As you rightly say the Sun perfects its conjunction with Mars, the querent, before Venus, the quesited conjuncts Mars, this is a case of the Sun prohibiting Venus from reaching Mars, not a frustration. In frustration Mars would have to apply and perfect an aspect or conjunction with another planet before Venus could conjunct it.

According to Lilly [CA 113-114] frustration occurs when:

...a swift planet would corporally join with a more ponderous, but before they can come to conjunction, the more weighty planet is joined to another, and so the conjunction of the first is frustrated...

In this case the swifter planet (Venus) is trying to reach the "more weighty" planet (Sun) but the Sun reaches Mars first. This fulfills Lilly's definition of Frustration.
According to Lilly Prohibition occurs when a faster planet than the two that are coming to conjunction overtakes the first and conjoins or aspects the second before the two sigs can perfect.

In prohibition it is a non-significator that causes the prohibition.
In frustration it is one of the significators that causes the frustration.

Does Lilly specify that? I only ask because I haven't seen it mentioned.

Thanks Maurice...

Pete

Hi Pete,
Recently in the AA Journal, July/August 2006, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 5-14, I wrote an article on this very subject. I tried to explain to beginners among many other things, the difference between prohibition and frustration. Since then 2 letters from Graeme Tobyn questioning parts of the article were received by the editor and will be published along with my replies, I believe, in the next issue of the Journal. If you can get a copy of that issue you may find the article helpful. Otherwise what I have said here regarding prohibition and frustration still stands.

Maurice.

Pete wrote: Hi Maurice,
as I understand it, John Frawley advocates the use of the real-time method and I think he discusses this in "The Real Astrology", a copy of which I don't have.
Maybe Tom can throw some light on this?

Cheers...

Pete

This is from Frawley`s article "How to beat time" (Astrologer`s Apprentice issue 20):
......example:let us say that our event is shown by Mercury applying to aspect Mars, and Mercury is now at 8 deg of its sign, Mars at 12 deg of its. From looking at the ephemeris we see that aspect perfects when they are both at 16 deg of their signs. Mercury has had to travel 8 degrees to perfect the aspect, so our judgement will be the event will happen in 8 somethings: days, weeks, months, years, whatever. But sometimes we will assume that Mars stands still and take only the distance between the planets`present positions, giving us just 4 degrees and so 4 days,weeks,months etc.
"So how do I know when to go for true aspect and when to go for the transit?" I don`t know. I have not found any reliable guidelines in either the texts or in practice. I would suggest that the only guide is that in many cases one answer will make sense within the context of the question, while the other will not. I suggest that this is what we see Lilly doing in various of his judgements - bouncing possibilities off the client, or off his own knowledge of the realities of the situation.................

Trojan

Hi Trojan,
It makes sense to try all of the methods used by Lilly and others, though examples from the 'others' are thin on the ground.
Timing is not easy and I don't know of any reliable method. To satisfy yourself test every method you know thoroughly and see what the results are. That's about the best I can say.

Maurice.

Hello,

Just a reminder to anyone browsing that John Frawley's article 'How to beat time' is available free here on skyscript:

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/timing.html

Mark

Quick question about aspects applying to the ASC (or any angle). Does Venus at 27 Libra apply to a 29 Sag ASC? Intuitively I took it to be an applying aspect, yet the ASC - in real time - moves faster than Venus ...

Can anyone help me with this please? The crux of my judgment rests on this.

Hi Pete,
Recently in the AA Journal, July/August 2006, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 5-14, I wrote an article on this very subject....

...If you can get a copy of that issue you may find the article helpful. Otherwise what I have said here regarding prohibition and frustration still stands.

Hi Maurice,
I'm not a member of the A.A. so unfortunately it looks like I won't get to see your article or your response to Graeme Tobyn.
Regarding the terms 'Prohibition' and 'Frustration'. I looked up the definition of 'Prohibit' and 'Frustrate' on Dictionary.com and this is what I found:

"Prohibit": to forbid, prevent, hinder.
"Frustrate": to disappoint, thwart, nullify.

Now it seems to me that there is very little difference in these definitions so regardless of whether Lilly's method of defining Frustration or the one that you advocate is correct, I think that in real terms the end result is the same: the desire of Venus to perfect her conjunction to the Sun is prevented, thwarted and nullified by the Sun's conjunction to Mars. In terms of the horary, the open rival is rushing to connect with whoever is signified by the Sun (co-ruler of 9th), but the Sun will have none of it and reaches the querent first. The question is, why is the Sun rushing to the querent? Mars has been captured by the Sun's rays and is being "burned up" so to speak, but if this is preventing the open rival from reaching the querent then surely this is a good thing ultimately, for shortly after being cazimi, Mars accrues dignity, triplicity and term in Scorpio. In other words, Mars is totally transformed. Venus follows both of them into Scorpio but she immediately loses all power to act by entering her detriment. She might turn nasty but there's nothing she can do any longer.

