fadi,

thanks... direct me to a page number and i am curious to read it.. thanks..

therese

Therese Hamilton wrote: This is not the same thing. Could you play music if you knew nothing about the musical scale, notes, rhythm, beat, tone, harmony? Could you know anything about astrology if you had never learned about signs, houses aspects? These are all foundations from our study of astrology.

you'd be surprised what a person can do if they are interested in learning about something! think of it this way... when a child is first learning to speak they mimic the sounds they hear... they don't learn the alphabet before saying words... it is much the same with music... imitation is a large part of how people learn...

all my astrology mistakes - i learned imitating others, LOLOL!

all the astrology that i do that works - i figured that out on my own, LOLOL!

i am joking with you, but there are many ways to learn... there is no one way but the most important way is having an open mind and being curious.. in music i am mostly self taught, although i would have to say that watching others and picking up many diverse ideas from others has been an important part of my learning curve..

some folks might feel more comfortable in a traditional learning environment - school, university and etc, but ultimately you learn what works and you discard what doesn't seem to work.. trail and error is a big part of it and i think this is true with astrology too..

let me give you a musical example of something that i think is relevant.. the flat 5 or augmented 4th .. this was considered the devils interval that was banned in Renaissance church music.. https://www.theguardian.com/notesandque ... 67,00.html

what happened was that over time this sound was embraced, especially in the bebop era of charlie parker, dizzie gillespie and others...

so what happened here? was it a terrible chord, or was the beauty or ugliness of the sound in the ear of the beholder??

i think this same thing happens in astrology all the time with techniques that others will attempt to use that don't make sense to others... i favour experimentation..

as for the comment on my chart - the uranus conjunct ascendant in the navamsha is expressed as a 120 from the 9th house to my ascendant in the natal chart.. any planet, 40, or 80, 120 or 160 and etc to another will show up as conjunction in the navamsha chart.. thus my uranus 120 ascendant show up as a conjunction in the navamsha chart...

if a person has a planet 20, 60, 100, 140 and etc - they will show up as an opposition in the navamsha or 9th harmonic chart.. it is all about mathematics.. what is the significance of numbers - 9 in particular in this example?? for that, i think we have to leave the orthodox realm of astrology and try to fathom a different reality..

your move!!