Collection of light and timing v.s. interference

D

dourage

Well-known member
Hi all,

I'm trying to figure out if in this chart there is collection of light or something totally different, namely, interference. I understand that you wonder how I could ever confuse the two, but here's why.

A friend asked whether or not she will consume her relationship with a man she is interested in. She is represented by Mars, he by Venus. Now both planets are separating from a trine, but are brought back together, or at least I thought, by the Moon.

BUT, here comes the thing I am not really sure about (and this also ties in with my question about timing), the Moon applies to three planets (Venus, Mars and Jupiter). Since Moon applies to both Venus and Mars I would think there is a collection of light, but the Moon first applies to Mars, then to Jupiter, and then to Venus. So is this still collection of light then, or does Jupiter mess it all up?

Second, if there is indeed collection of light, then how do I calculate the timing for such an aspect? I get it when it's a "normal" aspect, but how does it work with collection of light? (Since there are basically three aspects involved).

Sorry if I am saying something that is really off base, but I'm trying to grasp this whole translation of light and collection of light thing.

Thank you so much in advance for any help you offer me in clearing up this matter.
 

Attachments

  • sleep.jpg
    sleep.jpg
    82.6 KB · Views: 66
Last edited:
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
Personally I do not think that Mars collects the light from the Venus via the Moon, because Venus seperates from Mars; here Venus is the "inferior" planet, and Mars the superior one; for Mars to collect the light (via Moon applying to both Mars and Venus), the inferior planet (Venus) must also be applying to the superior planet (Mars) for this to occur. Such is my understanding of the collection of light as outlined by Al-Biruni.
 
D

dourage

Well-known member
Hi dr. Farr, but why in this case should Mars be collecting? Doesn't the planet that applies to both other planets automatically collect the light? Or do, as I now understand from your post, we have to see which is the more dominant planet? So you're saying that in this chart the Moon cannot be collecting the light because Mars is dominant? And, but, if Venus would be applying to Mars, we wouldn't need collection in this case right? Lilly says the following about collection of light:

"Matters are also brought to perfection, when as the two principall Significators doe not behold one another, but both cast their severall Aspects to a more weighty Planet then themselves, and they both receive him in some of their essential dignities; then shall that Planet who thus collects both their Lights, bring the thing demanded to perfection: which signifies no more in Art then this, that a Person somewhat interested in both parties and described and signified by that Planet, shall perform, effect and conclude the thing which otherwise could not be perfected: As many times you see two fall at variance, and of themselves cannot think of any way of accommodation, when suddenly a neighbour or friend accidentally reconciles all differences, to the content of both parties: And this is called Collection."

So he means with "a more weighty planet then themselves" a planet that is more dominant or something? Also, if what I say would be correct, Venus is not receiving the Moon, only Mars, so this probably also means that collection is not in the cards here. Wow this is not confusing at all.
 
Last edited:
A

Anachiel

Well-known member
dourage said:
BUT, here comes the thing I am not really sure about (and this also ties in with my question about timing), the Moon applies to three planets (Venus, Mars and Jupiter). Since Moon applies to both Venus and Mars I would think there is a collection of light, but the Moon first applies to Mars, then to Jupiter, and then to Venus. So is this still collection of light then, or does Jupiter mess it all up?

Second, if there is indeed collection of light, then how do I calculate the timing for such an aspect? I get it when it's a "normal" aspect, but how does it work with collection of light? (Since there are basically three aspects involved).

Sorry if I am saying something that is really off base, but I'm trying to grasp this whole translation of light and collection of light thing.

Thank you so much in advance for any help you offer me in clearing up this matter.
Click to expand...


The main significators show the point...Venus is leaving or separating from a trine of Mars. So, it would appear that Venus is losing interest.

The Moon can only apply to one planet at a time. The Moon is applying to Mars but, Mars is leaving the trine with Jupiter because it is retrograde. So, there is no real connection there and no collection of light between these.

Venus is also leaving Jupiter, so it would appear that whatever collection might have existed is fading away...the connection is fading.

The Moon cannot aspect Venus without meeting Mars and then Jupiter, first. Venus is not applying to anything, really...not anything that connects the main significators anyway.
 
D

dourage

Well-known member
Hi Anachiel, thank you for your reply. I think I get most of what you're saying. But then what in astrology's name IS collection of light then?

I mean, I get that the Moon cannot apply to two planets at the same time, that sounds like it makes a lot of sense, but how could collection of light ever exist then? Isn't the whole point of collection that one planet connects two others by application?

You say that the Moon applies to Mars first, then to Jupiter and then to Venus. If I understand it correctly you are indeed saying that Jupiter is the spoilsport here, right? That it's interfering from the Moon collecting the light because it aspects Jupiter first before it aspects Venus? So would you say that if Jupiter had not made any aspects to the Moon, would the Moon then have collected the light, in your opinion, or not?
 
Kaiousei no Senshi

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
Well, the Moon can't collect light anyway because she's the swiftest planet. She can translate, but not collect.

The Moon can't translate light in this chart because she's not separating from Mars or Venus, and the recent separation has to already have happened.

Jupiter isn't collecting light because Mars is already past his Trine to him, and even if it weren't it's unlikely that it would be a correct case of collection since Jupiter is in Mars's detriment.

So he means with "a more weighty planet then themselves" a planet that is more dominant or something?
Click to expand...

What he means is that two lighter planets have to be interacting with the same heavier planet. Such as Mars and Venus interacting with Jupiter (who is slower than they are). One of the two planets would have to have recently separated from Jupiter while the other is immediately applying to him. Many authors suggest that the planet collecting will have to be in the dignities of both planets.

Hope that didn't confuse you more!
 
SagiCap

SagiCap

Well-known member
Kaiousei no Senshi said:
What he means is that two lighter planets have to be interacting with the same heavier planet. Such as Mars and Venus interacting with Jupiter (who is slower than they are). One of the two planets would have to have recently separated from Jupiter while the other is immediately applying to him. Many authors suggest that the planet collecting will have to be in the dignities of both planets.

Hope that didn't confuse you more!
Click to expand...

But I recently posted a chart with placements just 6 days before dourage's here and they showed the above, but it was said to be prohibition. (Side note: Is prohibition same as interference?)
 
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
SagiCap: yes, to my understanding they are synonymous
Dourage: yes, "weighty" (more weighty) means the "superior" ("dominant") planet, which also coincides with the average speed of the planets, and also with the Chaldean order of the planets (Saturn first, Moon last)
 
Kaiousei no Senshi

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
SagiCap said:
But I recently posted a chart with placements just 6 days before dourage's here and they showed the above, but it was said to be prohibition. (Side note: Is prohibition same as interference?)
Click to expand...

Can we get a link to this chart, please? It could be interesting to see. Though, I think that what it might come down to is that Jupiter probably isn't in any of Mars's dignities in Taurus. I don't have the terms memorized, but I'm pretty sure Mars's terms in Taurus are at the end of the sign.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Kaiousei no Senshi said:
Can we get a link to this chart, please? It could be interesting to see. Though, I think that what it might come down to is that Jupiter probably isn't in any of Mars's dignities in Taurus. I don't have the terms memorized, but I'm pretty sure Mars's terms in Taurus are at the end of the sign.
Click to expand...
The Terms of Mars in Taurus according to Ptolemy are Taurus 28[FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT] - 30[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]º[/FONT][/FONT] http://www.skyscript.co.uk/dig2.html:smile:
 
SagiCap

SagiCap

Well-known member
dr. farr said:
SagiCap: yes, to my understanding they are synonymous
Click to expand...
Thank you.

Kaiousei no Senshi said:
Can we get a link to this chart, please? It could be interesting to see. Though, I think that what it might come down to is that Jupiter probably isn't in any of Mars's dignities in Taurus. I don't have the terms memorized, but I'm pretty sure Mars's terms in Taurus are at the end of the sign.
Click to expand...

I hope this is ok to post here, dourage. Here is the chart, Kaiousei: Example of Prohibition? Jupiter is between Mars and Venus trine, but they both apply to the weighter body (Jupiter). Why is there no translation either? I thought the criteria you posted above is fulfilled here. Are the conjunction and 2 trine aspects too close?

6824613996_a6b371013f_b.jpg


The querent's question was: "Did the song (he posted) remind him of me?" Song is her 5th or his turned 5th? Here's the thread too: http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47656
 
Last edited:
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Chaldean Terms of Mars are Taurus 21º - 26º as illustrated by attachment (for Saturn/Mercury the diurnal planet is indicated first) :smile:
 

Attachments

  • chaldean_terms.jpg
    chaldean_terms.jpg
    59.1 KB · Views: 32
Last edited:
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
In the reference chart (according to my outlook), significators would be:
-song he posted = 5th from 7th = Mercury significator (note: houses are whole sign)
-him = 7th = Venus
-querent ("me") = 1st = Mars
-querent co-significator = Moon
...so, Jupiter would not enter into this equation UNLESS (and this is by standard horary doctrine-it is not followed in the Ankara methd) Jupiter became the "jam"** (collector of light) from the relevant significators (at least from the primary significators, Venus and Mars) which in fact happens here in this chart (Mars and Venus applying to Jupiter, makes Jupiter the collector of their light which = a defacto conjunction of the significators via Jupiter's collection of their light)
There would be no TOL (involving significators) because there is no intermediate lighter (than Mars) planet to transfer the light between Mars and Venus; Jupiter is heavier than Mars, so Jupiter collects Mars light, as it also collects the Venus light, and therefore is "jam" (collector of the significator lights) and makes the defacto "conjunction" between the significators, occur.

**"Jam" was the Arabic designation for Collector of the Light, used by various Islamic era authors such as Al-Biruni. Also note that, for the Islamic-era horarists, a Collector did NOT have to be in the term of any planet it collected light from.
 
Kaiousei no Senshi

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
Sagicap,

As our friends JupiterASC and Dr. Farr have shown us, Jupiter would not be in any of Mars's dignities so that's our main problem. Another problem would be to doublecheck and make sure that Mars's retrograde Trine to Jupiter would really be the next aspect he makes, or if someone else doesn't get to either of them first, it doesn't seem like Mars is at full speed yet, but I could be mistaken. I'm unable to check at the moment.
 
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
The Moon will probably act as interference (by aspecting Mars, first by sextile)) ie, by prohibition, prior to Mars perfecting the trine to Jupiter, which would (in standard horary) negate Jupiter as collector of light, in the reference chart. And Jupiter would act to prohibit the perfection of the Venus/Mars trine, because Venus will conjunct Jupiter prior to the perfection of the Venus/Mars trine. So the primary significators form no applying aspect that will perfect, plus secondary quesited significator Mercury forms no applying aspect with any significator, and Moon is applying to an opposition to Mercury (which will perfect), so, in my understanding of standard horary, all this would give a "no" answer to this question.

(Ankara horary would look at all of this differently, but that is another matter, off topic as far as this thread is concerned)
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Kaiousei no Senshi said:
Sagicap, As our friends JupiterASC and Dr. Farr have shown us, Jupiter would not be in any of Mars's dignities so that's our main problem.

