posted August 29, 2011 11:24 AM            

I remember reading the book from cover to cover, laughing at the humor and personal anecdotes and saying to myself "that is so me" .

I remember thinking "how can someone so far away, who has never met me, know so much about me?". Astrology fascinated me and I didn't understand why, if it has existed so long, was it not being taught in schools so that people could gain a clearer perspective on who they are?

Its not like the book was telling me whom I was and I was arranging myself to align to its diction, but it seemed to be taking all the words that I struggled to find to explain my intentions, explain what I felt, whom I felt I was and made them easily accessible to me(as if they were always there, I just couldn't see them clearly).

This was before ascendants, moon, chart rulers, descendants, venus signs, juno, composite, sidereal, vedic, transits, composites etc and all that jazz started to haze the picture and make things more complicated.

Am I really a Sagittarius when my Moon is in Cancer and I have my Sun-Neptune in conjunct?

Perhaps then I am not really a Sag because my Sun does not fall into one of the angular houses? There could be another sign/planet that supercedes it?

I miss that. I miss when astrology was less complicated and all I had to deal with was just my Sun sign.

Not to say that I do not appreciate the immense knowledge that I have gained getting to know my Moon, Asc and other planetary placements. I do.

But I do wonder that perhaps in my pursuit for "more" and "more" and "more insightful"
, I have gained so much intellectual perspective, but little TRUE KNOWING.

The kind of "knowing" that when you stumble upon, you can't deny; especially in the privacy of your own feelings.

So, I was wondering if I was the only one who felt this way. The only one who felt like they missed the childlike enthuisiasm of "meeting" yourself for the first time.

Cheers to Linda,for in her way, she made it possible for me to know ME.