Skyscript Astrology Forum

Hello everyone! I need some friendly help to figure out (both theoretically and practically) one particular point about transits: the phases of the transiting planet.

Things being more or less clear for a planet transiting a place (whatever you mean by a place), I’m particularly interested in the case of a planet engaging another planet through a transit aspect. We have two scenarios here: a transiting aspects the other planet(s) and continues its motion; a transiting planet can engage the other one three times: two times by its direct motion and once by its retrograde motion.

Here’s a quote from Valens Book IV. Riley’s translation: « If the stars are passed the first stationary point and are found to be retrograde, they delay expectations, actions, profits, and enterprises. In the same way they will be rather weak and thwarting when in opposition to the sun; they hold out only appearances and hopes. If they are at <or> the second stationary point, they cancel any delay and reinstate the same activities. They then bring stability and success in life. If the stars are at their last visibility, they bring obstacles and pains in one’s accomplishments, as well as bodily crises, illnesses, and afflictions of the hidden parts. Often they hold out rank and great hopes only to turn them to the worse. »

(I guess we agree that this quote concerns the transit through places, but I suppose the same principle is applicable to the aspects to other planets)

The question is: what happens BEFORE they are found retrograde? What’s the planet’s effect while during its first transit, before coming back retrograde and re-transiting direct? What it is supposed to be theoretically? As simple as « it gives what it promised »?

What I’ve found on the level of my personal experience is that a planet can carry on what it promises on any of the passages or even three times, although the retrograde planet is not supposed to do it (I’m not seeing it often though, also includes cases when a planet is about to become stationary). I’ve also noticed that sometimes it can concern like two (or three) different events/effects/spheres - while sometimes it can really concern one particular thing within « impulse-delay-achievement » scenario. Sometimes it can only give once: the first or the last time. And I can’t quite figure out the system. What is missing? (apart of changing frames of solar/lunar return charts)

I’d be very grateful if you share quotes from other authors if you know any (probably Arab ou Persian, they are quite meticulous?) and/or your personal experience.

mari,

it's a good question! it might be better to give you my perspective and you can possibly get a better perspective based off something i might say here..



this is a chart for 10 pm new york time today... the retrograde cycles are all governed by the transit of the sun or perhaps even more specifically the relationship between earth and sun over the course of a 365 day year! all the planets will appear forward moving or not based on where they are in relation to where the sun is... so, in a funny kind of way, retrograde is really about the cycle of the sun, or the cycle of earth around the sun..

at present sun is at about 22 or 23 capricorn... mercury, saturn and pluto in this chart are in earlier degrees of capricorn - rising ahead of the sun, if you were to move everything forward a 1/2 a day to sunrise...venus and jupiter are in sag, rising even sooner ahead of the sun.. it is easier to understand this by breaking down the inner planets - mercury and venus and keeping them separate from the outer planets..

i will concentrate on the outer planet jupiter here forward..

as the sun moves forward in the zodiac - into the signs aquarius, pisces and aries - jupiter which is in sag, will remain in sag and eventually be in a 120 relationship to the sun in late aries.. this is when jupiter will appear to go retrograde.. this is the ''first'' station.. it happens approx 87 days from today, or what is about 3 signs or 90 degrees from where the sun is now - so - when the sun is at approx 20 aries - jupiter will still be in sag, but will ''appear'' to go retrograde.. here is what it looks like on a chart..



as you can see, there is an s next to jupiter.. it is said to have just gone stationary - 2 days prior to this date and will appear to be going retrograde for about 4 months - august 12th area which will put it at it's 2nd station - coincidentally also in a type of trine relationship to the sun, now in mid leo.. see chart below..



so, this is the 2nd station - approx aug 12th!

the first station - was in the april 12th area, so its about a 4 month cycle where jupiter '''appears'' to be retrograde...

finally - when the sun gets to sag - close to where jupiter is - jupiter will be said to be going under thesuns beams, - what is a position approx 15 degrees later ( in terms of zodiac degrees) then the sun in the sign sag - and will eventually see the sun in the same spot as jupiter - an exact conjunction - or even cazimi - and then moving out from under the suns beams and eventually regaining it's strength ( as the sun moves into later degrees in the zodiac then were jupiter is - like the chart on top and at present - jupiter would be said to be in a strong planetary phase at present in the chart at top)..

personally i find it easier to understand this from this vantage point i share with you.. the movement of jupiter has changed very little in all of it.. what has changed is it's relationship to the sun and how it is viewed from the position of planet earth! so, for me understanding retrograde and the stations of the planets is about understanding how the sun fits in all of this..

in terms of planetary phase - this is the term used to define all of this - jupiter is considered strong and effective when it has come out from under the suns beams - especially the first 30-80 degrees approx... it loses some of it's strength and etc, as it approaches the first station and then regains it as it reaches the 2nd station... it loses it's strength as it gets within a distance of 15-20 degrees of its conjunction to the sun... it is an ongoing cycle that is totally reliant on the transit of the sun as viewed from earth.. all of this planetary strength concept is dependent on the concept of sun centered or earth-sun centered astrology!

well, this will probably give you something to think about, if nothing else!! perhaps someone who is more versed on the astronomy will chime in here... it is different for the inner planets - mercury and venus, then it is for the outers - mars, jupiter and etc... this also has to do with the fact we see everything from planet earth and what is inside - mercury and venus, are viewed differently then what is outside - mars and etc.. read up on planetary phase if you want to get more understanding of this...

the whole idea of planets retrograde not having their strength and etc is another controversial topic in astrology, but in terms of what this idea is based on - strength and weakness - it is all based on what it looks like from the position of earth and based fully on the sun-earth cycle that we know as the yearly cycle of the earth around the sun...

Hello, James!

Thank you, your post is very meaningful!

Yes, of course, when speaking about the phases of planets (transiting or not), I try not to forget what that phases mean

The strength of the planet with the regard of its position relatively to the Sun is definitely to take into consideration (combust, under the beams, oriental occidental).

And I guess being under/not under the beams can explain some things: I'll check it out more in depth, because so far I was paying more attention to oriental/occidental point.

But that's the problem with it and it doesn't go away. Planets are stronger when oriental: so logically they are supposed to act in the most productive way on their first transit, then made retrograde they temporarily delay and spoil things, and then when they are direct again they are occidental, right? They are weaker than when they were oriental, so nothing special is supposed to happen.

But coming back to Valens: "If they are at <or> the second stationary point, they cancel any delay and reinstate the same activities. They then bring stability and success in life."

That's theoretically. Practically I've seen some spectacular effects delivered by the occidental planet (transiting for the third time after first D and second R transit).

F.e. I can site a personal example from my youth (since I happen to have such an example that developed into a whole scenario, which is interesting). A strong Jupiter transited an important point of my radix: three times within the same solar return frame.
The first time close to nothing happened within the partile aspect itself, but roughly it was a period when I started working for a foreign company and I was working a lot.
When the retrograde Jupiter passed this point again I visited this country. In the meantime I had plans to complete my higher education in this country and I applied for it, but it didn't work out: instead I unexpectedly organised this summer university visit.
And when Jupiter passed this point for the third time I moved to that country to study, which was a thing that came truly by surprise: at the very last moment I was contacted and said that my application problems were no problems any more and I could still start my college year abroad as I wanted to. The funny thing is that my plane landed like exactly at the moment of the partile aspect (I didn't chose the date for the tickets!)

Well, that's an interesting example because it unfolded like a scenario, all three stages were somehow connected. That's why I gave it although I believe it's rather rare actually.

But what we see here is that what we can call a major event of the year was delivered by occidental transiting planet, not the oriental one. Sure, we can speculate that the first transit gave in impulse to what happened next, but for a person what counts is the events of his or her life, not the vague "smth is going on it's just you didn't notice that it was important although nothing special happened". Besides, I have also seen the reversed cases: an event taking place at the first transit and nothing special after, so neither it's not safe to say "smth in the same sphere of your life will unfold at this time later" (because probably the event is already behind and nothing will happen). I still don't know how to treat this question.

