PDA

View Full Version : Opheicus


ravenest
16-02-2006, 09:18
This might not be astrology, it might not be astronomy, but they used to be both. Anyway we have been working for some time on an updated, scientific astrological, sidereal southern hemisphere 'astrology'.

I've argued with Tropical Astrologers (they were silly!) Ive been dissed on the internet ("Not this again! Every so often some idiot looks at a star map and goes Wow- there are 13 constellations not 12. Its plainly obvious that the system started in ancient egypt and they devided the ecliptic into 12 houses that extended to both poles and blah blah blah") - they were silly!

The Ancient Egyptians knew about the south pole now? Even the Dendra Zodiac shows seperate constellations around the north pole, very distinct from the ecliptic?

Whadda you reckon?

dadsnook2000
16-02-2006, 09:52
Over 30 years ago I remember seeing a "sensationalizing" book about astrology being all wrong because there was 13 constellations, not 12. First of all, the author was talking about constellations -- not signs. Tropical astrologers use "signs" which are divisions of 30 degrees each, the first sign being marked by the spring equinox point.

Then, someone comes along and says but signs and constellations were the same at one time and the Egyptians (or sometimes someone else is cited) used them in this way. Wrong! The last time the commonly used signs were coincidental in location with the commonly used constellations or star patterns that more-or-less represented the signs was back around 213 AD. Of course, when you talk about signs and constellations together you have to realize that some constellations stretch further along the zodiac than others, and that some constellations are further displaced from the zodiac path than others.

So, did the ancient Egyptians practice astrology? Perhaps, but not like that which we practice today. They were very good astronomers and constructed both temples and pyramid/observatory structures to help them define the heavens. They measured helical risings and set their cultural and agricultural calendars with great precision. There is even evidence to suggest the knew and could measure the circumfrence of the Earth and understood latitude calculations and other information.

I can understand that you don't respect the Tropical Astrologers because they often mis-speak and lack understanding of the basics. I subscribe to the practices and methodology of Sidereal Astrologers (as developed and defined by Fagan and Bradly and others) although I'm flexible enough to use what works from both sides of the fence. It doesn't bother me if you or someone else is trying to construct a "southern" zodiac -- a rose is a rose by any name, etc. There are horoscopes and astrological information that does go back many eons, so I think we can survive another change among many changes that have emerged over that long period of time. Dave

ravenest
21-02-2006, 12:00
Old stories will keep coming around when satisfactory answers are not given.

Over 30 years ago I remember seeing a "sensationalizing" book about astrology being all wrong because there was 13 constellations, not 12. First of all, the author was talking about constellations -- not signs. Tropical astrologers use "signs" which are divisions of 30 degrees each, the first sign being marked by the spring equinox point. Dave

You dont need a "sensational book" to work that out, look at an astronomical map!


Then, someone comes along and says but signs and constellations were the same at one time and the Egyptians (or sometimes someone else is cited) used them in this way. Wrong!
Dave

So signs are not constellations? They just have the same names, appear in the same order.....



and coincided with each other in 213 ad (bit of a coincidence ?).


So, did the ancient Egyptians practice astrology? Perhaps, but not like that which we practice today. They were very good astronomers and constructed both temples and pyramid/observatory structures to help them define the heavens. They measured helical risings and set their cultural and agricultural calendars with great precision. There is even evidence to suggest the knew and could measure the circumfrence of the Earth and understood latitude calculations and other information. Dave

Egyptians definatly used constellations (but not as we know them). They did devide the heavens up equally, which possibly had some specific function to do with time keeping at night (Egyptian celestial astrology and the 'Hour priests' ?)

Dave[/QUOTE]
I can understand that you don't respect the Tropical Astrologers because they often mis-speak and lack understanding of the basics. I subscribe to the practices and methodology of Sidereal Astrologers (as developed and defined by Fagan and Bradly and others) although I'm flexible enough to use what works from both sides of the fence. It doesn't bother me if you or someone else is trying to construct a "southern" zodiac -- a rose is a rose by any name, etc. There are horoscopes and astrological information that does go back many eons, so I think we can survive another change among many changes that have emerged over that long period of time. Dave[/QUOTE]


My basic problem seems to be that many tropical astrologers will not, or canot reason about their ideas. I am interested in finding out what tropical astrology is NOT defining (even though some say it is) as then I might get to some understanding of the value of the system, which so far appears to me to monitor and predict seasonal and natural cycles on earth. But if astrology is the "science of the stars" then western tropical astrology does not fulfil the deffinition?

dadsnook2000
21-02-2006, 13:09
Well, who is saying that Astrology is the science of the stars? Do they speak for all astrologers? I think not. I'm a very good astrologer, I don't use the stars in any direct or interpretive manner -- never have.

ravenest, you seemed surprised about signs not being constellations?! Have you been into serious astrology for long? Perhaps this is where our dialog is missing a connection -- perhaps this is why I say that who cares about the 12 or the 13 or even the 14 constellations along the ecliptic band -- you are talking star patterns and I'm talking about perfect 30 degrees of space as a measuring tool! I couldn't care less about constellations -- or the now unrelated signs that astrologers use. Many Sidereal Astrologers use signs; they argue with the Tropicalists about where Leo is and why some of Virgo is actually Leo and why doesn't the other type of astrology adjust its sign meanings. They both want to be right. I feel that both of them, and yourself, are all out of whack.

This isn't really worth discussing, for me, anyways. Good luck in your studies. And I sincerely hope you find your answers but it doesn't seem that I should speak for others who believe and practice differently from myself. Dave

stardancer
22-02-2006, 02:30
I probably saw the same book a long time ago. All I know is that the current system of astrology as I practice it works. When Pluto, Neptune and Uranus were discovered, they were inserted into astrology and worked. For whatever reason, no one has inserted new signs into astrology and made it work. At least that I know of. If someone else wants to go to the trouble, more power to them. Astrology is already so complicated with many theories. I've looked at a lot of them and besides composites and harmonics charts, nothing else I've seen theorized on works quite as well as the good old fashioned way we've been doing it for years.

Saturness
22-02-2006, 08:43
Just a question...are the signs/houses based on the myths behind them or on the constellations? Because then they signs could e caled anything, right, if they are not based in the pattern of starts that make the 'shape' of the constallation? This shape gave them the name they have.
I'm just curious because in many books of astrology i've seen Sagittarius people being decribed as 'the centaurs' and many comparations between the 'personality' of the sign and the 'mythic' creature represented by the constellation, that is half a horse, half a man. That's just and example.

For me it sounds all connected....or was it all connected once upon a time, and now isn't anymore? Why?

~Yuko

dadsnook2000
22-02-2006, 09:23
Signs are not houses ... Signs are not constellations ... Houses are not constellations. FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES TREAT ALL THREE OF THESE AS BEING TOTALLY DIFFERENT THINGS!

Constellations are commonly described and defined PATTERNS OF STARS which different people use to help identify individual stars in the sky -- of which there are a variety of brightness categories. The brightest individual stars are often used to form the framework of a group of stars that people use relative to creating a "picture" in the sky. Because of the variablity of the constellations (or groups of star patterns) in terms of their number of stars (typically from 5 to 15 stars) and space occupied in the heavens, each constellation may cover only a small portion of the sky (from 8 degrees of distance along the zodiac belt to some 45 degrees along the zodiac belt). Because we see approximately half of the sky dome from any one place on earth, we see stars spread over the entire sky area above us. Some of the star patterns we see are overhead, some are often seen at mid-sky levels, while others appear to be along the milky way or ecliptic. Not all of them straddle the ecliptic in whole or in part, most are elsewhere in the sky.

Signs are mathematical divisions of space as measured along the zodiac belt or ecliptic. They are all equal in length, 30 degrees precisely, and there are twelve of them -- 12 mutliplied by 30 equals 360 degrees. Signs have names which are also used for some constellations. That is their only similarity !!! Each person's horoscope chart has these 12 signs in it. The signs are shared by everyone in their charts and symbolically provide us with a collective common basis for measurement and meaning.

Houses are mathematical divisions of space derived and based upon a specific time and specific place. As such they are highly individual. The house system is a mathematical construct that uses the MC (overhead longitudinal line along a great circle that bisects the geographical north pole and the earthly location we are born at) and the Ascendant (eastward projection of the local horizon where it bisects the ecliptic plane). Using these factors, the various groups of house systems divide the quadrants of space defined by the MC and ASC axis points in various ways -- some divide a quadrant in terms of the time it takes to rotate up from the Ascendant to the MC, others trisect the quadrant and project it along the local horizon to where it interesects the ecliptic, others divide the quadrant along the MC's great circle and project it out to the ecliptic in a complex process. Other systems of house division also exist and are used. There are even house systems with a different number of houses -- eight-house systems were popular in biblical times (suggesting that there is no correlation between signs and houses).

Relative to houses, most astrologers have no understanding whatsoever as to which type of house-division system should be used for various types of charts. I'll go further to say that most astrology students don't even know of the many types of charts that can be used and when they could be used.

