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:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

What do you say to people with bad and difficult charts?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
waybread



Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 872
Location: Canada

Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

muchacho, I take your point that both "free will" and determinism are illusions. Unfortunately, most of us don't live in the blissful world of the spiritual masters. We have to decide (whether freely or fatalistically) what to cook for dinner and or whether to stop at the bank. We can do this with a high or low level of spirituality, but at some level, somebody has to take out the trash and make a few decisions regarding the physical body. Seeing everything as One is super, but humans survive as a species because we are able to make discriminating choices-- even if free will is illusory.

My thinking was highly influenced by the old Jane Roberts "Seth" books. Basically Roberts channeled a disincarnate entity called Seth, who saw the expansion of creativity as one of the basic principles of the universe. This creativity ranges from the evolution of new species, to the expansion of the universe, to the artist's canvas. In this vastly creative universe, people do make choices, although these are limited both by physical realities (on our earth plane) as well as by previous choices we have made.

Seth's big lesson is that humans create their own reality.

The books have no astrological content to the best of my recollection, but they can inform astrological discussions on a "nature of reality" level.

http://www.gestaltreality.com/articles/the-seth-material/

“You create your own difficulties. This is true for each individual. The inner psychological state is projected outward, gaining physical reality — and this regardless of the nature of the psychological state. … The rules apply to everyone. You can use them for your own benefit and change your own conditions once you realize what they are."

“You cannot escape your own attitudes, for they will form the nature of what you see. Quite literally you see what you want to see; and you see your own thoughts and emotional attitudes materialized in physical form. If changes are to occur, they must be mental and psychic changes. These will be reflected in your environment. Negative, distrustful, fearful, or degrading attitudes toward anyone work against the self.”

These quotes bring us full circle to the OP. While I believe that on the physical plane, physical problems can be objectively real, the horoscope surely tells us a lot about how the native experiences the world.

Whether one practices western traditional or modern, Vedic, Uranian, or some other form of astrology; as Robert Hand put it, we can suggest to people the most empowering uses of the charts. Based on my personal experience, I do think the universe notices when we make the attempt to cast a given horoscope issue in a more empowering manner, even in small ways. Mercury square Saturn in the 8th may still be a bearcat, but we can begin to "listen" to them, inquire of them as to their motives and objectives, and then look for a way to meet both of their needs.

We can also begin to assume some responsibility (not guilt) for acknowledging the influence we have had on negative events in our lives, and then make some effort to input some corrections.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
muchacho



Joined: 11 Jul 2014
Posts: 15

Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Waybread,

I think we are on the same page here. Decisions do happen and things get done. To the question "Who done it?" the average human (from the perspective of MANY) will answer "I did it" and the master will probably just remain silent because from the perspective of ONE things get done but there is no doer to be found and those who claim doership are just fictional characters that falsely assume that they are in charge. But the fictional character plane is exactly what we are dealing with in astrology. So in that sense, it's okay to go with the assumption of free will.

I never read the Seth books. I am more familiar with the Abraham-Hicks material. Jerry Hicks was very much into the Seth books, especially the idea that humans create their own reality. But somehow Seth never really explained HOW humans create their own reality. That was his big question and later when his wife Esther started channeling herself, that's what the channeled material mostly was about, how humans create their own reality. So it's somehow a continuation of what has been started with Seth.

Abraham's big lesson is that humans create their own reality and that their emotions tell them how they are doing.

There are also some rare comments about astrology.

And since you mention Seth, he once said that "Spontaneity has its own order" which I think is what we are both trying to say here. Although we may differ on how much is actually spontaneity and how much is order.

Which brings us back to the OP. From my perspective, there are no inherently bad or difficult charts. And you probably wouldn't go so far if I understood you correctly?


Last edited by muchacho on Tue Jul 22, 2014 2:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Sternbach



Joined: 01 Mar 2014
Posts: 445
Location: Switzerland

Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Waybread and Muchacho,

Surely we all have a perception of ourselves freely making choices. Whether this is merely an illusion may not make much difference practically but it's an appropriate topic for philosophical study nevertheless. (Incidentally, my grandfather, a professor of philosophy, wrote a whole book dedicated just to this.) I think, Eastern philosophies may provide us with some clues here, regardless of non-dualism being a first-hand experience for us or not. So I look forward to Muchacho's ideas on thought processes and decision making.

Our personal answer to this question of free will verses determinism however is part of our philosophy of life, and this does make a big difference practically! Because, as Jane Robert's trance personality Seth said, we create our experienced reality largely based on what we believe, and our experiences will reflect and reinforce our beliefs.

The only mention of astrology by Seth that I'm aware of is in The Unknown Reality, Vol. 2. Seth doesn't deny astrology's basic validity but, of course, doesn't see it as deterministic either. According to him, always the individual exists in an infinite framework of “probabilities” - alternative experiences that can physically manifest themselves, or not. This is a concept related to quantum mechanics.

What I think may be particularly relevant to astrology is Jane Roberts' Aspect Psychology in “Adventures in Consciousness”, describing how our various “archetypal” selves are tuning into different levels of psychological reality.

Quite clearly, astrology demonstrates the basic truth of how we are creating our physical experiences, as the symbols in the chart are often at once manifest internally as well as externally.

As above, so below
As within, so without


Michael
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
muchacho



Joined: 11 Jul 2014
Posts: 15

Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael Sternbach wrote:
Muchacho,

Yes, Eastern philosophies generally take a non-dual outlook on reality. To you, this seems to imply that there is neither free will nor predestination.

Let's talk about this further. Arrow

Michael,

Actually, the question of volition has no answer. The question will just fall by the wayside and disappear and will be a non-issue after it has been seen through. But if you want to call it neither free will nor predestination, that's fine with me because basically we are talking about an absence (which does not mean the presence of something else).

We have to keep in mind that both volition (free will) and non-volition (predestination) are stories connected to a fictional separate entity that in reality does not exist. Which means without that separate entity, there's no need for either of these stories. Same goes for the question about purpose.

So, seeing through the myth of separate entities is the only way the question of volition can be put to rest once and for all. But, unfortunately, that cannot be done via mental investigation because it has to be seen from the perspective that is non-conceptual, prior to mind/intellect.

What can be done, however, is showing that volition is just a concept. And that can be done by investigating how your decisions come about. You will see that you can do and think what you want but if you take a step further back and ask why you want what you want, then you will probably run out of answers. Volition will be exposed as a mere assumption, a conclusion after the fact.

However, the funny thing about this investigation is (which brings us back to my original point) that it will be without any practical consequences. Lets say you conclude that predestination is the case, and free will false. As long as you can remember that conclusion, it will influence the way you look into the world. But when push comes to shove and you are fully occupied with what's going on here and now and you don't remember your conclusion anymore, you will fall back into your default mode of a separate volitional person which takes free will for real.

So, from the position of a separate entity, believing in free will is not a problem and just a natural consequence. Believing in predestination from a position of a separate entity, however, is a problem because it's against all natural instincts and creates a split mind situation.

That's why I say volition discussions don't go anywhere and don't solve anything. From the position of a separate entity we can't help but take free will for real. It just comes with the territory.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
muchacho



Joined: 11 Jul 2014
Posts: 15

Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael,

What Seth says there seems to be in alignment with what I've heard Abraham-Hicks say about astrology. It's all about potentials and actually more about probabilities than possibilities.

Do you know if Seth believes in the concept of souls?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
waybread



Joined: 05 Mar 2009
Posts: 872
Location: Canada

Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muchacho wrote:

Quote:
Which brings us back to the OP. From my perspective, there are no inherently bad or difficult charts. And you probably wouldn't go so far if I understood you correctly?


It's been years since I read the Seth books, but the site linked in my previous post offers a good refresher. The "who" or "what" is a non-physical entity that persists through many incarnations. I understand it in terms "soul" but this carries sectarian connotations that are not part of the Seth message. We experience human life on an "outer" embodied and ego-driven physical level, but our unconscious motivations are driven by the interior or soul-like entity.

This entity is part of "All-That-Is", for whom the Christian word "God" is only an approximation. There is nothing (including each of us on a bad day) that isn't part of All-That-Is.

