skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Godfather of Modernity: The Alan Leo Legacy Vol. One - Early Astrological Journals 1890-1912, compiled by Philip M Graves
Reviewed by Deborah Houlding
Lilly's Considerations
compiled by D. Houlding
Book II of Carmen Astrologicum by Dorotheus
translated by David Pingree
Compiled by Deborah Houlding
The Babylonian Astrolabe: the Calendar of Creation, by Rumen K. Kolev
Reviewed by Gill Zukovskis

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Unfaithfulness in Natal,Revolution and Directions
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
###



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1381

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

. . .

Last edited by ### on Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:50 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:35 am    Post subject: Faith and 'unfaithful' Reply with quote

Good morning,

If one read the definitions of 'faith' at Wiktionary, one finds no reference to sexual morals. In the definitions of 'faithful', monogamous conduct is the last of 5 definitions, in those of 'unfaithful', adultery likewise the last of five.

If mutual sincere intent is involved in pledges, their non-observance without duress is a breach of fidelity, vows of sexual behaviour within the framework of the given society being one amongst many examples.

Since the restricted meanings of 'unfaithfulness' and even more so of 'cheating' in this thread have usually presupposed (heterosexual?) monogamy (by the way there are at least two types: 1. lifetime sole sexual mate and 2. sequential exclusive sexual mates) of both sexes as the norm, may they be deemed suboptimal in the context of astrology?

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Larxene



Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 268

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear lihin,

I take it you find the delineation of "unfaithfulness" suboptimal because people can have different understandings of the word due to individual, cultural, whatever-al differences and imperatives?

If so, then perhaps you can suggest to the author to define unfaithfulness before asking for delineative techniques.

However, for those people who really are searching for techniques to determine whether a potential partner might be or might end up having sexual intercourse with another person whilst committed to a monogamous relationship, the answers to this question are indeed very optimal.


~Larxene<3~
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 3:25 pm    Post subject: Context Reply with quote

Good afternoon,

IF, in a specific astrological consultation setting, astrologer and client(s) agree with defining 'unfaithfulness' as any sexual relations by either males or females other than strict heterosexual monogamy (lifelong or sequential), why should one object?

Generalisation of such a definition is quite a different matter. Moreover, the underlying Hellenistic and / or Mediaeval astrological doctrines may well not be based on this definition. To apply it anyway may lead to material astrological misreadings.

Another significant part of the question would be whether adoption of such a definition might obscure the participants' views of assumptions and / or recognitions of major illusions about human behaviour, the delusions from which might be experienced quite painfully. Extreme 'virtue' can be vicious.

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Larxene



Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 268

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello lihin,


"Moreover, the underlying Hellenistic and/or Mediaeval astrological doctrines may well not be based on this definition. To apply it anyway may lead to material astrological misreadings."

That is correct, which is why one needs to read the text on which the technique is based and furnish it with the correct context, which should be available in the original text. Indeed, cgreen did state that he read about Lilly's method and asked about what forumers read about unfaithfulness.


"Extreme 'virtue' can be vicious."

The problem is, what is moderate and what is extreme? What is extreme in one ethical system may not be extreme in another. And you and I probably know from experience that different people follow different systems, and to different degrees.


"...whether adoption of such a definition might obscure the participants' views of assumptions and/or recognitions of major illusions about human behaviour, the delusions from which might be experienced quite painfully."

However, it is not up to the astrologer to decide whether the underlying assumptions are the 'correct' ones or not. See my previous point.

Consider this: a person who doesn't follow a sexual monogamy paradigm probably wouldn't ask such a question anyway. It is for those under this paradigm that the technique is relevant. Should we refuse such requests?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zoomaster



Joined: 31 Jul 2010
Posts: 28
Location: Hyderabad, India

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lihin, I see your point regarding the latent patriarchal underpinnings of many medieval and classical works. I agree that much of what is written in these texts, you cite Lilly in particular, sounds somewhat 'sex-negative.'

However, I don't think a matriarchal 'reinterpretation' is necessary. The aphorisms apply to men and women equally.

Really what they are referring to with these Venus/Mars configurations is the predilection of the native to lie or be dishonest regarding sexual matters. This is because most individuals (but obviously not ALL individuals) value transparency in their interpersonal relationships.

