Hades moon?

[dadsnook2000]

I would like to hear more about "leathery emotions." It is not a term that I can relate to. My Pluto has no major aspects so I may not be "connected" enough to appreciate how Pluto can affect one's feelings, responses, and emotional levels. So, if you can, describe just what a "leathery emotion" seems to be. Dave.

[strangebrew]

Originally Posted by dadsnook2000

I would like to hear more about "leathery emotions." It is not a term that I can relate to. My Pluto has no major aspects so I may not be "connected" enough to appreciate how Pluto can affect one's feelings, responses, and emotional levels. So, if you can, describe just what a "leathery emotion" seems to be. Dave.

Dave, pluto is about deep transformation and depthless emotion (i am a Scorp so know this only too well) ~ pluto has taught me more about life than any other planet up to now. I will leave it up to the aries lady to answer the *leathery emotion* question but to my heart that is someone that shows a tough exterior maybe?

[Minderwiz]

Originally Posted by LovelyMissAries

Hi Strangebrew,

I also have a Hades moon (Moon opp. Pluto) and have read on various sites this is sometimes connected to an "unhealthy" attachment to the mother. Perhaps the mother also had problems giving birth to the child born with a Hades moon. )

I actually had a very difficult birth and for a while it was touch and go. Now that fits well with your description of the hades Moon (I have the Moon in a separating opposition to Pluto).

However I also have Saturn in detriment conjunct my Ascendant. Trraditionally and indeed for many modern writers that is a significator of a difficult birth. So, which is operative here, the hades moon or Saturn on the Ascendant? Unless both are examined and tracked through life, it's difficult to be certain but my point here is that if I simply went with the hades moon explanation, I'd miss the alternative explanation. We are too quick to assign causes to single aspects or features, without looking at possible alternatives explanations, or indeed supportive explanations.

In my work I've found that Saturn is actually more significant than Pluto but that's a personal experience. However we should also look for alternative explanations or features before making a final judgement.

[strangebrew]

Originally Posted by Minderwiz

I actually had a very difficult birth and for a while it was touch and go. Now that fits well with your description of the hades Moon (I have the Moon in a separating opposition to Pluto).

However I also have Saturn in detriment conjunct my Ascendant. Trraditionally and indeed for many modern writers that is a significator of a difficult birth. So, which is operative here, the hades moon or Saturn on the Ascendant? Unless both are examined and tracked through life, it's difficult to be certain but my point here is that if I simply went with the hades moon explanation, I'd miss the alternative explanation. We are too quick to assign causes to single aspects or features, without looking at possible alternatives explanations, or indeed supportive explanations.

In my work I've found that Saturn is actually more significant than Pluto but that's a personal experience. However we should also look for alternative explanations or features before making a final judgement.

That is very interesting David about your difficult birth, so did my son, but he doesnt have the moon pluto aspect but does have moon saturn (but only by sign and not degrees). I agree about assessing single aspects, it doesnt stand up i feel.

Saturn is a biggie for sure (especially at the moment...uugghh into Scorp), Saturn by nature is more solid and *visible* somehow in the chart, so yes i agree with you there

Thanks David!!

[Minderwiz]

I don't think the Hades Moon has any role in this instance in my chart, Saturn is 2 degrees from my Ascendant, Pluto is 9 degrees. The Moon Pluto aspect is wide and separating but the Moon is in partile opposition to Saturn on my Ascendant (and therefore conjunct my Descendant) This aspect is angular, tight (in respect of Saturn, Moon and Ascendant).

Like Dave, I think that Signs don't really work with the outers. They are in there for so long that any modification that occurs from a sign change is only likely to be noticed in terms of Mundane Astrology (the Astrology of nations and peoples) and even that is difficult to be sure of. However like Dave, I don't use modern sign meanings. They are two personalised, in the sense of giving signs personality characteristics. Signs modify planets, and it's planets that are the actors in any chart. Modification here is the extent to which a planet manifests either its positive or negative nature in the given circumstances. That is Mars doesn't become less Mars by being in Sagittarius rather than Scorpio but it's a much less 'sure' expression. How important this change is, depends on where Mars is in the chart (house position).

I know modern Astrologers tend to associate Pluto with Scorpio but in many ways this is achieved by changing the characteristics of Scorpio to fit Pluto. Indeed when Pluto was discovered there was quite a large minority opinion that it should rule Aries (modern Astrologers didn't understand the basis of the then existing sign rulerships and thought, and indeed still think that rulership is on the basis of similarity or association).

So there's at least two issues here. Firstly has Pluto any association by nature with a sign and secondly is it's natural expression modified when it changes signs. This is actually quite a difficult pair of questions. Because the pair beg the further question, 'how do we identify the nature of a planet?' At the moment it seems that this comes down to personal opinion or even worse an uncritical acceptance of mainstream ideas. But even a critical stance presents all sorts of problems. This isn't really something that can be settled one way or the other. As in most other sciences, mainstream Astrology does change but more because the adherents gradually die out and the critics gradually grown in number, replacing one orthodoxy with another. This is a continuing process, though the period of dominance of an orthodoxy might be anything from ten or 20 years up to two or three hundred. My advice is always be critical. Even if you decide to go with the current orthodoxy at leas know why you have chosen to do so, and be aware of criticisms. Thinking about your Astrology will always produce rewards