So, I hope for the final time, everyone understands that Houses are not Signs, Signs are not Constellations, and Constellations are not Houses, and one cannot correlate the meanings of Houses to those of Signs, and that Constellations are no longer a working part of Astrology and haven't been for very many centuries.

If anyone wants to undo many centuries of development or to create a whole new way of working with the stars then please have the courtesy to
A) call it something different,
B) be very precise and knowledgable when trying to link it to any form of current/past Astrology,
C) try not to confuse early-studies students of other conventional systems, D) develop your definitions and theories and concepts carefully, thoughtfully and rigorously over a period of time so that others can closely evaluate them, and
E) take the time to fully understand the other person's system, terms, practices, mathematics, history and track record before comparing their system to another. Dave.

ravenest
22-02-2006, 11:25
Well, who is saying that Astrology is the science of the stars? Do they speak for all astrologers? I think not. I'm a very good astrologer, I don't use the stars in any direct or interpretive manner -- never have.


Well I am glad you cleared that up! I wonder how many other forms of astrology (throughout time and in different places; Vedic, Tibeten, Aboriginal Australian, etc.) would make the same statement? I always thought the original essence of Astrology had to do with the stars?


ravenest, you seemed surprised about signs not being constellations?! Have you been into serious astrology for long? Perhaps this is where our dialog is missing a connection -- perhaps this is why I say that who cares about the 12 or the 13 or even the 14 constellations along the ecliptic band -- you are talking star patterns and I'm talking about perfect 30 degrees of space as a measuring tool! I couldn't care less about constellations -- or the now unrelated signs that astrologers use. Many Sidereal Astrologers use signs; they argue with the Tropicalists about where Leo is and why some of Virgo is actually Leo and why doesn't the other type of astrology adjust its sign meanings. They both want to be right. I feel that both of them, and yourself, are all out of whack.


Not really, recently surprised, more long - term amazed; that astrologers calmly accept the fact that that equalling out of constellations into 30 degree 'signs' has no basis in stella reality, that they are not studying the heavens only charts, that the 12 sign system just happens to use the same names and order sas the constellations. Are you not a Sidereal astrologer? isnt sidereal astrology an attempt to move the signs into a closer alignment with the stars constellations they represent? Am I the one out of wack? Cant reasonible, logical and sensible answers be given to students, beginers or scientists?


This isn't really worth discussing, for me, anyways. Good luck in your studies. And I sincerely hope you find your answers but it doesn't seem that I should speak for others who believe and practice differently from myself. Dave

Well, you put a lot into something that doesn't seem worth discussing. My aim is to discuss and to get to the heart of the jewel that we all posess.

If there are any astrologers, new or ancient, young or cynical, astronomers, etc who would like to openly pool resources, perhaps we can all learn a little more and broaden our horizons.

ravenest
22-02-2006, 11:44
yes, I do understand the sign, constellation, house difference, my point is that a sign is a construct to explain a moved 30 degree area (against a background constellation) in reference to the movement of the equinoctal point. I may still be under the illusion that sidereal, fagan-allen, etc, is an attempt to align signs with their constellations?
You made a point that astrological signs are not constellations, yet got into a rave about the positioning of Ophiucus off the ecliptic so thats why it isnt included as a sign ??? As proof that they are not the same thing, you say they dont match up and only did in 223 (approx Ephemeris gives 221) AD. Um, isn't that because that was the era they were calculated for, so of course they lined up then and the 72 (71 1/2) year / 1 degree precession has continually moved that chart to be so out of wack that people have had to invent the concept that signs no longer have any thing whatsoever to do with the stars and constellations?

As for Ophiucus not being included in the band of the ecliptic as the main part of its constellation lies 45 d. nth. of Ecliptic, a quick glance at any astrolonomical map shows that the stars of lower scorpius (near Corona Aus.)
lie well below the ecliptic while the western part of the const. is in the ecliptic and mirror the same effect as Oph. ie. some in and some out of the ecliptic.

But then again perhaps I am all wrong about all of this. My seekings have been not just through one system or in one time. Perhaps I have made a grave mistake in considering that Astronomy is (or was) the science of the stars. Apparently it does not have much to do with the stars at all, nor with science (excluding the science of the 3rd millenia).

Surely the survival of the wisdom / sacred sciences is tied up with the application of new scientific, discoveries and understandings?

ravenest
23-02-2006, 09:00
Well, who is saying that Astrology is the science of the stars? Do they speak for all astrologers? I think not. I'm a very good astrologer, I don't use the stars in any direct or interpretive manner -- never have.

I feel that both of them, and yourself, are all out of whack.

Dave
Deborah Houlding (www.skyscript.co.uk/temples/2.html) ‘Historical Overview’ p.2.
“We know that the eastern horizon had been marked out by a particular STAR or CONSTELLATION long before the use of zodiacal degrees … the FUNDAMENTAL RELIANCE upon the rising and setting of STARS over the horizon leaves us with no doubt that the cardinal points have always been the pivotal supports for astrological interpretation.” (my emphasis)

Australian Aboriginal astrology is star based and throws up some extremely interesting concepts (see my post, ‘More Than Interesting’)

There are various types of Esoteric Astrology that use stars and constellations. One example of this is the Golden Dawn system which uses a stella and constellation astrology commencing with the star Regulus in Leo.

Some western astrologers use constellations and have various ways of calculating the area of the ecliptic they govern. One method is to look at the stars that make up the actual constellation and take the stars that are furthest ‘east’ and ‘west’ and then draw a ‘vertical’ (longitudinal) line to the ecliptic to define that constellations area of influence. Other astrologers don’t like this method as areas overlap or fall short – leaving blank unattributed space on the ecliptic. Others adjust this by averaging out (pos. or neg.) the boundary.

Some Bio-dynamic gardeners use an interesting system where they are more accurately mapping the constellation boundaries by collecting nature based observational material (see Brian Keats, Antipodean Calender). This is a very interesting field as it allows you to grow plants under certain conditions (eg time of germination corresponding to a moon phase and position) using a tropical and sidereal system and observe the differences. (Bio-dynamic farming uses sidereal astrology). Not only do they use constellations, they talk about spiritual beings that reside in the constellations, communicating and receiving energy to / from Earth. [Bio-dynamic farming shows very good healthy results]

And, of course, I use the constellations myself.

So, I have tried to show one example from each field of reference, ie:
An ancient historical; an ancient living tradition; an esoteric or magical tradition; an experimental trend; a developing, modern, nature – based, observational research; (which demonstrates success) and personal experience.

I hope this addresses anyone’s concerns that astrology doesn’t use the stars.

Of course, one can make a fuss and insist that these things do not fulfil the definition of astrology (or your particular definition of astrology) but that particular tack, I think, would expose some other ‘dynamic’ at work.

Also lets forget our old handy reference; the dictionary.
Websters; Etymology - Greek / astro = star. "Divination by the stars."
Wordnet (Princeton University) ; (syn) Star divination.
Merrian-Webster online; The divination of the supposed in fluence of the stars and planets on human affairs.
Encylopeadia Britannica; type of divination that involves the forecasting of earthly and human events through the observation and interpretation of the fixed stars, Sun, Moon and the planets...

(And I am all out of wack?)

ravenest
23-02-2006, 09:04
Just a question...are the signs/houses based on the myths behind them or on the constellations? Because then they signs could e caled anything, right, if they are not based in the pattern of starts that make the 'shape' of the constallation? This shape gave them the name they have.
... For me it sounds all connected....or was it all connected once upon a time, and now isn't anymore? Why?

~Yuko

Yes Miss Yuko, a very good point!

More Than Interesting

Admittedly western tropical and sign based astrology work for some, but what about the stella influences? Many cultures see the influences on Earth portended by or relating to the stars and constellations.

That is, significant events that occurred on Earth are attributed to the stars influences (overhead or on the horizon) at a specific time of year. Some say this is a projection, meaning that the events occurred on Earth and as certain stars were used to mark or remember these events the stars took on a significant remembered meaning. The Earth events were projected on to the stars, the stars didn’t ‘beam’ that energy to Earth and influence events.

Yet if this projection (earth based) theory is correct (and it seems most reasonable and logical that that is the case) how do we explain the similarities in esoteric explanations of star and constellation energies from cultures with no previous contact?

Take for example this Australian Aboriginal story:

Once there was a young boy who had an older and cheeky girlfriend. The elders came to take the boy to be initiated. They told the girl to go away [as this is a secret men’s rite]. The boy was circumcised in the ceremony with the other boys. The elders left and told the boys to stay in the circle and sleep there. But the girl had hidden nearby and watched the men’s ceremony. [This is a very bad and shocking thing to do in traditional Aboriginal society] She quietly crept into the men’s circle and awoke the boy, curious and demanding to see what the elders had done to him. When she saw his injury she became excited and made the boy have sex with her, right there in the circle. The Guardians [also camped nearby] heard the boy cry out in pain and ran to the circle and saw them. The girl, realising she would be instantly killed tried to flee. But the boys injured member, now swollen from further injury, caused them to be stuck together so the girl lifted up and carried the boy, the boy held on with his arms around her neck and his legs around her thighs and they ran off together with the guardians chasing them. The girl ran to the edge of the horizon with the boy and then climbed up into the sky. The guardians followed them, and to stop them getting away threw a boomerang and a throwing stick at them.