There are some people whose nativities sort of 'encourage' them to be opaque rather than transparent regarding their relations. I'm not judging this...just commenting that one can't really expect a native born with Venus strongly configured with Mars, or vice versa, to live up to the ideal of transparency.

The problem is when one person expects something of the other person...and the other person cannot fulfill this expectation.

Again, no one is at fault here. It could be that individuals with 'lecherous' nativities are here to teach us some very important lessons!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul
Moderator


Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 1144

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nixx wrote:

You say so but if you look at comments here and elsewhere you do wonder. Young Paul is a notorious amoralist and one would assume if you entered his Horary space for a good time to go on a mission to kill a hundred 3yr old children in a 13 hr time period he would regard it as his duty to provide you the ''optimal' moment. He may not if reality appeared in his conceptual consciousness, or you would hope his senses appeared.


Please do not consider yourself wise enough or knowledgeable enough to assume to know what I would or would not do.

'One would assume' nothing of the sort.

For the record, my name is just 'Paul', not 'Young Paul'. Perhaps, based on your later statement regarding your own age, you feel that by prefixing my name with 'Young' you hope to degrade my points. Who knows.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 11:58 am    Post subject: Mathesis Reply with quote

Good afternoon,

On a positive note one might recommend reading Julius Firmicus Maternus' delineations in his Mathesis, a complete, annotated translation of which by James H. Holden was recently published. Maternus' style and contents are amongst my favourites. They stand in stark contrast to the exclusively pastel-coloured ones found in many 20th century astrological textbooks and are not for the faint of heart. On nearly all occasions i find combinations of Maternus' delineations very reliable, even 'shockingly' so, including matters of moral and sexual behaviour.

Maternus explicitly states that the delineations are NOT to be used in an isolated way but combined and applied according to the structures of the chart.

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
StellarTiggy



Joined: 17 May 2011
Posts: 148

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ile wrote:


Lot of the Unchastity of Women (Asc + Mars - Moon) is also not to be neglected. This formula given by Al-Biruni is also given to other similar lots:
- Misconduct by women
- Intercourse of women with men.

Lot of Sexual Unions (ASC + DC - Venus) is also informative.

Trickery and deception of men and women (Asc + Venus - Sun).
This one was exactly on Solar Return DSC in the year when my friend's wife cheated on him.


These are all sexist and biased in favor of men. Also it would be informative to find out whether your friend has cheated on his wife and which Solar Return placements fell with that.

These formulas by their very title "misconduct by women, intercourse of women with men" are misogynistic. Why shouldn't they be neglected, because male infidelity is accepted, expected, and promulgated by just about every culture?


Last edited by StellarTiggy on Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:12 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
StellarTiggy



Joined: 17 May 2011
Posts: 148

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

zoomaster wrote:
Lihin, I see your point regarding the latent patriarchal underpinnings of many medieval and classical works. I agree that much of what is written in these texts, you cite Lilly in particular, sounds somewhat 'sex-negative.'

However, I don't think a matriarchal 'reinterpretation' is necessary. The aphorisms apply to men and women equally.


Really, you don't think matriarchal reinterpretation is necessary? Just out of curiosity, are you male?

Secondly, where did you get the idea that the aphorisms apply to men and women equally? Do they sound as if they were applied equally? Because from what I've been reading it looks like they have not only been biased but they are even titled in such a way, as to pass down only that, which is biased, instead of bringing in the idea that infidelity is inherently sex-blind. Throughout the course of this discussion have you wondered why there are so many of these Lots and/or "aphorisms" geared specifically towards the "unscrupulous behavior" of women, and we have little to show for the same principle in the unscrupulous behavior of men? Of course it was discriminatory! And no, unless you can find a legitimate translation of an ancient work that specifically explains of the equality you are mentioning, don't assume there was any equality in these works.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:59 am    Post subject: Cultural biases Reply with quote

Good morning,

In my humble opinion, Ms Stella Tiggy's points are mostly valid. In other threads, e. g. on the Third House of the Goddess, i have mentioned the increased pervasive, patriarchal, Abrahamic-monotheistic influence in Mediaeval compared to Hellenistic astrologies. One might, however, recall that both the Brahmin Indian and the ancient Greek tribes were patriarchal. Thus, it could only be expected that these values and attitudes are reflected in the corresponding astrologies.

Other similar items are ex. gr. preference for the right to the left, for the light to the dark, for the 'masculine' to the 'feminine'. The ancient texts seldom use 'active' and 'passive' that would be applicable in matriarchies as well as patriarchies with reversed gender roles. Many stringent rules of patriarchy concern patrilineal inheritance of property that precludes female promiscuity because, until quite recently, it was quite difficult or impossible to clearly establish fatherhood in cases of polyandrous mothers. So indeed, in practice patriarchal societies have often de jure and almost always de facto accorded liberties of sexual conduct to men but denied them to most women, at least to 'virtuous' ones.

Since most observation of real conduct leads to the conclusion that homo sapiens, like other primates, is more likely polygamous-polyandrous than monoandrous-monogamous, why should one object to widening the delineations of some of the astrological lots to apply equally to both sexes, if such widening respects the underlying astrological symbols?

On the other hand, equivalence of 'matriarchy' to a kind of 'paradise' and 'partriarchy' to a kind of 'inferno' is in my humble opinion illusory, often part of a political ambition to (re)establish matriarchy in the particular interest of some females. Are female tyrants by nature milder than their male counterparts? Given the balances between Benefics and Malefics, generation and corruption, etc., human society, matriarchal or patriarchal, might best be compared to a 'purgatorio', mitigated when its members of both sexes seek to behave towards each other with respect, understanding and - occasionally - even love.

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
StellarTiggy



Joined: 17 May 2011
Posts: 148

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:50 pm    Post subject: Re: Cultural biases Reply with quote

lihin wrote:
Since most observation of real conduct leads to the conclusion that homo sapiens, like other primates, is more likely polygamous-polyandrous than monoandrous-monogamous, why should one object to widening the delineations of some of the astrological lots to apply equally to both sexes, if such widening respects the underlying astrological symbols? lihin


Hi Lihin,

I appreciate your support. The reason I am opposed to widening it is because it isn't clear at this time whether they really do apply equally. There should be a panel of astrologers who sits down and does the due diligence, and collects the charts of cheating men to see whether the Lots created for women also apply to the cheating men. Then, assuming the Lots do apply equally (which I highly doubt they will) they should be renamed to account for both sexes.

This is the point: there is an understanding of why these sexist scripts have survived and the fact that they were passed along from one sexist society to the next (let us call it what it is), but where will this stop? Where can we stop and say "let the discrimination stop" and take action to see whether these actually hold up for both sexes in practice? And if they don't, how can we, as astrologers, take an ethical stance on such a one-sided deal?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 8:44 pm    Post subject: Realistic? Reply with quote

Good evening,

Why 'cheating'? Why not just fulfilment and expression of human nature? Enjoyment, pleasure, lust, love, beauty - all Venusian, Benefic! It looks to me (new highest-level, illustrative examples from the USofA have just become public) that human monoandry and monogamy are mostly illusory, maintained if at all for appearances' sake and perhaps to underscore the adage, "forbidden fruits taste better".

Genders and sexual relations are (fortunately) realities. To me the word 'sexism' means little to nothing. 'Gender discrimination' is a more familiar expression.

May one doubt if the Mediaeval astrology authors were purposefully engaged in gender discrimination? To me it seems more likely they applied astrological symbols to their social environments that were Abrahamic monotheistic and patriarchal, defining social gender roles in set ways.

Several of the lots can differ (depending on the author) from males to females. Personally, i have yet to see any consensus on anything astrological past or present, so i doubt that a panel might achieve the desired results. Another underlying issue might be that 'usual' social gender roles may strongly oscillate between matriarchies and patriarchies.

In my own practice, not seeking to condemn anyone who is polyandrous or polygamous, bisexual or abstinent, if the client expresses particular interest in this domain, i delineate the basic sexual behaviour as it is indicated by the natal chart, ex. gr. configurations of Malefics with Venus, 5th and 7th places. The lots are at best a complement. However, one thing many apparently forget is that the most frequent delineation of anything is 'middling'.

Another item is that reality often seems not to accord itself to current or other notions of 'morals' and 'ethics'. One can cite the examples of Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix and of Joseph Stalin. The famous German playwright Bertold Brecht wrote, "Erst kommt das Fressen und dann kommt die Moral." (First comes the eat and then come the morals.) If we like to wear rose-coloured moralistic spectacles, we might read charts better by removing them. Many people seem reluctant to consider that the sums of good and benefic may be about the same as those of evil and malefic.

Might one observe that, to the best of my feeble current knowledge, there is still no reliable way to ascertain the gender of the native from a natal chart?

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
StellarTiggy



Joined: 17 May 2011
Posts: 148

Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You can call it gender discrimination, but in actuality is discrimination based on sex and not gender.

Quote:
Why 'cheating'? Why not just fulfilment and expression of human nature? Enjoyment, pleasure, lust, love, beauty - all Venusian, Benefic! It looks to me (new highest-level, illustrative examples from the USofA have just become public) that human monoandry and monogamy are mostly illusory, maintained if at all for appearances' sake and perhaps to underscore the adage, "forbidden fruits taste better".


Why cheating? because that is what it came down in those societies. During those times, for a woman, just being out in public was considered unscrupulous behavior. Enjoyment, pleasure, lust, love, and beauty are all fantastic EXCEPT at the expense of another person OR with the use of deception and trickery to attain a means. Those are the domains of Saturn and Neptune. Are you saying doing something that would hurt another person (usually a woman) is enjoyable? Is this really what you're arguing?

What it sounds like to me, is that you're trying to fit what is happening in our everyday lives to the mold of ancient scripts. Either that, or trying to fit what the ancients have said to fit what is happening in society. But what you are acknowledging is that infidelity in and of itself is a normalized behavior. I am willing to bet, that if society normalized murder (an eye for an eye, for example) you'd probably be fitting a few astrological aphorisms to try and justify why it is occurring! You'd say, "OH! It's that Lot! The one from Saturn to Mars and equally from the Ascendant!"

To me, it sounds like you're confusing things. You're making the waters muddy. Eh, again, call it what you will! It's a shame you feel that normalized behavior should be used to justify some kind of moralistic (or that which is amoral) reality. Why would you even use such notable public figures? Men in those positions are hardly representative of the population. Presidents, governors, generals, and other notable figures are often feel differently about themselves than the average person. They feel they are "special" and should be allowed to indulge regardless of who it hurts.

As for the Lots being able to tell sex, no, but why do you feel that is a justification for NOT doing the work? You'd still need to sit down with the charts of "unchaste" men and figure out if the Lots work identically in their charts. I keep seeing you try to make excuses for avoiding this most significant point.

And again, from an ethical standpoint this hasn't even been addressed! I keep seeing excuse after excuse as to why these issues should not be addressed. I don't know if the Lots discriminate against sex, but I know people do! And so, if a husband has cheated on his wife dozens of times but suspects his wife of cheating on him once, an astrologer may see the husband as justified in his suspicion while the husband's indiscretions have been completely ignored.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 6:45 am    Post subject: Participation Reply with quote

Good morning,

Organisation of human, be it matriarchal, patriarchal or mixed (despite occasional contrary outward appearances, the last form seems to be by far prevalent), is methinks somewhat more complex than 'gender discrimination' alone might suggest. In matriarchies, males are 'victims' of gender discrimination, as we can observe today in societies and subcultures where de facto matriarchy reigns.

Whoever says 'woman and man' can consequentially pass from the duad to the triad to include 'child'. Until quite recently using gene tests of paternity, it was, i must repeat, impossible to establish fatherhood required for patrilineal inheritance without severely restricting the sexual liberties of females. Not love but property was the primary consideration.

If anyone would like, we could examine some of the Hellenistic and / or Mediaeval basic delineations concerning sexual behaviour individually, attempt to determine if and why they are appropriate for both sexes and, depending on findings, try to edit the delineations according to the adage,

"What is good for the gander is good for the goose."

May i might i suggest we take for example Book VII, Sections 12 to 25 of Mathesis by Senator Julius Firmicus Maternus as a base?

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated