By Sign Or By Orb?

Osamenor · Dec 19, 2017

Some astrology folks consider aspects to be aspects if they're within orb but out of sign. Others do not, citing the elemental natures involved. Fair enough. Personally, I do tend to consider out of sign aspects if the orb is close enough, but for those who do, how do you reconcile the nature of the signs with the nature of the aspect?

For example, if we consider aspects by orb, a planet at 29 Aries and a planet at 0 Leo are square. But, both being fire signs, they have that shared fire nature, and by sign, they're trine. Does that make it a different quality square? Or (since this example recently came up in a Read My Chart thread), a planet at 0 Aquarius and a planet at 29 Taurus are trine by orb but square by sign... is that perhaps a less easily flowing trine?

All opinions welcome, but please don't confuse opinion with hard fact!

Frisiangal · Dec 19, 2017

Hi Osamenor,
As one living with an out of sign [applying] square with a 6* orb between Saturn in 10th and retro. Neptune in 2nd house, in Air, I can personally vouch for their working effect in a number of different manners of manifestation, as per their ruling 5th and (modern)7th houses.
Neptune also turned direct at a time that coincided with my returning to work after either fulfilling or wavering my 'parental' role (according to how one looks at it), in favour of 'being out there'. The first company was a manufacturer of aromatic essences!
The salary earned during the years aided towards a mortgage, paying school and college fees.

My son's chart, that I have mentioned quite often, has been one of my personal greatest (astrological) learning processes (my ruler 5th house in Gemini?). He has an out of sign [applying] opposition between Saturn end Taurus (my Sun sign) in 3rd, and Neptune conjunct MC in Sagittarius (dad's Sun sign) in 10th house; a 4* orb. They rule 12th and (modern) intercepted 1st house.
(I believe the opposition strongly influences his feelings and attitudes towards both parents.)

After many external struggles along unfulling paths he was led back to his first love, the helping profession. First major hurdle was to overcome a huge failure complex that had plagued him since young teens (missed playing football for county because he didn't try hard enough; whole family noticed and didn't understand it!). He finally qualified as a First Aid Emergency Response trainer, with a 'speciality' in personally applied firm necessity rather than 'general' First Aid.

From dire financial circumstances 5 years ago, he has built up a very good professional reputation working almost 50% between contractors and his private one-man business. His 'clients' from all walks of life ask for him, especially, because he makes the trainees apply the practical work to the theories themselves, rather than making them watch what he does in instruction with the risk they fall asleep out of boredom during the training.

Re; your examples. There's a difference between fire and fire, isn't there? The trine temperament may be 'controlled' is some way, but the square may prove more challenging to the individual, through the very force of heat within and that drives it.
Earth can 'ground' the Mental Air energy current to make something physically plausible, or Air can take the proverbial bull by the horns to get it moving. Yet Aquarius-Taurus might prove more difficult as both are FIXED in their ways. :biggrin:

For me, there's a reason for everything that doesn't quite fit the man-made rules of astrology, and that's because they aren't man-made, yet are celestially there to work out...or upon.
For me, out of sign orbs work because they have proven to do so.

:smile:

katydid · Dec 19, 2017

Osamenor said:
Some astrology folks consider aspects to be aspects if they're within orb but out of sign. Others do not, citing the elemental natures involved. Fair enough. Personally, I do tend to consider out of sign aspects if the orb is close enough, but for those who do, how do you reconcile the nature of the signs with the nature of the aspect?

For example, if we consider aspects by orb, a planet at 29 Aries and a planet at 0 Leo are square. But, both being fire signs, they have that shared fire nature, and by sign, they're trine. Does that make it a different quality square? Or (since this example recently came up in a Read My Chart thread), a planet at 0 Aquarius and a planet at 29 Taurus are trine by orb but square by sign... is that perhaps a less easily flowing trine?

All opinions welcome, but please don't confuse opinion with hard fact!

If a native has the Sun @ 29 Aries and the Moon @ 0 Leo, I will consider the aspect between the lights to be a square. However I will take into account the double Fire energy, and take note that the square is 'out of sign.'

