The horoscope of Alice Bailey

The horoscope of Alice Bailey. 


Tradition claims she has reported as time of birth 7:32 to her closest friend Dane Rudhyar. Who in turn rectified her horoscope to 7:42. The funny thing is she made fun of astrologers, who each claimed a different ascendant for her; one would say Leo, another Virgo and another Pisces.

She, herself, preferred Pisces, because as she claimed her husband was Pisces and her children were related to that zodiac axis. Even today amongst her students there is a debate about which her rightful ascendant is.
A second most important of dates is the one it is said she had her first telepathic contact from the Tibetan.
Apparently it was November 19, 1919 when this happened for the first time and many astrologers tried to see what might have happened to her horoscope during that day. Neptune transiting her ascendant in Leo sure makes an impression, but transiting Sun in a T-Square formation to transiting Uranus and natal Pluto is also important.
Solar Arc however is much more revealing, as Solar Arc MC puts itsef right on natal Pluto, at the same axis, transiting Sun was activating. Taurus 27 degrees might make a bad impression as a degree but as it turns out, it was closer to the fixes star Alcyon at that time rather then Algol.
Another important point in her chart are of course Planets out of Bounds. Mercury in Cancer on the 12th house cusp, could for many, be related for her telepathic contacts, whereas Lilith in conjunction to Venus and the Sun in the 11th house could have to do with her adventures in the various theosophical groups she participated.
Sure thing is that a telepathic event of such an importance requires further study than juse watching the transits or solar arc. If it is true that the Masters take more the sidereal zodiac into account, then it is worth examining how her sidereal chart is related to the tropical one. Then, we will see that sidereal Neptune is in conjunction to her tropical Midheaven, a clear indication for telepathic contact, as the Midheaven is related to the Crown Chakra. Sidereal Uranus in conjunction to natal Ascendant also reminds us more of the insubordinated attitude Alice Bailey showed as a woman in her life.
Placing both sidereal and tropical transits on her tropical natal chart, we observe a conjunction between sidereal Saturn and tropical Jupiter but also a Midpoint of sidereal Jupiter and Saturn placed on her tropical ascendant and tropical transiting Neptune. A planetary picture indicating the selection of leader, a choice which however is not very clear to herself at the start, as she doesn't know why she was picked out and what they want from her.
Even more stunning however is the tri-wheel examination of sidereal solar arc, tropical solar arc and her natal tropical chart. There it is apparent that on natal Pluto, we don't only have tropical solar arc Midheaven, but we also have sidereal Neptune. And all this near the fixed star Alcyone (it is not unusual for the Masters to pick times of initiation or contact that are related to fixed stars).
Natal Pluto on the other hand activated indicates that her perception of the telepathic contact was not one of initiation but one of  possesion. She had to give up any control she had to a hosting entity in her mind. At least that is how she might have experienced it (the tropical chart usually shows our subjective experience, versus the sidereal one which indicates how it is seen by the Masters).
A very interesting study i suppose which shows that in initiation horoscopes the tropical zodiac is not enough to explain the nature of what's happening.
Relevant charts follow for your personal study.

Natal Chart Source: https://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Bailey,_Alice_A.

Astrology - Why a "scientific" astrology is not enough

One of the biggest challenges of our astrological time – as well as of other times astrology flourished - is to define philosophically (and not only philosophically) what exactly is this thing, called astrology. Is it a predictive science, a tool for self-analysis, a method of contact with non-material realities? What exactly is the nature of this subject and what is it intended for?

As it has happened in other periods of astrological history we are divided on this issue. Most astrologers, whether acknowledged or not, believe inside them that astrology has a metaphysical connotation. To some extent they pass this out, because they cannot otherwise explain some astrological concepts that are not "translated" properly in modern psychological language (e.g. the issue of Lunar Nodes).

On the other hand, many astrologers, either for professional reasons or perhaps in order to maintain a high prestige make a major effort to prove that astrology meets the requirements of modern science. And in order to do so, they are trying to find scientific evidence for the validity of astrology.

The problem with this approach is the nature of proof itself. As it is nicely described in the book Astrology, Psychology and the Four Elements by Steven Arroyo, until now the scientific community accepts as proof the so-called "quantitative" proof. To prove that astrology is a phenomenon or a natural law, it should be described quantitatively, i.e. with mathematical equations and pass the test of cause and effect. Which means, whenever there is a specific reason, we should have a specific effect and vice versa. Whenever there is a specific effect a specific cause should hide behind.

Please note however that in the course of science in the 20th century, the last rule of cause and effect has been a little less strict, with the introduction of statistics in the scientific process; which transformed the natural law from a rigorous rule to an average behavior in accordance with a probability function.

The challenge then, for many astrologers or sympathizers of astrology is to prove in terms of cause and effect, or even in terms of statistical frequency that there is a relationship between planetary motions and human facts.

This approach, however, paints only half the picture and does not deal with the experience of the “subject”. It deals only with what the subject "does" outside, which is the only measurable data under investigation.

In other words the statistical processes can measure only "facts" and not emotions, internal conflicts (which may not ever occur), or differences due to the subjective view of events.

So, statistical science can describe only a part of today’s astrology, namely that part which deals with macrocosmic situations, political issues or other forms of measurable events.

On the other hand statistics cannot tell the personal story of each of us, where the subjective view of things is not a "veil" of reality but a reality itself. You see there isn’t any measurable size that can say if I am unhappy or if I'm happy. There isn’t any measurement that helps me put goals in life, or tell me how in all this puzzle of contradictions I can find something I can call "myself". Or any measurement that can get me a tip on how to put all things in order in my life and explain why I’m acting the way I’m acting.

All this is data unavailable for the statistic science because it is not just a "phenomenon." But for the person who goes to an astrologer for advice, these things "are" his reality, a reality as real as it will ever become, unlike statistics and numbers which only lay somewhere in some hidden books.
For such a person the statistical approach of astrology is completely irrelevant and the so called 'scientific' approach is nothing less than another "academic" theory.

So, the fact that the quantitative process has helped man conquer nature and improve the chances of survival simply mean that numbers are only a means of measurement for the average. It does not matter if someone is hungry, what is important is that the “average person” is not hungry, or in other words, that the GDP rises. If economists say that we are doing well, so be it, even if some of us are a bit unhappy. It doesn’t matter what a specific person thinks personally about things; it is rather important what the “experts” say about those issues. Each and everyone’s personal opinion has never been less important for how things are going to end up finally. And of course this person, whose opinion is ignored every day, tries desperately to feel important through participation in reality shows and other means of discharge for his dissatisfaction.

Having to deal with all this, astrology can offer a different perception on how we can arrange our lives avoiding the fury of numbers and it also offers a completely different perception of what "proof" essentially means. Proof in Astrology is not just the quantitative measurement or the mathematical representation. Proof is mainly the result. If the result is there, then all other approaches are simply theories and redundant. If the result is true, then there is no reason for further study, dispute or controversy. If astrology works, this is enough for us and should be sufficient at least for all astrologers who claim to do advisory work. If astrology works, we must thank God that we have it and have inherited it from our ancestors. Because, if astrology weren’t there, we would probably have been forced to invent it!