| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1103.1 | Start it off | DNEAST::EASTMAN_JAME | | Mon Aug 07 1989 14:33 | 9 |
|
Hi, Jim here, I guess I'll start things off. My name is
James Louis Eastman. I was born February 13, 1970 at 7:00 P.M.
in Derry New Hampshire. I'm not sure what else whoever (if anyone)
does this may need but this is a start.
Many Thanks,
Jim
|
| 1103.2 | Background of Jim's natal chart generation | AICAD::DOLLIVER | The Watcher | Mon Aug 07 1989 16:36 | 60 |
| Jim,
I was wondering whether anyone would consent to have their natal chart
analyzed in the public forum of DEJAVU. I am impressed by your openness
(but don't tell us too much more about yourself quite yet or it may skew our
astrological interpretations ;-}). I think that many people may learn a
great deal about how natal chart analysis works, and what sorts of things
may be gleaned from such an analysis. I am sure that there will be people
looking for proof on both sides as to whether the analyses are valid or not,
but in the end you must judge this for yourself, Jim.
I can help this process along by presenting the data for your natal chart
in the next reply. I may provide some sample analyses in following replies.
Others are encouraged to do likewise, but I caution people to be kind to Jim
by trying to maintain some perspective in your analyses. For example, the
interpretation for Saturn in ANY house never sounds very appealing, but keep
in mind that EVERYONE has Saturn in SOME house, so we are all in glass houses
as far as Saturn is concerned ;-}.
The natal chart data in the next reply may seem rather cryptic in spots,
and I will try to help clarify if people indicate what is confusing to them.
There is actually a bit more data available which I have edited out of this
natal chart to try to simplify it for general consumption. Also, the houses
were determined according to the Tropical Geocentric Placidus house system.
I have house cusps for a few other systems also, but thought that this may
get too confusing. If someone feels that another house system should also
be considered then please present those house cusps also. Please also notice
the aspects considered along with their orbs of influence, and adjustments
to those orbs based upon particular planets.
Actually, in order to generate the natal chart I needed the following two
bits of data: Latitude/Longitude of Derry New Hampshire, and the time zone
relative to Greenwich Mean Time. The time zone for EST is 5:00 indicating
that it is five hours *earlier* here than GMT. Based upon other charts which
I have generated for places not too far from Derry, I used Latitude 43'15"N
and Longitude 72'00"W. If you have planets very close to a house cusp then
this inaccuracy could shift a planet from one house to the neighboring house,
but I believe that the Lat/Long is close enough that the difference would be
less than one degree. If your birth time is off by just a half hour, however,
this could skew the house cusps by 7 or 8 degrees.
Finally, just so people can make sure that they are reading the following
natal chart correctly, I will give just a few random astrological indicators
which people can verify against Jim's chart in the next reply:
Ascendant 15'46" Virgo (Cusp of 1st House)
MidHeaven 13'02" Gemini (Cusp of 10th House)
Moon 4'26" Gemini in the 9th House
Sun 24'53" Aquarius in the 6th house
Venus 29'45" Aquarius
Sun conjunct Venus within 4.86', aspect is Waning (past conjunct)
Interpret away ...
Todd
|
| 1103.3 | Jim's Natal Chart | AICAD::DOLLIVER | The Watcher | Mon Aug 07 1989 16:38 | 185 |
|
---Date--- -Time- -Zone- -Lat- -Long- -----Comment----------------------------
1970/02/13 19:00 5:00 43N15 72W00 James Louis Eastman Natal Chart
GMT= 0:00:00 GST= 9:34:23 LMT=19:12:00 LST= 4:46:23
Day of the week (from LMT) is Friday (Ruled by Venus)
JulianDay=2440631.500000 Besselian year = 1970.121104235
Key:
A = Aries L = Leo / = Sagittarius
T = Taurus V = Virgo K = Capricorn
G = Gemini = = Libra Q = Aquarius
C = Cancer S = Scorpio P = Pisces
AS = Ascendent MA = Mars NE = Neptune
SU = Sun JU = Jupiter PL = Pluto
MO = Moon SA = Saturn MN = Moon North Node
ME = Mercury UR = Uranus PF = Part of Fortune
VE = Venus
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geocentric planet positions (longitude,direction,latitude,declination)
Sun Merc Venus Mars Jupit Satur Uran Nept Pluto Moon Node P.F.
24Q53 0Q35 29Q45 14A47 5S55 3T36 8=20 0/48 26V46 4G26 12P57 25/19
DIR DIR DIR DIR DIR RETRO DIR RETRO
0N00 0S32 1S25 0S05 1N21 2S19 0N45 1N42 16N07 5N14
13S14 20S33 12S54 5N45 12S13 10N32 2S37 18S40 16N02 26N10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House cusps in Tropical Geocentric PLACIDUS house system
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
15V46 9=56 9S16 13/02 17K40 19Q00 15P46 9A56 9T16 13G02 17C40 19L00
Rising I.C. Desc. M.C.
Ruling planet is Uranus
Significator (planet ruling the rising sign) is Mercury
Rising planets: Pluto
Distribution of elements is as follows:
.-------Cardinal-------.---------Fixed--------.--------Mutable-------.
Fire . MA . . NE PF .
Earth . . SA . PL AS .
Air . UR . SU ME VE . MO MC .
Water . . JU . MN .
.----------------------.----------------------.----------------------.
The following aspects are considered :
Aspect Degrees ORB
Conjunct 0 6
Semisex. 30 2
Semisq. 45 2
Sextile 60 6
Quintile 72 2
Square 90 6
Trine 120 6
Inconj. 150 3
Opposed 180 6
The following ORB adjustments are made for specific planets:
Planet Adj(degrees)
Sun 2
Moon 2
Moonnode -1
Pars F. -2
Ascend. 2
Important aspects are as follows:
Object#1 Object#2 Aspect (deg) Orb Applying/Waning
Sun Venus Conjunct( 0) 4.86 W
Sun Saturn Quintile( 72) 3.29 W
Sun Neptune Square ( 90) 5.92 A
Sun Pluto Inconj. (150) 1.88 A
Sun Pars F. Sextile ( 60) 0.42 W
Mercury Venus Semisex.( 30) 0.84 W
Mercury Mars Quintile( 72) 2.20 A
Mercury Jupiter Square ( 90) 5.33 A
Mercury Saturn Square ( 90) 3.01 A
Mercury Neptune Sextile ( 60) 0.22 W
Mercury Pluto Trine (120) 3.82 W
Mercury Moon Trine (120) 3.84 W
Venus Mars Semisq. ( 45) 0.03 W
Venus Jupiter Trine (120) 6.17 A
Venus Saturn Sextile ( 60) 3.84 A
Venus Neptune Square ( 90) 1.06 W
Venus Pluto Inconj. (150) 2.98 W
Venus Moon Square ( 90) 4.68 W
Venus Pars F. Sextile ( 60) 4.44 A
Mars Uranus Opposed (180) 6.44 W
Mars Ascend. Inconj. (150) 0.99 W
Mars M.C. Sextile ( 60) 1.75 A
Jupiter Saturn Opposed (180) 2.32 A
Jupiter Uranus Semisex.( 30) 2.42 A
Jupiter Moon Inconj. (150) 1.49 W
Saturn Neptune Inconj. (150) 2.79 W
Saturn Moon Semisex.( 30) 0.83 W
Uranus Moon Trine (120) 3.91 W
Uranus M.C. Trine (120) 4.69 W
Neptune Pluto Sextile ( 60) 4.04 W
Neptune Moon Opposed (180) 3.62 W
Neptune Ascend. Quintile( 72) 3.03 A
Pluto Moon Trine (120) 7.66 W
Pluto Pars F. Square ( 90) 1.46 A
Moonnode Ascend. Opposed (180) 2.82 W
Moonnode M.C. Square ( 90) 0.07 W
Ascend. M.C. Square ( 90) 2.74
Parallel aspects (if any) are as follows:
Sun parallel Venus within 20.0' (13S14 & 12S54)
Venus parallel Jupiter within 40.8' (12S54 & 12S13)
Essential dignities (if any) follow:
Sun is detrimental in Aquarius
Mercury is exalted in Aquarius
Venus is harmonious in Aquarius
Mars is natural in Aries
Jupiter is inharmonious in Scorpio
Uranus is harmonious in Libra
Neptune is exalted in Sagitarius
Mutual receptions (if any) follow:
Venus and Saturn are mutually receptive by natural signs
Venus and Uranus are mutually receptive by natural signs
Chart below uses Tropical Geocentric ...Placidus... House System
.C...............G...
..... . ....
... . ...
.... . MO ....
.. . . . ..
.L . . . .T.
.. . . . ..
.. . . . SA ..
.. . . . .
. . . . .
... . . . MA ...
. ... . . . .. .
.. ... . . . ... .
.. .. . X . IX . .. ..
V ... . . . ... A
.. ... XI . . . VIII ... ..
. .... . . . .... .
. ... . . . ... .
. XII ... . . . ... VII .
. ......... .
..................................+..................................
. ......... MN .
. I ... . . . ... VI .
. ... . . . ... .
. PL .... . . . .... .
. ... II . . . V ... ..
= ... . . . ... VE P
. .. . III . IV . .. SU ..
. UR ... . . . ... ..
. ... . . . ... .
... . . . ....
. . . . ..
. . . . ME ...
. . . . ..
.. JU . . . .
.. . . . Q.
S. . NE . PF . ..
.. . . . ..
.... . ....
.... . ....
..../...............K.
Intercepted signs (if any) follow:
|
| 1103.4 | It's too complex for me...there are easier ways | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Mon Aug 07 1989 16:55 | 30 |
| re: .0 (Jim)
There are enough astrology notes in here to choke a horse...
so certainly there is plenty to read. ;-)
You say you do not understand why others don't take astrology
more seriously, well, I won't speak for "others" but simply myself.
First off, it is fairly clear to me that astrology is valid, so why
wouldn't I use it? Because to me it clearly delineates cause and
effect, that's why. What's wrong with that, you ask? I believe
in creating my own reality and therefore am not bound by cause and
effect as most of us have grown up with those concepts. Astrology
seems to be saying that just because such-and-such happened,is
happening,will be happening that that-and-that will happen. I
believe that we have total control (unfortunately most of us
aren't consciously aware of this) over our future, present and
past. This belief "over-rides" astrology. Astrology, then, to me
is a subset, if you will, of reality. But like all predictors,
it is not of *no* value, in other words it *does* have value
in perhaps showing tendencies or where one will head UNLESS they
take conscious control of "determining the outcome." So,
if it has value to you, great. I have managed to create a reality
that has not relied on astrology and have done as well without
it as those who use it do by using it...so maybe things aren't all
that bad for non-users.
Frederick
:-)
|
| 1103.5 | Let the analysis begin! | DNEAST::EASTMAN_JAME | | Mon Aug 07 1989 17:17 | 16 |
|
Re:-1 I liked that Frederick.
Todd,
Thanks for typing all that in! That must have taken forever! I have
absolutely no clue what any of that means. You have me kind of scared
about the Saturn thing. Is it negative. I am a true believer that the
truth of all predictions is always in your hands. But it's always neat
to learn more about yourself. What kind of people you get along with
etc. I certainly welcome anyone's analysis of my chart be it good or
bad. Maybe we can all learn something!
Thanks Again,
Jim
|
| 1103.6 | A Clockwork most Complex | DNEAST::CHRISTENSENL | | Mon Aug 07 1989 18:13 | 16 |
| Re Frederick's last:
Seems to me we all use a mechanical device to tell "time".
A clock tells us when we (by agreement) get to go home. The apparent
motion of the sun across the sky is another, most natural, teller
of the time of day.
My sense about astrology is it being a very complex clockworks
which reports certain things to some people who have studied
and learned to tell "time" astrologically. Since we actually
are at effect of our own creation, it is a natural tendancy
to speak as if the positions *cause* our situation at the
moment. I suggest as we created our reality, we created
a reporting system to explain it to us. Comment?
Larry
|
| 1103.7 | Astrology does not require predestiny | AICAD::DOLLIVER | The Watcher | Mon Aug 07 1989 19:02 | 33 |
| re .4 (Frederick) ;
It seems to me that once astrology is recognized as being valid then the
potential value of information which is accessible through astrological
investigations is limited only by our ability to interpret it.
I do not view astrology as predestiny as you seem to view it ... I agree
with you that we have full control over our realities. However, all of our
realities are created on a backdrop of innumerable influences, which
inevitably affect our reality choices. Astrology may provide an understanding
of certain key influences which could allow us to expand the perspective from
which we make our reality choices.
re .5 (Jim) ;
First of all, I didn't type your chart in ... I don't do the math fast
enough or type fast enough so I had a computer do it for me ;-}.
Second of all, there is no need to be "scared" of the "Saturn thing".
My selection of Saturn's house placement was in no way based upon your
chart in particular, but simply because the effects of Saturn are a
restrictive influence in everyone's chart, in the same way that Jupiter
is and expansive influence for everyone.
Over-simplified, the house placement of Saturn indicates in which area of
your life you may be challenged with restrictions or limitations. While this
may seem like a "negative", often it is precisely in these challenged areas
that we can develop the most discipline, maturity, personal mastery and growth.
It doesn't represent those lessons which are the most fun, but it may
indicate the lessons that are most worthwhile.
Todd
|
| 1103.8 | My bet's on Larry's Dream in the seventh... | SHALOT::LACKEY | Service rendered is wisdom gained | Mon Aug 07 1989 21:20 | 10 |
| I agree with Larry (.6). Astrology doesn't "make" things happen.
Rather it is a reflection of the reality which we have created for this
lifetime.
Within a lifetime, granted, there are periods which are more or less
conducive to certain activities, which astrology can report, but they
aren't "created" by astrology. Astrology is a reporting mechanism of
what has already been created.
Jeff
|
| 1103.9 | The odds are good, and he's a favourite | LEDS::BATES | Sic transit Gloria | Mon Aug 07 1989 22:15 | 16 |
|
Larry's description elegantly sets forth the temporal definition of
astrology - quite appropriately, given the time-marking function
of heavenly bodies from earliest recorded history.
I've seen astrology as another kind of reporting mechanism, a map
that shows us the terrain we've decided to explore this time around,
the pathways we've defined and are travelling, and where they are
likely to lead us, given our current propensities. But as the
predominant creative force in our own lives, (and to drag out the
metaphor, which I'm all too fond of doing) we're in charge of the
Department of Public Works, and we can and do shift the roadbeds,
so it's nice to know from time to time where the landmarks are...
Gloria
|
| 1103.10 | Would you like another? | ASDS::NIXON | Dangerous, but worth the risk! | Tue Aug 08 1989 00:01 | 9 |
| I too, am interested in what my astrolgical background has to
say about me. If you would like another willing "victim" for this
little study, I'd be happy to volunteer.
Birthdate: March 22, 1955 12:30a.m
Birthplace: Titusville PA.
Vicki
|
| 1103.11 | Jim's natal chart .. simplified | AICAD::DOLLIVER | The Watcher | Tue Aug 08 1989 01:11 | 64 |
| James Louis Eastman: Simplified Natal Chart (Placidus Houses)
February 13, 1970 7:00 PM
Derry, NH (Lat 43'15"North, Long 72'00"West)
Object Position House Quality Element Direction
------------- ------------------ ------------ --------- ------- ----------
Ascendent 15'46" Virgo mutable earth
Sun 24'53" Aquarius 6 fixed air
Moon 4'26" Gemini 9 mutable air
Mercury 0'35" Aquarius 5 fixed air
Venus 29'45" Aquarius 6 fixed air
Mars 14'47" Aries 8 cardinal fire
Jupiter 5'55" Scorpio 2 fixed water
Saturn 3'36" Taurus 8 fixed earth
Uranus 8'20" Libra 1 cardinal air retrograde
Neptune 0'48" Sagittarius 3 mutable fire
Pluto 26'46" Virgo 1 mutable earth retrograde
MoonNode 12'57" Pisces 6 mutable water
PartOfFortune 25'19" Sagittarius 4 mutable fire
House Cusp Position House Cusp Position
----- ------------------ ----- ------------------
1 15'46" Virgo (Ascendent) 7 15'46" Pisces (Descendent)
2 9'56" Gemini 8 9'56" Aries
3 9'16" Scorpio 9 9'16" Taurus
4 13'02" Sagittarius (Nadir) 10 13'02" Gemini (Midheaven)
5 17'40" Capricorn 11 17'40" Cancer
6 19'00" Aquarius 12 19'00" Leo
Object#1 Object#2 Aspect (degrees) Orb (0'= exact aspect)
-------- -------- ----------------- ---
Sun Venus Conjunct ( 0') 5'
Sun Saturn Quintile ( 72') 3'
Sun Neptune Square ( 90') 6'
Sun Pluto Inconjunct (150') 2'
Sun PFortune Sextile ( 60') 0'
Mercury Mars Quintile ( 72') 2'
Mercury Jupiter Square ( 90') 5'
Mercury Saturn Square ( 90') 3'
Mercury Neptune Sextile ( 60') 0'
Mercury Pluto Trine (120') 4'
Mercury Moon Trine (120') 4'
Venus Jupiter Trine (120') 6'
Venus Saturn Sextile ( 60') 4'
Venus Neptune Square ( 90') 1'
Venus Pluto Inconjunct (150') 3'
Venus Moon Square ( 90') 5'
Venus PFortune Sextile ( 60') 4'
Mars Uranus Opposed (180') 6'
Mars Ascendent Inconjunct (150') 1'
Mars Midheaven Sextile ( 60') 2'
Jupiter Saturn Opposed (180') 2'
Jupiter Moon Inconjunct (150') 2'
Saturn Neptune Inconjunct (150') 3'
Uranus Moon Trine (120') 4'
Uranus Midheaven Trine (120') 5'
Neptune Pluto Sextile ( 60') 4'
Neptune Moon Opposed (180') 4'
Neptune Ascendent Quintile ( 72') 3'
Pluto Moon Trine (120) 8'
Pluto PFortune Square ( 90') 2'
Moonnode Ascendent Opposed (180') 3'
Moonnode Midheaven Square ( 90') 0'
Ascendent Midheaven Square ( 90') 3'
|
| 1103.12 | An astrological consideration | EN::C_JOHNSON | The stars impel, they don't compel. | Tue Aug 08 1989 20:30 | 39 |
| Astrology is suitable for delineating character. What we bring into the
world when we make our entry, our tendencies and reactions to certain
situations be they positive or negative. As time passes, experience
tends to change the original profile of the person and the indicators on
which these readings are based in many cases are no longer valid because
of the lessons learned during life. The natal chart no longer matches
the evolved character.
In spite of this, there is an underlying inclination to react as
indicated by the natal chart in those areas where little progress has
been made since the birth of the native. For these reasons there will
always be a discrepancy in the chart readings but in a general sense, the
basic character of the person can still be determined. For a person who
"rules their stars", astrology is useless.
Besides character delineation, astrology in the past has been used as a
means of predicting the future through progression of the natal chart.
This has given astrology a bad reputation because it is not a reliable
tool for prognosticating unless the birth time is absolutely correct and
it seldom is.
There are several methods for "running the time pattern forward" or
projecting the planetary configurations into the future. These are known
as "directions" and the most common is the substitution of a year for a
day. By this method, one year of life is represented by one day of
planetary motion. The contacts made by the planets as they change
configuration supposedly affects the different areas of living which
bring us the challenges, joys and sorrows which a person experiences as
time passes.
Because the time factor is so critical in chart progression, a small
mistake of even five or ten minutes can cause the reading to be in error
in the timing of the events and the areas of life affected. For this
reason ALL charts need to be rectified in order to be progressed,
something which the professional astrologers do not like to do because it
is time consuming, therefore very expensive but absolutely essential if
one is to use astrology as a map along the pathway of life.
-Carl
|
| 1103.13 | Calling all interpreters! | DNEAST::EASTMAN_JAME | | Wed Aug 09 1989 12:25 | 6 |
|
Jim here. Is there anyone out there who can interpret my chart?
I'm anxious to learn what all this stuff means.
Regards,
Jim
|
| 1103.14 | | WILLEE::FRETTS | flight of the dark... | Wed Aug 09 1989 13:02 | 10 |
|
Hi Jim,
Are you sure about your birth time? Whenever I see an "at the hour
or half-hour" birth time, I always question it for accuracy. You
have some planetary placements very close to house cusps which
would adjust some if the time were off a bit.
Carole
|
| 1103.15 | I do also | DNEAST::EASTMAN_JAME | | Wed Aug 09 1989 14:37 | 8 |
|
This time 7:00 p.m. was written on my birth certificate. I too
wonder whether someone "rounded" or not. I'm not sure if this a common
practice or not. But 7:00 p.m. is all I have to go on.
Regards,
Jim
|
| 1103.16 | not "ruled" by the stars, but... | NAAD::BARNETTE | I'm a soul, man! | Wed Aug 09 1989 14:52 | 16 |
|
RE .14, what if the clock was wrong in the O.R. when Jim was
born? ;^)
I just wanted to add my concurrence (I know you just couldn't
*live* without it ;^) to the viewpoint in .6. I believe we
are born at a certain date/time/locale etc due to the causes
we've created, and tendencies we've shown during other existences.
The stars bear witness, as it were, to the character of the
incoming entity. Any influence, astrological, environmental,
karmic, hereditary or whatever, is always subject and subordinate
to the mind, or will.
Neal/B
|
| 1103.17 | (-: Eyewitness :-) | NATASH::BUTCHART | Intergalactic Elephant | Wed Aug 09 1989 14:57 | 13 |
| re: .16
Oboy! "The stars bear witness" -- can I steal that for my next
personal name?? Pleeeeeezzzz?
FWIW, I agree with that. Many of us (including yours truly) speak
(incorrectly) of the planetary configurations as 'causing' us to be a
certain way. My feeling has been that they simply 'bear witness' to
what we chose to be when we came on board this time around. A
correlation, not a causation. A 'model' of reality, if you will, not
reality itself.
Marcia
|
| 1103.18 | | DNEAST::EASTMAN_JAME | | Wed Aug 09 1989 15:03 | 3 |
|
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.... interesting...
|
| 1103.19 | My thoughts | UBRKIT::PAINTER | One small step... | Wed Aug 09 1989 16:23 | 13 |
|
Nothing, including astrology, should replace that oh-so-small voice of
intuition within you.
Those who come from abusive home situations, no matter what the
intensity, probably have been quite successful in shutting off that
oh-so-small voice in order to simply survive in an impossible
situation. Therefore it is doubly important to go within and resolve
that which needs resolving so that you are able to listen to and trust
your intuition. Then astrology will become a valuable tool to assist
you as opposed to it potentially ruling you.
Condy
|
| 1103.20 | Cindy-roo the Condor-kangaroo | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Wed Aug 09 1989 18:15 | 7 |
| re: .19
Hi, "Condy"!
Frederick
:-)
|
| 1103.21 | Thanks, Freddie ol' buddy, ol' pal (;^) | AIRPRT::PAINTER | One small step... | Wed Aug 09 1989 18:26 | 7 |
|
Ever have one of those days...
In the UU conference, this is about the time we decide to switch to
decaf for the coffee hour.
Condy-roo
|
| 1103.22 | Looked good - could I have one? | SAGE::BARRY | Sandra J. Barry -BOIS- 264-0187 | Thu Aug 10 1989 15:28 | 9 |
| RE: 1103.3
The Watcher,
Could you run my birth info through your program?
June 16, 1958 - 3:11pm - Framingham MA.
I figure from there I could look up the particulars.
Thanks!
Sandy
|
| 1103.23 | Need to consider both Adam and Eve | AICAD::DOLLIVER | The Watcher | Thu Aug 10 1989 20:17 | 18 |
| Since planets may carry different interpretations for males and females
I have decided to add a simplified version of Vicki's natal chart as the
next reply to this note to complement Jim's chart entered earlier in .11.
Try to be patient for your interpretations, Jim and Vicki. Following some
initial overall interpretations I am sure that it will be easier for people to
add interpretations and insights, but sketching out an initial comprehensive
overview of a natal chart can be difficult and time consuming. Maybe it
would be easier for us to start with a few random observations, and gradually
progress towards a more comprehensive view.
I recall that not too long ago Marcia entered an excellent reply under
another topic which enumerated a set of steps for analyzing features of a
natal chart in the order of their percieved importance and influence.
If someone can provide a pointer to that reply, then maybe we can follow
those steps as a starting point for this exercise.
Todd
|
| 1103.24 | Vicki's natal chart .. simplified | AICAD::DOLLIVER | The Watcher | Thu Aug 10 1989 20:19 | 69 |
| Vicki Nixon Simplified Natal Chart (Placidus Houses)
March 22, 1955 12:30 AM
Titusville, PA (Lat 41'20"North, Long 79'40"West)
Object Position House Quality Element Direction
------------- ------------------ ------------- --------- ------- ----------
Ascendent 12'10" Sagittarius mutable fire
Sun 0'50" Aries 3 cardinal fire
Moon 5'33" Pisces 3 mutable water
Mercury 5'46" Pisces 3 mutable water
Venus 20'16" Aquarius 2 fixed air
Mars 16'32" Taurus 5 fixed earth
Jupiter 19'56" Cancer 8 cardinal water
Saturn 20'49" Scorpio 11 fixed water retrograde
Uranus 23'38" Cancer 8 cardinal water retrograde
Neptune 27'34" Libra 10 mutable air retrograde
Pluto 24'48" Leo 8 fixed fire retrograde
MoonNode 1'10" Capricorn 1 cardinal earth
PartOfFortune 16'53" Scorpio 11 fixed water
House Cusp Position House Cusp Position
----- ------------------ ----- ------------------
1 12'10" Sagittarius (Ascendent) 7 12'10" Gemini (Descendent)
2 16'11" Capricorn 8 16'11" Cancer
3 25'37" Aquarius 9 25'37" Leo
4 1'56" Aries (Nadir) 10 1'56" Libra (Midheaven)
5 0'25" Taurus 11 0'25" Scorpio
6 22'47" Taurus 12 22'47" Scorpio
Intercepted signs (not on any house cusp) : Virgo / Pisces
Object#1 Object#2 Aspect (degrees) Orb (0'= exact aspect)
-------- -------- ----------------- ---
Sun Uranus Trine (120') 7'
Sun Neptune Inconjunct (150') 3'
Sun Moonnode Square ( 90') 0'
Sun Midheaven Opposed (180') 1'
Mercury Mars Quintile ( 72') 1'
Mercury Moon Conjunct ( 0') 0'
Mercury Moonnode Sextile ( 60') 5'
Mercury Ascendent Square ( 90') 6'
Venus Mars Square ( 90') 4'
Venus Jupiter Inconjunct (150') 0'
Venus Saturn Square ( 90') 1'
Venus Uranus Inconjunct (150') 3'
Venus Pluto Opposed (180') 5'
Venus PFortune Square ( 90') 3'
Venus Ascendent Quintile ( 72') 4'
Mars Jupiter Sextile ( 60') 3'
Mars Saturn Opposed (180') 4'
Mars Moon Quintile ( 72') 1'
Mars PFortune Opposed (180') 0'
Mars Ascendent Inconjunct (150') 4'
Jupiter Saturn Trine (120') 1'
Jupiter Uranus Conjunct ( 0') 4'
Jupiter PFortune Trine (120') 3'
Jupiter Midheaven Quintile ( 72') 0'
Saturn Uranus Trine (120') 3'
Saturn Pluto Square ( 90') 4'
Saturn PFortune Conjunct ( 0') 4'
Uranus Neptune Square ( 90') 4'
Neptune Pluto Sextile ( 60') 3'
Neptune Moon Trine (120') 8'
Neptune Moonnode Sextile ( 60') 4'
Moon Moonnode Sextile ( 60') 4'
Moon Ascendent Square ( 90') 7'
Moon Midheaven Inconjunct (150') 4'
Moonnode Midheaven Square ( 90') 1'
Ascendent Midheaven Quintile ( 72') 2'
|
| 1103.25 | See note 269 for beginners | SAGE::BARRY | Sandra J. Barry -BOIS- 264-0187 | Fri Aug 11 1989 14:33 | 5 |
| Thank-you for the chart Todd it was very interesting. I found
that note 269.* is a good place to start for beginners who'd
like to interpret their chart.
Sandra
|
| 1103.26 | Wonderfully interesting! | ASDS::NIXON | Dangerous, but worth the risk! | Fri Aug 11 1989 15:51 | 14 |
| Todd,
Thank you for putting that chart together. It makes absolutely no
sense to me in it's present form. ;^) Should I go over to .269 and see
if I can make some sense of it?
Were you goin to do more with these charts?? What do you think
the best way to procede with this would be? Jim..??
I really appreciate the time you have taken so far with this!! It
is fascinating.
Vicki
|
| 1103.27 | Another one? | GLDOA::PAGEL | | Sat Aug 19 1989 23:57 | 15 |
| RE: .2
Todd,
I ahd my chart done years ago, and can't seem to find it. Would
you please run your spiffy program on my birthdate?
Thanks, Cindy
March 7, 1949
6:37 pm
Highland Park, Michigan (Detroit suburb)
Thanks again.
|
| 1103.28 | please.. | CURIE::MITAYLOR | There's nothing like the sun | Mon Aug 21 1989 19:35 | 11 |
| Todd,
I was wondering if you'd run my birthdate through your program also
March 15th 1962
Time: 7:08 p.m.
Place: Norwich, Conn.
Thanks,
Michaela
|
| 1103.29 | Double Gemini? | SAGE::BARRY | Sandra J. Barry -BOIS- 264-0187 | Tue Aug 22 1989 17:07 | 2 |
| What's a double or a triple Gemini?
|
| 1103.30 | | USAT05::KASPER | If not now, when? | Tue Aug 22 1989 17:25 | 7 |
| > What's a double or a triple Gemini?
I think they can be purchased in adult book stores with
complete instructions on how to use them. Make sure you
read the warnings. ;*)
Terry
|
| 1103.31 | Doubles and Triples | AICAD::DOLLIVER | Watching my life go by ... | Wed Aug 23 1989 14:03 | 26 |
| re .29; Sandy,
A "triple" of any sign (eg. Gemini) is a person whose Ascendent, Sun and
Moon all fall in that single sign. These people demonstrate consistency of
expression, yet may be very one-sided having only one predominant manner of
addressing issues in their life.
A "double" of any sign (eg. Gemini) has the Sun and one of either Ascendent
or Moon in that single sign. The Sun-Ascendent double is considered stronger
since it aligns the dynamic and active Sun energy with the self-expression,
appearance, and approaches (Ascendent), making it quite obvious to everyone
as to which sign energy is predominant. The Sun-Moon double aligns the
dynamic and active Sun energy with the receptive and reactive Moon energy,
thus providing a well-integrated personality (although the Moon may be
diminished in expression), yet this personality is projected upon the world
according to the sign of the Ascendent. The Sun-Moon double indicates that
the person was born close to a new moon, and thus there may be many
opportunities to start fresh and initiate a new cycle of internal growth
in this lifetime.
Todd
PS. I have nearly completed an initial set of interpretations for Jim's
natal chart. I expect to enter it here before the end of the week.
Vicki's to follow ...
|
| 1103.32 | Grey Lizard Rising | BTOVT::BEST_G | Aporia Trismegistus | Wed Aug 23 1989 14:30 | 9 |
|
I just discovered that I have Scorpio rising. Can anyone tell me what
this means?
Is this why I was initiated as a Scorpio-ite?
;-)
Guy
|
| 1103.33 | Heh heh | UBRKIT::PAINTER | One small step... | Wed Aug 23 1989 21:48 | 8 |
|
"Scorpio rising?!?!?"
I'm not gonna touch that for anything!
Levitation also comes to mind here, but...oh, I can't continue.....
Cindy
|
| 1103.34 | your partner in (nearly) everything | BSS::BLAZEK | dance the ghost with me | Thu Aug 24 1989 03:22 | 4 |
| Sometimes, Cindy, I can read you like a book. =8-)
Carla
|
| 1103.35 | Call it what you will... | BTOVT::BEST_G | Aporia Trismegistus | Thu Aug 24 1989 11:25 | 9 |
|
re: .34 (Carla)
> ...your partner in (nearly) everything...<
Hmmmm....this sounds very interesting.....;-)
Guy
|
| 1103.36 | this must have *something* to do with astrology | BSS::BLAZEK | dance the ghost with me | Fri Aug 25 1989 01:23 | 8 |
| .35> this sounds very interesting.....;-)
Only if you're passionately involved with champagne and chocolate.
Especially chocolate of a Swiss origin and champagne from France.
Still interested? =8-)
Carla
|
| 1103.37 | | JUPITR::KELLEY | | Fri Aug 25 1989 11:38 | 12 |
|
Hi,
Just found this conference after loosing it for 5 or so months.
My name is Patti, I'm a Pisces born 3/14/63 at 8:05am in Worcester
Ma. I'd appreciate it if anyone could give me a brief description
of what my DOB and personality traits are supposed to be like.
Thanks in advance.
Patti
|
| 1103.38 | Yeah, I have a sweet tooth (the others fell out) | BTOVT::BEST_G | Aporia Trismegistus | Fri Aug 25 1989 11:47 | 10 |
|
re:.36 (Carla)
Oh no! Here we go again! Champagne AND chocolate au naturale (sp?)?
It's just too much!
;-)
Guy
|
| 1103.39 | Seems like old times... | UBRKIT::PAINTER | One small step... | Fri Aug 25 1989 22:49 | 9 |
|
Jay Jollimore - where is he?
Oh...there he is...over there in the corner!!!!!
It's time for some myth-making again before it gets too cold to commune
with nature au natural.
Cindy
|
| 1103.40 | These things seem to seek their own level... | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Mon Aug 28 1989 15:19 | 6 |
| I have a question...when is Scorpio *risen*? Does that imply
that Scorpio *descends*? Does a Scorpio ever fly at half-staff?
What does it take to make a Scorpio rise?
Frederick
|
| 1103.41 | ;-) | LESCOM::KALLIS | Time takes things. | Mon Aug 28 1989 15:28 | 9 |
| Re .40 (Fredrick):
>What does it take to make a Scorpio rise?
For a well-bred male Scorpio, it's when a lady ernters the room.
For any Scorpio, an alarm clock might do.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 1103.42 | there's a point here somewhere... | BTOVT::BEST_G | Aporia Trismegistus | Mon Aug 28 1989 16:11 | 7 |
|
I was reading the other day that Scorpios are symbolized by the
Phoenix, rising from the ashes....
So what goes down must come up and vice versa....;-)
Guy
|
| 1103.43 | Come up and see me sometime... | LEDS::BATES | Sulla cresta dell onda | Mon Aug 28 1989 17:30 | 8 |
|
To paraphrase Mae West -
Is your ascendant Scorpio, or are you just happy to see me?
gloria
|
| 1103.44 | Rising | AICAD::DOLLIVER | Watching my life go by ... | Mon Aug 28 1989 18:00 | 27 |
| re .49 (Frederick) ;
On the off-chance that your question was actually serious, the "rising" or
Ascendent sign is the sign "rising" above the horizon at your time of birth.
Thus, if you were born exactly at sunrise then your rising sign would be the
same as your Sun sign. Similarly the Descendent is the sign descending
below the western horizon at the time of your birth, and if you were born
exactly at sunset then your Decendent sign would match your Sun sign.
In addition to defining the Ascendent (cusp of 1st house) and Descendent (cusp
of 7th house), the cusps of all 12 houses in a natal chart are determined by
the latitude, longitude, and time of birth.
The "rising" sign (and degree) is actually the most "personal" indicator in
your natal chart, since even people born on the same day, yet at a different
time (or same time, different place) probably have different rising signs.
Twins may or may not have the same rising sign, depending on how far apart
in time they were born, and whether a new sign appeared on the eastern horizon
in the meantime. Each of the 12 signs appears on the Ascendent once per day,
for a period of almost exactly 2 hours.
In astrological traditions the Ascendent was more highly elevated in
importance than in today's popular astrology, presumably because today most
people know their Sun-sign, while few know their rising sign. Thus a book
such as "Sun Signs" is likely to have a larger audience of readers today
than a book called "Rising Signs".
Todd
|
| 1103.45 | Initial Interpretations of Jim's Natal Chart | AICAD::DOLLIVER | Watching my life go by ... | Mon Aug 28 1989 19:14 | 707 |
| 1103.46 | Hee hee...snicker! | UBRKIT::PAINTER | One small step... | Mon Aug 28 1989 22:04 | 8 |
|
Re.41 (Kallis)
Steve,
That was great! (;^)
Cindy
|
| 1103.47 | ONE MORE TIME! | LEDS::MORRILL | | Fri Sep 15 1989 16:43 | 9 |
| DO ME! DO ME! LIKE I'VE NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE!
I'd love for you to interpret my chart,too, if you could find the time.
My birthdate is July 9,1949 @ 1:16 am in Clinton,Ma. Maybe you can
help to explain the bizarre occurances over the years, and also let
me know if they're ever gonna end!
Thanx in advance,
Kris
|
| 1103.48 | Still waiting .... ;^) | ASDS::NIXON | Pet the Hot Kitty. | Mon Sep 18 1989 10:47 | 5 |
| Todd,
How's it going with the interpretation on my chart?
Vicki
|
| 1103.49 | Since August 25th, no responce yet. | JUPITR::KELLEY | | Tue Sep 19 1989 16:55 | 8 |
|
I wrote in August 25th, maybe got lost in the shuffle. Could someone
give me an interpretation also? If not, let me know.
Waiting patiently.....
Patti
|
| 1103.50 | Interpretations take time .. | AICAD::DOLLIVER | Watching my life go by ... | Mon Sep 25 1989 14:42 | 49 |
| Sorry for the delay in communications (typical during Mercury retrograde)
but I have been on vacation for the past week. No evasiveness intended.
re .37, .49 (Patti)
re .47 (Kris)
As I hope you can recognize, there is a significant amount of work involved
in preparing a natal chart interpretation such as the one prepared for James.
I simply don't have the time to provide this analysis for everyone.
However, I have already prepared several "Simplified Natal Charts" for people
who have requested them, and I am willing to prepare one of these for other
people on a first-come first-served basis. These Charts take me about 20-30
minutes to prepare, and I can probably find time to complete a couple each
week. These Charts provide all natal data required to look up interpretations
for planetary positions and aspects in a standard "Planets in Aspect" and/or
"Planets in Houses" reference book.
If you would like to get in the queue then send me mail. I will consider
Patti and Kris to be at the head of the line. In your mail you must include
your date, time (with zone EST,DST,PST, etc), and location of birth. Times
must be accurate or the house cusps will be misaligned. Please also specify
the location as both town/state and latitude/longitude. If you have trouble
finding the lat/long then I may be able to help, but I don't have maps for
the entire U.S. I can determine time zones within the U.S. but will have
trouble determining time conversions outside the U.S.
re .48 (Vicki)
Vicki, I guess that I still intend to provide some interpretations for your
chart since I indicated that I would do both a man's and a woman's chart, but
the interpretations will still be a while coming. I must admit that my
motivation has dwindled since the interpretations of James' chart elicited no
discussion or response at all. It appears that Dejavu prefers quips to content.
I guess that my expectations are to blame, but I thought that these
interpretations could help people to understand the natal interpretation
process and what sort of information is revealed. I would not have provided
interpretations if I had thought that it would only benefit James and Vicki.
I understand people's desire to have their own natal chart interpreted since
I have gained a great deal from interpreting my own. I feel that this is a
worthwhile endeavor which I encourage, and that this topic could serve as an
aid to help people interpret their own charts. However, I am not in a position
to prepare complete natal interpretations for everyone. Sorry ... I wish I
could, but I can't. If others are able to provide interpretations then I
encourage them to do so.
Todd
|
| 1103.51 | We're out here. We're tired. | DOCS::DOCSVS | | Mon Sep 25 1989 16:07 | 18 |
| Todd --
I can't speak for the majority of noters, but the reason why I haven't
spent a lot of time commenting on the charts is because it's really
quite a lot of work. You put a humongous amount of time and thought
into the astrological work you do in this notesfile, but I suspect
that many noters 1. aren't practicing astrologers, and thus don't
take the time to analyze, or 2. if they are astrologers, they simply
can't devote the time.
It's too bad; I'm sorry that you didn't get the results you were
hoping for. I, like you, was hoping to see some discussion going,
but it's my fault for not taking the initiative. (I got "exhausted"
after processing dozens of requests for charts from everybody and
his dog, and so I don't work on any chart I don't absolutely have
to. I wanted to be more-or-less "read only" this time.)
--Karen
|
| 1103.52 | Talking Astrology Shop? | DOCS::DOCSVS | | Mon Sep 25 1989 16:12 | 9 |
| Of course, if you want to talk "astrology shop", I'd love to dive
right in. For example, we could start a note on something like
the Arabic Part of Fortune, or the significance of the asteroids,
or something. Maybe some of the people who want charts interpreted
could benefit from having us talk about the significance of the
Eighth House, or something like that. Or would that be too esoteric?
Please comment; I'd like your opinion.
--Karen
|
| 1103.53 | Dark of the Moon Ephemeris | COMET::BARRIANO | choke me in the shallow water... | Wed Sep 27 1989 16:25 | 13 |
|
I've just recently been introduced, by way of a well-worn paperback, to the
concept of Lilith in an astrological sense. Lilith is a term for
dark-of-the-moon. Where the dark of the moon was when we were born
influences our shadow side. It's similar to finding what sign your
moon is in and that influences your emotional side.
The problem with the book is there is no ephemeris with it. Would
anyone have that information? I would be willing to send you a SASE
if you could send me a copy.
thanks,
jayna
|
| 1103.54 | Not clear what it means. | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Wed Sep 27 1989 20:16 | 53 |
| I'm afraid we'll need more information, since this is not the standard
use of the term "dark of the moon". The dark of the moon generally
refers to a *time* (i.e., any time when neither the sun nor the moon
is in the sky) rather than a place.
Some possible interpretations:
1) it means something if you were born during the dark of the moon.
In that case you can check if you were born during the dark of the
moon by checking to see if both the sun and the moon are in the
houses "below the ground".
2) The dark of the moon means something like, "it would be nighttime
if the moon were the sun, and being born then has significance. In
that case you can find out the same way as for 1, but ignore the
sun.
