View Full Version : Newbie question about how astrology works
I'm sure this is a question that has been asked many times but I couldn't find anything by searching, so apologies for dragging the subject up again.
It does seem to me as though there is definite correlation between the positions of the planets at the time of our birth and, also having an interest in Tarot and numerology I can understand that we may never understand why this is so.
However, I believe that a baby is alive in the womb, so why is the date and time of birth considered to be the significant moment? I have also read some opinions that a "soul" will wait for the right time to be born. However, my husband's colleague is waiting for his daughter to be born and she is overdue (waiting for the right time?). They may have to induce soon. So if they induce, will her birth still be at the right time?
As I am very new to this subject these are really just musings and I would be very interested to hear others' thoughts.
Your question is a good one, and it deserves a good answer. But, I'm afraid that you'll have to be satisfied with a reply and not an answer. Astrology just works -- period. It seldom, but not absolutely, makes no difference when or how a child is born -- the birth moment almost always seems highly relevant. So, we just go with it.
Have I seen birth charts that just don't seem to fit a person? Yes. Is that because astrology doesn't work? No. You are more than just your birth chart. And you may not "be in tune" with your chart, but only certain portions of your chart. I'll give you a very real example.
Other than in the most general way, my oldest daughter did not reflect her chart. Yes, she was born close to a Solar Eclipse and did exhibit a lack of energy and self-direction. Beyond that, the chart just didn't work. Years later I found that she responded strongly to a New Moon chart. Whereever the planets were in her natal chart when a Full Moon occurred, that is the aspectual and house-related meanings that she exhibited. Transits and progressions -- forget them.
So, the whole chart may not be an astrological profile for some people. Some portion of that chart may be. Fortunately this doesn't happen often. Dave.
I'm not an expert expert myself, just an amateur who loves astrology. There have been a few threads here, where the time of conception was mentioned as it relates to astrology. Here are three that I found using the search function and the keyword "conception":
I can see your point. I suspect the reason is that date of birth is much easier to track than date of conception. Personally I find natal (birth time) astrology to be fairly accurate. But maybe there's something we're not seeing.
The birth day and time is significant because it is the only time that can be reliably measured. If a couple has sex every day and finds out a month later that they are pregnant, how are they to know which act of love created the child? And even if a person can pinpoint the time of sex (specifically, the time of the ejaculation), then it is still impossible to determine the time of conception. That can happen anywhere from a few hours to two days later.
And then there's the whole issue of whether there is a soul at that point or not. Does the soul enter at conception, when the pre-embryo (I forget the medical term -- blastula maybe?) attaches to the uterine wall, or some other point along the line?
I'm not going to answer that question as I don't want to start a huge abortion rights debate. But do you see my point that it is impossible to assign a time to any of those events and therefore impossible to create an accurate astrological chart for a pre-birth event?
As for the inducement question. If a baby is induced, it is still the right time for that baby to be born because it couldn't have happened at any other time. Like right now is the right time for you to be sitting in front of your computer reading this post. Whether you'd prefer to be elsewhere, should be elsewhere, or were told by an authority figure not to read this post is irrelevant. The fact remains that you are reading this post right now and therefore this is the right time to read this post.
Same thing with birth -- whatever time a child is born is the right time for that child to be born. Be they premature, late according to the doctor's educated guesswork, or induced. We can hypothesize about alternate universes in which a person was born at a different time, but that doesn't apply to this universe.
You may want to read the post from a couple months back about Alexander the Great. Legend has it that his delivery was delayed to align with the stars so he would be king. If meddling with birth times worked for The Great, then it should certainly work for husband's colleague's baby. :)
Reading this over, I sound a mite authoritative. I'd like to add that these are just my thoughts and beliefs. I have no idea if they're right or not, but take comfort in the fact that no one else really knows either. :D
Thank you all for your replies which are very clear and make sense. I will read those threads you posted Nevada - thank you for finding them for me :)
The more I delve into these things, the more I'm awed by the role the "universe" plays. Whatever force it is that keeps nature in balance, that ensures the seasons come and go, that makes birth charts work, that keeps things in check so that the planet isn't overrun by one gender or another - I don't know what it is, but it's clever :)
Kaylee Marie, what you say makes sense...that inducement or no, the time will be right.
It's all very interesting...
There is no reason in principle why conception should not be the basis of a chart - and indeed there are a number of techniques that have been used for the purposes of establishing the moment of conception.
The big drawback with such techniques is that there is no objective measure of the time of conception that can be used to test the Astrological 'corrections'.
However, there's also some evidence quoted by Geoffreey Cornelius in 'Moment of Astrology' of accurate predictions based on an inaccurate birth time - so it might just be possible that the birth time itself is not quite as important as we assume.
We tend to take a linear view of time - that something or someone has a starting point (conception or birth) and that time then flows in a unidirectional way
Such an approach deems the 'Moment' of 'beginning ' as extremely important - the idea that time might flow in eddies, or backwards at some times and forwards at another is quite at odds with our 'scientific' view of the world around us.
It might just be, that what is important is not objective time but the subjective time of the Astrologer. We cast a chart based on our understanding and interpret that chart.
That's something of a heretical view and I don't by any means claim that this is in fact the case, merely we should remember that interpretation is not independent of the Astrologer. Even computer programs that 'interpret' are based on a particular Astrologer's view of 'reality'