Horary Readings Round 7 - Questions

[Minderwiz]

I'm saying that Masha'allah allowed the matter to perfect if either the Lord of the Ascendant or the Moon aspected a benefic in an angle (and no affliction from a malefic). It's from On Reception, though he was talking about questions on illness and on getting a kingdom (he didn't cover marriages).

So if he would apply that to all questions (and I see no reason why he wouldn't) and if Venus can be treated as angular, and if he's right about this, then Yes! she will marry.

There are a number of conditions there, but there must be a good chance here and if it doesn't work out, then you can blame Masha'allah LOL.

 

[Chanah]

Not trying to horn in on the thread, but I'm always cautious of pronouncing a 'yes' when the moon is new. It might be good for secrets but on the few occasions I've seen something perfect that was asked at the time, it hasn't ended well. And most of the time things just don't perfect.

I hope it all works out for your friend!

 

[Minderwiz]

Not trying to horn in on the thread, but I'm always cautious of pronouncing a 'yes' when the moon is new. It might be good for secrets but on the few occasions I've seen something perfect that was asked at the time, it hasn't ended well. And most of the time things just don't perfect.

I hope it all works out for your friend!

Your always most welcome to post!! You have great knowledge and always add something of real value to the threads. You may well be right here, and the Moon rapidly losing light is something that came up in a previous horary. I was particularly cautious in my last post but one, as I was working on Masha'allah's view in On Reception, and to be honest, I'm not sure whether it holds up. For what it's worth he wrote relating to a finance question):

...if the Lord of the Ascendant (and the Moon) is not being joined to the Lord of the 2nd domicile, nor to any planet in his place ...then look to see to whom the Lord of the Ascendant or the Moon would be joined. Which if they were both (or some one of them) joined to a benefic and that benefic planet did not commit its own disposition to another, and it were in an angle or in a strong place, the matter will be perfected

Dykes translation.

Two things which I was unsure about from memory were his reference to a 'strong place', which I think would allow the benefic to be in the eleventh (thus strengthening Venus' claim to be used) and his reference to the benefic not committing its disposition to another. Now that means that Venus should not be applying to another planet. In this case Venus is not applying to another planet (though interestingly she is applying to the Ascendant).

The Moon is decreasing in light, indeed it is only two degrees from being under the beams (using the medieval definition) and four degrees away using the Hellenistic definition. There certainly is a strong view that this greatly weakens the Moon's power to deliver, to which your comments add testimony. As I said I raised this in a previous horary, of which we still don't know the outcome. But I didn't take it up here and I should have done.

You're of course right that in the second post I should have been more guarded on the 'Yes' but I think my comment in the previous post holds. There is a chance but it's by no means a certainty.

It does raise the possibility of an interesting translation of light though. If we use Lilly's idea (itself medieval) that in a marriage question we can use the additional significators of Venus for the female and the Sun for the male. The Moon, her co-significator will alternatively aspect Venus her second significator and then Jupiter, his primary significator and then go on to conjoin the Sun his second significator. A square between Moon and Jupiter is not destructive of the matter.

I wouldn't have seen that one but for your point about the Moon and I don't disagree with that at all. But I think it strengthens the case for at least not giving her a 'no' answer.

Please put your oar in as often as you want. The Masha'allah comment is new to me, so it's a learning experience and a second opinion is always welcome, especially from you.

 

[Ronia]

I used the time to indeed re-read a few passages from On reception and yes, Masha'allah would allow this to perfect. He doesn't mention the 11th in my passages, not specifically, neither as best or worst. He does speak of the planets (applying and receiving) to "see" the Ascendant as requirement for a good outcome or at least a desirable (very) condition, which is true here.

I guess we'll see. I'll certainly update you! Another thing I overlooked a bit is the strength of my friend being in the 10th and in her own sign. She may actually ahve the power to move the situation in the desired direction. I'll think carefully what to tell her.

Hi Chanah, I wouldn't consider this a New Moon, not even by ancient orbit allowance. The Moon is well out of orbit to be New, IMO. She will fist have a couple of aspects, as well. To me the chart is good to be read.

In my previous horary with the work mistake I did and I had a New Moon - yes, I've noticed that a number of times, it's good when you need secrecy and it does allow things to happen in the dark, for better or worse, of course.

P.S. I knew we were having a New Moon today, so I checked actually. Besides, the Moon decreasing in light may be weakened but the Moon in her exaltation is strenghtened significantly.

 

[Ronia]

It does raise the possibility of an interesting translation of light though. If we use Lilly's idea (itself medieval) that in a marriage question we can use the additional significators of Venus for the female and the Sun for the male. The Moon, her co-significator will alternatively aspect Venus her second significator and then Jupiter, his primary significator and then go on to conjoin the Sun his second significator. A square between Moon and Jupiter is not destructive of the matter.

