Astrology: The Spring Equinox - March 20 2017 6:28am ET

Less talk, more rock

As the Sun exits Pisces and enters Aries the annual astrological cycle is completed and a new one begins, making this the birth chart of the new cycle, a snapshot of the whole year, or at least the new season. The Spring Equinox marks the transition from submersion in the Piscean mystical waters to the rebirth into the manifesting energies of Aries; the renewal of Spring, marking the end of the zodiacal initiatory cycle and the beginning of a new cycle of experience and transformation.

Since the Winter Solstice, which introduced a formidable Pluto/Uranus/Jupiter T-Square, the Lunar Eclipse of February 10 brought a very harmonious Sun/Moon/Uranus/Jupiter Mystic Rectangle and the Solar Eclipse of February 26 featured a beneficial Saturn / Mercury / Jupiter Minor Grand Trine as a Mars/Uranus conjunction spiced things up.

The T-Square as such will fade before the Summer, although all three aspects remain in play variously until the Winter, which will bring a different energy. I see three major hot spots on this chart, all very connected to the T-Square:

Sullen, Strong Saturn

The Moon/Saturn Conjunction is a pretty austere aspect, bringing feelings of isolation, pessimism and emotional blockage. Moreover, the Sun Square Moon/Saturn aspect means repressed tensions can surface and various conflicts arise. This is offset by the continued Saturn Trine Uranus aspect that brings a methodical sense of change and the Mars Trine Saturn aspect brings concentration, stamina and perseverance and should give plenty of Spring Mars energy even though Mars is in Detriment in Taurus, and not in Aries, where it rules.

Powerful, Pushy Pluto

The Sun Sextile Pluto aspect brings positive, intense experiences, alleviating the difficult Sun Square Saturn/Moon aspects, but can also strengthen the conservative status quo energy of Pluto in

Capricorn. Note also the Chiron/Sun Conjunction that brings self-esteem and healing energies.

Intense, Social, Creative Mercury and Venus

The Mercury/Venus Conjunction brings a capacity to appreciate and communicate feelings and beauty, which favors artistic and financial endeavors. At the same time, this aspect is Square to Pluto and in Opposition to Jupiter, and slightly out-of-orb with a Uranus Conjunction creating a second T-Square. This can bring energies of intense relationships, over-optimism, over-indulgence and obsessive ideas.

The more Jupiterean faults are emphasized as Jupiter has no easy aspects to stabilize its action compared to Uranus and Pluto. Moreover, Venus is retrograde in Aries, causing more friction and questioning in relationships

Summary

The first half of this powerful Pluto/Jupiter/Uranus T-Square (formed around the Winter Solstice) has benefitted from various harmonious aspects giving this energy of change, conflict, and power struggles some beneficial waves of diplomacy and order to better coordinate the propensities for debate and discussion. With the Spring Equinox, although relatively well-balanced, we enter a more complicated second phase where things are more cowboy as the Plutonian status quo repression, the Uranian freewheeling revolution and Jupiterian open, optimistic rhetoric energies become more intent on asserting their particular agendas and are less willing to cooperate or compromise. Moreover, it seems that discussions could be less productive, less realistic as well as more intense and challenging.

If the Winter was spent constructively building bridges and working for change, then the Spring can be a great period of action and implementation; if not, then the danger is that with these aspects, one can get overwhelmed with powerful forces of change which bring a lot of resistance. Moreover, it seems that certain relationships could reach a kind of crisis point. This could be the most intense season of the year. I think it’s a question of using adaptation skills to assure that various changes work out in a positive manner. The positive energy of the two eclipses should help things and the positive transformative energy of the Sun Sextile Pluto in Conjuction with Chiron is a factor to be reckoned. Happy Spring to one and all.

“This is spirit's progress, and it may be said to be a process of regeneration, shortly typified by crucifixion and resurrection. The old man dies, the new man rises from his grave. The old man, with his lusts, is crucified; the new man is raised up to live a spiritual and holy life. It is regeneration of spirit that is the culmination of bodily life, and the process is crucifixion of self, a daily death, as Paul was wont to say.

 In the life of spiritual progress there should be no stagnation, no paralysis. It should be a growth and a daily adaptation of knowledge; a mortification of the earthly and sensual, and a corresponding development of the spiritual and heavenly. In other words, it is a growth in grace and in knowledge of the Christ; the purest type of human life presented to your imitation. It is a clearing away of the material, and a development of the spiritual--a purging as by fire, the fire of a consuming zeal; of a lifelong struggle with self, and all that self includes; of an ever-widening grasp of Divine truth.”

