sun sign or ascenda...
 
Notifications
Clear all

sun sign or ascendant?

12 Posts
7 Users
0 Reactions
4,235 Views
Posts: 43
Topic starter
(@cinammon)
Eminent Member
Joined: 14 years ago

Hi

Apparantly, the 'ancients' used the ascendant, not the sun sign, as the main sign.

Anyone feel it'd be more accurate to read our horoscopes from the ascendant sign, rather than our sun sign?

Cheers

11 Replies
Sue CarberryF
Posts: 207
(@sue-carberryf)
Estimable Member
Joined: 20 years ago

Hi Cinammon,

I have 5 planets in Pisces (Sun, Mercury, Saturn, Mars and Moon) + Chiron, but, I have a 6.46 Leo ascendant. I look more Leo, I have good boundaries, I can speak for myself and others, my hair is cropped and dyed red and I'm nearly 6ft tall. On the other hand, I'm a very sensitive healer with a deep compassion and empathy for others.

Upon meeting me you'll find the Leo is the prominent, but then the ascendant is how others see you and your physicality being the beginning of the 1st house.

You need to see the natal chart in it's entirety and not just the sun or ascendant.

Cheers, Sue

Reply
Posts: 43
Topic starter
(@cinammon)
Eminent Member
Joined: 14 years ago

Cheers, Sue. It was really to see if anyone else felt the ascendant was more accurate for horoscopes, than the sun sign, as apparantly it used to be the ascendant people referred to. I read that it's only recently (well, I say recently ...!) that the sun sign's been used as the main sign.

Reply
dogwoman
Posts: 125
(@dogwoman)
Estimable Member
Joined: 14 years ago

I read both sun and rising sign information when I consult daily horoscopes.

Reply
Apollo
Posts: 487
(@apollo)
Reputable Member
Joined: 21 years ago

Hi

Apparantly, the 'ancients' used the ascendant, not the sun sign, as the main sign.
Anyone feel it'd be more accurate to read our horoscopes from the ascendant sign, rather than our sun sign?
Cheers

Having some 25 years in studying astrology behind me now... I would heartily recommend that people ignore the greater majority of 'sun sign' literature and pay far greater attention to their actual natal charts. All natal charts begin with the ascendant; it is a critical position. It can reflect the appearance of the person - but this can be as much about the way others see or feel you than what you look like. However it is much more than that - accurately defined, the ascendant can be used to determine key events in life with attention to transits and progressions.
Unfortunately, the media propels this nonsense of sun sign horoscopes everyday and this tends to keep the majority of people in ignorance of the real subject... You won't find any of these celebrity (pseudo) astologers writing an article on key reality of astrology with examples of how the real subject works - in any newspaper or weekly magazine - but you will see them promulgate "what the stars have in store for you" type rubbish articles (IMHO) - because that is what they get paid their money for... It wouldn't do to tell readers the truth would it...
I'm amazed by the way so many folk become duped into the false belief of sun sign 'astrology' - I tend to grant people to be relatively intelligent generally speaking - yet so many fall for the same old stuff - as if they can't see through the facade. How can it possibly be that what some daily writer says about Cancerians will be right for 1/12th of the entire population?! They never specifiy exact case realities - yet if they really were genuine astrologers with thorough understanding of their subject - they could write case articles which could inspire more people to study the real subject... A good astrologer can for example tell you that you might get a job offer between 1pm and 3pm on a day, six months in advance... Then when the phone call & job offer comes and the astrologer is asked 'should I take it or not' - they might for example reply - no - wait - delay your answer back until 4.30pm... So the company calls again and offers another 2k/yr - then you take the job! That is real astrology... Wouldn't it make a change to read case examples like that in the tabloids - no - it would be a miracle!

Of course an ascendant is infinitely more significant than a 'sun sign'!

A.

Reply
Posts: 43
Topic starter
(@cinammon)
Eminent Member
Joined: 14 years ago

Hey Dogwoman

Thanks for answering - I consult both ascendant and sun sign too!

Appollo - thanks for your detailed answer. I've also studied astrology for about 25 years! and absolutely agree with you re the importance of the rest of the chart. But the sun sign IS very, very important - after all, it's the sun that keeps the Earth going; it's always THERE as a presence, whether we feel its power or not. Without the sun, there would be no life here. And in astrology, as I understand it, it's the ascendant which shows what we project now, in a way, while it's the sun sign which determines what we are working towards - the self-actualisation of us: the core of us.

So it's little wonder, really, that the sun sign is seen as being THE sign, and that was changed from the ascendant. Of course the rest of the chart is important when it comes to character, and forecasts, and it goes without saying that nobody with any knowledge of astrology would go by the sun sign alone when drawing up a chart - but the sun sign is hardly a negligable part of the horoscope in any sense!!!

As for the horoscopes in mags and newspapers - I doubt anyone really takes them seriously - they're a bit of fun. They may point to some general trends; they may buck you up a bit if you're feeling down, but they're not serious astrology. They can be a very good starting point, though, to promote interest, and keep astrology in the mainstream.

All the best,

Cinammon

Reply
Apollo
Posts: 487
(@apollo)
Reputable Member
Joined: 21 years ago

Hey Dogwoman

Thanks for answering - I consult both ascendant and sun sign too!
Appollo - thanks for your detailed answer. I've also studied astrology for about 25 years! and absolutely agree with you re the importance of the rest of the chart. But the sun sign IS very, very important - after all, it's the sun that keeps the Earth going; it's always THERE as a presence, whether we feel its power or not. Without the sun, there would be no life here. And in astrology, as I understand it, it's the ascendant which shows what we project now, in a way, while it's the sun sign which determines what we are working towards - the self-actualisation of us: the core of us.
So it's little wonder, really, that the sun sign is seen as being THE sign, and that was changed from the ascendant. Of course the rest of the chart is important when it comes to character, and forecasts, and it goes without saying that nobody with any knowledge of astrology would go by the sun sign alone when drawing up a chart - but the sun sign is hardly a negligable part of the horoscope in any sense!!!
As for the horoscopes in mags and newspapers - I doubt anyone really takes them seriously - they're a bit of fun. They may point to some general trends; they may buck you up a bit if you're feeling down, but they're not serious astrology. They can be a very good starting point, though, to promote interest, and keep astrology in the mainstream.
All the best,
Cinammon

Cinammon,

Kind regards...

I think my main ethos in this subject is derived from a deep rooted issue with the way society as a whole is kept in perpetual ignorance by media moguls in regard to astrology - by the drip drip feeding of 'garbage astrology'... I don't like the way it paints the picture - and no doubt as you and I both know by now, real astrology has infinite possibilities to offer Humanity - yet it is seemingly forever kept as a 'hidden science'. IMHO the 'garbage astrology' is worse than no astrology at all being published because it promotes singular attention to the Sun sign only. Of course there is merit in what you say in regard to the Solar perspective - but that and that alone is surely spiritually unhealthy... When you look at a garden and see the flowers all with only a single petal each... it doesn't look natural. It's the people that charge their entry fees to view the garden that I despise.

A.

Reply
Posts: 43
Topic starter
(@cinammon)
Eminent Member
Joined: 14 years ago

Hey Apollo

V. interesting perspective - absolutely agree with you re your other post in aquacrystal's thread - everybody's got their own opinion, etc - but, again, v. interested in your point of view.

Excellent metaphor. I suppose I could extend it a bit to say that without the sun, there'd be no flowers in the garden at all(!) but of course agree with your point re concentration only on sun sign.

But do think, ironically enough, that the sun sign may be under-rated in serious astrology. (I'm thinking a lot about the sun sign and self-actualisation now, thanks in large part to your posts. Nothing like an opposing pov!) Am now thinking whole sun/sun sign thing more intricate and powerful than have thought before.

Like the way you put it re 'infinite possibilities to offer Humanity'. Don't know about infinite, but agree it certainly has soooo much to offer people that isn't taken up, thanks to its sidelining.

Don't want to ruffle any Christian feathers here, but one pov is that astrology (esp. regarding the sun) also v. v. v. important in the bible, both old and new testament, and can help to make sense of it, as well as of other symbols in life, as you prob. know. And, again as you know, can make us more understanding of where people are coming from/hopes/fears, etc (well, that's the theory!!!)

Great to see someone defending astrology - I seem to have spent a lot of time saying it's NOT rubbish, and explaining the importance of the whole horoscope, so makes nice change for me to be the one defending the sun sign!

Take care, and all the best!

Reply
Apollo
Posts: 487
(@apollo)
Reputable Member
Joined: 21 years ago

In my more active younger years I used to defend astrology too - but took things a little more direct... I used to do a lot of study progressions and transits - I was pretty accurate with predictive work and built up a fairly good reputation. In those days there seemed to be a lot more parties... There was always the 'late night kitchen debate' and once I appeared on the scene someone would always have wee dig or jokey jibe at me... I used to laugh with everyone else - but always had the little ace card up my sleeve...
I'd put a wager to any skeptic present - that I could give predict an event in a person's life either in their future or even something major in their past - simply by having their time, place & date of birth... The wager was £100. - If I got it wrong my £100 would go to any charity... If I got it right ... my challenger would forfeit their £100 to any charity of my choice.
Strangely... nobody ever took up the challenge...:)
I had friends back then that were very up on the psychological stuff and they had tremendous insight into the personality... Myself - it was always either spiritual or prediction; that's all I was really into... Time used to fascinate me; I realized that 'time' wasn't and couldn't really be understood by ordinary consciousness; it's an illusion - albeit a perfectly controlled one.
I recall doing some work for a friend at the time. I remember he asked me about an event and what did I think was to happen at that time (can't remember what it was now:o...) and I timed the event exactly and the prediction was correct - he was happy & I added his case to my expanding file. However about a year later, I happened to go back through the case and realized a mistake in my calculations... making the timing of that event impossible to be correct... yet it was?! I looked at other cases and began to put together a perception that events are frequently due to happen (karmic jigsaw principle) at given moments in life and that sometimes you can be given the right 'tools' for defining that moment; even if one of the tools is incorrect... - time. I then developed a conclusion that time is fluid.
It was irrelevant that I had made the wrong calculation; the timing of the event and its passing was 'designed' - had I used the actual correct data I believe I would have still come up with the same time and event...
Infinite possibilities... maybe that's a touch of overstatement - but some people are pretty amazing in their work; medical astrologers for example...

A.

Reply
Posts: 12
(@peteluce)
Active Member
Joined: 13 years ago

Having kept a daily diary for 30 years, I did a study of what points on my natal chart were being trasnited, and by which planets, on the most important days in my life. The natal sun was the point most commonly involved, followed by the Ascendant, followed by the other personal planets.

AS regards the long outer planet transits, transits to my natal sun eg Neptune conjunct natal sun, Pluto conjunct natal sun, have been very eventful, life-changing periods, but so equally have transits of Pluto and Uranus to my natal Venus, and Saturn and Pluto to my Ascendant. If I only looked at "Sun Sign Astrology", I could explain about 1/4 to 1/3 of the most memorable periods in my life. So I don't think Sun Sign Astrology is worthless, just very misleading if you think that's all there is to Astrology.

As regards what the Ancients did, I don't think we should assume they were right, anymore than we should assume that we "Moderns" always know better. You have to consider what Astrology was being used for in ancient times. Mainly it was to help kings in their policy decisions. More about obvious outward events, like people dying, rather than about internal things.

Ascendant is about how you relate to the world in general, and Descendant (which is precisely opposite) shows how the world responds. e.g. if you're Aries rising, the world keeps telling you to be more Libran!

Reply
Posts: 14
(@astrolandrea)
Active Member
Joined: 12 years ago

astrology

I have been studying astrology since 1971 and - although I may not be popular amongst many astrologers, I rarely look at transits or progressions as I consider the purpose of astrology is to show us ourselves.
Of course many will never be interested in the subject enough to study it but this is where those who do come in, to erect and interpret birth charts.
We make our own lives with each choice and decision (or lack of), and so knowing our weaknesses and strengths can only help.
For me the Ascendant and overlay pattern is very important - but I agree the whole chart is too. Before computers, writing out every sign on house cusp, every planet in sign and house and every major aspect plus the Nodes and very soon the character of the individual comes into sight. Even the goals of the life are there.
Everyone will see astrology differently and will have expertise to bring to the subject, so let's keep astrology alive whether it is in daily columns or Sun Signs or prediction or birth chart interpretation..

Reply
bozana64
Posts: 44
(@bozana64)
Eminent Member
Joined: 17 years ago

Cinammon,

I am Sun sign Taurus, Ascendant Libra with Moon in Pisces. Personally i like more people born in Sun sign Libra. I am a bit stubborn (Taurus) and romantic (Pisces). All other belongs to Libra and in my life, I met many people, born in Libra.
I have started with Astrology 1995, to see what is wrong with me (my long chronic pains) and how come I stayed alive, when I took 24 pills (not for sleeping) and felt in a deep sleep. My neighbour found me.
That is also reason that I would like to work with Doctors they practice Astromedicine.

Reply
Share: