Conference hydra::dejavu

    Well, on your birthday, Uranus in Sagittarius will be _exactly_
    trine your Leo Sun; Venus will be loosely conjunct (2 degree orb)
    your natal Sun.  Without knowing anything else of your horoscope,
    I can't say what other planetary transits are important, meaning
    that I don't know which transiting planets are aspecting natal
    placements.  The only one I know for sure is the Sun since on your
    birthday it returns to its natal placement.
    
    The Sun-Venus conjunction trine Uranus sounds very nice, like your
    talents (or even just your attractiveness) could manifest in unusually
    pleasant ways this year.  I've noticed that when Uranus is making
    "hard" aspects (square,opposition,inconjunct) to the Sun or Moon
    in my chart, I feel very "different" but distinctly alienated and
    out of step.  When Uranus makes trines or sextiles to the Sun or
    Moon, I seem to naturally flow into ways of being individually unique
    that are well received.
    
    Can't say what areas of your life might be affected precisely without
    a complete chart since I don't know what house your Sun, Venus or
    Uranus are natally or transiting.  Do you have your chart?
    
    Marcia

    Marcia,
    
    Thank you for the info.
   
    What kind of info do you need to tell me more?  Can you make me
    a chart that I can understand?  
    
    Thanks again,
    
    Linda - Leo the Lion
    

    The information an astrologer needs to cast and interpret a chart
    is a person's birth date (day-month-year), birth time (hour:minute)
    and birth place (town, state, country).
    
    Any chart done by any astrologer is hard to understand, the same 
    way that sheet music, with its arrangement of little dots on little
    lines is so much gibberish to anyone but a musician.  The birth
    chart itself is a shorthand, graphic display designed to convey
    a tremendous amount of information in a very small space to those 
    who know how to read it.  The funny glyphs and symbols on the chart are
    confusing to people not familiar with them, but to the astrologer 
    convey in a single page of paper information that would take someone 
    at least 20 times that amount (of paper) to write out.
    
    So any astrologer can make you a chart, but will still have to help
    you interpret it.  This is because even when the novice knows that
    a given arrangement of glyphs means, say, "I have Neptune in Scorpio
    in the 5th House at the apex of a T-Square" that phrase doesn't 
    make too much more sense than the graphics, does it?  It's our own 
    professional jargon (every profession has its own--grin) and it's 
    translating this into "real life" terms ("what does it all mean?") 
    that the astrologer must do for his/her client.
    
    Marcia

	Can anyone check what's 'in the stars' astrologically March
    5, 2000 ?   I have an astronomy (no L) application called GIRLS
    for the PRO and found that all the planets but Neptune, Uranus and
    Pluto will be aligned.  Something like what happened a few years
    ago.
    	I believe Nostradamus said this would be the end of the world?
    or the end of the piscean age into the New Age or the aquarian age
    (Anybody read Aliens Among Us by Ruth Montgomery?)
    
    

    	Please do NOT confuse the science of ASTRONOMY (the study of
    the Universe) with astrology, the belief that the stars and planets
    influence our lives just because of their random positions.
    
    	Larry
    

    Re .6:
    
    I believe .5 was saying that the astroNONY program indicated a certain
    alignment of planets.  In short, the program gave relative positions
    of planets.  If a query about what the [supposed] astroLOGical
    significance of such an event might be, it's not an improper question.
    
    On the other hand, there have been several apparent alignments of
    planets in the past; nothing much seems to have come from them.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.
    

    	The Moon and Sun have a far greater gravitational effect on
    Earth (called tides) than all of the other objects in our Solar
    System COMBINED!  
    
    	There is NO "grand scheme" to the arrangement of the planets
    and stars, except in certain peoples' minds.
    
    	Larry
    

    	Isn't gravity a "grand scheme" to the arrangement of the planets
    and stars, as described and believed in by certain people?
    
    	This idea that the earth, planet, and stars are inanimate is
    another implicit, unsubstantiated, unprovable belief. 
    
    	Noticing relationships between people and planetary positions
    is what astrology is about (as I understand it). It is easy to state
    categorically "There is no such relationship", but you won't get
    very far convincing people who have been studying thousands of such
    direct relationships. You can decide to ignore astrology yourself, but
    don't expect to stop others from investigating what they think is
    worthwhile. 
    
