CA vol I: ch.19 - aspects
Part VI of Deborah Houlding's annotated edition of Lilly's Christian Astrology, covering pages 105-114 |
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
varuna2
Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Posts: 289
Location: Lemuria
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:17 am Post subject: |
 |
|
delete
Last edited by varuna2 on Sat May 04, 2013 5:16 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
varuna2
Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Posts: 289
Location: Lemuria
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
delete
Last edited by varuna2 on Sat May 04, 2013 5:17 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
varuna2
Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Posts: 289
Location: Lemuria
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:14 am Post subject: Re: Sidereal ascendant, appearance and constitution |
|
|
delete
Last edited by varuna2 on Sat May 04, 2013 5:17 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nixx
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 230
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Deb wrote: | Maybe you need a change of zodiac system Nixx - or perhaps start smoking something else that chills you out a bit  |
It's the same problem with the Ganga weed. Incense gets in the throat and makes smoking an unpleasurable experience. If you are seeking to reduce your lifespan or die a long painful death after a lifetime of sensual Sweet Aftons then it seems irrational, if not idiotic, to expose oneself to material substances that reduce ones oral, or oedipal, pleasures. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul
Moderator
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nixx wrote: | | If you are seeking to reduce your lifespan or die a long painful death after a lifetime of sensual Sweet Aftons then it seems irrational, if not idiotic, to expose oneself to material substances that reduce ones oral, or oedipal, pleasures. |
Do you lack air in your chart? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nixx
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 230
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Paul wrote: | Erm not to detract from this thread further, but I'm not sure what version of psychological astrology you studied that suggested that Water was a rational element and Air was irrational. In fact that's outright contradictory to everything I've read of modern psychological astrology. I believe you said on another forum that you were a follower of the CPA, but in the CPA Air and not Water is the rational element. In fact air and earth are generally considered rational with fire and water considered less rational.
This is off topic in a sidereal forum of course, but I do think that if you are to follow tropical astrology you have to be aware of the potential logical problems it raises for the southern hemisphere. Of course if the sidereal argument that the luminaries are NOT assigned to Leo and Cancer because of seasonal attributions is correct then of course this very same argument neatly solves the southern hemisphere problem for us - at least with regards rulerships. There are other problems of course. |
Bad typo on my part should have written Earth not Air. Water remains Rational. What led you to think it was perceived by Psychological Astrologers as Irrational?
''Jung arranges these four functions into two pairs of opposites. Firstly there are the two perceiving (or, non-rational) functions of Sensation and Intuition. Secondly, there are the two judging (or, rational) functions of Thinking and Feeling''.
http://www.transpersonalscience.org/types.aspx
I once heard there was a Jungian influenced/shaped Psychological Astrologer in the USA who utilised the Sidereal Zodiac. 
Follower of the CPA?, I may have written somewhere I was representing a text or two of from there in a post perhaps.
If the lights were not given to Cancer/Leo for Hellensitic heat reasons then is there an alternative occult narrative? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul
Moderator
Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 819
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nixx wrote: |
Bad typo on my part should have written Earth not Air. Water remains Rational. What led you to think it was perceived by Psychological Astrologers as Irrational? |
Yes, that's true that Jung does refer to water as part of the rationale types, but psychological astrologers refer to Water as irrational and refer to Air as rational. Obviously the typo meant you didn't mean air. But they still refer to water as irrational. When Jung refers to rational and irrational he does not mean it in the colloquial sense. Perhaps you didn't either, and your typo is what made that not obvious
I don't think anyone can doubt Liz Greene's credentials as a psychological astrologer so I'll use her as an example, but in truth the same idea is found by several other authors.
Astrology for Lovers, Liz Greene
| Quote: |
The element of water...is the most 'primitive' in that it is furthest from the rational realm that we are pleased to call human thought.
...
The water signs move like the realm of nature: with instinct, at home with that which is nonrational, unexplainable, sometimes magical. They are all motivated by feeling - and feeling, as everyone except a few fanatical material scientists will admit, is not something that you can measure by statistics, define by hypothesis, contain with rationally defined laws.
|
Clearly Greene is also using it in the colloquial sense of the word. This book is in fact littered with examples of water being referred to as irrational.
| Quote: | | If the lights were not given to Cancer/Leo for Hellensitic heat reasons then is there an alternative occult narrative? |
We don't know but we do know that sidereal astrologers do not buy into the logic behind the rulerhsips as put forth by Ptolemy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
varuna2
Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Posts: 289
Location: Lemuria
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
delete
Last edited by varuna2 on Sat May 04, 2013 5:20 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
margherita
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1259
Location: Rome, Italy
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Paul wrote: | | Nixx wrote: |
An idea which has some currency perhaps in more recent time is big eyes and Pisceans. Again why? , could be Jupiter as a ruler/co-ruler and its expansive functions I suppose. |
The luminaries are the lights of the sky, some even claimed they were the eyes of god. That sun is the eye of god by day and the moon the eye of god by night.
I've never heard of the association with big eyes and Pisces though, but I would imagine that it's a modern take on it and probably to do with the stereotypical modern image of Pisces as being doe eyed and sensitive and barely able to move for all the crystals and incense surrounding them. Or perhaps they're just drunk. |
I don't wish to intrude into the sidereal forum but that's not a modern invention.
Beautiful eyes are traditionally connected with Venus (which is exalted in Pisces) and phlegmatic (cold-moist) humor.
Those quotes are taken from my article on Liz Taylor, famous for having special eyes, with two lines of eye-lashes
Ptolemy:
Venus has effects similar to Jupiter’s, but is apt to make her subjects more shapely, graceful, womanish, effeminate in figure, plump, and luxurious. On her own proper account she makes the eyes bright as well as beautiful.
Giovan battista della Porta (1652):
(he classifies natives by planets, but he explains several times they take their virtue from the 4 temperaments)
Venus makes wonderful hair, and beautiful eyelashes, in walking and doing everything does not move a lot, of middle height. Others say it makes the face as a rose, and shining and moist eyes, inclining to look back, the excellent beauty.
This other is a small compilation about signs in traditional astrology written by Bezza:
CCAG xxii, page 191:
The woman is full of virtues, good looking, with beautiful eyes
And finally, from Yavana Jataka:
If Pisces is in the Ascendant, the native is a wealthy man, with expanded nostril and bright eyes...
(you would say that Indians would not use tropical zodiac, but it is evident they found it in Hellenistic texts, Ptolemy included.)
margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Gansten
Moderator
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 805
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| margherita wrote: | | (you would say that Indians would not use tropical zodiac, but it is evident they found it in Hellenistic texts, Ptolemy included.) |
Actually, Ptolemy excluded, as far as we can tell. The first Sanskrit texts on horoscopic astrology (derived from Greek traditions) were probably written around the same time as the Tetrabiblos.
That said, it is a general principle that the benefics (and Venus in particular) incline to beauty -- of face and body, not excluding the eyes. A sign where both benefics have authority would naturally reflect that. Nevertheless, in my experience, natives with the luminaries in or ruling the ascendant typically have more prominent eyes (not always beautiful, but noticeable).
Oh, and: please don't worry about 'intruding'. Everyone should be welcome to post here, as long as we stay reasonably within topic. I for one welcome your input. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
margherita
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1259
Location: Rome, Italy
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Martin Gansten wrote: |
That said, it is a general principle that the benefics (and Venus in particular) incline to beauty -- of face and body, not excluding the eyes. A sign where both benefics have authority would naturally reflect that. Nevertheless, in my experience, natives with the luminaries in or ruling the ascendant typically have more prominent eyes (not always beautiful, but noticeable).
|
I cannot confute your personal experience, but my understanding is that Lights are not exactly like other planets, so it's true the when afflicted they give problems with eyes, but they don't give the shape of body, which just depend on the five planets. In fact for example Lilly don't consider Lights as the rest of the planets, gives a score just by season or phase.
Anyway true that Moon in the first house gives moisture and coldness, so I would imagine special beautiful eyes, but honestly not for the Sun in the first, or Leo rising.
Anyway just my idea.
margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Deb
Administrator
Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3615
Location: England
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm not sure why you say that Margherita - Lilly gives the typical corporature significations of the Sun on p.70 of CA and the Moon on p.81. These are only taken from older works; for example very similar to those we find in the text of Alcabitius. Bonatti, in his 3rd book, references Dorotheus and Umar for saying that the Sun rules the right eye and the left one of women. But he also says this which sounds very similar to the point you are making: "Dorotheus said the figure of the Sun and the Moon is like the figure of the planets who are with them, and of him who is more worthy in their places". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Gansten
Moderator
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 805
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| margherita wrote: | | I cannot confute your personal experience, but my understanding is that Lights are not exactly like other planets, so it's true the when afflicted they give problems with eyes, but they don't give the shape of body, which just depend on the five planets. |
I know that this is often said, but it is not universally agreed. The Indians certainly treat the luminaries like any other planets in this respect (at least I can't recall any exceptions), and as I said my experience corroborates their opinion. (It is, in fact, one of the areas of astrology of which I am most confident, as I use it all the time with excellent results.) To pick just one quick reference, Varāhamihira says (Bṛhajjātaka 2.8, my translation):
| Quote: | | The Sun has honey-yellow eyes and a square body, a constitution [dominated by] bile (pitta) and little hair. The Moon has a body [both] slender and rounded, with much wind (vāta) and phlegm (kapha), is wise and soft-spoken, with fine eyes. |
There are other areas, too, where we have conflicting traditions regarding the luminaries. Some say they can't be Rulers of the Year, others that they can (see Ben Dykes's recent translations, particularly, if memory serves, The Book of Aristotle). There is even a version of the terms where the luminaries share rulership with the five planets, though I can't say how useful it is. (I do think they can be Rulers of the Year, though.)
It would be interesting to know if others are aware of any non-Indian sources explicitly stating that the luminaries can decide the shape of the body. It's a topic worthy of research. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Gansten
Moderator
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 805
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Deb wrote: | | I'm not sure why you say that Margherita - Lilly gives the typical corporature significations of the Sun on p.70 of CA and the Moon on p.81. These are only taken from older works; for example very similar to those we find in the text of Alcabitius. |
Aha! Thanks, Deb -- our posts crossed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Gansten
Moderator
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 805
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| margherita wrote: | | Anyway true that Moon in the first house gives moisture and coldness, so I would imagine special beautiful eyes, but honestly not for the Sun in the first, or Leo rising. |
On a personal note: my second son has sidereal Leo rising with no planets in it. For the first few years of his life, almost everyone seeing him for the first time commented on the size and beauty of his eyes. At the age of 14, the rest of his face has caught up with them, but they are still noticeable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
Skyscript on Facebook