My Changed Views About Astrology

[ast...@gmail.com]

MY CHANGED VIEWS ABOUT ASTROLOGY

The past few days, my beliefs have been changing. I feel like my long
time beliefs have been challenged and leading to me to be shook up and
confused. This has to do with Astrology. Of course, this has been
going on for awhile. I abandoned the tropical zodiac and house
systems to only return to it because it was very familiar. It was a
habit.

I have lost all belief in the Tropical Zodiac, understanding that the
Babylonians used a Sidereal Zodiac and not a Tropical Zodiac which
Mainstream Astrologers use and that the 2 zodiacs were aligned back in
221 AD. It was the Greeks that made changes and ignored precession of
the Equinoxes. I always had problems with that whole "it's based on
the seasons" explanation. It doesn't consider the Southern Hemisphere.
These Greek astrologers didn't bother considering that there are
people live in the Southern Hemisphere. They obviously didn't know
about the Southern Hemisphere. They figured that their Zodiac would
apply to everybody on the planet. I have problems with the
mainstream house systems because they are so inconsistent and don't
work in the polar regions. They didn't consider about people living
in the high latitude areas because of the focus populations in the low
latitudes.

I considered Sidereal Zodiac, but that doesn't make sense to me
either. Like the Tropical Zodiac, the Sidereal Zodiac has 12 equal
signs. It is different from the Constellation Zodiac. My Sun is in
Tropical Scorpio and Sidereal Libra, but it is not in the Libra
constellation. It happens to be in the Virgo constellation. I was
born on the 2nd to the last day of Sun in Virgo before entering
Libra. How can I actually agree with the Sidereal Astrologers telling
me to look up in the sky and see that my Sun is in Libra when it
really is in Virgo? I have a problem with the Western Sidereal
Astrology's main house system, Campanus because it doesn't work well
with high latitude charts, and that is not just the polar region
charts. You would think that an astrological system that focuses on an
astronomically correct zodiac would also focus on an astronomically
correct house system.

I also have certain placements in Ophiuchus which the Sidereal
Astrologers disregard because it will mess up their 12 Sign system. I
have a conjunction of Imum Coeli in 11'14 Sagittarius (domestic
environment,roots,family) and Jupiter in 8'17 Sagittarius
(expansion,judgment,beliefs) in Ophiuchus. The asteroid, Aesculapia
in 12'36 Sagittarius is also in Ophiuchus conjunct my Imum Coeli and
square my Ascendant/Descendant in 13'27 Virgo/Pisces. I have a strong
Aesculapia energy. It is also trine my Eris which can indicate my not
going with the status quo and being controversial with the Asclepius-
Ophiuchus themes. Interestingly, Aesculapia is also conjunct Apollo in
13'10 Sagittarius. Apollo was said to be the father of Asclepius. The
constellation, Ophiuchus was supposed to be named in honor of
Asclepius who was known to the Romans as Aesculapius. It is believed
that Asclepius was actually Imhotep who was a famous healer in Egypt.
In my Heliocentric chart, I have Asclepius in 14'41 Sagittarius
conjunct Venus in 14'36 Sagittarius,Jupiter in 14'07,and Mercury in
17'02 Sagittarius. It's like I am supposed to value and believe in
Asclepius-Ophiuchus themes as part of my higher purpose. Of course,
the Mercury-Venus-Jupiter-Asclepius conjunction is in the Ophiuchus
constellation!

Looking at the Nodes of the minor planets also makes sense
I was born during Sun-Earth-Imhotep Node-Eris Node-Apollo Node-Hermes
Node-Themis Node alignment

Sun in 5'20 Scorpio
conjunct Geocentric South Imhotep Node in 5'24 Scorpio
conjunct Geocentric South Eris Node in 5'30 Scorpio
conjunct Geocentric South Apollo Node in 5'37 Scorpio
conjunct Geocentric South Hermes Node in 5'07 Scorpio
conjunct Geocentric South Themis Node in 5'44 Scorpio
oppose Geocentric North Imhotep Node in 5'29 Taurus
oppose Geocentric South Themis Node in 6'07 Taurus

Earth in 5'20 Taurus
conjunct/oppose Imhotep Nodes in 5'26 Taurus/Scorpio
conjunct/oppose Eris Nodes in 5'30 Taurus/Scorpio
conjunct/oppose Apollo Nodes in 5'52 Taurus/Scorpio
conjunct/oppose Themis Nodes in 5'52 Taurus/Scorpio

