Why is a planet placed first on an aspect?

Pluto9th · #1 02-25-2007, 03:56 AM

Hi all,

Forgive me if this is too obvious for some, but why is one planet in an aspect placed first (e.g., Sun square moon) rather than the other way around? What is the rule behind this?
In other words, if I was looking at a chart and I hadn't drawn the lines to connect the planets, what would determine the position? Thank you ahead of time!
Jen

astro.teacher · #2 02-25-2007, 04:19 AM

The swifter planet ALWAYS applies to the slower one. Saturn will never conjunct Mercury, its impossible. Mercury always has to conjunct Saturn because Mercury moves faster than Saturn.

http://antiquus.50webs.com/Cosmo.html

The graphic at the bottom of the page should help you picture this concept.

Aaron Brody - Astro.Teacher
http://antiquus.50webs.com
Antiquus Astrologia

Pluto9th · #3 02-25-2007, 06:30 AM

Hi astroteacher,
I was just looking at your website, by the way. Interesting ...
Ok, that makes sense. That sort of crossed my mind, but it isn't explicitly mentioned in the book I have.
I couldn't access the link you gave here. Anyway, thank you for the info.
Jen

astrofonder · #4 02-25-2007, 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pluto9th

Hi all,

Forgive me if this is too obvious for some, but why is one planet in an aspect placed first (e.g., Sun square moon) rather than the other way around? What is the rule behind this?
In other words, if I was looking at a chart and I hadn't drawn the lines to connect the planets, what would determine the position? Thank you ahead of time!
Jen

Hi jen.
If a planet is exalted or in its own sign but aspcted badly by other planet esp.malefics it will not give that result that it could be. That"s why one planet in aspect placed first.
THANKS
SANDEEP

wilsontc · #5 02-25-2007, 04:05 PM

Pluto,

It depends on what "aspects" you are talking about. ALL aspect patterns can occur if you are talking about transiting planets aspecting birth planets. In this case, the transiting planets are moving and the birth planets are not moving, so any transiting planet could aspect any birth planet, depending on the chart.

Also, in modern astrology, the birth chart is looked at as a fixed, non-moving chart. So, again, any planetary combination is possible, depending on the chart. Uranus conjunct Mercury is the same as Mercury conjunct Uranus: since neither Uranus nor Mercury is moving in the chart, there is no need to take into account their relative speeds, as is necessary in a "moving chart".

However, if you look at ALL astrological charts as moving charts, then the faster planet will always aspect the slower one. Being concerned about which planet comes first in an aspect and setting rules about it is more common in traditional astrology than in modern astrology.

Giving options,

Tim

Pluto9th · #6 02-26-2007, 02:19 AM

astrofounder and wilsontec,
Thanks to the both of you for the replies.
Astro, please give me an example of what you're talking about. It sounds different from what astroteacher (he only spoke of one planet being faster than another) and wilsontec are saying.
Wilsontec, are you saying that in a natal chart, it doesn't matter which planet comes first? If so, that really clarifies things for me.
Jen

wilsontc · #7 02-26-2007, 03:45 AM

Jen,

Different astrologers have different rules. I look at the birth chart as a "non-moving chart": we are born at one moment and time and our chart freezes the energy of that moment and time in us. Everything in our life refers back to this "birth moment." So it doesn't matter which planet is listed first in the aspects of a birth chart.

Some astrologers regard the birth chart as a "sort-of" moving chart, so they talk about planets in the chart as "applying" (moving forward) and "separating" (moving away) from each other. "Applying" aspects are considered stronger than "separating" aspects. These astrologers would also tend to be very careful about which planet came first in the aspect, since that is the planet "applying" or "separating" in the chart.

Giving more options,

Tim

Soul Friend · #8 04-24-2007, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by astro.teacher

The swifter planet ALWAYS applies to the slower one. Saturn will never conjunct Mercury, its impossible. Mercury always has to conjunct Saturn because Mercury moves faster than Saturn.

http://antiquus.50webs.com/Cosmo.html

The graphic at the bottom of the page should help you picture this concept.

Aaron Brody - Astro.Teacher
http://antiquus.50webs.com
Antiquus Astrologia

I was always under the impression from my studies that the "astrological alphabet" of the planetary order prevailed. The speed of the Moon is always swiftest and never retrograde but the Sun gets first billing.

I've got a youngster here distracting me from reading all this post and maybe that was mentioned but if not I thought I'd throw that thought into the mix.

unukalhai · #9 04-24-2007, 10:26 PM

Your question comes with a warning, as Tim eluded to. This is one of the sort of things we all have different opinions of, and there's no "right" answer.

My humble opinion on the matter:

The angles of the birth chart are locked in place. They are your "Cross Of Creation" and only receive aspects. Therefore, it's always "Mars trine ascendant". The faster moving planet always comes first, based on the average orbital period of the object around the zodiac. Whichever object moves fastest is what times the aspect, so we put it first.. Moon trine Saturn, for example. I try not to make it any more complicated.

However, one must realize that this is somewhat backwards, even if it is logical in a certain sense and seems to be accepted as normal. When a fast-period, fleeting object like the Moon or Mercury or Venus, etc, lines up with a slow, powerful, limbering object such as Neptune... The actual reality of the situation is that Neptune's powerful dissolving influence is modifying the more fleeting planet. The slower the period, the more overarching it's powers are, and the more likely it is to overpower a faster planet. It's as if the faster planet temporarily comes under the slower planet's more overarching influence. We really should say Neptune trine Venus if we want to express whats really going on in an energy sense, but since we are directly measuring space/time and implying the energy effects through our interpretation, we dictate the aspect as it occurs in the space/time realm, not the energy realm.

I generally avoid worrying much about applying vs separating in a nativity, although if you are doing a very detailed analysis and really trying to understand some of the more subtle matters of the chart, and especially when working with the Lunar nodes (or any other exact axis), applying vs separating is certainly something to add to the mix. It is, however, potentially just another piece of extraneous data to deter you from the real meat of the chart. Consider it desert, if you have room after all that tasty brisket and sausage, dig in.. Otherwise be glad you got stuffed.

What I do think folks tend to ignore far more than they should, however, is the waxing vs waning concept. I will admit I'm _finally_ starting to consider this on a more regular basis after many times of kicking myself for neglecting the concept. There are two of each aspect... The waxing sextile, for example, happens when the faster object is placed 60 degrees ahead of, as in the direction of forward motion, the slower object. However, the sextile will happen again, as the waning sextile, during the same planetary cycle when the faster object is 60 degrees behind, as in the direction of retrograde motion, the slower object. Both are sextiles, but one occurs 60 degrees into the cycle, the other 300 degrees into the cycle, which is also 60 degrees from the next cyclic conjunction. The first represents the sextile energy being used to build (lay a foundation), the second of the sextile energy being used to actualize and integrate. I suppose this goes way beyond the scope of this thread, but it seems atleast somewhat related to the concept of which direction aspects work and hopefully will provoke a few people to start considering waning vs waxing aspects, as they can actually add some more-than-subtle meaning to the energy flow of a chart; which after all is what aspects are all about!

If I've confused you, please say so and I will attempt to explain further