Horoscope Superimposition Techniques: Dialogue

(Dialogue between Michael Robbins and Phillip Lindsay)

MR: I believe it is profitable to bring the Sun to the natal ascendant. AAB with a 9 degree Leo natal ascendant should have  the Sun advanced to the same degree, and all planets and points advanced to their respective degrees. The Sun sign is a subset of the Ascendant.

PL: OK, I was interested to get this feedback re the presentation of such charts. It means then that the outer life can be seen on the inner wheel an the inner life on the outer wheel.

MR: Unless I am missing something, where we put these wheels on paper makes very little difference. In the Solar Fire format, the natal chart usually has its house cusp degree numbers on the outer wheel, but its planetary positions on the inner wheel. The solar chart would then, in terms of appearance, be the outer wheel, or the second circle. I think the important thing is to consider the natal chart as the subjectively inner wheel.

To the best of my recollection, Stephen Pugh and others when approaching one type of superimposition, simply contrast the natal chart with solar chart using equal houses, and there is much to be learned thereby. For instance, if my 10 degree Aries Sun were at the cusp of the first house, then my Venus in 12 Taurus would be in the second house (as contrasted with the 11th house position in the natal chart), and my Saturn and Uranus (8+ Gemini and 1+ Gemini respectively) would be almost into the third house, etc.(in contrast with the 11th house position in the natal). SP says that such a solar chart represents the personality life in a way which the natal chart does not (though of course he recognizes that the natal chart also has much to say about the personality).  Of course it would be best to let him speak for himself in these matters.

The kind of super-imposition we are now attempting is something different, and more strange in a way. It has to be researched to make sure we are really learning something, and not just imposing our expectations on a new chart form.

PL: One major question I have is how relevant are the planetary positions after they are all advanced by the same arc as the Sun to the Ascendant? What reasoning can we apply to their significance? For instance in the AAB charts,  inner chart (IC) Jupiter is conjunct outer chart (OC) Pluto. IC Neptune conjunct OC Sun.

MR: Certainly the aspects are significant, as probably, also the house positions. Research will tell whether the sign position means anything. Really, we are looking for geometrical alignments rather than qualitative changes. But still, these qualitative changes could be considered and their indications fathomed–as long as we do not read too much in.

PL: If we are to gain some sort of interpretation about the inner and outer lives, the symbolism is certainly apt, but what is the reasoning and rationalisation behind doing such a thing? Unless we have a true occult understanding as to why it is relevant, then our understanding will only be mystical at best. Do you know what I am getting at here?

MR: I get it. Perhaps the greatest symbolism is the alignment of the personality (Sun) with the soul (indicated at least somewhat by the Asc.) If these two are in alignment (as eventually they must be) what else much be *done* to help bring this about. Maybe other planetary connections caused by the revolution of the wheel by the appropriate arc will tell us of energy manipulations towards which we must strive, or which would appear once the Sun and Asc. were in alignment.

PL:  My understanding of moving the Sun to the Ascendant is about looking at the potential of fusion of soul and personality.

MR: Yes, I think so.

PL: So are we to regard all the other planetary arc movements in a similar symbolical manner? For such an important revelation of being shown the inner and outer lives, how can such a thing be so? Is there some deeper astronomical or other reason behind the symbology?

MR: I think it’s worth a look, for the reason offered above. I don’t think we are going to find the reason in astronomy, unless its some kind of “inner astronomy” represented in rotations and alignments of vehicles. How must the personality vechicles “turn” in relation to the turning or rotatry motion of the causal body. All these vehicles are, after all, turning, which reflects astronomical cycles. But we are venturing into the unseen here–yet I feel the key is there to be found.

PL: Another question also arises – is this the type of superimpostion to which DK was referring?

MR: We are going at superimposition in a rather technical way. However, what about superimpositing one *quality* upon another *quality*, in an hierarchical manner. What happens if I superimpose love on greed? Or luminous intelligence upon anxiety? In a way, all higher qualities are to be superimposed hierarchically upon lower qualities. The higher then order and command the lower and alter their expression. So I think there is a king of psychospiritual superimposition of the meaning of a superior chart upon the meaning and tendencies of a lower chart, with the purpose of correcting or modifying the expression of the lower.

