i am just curious if everyone looks at moon's last aspect everytime you read an horary chart.

if so, how do you reach a conclusion when there is no applying aspects (no translation of light either) between significators but maybe good reception between two and moon's last aspect being positive. would you say the matter will conclude well somehow?

thanks.

Libra Rising,

When using Solar Fire V6 and Regiomontanus House system, the various considerations re the Moon are given on the Horary Chart page. Where she has been and where she is going are both very important. The Moon is always a co-significator of the Querent and she also tells us what the Querent is thinking about.

Julie K

the moon talks about the action happening in the chart, from what has happened to what is happening next, if that helps. It is one of the things you tend to look at in a chart because it helps fill in the story line.

Granny

I wouldn't say that just because the moon makes a "positive" aspect last or has translation of light or mutual reception, that something would end positively. And there are also essential/accidental debilities of planets... and hard aspects to malefics like Saturn often make something negative.

And I never understood trines, sextiles, and conjunctions as always being positive. It usually means something will more easily happen - it's a "yes" to a question, which could be a negative question.

My understanding of the matter is as follows:

The moon is fast or "swift", so it is the planet that tell us the development of the matter in a quick, imediate way (so, a good idea to ask the same question is to wait for the moon to change signs I would say). The aspects of the moon shows the next movement and what will come of it. So, the last aspect of the moon in sign would show the matter's (the sign into which it is represents the present matter) last development for now, before a turn on it (whatever turn that is, it becomes harder to detect that).

Anyway, one thing that people tends to forget is that the Moon is CO-significator, not a significator. Even though it carries disposition's, the significator's for a horary is hardly the Moon itself, and when it is for the quesited, you are advised to even not use Moon as querent co-significator (that's my opinion). So, the full development of the matter is still up to the rulers of the matter, then exaltation ruler, if need be. If there is enough room for that, you look at trip, term and face for further info.

Also, one thing that always bugs me, is that the Moon carries disposition, but does it aspects changes the matter so radically that the question is destroyed? Meaning, for example, we have Mercury 8? Capricorn, Jupiter 25? the same sign, both being significator of the matter. They are going conjunct before leaving sign, but before that the moon will be doing lots of aspect to it, but they will still come conjunct in that sign (meaning the question or the matter does not change in the long run in my opinion). I think that the Moon aspects to it (she is for example in 8? Virgo) will only point the development of the matter, rather than totaly defining it (the definition will come by the conjunction, IF Mercury does not go R. or Jupiter escapes it to Aquarius before, which will not happen in this example).

What do you think about all this?

apologies for not laying out question in a better way. i often think in reverse...

my original understanding was pretty much same as granny's and i was happy with it personally. but the question came to my mind when i noticed a horary astroger take a look at moon's last aspect even when rulers of the question successfully indicate let's say, positive answer due to its reception, aspect and all the other considerations relevant to horary. but then the person added extra negative advise to the outcome to a question which was originally asked by a client as if the moon's last aspect will be the real outcome.

so i wanted to know how much importance moon's last aspect carries in horary but from your posts learned that its not to overturn the state of significators.

thanks for your help.

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

In this link there are some very good examples. Two of them shows how the full outcome of the matter can not be taken by the Moon alone (the 2nd and the last example).

Although, one thing is for sure, a hard aspect of the moon before changing signs can bring a definitive turn to the matter (3rd example).

So I assume the Moon being the fastest planet to be an aid to determine the near future.

PFN,

yes, this is what i meant. applying conjunction is not good enough and have to look at moon because moon overturns things. but then i never seen so perfect horary chart before! i mean, to have all clear positive is more difficult than obtaining negative, it seems. geez....i supposei should understand that the state of moon always needs to be looked at when looking at a chart.

thank you.