I think ,
Praying before a consult is a welcome distraction which takes away your mind from pre-conceptions you may have and start afresh. The god doesn't matter the pause and blank mind does help.

Autumn, thank you for your thoughtful post!

in my universe, people are equals on account of their essential humanity, regardless of their level of education. I am a retired academic, but have no psychology, psychiatry, counseling, pastoral care, or social work credentials.

Back in the 1970s and 80s, "modern psychological astrology" was the main form practiced in English-speaking countries. The psychology part was often very thin, and today, I don't think many modern astrologers see our work as particularly psychological. Advice given may have nothing to do with topics that clinical psychologists typically address.

I would point out that all kinds of people give advice without these credentials-- and get paid to do it. Newspaper (and now on-line) advice columnists have been advising people at least since the mid-1950s; and before that, you find advice showing up in old cookbooks. Few of these (mostly) women had any counseling credentials: you may be familiar with one of the current rock stars of advice columnists, "Sugar" (Cheryl Strayed,) whose background is English literature. Many of the popular advice columnists in print today started out as journalists.

When I was working, I was required as part of my job to advise undergrad students on their majors, and the informal name for a graduate thesis supervisor is "adviser." Near the end of my career, when I became active in my campus faculty association as a type of service commitment, I was called upon to advise professors appealing negative tenure or promotion decisions and the like.

In my work capacity, I could claim over 30 years of advice-giving, though none of it was related to astrology. But I certainly had students, who had asked for an appointment, in distress in my office-- and I kept a box of tissues handy for that purpose. Their distress could be about anything from failing grades, a recent death of a parent just prior to a major exam, to emotional issues-- where I did refer them to campus counseling services.

Other advising jobs that I can think of that require no counseling credentials would be: travel agent or the on-line trip advisor sites, a financial planner, stock broker, pension plan analyst, or labour union grievance officer. Really, it's none of a banker's business how you manage your money, but my husband gets calls once or twice a year from a banker who informs him of changing interest rates or offers that could save him some money, and than explains the options to him.

Not to mention my being a parent to two now-adult children whose lives (knock on wood) turned out OK.

I nickname what I do on an astrology forum (not so much here, but on two others) as giving "kitchen table advice." We've all given it on occasion, and most people will have asked for it, on occasion, from a friend or family member.

I have never charged money for a chart reading. I call myself an amateur. People know when they post on an an Internet forum that they are not paying for professional astrological services.

I do think it would benefit the profession of astrology if astrologers obtained some credentials in astrology-- as well as counseling. I don't think this is going to happen, but it is hard to think of any other profession that doesn't require some kind of credential from their state/province in order to practice.

(to be continued)

Autumn-- continued from my previous post.

There's an awful lot of astrology that I don't know, and some astrology that I am now trying to learn or hope to learn in the near future.

But sometimes if an individual claims that her chart doesn't fit her, I try to learn why. So often I see posts from newbies (at Astrodienst and Astrologer's Community) that say, "Why don't I feel like my sun sign?" Often they feel more like the adjacent sun sign. Well, if you probe a bit further and see their natal chart, it turns out that they have a slug of planets in the neighbouring sign, or some other chart factor that would explain it.

Moreover, a newbie often has a very limited, popular astrology basis for understanding his sun-sign; generally based upon stereotypical caricatures or a collection of static personality traits.

So I try to work with them. No: a Virgo sun doesn't necessarily mean that you are a neat-freak. Let's look at what a mutable earth sign means. Let's look at how Virgo's quest for excellence is likely to play out in an ordinary life. Then lets look at your second house, and see how that Jupiter-Uranus conjunction confounds the stereotype of Virgos as neat and tidy.

A lot of posts by me and others on Internet forums are not about some kind of God-like reading of newbies' charts. It is more about teaching them astrology basics so that they can read their own charts.

Then let's look at the work of advanced astrologers. When I feel that astrology cannot make certain claims yet the experts show how they would handle the issue, I recognize that merely because I am ignorant of a given technique or insight doesn't mean that astrology itself is deficient. The practitioner's level of expertise, coupled with an intuitive sense, makes a big difference.

By analogy, I could never ski a double black diamond ski run in the Rockies, but that doesn't mean that an expert skier couldn't do it.

Then we get into the big debate about which type of astrology works best: traditional western, modern western, or Vedic (jyotish.) Does horary work better for most issues than looking at a nativity plus transits? What about sidereal vs. tropical? Modern astrology does a whole lot less predictive work than traditional astrology, for example.

So I will assume that you have a lot of proficiency in chart reading, notably your own chart. But recently more modern western astrologers are picking up on new methods from the older practices-- finding that they work better-- or at least offer new insights. Just possibly, at this stage of life, you might enjoy exploring a different branch or type of astrology.

(To be continued)

(continued from my previous post)

Autumn, thanks again for your thoughtful reply. You've given us a lot of food for thought.

I might mention that I was well into middle age before I began reading horoscopes for other people, and 40 before I even started to learn astrology. Since then, I've put on a lot of astro-mileage.

When I first read some horoscopes on my own, it was a huge awakening. I did feel that a horoscope showed us the wiring of the soul. Or that astrology let us look under the hood (bonnet, to any Brits here) of the external human being. It felt sacred.

In that state, when I first read some on-line charts for people, I retained some of that sense of caution and awe. Possibly as a result, I had some good beginner's luck.

What I have learned since then, is that most on-line "read my chart" requests are not asking for esoterica. Querents primarily want to know about their relationships, their work, their bodily health. Maybe travel, housing, or money. Rarely do I find someone wondering about her spiritual purpose in life.

And I am good with that, because in my cosmos, people incarnate into the material plane for a reason. I think that we, as human beings, are precisely meant to deal with our bodies, other people's bodies, our material circumstances, and exterior personalities. We'll live in the next dimension soon enough.

So to come full circle to my OP, I wonder to what extent it is possible to interact with people on their own material terms, while keeping a spiritual context for my efforts.

Granted, people come to spirituality on their own, and on their own terms, but Wherein Is It Written that you or I cannot be part of their process? Maybe we were the ones "meant" for their spiritual progress??

In one brand of spiritual astrology, people are on the planet to learn and to teach. What this looks like for us is indicated by our pre-natal lunar and solar eclipses. But we are on the planet to teach-- even if by negative example.

I don't think it is ethical to answer-- or even to explore-- certain types of astrological insights when dealing with vulnerable people. But I will give you an example, or case study, of practical, kitchen-table advice.

A wife suddenly learns that her husband is leaving her for another woman, planning an immediate separation and subsequent divorce. She is understandably focused on the astrology of the "Why?" or "Will he return?" She's never even thought about what a divorce entails in practical terms. So after explaining her rough 7th house, it doesn't hurt to suggest that, if she hasn't done so already, that she immediately deal with any joint bank accounts or liquid assets, so that the husband doesn't suddenly clean her out financially. Cancel any joint credit cards. See a lawyer immediately to draft up a separation agreement. This is for her own protection, based on decades of wives' real experiences.

This isn't about tinkering with the wife's soul. It is about trying to be helpful in the here and now. If the wife says, "Buzz off," because she knows all about divorce issues, no harm done.

But I am not saying, whatsoever, Autumn, that you or anybody else should give astrological or collateral advice if you do not wish to.

And I do greatly appreciate the spiritual approach that you bring to astrology.

pankajdubey wrote:I think ,
Praying before a consult is a welcome distraction which takes away your mind from pre-conceptions you may have and start afresh. The god doesn't matter the pause and blank mind does help.

I agree! Some of the ancient Greek astrologers prayed to Mercury, the god of astrology. Lilly was a Christian. That in itself raises some interesting theological questions. But regardless, there is a long history of astrologers trying to create a separate and distinctive space between their everyday lives and their time with the horoscope.

waybread you seriously do not need to explain yourself to anyone. You are ian intelligent mature individual well capable in making decisions and accepting results.

What you need to consider is that asking guidance from inexperienced indoviduals will result in perpetuating problems resulting in some turbulent results for you. After all energy released out by you returns home to you. Good intentions that create problems or turbulence for others do not tend to have happy endings for the perpetrator irrespective of intent.