    	And re .6:
    
    	Planetary positions are NOT random. They are quite precise and
    periodic.
             
    	Ed

    	What I meant by "grand scheme" was that there is no "plan" by
    the planets and stars to be in certain positions for the human species
    to use - that is a very ethnocentric attitude.
    
    	Gravity is a scientific fact, not a "grand scheme" in your view.
    
    	And I would like to see YOUR proof that planets and stars are
    "alive".  Since when are rocks and helium organisms?
    
    	Larry
    

     RE .9

>    	What I meant by "grand scheme" was that there is no "plan" by
>    the planets and stars to be in certain positions for the human species
>    to use - that is a very ethnocentric attitude.
    
Let me throw something out for discussion on this... just a hypothesis...

Let's look, for a moment, at the planets as a basis for measuring time.
Maybe, by measuring time exactly, we can make a guess as to psychic and
psychological forces because we know that nature is essentially rhythmic.
The primary method of measuring time used by the older civilizations was
keyed to the stars and seven visible planets.

Just as we can predict waveforms for a given time in the future (time t+300)
in the present (time t), we can estimate the "cycles" in the psychological
and psychic make-up in an individual by placing the exact time of birth
in this scheme of things.  This may not be the time needed for an accurate
reading... it may be the moment of conception, but birth is the easiest
event for us to place (with current technology) in the grand scheme of things.
Since we're measuring a coarse event (birth) instead of a fine event 
(conception) there are certain inaccuracies inherent in this "science".

We assign attributes to the planets, based primarily on the religious beliefs
of the past (personalities of old style deities).  These attributes are images 
within the psyche, and tend to be expressed as archetypes.  These archetypes
could be peak energy levels of some unknown forces that shape our lives.
In this way, astrology would not "predict" the future, but point towards
certain tendencies based on these complex cycles.

Re: ego-centered astrology

Let's say an intelligent race with similar psychological make-up evolved
on a planet in a different star system.  They might create create a set
of religious beliefs that include their archetypes personified in their
group of planets and "zodiac".  Their system becomes a mirror of their "psyche"
and becomes their "astrology".

>    	And I would like to see YOUR proof that planets and stars are
>    "alive".  Since when are rocks and helium organisms?

Moot point, since there is no "proof" (other than belief) that there is not
a piece of Divine Providence in all physical matter, just as though there
is no real proof that man consists of an immortal soul.
    
Of course, this is as debatable as anything else... I just thought that
I would throw some fuel into the fire... ~/~ 


						-- Mike

    
    Please - let's not get into a stone-throwing match here.
    
    Though I've only been reading this conference for a short while,
    I've been overwhelmingly impressed at the diversity which exists
    here........all in harmony.......most of the time........
    
    Just to throw in my own comment for a brief second - I'm not into
    rocks, tarot cards, astrology (very much), just to name a few. 
    I am quite taken with what has been written on Lazaris, Zen, religions,
    paths to higher learning/living and the like.
    
    HOWEVER, this is not to say that I will NEVER be into rocks, astrology,
    etc. and so forth.  This conference is like a good menu - we can
    choose what we want to discuss and yet the end result is to become
    more in touch with ourselves, the world around us, to grow ourselves, 
    to help others grow, to provide information and all that good stuff.
    And that, in my opinion, is quite an admirable goal indeed!
    
    So, if we can all keep open minds, not get hostile and start 'hiding
    behind our respective beliefs and pitching stones at the unknown
    as you believe your reality to be TODAY', then we will all be better
    off.  OK?
    
    Cindy

    	And that will only make for a very stagnant Conference which
    by not wishing to "offend" anyone's "beliefs", no one will look
    deeper into a concept to see if it is valid or not.
    
    	The "stones" are being "thrown" (debated) at the ideas, NOT
    the people who wrote them.
    
    	Larry
    

    	I was implying that it is rather self-centered that the relatively
    small human race would think that the ENTIRE Universe was made just
    for it in one sense or another.
    
    	We are a PART of it, but we do not OWN it, and it owes us nothing!
    
