max karma should I run screaming?

topic posted Mon, August 10, 2009 - 11:36 PM by  rose
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
So I'm looking at this long-term friends chart. There is some mutual interest and i notice that
A. our north nodes are opposite each other
B. his north node is conjunct my ascendant (as well as his own)
C. the vertex of the moon in each chart is in exactly the same location

So, do I run screaming and stay the hell out of his bed?
posted by:
rose
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

    Mon, August 10, 2009 - 11:42 PM
    Sounds like it could be a good thing rather than a scary thing to me. I could be wrong. Other things in the charts may make it a bad idea, but based on the info you provided, I don't see any imminent disasters.
    • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

      Tue, August 11, 2009 - 1:35 AM
      ditto
      opposing nodes and cnj ascendants sounds like functional synastry to me
      • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

        Tue, August 11, 2009 - 6:39 AM
        It all sounds pretty good to me
        • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

          Tue, August 11, 2009 - 9:33 AM
          Hmmm, in my experience having just the node conjunct a personal planet in my chart led to an inability to get out of the relationship because the "weight" of it was so heavy I couldn't pull away. I discovered this after first learning about the n node as a karmic point and reviewing past relationships.
          Just now I was reading about degrees and points in the chart and have saturn in the seventh on a negative degree position, which stands to reason.
          Seeing all of those karmic points (I've not seen that many of the big hitters unless you are speaking of Plutonic intraspects) makes me understandably nervous due to the crap I've stuck around for before (when typically I would never) with just the N Node.


          • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

            Tue, August 11, 2009 - 8:47 PM
            >>>
            Hmmm, in my experience having just the node conjunct a personal planet in my chart led to an inability to get out of the relationship because the "weight" of it was so heavy I couldn't pull away. I discovered this after first learning about the n node as a karmic point and reviewing past relationships.
            Just now I was reading about degrees and points in the chart and have saturn in the seventh on a negative degree position, which stands to reason.
            Seeing all of those karmic points (I've not seen that many of the big hitters unless you are speaking of Plutonic intraspects) makes me understandably nervous due to the crap I've stuck around for before (when typically I would never) with just the N Node.
            >>>

            The way I look at these situation is -
            you are in some sort of relationship - what shape will it take?
            The great weight might make it hard to get "out" (although even with the most insistent sorts - this is always possible! Trust me, I know hehe). At the same time - there is always the option of "reshaping" versus "getting out".

            I have often seen astrological warnings at times when the circumstances of life definitely pointed me in a direction against the astrological warnings. This happened with the purchase of my car for instance (which has yet to prove problematic). I take these less as "ultimatums" against a certain course of action (something that others in astrology circles would hotly scold me for). I take them more as "warnings" to keep more on my toes and be more careful and aware.

            Certainly whatever you do - maybe just be aware of the karmic impact your choices might have.
            Maybe stepping out at an early stage is the right thing ... I bet it depends somewhat on your current karmic state and personal karmic history. How does this situation fit in your own relational patterns and the karma they have generated so far? Do you feel that you need to learn to step out and say no or does that really not make sense? If it doesn't make sense then I'd say that the "bad karma" might be a limiting way to look at this. Maybe the other person has some karmic reason for needing the relationship ... who knows.
            If it does make sense on the other hand (that your karmic history leads you to need to step away early) then you have some more supporting evidence for doing so than just one particular interpretation of a chart.

            This makes me curious about the composite chart between the two of you!
  • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

    Tue, August 11, 2009 - 9:47 AM

    I just want to point out

    technically and if you study astronomy,

    all objects have nodes

    all a node is the interface of an object's orbit with another object's orbit


    therefore Moon is not only the object that has nodes

  • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

    Tue, August 11, 2009 - 12:16 PM
    I'm with everybody else. All the node and vertex contact is a GOOD thing. Run the other way? Only if you want to be unhappy, maybe.
    • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

      Tue, August 11, 2009 - 2:41 PM
      There were different discussions concerning this point before. Maybe all those folks are gone now.
      The node of the moon is the only one to be concerned with in this topic and I have verified it's effects for myself. karmic does not always equal good, but I will consider the group think on this one.
      • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

        Tue, August 11, 2009 - 2:48 PM
        I don't really believe in 'good' and 'bad' contacts in synastry. I think that any 'interesting' aspects such as conjunctions of nodes or oppositions of them etc are just going to create a 'draw' between two people, a sort of attraction. Whether that attraction be a good one or a bad one totally depends on the two people in question and whereabouts they are themselves with their own lives. I don't think astrology can tell us that.
        • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

          Tue, August 11, 2009 - 4:14 PM
          That's more like what I wanted to hear. A lot of my concern is that this 'draw' might just be a bit too much to tangle with. I'm concerned that multiple aspects like this might multiply the magnetism that I have, in the past, found very overwhelmng with just nodal contact or just the vertex. Maybe because it's both vertex points together that might balance out some of the power issues that have happened in the past. I've had people realize that i was putting up with way more than I usually would, which led to them realizing I was having difficulty extracting mysel, which led to things getting worse.

          This morning I realized that I had saturn in the seventh in a point that is considered really bad and that resonated for me. bad luck in relationships. Still don't know if I should run away based on astrology. Saturn return exact in a couple weeks, so maybe I just go with it and see what happens, like usual...scary.
      • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

        Tue, August 11, 2009 - 4:18 PM
        "There were different discussions concerning this point before. Maybe all those folks are gone now.
        The node of the moon is the only one to be concerned with in this topic and I have verified it's effects for myself. karmic does not always equal good, but I will consider the group think on this one."

        You had one, example - ONE - of a situation in which Node contact was a bad thing. That doesn't mean you should automatically take off running THIS time, or that ALL Node contact is automatically a bad thing. You're too quick to want to see this as a bad thing and you may end up taking off on somebody who might actually make you HAPPY.

        Stop being so negative.

        I've also heard the nodes linked to reincarnation, not karma, which is a separate thing entirely.
        • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

          Tue, August 11, 2009 - 4:53 PM
          UHmmmmm, we are actually NOT talking about one situation. I have dated a very large amount of people in my life and of those whose charts I have I am talking about all the ones who have nodal conjunctions. Of which there is definitely more than one. You may want to not make such big judgments and orders like "stop being so negative" without actually paying attention to what people are actually saying rather than your own perception of what people are saying.

          It is much easier to hear people who listen.
          • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

            Tue, August 11, 2009 - 4:56 PM
            Oh and in reviewing my own thing which led to rereading that, I am not looking for someone to make me happy. I'm pretty damn happy on my own. Which, in repeating that makes me feel better about not getting involved. Thanks for your reverse advice.
            • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

              Tue, August 11, 2009 - 5:07 PM
              "Oh and in reviewing my own thing which led to rereading that, I am not looking for someone to make me happy. I'm pretty damn happy on my own. Which, in repeating that makes me feel better about not getting involved. Thanks for your reverse advice."


              Rose -

              You make a lot of assumptions. I didn't mean that in a "your-life-sucks-and-you-need-a-guy-to-survive-or-experience-any-kind-of-happiness" kind of way. Happy as in...have a happy, healthy relationship...with someone who loves you....that you....love back. How you got that I was saying you were in a state of misery and needing another person to complete and SAVE you out of that, I do not know.

              And again - one nodal contact that went bad, or two, or three, or four, or five - that doesn't mean ALL. Say what you want, but you ARE coming at this negatively and really already have your mind made up that you don't even WANT to give this guy a shot because of something that is essentially out of his control that could very well turn out to be a very good thing for you BOTH.

              You just don't WANT to be with this guy, so let me tell you what you want to hear :

              "Yes, ma'am - he's an evil, no good slimeball who makes Buffalo Bill look like Mister Rodgers."
          • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

            Tue, August 11, 2009 - 5:11 PM
            "It is much easier to hear people who listen."

            I was listening - wondering why now, though.

            Look, why is it that everyone who came in and said this could be a good thing, you're basically like, "Meh", but when someone comes in and presents the possibility that it may not be, you say, "That's what I was hoping to hear?"

            If that's not negative, I don't know what is. You essentially disregarded any possibility that this could be a positive experience and were quick to grab on to the idea that it wouldn't be.

            This guy never stood a shot with you from the get-go. You already had your mind made up that he was scum.
            • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

              Tue, August 11, 2009 - 6:09 PM
              What Paul wrote was not negative.
              It showed thought and was actually neutral. I wanted to have an intelligent discussion. Not a bunch of men who didn't actually understand that the question deserved being asked and was worth thinking about. Not basically blowing off that I might have a good reason to question it at all. I guess I left this forum for a good reason if what could be good discussion topics automatically degenerate into this useless argumentative drivel.
              • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

                Tue, August 11, 2009 - 6:23 PM
                "What Paul wrote was not negative.
                It showed thought and was actually neutral. I wanted to have an intelligent discussion. Not a bunch of men who didn't actually understand that the question deserved being asked and was worth thinking about. Not basically blowing off that I might have a good reason to question it at all. I guess I left this forum for a good reason if what could be good discussion topics automatically degenerate into this useless argumentative drivel."


                Rose -

                It was negative in the sense that it was the only post implying that North Node connections could be a bad thing. Every other possiblity that was presented to you indicating that it could be a good thing, you immediately disregarded. It's like you really already had your mind made up that this guy had to be no good and you really came here wanting only to hear that echoed from another person.

                I also don't see where any of the individuals who posted before me didn't understand the question being presented to them. You brought up Node connections in synastry and they answered the question. Pretty basic stuff.

                And it's only argumentative drivel to you because I'm not parroting back to you what you want to hear. If I said Node connections were a bad thing and that this guy is a jerk and you should run like hell, you'd probably be thanking me profusely for the assistance and waxing rhapsodic about my wisdom. I'm telling it to you straight - you are not being fair to this man. Period. He cannot control when he was born and his natal chart placements and how they interact with yours, and that aside, he could very well be a good man and the Node connection could turn out to be a very positive thing so No, I'm not on board with you.

                Take from that what you will.
                • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

                  Wed, August 12, 2009 - 1:12 AM
                  Book

                  "It was negative in the sense that it was the only post implying that North Node connections could be a bad thing."

                  Not sure if you understood me right. I am implying that the connections between ANY point in the chart (be that a planet, angle, node etc) is NEITHER good NOR bad. So I am not suggesting a north node connection could be a bad thing any more than I am suggesting it could be a good thing. I am suggesting that subjective words like 'good' and 'bad' don't adaquately apply. My understanding is that the connections simply 'draw' people together, it creates a kind of psychic charge. However the nature of that charge for each person in the relationship will depend ENTIRELY upon themselves and what their experiences and development are.

                  To go one step further, if we imagine that North Node as pertaining to Karma, we might suggest that node conjunctions in a synastry chart might show a relationship that deals with our 'karma'. But we couldn't tell anything more. We cannot tell whether the person will, for example, personify the negative karma we should avoid, or the positive karma. Apart from that, we also cannot tell whether, for the other person, we personify THEIR negative or postiive karma. Perhaps these connections might show that there was a relationship in a previous life (if you believe in such things). However the relationship might have been a good one, or a bad one, or started good and went bad, or was not a sexual relationship but a parent-child one, or the relationship was necessary for greater development even though it didn't work out etc etc etc.
                  How we personally view the situation (as good or bad) will depend very much upon ourselves. My friend fell in love with someone and went out with them for four years. They each had a node connection to either the Sun or Moon (i forget which now). Although in love, their relationship was one of those fight-makeup-sex afterwards relationships. Eventually they called it a day after much arguing. However they are still friends and much better as friends than as lovers and neither side regrets the relationship both saying "I grew up a lot and learned a lot". So was this a 'good' relationship or a 'bad' one. It was bad in that it didn't have longevity, but good in that they developed as people through it. That's why I don't like terms like 'good' and 'bad' in this respect as we don't always know what's good for us. Plus they both agreed that they were too young and inexperienced in relationships and had they not been, it might have worked. So it goes back to my point about depending at what level of experience each person is at.

                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
                    Unsu...
                     

                    Re: max karma should I run screaming?

                    Wed, August 12, 2009 - 1:55 AM
                    I think that was really well said, Paul. Thank you for taking the time to share it.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: max karma should I run screaming?

                    Wed, August 12, 2009 - 12:19 PM
                    " "It was negative in the sense that it was the only post implying that North Node connections could be a bad thing."

