One more time for Void of Course 1 by Yikkes! Hi Folks, Hope you are ALL well. A planet is void of course if it will leave the sign it's in without 1/ applying to another planet in a completely new aspect 2/ or completling/ exacting one that is already applying. I struggle because the 1st means that most planets are VOID after about 20? whilst the second is more a 27? thing. To be VOID it has to be seperating all aspects and without the possibility to form any more? I think YES. I'm confused even asking about it but it is CRITICAL. H. PS They are playing "I'll stand by you !" Debbie Harry or who ? Yikkes! Quote Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:00 pm
Void in Traditional Astrology 2 by spirlhelix To be VOID it has to be seperating all aspects and without the possibility to form any more? In traditional astrology, the definition of "void" varies from modern astrology because the definition of "apply" differs. According to traditional astrology, a void planet must be out of orb with any other planets at the moment the question is asked. This is distinct from the definition you have given above, since modern astrology (as far as I can tell) does not limit out-of-orb future or what they call "applying" aspects while the planet remains in the same sign. To "apply" in traditional astrology, the planets must be in orb. Using this definition for "apply", Lilly's rule for Void of Course Planets says: "VOID OF COURSE A planet is Void of Course when he is separated from a planet, nor doth he forthwith, during his being in that Sign, apply to any other: This is most usually the case in the Moon; in judgments do you carefully observe whether she be void of course yea or no; you shall seldom see a business go handsomely forward when she is so." That's the simple definition. There are some more qualified rules for the Moon, but in general that's the gist of it. Warmly, Pam "Id rather learn from one bird how to sing than teach ten thousand stars how not to dance" Quote Wed Sep 19, 2007 8:48 pm
Re: Void in Traditional Astrology 3 by RC spirlhelix wrote: To "apply" in traditional astrology, the planets must be in orb. Using this definition for "apply", Lilly's rule for Void of Course Planets says: "VOID OF COURSE A planet is Void of Course when he is separated from a planet, nor doth he forthwith, during his being in that Sign, apply to any other: This is most usually the case in the Moon; in judgments do you carefully observe whether she be void of course yea or no; you shall seldom see a business go handsomely forward when she is so." That's the simple definition. There are some more qualified rules for the Moon, but in general that's the gist of it. Warmly, Pam Coming from a modern astrology background, I too have a little trouble with this. I understand best with examples. In the following, is the moon VOC or not?? Saturn 00 Virgo 31 Mercury 01 Libra 57 Jupiter 11 Sag. 20 Sun 13 Virgo 45 Venus 16 Leo 39 Retro Uranus 16 Pisces 49 Retro Moon 17 Cancer 16 Mars 18 Gemini 35 (out of major aspect) Neptune 20 Aquarius (out of major aspect) Moon?s completed aspects: Sextiled Saturn, Sextiled Sun, Trined Uranus. Nothing after that applying other than Sextile MC. Since Moon is still within orb of aspect to Sun (& Uranus if you were using it) would Lilly hold this to be Void of Course?? When reading his material, I think he means that it isn't (voc) since still in aspect, just not applying. Thank you , RC Quote Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:14 pm
4 by spirlhelix In the following, is the moon VOC or not?? Saturn 00 Virgo 31 Mercury 01 Libra 57 Jupiter 11 Sag. 20 Sun 13 Virgo 45 Venus 16 Leo 39 Retro Uranus 16 Pisces 49 Retro Moon 17 Cancer 16 Mars 18 Gemini 35 (out of major aspect) Neptune 20 Aquarius (out of major aspect) William Lilly, Christian Astrology "Generally consider the state of the Moon, for if she be Void of Course there's no great hopes of the question propounded, that it shall be effected, yet if she be in Cancer, Taurus, Sagittarius or Pisces, your fear may be the less, for then she is not so much impedited by being Void of Course (p.299)." "Confused by the definition of void of course? You will be. . ." Deb Houlding http://www.skyscript.co.uk/voc.html Deb knows what she's talking about! The Moon in Cancer is one of Lilly's exceptions to his own Void of Course rules. In most of the other signs, yes, this Moon would be Void of Course. Even when she is in Cancer, I would still look for other action on the chart which confirms a positive answer for your question. According to my experiences with VOC charts, I would just say that the Moon being void will not prevent a positive answer to your question in these exceptional signs: Cancer, Taurus, Sagittarius, or Pisces. While Moon is separating from an aspect to the Sun, she is still Void of Course. This is of interest when we are making predictions about future events. Theoretically, if the action the chart asked about has already transpired, we would not need an applying aspect to validate a positive answer. A separating aspect would be fine. I have rarely been asked to read a "postdiction" chart (if there is such a thing!). I guess that sort of astrology would be more of an event chart, if we knew enough data. I recently had a querent ask "What will be a sucessful plot for a novel?" He knew enough about astrology to know we could ascribe some meaning to the aspects of the Moon. Since he did not ask, "Will I write a sucessful novel?", the fact that the Moon was VOC did not bother me. I just took the aspects from the top and read them down. That odd sort of astrology is probably pushing the envelope, since we don't have sucessful examples to consider. But we can always learn from experience where examples fail us! I digress. Hope this helps! Regards, Pam "Id rather learn from one bird how to sing than teach ten thousand stars how not to dance" Quote Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:47 pm
5 by RC spirlhelix wrote: I would just say that the Moon being void will not prevent a positive answer to your question in these exceptional signs: Cancer, Taurus, Sagittarius, or Pisces. While Moon is separating from an aspect to the Sun, she is still Void of Course. This is of interest when we are making predictions about future events. Theoretically, if the action the chart asked about has already transpired, we would not need an applying aspect to validate a positive answer. A separating aspect would be fine. Yes especially the parts shown quoted here.. Thanks RC Quote Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:21 pm
6 by spirlhelix Theoretically, if the action the chart asked about has already transpired, we would not need an applying aspect to validate a positive answer. A separating aspect would be fine. I have to qualify that by saying that most astrologers would read a separating aspect between significators as a denial of the event coming to pass, not as a confirmation that it has already happened. Unless you are pretty sure you have a good reason to read it that way, I'd say stick to the rule that separation=denial. After all, as Lilly says, Abs te a scienta. (loosely translated, "From you and from Science." Or, use your own imput, not just the rules. I have had young querents from time to time who, in telling me their question, revealed that the matter had already perfected, but they did not know it yet. Some innocent first-time apartment dwellers do not assume that being given the keys to the apartment means that you have rented it (believe it or not). Others do not know that having your employer ask, "Are you ready to do this job for me?", and answering "Yes", means you got the promotion. In these charts, separating aspects confirmed the event they were asking about had already taken place! But the real lesson here: The Moon times the chart. Above the Moon on our list (degrees less than the Moon's)=past. Below the Moon (degrees larger than the Moon's)=future. Void of Course Moon, way down at the bottom of the list, suggests that all the "changing" that is going to happen in this matter has already been done; at least as regards the actions of the Moon, which are usually the most significant in the chart. Regards, Pam "Id rather learn from one bird how to sing than teach ten thousand stars how not to dance" Quote Fri Sep 21, 2007 11:15 am