Moon's Nodes

[Guest guest]

At 01:24 PM 3/2/04 +0100, Anny wrote:

> Formerly I learned from a noted lady astrologer in Holland

>in her astro magazine, that the moonnode's place and aspect would be

>interesting in the charts of the people involved in the drama with

>death following. It is a drama-en-masse-point.

 

That interesting, Anny, because the Moon's nodes seem to be prominent in

most quake charts, more often than not by their placement on angles or via

close relationship with tight aspect configurations.

 

According to Jyotish the nodes only make trine aspects besides the

conjunction to planets. I don't know where that idea came from, but in the

San Francisco 1906 ingress and quake charts, NN is trine the ascendant with

a one degree orb. The orb in the F-B ingress chart is wider, a little over

3 degrees.

 

In the Kanto quake the nodes are at the zenith/nadir (K ingress) and at the

MC/IC in the quake chart, same degree as the MC.

 

In the India quake ingress, NN is trine the ascendant; in the quake chart

NN is trine Uranus/Moon in the first house foreground.

 

Izmit, Turkey: nodes are right on the F-B ingress Asc/Dec and square the K

ingress MC/IC; In the quake chart the Nodes are with the oppostion of

Mercury-Uranus (which are square Jupiter/Saturn).

 

This says something about the Sun-Moon-earth stress during earthquakes. It

also says that the nodes are important in astrology, perhaps especially

with public events that affect many people.

 

It would be a good idea to test the mean/true nodes in quake charts for

closeness of aspect to angles and planets. The authors of the Betz Lahiri

Ephemeris (1940-2040) says that neither the mean nor true node is exactly

correct:

 

" ...The truth is the position of the node is really known only when the

moon is on the ecliptic plane which happens twice every revolution of the

moon around the earth. The position of the moon's node at other times is

arguable but it seems ot us its motion should be as smooth as possible whle

assuring that the values for its position exactly conform to the position

of the moon when it passes through the ecliptic. " (page 3)

 

The Betz Ephemeris is available from astroamerica.com. It's nice to have

all those years in one book, but the text is compressed, and I have to use

a magnifying glass to see the figures clearly. I have the book as a backup

in the event that computers go down due to world electrical blackouts.

 

The Betz ephemeris uses interpolated values for the nodes. I've generally

found the mean nodes to be more accurate, but I have no research to back up

that opinion, only a hazy memory of working with horoscopes.

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

, " Bettina " <chiria@n...>

wrote:

> This is my first time to join in a conversation here, although I

introduced

> myself a little while back. My main area of interest is the birth

charts of

> individuals, and since Therese brought up the subject of the Moon's

Nodes in

> quake charts, I wondered if anyone out there has a pretty good

grasp on the

> meaning of Rahu and Ketu in birth charts, especially when conjunct

Moon,

> Sun, or asc. I have some ideas myself. For instance, I've noticed

that NN,

> or Rahu, is often prominent in the horiscopes of cult leaders, so

that would

> have to say something about its effect on the personality or the

psyche.

>

> Anyone?

>

>

> ... Bettina

 

 

I don't know much about Rahu and Ketu, so I went and read up a little

bit on them. It seems to me that this is the difference. Rahu is

worldly, ambitious (likes power), likes to get out there and achieve

things, and, as someone describes it, has a 'seizing' quality. Ketu

is the opposite -- introspective, does not draw attention, and maybe

spiritual, withdrawing from worldly things. Is this right? It'd be

interesting to know a few examples of people who have either

prominent Rahu or Ketu.

 

Elisabeth

[Guest guest]

At 07:14 PM 3/8/04 -0800, Chris wrote:

>Here's an example: Einstein had Ketu aspecting his Mercury in Pisces. Many

>would say this accounts for his keen powers of perception and usual and

>brilliant intelligence, with even some of his early learning problems thrown

>in for good measure.

 

Hi Chris,

 

This was a trine, wasn't it? Einstein had Mercury with Saturn in Pisces in

a lunar mansion of Saturn. It seems that Ketu's aspect might have given a

sharp intuitive edge to Mercury-Saturn--if Ketu is somewhat similar to

Mars....?

