Can you explain what you mean, because the difference seems so subtle as to be imperceptible. If the brick is "meant for you", then it IS based on what you have done, else it would not be part of a current lesson.

Sure, what I mean is that you could have three scenarios, one, Rudhyar's, which is there is a brick, but due to some failing of your own psyche, or due to some law of attraction whereby you attract a falling brick due to your lack of emotional/spiritual/psychological development the brick, which otherwise would have remained stationary falls upon you because on some level it is your fault that it fell.

The second situation is that the brick was always going to fall and by accident you walk under it - it wasn't meant for you, it was just an accident and therefore it falling on you is not really your fault at all.

The third situation is that the brick was always going to fall on you, not because of some failing on your part, it would have fallen on you even if you were entirely spiritually englightened and therefore the brick falling on you is not really your fault at all.

There's no way to have the solution to that question, since we can't see both alternatives at once. Any differences in events between similar charts will be marked up to those differences. In other words, I can't think of an observable way to know the difference.

Right, we're forced to be agnostic about the issue. It may be because of some fault of yours, or it may not.

I think the point that was being made here is that Chris sees the assumption that it is due to the individual as being a pitfall of modern astrology. Now in reality modern astrology itself doesn't dictate this approach, rather if it is a pitfall it is one of particular modern astrologers, not necessarily modern astrology.


The potential problem with espousing this kind of thinking is that it essentially blames the victim. If for example the brick falls on the client, and the astrologer explains it's because they didn't OWN that Mars in the 3rd house, but had they owned it then it wouldn't have been a brick falling, it would have been just a few heated words with the neighbours, or whatever else, then it's essentially saying it's your fault this brick fell. If only you had been better, if only you'd been more conscious, more spiritual, more enlightened, more self aware, that brick would not have fallen.

This is fairly innocuous with a brick. But it can easily extend its logic from this basic starting point. If only you had owned that Saturn on the fifth house cusp, that crazy gunman wouldn't have come into your child's school and killed your child. If only you really owned that Venus Pluto square that guy in the club wouldn't have spiked your drink and date raped you. If only you had been a better person, if only you had been more self aware and more spiritually grounded, if only you done or thought something different or been more 'conscious', then these bad things wouldn't have happened. But you weren't self aware enough, and so the brick falls on your head, your child is killed and you're date raped.

If we take the logic that you are responsible for the apparently external events which happen to you, then we can essentially conclude that we're blaming the victim for putting themselves, in whatever occulted way, into victimhood.

But when we know that we have no way of really knowing this from the chart, then we're walking on very dangerous ground that has the potential to be incredibly psychologically damaging.

Hello Paul,

I don't know how "up" you are on Edgar Cayce material, so won't go in that direction, even though I think it could be efficacious in this discussion...

Of course, if someone loses a child to some psycho shooting up the school, then it would be more idiot than astrologer for someone to say it was the parent's or child's "fault." Having something bad happen is different than having something bad happen and having your nose rubbed in it.

Still, I maintain that for that to happen, certain pre-conditions are necessary otherwise it just would not be happening to that particular person. This is a long way away from the idea "you asked for it somehow, so just get over it already." I am fully sympathetic to others' suffering...it's actually the main reason I got into astrology in the first place. However, my philosophical stance is that everything that happens in that life is for that life's growth/development. I believe this is true all the way from getting that dream job all the way down to becoming paraplegic in a scuba dive.

Let's take Christopher Reeve as an example. I believe there were circumstances he needed to find himself in, sympathies he needed to build, internal values that needed to change; which could not, would not have been possible on his previously current path. It became necessary that something happen to make these other things possible. To most, it was a terrible accident that came out of nowhere and left a wonderful person with virtually no control over their own body. To his Soul, it was the first step of many years of important developments. He did many more things for other suffering people while he was a paraplegic than he would ever have done as Superman.

Look at his chart. Pluto on the Ascendant...Uranus at the cusp of the 12th, squaring a Saturn-Neptune conjunction in the 3rd. The potential for a major accident with extreme health repercussions was always possible due to the symbolism. When it, in fact, happens, should we look at it with outrage and question why bad things happen to good people or do we see the strong potential in the birthchart and realize that this was something he needed to experience? (otherwise, it surely wouldn't have happened)

Remember... on the day that he had his fall, it was he who got on the horse. At the same time, I don't think it was possible for him to do otherwise. His fate was awaiting him.