The Sun-South Imhotep Node-Eris Node-Apollo Node-Hermes Node-Themis
Node conjunction is in the Virgo constellation.
This makes perfect sense. I don't fit neatly in the Sidereal Zodiac
system, and so I would be controversial (Eris Nodes) and not go with
the status the quo (Eris Nodes), pointing out the issue that my Sun is
in Virgo constellation and not the Libra constellation because the
Sidereal Zodiac is not the actual constellation zodiac. I could
express the truth that there are 13 zodiac signs that include
Ophiuchus (Imhotep Nodes) named for Asclepius, the son of Apollo
(Apollo Nodes). I could be the messenger (Hermes Nodes) that helps
bring light (Apollo Nodes) in that regard. I could point to the
natural order of things (Themis Nodes).
My Sun is in opposition to Aletheia in 4'42 Taurus R, and my Earth is
conjunct Aletheia in 4'53 Taurus. Therefore, I have a Sun-Earth-
Aletheia alignment. Aletheia is the asteroid named after the Greek
Goddess of truth. Truth is part of my main higher purpose. I also
have Veritas in 3'51 Cancer, and so that trines my Sun in 5'20 Scorpio
and Moon in 3'11 Pisces and oppose my Sun/Moon midpoint in 4'16
Capricorn. Veritas is the asteroid named after the Roman Goddess of
Truth.

My Mercury in 17'02 Sagittarius, Venus in 14'06 Sagittarius, Jupiter
in 14'36 Sagittarius conjunct collective energy points in the
Ophiuchus
Mercury Perihelion in 16'50 Sagittarius
South Venus Node in 16'25 Sagittarius
South Uranus Node in 13'52 Sagittarius
This indicates communications,values,beliefs are in connection to
collective communications,values,and change. This could be about
Ophiuchus. My Mercury-Venus-Jupiter is opposite Veritas in 17'06, and
so truth is part of it. My Mercury-Venus-Jupiter trine Hermes in 15'48
Aries which indicates that I am a messenger. As I pointed out before,
I have a conjunction of Mercury,Venus,Jupiter,and Asclepius in
Sagittarius in Ophiuchus.
My Mercury in 17'02 is also conjunct the Heliocentric South Babylon
Node in 17'04 Sagittarius, and so communications involve collective
Babylonian past. My Mercury-Veritas opposition is aligned with the
Heliocentric Babylon Nodes which points to my concern about the truth
about Babylon.

It all adds up to being an astrologer that rejects both the Tropical
Zodiac and Sidereal Zodiac to work with the unequal 13 Zodiac system
that includes Ophiuchus.

There is more.

My Jupiter in 8'17 Sagittarius
conjunct Geocentric South Babylon Node in 8'53 Sagittarius
oppose Babylon in 8'14 Gemini R
oppose Hipparchus in 7'49 Gemini R
This appoints to reasessing my belief systems about the tropical
zodiac system because it is at odds with what the Babylonians
practiced. The opposition is squaring my East Point/West Point in
8'00 Virgo/Pisces which is an auxilliary Ascendant/Descendant, and so
these themes are strong for me.

Heliocentric Hipparchus Nodes in 19'10 Aquarius/Leo
square Geocentric Mercury in 18'21 Scorpio
thinking in regards to the Tropical Zodiac


Ptolemy did have an influence on me that cannot be denied.

Heliocentric Ptolemaeus Nodes in 10'40 Leo/Aquarius
oppose Lunar Nodes in 10'00 Aquarius/Leo
trine/sextile Midheaven/Imum Coeli in 11'14 Gemini/Sagittarius

Geocentric South Ptolemaeus Node in 12'13 Capricorn
square Geocentric South Kepler Node in 12'53 Libra
square Eris in 12'15
suggest being controversial, going against the status quo in regards
to the past about Ptolemy in regards to Tropical Zodiac Astrology as
well as giving up the use of the tropical zodiac system and houses
just like Johannes Kepler did

Ptolemaeus in 29'48 Leo
square Urania in 0'03 Gemini
This indicates conflict about Astrology in regards to Ptolemy in
regards to Tropical Zodiac Astrology