Another problem would be to doublecheck and make sure that Mars's retrograde Trine to Jupiter would really be the next aspect he makes, or if someone else doesn't get to either of them first, it doesn't seem like Mars is at full speed yet, but I could be mistaken. I'm unable to check at the moment.
Click to expand...
Kaiousei no Senshi, I checked the thread Sagicap linked to regarding the chart in question, and on that thread dr. farr posted the following comment which IMO answers your question :smile:
dr. farr said:
Well, here is where the Ankara (Ottoman astrology) approach might make some sense:

yes there is an applying trine between Venus and Mars (wide orb though, 7 degrees, but lets accept it) but it won't perfect due to prohibition (Venus conjuncts Jupiter before perfecting trine with Mars)

SO, in the Ankara approach, this trine would not count at all (would be given 0 or neutral testimony in the totality of testimonies
Click to expand...
I was about to post the above when I noticed the following which I now add to my comments:
dr. farr said:
The Moon will probably act as interference (by aspecting Mars, first by sextile)) ie, by prohibition, prior to Mars perfecting the trine to Jupiter, which would (in standard horary) negate Jupiter as collector of light, in the reference chart. And Jupiter would act to prohibit the perfection of the Venus/Mars trine, because Venus will conjunct Jupiter prior to the perfection of the Venus/Mars trine. So the primary significators form no applying aspect that will perfect, plus secondary quesited significator Mercury forms no applying aspect with any significator, and Moon is applying to an opposition to Mercury (which will perfect), so, in my understanding of standard horary, all this would give a "no" answer to this question.

(Ankara horary would look at all of this differently, but that is another matter, off topic as far as this thread is concerned)
Click to expand...
Thank you for that elucidation dr. farr :smile:
 
D

dourage

Well-known member
Kaiousei no Senshi said:
Well, the Moon can't collect light anyway because she's the swiftest planet. She can translate, but not collect.

The Moon can't translate light in this chart because she's not separating from Mars or Venus, and the recent separation has to already have happened.

Jupiter isn't collecting light because Mars is already past his Trine to him, and even if it weren't it's unlikely that it would be a correct case of collection since Jupiter is in Mars's detriment.

What he means is that two lighter planets have to be interacting with the same heavier planet. Such as Mars and Venus interacting with Jupiter (who is slower than they are). One of the two planets would have to have recently separated from Jupiter while the other is immediately applying to him. Many authors suggest that the planet collecting will have to be in the dignities of both planets.

Hope that didn't confuse you more!
Click to expand...

dr. farr said:
Dourage: yes, "weighty" (more weighty) means the "superior" ("dominant") planet, which also coincides with the average speed of the planets, and also with the Chaldean order of the planets (Saturn first, Moon last)
Click to expand...

Thank you both very much!! I think I really understand it now, very very clear! Stupid me I had NO idea to rank the planets in terms of weight!

So if I understand correctly (please correct this list if you see anything wrong):

Translation and Collection of Light

1. Collection of light cannot be done by a planet swifter/lighter than the planets of which it should collect their light that are slower/heavier.

2. Translation of light can (only) be done by a planet that is swifter/lighter than the planets it is consequently separating from and applying to.

3. Planets need to be in each other's dignities in order for both translation and collection of light to happen/be effective.

4. A planet can interfere through prohibiting an aspect between translator of light and the significator of the chart it applies to from perfecting, by perfecting an aspect to that significator first.

5. A planet can interfere through prohibiting an aspect between collector of light and the significators of the chart collector is applying to, by perfecting an aspect to either one of the significators first.

6. Following point 4 and 5, "perfecting an aspect first" means that the planet that is interfering can be further away in orb by aspect, but is in fact (in reality) perfecting the aspect to the significator in question sooner than translator or collector of light is. (This then depends on the speed of the planet defining the weight of the planet).

Only two questions I have left:

- Is point 2 correct or do I need to remove the (only) part?

- Do the dignities need to be mutual? So for example, in the case of collection of light, let's say Jupiter is applying to both Venus and Mars without any interference. Do Venus and Mars then both have to be in Jupiter's dignities? And do they then have to be in the same dignities too? Or is the collection of light still relevant when Venus is, let's say, in Jupiter's term, while Mars is in Jupiter's triplicity?

SagiCap said:
I hope this is ok to post here, dourage
Click to expand...

Of course it is! We are all here to learn, right? (And well, ok, some of us to teach rather than learn ;-))

Thank you all for this nice discussion! At least for me it is very helpful.
 
A

Anachiel

Well-known member
I just want to add a few things for clarity if you don't mind.

dourage said:
First, I am concerned the the querent is not asking what is really on her mind. I mean, is she wondering if the guy is going to get back together with her or contact her or...? The question about the song is, to me, a front for some other real concern here.


Second, the difference between Prohibition or Collection or Translation is the significators and how they interact with each other. This is overly simplified but it gets to the root of the confusion.

For example, with Translation, the main significators must have had some aspect with each other that now a faster body renews by first having aspected one then immediatly applying to aspect the other. If the Mains are about to aspect but, some faster body interposes itself then this interferes.


Another example, with Collection, the mains do not have to have been in aspect but, they do need to immediately apply to a third, slower body that receives them. If it doesn't, then it may not want to bother with the matter or the people or there may be little sympathy to effect the matter.


In the horary above see that Jupiter, in that horary, collected both Venus and Mars on the 14th March. Jupiter is in the house of joy of Mars and also some of the dignities of Venus....so, think on that. It may assist even though it has little power and is not well placed being in the 6th. The Moon does not interfere here as a semi-sextile and an inconjunct to Mars and Venus/Jupiter, respectively, does not count.

Translation and Collection of Light

1. Collection of light cannot be done by a planet swifter/lighter than the planets of which it should collect their light that are slower/heavier.

Right

2. Translation of light can (only) be done by a planet that is swifter/lighter than the planets it is consequently separating from and applying to.

Right, and must be received as well.

3. Planets need to be in each other's dignities in order for both translation and collection of light to happen/be effective.

No, in Collection the heavier planet needs to be in a dignity of the faster significators.

In Translation, the translating, faster planet needs to be in the dignities of both slower, significators or, at the least, the dignity of the slower one it separates from.

4. A planet can interfere through prohibiting an aspect between translator of light and the significator of the chart it applies to from perfecting, by perfecting an aspect to that significator first.

With translation this would be like two mains applying to aspect each other but a faster body reaches the first significator and aspects it before the two mains can perfect their aspect.

5. A planet can interfere through prohibiting an aspect between collector of light and the significators of the chart collector is applying to, by perfecting an aspect to either one of the significators first. Or, if the translating planet is not translating main significators and the mains have no relation to each other.

Well, if the Collecting planet is not friendly, badly placed, detrimented, etc. it may not want, be able or may have malice in perfecting the matter. Similarly, if the mains aspect or get aspected before being able to immediately apply to the Collector this will prevent it. Or, if the Collector is not collecting the mains.

6. Following point 4 and 5, "perfecting an aspect first" means that the planet that is interfering can be further away in orb by aspect, but is in fact (in reality) perfecting the aspect to the significator in question sooner than translator or collector of light is. (This then depends on the speed of the planet defining the weight of the planet).

The gist is: It is all a matter of timing, order and if the mains are involved (i.e. are these planets significator or assisting the significators, or not).

Only two questions I have left:

- Is point 2 correct or do I need to remove the (only) part?

See above

- Do the dignities need to be mutual? So for example, in the case of collection of light, let's say Jupiter is applying to both Venus and Mars without any interference. Do Venus and Mars then both have to be in Jupiter's dignities? And do they then have to be in the same dignities too? Or is the collection of light still relevant when Venus is, let's say, in Jupiter's term, while Mars is in Jupiter's triplicity?

See above

Of course it is! We are all here to learn, right? (And well, ok, some of us to teach rather than learn ;-))

Thank you all for this nice discussion! At least for me it is very helpful.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
My only exception to the excellent outline provided by Anachiel is this: while certainly standard horary (since the time of Bonatti) requires the dignity association, this was NOT required in the earlier Islamic-era horary (c9th through early 13th centuries) for collection of light to occur. However, I emphasize that in standard (Western) horary practice since the 13th century, this dignity is a requirement.
 
Top