As one example, what happens if I superimpose (qualitatively) my Cancer Asc. on my Aries Sun. Do I not become more sensitive, and more caring about repercussions. Do I not “push forward” (Aries) with “consideration” Cancer–etc.

I would suggest that as a mental psychological discipline, we simply experiment with qualitative super-imposition.

Probably, technical, geometrical superimpostion implies a qualitative superimposition. Always in superimposition there should be hierarchicalization–I think.

MR: I believe the birth chart should always be considered an “inner wheel”. The Sun sign chart (advanced by the arc separating the natal Ascendant from the natal Sun, should be considered an outer and secondary wheel, as it is built up around the Sun sign, and therefore refers (initially) to the personality. One can also simply consider the Sun-sign degree as an Ascendant, and find other houses by an equal house system numbering from the Sun sign as Ascendant.

PL: When you say ‘built up around the Sun sign’ does that mean then that it equates with point 6. in EA513?

MR: Yes, in a way. Any Sun-centered chart is built up around the Sun. This “built up” terminology could indicate simply a solar chart (sunrise chart) OR it could mean that the Sun and its exoteric rulers would simply be considered the most important factor in an ordinary chart. The Rising Sign would then be emphasized in a more personal or material sense (as it seems to function in the life of a child–physically)

PL: This is what I am addressing in my ‘reply # 3’ because there seems to be some confusion about this. Point 6 is talking about ‘adequate for ordinary humanity’. If it does relate to point 6, then what does the horoscope for Point 7 look like? Just with the rising sign which dictates where the sun and other planets fall by sign and house?

MR: Yes, I believe so. Just an ordinary chart, with the Asc. and its esoteric ruler emphasized over the Sun and its orthodox ruler. As well, in such a chart, if one wanted to emphasize soul indications over personal indications, one could take the obvious step of contrasting the esoteric and exoteric rulers of the houses–their signs and aspects. Probably illuminating indications could be gathered in the ordinary natal chart by contrasting the sign ruler of every planetary position. For instance, if my Mars were in Cancer, I might contrast the Moon (its sign, house and aspects) with Neptune (its sign house and aspects). This might show subtle spiritual reinforcements to the Mars position as compared with the more ordinary associations.

PL: A. As given in EA513-2 – horoscopes “built around the Sun sign” and “built up around the rising sign”.  B. As given in EA59-60 – Conception chart and birth chart.  C. As given in TWM 239 – physical, astral and mental charts:”geometry of the individual”. Similar to Point  B.

PL:  Point A: In EA513 : “6. The horoscope, built around the Sun sign, is adequate for ordinary humanity. The exoteric planets rule and the man lives within the limitations of the twelve houses.”

When DK says “The horoscope built around the Sun sign” – does he mean just an ordinary horoscope? I think we have always assumed that. Is there anything to be read into “built around the Sun sign” ? Or is he just speaking figuratively, i.e. that the focus is just on the Sun and exoteric rulers?

MR: As stated in the previous email, solar charts can be used (sun degree equals Asc. degree); or the ordinary horoscope can be  interpreted with special attention to the sun degree, sign, house, and aspects, as well as the orthodox ruler of sun–its degree, sign, house and aspects. So he could mean the solar chart, and also be speaking, as you say, “figuratively”

PL: In EA513-2: “7. The horoscope built up around the rising sign, with the esoteric planets ruling, will convey the destiny of the disciple. As I told you, the disciple will later be responding to the influences of the twelve arms of the three Crosses as they pour their influences through the esoteric planetary rulers via the twelve houses.”

When DK says “The horoscope built up around the rising sign”, is he talking figuratively, i.e. the focus is on the rising sign and esoteric rulers? Or is he talking about the Sun/Asc arc? Is there anything else to be read into “built up around the rising sign”?

MR: For me, at this time, I would take the Asc. as the dominating energy (in the highest place–hierarchically), and subordinate all other enegies to it.  It would then be the central focus, and in a way, would be (figuratively) superimposed upon all other energies in the horoscope.

PL: If he is talking about the Sun/Asc arc, then would that mean we go back and approach point 6 in a different light?

MR: It seems that the use of the Sun/Asc arc is only useful if working with a bi-wheel configuration. I cannot see the value of interpreting the natal  chart by adding the Sun/Asc arc to all factors in the natal chart and treating this new chart as if it were an independent chart. I can see the value of arc-adding only in relation to the original natal chart (unless we were focussing on internal charts–another matter).