Kepler in 0'28 Libra
conjunct Pluto in 0'51
trine Urania in 0'03 Gemini R
This indicates transforming the way I do Astrology and being like
Johannes Kepler with his view of tropical zodiac system and house
systems

Geocentric South Astronomia Node in 13'16 Sagittarius
conjunct Aesculapia in 12'36 Sagittarius
(the conjunction is in Ophiuchus constellation)
square Ascendant/Descendant in 13'27 Virgo Pisces
This could indicate that I have karmic astronomical past involving
Asclepius/Ophiuchus

I am a believer in tolerance of diversity which I believe is
something is my greatest lesson with my highly evolutionary
intensified collective Sun-Earth-Eris Node alignment, and so I will
not claim that any system is right or wrong. I just don't believe in
Tropical Zodiac Astrology which stems from the Greeks including
especially Hipparchus and Ptolemy because they changed what the
Babylonians and Egyptians practiced. This fits perfectly with my Sun-
Earth-Eris Node alignment and Sun-Earth-Imhotep Node alignment. The
latter is not only the connection to Ophiuchus but also the Egyptians
for Imhotep was an Egyptian. I can't practice Tropical Zodiac
Astrology with a conscience. I can't do the same for Sidereal Zodiac
either. The Sidereal Astrologers leave out Ophiuchus and ignore the
unequal 13 Zodiac sign fact, and that makes no sense for an
astrological system that is supposed to be star-based. My Virgo
constellation Sun and my Ophiuchus Jupiter-Imum Coeli conjunction does
matter even though they don't think so. My Heliocentric Ophiuchus
constellation Mercury-Venus-Jupiter conjunction matters too. I am
convinced without a doubt that I am meant to practice a 13 Zodiac sign
system that doesn't use houses,and I will do that.

I want to embrace my constellation Aquarius Moon which is in alignment
with Alpha Aquarius star, Sadalmelik and my constellation Libra
Mercury which is in alignment with Beta Libra star, Zubenelschamali.
How can I view myself having Moon in Pisces (Tropical Zodiac) with my
Moon having such a strong Aquarius constellation influence? How can I
view myself having a Geocentric Mercury in Scorpio (Tropical Zodiac)
with my Mercury having such a strong Libra constellation influence. I
just can't. I can't just say that my Moon is in Pisces in alignment
with Alpha Aquarius star, and I can't just say that my Mercury is in
Scorpio star in alignment with Beta Libra star. I need to embrace who
I really am.




Raymond

[Kjell Pettersson]

On Feb 12, 8:42 pm, "asty...@yahoo.com" <asty...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

> It was the Greeks that made changes and ignored precession of
> the Equinoxes.

The Greeks did not ”ignore” precession. In the tropical zodiac
precession is irrelevant, as the tropical zodiac is defined by the
Sun's position at the vernal equinox and has got nothing to do with
precession, which is a phenomenon that affects only the *fixed* stars.
(The Sun is not considered a fixed star as it seems to be moving
against the background.)

If you want to go back to whatever system the Babylonians used, you
would probably have to forego the constellation Libra, which is a
relatively late invention. The scales are originally part of the
constellation Scorpio, specifically its claws.


[---]

> You would think that an astrological system that focuses on an
> astronomically correct zodiac would also focus on an astronomically
> correct house system.

I am far from an expert on the mechanics of house systems, but it
seems to me that you are speaking of two different things here. If
something is ”astronomically correct”, though I am not quite certain
what you mean by that, it seems to me that a house system could be
astronomically correct while still having these effects on Earth
(polar regions, etc). Some even argue that the polar region effects
should be interpreted rather than seen as faults (it's a feature, not
a bug-theory). Houses are primarily geocentric and so I do not
understand how they would be astronomically incorrect?

If you disregard house systems, and if you disregard a solar
(ecliptic) basis for astrology, does it follow from this that you also
do not use Ascendant or Descendant, as this axis is based upon the
intersection of the ecliptic with the local horizon?

>  I also have certain placements in Ophiuchus which the Sidereal
> Astrologers disregard because it will mess up their 12 Sign system.

[…]

> Of course,
> the Mercury-Venus-Jupiter-Asclepius conjunction is in the Ophiuchus
> constellation!

