Why Harmonic Properties Of Arabic Parts
Are Important

Copyright © 2005 All Rights Reserved

by David Cochrane


Excellent astrologers like Moses Siregar and Steven Forrest have encouraged astrologers to be open-minded and to welcome the increasing diversity within our field. With the expanding understanding of ancient western methods, the increasing popularity of Vedic astrology in the west, and continued enthusiasm for psychological astrology and other approaches to astrology, we now encounter a much wider spectrum of ideas, concepts, and theoretical models within the field of astrology than perhaps ever before in history.


I applaud the insights of Moses and Steven, and I would like to extend our acceptance of diversity one step further: we can look for relationships between seemingly disparate approaches to astrology. In doing this, we may help turn the upside-down pyramid of astrology right side up.

By "upside-down pyramid" I mean that astrological theory consists of an ocean of anecdotal evidence, different paradigms and conceptual models, and there is no consistent agreed upon theoretical fabric to weave together different astrological concepts into a coherent whole. Rather than having, as physicists do, a few fundamental principles upon which diversity is explained, there are a great number of astrological concepts that we synthesize together to draw conclusions.

  • Physicists postulate that there are 4 fundamental forces which are the basis for all physical behavior in the universe.
  • Chemists claim that all material things, despite the variety of colors, textures, etc., are essentially the same thing simply arranged with different numbers of identical components.
  • In modern science there is a kind of vision of oneness underlying apparent diversity, and this strikes me as a rather spiritual and universal vision. Modern science is designed and "promoted" primarily for its utilitarian benefits and rational basis, but nevertheless the implications of the theories are inspiring and uplifting.
  • Astrology, on the other hand, typically strives to achieve synthesis as an end result of analyzing specific data. Astrology sees the world of diversity and extracts conclusions from analyzing the complexity of aspects, rulers, house placements, etc.
  • Modern scientists, on the other hand, analyze behavior as variations of a handful of underlying principles.
  • Scientists have a pyramid, with a point at the top; from oneness diversity descends.
  • Astrologers have a pyramid with the base at the top; from diversity one gradually distills specific conclusions.

Can, for example, a Uranian astrologer who relies on symmetry as a theoretical underpinning find a mutual point of agreement and synthesis with a traditional astrologer who uses the fundamental "twelveness" and its constituent triplicities and quadruplicities as a fundamental paradigm? As we continue to expand our horizons and incorporate more astrological ideas, we may occasionally discover a point of agreement and synthesis. These points of synthesis are rare but are important.

One of the most profound examples of unanimity stretching across very diverse astrological systems is the agreement in classical astrology and cosmic cybernetics that arabic parts (or lots as some classical astrologers prefer to call them) are extremely important.


Arabic parts are, in fact, so important that they are one of the most fundamental principles in both of these systems of astrology. Also striking is that arabic parts have little obvious or intuitive appeal. The formula upon which the arabic part is based seems superficially to be rather arbitrary. Perhaps for this reason arabic parts have fallen out of favor in modern psychological astrology.

That two very different astrological systems come to the same conclusion is rather striking. Arabic parts have very powerful harmonic properties that from the viewpoint of cosmic cybernetics are extraordinarily profound and powerful. That some of the most ancient systems of astrology relied on a formula that produces powerful harmonic resonances is intriguing. There is no extant evidence that the ancients developed arabic parts based on a theory of resonance, and we may never know how the idea originated. We do know that classical astrology and cosmic cybernetics agree that arabic parts are fundamental and critically important.

For more information on the harmonic properties of arabic parts the article Mathematical Basis of Arabic Parts is helpful. The article The Three Symmetries provides information on other astrological concepts that are fundamentally the same as arabic parts.


If we keep an open mind as Moses and Steven suggested, and if we research astrological ideas carefully, we sometimes discover that precisely the same concept is being conveyed in very different historical and cultural contexts. I find these occasional discoveries one of the most exhilarating and exciting experiences in the study of astrology.

David Cochrane AUTHOR: David Cochrane