From tyagi@bjt.net Tue Nov 19 09:12:13 1996 Return-Path: tyagi@bjt.net Received: from kudonet.com ([165.227.52.1]) by bitsy.hollyfeld.org (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA05295 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 07:24:20 -0500 Received: by kudonet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id DAA27308; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 03:14:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 03:14:59 -0800 Message-Id: <199611191114.DAA27308@kudonet.com> To: tyagi@hollyfeld.org Subject: Astrology/9611.agaqrus.m From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva) Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva) Status: O >Path: kudonet.com!news.scruz.net!noos.hooked.net!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.usaor.net!usenet >From: marijam@usaor.net (Marilynn) >Newsgroups: alt.astrology >Subject: Re: Astrology and One World? >Date: Sun, 17 Nov 1996 17:41:51 GMT >Organization: USA OnRamp >Lines: 42 >Message-ID: <56niph$7qo@news.usaor.net> >References: <56jobc$kra@electra.saaf.se> <1996111618250874873@zetnet.co.uk> <56lc5b$sva@panix2.panix.com> >NNTP-Posting-Host: dyn109.usaor.net >X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 rakshasa@panix.com (Kevin Filan) wrote: > Am I the only person around who dates the beginning of the Age of >Aquarius at some time in the late 18th century? I'd say the French >Revolution, the work of people like Newton and Leibniz, and the whole Age >of Enlightenment were the first stirrings of the Aquarian Age -- and the >discovery of Uranus was its Star of Bethlehem. >Peace >Kevin Filan Depends on if you see the Age of Aquarius as an astronomical phenomenon based on the Precession of the Equinox, or if you think the Age of Aquarius is a subjective phenomenon that cannot be measured, but can only be argued based on a perception of mass cultural changes or, to use an outworn phrase, a "paradigm shift". If it is the former, then we have a least a 150 years to go (has also been estimated as a greater number, depending on whether the measurement of the constellation Aquarius begins with its first star or an arbitrary border) . I agree with you that the late 18th Century marked a profound Uranian change, well represented by the discovery of Uranus. But I rather see these changes as symbolize by the discovery of Uranus alone, rather than as a mark of Aquarius (which I now see as strongly related to Saturn, as it was originally intended. Saturn takes on different characteristics when involvings Capricorn or Aquarius, and it prefers Aquarius). I do observe a link between Uranus and Aquarius, but I do not take this planet as its primary steward. Since Uranus, we have discovered Neptune and Pluto. Do these planets have less importance in our evolution than Uranus? Besides, if the Age of Enlightment is to herald what's to come with the Age of Aquarius, then get me off this ship! Marilynn