    	The physical Universe itself is indifferent to those who inhabit
    it; if we follow the physical laws of nature (realizing how gravity
    can hurt if you try and fly off a high cliff without proper flying
    gear, for example), then we'll live and succeed - if we don't "get
    out the way", then we will pay for it.
    
    	Larry
    

    RE;-2
    
    Larry,
    
    There is a big difference between asking the question:
    
    	"I don't understand what you are saying.  Why do you believe 
         that the.......    Please explain further."
    
    as opposed to:
    
    	"I don't believe you.  That's absurd.  PROVE YOUR STATEMENT!"
                               
    The second statement puts people on the defense and the creates
    the walls between us.
    
    We can all be polite, treat each other with respect, search for the 
    truth AND expand our knowledge at the same time.
                                                     
    Cindy

    	I'm all for the first way you mentioned of debating issues;
    the second way was NOT how subjects were being debated, despite
    how you interpreted them.
    
    	Larry
    

    |<takes deep breath; holds it: expels in soulfelt sigh>|
    
    The history of this note shows what can happen when we're looking
    elsewhere.  One person asked a question; by the conclusion of this,
    we're getting into the twin subjects of The Meaning of It All and
    Noting Etiquette.
    
    Let's go back to about .0:
    
    Querient asks:  I hear the planets may be in alignment at such-and-
                    such a date.  Does anybody know what might happen?
    
    The question presumes a cause-and-effect relationship.  Is there
    one?  I believe the jury's out, though the fact that there have
    been other such alignments in history without notable disaster is sug-
    gestive.
    
    How close have people come to ansdweering the question?
    
    Let's all lighten up a little.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    Postscript:
    
    >    This idea that the earth, planet, and stars are inanimate is
    >another implicit, unsubstantiated, unprovable belief. 
 
    Of _course_ rocks, for one, are alive!  Haven't you ever heard of
    a rock garden?
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    This is the way that I have learned to understand how astrology
    works.  My understanding comes from some channeling and lessons
    that were channeled in a group that once was.
    
    Astrology does not assume that the Universe was made for man. Astrology
    says that the position of the stars and planets represent what
    influences were present when the being was born and these will give
    information related to that being.
    
    If you delve into metaphysics very deep you will find that the planets
    as gravity wells are not what affects the person or persons but
    the etheric or spiritual vibrations that the planet puts out is
    what affect the environment.  Look at it this way when God created
    the universe in the beginning the only source material at hand was
    the very vibration that was God.  This vibration was changed to
    produce the universe both physical and nonphysical therefore everything
    that exists is a part of God and has and affect on the rest of the
    universe.  You can even go so far as to say that everything has
    an awareness of itself. (Hence this is why I talk to my car 8^)).
    
    
    Steve
    
    

    Well I for one have problems with Astrology, but it's a cheerful
    problem that can be perhaps explained (or maybe pointed to elsewhere in
    this notesfile). 
    
    That problem is that if the positions of the planets and stars are
    indicative of influences present then why are the influences seemingly
    predicitable? It would follow that light from planets takes less time
    than light from stars. It is also reasonable to think that relative
    positions of the planets and stars are not in the same absolute
    relationship the next year. Even if after 24,000 (or even 1 minute)
    years all the stars and planets were exactly the same as 24,000 years
    before we would be in a different part of the galaxy and a different
    part of the universe. Thusly the influences would be different, humans
    would be passing through different energy fields/rays from different
    energy sources within the galaxy. I could readily see one time
    influences but not a cyclic year after year pattern.
    
    Could someone point me to the right place or explain this? Thanx.
    
      Mikie? 

     Re: .21 
    
>    That problem is that if the positions of the planets and stars are
>    indicative of influences present then why are the influences seemingly
>    predictable? 

They *might* be as predictable as bio-rhythms are.  I'm not well versed
in classical or "modern" astrology, I just know of the "psychic" influences 
attributed to the planetary spheres from study of the Qabalah.

>    It would follow that light from planets takes less time
>    than light from stars. It is also reasonable to think that relative
>    positions of the planets and stars are not in the same absolute
>    relationship the next year. Even if after 24,000 (or even 1 minute)
>    years all the stars and planets were exactly the same as 24,000 years
>    before we would be in a different part of the galaxy and a different
>    part of the universe. 

