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
lihin



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

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 1:49 pm    Post subject: Social integration of astrologers Reply with quote

Good afternoon,

Obviously, in most circumstances one fares socially 'better' with less probability of malefic Martian events, if one swims in the theological and political main currents of the society one lives in. "When in Rome do as the Romans".

Since religions, scientific paradigms and the like come and go like sand castles at high tides, there is no honour lost by preferring a rather non-abrasive life style in this regard. After a shift of religion by conquest, of which history is replete with examples, many including astrologers convert, more or less by 'free will', to the new dominant state religion, e. g. Julius Firmicus Maternus, a noble Roman citizen, to Christianity, fortunately for us after having written his outstanding compendium of (deterministic) Hellenistic astrology.

Elsewhere at Skyskript one can read a translation of an autobiographic book by a 20th century German astrologer who was forced to work astrologically for high SS officers.

More on topic, the astrological delineation of 'moral' behaviour in a moralistic way, heavily influenced by current social and theological assumptions, can easily lead to subjective judgemental opinions on natives. Patriarchal, patrilineal (inheritance chiefly via males) societies, to attempt to assure that children be correctly attributed to certain fathers, had little choice but to inflict heavy restrictions on sexual behaviour of females. DNA paternity tests are a rather recent technological development.

One might also call to mind that, judged by common moral criteria, some of the most offensive men in history never regretted or apologised for any of their acts and died natural deaths whilst in office and / or in high social esteem, for example Lucius Cornelius Sulla (see Maternus' book), Joseph Stalin and Francisco Franco.

In many societies, some of them matriarchal, some not, promiscuous courtesans of one or both sexes were held in high social and / or religious esteem, their company and services sought and remunerated by prominent citizens and by worshippers of e. g. the Goddess Aphrodite.

In my humble opinion astrologers and other advisers do well by clearly and lucidly reading and delineating the data, not by passing their own moral judgements on their clients or, worse, by abusing consultation with hidden agendas of religious missionary intent. This, however, does not exclude awareness of possible balance in the chart provided by philosophic or religious activities nor of prominence in these fields, should such be indicated.

Best regards,

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



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1381

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

. . .

Last edited by ### on Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3205
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"
Quote:
So the popular game among traditional astrologers of beating each other on the head with weighty volumes is a foolish one. There are those who like to play ‘My authority is older than yours’. Others prefer the variant ‘My authority is more obscure than yours’ – if you can base the whole of your astrology on the work of someone whom nobody else has ever heard of, you’ve really got something!"

It seems Frawley can play the game as well as anyone!


It isn't really a game. He's pointing out a game of one-upmanship (I've read more than you) or a spin on a propaganda technique or false logic: appeal to authority. Although admittedly this is a difficult one to avoid. A popular example is "Aristotle said the appeal to authority is the worst form of logic." Notice the appeal to Aristotle's authority.

The fact that this or that authority said this or that or the fact that one authority predates another is irrelevant. Is what they said true should be the criteria. Valens is not superior to that which came after him because he came first or early on. If in fact Valens' astrology is superior it is because of the truth of its internal structure, not because it is old.

On the other hand the moderns are equally wrong when they criticize traditional astrology on the grounds that it is "old" and out of date. Traditional astrology should stand or fall on its merits not its age. T

I recall many years ago on this Forum disagreeing with something or other and my exasperated opponent said, "But Bonatti said so!" He may have, and he may have had good reasons, but it takes more than that to make it true.

Still we're all entitled to our beliefs and opinions and we're not all going to agree on all of them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nixx



Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Geoffrey wrote:
However, the point I was making was that the word 'Christian' never appears again in the book, which means Lilly did not need to refer to it again or explain the title - everybody would have known why he put that word in the title. The reason was not erudite or obscure, it was common cultural currency at that time.

Geoffrey


Well I suppose one would need to know a fair bit about his demographic. Perhaps erroneously I understood it as a simple title, i.e he defined himself as a Christian and also believed idealist abstract models, although he may not have known much about Horoscopic roots, enabled him to know more about the future than he would have done otherwise. So on the face of it a coherent title, in his mind, for the book.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nixx



Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kirk wrote:
Yes, that is all obvious enough, don't you think?



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.

More seriously the idea astrolgers can't comment on moral issues is a nonsense since Horoscopy is a cultural or cognitive construct shaped and informed by all sorts of values. For example Jupiter is seen as a benefic and one of it's meanings is hope, i.e hope is a 'good' or something beneficial.

This gets me thinking about how the early Hellenists thought about sexual fidelity and monogamy and how this did, if it did, permeate into their Horoscopic semantics, anyone know ....?

I don't follow Lihin's train of thought, but we do know of cultures and subcultures where the concept of ''unfaithfulness'' does not exist as a person's sexuality is not owned or promised to another. So one would need to find out more as to the psychic context before imposing one's own morality into any guidance or advice. If someone said I'm finding it hard to trust the wife and the astrologer said I see promiscuity on her chart and the chap turns round and says so what it's an open marriage or somesuch then the astrologer ought to feel like a right numpty.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
###



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1381

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

. . .

Last edited by ### on Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:53 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3205
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I don't follow Lihin's train of thought, but we do know of cultures and subcultures where the concept of ''unfaithfulness'' does not exist as a person's sexuality is not owned or promised to another.


But then it isn't cheating, is it? Put another way, if a man is in a polygamous relationship, he is not cheating on his other four wives when he sleeps with the 5th. Lilly, on the other hand is referring to monogamous relationships, so when the same guy above sleeps with another woman, he is cheating on his wife. That is not judgmental. It is a violation of an oath. In the polygamous relationship it is not a violation of an oath, so it is not cheating.

Lihin seems to be objecting to the fact that what is OK in A's worldview is not OK in B's. I don't follow that either. Regardless, when Lilly is describing adultery, he is not being intolerant of a particular worldview that he never experienced. He is discussing his astrology within the world that he lived. What is the problem with that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nixx



Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kirk wrote:
Quote:
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.

More seriously . . .


Not funny. Nor appropriate.


No arguments there. I would be quite happy with the stat that 90% of what I said before the age of 35 on reflection was bordering on idiocy, so we must be tolerant when we point out certain naivities amongst the younger or more cognitively compromised brethren herein. After all it is the 'belief' our mentalities are reflected in these Platonic models which brings us together here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nixx



Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tom wrote:
But then it isn't cheating, is it? Put another way, if a man is in a polygamous relationship, he is not cheating on his other four wives when he sleeps with the 5th. Lilly, on the other hand is referring to monogamous relationships, so when the same guy above sleeps with another woman, he is cheating on his wife. That is not judgmental. It is a violation of an oath. In the polygamous relationship it is not a violation of an oath, so it is not cheating.

Lihin seems to be objecting to the fact that what is OK in A's worldview is not OK in B's. I don't follow that either. Regardless, when Lilly is describing adultery, he is not being intolerant of a particular worldview that he never experienced. He is discussing his astrology within the world that he lived. What is the problem with that?


I don't personally know much about Lilly's context, but assuming this is the case then obviously the above is coherent and sensible and he has the 'right' to comment on this matter in this way as it is being presented to him as a minus or a problem for one or more persons involved. Most of the time as far as I know monogamy has been a cultural reality, or at least it has been in recent centuries in most of the world. It may be going back 10's of thousands of years psychological dynamcis were very different in many places.

As I said before I don't quite follow Lihin's slant here. Clearly if you go and see an astrologer and you enter an environment shaped by them whether this is the wall colour, chair, selcetion of teas, reliance on the works of Lilly as opposed to Valens or Jones, etc .. you are already having a considerable amount of their 'morality' imposed upon you, so how Lihin is processing these realities I know not?

Anyway what interests me here is how monogamy was, or wasn't, built into the Horoscopic semantics early doors, ie. before Valens.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
###



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1381

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

. . .

Last edited by ### on Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:52 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: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:02 am    Post subject: Levels of social behaviour Reply with quote

Good morning,

My intention is neither a- nor anti-religious nor -moral but rather to point out that such phenomena, like all others, are subject to appearance and disappearance, thus only relatively less transient than phenomena of even shorter duration.

It seems appropriate to distinguish amongst various levels of social behaviour. Assuming a patriarchal social environment at least outwardly demanding strict monogamous behaviour (a very rare phenomenon amongst species, not exhibited by any primates) from both human sexes, one can ask whether and to what extent there is corresponding inner identification and commitment to such norms by the members of such a society. If not, taking such vows amounts to a simple formality without intention of compliance. Generally, behaviour slightly 'below the surface', often called 'hypocritical', is quite different from official norms.

Official norms are occasionally abrogated, for example in Christian Germany after 1648 where polygamy was permitted and encouraged to restore the population decimated in the 30 Years War.

In the case of traditional patriarchal Islamic society, for example, things are even more complex due to the permission, even encouragement of polygamy for males, legality for both sexes to own slaves, and, amongst certain significant minorities, permission and encouragement of temporary marriages by both males and females.

In classical, patriarchal Hellenistic civilisation, free citizens, especially males, were, except for coercion, usually free to unfold their sexuality, the ideal apparently having been active bi-sexuality, although the passive role in male homosexual relations was considered inferior to the active one. Females, if they were qualified by nature and so inclined, could become highly respected, wealthy courtesans.

In ancient Egyptian society the ideal marriage was considered to be between sister and brother, 'hierogamy', this best preserving the qualities of physical and material inheritance. Hierogamy was practised, especially amongst nobility, until the end of the Ptolemaic dynasty. It was forbidden by the later Roman rulers.

In originally matriarchal Mesopotamian society, women were Priestesses and High Priestesses of Ishtar (Aprhodite). Sexual relationships with them were a vital part of the worship of this Goddess.

If one considers for a moment the other side of the coin, one finds that acts considered the most heinous crimes in civilian life become deeds of heroism in warfare.

Even amongst the seven planets visible to unaided human sight, there are endless combinations and permutations of positions. This kalaidoscope is reflected in human societies with their myriad variations of morals, customs, behaviours, religions, etc. Fascinating!

Best regards,

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



Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 245

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm...so how does the diversity of sexual norms across cultures prevent the prediction of potential unfaithfulness?

Is your issue with the word "unfaithfulness" itself where monogamy is assumed as the moral standard?

I do not think that an astrologer should delineate unfaithfulness without the permission and request of the querent, but I think that if it is being requested it is a valid issue. In this case, it is prudent to discuss about the indicators of unfaithfulness, especially because we wouldn't want to make a false accusation and destroy a hitherto honest, monogamous relationship.


Would like to hear your thoughts,

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



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1776
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i have been following this thread with interest and enjoyment.

i think context is relevant which is how i view lihin's comments as wanting to emphasize. i especially liked Geoffrey's initial response to the thread mentioning how lihin is being dumped on and giving the example of "christian" in the title of lillys book 'christian astrology'.. this was followed with a link from nixx highlighting the same thinking thanks to Frawley..which came first? lol.. good stuff either way! all and all it forces ( or not) a person to consider the cultural context values and ideals are held within which i think is an important exercise for astrologers of all stripes to consider..

as for unfaithfulness in relationships in a contemporary context, i think it is a good question to ask of what the astro signatures if any, are... my own thought on this is some sort of venus/saturn hard aspect and mostly a problem to do with saturn in connection to relating to others. however, i also believe saturn can be very loyal and steadfast depending on how everything is connected in a chart.. these are just some simple astro ideas i would consider.. soft verses hard aspect between mars/venus might be another area to consider. i am not sure what the traditional and ancient authorities say, other then the examples cited up above..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
###



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1381

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

. . .

Last edited by ### on Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:51 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james_m



Joined: 05 Dec 2011
Posts: 1776
Location: vancouver island

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kirk,
perhaps it hinges on whether saturn is operating in a good or bad sense.. i think it is sometimes difficult to tell just off the chart..
cheers james
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 2 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