Spirit Teachings, Section 30, William Stainton Moses

References:

Robert Hand, Planets in Transit

http://www.billherbst.com/Comm21.pdf

http://www.astrobarry.com/2017/feb2617.php

for more on the Pluto/Uranus/Jupiter T-Square see:

https://theosophyproject.blogspot.ca/2016/12/astrology-winter-solstice-wednesday.html

Plato's Four Arguments for the Immortality of the Soul from the Phaedo part 4

4- Argument from Causation through Forms (Form of Life) (102b-107b)

Objection: The soul pre-exists, but even if it continues after death, it might not be immortal; it might eventually wear out and perish.

A full response to this objection requires a full treatment of the causes of generation and destruction.

As previously discussed, we can assume the existence of such forms as absolute beauty, goodness, and magnitude (see Argument 2). A thing is beautiful because it take part in absolute beauty. It is by beauty that beautiful things are beautiful and the same goes for forms such as largeness and smallness.

From this perspective, it would  be better to say that a tall man is taller by virtue of tallness than being tall by a head because a person cannot be taller by the same thing that makes someone shorter (or by something that is short).

We can then infer that no object can come into being except by participation in the reality peculiar to its appropriate universal; therefore, one plus one equals two, not by virtue of addition, but by participation in duality.

For example, Simmias is bigger than Socrates due to his height, and Socrates has the attribute of shortness relative to the height of Simmias.

Additionally, Simmias is smaller than Phaedo because Phaedo has the attribute of tallness in comparison with the shortness of Simmias.

Therefore Simmias is both short and tall, because his shortness is surpassed by the tallness of Phaedo and his tallness is asserted over the shortness of Socrates.

We can further infer that a form (tallness) cannot be both tall and short; tallness will not admit shortness; if shortness approaches, it must either withdraw or cease to exist.

However, Socrates can receive both shortness and tallness, but tallness itself cannot receive shortness and remain what it is.

And as seen from the first argument, opposite things come from opposite things; but the form of opposite itself can never become opposite to itself.

Therefore snow can never admit heat and remain snow; fire cannot admit cold. Moreover, the attribute of the form is applicable to both the form and the object possessing the form. For example Three is both three and odd, though not identical with oddness.

A given form does not admit its opposite and everything that possesses that form also does not admit its opposite.

For example, three (which is odd) cannot admit anything that is even and remain three. Three is always accompanied by the opposite of even (odd), even though not odd itself. Two is always accompanied by the opposite of odd (even). Fire is always accompanied by the opposite of cold (hot).

Consequently, double will not admit the form of odd; one and a half will not admit the form of whole.

Therefore it takes fire to make a body hot, not heat. (It takes an object possessing the form of heat and not the form of heat itself). Hence it takes fever to make a body diseased, not the form of disease itself.

We can then infer that it takes the soul to make the body alive and not the form of Life; and the opposite of life is death; therefore soul cannot admit its opposite, which is death; and that which does not admit death is immortal. Therefore the soul is immortal.

What is immortal is imperishable. God and the form of Life are immortal.

And so when death comes, the mortal part dies, and the immortal part escapes unharmed and indestructible and so we can infer that our souls will exist in the next world.

If the soul is immortal, then it demands care at all times. It takes nothing to the next world except the education and training it received in this life. Then it is of supreme importance in helping the newly deceased at the very beginning of their journey there.
Back to Part 1 

Plato's Four Arguments for the Immortality of the Soul from the Phaedo part 3

3- Argument from Affinity (Body / Soul duality) (78b-84b)

At this point, a question is raised: we are sure the soul exists before birth, but how can we be sure it continues after death?

In responding, we first need to ask what sort of thing would be naturally dispersed after death.

A composite or natural object will decompose, an incomposite one will not. Incomposite things are constant and invariable, and so these can thus be considered as absolute realities. Absolute Equality or Beauty are constant and invariable whereas concrete instances of beauty or equality are inconstant and variable. Concrete objects are sensual and perceivable whereas constant entities are only perceivable by thought, hence they are invisible.

One can therefore infer that invisible things are invariable and visible things are variable.

Now human beings are part body and part soul and the body is visible whereas the soul is invisible.

When the soul uses the body for inquiry (via the senses), it is drawn to the variable natures and gets confused; but when it investigates by itself, it passes into the pure, eternal, immortal,  immovable, and absolute nature which is constant and invariable; this latter process is then a kindred nature with the soul.

Therefore the body is variable and the soul invariable; and it would be good then, to assume that the divine part, the soul, should govern, and the mortal part, the body, should serve.

Conclusion:

Body	Soul
Human	Divine
Mortal	Immortal
Unintelligible	Intelligible
Multiform	Uniform
Dissoluble	Indissoluble
Never Self-Consistent	Always Self-Consistent
Variable	Invariable

The philosopher, following reason and shunning pleasure and passions, frees himself from the imprisonment of the body and does not fear death.

Part 4 

Plato's Four Arguments for the Immortality of the Soul from the Phaedo part 2

2- Argument from the Theory of recollection

Recollection (72e-76e)
Definition of recollection: If we question someone in a certain way so as that they are lead to give a correct answer to a problem that they previously did not understand, or a correct understanding of a diagram they did not understand, this would indicate that the person had prior knowledge but had forgotten it and required that there memory be stimulated (For a full development of this concept, see Plato’s Meno).

If someone is reminded of something, then they must have known it previously. Recollection is arriving at knowledge in a particular way. Ex. Lovers see an object belonging o loved one and remember lover. Objects not seen in a while, that we had forgotten. Recollection may be caused by similar or dissimilar objects (one can see an object of Simmias or a portrait of Simmias and be reminded of Simmias)

Forms or Ideas (Eidos)

Along with recollection, we need to understand the nature of knowledge, and to this end we need to introduce the notion of forms (or ideas, in Greek: eidos).

To understand that nature of a form, let us admit that there is such a thing as equality (absolute equality, not the relative equality of two sticks, for example).

We can then observe that from seeing two equal sticks we are reminded of the idea of equality which exists separate from the sticks.

Whether the two sticks are similar or dissimilar does not matter as long as they remind you of the idea of equality. They do not have to be perfectly equal to remind one of equality.

We can then infer that we must have had previous knowledge, a previous understanding of equality, to understand the nature of seeing equals things striving after equality and falling short.

Sensation and Cognitive Theory

Note that it is through the senses that we perceive equality in sensible objects; therefore we must have acquired knowledge before using our senses; and since we acquire the sense faculties at birth, then we must have acquired this knowledge prior to our birth.

We can therefore infer that we must have acquired knowledge of all absolute standards before and at our birth.

And so we are born knowing and continue to know all our lives; we retain the knowledge we possess; and forgetting is loss of knowledge.

Therefore if we had knowledge prior to birth and lose it at birth and recover it after birth by exercizing our senses on objects, then this process is recollection.

Furthermore, since it is possible to be reminded of something we had forgotten by seeing an object (through association), then seeing is a kind of recollection.

So if someone us unable to explain something, it means that they do not possess that knowledge, then they need to recollect it, having forgotten it. When had they known it? If not in this life, then it must have been prior to that.

Conclusion

Hence souls had a previous existence, independent of bodies, and were possessed of intelligence, so we can infer that they must have had knowledge that embodiment has caused them to forget, therefore freedom from body gives them greater knowledge.

In conclusion, if there are absolute realities such as Beauty and Goodness and it is to them we refer to recollect, as copies refer to original patterns, then all objects of sensible perception can stimulate recollection.

Moreover, if these absolute realities exist, then so do our souls before our birth; if one of the two notions is impossible, so is the other.

Part 3 

Plato's Four Arguments for the Immortality of the Soul from the Phaedo part 1

1- Argument from Generation of Opposites (70b-72d)

Presented herein are the four arguments for the immortality of the soul from that classic work on reincarnation, Plato’s Phaedo.

Historical analysis has determined that Socrates’ associates in this dialogue are Pythagoreans, and so there is no need to argue for the belief in reincarnation as it is an accepted belief of Pythagoreanism. Moreover, one notices various allusions to Greek mystery religions, and so one can infer that this dialogue pertains to teachings related to the mysteries of initiation, making this dialogue a kind of philosophical mystery drama.

The first argument begins with the question: Do the souls of the departed exist in another world or not?

Accepting the Pythagorean account of reincarnation, the first premise proposed is:

“The living come into being again from the dead”

We can infer, therefore, that our souls exist in another world because if they did not come from the dead, they would not pre-exist.

And so the task at hand is to prove that the living come from the dead, that this is a necessary law.

To do this, a more general premise is presented:

Everything that is generated (plants, animals, humans) is generated from opposites; for example, when a thing becomes bigger it must have been smaller first.

This theory of opposites is a prevalent notion in Greek natural science; see, for example, Aristotle, Physics book 1. Further examples are given:

Smaller	Bigger
Weaker	Stronger
Faster	Slower
Worse	Better
Just	Unjust

Moreover, there are two processes of generation, the first to the second and the second to the first (back and forth and vice versa). For example:

Increasing	Decreasing
Separating	Combining
Cooling	Heating
Sleeping	Waking
Living	Dying

Hence, between each pair of opposites, there are two processes of generation.

We can then assume:

As sleeping and waking are generated opposites that have going to sleep and waking up as a process, so living and dying are generated opposites, the process being dying and coming to life.

And if this is so, then the souls of the dead exist in a place where they are to be reborn.

Furthermore, we can assume that the process of change from opposites must exist in a continuous cycle, or else things would remain static because if there was no waking up, we would always be asleep, and if there was no coming to life, then everything would die away.

One can then infer that since this process never ends, then the soul is immortal.