If my theory holds water (and it's just that, a theory) then it follows
that it's the timing of the conjunction of the planets, and their current
location respectively that determines where in the cycles you are.  In the
timespan of an aeon, the span of a man's life is short.  Variations taken
over 100 years would be a lot less than those taken over 1000 years.

>    Thusly the influences would be different, humans
>    would be passing through different energy fields/rays from different
>    energy sources within the galaxy. 

IF you think that the "predictability" comes from the being passing through
different energy fields.  I don't think that's the way it works, but who
knows??

>    I could readily see one time
>    influences but not a cyclic year after year pattern.
    
Again, it's just an "influence".  Freed from the "norm" (that is, having
true "free will", whatever that entails) you still have a choice in your
destiny. 

As an example, you may know that you have certain tendencies that correspond
to your birth sign... maybe towards quick (sometimes thoughtless) action.
Knowing this, you can alter your behavior so that this characteristic has
less affect on your life.  This tendency may always be there... sometimes
more than others due to the cyclic nature of the internal force that manifests
itself in this type of action.  During times of internal stress on the psyche
(partially due to another cycle, but also due to some external influences)
your control breaks down.  A gifted astrologer might be able to see this
coming by stating that "you will have additional stress in your life from
a mumble sign because..." and s/he sees this from the perspective of another
person triggering this sort of response because of where the triggering
person is in his cycles; the "triggering" having a negative effect because 
you are at an internal "peak stress" condition.  

This could be compared to plotting bio-rhythms and knowing that you are at a 
mental "critical" day and that you will have problems with "mental" things.

It seems to me that, if astrology has a basis, that there must be some sort
of group mind or group "cycle" at work.

Any comments from the astrological practitioners out there??


						-- Mike

    	Astrology was a way for the ancients - who knew next to nothing
    about the real workings of the Universe - to try and make some sense
    and order not only of the behavior of the heavens, but of the role
    of human life in it as well.  If you were some early civilization
    constantly at the mercy of the elements, you too would do your best
    to make some "sense" out of the seeming chaos around you (The gods
    have flooded our land becasue we were somehow evil, or a comet -
    which was a *big*, unpredictable mystery to the ancients - became
    an omen of evil to come).
    
    	Since we have come a LONG way in our knowledge of the Universe;
    the planets are now known to be worlds, and not gods, for example -
    we should look to guidance where it has always truly lay:  In our
    intelligent minds, as we are the ones who "predict" our futures
    through our actions.  The stars and planets are just part of our
    reality, not the controllers.
    
    	Larry
    

    
    
    Well, I'll give this a shot.  Though I don't have quite the gift
    of words that Marcia has, I'll try to explain what I feel about
    all of this.  First, the planets and the luminaries (sun and moon)
    have been given certain "characteristics" to describe their 
    relationship with humanity.  No matter what their position in the
    heavens, these characteristics do not change.  Next, the signs of
    the zodiac - the zodiac is actually like a belt around the earth.  The
    definition of each of the 12 zodiac signs never change - their history
    ties in very much to the cycle of nature in our world, the changing
    seasons.  Next, the houses - these are structured based on your
    time and place of birth, and they range from 1 through 12 - the
    definitions never change and they represent the areas of life that
    each of us experience, as well our development as human beings.
    Each birth chart is a "whole" and our experience through life is
    the process of "becoming" that "whole".  
    
    Then we can get into placements of the planets in signs in houses
    in aspect to one another.  It is an incredibly complex study.  Once
    these are understood, there are the transits of the planets today
    and how they interact with the placement of the planets at birth.
    And on and on and on.
    
    I look at the birth chart as a map (and a gift) given to us in order
    to deeply understand that we are here for a purpose and that the
    events in our life don't have to look like random luck or random
    crises, but rather stepping stones to becoming.  Understanding your
    map doesn't take away the experiences - it helps you to not feel
    so tossed around by the events in your life and to know that these
    are cycles that are necessary for growth along the path "you have
    chosen" for this life.  Some people handle the information 
    cautiously and with respect - others carelessly.  
    
    As a personal note, my own birth chart has shown me the pattern
    that I need to work with in this life.  And it also helped me to
    see why I chose to come to the family I did.  The environment was
    absolutely perfect to create the "type" of experiences I needed
    to create growth.  However, this could have gone different ways.
    For example, I have a square (difficult) aspect from Saturn (discipline,
    structure, restriction, repression, isolation) in the 4th house
    (home, childhood, past experience) to Mercury (thought process,
    communication) in the 12th house (hidden self, self-sacrifice).
    Also, there is a square aspect from the Sun (our essence and will
    to be) in the 1st house (who I am, how I present myself to the world
    and how the world sees me) to Pluto (power, control, will, trans-
    formation) in the 4th house again.  You can see that this would
    point to a very lonely, sad childhood with me probably giving up
    my sense of having any personal power or control over it.  They
    also indicate some other things, but the point I want to make here
    is that I got the environment needed to create this experience.
    It is important to remember that the birth chart "is our perspective
    on our world".  My sisters and brother in many ways saw our world
    differently and related to our parents differently.  If my parents
    had had the time to be more conscious of my needs, they might have
    been able to give me more and therefore my experience of loneliness
    and depression would not have been as strong.  It still would have
    been there, however.  Instead they played their roles to the 
    opposite extreme.  
    
    What my study of this "divine science" (as it has been called and
    I like the term) has given me is the ability to accept responsibility
    for my life, and to forgive.  Two very priceless gifts.
    
    Regards,
    Carole
    
    

    Re .23:
    
    >Since we have come a LONG way in our knowledge of the Universe;
    >the planets are now known to be worlds, and not gods, for example -
    >we should look to guidance where it has always truly lay:  In our
    >intelligent minds, as we are the ones who "predict" our futures
    >through our actions.  The stars and planets are just part of our
    >reality, not the controllers.
     
    Actually, I have reservations about Judicial Astrology, but a few
    points worth mentioning.
    
    1) Many astrologers say, "The stars impel, but they don't compel."
    By this, they mean that the "stars" (presumably planetary positions)
    give an overall view of certain tendencies, but they don't force
    anyone to accept them.  Even among astrologers, in many cases, free
    will lives.
    
    2) If we take the view that the planetary positions can be treated
    analogously to the hand positions of a highly complex clock (with
    between seven and ten "hands," depending upon how one wishes to
    view things), then the positions can perhaps subtle cyclic things that
    affect humans and their personalities.  Using a very crude example:
    if you plant pumpkin seeds in Massachusetts after July, you'll get
    no pumpkins (unless you have a greenhouse, and even then, it's
    questionable).  That the solar position is so-and-so-many degrees
    above the horizon at locan noon is a factor, but what's _really_
    going on is available heat energy during the period for the plant
    to reach maturation (frost will hit the plant, pre-pumpkin).  It
    might be that if there are subtle earth-related forces affecting
    human behavior, the ancients (over years of observation) found
    correlations with planetary positions.
    
    >Astrology was a way for the ancients - who knew next to nothing
    >about the real workings of the Universe - to try and make some sense
    >and order not only of the behavior of the heavens, but of the role
    >of human life in it as well.
    
    Astrology and astronomy were one and the same in the earliest
    civilizations.  The priest-astro_watchers (to take a neutral term)
    often related stellar events to earthly happenings because there
    _was_ a seeming correspondence.  The ancient Egyptians, for instance,
    knew the Nile would flood (bringing much-needed water plus alluvial
    soil) aboiut the time Sirius forst appeared in the evening sky.
    That was true (and still would be, were it not for the Aswan dam)
    because the flooding was an annual event that took place at a certain
    thin time slice of the year.  There was no _causal_ connection,
    but you could figuratively "set your watch" by that relationship.
    Is it any wonder that with "evidence" like that, astrology flourished?
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr.

    	The constellations which you call the Zodiac DO change - stars
    move very slowly over the centuries, but they do move; thus many
    thousands of years ago the constellations did NOT look like they
    do now, as the stars are constantly changing their positions in
    the Milky Way Galaxy - so the "signs" were totally different way
    back then, and were not the "Zodiac".    
    
    	Larry
    

    
    
    Re. .26
    
    Larry,
    
    I guess what I am trying to say is that "today" (modern times),
    the interpretation of the zodiac "symbol" is always the same, just
    as the interpretation of the planetary "symbol" is always the same.
    Of course, the planets and the constellations move - everything
    is always moving to some extent.  But our maps have a structured
    approach to interpret their symbology.  
    
    Also, as was mentioned in another note, and as an aside comment,
    using the planetary placements in the constellations is another
    form of astrological study called Sidereal Astrology.  This is not
    what I was referring to.
    
    Regards, Carole
    

RE: .26
    
    I'm still trying to catch up after my vacation, and I have a bit
    more to say on this subject when I get to it, but, for now...
    
    Larry, I think you mean "hundreds of thousands" of years rather
    than "thousands" of years.  The movement of stars can be measured
    using sensitive instruments, but the differences in the appearances
    of the constellations due to this effect over a mere few thousand
    years is rather minor.  The Babylonian priest/astrologers would
    instantly recognize the constelations as seen today from a dark
    part of the Middle East.
    
    More significant is the change in Earth's orbit, specifically something
    called the "precession of the Equinoxes".  As a result of this when
    an astrologer (at least most astrologers) says that you were born
    with, say, the sun in Cancer, and if you looked it up in an
    astronomical table, you would find that the sun was not actually
    in the constellation Cancer when you were born.
    
    This is frequently used as a critism of astrology.
    
    Astrologers generally answer that the "signs" used in astrology
    are not the same thing as the "constellations".  The signs, unlike
    the constellations are each exactly 1/12 of the zodiac.  They were
    named after the constellations they were roughly coincident with
    when the Babylonians were inventing/discovering the system.  To an equal
    extent the "pictures" imagined for the constellation were, in part,
    based on associations with the characteristics of the signs.
    
    The "fixed stars" are, according to this thought, irrelevant to
    astrology -- or at least ordinary, individual oriented, astrology.
    
    Given the general framework, this seems quite reasonable to me.
    
    					Topher

    re .28:
    
    > ...                                           The signs, unlike
    >the constellations are each exactly 1/12 of the zodiac.  They were
    >named after the constellations they were roughly coincident with
    >when the Babylonians were inventing/discovering the system.  To an equal
    >extent the "pictures" imagined for the constellation were, in part,
    >based on associations with the characteristics of the signs. 
    
    Minor point of information (which I suspect Topher knows):  The
    name "zodiac" comes from the same base word as "zoo," as "the place
    where animals are kept."  The majority of the constellations in
    the Zo[o]diac are supposed to represent animals, and thus the Zodiac
    means roughly "belt of animals."  the oriental Zodiac, though using
    different animals, does much the same thing.
    
    Steve Kallis, Jr. 

re: .28

Ah, I was going to ask about that ("precession of the equinoxes")!  Back
in the days when I lived in California (during the Early Middle Late period:-))
I remember hearing that modern astrology was no longer accurate because it
failed to take the precession of the equinoxes into accout.  Marcia, so you
know what the explanation for that is?

Another thing which I heard around the same time was that the Zodiac could
more correctly be said to have either 13 or 14 signs (as opposed to 12).  I
think Ophiucius (sp?) was the proposed 13th sign.  Maybe Cetus was the supposed
14th?  This was based on actually tracking what constellation the sun rose in,
I think.
								paul c.

    I've just returned from a long weekend vacation and have finally
    caught up on my note reading.  This has turned out to be a most
    interesting one!  Here, for what they're worth, are my own thoughts
    on the subject of astrology.
    
    Astrology, in my feeling, is really a metaphysical discipline whose
    relatively modern (and, I feel, more correct) goal is to broaden
    an individual's perspective on him/herself, enable him/her to intuit
    his/her own special makeup and perhaps destiny, and therefore, to
    exercise some control over it.  It is an inward-looking study, but
    is not, in its best form, ego-centric.  It acknowledges that each
    person has his/her own way of viewing Reality; that each person
    has his/her own unique combination of strengths and weaknesses which
    (enable personal belief based on personal experience) they can,
    to a large extent, control with the famous Free Will, once they
    know about them.
    
    It is not defaming astronomy to base astrological ideas on physical
    astronomical facts.  I also love astronomy, have been an avid star-
    gazer since I was a child, and knew what the Precession of Equinoxes,
    red shift, quasars, supernovae, etc. were all about before I was
    10.  When I study astronomy, I am awed at the vastness of the Universe 
    of which we are such a small part.  When I study astrology, I am 
    awed at the vastness of the Universe within each person.  This is 
    what is perhaps the bedrock belief of astrology--that each person 
    contains a piece of the vastness of the Universe within him/herself.
    Look at the structure of a galaxy and an atom--sort of look and
    behave alike, don't they?  Look at crystalline mineral
    formations--their outer form mirrors their atomic structure.
    
    Astrology is also not the first (or the last) metaphysical discipline 
    to use physical reality as its inspiration.  A religion such as 
    Christianity is based on the life teachings and death of someone we 
    are sure was a real person, for instance.
    
    And then one gets to the question:  Well, if astrology works, how
    does it?  The real answer to that is: no one knows yet.  A person's
    horoscope, with the pattern of the planets in the zodiac as seen
    from earth at the moment (s)he drew his/her first breath, for some
    reason can be correlated with tendencies of the soul.  Why?  I can't
    tell you.  But my personal experience has shown that those correlations
    are very strong.  As Steve K. said (in my own words) "correlation
    is not causation".  It's not like the planets _make_ you some way
    or other, but for some reason looking at their positions gives you
    a good idea of Who You Are.  My husband likens the system to a model.
    It's _not Reality_!  It's a model of same, and since it is a model,
    if standard statistics can be applied, there will be vast majorities
    of people who fall within "normal" predicted behavior curves of
    this model and those who are so far out that they don't fit into it.
    Maxwell's Equations do not "work" at predicting electro-magnetic
    behavior when you get to really fine-tuned, vanishingly small
    measurements.  Does that mean they are invalid?  No, it just means
    they can't be used for predicting every electro-magnetic behavoir
    in existence.  _Astrology can't either._  Interesting idea, yes?
    
    Given that one accepts the possibility that what we have here is
    a model, empirically developed, which is not truly Reality but can
    be used to represent it, we then get into debates about the Most 
    Correct Model To Use.  Both the Tropical Zodiac and the Sidereal 
    Zodiac (which takes Precession of Equinoxes into account) are used 
    by professionals today, and most will argue vehemently for their
    particular system.  I use a blend of both, with primary emphasis 
    on the Tropical Zodiac, modified by Sidereal considerations.  I 
    see many people in whom Neptunian influence is very strong, much 
    stronger than traditional texts would suggest, for example.  Well, 
    Neptune's sign, Pisces, is the sign of the Spring Equinox right
    now, not Aries.  So it is no surprise to me that the Piscean energy
    has more importance for many today than the Babylonians.  I suspect 
    that Aquarian energy will become more important in the next century 
    when we finally get into the Age of Aquarius (when the Spring Equinox
    occurs in Aquarius).
    
    And house systems!  I won't even _begin_ to try to justify the systems
    of houses division (a totally mathematical construct in the birth
    chart, with no "basis in reality", i.e., planets, constellations,
    etc.) that have been invented.  Most astrologers have their own
    particular system they've adopted, that they feel gives good results
    and use it.  And most will end up arguing vehemently in favor of
    their particular system.  And then there are all sorts of realms
    of detail that can be plotted in addition to basic sign positions
    of planets--decanates, dwads, vertices, midpoints, Arabic Parts,
    planetary nodal axes, progressions, rulerships, fixed stars, ad 
    infinitum, all invented to try to fine-tune the potential
    interpretations.  This discipline is not a simple subject!  If 
    you tell me you don't believe in astrology because your horoscope 
    you read in the daily paper doesn't "come true", I will laugh in 
    your face and tell you that you don't know what you're talking 
    about.  Any astrologer can tell you that those little ditties are 
    all c***.
    
    How sensitive is each person to all the details?  That seems to 
    be, as I'm discovering, uniquely individual to each person.  Just
    like a person's unique bio-chemistry.  It's all the same chemicals,
    but boy, can the details of what one person needs, nutritionally,
    differ from another.
    
    And as to What's Happening On August 16-17 and Planetary Lineup 
    for 1990.  The grand trine of Aug 16-17 isn't one, really.
    The angles on that day are not exact enough to complete the total
    configuration, even though there will be bunches of planets in each
    Fire sign.  _Not every one of you will feel this!_  (People with 
    planets being contacted by the transiting planets will feel it 
    most.)  Trines are _much_ more subtle than transiting squares or 
    conjunctions, and seem to relate to states of being, rather than 
    action.  Energy there will be, to be sure, but don't be surprised 
    if you're not being "quiet" enough to hear it.  The one trine that 
    will be exact on Aug 16 is Sun in Leo to Uranus in Sag.  _What a 
    relief_ I mutter to myself, from the previous square of Jupiter in 
    Pisces to Uranus in Sag in February.  What a relief, for that matter,
    _this very week_, while an exact trine between Jupiter in Aries 
    and Uranus in Sag takes place!  (I don't know if you realize how 
    philosophically cogent and respectful of alternate views you all sound
    lately, but I sure have noticed.)  I, for one, am looking forward to 
    Aug and I'm enjoying the h*** out of right now (I have a natal Jupiter
    Uranus trine).  I have a feeling that if the "world ends" or there 
    is a shift in consciousness it will be subtle and may not show up 
    in all its glory immediately.
    
    And yes, Steve K. is correct; there have been other planetary lineups
    that have not caused great disaster, societal, tectonic (sp?) or
    otherwise.  I am not exactly looking for the world to end in January
    1990 either, even though it may be significant for me personally;
    my sun sign of Capricorn is involved.  We'll just have to see.
    
    The moral here (if there is one) is: just because astrology has
    its inspiration in a piece of physical reality is no reason that 
    every aspect of that reality has significance in the model.  Only
    observation will show what is and is not significant.  Let's observe.
    
    One final word: there are those of you who feel that astrology is
    invalid because, as a model, it cannot be used to predict/model/
    represent behavior in double-blind, laboratory type tests.  This
    is true--it cannot.  It is a subtle and complex interpretive tool,
    and needs a skilled pro to use it well.  If you go to an astrologer
    and sit there like a lump, waiting silently while you demand that
    (s)he administer the astrological equivalent of the MMPI, while you 
    mentally pass judgement in silence, your consultation will be a 
    poor experience in self-enlightenment indeed.  What many good pros 
    will do is behave like a good doctor:  "I see such and such an 
    energy indication made by this and that planet in these houses, 
    etc--have you had any of the following feeling or events?  What
    has been true for you?"  (The doctor says "Your lab test came back 
    looking like x--have you had any of the following symptoms?")
    _This is the way the astrologer learns how you have chosen (yes,
    chosen) to shape your own particular reality and destiny._  After 
    you get to know your astrologer you can continue to treat him/her
    like your doctor  ("Doc, I hurt here and here, can I see you to
    find out what's going on?")  If the astrologer has your "case history"
    (s)he will be better able to tell you how you are affected by current
    transits, etc.
    
    Lastly, some may wonder: doesn't knowing what's in store in the
    way of transits make you behave or feel more like what you expect?  
    The answer, in my personal experience, is a resounding NO.  I behaved
    much more in line with the classic, textbook interpretations of
    my birth chart when I knew _nothing_ about it.  After I became aware,
    much of the energy of transits and such became an internal experience,
    rather than concrete life events.  It freed me of having to always
    go through some kind of event trauma in order to grow.
    
    And that last point brings up a good way to look at the art of
    astrology.  It will not show you so much what your external reality
    is like as it will reveal your _inner perceptions_ regarding your
    external reality.  This was one of the most valuable things I
    personally gained from its study, a validation of my inner experience
    and the courage to exercise control over it.
    
    I also have gained enormous respect for the diversity among people
    and the uniqueness of each one.  Astrology does not necessarily
    show how we're all the same; it really shows me how wonderfully
    different we all are.
    
    Marcia