posted February 14, 2012 01:05 PM            

i was checking over my chart with longtime friend and sort of ex with whom i experience occasional mutual attraction but with whom i'm not sure i should be (complicated). anyway i noticed that natally we each have sun trine pluto. we're born the same year, and our suns are trined (making a grand trine from both our natals to pluto), BUT in composite, we have sun OPPOSED pluto.

so yeah, i wonder how two nice flowing energies in natal/synastries can, when taken at their midpoint, become an opposition? my best theory is that it's for the purpose of BALANCE as opposed to struggle, but that has gotten me thinking that interpreting composite should be *MOSTLY* based on natal/synastry to begin with, with variable meanings, *relative* to those. cuz yeah, i don't see how in the world all these lovely trines become a power struggle..

posted February 14, 2012 02:07 PM            

but i wonder like WHY spiritually we should have a challenge come of something we are both inherently in harmony with? the math of it makes sense forsure and i believe there is a sacredness and wisdom to the math, i'm just curious how/why that translates psychologically..?

i guess, maybe, we're both so in tune with pluto on our own terms (each a tight trine) that we are 'asked' to face that energy head-on by way of the opposition, and the challenge of the opposition exists because we need to reconcile our differing relationships to pluto. so this is why i have the theory that composites should be observed through the lense of natal/synastry first and foremost. cuz yeah i agree oppositions aren't 'bad' BUT most interps of sun opp pluto is major power struggles within the relationship. personally we don't seem to have that, BUT i can see how our respective sun trine plutos are in a slight challenge *because* we each have a strong sense of pluto affixed to our consciousness, so together we need to find a reconciliation, or balance in order to see eye to eye. *fortunately* we have sun trine sun in synastry so it isnt' so difficult to get on the same page when we have minor challenges.

so, i feel the opposition is assisted by our natal and synastric trines and therefore the positives of the opposition are much easier to accomplish.

and yeah mutual squares in natal would create either an opposition or a conjunction in composite, so again the opportunity for reconciliation or balance is there.

posted February 14, 2012 05:04 PM              

quote:

---

okay so why do two trines creat opposition in composite?

---

it's pure maths.composites are created by mildpoints from one person's planets to another...

Basic astrology forum, How to approach Synastry http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum12/private-jjLYZw161/HTML/000667.html

posted February 14, 2012 05:45 PM            

yeah i get that at its most basic it's the math, buuuut i couldn't wrap my brain around why aspects that were positive would come together to create a challenge.

but it's interesting cuz i'm applying my theory (basically that you filter syanstry through natal and then composite through synastry) to my composite with my ex (twice over) whom i've been in love with for 17 years and whom this psychic astrologer lady said is my twin soul, and our composite only has two (sets, involving conjunctions) of negative aspects, and both would ordinarily basically 'doom' a relationship: merc/mars square neptune and moon/venus sq uranus. BUT i'm looking at the 'story' of our natals and synastry a little more closely and due to us each having some 'backstory' that we carry into these aspects, they seem far less daunting.

like, we both have mercury conjunct mars natally. and we both have mercury *eight degrees* from aspecting neptune *positively* either way, so together they make up for those 8 degs and create an exact square. but the positive aspect was only barely grasped by us each respectively, being in wide orb, but it's like together we pull up that slack. and i have more theories on the particulars but i'm already babbling as it is.. but yeah it alters the traditional meaning of mercury or mars square neptune to me.

and then the moon square uranus, that's supposed to be another doomer, but in natal he has moon cj urauns and i have moon opp uranus. but his sun is on my moon and so this is a very active axis but it is also a type of energy we are both familiar with and thus can *work with* in my opinion. also it's all fixed- in both natals and in composite. and of course moon cj venus helps ground and soften things too. and moon/venus falls on my ceres and his eros too, so that helps.

okay all this is seeming pretty obvious now but it's like, i am feeling less comfortable looking at a composite and saying 'this means that' cuz unless you know the charts inside and out, and even when you do, you're going to struggle with defining the real meaning or manifestation of any aspect.

posted January 28, 2016 09:37 PM            

Sum the two midpoint results ( from the two trines) and it will be 60+120= 180, hence the opposition in the composite

if both trines had the near midpoints ( instead of one near and one far), then the composite would have had resulted in a trine ( 60+60=120).