Parallel and Contraparallel aspects

Here is something that I need to get my head around. I remember reading about this many years ago and haven't really applied it since.

From what I understand, the Earth's equator gets projected into space and this is called the Celestial Equator.

The angle that the planet makes to this Celestial Equator is the declination of the planet and is measured in degrees - the angle between the earth's surface to the planet and the celestial equator. It can be north or south or zero degrees I guess.

If within one degree, one planet is south (eg 12deg S) declination and one planet is south (eg 13 deg S), then these planets are parallel. If one is north and one is south within one degree, then it is contraparallel (eg 12 deg S v 13 deg N). Parallels act like a weak conjunction contraparallels act like a weak opposition.

Now question, how is this viewed on a chart? Can someone give me an example? I take it the IC is actually N and MC is S. So in my chart, my MC/IC sits at about 17 deg Cap/Can. I guess these configurations occur around these axes. If a planet at for example 20 deg Cap and one at say 20 deg Can - is that contraparallel? (mirrored once through the MC and then once through the AC-DC line) Likewise, if one planet is 20 deg Can and another is 14 deg Can - is that parallel? (I'm imagining that the IC in this instance acting as a midpoint or a mirror.)

Is that right? I feel that I am not transferring my understanding of info properly to a flat chart.

I'd appreciate any help

Come to think of it, if parallel is to exist between two planets, that means there has to be conjunction between the planets right? - eg 12 deg Can and 13 deg Can.

Not sure, HELLLP!

oh or is it the AC-DC axis acting as the mirror? My AC-DC axis sits at about 15 deg Aries-Libra.

So if I have a planet at 20 deg Libra and one at 10 deg Libra - are they contraparallel?

or if I have a planet at 20 deg Libra and one at 20 deg Aries - are they contraparallel?

And if I have a planet at 20 deg Libra and another one at 20 deg Libra - are they parallel?

or if I have a planet at 20 deg Libra and another one at 10 deg Aries - are they parallel?

Is that right?

Yup, this is definitely where the fun comes in. Remember your Great Circles? There are five of them.

The Ecliptic
The Horizon
The Prime Vertical
The Meridian and
The Celestial Equator

Three of these are the basis of the three systems of celestial measurement; The Ecliptic, the Horizon and the Celestial Equator.

Celestial Longitude is a measurement along the Ecliptic. It's the one we astrologers are most familiar with. 0° is 0 Aries 90° is 0 Cancer, etc. etc. Celestial Latitude is a measure of distance from the Ecliptic and has a North and South component. Latitude explains why, for example, the Moon can actually be above the horizon, yet still be in the 1st house. Our horoscope shows us Longitude, not Latitude.

Azimuth is a measure along the Horizon, while Altitude is a measure from the Horizon, it also has a positive and a negative component.

Lastly Right Ascension is a measure along the Celestial Equator and Declination a measure from it.

The angle which the Ecliptic makes to the Celestial Equator varies slightly from year to year due to numerous complex factors. That angle is around 23°26'. This is refered to as Obliquity. So the maximum Declination of the Sun, whose latitude is, of course, always zero (cause it's on the Ecliptic and defines it), is this 23°26' (- or +) which happens on the first day of Summer and Winter, or 0Cancer and 0Capricorn.

So a 'planet' does not make an 'angle' to the celestial equator, nor does the earth's surface, rather it's the Ecliptic which does. Parallel Declination simply says that two bodies have the same declination. Contra-Parallel says that the declination is the same, just that one is positive and the other is negative declination.

Do not confuse this all with the 'mirror' points of which you speak. This is called Antiscia and Contra-Antiscia and is a measure of distance from 0Aries-Libra and 0Cancer-Capricorn respectively.

This is a truly complex subject to which really smart people devote years of study, so do not be surprised if smoke emerges from your ears while contemplating the dynamics here. But do you notice, thinking about it does something to you???!!!

Enjoy


FM

Declination, to 23

23,

Here's a link that talks about this:
http://www.mandala.be/declination/index.htm

Linking,

Tim

Thanks for info guys, I need to do a lot more reading on this. I don't feel I am advanced yet to tackle it but thanks for info, I will certainly be reading it in the near future

Hi.

For a full discussion of Astrology I have around 250 pages of free information available at www.firststop-astrology.com

James Young

Hi James I like all the Key words which on your site. I was going to buy a book on key word Astrology but there seem to be plenty here

Shining Ray

Yes the list is pretty comprehensive and perfectly adequate for most uses. I should mention that there are around 250 pages of free info on my site, so do feel free to browse and ask questions.

Regards.

James Young.

Thanks for info, I will try to make a visit soon to your page James

I am interested in reviving this thread.

One of my recent avenues of research, has been to look at the historical basis of the parallel and contraparallel; I am especially intrigued by the possibility since the conjunction across the plane of the ecliptic would be greatly intensified - in theory - by a corresponding conjunction perpendicularly to it; it would be - if you like - a double conjunction.

If you are standing on the beach and you look out to sea and there is a ship on the horizon and then up in the sky directly above it there is an airplane then that is the real-world equivalent of a conjunction on the ecliptic.

Similarly, if you look into the sky and there is an airplane and you turn ninety degrees and see another airplane in the sky at the exact same height above the horizon then that is the equivalent of a conjunction by parallel.

So clearly, is you look out to sea and witness an airplane crashing into a ship on the horizon that is the equivalent of a conjunction on the ecliptic and by parallel.

It stands to reason then that a conjunction in your chart that is also in parallel aspect ought to be spectacularly intense, and it might be worth bearing in mind the traditional understanding of the parallel aspect: this from The Astrologer's Magazine, Volume 1, Number 1, August 1890:

"The parallel is like the conjunction in effect and nature but more powerful." I should add that the bold type is not mine, but the original text is emphasised thus, it seems that the author was keen to have this particular observation given especial emphasis.

Later on, in a later volume (September 1890) there is an in-depth article about orbs (it seems nothing really changes) wherein it is stated:

"The closer the aspect, the stronger the effect, always taking into consideration the relative strength of the planets in aspect, viz., if in their own houses, angular and whether the aspect is a strong one. In order of strength, the Parallel come first, then the conjunct, then opposition, then trine, then square, then sextile, the latter being the weakest of the aspects." (my emphasis here). FYI the article concludes that 5 degrees should be a general guide for the major aspect, although "no hard-and-fast rule should be made, as exceptions are commonplace."

The Astrologer's magazine which leans heavily on the old sources but invites many articles from the likes of Sepharial and Alan Leo, seems to me to be very sound in it general approaches.

I am struggling to find many other sources of wisdom about the parallel, although to my wandering mind, the beautiful potential of the juxtaposition by conjunction and parallel is just too divine in prospect to ignore, and even beyond my rather mystical predilections the logic is eminently sound, it is simply a conjunction across the perpendicular axis; how is that not a conjunction of at least equal merit?

Thoughts, comments, insight? And of course, who has the magical double conjunction, the perfect alignment of spheres?

I consider (in practice) the orb for Parallel of declination to be up to 2 degrees; I regard Parallels as equivalent to strong conjunctions in longitude; I do not factor in contra parallels of declination (because historically some authorities have regarded these as having the same effect, ie conjunctional effects, as parallels, while others have regarded these as being equivalent to oppositions in longitude)...

Dr. farr, what are your thoughts on parallels involving the lunar nodes? Have you found them to be relevant?

dr. farr said:

I consider (in practice) the orb for Parallel of declination to be up to 2 degrees; I regard Parallels as equivalent to strong conjunctions in longitude; I do not factor in contra parallels of declination (because historically some authorities have regarded these as having the same effect, ie conjunctional effects, as parallels, while others have regarded these as being equivalent to oppositions in longitude)...

Click to expand...

Highly so-indeed the most significant of all Parallels, whether in personal natal as well as mundane charts. First thing I always check are any Parallels (within 2 degrees) of the Nodes with any planets, with the part of fortune, or with the ascending degree or the MC.

Although anything even approaching a really accurate delineation would require an extensive elaboration, very succinctly I would say: problems connected with Lunar, Jovian, Neptunian and Uranian significations, and lucky and quite positive indications connected with Vestan significations.

Say I have Mercury and Neptune parallel by declination. Then I have Venus and Neptune conjunct by longitude. Do I need to consider the possibility of Mercury and Venus being conjunct as a result?

In my opinion, as a defacto "strung conjunction" yes...

In my chart there is a rather wideorbed out of sign conjunction with
Mercury and Jupiter.

In parallel however ME (8th) and JU is in exact contraparallel.(0,01 orb).

I would say that one of my most dominant features have always been learning
about higher meaning, philosophy and reading about various "Guru"s et.c.

A bit negleced subject in astrology today it seems.

I read recently in a book by Astrologer Charles Jayne about declinations where he
showed the declinations of Walt Disney. That basically made the chart fit to reality. With a set of contraparallels with Neptune MC venus Jupiter et.c
(showed below).

Shanti said:

In my chart there is a rather wideorbed out of sign conjunction with
Mercury and Jupiter.

In parallel however ME (8th) and JU is in exact contraparallel.(0,01 orb).

I would say that one of my most dominant features have always been learning
about higher meaning, philosophy and reading about various "Guru"s et.c.

A most undervalued subject in astrology today.

I read recently in a book by Astrologer Charles Jayne about declinations where he
showed the declinations of Walt Disney. That basically made the chart fit to reality. With a set of contraparallels with Neptune MC venus Jupiter et.c
(showed below).

Click to expand...

Thank you for sharing this great example and your personal insights.

I wonder if you have any insights about how Jupiter parallel Neptune and both contraparallel MC, North Node, Vertex and Fixed star Rigel would mean. Jupiter also conjunct Uranus, South node, IC and anti Vertex. Right now I am working as a registered nurse. I do wonder if I will ever change my profession.

Thanks

Edited: Jupiter itself rules the 4th house, Uranus and Neptune in 4th as well as the 7th house.

Shanti said:

In parallel however ME (8th) and JU is in exact contraparallel.(0,01 orb).

Click to expand...

You're saying that you agree that a contra parallel is similar to an opposition? I see mixed info on this.

I have Moon and Venus contra parallel in my scope and it resonates. Furthermore both are out of bounds.