From the linked site:

"The mental energy of God is the composite substance of all things, including all beings, all universes, and all events and phenomena. God’s consciousness extends into all things as they are created, and is therefore omnipresent. For these reasons, all things in existence, including physical matter, have life and consciousness. God wishes to experience existence in all its forms and ramifications, and through its creations is able to do this. God is therefore dynamic and ever-changing and shares in the failures, triumphs, perfections and imperfections of its creations. The individuals that exist within God, though part of God, have free will and self-determination. If there is reality outside of God, the Seth personality was not aware of it.["

This "free will" (not a concept I like, BTW) fundamentally consists of our ability to create our own realities through our thinking and experiencing. If we experience life in an inherently pessimistic manner, then the things we dislike or fear are apt to manifest materially. If we maintain a constructive, positive, friendly outlook, then we organize our material manifestations to follow suit.

This is why I think astrologers, whether western traditional, modern, Vedic, or what-have-you do well to encourage constructive horoscope interpretations. This isn't because modern astrologers want to be all nicey-nice and can't handle bad news. It is because astrologers can make a tough situation harder to bear for a vulnerable and unhappy native.

We have to be careful here, as we've all heard of evangelical Christian ministers who encourage their congregation to visualize getting wealthy. I don't think Seth's teachings work this way; I think it would be more to experience abundance at whatever level of financial resources one had.

So to respond to your final comments to me, on an esoteric level, of course, there are no bad charts. Humans are merely particles of All-That-Is experiencing life in all of its various ups and downs. (I sometimes say, "God doesn't make mistakes.")

However, most of us have to live in a physical plane, even if well-informed by an esoteric philosophy. This afternoon, for example, I need to get a couple of documents notarized, fax one of them, and buy some dog food (or our dog will be hungry.) Even if I get my head around the Cosmic Oneness of everything, and that there is no Me here and no Dog over there, it doesn't seem quite right to let her suffer (within her canine universe.)

I read charts for people, and most people focus on the physical plane. If someone wonders why she's 40 and still single (unhappily so) she doesn't want a metaphysical lecture on the Oneness Of The Everything, so it wouldn't help her for me to tell her so.

And I think we're on the physical plane for a reason. I think we are meant to live in it as our medium of existence in this incarnation; and not just try to outsmart it, out-theorize it, rise above it, or ignore it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Sternbach



Joined: 01 Mar 2014
Posts: 445
Location: Switzerland

Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muchacho wrote:
Quote:
Michael,

What Seth says there seems to be in alignment with what I've heard Abraham-Hicks say about astrology. It's all about potentials and actually more about probabilities than possibilities.


Muchacho,

Yes, Esther Hicks, with the assistance of her husband Jerry, certainly did an amazing job sharing unusual perspectives from a transpersonal source. I'm not familiar with most of their publications, however. I would appreciate a reference to where Abraham-Hicks talked about astrology.

Actually, Seth did give some specific information on how we are creating our personal reality, from various angles. It seems to be a vast and complex topic, however, and it's not easy to put all the pieces of this jig-saw in their place.

Quote:
Do you know if Seth believes in the concept of souls?


Yes, one of his best known books actually has the title Seth Speaks: The Eternal Validity of the Soul. Alternatively, Seth would use terms like "entity", and others. He insisted that we are a part of our soul, inseparable from it. His concept of the whole self was more encompassing than any other I have ever heard of, and he kept expanding it over the years. On the website mentioned above, the following post might give you some idea, even though it is based on material from a rather early period of Seth's activity.

http://www.gestaltreality.com/2013/05/22/the-multidimensional-self/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
muchacho



Joined: 11 Jul 2014
Posts: 15

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2014 4:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Waybread,

Yes, attitude is a very important factor. I fully agree that interpretations should focus on the potentials. However, following the LOA logic of 'like attracts like' or, if we apply this to people, 'people of similar vibrations will be drawn to each other' (birds of a feather flock together) then the astrologer and the client have to be of a similar vibrational level in order to have a meaningful interaction or to get matched up at all. It's not likely that someone all bright and shiny will go to an astrologer that tends to hand out defeatist interpretations. And it's also not likely that someone with a fatalistic attitude will go to an astrologer that believes that everyone is the creator of their own reality and that our thoughts are more influential than the stars and planets. If both are to far apart (vibrationally speaking) then there is no meaningful interaction possible and they probably won't even cross each others paths.

Which I think is an important point to keep in mind if we should talk about 'responsibility' in the context of giving advice and such.

I also fully agree that there is the question of appropriateness. Giving answers to questions the client has never asked is only confusing. As you say, someone fully occupied with the physical plane doesn't want to hear a metaphysical lecture.

waybread wrote:
And I think we're on the physical plane for a reason. I think we are meant to live in it as our medium of existence in this incarnation; and not just try to outsmart it, out-theorize it, rise above it, or ignore it.


As long as 'for a reason' doesn't mean that we are here to learn certain lessons that we didn't learn the last time we were around or that we are here to accomplish some kind of important mission like uplifting humanity, I'll agree.

And yes, the non-physical plane is not better than the physical plane. They are different only in perspective, but not one better than the other, not one more spiritual than the other because there is no separation between physical and non-physical. The physical is an extension of the non-physical. In fact, if we follow the A-H teaching, the physical is the leading edge of creation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
muchacho



Joined: 11 Jul 2014
Posts: 15

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael,

According to A-H, the creation process is very simple, you get back what you are sending out vibrationally. And by the way you feel, you always know if what you are sending out (and therefore what you will get back) is in alignment with your broader intentions or not. That's very precise 'inner guidance' here and now. Which means from that point of view, astrology is just secondary 'outer guidance' and basically superfluous (but also not wrong!). I don't know if Seth has been that clear.

I will dig up some A-H quotes about astrology later and put it in a separate post.

I've read your link about souls and this seems to be going into the direction of what A-H say (I say 'they' because the Abraham entity is a group entity) about this topic (although less technical):

"The mistake that most make, or the assumption that is not accurate that most physical Beings make, is that there is one physical Being, or one physical clump, and one Nonphysical clump that is assigned to that physical clump. And we say, it is not that way. It is a Stream of Consciousness that may flow through you and a tree and a dog, all in the same moment."

This is a whole new perspective on the traditional reincarnation concept.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Sternbach



Joined: 01 Mar 2014
Posts: 445
Location: Switzerland

Posted: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muchacho wrote:
Quote:
According to A-H, the creation process is very simple, you get back what you are sending out vibrationally. And by the way you feel, you always know if what you are sending out (and therefore what you will get back) is in alignment with your broader intentions or not.


A-H has a beautiful as well as practical way to explain the creation process. However, breaking it down a little further, and in the most simple of terms, it seems that our surroundings either mirrors us (including unconscious parts of ours) or complement us in some way. An example for the latter being somebody with a lack of Earth in the natal chart and a weak Saturn position always making Capricorn friends.

Quote:
That's very precise 'inner guidance' here and now. Which means from that point of view, astrology is just secondary 'outer guidance' and basically superfluous (but also not wrong!). I don't know if Seth has been that clear.


Agreed, basically we could find all our answers simply by looking within. To have a suitable mirror can be very helpful sometimes, however.

Seth was really not very elaborate on the topic of astrology, but he certainly would have agreed that inner guidance should always be foremost.

Quote:
I will dig up some A-H quotes about astrology later and put it in a separate post.


I can't wait for it! Lala Happy

Quote:
I've read your link about souls and this seems to be going into the direction of what A-H say (I say 'they' because the Abraham entity is a group entity) about this topic (although less technical):

"The mistake that most make, or the assumption that is not accurate that most physical Beings make, is that there is one physical Being, or one physical clump, and one Nonphysical clump that is assigned to that physical clump. And we say, it is not that way. It is a Stream of Consciousness that may flow through you and a tree and a dog, all in the same moment."

This is a whole new perspective on the traditional reincarnation concept.


That sounds interesting but a little unclear for my taste without further explanation.

Michael
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Larxene



Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 312

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players."


...but still, I prefer to see the world through the lenses of Two, rather than One. Two is better than one. Tongue Out

The world is a Role-Playing Game, and there are winning and losing conditions. People inside the game may feel like they are doing something meaningful. The players "outside" the game may not feel the same; to them, it may merely be entertainment.

Nonetheless, to me, it is rather more practical to see the world as having both advantages and disadvantages, and to maximise on the advantages while mitigating disadvantages. Both pre-determination and free will exist, rather than being a non-issue. There is a post I made on another forum that describes my view on this. There may be no "inherently" bad charts. However, life experiences are perceived as good or bad or neutral, and to me, these are problems to solve in this world. Maybe it is meaningless to solve them once I'm dead, but as long as I am within this stage, I shall act my part.

Without pain, there can be no pleasure. To live like the spiritual masters is to deny myself both pleasure and pain. It is mental suicide. However, there is merit in it, for those people who are experiencing mostly pain and no pleasure. On the other hand, in such situations, I prefer to seek pleasure to compensate for my pain, rather than avoiding the pain.





Michael,

I think that quote is just an elaboration on Oneness. There are no souls, only One Soul (and this sounds like Anima Mundi). All of our souls, presuming the existence of a soul, are either fragments of the same soul, or are in fact the same, identical soul. Think of RAM. There are many processes in a computer requiring the use of a RAM. Yet, it is possible to run multiple processes using only one RAM. In the same way, it is possible for one soul to animate multiple individuals.

So a person who thinks "my soul goes to heaven, your soul to hell" is rather misguided, according to this theory. If my soul goes to heaven, then your soul also goes to heaven, for the souls are identical or inseparable.

This also kind of relates to the idea of benefics and malefics in the Ptolemaic universe. Jupiter and Venus are both moist; they have uniting and combining qualities. Saturn and Mars are both dry; they are separative in nature. So the combining planets, being closer to One (or the Anima Mundi), are benefic, while the separating planets, causing things to move away from One, are malefic.


It also reminds me of one of my hypotheses on re-incarnation, which I will not go into for the moment.
_________________
Interested in Hellenistic astrology? Visit my blog.

The appearance changes, but the essence remains.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pankajdubey



Joined: 17 Nov 2006
Posts: 1214
Location: Delhi

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 5:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The question presumes that Astrologer knows everything and all that is left is how to break the bad news ?

Humility, care and circumspection is needed because of the astrologers own frailties, leave alone the querent's misfortune.

Why do people take up astrology ?

One reason is that they are unable to decide about something.Now. if the same person is going to do the astrology, he or she is going to be equally indecisive- it just shifts the indecisiveness to a different branch of knowledge.Most successful astrologers or for that matter all successful people are decisive and able to take risk and take the blame or deftly transfer it to a subscript.

From a practical standpoint, astrology is about decisions and risk-taking.As an amateur astrologer, i have most often gone wrong, when I am unable to convey the fruitlessness of a venture and the person keeps coming back for more and more follow-up questions.

PD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Michael Sternbach



Joined: 01 Mar 2014
Posts: 445
Location: Switzerland

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Michael,

I think that quote is just an elaboration on Oneness. There are no souls, only One Soul (and this sounds like Anima Mundi). All of our souls, presuming the existence of a soul, are either fragments of the same soul, or are in fact the same, identical soul. Think of RAM. There are many processes in a computer requiring the use of a RAM. Yet, it is possible to run multiple processes using only one RAM. In the same way, it is possible for one soul to animate multiple individuals.

So a person who thinks "my soul goes to heaven, your soul to hell" is rather misguided, according to this theory. If my soul goes to heaven, then your soul also goes to heaven, for the souls are identical or inseparable.


What is not included in this is that we are not simply the receivers of some all-ambient flow but just as much transmitters in our own right. This reminds me of a discussion I once had with a Zen priest in Japan.

What your comment further makes me think of is a metaphor by Itzhak Bentov in which he draws the minds/souls of individual people as cones projected from the top of their heads. The higher up you go, the more each cone expands, and the more it becomes congruent with all the other cones...

Quote:
This also kind of relates to the idea of benefics and malefics in the Ptolemaic universe. Jupiter and Venus are both moist; they have uniting and combining qualities. Saturn and Mars are both dry; they are separative in nature. So the combining planets, being closer to One (or the Anima Mundi), are benefic, while the separating planets, causing things to move away from One, are malefic.


This reflects something I wrote myself on the "Is Uranus Associated with Uranus?" that I would like to again share here:
Quote:
Another way of looking of looking at a planet's nature is based on the planetary sigils: Saturn's glyph consists of a moon under a cross, the latter symbolizing the physical (earth = the four elements or directions); and Mars' glyph (in one variation) is a circle (sun) under a cross. The benefics' glyphs are exactly reversed: Jupiter is a moon over a cross, Venus a circle over a cross. The way I read this, the material forces are dominating the spiritual in a malefic; vice versa with the benefics. The division into malefics and benefics may then reflect a certain gnostic perspective according to which the physical world is conceived as inherently bad, the spiritual world as good. Not a point of view that I would subscribe to - but in terms of etheric energies, it's fair to say that the malefics have a stronger tendency to lower the frequency while the benefics tend to lift it up. Sure enough, living in a physical world, we need both types of influences. I wouldn't make a dualistic bad/good thing out of it, which the ancient terms however imply.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Larxene



Joined: 22 Sep 2012
Posts: 312

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pankaj, that point has been raised earlier and acknowledged. Indeed, I am human and humans are not omniscient. The question became, if, despite stretching myself to the best of my abilities, I cannot see a way to get out of the difficult situation, what should I say to the client?

To me, the answer was to seek more knowledge and insights so that I can help the person better, to ask him to do what he can in the meanwhile, and to count his blessings, no matter how few they are. Additionally, it also meant feeling the client to see how much adversity he can handle at that moment, and to ease him in on his misfortunes, as Deb Houlding suggested.




Michael,

Of course, in life, there is both the Fortune component and the Spirit component. That analogy was not meant to be comprehensive.

Yeah, things are not either "all bad" or "all good". But some ancient authors probably did not think about things in a totally dualistic way. In Valens, I have read not once, not twice, but THRICE about his statement that when the malefics are well-placed, even they are bestower of good things. On the contrary, benefics who are amiss can cause reversals. Dorotheus' books probably had at least one statement that conveys a similar notion. Finally, in Maternus, we see for example that a positively positioned Mars gives the native an authoritative power over people (which, from my perspective, is a good thing).

And let's not forget Valens' analogy of the paints.

Personally, at the moment I am convinced that the benefics are more beneficial to the native than malefics. To be precise, well-placed benefics are more supportive than well-placed malefics. Similarly, badly positioned benefics is still better than badly positioned malefics. Benefics, even when compromised, still strive to create something good for the native. Malefics, when amiss, are quite content in demolishing the native's life.


Of course, the main issue is the difference in values between human beings. For instance, I believe that money and property is good; it is the way that people acquire and use their financial resources that can lead to evil things. Hence, for a person like me, a lot of money => a good thing => benefic. However, if you ask Saleh (a character from FE: Sacred Stones), he'll say that material affluence begets strife. It is better to live without those things. To him, a lot of money => bad => malefic.

Basically, we may reach different conclusions if we base ourselves on different values, on different axioms. If I agree with the ancients that Saturn and Mars are malefics, while Jupiter and Venus are benefics, it may be because I have values similar to the ancients.

...And that is the question.
_________________
Interested in Hellenistic astrology? Visit my blog.

The appearance changes, but the essence remains.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pankajdubey



Joined: 17 Nov 2006
Posts: 1214
Location: Delhi

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Larexene,

Think of yourself as a Doctor or a healer and follow the principles of breaking bad news.

First step is to ask what the querent already knows about the situtation.
Second , what are their worst fears and their best hopes.

By these two questions, you have already primed them and then follow it with- I am afraid ....

A famous Scottish physician, Sir Robert Hutchison wrote the book- Hutchison's Clinical Methods ,now in it's 23 edition.Towards the end of his career his advise to young physicians was:

Quote:
From inability to let well alone; from too much zeal for the new and contempt for what is old; from putting knowledge before wisdom, science before art and cleverness before common sense; from treating patients as cases; and from making the cure of the disease more grievous than the endurance of the same, Good Lord, deliver us.
Sir Robert Hutchison, 20th century physician, British Medical Journal, 1953; 1: 671.


http://www.bmj.com/content/1/4811/671.1

from another:

Quote:
Cured yesterday of my disease, I died last night of my physician.
Matthew Prior (1664-1721).


Sometimes, it is best left alone by saying I can't answer it !!


Pankaj
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science 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