Question about Translation of Light

Oddity

Well-known member
No it doesn't. To translate light, the moon first has to pick up the light from one planet and carry it to the other.

If I'm reading you correctly, you're talking about a situation where the moon hasn't collected any light to translate yet.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
With translation of light does the translating planet *have* to be separated from one planet and applying to another?

What if, for instance, the Moon is applying to 2 planets consecutively;
Does the Moon transfer light from one to the other even if it isn't separated from one of them?
Would be helpful if there were a chart to view :smile:
 

Kitchy

Banned
I wonder about a new dark moon, perfecting an aspect to mars or jupiter, and then at same time, applying to saturn.

That would be some jacked up translation of light, in my opinion. But if anyone's got a story of such, I'd be fascinated to learn.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I wonder about a new dark moon, perfecting an aspect to mars or jupiter, and then at same time, applying to saturn.

That would be some jacked up translation of light, in my opinion.

But if anyone's got a story of such, I'd be fascinated to learn.
Chart would be helpful of that dark moon aspecting mars and so on, sounds interesting :smile:
 

Kitchy

Banned
I don't have a chart for one - but I always wonder about the dark moon in transition of light. Hopefully somebody will have a chart to post here or otherwhere - assuming OP is cool with it.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I don't have a chart for one - but I always wonder about the dark moon in transition of light.

Hopefully somebody will have a chart to post here or otherwhere - assuming OP is cool with it


.
Title of thread is "Question about Translation of Light" so seems would be ok and on-topic :smile:
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Just how New/Dark is the Moon you have in mind Kitchy? :smile:

WILLIAM LILLY CHRISTIAN ASTROLOGY

".....In all Questions
know there's not so great an affliction to the Moon
as when she is in conjunction with the Sun
the ill aspects of the Infortunes doth much afflict her
but none so powerfull as her Combustion....."
 

tsmall

Premium Member
I was just arguing about this with tikana the other day. The thing about translation of light is that it has a few qualifiers. The first is the idea that the planets cannot be in applying aspect to one another. For example, Venus applying to square with Saturn, Moon separating from Saturn and applying to Venus. That's not translation, depending on what the Moon represents that's probably prohibition. But each chart is different, which is why it is really important to understand the concepts of collection, transfer, pushing, and at the end of the day why Masha'allah probably had it right with his "hot potato" ideas of with whom the final disposition rests.


To answer the op, there is almost no way the Moon can be applying to two planets concurrently, unless the two planets happen to occupy the exact same degree, minute and second. Once the Moon has separated from a planet, even by a minute, it is separated. Does that make sense?
 

tikana

Well-known member
I am more interested in this TOL

"Mercury 15 Virgo Jupiter 16 Leo Venus 17 Scorpio

Mercury and Jupiter are significators not in aspect. Venus is separating from Jupiter and carrying his light. Mercury catches up with Venus and the light of Jupiter is translated to Mercury."


How the heck is this TOL i dont get it..

Merc perfects with Jupiter... 2 significators.. what does Venus have to do with Merc/Jupiter I have no bloody clue

T
 

tsmall

Premium Member
This arrangement fulfils Bonatti's first type of perfection, not considered by him to be a translation of light but rather a simple perfection of both significators for the querent with that of the quesited.

Next, tik? :devil:
 

tikana

Well-known member
Next, tik? :devil:

yeah moon goes to jupiter that gives the validation - perfection with timing

that is logical ..

merc going to jupiter perfects the issue 2nd time

what is the problem. moon does not interfere.. yet i have seen moon interfering i was telling you moon became a denial of the perfection because it stood between Significator 1 and Significator 2 with an opposition .. i told you the guy's mother would interfere.. and she did..

Moon rushes things through for jupiter when merc gets to jupiter slower (that is the example i was ttrying to explain) and I did ask that on the group once what happens if 2 planets moon coruler and Significator 1 applies to the slower planet.. does it indicate 1 event or 2 .. it was a solid 1 event depending on if the planet is dual sign of not..

i gotta go back to our IMs to find it..

T
 

tikana

Well-known member
Tsmall

also continue reading

""Let Saturn be in 20 degrees of Aries, Mars in 15 degrees of Aries and Mercury in 16 degrees of Aries. Here Mercury, a swift planet, separates from Mars and translates the virtue of Mars to Saturn. It's done also as well by any aspect as by conjunction. And the meaning hereof in judgment is no more than thus: that if a matter or thing were promised by Saturn, then such a man as is signified by Mercury shall procure all the assistance a Mars man can do unto Saturn, whereby the business may be the better effected."

It appears that Lilly is suggesting the possibility of the applying significators, Mars and Saturn, perfecting on their own, but the interposition of Mercury points to how the outcome may be more successfully achieved. All will depend, as we shall see, on whether Mercury is a helpful friend or an interfering enemy to the querent "

not arguing just pointing out the fineness ..

i love brainstorming with Tsmall .. lol

T
 

tsmall

Premium Member
The thing about the Moon that most people get hung up on is that it is a "co-significator" of the querent, which means they want to replace the primary signifier with the Moon, and that's just bad astrology. It co-signifies the querent's state of mind, and then it can do double or even triple duty. Leo rising, querent is the Sun, hands down. The Moon's position tells us a bit about state of mind, and if we believe Sahl and Masha'Allah (and I haven't yet found a reason not to) can provide us with underlying clues about the real nature of the question. Moon's last aspect gives us the back story, along with the last aspect (no matter how long ago) between the primary significators. Co-significator doesn't replace primary significator.

And then there are general significations, er, like the Moon being a general significator for mothers. :whistling:

Which is why 1) It is excruciatingly important to understand the mechanics of astrology, like reception, pushing, transfer, reflection, collection, escape, blocking, prohibition, and all 1000 other of them, and 2) it is highly important to be able to identify when a planet means what, what general significators represent, and how things can come to perfection all on their own.
 

tikana

Well-known member
Ahh good thing you pointed out the moon

moon hated the querent.. by reception.. in that chart i am talking about.. so i said that mother is hell for her son
 

tsmall

Premium Member
Thank you, it makes sense. I have a lot more to learn- I don't even know what pushing and transfer are yet. Do you know of any good articles or books where I can learn about these?

Well, tik keeps pointing to Lilly, CA, but seriously? The best technical manual I've found for understanding the mechanics of astrology (and please don't let the title fool you, I studied traditional astrology in depth for two years before I could understand a freaking thing in this book) is Benjamin Dykes' Introductions to Traditional Astrology, specifically the part as relates to planets in relation to each other. It's like $45 USD, but oh, so worth it.
 

tikana

Well-known member
Well, tik keeps pointing to Lilly, CA, but seriously? The best technical manual I've found for understanding the mechanics of astrology (and please don't let the title fool you, I studied traditional astrology in depth for two years before I could understand a freaking thing in this book) is Benjamin Dykes' Introductions to Traditional Astrology, specifically the part as relates to planets in relation to each other. It's like $45 USD, but oh, so worth it.


i can live without Dykes.. survived for a long time.. besides.. i got latin version of nativities under my fingertips. why would i need Dykes translation when i can read it on my own??.. besides i love short term horaries. they are the best learning charts

i do not touch nativities at all. i could care less. run a horary = problem solved

T
 
Last edited:
Top