skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Notes From Cyril Fagan
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Sidereal Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1213
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2014 5:01 am    Post subject: Cyril Fagan's Deafness Reply with quote

Sidereal Analysis of Fagan's Deafness:

In the Essentials of Medical Astrology Dr. K.S. Charak states: "Mercury deals with hearing as well as communications of any sort. A strong Mercury under benefic influences indicates a strong and healthy hearing mechanism. Afflictions indicate the reverse." (p. 160)

H. L. Cornell's (M.D.) Encyclopaedia of Medical Astrology places the rulership of the ears under Taurus [and by extension the 2nd house]. He connects deafness with Mercury and the 12th house. So taking Fagan's birth chart:

(1) Mercury is the lord of the 2nd house, and in extreme infancy at 21 minutes of Gemini.
(2) Mercury receives the square from Mars in Pisces from the 8th house.
(3) The 12th lord Moon is in the 2nd house and in weak square aspect to 2nd lord Mercury.

Dr. Charak has the chart of a deaf girl in his book, and the 12th lord Venus aspects Mercury which is in extreme infancy (two minutes into Libra). Moon, lord of 2nd is also in extreme infancy, 22 minutes into Aries, and Saturn is in the 2nd house.

I've posted the tropical chart if someone wants to take a stab at Fagan's deafness with tropical rulerships.
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4962
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2014 8:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

On the subject of Cyril Fagan , Ken Bowser has written this short essay on him on his website. Its partly a brief biography and partly a synopsis of the western siderealist position.

http://www.radical-astrology.com/irish/fagan/bowser.html

Much is made in western sidereal literature of Cyril Fagan 'discovering' an explicit date for the origin of the exaltation signs and their degrees. In particular, Fagan believed he had found a specific date of the first of Nisan, the first Babylonian month, April 3rd, 786 B.C. Julian at Moonset.

However, in the light of contemporary academic research into the exaltations is Fagan's theory still worth serious consideration by astrologers? From the research I have seen (Francesa Rochberg, Koch-Westenholz, Robert Schmidt, Joanne Conman etc) I would suggest his theory looks rather naive and quite dated.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1213
Location: California, USA

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2014 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:
Much is made in western sidereal literature of Cyril Fagan 'discovering' an explicit date for the origin of the exaltation signs and their degrees. In particular, Fagan believed he had found a specific date of the first of Nisan, the first Babylonian month, April 3rd, 786 B.C. Julian at Moonset.

However, in the light of contemporary academic research into the exaltations is Fagan's theory still worth serious consideration by astrologers? From the research I have seen (Francesa Rochberg, Koch-Westenholz, Robert Schmidt, Joanne Conman etc) I would suggest his theory looks rather naive and quite dated.

Thanks for the biographical link, Mark. Rupert Gleadow questioned Fagan's exaltaton theory. Here is what he wrote in The Origin of the Zodiac (1968):

"Thus although Mr. Fagan claims that the exaltations of the planets originated in 786 B.C. when the new temple of Nabu, who is Mercury, was opened...yet 200 years later, in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, the Moon's exaltation, though in the right place, is not spoken of as in Taurus, and hense the zodiac, though it had probably been imagined, had not yet superseded the earlier system." (p. 171)
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 2906
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2014 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RodJM wrote:
Therese Hamilton wrote:

Quote:
Also, as Fagan suggests, planetary aspects can take priority over sign attributes. Sometimes a sign simply manifests a type of energy that is only perceptible when living or conversing with a person. This makes sign research extremely difficult unless one follows a profession relating to a sign whose ruler is prominent. Planetary interaction is always stronger than sign attributes.


This is powerful and I totally agree with you and Fagan.


in the astrologers tool box, i think signs are over-rated. how this relates to fagan or your comments below, i am not sure. i note how little signs are discussed in the hellenistic astro literature that i read.. it is mostly whether a planet, especially the moon is well placed based in it's relation to the "fortunes" or "infortunes".



RodJM wrote:

If I could use a snippet from my own natal chart to demonstrate this concept.
I have a tight Venus/Pluto conjunction (within 5 minute orb) and conjunct Uranus (within 2-1/2 degree orb) all of which sextile Neptune (again, within another 2-1/2 degree orb) Of course the rulers of my luminaries are tied up in this as can be seen by my signature.
If you were to know me in real life, I would be the most Un-Libran person you could ever know. That is, I do not fit the description of a typical Sun sign Libran or one that is further "pacified" by the Pisces moon too.. and yet my Pisces moon is not weak as its in the Gibbous waxing phase and conjunct my out of sign IC but not tight (6-1/2 degree orb)
I would be seen by others as somewhat of a loner, strong willed and quite self sufficient in life.


rod - i am curious how you interpret your own chart based on the characteristics you articulate as others seeing you.. it appears you base your own observations based on the venus/pluto and uranus config and the rulership connection to the lights. i am just double checking. thanks.

one small question - rulerships relies heavily on signs.. if you do see signs as not being so central, how do you place the concept of rulerships?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RodJM



Joined: 02 Feb 2014
Posts: 82
Location: Tasmania!

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 1:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Therese Hamilton wrote:
Rod, thanks for posting your chart. Since you have Sagittarius rising, Jupiter is the magnet that attracts planetary energy to yourself. The placement of Jupiter is very interesting because it changes signs between the Fagan and Lahiri/Krishnamurti ayanamsas. It's very "old" with Fagan (last degree of Aries) , and very "young" with L/K, 59 minutes into Taurus with K. So either Mars or Venus disposits your Jupiter. Can you identify with either position of Jupiter?


Thanks Therese, that's a very thought provoking analysis you did for me, I am deeply grateful.

Before I go any further, I just want to say that I don't mean to hijack this thread as its about Fagan's notes etc..

However, I'm still getting use to the sidereal school of thinking on this after spending many years laboring under the tropical zodiac natal chart system. I spent years reading the works of Jeff Green and Dane Rudhyar back in the late 80's and early 90's. After this period, I stopped reading them and became quite disillusioned with western astrology in general because they and the rest of the western world's astrological thinking was based on the mathematical construct of the zodiac as devised by northern hemisphere observations from folks like Ptolemy etc..back in their day (couple of millenniums ago of course)
There is something about the whole tropical system that just doesn't fit properly for a holistic global approach of western astrology, of which I firmly believe is the only way to go for the evolution of western astrology today.
I don't want to get off topic again but I feel strongly about mentioning this as I think it has relevance.. perhaps the upcoming transiting grand cross of Pluto/Uranus/Jupiter/RxMars in sidereal zodiac is spurring this on ... just my thoughts on this whole dilemma at the current moment.

As for the Mars or Venus dispositorships of RxJupiter, Overall, I would say it changes depending on age in life. There is no one or the other, if you know what I mean.

The position of Jupiter is also conjunct the Vertex and from what I have read on this, its a very fated path in life, weather one is conscious or not of this, it doesn't seem to matter because circumstances in the individual's life conspire to bring this on. (This is a whole other topic so won't ramble on too much about the significance of the Vertex for now)

In my case for example, being born into a middle class family from a "Liberal democratic" (I use that term loosely) country like Australia today, has blessed me with opportunities to "expand" in affairs related to Jupiter.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

The two planets that influence Jupiter are the Aquarian Saturn (square) and the Pisces Moon (sextile).


That square has cause me the biggest hurdles in life to self development and fulfillment. They have a "fixedness" about them, hence I feel they are more influenced by Aquarius and Taurus backdrops than the previous cardinal signs and they have lead me to internalize (Rx influence) stubborn thinking.
Also having Sun/mercury conjunction can make one "blind" to alternative ways of lateral thinking to overcome difficulties involving ego development. Remember this Sun/mercury conjunction is quiet common in the population too.[/quote]

(But with Fagan these aspects are out of sign.) The Moon gains additional strength because it's on your navamsa ascendant, assuming that your birth time is correct. It all goes back to having a very clear sense of the attributes of each planet.
Can you identify with a lunar or Saturn influence? [/quote]

In a nutshell... both simultaneously!
I have no issues with anything to do with moon's symbolism in my psyche and deeply understand the boundaries and responsibilities of Saturn's symbolism. Traditionally, they are suppose to represent the Mother and Father influence on one's development and growth in life. My parents were mostly happily married for 35 years if that has relevance to "stabilizing" ones childhood growth and formation.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

Often it's difficult to sense a sign influence if planets are in the early degrees, and that's where your Sun, Jupiter, Saturn, Mercury and Moon are--in early degrees of signs, so (as you know) the tropical signs will be the same. What fun!!


Oh yeah! tell me about it...lol... Smile

Therese Hamilton wrote:

It may be that the Venus-in-Leo stellium doesn't refer to you at all, but to some circumstances in your life. But there is a Sun-Venus mutual reception which you should notice. This connects the 9th and 11th houses, and there will be a Venus influence on the Sun. It's the mutual reception that will be dominant with your Leo and Libra planets. Then Venus is connected to both Uranus and Pluto. You should see this influence in 6th and 11th house affairs since Venus rules those houses. And relationships, of course. But I leave the details up to you!


6th house influence is fated no doubt because of the NN (Rahu) located there and yes, here I am at my age in life, fit as a fiddle and physically look about a decade younger than my real age (so I've been told by strangers or folks I've just very recently met!) This, I put down to practical daily application of 6th house matters to do with health and self improvement issues like physical exercise etc.. aided of course by the trine to the Sun/Mercury combo and RxSaturn.
Its fascinating that you mention the Sun/Venus connection, because I am seriously looking at pursuing a creative career in digital media and photography! only about my 6th career change...lol! but thats not uncommon these days for a vast majority of folks born in this period of human history.

Therese Hamilton wrote:

P.S. Despite what the books say, the 11th house doesn't rule group affiliation. The 11th has to do with gain and patronage from others, especially as relating to monetary flow and favors. Sometimes the 11th is simply good luck at certain times in the life, and it can have to do with material comfort or the lack of it.


Good point! traditional understanding of 11th house matters has never "felt" right to me either. Something I have to explore further.. [/quote]

Therese Hamilton wrote:

Rahu is trine your Sun and Mercury. That can relate to interest in astrology and metaphysics. If your asc lord Jupiter is in early Taurus, that adds the influence of Neptune since it's in early Taurus (1° 25') in the navamsa.
Smile

Yep! no doubt.. the proof is in the pudding... so they say... lol..Smile
_________________
Libra Sun/ Pisces Moon/ Sagittarius Rising
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RodJM



Joined: 02 Feb 2014
Posts: 82
Location: Tasmania!

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:15 am    Post subject: Clarification Reply with quote

james_m wrote:
RodJM wrote:
Therese Hamilton wrote:

Quote:
Also, as Fagan suggests, planetary aspects can take priority over sign attributes. Sometimes a sign simply manifests a type of energy that is only perceptible when living or conversing with a person. This makes sign research extremely difficult unless one follows a profession relating to a sign whose ruler is prominent. Planetary interaction is always stronger than sign attributes.


This is powerful and I totally agree with you and Fagan.


in the astrologers tool box, i think signs are over-rated. how this relates to fagan or your comments below, i am not sure. i note how little signs are discussed in the hellenistic astro literature that i read.. it is mostly whether a planet, especially the moon is well placed based in it's relation to the "fortunes" or "infortunes".


I'm leaning into the premise that constellation signs should take a secondary backdrop to firstly, planets and aspects. I've come to learn in reading many different authors on western astrology over the years that the zodiac signs are like background "color" to the forefront picture of the planets themselves and of course how the energies are linked are aspects relevant to the inner workings of an individual.
I'm not up to speed on fortunes, too much at the moment to consider with grasping the wholeness of the sidereal school of thinking. However, in time I will explore these further.

RodJM wrote:

If I could use a snippet from my own natal chart to demonstrate this concept.
I have a tight Venus/Pluto conjunction (within 5 minute orb) and conjunct Uranus (within 2-1/2 degree orb) all of which sextile Neptune (again, within another 2-1/2 degree orb) Of course the rulers of my luminaries are tied up in this as can be seen by my signature.
If you were to know me in real life, I would be the most Un-Libran person you could ever know. That is, I do not fit the description of a typical Sun sign Libran or one that is further "pacified" by the Pisces moon too.. and yet my Pisces moon is not weak as its in the Gibbous waxing phase and conjunct my out of sign IC but not tight (6-1/2 degree orb)
I would be seen by others as somewhat of a loner, strong willed and quite self sufficient in life.


james_m wrote:

rod - i am curious how you interpret your own chart based on the characteristics you articulate as others seeing you..


I'm describing my life at present in how it has evolved to this point in time, of course matters like secondary progressions and current transits can complicate this, also I'll admit, I'm victim to the dreaded subjective "blindness" of Sun/Mercury conjunction... Sad although that is somewhat alleviated by the trine from RxSaturn.

james_m wrote:

it appears you base your own observations based on the venus/pluto and uranus config and the rulership connection to the lights. i am just double checking. thanks.


Well, one of the most noticeable things about my natal chart is that triple conjunction near one of the most important angles in any natal chart - MC. As you would know, any planets near or on the angles, places great importance on the symbolism of the related planets before any other considerations of the natal chart interpretation. That triple conjunction is also tied up with the (some may call "minor") aspect of semi-square from Mercury to Uranus. and Mercury being the ruler of the NN and conjunct the Sun with other major aspects to it, re-inforces the energy of this triple conjunction. Its tight in orb and It can make thinking jumpy and quirky at times, but keep in mind, Mercury and the conjunction to the Sun is supported by the trine from what I consider the final dispositor in the chart - Saturn in Aquarius (mundane traditional ruler) of course.
Traditionally, as you know, Venus is ruler of Libra/Taurus and I feel strongly that Neptune should be allocated ruler of Pisces, the two have so much in common (as far as we know), it would be quite foolish to dismiss this.
One could also go on to say that Uranus is in its "detriment" in Leo, but I find such categorisations like that an over simplification of a still, relatively speaking of course, "newish" and "unpredictable" planet such as Uranus, (thats "newish" in the sense of keeping it relevant with millenniums old traditional western astrology) even using pure astronomy, Uranus is the only planet to "sit on its side" as it circulates around the Sun, NASA can provide more info on that.[/quote]

james_m wrote:

one small question - rulerships relies heavily on signs.. if you do see signs as not being so central, how do you place the concept of rulerships?


Just because I consider zodiacal sign rulership as a secondary concern doesn't diminish its importance, its just that I find the planetary symbolism so compelling in symphony with aspects that they are, at least to me, at the forefront of human behavior explanations before the coloring of generalisations from commonly agreed zodiacal sign interpretations.
_________________
Libra Sun/ Pisces Moon/ Sagittarius Rising
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phil



Joined: 07 Jan 2012
Posts: 51

Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

James (Atlantean), thank you.

James and Mark, I believe that the things you say just after my last post are not at odds with each other, even though they could seem to be. A vocal "siderealist" relying on a "tropical" chart? A "tropicalist" taking a class from a well known "siderealist" steeped in Indian astrology?

Though going in opposite directions, your comments reinforce each other and reinforce the point of my prior post about Mr. Fagan's statements: One should be very cautious about creating lines in the sand. They're not real, and you put them there, so you'll likely have to cross them yourself some day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bogdan574



Joined: 06 Nov 2013
Posts: 59
Location: United States

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RodJM wrote:
Quote:
I'm leaning into the premise that constellation signs should take a secondary backdrop to firstly, planets and aspects. I've come to learn in reading many different authors on western astrology over the years that the zodiac signs are like background "color" to the forefront picture of the planets themselves and of course how the energies are linked are aspects relevant to the inner workings of an individual.
I'm not up to speed on fortunes, too much at the moment to consider with grasping the wholeness of the sidereal school of thinking. However, in time I will explore these further.


I was thinking of something similar: a system where the planets and their aspects reign first and foremost. The sign that gives the most impact is the rising sign. The other signs will take a backseat and be minor, and what will be taken into account more is the houses the planets are in.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1213
Location: California, USA

Posted: Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The ascendant sign generally won't show up unless planets are located there. I've done a little research on the Sun on the ascendant in various mansions, but these posts seem to have mainly escaped notice. If no planets are in the ascendant sign, it is likely to be a mute point except as reference for the sign lord and aspects to that planet.

Or the ascendant can be a focal point for close aspects from planets, in which case the sign those planets are in will often be obvious, even in the appearance.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7562
Sun on the ascendant: Aries through Cancer

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7683
Sun on the ascendant: Leo through Scorpio
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 2906
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2014 4:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phil wrote:

James and Mark, I believe that the things you say just after my last post are not at odds with each other, even though they could seem to be. A vocal "siderealist" relying on a "tropical" chart? A "tropicalist" taking a class from a well known "siderealist" steeped in Indian astrology?

Though going in opposite directions, your comments reinforce each other and reinforce the point of my prior post about Mr. Fagan's statements: One should be very cautious about creating lines in the sand. They're not real, and you put them there, so you'll likely have to cross them yourself some day.


hi phil,

i didn't say too much, so not sure what you picked up and how it goes into what you are saying here. perhaps you'd like to elaborate, or pm me privately. cheers.

rod

rather then take up the board discussing your chart, i sent you a private message (pm) 5 or so days ago, but i note you haven't seen it. since you are relatively new around here, on the left side of the screen is a spot that says 'Check PM's' if you care to see it. cheers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4962
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2014 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

James M wrote:
Quote:
hi phil,

i didn't say too much, so not sure what you picked up and how it goes into what you are saying here. perhaps you'd like to elaborate, or pm me privately. cheers.


I think Phil was discussing the comment on page 4 of this thread by the other James here (Atlantean) not you.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 2906
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2014 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mark, thanks for pointing that out to me.

Phil wrote:
The art is ancient, and there are many ways to look at it. I’d beware folks who draw lines in the sand and claim to possess the only “right” way of approaching things. As the academics show us, the people who know best have many more questions than answers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Therese Hamilton



Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 1213
Location: California, USA

Posted: Thu May 08, 2014 3:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cyril Fagan on Pluto:

The planet Pluto may be regarded as being the antonym of Neptune. While the latter denotes the many, the collective,the mass, the shoal, Pluto is strictly individualistic, always alone and on his own. The scions of Pluto are the shyest of all people and spend most of their time trying to avoid their fellowmen. Pluto is indeed the loner among the planets. For this reason the Plutonian can be considered something of an oddball.

The average among them likes to live alone and undisturbed away from the busy haunts of man where he can pursue his pet hobby unmolested and to his heart's content. When the Plutonian is forced to mingle with others, he is ill-at-ease and often extremely irritable and bad tempered. The children of Pluto are happiest when alone. Rarely do they sally forth from their homes and mingle with the madding throng. In some cases they even employ others to do their shopping.


Astrological Origins
(1973), p. 152
_________________
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/LostZodiac.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Raymond Scott



Joined: 08 Mar 2012
Posts: 25

Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2015 6:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cyril Fagan was an outside the box thinker, and this easily seen if looking at his chart from the 21st Century Astrological perspective.


His Mercury was in aspect to 2 transneptunian dwarf planets

using Fagan-Bradley

Mercury in 29'22 Taurus
conjunct Haumea in 29'58 Taurus
square Eris in 28'27 Aquarius



Haumea was named after the Hawaiian Goddess of Childbirth and Fertility
Creative and Spiritual Birth
Haumea ( 2003 EL61 / 136108 ) is a focus point through which we connect with the Mother Focus in the Divine energy, the point where spiritual birth or rebirth can be accessed and experienced. Haumea brings a greater spiritual awareness and attunement. She opens doors within us.

When mixed with other strong energies, Haumea seems to become a reformer of those energies or perhaps to be giving birth to those energies in a new form. Aspects with other planets represent issues in the birth process and forces that facilitate or hinder that process. (I mostly worked with people from the 1800s because Haumea had such strong planets conjunction it for most of the 20th Century that it was very difficult to sort out it's meaning.)
http://www.astrologicaldepth.com/TNOInfo/Haumea.htm



Eris was named after the Greek Goddess of Discord
Unexpected, Unsettling Awareness
Eris ( 2003 UB313 / 136199 ) Each of us has a normal process of thinking, a standard view of the world and of our place in it, a set of attitudes that describes who we want to believe we are. Eris is beyond that. She sees the whole and recognizes the pretensions and incorrect beliefs within the conscious operating processes. Because of this she is rejected. She is not allowed into normal operating processes. Thus she acts within each of us from way out in left field, piercing the consciousness and revealing its pretensions and misperceptions of reality. Her action is so uncomfortable that as long as the ego is in charge, she will be rejected and denied over and over again. Eris' aspects shows your blindspots, what it is hard for you to see, what she opposes, what she conflicts with, where she forces adjustments. The trine and sextile show where and in what way her awareness is easier to accept. The contraquindecile (165) shows the core nature of her awareness experienced as an outside force.
http://www.astrologicaldepth.com/TNOInfo/Eris.htm



With his Mercury square Eris, he had to watch that he doesn't become intolerant of divergence and diversity in communications
There can be the potential to think his views are right and everybody else's are wrong which is something that Eris co-discoverer said what mythological Eris was about.


“It is absolutely the perfect name,” Dr. Brown said, given the continuing discord among astronomers and the public over whether Pluto should have retained its planetary status.

In mythology, Eris ignited discord that led to the Trojan War.

“She causes strife by causing arguments among men, by making them think their opinions are right and everyone else’s is wrong,” Dr. Brown said. “It really is just perfect.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/15/science/space/15xena.html?_r=0


I have Mercury biquintile Eris - '05

they are also in paran
Cyril Fagan believed that parans were important in Astrology

on the day that I was born

Mercury set a 6:41 PM
Eris rose at 6:43 PM

therefore, I have 2 Mercury-Eris configurations


BTW
I am neurodivergent with Dyslexia,Dyspraxia,ADHD
I support the Neurodiversity Movement.


I read about Cyril Fagan had problems with hearing

I have auditory processing issues in connection to my Dyslexia
I used to have auditory reversals , and I had auditory therapy to correct those issues.
I problems with auditory memory, auditory-sequential processing, and auditory-input speech lags, auditory overload
too much information to my ears for my brain to process

I have same issues with visual processing

I think all of it is based on sensory integration issues.

I believe that my neurodivergence stems from a combination of being ultrasensitive, picture-thinking, nonconformist


I like to look at things from different angles
I have a tendency to retort
I feel the need to give an alternative view about things.
I am an intense communicator
I do my best to avoid the mentality of being right and others wrong.
I consider people's viewpoints other than my own.
I don't go around telling people that they are wrong.
I don't claim to be right at all.
I also agree to disagree.
I am very capable of compromise.

I really want harmony. It's important that I have that around me.
In Sidereal Zodiac
I have Sun, Mercury, and Venus in Libra (They are in Scorpio in Tropical Zodiac)
I have Mercury conjunct and parallel Venus.



I am very strong in the 21st Century transneptunian dwarf planet energy including Eris,Ixion,Sedna,Haumea,Quaoar,Varda,Varuna,Orcus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jens



Joined: 17 Dec 2016
Posts: 54

Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 5:32 pm    Post subject: Re: Cyril Fagan's Deafness Reply with quote

Therese Hamilton wrote:
Sidereal Analysis of Fagan's Deafness:

In the Essentials of Medical Astrology Dr. K.S. Charak states: "Mercury deals with hearing as well as communications of any sort. A strong Mercury under benefic influences indicates a strong and healthy hearing mechanism. Afflictions indicate the reverse." (p. 160)

H. L. Cornell's (M.D.) Encyclopaedia of Medical Astrology places the rulership of the ears under Taurus [and by extension the 2nd house]. He connects deafness with Mercury and the 12th house. So taking Fagan's birth chart:

(1) Mercury is the lord of the 2nd house, and in extreme infancy at 21 minutes of Gemini.
(2) Mercury receives the square from Mars in Pisces from the 8th house.
(3) The 12th lord Moon is in the 2nd house and in weak square aspect to 2nd lord Mercury.

Dr. Charak has the chart of a deaf girl in his book, and the 12th lord Venus aspects Mercury which is in extreme infancy (two minutes into Libra). Moon, lord of 2nd is also in extreme infancy, 22 minutes into Aries, and Saturn is in the 2nd house.

I've posted the tropical chart if someone wants to take a stab at Fagan's deafness with tropical rulerships.

I`ve got Mercury in an early degree conjunct Saturn and have hearing problems.Mercury rules sideral 2nd.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Sidereal Astrology All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated