posted January 05, 2018 03:35 PM            

1. The orb has to be tight. I think 1<
2.The contra-parallel is the opposition
3. I think a parallel aspect between two traditionally unaspected is enough on its own. An additional aspect between further emphasizes the nature of the aspect.
4.Declinations for cusps and North Node can also be used.

I have Mercury/Jupiter parallel and Mercury/Sun parallel. But the two make no aspects to each other on the flat wheel.

Nevertheless, I do identify strongly with both. Especially since when looked at holistically, they all form parallel " stellium" of Jupiter,Sun and Mercury.

posted January 05, 2018 04:31 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by kirki:
Hi i would like to ask what is the orb we can use for parallels,if contraparallel is same as opposition.

---

Depends on the planet, but generally 1-1.5°. Less for the outermost planets Uranus, Neptune, Pluto; more for Sun, Moon, Jupiter. Luminaries in aspect with each other, possibly up to 2°.

quote:

---

Also if we can use declinations for cusps,and north node.

---

Yes.

quote:

---

My north node is parallel to neptune but there are no aspects between them,so a parallel is significant by itself or requires an aspect too?

---

That parallel is like a conjunction. It does not need another aspect in longitude (zodiac) to make it real.

posted January 05, 2018 07:58 PM            

I've read online parallels are like conjunction but softer. Same for opposition. What do you guys think about this?

posted January 05, 2018 08:18 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by SimplyLuna:
[B]Is it okay I ask a few questions about declination too?

I've read online parallels are like conjunction but softer. Same for opposition. What do you guys think about this?

---

Yes.

quote:

---

And... how about Mercury? I have Mercury contraparellel Pluto at between 1-1.5 degree. Is the orb too wide?

---

That aspect would get only about a 1° orb.

posted January 06, 2018 03:09 PM            

I like em. Ever since I learned of em, I have been fascinated.

posted January 06, 2018 06:17 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aries23Degrees:
I don't get the "like conjunctions but "softer" part" on these sites. What makes a Moon conjunct Mars "softer" than Moon/Mars parallel?

---

Softer means less intense in spite of the similar dynamic of fusion of two planets, or special emphasis.

I estimate that two planets/points in parallel aspect -- unless they are the tightest aspect in the chart -- have the dynamic of a conjunction, but less intensity of a conjunction relative to the arc space/time difference. In other words, because there is 360° arc space that creates a conjunction in longitude, but only a total of 114° maximum (based on Moon's max declination of 28.5°), there is only about 1/3 the arc space in declination to create parallels. (In reality this is more like a max of 25° for OOB planets, thus 100° for the total paths). This means they happen more often, and there is less distance to create as much tension/climax/importance. Therefore, parallels of declination are major aspects, but probably have an intensity more like that of a sextile or trine. So that is the explanation of 'softer'.

This may not be as true in practice if a parallel aspect in a person's chart is the tightest one in it. That gives it an emphasis of its own that may allow it to outweigh the influence of other conjunctions in their chart.

posted January 13, 2018 07:15 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by SimplyLuna:
thanks Kannon! the information is useful. In that case mercury with 1° orb from my understanding. Also for Venus and Mars?

---

Yes.

quote:

---

Can I also ask what orb is suggested for planets on the angles? Is it the same concept between planets?

---

About the same. I do know that the Moon for example can be given at least a 1.5° orb for parallels / contra-parallels to Asc or MC -- IF you know that Asc or MC figure is dead-on accurate. That must be partly because the Moon is so close to Earth compared to other planets. I think the Sun would get a similar orb.

posted January 23, 2018 08:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kannon McAfee:
Softer means less intense in spite of the similar dynamic of fusion of two planets, or special emphasis.

I estimate that two planets/points in parallel aspect -- unless they are the tightest aspect in the chart -- have the dynamic of a conjunction, but less intensity of a conjunction relative to the arc space/time difference. In other words, because there is 360° arc space that creates a conjunction in longitude, but only a total of 114° maximum (based on Moon's max declination of 28.5°), there is only about 1/3 the arc space in declination to create parallels. (In reality this is more like a max of 25° for OOB planets, thus 100° for the total paths). This means they happen more often, and there is less distance to create as much tension/climax/importance. Therefore, parallels of declination are major aspects, but probably have an intensity more like that of a sextile or trine. So that is the explanation of 'softer'.

This may not be as true in practice if a parallel aspect in a person's chart is the tightest one in it. That gives it an emphasis of its own that may allow it to outweigh the influence of other conjunctions in their chart.

---

Not true, Parallel is a very strong aspect, even stronger than a conjunction. I have seen the effects as loosely as a 2.50 orb for Parallels especially involving the inner planets.

posted January 26, 2018 11:17 AM            

N I don’t think he literally ment that parallels are like trines and sextiles but it’s influence and feel is softer in effect like tribes, to me it makes sense as far as harmony.

This makes sense to me because from my experience parallels seem to express themselves in a very immediate way, I can always pick them up, but it seems to come from a “softer” way of expression, like more subtle and I’m not sure if I’m using the proper usage but inna way “positive” expressions of the conjunction. I see the less ego side of parallels.

Like for example, mars and Pluto parallels don’t seem to be as confrontational, tho I’ve met two girls with their mars parallel their moons and they both have a very biting way of expressing themselves, not super obvious but apparent enough I could pick up on an argumentative, snappy side that wouldn’t be as readily apparent in their flat charts with no obvious mars aspects but made total sense once I looked at declination. To me it just felt like the energy was expressed in a more subdued way, yet still potent enough that I’m able to pick up on the parallel energies.

posted January 26, 2018 01:02 PM            

Mercury-Jupiter parallel
Sun-Mercury parallel
Uranus-Mc parallel