31 by Deb As a rule, if it's within 12 degrees of the ascendant, it's still a daytime birth. There are exceptions, but not too many. Hi Olivia, I wonder if you can offer a reference to that rule. Or is it your own suggestion? As far as I'm aware, a chart will turn from being diurnal to nocturnal in an instant, just as the 12th diurnal (seasonal) hour will move into the 1st nocturnal hour in an instant. I think that modern astrologers try to add in a twilight factor but that seems to me to contradict the ancient approach to this matter. Regards Deb Quote Fri May 22, 2009 7:48 pm
32 by Olivia I've got some somewhere, Deb, but I'll have to dig them up. It's something to do with observation over philosophy again, though. I will try to find it; it didn't come out of my own head. Memory, not too reliable, suggests that both Lee Lehman and the Gaquelins mentioned this and quoted sources if that helps any - or if anyone finds it faster than I do. Quote Fri May 22, 2009 8:00 pm
33 by ### This was a good opportunity to start a new thread concerning the Sun relative to the horizon: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... 9582#39582 Quote Fri May 22, 2009 9:04 pm
34 by trevor Kirk wrote: No astronomical thinking here. I'm following the observational foundation of the day as measured by the Sun's complete cycle from the eastern horizon to its return there the next morning, and the year as measured by the Sun's movement along the ecliptic. Those two types of motion acquired symbolic meaning: That's astrology. Noting the percentage of time spent by the planets in retrograde motion is not astrology! What use is it? Its most obvious use is to dissuade people from bothering with astrology at all. Statistics and symbolism both start with the letter s, and that's about all they have in common. What difference does it make if retrograde motion is regular? We aren't considering the occurrence of retrograde but the effects. Retrograde motion doesn't 'turn on' so that the planet always and continuously acts like in a certain manner for a set amount of time. The planet enters a period of a more irregular likely expression. It does depend on the definition used of irregular and impulsive behaviour in people. When is someone's action somewhat quirky and when is it clearly irregular? Who determined the definitions and rules that were then used in the literature for judgment? With retrograde motion maybe we are in one of those areas where natal and horary astrology need to be treated differently. Well I think I'll blame you for using 'astronomy' as I was temporarily in this spatial Ptolemaic mindset imagining the apparent motions of the celestial objects from a geocentric frame of reference in an effort to try and work out why the idea of retrograde is seemingly regarded as more ?negative? in the ??traditional?? literature than the ?contemporary? literature. Is this a lame excuse? But I wouldn't throw statistics out so early if we are looking to define impulsive or irregular. How do we measure these in these infantile days as regards cogntive neuro-psychology other than relying on a group of psychotherapists looking at behaviour through a one way mirror and speculating as to whether person X?s behaviour is of a more ?irregular like expression? this week/month. As to natal and horary being treated differently can you expand your thoughts on this? Quote Fri May 22, 2009 9:16 pm
35 by johannes susato Deb wrote:As a rule, if it's within 12 degrees of the ascendant, it's still a daytime birth. There are exceptions, but not too many. Hi Olivia, I wonder if you can offer a reference to that rule. Hi Deb, hi Olivia, I just find the 'real' astrologer John Frawley saying - The Horary Textbook, p. 48 -: "Allow a few degrees in favour of day at either end [of the AC-DC-line], so if the Sun is only a couple of degrees below the Ascendant or the Descendant you count it as day. This is because the Sun's light is visble before the Sun rises and after it sets. 'A few' is all the precision necessary here: the precise number varies with latitude and time of year." This definition seems to be rather imprecise and in reality a maceration of the classical definition of day and night, a contradiction to it as Deb has already stated above. Regards Johannes Quote Fri May 22, 2009 10:52 pm
36 by ### Thread-hopping is getting me confused. In the other one I wrote: I've been rummaging around for something I saw months ago which I believe was from the 17th century. That's not ancient but it's quite a few steps back. What sticks in my mind is a statement in someone's book which surprised me at the time that one should consider a chart to be nocturnal when the Sun was approaching the Descendant within a certain number degrees. I'm thinking it was Ramesey, Partridge or Coley, but I haven't found it yet. Or maybe it was later in Sibly. The person who wrote it may have gotten it from an earlier source ? or 'modern' was already creeping in. http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... 9582#39582 If anyone's curious, I listed the authors in the order I think to be most likely as the source, with Ramesey as seeming the most likely. Quote Sat May 23, 2009 1:10 am
37 by johannes susato Kirk wrote:Thread-hopping is getting me confused. Your are right, Kirk! So I copy my answer to Deb and Olivia into your new thread. Johannes Quote Sat May 23, 2009 7:45 am