I still can't figure it out.

hi mari,

thanks for sharing your personal example and experience.. i would say it is not so simple to imply oriental is strong and occidental is weaker.. generally the superior planets - saturn, jupiter and mars are said to be better placed oriental of the sun and this works especially well in a duirnal chart.. venus can work well occidental in a nocturnal chart.. moon is said to work best increasing in light - occidental, and less so oriental the sun... mercury can swing both ways... you would benefit from reading this post where i asked the same question in connection to temperament... pay close attention to the poster astrojins comments.. in fact you might benefit from doing a search on all of astrojins comments!

see if this sheds more light on this topic - http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10130

OK, James we pretty much think the same about the same things (I'm usually attentive to the sect as much as to the phase). I'd only object that it seems to me that the oriental position is a strength indicator itself regardless of the sect: pretty much in the same way as being on MC is always a strong position, which in turn can be disastrous if it as Mars by day or Saturn by night.

But anyway, in my example we had Jupiter of day sect, and still...

And since I have a Jupiter sensitive radix, here's another example from my youth ))) A special transit - Jupiter return - which is still a transit.

I managed to marry on the partile R return (and once again I had like a choice between two days and I didn't know them in advance, I was just offered this particular date). On the first return nothing happened, except that roughly at that time we suddenly decided we needed to get married, we got married at the R return and on the third return virtually nothing meaningful happened. Now, the signification was according, so it's all OK: if I were to interpret these radix+solar return+Jupiter return to a stranger, I would probably say that marriage is possible within this year. But how on earth could I predict that it would happen on the retrograde transit (rather than the last one, for example). Yeah, probably the first return chart was more pushing, so that it happened within its time, I don't remember any more, but that's intriguing me...

P.S. Now I must, maybe, say that I regard transits in BOTH ways: close aspects as much as transits through places (signs or houses), I find the latter as effective as the first and the letter can produce not only processes but the events as well (but often triggered by other planets). I generally figure out transits by close aspects pretty well (strength + reception) and it all goes well. But I'm still at a complete loss with this particular kind of an aspect (d-r-d).

hi mari,

i have tried hard to move from a more fated view of astrology to more of one where free will plays a big role! what i mean by this is that a lot of ideas that i have collected from astrology books - astro doctrine if you will - are not all that helpful for living in the moment.. in fact, often i am better off looking at the astro after to see how it unfolded...

i have saturn on an angle in a nocturnal chart.. i don't believe it is as negative as it is cracked up to be.. i wouldn't throw the concept out, but i remain receptive to understanding the complexity of astrology without falling into polarized positions on a lot of it!

regarding your examples, the best way for me to appreciate them is to have that data and see what exactly you are talking about! however, i don't think it is necessary as i have my own experiences that tell me some of the astro doctrine on this and that is not 100 proof and often there are other factors going on that make mince meat of these ideas we are given from reading books.. so, i like to observe mostly! and it is really helpful when i look back in retrospect...

theories are great.. they just aren't the same as actual experience.. everyone is different.. we all resonate to different planets and maybe we don't resonate to all of them at the same time.. i suppose i am being very subjective and vague in saying all this.. ultimately the astrology has to come from observation, as opposed to theory... however the theories have been put in place by others who based it on observation!! so, it is complicated and learning astrology is a lifelong adventure!

Hi, James!

i have tried hard to move from a more fated view of astrology to more of one where free will plays a big role!

Well, I guess that's a philosophical question for a separate discussion

so, i like to observe mostly! and it is really helpful when i look back in retrospect...

Sure, that's what I do and as you see that's exactly how I got to this question I'm not exactly satisfied with the vague idea that "sometimes it works out, sometimes not". Jupiter and Saturn transiting an important radix or solar return point can be a big deal in a year of a person, so it's better to know not only what it can bring, but also when and how many times (once, twice or three times - in case it goes on and back and on).

Things being more or less clear for a planet transiting a place (whatever you mean by a place), I’m particularly interested in the case of a planet engaging another planet through a transit aspect.

Robert Schmidt translated Hellenistic passages on transits by Dorotheus, Orpheus, Anubio and ''pseudo-Valens'' in 1995 in ''Teachings on Transits'', and they are all by sign. He says that ''first of all, the Greek concept clearly includes transits to the zoidion occupied by the planet, which is regarded as the place occupied by the planet in the whole-sign system of houses''. The relevant passage of Ptolemy is also suggestive of whole sign usage.

So Valens' quote is best understood in that context. The effects of Hellenistic transits are not perceived as ''hits'', but as chronocratorship with wider time frame (the shortest being of the Moon - 2 1/3 days). Personally, I have no opinion on the phases with this system, since I have not bothered with that sort of thing.

Hello, Petosiris!

As I previously mentioned, I do use transits through places (signs as much as houses) and I have no problem with it (it works out as I expect it to do). It's a good and useful thing, however I personally find it incomplete without the use of partile aspects.

hi mari,

well it is a philosophical observation, more then a question... i thought i would say it as it is what i think! as for why some stuff works out and other stuff doesn't - this is an ongoing challenge for astrologers!!

one can fall back on any number of astro techniques, or claim that one works better or is more foolproof then another and etc. etc. etc.. it is endless...

aspects by sign, as opposed to aspects by degree that would include out of sign, and on and on it goes.. it's endless!!!

so here is one example... the year is a jupiter profection year and the other one is a saturn profection year... is there a difference? would one favour a particular profection year more then the other one? the answer is yes...

how about tying that in with the position of jupiter or saturn in the solar return for either of those years? see how many various possibilities there are here? it is endless as i say...

if you work with primary directtions thru the bounds... an angle, sun or moon moving thru jupiter bounds will be different then thru saturn bounds! have you looked at all the differences on all of these levels? most astrologers don't... maybe some use bounds and others don't...

without sharing a chart and having others comment on it, personal examples are only good so far... cheers james

so here is one example... the year is a jupiter profection year and the other one is a saturn profection year... is there a difference? would one favour a particular profection year more then the other one? the answer is yes...

As in my examples I explicitly mentioned that they all concerned the same solar return(s), you may have guessed that I do pay attention to annual time lords

*That being said, the tiny problem with time lords is that even annual profections and even the profected ASC usually give us a couple of time lords. Now if you take into consideration that Valens applied the annual profection not only to ASC, but to several other points, we can virtually have all planets as various time lords at any time. If we add there aphesis and the subdivisions, we can safely have all planets as time lords of anything at every time. At some point we can get as many indicators of anything that we can prove by it anything anytime (just like in the modern astrology with the abundance of extra points and extra aspects, etc. making virtually anything possible any time).
That is why I don't see the smaller divisions of time as a safe alternative to partile transits (as suggested earlier).

**But maybe that's where the explanation lies: different lunar returns/significations, different monthly time lords. To me that definitely explains how within a year the same transit can play out differently (say, in different spheres of life), although it doesn't explain why sometimes it plays out in a major way and produce close to nothing the other time.

without sharing a chart and having others comment on it, personal examples are only good so far...

No, that's not at all about my chart. I'm interested in this question theoretically (if anybody saw another author treat this question) and practically.

have you looked at all the differences on all of these levels? most astrologers don't...

Well, generally the time that it takes a planet to aspect another one while oriental, retrograde and occidental is not enough to change bounds in directions [/quote]

mari

it is not just about time lords or bounds as i implied in my post.. there are numerous astrological techniques that can be applied.. this partly explains why different astrologers arrive at different conclusions off the same chart!! i am sorry i can't help you out any more.. perhaps some others here will chime in with another perspective...