How to interpret fluent aspects with disharmonic signs?

Venusinlibra

Well-known member
I have a question that is repeated many times. How to interpret an aspect between planets, whether in a natal chart or in a synastry, when the planets are in a reasonable orb of few degrees, but in signs that do not harmonize in the same way as the formed aspect? For example, in the attached synastry, one person's Moon in Aquarius forms various oppositions with the Sun, Uranus, and Pluto on the other in Virgo, and a trine with her Mars in Cancer. Just as an example, in the case of the trigone: what is more important, the trigone, harmonic, or the disharmony between Aquarius and Cancer? How to interpret, what to expect from these aspects? The opposite also happens, challenging aspects (squares) between planets in signs that harmonize with each other ... How to interpret them?
 

Attachments

  • sinastria.jpg
    sinastria.jpg
    44.7 KB · Views: 27

rahu

Banned
I have a question that is repeated many times. How to interpret an aspect between planets, whether in a natal chart or in a synastry, when the planets are in a reasonable orb of few degrees, but in signs that do not harmonize in the same way as the formed aspect? For example, in the attached synastry, one person's Moon in Aquarius forms various oppositions with the Sun, Uranus, and Pluto on the other in Virgo, and a trine with her Mars in Cancer. Just as an example, in the case of the trigone: what is more important, the trigone, harmonic, or the disharmony between Aquarius and Cancer? How to interpret, what to expect from these aspects? The opposite also happens, challenging aspects (squares) between planets in signs that harmonize with each other ... How to interpret them?

I don't think the aspects are affected by the harmony or disharmony of the signs. say you are looking at a tropical chart with this problem. then you could look at the sidereal of the same chart and the signs might not be disharmonious any more but he aspects woul dbe the same. so I don't think which sign you use is going to change the nature of the mathematically derived aspects
rahu
 

IleneK

Premium Member
I would tend to respectfully disagree with rahu, and see this as more of a philosophical disagreement. And I am speaking of western tropical astrology.

I think that the relation between the signs determines the aspect, rather than the degree determining the aspect. Most of the time sign and the degree aspect are in accord. But when they are not, I tend to think that the relationship between the signs clearly dominates over the orb of the degree [or what rahu refers to as the mathematically derived aspect].

For example in your case with Moon in Aq and Mars in Cancer; the two planets are five signs apart. They do not trine by sign, so the harmony that accompanies a true trine by sign is quite lost here. What good is it to say that they trine by orb but have nothing harmonious in common by sign, compared to say if Moon were in Gemini? After all, planets that are 5 signs apart are traditionally identified as disjunct, meaning that they are averse by sign: they do not see or regard each other. How then can they enjoy the easy energy of the trine when they do not see each other? Practically speaking, what would that look like?

Of course it is up to you to decide by practice and experience to see what is most descriptive for you. And there are out of sign aspects, as these examples are often referred to, that not averse by sign but still offer up a problem, like when planets square by degree but trine by sign.

But over all I think it keeps it simpler, cleaner and more internally logical to look at the aspects as a function of the sign they are in. And if they are in sign AND close by degree, then that amplifies the aspectual influence.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Last edited:
Top