3) The houses represent a projection of points on the surface of the
earth (points selected relative to the position of the birth or
other event being studied). Some of those places on the earth
will be experiencing the dark of the moon (unless the moon is full).
The position of the dark of the moon would then be those houses
corresponding to those places. Look at the 6 houses opposite the
moon and the 6 houses opposite the sun, any houses in both sets will
be in the dark of the moon.
4) The region experiencing the dark of the moon in 3 would have a
center point or that house would be found by the same method
as in 3.
5) Same as 3 but ignoring the sun (as in 2).
6) Same as 4 but ignoring the sun (as in 2). This would simply be
the house or point within the houses "opposite" to the
house/house-position of the moon.
7) Same as 3 except on the zodiac. The dark of the moon would be that
region which stretchs between the two quartile aspects of the moon
through the opposition aspect of the moon, minus the similar arc
for the sun.
8) Same as 4 except on the zodiac. The center of the arc described
in 7.
9) Same as 5 except on the zodiac. Just the arc between the quartiles
and through the opposition.
10) Same as 6 except on the zodiac. Just the position for an
opposition aspect on the moon.
11) Something else entirely.
Topher
|
| 1103.55 | exhilarating analysis - esp. the last! | GVAADG::DONALDSON | the green frog leaps... | Thu Sep 28 1989 07:08 | 1 |
| Ah Topher, a 'tour de force'.
|
| 1103.56 | No one told you when to run, you missed the starting gun... | USAT05::KASPER | Life's a gift, learn to accept it | Thu Sep 28 1989 16:11 | 7 |
|
Or...
You were born under the sign of Pink Floyd.
Terry ;-)
|
| 1103.57 | Forthcoming - a definition | COMET::BARRIANO | choke me in the shallow water... | Thu Sep 28 1989 18:26 | 14 |
|
I vote for 11 :-)
Seems I remember that the term was not used in it's usual sense of
dark of the moon. Actually, I was very disappointed that it wasn't
that I could figure out.
I'll look for the book and get a more definitive description.
How do I tell what group I was born under? Pink Floyd wasn't around
when I was born. Neither was the Beatles but that's all I'm going to
tell.
jayna
|
| 1103.58 | not you? ;-) | IJSAPL::ELSENAAR | Fractal of the universe | Thu Sep 28 1989 20:01 | 10 |
| RE -1
> How do I tell what group I was born under? Pink Floyd wasn't around
> when I was born.
But, jayna, if it's not you who is running though the corridors every day,
shouting: "Careful with that VAX, Eugene!", who is it, then? :-):-)
Arie
|
| 1103.59 | The other "dark of the moon" | NATASH::BUTCHART | The stars bear witness | Fri Oct 06 1989 19:43 | 42 |
| Lillith, also known in astrological circles as "Earth's dark moon", is
supposed to be another moon of earth, one that is hidden from our sight
at all times because of its orbital mechanics and its (non)reflective
qualities. Ephemerides have been constructed for it, but it has never
(to my knowledge - perhaps Topher or one of our helpful astronomers can
correct me on this one) actually been sighted. The ephemeris (again,
to my knowledge) is therefore based on mathematical projections of its
position only, rather than on any actual sighting to confirm its
existence.
Lillith is what is called a hypothetical planet. There are many
hypothetical planets that different astrologers of different schools
have used; Vulcan is the most famous, but the Uranian school of
astrology has posited (invented?) a dozen or more.
I have had Lillith interpreted in my own chart by two astrologers, I've
tried using it in interpretations of charts I've done for others, and
have not yet found it either convincing or illuminating. Particularly
revealing to me was when its position appeared to form major aspect
configurations with other planets (3 or more planets making a special
"picture" in a chart), neither my clients nor I noticed any effects.
And normally strong aspect configurations are quite pronounced in their
effects. I have two other major aspect configurations in my chart, and
have felt their profound effects all my life, so I thought it strange
that another major configuration would produce zippo for effect.
Or perhaps I was using (interpreting) Lillith incorrectly somehow. The
small literature I've seen on it do not give very revealing
interpretations. I've not been able to get any intuitive feel for its
meaning myself. And I admit I prefer using the bodies that are
manifestly, provably "out there", and have not found it revealing to
resort to using hypothetical bodies. By this I mean that when I come
across anything that is not demonstrable by the existing known
bodies when matching a life to a person's birth chart, looking at the
positions of hypothetical bodies to see if they might have been
involved has shown me no connection.
Was Lillith interpreted for you in a chart reading once, and you're
interested in it as a result? I can look over my meager collection of
books that mention Lillith and give you some titles...
Marcia
|
| 1103.60 | | COMET::BARRIANO | choke me in the shallow water... | Fri Oct 06 1989 20:04 | 8 |
|
No, I have not had Lillith interpreted for me. I found this book in a
dusty bin of used book store and was intrigued by the title.
I appreciate all of this information and particularly your experience
with it.
jayna
|
| 1103.61 | an itsy-bitsy, teeny-weeny, tiny polka-dot ... moonlet | LESCOM::KALLIS | Time takes things. | Sun Oct 08 1989 15:23 | 40 |
| Re .59 (Marcia):
>Lillith, also known in astrological circles as "Earth's dark moon", is
>supposed to be another moon of earth, one that is hidden from our sight
>at all times because of its orbital mechanics and its (non)reflective
>qualities. Ephemerides have been constructed for it, but it has never
>(to my knowledge - perhaps Topher or one of our helpful astronomers can
>correct me on this one) actually been sighted.
There are only a few ways there can be a moon of this planet that hasn't
been observed. One major one is that it is so small that it's effectively
beyond notice (orbiting pebble) and another is that somehow it "hides
behind" something else. If it were a large dark mass (unless it
were a Black Hole (more of which about later), it would perturb
the orbits of other things orbiting the Earth (e.g., a geosynchronous
artificial satellite), and it would be faintly visible (the Moon
is fairly dark; it _looks_ bright because it's brighter than "absolute"
blackness, as in deep space). Additionally, it would occasional;ly
"occult" stars or planets (that is, get between the Earth and the
star/planet so that it would block off the light). The other
possibility would be that it would, say, orbit so that it was always
behind the Moon. Such an orbit is theoretically possible, as computer
by LaGrange, but such a position is unstable, and without outside
force, the moon-behind-the-Moon would drift into view.
Interestingly, the Earth had a small secondary moon that "escaped"
in historic times. My recollection of it is hazy, but I think it
was discovered after-the-fact by astrophysicists recalculating orbital
data, and it was named Toro (Spanish for "Bull") for reasons I don't
even remember.
Anent Black Holes: such a mass would be "invisible" if you shined
a light at it, but nonwithstanding that it would have to be a
small Black Hole (or the Earth would be orbiting _it_), outside
the Event Horizon, it would act like a lens, and besides occulting
stars, it would refract their light.
Thus, if there is a Lillith, it'd have to be pretty small.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 1103.62 | Too much work ... don't bother. | ASDS::NIXON | Pet the Hot Kitty. | Sun Oct 08 1989 17:40 | 14 |
| Todd,
Just skip doing my chart. I don't want you to be putting that
much extra effort into it.
I, too, had hoped that these two charts would generate
discussions that just haven't happened. Perhaps it is too complex
to be discussed in a notes conference. Perhaps a specific question
can work or a general discussion of astrology but not a specific
person's chart.
Thanks for giving it a shot anyway.
Vicki
|
| 1103.63 | Not likely if it consists of matter. | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Mon Oct 09 1989 15:01 | 32 |
| RE: .61 (Steve)
I'll second Steve, and body of significant size would have made itself
known by its gravitational effects. Even a relatively small body in
stable orbit within the Moon's (and I doubt that such a body could be
stable in astronomical terms -- Luna is awfully big relative to its
primary (the Earth) -- but of course, we only care about historical
time-scales in this context) would have had quite an obvious
"signature" in terms of how it would warp the orbits of artificial
satalites. So we are either talking about something no larger than
a "boulder" or something not too much larger than that and quite
far away. When you start worrying about that kind of debris, you have
lot's and lot's of choices: the solar system is full of it.
A black hole is unlikely to go undetected in Earth orbit. In
astronomical terms, the vacuum in Earth orbit is rather poor. A
black-hole, however small, has an intense gravitational field close
to its event horizon. That means that it sweeps up and compresses
solar-system gas in its vacinity. In the process it heats it quite
intently. While a black hole will not reflect light, the gas near to
it is likely to glow quite brightly. A moderately small black hole
in the outer solar system might escape notice (since there is less gas
and it is much further away), but I doubt if it could anywhere in Earth
orbit.
Add to that, that according to Hawking, black holes (or more accurately
their event horizon) act like they are hot themselves. The smaller
the black hole, and therefore the weaker its *total* gravitational
field and the less likely it is to warp observered orbits signficantly,
the hotter it is, and the brighter it glows.
Topher
|
| 1103.64 | Lillith | NATASH::BUTCHART | The stars bear witness | Wed Oct 11 1989 12:50 | 31 |
| Thanks for the astronomy lessons, Topher and Steve. Makes me feel
validated. One friend of mine was quite passionate about using
Lillith, and had all kinds of theories, from conspiracy to incredible
blindness and stupidity, to account for why its existence wasn't openly
acknowledged.
One question I give a lot of thought to regarding hypothetical bodies
is: why are certain astrologers so insistent on their existence? Since
I tend to regard the planets as symbols of the basic energies in the
psyche, I tend to feel that the hypotheticals represent some part of
their advocates' psyches that they just don't feel is represented by
the known planetary symbols. The various myths of Lillith appealed to
my friend enormously, and especially interesting to me was the story,
supposedly deduced from a few lines in Genesis (Topher, correct me here
if needed), that Lillith was Adam's real first wife, created prior to
Eve and made of dust, just like him, rather than from his rib.
According to her version of this story, Lillith regarded herself as
Adam's equal, refused to submit to any domination and was therefore
exiled. To my friend, an ardent feminist and lesbian, (and who kind of
lived herself "in exile") Lillith represented the deepest, darkest,
uncontrolled female mysteries.
When we traded chart interpretations, she focussed on my Lillith
position as a key to my connection to and fascination with these
mysteries, while ignoring another (and much more powerful, IMO)
symbol of the same thing, that being: my natal Pluto is precisely
conjunct my Rising Sign degree (Ascendent) and is in moderately tight
square aspect (1 degree 14 minutes orb) to my natal Moon (that
quintessential Yin symbol).
Marcia
|
| 1103.65 | just a thought.... | IJSAPL::ELSENAAR | Fractal of the universe | Wed Oct 11 1989 13:55 | 18 |
| Marcia,
couldn't it be, that "they" are looking for a means to express a combination of
astrological factors that gives a coherent result for them, and found this in
defining an imaginary planetary body?