PL:  EA512: “8. The Sun sign, governed by the ruling esoteric planets and the rising sign governed also by the esoteric planets, can both be used in casting the horoscope of the initiate; when superimposed upon each other, the outer life of the initiate in the three worlds and the inner life of subjective realisation will appear. This mode of super-imposition will be a feature of the new astrology.”

What does this actually mean? Are we on the right track by simply moving the Sun to Ascendant position?

MR: No easy answer here.

1. The simplest way is to compare and contrast the degree, sign, house and aspects of the esoteric ruler of the Asc. with the degree, sign, house and aspects of the esoteric ruler of the Sun sign. As well the Sun and Asc (pure and simple) should be compared and contrasted–as well as the rays transmitted through their signs.
2. However, what about “planet(s)”–in the plural? Because the “outer life of the initiate in the three worlds” is mentioned, it looks like the house  position is very important. House position can also tell much about the inner life, as anyone will realize when the *esoteric* meanings of the houses are used.

3. One can simply by arc move the Sun to the Asc, but then the rulers all  change, don’t they? This gets back to your question of whether the new sign position of the arc-moved planets counts for anything. Moreover, with the change in sign of the Sun (as it is arc-moved to the natal Asc), the esoteric ruler of the Asc and the new Sun position become the *same*–not very good for contrasting.

4. Arc-movement I think is good for showing possible soul-personality alignments which can be worked upon and finally achieved. I think it may give *a* formula for soul-personality alignment–not *the* formula.

5. If we want to retain the Sun in its original position and all planets in their original positions, and still have *two* charts to compare and contrast  (and thus to superimpose–the greater upon the lesser), then we could again produce a solar chart. Make the Sun position house number one and create equal houses.

Then, go house by house and position by position always using *esoteric* planets. In my own case, the higher order chart at the first house would show the Neptune esoteric ruler of the Asc. in the third house almost conjunct the IC.

This would be superimposed upon the esoteric ruler of my solar-Aries Asc–Mercury–and Mercury would be slightly in the 12th H, just four degrees from the Asc.

Perhaps then, I could also look for the esoteric ruler of the Nepune sign (Libra), which would be Uranus in Gemini in the 11th, and the esoteric ruler of Mercury in Aries, which is Mercury itself in the 12th of the Solar-Asc.chart.

I could then go from house to house doing the same, comparing, contrasting and basically superimposing (or making more important) the esoteric rulers and positions of the natal chart upon the esoteric rulers and positions of the solar chart.

The advantage of this system would be that the signs would remain as they actually are. House cusps, house cusp rulers and the position of house cusp rulers would all change.

I wonder, when using a solar chart, whether a person should be a *personality*. If the person were not yet a personality, much might be learned by putting the Moon as the first house cusp–I think as Zach has suggested.

PL: Point 8. seems to be talking about combining the horoscopes of points 6. and 7.

If DK is talking about advancing the Sun to the Ascendant in point 7., then points 6, 7 & 8 are respectively: ordinary birth chart, Sun to Asc chart, and the combination of both?  This seems to be critical in understanding the sequence of points given.

MR: When the horoscope is built up around the Rising Sign, I think it is the ordinary natal chart, using esoteric rulers.

I suggest the following:

1. Point 6 could be,  a): the ordinary birth chart emphasizing the exoteric  rulers, and especially the exoteric ruler of the Sun as well as the Sun  degree, sign, house position and aspects; b) the solar chart alone (Sun as  the Asc) using exoteric rulers of all houses. Obviously, the position of  these rulers would be different (almost always) than the exoteric rulers of  the natal house cusps.

2. Point 7 could be the normal astrological chart, interpreted by means of  analyzing the degrees, signs, house positions and aspects of the esoteric  rulers.

3. Point 8 could be: a) the use of the natal chart with esoteric rulers of  house cusps and planetary sign positions, contrasted with the solar chart,  also with esoteric rulers of house cusps and planetary sign positions; or, b) a biwheel with the Sun advanced to the Asc. degree and all planets advanced by the same arc. I do not, however, think that this is what the Tibetan means for us to do in point 8 (as revelatory as this technique may be). The rulership system is thrown off if we advance the Sun to the Asc and all planets by the Sun/Asc arc. What may be revealed are new alignments (as I have suggested in this document and the two earlier ones written today). I think it is very valuable to work in this way, but I am not sure DK means this in point 8.

This gets back to Phillip’s original question about the validity of the new sign positions created by arc-advancement. We would have to very careful here. Obviously, the individual was not born with these arc-advanced positions. Does he have them or not? Qualitatively, I would say “No”. However any strong and tight aspects caused by arc-advancement might show desirable relationships between faculties (i.e.,planets) within the  human energy system. Just as we all strive to make the Sun a subset of the Asc., so we might strive to make a certain planet in the Sun-advanced chart a subset of a  natal planet.

As I have said before, however, it is possible to superimpose qualitatively without the technical arc-geometry.

PL:  EA512: “9. When the Sun sign, with the exoteric rulers, is worked out in a chart, the rising sign with the esoteric rulers is also worked out and the two are superimposed upon each other, the problem of the disciple in any one incarnation will appear.”

This seems to be employing the same techniques as point 8. except the focus is on different rulerships.

MR: I agree.

PL: Point B:

If in Point A the inner/outer charts are the birth and Sun to Asc charts, how is that read differently from the conception and birth charts being the inner and outer charts?

MR: When dealing with the conrast between the conception chart and birth chart (forgetting the animation chart for the moment), I would prefer to keep them distinct.

Yes, something might be learned by bringing the natal chart Sun (the natal chart now being the *inferior chart*) to the conception Asc. and advancing all planets accordingly, but the technique seems rather too complicated, or too technical.

I would simply go house by house–checking:   1. the esoteric ruler of all houses in the conception chart with the esoteric rulers of all houses of the natal chart. This would be for initiates of the first three degrees, and especially for those of the second and third degree.

2. the esoteric ruler of all houses in the conception chart with the *exoteric* rulers of all houses of the natal chart. This would be for aspirants and disciples.
3. Perhaps the exoteric rulers of the conception chart houses could be used for average man–but it still remains to be shown how much the average man responds to his conception chart (which, according to theory) is a Uranian chart. The birth chart with exoteric rulers would be far more useable for the average man, I think.

4. One other interesting possibility would be to forget the Sun sign altogether when dealing with conception/natal comparisons, and advance the natal Asc. to the conception Asc. It is my opinion that a *higher order* of soul-directive would be shown by the conception Asc. than is shown at the natal Asc.

Of course, one must make sure that one has a legitmate conception chart; one that is rectified against life events (perhaps life events of a more  psychological nature–though outer events, too, seem to show in the  conceptionand animation charts.

I recommend Niklas’ thoughts on these matters, as he has investigated the subject more than I.

In my own case, for instance, I am working with a Leo Asc. in the conception chart, and also a Leo Asc in the animation chart. The birth chart shows a Cancer Asc (which is correct as far as my physical brith is concerned).

I must ask myself about the spiritual importance of that Leo conception Asc. Is it hierarchically superior to my Cancer Asc.? In many ways, I would say “Yes”. All my major work has been on theories of *Identity*–the ray books and also the Infinitization of Selfhood. Even my work in astrology is about *Identity*. Further, the astrological operas have a lot of connection with the stage and Leo.
But it is for everyone to decide whether there is any value in conception charts, and whether they learn something interiorly about themselves from their use. Then each person might ask, how would my life be different if my natal chart were subordinated to my conception chart. This would be a psycho-spiritual superimposition, and would have, I think, as much validity as the more technical methods upon which we are now working–not to discount the possible revelatory nature of the latter.

There are many implications when considering the Sun, Moon Asc. relationships which produce the conception chart. The Moon position of the natal chart becomes all important in determining the Asc. of the conception chart.

What is most important is not to get lost in technique. The new astrology is an intuitive astrology, using the various techniques as springboards for  insight. I fear getting lost in the trees–I want to see the forest as a whole.

Still, experimentation is needed. I suggest that if we want to know the value of any of these techniques, we study our own charts and share any psycho-spiritual revelations that may have come with the group. If the revelation could have been seen in an easier way, then the Law of Economy is  against the great labor required to produce these additional charts. If, however, new insights appear (which did not appear in any other way) they we  know that our labors have been worth-while.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *