Spock?

Sherpa???

>>>What orb would you give a Venus-Saturn aspect as a matter of interest, Spock?<<<

A conjunction, 12 degrees maybe even more. Opposition around 10, square or trine around 8. And even though that's much more than I would give any other combo, I wouldn't absolutely rule out even larger.

Hi,

I’ve read some information on the Nodes and there is a lot of talk about these points being about relationships and being “karmic.” I’m not sure what they mean by that. I know of karma through Buddhism.

A lot of what I’ve read on Sun and North Node conjunctions tends to paint an “easy” picture of dealing with evolution as a person. “Cookbook” astrology books give a very complacent look at the Sun conjunct North Node. I don’t see it as a “rewarding” aspect because of previous karmic “good” points, as some authors write. One author even objected to the word “karma” because she felt it implied no free will. Karma is about free will…but that free will includes accountability for our actions.

I think a lot of times karma is reduced to a kind of reward system in the west, where, if we do good deeds we get “good” karma points and if we do bad deeds we get “bad karma” points. In Buddhism karma is the theory of causation and effect, there isn’t a qualitative judgment. It’s aim is to illustrate that we are responsible for our own actions, our own happiness etc. and that we have a direct effect on those around us through our actions, for good or ill.

If I we’re to use karma in the Nodes , the way I relate to them, I would see a Sun conjunct North Node like having a mirror held up to the ego. The way I see it, this aspect makes it more evident to the person…makes them more self aware of what they must overcome to evolve as a person. Maybe this awareness isn’t immediate, but it’s inescapable, so to speak.

Following this method, the middle point between the two Nodes I liken to the idea of navigating the “Middle Path” in Buddhism in order to escape Samsara, the cyclical existence or perpetual wandering. In Vedic astrology, both nodes are considered malefic, so in that way, this might make sense. Not gravitating to either / or, but the “middle.”

Now, how does this apply to my own aspect…that I’m still working on. I’ve developed this theory, but I’m always learning…and next week I might reconsider it all and scratch this whole thing. What I do know is that I’ve redefined my outlook on life since I started studying Mahayana Buddhism. I’m a little more aware of the negative self-centeredness I clung to when I was an arrogant 18yr. old. And maybe that’s what it is. Sun conjunct North Node doesn’t let you escape your “ugly” side…that raging, hungry ego. That’s what I’m working on taming.

So…that’s what I’ve got. I’m not sure if it makes any sense. I’m not very adept at the astrological language. I’m still learning it.


Peace, Bo

Derrick,

I don't know about dissecting a quincunx. The way I understand it is from personal experience and observation. Both sides are within sight but not quite in line with one another. I think planets that form this aspects can understand the underlying motives of each other but cannot seem to find the right medium to act harmoniously. One will go first and the other will follow with reaction. It keeps going back and forth until both sides realises that there has to be constant sidestepping and reminders to the planets involved of each other's weakness and strengths.

With the square, both of them want the same thing at the same time with the same intention but different methods and since neither are willing to relinquish the power, and sometimes friction is the best way to dissolve the tension. The square has a scapegoat tendency, I think - to let things build up until it erupts. Two energies meet headlong.

As for the opposition. It is inherently a balance of one energy in it's extremes. Sometimes I picture a parallel path that leads to the same destination. Like electrical currents sweeping up and down a cable. Oppositions don't necessarily mean balance but that the tendency to switch between one end or the other is more drastic and obvious. Finding the middle ground and recognising that both sides of the coin is really the same coin is the challenge. No one leads in an opposition. It's a matter of realising where on the other side or this side, the patch of grass is still the same.

That's my rather limited understanding of these aspects.