Author Topic: Michael & Astrology  (Read 8672 times)

Wayne

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
Michael & Astrology
« on: April 22, 2011, 05:32:26 AM »
While I'm here, can anything in the Michael Teachings be compared to traditional astrology?

Thanks!

John Roth

  • Forum Support
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2011, 12:27:05 AM »
While I'm here, can anything in the Michael Teachings be compared to traditional astrology?

Thanks!

In a word: no.

That doesn't mean that either is more or less valid than the other; just that trying to compare them doesn't work well. The conceptual frameworks are too different.

Within the MT, astrology is usually considered to be an expression of the life path. That is, the older, event-oriented astrology, not the newer personality oriented astrology.

HTH

John Roth (who's been studying astrology since 1976 or thereabouts.)

Chiara DB

  • Forum Support
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 238
  • Love all, trust a few. Harm none.
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #2 on: April 25, 2011, 02:41:33 AM »
I think the role and the casting can be accurately compared to sun sign and rising sign, but further than that I have not attempted to make any correlations.

John Roth

  • Forum Support
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2011, 04:51:36 PM »
I think the role and the casting can be accurately compared to sun sign and rising sign, but further than that I have not attempted to make any correlations.

Since Essence chooses the birth time, within the limits set by the choice of parents and other circumstances, it's not at all surprising that many Essences would choose a chart that reinforces the role or some of the overleaves. The numbers simply don't work out.

HTH

John Roth

Drury

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2011, 05:44:05 PM »
My sign is Capricorn and I'm very fun loving, have always been into frequent change in almost every aspect of my life, my follow-through isn't always the best unless someone is counting on me, freedom/stimulation/experience are very important to me for learning/growth, and I don't seem to fit Capricorn well at all.  Some people have said to use sidereal, which would make me Sagittarius and my husband Capricorn, which would fit him much better than Aquarius.  But other people resonate well with their signs and sidereal would throw them off.  What would be a reason I fit so poorly?  I was born 3 weeks early, which would have made me an Aquarius, but I’m not sure that matters.  I have Capricorn in sun, moon and mercury, and my rising sign is Virgo, though I don’t know what any of that means.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2011, 05:45:39 PM by Drury »

Chiara DB

  • Forum Support
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 238
  • Love all, trust a few. Harm none.
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2011, 06:35:55 PM »
Since Essence chooses the birth time, within the limits set by the choice of parents and other circumstances, it's not at all surprising that many Essences would choose a chart that reinforces the role or some of the overleaves. The numbers simply don't work out.

I didn't mean that my Aries sun sign correlates to my King Role and my Gemini rising sign correlates to my Server casting, though that is an interesting idea! I just meant that functionally they behave similarly in describing the personality.

Jondalf

  • Banned
  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • "deeds cannot dream what dreams can do" - ee cummi
    • View Profile
    • Letters To My Future Selves
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #6 on: May 05, 2011, 10:08:42 PM »
Well, sorry to throw my 2 cent's into the ring, but I've felt that one's natal Aspectarian - the compilation of all the angles the planets, asteroids, fixed stars, Arabian parts and House cusps all make to each other, was the "Meat" of 'Astrological Significance' as well as the best indications of strains and augmentations in the materially manifest 'corpus' of the Overleaves.  Personally, I can look at my Natal Chart, and see just how my Essence used the Gravity Waveforms, relative vectors of magnetic flux, fieldstrengths and the progression of all these bodies that bend spacetime and combine and repel to create rough waters or fair winds as one sails one's life through the unfolding futures we choose.

THE MOST IMPORTANT ASTROLOGICAL AXIOM TO REMEMBER IS: "THE STARS DO NOT 'COMPELL', THEY SIMPLY 'INCLINE'"

Astrology is MOST influential IN THE ABSENCE OF OTHER FACTORS during which it seems to me to be most significantly acted upon by Ebertin's "Asteroids At Midpoints" cosmobiological descriptions.  Usually short, definitive predictions of a nudge or a period of resistence to the native' aims or ongoing life direction, they seem to have an uncanny ability, through transits to midpoints, and activated midpoint trees, to highlight crises pertinent to one's ongoing struggle with Chief Features.

Also, John Roth, are you proficient in "Gauqelin" Chart Calculations?  I'm a tad rusty, but, just as things like "highlights and indications of planets on the angles"; asteroids, Arabian Parts and planets near the midheaven were, to Gauqelin's chagrin (as a statistician setting out to 'debunk' Astrology) statistically indicative OF JUST WHAT CONSENSUS ASTROLOGY PREDICTED THEY SHOULD BE.  I'll bet you a dollar to a donut that correlating Gauqelin sectors with the MT will prove useful in defining a causal link or two, if anyonehas the time. 

Also, the 5 Book Series by Schulman:  "Karmic Astrology", utilizing the Moons nodes and the nodal axis, house and sign placement of Pars Fortuna, house and sign incidences of retrograde planets in cadent houses, secondary progressions AND the whole field of VEDIC Astrology, respected for 4,000 years in India are not indicators to be dismissed. The Schulman Books, when applied to one's possible major/minor agreements, the best times (and even adverse/advantageous geographical locations using Astro*carto*graphy)
to attempt to 'burn karmic ribbons', etc etc., all these things have helped me chart the reefs and shoals, and fair harbors, that are CREATED by the confluence of spacetime continuum tides, currents beaches, winds et al.

So while there is no Absolute one-to-one correspondence between Overleaves and Astrology, if your Overleaves are the make, model and options package of your "incarnation vehicle", you'd be stupid to drive across an unknown country without a road map (Astrology) RIGHT?

Nancy

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Where ever you go, there you are.
    • View Profile
    • Imagine, Ordain, Manifest
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #7 on: May 25, 2011, 08:00:36 AM »
While I'm here, can anything in the Michael Teachings be compared to traditional astrology?

Thanks!

Hi Wayne,

New to the board here hence the late reply to your query.  I started out with an interest in Astrology that sort of evolved into Esoteric Astrology and I think it is that background that makes the MT teachings so intriguing to me.  I can see the similarities and how they dovetail one another in terms of self awareness and understanding of choices made - throughout the souls evolution.

Again, its perspective, some may see that, some may not.   

Blessings
Nancy

jk

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #8 on: June 09, 2011, 09:29:48 AM »
Quote
What would be a reason I fit so poorly?  I was born 3 weeks early, which would have made me an Aquarius, but I’m not sure that matters.  I have Capricorn in sun, moon and mercury, and my rising sign is Virgo, though I don’t know what any of that means.
I believe that would do it. Michael once said that Astrology based on DOB is inaccurate for this reason and that it would be more fitting if we went by date of conception.

For myself I definitely see a correlation between my Astrological and Michael chart.

John Roth

  • Forum Support
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #9 on: June 09, 2011, 09:02:09 PM »
Quote
What would be a reason I fit so poorly?  I was born 3 weeks early, which would have made me an Aquarius, but I’m not sure that matters.  I have Capricorn in sun, moon and mercury, and my rising sign is Virgo, though I don’t know what any of that means.
I believe that would do it. Michael once said that Astrology based on DOB is inaccurate for this reason and that it would be more fitting if we went by date of conception.

For myself I definitely see a correlation between my Astrological and Michael chart.

There's always been an issue in astrology about the "correct" birth time to use. Astrologers I respect rectify charts, and only accept birth times that produce accurate results. Of course, this doesn't really help when you want to rush into print with an analysis of the latest person to hit the news so you catch it before the public turns to the next ephemeral sensation. It takes work.

Michael's comment about the time of conception is at least consistent with basic astrological theory: that's when the fetus starts growing, so it's definitely a beginning. It's just that it's awfully hard to pin down in a lot of cases.

John Roth

Nancy

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Where ever you go, there you are.
    • View Profile
    • Imagine, Ordain, Manifest
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #10 on: June 10, 2011, 08:34:46 AM »
Quote
What would be a reason I fit so poorly?  I was born 3 weeks early, which would have made me an Aquarius, but I’m not sure that matters.  I have Capricorn in sun, moon and mercury, and my rising sign is Virgo, though I don’t know what any of that means.
I believe that would do it. Michael once said that Astrology based on DOB is inaccurate for this reason and that it would be more fitting if we went by date of conception.

For myself I definitely see a correlation between my Astrological and Michael chart.

There's always been an issue in astrology about the "correct" birth time to use. Astrologers I respect rectify charts, and only accept birth times that produce accurate results. Of course, this doesn't really help when you want to rush into print with an analysis of the latest person to hit the news so you catch it before the public turns to the next ephemeral sensation. It takes work.

Michael's comment about the time of conception is at least consistent with basic astrological theory: that's when the fetus starts growing, so it's definitely a beginning. It's just that it's awfully hard to pin down in a lot of cases.

John Roth

Hi John,

I actually know when I was conceived within about two hours (heh, my mother, what can I say?) and using that information I have to say that it does *not* fit me at the least bit.  But then again I also know exactly when I was born, to the minute and that chart definitely fits me.   

I can rectify a chart (I had to do it for my husband cos MIL could not remember exactly when he was born and his birth certificate was half way around the world at the time).  I managed to get it within 6 minutes (shocked the hell out of myself with that one) when we finally did receive the certified/translated copy.  I still go with the rectified one.

And so it goes

Blessings
Nancy

John Roth

  • Forum Support
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #11 on: June 10, 2011, 05:16:55 PM »
Quote
What would be a reason I fit so poorly?  I was born 3 weeks early, which would have made me an Aquarius, but I’m not sure that matters.  I have Capricorn in sun, moon and mercury, and my rising sign is Virgo, though I don’t know what any of that means.
I believe that would do it. Michael once said that Astrology based on DOB is inaccurate for this reason and that it would be more fitting if we went by date of conception.

For myself I definitely see a correlation between my Astrological and Michael chart.

There's always been an issue in astrology about the "correct" birth time to use. Astrologers I respect rectify charts, and only accept birth times that produce accurate results. Of course, this doesn't really help when you want to rush into print with an analysis of the latest person to hit the news so you catch it before the public turns to the next ephemeral sensation. It takes work.

Michael's comment about the time of conception is at least consistent with basic astrological theory: that's when the fetus starts growing, so it's definitely a beginning. It's just that it's awfully hard to pin down in a lot of cases.

John Roth

Hi John,

I actually know when I was conceived within about two hours (heh, my mother, what can I say?) and using that information I have to say that it does *not* fit me at the least bit.  But then again I also know exactly when I was born, to the minute and that chart definitely fits me.   

I can rectify a chart (I had to do it for my husband cos MIL could not remember exactly when he was born and his birth certificate was half way around the world at the time).  I managed to get it within 6 minutes (shocked the hell out of myself with that one) when we finally did receive the certified/translated copy.  I still go with the rectified one.

And so it goes

Blessings
Nancy

I can't say I'm surprised. Astrologers have to have an extremely hard-headed approach to validation because it's really easy to talk yourself into seeing a match where it really isn't there. I know of astrologers who always, and I mean always, rectify charts. They won't interpret a chart unless they've got the life history data that validates the birth time they're using. It's the GIGO principle - if you let crap into your head from "interpretations" of charts with wrong birth times, then crap is going to come out.

The thing about conception charts is that the current approaches are all "tuned" to birth charts; what a conception chart looks like and how it's to be interpreted is relatively unexplored territory.

John Roth

jo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #12 on: January 06, 2012, 09:29:38 AM »
I think the role and the casting can be accurately compared to sun sign and rising sign, but further than that I have not attempted to make any correlations.
As I am also an aries, I think it´s also connected to flow. Because aries says: "Get lively again". And this feels/felt more or less right.
 I don´t know if it fits with artisan and priest casting.

John Roth

  • Forum Support
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 226
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #13 on: January 11, 2012, 03:06:21 PM »
I think the role and the casting can be accurately compared to sun sign and rising sign, but further than that I have not attempted to make any correlations.
As I am also an aries, I think it´s also connected to flow. Because aries says: "Get lively again". And this feels/felt more or less right.
 I don´t know if it fits with artisan and priest casting.

I would think it fits more with your mode. Aries is cardinal fire, which means it's initiating and enthusiastic.

jo

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
Re: Michael & Astrology
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2012, 05:57:31 PM »
I also found it very interesting, that I have Pluto and Scorpion in the third House. And Mercury in the 8th.

@John Yes, that could be true, in an ordinal way (casting).