Maybe I'm not clear enough. They may have seen a pattern in astrological
attributes that could not be related to the current set of planetary bodies that
is in use now. One way to make this pattern more "approachable" is to link this
to existing planetary bodies, and include them in chart readings. But what if
this appears to be too difficult? What if it is much easier to just *define* a
new one, whether or not it exists?
Again in other words: suppose it is sufficiently proven that Lillith doesn't
exist (and who dares oppose Topher and Steve? :-):-)), would that invalidate
readings based on Lillith? I don't think so.
Arie
|
| 1103.66 | ... Peek-a-boo! | LESCOM::KALLIS | Time takes things. | Wed Oct 11 1989 14:04 | 20 |
| Re .64 (Marcia):
The Lillith legend's an old one. I'd venture a guess that it came
from an amalgamation of Gen 1:26-27 and Gen 2:7,18-24. Gen 1 is
primarily a cosmic view of the legendary creation process; Gen 2
is primarily a more detailed, homocentric view of the process.
Since in Gen 1 is was implied that male and female humans were created
together, and in Gen 2 it was stated that God wanted to give Adam
"an helpmeet," and created Eve from his rib, there may have been
another woman floating around. [This is partially validated in
Gen 3:16-17, where Cain left Eden and went to the Land of Nod where
he "knew his wife," meaning (besides the Daathian meaning of "know,"
to the Qabbahlists among us) that he _had_ a wife, previously
unmentioned in Scriptures. This is not to imply that Cain's wife
was Lillith, but that not every event was spelled our rigorously.]
Lillith legend gets a little complex; one form has her transformed
into a demon, usually a succubus.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 1103.67 | Not a nice "person" | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Wed Oct 11 1989 15:56 | 40 |
| RE: .64 (Marcia), .66 (Steve K.)
Steve has it essentially right. I suspect, however, that the Lillith
legend existed independently of Genesis, perhaps predating it, and it
was encorporated and justified within popular Jewish culture in terms
of the Genesis contradiction (that contradiction is generally cited,
by the way, by comparative religionists as evidence that the biblical
creation story is a combination of two previous creation stories).
As generally told, Lillith was a demon right from the beginning.
Genesis discusses the creation of the natural world and the human
world, but not of the general supernatural world (demons and angels).
According to this tradition, when God made Adam to have dominion over
the natural world (more spiritual than it, and therefore naturally
immortal), he was given an immortal, supernatural wife, Lillith -- a
demon. This didn't work out and so God created Eve to keep Adam
company. This ended with the expulsion from Eden and the loss of
immortality.
Lillith, however, was not part of the expulsion, and was still a demon.
And she was jellous as all get-out about Adam. She has been taking
it out on the children of Eve ever since. Sometimes this takes the
form of seduction of the husbands of the daughters of Eve, but more
often it takes the form of stealling or killing the children of the
daughters of Eve. A great deal of Jewish superstitious custom comes
from this. For example, a traditional Jewish mother will not mention
out loud the name of her baby until it enters into the spiritual
protection of the Jewish community at the age of eight days. The glass
broken at Jewish weddings, generally rationalized in various ways by
Rabbis, almost certainly originated in an attempt to "frighten" Lillith
away so she would be unable to work her vicious spite on the marraige
while it was "newborn" and vulnerable.
All in all, not a very nice role model -- it plays right into the
stereotypes of feminists as vicious, power-hungry, sexually frustrated
bitches. (Of course you could justify Lillith as a symbol, by assuming
that she *has* such a reputation unfairly, and for exactly the same
reason that it is pushed onto modern femenists).
Topher
|
| 1103.68 | Pitfalls of symbol interpretation | NATASH::BUTCHART | The stars bear witness | Wed Oct 11 1989 16:32 | 117 |
| To Arie, about what astrologers are doing when they invent hypothetical
bodies:
What you described is precisely what they do. And I have felt the same
kind of thing, the feeling that I somehow was seeing an effect that was
not caused by any known factor. But what I do with the information on
hypothetical bodies now is personal research. I study what the
proponents of a given body believe in terms of its energies and
effects, calculate its position in my chart and then go through my
life-time to see if any inner and outer events correlate with
significant transits and progressions that would "set off" the energy
of the hypothetical body. A few very close friends also let me do this
research with them. If I can't find any correlations, or if the
correlations only hold true for me (but not for anyone else), or the
correlations are inconsistent, I shelve the hypothetical body. So far
I've shelved all the ones I've studied in depth.
This is not to say that I don't resonate to the kind of energy that is
attributed to the hypothetical body. I resonate strongly to the
Lillith idea. But just because I am strongly attracted to it does not
mean that it has a separate planetary energy all its own. What I have
found happens most often is that _the symbolic content of an existing
body is defined too narrowly_. I feel the "Lillith" energy is actually
"Moon" energy, but it is split-off aspect of it; not split off by the
nature of the energy, but by cultural beliefs.
I was strongly attracted to hypothetical bodies when I was reading
astrology texts by older authors, who were really limited in what they
thought the existing planetary symbols signified. I would read the
descriptions of certain effects and think "Well, that can't be the
energy responsible for what I'm going through now." But the older
authors defined many of the planets _very_ narrowly, and, IMO, very
poorly. Many depth astrologers, from Dane Rudhyar onward, have been
trying to distance themselves from _societal_ definitions of the
planetary symbols, and have been attempting to figure out what their
basic energies are _really_ all about. And I was very fortunate to be
able to take classes with someone who was trying to do this also, and
it sensitized me to the extent of the problem. I have to strive to
master it in every reading I do.
Here's an example of what I mean by cultural "contamination" of the
interpretation of planetary symbols. In the discipline of synastry
(the astrological analysis of relationships), one of the chief things
that is analyzed is the inter-aspects between two people's charts.
What angles (conjunction, opposition, square, trine, and so on) exist
between each of their planets? One of the things that all books, even
modern ones, write about is the importance of aspects between two
people's moons, especially for longstanding emotionally based
partnerships. Conjunctions between two people's moons are considered
tops for emotional compatibility, trines are next, oppositions good
for strong emotional attraction, sextiles good for emotional
understanding. (I'm vastly oversimplifying here)
Squares between two person's moons are considered uniformly horrible.
Even if other indicators in the synastry look good, if you and another
person's moons are in square aspect to each other, you might as well
dump each other right now because you'll never understand what each
other needs or be able to support each other emotionally and
consequently, will never be happy.
My husband of 15 years and I have a fairly tight square aspect between
our two moons. And our very loving relationship has not been fraught
with conflict, not a whole lot of hurt feelings either, and we have
been (and are) often very happy. So what I thought as I studied this
interaspect was: "What might be the _real_ meaning of a square between
moons?" After looking over our life together, I _could_ agree with one
manifestation that the books described, that we often didn't understand
what the other wanted, didn't understand instinctively, without asking.
What I _didn't_ agree with was the consequences. Because through the
years I was also reading more and more books about good relating that
were saying: "_Never assume_ you know what the other needs; never
assume that they know what you need; find out; define your own needs
and then ask for them to be met; ask their real needs and see if and
how you'd like to meet them." And when I tried these methods, they
worked, by golly. Solution to other person not knowing what you need
is to tell them and then you do the same for them. How wonderful, how
simple! So what's the big hairy deal about the square between moons?
Well, the methods were hard to implement. When I looked carefully at
why they were hard for me, I came slap up against my own cultural
training, to wit: I shouldn't have needs at all; I should only be
there to serve; and if I did recognize a need I should never, ever ask
for it to be met; my only hope was to accept what might be offered,
purely by chance.
Having soaked up cultural training like that, why _wouldn't_ I want my
moon to be conjunct with my mate's, to have a mate to whom I didn't
have to express what my training had forbidden me to articulate (my
needs), who would instinctively understand them and provide for them,
whose needs were the same as mine? How wonderfully easy that would
make it all...
But I did not take a hike. I did learn to articulate what I had been
forbidden, and to begin freeing myself (and him, too) thereby. As
Marilyn Monroe said in _Some Like It Hot_, "Say it, sugar." The
greatest compliment anyone ever gave us was given by a man who said: "I
knew your relationship was different, because he asked you a question,
and you answered, and he was _really listening_, and then he gave you
some feedback, and you were _really listening_. It was so obvious that
_neither_ of you was expecting the other to respond in such and such a
way and being offended when the other didn't follow some script."
So if such an important interpretation of major symbols could fall
short of the mark because of cultural blinders, why not others? Why
not all of them? And if my conception of the existing planetary
symbols was limited (like my conceptions of God(ess)?) might that
result in a need for hypothetical bodies to express their split-off
aspects? If I properly understood the existing symbols in all their
vastness, would I feel the need for extra factors at all? It was after
the synastry analysis that I almost gave up reading texts, and
concentrated almost exclusively on reading actual people's charts
as my "textbook". Today, I look very carefully at interpretations of
the existing symbols, because they still have some culturally based
content that may have to be weeded out in order for the full
complexity of the symbols to flower.
Marcia
|
| 1103.69 | more on the legend | LESNET::KALLIS | Time takes things. | Wed Oct 11 1989 17:00 | 22 |
| Re .67 (Topher):
Ah, folk traditions!
>As generally told, Lillith was a demon right from the beginning.
>Genesis discusses the creation of the natural world and the human
>world, but not of the general supernatural world (demons and angels).
>According to this tradition, when God made Adam to have dominion over
>the natural world (more spiritual than it, and therefore naturally
>immortal), he was given an immortal, supernatural wife, Lillith -- a
>demon. This didn't work out and so God created Eve to keep Adam
>company. This ended with the expulsion from Eden and the loss of
>immortality.
The folktellers assumed something that wasn't so. Adam and Eve
were not initially immortal. Interestingly, they were "driven
from the garden" (not in a Porche (-: ) _because_ God didn't want
to have them eat from the Tree of Life and _become_ immortal (Gen
3:22-24). As noted in my previous reply, what _wasn't_ said, rather
than what was, contributed to the Lillith legend.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 1103.70 | Could be wacked, but.... | BTOVT::BEST_G | Walking this dream everlasting | Wed Oct 11 1989 17:10 | 14 |
|
re: .68 (Marcia)
From what I have read here, Lillith seems to me like a personification
of Jung's "animus" archetype. What is interesting about this is I've
seen the Moon mentioned as symbolic of the "anima" archetype. Another
possibility is just a darker side of the anima archetype.
You might want to check the note on the animus archetype in note 1043.?
specifically the "death-demon" aspects.
I would be curious to hear your thoughts on this.
Guy
|
| 1103.71 | Mommy Dearest | USAT05::KASPER | Life's a gift, learn to accept it | Wed Oct 11 1989 17:36 | 10 |
| re: .70 (Guy)
> From what I have read here, Lillith seems to me like a personification
> of Jung's "animus" archetype.
Sounds more like the Terrible Mother to me. Tophers description seemed
to fit.
