Skyscript Astrology Forum

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2011 9:18 am**

I do not understand that Paulus and Scholia are taking aplication and separation as aspects in SPACE. They are using the last and future aspects of the planets to think about time.

In the Greeks we find two concepts: one that is associated with the space, and second one which is associated with the time.The first one I have called a ?static? teaching and the second one ? ?dinamic? teaching.The first concept is the concept of aspects, the second- concept of application / separation.Of course is not correct to say that the second concept is the concept of aspects(I used incorrectly for second teaching ?conjunctions/aspects? only because in modern astrological thinking is not clear distinguishing between these two concepts and for the convenience of the readers of this forum- see for example: Robert Hand, Aspects in Medieval astrology, part I &part II, Mercury Direct, Issue No2&No3, 2000).

These are two different teachings.In the Middle ages these two concepts are mixed together and elements belonging to the second teaching are applied to the first teaching.For example what we call now the ?orb? of planets is a part from the second doctrine, but not from the first.And that?s why we don?t can to speak about ?orbs? of aspects. This one I wanted to show with the example from Haly Abenragel.

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2011 2:40 pm**

margherita wrote:Hello Clelia & Dimitar

Clelia Romano wrote: Sahal and Ibn Ezra were the only ancient authors to accept the out of sign conjunctions and they were Arab Medieval and not Hellenistic authors.
I don?t have any Hellenistic source accept the out of sign aspects. I will really appreciate to know where you found out this concept.
In TARES volume 2 there is this, from Serapio:

"That if one of the stars chances to be in the first three degrees of an image it has its power in reference to the image behind, just as again if one of the stars chances to be in the last 3 degrees of an image, it has the power of its rendering in relation to the next image..... If some star chances to be upon the section of 2 images, it is quite powerful and immoderate in regard to its working."

margherita

Hello Margherita!

Your quote is talking about movement and not out of sign aspect.
Aplication and separation refer to things that happened in the past or will come to be.

Bonatti, many centuries later, says that a star in the last degree of a sign has power over the next sign and not in the sign it is in.
This "power" in my point of view is related to events and not to delineation.
I can?t imagine that a native with the Moon let?s say in the last degree of Scorpio can be considered as having a Sagittarius Moon.

But we do have to take into account that if the Sun is at 0 degrees of Aries, in the example above, the Moon?s next aspect will be a trine with him. However this trine will not produce the same kind of thing as it was able to do if happened with the Moon still in Scorpio: when the Moon changes signs the scene changes totally.

At least this is what I have been reading and my consultations examples point out in the same direction, too.

regards

Clelia

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2011 2:46 pm**

astroart wrote:
I do not understand that Paulus and Scholia are taking aplication and separation as aspects in SPACE. They are using the last and future aspects of the planets to think about time.
In the Greeks we find two concepts: one that is associated with the space, and second one which is associated with the time.The first one I have called a ?static? teaching and the second one ? ?dinamic? teaching.The first concept is the concept of aspects, the second- concept of application / separation.Of course is not correct to say that the second concept is the concept of aspects(I used incorrectly for second teaching ?conjunctions/aspects? only because in modern astrological thinking is not clear distinguishing between these two concepts and for the convenience of the readers of this forum- see for example: Robert Hand, Aspects in Medieval astrology, part I &part II, Mercury Direct, Issue No2&No3, 2000).
I was looking for Robert Hand?s text but I was unable to find it! Do you have any idea if the text is still avaible?

Thank you
Clelia

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2011 3:19 pm**

Hello, all

Clelia wrote:

This "power" in my point of view is related to events and not to delineation.

Every delineation has to do with 'events'; how are we to keep these two tightly interwoven concepts apart?

Regards,
Goran

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2011 7:22 pm**

Hello Clelia

Clelia Romano wrote:
Your quote is talking about movement and not out of sign aspect.

Robert Schmidt introduces this quote from Serapio with these words: "what happens if two planets are within 3 portions of forming an exact figure...this is what modern astrologers call an "out-of-sign aspect". The following passage from Serapio may be addressing such a situation."

I can?t imagine that a native with the Moon let?s say in the last degree of Scorpio can be considered as having a Sagittarius Moon.

very, very true

But we do have to take into account that if the Sun is at 0 degrees of Aries, in the example above, the Moon?s next aspect will be a trine with him. However this trine will not produce the same kind of thing as it was able to do if happened with the Moon still in Scorpio: when the Moon changes signs the scene changes totally.

The Moon cannot change sign if this is a natal chart and not an horary. We should judge the Moon in the position she is.
The native has the Scorpio Moon applying by trine to the Sun, still here the testimony of the Sun is not completely positive - without entering in the fact it is Moon and not another planet to apply to the Sun...

At least I would read like that,

margherita

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2011 7:49 pm**

cor scorpii wrote:Hello, all
Clelia wrote:
This "power" in my point of view is related to events and not to delineation.
Every delineation has to do with 'events'; how are we to keep these two tightly interwoven concepts apart?

Regards,
Goran

Hello Goran:

I wanted to mean for "events" the flow of events, the chart in movement. I used the 2 words in the sense that first comes the delineation, the analysis of any matter by house, planetary position and general configuration of the significators, and after comes prediction, based, you?are right, in the delineation and the evolution of the chart itself, but also in directions of any type.

The delineation is a promess but evolution of the chart and the movement of of the stars and angles will say what will be realized and when.

I?ll use the example of the Moon in the last degree of Scorpio and imagine that she is in the 2nd house, the almutem of the house is Mars in the 10th. Making it simple I?ll say that the native makes his living and earns money using "praxis", profession and matters of the 10th, or that the 10th house produces money.

If the next movement of the Moon was a trine with the Sun when entering in Sagittarius and the Sun has to do with open enemies, partnership and war, I can expect that in some point of the native?s life it will happen an association with brothers. But this association, a finantial association, is no longer related with Mars ( besides the fact that the Sun is disposed by Mars, but forgetting this point just now) but related with the ruler of Sagittarius and the situation of Jupiter in the chart. The phocus will change, because, the Moon changing signs, the dispositor changed as well.

Hope I made myself clearer now;_0

Clelia

Posted: **Sun May 08, 2011 8:36 pm**

Hello Margherita:

Clelia Romano wrote:
Your quote is talking about movement and not out of sign aspect.

"Robert Schmidt introduces this quote from Serapio with these words: "what happens if two planets are within 3 portions of forming an exact figure...this is what modern astrologers call an "out-of-sign aspect". The following passage from Serapio may be addressing such a situation."

I think it would be interesting to revisit the Serapio?s words that you quoted before:
?That if one of the stars chances to be in the first three degrees of an image it has its power in reference to the image behind, just as again if one of the stars chances to be in the last 3 degrees of an image, it has the power of its rendering in relation to the next image..... If some star chances to be upon the section of 2 images, it is quite powerful and immoderate in regard to its working."

I admit that Schmidt is an authority and is on the road before me, having a much more deeper relation with the Greek way of thinking than I have, but in my humble opinion, first, Serapio is an alone voice, second, according to the philosophical Hellenistic background, to imagine that a planet has power in 2 signs which by the way do not see each other is at least controversial.

Margherita
The Moon cannot change sign if this is a natal chart and not an horary. We should judge the Moon in the position she is.

I agree with the last part. But, as I answered above in my last post, life is in movement and if the native will live for a while, he will feel directions and transits.
This kind of thing can have a huge impact in the native?s life. If the Moon had separated from Mars and the next aspect would be with Saturn in Aries, she would be considered besieged, generating very bad effects in the native?s life.

Margherita:
The native has the Scorpio Moon applying by trine to the Sun, still here the testimony of the Sun is not completely positive - without entering in the fact it is Moon and not another planet to apply to the Sun..At least I would read like that,

I respect your way of reading, but I can?t imagine this Sun and Moon in any relationship besides the fact that Mars rules both.
But in the future I consider that they will be able to stay together in con iuntio ( by trine)

Clelia

Posted: **Mon May 09, 2011 7:23 am**

Hello Clelia

Clelia Romano wrote: I agree with the last part. But, as I answered above in my last post, life is in movement and if the native will live for a while, he will feel directions and transits.

but not only that...

I mean aspects are important even for native's qualities which stands all life long , like body, mind, temperament, not just events and change in life.

So the way we consider an aspect, if we consider or not, it is very important.

In every case, it seems that in quoting Serapio, Schmidt agrees with Bezza, I'm very happy when different sources converge.

margherita

Posted: **Mon May 09, 2011 3:17 pm**

margherita wrote:Hello Clelia

Clelia Romano wrote: I agree with the last part. But, as I answered above in my last post, life is in movement and if the native will live for a while, he will feel directions and transits.

but not only that...

I mean aspects are important even for native's qualities which stands all life long , like body, mind, temperament, not just events and change in life.So the way we consider an aspect, if we consider or not, it is very important.
Yes, it is. Just because of that it is important to discuss this issue.

In every case, it seems that in quoting Serapio, Schmidt agrees with Bezza, I'm very happy when different sources converge
.

I would say that two astrologers agree, not two sources, since Bezza and Schmidt are not authors.

Clelia

Posted: **Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:03 pm**

Is this an example of an out of sign "aspect" in Vettius Valens?

"8K;6P. Hostile Stars and Critical Places. The First Table of Critodemus.

It is necessary to investigate the hostile places and stars, not only with respect to the other stars, but also for the Ascendant, the sun, and the moon. When they come into opposition, they indicate critical periods and death. Take Saturn for example: note which god controls the degrees in opposition to the position of Saturn, as given in the table. The native will die when Saturn is there, is square with the Ascendant, or in signs with the same rising time, depending on when the chronocratorships coincide. The same must be done for the other stars, because the rulers of the terms of the degrees in opposition are hostile. These stars indicate destruction when they come to these places or to the places with the same rising times as the Ascendant.

For example: Saturn in Cancer 21?, terms of Venus. The point in opposition is Capricorn 21?, terms of Mars; Mars was in Taurus 27?. The native will die when Saturn is in Virgo, because it was square, as calculated by degrees."

It's on p.63 of that PDF, book III of the anthology, and either 8 or 6 depending on numbering system.

I'm using the version of Vettius Valens that Chris Brennan publicised a couple of years ago - PDF version online and free at http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/Vet ... entire.pdf

If you want to check the original Greek, it's on page 135 of Pingree's 1986 version of "Vettivs Valens Anthologiae", Book III, six (but sidenoted as III-8 too).

Posted: **Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:47 pm**

Hi Chris,

Looking quickly at my copy of the Knoll, it is Helios at 27 Taurus, not Ares. But otherwise, it could be called an "out-of-sign" aspect, but still, it is an actual aspect, if Saturn has just entered Virgo it would be within 3 degrees of the Sun's applying tetragonally to it.

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Orbs of the aspects according to Haly Abenragel