Here you start by speaking of the twelve signs, and end up speaking
about constellations. I think it is paramount that one understands
that a sign is something different than a constellation. There are no
”signs” in the Heavens (except metaphorically), but there are
constellations.

You also introduce the Ophiuchus constellation, as it seems on the
ground that you would have placements there. I do not quite understand
why you think Ophiuchus should be included more than, say, Horologium,
Eridanus or the Southern Cross? Also, constellations have been
changing throughout millennia, which millennium has the right ones?

Pluto may at times be up to 30 degrees off the ecliptic, and that
would certainly make more constellations places where you could have a
placement. A band stretching 30 degrees south and 30 degrees north of
the ecliptic must contain more than 13 constellations.

There are more exotic celestial bodies on the fringes of the solar
system and it seems to me that there may very well be others that are
way off the ecliptic. As you seem to want to include all these
planetoids, plutinos etc, the ecliptic does not seem to be too
important to you any more.

If you choose Ophiuchus because it is partly upon the ecliptic, while
at the same time renouncing the ecliptic as foundation for the zodiac,
it seems to me you are taking an illogical step. If this is not what
you do, I do not understand on what grounds you include Ophiuchus.

> This makes perfect sense.  I don't fit neatly in the Sidereal Zodiac
> system, and so I would be controversial (Eris Nodes) and not go with
> the status the quo (Eris Nodes), pointing out the issue that my Sun is
> in Virgo constellation and not the Libra constellation because the
> Sidereal Zodiac is not the actual constellation zodiac.

That is perfectly correct. The sidereal zodiac is not a constellation
zodiac. If you are interested in the constellations and what they
speak of very interesting work is being made. I have mentioned this
newsletter before here in the group:

http://www.zyntara.com/starlight_newsletters.htm

This is from the introduction on the page:

”Visual Astrology is the astrology of working with the whole sky. It
does not replace the horoscope but rather complements it. In this
newsletter we look at the current sky and combine that with the
writings from ancient Babylon.”

I do, however, see a problem for you in returning to Babylonian ways
of doing astrology, and it is well captured in the name of the
newsletter. It is a *visual* astrology. You could not include Eris and
all the other bodies there. Eris, in spite of its Greek mythological
name, can be seen against no constellation.

And should you do it really thouroughly, you should probably sort out
the mythological differences between the Hellenistic/Roman world and
the Babylonian culture. It seems to me to be a hopelessly big project
to take on all alone, if you don't mind my saying so.

[...]

> I am a believer in tolerance of diversity which I believe  is
> something is my greatest lesson with my highly evolutionary
> intensified collective Sun-Earth-Eris Node alignment, and so I will
> not claim that any system is right or wrong.

That is good. Also, if you did, your posts would not be let through
moderation, as they would violate the Charter if you tried to claim
that your particular system would be superior.

> I just don't believe in
> Tropical Zodiac Astrology which stems from the Greeks

Trust not Greeks bearing gifts, eh? ;-)

>including
> especially Hipparchus and Ptolemy because they changed what the
> Babylonians and Egyptians practiced.

At this point I think it must be said that if one were to harmonize
the teachings of Babylonians AND Egyptians, one would have to make
changes to both systems, as they were hardly the same. It seems to me
that Greek astrology is *a* (not THE) synthesis of these systems, put
on a solid Greek philosophical footing. Are you attempting to
construct a new synthesis, or are you concerned only with the
Babylonian astrology?


[...]

> The Sidereal Astrologers leave out Ophiuchus and ignore the
> unequal 13 Zodiac sign fact, and that makes no sense for an
> astrological system that is supposed to be star-based.

No one is making the claim that the tropical zodiac should be
starbased, unless you mean Sol when you say starbased. The sidereal
zodiac is usually considered ”starbased” if you take star in the
singular and let it represent Spica, which is considered the ”fixed
point” of the sidereal zodiac.

As you started your post with mentioning the Babylonians and that you
did not like the changes that the Greeks brought to astrology, I am
somewhat curious if you have any knowledge of whether or not the
Babylonians used the sign Ophiuchus astrologically. Or the Egyptians,
for that matter.

You write ”unequal 13 Zodiac sign”. I would like here to ask for
terminological clarity by saying that I think you probably would want
to say ”unequal 13 constellations”. ”Constellation” is quite a literal
word and it fits well with what you speak of, whereas ”sign” is much
harder to fit into the paradigm you seem to me to be espousing.


[---]

> I want to embrace my constellation Aquarius Moon which is in alignment
> with Alpha Aquarius star, Sadalmelik and my constellation Libra
> Mercury which is in alignment with Beta Libra star, Zubenelschamali.
> How can I view myself having Moon in Pisces (Tropical Zodiac) with my
> Moon having such a strong Aquarius constellation influence? How can I
> view myself having a Geocentric Mercury in Scorpio (Tropical Zodiac)
> with my Mercury having such a strong Libra constellation influence.

Again, if you want to do things the Babylonian way, I think you need
to check whether they really used the constellation Libra. As
indicated above, I think Libra is a fairly recent innovation, perhaps
even a Greek one!

[…]

> I need to embrace who
> I really am.

We will all hopefully do precisely that, whichever way we choose to do
so. Godspeed!

/Kjell

[Todd Carnes]

Raymond,

I doubt this will get through moderation, but here goes...

I usually make a deliberate effort to avoid your posts, because I believe you pretend to seek knowledge, but actually refuse to listen to anyone and everyone who try to help you and are really just try to push your own beliefs down everyone's throats as "the only true way"... and that irritates the heck out of me.

Anyway...

Your post is so full of contraditions and illogical "stuff" that I hardly know where I would/should begin, so I'll just through out a few random thoughts in no particular order...

1. Signs and constellations are not, and no one but noobies and the really misguided, ever said they were the same thing.

2. The Greeks never tried to create a system that worked for the southern hemisphere. They created a system that worked for them.

3. You can try to combine the Babylonian & Egyptian systems with the visual contellations in the sky if you want, but I suspect you'll either end up with something suspiciously similar to what the Greeks came up with and/or a total train wreck that no one but you will ever be able to understand.

4. It's a good thing we have computers today, because you'll need one to keep track of the 88 constellations/signs and the 10's of thousands of heavenly bodies in your system. (I suggest you call it kitchen sink astrology -- i.e. you've included everything, but the...)

Todd

[Todd Carnes]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2012 11:25:27 CST, Todd Carnes <toddc...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I doubt this will get through moderation, but here goes...

Wonders never cease, I stand corrected. :)

[A B]

"ast...@yahoo.com" <ast...@gmail.com> wrote on 12th February:

This all reminds me a little of Klaudio Zic, who posts a lot on
alt.astrology. He does it by constellations too, and uses a good many
exotic bodies, some of which I suspect him of making up. (He also counts
planets as in whatever constellation is behind them, ecliptic or not, as
Kjell suggested.) But he mainly seems to be interested in selling expensive
e-books, and I couldn't get much sense out of him. Pity.
--
A. B.
><>
My e-mail address is zen177395 at zendotcodotuk, though I don't check that
account very often.
Post unto others as you would have them post unto you.

[Kjell Pettersson]

On Feb 17, 12:22 am, "A B" <@bleBaker.uk> wrote:

> This all reminds me a little of Klaudio Zic, who posts a lot on
> alt.astrology.  He does it by constellations too, and uses a good many
> exotic bodies, some of which I suspect him of making up.  (He also counts
> planets as in whatever constellation is behind them, ecliptic or not, as
> Kjell suggested.)  But he mainly seems to be interested in selling expensive
> e-books, and I couldn't get much sense out of him.  Pity.

I have read some of his texts and it seems to me that he has embraced
quite a lot—excepting interpretation. Unlike Raymond Klaudio does not
offer any (meaningful) interpretation at all. The only thing I can
recall that was vaguely reminiscent of interpretation was something
about blondes having more fun, which I hesitated to take seriously.
("Hesitated" may be taken euphemistically.)

I say this not because I interpreted your post as an attack upon
Raymond, but because this is a difference and one I would not want to
get lost if I was myself mentioned in connection with KZ. Raymond may
embrace what to many may seem exotic, but he does so with what I would
like to call an astrological mindset.

If a person disregards interpretation of celestial events (no matter
which events), then, IMO, it is questionable whether he is doing
astrology at all.

/K

[A B]

"Kjell Pettersson" <kjel...@kjellpettersson.com> wrote in message
news:bca80201-17cc-48d9...@y10g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...

True, yes. No offence intended, Raymond!