Aeclectic Tarot
Tarot Cards & Reviews Free Tarot Readings Tarot Books Tarot Card Meanings Tarot Forum

Pluto

  > Aeclectic Tarot Forum > Beyond Tarot > Astrology


 
Minderwiz's Avatar
Minderwiz  Minderwiz is offline
Student of Astrology
 
Join Date: 20 Apr 2002
Location: Wigan, UK
Posts: 7,888
Minderwiz 

Dave's reference to the different types of charts reminded me that up to the eighteenth century Astrologers learned the craft by starting out with horary and event charts. Only when these were thoroughly mastered did the apprentice Astrologer move on to natal charts and eventually mundane charts.

Horary and event charts have very limited issues to analyse and the Astrologer only concentrates on one or two important significators, so the need to integrate is virtually absent. They are also quite useful for predictive work, often much better than natal charts, if prediction is related to a specific issue.

There's an interesting book by John Frawley on Sports Astrology looking at predicting the outcome of sports matches. Most of the work focuses on planets and their position in the horoscope rather than signs and it's a good way of learning that a planet's position determines the way in which it functions.

Sadly horary has largely fallen out of use, partly because of laws against fortune telling and partly because modern Astrologers are often more concerned with character and the mind rather than predicting external events when it comes to reading horoscopes. So there is a need to learn some techniques which have fallen out of use but it is worth the effort as these type of charts can usually be analysed quite quickly.
Top   #21
dadsnook2000's Avatar
dadsnook2000  dadsnook2000 is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 30 Apr 2003
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 3,474
dadsnook2000 
Those other types of charts . . .


Dead on, Minderwiz. Natal charts require time and study beyond reasonableness in order to synthesize and understand all of the details. Other types of charts require you to focus on only specific factors, making it easier and quicker to get the answers you need. When I do predictive work on-line, many are amazed that I can post answers within a few minutes if I have the needed data at hand, even though I may cast 3 or 4 charts.

This is what I referred to earlier when I mentioned that you develop an "ease" about using the concepts of astrological practice. You know which tool to use and how to use it to go for only the information you need.

Because experience brings these "tools" to us, I have introduced in the Planet Series the concept of using "phase relationships" or cyclic understandings of the chart. This shortcut permits one to just glance at key combinations in a chart, without worrying about aspect details and other stuff, and just gather a "feel" of what that person is all about. Instead of studying a chart for an hour you can just glance at it for two minutes and then move on to doing one of these more focused types of charts to get an answer.

SIMPLICITY comes from knowing how to avoid tedious and complex steps that add more clutter then understanding. Dave
Top   #22
Starling's Avatar
Starling  Starling is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 16 Oct 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 432
Starling 

<grin>

I think I understand the moving beyond keywords pretty well for a couple of reasons. I'm in the process of doing that with the Tarot cards at the moment. And, I never did the memorizing keyword thing on my previous attempts at learning Tarot and Astrology.

This time I'm forcing myself to slow down, at least a little. It doesn't help that not only do I already know about a lot of intermediate and advanced things in both Tarot and Astrology, but I understand those things. But I did all of that, in both studies, in the past without a firm foundation.

Keywords do provide that foundation. It allows you to TALK about a card or a sign and not just "feel" what it means. Keywords let you begin to talk, much in the way describing a card gets your mouth moving.

As an example: I've got Saturn in Taurus in the 10th House. I know that Saturn is restriction, Taurus is a love of beauty and also practicality, and that the 10th house is duty. (Obviously in addition to a lot of other keywords and concepts, but this is a beginning.) So Saturn restricts my love of beauty, probably makes me even more practical than I would be otherwise (I have so much practicality that it might not be all that positive) and it is all tied up with what my duty is.

Having written that all out, I've just learned a lot more about that placement of Saturn than I ever really understood before.
Top   #23
Minderwiz's Avatar
Minderwiz  Minderwiz is offline
Student of Astrology
 
Join Date: 20 Apr 2002
Location: Wigan, UK
Posts: 7,888
Minderwiz 

It could also mean that you should pursue a career (10th House) making designe(Taurus) plant pots (Saturn is the planet of containers).

You can't make such a judgment (or the one you made ) without some specific point in mind and without some reference to your underlying personality/character (classically, your temperament).

Remember planets act (and Saturn could well be concerned with restriction orz containment, it could also be a teacher or father or old age Which of these Saturn represents in your chart depends on the issue you are exploring.

Taurus in not just beauty (or even beauty) it could be craftsmanship, practical design, earthiness, melancholic tendencies. Again how it modifies Saturn depends largely on the circumstances under consideration and what functions Saturn plays in your chart.

Yes this makes analysing natal charts more challenging. That's one of the reasons why the classic Astrologer tended to concentrate on particular areas of life when looking at a natal chart, rather than trying to integrate the chart as a whole (a feature of modern psychological Astrology). Thus given your temperament I might analyse your career choices in terms of the 10th house, it's ruler planets in it and aspects to them. career also involves earning power (second house) and possible partners or competitors (seventh house) - the analysis will spread out but still focus on one area of life - career.

Start with some issue in mind - some aspect of your life that you want to analyse and start to examine the planets in context. Ask yourself which planets are relevant and why, begin to examine how they are going to act in this context and how they are modified by the signs. Key words can help here but in the context of a clear focus. You will learn much from a practical application.
Top   #24
Bernice's Avatar
Bernice  Bernice is offline
Denizen of the Coalsack Nebula
 
Join Date: 07 Dec 2007
Location: Central England
Posts: 3,901
Bernice 
Minderwiz:


Quote:
Earlier posting: ...the problem is that some Astrologers who should know better do talk as if Mars, Aries and the Ascendant were the same thing
Agreed! I might also add that I have come across those who 'assess' a chart primarily via the occupied/unoccupied Signs - their element. I can't agree with this because the only CERTAIN thing about astrology is the Planets! I think an 'assessment' of the planetry aspects - midpoints & whatever else - should preceed their Sign environments.

Quote:
It could also mean that you should pursue a career (10th House) making designer (Taurus) plant pots (Saturn is (also) the planet of containers).
And actually the whole of this post you made.... Applause!

There is ONE further fly-in-the-ointment though. Much depends on the House system you use, or don't use. I am aware that in the end an Astrologer & their Chosen System will work. But just 'cos one working method or House system has been written about, it doesn't mean that it's set in stone or even traditional!

Quote:
Start with some issue in mind...
Very good sound advice.

Cheers, Bee.
Top   #25
crystal dawn's Avatar
crystal dawn  crystal dawn is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 07 May 2004
Location: England
Posts: 388
crystal dawn 
Cool bring back plutos right to rule


by they i take it you mean astronomers - that is a different subject altogeather from astrology.
we as astrologers should not let the astronomical world dictate to us what we can and cannot class as a planet.
I noticed someone here has said that if you use pluto in an astrology chart there should be a good reason to do so - why???

A long time ago astrology and astronomy where pretty much the same subject, but both have gone off in there own directions and have become totally different subjects in their own right. Its important not to mix the two subjects up though. Some astrologers rely more on astronomy than others - which is fine - but you have to wonder whether you are getting an astronomy chart/reading rather than an astrological one.

If you choose to use pluto in a chart is up to the individual - i personally have always used it and will continue to do so no matter what is said about it.
Its the energies that these orbs represent that matter when constructing a chart and not whether they have official planet status or not.

Alot of people only associate pluto with having negative attributes and fail to see that it also has a beautiful calm side also.

for me it will always be the official ruler of scorpio.

Its such a shame that there are a number of old books that have been reprinted now, that once upon a time had astrological associations of pluto in them and in the reprints these associations are now been blanked out - depriving the reader the choice of whether to use them or not.

Whether you choose to use pluto or not is entirely your choice.

blessed be

crystal dawn
Top   #26
Minderwiz's Avatar
Minderwiz  Minderwiz is offline
Student of Astrology
 
Join Date: 20 Apr 2002
Location: Wigan, UK
Posts: 7,888
Minderwiz 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crystal dawn
by they i take it you mean astronomers - that is a different subject altogeather from astrology.
By modern standards that's certainly true, as you say later on, historically, it's not the case. Without a grasp of at least some astronomical basics, it's difficult to grasp some of the symbolism of Astrology - many of Saturn's characteristics are related to it being the most distant visible planet.


Quote:
Originally Posted by crystal dawn
we as astrologers should not let the astronomical world dictate to us what we can and cannot class as a planet.
Well apart from the 'trans Neptunian Planets' in Uranian Astrology (and they can be related to Astronomical knowledge of the time), it appears that we always have done and still do . But if we reject Astronomers' definition of planets then who decides? Do we simply pick something we like or make something up? Even worse, many Astrologers seem to feel that they should adopt all sorts of bodies that Astronomers discover - Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Chiron, Sedna and many more bodies seem to have been adopted because astronomers discovered them, rather than because Astrologer/Astronomers pondered over the night sky.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crystal dawn
I noticed someone here has said that if you use pluto in an astrology chart there should be a good reason to do so - why???
Well if you haven't got a good reason to use it, why would you? Or are you suggesting that we can do anything we like in Astrology whether we've a reason or not?

I don't think you are and I'm sure that you feel that you have a good reason to continue using Pluto - you've clearly reasoned your response to astronomer's downgrading Pluto.


Quote:
Originally Posted by crystal dawn
Some astrologers rely more on astronomy than others - which is fine - but you have to wonder whether you are getting an astronomy chart/reading rather than an astrological one.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. An astrological chart is a representation in two dimensions of the planetary positions relative to an observer in a defined location on Earth. In that real sense it is astronomical but I've never really had the impression that you describe, even from Astrologers that I disagree with - I've always felt that they were giving an astrological reading - as Dave has often said, Astrology is a many faceted art.

I
Quote:
Originally Posted by crystal dawn
f you choose to use pluto in a chart is up to the individual - i personally have always used it and will continue to do so no matter what is said about it.
You have every right to use whatever bodies you wish and there''s no way that I would wish to stop you or anyone else. All that I seek to do is to get people to think about why they use bodies and also to realise that jumping on the astronomers' bandwagon and incorporating newly discovered bodies into Astrology is not a particularly wise move. Ironically, given your statement on astromomers and astrologers, Pluto was adopted into Astrology BECAUSE astronomers had discovered it, rather than because it had any obvious Astrological symbolism. It's difficult to ascribe Astrological characteristics when all you've got to go on is astronomical descriptions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by crystal dawn
Its the energies that these orbs represent that matter when constructing a chart and not whether they have official planet status or not.
I think you mean 'bodies' here, 'orbs' have a different meaning in Astrology. However, you are quite right, it's the energies that matter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crystal dawn
for me it will always be the official ruler of scorpio.

Its such a shame that there are a number of old books that have been reprinted now, that once upon a time had astrological associations of pluto in them and in the reprints these associations are now been blanked out - depriving the reader the choice of whether to use them or not.

Whether you choose to use pluto or not is entirely your choice.
Who decides what is 'official'? there's no ruling Astrological body that decides on rulerships, or anything else. As I tried to point out earlier in the thread the ancients had a reason why Mars rules Scorpio and the moderns do not, other than they think it is associated with Scorpio or has Scorpio characteristics. Indeed they've even tried to change the nature of Scorpio to make it better fit Pluto. By all means adopt Scorpio as a ruler in your own system but please recognise that it doesn't have an 'official ' status (neither does Mars if it comes to that - though it does have a couple of thousand years plus of history).

As Pluto was only discovered in 1930 there are not all that many 'old books' that need reprinting. However I agree with your sentiment. reprinting should be because there is a belief that Pluto was a mistake. If you don't believe that and believe that Pluto rules Scorpio then you don't need to reprint or rewrite anything. It's quite possible to believe that Pluto is a 'dwarf planet' and still believe that it rules Scorpio. I've seen some Astrologers claim that Ceres rules Taurus and those Astrologers never believed that Ceres was other than an asteroid (though the astronomers that discovered it at first did believe it was a planet).

Yes, I fully agree that using Pluto is a personal decision and Astrologers should be perfectly free to use or not use it.

I take the view that it's the planets (however defined) that matter and their characteristics - or energies - Sign rulership was always the wrong basis on which to defend Pluto - it's much better to base it on Pluto having characteristics that cannot be represented by any other planet. The case for using Ceres as expressing a feminine principle that is distinct from Venus and the Moon is a valid one, which I respect. There's a good reason for using it and for those who do use it, it gives an additional dimension to their chart reading. To me Pluto falls into the same category. If Pluto has a meaning to you that cannot be expressed by any other body, then use it!
Top   #27
AmethystEyes's Avatar
AmethystEyes  AmethystEyes is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 31 May 2009
Location: With the stars
Posts: 24,891
AmethystEyes 

Hmm Mars is the most prominent planet in my chart, I thought that would mean I have an dominate Aries type influence, so would be Scorpio then? Or should I just not look at it like that?
Top   #28
dadsnook2000's Avatar
dadsnook2000  dadsnook2000 is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 30 Apr 2003
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 3,474
dadsnook2000 
Pluto and others


Pluto is currently defined as a "Dwarf Planet". We should recognize that there are other dwarf planets. Let's consider them and their relative size compared to our Moon's diameter.

** ERIS is the largest, about 75% of the Moon's diameter.
** PLUTO is about 68% the size of the Moon. As far away as it is, it is far closer than the other dwarf's except for Ceres.
** MAKEMAKE is about 43% the size of the Moon.
** HAUMEA is 33% the size of the Moon.
** CERES is 28% the size of the Moon and is the closest of all by a considerable amount, being found in the Asteroid belt. The others are in the Kupier belt or further out in space. Ceres also represents about a third of the total mass of all of the asteroids and is spherical with a rock core and ice surface.

So, does distance or size make a difference? If Asteroids have significance, then why wouldn't these far larger bodies have significance. Are their positions in space as separate bodies more important than some of the planet's moons which are larger than than the smaller dwarf planets? It is difficult to say which to use, how to use it, as far as astrology goes. Dave
Top   #29
Minderwiz's Avatar
Minderwiz  Minderwiz is offline
Student of Astrology
 
Join Date: 20 Apr 2002
Location: Wigan, UK
Posts: 7,888
Minderwiz 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dadsnook2000
So, does distance or size make a difference? If Asteroids have significance, then why wouldn't these far larger bodies have significance. Are their positions in space as separate bodies more important than some of the planet's moons which are larger than than the smaller dwarf planets? It is difficult to say which to use, how to use it, as far as astrology goes. Dave

'A guiding aesthetic for astrology, something necessary, since astrology is an art as well as a science, should be simplicity' Stephen Arroyo (New Insights in Modern Astrology).

Arroyo goes on to quote Dougllas Donleavy, the former editor of Transit (the newsletter of the British Astrological Association' in some depth but one extract is:

'There are some otherwise excellent and perceptive astrologers whose motto seems to be - if it moves interpret it. Whence comes this ever more frantic attempt to ensoul newly discovered or newly imagined planetoidlets?'

The key message seems to be that we should apply 'Occams's razor' - multiplicity ought not to be posited without necessity' or, if you prefer, 'Keep It Simple Stupid!'

Now the above quotes come from leading modern psychological Astrologers, but I can find you a similar type of quote from well over a thousand years ago complaining about the multiplicity of Arabian Parts, so it's not a modern phenomenon by any means.

So coming back to Dave's comment - does size matter - To an extent yes, there are thousands of objects out there and if we used them all the chart would be solid black - an astrological black whole. But what really matters is 'do we really need them?'. I can manager perfectly well without Uranus, Neptune and Pluto or Chiron, or trans-neptunian planets, or dark moons, or even all but a couple of Arabian Parts/Greek Lots (in relatively few circumstances). I can quite see that others may need to use the outers or mid points, etc - some approaches to Astrology virtually demand it. However all of us can still take the line that we only use the bare minimum of planets/objects/points that we need in order to carry out our analysis.

And to finish with another quote from Arroyo:

'...use the minimum number of major reliable factors required to enable you to see a client and his or her situation clearly'
Top   #30




 


 


Tarot Cards & Reviews Free Tarot Readings Tarot Books Tarot Card Meanings Tarot Forum
Aeclectic Tarot Forum Links
· Tarot
· Tarot Special Interest
· Beyond Tarot
· Forum Library

Aeclectic Tarot Categories
· Angel Decks
· Dark & Gothic Decks
· Goddess Decks
· Fairy Decks
· Doreen Virtue Decks
· Beginner Decks
· Cat Decks
· Pagan & Wiccan Decks
· Ancient Egyptian Decks
· Celtic Decks
· Lenormand Decks
· Rider-Waite Decks
· Marseilles Decks
· Thoth Decks
· Oracle Decks
· List All Decks
· Popular Tarot Decks
· Available Decks
· Tarot Books
· What's New

Copyright © 1996 - 2019 Aeclectic Tarot. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy. Contact us.