The question was "Will I leave my present job?" and we see Mercury, L.10 in the 1st, dignifying Mars and about to conjoin Jupiter, L.2. My client says she has recently joined the teachers union to try to solicit some help, and I consider Jupiter (L.2) to signify the union (2nd is the house of those who can help the querent). This might show some kind of meeting between union and management over this issue.
The Moon - co-ruling the querent - is in Virgo in 10th, ruling the 9th (teaching) and applying to trine Mercury and then Jupiter.

My judgement is that she should stay in her present job and ride out the storm as she is about to enter a position of much greater strength and influence in the situation and the actions of her former friend and now rival (Venus L.11, 7 & 12) will soon have little if any effect. The union may well be in a position to help her out and she may even get some kind of promotion or pay increase ( Mercury L.10 applying to conjoin L.2 ). She is in fact far more highly qualified than her rival.

I'm sticking my neck out a little and I know it, so before I pass on my judgemjent I'd welcome any comments or advice.

cheers,
Pete

Does Venus at 27 Libra apply to a 29 Sag ASC? Intuitively I took it to be an applying aspect, yet the ASC - in real time - moves faster than Venus ...

Alanna,
in this situation Venus is applying to the Ascendant, as it is in the earlier degree. Bear in mind though that the Ascendant is *very* late and that alone should have some bearing on your judgement.

Mark,
thanks for posting the Frawley article. I hadn't seen it and now I'm more clear as to his stance on timing. Interesting stuff...

cheers...
Pete

Thanks, Pete. But in regard to my question about Venus at 27 Libra applying to ASC 29 Sag ... it is true that Venus is in an earlier degree but if, for instance, Mars at 27 Libra were seemingly applying to Venus at 29 Sag (to give an example) ... Mars would be at the earlier degree, but would NOT be applying because Venus is the faster planet. The ASC moves more quickly than Venus, so does this apply in the Venus/ASC situation as well? Simply being in an earlier degree doesn't make an aspect applying if the earlier degree planet moves move slowly than the later degree planet. In that case, the aspect is separating. So I'm still wondering about the answer to my question.
In regard to the late ASC, it fits the symbolism of the question to be on the brink of change so I didn't take it as a stricture against judgment, but thanks for the heads up.

Hi Alanna,
you raise an interesting point. I have to say I've never seen any examples in C.A. or elsewhere where an applying aspect to an angle was considered irrelevant on this premise. As far as I'm concerned the planet applies to the angle by symbolic measure. Contrary to aspects between planets, the angles don't move to escape the application, as a planet might.

Just my two-pence worth...

cheers,
Pete

Thanks Pete. I have a feeling the angles are treated as static points too. Far from being irrelevant, however, this Venus application to the angle is highly relevant to the question as it rules the 10th and the question is about applying for a new job. If 10th ruler applies to sextile ASC (the querent) this looks like a yes to the question to me.

Hi Pete,

Yes, I can imagine how you must be feeling like you?re sticking your neck out. This is a hard one. Initially I felt you were putting too much of a positive spin on the combust state of Mars (by looking ahead to when it later experiences cazimi and then enters its own sign). I personally wouldn?t allow any recognition of the cazimi state, because Mars isn?t in that condition now and the fact that it will be later is part and parcel of being combust. I do agree that there is a promise of better days for Mars rather than Venus with this change of sign, but will it come in time to help this present situation, given that Mars is also very weak in the 12th house? Ordinarily I wouldn?t think so, but we have that support from the Moon so that probably would have budged me to the same position you?ve taken: to hang on if she can. There seems to be some financial benefit for her in the application of the Moon to the conjunction of Mercury (job) and Jupiter (2nd-ruler) in the first.

Alanna,

On your issue I agree with what Pete has written. I don?t recall any historical example where timing derived from application to cusps or angles was used by anything other than symbolic measure (the angles and cusps being seen as fixed for the time of the chart). I don?t think Pete was suggesting this is irrelevant (the opposite in fact), and of course Lilly put a lot of emphasis upon perfection shown by application from a significator to the relevant cusp.

I also want to say that I liked the definition Maurice gave earlier about frustration being caused by a significator and prohibition being caused by a non-significator. That seems very logical to me.