Is Pluto an astrological planet?

[JUPITERASC]

by the way
originally the following comments formed part of another thread
but were moved here by a moderator who then titled this thread
"Is Pluto an astrological planet?"


Regarding pluto, latest news is that the jury is still out
that's because of
the definition of the word 'planet'
WHY PLUTO IS NO LONGER A PLANET http://www.universetoday.com/13573/why-pluto-is-no-longer-a-planet/

 

[JUPITERASC]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

Thank you, Jupiterasc. I didn't know that astrology also doesn't perceive Pluto as valid as a planet, as astronomy does.

dwarf planet pluto was discovered a mere 84 years ago
on 18 February 1930
and
there is no consensus amongst modern astrolgogers as to its validity

I understand that the dispositor of Scorpio is now Mars?

For at least two thousand years SCORPIO has traditionally been the territory and home of MARS


when recently discovered
less than a century ago
dwarf planet pluto was assigned co-rulership of SCORPIO
by SOME modern astrologers

but not all

Does it seem right?
Scorpio is so mysterious and refined in actions
and I associated martian energy with something more crude and psychologically guileless

Would be interested to read your sources regarding this statement

My Venus is peregrine, lacks essential dignity.
I understand. I will read more about it.
Do you think that could be the main factor with my situation there?

It is very nice that you used traditional astrology here,
it's not common to have such a knowledge and I appreciate this.

A debilitated Venus is certainly a factor
however
one planet or aspect alone provides only a part of the story
and
the chart requires being viewed as a whole

 

[JUPITERASC]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

I understand that you deny the role of Pluto in astrology, but can I ask why? As you wrote, some modern astrologers use this dwarf planet too.

Can you specify why Mars is the only answer, apart from that it was used long before the discovery of Pluto? Argumentum ad traditionem is not enough here, I'm afraid. I'm still learning and knowledgeable answers are great source of wisdom for me.

I understand that you deny the role of MARS in SCORPIO

Now I would like to say that I know that martian domicile is Aries and Scorpio, Mars is exalted in Capricorn, in detriment in Libra and Taurus and fall in Cancer. I will write what I have read, without sources now. If they will be needed, I will delve into meticulous search later

Mars in exalted in Capricorn, because it gains extra power of constructive, concious action and purpose when coupled with structuring influence of Saturn. That's understandable. Mars is detriment in Libra and Taurus, because these are too venusian signs and they weaken martian power there. Fall in Cancer, because this is too lunar end emotional sign.

But when we strip all the influences of exaltation, detriment etc.? When we consider it's primal form- domicile?
It leaves us with this impulsive, hot, dry, raw, direct, aimless-but always ready to take action energy, which is not so easy to associate with Scorpio.

you are entitled to your opinion
after all
astrologers frequently differ
that is not unusual

 

[JUPITERASC]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

I never stated that I deny Mars as ruler of Scorpio,

I was asking for some based on merit answer why is it so.

I didn't express any opinion,
just statements of fact.
Don't confuse that two.
I was hoping for constructive answer.

Likewise.....
and
I now post the following fact

dwarf planet pluto is entirely absent from the following table of ESSENTIAL DIGNITIES OF THE PLANETS
which has been in use for at least TWO THOUSAND YEARS

 

[JUPITERASC]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

Thank you, StillOne! It's so helpful to hear something about yourself from others,
you can never judge your own life in right, detached perspective

Jupiterasc, does your statement mean that we should reject any new discoveries?

I am certain you are well able to objectively
and
with the right detached perspective
deduce the meaning of any of my statements

which are abundantly clear

 

[JUPITERASC]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

Saying that something was used for a long a long time is not enough to validate it's truthfulness, I'm afraid.

It's always better to have wider array of arguments.

Jupiterasc, there is no need to be defensive here. It's only a discussion.

The fact that MARS is the traditional ruler of SCORPIO for the past two thousand years
is clearly insufficient for you

perhaps after another two thousand years have passed
that shall be sufficient time for you
but perhaps not

 

[JUPITERASC]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

I'd say it's safe to say the JupAsc follows the guidelines provided by Traditional Astrology
and thus does not include the last 3 "Planets" typically included by astrologers in the "modern" camp.

There is no 'typical modern camp'
because
there are a myriad differences of opinion amongst modern astrologers

HOWEVER

even modern astrologers acknowledge that SCORPIO is the home territory of MARS
on which dwarf planet pluto merely has 'co-rulership'

 

[JUPITERASC]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

The OP natal chart has an Exalted JUPITER in the SIGN of CANCER
opposing
a Domiciled SATURN in the SIGN of CAPRICORN

and

both JUPITER and SATURN

are in SQUARE challenging aspect

with a SUN conjunct MERCURY in the SIGN of ARIES

 

[StillOne]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

[FONT=Georgia[SIZE=3[COLOR=Navy]There is no 'typical modern camp'
because
there are a myriad differences of opinion amongst modern astrologers

HOWEVER

even modern astrologers acknowledge that SCORPIO is the home territory of MARS
on which dwarf planet pluto merely has 'co-rulership'[/B[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

I don't think I said that there is a "typical" modern camp.

 

[JUPITERASC]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

I don't think I said that there is a "typical" modern camp.

Fair enough
Arguably, there are no "typical" astrological camps of any kind
because
disagreements are not uncommon "within camps"
whether those "camps" are "modern" or "traditional"

 

[StillOne]

This is so great Jup! Now you don't have to spend all that time whenever someone brings up Pluto! You can just direct them here!

 

[JUPITERASC]

This is so great Jup!
Now you don't have to spend all that time whenever someone brings up Pluto!
You can just direct them here!

I did not commence this thread though
the posts are re-directed from another thread by a moderator who titled the thread with a question I have no need to ask

 

[StillOne]

I did not commence this thread though
the posts are re-directed from another thread by a moderator who titled the thread with a question I have no need to ask

Oh, then all the better... You can start your own thread and direct posters there about Pluto, Trad Astro, etc. What a time saver!

 

[JUPITERASC]

Oh, then all the better...

You can start your own thread

and direct posters there about Pluto, Trad Astro, etc.

What a time saver!

I'm surprised that while instructing me to 'start my own thread' on a subject of your choice
yet
you have neglected to instruct me as to the title of that thread as well

Certainly you have an interest in traditional interpretations of your own natal chart http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80169

by the way

pluto is a dwarf planet
and only one of many similar objects in the Kuiper Belt

 

[StillOne]

I'm surprised that while instructing me to 'start my own thread' on a subject of your choice
yet
you have neglected to instruct me as to the title of that thread as well

My apologies, just trying to make things easier.

Certainly you have an interest in traditional interpretations of your own natal charthttp://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=80169

Indeed, I have interest in many things astrological.

by the way

pluto is a dwarf planet
and only one of many similar objects in the Kuiper Belt

Maybe that can be the thread title?

 

[Dirius]

Re: I wonder- is it a highly plutonian chart?

I understand that you deny the role of Pluto in astrology, but can I ask why? As you wrote, some modern astrologers use this dwarf planet too.

Can you specify why Mars is the only answer, apart from that it was used long before the discovery of Pluto? Argumentum ad traditionem is not enough here, I'm afraid. I'm still learning and knowledgeable answers are great source of wisdom for me.


Now I would like to say that I know that martian domicile is Aries and Scorpio, Mars is exalted in Capricorn, in detriment in Libra and Taurus and fall in Cancer. I will write what I have read, without sources now. If they will be needed, I will delve into meticulous search later

Mars in exalted in Capricorn, because it gains extra power of constructive, concious action and purpose when coupled with structuring influence of Saturn. That's understandable. Mars is detriment in Libra and Taurus, because these are too venusian signs and they weaken martian power there. Fall in Cancer, because this is too lunar end emotional sign.

But when we strip all the influences of exaltation, detriment etc.? When we consider it's primal form- domicile?
It leaves us with this impulsive, hot, dry, raw, direct, aimless-but always ready to take action energy, which is not so easy to associate with Scorpio.

Pluto doesn't reflect light....Pluto doesn't carry a message for us.....

You can't see pluto with the naked eye.

There are thousands of Pluto Like objects in the orbit of the sun, so....if we are using pluto we should be using those planets too.

The problem si that we assume that because pluto is in our solar system, it should be added to our astrological calculations.

 

[Dirius]

I understand that, and I respect it, but in my case I don't consider neptune/uranus either for anything at all.

Almost everything that this 3 planets "represent", can be explained by the placement of other planets in the charts. Or even using the fixed stars, something that doesn't exist in modern astrology.

We assume that they represent something, because like I said, they belong to what we call "the solar system", our backyard, sort of speak...So we think that since they are so big, they must mean something.

Astrology is born in ancient egypt/greece, by tracking the movements of the 2 luminaries and the 5 errant stars, along with the placement of the fixed stars and constellations:

Sun and moon + mercury/venus/mars/jupiter/saturn + stars

Neptune...uranus...unfortunatly they should mean nothing to us in astrology

 

[Vista]

JupiterAsc,

I did not create this thread for you however if you prefer I can close it down given you were not interested in the title of this thread to begin with.

Let me know what you wish to do!

Vista

 

[Kaiousei no Senshi]

To explain further, there are a few philosophical issues that arise when using the outer planets. It's true that many more classically oriented astrologers use them, but they tend to regard them as fainter fixed stars, so their importance and abilities tend to be scaled back or ignored unless they are on an angle or conjunct some important planet.

Dirius is correct in noting that the fact the outers carry no visible light is a major detriment to their inclusion into the classical framework. Astrology evolved alongside ancient optical theories and these theories still permeate astrological discourse to this day. Planets in aspect are said to "see" or "regard" one another and their light is often considered a transmitter of their influence.

The word "planet" originally evolved from the Greek "planetes aster", or "wandering star" and referred to the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Jupiter, Mars, and Saturn whose motion could be detected against the backdrop of fixed stars that are stable in their relative distance from one another, but all move together as one large group. Today we have redefined what a planet is to serve our own categorical needs. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's important to remember that we, as astrologers, have organizational needs that are different from those of astronomy.

Another issue with the outer planets in general is that they lack much of the tools that the classical planets have. This isn't just referring to dignities (though that is a large part of it), but they also lack nature, sect, gender, years, winds, orbs, signatures, etc. This may all seem superfluous or unnecessary, but its significance really cannot be overstated. Without these associations, the outer planets are essentially blank orbs without instruction or meaning.

Finally, there is the issue with the meanings contemporary astrologers have given to them. Mostly they either 1) don't make sense within their own context or 2) are already taken by another planet.

About the first, a lot of the meanings of the planets have been assigned to them based on mythological interpretations or perceived mundane events happening around the time of their discovery. A lot of the mythological meanings are cherry picked and often nonsensical, like Uranus ruling rebellion, but in the myth Ouranos is the tyrannical dictator, not the freedom fighter. The mundane events are definitely cherry picked as there are many important events happening around the world at any given time. Pluto was discovered in 1930 and has taken on an association with nuclear force, but when I hear 1930s I think Great Depression and I've never heard anyone associate Pluto with financial ruination.

About the second, each of the outer planets have significations that are more or less plucked from the classical planets. Uranus's reported instability and recklessness can be found in Mercury and Mars. Neptune's illusions and mysticism can be found in the Moon. Pluto's transformation and general heavy-handedness are the domains of Mercury and Saturn. Not only does this create strange, cross-breed planets, but it makes the classical planets into flat characters when their meanings and significations are much more multifaceted in the tradition.

 

[StillOne]

Pluto doesn't reflect light....Pluto doesn't carry a message for us.....

You can't see pluto with the naked eye.

There are thousands of Pluto Like objects in the orbit of the sun, so....if we are using pluto we should be using those planets too.

The problem si that we assume that because pluto is in our solar system, it should be added to our astrological calculations.

I understand that, and I respect it, but in my case I don't consider neptune/uranus either for anything at all.

Almost everything that this 3 planets "represent", can be explained by the placement of other planets in the charts. Or even using the fixed stars, something that doesn't exist in modern astrology.

We assume that they represent something, because like I said, they belong to what we call "the solar system", our backyard, sort of speak...So we think that since they are so big, they must mean something.

Astrology is born in ancient egypt/greece, by tracking the movements of the 2 luminaries and the 5 errant stars, along with the placement of the fixed stars and constellations:

Sun and moon + mercury/venus/mars/jupiter/saturn + stars

Neptune...uranus...unfortunatly they should mean nothing to us in astrology

Out of curiosity, following in this manner, do you also then not utilize the moons nodes or any lots/parts?

Also, in interpretation, do you specifically use interpretation as described by the particular tradition you've studied? Meaning, no modern modification?