Job application

*** Edit**** after further discussion, The title of the post is questioned as.

"Will I hear from this job?"

I did hear from them.
I did interview.
I was offered.
I accepted, but not a fan of the job.

Mod
I dont know how to edit the title question to reflect proper inquiry.

eekndyn said:

*** Edit**** after further discussion, The title of the post is questioned as.

"Will I hear from this job?"

I did hear from them.
I did interview.
I was offered.
I accepted, but not a fan of the job.

Mod
I dont know how to edit the title question to reflect proper inquiry.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the update

unfortunately it is not possible to edit the original title question
but at least now we have received clarification
as to the more precise title of the enquiry
thank you, that is most helpful, especially for us learners

A little late to this. But this chart is so beautiful.

Jupiter, and a strong Jupiter(!), collects the light of Moon (Lord 10) and the Almuten of the First House, Mars.

(Mars is conjunct Cusp 1, the previous aspect of the Moon, beholding the Ascendant and ruling about half of House 1. No denying that it co-rules the Querent. Venus, on the other hand, is weak and absent from the first house, and she doesn't behold the first house.)

Just what a lovely chart to read. Of course the Querent got the job.

The separating aspect between Almuten 1 and Lord 10 and total lack of aspect between Lords 1 and 10, however, could explain why in the end the Querent isn't so thrilled by the job.

Amelia

ameliaastrology said:

A little late to this. But this chart is so beautiful.

Jupiter, and a strong Jupiter(!), collects the light of Moon (Lord 10) and the Almuten of the First House, Mars.

(Mars is conjunct Cusp 1, the previous aspect of the Moon, beholding the Ascendant and ruling about half of House 1. No denying that it co-rules the Querent. Venus, on the other hand, is weak and absent from the first house, and she doesn't behold the first house.)

The most beautiful thing? That Jupiter rules both their signs! And beholds the Ascendant!

Just what a lovely chart to read. Of course the Querent got the job.

The separating aspect between Almuten 1 and Lord 10, and total lack of aspect between Lords 1 and 10, however, could explain why in the end the Querent isn't so thrilled by the job.

Amelia

Click to expand...

The Almuten isn't Mars. But I understand why you are using Mars as co-ruler of the querent. Nevertheless Jupiter does not collect the light of Mars and Moon. In my understanding of CoL, this only works when 2 significators aren't in aspect.however Moon separated from an aspect with Mars. Actually we have to see this as prohibition of the Mars/Jupiter aspect. Moon gets in the way of the two of them. Or even to say it could be a translation of light (Moon separated from Mars and aspects Jupiter next) would make more sense but actually it isn't. And does not matter with your context (if you want to see Mars and Moon beeing connected.)

COL works when two planets are separating. No books are handy, but I'm pretty sure I read the examples in Lilly/Bonatti.

Please see page 8 of Guido Bonatti's Liber Astronomiae, Part 4 & On Horary, Part 1 trans Robert Hand, for a very interesting example.
Sun: 14 degrees Gemini
Jupiter: 15 degrees Sagittarius
Saturn: 18 degrees Aries

Al Biruni explained that in a collection, if the planets being collected are in aspect with each other, this aspect is replaced by the collection.

Deb Houlding also said:
https://www.skyscript.co.uk/gl/collection.html

Also see Barbara Dunn, Horary Astrology Re-examined P.332 & 473-474. She considered it collection of light in any case. It doesn't matter whether the planets being collected are in aspect or out of aspect with each other.

Amelia

Thanks I didn't studied Bonatti's or Holding's view about Col or Tol. But I'm sure that Lilly's definition is different. When he wrote:"when as the two principal significators do not behold one another,..."he meant, that they aren't within orb of a conjunction or aspect. Hence for this chart it doesn't apply because Mars and Moon are within orb of a sextile. Morover he wrote:" and they both receive him in some of their essential dignities..", i.e. Jupiter must be in one of the dignities of Mars and Moon. Jupiter is at 23,15 Degree in Sagittarius. Hence neither in any dignity of Mars nor Moon. Bonatti gave the same rule (the collector must occupy a dignity of both significators). Frawley's definition of col is similar to Lilly's but his view on receptions is different. Also he mentioned that it's more important that the 2 significators have receptions to each other than reception to the collector.However overall the receptions between the 3 planets have to make sense in the context.
I know that this topic is always difficult and everyone has maybe another view on it. That's why I'm glad for your hint of Bonatti's definition.

Thank you. I always had doubts, though, if Lilly meant that as a pre-requisite. But I appreciate your view.

I guess someday I would look at all Lilly's charts just to see if I could come up with anything meaningful for this discussion.

(At least for translation of light, Lilly provided two conflicting definitions. One required reception, the other didn't. See his demonstration on P111.)

I edited the post to add some more references in case somebody searches for the topic. One modern i.e. Barbara Dunn and one ancient Al Biruni (973-1050).

Just a side note to point out that Bonatti, like Lilly, could be quite unreliable when it comes to adhering to his own rules of dignity and reception. In the example above, Saturn is in fall, but Bonatti said that all planets had to be in some essential dignity for a collection to happen.

Also, according to this same Bonatti, trine and conjunction didn't require reception to perfect.

Even sextile, without reception, could perfect if the significator worked hard.

So one wonders why in collection, suddenly we need all the dignity and reception.

So I think how important reception is, would remain a matter of opinion. Deb Houlding for example thinks that a collection doesn't require reception. Of course, as said, it's her opinion (though she's a very experienced astrologer).

Amelia

A very kind (and deeply knowledgeable) friend pointed out to me that, in this thread, the Querent's intention was indeed to know whether she would hear from the company again. I did see the discussion, but in the heat of the moment I overlooked it. I took the question written on the chart - thinking this one was the initiate question when the chart was cast - and jumped in. My friend said this wasn't the way to do a consultation. And on second thought, my friend was right. So, Apologies to eekndyn for my insensitivity.

Since the intention was formulated that way, collection of light is entirely out of the question. My friend said "we have moon aspecting jupiter, that's it, so simple". And I agree.

All the best to eekndyn.

Amelia

I think her question included if she'll get the job because it is the title of the chart.You see it when u open it. So her question in mind when she casted the chart was: Will I get the job? But then she described the question a bit cumbersome, which leads to confusions.

kalinka said:

I think her question included if she'll get the job because it is the title of the chart.You see it when u open it. So her question in mind when she casted the chart was: Will I get the job? But then she described the question a bit cumbersome, which leads to confusions.

Click to expand...

Thank you for looking at this chart. I wish this job would of worked out. I did get hired, I had to call in on my first day and was never comfortable afterwards.

I am working on my communication. Its a fault. I know what I am trying to say, it just never comes out as intended or I have a mouthful. Learning less it more.