38 by Deb This is all a bit vague isn?t it? I am well aware of the sun light and twilight factor and I?m as real an astrologer as John We are both entitled to opinion, as was Ramesey, but if he did say whatever he might have said, I would still argue with him. My point is this: ancient astrologers didn?t just speculate about the moment of sunrise and sunset, they worshipped it, and they observed it religiously (or attempted to) in order to define it to a moment. The whole philosophy of sect is intimately bound to the concept of the seasonal hours, and assumes the belief that one planet?s hour represents a very different quality of time than the next planetary hour; and that the daytime hours are very different from the night time hours. We move from a day time hour to a night time hour in an instant and in that instant the chart changes from being a diurnal chart to nocturnal one. It is at this moment that sect alignments change, and I don?t believe it is philosophically justified or practically convenient to bring in a fudge factor to recognise twilight, be it nautical, civil or astronomical. As the planetary recording of time changes from diurnal to nocturnal, that is when the definition of the chart changes ? that is all I am saying; not that twilight doesn?t have a certain quality of its own. It might be argued that the planetary hours don?t mean much in modern astrology, but they certainly did in ancient astrology, which is where the concept of sect is most deeply embedded. But yes, twilight has a different quality; that is another issue. On the other hand I have sat and watched the sunset, doing nothing else but sitting and observing the sunset, and there is ? very definitely ? a single moment when the energy changes. The only time I have been able to see the same effect with sunrise was when I was in an airplane and I was watching the sun slowly rise over the a widespread horizon. The moment it actually rose was startling, because the whole horizon glittered, in the same way that a total eclipse glitters for a moment in its diamond effect. That is when I understood why it was such a sacred and religious moment, and that we can?t expect to spread its magic out to some extended period of time when the light is increasing or fading. Quote Sat May 23, 2009 8:13 am
39 by Cornelia The orthodox Jews have defined night as starting when 3 stars are visible. Given how ancient this tradition is and the continuity of quite a few mesopotamian traditions in Judaism, I wonder if that might have been the original Babylonian standard. Any thoughts here? Quote Sat May 23, 2009 1:57 pm
40 by Olivia Not really, Cornelia. If it's erev shabbat, night (the next day, since the Jewish day begins at dusk) begins 18 minutes before sunset, because you're eager to usher in shabbat. On other days, night (a/k/a the new day) begins at sunset. Full night on shabbat night is after three stars come out because you try to hold onto shabbat as long as possible. So it only applies one night per week, at least as far as I'm aware. Even still, you can go to web sites like chabad (which we can safely classify as frum) and see what time in almost any location shabbat officially starts and ends for any given week. Quote Sat May 23, 2009 6:22 pm
41 by Cornelia Olivia, Chabad is pretty much a world to itself even within orthodox Judaism, so I'd be a bit suspicious of their theories. My grandfather was an orthodox rabbi considered a "sage" by his followers in his old age and his second wife was a follower of the Satmer rabbi a highly respected Chassidic leader. I remember my grandfather taking me out and showing me the three stars, and explaining their importance for distinguishing day from night. He would explain things with Talmudic glosses, but in this case the stars as a pointer seemed very clear cut. None of the ideas you cited which I have never before heard though my family was full of highly religious orthodox Jews and distinguishing when evening starts was important for other functions, not just the shabbos. It's hard to check out exactly when those stars would have been visible now with our polluted light conditions. In the clear, dark skies above Babylon stars might have been visible earlier. Quote Sun May 24, 2009 3:39 pm
42 by geodorn PallasAthene wrote:matt23z wrote: I don't know about that but according to traditional astrology I wouldn't go very far when you do get up as Saturn in the 9th does not bode well for long journeys and square to ruler of the 6th means you may get ill when abroad. Matthew Hi Matthew, thanks for taking the time to comment. You know, you're right.. I had 2 week job in S Carolina last year...the whole crew went to a sea food restaurant and I was only one violently sick that night : ) Work, travel and health all connected. I also get a lot of work by word-of-mouth ie through friends and aquaintences. Makes sense, 6th ruler in 11th? Or is work 10th? Saturn is about delays, restrictions by nature, so I'm having trouble thinking about it Rx. Lessons learned.. extra slowly? Or internalised? And in the 9th of higher learning, spiritual development.. well that's an internal place anyway. Lost.. : ( I would like to repeat an advise that was given elsewhere on this forum (sorry, don't remember by who) not to take a single chart element and make conclusions / recommendations from it. I have Saturn Rx in the 9th and I lived abroad for more than half of my life and not that bad at that. This is not to say that anyone with Saturn in the 9th will have the same experiences, but to say that this factor is not sufficient to get you in trouble during long journeys. Quote Mon May 25, 2009 2:53 am