What would be the manifestation of certain combinations?

Artemia

Active member
Say that Mercury - the querent- in Sagittarius 22°17'47" angular in 4th house and Quesited in Taurus in 0°28' in 9th house.

Mercury will trine jupiter in 8°11 and Jupiter receives the trine in his rulership and mercury receives Jupiter in face BUT before Mercury reach Jupiter, Mercury will sextile a well degnified Saturn in libra 28°24' , so Saturn prohibits the matter -not the traditional way of prohibition that demands the intervenes of a swifter planet- but when can we judge that the prohibition just mean obstacle- delay? From the aspect and the receptions?

According to the Factors that configure a prohibition -From considerations about Masha'allah teachings of Horary Astrology- then the intervenes of a planet
does not prohibit :
1. If the significator commits it's disposition to another planet but the last one receives the significator.

2. If this planet is a fortunate star

3. If the planet is in an angle or in a place of his own strenght

then to the above example Mercury will reach Saturn before Jupiter but Mercury will apply a sextile from an angle to an essentially by exaltation dignified Saturn in 3 house that offers accidental dignity. If Saturn is the more degnified planet in the chart with more strenght that the others and receives Mercury in term and face and mercury will receive Saturn in Triplicity and then Mercury will trine a benefic star which is a significator too -peregrine but accidentally dignified- and receives the trine that mercury brings in his rulership and mercury receives Jupiter in face then, does saturn impede mercury for reaching jupiter or not?

At the same time moon in 28°41 of Aries in 9th house as a co- significator is seperating from a trine to Mercury and apply a conjunction to Jupiter , 1°47 till perfection but after changing signs - I do use that aspect and say that moon is not void-. At her current state Jupiter receive the conjunction in Triplicity and moon receives Jupiter in exaltation and triplicity and the Moon is also increasing in dignity upon aspect but the moon just seperated from a partile opposition to saturn in -0°18 orb so the moon translates the light from Saturn ? In this case do we count the moon as a co-significator conjuncting the quesited or as a translator of light due to the seperation of Saturn?

With this kind of convo would the manifestation of the combination - of Mercury-querent- trining Jupiter-quesited- and Mercury received in rulership but with the well degnified Saturn prohibiting mercury by a sextile aspect with mix reception and at the same time with the moon conjuncting Jupiter-quesited -The Greater Benefic- with mutual reception and increasing in dignity upon the aspetc but just seperated from Saturn -though it's good that there is the seperation from the malefic- be a positive one and say that the matter would come to pass with delay and after overcoming obstacles ?


Relevant References :

About Prohibition:
Antony Louis to his book refers about prohibition that the significators moving to perfection but a SWIFTER planet intervenes and prohibits meaning that either mercury needs to apply to aspect to a swifter planet than jupiter or a swifter planet than mercury applys to mercury or a swifter planet that jupiter applys to jupiter.


About Moon in Late Degrees :
Lilly says: A planet is void of course, when he is separated from a planet, nor doth forthwith, during his being in that sign, apply to any other: ...".Contrary to what most of us understood, this does not mean that the aspect has to perfect while the Moon is in its current sign. What it does mean is that the application has to be in effect while the Moon is in its current sign. Application operates only when the Moon (or planet) is 'within orbs' of the planet it next meets by major aspect. It doesn't matter, from this point of view, that it has to leave the sign before perfecting the aspect. So, to be void of course the Moon (or planet) has to be out of orb of the next planet it might meet by major aspect - even if it will eventually perfect this aspect within the current sign.

This matter largely depends on the definition of application in Lilly's terms, and those of the authors he drew upon, and it meant to be within orb. The application happeneth when as the circles or beames of the planettes come to joyne togeather by a corporall conjunction or by aspecte of the one half of their deamiters. This definition is clear: a planet cannot be said to be applying until it is within orb, or joint moieties, of another. The meaning of application has altered in modern times to that of 'moving forward in the sign', but Lilly deals with this separately. 'Applying to' means to be within the joint moieties of the two planets concerned.The evidence in Christian Astrology supports this almost exclusively and I conclude that the Moon is not void of course if it is contacting another planet through the joint moieties, whether it perfects in or out of its current sign. Therefore, the Moon (or planet) can be void of course even when it is in early degrees, if the next planet it meets in major aspect is out of orb.

About Factors that does not configure a prohibition -From considerations about Masha'allah
teachings of Horary Astrology :

1. If the significator commits it's disposition to another planet but the last one receives the significator.

2. If this planet is a fortunate star

3. If the planet is in an angle or in a place of his own strenght

example

mercury be in 10 capri looking for an aspectual conjuction with venus at 16 of cancer and mercury perfects the aspect to saturn first, mercury is in saturns domicile so saturn does not impede mercury for reaching venus.

venus does not receive mercury and mercury does not receive venus but venus is a fortunate star and if in a strong the matter will come to pass even if venus is not a significator and saturn is malefic, and both angular.

Masha' allah says:''...the end of the matter will be according the lord of the matter sought for because of a fortunate planet is in a good place even without reception'' page 32

Let's suppose that saturn did not receive mercury in the above case but was in an angle and in one of his dignities aqua-capri-libra Masha'allah admits that in this case at least part of the matter would cometo pass.

B. Also planets in the Asc or in the house of the matter should be a participant in the work even if they are less important that moon and the primal significators can offer possitive help. If a planet that is in the asc it is received by a planet applyng to it , it's an indicative of the goodness of the matter.

C. The moon and significators can transfer to the next sign to complete the apsect as long as they are in application in the current sign then judge accordingly to the planet to whom the moon or the primal significator will be joined first.

Your insights would be beneficial for understanding how this combination would manifest itself in a relationship-horary chart.
 
Last edited:

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
Can we get this chart posted up. My mind goes @.@ by seeing it all written out like this.

It seems to me like the matter would manifest much like you said, unless there's something bad going on with Saturn we haven't noticed. Is he afflicted by Mars or the lords of the 6th/8th/12th?
 

Artemia

Active member
Can we get this chart posted up. My mind goes @.@ by seeing it all written out like this.

It seems to me like the matter would manifest much like you said, unless there's something bad going on with Saturn we haven't noticed. Is he afflicted by Mars or the lords of the 6th/8th/12th?


'''''' My mind goes @.@ by seeing it all written out like this.''''' I laughed a lot with that but yes that-> @.@ is true...

Thank you for your reply, i will attach the chart. ( The chart has Virgo rising and Saturn ruler of the hour agrees with earth, so the Hour-ruler has same humoral nature as the ascendant, there is an agreement thus the chart is valid. )

No, as far as i noticed. Saturn rules 6th house, 8th house 29°51' though, of Pisces ruled by Jupiter and 12th house by Leo.

Sun in 5th house trines the Ascendant and trines Mars in 1st with mars receiving the sun in his exaltation-face .
Jupiter was heading to an opposition to Saturn but jupiter turned direct, so jupiter moves away from saturn and never completes the opposition.

North node is in a good place in sagittarius and angular in the 4 th house so is Part of Fortune in taurus and in 9 th house.

For my point of view i wouldn't say that the aspect between Mercury and Saturn is Prohibition i would call it Interference.

Mercury will sextile Saturn before trines Jupiter most would say that this is Prohibition but the meaning of prohibition stands for another planet interposing body or aspect, TO INTERPOSE MEANS TO APPLY so the planet doing the prohibition must be swifter.

Here Mercury is the swifter planet but will sextile Saturn, that is interference and not Prohibition by Lilly's term thus via the traditional term of prohibition.

When interference occur does not deny the outcome especially when the aspect is an easy one, the planets degnified and with reception but it means delays and obstacles.

From the Glossary of Traditional Astrology Terms

PROHIBITION - Prohibition is when two Planets that signify the effecting or bringing to conclusion any thing demanded, are applying to an Aspect; and before they can come to a true Aspect, another Planet interposes either his body or aspect, to that thereby the matter propounded is hindered and retarded; this is called Prohibition. For example, Mars is in 7. degree. of Aries, and Saturn is in the 12. Mars signifies the effecting my business when he comes to the body of Saturn, who promises the conclusion, the Sun is at the same time in 6. degree. of Aries. Now in regard that the Sun is swifter in motion then Mars, he will overtake Mars, and come to Conjunction with Saturn before Mars, whereby whatever Mars or Saturn did formerly signify, is now prohibited by the Sun his first impediting Mars and then Saturn, before they can come to a true Conjunction. This manner of prohibition is called a Conjunctional or Bodily prohibition; and you must know that the combustion of any Planet is the greatest misfortune that can be.

[2.] The second manner of Prohibition is by Aspect, either Sextile, Square, Trine , Opposition, viz. when two Planets are going to Conjunction; as Mars in 7 degree. of Aries, Saturn in 15 of Aries; let us admit the Sun in 5. degree of Gemini; he then being more swift than Mars in his diurnal motion, dos quickly overtake and pass by the Sextile dexter of Mars ( and comes before Mars can come to Conjunction) to a Sextile dexter of Saturn: This is called Prohibition by Aspect, in the same nature judge if the Aspect be Square, Trine, Opposition.


Your thoughts would be enlightning! And here is the thread .

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45455

Thank you.
 

Attachments

  • astro_2gw_303_will_we_be_together_again2_hr.58910.63530.jpg
    astro_2gw_303_will_we_be_together_again2_hr.58910.63530.jpg
    83.4 KB · Views: 25
Last edited:

Artemia

Active member
What's the question that prompted the horary, if I may ask?

Hello Anachiel!

Yes, you may ask :smile:

The question is '' Will we be together again ''.

Broke up some months ago and struggling.... :pinched:

ps ''''' If we take the time to read your chart, please take the time to update us on the outcome.''''' I agree 100% .
 

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
There's a lot of sign changing going on in this chart. Moon will need to change signs before she conjoins Jupiter, and Mercury will need to change signs before it can Trine Jupiter. That's probably going to be important later.

Ultimately, with Saturn as lord of the Sixth, it sounds like it could be a more serious retardant than originally thought.
 

Anachiel

Well-known member
OK, let's see here:

Say that Mercury - the querent- in Sagittarius 22°17'47" angular in 4th house and Quesited in Taurus in 0°28' in 9th house.

Mercury will trine jupiter in 8°11 and Jupiter receives the trine in his rulership and mercury receives Jupiter in face BUT before Mercury reach Jupiter, Mercury will sextile a well degnified Saturn in libra 28°24' , so Saturn prohibits the matter -not the traditional way of prohibition that demands the intervenes of a swifter planet- but when can we judge that the prohibition just mean obstacle- delay? From the aspect and the receptions?

Regardless, Saturn is in the way.

According to the Factors that configure a prohibition -From considerations about Masha'allah teachings of Horary Astrology- then the intervenes of a planet
does not prohibit :
1. If the significator commits it's disposition to another planet but the last one receives the significator.

2. If this planet is a fortunate star

3. If the planet is in an angle or in a place of his own strenght

then to the above example Mercury will reach Saturn before Jupiter but Mercury will apply a sextile from an angle to an essentially by exaltation dignified Saturn in 3 house that offers accidental dignity. If Saturn is the more degnified planet in the chart with more strenght that the others and receives Mercury in term and face and mercury will receive Saturn in Triplicity and then Mercury will trine a benefic star which is a significator too -peregrine but accidentally dignified- and receives the trine that mercury brings in his rulership and mercury receives Jupiter in face then, does saturn impede mercury for reaching jupiter or not?

Yes, Saturn prevents this. The mutual reception is too weak to perform. Each must receive each other in a strong reception or, two of the weaker ones. That triplicity only won't do the trick.

At the same time moon in 28°41 of Aries in 9th house as a co- significator is seperating from a trine to Mercury and apply a conjunction to Jupiter , 1°47 till perfection but after changing signs - I do use that aspect and say that moon is not void-. At her current state Jupiter receive the conjunction in Triplicity and moon receives Jupiter in exaltation and triplicity and the Moon is also increasing in dignity upon aspect but the moon just seperated from a partile opposition to saturn in -0°18 orb so the moon translates the light from Saturn ? In this case do we count the moon as a co-significator conjuncting the quesited or as a translator of light due to the seperation of Saturn?

The Moon is void. Jupiter needs to be at 0 for this to not be void. This is just my take on the matter, though.

With this kind of convo would the manifestation of the combination - of Mercury-querent- trining Jupiter-quesited- and Mercury received in rulership but with the well degnified Saturn prohibiting mercury by a sextile aspect with mix reception and at the same time with the moon conjuncting Jupiter-quesited -The Greater Benefic- with mutual reception and increasing in dignity upon the aspetc but just seperated from Saturn -though it's good that there is the seperation from the malefic- be a positive one and say that the matter would come to pass with delay and after overcoming obstacles ?

It's a stretch to me but, it might work.

Relevant References :

About Prohibition:
Antony Louis to his book refers about prohibition that the significators moving to perfection but a SWIFTER planet intervenes and prohibits meaning that either mercury needs to apply to aspect to a swifter planet than jupiter or a swifter planet than mercury applys to mercury or a swifter planet that jupiter applys to jupiter.


About Moon in Late Degrees :
Lilly says: A planet is void of course, when he is separated from a planet, nor doth forthwith, during his being in that sign, apply to any other: ...".Contrary to what most of us understood, this does not mean that the aspect has to perfect while the Moon is in its current sign. What it does mean is that the application has to be in effect while the Moon is in its current sign. Application operates only when the Moon (or planet) is 'within orbs' of the planet it next meets by major aspect. It doesn't matter, from this point of view, that it has to leave the sign before perfecting the aspect. So, to be void of course the Moon (or planet) has to be out of orb of the next planet it might meet by major aspect - even if it will eventually perfect this aspect within the current sign.

It can't change signs or it won't perfect. A change of signs is like walking from one house to another.

The orb of a planet is broken by changing signs. It changes the aspect, too. Like from Aries a square to Taurus a sextile, etc. The nature of the aspect is changed. The orb is irrelevant.

This matter largely depends on the definition of application in Lilly's terms, and those of the authors he drew upon, and it meant to be within orb. The application happeneth when as the circles or beames of the planettes come to joyne togeather by a corporall conjunction or by aspecte of the one half of their deamiters. This definition is clear: a planet cannot be said to be applying until it is within orb, or joint moieties, of another. The meaning of application has altered in modern times to that of 'moving forward in the sign', but Lilly deals with this separately. 'Applying to' means to be within the joint moieties of the two planets concerned.The evidence in Christian Astrology supports this almost exclusively and I conclude that the Moon is not void of course if it is contacting another planet through the joint moieties, whether it perfects in or out of its current sign. Therefore, the Moon (or planet) can be void of course even when it is in early degrees, if the next planet it meets in major aspect is out of orb.

This is mixing apples and oranges. It can't change signs and perfect the matter.

About Factors that does not configure a prohibition -From considerations about Masha'allah
teachings of Horary Astrology :

1. If the significator commits it's disposition to another planet but the last one receives the significator.

May I ask what you think this means?

2. If this planet is a fortunate star

3. If the planet is in an angle or in a place of his own strenght

example

mercury be in 10 capri looking for an aspectual conjuction with venus at 16 of cancer and mercury perfects the aspect to saturn first, mercury is in saturns domicile so saturn does not impede mercury for reaching venus.

venus does not receive mercury and mercury does not receive venus but venus is a fortunate star and if in a strong the matter will come to pass even if venus is not a significator and saturn is malefic, and both angular.

I have a feeling in this chart that Mars, (retrograde probably, but nevertheless) opposes Venus. Mars ruins this. Venus isn't a main player anyway just off the top here without seeing the whole chart.

Masha' allah says:''...the end of the matter will be according the lord of the matter sought for because of a fortunate planet is in a good place even without reception'' page 32

Let's suppose that saturn did not receive mercury in the above case but was in an angle and in one of his dignities aqua-capri-libra Masha'allah admits that in this case at least part of the matter would cometo pass.

B. Also planets in the Asc or in the house of the matter should be a participant in the work even if they are less important that moon and the primal significators can offer possitive help. If a planet that is in the asc it is received by a planet applyng to it , it's an indicative of the goodness of the matter.

C. The moon and significators can transfer to the next sign to complete the apsect as long as they are in application in the current sign then judge accordingly to the planet to whom the moon or the primal significator will be joined first.

Your insights would be beneficial for understanding how this combination would manifest itself in a relationship-horary chart.

Everything you are describing about the chart indicates there are obsitcles int he way of perfection. However, the matter is void. The Moon cannot do anything more in the sign she is presently in. This is foremost. It indicates that the matter, in it's present state, is done and over. Saturn describes why and what is in the way.
 

Artemia

Active member
OK, let's see here:



Everything you are describing about the chart indicates there are obsitcles int he way of perfection. However, the matter is void. The Moon cannot do anything more in the sign she is presently in. This is foremost. It indicates that the matter, in it's present state, is done and over. Saturn describes why and what is in the way.

A Planet is VoC, if it does not form any aspect with any other Planet before entering the next sign. Now we have to decide how we define “forming an aspect”. Modern astrology considers aspects to be valid only if they are exact. Traditional astrology, which horary is, of course, based on, recognises an aspect to be valid if it is exact, perfect, partile or platic. This makes a huge difference in the meaning of VoC.

If we look at the famous chart “When her husband, who is imprisoned, shall be delivered”, in Lilly’s Christian Astrology, we will see that Lilly did not count the Moon in 29*10′ Aquarius as VoC, because she is within orb of a sextile with Saturn and a trine with Jupiter, and judged accordingly .

Lilly was a great follower of Bonatti and both stated that the Moon would be void of course when not joined to any Planet by body or aspect, which means joined within orb, of course.

Bottom line, for me, is that VoC is a consideration before judgment. (That is why I wanted to quote it corectly, because it is so important) This means that Lilly probably would not have gone much further, if he would have judged the Moon being VoC in this horary. He did not judge it to be VoC, because he allowed orbs and worked with platic aspects.

I wouldn't treat the sextile to saturn as a prohibition cause actualy it is not, it is interference plus saturn is well degnified and the aspect is soft and cold and dry in houmor as Mercury, so i would treat it more like an abstacle that a destroyer of the matter. Also applications shows future events and moon will conjunct first Jupiter so something have to change so i would treat the changing of mercury to trine Jupiter as Kai said -that would be important later- in order to be together i have to move to another place, leave my home, my work etc.. so yes for the relationship to work in a practical way there are some big changes need to occur.

Also 6 th house is also the radix 12... i can say much but there is an illness affecting us both... plus he is physical away, long distant relationship ( radix 12) and when there is an obstacle seeing someone you care in your daily life ( 6th house ) that makes it really hard.

From Mâshâ’allâh’s Method in Short :

If the ruler of the Ascendant nor the Moon see the ascendant nor have their light reflected, and thus cannot qualify as significators according to the criteria above, then one should see which of them, i.e. the Ascendant ruler or the Moon, will be first to leave the sign it is in. This stands to reason; because when that significator does, it is then changing from aversion to the rising sign, to an aspect to the rising sign.

That one becomes the primary significator of the querent and one should see what application that planet first makes upon entering the new sign. Mâshâ'allâh demonstrates this in his 2nd example of an ill person. In that case he chose the Moon to work with first because she would be first to leave her sign even though both the Moon and lord of the Ascendant aspected the rising sign and the Sun was stronger in testimony by being angular.

So this rule applies also, when both significators see or aspect the ascendant, but both are void in course. Mâshâ’allâh is however not much concerned with void planets:

«For the number of degrees that exist before the Moon or the ruler of the Ascendant leave the sign they are in, indicates the tardiness and inactivity of events while that planet is void in course.»

They do not necessarily indicate whether or not a matter will be perfected, it simply shows ‘tardiness’. How much tardiness or how long of a delay is shown? As many degrees as are left in the sign the significator is in.

So while it is true we are going to work with specifically one of these two significators, i.e. the lord of the Ascendant or the Moon, they are always partners in signification, and in order to get a complete perspective of the outcome, we must examine both!

The main point though here, is that both significators of the querent give a combined picture of the outcome and both are necessary in judgment.


From Mâshâ’allâh’s Method in Short - When there is no joining of relevant rulers :

Then see whether planets are in the ascendant and/or the house representing the matter sought. But Mâshâ’allâh warns:

«However, the outcome of a matter and its prohibition does not happen according to a planet which is in the Ascendant but happens in the name of the lord of the Ascendant, or in the name of the Moon, and according to the stars to which they are being joined, and the joining together, reception, and the rendering of the reception of these stars.»

So, if the Moon or the lord of the 1st house apply to a planet in the house representing the matter, or planets in this house apply to the ruler of the first house or planets in the ascendant, we have perfection.

Mâshâ’allâh tells us that a planet in the ascendant or in the house of the question has a share in the outcome. If a planet in the house of the question commits its disposition to a planet in the Ascendant and the lord of the ascendant is not harmed, then we have perfection. This is especially the case if that planet in the ascendant has some authority there by having dignity in the sign it is in. The rulers thus situated will perfect the matter under the following conditions:

• If the application from a relevant house is to a fortune, the matter will be perfected, whether or not that fortune receives it, and it need not have any dignity in that house.
• If the application is to a malefic planet which has dignity in that place, the matter will be perfected and reception is again not necessary.
• If the application is to a malefic planet which has no dignity in that place, and it receives the lord of the Ascendant, or the Moon, the matter will be perfected.
• If the application is to a malefic planet which has no dignity in that place, and it does not receive the lord of the Ascendant, or the Moon, the matter will be destroyed.


Kai and Anachiel, thank you both for looking the chart!
 
Last edited:

Anachiel

Well-known member
A Planet is VoC, if it does not form any aspect with any other Planet before entering the next sign. Now we have to decide how we define “forming an aspect”. Modern astrology considers aspects to be valid only if they are exact. Traditional astrology, which horary is, of course, based on, recognises an aspect to be valid if it is exact, perfect, partile or platic. This makes a huge difference in the meaning of VoC.

VoC has nothing to do with orb. Even if a planet, usually the Moon, is in orb but separating from a planet and, cannot make any more Ptolemaic aspects to any other planet while in the sign it is in, then it is VoC.

If we look at the famous chart “When her husband, who is imprisoned, shall be delivered”, in Lilly’s Christian Astrology, we will see that Lilly did not count the Moon in 29*10′ Aquarius as VoC, because she is within orb of a sextile with Saturn and a trine with Jupiter, and judged accordingly .

Read it again. :) Lilly stated that the Moon is about to sextile Saturn. The Moon is at 29 AQUA and Saturn is at 0(!) TAUR. In your chart there is no planet at 0 degree to prevent the Moon from being VoC.


Kai and Anachiel, thank you both for looking the chart!

No problem, these are interesting.
 

Anachiel

Well-known member
Lilly was a great follower of Bonatti and both stated that the Moon would be void of course when not joined to any Planet by body or aspect, which means joined within orb, of course.

No, what that means is by conjunction (body) or aspect (the Ptolemaic aspects). Being in orb and separating does not count.

Bottom line, for me, is that VoC is a consideration before judgment. (That is why I wanted to quote it corectly, because it is so important) This means that Lilly probably would not have gone much further, if he would have judged the Moon being VoC in this horary. He did not judge it to be VoC, because he allowed orbs and worked with platic aspects.

No, see previous post, Saturn was at 0 degrees.

I wouldn't treat the sextile to saturn as a prohibition cause actualy it is not, it is interference plus saturn is well degnified and the aspect is soft and cold and dry in houmor as Mercury, so i would treat it more like an abstacle that a destroyer of the matter. Also applications shows future events and moon will conjunct first Jupiter so something have to change so i would treat the changing of mercury to trine Jupiter as Kai said -that would be important later- in order to be together i have to move to another place, leave my home, my work etc.. so yes for the relationship to work in a practical way there are some big changes need to occur.

But will the changes occur is what you are trying to delineate.

Also 6 th house is also the radix 12... i can say much but there is an illness affecting us both... plus he is physical away, long distant relationship ( radix 12) and when there is an obstacle seeing someone you care in your daily life ( 6th house ) that makes it really hard.

From Mâshâ’allâh’s Method in Short :

If the ruler of the Ascendant nor the Moon see the ascendant nor have their light reflected, and thus cannot qualify as significators according to the criteria above, then one should see which of them, i.e. the Ascendant ruler or the Moon, will be first to leave the sign it is in. This stands to reason; because when that significator does, it is then changing from aversion to the rising sign, to an aspect to the rising sign.

Thsi doesn't really apply to your chart tho...does it?

That one becomes the primary significator of the querent and one should see what application that planet first makes upon entering the new sign. Mâshâ'allâh demonstrates this in his 2nd example of an ill person. In that case he chose the Moon to work with first because she would be first to leave her sign even though both the Moon and lord of the Ascendant aspected the rising sign and the Sun was stronger in testimony by being angular.

So this rule applies also, when both significators see or aspect the ascendant, but both are void in course. Mâshâ’allâh is however not much concerned with void planets:

In an illness, any aspect to the ASC would be important because it signifies the body, and therefore the state of the illness or health of the body and the nature of the condition besetting the sick. In your question it really doesn't do anything, tho.

«For the number of degrees that exist before the Moon or the ruler of the Ascendant leave the sign they are in, indicates the tardiness and inactivity of events while that planet is void in course.»

True, but it won't perfect the matter either.

They do not necessarily indicate whether or not a matter will be perfected, it simply shows ‘tardiness’. How much tardiness or how long of a delay is shown? As many degrees as are left in the sign the significator is in.

Eh, this is possible but, in your question, it doesn't bring you two together. The Moon is VoC. In your question you want to bring two people together and the chart has to show it somehow. I'm not seeing it.

So while it is true we are going to work with specifically one of these two significators, i.e. the lord of the Ascendant or the Moon, they are always partners in signification, and in order to get a complete perspective of the outcome, we must examine both!

Very true.

The main point though here, is that both significators of the querent give a combined picture of the outcome and both are necessary in judgment.

I agree

From Mâshâ’allâh’s Method in Short - When there is no joining of relevant rulers :

Then see whether planets are in the ascendant and/or the house representing the matter sought. But Mâshâ’allâh warns:

«However, the outcome of a matter and its prohibition does not happen according to a planet which is in the Ascendant but happens in the name of the lord of the Ascendant, or in the name of the Moon, and according to the stars to which they are being joined, and the joining together, reception, and the rendering of the reception of these stars.»

So, where are you seeing this?

So, if the Moon or the lord of the 1st house apply to a planet in the house representing the matter, or planets in this house apply to the ruler of the first house or planets in the ascendant, we have perfection.

Yes, Dwelling in Houses, but where are you seeing this?

Mâshâ’allâh tells us that a planet in the ascendant or in the house of the question has a share in the outcome. If a planet in the house of the question commits its disposition to a planet in the Ascendant and the lord of the ascendant is not harmed, then we have perfection. This is especially the case if that planet in the ascendant has some authority there by having dignity in the sign it is in. The rulers thus situated will perfect the matter under the following conditions:

Yes, another sort of Dweling on Houses by co-significators, where are you seing this?

If the application from a relevant house is to a fortune, the matter will be perfected, whether or not that fortune receives it, and it need not have any dignity in that house.
• If the application is to a malefic planet which has dignity in that place, the matter will be perfected and reception is again not necessary.
• If the application is to a malefic planet which has no dignity in that place, and it receives the lord of the Ascendant, or the Moon, the matter will be perfected.
• If the application is to a malefic planet which has no dignity in that place, and it does not receive the lord of the Ascendant, or the Moon, the matter will be destroyed.

What do you think he means by this? I highlighted the phrase above it. How is the application to Saturn from a relevant house and, how does it's dignity have anything to do with bringing the two main signifcators together?


Kai and Anachiel, thank you both for looking the chart!

I think one has to really look at the headlines in the chart before trying to pull out the thesaurus to find other meanings to words to make the story more palitable. Of course, time always reveals.

I find it always harder to be objective with one's own questions and Lilly demonstrates this point clearly in his purchase of Mr. B's Houses.
 

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
This Moon is not Void, she applies to the conjunction of Jupiter. The idea that the Moon must perfect an aspect while in her current sign is a more modern interpretation of the technique. Artemia is correct with the source chart they site, Lilly does continue to give judgment (and a favorable one) with the Moon at the very end of her sign. The Moon is Void when she is not applying to any other planets within orb.

Anachiel said:
I think one has to really look at the headlines in the chart before trying to pull out the thesaurus to find other meanings to words to make the story more palitable. Of course, time always reveals.

Yes, I agree with this. The main themes of the chart appear to be the very active malefics. We've already ascertained that for this relationship to work there would need to be a lot of change on your part. Mars in the First Square Mercury, Saturn in the Third opposite the Moon, I personally wouldn't recommend making these changes.
 

Anachiel

Well-known member
This Moon is not Void, she applies to the conjunction of Jupiter. The idea that the Moon must perfect an aspect while in her current sign is a more modern interpretation of the technique. Artemia is correct with the source chart they site, Lilly does continue to give judgment (and a favorable one) with the Moon at the very end of her sign. The Moon is Void when she is not applying to any other planets within orb.

Ya, must be a modern interpretation of the traditional VoC, for sure.

What is being missed here is that in the Lilly example, Saturn is at 0 degrees. This is the same as saying 30 degrees of the sign (and many computer programs even note 30 degrees in a sign - hello!). The Moon is at 29 degrees and about to sextile to 30/0 degree Saturn.

In Lilly's example the Moon is not VoC. In this chart, it is! Jupiter is not at 0 degrees and the Moon must change signs to aspect it correctly.

VoC is not a hard concept but, many are confused simply because they don't understand what 0 degrees means.
 

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
No, you're missing the point. Here's Lilly's quote on the definition of Void of Course.

A Planet is void of course, when he is separated from a Planet, nor does forthwith, during his being in that Sign, apply to any other:

You'll notice that the location of the perfection of that aspect is not mentioned.

What is being missed here is that in the Lilly example, Saturn is at 0 degrees. This is the same as saying 30 degrees of the sign (and many computer programs even note 30 degrees in a sign - hello!). The Moon is at 29 degrees and about to sextile to 30/0 degree Saturn.

Wait, what?

Are you saying that Lilly's charts put Saturn in the entire wrong Sign? Being shown at 30° is not the same as being in 1° of the next sign. 30° in older charts translates into 29° in the way we draw charts up now. We start at 0° and older charts start at 1°, so 0=1, 1=2...29=30. 30 doesn't equal 0.

I think I may have confused what you meant.

VoC is not a hard concept but, many are confused simply because they don't understand what 0 degrees means.

Not at all, many are confused because of misunderstanding a quotation. Individual degrees are usually irrelevant (unless you're having to count out degrees for orbs to see if the Moon will apply to anyone before she leaves her sign) in VOC consideration.

You'll note that many programs will have two options for VOC Moon calculations. There's Modern where the Moon must complete an aspect in her current sign, and Traditional where the Moon must apply to a planet in her current sign. I know Janus has it (that's the program I use), but I'm not sure if others do, I would assume so, though.
 

Anachiel

Well-known member
LOL, oh my, this makes me laugh. Look, it is really simple...if the Moon could continue to make aspects in and out of her sign then there would be no reason to have the VoC definition to begin with. It's very simple.
 

Artemia

Active member
LOL, oh my, this makes me laugh. Look, it is really simple...if the Moon could continue to make aspects in and out of her sign then there would be no reason to have the VoC definition to begin with. It's very simple.

That is why we use orbs! WE DON'T SAY THAT THE MOON COULD CONTINUE TO MAKE ASPECTS IN AND OUT OF HER SIGN ! WE SAY THAT THE MOON HAS TO BE IN AN APPLYING ASPECT WITHIN ORB IN HER CURRETNT SIGN NOT TO BE VOID THAT CONCEPT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IF SHE WILL PERFECT IT AFTER PASSING IN THE NEXT SIGN AND OF COURSE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LETTING THE MOON TO CONTINUE MAKING ASPECTS IN THE NEXT SIGN!!!-That is why we say she has to be in an orb in her current sign and that is why we don't continue using the apsect she will do in the next sign which of course they will be out of orb-

In 0 degrees the moon would be in the next sign, what that means that only because is in an orb and will perfect in 0 degrees only then it is not void? Where that came from? Lily does not refer that anywhere ! Ιf the meaning of voc had to do with perfection in her current sign and not application within orb in her current sign that would mean that we shouldn't accept the passing - perfecting an aspect not even in 0 degrees because exactly she passed in another sign!..

As Kai said ''''the idea that the Moon must perfect an aspect while in her current sign is a more modern interpretation Individual degrees are usually irrelevant (unless you're having to count out degrees for orbs to see if the Moon will apply to anyone before she leaves her sign) in VOC consideration.''''

Traditional astrology, which horary is based on, recognises an aspect to be valid if it is exact, perfect, partile or platic. This makes a huge difference in the meaning of VoC that is why the terminology of VoC has nothing to do about changing signs but has to do whether be in an APPLYING ASPECT within orb- WHEN I STATED ''APPLICATION WITHIN ORB OF COURSE I MENT APPLYING ASPECT AND NOT SEPERATING!- The Voc definition exist because of the applying aspect in an orb the moon needs to make before leaving the sign - that means be in an applying aspect in her current sign and not perfecting it in her current sign! Of course that does not mean that we will count the future aspects she will make after passing to the next sign -it is not exist to prevent the moon to change her sign.

Here at this chart
http://www.astrosport07.webs.com/beckla.html
moon is in an orb with Venus but moon will perfect after changing signs... Moon in Leo 29°49 and Venus is in 1° 1' virgo. The answer was ''Yes''. How that could be if the moon was VoF? She is changing signs and she is not perfecting either in her current sign neither in 0 degrees.


Kai i would like to ask you ...

I agree that ''''The main themes of the chart appear to be the very active malefics'''' but they are seperating both mercury and moon from the malefics and moon is increasing in dignity upon aspect couldn't that mean that the effect of the malefics starts passing? A possibility of circumstances changing at least for the better?
Seperating aspects are those who have already occured and the planets are moving away from the angle defined by the aspect so seperating aspects shows what was in effect or still is and the energy is passing and aslo indicative of what led to the question.

Since application is the sign whereby events are denoted to take place, separation denotes what has already passed or taken place, whether good or evil, so we could say that the influence is passing away ?

I know that Lily used a perfect aspect as an exact when within an orb of the sum of the radii of the two aspecting planets, Lilly allowed planets a radius of 3 minutes of arc and the lights a radius of almost 17 minutes of arc. Here the opposition of moon from saturn is very close yes but she passed the 17 minutes of arc and she is separating could that mean that the energy only recently started to fade away?

And something else, do you consider that the moon separating from saturn and apply to jupiter is translating the light? The clasical definition requires that the significator from which the faster planet separates must receive tha translating planet in one of its essential dignities so that it can carry the light, here saturn is in moon fall so here the moon can act as a translator of light?

You also refered that changes have to occur from the querents parts, in which field that changes must occur we can identify it by the house the significator about to change sign falls in the chart and from which house it rules?
 
Last edited:

Anachiel

Well-known member
That is why we use orbs! WE DON'T SAY THAT THE MOON COULD CONTINUE TO MAKE ASPECTS IN AND OUT OF HER SIGN ! WE SAY THAT THE MOON HAS TO BE IN AN APPLYING ASPECT WITHIN ORB IN HER CURRETNT SIGN NOT TO BE VOID THAT CONCEPT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IF SHE WILL PERFECT IT AFTER PASSING IN THE NEXT SIGN AND OF COURSE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LETTING THE MOON TO CONTINUE MAKING ASPECTS IN THE NEXT SIGN!!!-That is why we say she has to be in an orb in her current sign and that is why we don't continue using the apsect she will do in the next sign which of course they will be out of orb-

Yelling isn't going to make your point any more valid. I can read regular print and understand it, really.

Orbs do not cross the division between the signs in traditional astrology. Only in modern astrology do they do this. If you want to practice modern astrology then put Lilly down and continue to make up your own...whatever it is...it isn't horary though.

In 0 degrees the moon would be in the next sign, what that means that only because is in an orb and will perfect in 0 degrees only then it is not void? Where that came from? Lily does not refer that anywhere ! Ιf the meaning of voc had to do with perfection in her current sign and not application within orb in her current sign that would mean that we shouldn't accept the passing - perfecting an aspect not even in 0 degrees because exactly she passed in another sign!..

Hon, every sign has 30 degrees. hello. This is basic astrology here. 30 degrees per sign, not 29 or 29 and a half but, 30 degrees. And if you read Lilly, thoroughly, rather than conveniently, you will see this.

As Kai said ''''the idea that the Moon must perfect an aspect while in her current sign is a more modern interpretation Individual degrees are usually irrelevant (unless you're having to count out degrees for orbs to see if the Moon will apply to anyone before she leaves her sign) in VOC consideration.''''

degrees are un-important?!....wow. I can't even comment on this one. It just seems like you're missing some very basic and important aspects of traditional astrological understanding but, I know that can't be true since you seem to be familiar with several good authors.

Traditional astrology, which horary is based on, recognises an aspect to be valid if it is exact, perfect, partile or platic. This makes a huge difference in the meaning of VoC that is why the terminology of VoC has nothing to do about changing signs but has to do whether be in an APPLYING ASPECT within orb- WHEN I STATED ''APPLICATION WITHIN ORB OF COURSE I MENT APPLYING ASPECT AND NOT SEPERATING!- The Voc definition exist because of the applying aspect in an orb the moon needs to make before leaving the sign - that means be in an applying aspect in her current sign and not perfecting it in her current sign! Of course that does not mean that we will count the future aspects she will make after passing to the next sign -it is not exist to prevent the moon to change her sign.

Again, yelling doesn't make this look any more valid of a point. You're just making things up now. Again, orbs do not cross sign divisions.

Here at this chart
http://www.astrosport07.webs.com/beckla.html
moon is in an orb with Venus but moon will perfect after changing signs... Moon in Leo 29°49 and Venus is in 1° 1' virgo. The answer was ''Yes''. How that could be if the moon was VoF? She is changing signs and she is not perfecting either in her current sign neither in 0 degrees.

I already answered this. If you aren't going to consider or read my responses then this isn't a conversation. A horary describes the situation which was eludidated by the person who read said chart. VoC doesn't neccessarily deny a yes...perhaps that is why you are confused? Not sure where you got that a VoC means, "no". Perhaps you can find that reference, too.

<snip>

10 characters
 

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
Anachiel, I already quoted Lilly's definition of Void of Course where he plainly says that the Moon only needs to be applying to an aspect with a planet before she completely separates a current one. Artemia also gave a chart example from Lilly where he plainly used the Moon applying to a planet in an out of sign Sextile.

So what were you bringing to the table to support your argument?

He's an appeal to authority to Sue Ward. Please scroll down to the Consideration Concerning the Moon when Void of Course section.
 

Anachiel

Well-known member
So what were you bringing to the table to support your argument?

My responses have to be read first before we can intelligently continue. Otherwise I am just repeating myself, or is that talking to myself...not sure...anyway.....

Your link, to your so-called 'authority', doesn't work either.
 

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
Anachiel said:
My responses have to be read first before we can intelligently continue. Otherwise I am just repeating myself, or is that talking to myself...not sure...anyway.....

Your link, to your so-called 'authority', doesn't work either.

I'm asking for sources, which your position seems to be lacking.

Also, I've read all of your responses, though you appear to be ignoring mine.

The whole crux of your argument appears to be that aspects don't count across sign barriers. This sounds good in theory and works well when considering the philosophy of aspects, but in practice doesn't seem to be given much weight. There is the aforementioned "Of a husband imprisoned" where Lilly considers the Moon applying an out of sign Sextile to Saturn. Why would he do this if the sign boundary doesn't allow the continuation of aspects? Or perhaps we can look to "A ship at sea, in what condition" where Lilly considers the last aspect of the Moon (@ 10°Virgo) to Saturn (@ 14°Taurus), which would have been a Square (and would have occurred when the Moon was in Leo). Lilly seems to be implying with his practice that sign borders are more permeable than we might have thought.

So, again, what sources are you using for your arguments on your views of the Void of Course Moon?
 
Last edited:

Anachiel

Well-known member
Hon, I'm getting bored with this topic.

And, for the record, my sources range from Johannes Schoener to Dariot to William Lilly and a few others. These were all, by the way, horary astrologers talking about horary rather than the natal astrologers that have been quoted and used in this horary discussion above.

Natal technique is not horary technique...sheesh....it can't it get any more obvious than that, c'mon.

In fact, most of the ancient sources that many people use to confuse horary are actually pointedly and specifically only intended and described for natal astrology. This means that a void Moon in a nativity is treated much different from a void Moon in a horary. If you mix the two, you will sow confusion as we have seen.

Oh ya, almost forgot. As for the ship at sea....they already knew it was lost..duh! It hadn't shown up. Otherwise they wouldn't be asking about it's condition. Lilly looks at the past aspects of the Moon to determine what happened to the doomed ship. Get it? happened. Obvious, very obvious...has nothing to do with void Moons or orbs or moieties or anything else other than looking at the past to see what happened. Oh-em-gee!, I can't believe this has to be explained......::grumble::grumble::
 
Last edited:
Top