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

At 09:52 AM 3/9/04 -0700, Bettina wrote:

>I have also read that Rahu (NN) is comparable to Saturn, and Ketu (SN) to

>Mars, but that confuses me. Maybe as far as the way they work in external

>circumstances it's true, but not as far as the personality ... I don't

>think. For instance, Rahu is large, overextended, ignores guidelines, takes

>what it wants. It also has to do with fame and attention, though usually

>this is followed by downfall. That doesn't sound like Saturn ('tho SA in

>10th can have to do with rise and downfall). SA generally has to do with

>humbleness, ordinariness, meagerness, lack in some area.

>

>Then ... Mars is bombastic, impulsive, fiery, aggressive. Ketu is supposed

>to be small, meek, invisible, diminished. I have read that the Western idea

>of the two is that Rahu is more like Jupiter ('tho it would most certainly

>have to be a very afflicted Jupiter) and Ketu like Saturn.

>Personality-wise, I could see that being true. But probably not event-wise.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Bettina,

 

These are very interesting thoughts, and I wonder if the Vedic view of the

nodes is just plain wrong!? I think I remember reading somewhere that the

old Chinese system reversed the meaning of the nodes--that is, that Rahu is

like Mars and Ketu like Saturn. That makes more sense in view of what you

said.

 

>I'd like to ask a question. I think I recall from one of my Vedic books

>that Ketu throws a trine and Rahu a sextile (probably only forward), not

>that they both throw trines. Any one know more about this?

 

As far as I know the Vedic books all say that both Rahu and Ketu make (or

receive) trine aspects. I don't remember anything about a sextile. These

trines show up in relation to the ascendant in some quake charts. Also the

traditional Vedic 8th house-Mars aspect: the quincunx.

 

> What would the more spiritual side of Rahu be? Or should I say, the

>more constructive or positive side?

 

Scientfic interests, maybe? Maybe working with the occult? I'm not sure.

Utilizing raw power in a constructive way? As Rahu seems to show up

routinely in earthquake charts, there's a great expenditure of destructive

energy there. Then there's the 'power' trip of cult leaders who have Rahu

prominent in their charts.

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

At 07:52 PM 3/9/04 -0800, Dark*Star wrote:

>

>Hi Bettina,

>

>You can get around this impasse with Mars and Saturn (I don't like their

>assignment either) by thinking Uranus for Rahu...Neptune for Ketu.

 

I tend to see the nodes in the opposite way: Neptune for Rahu and Uranus

for Ketu. This is because Ketu seems definitely to be psychic in a

sometimes creepy way, whereas Rahu is sort of like the god Neptune--always

trying to expand its horizons and territory.

 

Ah, but then, Rahu as Uranus would fit the likes of Charles Manson and Jim

Jones better.

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

, " Bettina " <chiria@n...>

wrote:

> Good point, Therese, but did not JJ and CM try to expand their

horizons?

> That's exactly what cult leaders do. If you think of Neptune as

the ruler

> of Pisces and Uranus the ruler of Aquarius, you get a different

picture of

> them from what's typically described. Pisces is changable,

unpridictable,

> can be erratic (like the ocean). Aquarius is often quiet, dreamy,

spacy.

> Tropical Pisces if always described as dreamy and otherworldy ...

but most

> of that is covered by Sid. Aquarius ... so there you go ... it's

ruled by

> Uranus ... which must be the dreamy one. Neptune must be the

erratic,

> impulsive one.

>

>

> ... Bettina

 

 

Or maybe, despite the name, Uranus is really the god of the ocean in

disguise and rules Pisces, and Neptune is some other mysterious god

that rules Aquarius. How did the newer planets get associated with

the qualities that they are associated with (e.g. Uranus and erratic,

Neptune and dreamy)? Is it from how they are *observed* to behave or

is it by association with the sign that they are supposed to rule?

 

Also, can someone mention a few examples of some well-known sid.

Aquarians who are " dreamy " and sid. Pisceans who are " impulsive " ? I

haven't really noticed many examples of this just by looking at

planets in signs. My impression of people with lots of planets in

sid. Aquarius is that they are often very creative, intelligent, and

humanitarian with strong empathy. But they also seem to be quite

level-headed and have the ability to be practical, not particular

spacey and dreamy. As for sid. Pisceans, I don't quite grasp them,

except that they seem very troubled and unhappy, and forever

disatisfied with the way things are, and they often don't do things

according to the rules and conventions. But I wouldn't specifically

describe them as impulsive. Sometimes the breaking of rules is quite

deliberate with some subjective reason behind it. But I know that it

is not enough to look at planets in signs, and the number of charts

I've looked at is also small, so it's possible that what I see is

just coincidence.

 

I wonder, if an Aquarius person has the quality of dreaminess, or if

a Pisces is very impulsive, how can we tell whether these qualities

are the effect of the sign or of some other factors in the chart?

 

elisabeth

[Guest guest]

Hi Bettina,

 

, " Bettina " <chiria@n...>

wrote:

> I think that Neptune has to be the god of the ocean because, well,

he has

> been since antiquity. I think Uranus has more to do with the

ether.

 

Yes, definitely. The gods should stay where they are.:-) What I meant

was that the planets could be misnamed. If planet Uranus is

*observed* by astrologers to be erratic and unpredictable, it might

(despite its name) be equal to the mythological god Neptune. But it

depends on whether the reputation of the planets really come from

observation.

 

 

All I can go by is some of my

> personal acquaintances, and I have known Aquariuses who seem the

way I

> described in my last post. Also, they tend to not have strong egos,

> probably because it's a weak sign for the Sun, as it's opposite

Leo, Sun's

> rulership sign.

 

I notice this as well, and it would seem to fit with the meaning of

Aquarius as a sign associated with Saturn, brotherhood and

equality.... If by contrast the opposite sign, sidereal Leo, has a

strong ego because it is ruled by the sun, then this would seem to be

at least one case in which the tropical sign description doesn't

transfer well to the sidereal. Sidereal Leo is Tropical Virgo, yet

the tropical description of Virgo as humble, self-effacing and

insecure doesn't seem to fit sidereal Leo.

 

 

 

> I think that the association with the signs that the planets are

supposed to

> rule in the Tropical is how the outer planets got their reputations.

 

Thanks. I've always wondered about this.

 

Elisabeth

[Guest guest]

At 06:30 PM 3/9/04 -0800, Chris (and Bettina) wrote:

>Yes, this is usually what they write in books...

 

> [bW] Maybe as far as the way they work in external

>> circumstances it's true, but not as far as the personality ... I don't

>> think. For instance, Rahu is large, overextended, ignores guidelines,

>takes

>> what it wants. It also has to do with fame and attention, though usually

>> this is followed by downfall. That doesn't sound like Saturn ('tho SA in

>> 10th can have to do with rise and downfall). SA generally has to do with

>> humbleness, ordinariness, meagerness, lack in some area.

>

>

>[CK] Right. Your view of Rahu is correct -- it's questing, materialistic

-- not

>really like Saturn at all. (that's why that usual view of Rahu being like

>Saturn is unhelpful). Gains made under Rahu's influence are often not held,

>but sometimes they will be, if Rahu comes under benefic influence in the

>natal chart.

>

>>[bW] Then ... Mars is bombastic, impulsive, fiery, aggressive. Ketu is

>supposed to be small, meek, invisible, diminished. I have read that the

Western

>idea of the two is that Rahu is more like Jupiter ('tho it would most

certainly

>> have to be a very afflicted Jupiter) and Ketu like Saturn.

(...)

>[CK] Rahu is usually seen as antithetical to spiritual truth. For example,

>people who have a Jupiter aspected by Rahu natally have problems with gurus

>and do not adhere well to the spiritual path. Rahu is often cited in

>revolutionary science and research, however. so the theme here is breaking

>with tradition -- whatever it might be. Both nodes are usually seen as bad

>for living significations. ( health, children, etc). Either node in the

 

>5th brings problems with children -- either sickness, bad delivery,

>abortions, or simply fewer progeny. Rahu is usually good for career and

>wealth, communication, etc. Ketu is more of a mixed bag with respect to

>career and wealth. For example, Ketu in the 2nd is often said to be bad for

>wealth generally however it can mean that wealth is acquired by unusual

>means, possibly having to do with spiritual enterprises.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Chris and Bettina, thanks for some really good thoughts here. Somehow this

post passed me by and I only noticed it when going through my mailbox today.

 

Therese