                    Not sure if you understood me right. I am implying that the connections between ANY point in the chart (be that a planet, angle, node etc) is NEITHER good NOR bad. So I am not suggesting a north node connection could be a bad thing any more than I am suggesting it could be a good thing."


                    Paul -

                    I think you misunderstood my post. The point I'm making is that every post before yours that said a North Node connection could be a good thing, she dismissed. Yours was the first one where someone went, "Well, it could be good or it could be bad." And that's the one she took and ran with, the one that presented the possibility that it MAY not be good. She essentially was looking for an astrological reason to throw this guy over in the first place.

                    That's what I'm saying.

                    And you see the nodes as connected to karma. I don't, and between you and Rose, this is actually the first time I've ever even heard of the idea, actually. Usually karma, if attributed to ANYthing in the chart, is linked to Saturn and possibly, the twelfth house. The nodes have actually been linked to reincarnation though, which is a completely separate entity. Usually the south is the past life and things we feel most comfortable doing, and the North Node is where we're headed or what we have to do now, so. I'm going to go with what I already know on that so I can't say I agree with you and Rose's theory, although you're certainly entitled to it.
                    • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

                      Wed, August 12, 2009 - 12:26 PM
                      "I think you misunderstood my post."

                      I think I might have. I understand what you're saying now.

                      "his is actually the first time I've ever even heard of the idea, actually. Usually karma, if attributed to ANYthing in the chart, is linked to Saturn and possibly, the twelfth house."

                      Really? I was taught that the indicators of 'karma' in the chart can be suggested by looking at the Nodes, Saturn and the chart ruler and 12th House.

                      I must say that i have not really considered charts in terms of Karma very often and do not 'actively' suggest karma when I consider any of these points. I put them out there to simply carry forth Rose's theme of karma.

                      "The nodes have actually been linked to reincarnation though, which is a completely separate entity"

                      Why so? Are they not at least connected?
                      • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

                        Thu, August 13, 2009 - 6:00 PM
                        " "I think you misunderstood my post."

                        I think I might have. I understand what you're saying now.

                        "his is actually the first time I've ever even heard of the idea, actually. Usually karma, if attributed to ANYthing in the chart, is linked to Saturn and possibly, the twelfth house."

                        Really? I was taught that the indicators of 'karma' in the chart can be suggested by looking at the Nodes, Saturn and the chart ruler and 12th House.

                        I must say that i have not really considered charts in terms of Karma very often and do not 'actively' suggest karma when I consider any of these points. I put them out there to simply carry forth Rose's theme of karma.

                        "The nodes have actually been linked to reincarnation though, which is a completely separate entity"

                        Why so? Are they not at least connected?"


                        Paul -

                        What I've read is different. I've never seen anything about Karma being linked to the nodes. Which is actually why I was surprised to see that here.

                        Reincarnation and karma are two separate things - karma is more about judgment - "You did this or that thing so now you are being blessed or punished". Reincarnation is simply the idea that we've had past lives and will have more lives, with no judgments attached to it.
                    • opposing nodes between two people

                      Wed, August 12, 2009 - 12:34 PM
                      An image of encounter comes to mind when I think of opposing nodes between two people. i see two individuals meeting each other on a bridge with each coming from opposite directions. Perhaps they come from different cultures and speak different languages. During their meeting at the center of the bridge there is an exchange, perhaps of currency or information or some story each one shares from the different realm they emerged from. After this encounter, they pass and continue on their way to enter the realm that the other came from. I see a kind of mutual initiation here -- of new experiences shared -- and a cross-referencing process that can be accomplished in a relatively short period of time, rather than over any long-term relationship. I could be wrong but that's the image I see and my ideas about it.
                      • Re: opposing nodes between two people

                        Wed, August 12, 2009 - 10:35 PM
                        I really enjoy these "images" Sherpa. I feel this resonates quite well and that I have lived this. I'm not so sure about short term as maybe the two mingle until the deal is done...or the fog lifts. How about nodes conjoined in the same direction. Two assisting each other, crossing a bridge, to a new chapter in life?
                        Enjoy your images and good to see you again.
                      • Re: opposing nodes between two people

                        Thu, August 13, 2009 - 3:13 PM
                        YAY! This imagery for that chart positioning resonates and makes a whole lot of sense.
                        Definitely helps to free up the possibilities and give a direction/context to things in a specific way that creates a lot of space for me, personally.
                        Thank you.
      • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

        Wed, August 12, 2009 - 11:18 PM
        <karmic does not always equal good, but I will consider the group think on this one.>

        Indeed, more often than not, it is not a huge positive. I think that it is important to remember the real essence of karma is the return to the unlearned lesson. The rerun. The second/third/ninetieth chance, etc. Now from that standpoint, you know, it is a matter of deciding whether you want to learn this one right now. And, I also have to say that in my experience the truly karmic relationships usually have a lot of "signs" or "flares" that herald them as being what they are. It would be good to assess whether or not that is happening in this to determine just how "karmic" this relationship may be. Astrology is not going to be detailed enough to say that you are going to get a tissue and blow your nose, and it is not going to give you the real sensation of the experience. You have to bring that to the chart and see if it is really reflected in a recognizable way, even if that winds up looking more abstract than what you experience. Take all the pieces of information in making a decision. But remember, not everything that is painful is bad for you. A breakthrough is painful more often than not, but nothing is more liberating either.
        • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

          Thu, August 13, 2009 - 6:06 PM
          " <karmic does not always equal good, but I will consider the group think on this one.>

          Indeed, more often than not, it is not a huge positive. "

          Amiable -

          Kind of 'glass is half-empty", there. You're entitled to it, but I still say there's just as much chance that it could be a good thing.

          I'll put it this way - if I were in this position, I'd be running TO, not from it. And even in the rare chance that it worked out to be bad, hell, I still say that it's worth it.
          • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

            Fri, August 14, 2009 - 12:53 AM
            Book ~

            <Amiable -

            Kind of 'glass is half-empty", there. You're entitled to it, but I still say there's just as much chance that it could be a good thing.

            I'll put it this way - if I were in this position, I'd be running TO, not from it. And even in the rare chance that it worked out to be bad, hell, I still say that it's worth it.>

            I am basing my comment on my experience and those of others that I have known. My view of karma, btw, is not a "reward or punishment" one ~ not a "justice" issue either. To me, it signifies lessons not completed and the returning to those to either complete them or move them along, if possible, which is not always the case. Karmic relationships are those arising from these unfinished lessons, and they often involve the unwitting repetition of past errors or a revisitation of past scenarios. Essentially, though, karma in and of itself is value-neutral.

            Of course, it is possible to reunite and constructively resolve whatever the issues might be, but that takes the insight of both parties, and, just as in other relationships, many people do not wind up on the same page. I'd say more often than not, especially in romances, they wind up on different pages and the relationship fails. Far more people have ex-bfs and ex-gfs than just a one & only from the get-go ~ and that is not taking karma into consideration. When it comes to some significant life lesson where the work is still being done, I think that the odds are that a quick fix is unlikely.

            There really isn't much of a way of discovering how the relationship will go until there actually is one. Standing on the sidelines trying to discern how it will go without participating in it will not yield much, imo. I wish I had a crystal ball on several occasions, but lacking that, all I could do was give it a shot. It is natural enough to be reticent about getting involved with someone when one has been hurt in the past, and when there are signals that certain attitudes or behaviors are at cross-purposes, it is not a bad idea to enter with "benevolent skepticism," but nothing really will be known without entering at all. Even so, at least in my case, a really vigorous preliminary assessment of a relationship prospect did not prove correct in the least at the end, so I have come to be skeptical of the efficacy of that as well. LOL.

            I understand the feeling that things are fine ~ why rock the boat, and is this person even in a boat solid enough for two? Is it worth the departure from the comfort zone? Well, sometimes yes, and sometimes no. Timing can play such a crucial role. Usually a sign of a karmic connection is spotted in the timing, and it can sometimes look almost too well-timed just as easily as it can look horribly timed. Timing alone is also not an indicator of a potential success or failure ~ just that the opportunity has come around. Sometimes people read way too much into what seems like a grand synchronicity, but the simultaneity alone is not really a clue to the outcome of the lesson revisited yet again. The moment may be ripe, but for what? That is the question I have wound up asking these days when I recognize a meeting as karmic.
            • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

              Fri, August 14, 2009 - 2:52 AM
              >>>
              The moment may be ripe, but for what? That is the question I have wound up asking these days when I recognize a meeting as karmic.
              >>>

              Amiable

              I'm really liking your take on this karmic situation!
              I also liked your thoughts on the fact that if it is karmic and you don't deal with it this time ... it is likely to show up again somehow.
              Brilliant!

              I also totally agree that a successful relationship isn't measured by how it ends (or doesn't end) as much as it is measured by the impact the two persons have on each other through the relationship. Breakups and pain ARE sometimes a good thing ... or sympoms of other good things.

              I don't think you were saying that necessarily it WOULD end painfully - just that even if it did it might still be good depending on how the people grow in the relationship and what they learn. Certainly most relationships will have their painful moments - but these don't have to characterize the entire relationship if people are communicating and balancing and working with each other.

              I really couldn't think of much to add because you stated things so well in my opinion - only this ... when keeping an awareness of karmic situations ... there is the resolution of lessons involving the past but also the fact that the choices we make now create new karmic patterns - karma creating more karma depending on how the person/ people choose to respond in the relationship.
  • challenge of opposite nodes (lunar), to rose

    Wed, August 12, 2009 - 8:49 AM
    rose,

    You said:
    "our north nodes are opposite each other"

    What this means is YOUR North node (future goals) conjuncts (energy is combined with) his South node (the past), and HIS North node conjuncts your South node. This could indicate when he "moves forward" in HIS life (i.e., moves towards his North node), he pulls you backward in YOUR life (i.e., moves you towards your South node). And when you "move forward" in YOUR life, you pull him backward in HIS life. It is a challenging connection to "balance things out" so that each person doesn't hold the other person back.

    Nodally,

    Tim
    • Re: challenge of opposite nodes (lunar), to rose

      Wed, August 12, 2009 - 9:07 AM
      "What this means is YOUR North node (future goals) conjuncts (energy is combined with) his South node (the past), and HIS North node conjuncts your South node. This could indicate when he "moves forward" in HIS life (i.e., moves towards his North node), he pulls you backward in YOUR life (i.e., moves you towards your South node). And when you "move forward" in YOUR life, you pull him backward in HIS life. It is a challenging connection to "balance things out" so that each person doesn't hold the other person back. "

      Why so Tim?

      It's also true that HIS northnode is conjunct HER south node. So the logic you applied to him also applies to her from his point of view. This makes things just 'interesting' in my view. Also there's nothing to suggest that both sides don't need this and that the relationship itself is the balance.

      that's the thing with synastry. ultimately the best way to find out if you're compatible is to do it without astrology. Find out if you like each other and take it from there. You could pore over every aspect of astrology and all you'd have done is spent your time navel-gazing. If there's an attraction - go with it. We're born not to study charts, but to live. Be wary of studying charts looking for the 'perfect one' only to find out you've grown old and not lived.
    • Re: challenge of opposite nodes (lunar), to rose

      Wed, August 12, 2009 - 9:18 AM
      I have heard this idea of Nnode being what one strives towards based on the experiences in the past of the Snode.
      At the same time - I don't think this means that ideally one focuses only on the Nnode ignoring Snode. I think that balance is more the goal and there is potential to either throw each other off balance or help each other maintain balance.

      I think it is absolutely possible for the backward/forward dynamic to emerge (nice insight Tim!). But I think ultimately balance is what each of you might be able to share in this situation if you both mutually desire this balance. The Snode often points towards strengths and experiences you already have that are important for springing forward towards a new direction pointed out by Nnode.
  • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

    Thu, August 13, 2009 - 6:33 AM
    Hi Rose, I have experiences with this reversal nodes thing. As far as I remember I had this with 4 of my love encounters. Two of them were not extremely hard to get out, but the other half were... They were what I call "loves of my life". With at least one of them I am sure I had a strong karmic tie. I "recognised" him at first sight, if you know what I mean. He knew this as well, it was spooky. We used to run a business together and that went very smooth because I had what he was lacking and vice versa.

    BUT I also remember I had a very strong feeling of *choice* shortly after we met and he suggested I would be his business partner. It was as if cosmic forces gave me a chance to say "no" if I wanted to. It was a very hard decision which felt very fateful. Eventually I choose for the "yes" because I was unemployed at that time and had no idea what I wanted to do with the rest of my life, carreerwise.

    So I guess it's up to you. Even if it's karmic, you still have a choice. Good luck with it.
    • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

      Thu, August 13, 2009 - 3:29 PM
      A lot of great thoughtful responses, all helpful. i think the movement across the nodes has one of those opposition thigns where one side there is stuff which was easy for you and the other is things you are working on gaining and I would rather keep those skills I gained from whatever I did to get them, while not getting sucked down into the habit of relying on those instead of doing the hard growth.
      I think having opposing nodes has the potential for each person to offer some sort of guidance to the other, perhaps in very minute ways, that can assist in gaining the skills and mastery to be balanced.

      i think nodal points in synastry have given me plenty to be concerned about in sexualized relationships, but i can feel into some of the suggestions here and be more aware, not just in this case but in others, about how to see the karmic/energetic weight of these things more clearly and avoid the traps that are contained there if necessary.

      Honestly, have never ran from a relation due to astrological configurations, however in this case and in future cases w/ these possibilites that are weighted more than I would like, I reserve the right to use the tools and understandings I have to keep from risking the security of my home and my ability to make my world happen. Typically these astrological points are paid attention to primarily because there is a "feel" that actually exists, which is recognizable without them; however for some specific aspects they can be very accurate descriptors of energy that exists within someone or between two people.
      I honestly think it perfectly fair to opt out of those situations, which one is not yet ready to deal with, who knows if you ever have to?
      Esther, I like that you had that feeling of choice there, in my past nodal contacts Ihave not felt that, things tended to happen quickly and then all of a sudden there was all this weight. hearing that experience and other peoples descriptions means that I can work on reconfiguring my own internal relationships (and other indescribables) so that maybe I can get more of that feeling of choice in the future and maybe purposely make a lot more time available for that opportunity to present itself. I know what having that moment of choice feels like even when it's karmic choices, just for those types of relationship I have not so much experienced that.
      Thanks everybody!
      • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

        Thu, August 13, 2009 - 9:26 PM
        Side note: I think Book is one of those people who want to pretend everything is much more posi-core than it really is or ever has been in any of our lifetimes. These folks usually end up creating negativity by leaving black holes of over-positive bs. In the meantime they stomp as hard as possible on any ideas that might sway from their hardline ignoring that they are injuring people on purpose. This would be the sort of thing that pisses me off the most and I purposely removed myself from this tribe for a few days to keep from continuing to argue in that direction.
        I would like to apologize to the folks who wrote the quick short answers in the beginning for being rude in a later post while arguing with this dude.

        I feel the need to say something publicly about all of that so I can continue to not engage and come back to this tribe here and there. Book, if you ever say anything that I feel has any value for me personally I will inquire more deeply about it and show appreciation. I doubt it will ever happen and I hope that when I post things you will keep that in mind and consider minimizing your responses.
        • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

          Thu, August 13, 2009 - 10:22 PM
          "Side note: I think Book is one of those people who want to pretend everything is much more posi-core than it really is or ever has been in any of our lifetimes. These folks usually end up creating negativity by leaving black holes of over-positive bs. In the meantime they stomp as hard as possible on any ideas that might sway from their hardline ignoring that they are injuring people on purpose. This would be the sort of thing that pisses me off the most and I purposely removed myself from this tribe for a few days to keep from continuing to argue in that direction.
          I would like to apologize to the folks who wrote the quick short answers in the beginning for being rude in a later post while arguing with this dude.

          I feel the need to say something publicly about all of that so I can continue to not engage and come back to this tribe here and there. Book, if you ever say anything that I feel has any value for me personally I will inquire more deeply about it and show appreciation. I doubt it will ever happen and I hope that when I post things you will keep that in mind and consider minimizing your responses."



          Rose -

          You really could've done me the courtesy of addressing me directly as opposed to issuing a passive-aggressive attack just then. Having said that, we were arguing? Really? I don't know, maybe you felt like it was an argument. I was offering my opinion, really. Nothing more, nothing less. I really don't see how my posts could've caused you injury, either. Either you agree, or you don't, and it certainly wasn't my intent to harm anybody.

          And I'm not pretending about anything. I'm well aware that the world is not perfect and life is not easy. But it's worth it. People are worth it. And I rather hold on to and focus on the good things and have hope than sit back, suck on my teeth, and damn everyone and everything, constantly looking for the negative.

          It's like someone cool said once : "....You can choose the rain/But I choose the sun...."

          And like someone else said : "I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are really good at heart."
          • Unsu...
             

            Re: max karma should I run screaming?

            Fri, August 14, 2009 - 10:43 AM
            Don't trample on another's karma because when SHe swallows the missed mark of your impatience , preconcieved ideas about the situation and lack of aim SHe will vomit the ocean contents right back out everywhere so leave him and everybody else out of it. Talk to him about this really honestly and please stop pulling us into the pool of your bed. He is your friend accept the friendship or walk away if he was cruel you wouldn't be having this conversation.





            • Unsu...
               

              Re: max karma should I run screaming?

              Fri, August 14, 2009 - 11:01 AM
              Rose,
              the feeling of running maybe just take his hand and run.lol!
              • karma = action

                Fri, August 14, 2009 - 4:07 PM
                Here's my 2 sense about karma, a term that suffered a distortion of defintion during the Sixties when eastern philosophies -- especially Hinduism and Buddhism -- became all the rage in the USA and Europe. The idea of "good" and "bad" karma became a Cheech and Chong deviation of the original Sanskrit meaning of karma as "action".

                There are different levels of karma, or action. For example, thinking constitutes an act of mental Karma. All Karma is the sum total of an individual’s acts, in the present life and in past incarnations. Karma does not just refer to action; it also the result of our actions. There is a latent power in Karma or action. This is called 'Adrishta'.

                To impose any moral evaluation onto karma as good or bad karma can only encourage that silly Old Testament belief that the cosmos is either out to punish us for our bad karma (paranoia) or out to bless us for our good karma (inflation of self-entitlement).
  • Unsu...
     

    Re: max karma should I run screaming?

    Sat, August 15, 2009 - 5:29 AM
    In every definition of karma between people that I have ever heard there is an excusing of violence and an insistence upon the victim feeling humiliation in response to having been attacked.
    • what limits us

      Sat, August 15, 2009 - 6:16 AM
      “Don’t let yourself be victimized by the Age you live in. When you put the blame on society, you end up turning to society for the solution. There’s a tendency today to absolve individuals of moral responsibility and treat them as victims of social circumstance. You buy that and you pay with your soul. It’s not men who limit women, it’s not straights who limit gays, it’s not whites who limit blacks. What limits people is lack of character. What limits people is that they don’t have the fucking nerve or imagination to star in their own movies, let alone direct them." -- Tom Robbins (from Still Life With Woodpecker)
      • Re: what limits us

        Sat, August 15, 2009 - 10:00 AM
        " It’s not men who limit women, it’s not straights who limit gays, it’s not whites who limit blacks. What limits people is lack of character"

        Which is of course easy for a White straight man to say.
        • Re: what limits us

          Sat, August 15, 2009 - 11:59 AM
          Paul

          Yeah, Tom Robbins is a straight white guy. Straight white guy delusions of entitlement aside, there was something in his quote that struck a chord for me. The quote also relates to the populist use of the term 'karma' as an excuse for whatever difficulty, frustration, or oppression one might feel victimized by. Have you ever read any of Tom Robbins' books yet? if not, I highly recommend them. He manages to squeeze more imagintion out of the English language than many other writers in his genre.
          • Re: what limits us

            Sat, August 15, 2009 - 2:14 PM
            Sherpa

            i've not read his books. His quote sounds really inspiring at first but when you think about it for even a moment it falls apart. Were blacks made slaves because of a lack of character or imagination? Of course not
            • Re: what limits us

              Sat, August 15, 2009 - 3:59 PM
              THough all blacks, as you refer, were subject to slavery, we cannot say for sure that all of them conformed or submitted.
        • responsibility, to Paul

          Sun, August 16, 2009 - 8:19 AM
          Paul,

          You said:
          "" It’s not men who limit women, it’s not straights who limit gays, it’s not whites who limit blacks. What limits people is lack of character" Which is of course easy for a White straight man to say."

          Quote from Tom Robbins:
          "There’s a tendency today to absolve individuals of moral responsibility and treat them as victims of social circumstance. You buy that and you pay with your soul. It’s not men who limit women, it’s not straights who limit gays, it’s not whites who limit blacks. What limits people is lack of character."

          I agree with you that Tom didn't make his point too well. Especially that "lack of character" comment which has nothing to do with his original argument! And then he got caught up in the trap of making a statement that implied, "No one limits anybody else"...which simply ISN'T true: of course SOME people limit other people. :-0

          All Tom was trying to say is that people should take responsibility for their situation and do something about it. The sense is that people should work to overcome others who are limiting...they should take responsibility and take actions to overcome their situation. So woman should get away from abusive men, and gays and blacks should do things to overcome the limitations others put on them. Pointing out the limitations without doing anything makes a person a "victim"...and doesn't solve the basic problem of the limitation. And no, it is NOT always a simple thing to take responsibility and work to overcome limitations: fighting against people trying to limit you may cause you to lose your life! :-0 That's why many people prefer to be "victims" than do something about it...because the cost of trying to overcome their limits is too high.

          Completely non-astrologically,

          Tim
          • Re: responsibility, to Paul

            Sun, August 16, 2009 - 11:47 AM
            <<Especially that "lack of character" comment which has nothing to do with his original argument! >>

            I beg to differ! Given how the choices we make define our characters within the trajectory of our lives, character may be another word for fate.
            • Re: responsibility, to Paul

              Sun, August 16, 2009 - 12:03 PM
              aurghh...I meant "shapes the outcome of our lives" not -- within the trajectory of our lives.
              • Unsu...
                 

                Re: responsibility, to Paul

                Mon, August 17, 2009 - 5:44 PM
                Tom Robbins' quote is not a new idea but it does bring forth an imaginative approach in which charaterizes himself as a writer. Setting aside the examples given for limitation . The message is bold and persausive and brings forth a literay sketch to agregate charater's traits and features. The emphesis is self reliance .The moral responsibility is essentually to reason for yourself, the mind is falliable but becoming mindless doesn't make you infallible. To be a director or star in your own movie now that is a creative metaphor for developing charater . To be creative is being a part of society's solution. Makes sense and has been proven time and time again.
            • Re: responsibility, to Paul

              Tue, August 18, 2009 - 2:32 AM
              Sherpa

              "I beg to differ! Given how the choices we make define our characters within the trajectory of our lives, character may be another word for fate."

              So what limits people is lack of fate? Does this make any semblance of sense? As he as used the word character we can only suppose he meant to use the word character, and not the word fate, which means entirely different things.

              I stand by what I said earlier. It's a quote that is well-intentioned. He clearly means to offer an 'empowering' message, however, upon any kind of reasonable thinking about the quote it completely falls apart. In fact it strikes me as a little bit like blaming the victim. If we suggest that all that was stopping Matthew Shepard from being murdered because of homophobia was a lack of character and imagination on his part, we're completely blaming the victim rather than the people who murdered him. Same with racism, if we suggest that blacks were only enslaved because they lacked imagination and character, we're totally suggesting that it was, in some way, their own fault. I don't like this kind of muddy thinking.

              "THough all blacks, as you refer, were subject to slavery, we cannot say for sure that all of them conformed or submitted. "

              But does this make anything less limiting? Take the man who wanted to look after his farm and care for his beautiful children and wife. He then gets snatched greedily from them by rich arrogant white people and forced into submission and sent to be sold as a slave. Now, he may not have conformed or submitted, but he was still forcibly made a slave. Lets imagine he has outstanding character and an inspiring imagination. He is still a slave taken from his family who he loves. Perhaps his family were slaughtered and his farm taken from him because the big white man with the gun raped him of everything he holds dear. Shall we say, oh well, poor black man, you lacked the imagination and character to 'somehow' prevent this from happening? I don't think so. That's what I mean, when pulled apart a little bit more the quote actually blames the victims somewhat.

              I think he definitely meant well. But actually, whilst worded nicely, the message completely falls apart. I repeat again that it is easy for a white straight man to make comments about blacks, gays and women - knowing of course, nothing about what it is like to be one of those people.
              • Re: responsibility, to Paul

                Tue, August 18, 2009 - 2:40 AM
                sorry sherpa, but to go further...

                There are of course times when we DO limit ourselves. We see this all the time with "I'll never be able to ...." and in times like this then you (and Tim Robbins) are probably quite right, what is limiting the person is the person themselves. Sometimes a paradigm shift of some kind is in order for them to take power over their own lives. I'm not suggesting otherwise. I am, however, saying that because a thing is true some of the time, does not make it true ALL of the time. Although it is true that we do limit ourselves sometimes, it is not true that all limts are applied by ourselves to ourselves. That is only true SOME of the time. In examples like feeling victimised for being gay, a woman or black, there are times when it comes down to perception - "I'll never be able to join the rugby team cos I'm gay". This is of course a self imposed limit, however there are other times when the limts are not self imposed such as during the 17th century when women weren't allowed vote. It doesn't matter how much character that woman might have had, it was illegal to vote, plain and simple.
                • Re: responsibility, to Paul

                  Tue, August 18, 2009 - 2:50 AM
                  Sherpa

                  As you can imagine any 'blame the victim' mentality irritates me. here's a current article on BBC News I've just noticed. It describes how homosexuals in Iraq are being 'hunted' and killed. Tim Robbins' quote might suggest that the reasoning behind this is due to a 'lack of imagination and character (or even fate)'. When juxtaposed with the stark realities, however, I think we have to accept that this simply isn't true. In fact suggestion of this actually makes me a little angry (as you may have guessed! ;p).
                  Let's juxtapose the idealism of his quote - that limits are merely a lack of character - with some of the actual realities that this article describes. I hope you do read the article.

                  news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world...8204853.stm

                  "The report says members of the Mehdi Army militia group are spearheading the campaign, but police are also accused - even though homosexuality is legal."

                  "Witnesses say vigilante groups break into homes and pick people up in the street, interrogating them to extract the names of other potential victims, before murdering them."

                  "The report, called They want us exterminated: Murder, Torture, Sexual Orientation and Gender in Iraq, says horrifically mutilated bodies of gay men have been left on rubbish tips."

                  "We've heard stories confirmed by doctors of men having their anuses glued and then being force-fed laxatives which leads to a very painful death," says Ms Moumneh told the BBC."

                  "it has simply become normal in Iraq to kill gay men"
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: responsibility, to Paul

                    Tue, August 18, 2009 - 9:25 AM
                    Paul

                    Seems like that quote I posted by Tom Robbins really got you going there.

                    To be clear, this quote does not represent any commited position or absolute belief of my own and so I have no defense or argument with any of your responses. I posted it as I see a relation with Robbin's view and the discussion on karma. I also like Robbins' literary style, his audacity and the fertile imagination behind his vision of things. He's an artist of a writer, not a social scientist like another favorite writer of mine, Robert Anton Wilson:

                    "The border between the Real and the Unreal is not fixed, but just marks the last place where rival gangs of shamans fought each other to a standstill." -- Robert Anton Wilson

                    What all this has to do with karma, or rather our speculatons on karma (that us what we are doing here, yes? - speculating) may be the way in which our lives are shaped by an ongoing interaction between fate and destiny. Fate and destiny, two words commonly confused to mean the same thing in some circles. In my circle, fate is whatever happens -- we do not control fate. Destiny is how we respond to fate by the choices we make and how their outcomes define our lives. To use a gambling metaphor (and all perceptions are gambles), fate is in the cards and destiny is how we play them. This process expresses the essence of what karma means to me.
                    • fate and free will, to sherpa

                      Tue, August 18, 2009 - 12:25 PM
                      sherpa,

                      You said:
                      "Fate and destiny, two words commonly confused to mean the same thing in some circles. In my circle, fate is whatever happens -- we do not control fate. Destiny is how we respond to fate by the choices we make and how their outcomes define our lives."

                      Fate and destiny do mean the same thing:
                      thesaurus.reference.com/browse/fate

                      However, fate and FREE WILL are two separate things. I think what you are saying about "destiny" is really about free will. Free will is how we respond to fate by the choices we make and how their outcomes define our lives. How I have often heard it is: we are fated to have certain experiences in our life (think of transits or progressions in the birth chart), how we RESPOND to these experiences is caused by our free will. We can extend this example further to take on the situation Paul is discussing: someone may be "fated" to be a slave, but their "free will" is in how they RESPOND to it. Do they simply accept it, or do they fight back? Granted, in some cases, the consequences of their response may be very severe (for example, if they fight back, they will be killed). But they still have the free will of making that choice.

                      Fatedly free,

                      Tim
                      • Re: fate and free will, to sherpa

                        Tue, August 18, 2009 - 12:42 PM
                        Tim

                        Thanks for clarifying those semantics of' 'free will' vs 'destiny'. If I replace the word destiny with free will, my gambling metaphor still works for me. Acting on our free will does indeed shape our destiny, regardless of our lot in life, our fate. I am reminded of what Astrologer Robert Hand once suggested -- that personality might be a modern word for fate.
                    • Re: responsibility, to Paul

                      Wed, August 19, 2009 - 1:03 AM
                      "Seems like that quote I posted by Tom Robbins really got you going there. "

                      Yes! ;p

                      I get annoyed when I perceive a degree of 'arrogance' from someone who then goes onto blame the victims. I'm sure that wasn't his intention though!

                      "What all this has to do with karma, or rather our speculatons on karma (that us what we are doing here, yes? - speculating"

                      Well I took from the quote that you meant to connotate that we all have 'freewill' but there was a paradox in also relating to destiny which I think Tim elaborated more on. From my point of view I see Karma as offering us a chance to learn and feel empathy - it is not a punishment.
                      • Robbins

                        Wed, August 19, 2009 - 1:45 AM
                        Actually, the quote struck me as a preliminary justification for this New Age view called "The Secret" or "the Law of Attraction," at least to a certain extent. There, if you don't think the right thoughts well enough, you are respsonsible for your failure ~ never mind if your cancer is genetic or whatever.

                        Free Will is all Well and Good. But sometimes it doesn't matter what you do or what your character is ~ stuff just happens, and it may or may not be stuff you understand very well, but there it is. I know that in my case, I am at least relieved enough if I am alone and just can yell "Fuck!" than when someone else is around and I know I can't say that.

                        I think Tom didn't think it all through quite well enough, but, oh well. Lots of people don't, obviously.
                        • Re: Robbins

                          Wed, August 19, 2009 - 2:31 AM
                          'There, if you don't think the right thoughts well enough, you are respsonsible for your failure ~ never mind if your cancer is genetic or whatever.'

                          Yes, quite. It is also worth noting the not-insignificant point that this kind of thinking can alsways undermine any attempts by any politically-opprerssed group to get 'heard,' let alone to push forward on any imptus to make any much-needed changes to the status-quo. Thus, any complaints about blatant acts of discrimination or appression can simply get written off as 'victim mentaility' or 'being negative.'

                          I saw this kind of thinking as rampant in the mid 80's where incidentally, there was very high unemployment in the UK and the Right were happy enough to blame the unemployed - nothing like a little scapegoating to deflect attention to the real causes of a problem) - rather than the monetarist policies that were then being pursued by the Thatcher government. And amongst New Age Circles, I then encountered the 'nobody is to blame but me for my oppression/cancer' etc. Thus if a woman for a boy gets attacked, it does sem to let the prepetrator off rather nicely. It might be worth noting that in many countries in the Middle East, as well as in certain communities in Europe and the Sates, 'honour killing' is still practised by many families. So if a woman gets raped, she has to be killed by the family to protect the good name of that family.

                          In astrology literature, one astrologer who really confronts this kindof thinking is Mike Harding, in Hymns for the Ancient Gods. Refreshing read on the whole.
                      • Re: responsibility, to Paul

                        Wed, October 21, 2009 - 12:51 PM
                        this whole tom robbins quote thing is pretty fascinating. my first reaction was feeling kind of sad. I do think this issue is too complicated to make any strong claims. I think we all have a right to be who we want to be, and we all can be judged by others too. If someone has cared very little to strengthen their defenses and polish their characters with strength, its completely their choice and its not the best choice or the right choice, they may suffer unfairly because of it though.

                        when you think about it, all the changes to improve human rights , have all been made by people who are willing to stand up to the abuse, step out of the victim mentality and fully embrace a new mental construct of empowerment.

                        you could wonder if someone who is being used for abuse, has some karmic option to really address their own ideas of courage, but i dont think failing to do so means that theyre a lesser person, whos to say how much power and potential we really have, maybe someone has very little to begin with, maybe we live multiple lives so we can work up our strength, maybe the ones who transcend their misfortunes have spent many past years failing at it...it is a very sensitive subject though,
      • Unsu...
         

        Re: what limits us

        Sat, August 15, 2009 - 11:54 AM
        Such directness, I love it :+)

        I think people sometimes are victims of social circumstance, that it happens, that it's not an illusion that can be simply brushed away without paying with soul. When it does happen I think the moral responsibility is to discover the root victimization, often buried in the past, that created the unconscious susceptibility to the victimization in the present. I think it is important to be able to see clearly that people are mean if they are mean, otherwise foolish altruism wins out and re-victimization is inevitable. I think there is a time to learn, and to express the value of what is being learned to anyone who may attempt to meddle in that learning process no matter how awkward or uncomfortable the world may feel at what often seems to them to be the humiliating ugliness of it. I don't disagree with a quote like Robbins' quote in it's entirety, but if quotes like it are saying such victimization is an illusion, why are they saying it? I say it is meddling in a reflection of something that feels humiliating in the self, enter the scapegoat. It has half the puzzle solved, I wonder? I don't know because I would like to see what such a writer or speaker would say about how they would protect a child from social circumstance before I would give it even that much credit.

        I appreciate the sharing of the quote very much, I don't think it is without value.

        • Re: what limits us

          Sat, August 15, 2009 - 12:10 PM
          aria

          << I don't know because I would like to see what such a writer or speaker would say about how they would protect a child from social circumstance before I would give it even that much credit. >>

          Good point (and thanks for you response).

          The issue of "character" and "lack of character" in Robbins' quote interests me.

          Very young children are vulnerable and highly impressionable to external social and environmental influences. Yet we can see how children undergoing identical social circumstances do not all come out with the same imprints, behaviors and personalities. Why some emerge into adulthood more victimized, while others emerge more self-determined is not always easily analyzed. It's the old Nature vs. Nurture argument.

          The question of character is complex and maybe unfathomable. This issue may be a good topic for astrologers here. I have some theories on how the natal chart might show stronger tendencies towards self-determination or innate character and, tendencies for a more passive and yielding orientation to life.
          • Unsu...
             

            Re: what limits us

            Sat, August 15, 2009 - 1:02 PM
            I would love to hear your theories, sherpa. Everything you mentioned there is of great interest to me. If you do start a thread about them I'll definitely be there as soon as I can. Thank you for your responses, sherpa.
    • different defintion, to aria

      Sat, August 15, 2009 - 9:24 AM
      aria,

      You said:
      "In every definition of karma between people that I have ever heard there is an excusing of violence and an insistence upon the victim feeling humiliation in response to having been attacked."

      Maybe you should look for a different defintion! :-0 Here's one:
      www.new-age-spirituality.com/sel...html

      There are more definitions like this out there if you are willing to look for them.

      Looking for "good karma",

      Tim
  • Re: max karma should I run screaming?

    Tue, August 18, 2009 - 3:54 AM
    The karma is always there, everywhere... Nodes reflecting eachother are interesting, as they seem to indicate a moment of balance or as Sherpa mentioned exchange. The nodes are the prime catalysts of karma, conjuring up the subconscious, culminated mass of selfidentifying action, ready to be formed or experienced.

    This opposition seems significant in many ways, perhaps foremost in becoming aware of how you effect eachother. It's like you are eachother's teacher on a subconscious level and the lesson is understanding that coming from somewhere and heading somewhere is essentially the same.

    The trick is to stop breathing and reacting for a moment, halting the creation of new -and distribution of accumulated karma and enjoy that which goes beyond them - this relationshipship could be a critical stage in understanding how you and others dream up the story of your lifes...Saturn's return makes it even more auspicious.

    Karma, whether 'good' or 'bad' evaporates when experienced without judgement...equanimity liberates us and creates the necessary space for Self-realization.

Recent topics in "Astrology"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
Santa's lap... Oneinmotion 44 Today, 8:20 AM
JUNO: what are you married to ? where are your betrayal issu... sherpa 250 Today, 3:34 AM
Confidence Remi Love 3 Today, 1:20 AM
Merry Christmas everyone Peter 22 Yesterday, 11:29 PM