Seven Years Bad Luck

May 26, 2008 at 11:31 pm | Posted in Editorial | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , ,

Seven Years
Bad Luck

The notion of “Seven Years Bad Luck” has always seemed suspicious, but the roots of the notion are worthy of examination and re-consideration.

The Traditional Notion:
Saturn is the Old Devil

Saturn has been called an “Old Devil.” (Refer to Liz Greene’s Classic: “Saturn: A New Look at an Old Devil.” I like to write about Saturn, I suppose, because I have an unusually highly pronounced Saturn in my chart. I call it an “Old Devil” and “Evil” quite a bit, but, secretly, it has been my friend in many ways. At many points in my life, after it stripped away some thing, idea, notion, or person from my life, I was invariably liberated to pursue some key project or key aspect of myself.

That said, the idea of “seven years bad luck” arising from certain kinds of events, typically some accident such as accidentally breaking a mirror, has been said by some (many?) to be the result of a one-quarter turn of a Saturn cycle. With roughly a 28-year cycle (which, oddly, corresponds to the Moon’s 28-day cycle), one quarter of a Saturn cycle is indeed seven years. The idea is that Saturn moves from one cardinal, fixed, or mutable point to the next corresponding cardinal, fixed or mutable point.

Saturn is also considered “the planet” (aka “THE Planet”) for “bad luck” because it is associated with “tests, trials, and tribulations.” That is, Saturn is associated with the EFFECT of the “bad luck.”

I have problems with this idea.

A Modern Notion: Uranus, a New Devil

No one claims that Uranus is a “devil,” but he is considered to be a malefic and is especially responsible for accidents. This alone makes Uranus a candidate for an alternative explanation, because Uranus is associated with the CAUSE of the bad luck (an accident) rather than the EFFECT (tests, trials, and tribulations).

Even more important, Uranus goes through a SIGN in precisely seven years. Astrologers tend not to discuss quarter-turns of cycles much. They do arise as a topic, but primarily is discussions of the Sun and “the Seasons.” However, Astrologers CONSTANTLY discuss transits of SIGNS and HOUSES (equivalent to signs). Demarcation of some life event as the transit of a sign (by Uranus) fits better with most asrological theory and typical astrological discussions.

Out with The Old Devil,
and In With The New

So, consider this: maybe the idea of Saturn being associated with Seven Years Bad Luck is just plain wrong. Maybe it is all about Uranus and his penchant for causing changes via accidents.

Good and Evil?

May 26, 2008 at 9:14 pm | Posted in Editorial | Comments Off on Good and Evil?
Tags: , , , , , ,

A popular notion in the metaphysics community is that the “truth comes from within.” We usually go to seminars to learn this, and at some point the paradox becomes at least a little obvious to some of us. My experience is that others trigger me to think, and at some point certain ideas emerge in a form sufficient for an article (or other creative work). Said differently, the truth often comes from without. Often, the truth comes from discussions and debates.

Good and Evil?



That said, the concept of “Evil” came up in a discussion tonight. Traditional astrologers used the concept all the time, along with “the King,” “the Castle,” and “seige.” (Planets can actually be “beseiged” in traditional astrology.) Concepts of “the King” and “the Castle” don’t work so well in modern times, so they were thrown out with “Evil” with the development of Modern Astrology.

Evil” became replaced with “learning experiences” and “growth opportunities.” Sounds good (surely a poor choice of words for some readers), and we all know that Good and Evil probably doesn’t “exist” at the largest viewpoints. Traditionalist Christians, for example, believe that God “wins” in the end. No need to really worry about Satan, since we know he’ll be defeated. “Good and Evil” don’t exist in Heaven because everything is good. (“It’s all good.”) Ditto for “Hell,” but in reverse.

Touchy feely New Age pundits have similar thoughts: “good” and “evil” aren’t real for them, either.

But, we aren’t “God,” we aren’t in Heaven, and we live in a day to day world in which people, places, and things are easily characterized as “Good” and “Evil.” The argument that such notions are “subjective” just doesn’t hold water for me for practical day-to-day purposes.

Pluto and Saturn?



Despite the modernist views of duality, Pluto and Saturn are basically evil for most people and most purposes. Some hold dear a chipper notion that both of them “clean out the old and make way for the new, “but sometimes that means they are “cleaning out” you and I. I don’t wanna be “cleaned out.” Do you?

What if you are “cleaned out” of your home due to the sub-prime mortgage meltdown? Your spouse, or children, or both no longer have a home. You are crammed in some tiny space, you are again becoming familiar with body odors you had forgotten about, and everyone in your home fights far more than before.

That isn’t evil?

[special commentary for certain people; they know who they are; skip over this if you are a normal person]

Okay, suppose you claim it isn’t “evil.” Are you a Buddhist or have a similar viewpoint? Do you believe that the source of all pain is “attachment”? The way of all life is “Change,” right? That is the point of the “I Ching,” the book of changes. Be sure not to fall into thinking that this is strictly an “Eastern” concept, and that you need to own at least one Brass Buddha to understand it. Heraclitus is reputed to have said “There is nothing permanent except change.” Same point.

Still in all your infinite wisdom, are you not sufficiently human that you cry out “but I didn’t want to lose that“?

Okay, you’ve never screamed out in agony even once in your life. Not even when you were an infant and your diaper needed to be changed. (Yeah, right.)

If you claim this, have you ever read “Candide” by Voltaire? Your name isn’t “Dr. Pangloss,” is it?

[/special commentary; back to regular programming]

Saturn in Capricorn and Pluto in Virgo, and their long stays in both signs, are together a sign that the sub-prime meltdown is the beginning of a much longer process. I’ll take a risk and go out on a limb to make this statement: for many (most people, this is Evil.

And, Jupiter is no hero here, either. His expansiveness led us into this trap. Pluto in Sadge and Jupiter’s return there setup everyone for these problems. They hung out in the sign of Expansion (Jupiter’s home) and were scheduled for a meeting, but it didn’t happen until they entered the sign of Contraction (Capricorn). And don’t be fooled for even a MOMENT when we get a brief snippet of relief during the time when Pluto re-enters Sadge. The minor economic upturn that is almost certain will lead some into an even deeper economic morass, probably this summer. Don’t be one of the ones led into the Tar Pit.

Severe contraction isn’t possible without over-expansion. THAT is why the ancients considered Jupiter to be a “malefic,” too. (Sometimes he is characterized as a benefic. At best, he is a “neutral” amplifier of other planets and aspects.)

Astrology and the Sub-Prime Meltdown



Okay, sorry to end on such a “cheery note.” I suppose I needed to make it clear that (a) I believe in “Good and Evil” (b) Saturn and Pluto both qualify as “Evil,” (c) I think the “meltdown” may be with us for “a while,” regardless of who we elect as President and (d) the truth sometimes comes from without.

I suppose I am just saying in a different way what is said in this blog entry from “the Church of the Churchless.”

And, I suppose that a better name for this article might have been “Astrology and the Sub-Prime Meltdown.”

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: