Definitions and Foundations, Configuration Intensive

[Doug_Noblehorse]

Mr. Noblehorse,

I will attempt to review your points as best as I can. Of course we are all still absorbing this material, so there may be things that I have not fully mentally digested yet. Sometimes I am doing the best that I can to present something with the hope that I will draw Mr. Schmidt into the conversation if I am missing the mark! He probably is a little tired of reviewing Antiochus' definitions and would enjoy more of the philosophical discussions. After 5 years of working on one work, I don't blame him. I have tried to bring out a few comments that I don't remember him clearly explaining and you picked up on them right off.

Agreed. When reading, struggling with, puzzling over, and absorbing this material it's quite humbling to remember that Antiochus entitled his book Introductory Matters and Mr. Schmidt entitled this particular volume of TARES Definitions and Foundations. We're just entering kindergarten folks!

I have misunderstood the testimonial concept (see the end of this post which includes a quote from Mr. Schmidt, that he posted while I was still typing this. I think your comments about slipping aside are correct, based on Mr. Schmidt's presentation. This is one of the insights Mr. Schmidt has provided about what appears to be missing from the presentation about planetary relationships in the synodic cycle.

In my opinion, the restoration of Hellenistic Astrology is an ongoing process that began in Ptolemy's day, if not earlier. We are indeed fortunate that Mr. Schmidt has the inclination, the training, the education, and most of all the will to assume the challenge of this restoration, In light of the history of this tradition and in light of the complexity of the subject it is inevitable that misunderstandings arise. It is in working through our misconceptions in pursuit of clarification that we not only learn but internalize. I am excited and grateful to be on this journey.

At this point in time I really don't think it is as important to explain what the configurations mean yet as opposed to being able to recognize them easily and accurately in the charts first! As we begin to put all of this together, we can start to try and understand what they are telling us. Mr. Schmidt has presented us with so many concepts that right now I think it is critical to correctly identify them.

Agreed. We need to know and understand clearly what it is we're looking at in a nativity. For too long astrologers have been seeing nativities imperfectly, with obviously imperfect results. There's always been enough there for us to know innately we're on to something; there's always been enough confusion and inaccuracy to keep us from fulfilling astrology's potential.

When I went back over the charts in Valens, hoping to see if these concepts from Antiochus make sense, I ran into a problem that I had forgotten about. There are several situations when Valens refers to a planet in a specific image in a chart example, but when using the dates suggested by Neugebauer in Greek Horoscopes,and calculating with modern astrological software or ephemeris, the planet is in a different image. I believe I have been told that this was due to the mistakes in the tables that were available at the time of Valens (and the errors were usually associated with Hermes). This can be a big deal when you are looking at a place ruled by the Twins and you need to know where Hermes is. After considering this, thinking about minutes of a portion does not seem to be quite as important. As a modern Western society, we love precision and believe that the more precise we are the more accurate we are. But this is straying into areas that probably need to be discussed in the philosophical groups! I seem to recall Mr. Schmidt discussing the idea of a portion as a discrete unit at some point in time in the PHASE lectures? I will return to the problems with the charts in Valens in another thread because I really want present some of the problems that I have encountered.

Yes, we've been struggling with these same problems out here in Arizona. The modern mindset involving ever-increasing precision perhaps steers us into so-called "analysis paralysis". Understanding portion as a "discrete unit" puts us into focus.

So does this mean that we have to consider the motion of both planets, not just the motion of one planet toward the natal position of another? This would mean that my thoughts about separating aspects being in testimonial relationships would not be possible if both planets are direct. Time to re-examine the texts and ponder some more....

This has always been my understanding of the perfection requirement for testimony.

Mr. Noblehorse

[Doug_Noblehorse]

Benefits of this Forum

Now maybe a lot of you are not comfortable demonstrating your lack of knowledge in front of others or are just much more thorough and have not finished studying the Definitions and Foundations book yet.