It still counts as a square however, for two main reasons.

One, geometrically speaking, a 90 degree angle is very different from a 120 degree angle. Like the difference between a First Qtr or Last Quarter Lunar phase as it moves towards it's \ Gibbous or Balsamic phase. One is sharp, critical, action oriented---the other, flowing, transitional, compliant.

HOWEVER, the main reason they still work as squares, is because of the transits/progressions.

If transiting Saturn conjuncts the natives Sun @ 29 Aries, that Saturn will be SQUARING the native's Leo Moon. They will experience a conjunction and a square at that time. :bandit:

And that indicates to me that the geometric placements of the planets are to be upheld, even if one planet has moved out of sign.

The same can be said of synastry. If they meet someone with Mars conjunct their Sun, that Mars will be squaring their Moon, not trining it.

katydid · Dec 19, 2017

Another way of looking at this question:

If Tr. Saturn is @ 29 Aries and the native has their Moon @ 0 Leo-----Is tr Saturn squaring their Moon?

I think the majority of astrologers would say the native was experiencing Saturn squaring their natal moon.

I don't know any who would say the native was experiencing Tr Saturn TRINE their Moon under that circumstance.

rahu · Dec 19, 2017

I have s one question.

if there is a situation such as caroline's chart that shows with the validity of a trine in question because it square by sign and not trine by sign, then if a sidereal astrologist cast her chart ,would the trine would become functional because the trine would be trine by sign though in a different sign.

it seems ridiculous to say the energies of a trine are subject to the philosophical bias of the astrologer.

rahu

Osamenor · Dec 19, 2017

rahu said:
I have s one question.

if there is a situation such as caroline's chart that shows with the validity of a trine in question because it square by sign and not trine by sign, then if a sidereal astrologist cast her chart ,would the trine would become functional because the trine would be trine by sign though in a different sign.

it seems ridiculous to say the energies of a trine are subject to the philosophical bias of the astrologer.

rahu

That is a good question. And yet, arguably, the energies of anything in astrology are subject to the philosophical bias of an astrologer--or, more to the point, what they mean is. It's not necessarily a question of what energies exist, but of how we're interpreting them.

In this thread, we have some excellent examples of how people experience their natal out of sign aspects. All we really can prove is what the subjective experience of people with any particular chart factor tells us.

AppLeo · Dec 20, 2017

I count out of sign aspects.. the zodiac signs are just guidelines. They are man-made, and the planets are not. A conjunction is a conjunction. A sun in Aries could be part Pisces or part Taurus. We could’ve divided the zodiac into 24 different signs or 1000 or only 2.

katydid · Dec 20, 2017

aquarius7000 said:
So basically take both the worlds into consideration. This again is a modern concept. Same thing when some astrologers, whilst finding the reason of a certain predicament in a chart, will consider both Jupiter and Neptune as the ruler of Pisces. Something will always fit between the two. Only problem (well not in modern astro) precision is lost along the way. We are so spoilt for choice (literally) in modern times.

Well, I guess that is one difference between us. I am not looking for 'precision.'

I am looking for answers and discussion points the explore with the client. I am not offering 'precise' answers to their dilemmas. It is not my place to do so, in my opinion. Life is to be lived.

And what is your reasoning for natal charts - frozen in time?

Where did I say charts were frozen in time? [edited response to possibly attacking comment - Moderator]

Frisiangal · Dec 20, 2017

aquarius7000 said:
So basically take both the worlds into consideration. This again is a modern concept. Same thing when some astrologers, whilst finding the reason of a certain predicament in a chart, will consider both Jupiter and Neptune as the ruler of Pisces. Something will always fit between the two. Only problem (well not in modern astro) precision is lost along the way. We are so spoilt for choice (literally) in modern times.

I was astrology brought up within its modern concept. Yet, very gradually I have found that considering traditional rulerships as 'working' cannot be absolutely denied. For me, it's taking the effect of a harsh 'habitual' Moon into account, which often seems to find the trad. rulerships just as defining, or more so than the modern.

If I may offer yet another example within my family.

My eldest daughter with Pisces Ascendant has a 1st house Saturn 29*Aries (intercepted) conjunct Sun 4*Taurus. Moon is on 6*Leo in the 6th house. If out of sign orbs are NOT considered, there is no aspect between Moon-Saturn. Her Moon is ruler I.C. and 5th house. It defines her management organisational ability within her work sphere, yet also the parental concern in managing and dealing with 2 'difficult' highly strung extravert and introvert daughters. Very draining.

She has suffered from arthritic difficulties for a number of years, which she blames on her maternal genes! :whistling:

I managed to control mine, yet my Cancer Sun sister (matriarch!) has the real gnarled knuckles/joints of a chronic condition (Saturn). [I could go into maternal ancestral history to knock more chronic nails on the head. :wink:

]

If I take 'ancestral influences' as a 12th house subject, I would 'expect' to find a Saturn/Capricorn influence to her 6th house Moon, ruler I.C. of hereditary conditions. Yet it isn't Capricorn on the 12th house cusp; it is Aquarius, of which Saturn IS the traditional ruler. And Saturn in Aries IS in an out of sign applying square to Moon.
Would a 1st house Saturn in Aries alone explain arthritis??? Would Uranus as modern 12th house ruler do so? There is no aspect between Moon and Uranus.

I may have been attempting 'to find something that fits' to explain her arthritic issues, which other signs/planets would not produce. Yet the fact does remain that it IS a Saturn to Moon influence defining a 12th-4th house ancestral-hereditary issue. It IS there.

Out of sign aspect working???? :smile:

aquarius7000 · Dec 20, 2017

katydid said:
Well, I guess that is one difference between us. I am not looking for 'precision.'

I am looking for answers and discussion points the explore with the client. I am not offering 'precise' answers to their dilemmas. It is not my place to do so, in my opinion. Life is to be lived.

So, to deduce form what you said there... your aim is to, or rather you don’t mind to provide delineation that is more general in nature and not precise. Actually, that just underlined the point I made in the rest of my previous post.

That is one my challenges with some practicing modern Astrology - anything works/ anything fits. And, this is an observation to which I am entitled, not a condescending remark. Then again, you are entitled to take it as you are able to interpret it.

“Where did I say charts were frozen in time? Is that another condescending comment I should just ignore?”
I said the “frozen in time” part. I did not say that you said it.

[deleted possibly attacking comment - Moderator]

aquarius7000 · Dec 20, 2017

Hi

On a wobbly NY train so pardon me if the post seems just as wobbly but I thought I had seen you prractise traditionally, but may be that is just a flaw in my understanding, or depends on your mood

That bit you said about the aspect to your Neptune in your previous post and how that fits to what you have experienced, couldn’t that have something to do with some other constellation in your chart? I would love to have a look with my trad eyes.

Frisiangal said:
I was astrology brought up within its modern concept. Yet, very gradually I have found that considering traditional rulerships as 'working' cannot be absolutely denied. For me, it's taking the effect of a harsh 'habitual' Moon into account, which often seems to find the trad. rulerships just as defining, or more so than the modern.

If I may offer yet another example within my family.

My eldest daughter with Pisces Ascendant has a 1st house Saturn 29*Aries (intercepted) conjunct Sun 4*Taurus. Moon is on 6*Leo in the 6th house. If out of sign orbs are NOT considered, there is no aspect between Moon-Saturn. Her Moon is ruler I.C. and 5th house. It defines her management organisational ability within her work sphere, yet also the parental concern in managing and dealing with 2 'difficult' highly strung extravert and introvert daughters. Very draining.

She has suffered from arthritic difficulties for a number of years, which she blames on her maternal genes! I managed to control mine, yet my Cancer Sun sister (matriarch!) has the real gnarled knuckles/joints of a chronic condition (Saturn). [I could go into maternal ancestral history to knock more chronic nails on the head. ]

If I take 'ancestral influences' as a 12th house subject, I would 'expect' to find a Saturn/Capricorn influence to her 6th house Moon, ruler I.C. of hereditary conditions. Yet it isn't Capricorn on the 12th house cusp; it is Aquarius, of which Saturn IS the traditional ruler. And Saturn in Aries IS in an out of sign applying square to Moon.
Would a 1st house Saturn in Aries alone explain arthritis??? Would Uranus as modern 12th house ruler do so? There is no aspect between Moon and Uranus.

I may have been attempting 'to find something that fits' to explain her arthritic issues, which other signs/planets would not produce. Yet the fact does remain that it IS a Saturn to Moon influence defining a 12th-4th house ancestral-hereditary issue. It IS there.

Out of sign aspect working????

wilsontc · Dec 20, 2017

Back to astrology, to All

All,

Please get back to astrology and keep out the attacking or patronizing comments.

Back to astrology civilly,

Tim

katydid · Dec 20, 2017

aquarius7000 said:
So, to deduce form what you said there... your aim is to, or rather you don’t mind to provide delineation that is more general in nature and not precise. Actually, that just underlined the point I made in the rest of my previous post.

That is one my challenges with some practicing modern Astrology - anything works/ anything fits. And, this is an observation to which I am entitled, not a condescending remark. Then again, you are entitled to take it as you are able to interpret it.

“Where did I say charts were frozen in time? Is that another condescending comment I should just ignore?”
I said the “frozen in time” part. I did not say that you said it.

[deleted possibly attacking comment - Moderator]

As to the bolded, it is not about being more 'general.' It is about being more respectful of the native's FREE WILL> And it is about giving people the opportunity to create their own lives. And the power to meet their obstacles with the strength to overcome them, not be given an absolute prognosis of failure.

It is NOT about proclaiming that an 18 yr old girl 'is absolutely infertile' and 'will never be married.' That kind of so called 'precision' is a trap that traditional astrologers lay for unsuspecting clients. And I will never condone that kind of 'precision.' :bandit:

Frisiangal · Dec 20, 2017

aquarius7000 said:
aquarius7000 said:

Hi

On a wobbly NY train so pardon me if the post seems just as wobbly but I thought I had seen you prractise traditionally, but may be that is just a flaw in my understanding, or depends on your mood

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it does appear to be a 'misconception' (kinder than 'flaw') in your understanding. I have never written anything from a purely traditional perspective. I wouldn't know how; there are so many 'rules' to take into consideration. Yet, as said, over the years I have come to see a truth that can lie in trad. rulerships, when a harsh Moon is evident. It's a personal perspective that the outer planets become 'rulers' of a sign in a positive manner when Sun comes into its own and moon works with it.

That bit you said about the aspect to your Neptune in your previous post and how that fits to what you have experienced, couldn’t that have something to do with some other constellation in your chart? I would love to have a look with my trad eyes.

Click to expand...

I don't deny that Jupiter can be of influence, and think the difference lies in the aspects to Jupiter and Neptune, and how they are perceived by the individual concerned. Both Jupiter and Neptune are rulers of 'intangible' signs, yet Saturn is pure physical manifestation plain and simple.
In my case, Neptune works through physical manifestation because of the (out of sign) square with Saturn. 12th Jupiter squares a 9th house Sun in Earth. The interpretations could/would be similar, yet for totally different reasons AND, I believe, at a different level of Spirit.

My foreign husband is a Jupiter-ruled Sun in Sagittarius. Yet the 'fish that slipped the net' was strongly Saturn influenced.
The stories are totally different.

aquarius7000 · Dec 20, 2017

katydid said:
As to the bolded, it is not about being more 'general.' It is about being more respectful of the native's FREE WILL>

And, everything is getting mixed up here. When I talked about 'precision', it was not about giving 'fatalistic' prediction, which is the way you seem to have understood it. Then again, it is just your understanding, not what I had said. Feel free to go back and read my post carefully.

The precision was meant more on following more precise astrological rules and not picking what is convenient whenever. For instance, if there problem being discussed is about 'alcoholism', pick Neptune as the ruler of Pisces, since Jupiter might not fit. That is the kind of imprecision I was talking about. Not about giving deterministic prophecies. Although sometimes the latter is exactly what is required, but when one is so confused about what to even pick as a ruler of a sign, how can one even give precise answers.