[The story ends by the story teller pointing to the stars we know as Scorpio and saying] and there they are [the two leading stars ] there is the boy and the girl [the middle stars] there is the boomerang and throwing stick [the trailing stars at the back] and there are the two guardians.

That a totally isolated and ancient living culture can come up with such a scorpionic story that details sex, intrigue, secrets, initiation, the breaking of taboos, pain, mutilation, genital cruelty, punishment & retribution, panic & fleeing, culminating into a flight of transformation up into the heavens I find more than interesting!

{For references beyond oral traditions see Joseph Cambell, ‘The Way of the Animal Powers’. – There are also other examples of these synchronistic ‘astro-myths’, like the comparison of Mars / Bungil (eaglehawk).}

tink27
06-03-2006, 10:16
This has been an ongoing search for me for a very long time.

http://www.13moon.com/faq.htm#Q7: A very interesting site, it will answer some of your questions and then perhaps we can explore this more in depth.

To help others understand this:
The Solar Zodiac Sun Signs

1. Pisces
2. Aries
3. Taurus
4. Gemini
5. Cancer
6. Leo
7. Virgo
8. Libra
9. Scorpio
10. Ophiuchus (the Serpent Bearer, I think associated with Pluto)
11. Sagittarius
12. Capricorn
13. Aquarius

There is so much more I'd like to say but I'll wait in anticipation for your response!

Thanks!

tink

sapienza
06-03-2006, 16:22
Hi Ravenest (and others),

I'm just new to this forum and this is one of the first threads I've read. I hope they are not all quite as argumentative as this one. Still, I love a good 'discussion'.

One thing I wanted to say though is that I think in some ways you are missing the point with Astrology. I know that some people refer to it as a science but many more would argue that it's not. It's a bit like the old argument as to whether psychology is a true science. To be honest I don't think the answer to either question really matters. Astrology, like psychology, is simply a tool that can be used to help an individual come to a greater understanding of themselves and their place in the cosmos. The Astrologer, like a therapist, has a wide range of tools at their disposal that can help facilitate this process. Whether someone uses a sidereal, tropical or whatever other approach doesn't really matter. What is more important is the connection one develops with their chart or an aspect of their chart that may help them to 'grow'.

I guess to someone really obsessed with science the above paragraph may sound like a whole lot of wishy washy garbage. But I think it's important not to get too hung up on the technicalities of it all. It's a bit like religion. If we analyse all the major religions they are all full of inaccuracies. Does this mean they have no value for people though? Of course not. They are just another tool that helps people in the journey of life.

Remember, just because a system doesn't work for you, doesn't mean it has no value.

Regards
sapienza

ravenest
08-03-2006, 10:15
Hi Ravenest (and others),
. The Astrologer, like a therapist, has a wide range of tools at their disposal that can help facilitate this process. Whether someone uses a sidereal, tropical or whatever other approach doesn't really matter. What is more important is the connection one develops with their chart or an aspect of their chart that may help them to 'grow'.

Some therapies are good, some not that good, some harmful, this goes for alternative and hard 'sciences' as well. All forms of astrology can be abused and lead to lack of self- responsibility, all forms can do the opposite.


Does this mean they have no value for people though? Of course not. They are just another tool that helps people in the journey of life.

Or supress them, eg. do old Christian concepts of guilt and suffering, original sin, divine retribution, etc, seem relevent today or are are they the realms of fundamentalists? Modern worthwhile Christianity seems to be moving away from these outmoded concepts and concentrating on the good they can do. As is Islam. An out moded system (wether it be astrology, tarot, medicine, qabalah) is just that; outmoded, so why not activly be involved in these fields and work to updating and improving them with all the knowledge availible?

A lot of my work with tarot (reading for over 30 years) has been to reassure people that have had downright bad and subversive interpretations of readers lodged in their memory and even psyche. I have deffinatly encountered this as well from astrological readings, aside from the readers viewpoint, a lot of this was because they used an old and out moded system (particularly western tropical astrology). When a varient system was used many of their difficulties and confusions about the old readings evaporated. Most people are at least curious about this (except long term astrologers, especially western tropical variety).

ravenest
08-03-2006, 10:29
Hi Ravenest (and others),

I'm just new to this forum and this is one of the first threads I've read. I hope they are not all quite as argumentative as this one. Still, I love a good 'discussion'.


