confusing enough that for a time I made

two charts for everyone, so I could see all these points in one of them. I

don't think I have the time for that. )

 

The "aspects" or angles we see as most significant are based on the way we

draw our charts and therefore on certain numbers more than others. We

could divide the circle into fifths of 72 degrees each, but we don't pay

much attention to planets that are at that angle to each other, that are

"in quintile aspect"... it's certainly not easy to see that pattern in a

chart. Some astrologers have worked a great deal with "harmonics," doing

for instance, a 5th-harmonic chart that will throw into prominence any

planets in quintile aspect. Yes, I think that's meaningful and

significant... and so is a 7th-harmonic chart, and so on. But I don't

have _time_ for all this!!

 

If those four asteroids are important, it will come out. All the new books

will begin to discuss them and show some evidence and tell stories about

their positions in certain charts, etc., etc. And then I guess I'll find

the time for them...

>What about this "new" sign that IIRC was introduced

>some years ago, called the snake holder (?) ?

>Is this something that is used by astrologers much,

>I can't say I have seen anything to it in the (few)

>books I have read.

 

Neither have I, though I must say it's an imaginative and suggestive name.

)) We could do a whole series of jokes on the influence of THAT sign.

)))

 

We are not actually using 12 constellations that each take up exactly 30

degrees or one twelfth of the sky around the zodiac, which is the plane

that the planets lie in. We are using a constellation symbolically for

that 1/12th of the sky. You could rename one and say anything you like

about it, but it won't change how that 1/12th shows up in horoscopes and

what its influence or significance is. Like renaming some element in one

of those psychological tests... it won't change the outcome.

 

Love,

Dharma