Astrology & Compatibility

[Lathyrus]

"Everything in this universe can be weighed and measured. ... If the Absolute is God it means that God can be weighed and measured, resolved into component elements, 'calculated,' and expressed in the form of a definite formula." - G

A: Mathematics is the one and only true universal language.

With the above quotes in mind, I've been thinking a lot about how, if the "laws" that govern reality are themselves mathematical, if there were a "mathematical basis" for interpersonal compatibility. Using astrology as a study tool of such, I've been focusing on the "modalities" and "elements" of the signs as a jumping-off point, which I hope might prove to be of some interest.

Gurdjieff speaks about the "Law of Three", or the three forces which are responsible for the production of phenomena, they being termed the positive, the negative, and the neutralizing. In astrology, the three modalities, the "cardinal", the "fixed", and the "mutable", would necessarily correspond with the trinity described. In addition to the three modalities are the four elements, which are themselves like the subdivisions of the positive and the negative, with "fire" and "air" both being very fluid and ethereal though differing in temperature, whereas "water" and "earth" may be quite similar in temperature while being different in fluidity.

I've got a little chart I whipped up that might help illustrate if anyone wants to see it, but the basic trend I saw is that same elements, or elements of the same polarity (e.g. fire/fire as they're both positive, water/earth as they're both negative) work well together when their modalities are different, but usually not if they're the same, and nor do elements of different polarities work together all that often regardless of modality. There might be some exceptions and I did have a bias towards looking more at long-term compatibility, so there you have it.

I guess that's about all I've got at the moment. Let me know if you have anything to say.

 

[bozadi]

Hi, Teragon.

I'm not an expert of astrology and I don't even have a basic formal education in it and therefore I know that I lack so much basic information about it but, nonetheless, I've always been deeply and haphazardly drawn to certain uses of astrology including on general life purpose based on "lunar nodal" interpretations and especially an evolutionary cosmological picture that astrology draws in connection with what could be described as the Ra-Cassiopaean cosmology. I previously shared some of my ideas about these.

The issue of "astrological compatibility", although probably the same also applies for the general "issue of astrology", has been one which I've been keenly trying to analyze and understand but I've found it to be too complicated except for some general trends, which can be misleading to take as a firm basis in some situations. Even if we accept that the astrology we have in hand (western astrology, specifically) is sufficiently valid and holistic, it can involve overwhelmingly high numbers of variables or factors that need to be considered to make valid and beneficial conclusions even in a simple matter of interest.

I don't feel that I really understand the functioning of "modalities", especially the "mutable", although I'm a Gemini. I also don't have a satisfactory grasping of the four elements. I fail to fundamentally associate the elements and the modalities with something I consistently observe in nature or in human life. Maybe this is something "elementary" and probably I've found many pieces of the answer but I've been unable to combine them aptly.

I would like to see the chart you drew up which, I think, is a basic expression of elements, modalities, etc.?

I certainly agree with the basic trend you observe that "same elements, or elements of the same polarity work well together when their modalities are different", but as you say, there can be exceptions despite the validity of such general trends. Also, the signs of the different elements of the same polarity and of "same modality" can also be especially well-functioning; you know, the "opposite signs". The issue of "opposition" in astrology is a strange one, I think. They oppose each other but they also happen to complete each other and form a whole. I think this can be very different from the "square" aspect, which, in common with the "opposition" aspect, is considered to be a destructive or unsupporting aspect. This is a big ambiguity to me.

And thanks to this law (?) of opposition, we can better understand the peculiarities of signs. We cannot really understand, for instance, what Gemini is or how it functions without comparing it to its opposite sign, Sagittarius. They somehow form a natural complementary duality, like dual expression of the same principle.

I'll be glad to exchange opinions.

 

[bozadi]

Speaking of opposition as a catalyst of learning about a duality and making a choice, you know, we have this fundamental polarity of STO and STS. And I think it applies very much in our (humanity's) current circumstances that it is essential to know about what STS is and how it functions to better know about STO. STS is a great and plentiful catalyst to know about and polarize towards STO. That is, learning about something can be more possible by knowing what it is not. I don't think that learning is only possible by comparing some object of learning to its opposite but it is an essential part of it, especially in our conditions, I think. And, of course, getting to know about STS is one thing and adopting it is something completely different.

I think that this is very much related to the emphasis by the C's on being "wise as serpents, gentle as doves". And in this context, I think that this particular network's emphasis on revealing and emphasizing how STS forces work on our lives is a great catalyst to more effectively polarizing towards STO for those who really want so. All of us are still STS but the more we see what STS does and where ultimately it leads to, the more willful we become to check ourselves and make any possible realignments in our specific conditions.

 

[Don Genaro]

Hi Teragon,

I'm not sure I understand very well what you're trying to ask with compatibility. If you mean "compatibility" in the sense of romantic relationships or relationships in general - work, friendships etc. but I think the following applies in any case:

I think that astrology is a good thing for working with "closed circles." I was a member of an astrology forum and have seen many people ask: "is this person the right one for me"? I've done it myself. I don't think astrology is of much use for making such decisions. It ends up being just your typical basic fortune telling. If you are attracted to a person, you will always be able to make connections in the horoscopes - you'll find find "challenging" aspects or "harmonious" aspects. But I would say that if it's of any real use, it's for integrating those modalities and elements in your own circle (your self) first. Any "compatible" person will probably mirror back to you elements that you have more integrated whilst "incompatible" people will reflect back parts of you that you haven't integrated.

As you may know, everyone in the modern system of astrology has a chart with 12 signs, 12 houses and 10 "planets" and I think astrology is valuable for reflecting on your self first through its myths and stories. It can also be interesting to make connections with the relationships in your life but again, because they trigger things in your chart.

Also, I don't think there's much use in trying to identify "types" of people based on their birth chart. I was watching all sorts of crazy stuff on astro.com a few months ago before the elections. Their knowledge of astrology was very good but they had little knowledge in the area of psychology, history or politics. I was following a thread on Syria and in that thread, Putin and Assad were "evil dictators" and everybody was looking for "signs" in their charts to confirm it. Some people tried to point out that maybe it wasn't so clear cut but there were a few members, one in particular who, ironically had the username "Ringo", conTrolled all the debate. He actually admired Hillary, a Scorpio and thought that anyone who couldn't see how wonderful she was, was "projecting their shadow onto her"! He also had a tendency to accuse anyone who questioned him, of having "Neptune conjunct Antares" or some other "terrible aspect"

You can do charts for countries, people, animals or even a table but it depends on who or what gives life to the chart I think. I hope this helps :)

 

[Don Genaro]

By "coincidence" I was reading the session from October 10th 2014 and I noticed this.

Session Date: October 11th 2014


(Approaching Infinity) You want to ask about Baby Caesar?

(L) What about Baby Caesar?

(Approaching Infinity) If his story was either taken on by Augustus, or if the Jesus story... if either of those people stole it from Caesar?

A: The Baby Jesus Story is an amalgamation of Mithras and Caesar. The story of "Jesus" causing wonder among the "Doctors of the Law" is referring to Caesar. Augustus borrowed an element or two of the tale of Caesar, but mostly not.

Q: (L) Okay. Hmm. Well, that doesn't help me at all, does it? Was there anything remarkable about Caesar's birth?

A: Comet.

Q: (L) So there was a comet at the time of his birth, and that was the main thing. A comet at his birth, and a comet at his death. Is that it?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) But, no “laid in the manger” business, no wise men, nothing like that.

A: No.

Q: (Pierre) But the comets meant something. It was not only random chance, was it?

(L) But all the stuff about Jesus and the manger and being born in a cave or whatever...

(Perceval) Well, how long was the comet in the sky, and how many were born at the same time?