Now, as per this discussion, the question remains, could Christopher Reeve have done something differently? We each have our opinions on this, but we cannot know if he might have been able to mitigate the outcome by having previously learned some of the lessons that he was to ultimately learn. Additionally, he gave a lot of hope to other paraplegics since he had regained some ability long after the incident occurred. If this hope were part of what he was here to impart (he does have Jupiter in the Midheaven after all), then the accident might have been a pre-requisite. [Paraplegics probably wouldn't be so inspired by a fictional character that stops speeding locomotives and can fly, but a handsome, famous, well-off actor that becomes one of them and then still leads a meaningful life and who still gets better through time... how could they not be inspired?]

To me, to think of it as an accident (in the truest sense of the word) would make the event so pointless and hollow. "Oh well, your tough luck, Christopher; I guess we should have named your horse Kryptonite, because it had no trouble bringing down Superman." To instead see it as the beginning of a great unfolding of Christopher's more noble qualities and a new perspective in life and taking up the cause for helping others' suffering, it suddenly makes it something to appreciate, rather than something to fear.

Which feels better to you, Paul? The thought that no matter what you do, when on a horse, random chance might just leave you a paraplegic for basically no reason at all or the thought, if I am too far afield from where my lessons/growth are that "life" will come along and get me back on track for my own long-term benefit, though there might be some heavy short-term consequences?

Interesting discussion, though I feel we are all bound to have very different ideas as to what is True here, based on our own experiences, second, and our own consciousness level, first.

Peace

James

I don't know how "up" you are on Edgar Cayce material, so won't go in that direction, even though I think it could be efficacious in this discussion...

I know who he is and am familiar with the 'gist' of what he spoke about, but I've not in any way studied him nor even found any compelling reason why I might. I take the attitude that lots of people have mystical insight, and whether or not Cacye is amongst them will be seen in a 'proof is in the pudding' kind of way.

Of course, if someone loses a child to some psycho shooting up the school, then it would be more idiot than astrologer for someone to say it was the parent's or child's "fault." Having something bad happen is different than having something bad happen and having your nose rubbed in it.

Right, if the astrologer told them the week before that things happen because of their lack of consciousness, casually explaining about that fallen brick, then the next week, with this new paradigm have taken root in their mind and as they go about their daily business noting the 'bad' things that happen to them and wondering how they can be more conscious owing to how these things are happening because of their lack of self-awareness etc. But then their child dies - events, as she knows, happen because of her own psyche, and wasn't the astrologer just saying last week about potential problems with their children. And didn't she argue with her child the night before and was very frustrated and angry with him, and, ultimately, isn't it all her fault her child is now dead!?
It might sound dramatic, but I don't use these examples as some arbitrary extreme example meant to score a point. This attitude can have real psychological damages and I know of some people who have had terrible events happen in their lives and who blame themselves because of some lack of spiritual awareness or self awareness - they live a life of 'if only' - if only I'd have been more self aware, if only I had owned that planetary energy more, if only I had been a better person.

But really, to my mind, this is an incredibly narcissistic and skewed way of looking at the world - believing that you have these hidden levels of control if only you tap into them. I genuinely believe it can lead to mental dis-ease and mental unhappiness. In my mind it is better to be non-attached to feelings or ideas about being in complete control of your destiny, this attachment to (in my mind) illusions of control leads to anguish and potentially real psychological damage.

However, my philosophical stance is that everything that happens in that life is for that life's growth/development. I believe this is true all the way from getting that dream job all the way down to becoming paraplegic in a scuba dive.

To be really clear, I don't mind the idea that "everything happens for a reason", the problem I have is the idea that "bad things happen cos you're not spiritual or psychologically aware enough, and they wouldn't happen if you were a better person".

To me, to think of it as an accident (in the truest sense of the word) would make the event so pointless and hollow. "Oh well, your tough luck, Christopher; I guess we should have named your horse Kryptonite, because it had no trouble bringing down Superman." To instead see it as the beginning of a great unfolding of Christopher's more noble qualities and a new perspective in life and taking up the cause for helping others' suffering, it suddenly makes it something to appreciate, rather than something to fear.