Terry
|
| 1103.72 | yup | BTOVT::BEST_G | Walking this dream everlasting | Wed Oct 11 1989 18:24 | 20 |
|
re: .71 (Terry)
That's why I mentioned the idea of a dark aspect of the anima.
You may not seem them as being anything alike, but then perhaps
you've read more of Jung than I have. I'm (as usual) just
tossing out ideas and trying to be helpful. I'm sure there
are zillions of dieties (if we were to speak mythologically)
that personify whatever archetype is being mentioned in these
descriptions of Lillith. The energy underlying the archetype
remains unchanged. Perhaps Marcia has a good feel for the exact
characteristics of this energy (that have been personified in
Lillith) and can recognize what fits and what doesn't. I haven't
paid that much attention to some of the past notes, so perhaps
I misread Lillith's characteristics.
Guy_who_loves_to_babble...
|
| 1103.73 | more | BTOVT::BEST_G | Walking this dream everlasting | Wed Oct 11 1989 18:43 | 27 |
|
If I had dreamt the version of the Lillith myth told by Topher in
.67, I would assume that (if I was in the place of Adam) that Lillith
were a representation of my anima - but that would also depend on the
feel of the archetype beyond her outward (but still in-dream) manifest-
ations.
The feminist stuff is confusing. What is often active in the feminist
is the animus. It is that cold, stubborn, unmoving part that many of
you may have come up against - and beyond which no one goes. Often,
when a male confronts a female with such strong convictions, it evokes
his anima along with it's irascible nature.
The problems that are coming up are, I believe, due to the confusion
over what archetype is actually motivating a manifestation (i.e.
Lillith) and what is being projected by others (you, me, story-tellers
from antiquity) *onto* that image. There are many different flavors
of the mother and father imagos - so we all pick the ones we've exper-
ienced. There are no absolutes, just follow your nose....
Mephistopheles (to Faust after giving him "the key")
"How great it's worth, you soon shall understand.
The key will smell the right place from all others:
Follow it down, it leads you to the Mothers!"
Guy
|
| 1103.74 | hmph | NATASH::BUTCHART | The stars bear witness | Wed Oct 11 1989 19:52 | 18 |
| Couple things:
One is that I'm not arguing that the archetype doesn't exist, just that
it's not necessarily best personified by a non-existent heavenly
object. To always ascribe some split off energy to yet another body
(especially when you have to make that body up) is, in my experience, a
fallacy.
The other is some annoyance at hearing my phrase "ardent feminist"
equated with anger, hostility, et al. Let me point out that one may be
ardent without being hateful, passionate without being hostile, hold to
a conviction without killing, care deeply without losing detachment,
make things anew without destroying everything in one's path first. My
friend personifies all the above; at a time when I thought that
feminist thought had nothing to offer me, she was the one woman who
"taught" me that what I just wrote is true -- by living it. Her
manifestation of feminism and its power had nothing in common with any
of the stereotypes.
|
| 1103.75 | | NELSON::FRETTS | All the Earth is alive... | Wed Oct 11 1989 20:38 | 12 |
|
RE: 68 Marcia,
After reading the account of your relationship with Dave and the
sharing of feelings, the question that keeps coming into my mind
is "How are their Mercury's aspected? Would that have anything
to do with your ability to communicate so well and to listen to
one another?"
Carole
|
| 1103.76 | fyi, Carole <grin> | NATASH::BUTCHART | The stars bear witness | Wed Oct 11 1989 21:03 | 12 |
| Natal Mercuries in sextile -- probably much better for true
understanding and awareness than the conjunction or trine. Also:
Mercury is his 7th House ruler, and trines my own 7th House ruler,
Uranus.
What you imply is correct; and knowing that there are factors like
this, I was puzzled that the authors I read felt that any "bad" lunar
interaspects supposedly cancelled out anything else "good", like one
"awshit" wiping out all accumulated "attaboys". This is what led me to
question these old interpretive chestnuts.
Marcia
|
| 1103.77 | sorry | BTOVT::BEST_G | Walking this dream everlasting | Thu Oct 12 1989 02:06 | 8 |
|
My apologies if I offened anyone with my careless remarks. I should
have said stereotype - even if that stereotype, like so many, are
completely without a basis in reality. The anima nature that I spoke
of could as easily appear in anyone - feminist or not. Feminists are
a non-issue with me.
Guy
|
| 1103.78 | JohnLennon-ism? ;-) | GVAADG::DONALDSON | the green frog leaps... | Thu Oct 12 1989 07:37 | 7 |
| > of could as easily appear in anyone - feminist or not. Feminists are
> a non-issue with me.
I'm just wondering what 'ism' would be...acceptable to readers
of this conference. :-)
John.
|
| 1103.79 | uh er ah | BTOVT::BEST_G | Walking this dream everlasting | Thu Oct 12 1989 12:01 | 6 |
|
Is that like McCartneyism?
;-)
Guy
|
| 1103.80 | 'attaboy', attagirl, attawoman ?!? ;') | ATSE::FLAHERTY | Nothing is by chance! | Thu Oct 12 1989 12:16 | 15 |
| Marcia (.68 and .74),
Many thanks for sharing that information about your relationship and
also for speaking out on the 'ardent feminist' term. Very helpful and
inspiring.
I believe we become part of the problem when we allow this type of
negative terminology to flourish. The work I'm involved in here at DEC
addresses this very issue - a woman's way of 'being' is different and
we no longer have to fit some male psychological model that is not us.
Thanks again,
Ro
|
| 1103.81 | Immortal Adam | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Thu Oct 12 1989 16:42 | 44 |
| RE: .69 (Steve)
> The folktellers assumed something that wasn't so. Adam and Eve
> were not initially immortal. Interestingly, they were "driven
> from the garden" ... _because_ God didn't want to have them east from
> the Tree of Life and _become_ immortal (Gen. 3:22-24).
Steve, I'm going to have to disagree with you (in part). I don't know
what the "truth" of the matter is (i.e., what the interpretation was
which the recorders intended), but the immortallity of Adam and Eve
before their act of disobediance, is a legitimate, traditional,
non-folk, interpretation with reasonable support in the text.
In Gen 3:2-3 (yes I looked it up), during Eve's temptation, she tells
the serpent that God said that they would die if they ate, or even
touched the fruit. There are a number of reasonable interpretations
but the most straightforward one given subsequent events (i.e., that
A&S didn't drop dead on the spot when they ate the fruit) is that
a consequence of eating the fruit would be mortality.
Later, (in Gen 3:19) while God is giving his judgement, he goes into
the dust to dust bit as if it were part of the punishment, along with
bearing children in pain and having to till the soil.
Note that even in the passage you cite, there is a clear implication
that A&E had access to the Tree of Life before the expulsion and God
hadn't then been concerned about it. It was only after eating of
the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that God barred their access.
The story is quite telegraphic, of course, depending on an oral
tradition for the readers to be able to fill in the details, so many
interpretations are possible. But it is clearly a legitimate
interpretation to suppose that A&E had been immortal, either
"naturally" from their respective creations, or by eating the fruit
of the Tree of Life (either once or regularly); that they lost
their immortality as a consequence of eating the forbidden fruit
(either as a "natural" consequence, or as a punishment from God for
their act of disobedience) and that God drove them from the Garden
of Eden either to prevent their reacquiring immortality by eating
the fruit of Life, or as a way of enacting his sentence (by preventing
them from renewing their life from the Tree).
Topher
|
| 1103.82 | Much appreciated | CGVAX2::PAINTER | One small step... | Thu Oct 12 1989 17:58 | 14 |
|
Thanks, Topher. A piece of the puzzle just fell into place for me.
There is a very amusing story about creation in the Nag Hammadi scrolls
where (just writing from extremely vague memory so don't quote me on it)
the powers-that-be decided to make Eve subservient to Adam by taking a
rib and telling her that she was to be his helpmate because of where
she was coming from. The amused spirit of Eve then laughed at this
attempt and immediately entered into a tree where she remained.
Kinda loses something in the translation...I'll try to remember to
bring the book in to quote from directly.
Cindy
|
| 1103.83 | Not off the top of my head, for once. | CADSYS::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Thu Oct 12 1989 19:35 | 86 |
| Spent a little while last night looking for what I could find in my
books about Lilith.
Here is what I found:
1) Lilith was derived from an Assyrian/Babylonian demon/succubus,
known variously as Lili, Lilit and Lilu (probably among other
variants).
2) The name means "Night Monster".
3) Some versions of the story have her as Adam's *second* wife, after
Eve. Presumably he dumped Eve because of the trouble she caused.
4) In addition to the "support" for the Lilith story already
mentioned (the "two creations"), support is found (for those who look
for support) in Genesis 5:3 where it says that Adam fathered a son
by Eve "in his own likeness". This is taken to imply (the exception
which proves the rule) that he had previously fathered children (by
Lilith) who were *not* "in his own likeness" (i.e., were not human,
i.e., were demons).
5) Apparently the "night hag" who "lives in the wasteland with wild
beasts..." in Isaiah 34:14 is Lilith.
6) The "terror by night", the Plague and the Scourge of Midday of Psalm
91 may all also be references to Lilith (the first being the most
plausible to me).
7) According to one apparently prevalent version of the story, Lilith
and Adam had problems because she considered herself his equal, and
because she objected to being underneath when they had sex (I am *not*
making this up!). She left him when he tried to force her into that
position. So far she *is* a wonderful feminist role-model. But then
she "turns bad".
8) She then went off and started having mad passionate sex with demons
(presumably they let her be on top). In the process she mothered
demon-children at the rate of 100 a day. God sent three angels to
talk her into coming back to Adam, but all they could manage was to
extract the promise that she wouldn't kill any children if the names
of the three angels were written down near the child (this protective
charm is still in use). When the angels had thus failed, God created
Eve from Adam's rib as a replacement (instead of the mud and filth
that Lilith had been created from). Meanwhile, Lilith had declared
war on the children of Eve.
9) The spawn of this mating were the Lilii or Succubi. Lilith was
therefore supposed to be the Mother and Queen of all Succubi.
10) There were a third set of demon-Spawn by Lilith, but I don't know
anything about them, perhaps these are the children of Lilith's matings
with the sons of Adam and Eve.
The entry in A Dictionary of Symbols by J.E. Cirlot (translated from the
Spanish by Jack Sage) is so apropos to some of the discussion that I have
decided to transcribe it with only minor editing:
*Lilith* Lilith, in Hebrew legend, was the first wife of Adam. She
was a night-phantom and the enemy of childbirth and of the newborn. In
mythic tradition she was regarded as a satellite invisible from the
earth (B.G.P. _Diccionario universal de la mitologia_ Barcelona, 1835).
In Israelite tradition, she corresponds to the Greek and Roman Lamia.