And it is about giving people the opportunity to create their own lives. And the power to meet their obstacles with the strength to overcome them, not be given an absolute prognosis of failure.

It is NOT about proclaiming that an 18 yr old girl 'is absolutely infertile' and 'will never be married.' That kind of so called 'precision' is a trap that traditional astrologers lay for unsuspecting clients. And I will never condone that kind of 'precision.'

You don't have to condone that kind of precision because that interpretation of what was said is not precise enough to be correct. :kissing:

aquarius7000 · Dec 20, 2017

Frisiangal said:
Unfortunately, it does appear to be a 'misconception' (kinder than 'flaw') in your understanding. I have never written anything from a purely traditional perspective. I wouldn't know how; there are so many 'rules' to take into consideration...

Click to expand...

A bit daunting though, but that is exactly what I like about the traditional school of thought - that it is so precise through all those convincing rules. And, best of all, there is always an explanation, sometimes a harsh one, but at least there is a reasoning behind every rule. That is sort of reassuring and gives the astrologer (well, a trad. astrologer at least) that you are standing on firm grounds. It is almost like maths... precise and clear, but, perhaps through that also dry and without much room for creativity.

katydid · Dec 20, 2017

aquarius7000 said:
And, everything is getting mixed up here. When I talked about 'precision', it was not about giving 'fatalistic' prediction, which is the way you seem to have understood it. Then again, it is just your understanding, not what I had said. Feel free to go back and read my post carefully.

The precision was meant more on following more precise astrological rules and not picking what is convenient whenever. For instance, if there problem being discussed is about 'alcoholism', pick Neptune as the ruler of Pisces, since Jupiter might not fit. That is the kind of imprecision I was talking about. Not about giving deterministic prophecies. Although sometimes the latter is exactly what is required, but when one is so confused about what to even pick as a ruler of a sign, how can one even give precise answers.

You don't have to condone that kind of precision because that interpretation of what was said is not precise enough to be correct.

As to the bolded, that is exactly what I was speaking about too. And the precision needed to make those kind of locked in traditional predictions, which can mess with people's lives. Some want 'precision' so they can say a girl is infertile or will never marry. I abhor that kind of so called precision.

As to the example you used, about Jupiter vs Neptune, and alcoholism---I would say BOTH this plants can indicate problems with alcohol abuse. So it is a moot point.

I really am tired of the way some trade here are speaking negatively about modern astrology. I think we should be on the same team and not be so negative towards each others systems.

aquarius7000 · Dec 20, 2017

katydid said:
As to the bolded, that is exactly what I was speaking about too. And the precision needed to make those kind of locked in traditional predictions, which can mess with people's lives. Some want 'precision' so they can say a girl is infertile or will never marry. I abhor that kind of so called precision.

Again, you seem to be confusing precision in regards to the astrological academics and rules you use in order to be able to interpret a chart at all, and the rest depends on your own human emotional maturity to have the good sense to put your interpretation in such a manner across to the native that it does not come across as fatalistic. Fatalism or determinism is NOT precision.

Precision is 2 + 2 = 4. And not 4 one occasion and 5 on another. Now I use that precise rule to read a chart.

As to the example you used, about Jupiter vs Neptune, and alcoholism---I would say BOTH this plants can indicate problems with alcohol abuse. So it is a moot point.

Even Venus and the Moon, actually even Mars and perhaps also the Sun play a part in alcoholism. So, given that kind of imprecision, we can deduce nothing almost. I was trying to make a point there and I do think I made that clearly, so let us not get stuck up on the planets used. I could have used two completely opp.-in-nature planets like Saturn and Uranus also.

I really am tired of the way some trade here are speaking negatively about modern astrology. I think we should be on the same team and not be so negative towards each others systems.

Pointing flaws out in a system is not being negative. It is just that - flaws. Perhaps not to you because you practice it.

It is the same as modernists love to say about trads. that they are so stuck-up...

katydid · Dec 21, 2017

aquarius7000 said:
Again, you seem to be confusing precision in regards to the astrological academics and rules you use in order to be able to interpret a chart at all, and the rest depends on your own human emotional maturity to have the good sense to put your interpretation in such a manner across to the native that it does not come across as fatalistic. Fatalism or determinism is NOT precision.

Precision is 2 + 2 = 4. And not 4 one occasion and 5 on another. Now I use that precise rule to read a chart.

Even Venus and the Moon, actually even Mars and perhaps also the Sun play a part in alcoholism. So, given that kind of imprecision, we can deduce nothing almost. I was trying to make a point there and I do think I made that clearly, so let us not get stuck up on the planets used. I could have used two completely opp.-in-nature planets like Saturn and Uranus also.

Pointing flaws out in a system is not being negative. It is just that - flaws. Perhaps not to you because you practice it.

It is the same as modernists love to say about trads. that they are so stuck-up...

Please, do tell, how is it NOT fatalistic to tell a 20 yr old that she will never marry and never carry a child to fruition? Are you seriously saying that there is a 'way' to say that, without 'coming across' as fatalistic? :pouty:

As to Jupiter and Neptune, that you used as an example, I assumed you used them for a precise reason. You specifically said that it was wrong for a modern astrologer to choose both Jupiter and Neptune to co -rule Pisces, when discussing Alcoholism. When I said that BOTH can indicate alcoholism, you then tell me to ignore the 2 planets that YOU chose...lol...

I do agree with your final statement however. :kissing:

Frisiangal · Dec 21, 2017

As to Jupiter and Neptune, that you used as an example, I assumed you used them for a precise reason. You specifically said that it was wrong for a modern astrologer to choose both Jupiter and Neptune to co -rule Pisces, when discussing Alcoholism. When I said that BOTH can indicate alcoholism

Just want to say that, by revealing my own in and out of sign orbs re: above planets, if any are thinking, 'aha, that's a sign she's an alcoholic to cope with reality', they would be very wrong. Enjoy a small wine with dinner or the occasional weak vodka-tonic of an evening now and then, but in moderation. With no aspects from either planet to Moon, or through a 3rd planet to each acting as a magnet, any 'addiction tendency' lay elsewhere.

I was brought up in the Christian faith, full stop. Any religious instruction came from school rather than church. Even as a young teen, my strong Earth side wondered how anyone could 'believe'(Jupiter) or 'be taken in by' (Neptune) such stories that were probably enlarged with each telling (Jupiter) until any sense of, or connection with reality had been erased (Neptune). The universal creative process is billions of years old and ever-changing. What 'force' can remain unchanged?

There was 'a force' in me leading my belief system that had to change. One commandment finally hit home; Thou shalt put no other God before ME'.
Neptune idolises and adores (Oh, come all ye faithful?) for which Saturn can create physical images/substances (on pedastals or tables) that are worshipped. These images in whatever form replace 'ME', who is then side-tracked, loses the way, and/or is forgotten. I.e. all faith is placed outside one's self instead of within one's self.

Imvho, neither Jupiter or Neptune can provide the physical in the images they create. Saturn is involved in physical manifestation. My son and I both have 'out of sign' Saturn-Neptune aspects in our charts.[ He drinks in moderation too, only at weekends]. Both our sense of 'failure complex' could only be overcome by undergoing them through those situations outside ourselves that brought about the change within ourselves.

Or; was it really due to my Sun square Jupiter, and his exact 11th house Jupiter in Sag. inconjunct 3rd house Saturn, without 'out of sign' involvement?

I may still be searching for something/someone to believe in, yet I have absolute faith in the intangible power of, and behind astrological symbolism. :smile:

By Sign Or By Orb?

Osamenor

Frisiangal

Well-known member

katydid

Well-known member

katydid

Well-known member

rahu

Banned

Osamenor

AppLeo

Well-known member

katydid

Well-known member

Frisiangal

Well-known member

aquarius7000

Well-known member

aquarius7000

Well-known member

wilsontc

katydid

Well-known member

Frisiangal

Well-known member

aquarius7000

Well-known member

aquarius7000

Well-known member

katydid

Well-known member

aquarius7000

Well-known member

katydid

Well-known member

Frisiangal

Well-known member