Well we can take the same approach either way. It's no less hollow to say "CONGRATULATIONS!! You're now bound to a wheelchair for life, but don't worry, other people will be totes inspired!".
But again it's no better to whisper "eeek, if only you owned that energy more you'd be walking".

Because ultimately as you say, we do not know. And I always think when we don't know something we shouldn't pretend to know something. Maybe he'd be able to walk if he owned that energy more and didn't somehow project it into the manifest world, but then again, maybe not. I think then that when it comes to how we live our lives, we should believe whatever is comfortable for us - be it that bad things happen cos of pure accident, because satan is rampant in your life until you atone for your sins, be it that they happen because of a build up of negative karma in previous lives, or because you weren't spiritual enough.
But when it comes to our role as ambassadors of astrology, I think we should stick to what we can see in a chart because that's what our job is when it boils down to it. At least that's how I see it - whenever I read tarot, or astrology, I see my role as translator. Perhaps this just suits my mercurial nature, I prefer to be amoral and not provide my own "life coaching", I just say what the chart indicates and let them take whatever they want from that and walk away with more information to help them make their own choice. I go to great efforts to not inject my own beliefs, even when others who are more on par with my beliefs open the discussion of it, when it comes to astrology I simply stay silent on those issues. This isn't better or worse, but it may explain my approach to things like this, because really it suits me better to strip away everything but what the chart is showing when it comes to doing astrology.

I had a conversation about horary with a friend of mine and she was appalled at someone at her work place who casually mentioned how awful it was that his sister may be marrying someone of a different caste. Of course it raised an ethical question - in horary astrology when someone of, say, Indian culture asks "Should I marry this man of a lower caste than me? Or will someone better of my own higher caste come along?" do you answer it. This might seem like a tangent, but the point is that my approach to astrology, which I guess is what guides me on issues like what's being discussed here, is to ignore my own personal moral stance on an issue. The querent, if she is genuine, has a real problem on her hands and needs help via a horary reading. Provided the question is not illegal, I take an amoral stance on it, even if it is hard to do that. I remain as detached as possible and whenever anyone asks what my role as astrologer is, I always say translator. It is not up to the translator to choose not to translate certain passages or certain phrases because "they don't like it".

Which feels better to you, Paul? The thought that no matter what you do, when on a horse, random chance might just leave you a paraplegic for basically no reason at all or the thought, if I am too far afield from where my lessons/growth are that "life" will come along and get me back on track for my own long-term benefit, though there might be some heavy short-term consequences?

I know what feels worse. Living my life thinking, if only I hadn't been angry with my sister, if only I had spent an hour in silent meditation, if only I had read the right books, if only I had been a better person - if only I had done these things I wouldn't be in a wheelchair (or I wouldn't have been raped, or I wouldn't have a dead child, or I wouldn't have a bump on my head from a fallen brick).

Hello Paul,

I think that you still didn't answer the question...

Would you feel better thinking that the mean ole universe came along and tripped up your horse for no other reason than "sh!t happens"... or to think that this accident was somehow a stepping stone, albeit a painful one?

To me, I have had great joys/triumphs in life and I have had very painful events. What has been the most helpful in both cases is to admit (to myself) that they were part of my journey...another chapter of lessons in my life. When someone close to me died, they weren't "taken from me", they were being utilized elsewhere...and in some cases, it was necessary to MY growth that they not be here anymore... Would I say that I caused their deaths? No, of course not! Would I say (in retrospect) that several of those deaths were directly responsible for some of my most important growth or directly changed my circumstances so growth would follow? Absolutely!

I think that part of my perspective comes from a spiritual stance... ie. wanting to see meaning where possible, rather than life as a pinball machine with unforeseeable trajectories. The other part of this perspective comes from doing so many rectifications. Time after time after time, we see particular symbolism and then, just like a German train schedule, here comes the major event fitting that symbolism, WHICH THEN DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY SERVES SOME MAJOR WAKE-UP OR LIBERATION FUNCTION to the person.

As I have mentioned before... in my event list, I have 6 deaths of important people... In Primary Directions and Secondaries, there are 18 aspects to the 8th House cusp within just minutes of arc, certainly way, way against what probability would dictate. These events occurred right on schedule.

The question still remains as to whether anything would have mitigated the damages... We, of course, can't know; but I think that yes, the event still happened, but I had (subconsciously) maneuvered myself into a position where the sting was much, much less.

I do understand where you are coming from relative to clients... we can't leave them feeling like every bad thing was invited in by them. On the other hand, our not saying it, does not make it not so.

To put it most bluntly, if you were born blind in this lifetime and have always wondered why did this happen... if you could see beyond the veil, you would see directly why. [Edgar Cayce also very clear on this point... in one instance a roaming nomad would rob families crossing the desert and then blinded people so that the raider could not be identified. What could be better karma balancing than to go through a subsequent life never seeing? Perfection! An eye for an eye, as they say.]

This IS a deep philosophical discussion and very interesting...the problem is, we are stating our opinions and in most cases, those are incredibly subjective...

Still, if there is any belief in the idea that we do in fact, reap what we sow, then it would seem logical that any mitigating we do relative to what we sow that it can have a direct impact (and WILL) over what we reap.

Peace

James

Atlantean wrote: Would you feel better thinking that the mean ole universe came along and tripped up your horse for no other reason than "sh!t happens"... or to think that this accident was somehow a stepping stone, albeit a painful one?

I thought I did. What I'm saying is that neither of those scenarios bother me. It's difficult to say which I'd prefer because really neither of those two bother me or are appealing to me. Considering it is outside my remit to be able to control whether the horse fell or not, it falling being some providence or a simple old accident wouldn't bother me, nor for that matter comfort me.
In a lot of ways it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. They both have pros and cons but I have no particular attachment to either of the pros or cons if you see what I mean.

What has been the most helpful in both cases is to admit (to myself) that they were part of my journey...another chapter of lessons in my life.

For me, like everyone, I have had what I perceive as problems in my life, and yes, I learn from them. But it doesn't bother me too much whether I say to myself "this problem is happening cos I have to learn something", as saying "A problem has happened but I've woven a silver lining into it by learning something from it". I'm agnostic as to whether it happened to ENABLE me to learn something (and thus to grow more as an individual), or whether I simply accept that all of life is growth, and therefore all things, be they good or bad, serves to enable that growth.

What I can focus on is how I respond and react to that event. For whatever reason, this approach is just more satisfying to me.
Now if a pattern begins to emerge, then I'll consider it more like a 'message' - either objectively 'real', in the sense that they are signposts on my spiritual/psychological journey, or simply perceived, as in, my mind happens to be focusing and seeing these patterns, but they are not signposts per se, just self-observations.
I don't beat myself up when bad things happen because I "should have looked closer at that energy" or say "my pet died, but it died cos I have to deal with my 6th house saturn transit", instead I simply accept that death is part of life and death is inevitable, all things are impermanent and my pet's life is one of them. I'll grieve, but I won't blame myself or beat myself up.
For me my pet doesn't die because of some deep failing on my part, or because of negative karma in a previous life, or because I'm just not psychologically AWARE enough to keep it alive (indefinitely). It's because animals, like all beings, die. It is only my attachment to the illusion that A) I have total control over my destiny, and B) that my psyche has potentially god like power, that could cause me suffering.

In this respect I guess I naturally follow a Buddhist-like philosophy with regards non-attachment, and for whatever reason, this seems best suited to me. I think it would be worse to think that my pet wouldn't have died if it wasn't for my human failings.

