hi konrad,

mars is casting rays on how many degrees? that i suppose is my question, as the orb is 8 degrees and 44 minutes.. if it is supposed to hit the degree ahead of the moon, how much of an orb is allowed, or is it just based on the sign? the way i have read those quotes is that it refers to the degree ahead as opposed to 'degrees' ahead.. maybe i have it wrong which is why i was hoping for more guidance.. thanks for your feedback!

Hi James,

I am not aware of any explicit number but I use the orbs given by Sahl in his introductory work. He gives the Moon "12 degrees in front of it and behind it". This is as found in Ben Dykes' Works of Sahl and Masha'allah, though I am not aware of the page number since I bought the Kindle edition. The section is entitled The chapter on the knowledge of the lights of the seven planets. The Su8n gets 15 degrees in front and behind, and for this purpose at least, I use out of sign aspects but only within the orb of the light, not the attending planet.

This may be a little maverick of me but I am beginning to see planets aspecting by sign as having only knowledge of each other, like the one planet is a guest in the other's house but without direct contact, or two planets staying in a hotel (for planets obviously) who have seen each otehr around but not really been introduced. Planets within orbs are in direct contact (either in the future when appyling or in the past when separating). It may not be to everyone's liking but this is how I am going about it at the moment.

hi konrad,

thanks for sharing. i know the orb question is an ongoing challenge for astrologers, but i appreciate your sharing some of the sources for your view on this and your general views..

i will quote dykes persian nativities 1 page 29 " the sun will be accompanied by spearbearers which precede him, but the moon by spearbearers following her within 7 degrees. spearbearers preceding the sun by at least 15 degrees, having come of of the rays, will not harm him."

and further down "Moreover with the Sun and the Moon [in the Ascendant or in the Midheaven, even if] established outside their own domiciles and kingdoms, but under the regard of the stars which we called "at rest" above,[such that the planet spear-bearing for the sun aspects the degree rising before the sun but for the moon, the degree after the moon] another kind of dusturiyyah occurs."

the last quote sounds like just the degree as opposed to degrees.. the first quote gives 7 degrees for the moon.. i continue to believe orbs are a relative question for the individual astrologer to decide for themselves.. however the way i read the last quote is more definitive - "the degree", not "the degrees". as i was saying, maybe someone has some better light to shine on this then what i am getting from the books..

Well maybe somebody does have a better light, james, but, and at the risk of repeating myself, these are two different versions of guarding. In the first it is the body of the attendant which is guarding. In the second, it is its aspect. The note about degree before or after is telling you where the attendant must be relative to each light. The Moon's is after because the Moon's attendants are to be follwing her so she is moving towards them by zodiacal motion. The Sun's attendant is before as we want him to be carried to the aspect by dirunal motion. For example, the Sun/Moon is at 20 Libra, we want the Moon's attendant to be 20+ in its sign and the Sun's less than 20 for them to qualify. That's it. It is as simple as that, there is no hidden or deep meaning in that choice of words. It is simply so the aspect version mirrors the body version.

It is my conclusion that the Sun's is before it because this is the direction the Sun moves in during his marking of the day. For the Moon, she waxes and wanes in zodiacal motion hence her guard needing to be ahead of her by body or aspect. The orbs are personal preference but I began by using only the sign, however, I was seeing natives which were greatly eminent with the Sun at a real early degree nullifying any possible guarding if I stuck rigidly to sign only. Napoleon's chart is a good example of applying an out of sign orb.

okay - thanks konrad,

the chart of napoleon is an interesting example. without the out of sign or aspect feature it is hard to see doryphory at work in the this chart.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Bon ... Napoleon_I

i was thinking maybe the bounds would help explain it, but i don't see that using tropical.. mercury is diurnally placed in napoleons chart and perhaps it can act as a type of assistant to the sun? mercurys use in doryphory doesn't get discussed anywhere i have read, that i recall..

the thing for me about before or after the sun or moon is all more of the diurnal, verses nocturnal idea.. a planet rising before the sun will be 'diurnally placed' no matter where the sun is. a planet rising after the moon will be nocturnally placed relative to the moon.. i think that is the basic idea regarding before or after either light.. i could be wrong, but that is what i think this morning..

James_m wrote:the thing for me about before or after the sun or moon is all more of the diurnal, verses nocturnal idea.. a planet rising before the sun will be 'diurnally placed' no matter where the sun is. a planet rising after the moon will be nocturnally placed relative to the moon.. i think that is the basic idea regarding before or after either light.. i could be wrong, but that is what i think this morning..

Then we'll just disagree on that, I don't have any more will to labour the point I have been labouring. The wording and the context is self-explanatory to me.

okay - thanks konrad - james