Can two luminaries in a grand trine pull an asteroid into another sign?

[SunMoonStar]

Sorry for a confusing title I'll elaborate here =)

I have a grand trine:

Sun in Scorpio 29 deg
Moon in Cancer 27 deg
Vesta in Aries 2 deg

Normally I would think this grand trine would be very weak because its two water and a fire, but what I'm wondering is if the Vesta is pulled back into Pisces energy because the grand trine includes the two luminaries. In other words because the sun and moon are so strong and the aspect is so strong, Vesta picks back up on the Pisces energy it just left. Does this make sense?

[Yoi]

No. Something is in one sign or another (unless it is on the cusp I guess). What a chart says may not please you but you can't just magically shift something a few degrees over into another sign to suit yourself!

I also don't think an asteroid can be part of a grand trine (and I speak as someone who would have a double earth grand trine if I included Chiron and an air grand trine if I included Pallas - and Pallas is on the MC). But that's a different matter.

But the long and short of it is no! What you are trying to do is rewrite your chart because you don't like an aspect of it! Hmmm...I don't really like having Mercury in Sagittarius because it is in detriment, but hey if I shift it over by a few degrees it is in Capricorn. You can put down on paper whatever you like but it still won't change the fact that your Mercury is in Sagittarius (sidereal/tropical arguments not withstanding). Besides, Isaac Newton had Mercury in Sagittarius and he was the greatest scientist and one of the greatest mathematicians of all time. His detrimented Mercury, despite how bad it looks on paper, was responsible for his genius. I've also seen Mercury in Pisces (another bad placement) in great scientists as well (Galileo, Copernicus). You cannot change reality just because you want things to be different and what you want to be different is not necessarily for the best.

Also the aspects you are talking about are not that strong. There is a 5 degree orb for the Moon and Vesta aspect.

[SunMoonStar]

What!? Trying to rewrite my chart? I asked how I can read my chart not for a psychoanalysis about my faulty egoistic approach to astrology, thanks. Also in my opinion a 5 degree orb is still strong when you're working with luminaries. Good luck with your mercury in Sagittarius, douchebag.

[Yoi]

What!? Trying to rewrite my chart? I asked how I can read my chart not for a psychoanalysis about my faulty egoistic approach to astrology, thanks. Also in my opinion a 5 degree orb is still strong when you're working with luminaries. Good luck with your mercury in Sagittarius, douchebag.

Actually you are trying to rewrite your chart. You don't like having Vesta in Aries so you are trying to find an excuse to put it in Pisces. Or what part of, "In other words because the sun and moon are so strong and the aspect is so strong, Vesta picks back up on the Pisces energy it just left." am I misunderstanding? You don't like having Vesta in Aries because you think it makes your "grand trine" "weaker" (you explicitly state this in your OP so it is not me misinterpreting this) and hence you are trying to look for some excuse to say it really contains Pisces energy. Not quite as bad as rubbing out a number on a piece of paper and putting a different number down but almost as bad.


What you are trying to do is the same as someone who changes the house system they are using to some obscure system no-one else uses not because they have any evidence or feeling it fits them better or for rational logical reasons but because in the obscure house system their Sun is in the 10th house instead of the 9th and they really really really want the Sun in the 10th house because all the articles say having the Sun in the 10th house is really good. Not quite as bad as shifting numbers on a piece of paper but nearly as bad.

You can't rewrite reality just because you don't like it. Have you ever heard of the Sun or Moon pulling ANYTHING into another sign? Or anything similar to it at all? You are just fishing for excuses to change your chart. This is not a case of you hearing something and then seeing if it applies to your chart. You are approaching this with the *intention* of trying to find some way to change your chart.

And I don't have Mercury in Sagittarius (mine is in Scorpio, conjunct Uranus in fact). I was using it as an example that something which at first glance doesn't look spectacular can actually turn out to be spectacular. If Newton didn't have Mercury in Sag he wouldn't have been Newton despite the fact that Mercury is in Sag is supposed to be in detriment and "bad". Learn to accept your chart for what you have. Even something that might seem not so good could in the end turn out to be brilliant.

Also if the limit to an aspect to a luminary is 10 degrees then 5 degrees is only middling strong, not very strong. It should still be noticeable of course but it isn't exactly "so strong".

You can call me whatever names you like - douchebag or whatever, but at least I can accept my chart for what it is (including the bad parts) instead of fishing for ways to change reality. If you don't like Vesta in Aries then work in life to do things to make it more Pisces-like. Do you think I like having Jupiter tightly (and by tight I mean about 1-2 degrees) my Sun? Everytime I have a really good Jupiter transit I have a really **** one at the same time! But it is a fundamental part of my chart. I don't like it, but it is who I am.

[SunMoonStar]

Actually you are trying to rewrite your chart. You don't like having Vesta in Aries fishing for ways to change reality Where are you getting this information from!? You're making all these horrible assumptions about my intentions behind asking a simple question. Cusps are a concept I'm genuinely struggling with. Good luck with your "Jupiter tightly (and by tight I mean about 1-2 degrees) my Sun" aspect, douchebag.

[Yoi]

Where are you getting this information from!? You're making all these horrible assumptions about my intentions behind asking a simple question. Cusps are a concept I'm genuinely struggling with. Good luck with your "Jupiter tightly (and by tight I mean about 1-2 degrees) my Sun" aspect, douchebag.

In your OP you make it pretty clear that your purpose behind this is because you want to have a perfect water grand trine. *Sigh* If only Vesta was in Pisces. But oh wait...it is trine the Sun and Moon. Maybe the Sun and Moon can "pull" Vesta into Pisces. Have you actually heard of any planet "pulling" another object into another sign at all?!! I suspect you just made it up there and then because you want that "perfect" grand trine and that sort of behaviour is something I find difficult to respect. I don't mind it when someone uses a different system from me if they have good reasons for doing so and they are consistent. But I really dislike it when someone tries to do something simply, making it up on the spot, because it makes their chart look "better". Astrology is nothing without rules and systems. If everyone can make things up and change things just so their chart looks "better" then there is no use for astrology at all.

Oh and thanks for the "good luck" with my Jupiter tightly square Sun. It's really a drag for me :( Did I mention that Jupiter is in fall as well. It's pretty bad all round on paper. Trust me it is a far far worse case on paper than the fact that your Vesta grand trine just isn't quite perfect because Vesta is in Aries, not Pisces. But well one must make do with what one has in one's chart you know. And squares are not necessarily all bad.

[SunMoonStar]

Alright man... I won't deny that I thought it would be nice to have a grand trine in my chart, but that doesn't mean I'm unwilling to confront the possibility that I don't. I really don't know whether what I was proposing was a substantial theory, that's why I asked it. If its a weak grand trine that's fine with me, I would just like to know if it is or not. I agree with you regarding aspects in that i look at it that there aren't "good and bad" aspects. I look at it as more "easy and hard." I look at it like with too many easy aspects, its like you're on a river that has such a nice flow that it takes you to wherever you need to go without much effort from you, but in the end you haven't learned how to paddle. With harder aspects you may have had to work your butt off to get where you want to go, but at the end of the day you're one heck of a paddler. I just think you made a lot of assumptions regarding me being unable to admit that my grand trine might be weak, which really isn't the case. I don't really understand cusps and I'd like to learn more about them. Also, I didn't mean the aspect was "strong" because of the orb, but because a grand trine is a strong aspect in general.

[Yoi]

I apologize for being too harsh and now that you've explained it to me I may have made too many assumptions. OTOH think of it as getting a taste of Mercury in Scorpio :) I'm in the part of Scorpio where Mercury has essential dignity too (term) and it's my ascendant ruler. I should dial it down though...I apologize.

The thing is, and what I was trying to say with all the examples I presented, is just because your chart is not "textbook" good doesn't necessarily mean you can't achieve much. This is not aimed at you but more to a general audience. Newton, Galileo and Copernicus all had Mercury in detriment or fall and were intellectual giants. Alexander the Great, the great conqueror had his Mars in *Gemini* of all signs. Not to mention Jupiter in Virgo and Moon in Scorpio. Also he had the Sun, Mercury and Venus in Cancer. One of the criticisms I have of astrology is the difficulty in actually seeing, let alone predicting, "greatness" in people's charts. According to the textbook definitions, I find it difficult to see one of history's greatest military giants with an insatiable lust for conquest in Alexander's chart. He has two major planets in detriment, Mars in non-fiery, non-martial Gemini and very heavy Cancer stellium. He doesn't have any grand trines either. Yet as we know from history he *was* one of history's greatest military giants with an insatiable lust for conquest and expansion. I think once astrology can really find the secret of predicting "greatness" (or at least a consistent method of explaining it) is when it will finally be taken seriously by the mainstream. I believe in astrology and practice it but I think that is really the main problem with getting other people to take astrology seriously.

Just a bit on terminology. When people talk about "strong" aspects they usually mean orbs. People talk about "major" and "minor" aspects with the trine, conjunction, square, opposition and sextile seen as the major aspects. The other aspects are all minor though some people argue that some of the minor ones should be major. The grand trine is not an aspect per se but an aspect pattern because it is made up of multiple different major aspects (trines).

Finally having a part of a grand trine out of element is not necessarily "weak". To be honest I haven't seen any standard interpretation of this.

[SunMoonStar]

Haha no worries.. I have Mercury in Scorpio on descendant so trust me I understand your Mercury placement :) The placement makes us good at getting to the heart of ridiculous arguments like this, though, and realizing that the fundamental disagreement was silly in the first place. I like my Mercury :p It also perfectly trines (10 minute orb) my Jupiter enlarging the effect of its already intense placement. Anyway, I actually didn't pull the whole theory out of my ***, I have heard of aspects sort of "pulling" planets. My sun is on the cusp of Scorpio/Sag (on scorp side at 29 deg) and an astrologer interpreted as my Sun keeping Scorpio energy because of that trine with my moon. He described it as the Moon as having a sort of pull on the Sun that strengthens its Scorpio placement (also fueling it with more water energy).

[Lin]

SunMoonStar, I sent you a personal message.
LIN