She may also be equated with Brunhild of the saga of the Niebelungen,
in opposition to Kriemhild (or Grimhild, or Eve). She is symbolic of
the Terrible Mother. All these characteristics relate her closely to
the Greek figure of Hecate, with her demands for human sacrifice [but
note that Hecate was, in general, the Goddess of childbirth and thus
the protector of the newborn as well as their destroyer. TC] Lilith
personifies the maternal _imago_ in so far as she denotes the vengeful
mother who reappears in order to harry the son and his wife (a theme
which, in some respects, is transferred to the Stepmother and to the
Mother-in-Law). Lilith is not to be related literally to the Mother,
but with the idea of the mother venerated (that is, loved and feared)
during childhood. Sometimes she also take the form of the despised
mistress, or the 'long forgotten' mistress, as in the case of Brunhild
mentioned above, or of the temptress who, in the name of the maternal
_imago_, seeks and brings about the destruction of the son and his
wife. There is a certain quality of the virile about her [she wants to
be in the "man's position", remember? TC] as there is about Hecate, the
'accursed huntress'. The overcoming of the threat which Lilith
constitutes finds its symbolic expression in the trial of Hercules in
which he triumphs over the Amazons.
Topher
|
| 1103.84 | See, it's Friday before we know it! | MISERY::WARD_FR | Going HOME--as an Adventurer | Fri Oct 13 1989 13:56 | 11 |
| re: .83
Thanks for the storytelling, Topher. Funny, but I never made
any association with the woman on top (in coitus, of course) with
demonology. I have always felt that it was more in tune with
heaven (or heavenly bodies ;-) ) or angelic...(depending on the
woman's weight.)
Frederick
:-)
|
| 1103.85 | yes and thanks | BTOVT::BEST_G | Walking this dream everlasting | Fri Oct 13 1989 14:40 | 15 |
|
re: .84 (Frederick)
My sentiments exactly!
;-)
re: Topher
Thank you. I found that very interesting.
Guy
@^%
|
| 1103.86 | Where are they now? -- Lilith | ERIS::CALLAS | The Torturer's Apprentice | Fri Oct 13 1989 18:50 | 12 |
| Topher, you forgot to mention (though you probably didn't know, so I
guess I'll excuse it this time) that Lilith is a VS2000 sitting in my
office in Spit Brook, next to my other system, Eris. Lilith has been
clustered to Eris, but they tend to fight, and Eris is really a lot
better at spitting than Lilith is, so I keep them separated.
These days, Lilith spends part of her days in the VMSINT cluster in VMS
development when she's not working on more exciting things. She's a
test system on which I run new versions of VMS before trying them
elsewhere.
Jon
|
| 1103.87 | Cosmic Muffin, where are you? | LANDO::PATTON | | Tue Dec 26 1989 18:59 | 13 |
| C. Muffin used to have a recording on a hotline, 617-262-6150.
It gave daily aspects and a short general interpretation.
Now this number just rings and rings--no answer. I'm not a daily
caller, so maybe I missed a sign-off recording, but it seems like
it just stopped.
Someone said they thought Daryl Martini/Cosmic Muffin changed radio
stations, and that might account for his hotline not answering...
Does anyone know what happened, and is there a new hotline number?
Thanks.
--jill
|
| 1103.88 | Oh where, oh where can he be? | DOCS::DOCSVS | | Wed Dec 27 1989 16:43 | 11 |
| Hi Jill! Fancy meeting you here!
I had heard on WFNX that Darryl had changed radio stations, but
the DJ didn't say to where. (I assume that since it wasn't to their
station, they didn't really care where he went.) He used to be
on WCOZ before he changed to WBCN -- now I don't know where he is.
Next time I go to Portland I'll see if he's still on WBLM.
Keeping my ears open...
--Karen
|
| 1103.89 | | LEDS::BATES | Sic transit Gloria | Wed Dec 27 1989 16:50 | 6 |
|
As of January 2, Darryl Martini (AKA the Cosmic Muffin) will be
broadcasting from WBOS 92.9FM in Boston. I Haven't heard anything about
a new hotline phone number, though -
gloria
|
| 1103.90 | Closing in on the Muffin | CARTUN::BERGGREN | Believing is seeing... | Fri Dec 29 1989 12:23 | 12 |
| re: Cosmic Muffin
Darryl's new hotline # ends with the call letters WBOS
but I'm afraid I missed the first three numbers, (which were
announced on BOS the other day). Sorry 'bout that, but at least
we're closing in on him...:-)! A call into the station should
fill in the missing blanks... I would do tht now, but I'm at a
friend's house.
kb
|
| 1103.91 | Cosmic Muffin FOUND | LANDO::PATTON | | Sun Dec 31 1989 13:49 | 13 |
| I got it! I was listening to a random radio station in the car
which turned out to be WBOS, and they gave the number:
617 262-WBOS
Then you reach a voice menu. On a touchtone phone, a "2" will get you
the Cosmic Muffin. A "1" is the concert/events listing, and "4" is
the ski report.
C. Muffin will be actively reporting on the air again on WBOS starting
January 8th. That's 92.5, I think.
Thanks for all the hints and pointers.
|
| 1103.92 | What fun we have coming up! | ROYALT::NIKOLOFF | Happy NEW Year | Sun Dec 31 1989 13:54 | 7 |
| it's 92.9....but who's counting...;-)
thanks for the info on the muffin. That should be fun..
Happy NEW Year!
meredith
|
| 1103.93 | Jim is finally responding! | DNEAST::EASTMAN_JAME | | Wed Jan 10 1990 17:00 | 58 |
|
First I would like to apologize to Todd as this note should have
been written four months ago. With the hectic time of returning to
college I didn't even have the time to thank Todd. I'm not sure if
you are still reading Todd but I'd like to publicly express my
gratitude to you for taking the time and energy to interpret my Natal
chart. Now getting back to the original purpose of this note...
I was truly amazed at how accurate some of the information
Todd gave to me was. At times it was almost unnerving to see my
exact personality being described by someone who has never met me.
Examples: In the interpretation 3 possible career paths were mentioned;
Writing, Law, and something else. I currently am studying in a Pre-Law
program a UMaine. There were many other instances where the
interpretation put in black and white things that I vaguely realized
about myself but had never thought about (or had avoided thinking
about). The interpretation was useful in that it caused me to stop
and look at areas of my life that I had taken for granted. One aspect
of the interpretation that I found surprising was the very specific
nature of it. It seemed to cover a lot things in a lot of detail which
at times proved to be contradictory. This leads me to a question that
anyone is welcome to answer; is there an order to the influences of
the planets, cusps, and houses? I'm pretty sure it's already been
stated but I'd like to see it again as it might help me to understand
which information to give greater credence to. On the whole the entire
process was a learning experience that I have to Thank Todd completely
for. If anyone has any questions about my chart feel free to post them
and I will answer them if possible.
Regards,
Jim
|
| 1103.94 | Synthesis of influences is difficult | AICAD0::DOLLIVER | Watching my life go by ... | Wed Jan 10 1990 20:44 | 80 |
| It's nice to hear from you Jim. Those who are interested can refer to reply
.45 to see the initial interpretations of Jim's natal chart. I notice that .45
does not explicitly identify my wife Lisa, but she helped a great deal with
interpretations and thus shares any credit (but not any blame of course ;-}).
We hoped that the interpretations in .45 could give a clear indication of
what type of information a natal chart can reveal. Also, we tried to supply
enough supporting information to allow others to proceed through a simple
analysis of their own chart in a similar fashion.
Actually, while Lisa and I are intimately familiar with our own charts, and
we have looked at a number of charts for friends and family, this is the first
time that we have attempted to analyze a chart for someone that we do not know.
Usually we spend most of our effort monitoring transits and progressions.
Thus it was also a learning experience for us, and your assessment of our
interpretations is interesting to us. We commend you for opening yourself up
to this type of analysis in a public forum when you weren't sure what it might
reveal (and even after the analysis you could have said that we were way off
base ;-}).
I am glad that you found the analysis useful, Jim. I have extracted the
following few sentence fragments of yours which clearly highlight part of
the flavor of natal chart interpretation which we were attempting to convey :
"... put in black and white things that I vaguely realized about myself
but had never thought about (or had avoided thinking about)."
"... it caused me to stop and look at areas of my life that I had taken
for granted."
"... I found surprising .. the very specific nature of it."
"It seemed to cover a lot things in a lot of detail which at times
proved to be contradictory."
As this last comment illuminates, reply .45 is a set of astrologer's notes
on each of the relevant individual characteristics of Jim's chart, but includes
only a few attempts at synthesizing these individual attributes into a coherent
whole person. In this 'notes' form there are almost always contradictions,
which are balanced out in various different ways by various people. Actually,
in a number of cases we already filtered the 'notes' to resolve contradictions
based upon overriding influences indicated by other aspects of the chart.
We all encompass and attempt to resolve these types of internal contradictions.
"This leads me to a question that anyone is welcome to answer; is there
an order to the influences of the planets, cusps, and houses?"
This is the nature of the added-value provided by a particular astrologer's
training, observations, experience, and intuition. There are some tenets to
guide the order of assessing influences and the relative weighting of them,
yet each astrologer may differ in their own assignment of relative priorities.
I have a couple of different proposed orderings of assessing natal chart
influences at home. Actually, reply .45 attempts to outline a simple scheme
by starting with the more general 'temperament' indicators (aggregate planets
in signs, on the left/right and top/bottom of the chart, and in patterns such
as 'locomotive', etc.) and then progressing to more detailed characteristics
involving the sign, house, and aspects of each astrological object in a
proposed order of personal significance (Ascendent, Sun, Moon, ...).
This scheme is overly simplistic, however, since certain predominant aspects
or other secondary features of the chart (eg. planets in the sign which rules
the Ascendent) could sway the priority orderings. Also, if a particular
question is asked (eg. what should I do for an occupation, will I have many
children, etc), then an entirely different relative weighting scheme should
be used.
I recall that Marcia Butchart supplied a proposed order of assessing natal
chart influences in Dejavu quite a while ago, but unfortunately I have been
unable to locate it. She supplied an astrological 'starter kit' in 269.0
which is worth looking at, but I recall an additional entry listing an order
for analyzing natal aspects. This is the toughest part of astrology ..
combining a multitude of diverse influences into a coherent total picture.
Good luck to you Jim and to all others who are attempting to better
understand themselves and their world through astrology. Your own natal
chart is the best place to start ... it's like looking in a mirror.
Todd (and Lisa)
|
| 1103.95 | Natal Chart..... | RAVEN1::GHOOPER | | Mon Oct 22 1990 03:51 | 4 |
| Could someone please give me a reading? I was born around midnight
02/08/64 in Springfield, Mass.
- Gary C. Hooper
|