Question to Thelemites who practice Astrology
-
@Laxus said
"Among the four main branches of Astrology (horary, natal, electional, mundane), which do you find yourself using the most often?
Also, which branch(s) has helped you the most in your development as a Thelemite?
+==---Laxus---<>"
I study vedic astrology. Very useful for me personally, both compatible and noth with my thelemic practices. Some concepts are very useful, if one practice bhakty yoga. And if you go to the Nakshatras you even can learn something about HGA concept
-
@Laxus said
"@IAO131:
@Veronica:I see. What part of astrology has helped you most with Thelema? For example, maybe it was the symbolisms of the planets that aided your understanding of the nature of human beings? Or maybe it help you discover more about your psychological tendencies (if you follow the more modern strand)?"
lol, the part when I learned that tropicial astrology had me with four planets in Sag, but that with the actual sidreal chart I had them in Scorpio!
And since I primarily with Goddess of Love, and have a, "ahem" sex drive of a porn star.....
It really drove home my concepts of my Will, and more to the fact of how I work towards manifesting Love Under Will, in all that I do.
It has helped me tremendously in my realtionships with others, in understanding the personal dynamics, and capacities of others in my life.
-
I'm using natal astrology and the related-to-it 'branches' - prognostic techniques & synastry
all of it helped me - and is helping me - in understanding better myself and the universe I encounter in my experiences.
I'm working with the Western Sidereal Astrology system.how about you, Laxus?
-
tropical, natal would be my preference.
I use tropical because I believe the earth to be the center of a geometrical fortress, even, symmetrical and mathmatical in a sense. Therefore every sign being given an equal 30 degrees. I don't think the stars themselves necessarily give the influence as much as the factor the direction of time-space.
"Socrates said that, from above, the Earth looks like one of those twelve-patched leathern balls."- Plato
...as if the earth is shaped like a dodecahedron or soccer ball. Astronomy being the physical, objective science and astrology the subjective. I use this to better determine personal psychology, even physiology, than to use it as a predictive art. As above so below has never been more true then when dealing with these studies. A look into Astrotheology will really shed some light on the subject.
- Plato
-
So your approach to science is ideological and belief-driven rather than empirical-evidential?
-
Which science in particular? standard science or astrolgy? Theyre both accurate to my understanding especially astrology because of my personal experience and findings.
-
@Shiftready said
"Which science in particular? standard science or astrolgy? Theyre both accurate to my understanding especially astrology because of my personal experience and findings."
I'm speaking of astrology. Astrology as I have known it for decades is founded only on structural elements that have been demonstrated in large-scale, replicated statistical examination of data. (Anecdotal observation is useful to point the way to a possible investigation, but is a poor basis for final conclusions.)
I was basing my question on the fact that you stated your conclusion entirely in terms of ideology.
-
Thank you for the pigeon holes
-
For me, it's sidereal, natal.
Of course, I'm a Libra by both systems, where they overlap, so I never spent years telling myself I was a different sign and generating all the resulting, confirming synchronicities for myself (anecdotal evidence).
To me, it seems like people who've spent years telling themselves they're a Scorpio are going to get a Scorpio-oriented response from it all. But there's also people like Veronica, for whom the shift to sidereal made things make more sense.
But what really impressed me with the sidereal system is the fact that there is actual statistical data that backs up some fundamental characteristics of the signs in people's natal charts. (I'm sure Jim can direct you to it quite readily if you're of a mind for statistical data.) Nobody ever found anything like that with the tropical system, the most widely practiced, which is why astrology has been mocked as "only for loonies" for a long time.
So, all that to say... Shiftready, maybe look at the characteristics for sidereal. You may find that some things just fit a lot better.
I have friend who is a sidereal Libra, tropical Scorpio, and he is just absolutely sold on being a Scorpio even after looking at the sidereal data. But it really makes me wonder how much benefit he may get if he took the time to allow a deep-level reorientation to sidereal, along with a study of the placement of his other planets.
Personally, I like sidereal more...
A: Because it has the most scientifically collected data, and
B: Because that's just where the planets *really are *at this very moment, which opens back up the possibility for some theories about how the stars may actually affect us. -
@Shiftready said
"tropical, natal would be my preference.
I use tropical because I believe the earth to be the center of a geometrical fortress, even, symmetrical and mathmatical in a sense. Therefore every sign being given an equal 30 degrees. I don't think the stars themselves necessarily give the influence as much as the factor the direction of time-space.
"I meet a lot of people who cast away Sidereal Astrology without really looking into it, without giving it a fair trial in their practice - simply on the fact that the majority of so-called astrologers use Tropical (and there is more literature, so it seems easier - you just have to read and read, and - voila! - knowledge is there - who cares about the actual observation of people and life
) and not less important - because they are afraid to let go of the concepts they have been using to define themselves - actually, identifying themselves with, so the fear is that they'll loose their own stable ground... such a ground, when it can be shaken up so easily!and there's another 'reason' people decide to close their eyes when it comes to actually trying Sidereal, to test it in their own experience and then to judge its value: they are attached to 'authorities' in the field; if this-and-that eminent astrologer says so, it must be right, right?
(and at the same time, the very 'authorities' are those most afraid to let go of that which 'made' them authorities ... so it's a closed circle of ignorance...) -
@Bereshith said
"
Of course, I'm a Libra by both systems, where they overlap, so I never spent years telling myself I was a different sign and generating all the resulting, confirming synchronicities for myself (anecdotal evidence).To me, it seems like people who've spent years telling themselves they're a Scorpio are going to get a Scorpio-oriented response from it all. But there's also people like Veronica, for whom the shift to sidereal made things make more sense."
Yeah, I think that's exactly it and I say so because I feel that very schism after only now having taken a good look at sidereal astrology. Then again, admittedly astrology has never been a large concern in my affairs and only my recently reinvigorated interest in the western occult tradition has made me look closer at it.
Yet, fact is, me being a Gemini was a large part of my identity. Even if astrology wasn't true, I would often say, and if anybody wanted a user's manual for me, at least I was a pretty text book Gemini (sun) and Scorpion (moon). However, sidereal makes me a Taurus (sun) and Capricorn (moon).
Frankly, I'm stumped. I feel the push and pull of all the different forces and emotions. I can feel my ego reeling and going back to saying its all bullshit. However, I'm kind of enjoying the whole vagueness of it all at this juncture in my life (where I'm sort of reinventing and re-evaluating my identity anyway). I don't really need it to make sense.
-
@Deus Ex Machina said
"...at least I was a pretty text book Gemini (sun) and Scorpion (moon). However, sidereal makes me a Taurus (sun) and Capricorn (moon)."
if your Moon is in Tropical Scorpio , it can't be in Capricorn in Sidereal; it can only be either in Scorpio or in Libra.
-
@danica said
"
@Deus Ex Machina said
"...at least I was a pretty text book Gemini (sun) and Scorpion (moon). However, sidereal makes me a Taurus (sun) and Capricorn (moon)."if your Moon is in Tropical Scorpio , it can't be in Capricorn in Sidereal; it can only be either in Scorpio or in Libra."
You are right, suffered a little brain malfunction! Scorpion Ascendant in tropical, with Aquarius Moon.
-
And be sure you don't interpret Taurus-Capricorn the way you're used to seeing the in Tropical books. To the extent that the books are based on observation rather than theory, you'd be reading about Sidereal Aries-Sagittarius! - Check out the interpretations from links here:
www.solunars.com/interp/signs.htm -
Hello Potater,
Aside from having similar strengths, weaknesses and preferences, they should also tend to have similar physical features, as apparent in the case of twins.
However, the physical features are also dependent upon the Term and Face ruler of the Ascendant, among other things, which can be pretty sensitive to the change of time, as there are five Term rulers and three Face rulers in each sign. A 20-30 minutes difference in birth times is sufficient to change the Term ruler, assuming that the first person's Ascendant was at the beginning of the Term.
Another important thing is to note the Moon and its aspects, for it signifies the body and is the fastest moving...'planet'. Change or perfection of aspects will also change the body.
In some rare but interesting cases, we might also see a planet retrograde in one chart and stationery in another chart, and vice versa.
Needless to say, all this is also true for talents and preferences.
In the case of twins, they will likely be very similar in nature. But then there's nurture. Moreover, the objects or constructs in a natal chart symbolizes many things, signifying that there are several possible paths for a person to take. So twins can end up in different places though they are very similar in nature.
EDIT:
It would be interesting to check hospital records to look at how often this occurs