(Pierre) But an individual having a comet at his birth and at his death...

(L) Is kind of special. I mean, look at Mark Twain!

(Perceval) But how many people were born at that time? It doesn't necessarily relate to Caesar. If it was there in the sky for a week or two weeks, then you've got hundreds of people being born with the comet in the sky. But from a human point of view, people took it as a sign...

A: Receivership capability!

Q: (L) So there can be hundreds of people born with the emanations of a comet in the atmosphere, but only the one that has the receivership capability would be affected or influenced by it?

A: Yes

Maybe something similar applies in astrology with the planets? I'm not even sure if this relates much to your question but I think there's a lot of distraction in astrology although I also think it can provide important clues.

 

[bozadi]

...I think there's a lot of distraction in astrology although I also think it can provide important clues.

Hi, Don Genaro. I also think that there might be distractions in astrology maybe implanted by the PTB or there might be some serious deficiencies or lost information about astrology but I think that in most situations, distraction is already available in human mind with many STS programs and it will influence whatever interest one takes in.

About the "receivership capacity" reference in connection with astrology, I agree with that completely. I don't think that an astrological birthchart can say what a person really is or will be like or do other than some general higher and lower probabilities. A chart will not tell if a person born under that chart is or will be more STS- or STO-oriented, or if that person is an OP or not, for instance. Astrology by itself is not sufficient to make strict conclusions. Some direct observation of the person and the conditions is necessary along with other tools of knowledge to make such conclusions. I think the same can also apply to "compatibility" issues. Astology by itself can, as you said, produce very valuable clues or likelihoods but not an absolute truth or fate without sufficient contextual knowledge and observation, and preferably other tools of insight in support.

 

[Martina]

Well I don't know if that's true in real life but if I understood by the name of the topic what you're interested in
you should look for match of first and seventh house in partners horoscopes. e.g. I have a Uranus in the first house so my compatible mate should have it in seventh house like Christian Bale :) and my seventh house and his first should match... but that's just a theory and my partner has a Mercury in seventh house and he's not exactly a Batman :)
but what I think is that natal chart shows personality traits which could be developed, talents... and maybe when are some transits there is a possibility to let's say solve something easier... but maybe someone more educated could tell us more.
Thanks

 

[Ant22]

(...) I have a Uranus in the first house so my compatible mate should have it in seventh house like Christian Bale :) and my seventh house and his first should match... but that's just a theory and my partner has a Mercury in seventh house and he's not exactly a Batman :)
(...)

Martina I'm really sorry for going off topic but you totally made my day with the bolded sections

This is the funniest thing I've read in a very long while, I literally laughed out loud at this :D

 

[Lathyrus]

Hi bozadi, Don Genaro,

Yes, the chart is like you've said bozadi, arranged first by element, then by modality. "G" stands for "good", "M" for "mixed", "B" for "bad". I was coming at it somewhat more from the perspective of romantic compatibility, but as I didn't think it'd be appropriate to exclude more general compatibility like work/friendship, I made it with that in consideration as well. Some might think of a romantic partner like something greater than a best friend, while others could not be further from such a notion. Where should the line go, if there's to be a line at all? I don't really know. Whatever the case, more specific charts could be made with more specific criteria in mind, but I tried to keep this one as general as possible. I'm a Virgo, if that could be considered a bias (it probably should be). I'm not all too familiar with the workings of this forum yet, but I've attached an image of it to my post, which I hope will turn out OK.

I do agree that, even were astrology a sufficiently reliable model to work with, all the possible variables involved are probably just too complicated to come to any definite conclusions to. Even so, I do think that some progress can be made in reaching a greater understanding of how things like planetary or cosmic influences can influence us, and maybe working back from the broadest strokes will help to outline the interwoven order in more and more detail. I hope you'll excuse me if I end up being a bit vague, but I'll do my best to clarify as much as I can.

Re: elements/modalities, I find it easiest to think of the former as being like metaphors for the essential qualities of human nature (e.g. "he's really hot-headed", "she's very down-to-earth", "she goes with the flow", etc.), and I just got this idea, but the latter are like how these essences are given form through expression, as otherwise they might only be like a thought in a bubble, a mere idea rather than something "real". In regards to the "mutable" modality, I think it's something to the effect of, "willing to change as the situation demands". I'm not really sure how the modalities are meant to be different from elements in an essential sense, it only seems apparent to me that they're sets of forces that are related in some way. I wish I had a more coherent way to put it.

I'm not really sure what to make of this idea of "oppositions" yet, but looking at this chart here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrological_sign#/media/File:Sign_position_example.svg, the pattern I see is that the opposites are of like modality and are of a complementary element. I'm not sure I can make much further comment on it at this time, but hopefully soon.

I think that astrology is a good thing for working with "closed circles." I was a member of an astrology forum and have seen many people ask: "is this person the right one for me"? I've done it myself. I don't think astrology is of much use for making such decisions. It ends up being just your typical basic fortune telling. If you are attracted to a person, you will always be able to make connections in the horoscopes - you'll find find "challenging" aspects or "harmonious" aspects. But I would say that if it's of any real use, it's for integrating those modalities and elements in your own circle (your self) first. Any "compatible" person will probably mirror back to you elements that you have more integrated whilst "incompatible" people will reflect back parts of you that you haven't integrated.

It certainly can be tempting to ask that kind of question, but like you say, seeking such an answer in some external thing is about as good as anything in determining whether or not someone is the "right" one. Whether or not someone is or isn't compatible, it was always going to be that way as they're just who they are and aren't anything but. I see charts and the information they provide as being more like an explanation of "how" something does or doesn't work out, like they describe the variables of some obscure, but ever-functional equation, whose result is always just as it was going to be. In regards to that comment from the C's, and I'm still not totally sold on the idea of "planetary" and "cosmic" influences as necessarily being a set-in-stone fact, but it would stand to reason that someone could receive all of the "negative" influences of some arrangement of planets/celestial bodies, but none of the positive ones (if there's such a thing as either), so even if everything lines up by what the charts say, it ends up being a one-way ticket to hurtsville. Interesting stuff! I recall that the C's have spoken about "receivership capability" on some other occasions as well, so perhaps there's something to it in the broader sense. Thank you for finding that excerpt.

Also, I don't think there's much use in trying to identify "types" of people based on their birth chart. I was watching all sorts of crazy stuff on astro.com a few months ago before the elections. Their knowledge of astrology was very good but they had little knowledge in the area of psychology, history or politics. I was following a thread on Syria and in that thread, Putin and Assad were "evil dictators" and everybody was looking for "signs" in their charts to confirm it. Some people tried to point out that maybe it wasn't so clear cut but there were a few members, one in particular who, ironically had the username "Ringo", conTrolled all the debate. He actually admired Hillary, a Scorpio and thought that anyone who couldn't see how wonderful she was, was "projecting their shadow onto her"! He also had a tendency to accuse anyone who questioned him, of having "Neptune conjunct Antares" or some other "terrible aspect"

Yeesh! Some people just want to see things the way they want to. That is pretty funny though!

Well I don't know if that's true in real life but if I understood by the name of the topic what you're interested in
you should look for match of first and seventh house in partners horoscopes. e.g. I have a Uranus in the first house so my compatible mate should have it in seventh house like Christian Bale :) and my seventh house and his first should match... but that's just a theory and my partner has a Mercury in seventh house and he's not exactly a Batman :)
but what I think is that natal chart shows personality traits which could be developed, talents... and maybe when are some transits there is a possibility to let's say solve something easier... but maybe someone more educated could tell us more.
Thanks

Hi Martina,

I haven't gotten too far in the study of the "houses" and so forth, but I'll definitely give it a better look soon here. Thank you for the suggestion.

 

[bozadi]

Hi again, Teragon.

Thank you for sharing the chart that you drew up. It shows some general guidance about some compatibility likelihoods among astrological signs ("sun-signs", most probably). I think you will agree about the potential deficiencies and, therefore, possibility of misleading by accepting this chart as a definite guidance in actual interpersonal relationships. This potential guidance is most often taken in the context of sun-signs but a personal astro-profile includes much more than sun-signs. Sun in astrology is only one of the "planets" of interest. It is a very important one but it is doubtful if it is singly the most important.

Besides, there is the issue of "degrees". For instance, one person's Sun might, depending on that person's birthdate, be on 1st degree of Aries or on the last (the 30th) degre of Aries. In either situation, that person is an Aries according to the Sun-signs table. But this difference in degrees might change the whole picture in terms of intrapersonal or interpersonal "compatibility". Let's say a second person has their Sun on the 1st degree of Leo. Now, in the case the first person's Sun is on the 1st degree of Aries, then there is a "trine" (120 degrees) aspect between that the Suns of the two people, which is accepted as a very "harmonious" and favorable aspect. So this will result in a very favorable interpretation about the possible relationship. But in the case the first person's Sun is on the 30th, instead of the 1st, degree of Aries, then this means there is a "square" (90 degrees) aspect between the Suns of the two persons, and the square angle is accepted as a very "challanging" aspect to form between two astrological planets, and will result in a radically different (kind of negative) interpretation. You see, in either situation (Sun is on the 1st degree or on the 30th degree of Aries), the first person is still an "Aries" but the beginning and the ending degrees of the sign hold very different potentials. This is only one of the numerious factors in terms of why accepting the general sun-sign compatibility chart alone as a realible source of recommendation can be misleading. This doesn't mean that the table is "worthless", it can teach us many valuable things about the functioning of some natural (probably universal) forces but it alone can be very misleading when it comes to making serious assumptions about the future of a relationship, be it a romantic or other kind of relationship.

And even if the Suns of two subjects are actually in astrologically challenging positions, many other items of astrological profiles of those subjects can render that relationship a very constructive one. And even if "many" of the astrological profile items of two subjects are placed on challenging positions, they can still have a generally good, constructive relationship if they are sufficiently STO-oriented, empathetic, understanding, etc. Vice versa, very favorable aspects between the astro profiles of two subjects don't necessarily mean they will/can have a very good and constructive relationship. And what about karmic, pre-incarnational and post-incarnational plans of various types of relationships and/or missions at deep/high spiritual levels, which might not be reflected in the comparative astrological charts in terms of primary factors other than some secondary ones like transits, progressions, and many others? Ways of life are too many. Our own STS programs and the STS attacks/manipulations that we are subjected to will complicate the picture even more. You see, it is too complicated. Objective contextual knowledge with sufficient observation are essential for making critical and at the same time reliable astrological recommendations regarding relationships.

I must say that what attracts me in this thread that you started is actually a basic/general exploration of astrology's compatibility with our understanding of our life. This can surely include the specific subject of astrological interpersonal compatibility but focusing on a specialization on this specific issue will probably not be as productive and might even prove counter-productive within the specific conditions of this forum. I'm certainly not in a position to speak with authority about what is good to discuss and what is not, but I just want to share my feeling about it.

I might also would like to exchange opinions about one of the astrological clues that Martina referenced but I think that then this could eventually lead to a very subjective or personal astrological chatting among us. One of the reasons in my mind for this probable result is, as I previously mentioned, that there are numerous astrological variables to consider before one will be able to make sound conclusions and recommendations. And even if any one of us was (or is, or will be) possessing such profound and multifaceted knowledge of astrological interpersonal compatibility issues, it would still be doubtful, I think, if this forum is a suitable venue for offering of such personal astrological guidance. This would necessarily deserve an astrology forum. I completely agree with Don Genaro's views that you quoted.

Also, before comparing the astrological profiles of two subjects, we need to be sufficiently able to explore and understand the astrological profile of any single one of them. "Intrapersonal" compatibility issues are more elementary to be explored and understood than "interpersonal" ones. Astrology is very complex and multifacted even in the case of a single person. And without sufficient contextual knowledge and observation, it can be inefficient and even dangerous to make absolute conclusions just based on the apparent astrological profile of a person. This needs to be left to astrologers with relevant specialization, which doesn't mean that each one of them will be reliable at the same high level each time.

I think that one of the main benefits of an amateur interest in astrology is that even a partial exploration of the validity of astrology can tell much to a person in religious/philosophical terms. I remember the deep positive excitement I experienced when I first read general sun-sign characteristics in an astrological reference book. And I was to discover the interpretations of other planets in various signs, various aspects among them, houses, etc. "Wau!", I said. "Life/Universe knows about me somehow!" I think this is about the exploration of the "universal/existential network". There were also some frightening elements in the book. In its interpretations for some planets in some signs with certain bad aspects, it told about agonies, diseases, violent deaths etc. Such parts were very depressing and inferiority and guilt inspiring to me.

My interest in astrology in the context of this forum is based on exploring possible relations between some basic astrological lore and some other main topics of the forum. In your first post in this topic, you made such a potential relation/compatibilty:

Gurdjieff speaks about the "Law of Three", or the three forces which are responsible for the production of phenomena, they being termed the positive, the negative, and the neutralizing. In astrology, the three modalities, the "cardinal", the "fixed", and the "mutable", would necessarily correspond with the trinity described.

I like exploring such potential relations/compatibilities, especially when this enables us to have a deeper or wider insight into both astrology and other topic(s). I surely respect your will to deal with the subject as you like. I'll just check to see if something attracts me.

 

[Lathyrus]

Hello bozadi,

I'll have to concede that it's looking much more complicated than can be done without going to great lengths, so perhaps it would be better to move on to a different subject.

I'm not sure how much it'd apply here, but when it comes to the Law of Three, I've been ruminating on some thoughts. Yesterday I came across this idea of "Thesis, Antithesis, and Synthesis", which has something to do with the philosophy of Hegel, but the third component, "synthesis", is supposed to be a reconciliation of the two opposing forces. Now, alongside this is something that's been perplexing me for quite a while which Don Genaro mentioned.

But I would say that if it's of any real use, it's for integrating those modalities and elements in your own circle (your self) first. Any "compatible" person will probably mirror back to you elements that you have more integrated whilst "incompatible" people will reflect back parts of you that you haven't integrated.

The C's speak of something similar, albeit in more extreme terms at one point.

Q: (L) I want to ask again for the benefit of Terry and Jan, what or who were the beings seen by DM in her hypnotic regression the other night? {This session is recounted in the Wave in some detail including direct transcript.}

A: Her essence.

Q: (L) Were these in any way physical beings on the earth we occupy in space/time from where we are at this moment?

A: No.

Q: (L) This happened in a so-called alternate reality?

A: Is still.

Q: (L) So, in some alternate reality, DM is a preying mantis being eating little children?

A: And so are you. And all others.

Q: (L) This is an essence of what?

A: Her being.

Q: (L) Are these aspects of our being coming to earth as part of the realm border crossing?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Are all of us going to have to face these aspects of ourselves as other beings?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Are there other parts of us in all realms doing other things at this moment?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) And how is this going to be affected by the realm border crossing?

A: Will merge.

Q: (L) Do we need to do extensive hypnosis to bring these aspects of ourselves up and deal with these things a little at a time?

A: Will happen involuntarily. Will be like a thermonuclear blast. Message follows: See pattern. Orion, Pleiades, Arcturas, Cassiopaea; check distances from earth; progress locator for wave combined with earth references of space time. For you to figure out. Cross reference channelled messages, printing dates and location. We are where we are.

When someone looks out into the world, it can soon become apparent that there're many others that are, at least apparently, not like themselves. How much that truly is the case is, I would say, not very, as there's not altogether that much differentiating ourselves in an essential sense from "alternate reality, child-eating mantis beings", much less people that we might simply find ourselves different from in some manner, than a difference of degree, as existence in this STS reality is predicated on the same basic principles irrespective of who you are. This's something that I've found very difficult to swallow, as I've often worked under the hope that if I just do what I can to be as caring and understanding as I possibly can that, somehow, everything will work out in the end; maybe it's from my own insufficiencies that I'm still having this sort of problem, but if there is anything that can reconcile these apparent differences, that might be the "third force" that G describes.

What exactly that might be however, is not abundantly clear. G describes how, in an individual that has aspirations to "attain a higher level of being", the passive force of his being (described as "The inertia of all his habitual psychological life which shows opposition to his initiative") will work against his active one, which thereby negate one another and produce no work. It is only at the introduction of the "third force" that it becomes possible for the individual to overcome the passive force. While G calls one form of the "third force" as new knowledge, at the same time he speaks about how it's imperceptible to our subjective state of consciousness, and that if we could perceive the "third force", then we would be able to see the world "as it is".

The more I get along here, the less I feel this has much to do with astrology, but there you go.

 

[BHelmet]

Yes, it is all highly problematic and subject to many interpretations. Throw into the mix Vedic Astrology and/or other systems and then you begin to wonder what to believe. Then there is Chinese astrology which kind of views humans born in a certain lunar year as like a crop or vintage of grapes rather than dividing it up into months. I think this has some validity, too. AND there is an idea that when you change your location, your horoscope changes or is at least influenced by the new co-ordinates as if you were born in the new location. I can vouch, by my own experience and observations, that there is something to that one, too. Astrology is all highly complex and problematic and probably only good for amusement purposes only. I guess it can be good for lessons too.

I sometimes quip that I am a Virgo (earth) with Pisces rising (water) so that makes me a Mud Sign! ;D

And on top of it all are the cosmic changes happening which may throw all of it out the window in unforeseen ways.

 

[seek10]

Yes, it is all highly problematic and subject to many interpretations. Throw into the mix Vedic Astrology and/or other systems and then you begin to wonder what to believe. Then there is Chinese astrology which kind of views humans born in a certain lunar year as like a crop or vintage of grapes rather than dividing it up into months. I think this has some validity, too. AND there is an idea that when you change your location, your horoscope changes or is at least influenced by the new co-ordinates as if you were born in the new location. I can vouch, by my own experience and observations, that there is something to that one, too. Astrology is all highly complex and problematic and probably only good for amusement purposes only. I guess it can be good for lessons too.

In india, people tend to hire astrologers to check the charts for marriages. If one decides to go in that direction, it will be while before one gets married with so compatibility variables like caste, family background, wealth etc. Whether this works or not I don't know. No body may know. Couples chug along despite deep divisions and it may look nice outside, but they may be going against their soul's learning needs. Some times they fight for a long time to reconcile and learn their lessons. But It is hard to measure.

 

[Don Genaro]

Yes, it is all highly problematic and subject to many interpretations. Throw into the mix Vedic Astrology and/or other systems and then you begin to wonder what to believe. Then there is Chinese astrology which kind of views humans born in a certain lunar year as like a crop or vintage of grapes rather than dividing it up into months. I think this has some validity, too. AND there is an idea that when you change your location, your horoscope changes or is at least influenced by the new co-ordinates as if you were born in the new location. I can vouch, by my own experience and observations, that there is something to that one, too. Astrology is all highly complex and problematic and probably only good for amusement purposes only. I guess it can be good for lessons too.

I sometimes quip that I am a Virgo (earth) with Pisces rising (water) so that makes me a Mud Sign! ;D

And on top of it all are the cosmic changes happening which may throw all of it out the window in unforeseen ways.

 

[bozadi]

Trying to find possible relationships between the Law of Three (LoT) and the dualities and trinities in astrology can be interesting. Although this can also be very complicated, I think it is worth trying.

I must admit that currently I can't relate LoT to the astrological 'modality' trinities (cardinal, fixed and mutable signs of each element) in a coherent way because it seems difficult to me to find a thesis-antithesis-synthesis (TAS) type of relation among any specific modality.

Dualities might be a better place to start with. I believe that the first opposition/duality of Aries & Libra can be revealing in various ways. As it is a 'duality' rather than a 'trinity', I think it is also not easy to directly find a TAS relation in it. I remember contemplating on this duality seeking various such symbolic relations. I couldn't arrive at any concrete conclusion but some possibilities that can be checked further.

We know that the Aries and Libra duality, in one of its interpretations, is somehow closely related to the Man and Woman duality. In a general way, manhood is symbolized by Mars and womanhood by Venus. Yes, it seems that many examples of the thesis & antithesis principle can be examined over the parallelism between the Mars & Venus and Man & Woman relationships. And many speculations can also be made about possible examples of a synthesis and this might help us better understand the 'third force'.

But, along with that, I also suggest to examine a slightly different instance of a TAS trinity in the Aries-Libra duality. Although this is also closely about relationships, this is a more general one and it might also shed some light to some possible shady parts of the above approach. Generically, any individual, either male or female, is an instance of the Aries principle. Everyone is an individual, a self. And individuality and selfhood is more related to Aries than Libra. In this specific context, the Libran principle is not any one individual but the "relationship" established between or among individuals. This is not only about human individuals but also other collective individualities such as a family, group, company, nation, etc. The Arian tendency of warring is closely related to the archetypical subject of 'conflict of interests', which is almost the most widespread issue of the entire human history.

As can be easily noticed, the subject is closely related to the STO-STS polarity. The C's said STO is balance and STS is imbalance. And in the astrological duality of Aries & Libra, Aries is classically associated with imbalance and Libra with balance; Aries with war, Libra with peace; Aries with fire, Libra with air, Aries with vulgarity and ignorance, Libra with mannerliness and wisdom. This is also like a comparison of a freshman and a graduate. But this approach by itself can also be misleading. And this might be likened in the yin-yang symbol to the black point in the middle of the white circle and vice versa. The concept of balance is such that sometimes it can necessitate more Arian action than Libran. You know, sometimes you really need to challenge and even fight for protecting something that must be protected rather than considering that any peace/concession is better than fighting. This also reminds me, "From fire comes light." So depending on the situation, the balance & imbalance duality can change sides within the duality of Aries & Libra just like in any other duality of signs although this might not completely invalidate the main symbolism just like in the general black and white halves of yin-yang with smaller points of opposite colors.

I have difficult in thinking of some good examples about the issue of thesis and antithesis in our general life conditions but we know that there are plenty of them in so many different levels of our lives. There are many ideological theses and antitheses, for instance, and these involve a lot of objective and subject conflicts of interest. And in many situations, there is some truth to both sides of such oppositions. In this sense, a sufficient increase of knowledge will eventually resolve the issue and here we can easily relate gaining of knowledge to the third force. You know, people quarrel a lot on various matters, they experience many difficulties, many experiences and they gradually increase their knowledge and eventually resolve issues. And "networking", a very Libran concept, can also be a considered as a very good and essential catalyst of an intensive knowledge gaining. Libran attitude of learning to resolve issues rather than immediately easily into a vicious circle of fighting is a "liberating" attitude. And I think that, the Libran attitude/intuition is closely related to an awareness of and/or a belief in the Absolute truth, 7D.

So, I think the first astrological duality of Aries & Libra summarizes the process so effectively although I might have missed many other important points or misunderstood some of the points I've speculated on. This also applies about my interpreation of the third force. It can have many layers that need to be explored.

I think that the similar and relevant duality of Gemini & Sagittarius also sheds some complementary light on the picture, which I would like to speculate on at a suitable time for me.