Hi sapienza, welcome. Ah yes ... a good discussion. Argumentative? Hmmm I do tend to argue my point when I am told I am all out of wack and asked to prove that there is a relationship to stars and astrology.

ravenest
09-03-2006, 14:23
http://www.13moon.com/faq.htm#Q7: A very interesting site, it will answer some of your questions and then perhaps we can explore this more in depth.


Thanks , read it. Explore? Over to you.

sapienza
10-03-2006, 12:42
Hi again. Well, I do completely agree with you that like therapists there can be good and bad astrologers. I think a 'bad' astrologer can be very dangerous. And I don't mean so much someone without a lot of technical knowledge, but rather, someone who speaks as if what they are saying is an undeniable fact. If I speak to a person about a chart I try to give them ideas about the energy they have work with and why they may be feeling certain conficts but I never say 'well you have this and this so you must be like this and do such and such', but I know some people do.

Moving on however, I still get the impression that what you are trying to say is that because you have a certain view about this, everyone else should think and do the same as you. I mean, I don't necessarily agree with you and I might have different beliefs and work in a different way so does that make me wrong because I don't agree with you? Is it possible that people can do things in different ways and therefore help people in different ways? Does there have to be a right and wrong?

ravenest
13-03-2006, 10:07
Moving on however, I still get the impression that what you are trying to say is that because you have a certain view about this, everyone else should think and do the same as you. I mean, I don't necessarily agree with you and I might have different beliefs and work in a different way so does that make me wrong because I don't agree with you? Is it possible that people can do things in different ways and therefore help people in different ways? Does there have to be a right and wrong?

Hmmm, you make me sound like "The Reverand Fred Nile"

No, that's not quiet right,I dont think everyone should think and do the same as me (do you really think that or were you just being a bit 'colorful'?) its more like the following; I have a certain view about western astrology and specifically the western tropical variety. Until someone can answer the questions arising from my basic premises (rationally and without inventing silly explainations or making rash statements that cannot be backed up by any expression of the facts) I will maintain that western tropical astrology is not an accurate map of stella forces and influences on us and the planet.

I understand my view is quiet radical, as I use astronomical information and technology yet I accept the basic (thru time and location) deffinition of astrology that celestial forces influence our lives and development.

The fact remains that 99% of people (astrologers, people who are having readings done, those just curious and those with little knowledge at all) all believe that astrology is about the influences of the stars on the earth and people. This view goes back through time and varied locations and the 'science' of astrology was practiced in this way.

By measuring sign devisions in equally balanced 30 deg. segments from the equinocal point is not calculating a stella infuence. It might tell you what the terrestial seasonal influences were at the time of your birth but it isnt a celestial science as it once was and still remains with many other systems.

sapienza
30-03-2006, 13:16
Hi Ravenest
Sorry about the delay in response, I've been busy with uni assignments, parenting, and a whole array of other things. Anyway, firstly I will say that yes, it did sound like you want everyone to do things your way. Secondly though, your last post clarified where you were coming from for me a bit more. I do understand exactly what you are saying, that there is no scientific basis for western tropical astrology etc. So, is your issue that other people use this form of astrology or is it that they use it and claim it is about stellar influences? I mean if I was using tropical astrology but didn't say that it was related to the influence of the planets on us then would that be ok? It is interesting because (in western tropical astrology) I am a strong Sag with Aquarian stuff and with lots of Capricorn as well. So the Sag/Aqu part of me loves astrology but the Cap part is constantly reminding me that this is a load of garbage because there is no logical basis for it at all. And yet, it works for me. All of it. The more I look at the it more it fits. And so I wonder if whatever system we use to learn about ourself is irrelevant and its accuracy is also irrelevant because what we 'see' in the system is just a mirror of our self and our own processes anyway. Does that even make sense? This is getting a bit long-winded. I'll leave it with you.

sapienza

ravenest
01-04-2006, 09:56
Anyway, firstly I will say that yes, it did sound like you want everyone to do things your way.

Well, I re-looked at this and perhaps you are right, I do expect people to think like me and do things my way ... during a discussion (or argument) I do expect reason and logic and communication, but I guess I just have to accept that some people are not going to go about it that way.

Secondly though, your last post clarified where you were coming from for me a bit more. I do understand exactly what you are saying, that there is no scientific basis for western tropical astrology etc.

Ah good ... some clarity. But it isnt that there is no scientific basis for astrology at all, that does not concern me. I observe lots of things manifesting that seem to have no scientific basis. My problem is that the tropical astrology seems to have no astrological basis (ie. with all varied peoples, cultures and time periods practising astrology). According to many "well respected and proven accurate" astrologers, they do not, have not and never did observe the stars and their influences and then try to say that no astrologers ever did. I believe my basic quieries are fair questions, yet I keep getting these really wierd responses eg. Most (even astrologers) have no idea what I am talking about, apparently I am not happy as a Cancer and am trying to "change everything". I am a trouble maker, the signs themselves have actually changed meaning thru time ( Thats a great one!)etc, etc. The only ones who give me a decent (although I feel overly harsh) response are people who practice non-tropical astrology.

So, is your issue that other people use this form of astrology or is it that they use it and claim it is about stellar influences?

Yes that is correct and also that nearly all the people that have their readings done are totally surprised when informed that their chart does not depict the accurate placement of 'heavenly bodies' against the stars. My other issues are; the above reaction to my questions, the inability for tropical astrolgers to describe what it actually is they are measuring and calculating (on a physical level), my belief that the ephemeris used for calculations was a map that was based on constellations as they appeared in the 3rd century and is still used today even though it is about 28 deg. out, hence readings will be out, etc.

I mean if I was using tropical astrology but didn't say that it was related to the influence of the planets on us then would that be ok?

No, because tropical astrogy IS related to the influence of planets on us. It is also relating to houses and one star (the sun) but not THE stars.

It is interesting because (in western tropical astrology) I am a strong Sag with Aquarian stuff and with lots of Capricorn as well. So the Sag/Aqu part of me loves astrology but the Cap part is constantly reminding me that this is a load of garbage because there is no logical basis for it at all. And yet, it works for me. All of it. The more I look at the it more it fits.

yes, v. interesting but I will have to get back to u on this as Library is closing and I am being kicked off computer

And so I wonder if whatever system we use to learn about ourself is irrelevant and its accuracy is also irrelevant because what we 'see' in the system is just a mirror of our self and our own processes anyway. Does that even make sense?

Dont worry u r making sense
but finish response later
This is getting a bit long-winded. sapienza
me too :-)

ravenest
04-04-2006, 11:19
It is interesting because (in western tropical astrology) I am a strong Sag with Aquarian stuff and with lots of Capricorn as well. So the Sag/Aqu part of me loves astrology but the Cap part is constantly reminding me that this is a load of garbage because there is no logical basis for it at all. And yet, it works for me. All of it. The more I look at the it more it fits.


If you do an adjustment to your chart to 'correct it' (ie. precess it to align with a sidereal system ) you will notice that the relationship of the planets with each other and the Sun is not effected ... it is the 'backdrop' of stars (or signs) that changes nearly 30 degrees so some of your dynamics will be the same but work in different areas. eg. I am tropically a Cancer and I do feel quiet Cancerian at times and some close friends will not have it any other way as they KNOW I am a Cancer from close observation. But what are they saying about me? I am a Cancer - what does that mean? What they appear to be saying is that when I was born the Sun was 'in' the sign of Cancer and I exhibit traits associated with Cancer (and I do too). Yet I have always had a 'problem' that I become analytical and move away from that Cancarian nature and some friends and family dont like that. Sidereally I am 'a Gemini' (the actuall backdrop of the stars behind the Sun when I was born.) I Know I am a Gemini and relate to that ... so whats going on? Casual aquaintences pick me as Gemini quiet quickly - it so obvious. But with the precession of my Sun from Cancer to Gemini, my Moon goes from Leo to Cancer (because although all relationships WITHIN the wheel stay the same, they all move together), intimate friends whom I share my self and feelings with via my Moon easily detect my Cancerian nature , but others, often to whom my Moon is occluded see my Gemini. So although I could convince myself that I am a Cancer quiet easily it causes problems figuring out certain dynamics in relationships and with myself. Now that I understand my Cancerian energy comes thru my Moon and Gemini via my Sun, quiet a few confusions in my life and about myself have cleared up.


And so I wonder if whatever system we use to learn about ourself is irrelevant and its accuracy is also irrelevant because what we 'see' in the system is just a mirror of our self and our own processes anyway. Does that even make sense? This is getting a bit long-winded. I'll leave it with you.

sapienza

Yes. I have had people show me books and charts and exclaim how accurate they are (to them) while others listening are laughing silently that this only describes the persons illusions about themselves and all can see a very different personality at work in their relationships to them.

Tropical astrology, by nature of measuring houses starting at 0 deg. Aries as the Equinoctal point is not a cosmic system. The equinoctal point has no existence or reality outside of the Earths viewpoint (as it is formed by a relationship between the tilt of the Earths axis in relation to the plane of the Solar System). Therefore it is measuring seasonal progression. One might as well say that one is a June/July instead of a Cancer.

Now I full realise that a baby born amidst the short days and cold wheather of mid-winter can be differently programmed than one born in long hot days and that is one astrologicaly dynamic, but what about the stella and cosmic influences portending to our time of birth? How are we to correctly understand this greater and more spiritual destiny (ie. our own true self and path as opposed to one expected of us or mapped out for us) if we dont have an accurate map of the stella influences?

Phoenix Rising
18-01-2009, 09:05
Hi Ravenest,

I thought this link might interest you Ophiuchus (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4101)
This is an excerpt from the link above as to why they think this sign was "ignored"

Twelve of the signs of the zodiac are familiar to us from the astrology columns in the daily newspapers, but what happened to the thirteenth, and what was its symbol? This question can be answered by consulting the works of the ancient astronomers. Ptolemy of Alexandria gives the name of the constellation, and also the bearing and magnitude of the stars which form it. The constellation was called Ophicius (in Greek) and Serpentarius (in Latin). Both names mean 'snake-holder', and refer to the pythoness, the high priestess of the goddess temples. The symbol of this sign, a bare-breasted woman holding snakes, occurred in the Sumerian; Minoan, and other cultures of the Archaic period. Thus the missing month, the month that we disrupted an orderly calendar to avoid, was the month of the Goddess

Less familiar is the forgotten thirteenth sign, which lies "betwixt" them, Ophicius, the Snake-Holder, the symbol of which was a goddess or priestess brandishing two snakes, and which connoted the most important new moon in the goddess' lunar calendar. Milton, who also wrote the Book of Common Prayer used by Protestant congregations, has told us here in cryptic form that he was mindful that the Christian Satan (aka the Devil), was a new name given to an older but unmentionable deity, the goddess.

According to this system it makes me a Pisces, and I have always been more of a Piscean than an Arian. Although my ascendent is Pisces. So using this system, if my sun is Pisces what would now be my "ascendent"? I would think that there probably isn't a software programme that includes in the natal chart "Ophiuchus" it would be a mission and head ache to astrologers to have to re-learn a new method.

I am in New Zealand and our Maori culture have interesting stories too as far as the constellations. Our Maori New Year is the New Moon after the first appearance of Matariki or "the pleiades' usually in and around 20-26 June. This makes more sense, than the Gregorian New Year of January 1, it has no celestial significance at all. Although we know that the Gregorian calendar was changed to fit in with who ever was in charge at the time, and their ceremonies and self-proclaimed rulership just like Caesar with his Julian calendar. There is alot of wisdom and truth in ancient and native cultures. They were at a time, when they didn't have the influence of western society, they lived by the stars and nature.

Phoenix

ravenest
19-01-2009, 11:26
Thanks PR, interesting .... the Goddess ... holding two snakes? I've seen a statue of that. She's also on the Thoth Universe card (The daughter of Bablon the beautiful 'dancing' with what looks like a diamond python).

No doubt your contact with Maori culture has enabled you to see the living tradition that deffinatly used a trype of astrology based on the the stars and heavens.

Sadly, nowadays, many people are denying the link bewteen modern astrology and the starts.

Phoenix Rising
19-01-2009, 11:49
Hi Ravenest,

Yes our ancestors, followed the stars religiously, they followed them to navigate here, at the time of the great migration from our origins of Hawaiki.

Also one of our great chiefs the second Maori king, had looked to the stars and had seen that a great change needed to take place, otherwise our culture was going to die out, we were very much a warrior race, but we couldn't compete with a weapon that could kill 100 or so metres away. We were hand to hand combat fighters, with taiaha and patu's, (spear, hand baton) But not only the white man, we were fighting our own people as well, other tribes. So he saw in the stars, that a time of peace was coming, he was known as the peace maker.

It is interesting that I also read Here (http://astronuts.tribe.net/thread/ed2f01aa-4d7f-4115-b4a4-6b05ee7fe73b) that at times of Great "plagues and illnesses" when there were eclipses, solar and lunar, a combination of other planets were sitting at the left hand of ophiuchus.

ravenest
23-01-2009, 12:57
Cool. Also here in Oz ... outback ... in the desert where the sky is V.clear and the stars are numerous and dazzling, some Aboriginal cultures utalise the shapes where there are NOT any stars ... the black dust clouds in the milky way and others. They symbolise shapes to them ... the same way we have made shapes by joining the stars together, they made shapes in the blackness between the stars. For example in the Wardaman culture the stories of these mystical beings are so important that the whole initiating seqence (into skin, blood, country and culture - ie. the whole reason for existance) is based on the 'adventures' and parables and seasonal timings of these 'dark area animals'.