Astrologers : Do you use the hypothetical planets when interpreting a birth char!
Question: Astrologers : Do you use the hypothetical planets when interpreting a birth chart!?
Like Hades , Apollon , Kronos!.!.!.etc , and if not then why!?
Thanks for any serious answers!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Thanks for any serious answers!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Answers:
I'm off work now, so I'm able to concentrate and actually clean this up!.!.!.f!.y!.i, don't even bother with this, unless you're sure you are in the mood!.!.!.!.
Most importantly, there needs to be a definition for what is hypothetical, and what isn't!.
That's from the scientific point of view (size and relative gravitational pull in the universe)
And from the astrological point of view (it's inherent effect on the human psyche and life)
Personally, I feel they both coincide!. And in a greater way than simply stating "The sun is large, and in the middle, so!.!.!.our sun sign is most important!." Like, for example, !.!.!.a person whose Mercury squared jupiter at -87!.!.!.!.would feel the affects of that much greater than that than of a sun squaring Jupiter at -1!.
hypothetical would need to be more clearly defined!.
For example, Chiron or other asteroids!.!.!.many astrologers put no real basis on them!.!.!.but other astrologers want to applied labels to their meanings!.
Should it receive that emphasis!? Why or why not!? Where should the line be drawn!?
Maybe Pluto and Uranus switch paths for a while, and it throws off the orbit of some asteroids!.!.!.who knows what small butterfly effects may happen!.!.!.but even if one of those asteroids were nearly as large as Pluto!.!.!.should that really open the flood gates for applying astrological significance to the planet and our lives!?
Like for example, we thought Pluto was a planet for a very long time, but turns out it's not!. So, if Aries is already ruled by Mars, which makes good sense, what is Scorpio supposed to do now!? They have Mars, for fire, but now no Pluto (technically) for their depth!.!.!.despite Pluto being not being classified as a planet, it can still be applied to Scorpio!. Hypothetical analysis!.
*But that brings up my point!. According to science, Pluto is not a planet!.!.!.according to Astrology it is:
1: How important is size and gravitational pull!?
2: How much emphasis should astrology give science!?
3: If science says Pluto isn't a planet, and astrology treats it as a major planet!.!.!.are we to discard our views of Pluto and Scorpio in the name of science!?
Probably not!. There is an abundance of space for astrology to be re-eaxmining it's foundation!.
Science says Pluto isn't a planet, by their characteristics and judgement!. But, astrology does consider Pluto to be a planet, because of it's effect!.
What sort of specific roles does a planet need to play in a persons life!? How significant must the effect be to be taken seriously!?
Where is the line drawn between the 'scientific' planet and an 'astrological' planet!? What's the difference!?
example : The Sun is a Star, not a planet!. But, it rules leo!. The sun, in that respect, would have to be considered a hypothetical ruling planet for Leo!. Or Cancer, and the moon!.
Example: If any sign were ACTUALLY going to be ruled by planet earth, it would probably be Virgo!. But, no sign was assigned rulership by Earth, so they gave Virgo Mercury!. Which is frankly ridiculous, IMO!. Virgo, is mutable, and an earth sign, and should be more associate with planet Earth, as the characteristics between the sign and the planet are so similar!. But it's not, for various reasons!. Such as we're all on Earth and it belongs to everyone!.!.!.and then it would get into the complicated mess of where is your Earth placed, when it placed below your feet, and Earth doesn't exactly go through cycles like other planets, it just HOUSES the cycles, in many traditional views!.!.!.But ofcourse, there are various theories!.
I mean!.!.!.it's still really interesting though!.!.!.the Greeks and Romans, who put great emphasis on astrology, didn't have the same kind of capabilities to observe planets as we do!.!.!.
But none the less, they associated Uranus with Aquarius!. Now, we know that Uranus changes it's orbit quite dramatically, like many aquarians are known to do!.!.!.but how the hell did the greeks really know that!? Beats me!.!.!.later on Saturn was tacked on as co-ruler!.
Sometimes I have such a hard time grasping that concept!.!.!.Example!.!.!.many many centuries, we assumed that the Sun revolved around the Earth!.!.!.obviously that's been discarded!. But here's this!.!.!. Leo, is a fixed fire sign!. It's always been determined in Classical Civilization, from Phaethon's chariot ride into the sun, from acient mythology, that Leo was ruled by the Sun!. Leo's are known to take center stage!.!.!.just one creepy example of many from mythology!. Their NATURAL view of the Sun, was 'center stage'!.
It takes the nature nuture to a whole new level for the basis of astrology!.
So!.!.!.yeah!.!.!.some hypothetical planets could be used to interpret, but others shouldn't be!. Like, a giant asteroid shouldn't be taken too much into consideration!.!.!.however, hypothetically speaking, it could have put SOME sort of minute schism in the placement of my planets at the time of my birth!.!.!.but just because we want to PUT emphasis on it, doesn't mean it's actually deserved!.
Furthermore, you have to take into consideration!.!.!.just because they see the planet, does not necessarily mean that it's necessary!. Just because 'they' said it's a 'hypothetical' planet, like lilith or apollo, doesn't mean it really is!.
Or, do we just pass them off because they aren't 'popular'!?
Astrology as been around for a very long, and it still gives many unanswered questions!. Personally, I put most emphasis on sun,moon,rising,mars,venus!.!.!.in that order, followed by conjuctions, trines, ect!. The only reason I place emphasis on these planets and rulers, is because!.!.!.for the past few thousand years, they've proven accurate!.
I believe, (haha), size does matter!. That's just logical!. If size didn't matter, I would not only be ruled by Saturn, I would also be ruled by the carbon rings and dust and random particle surrounding Saturn in it's rings!.!.!.perhaps I am!? But, did you also know, that the earth magnetic core changes on a regular basis!? North becomes south and south becomes north!? It's part of the geological process for keeping our orbit balanced, among other things!.!.!.!.but, we don't get whiplash on these days!.!.!.infact, we wouldn't even know if it wasn't for some science magazine pointing it out to us!.
Importance is tiered!. Eventually, as you go down the totem pole of importance, hypothetical becomes more gray and gray, and possibly a waste of time!.
But, if you look at, for example, gilgamesh, or the koran, or the bible in genesis!.!.!.they always have two things in common, and this is true the majority of all major religions!.
1: A giant flood
2: Man was made from dust
Even if you look at the big bang, the entire universe was just made out of dust!. Eventually the super nova just took in too much gravity and exploded from the pressure!. I don't remember the exact chemical compounds, but carbon is the main one!. And we all have carbon inside of us, because it's an element and that means it is naturally occuring and organic!.
Carbon is found in each one of our bodies!.!.!.it's the same element that the first star was mainly composed of, which means we share that common link with the entire universe!.
In that respect!.!.!."hades, apollon, kronos!.!.!.ect" are all important!.!.!.but not equally!. The thing that I find most interesting about astrology, isn't personality traits, or the EFFECTS of planetary placements!.!.!.what's most fascinating about astrology is the complete mystery to the reasons BEHIND it!.!.!.but that's a completely different subject!. Your twelve word question, in my opinion, entails quite a bit!. I think the study of new planets and bodies is just beginning, and it will take many years and studies of generations, before a clear answers is reached on that!. Of course, interpreting a persons personality or what-not, is quite interesting!.!.!.but I feel that Astrology is also a science!. And, it's a science that is lacking is explanation and principles, at least on the mainstream basis!. Astrology is interesting!.!.!.it's like a trade really!.
In closing, I think!.!.!.they shouldn't be interpreted with absolute certainty, but should certainly be observed!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Most importantly, there needs to be a definition for what is hypothetical, and what isn't!.
That's from the scientific point of view (size and relative gravitational pull in the universe)
And from the astrological point of view (it's inherent effect on the human psyche and life)
Personally, I feel they both coincide!. And in a greater way than simply stating "The sun is large, and in the middle, so!.!.!.our sun sign is most important!." Like, for example, !.!.!.a person whose Mercury squared jupiter at -87!.!.!.!.would feel the affects of that much greater than that than of a sun squaring Jupiter at -1!.
hypothetical would need to be more clearly defined!.
For example, Chiron or other asteroids!.!.!.many astrologers put no real basis on them!.!.!.but other astrologers want to applied labels to their meanings!.
Should it receive that emphasis!? Why or why not!? Where should the line be drawn!?
Maybe Pluto and Uranus switch paths for a while, and it throws off the orbit of some asteroids!.!.!.who knows what small butterfly effects may happen!.!.!.but even if one of those asteroids were nearly as large as Pluto!.!.!.should that really open the flood gates for applying astrological significance to the planet and our lives!?
Like for example, we thought Pluto was a planet for a very long time, but turns out it's not!. So, if Aries is already ruled by Mars, which makes good sense, what is Scorpio supposed to do now!? They have Mars, for fire, but now no Pluto (technically) for their depth!.!.!.despite Pluto being not being classified as a planet, it can still be applied to Scorpio!. Hypothetical analysis!.
*But that brings up my point!. According to science, Pluto is not a planet!.!.!.according to Astrology it is:
1: How important is size and gravitational pull!?
2: How much emphasis should astrology give science!?
3: If science says Pluto isn't a planet, and astrology treats it as a major planet!.!.!.are we to discard our views of Pluto and Scorpio in the name of science!?
Probably not!. There is an abundance of space for astrology to be re-eaxmining it's foundation!.
Science says Pluto isn't a planet, by their characteristics and judgement!. But, astrology does consider Pluto to be a planet, because of it's effect!.
What sort of specific roles does a planet need to play in a persons life!? How significant must the effect be to be taken seriously!?
Where is the line drawn between the 'scientific' planet and an 'astrological' planet!? What's the difference!?
example : The Sun is a Star, not a planet!. But, it rules leo!. The sun, in that respect, would have to be considered a hypothetical ruling planet for Leo!. Or Cancer, and the moon!.
Example: If any sign were ACTUALLY going to be ruled by planet earth, it would probably be Virgo!. But, no sign was assigned rulership by Earth, so they gave Virgo Mercury!. Which is frankly ridiculous, IMO!. Virgo, is mutable, and an earth sign, and should be more associate with planet Earth, as the characteristics between the sign and the planet are so similar!. But it's not, for various reasons!. Such as we're all on Earth and it belongs to everyone!.!.!.and then it would get into the complicated mess of where is your Earth placed, when it placed below your feet, and Earth doesn't exactly go through cycles like other planets, it just HOUSES the cycles, in many traditional views!.!.!.But ofcourse, there are various theories!.
I mean!.!.!.it's still really interesting though!.!.!.the Greeks and Romans, who put great emphasis on astrology, didn't have the same kind of capabilities to observe planets as we do!.!.!.
But none the less, they associated Uranus with Aquarius!. Now, we know that Uranus changes it's orbit quite dramatically, like many aquarians are known to do!.!.!.but how the hell did the greeks really know that!? Beats me!.!.!.later on Saturn was tacked on as co-ruler!.
Sometimes I have such a hard time grasping that concept!.!.!.Example!.!.!.many many centuries, we assumed that the Sun revolved around the Earth!.!.!.obviously that's been discarded!. But here's this!.!.!. Leo, is a fixed fire sign!. It's always been determined in Classical Civilization, from Phaethon's chariot ride into the sun, from acient mythology, that Leo was ruled by the Sun!. Leo's are known to take center stage!.!.!.just one creepy example of many from mythology!. Their NATURAL view of the Sun, was 'center stage'!.
It takes the nature nuture to a whole new level for the basis of astrology!.
So!.!.!.yeah!.!.!.some hypothetical planets could be used to interpret, but others shouldn't be!. Like, a giant asteroid shouldn't be taken too much into consideration!.!.!.however, hypothetically speaking, it could have put SOME sort of minute schism in the placement of my planets at the time of my birth!.!.!.but just because we want to PUT emphasis on it, doesn't mean it's actually deserved!.
Furthermore, you have to take into consideration!.!.!.just because they see the planet, does not necessarily mean that it's necessary!. Just because 'they' said it's a 'hypothetical' planet, like lilith or apollo, doesn't mean it really is!.
Or, do we just pass them off because they aren't 'popular'!?
Astrology as been around for a very long, and it still gives many unanswered questions!. Personally, I put most emphasis on sun,moon,rising,mars,venus!.!.!.in that order, followed by conjuctions, trines, ect!. The only reason I place emphasis on these planets and rulers, is because!.!.!.for the past few thousand years, they've proven accurate!.
I believe, (haha), size does matter!. That's just logical!. If size didn't matter, I would not only be ruled by Saturn, I would also be ruled by the carbon rings and dust and random particle surrounding Saturn in it's rings!.!.!.perhaps I am!? But, did you also know, that the earth magnetic core changes on a regular basis!? North becomes south and south becomes north!? It's part of the geological process for keeping our orbit balanced, among other things!.!.!.!.but, we don't get whiplash on these days!.!.!.infact, we wouldn't even know if it wasn't for some science magazine pointing it out to us!.
Importance is tiered!. Eventually, as you go down the totem pole of importance, hypothetical becomes more gray and gray, and possibly a waste of time!.
But, if you look at, for example, gilgamesh, or the koran, or the bible in genesis!.!.!.they always have two things in common, and this is true the majority of all major religions!.
1: A giant flood
2: Man was made from dust
Even if you look at the big bang, the entire universe was just made out of dust!. Eventually the super nova just took in too much gravity and exploded from the pressure!. I don't remember the exact chemical compounds, but carbon is the main one!. And we all have carbon inside of us, because it's an element and that means it is naturally occuring and organic!.
Carbon is found in each one of our bodies!.!.!.it's the same element that the first star was mainly composed of, which means we share that common link with the entire universe!.
In that respect!.!.!."hades, apollon, kronos!.!.!.ect" are all important!.!.!.but not equally!. The thing that I find most interesting about astrology, isn't personality traits, or the EFFECTS of planetary placements!.!.!.what's most fascinating about astrology is the complete mystery to the reasons BEHIND it!.!.!.but that's a completely different subject!. Your twelve word question, in my opinion, entails quite a bit!. I think the study of new planets and bodies is just beginning, and it will take many years and studies of generations, before a clear answers is reached on that!. Of course, interpreting a persons personality or what-not, is quite interesting!.!.!.but I feel that Astrology is also a science!. And, it's a science that is lacking is explanation and principles, at least on the mainstream basis!. Astrology is interesting!.!.!.it's like a trade really!.
In closing, I think!.!.!.they shouldn't be interpreted with absolute certainty, but should certainly be observed!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Haha, alright Hades, I am not an astrologer but I am easily humored and I have to say that I laughed at your details to No N hahah!. Sorry, I don't have an answer for your question but I'm not asking a question here either!. ;)
Edit: Awww, thanks :)Www@Enter-QA@Com
Edit: Awww, thanks :)Www@Enter-QA@Com
yes, v in vedic astro use 2 hypo planets!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
No but I'm only a student!.
I wouldn't even know where to locate them in the chart!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
I wouldn't even know where to locate them in the chart!.Www@Enter-QA@Com