Part Two 

The Rose Garden (Gulistan) of Sa'di

Human beings are members of a whole,
In creation of one essence and soul.
If one member is afflicted with pain,
Other members uneasy will remain.
If you have no sympathy for human pain,
The name of human you cannot retain.

The above verse can be found in the entrance of the United Nations Hall of Nations: building. Known as Bani Adam, (the Children of Adam), it is from chapter 1, story 10 of "The Rose Garden"( Gulistan) of Sa'di (1210-1291), a Persian poet in 1258. (Rhyming translation by -M. Aryanpoor) Iranian poet Sa'adi, from the 13th century, is one of the major influential Persian poets of the medieval period. He is recognised in the literary world for the quality of his writing style and in the spiritual realm for the depth of his thoughts. The well-known saying “I cried because I had no shoes until I met a man who had no feet”, which was highly valued by Helen Keller, comes from Chapter 3, Story 19 of The Rose Garden.

His Rose Garden is said to be one of the widest read books of all time. It is wonderfully edifying poetic work full of short parables, verses and maxims, with a Sufi leaning. There are ten chapters:

I The Manners of Kings
II On the Morals of Dervishes
III On the Excellence of Content
IV On the Advantages of Silence
V On Love and Youth
VI On Weakness and Old Age
VII On the Effects of Education
VIII On Rules for Conduct in Life

Below is a translation from Sir Edwin Arnold:

The sons of Adam are limbs of each other
Having been created of one essence.
When the calamity of time afflicts one limb
The other limbs cannot remain at rest.
If thou hast no sympathy for the troubles of others
Thou art unworthy to be called by the name of a man.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/gulistan.txt

This post dedicated to the victims of the Quebec City mosque shooting
http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebec-mosque-shooting-muslim-community-expresses-gratitude-for-outpouring-of-support 

Harvey Cox - The Market as God - 3rd Global Conference on World's Religions after September 11

Harvey Cox is the Hollis Research Professor of Divinity at Harvard Divinity School. The following is a paraphrase of a talk given on September 15, 2016 at the 3rd Global Conference on World's Religions after September 11. He has also published a book recently on the subjet:
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674659681

His thesis is similar to concepts of Mircea Eliade who posits that even in a desacralized society, structures of the sacred do not disappear, they persist in more secular forms, so one can perceive mythical  and initiatic structures in novels and films, for example.


The Market as God – Consumer Capitalism as a Religious System

We live as a deified economy. Why are we all so gloomy? Why are we so self-obsessed? There is a global crisis. Consumer Capitalism is contributing to the destruction of our common home. This religion is not represented. Priests don’t admit it is a religion, but pronouncements are expected to be infallible such as ‘’the market will correct itself’’; yet the poor are still waiting.There is a market god with a market faith. There is an office of evangelisation. There are enormous efforts of penetration of market missionaries. It is a world faith with all the accoutrements of religion: a narrative, rituals, cathedrals (malls). There are prophets who look into future to invest funds. There is credulity, even if not producing what is promised, such as when poverty persists. If someone dies of hunger, there are no police to locate the culprit; when homeless person dies it is not news, but when the Dow (stock market) goes down, it’s news.Polemic debate was a fine art amongst all known religions but we are now in a post -polemical era between world religions. Where are the great skeptics such as Voltaire,who made fun of his religion. People turn to this destructive market Deity that causes despair and homelessness. We need a rebirth of historical critical thinking with polemics to deal objectively with religion.

The market God has become omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent. Monetary values have invaded all parts of our life. People pay their children to do the dishes. Students are viewed as customers and students thinks of themselves as consumers. Their used to be a sense of community. It is everywhere, it is extending its grip, it is relentless. It has us all in its thrall, but cannot make good on its promises. It’s omniscience is now under question. It is an incredible faith we are asked to subscribe to. It uses parables: commercials are mini-parables in three acts: 1- Illustrates consumers inadequacy; 2- Proposes some product; 3- The result is bliss. I went to Clifford Geerts anthropologist and his definition of religion is: system of symbols which acts to establish a persistent, pervasive and long lasting motivation in the form of a worldview that influences behavior in long run.

This market system has a narrative, symbols, rituals; it is a complete system with the objective to buy things. It’s about commodity, distribution and sales. I heard a confession of a businessman: “I spend all of my days trying to convince people to buy things they did not need”. It is a religion that persuades people to buy something that they don’t need. We all share the guilt for that. It is the escalation of one institution as the dominant force in our society. The market greatly exceeds its role, a dominant narrative is created. I am disappointed that people in theology don’t recognize this or gladly go along with it. This almighty God, all hearts open to him, all desire him who demands an impermanent fulfillment of needs. There is a cathedral in Milano; there is a mall whose design replicates the cathedral. Let us not ignore it, let us face honestly its threat because there is a globalization of indifference. Let us begin to train our critical thinking and our polemics at this threat. We have the right not to starve, and not to die of cold.