Aspects question/controversy

[m***@gmail.com]

I was taught it is the number of degrees (within a certain orb) that determines an aspect. Thus, a late Sagittarius planet can, for instance, oppose a planet in early Cancer. My friend was taught that the signs involved must be "correct" and does not recognize aspects that violate this principle, no matter how close to exact the number of degrees involved. Your thoughts? Opinions?

[CFA]

Post by m***@gmail.com
I was taught it is the number of degrees (within a certain orb) that
determines an aspect. Thus, a late Sagittarius planet can, for instance,
oppose a planet in early Cancer. My friend was taught that the signs
involved must be "correct" and does not recognize aspects that
violate this principle, no matter how close to exact the number of
degrees involved. Your thoughts? Opinions?

Sign placement filters a planet's energy, not neutralize it. Out of
sign aspects work fine, IMO.

Ken

[Robin Wilkie]

Post by CFA
Sign placement filters a planet's energy, not neutralize it. Out of
sign aspects work fine, IMO.
Ken

Nicely and cogently put.
Thanks, Ken
-=Rab

Post by CFA

Post by m***@gmail.com
I was taught it is the number of degrees (within a certain orb) that
determines an aspect. Thus, a late Sagittarius planet can, for instance,
oppose a planet in early Cancer. My friend was taught that the signs
involved must be "correct" and does not recognize aspects that
violate this principle, no matter how close to exact the number of
degrees involved. Your thoughts? Opinions?

Sign placement filters a planet's energy, not neutralize it. Out of
sign aspects work fine, IMO.
Ken
--
cfa at alt dot net

[Robin Wilkie]

Rules like these need to be understood in relation to the system used.
Different systems - different rules. Systems can be compared later.

In this case one could argue that the whole-sign system of the
ancient Greeks has been improved considerably of late, especially
since the advent of Harmonics, roughly 50 years ago.

Irrespective of Tropical signs -- and whichever sidereal zodiac or
mundane House system one might choose to use as a backdrop --
aspects are effective in their own right, as crucial angular relationships.

An applying Full Moon is an applying Full Moon, whether or not signs
agree. By the same token, would we not count the conjunction of Mars
& Uranus near a cusp as a conjunction -- because Mars, less than a
degree away, had not quite entered the same sign as Uranus?

The whole-sign rule or system, however, might have an effect. There
could be a difference between what happens when an aspect, forming
or separating, involves 'inappropriate' vs 'appropriate' signs. The only
way to find out if this is so, is to study the issue.. using many examples.

Anyhow, rules in astrology are flexible to some extent, and not necessarily
mutually exclusive. Often they can seem co-dependent or at least related.

This may become apparent only after one has found satisfaction with,
and understood, the principles that underpin one particular set of rules
Eyes might then stray to something completely different. It may be
unwise to change horses in midstream, but having reached the other
side, one might see a unicorn -- or Porsche -- waiting.

-=Rab

Post by m***@gmail.com
I was taught it is the number of degrees (within a certain orb) that
determines an aspect. Thus, a late Sagittarius
planet can, for instance, oppose a planet in early Cancer. My friend was
taught that the signs involved must be
"correct" and does not recognize aspects that violate this principle, no
matter how close to exact the number of
degrees involved. Your thoughts? Opinions?

[Pete 4twain]

Unicorn or Porsche -- I want both of those! But I would use one system and make notes, then use the other system and make notes, and go with the one that suggests Porsche rather than unicorn.

Post by Robin Wilkie
Rules like these need to be understood in relation to the system used.
Different systems - different rules. Systems can be compared later.
In this case one could argue that the whole-sign system of the
ancient Greeks has been improved considerably of late, especially
since the advent of Harmonics, roughly 50 years ago.
Irrespective of Tropical signs -- and whichever sidereal zodiac or
mundane House system one might choose to use as a backdrop --
aspects are effective in their own right, as crucial angular relationships.
An applying Full Moon is an applying Full Moon, whether or not signs
agree. By the same token, would we not count the conjunction of Mars
& Uranus near a cusp as a conjunction -- because Mars, less than a
degree away, had not quite entered the same sign as Uranus?
The whole-sign rule or system, however, might have an effect. There
could be a difference between what happens when an aspect, forming
or separating, involves 'inappropriate' vs 'appropriate' signs. The only
way to find out if this is so, is to study the issue.. using many examples.
Anyhow, rules in astrology are flexible to some extent, and not necessarily
mutually exclusive. Often they can seem co-dependent or at least related.
This may become apparent only after one has found satisfaction with,
and understood, the principles that underpin one particular set of rules
Eyes might then stray to something completely different. It may be
unwise to change horses in midstream, but having reached the other
side, one might see a unicorn -- or Porsche -- waiting.
-=Rab

Post by m***@gmail.com
I was taught it is the number of degrees (within a certain orb) that
determines an aspect. Thus, a late Sagittarius
planet can, for instance, oppose a planet in early Cancer. My friend was
taught that the signs involved must be
"correct" and does not recognize aspects that violate this principle, no
matter how close to exact the number of
degrees involved. Your thoughts? Opinions?

[Robin Wilkie]

Post by Pete 4twain
Unicorn or Porsche -- I want both of those! But I would use one system and
make notes, then use the other system and make notes, and go with the one
that suggests Porsche rather than unicorn.

Ahhh.. but a Porsche doesn't go through walls 8-)
-=Rab

Post by Pete 4twain

Post by Robin Wilkie
Rules like these need to be understood in relation to the system used.
Different systems - different rules. Systems can be compared later.
In this case one could argue that the whole-sign system of the
ancient Greeks has been improved considerably of late, especially
since the advent of Harmonics, roughly 50 years ago.
Irrespective of Tropical signs -- and whichever sidereal zodiac or
mundane House system one might choose to use as a backdrop --
aspects are effective in their own right, as crucial angular
relationships.
An applying Full Moon is an applying Full Moon, whether or not signs
agree. By the same token, would we not count the conjunction of Mars
& Uranus near a cusp as a conjunction -- because Mars, less than a
degree away, had not quite entered the same sign as Uranus?
The whole-sign rule or system, however, might have an effect. There
could be a difference between what happens when an aspect, forming
or separating, involves 'inappropriate' vs 'appropriate' signs. The only
way to find out if this is so, is to study the issue.. using many examples.
Anyhow, rules in astrology are flexible to some extent, and not necessarily
mutually exclusive. Often they can seem co-dependent or at least related.
This may become apparent only after one has found satisfaction with,
and understood, the principles that underpin one particular set of rules
Eyes might then stray to something completely different. It may be
unwise to change horses in midstream, but having reached the other
side, one might see a unicorn -- or Porsche -- waiting.
-=Rab

Post by m***@gmail.com
I was taught it is the number of degrees (within a certain orb) that
determines an aspect. Thus, a late Sagittarius
planet can, for instance, oppose a planet in early Cancer. My friend was
taught that the signs involved must be
"correct" and does not recognize aspects that violate this principle, no
matter how close to exact the number of
degrees involved. Your thoughts? Opinions?