The best action is to equip yourself with a professional consulting therapy course and undergo own therapy to experience first hand. I think there are some year long ones...not that long!

Otherwise you are going into battle with a reed.

One tip i may give is that focusing on whatever it is ...question, skill, problem....and meditating for as long as it takes usually gives excellent results.

I dont know which way is best for you to meditate...its very individual. Techniques abound. I prefer movement or sleep but its a personal to user thing.

I wish you luck anyway with your adventures.

Say what?

Sorry, Autumn. I appreciate your willingness to give me advice. Lord knows I could use some.

But we seem to have very different metaphysical and practical understandings of human nature and astrology.

Actually I was in therapy for a while with a Ph. D. clinical psychologist who subsequently published some books that made her well-known. I've also been a client in a few stints of marriage counseling. I learned through these sessions that psychologists, no matter how credentialed, are not always terrifically helpful. One of them was actually a distinct waste of money; although in general I sometimes recommend that people seek the services of a licensed therapist, notably for PTSD, childhood sexual abuse, depression, &c. I also sometimes recommend Al Anon.

I think sometimes it is helpful for someone coming to a forum with a "poor me" attitude to get angry. It shows he is willing to stand up for himself and recognize that core of self-worth. Anger is a natural human emotion. We don't have to fear it. Everybody has Mars somewhere.

Ultimately each person has to take responsibility for his/her own identity and actions. No one else can do this for her. This includes people seeking answers on an astrology forum.

The OP here is actually about the question of praying, meditating, centering, or letting-go, prior to initiating a horoscope reading.

I started out with a raw feeling that there was something profoundly wrong with the way the world was going and that this had to be turned around. And with modern science. As Arthur Koestler said, around the time of the A bomb, they have done the equivalent of handing a fun to a two-year-old. And I think that the change that came about in the sixteenth century if not before was to assume tat "the natural world" was strictly material and had no mind or soul and could be understood "objectively" by nutriments and had nothing to tell us.
Until the experiment that showed that whether an electron was a wve or particle depended on whether or not it was observed. Now I believe that that also tells us a lot about human beings. Do we ask ourselves whether we are the same person whether or not we know we are being observed?
I remember my own first moment of true consciousness, at around four I would say, when I first became aware that I was actually breathing, it wasn't just happening to me. What a responsibility! What if I forgot and just died? Then a feeling came over me and I felt somehow I was being touched and I knew i was now like my older friends and able to say like them "I did this yesterday" or " I will do this next week" and that this was something that happened to everybody.
Something maybe that happened to an an electron/wave? And did something also change the scientists who observed it?
When two sentient humans (or more) encounter each other, are both the same afterwards? Science has shown that there are such thins called "mirror neurons" that make the same neurons fire upon the brain of an observer of an action that are fired up in that of the performer. For the early years we all, if we are to survive, must learn to imitate those around us.
But "scientists" by imputing only mechanics to the world around us, and spending so much of their energy in "objective" observations, would logically subject themselves to the danger of becoming not people, but "things"" themselves, As William Blake aid "We become what we behold."
Astrology is the only art/science that has held out and has not left the observer out of the equation. I also think that logically the planets themselves must alter their meanings, ever so slightly perhaps, with every contact they make with humans or each other.
That is why, if and if ever, the "scientists" turn around and retrace their steps, we may be ble to help.

I hope you find this thread informative: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8963

It is important to distinguish between the physical, natural, and medical sciences; social science; and the humanities. It is important to distinguish between science, scientists, and scientism. Too often astrologers who criticize science do not know any scientists personally, and do not know what goes on in science today.

Thank you for your interest, waybread.
Yes, I have known scientists personally, both as friends and teachers in the undergrad science program I pursued. Most I liked, but there were exceptions. Some are also close relatives.
And I admire their history, especially Pasteur, Semmelweis, George Washington Carver and Luther Burbank. And the contemporary scientists who're doing their best to halt or slow down climate change or even convince some people that it exists and is caused by human behaviour .A tough row to hoe.
Actually I was prompted to insert my comments by three factors.
One was an article in The Atlantic Monthly, "The Universe is as Spooky as Einstein Thought" (February 10, 2017) on quantum physics. They were discussing the double-slit experiment and why a photon can be a "wave"or a particle depending on the method of measuring. I didn't comprehend most of what they said, except the concrete facts and that they were puzzled and dissatisfied.
The second was a long-held opinion of my own that scientists, as a body, have long neglected their social role. Giving a warring world bigger and better means to destroy itself, is like, as Arthur Koestler said, handing a loaded gun to a two-year-old. Not to speak of inventing pesticides, or, for that matter, artificial fertilizers ; by introducing these into the natural world with no regard for the longterm effects, they are responsible for a lot of the trouble we are in. Not to speak of global warming, of course..
The third is leaving the observer (they themselves) When studying sociology, they do not consider the effects produced by the experts who advise advertisers how to sell their products, or those who tell politicians what to say to get votes. Nor the increasing automation of work the new discoveries in AI bring about, using it to replace actual humans who could do a much better job, in my opinion. Plus the economists who despite all evidence to the contrary continue to believe that free trade is the answer to everything.
There has to be a way to do science whereby scientific observation per se would have a reciprocal effect on the knower ("For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction") that would boost his/her level of consciousness and sense of responsibility.
There are at least two schools of thought about what "science" is. The first is the one we are used to, espoused by Francis Bacon, in which Man puts Nature to the test and, by learning her laws, gains power over her, remaking her for the benefit of mankind. And to give some men power over others. The experimental interrogations, usually with instruments, are described in detail and have to be reproducible.
Then there is Goethe's way, which Wikipedia also describes ("Goethean
Science.") which I will discuss next.

This is a continuation, not a reply.oee, etc., A
Quoting from page 1 of Goethe's Autobiography (blogged by Goethe Girl in '"Goethe etc., August 2009")
"It was on the 28th of August at the stroke of twelve noon in Frankfurt on the Main. The Constellation was auspicious. The Sun was in Virgo and at its culmination for the day. Jupiter and Venus looked amicably up on it, and Mercury was not hostile. Saturn and Mars maintained indifference. Only the Moon, just then becoming full, was in a position to exert averse force, because its planetary hour had begun. It did, indeed, resist my birth, which did not take place until the hour had passed.
" These good aspects, which astrologers in later years taught me to take very highly, were probably responsible for my survival, for the midwife was so unskilled -- that I was brought into the world as good as dead, and only with great difficulty could I be made to open my eyes and see the light."
"Goethe began his autobiography with the above description of his birth. He was somewhat fanciful, for he rejected the 'metaphysical assumptions' of astrology, namely that one's path in life was determined by position of the planets and other stars at the moment of one's birth.
"Nevertheless. he saw fate (Schicksal), an element of what he referred to as necessity (Notwendigkeit) determining one's life in an 'incomprehensible way' (auf unbegreifliche Weise'). Moral freedom was achieved by the individual working within the limitations imposed by necessity and thereby crafting a meaningful life .Goethe's views would seem to have something in common with the Ancients, especially the Stoics, an aspect I have not investigated much in connection with Goethe. There was a great amount of willfulness in his view of the world, especially as he grew older, perhaps influenced by a resistance to mysticism, as willing soothing to be the case would make it so.'

this is a continuation, not a reply
The reference to the Moon's hour , on a Thursday, is in some conflict with what little I know about planetary hours. When I calculate the Moon's hour from the surmise and sunset given by Google, (5:26 am and 7;11 PM), it lasts from 11:10 am to 12:18 pm; when I take it from the time the Sun contacts the Ascendant to when it contacts the Descendant (5:14 am to 6:47 pm) it lasts from10:53 am to 12:01 pm. Am I to understand that the Moon hour began at the last stage of labor and retarded it? Or was Goethe not really being serious here? In any event, the birth certificate quoted by Lois Rodden gives a birth time "between noon and one pm". and uses 12:30, whereas I think noon is more accurate.
It was a Full Moon birth, with the Sun at 5 Vi 10 and the Moon at 11 Pi 12 par tile Sedna at 11 Pi 45.[/quote]