Who wouldn't want to be in the same company of the astrologers down through the ages? I believe Mr. Schmidt has pointed out several times that Valens himself at one point expressed a measure of frustration in trying to understand what his predecessors were communicating. James Holden points out in his translation of Al-Khayyat's The Judgments of Nativities that Ptolemy complained in his Tetrabiblos that the subject of astrology was complex and difficult. I think we're all in fine company!

2) Since I have been unable to attend the Intensives in person,

A distinct disadvantage in some respects. We too have been unable to attend any of the Intensives - which we (I'm not speaking in the third person - I have a significant other that is studying this material with me...) hope to correct in the future. At the same time however, the CDs are invaluable as they allow us to listen to material as many times as needed for understanding. Sometimes just an hour of Mr. Schmidt's presentation takes a couple days to properly absorb because of the complexity and subtlety of the material.

Or maybe I was the only one who did not understand a concept...........

I hardly think so! We're all taking baby steps here!

Mr. Noblehorse

[David_Stricker]

Neighboring (cont.)

I realized the reason I was having such a hard time finding neighboring conditions by figures was not so much that the planets were not in the same confines, but it is that applying figures within three portions are not very common. I found some. I looked over a 130 charts and found about 16 that had neighboring conditions that were not just adhering conditions. It occurred to me later after I stepped away from my computer that I have three figures in my chart that are within 3 portions. Two of them were not only within three portions, but they are neighboring aswell! Selene at 8 portions of the Twins in diametrical opposition to Kronos at 11 portions of the Archer (both in the confines of Zeus). Aphrodite at 19 portions of the Twins in tetragonal relation to Zeus at 22 portions of the Virgin (both in the confines of Ares). Normally I start with my own chart, but lately I have been looking at people that I considered prominent in the world (not exactly eminent as per Valens' procedures). All of the planets are in cadent houses, places that we were calling falling amiss (parapipto) but now maybe unable to conduct business (achrematistikos). I am not sure if there is a difference between parapipto and achrematistikos, but I am sure that it is going to come up at some point in future translations.

So here are some of the people I found that have neighboring conditions by figure in their charts. I am not going to put all of the charts in this post. I am going to just include a few. The AA after their names refers to the Rodden Rating -see rating system from Astrodatabank: http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Help:DataSource

Jimmy Hoffa - Ares at 26 portions of the Goat-horned one trigonal to Kronos at 27 portions of the Bull. Both are in the confines of Ares.

JImmy Hoffa - AA.gif (24.88 KiB) Viewed 991 times

Tina Turner - Selene at 7 portions of the Twins diametrically opposed to Hermes at 7 portions of the Archer. Both are in the confines of Zeus

Tina Turner - AA.gif (25.4 KiB) Viewed 977 times

John F. Kennedy - Selene at 17 portions of the Virgin in trigonal relationship to Ares at 18 portions and Hermes at 20 portions of the Bull. All three are in the confines of Zeus. As Ms. Hamilton mentioned several posts ago, Hermes is enclosed by Ares and Zeus. Hermes and Ares are neighboring in the confines of Zeus, but Zeus does not join in the neighboring since he is in the confines of Kronos. I hope someday we can make detailed distinctions about enclosures that are all in the same confines versus ones that are not. And maybe even the differences in intervention when the ray is from a planet that is in the same confines as some of the planets in the enclosure?

John F Kennedy - A.gif (25.47 KiB) Viewed 977 times

I have realized that a few of the other charts I had picked were actually based on Ptolemy's confines and they ended up not being neighboring using Egyptian confines.

[Therese_Hamilton]

After a forced hiatus from reading Definitions and Foundations due to family affairs, I'm now returning to a methodical perusal of the text, notebook in hand. I've deleted this post on Gandhi's chart, and will revise it using proper terminology. The revised text and chart will be placed under "The Zodiac Question" topic where it more properly belongs.

Therese Hamilton

[Therese_Hamilton]

My older computer can't handle so many graphics at once. So posting several charts plus my chart stalls out my graphics capability. Perhaps we could provide links if we want to illustrate more than one chart in a post? Or should I upgrade my computer?!

Therese Hamilton

[David_Stricker]

I don't mind only putting one chart in a post. It seems like most of use could always use an upgrade to our computers but it is not always necessary. I am a computer technician in my day job so I know the frustrations people experience with inadequate computer equipment. I certainly do not want to add to that problem.

[Therese_Hamilton]

Additional notes on Gandhi's chart are being transferred to "The Zodiac Question."

[Therese_Hamilton]

I don't mind only putting one chart in a post. It seems like most of use could always use an upgrade to our computers but it is not always necessary. I am a computer technician in my day job so I know the frustrations people experience with inadequate computer equipment. I certainly do not want to add to that problem.

Thank you, Mr. Stircker. Your illustrations have been so clear that probably one chart is sufficient. However, you could refer us to the ADB site and give us the names of some charts that have the configuration you're discussing. I do like to see a number of charts, but my computer doesn't lke a lot of charts. This ADB research is very valuable. I'll have to check out the new site. I have the software, so haven't paid much attention to that site. However, I know it's a great service to astrologers.

Can someone tell me how to get multiple quotes in one post as many have been doing? I can get the quote at the beginning of a post, but don't know how to get subsequent quotes.

Thanks,
Therese Hamilton

[David_Stricker]

The astrodatabank website was listed with my statement about what the Rodden Rating means. But here is the home page for Astro-databank:

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Main_Page

If I am lucky and it comes through properly, the addressed should be underlined and in blue font and you should be able to click on it from here to get to the website.

Regarding your concerns about the evil effects of Kronos in Gandhi's life, first of all, Kronos is not as bad in a diurnal chart. I am not going to comment beyond that because we are not using the same zodiac. This is making the discussion of the same chart really confusing.

I know it is tempting to start associating what we see in the chart with what we know about a person. There is still a lot to learn about how the Hellenistic system works. Maybe that is why these introductory texts didn't have example charts. It is hard to keep an enthusiastic astrology student focused on the basic principles, as the system starts to unfold in front of them (or below them-- my dimensionality concepts are in flux at the moment! ) That is why I have shied away from trying to explain characteristics or events in a person's life with the Hellenistic chart principles in this forum (even the contractor example- so far anyway). Since Mr. Schmidt began lecturing last winter and the first volume of the TARES came out this summer, I have realized that I have to start over almost from scratch on a lot of things (aspect theory for one) that I thought I knew about Hellenistic astrology.

Some people may still not understand Mr. Schmidt's to insistence on using the Greek names for the planets, calling zoidion -> images, houses-> places, Capricorn -> the Goat-Horned one. He has explained it in the Intensives. Anybody who has studied astrology for a few years has associations in our mind that we link with the astrological terminology. For a lot of people, it is probably in the subconcious mind if you have been studying long or hard enough. We need to leave some of this behind, because it is wrong, from the perspective of Hellenistic astrology. So if we seriously want to study this system, we have to leave our "baggage" at the door. By associating these revised concepts with different words, we can begin to train our brains not to make the old automatic associations and hopefully be open to seeing this system that Mr. Schmidt has described as being so rich and deep. Granted he has been steeped in it in the original language, but I think we can start to see some of the additional understanding that is available just by things like participation, counteraction,testimony, spear-bearing and the whole synodic cycle description, just to name a few.

[David_Stricker]

Some thoughts on Neighboring

Just for the sake of clarity , I am going to use just examples of adhering that are neighboring (not figural conjunctions).

Is there a difference without considering the other planets that may be have "aspects" with them between:

Hermes at 10 portions of the Goat-horned one adhering to Ares at 12 portions of the same image and

Hermes at 16 portions of the Goat-horned one adhering to Ares 18 portions of the Goat-horned one ?

Both planets are in the same image in both cases, which means they will have the same domicile lord and exaltation lord. But I think it would be safe to acknowledge that there could be a difference in these two adhering, applying bodily conjunctions. Of course, my heading gave it away. While both of planets are in neighboring conditions, they have different confine lords. The first pair have Zeus as the confine lord and Aphrodite rules the second pair's confines.

So in the course of trying to delineate the Hermes/Ares relationship in the Goat-horned one, a few of the things we need to consider are:

The domicile lord, Kronos and his placement in the chart, and any planets that are in figural conjunctions with him or testifying to him.
Ares as the exaltation lord of the Goat-Horned one (the more I type "Goat-Horned one", the more I start to think about what the hell it is?)
The sect of the chart, the place in the chart that the neighboring planets fall and other factors that I am not going to try and elaborate at the moment.

I think it might also be possible to make distinctions based on the different confine lords with regard to neighboring.

Yesterday I was trying to visualize different kinds of neighbors and how they might possibly be useful in understanding another level of distinction. Not just that it is ruled by Zeus or Aphrodite, but what would it might "look" like. I am trying to do the same thing here that Mr. Schmidt has been doing with the testifying and recalling a witness and other courtroom and nautical concepts and how these might assist us with our delienations.

Mr. Schmidt talked about the planets that are neighboring as "watching over" each other. But it seems to me that they may not always watch over each other the same way. They can be in different bounds, so there may be distinctions in how they watch over each other.

So I thought about my neighbors I have had in the past and how this could relate to the confines and their planetary rulers:

I had a neighbor that was the old man that I never met. The things he had around his house were from the 1960's. He was never outside and his house was always quiet.

Then there was the neighbor that had 3 kids and a couple of smaller dogs and a built-in swimming pool. Their house was never quiet. Kids were playing and splashing around in the pool, dogs were barking all the time. Bikes were laying in the yard and on the sidewalks. Toys were scattered in the yard. I never saw or heard the parents. But I definitely heard the kids.

Then there was the neighbor that grew a beautiful flower garden in her front yard. There were always some kind of pretty flowers blooming most of the summer. I never saw her husband much. She baked a lot and brought us an occassional loaf of desert bread or brownies. She always was friendly and wanted talk about the things she loved doing.

Then there was the neighbor with the teenage son who got a hot car. He and his trouble-making buddies were always out in the driveway tweaking the engine. revving it up and playing the music so loud that the woofers made my windows rattle! Speaking of woofers, they had a crazy pit bull in the back yard that everyone was worried about. And of course, the father was a gun collector.

Then there was the neighbor that was a college professor. His yard was over grown with bushes that needed to be trimmed and weeds growing in the yard. He traveled overseas a lot and when he returned he brought back artifacts from different countries that he displayed in his home. His house was bulging with books. Whenever I talked to him in the driveway he always had an opinion on everything and did not seem to notice when I wanted to reply to anything he said.

Okay, so I really did not have all of these neighbors (a few though!). But I think you can get what I am driving at. There are different kinds of neighbors just as there are confines ruled by different planets.

I could just have easily expanded this out to stereotypical neighborhoods, to maybe more accurately describe the bounds and what it might be like when the planets move from one bound to the next. It could be like driving out of one part of a city into another (with regard to the neighboring concept).

Say you have the downtown business district. Big expensive buildings, banks, lots of people in suits hurrying to their jobs. But right on the edge of this district are some rougher buildings and closed factories and at night there are problems with gangs and prostitiution in that area.

Or you drive past a neighborhood with a lot of houses with families but then you come to a park with a pool and softball diamonds and soccer fields.

Or you drive though the local univeristy or the part of town where the churches seem to be clustered together.

Each of these I think could add a different flavor when trying to think about how two planets watch over each other. In my examples, it is still Ares and Hermes. But place the planets in different neighborhoods and the way they watch over each other could be different. I don't know if this is "right" for delineating the neighboring concept. But I have a strong feeling that there needs to be distinctions when taking into consideration the different planets that rule the bounds.