SteveS wrote: Fri Oct 29, 2021 5:52 am
Jim wrote:
The Mars-Neptune square is close (Class 1) regardless of mundane aspect considerations, so one can't be definitive. Yes, in my best and worst traits, it's one of my most descriptive aspects.
Jim, correct me if I am wrong. Since I have known you on your forum, I think you were experiencing the “torment” of the 0,07 mundo partile Mars-Neptune 90 in Indiana from a cultural standpoint; but when you moved to LA you lost most of this “torment” by moving into a much different culture suited much more to your way of thinking and philosophical beliefs. I know for sure in LA you moved into a much better receptive climate for astrological things.
Yes, cultural issues were very much a part of it. However, I see that this is how astrology works: When one moves to a new location, it usually seems that some "condition" causes conditions to change - not just some magical "it's all different now!" - and it usually "makes sense" without astrology. However, the astrology nails it.
Consider: An unusually large number of U.S. Presidents have had Jupiter angular at birth. Of those who have not, a very large number of them had Jupiter angular for Washington. One could say that, "Well, Washington, DC is the only place they could live and be president, that's just where the job was located." However, the simple astrological truth is that they were likely to be more important and have greater esteem, power, and rank at the longitude of Washington, DC.
Since my native state has been one of the highest density Covid-19 outbreak areas (cultural aversion to masks etc. for political reasons), imagine if I had continued to live there with a 0°07' natal Mars-Neptune mundane square! I imagine this would have lead to a much increased chance of infection and serious illness.
BTW, you wrote of the environment tormenting me. I was also (and perhaps primarily) talking about the other side: I'm certain that I tormented my environment. It was mutual antipathy. I candidly admit that I have hurt people in my life, perhaps more due to Mars-Neptune behaviors than any other, and these traits were far stronger in me in my native state than after I left. When I look at the aspect mix for Indiana, I realize I could have become quite the criminal - or, at least, gotten in a lot more trouble (not the good kind!), suffered for it and caused more suffering to others, etc. if I'd stayed there.
Jim wrote:
What's particularly interesting, though, is that at birthplace the mundane aspect is my single closest aspect, but I lost that distinction when I moved to California.
Jim, you taught me that partile aspects “Reign Supreme.” The way I see this aspect issue we are discussing: When you moved to LA, you left this
reigning “tormenting” partile mundane Mars-Neptune behind you.
Yes. That's especially true in predictive work where we are waiting for the time when a high-intensity concentration of energies peaks and comes to the fore. But prediction isn't my strongest interest, and it's also clear that in natal charts the subtler forces develop strongly as well. In a natal chart, the rule is probably more like, "Whatever is closest will dominate - no matter how strong or weak it is inherently." For example, if somebody had no aspects within 3° (a very rare condition), the 3-4° aspects would reign supreme in their nativity - would be the strongest forces in their character.
In my case, Mars squares Neptune ecliptically 2°45'. That's Class 1. It's my sixth-closest natal hard aspect; nonetheless, it is extremely strong, has a definite voice in who I am. No matter where I am in the world, it's going to have the strength of a Class 1 aspect, having more than 90% of its full strength. -- But at birthplace, the concurrent mundane aspect spikes that orb to 0°07', spikes it to 100% certainty of expression (100% of its strength). It also becomes the single strongest aspect in the chart, the leader in terms of which all the other aspects express. (In LA, that "leader" role is taken over by Uranus square Neptune.) So, in looking at my character and life pattern, we'll see the Mars-Neptune regardless, but in LA it isn't just pushing its way past all the others to get to the front.
Jim wrote:
One of the most interesting features of mundane aspects in a nativity is how they shift with locale.
Indeed Jim!!! I find it most interesting, just like we find Bagdad’s 1991 Capsolar most interesting with its partile mundane aspects. When Mike completes his program, I think you should write combined with Mike’s program an essay, when you find the time, on the possibility of how natives could possibly
cancel out the malefic effects of a class 1/partile malefic mundane aspect from a birthplace local by moving to a different local. I think this has the possibility of making a
world of difference beneficially for a native pertaining to malefic class 1/partile aspects born under a birthplace local.
There will be something on it in the relocation chapter of the 'masterwork' I plan to write. The point is pretty simple, though the math isn't simple at all. We have no way of displaying where these mundane aspects exist (e.g., on a map). We can only try one location after another by trial and error.
This topic is particularly interesting to me for the following reason: I take it as fundamental that
you never lose your natal chart. For example, in moving to LA I gained angular Venus and Pluto but did not lose my natal foreground Moon (I'm quite lunar). From observation, natal mundane aspects seem an exception to this, requiring me to think a lot about it. Over the last couple of years, multiple observations have reiterated the seeming fact that the
mundane framework - call it, perhaps, the "house framework," even if we don't deal with houses
per se - is most connected to exterior manifestations. Not just the angles, though they are the chief examples, but, rather, the whole mundane framework. This makes sense because mundane aspects (like houses) are completely bound up in your specific location. - Now, this is true for angles, too, and one might ask why one doesn't lose natal angularity in moving (observation suggests that one does not), but it does seem that mundane aspects SPECIFICALLY are (let's call them)
always local, even at the birth place - that there is something tenuous and temporary about them that lightens when one relocates and has time to change one's responses and behaviors. This is something new - and something quite exciting.
I only know for sure that, when I compare someone's mundane aspects at birthplace to mundane aspects at new residence, if I know enough about their life it's obvious that the aspects they have
lost moving away from the birthplace and those they've
gained at the new location characterize the different location. Also, since being persuaded that hard natal mundane aspects are equal to ecliptical ones in a birth chart, this means that the balance of
what natal aspects you have can change when you move.