I actually wondered about that but thought I'm overthinking it, completely forgetting that in a marriage question venus would be her secondary significator and indeed, she is interested in a marriage, not in a fling, and this was her specific question. Hm... Was this used in the past? I don't recall ever seeing it written but this means nothing, it can always work. Well, now I'm dying to see if and what will happen this year!!!

 

[Minderwiz]

I actually wondered about that but thought I'm overthinking it, completely forgetting that in a marriage question venus would be her secondary significator and indeed, she is interested in a marriage, not in a fling, and this was her specific question. Hm... Was this used in the past? I don't recall ever seeing it written but this means nothing, it can always work. Well, now I'm dying to see if and what will happen this year!!!

Well Lilly uses it in chapter 49 Book II but he's a bit imprecise. he assigns the additional significators (Venus for her, Sun for him) He explicitly says that for a woman querent the significators are the Ascendant and his Lord, the Moon and Venus and says that the querent has three significators and the party desired has three significators and lists five possible ways the matter might perfect.

1. Ascendant ruler or the Moon is in the seventh

2. The planet the Moon separates from applies to the same planet the Moon applies to

3. the Sun and Venus apply to each other

4 Lord 1 in the seventh or Lord 7 in the first

5 Any translation of light between the significators.

Now I usually take (1) to mean that the querent desires marriage but not that it will necessarily effect the matter. (4) appears to be a partial repetition of (1) and (3) appears to require a mutual application of Sun and Venus, which can only happen if Venus is Retrograde. However I think he simply means it can either be through Venus applying to the Sun, or the Sun applying to Venus (when Venus is slowing or stationary).

But (5) seems to fit the situation in this horary.

Lilly previously refers to 'Alkindus' (Al-Kindi) and gives some aphorisms, of which the first is Lord 1 applying to Lord 7 (or vice versa) and the second is 'if the Moon doth apply to Venus and she is strong, increasing in her motion and in some of her of her own dignities, and the Moon likewise, the marriage shall be concluded

Now in this case we might not need anything more. Venus is in her own triplicity, terms and face and she is direct, swift and in a good house. The Moon is in her own exaltation and in a mutual reception with Venus by domicile. She is swift and in a good house. Her only defect is that she is waning. So is that enough to end the matter. I would not have thought so but it does cast a doubt. But on Al-Kindi's argument the answer should be that they will very probably get married (the Moon waning counts only -2 in the Medieval scheme). But remember Chanah's experiences with a New Moon or near New Moon.

My view is that there's no way you can say the answer is 'No' with these testimonies. But I don't think you can guarantee a 'Yes' or give an unequivocal 'Yes'. Highly likely but not completely cast iron, seems to be the conclusion.

At least that's better than your initial judgement, so we've shifted things around.

 

[MandMaud]

The question should concern you,

Hi Minderwiz! You say "should concern you"... would it be all right to ask something for my son? (I am concerned about it but I don't think that's quite how you mean it. )

 

[Minderwiz]

Hi Minderwiz! You say "should concern you"... would it be all right to ask something for my son? (I am concerned about it but I don't think that's quite how you mean it. )

No, I did mean it that way - it's not simply a matter of things that are entirely personal. Any area of your life that you have concerns about will count. if you're concerned about your son, that qualifies. What matters is that it's a pressing matter that gives you concern, rather than simply a piece of idle speculation. So ask away.

 

[MandMaud]

No, I did mean it that way - it's not simply a matter of things that are entirely personal. Any area of your life that you have concerns about will count. if you're concerned about your son, that qualifies. What matters is that it's a pressing matter that gives you concern, rather than simply a piece of idle speculation. So ask away.

Great! OK, he's sitting his first public exams at the moment (GCSEs) - just three subjects this year. We home educate. Basically it is about how the exams will go and of course how the results will be.

The exams are during this/next month (two papers down, four to go) and he'll get his results in late August. Do you need more specific dates? And his birthday: 13 March 2000, 10:36am.

 

[Minderwiz]

Great! OK, he's sitting his first public exams at the moment (GCSEs) - just three subjects this year. We home educate. Basically it is about how the exams will go and of course how the results will be.

The exams are during this/next month (two papers down, four to go) and he'll get his results in late August. Do you need more specific dates? And his birthday: 13 March 2000, 10:36am.

So the key concern is whether he will pass and of secondary importance, how he will cope with the process because finding the process easy is not necessarily a good indication of success and indeed finding the process difficult doesn't necessarily indicate failure.