I do understand where you are coming from relative to clients... we can't leave them feeling like every bad thing was invited in by them. On the other hand, our not saying it, does not make it not so.p

Right, our not saying it won't mean it's not true. But our not saying it does mean that if it ISN'T true, we won't have potentially psychologically scarred them, and regardless of whether it is true or not true, we won't be projecting (and enforcing?) our particular paradigms onto, potentially vulnerable, people. These things are not a pre-requisite for astrology. It is not that in order for astrologers to do astrology we must adapt these philosophies. Because of that I tend to keep my astrology to simply just astrology wherever I can. If advice is asked IN ADDITION to that, well okay, I'll explain my own viewpoint as I would if the person were my friend, and I'll let them make up their own mind on how best to handle the situation. Sometimes I can't be much help and I'll say that. I'll tell the Indian client "The horary shows that there's little chance of a successful marriage with this individual, however, there is someone else who seems more likely for a marriage, and this significator is (let's imagine) linked up with your fourth house, so perhaps someone of a more similar cultural or racial background". But let's say it doesn't show that, let's say it shows that their significators are in trine with mutual reception or something, I'd say "Well it looks like there is a good chance of a harmonious marriage with this person" but if she asks for advice about how to have a successful marriage with someone of a 'lower' caste - well I'm entirely impotent to help, I've no idea about these cultural considerations and I've never had any trouble saying "I don't know".

To put it most bluntly, if you were born blind in this lifetime and have always wondered why did this happen... if you could see beyond the veil, you would see directly why. [Edgar Cayce also very clear on this point... in one instance a roaming nomad would rob families crossing the desert and then blinded people so that the raider could not be identified. What could be better karma balancing than to go through a subsequent life never seeing? Perfection! An eye for an eye, as they say.]

Right, but this kind of thinking just leaves me cold. I'm being punished for some imagined crime I may or may not have committed in some previous life.
My preference is to think I'm born blind. This is what I know. How I deal with that now is up to me, but I may experience suffering that other people are not born blind but I have the bad fortune to be, but if I let go of those feelings of 'hardship' and if I am simply quietly accepting of my condition, then I can refocus my efforts on finding new and creative ways of living my life.
Ideas of "ha! you deserved it for being a bad person in some previous life that you can't even remember and would not even recognise" just don't fulfil me. In this respect I'd depart from Edgar Cayce, and for that matter many Buddhist philosophies. The important part is in recognising that things are outside your control, but your reactions to those things never are.

I guess I can't help but know many otherwise successful and happy people who are not particularly nice people, who are bullies, or who are not compassionate, or who are selfish and manipulative. For me it is clear that material success is not linked to spiritual advancement, and similarly those who are destitute, or who are born blind or whatever else may be truly generous and compassionate people.

For me it's much simpler, ideas of "this is your fault" just dont' help me. It may be, it may not be, but it won't change the facts. If I totally own all my planetary energy, will this stop death? Will it cause fallen bricks to slow down mid air and pause above me? Will it prevent my animal dying?
I don't think so. But if I cultivate less attachment to ideas that life should be all 'happy' and if I cultivate more acceptance that life changes and that part of that change is decay and death - then maybe I won't take it so personal next time a pet dies, maybe if I focus on giving up attachments to all of this, maybe then I'll live a more fulfilled life.

delete

Paul and Atlantean, I think one thing you have to do is to unpack the concept of "meaning." Was the brick "meant" for your head? Were you "meant" to have an accident at that moment-- or any moment?

Does "meaning" imply some agency? If so, by whom or by what?

Incidentally, bricks are ruled by Saturn and Capricorn; and accidents by Mars and Uranus, according to Rex E. Bills, The Rulership Book. Presumably the falling brick problem could relate to some nasty transit involving these planets. (OK, traditionalists-- leave out Uranus and add Mercury or somesuch.)

In my previous post, I gave an example where I did have some responsibility for falling bricks.

But Rudhyar's point-- as obtuse as he makes it-- is that accidents happen in life. It's no good feeling victimized because when we sign up for a lifetime membership on Planet Earth, the fine print in the contract states that we acknowledge that Earth is not inherently safe, and we agree not to hold the Management responsible for liability.

I think his real point is whether people see themselves as victims. Which I think the Stoics said we do have some control over.

Also, current events are full of oh-so-inspiring stories of people who did have rotten accidents-- losing limbs or becoming paraplegic, for example, yet they do find the good in what happened to them. One of the best examples I can think of was a news report of a teenager who lost both his legs in a boating accident. He went on to work with children with disabilities, which he said he never would have done as an able-bodied person. He actually said on the news he was therefore glad his accident had happened.

This example further suggests that meaning is created by the individual, not somehow external to us in the ozone.

Most of us aren't that stoic, but Ptolemy essentially says in his intro to Tetrabiblos that forewarned is forearmed, and that this is the value of astrology.

But Rudhyar's point-- as obtuse as he makes it-- is that accidents happen in life. It's no good feeling victimized because when we sign up for a lifetime membership on Planet Earth, the fine print in the contract states that we acknowledge that Earth is not inherently safe, and we agree not to hold the Management responsible for liability.

I don't think that's Rudhyar's point, as I understood it, his point isn't that accidents happen, it's that you happen to 'accidents' in the sense that there are no accidents, there's is just your misuse of consciousness. That the brick falls is your fault.

Here is the longer quote from the link posted on page on of this thread:

"An individual person walks ? or drifts along collectively determined social paths ? toward the future. He meets the vast pageant of universal action and reaction. He meets the world; the world does not bother to go and meet him. If a brick falls upon the man's head as he walks along a street, it is the man's responsibility. He walked into the field of the brick's fall. He happened to the brick, because he is a conscious individual and the brick only a piece of universal nature. Man happens to nature. He uses the forces of nature; his, the responsibility for the results. Nature is unconcerned. It merely acts and reacts."

Of course, if we look only at the brick part, the message seems pretty silly. What I think Rhudhar says, however, is that by taking responsibility for living in the physical universe, as it comes to us and as it happens, there really is no victimology or no fault involved, to use your expression.

I don't think he is saying, "If a brick falls onb your head it is your own damn fault." Rather, "Bricks happen. Accidents are part of life. Adjust."

Gosh! I don't even particularly like Rudhyar's brand of writing or astrology. Funny I should appear to be sticking up for him. I am not. I am only trying to interpret what I think is his meaning behind the brick example.

Previously in this essay Rudhyar talks about "a conscious participant in the activities of a greater whole - be it called society, humanity, or God; a power for destruction..." Put this way, everytime we walk down the street, we should consciously recognize that the world is an inherently dangerous place, and not blame society, God, or ourselves for misfortunes.

But have it your way, Paul. Most times I am very critical of Rudhyar's form of astrology.

It would bother me to think that his brand of metaphysics is how a traditional astrologer would view modern astrology today; any more than a traditional astrologer would not wish to have a modernist equate traditional astrology sum toto with its peculiarities and bizarre statements.

p.s. I just found out today how much income tax I owe! Yikes. Talk about a "brick" falling on my head. But it is my responsibility to keep on top of the regulations.

waybread wrote:But have it your way, Paul.

It is not that I want to have it 'my way'. This is just how I read his comments, not just the isolated pieces that have been quoted, but his work as a whole. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding him, but it is not because I'm wanting to misunderstand him. I have no real attachment one way or another to Rhudyar, I don't particularly care about him either way.

Hello waybread

Interesting name... should we know where it comes from? ie. is it a cultural reference or something personal? As someone that picks quirky names, I am curious to others' "quirky names", if you don't mind that characterization.

Re: "This example further suggests that meaning is created by the individual, not somehow external to us in the ozone."

It might suggest that, but I don't agree. I think that all of life (here) is for our development...there is a deep and intrinsic purpose for all things. All the way from "meeting your future mate in an internet chat room" to "the death of one's uncle in a car accident" to "that 89 you got on your 3rd grade book report"... all have their reason.

My coming to this conclusion is partially related to seeing over and over again how the events in people's lives serve important purposes for their development. Certainly, if we stay (focus-wise) mired in the mundane elements of clients' lives, then we likely won't see these obvious splashes of meaning behind the events. Usually, taking one step outside and asking WHY will give very clear meaning.

An example... two people are in a long term relationship (14 years) and from both the astrology and their lives, it's hard to see or understand the connection...they have really no common ground. One wants to socialize a lot, the other wants to stay home virtually every night. One of them is up and mostly optimistic, the other is moody, dark, and very much a realist. One of them wants a home together, fitting their dream vision of what "togetherness" would mean. The other one wants to live in a separate home down the street. One of them wants a father figure for their Son (from a different relationship), while the other one views the Son as competition for affection and therefore conducts a secret "war" against the Son. ETC.! Now, seeing the first one of them having symbolism for meeting and trying out new perspective partners and then doing exactly that, tells me that the activity is necessary for further development. The relationship unhappiness begs for it...the astrology corroborates it...and the life is finding the expression of it. The need for it, the astrological statement of it, and the events of the life reflecting it are a package deal.

The meaning behind it is intrinsic. Oxygen was discovered, it wasn't invented.

It's not just through astrology that this "higher level" functioning exists. Very, very often, I will start to go somewhere or do something and suddenly a thought enters my mind to do some additional thing, perhaps to bring something with me. LATER, some event/circumstance changes, and the very thing that was brought FOR NO REASON AT THE TIME, turns out to be a fundamental positive that it happened. This happens very often. As just one simple example... I am getting ready to leave the house. I have all that I need. For some reason, when getting ready to leave, suddenly my attention is on which coat I grab. On this day, I grab a warmer, dress coat, that is actually warmer than what I need. I realize this, but since I feel that I am supposed to take it, I do. Later, my Wife calls and she has an appointment that is running long and I have to go open her jewelry store and wait until she comes in. The keys for the store were in that warm, dress coat. I took the coat for no real reason, against my own inclinations and later find out WHY. My reasoning? My subconscious knows that I will need to get into the jewelry store, however, since I don't consciously know that yet, taking the "wrong coat" doesn't seem to make any sense. Later, I find out that if I had taken the "right coat", I wouldn't be prepared to open the store. This is one very isolated example. These kinds of things happen constantly.

I have a bag that I keep my guitar accessories in. Once a week, when playing guitar with a friend, I always grab my guitar, the bag and my effects pedals. On one day, really for no known reason, I grab a second bag (really by "mistake") and cart that one along too. Later, at the friend's house, I discover that I need a little adapter plug because one of his quit working the night before! Had I not "mistakenly" taken my extra bag, I would have had to race back home. These things happen constantly. If we remove meaning from this, then they're just a repeating series of random events. If they were just random events, then as often as I take something I don't need and later find out I do need it, would be offset with as many instances of not taking something and later finding out I needed to.

Just today, I have a paper that I need to have my doctor fill out. It was for a very important meeting scheduled for today. When the chance to see the doctor came up on Tuesday, I decided that I didn't need to go. I didn't know WHY, but I just (on some level) knew that it was not necessary. While writing this post, my appointment called me to let me know that she had started work, but was losing her voice and needed to reschedule for next week, Thursday.

I see all these side-elements as being interconnected on some level. Were it not for some ultimate reason, these strange deviations from the norm would not keep happening, leaving me better prepared for my (then indeterminate!) future.

When I go back over my event list of my life, I can see how each of these main events had both a surface component (the event) as well as some imparted meaning, lesson, or (let's say) paradigm modification connected with it, but much more important than the event itself. Interestingly, the ultimate meaning behind the event matches the astrological symbolism!

I like this stance,...it is comforting. Even the little things in my life are still important to the ordering of the universe.


Peace

James

Hi Paul-- what I meant was that I am not going to the mat for Dane Rudhyar!

Hi Atlantean-- My nickname has several meanings.... food for our journey (lembas of the Tolkien trilogy), as well as a common name for a very common weed that actually has a lot of medicinal value (Plantago major.)

I don't dispute what some might call synchronicity. My sense is that people who are very authentic in their lives often have good "coincidences" happen to them. But at some point, these people have to be a stand for their authenticity, and be willing to see synchronicity when it occurs.

You've probably heard the parable about the man with a wonderful son (good news) but then son breaks his leg and is disabled, which is bad news, but then this keeps him out of the army, which is good news, &c. &c.

By my "ozone" comment, I meant that sometimes people think that luck is just something that bonks them on the head. You win the lottery. The government says you owe them $4000 in taxes. The individual had nothing to do with it. But if we unpack these "luck"-related events, there is usually an element of some personal responsibility in what the person did.

Maybe what Rudhyar is saying is that people are part of the universe, not isolated from it such that it makes sense to think of an absolute binary comprised of "me" and "everything else." If we are not the dependent variable and the universe is not the independent variable, then it makes sense to think we can and do influence the outcome of events.

Of course, life is one big learning experience! The only question is, what sort of meaning or interpretation do we place on it?