Can pluto be included in a prohibition ?

Sharla

I know we're not meant to use outer planets in horary, which is why im asking.

If the moons next aspect is a trine to pluto before she then will conjunct mars through antiscion, is this a prohibition from pluto ?

Moon 15°11 virgo, pluto 18°21 capricorn, mars antiscion 18° 30 virgo.
 

Minderwiz

I know we're not meant to use outer planets in horary, which is why im asking.

If the moons next aspect is a trine to pluto before she then will conjunct mars through antiscion, is this a prohibition from pluto ?

Moon 15°11 virgo, pluto 18°21 capricorn, mars antiscion 18° 30 virgo.

When the Moon reaches 18 degrees Virgo she will be in partile conjuntion with Mars. If, instead of Pluto, it was say, Saturn in casting the antscion, the Moon would be in a partile trine to it. However, as Conjunctions carry more force, the conjunftion would outweigh the trine. A trine would not necessarily prohibit a conjunction.

Now putting Pluto back into the frame; there are several problems with using the outers in horary. For me the key one is that the outers cannot cast a traditional aspect - that is they cannot reflect the light of another planet, or the Sun. They are invisible. So Pluto cannot cast an aspect to the Moon. (Modern theory, of course, says that it can but offers no consistent explanation, other than a particular harmonic of the 360 degree circle.
 

RohanMenon

I have a slightly different take on this

unlike in a natal chart, a horary chart's question will be resolved in a reasonable time frame.

At which point it might be useful to look at what actually happened and see if it reflected a prohibition by Pluto (however you interpret Pluto) or a perfecting conjunction via antiscion to Mars. Thus, evolving theory from experience..

That said, with my present (minimal) knowledge of horary, I'd be very dubious of using aspects to the outers in a horary. ....unless lived experience convinced me otherwise
 

Sharla

When the Moon reaches 18 degrees Virgo she will be in partile conjuntion with Mars. If, instead of Pluto, it was say, Saturn in casting the antscion, the Moon would be in a partile trine to it. However, as Conjunctions carry more force, the conjunftion would outweigh the trine. A trine would not necessarily prohibit a conjunction.
I thought aspects to antiscions were only by conjunction or opposition ?
Now putting Pluto back into the frame; there are several problems with using the outers in horary. For me the key one is that the outers cannot cast a traditional aspect - that is they cannot reflect the light of another planet, or the Sun. They are invisible. So Pluto cannot cast an aspect to the Moon. (Modern theory, of course, says that it can but offers no consistent explanation, other than a particular harmonic of the 360 degree circle.

Yes this makes sense, i just thought pluto maybe of significance here as it was a 9 min arc between moon and mars. I was also thinking, as this was a "when" question, that maybe pluto has an influence in regards to this conjunction happening with mars....its pluto that causes it so to speak, as moon trines pluto first.

So along the lines of....wanting to know all the facts and dig deeper on an issue, hence the conjunction then with ansticion of mars.

I'll just have to see how this plays out, in the chart moon was mutable sign, succedent house, so seems like maybe 3 weeks more than days.
 

Minderwiz

I thought aspects to antiscions were only by conjunction or opposition ?

Yes, the Moon will reach a partile conjunction with Mars'antiscion. Sorry, I didn't have the chart in front of me when I typed that. so it's a typo through lapse of memory.

Yes this makes sense, i just thought pluto maybe of significance here as it was a 9 min arc between moon and mars. I was also thinking, as this was a "when" question, that maybe pluto has an influence in regards to this conjunction happening with mars....its pluto that causes it so to speak, as moon trines pluto first.

So along the lines of....wanting to know all the facts and dig deeper on an issue, hence the conjunction then with ansticion of mars.

I'll just have to see how this plays out, in the chart moon was mutable sign, succedent house, so seems like maybe 3 weeks more than days.[/QUOTE]

What matters is that the aspects are partile (in the same degree) But even it that did not hold, the conjunction trumps a trine (and opposition, square and sextile) So the conjunction will be considered effected. Now as I haven't the full chart, I can't actually tell if there's any other factors involved. I can only go off what you tell me.
 

Sharla

Yes, the Moon will reach a partile conjunction with Mars'antiscion. Sorry, I didn't have the chart in front of me when I typed that. so it's a typo through lapse of memory.

Yes this makes sense, i just thought pluto maybe of significance here as it was a 9 min arc between moon and mars. I was also thinking, as this was a "when" question, that maybe pluto has an influence in regards to this conjunction happening with mars....its pluto that causes it so to speak, as moon trines pluto first.

So along the lines of....wanting to know all the facts and dig deeper on an issue, hence the conjunction then with ansticion of mars.

I'll just have to see how this plays out, in the chart moon was mutable sign, succedent house, so seems like maybe 3 weeks more than days.

What matters is that the aspects are partile (in the same degree) But even it that did not hold, the conjunction trumps a trine (and opposition, square and sextile) So the conjunction will be considered effected. Now as I haven't the full chart, I can't actually tell if there's any other factors involved. I can only go off what you tell me.

Not sure what's happened with this post, so i'm typing in bold. Anyway this is the chart, but going on the antiscion, i can't see anything else hindering it, like a frustration or ...whatever the other ones called.

https://postimg.org/image/nb923i14p/
 

Sharla

Well it seemed that Pluto did hinder the conjunction with Moon and mars antiscion, as the timeframe i gave this was 3 weeks.

Or i wonder if Moon in a mutable sign and succedent house, meant months and not weeks like i originally thought.

Or i wonder if all the angles being on fixed have had a say in this, rather than it being pluto. ?
 

Minderwiz

You also have Lord 1 (Sun) applying to a sextile to Lord 7 (Saturn). Lord 7 is slow and in a double bodied sign (Sagittarius) so it might take him two attempts to make contact. Given that Lord 1 is also in its Detriment and in the sixth house, neither party is going to act quickly and decisively. Although there is only one degree to the sextile, a false start and weak Lord 1 will slow things down. so think about one month plus.

With that aspect forming, the lunar conjunction with Mars antiscion is moot, as you have an aspect between the two major significators and one that will perfect.
 

Sharla

You also have Lord 1 (Sun) applying to a sextile to Lord 7 (Saturn). Lord 7 is slow and in a double bodied sign (Sagittarius) so it might take him two attempts to make contact. Given that Lord 1 is also in its Detriment and in the sixth house, neither party is going to act quickly and decisively. Although there is only one degree to the sextile, a false start and weak Lord 1 will slow things down. so think about one month plus.

With that aspect forming, the lunar conjunction with Mars antiscion is moot, as you have an aspect between the two major significators and one that will perfect.

That was the first aspect i noticed, obviously with it being the main significators also...so i don't know why i've then jumped to the Moon and dismissed this.

Infact (having taken a look back at the chart), the reason why i dismissed the saturn and sun sextile, even though like you say it was a close applying one by 1 approx 1 degree, is because with the moon moving the fastest, i thought the moon would reach the mars antiscion first.

And looking again, mars isn't even relevant to be read in the chart, so why have i even included this...i think i got over excited when i noticed the antiscion and moon applying to a conjunction with it.
 

Minderwiz

Aspects between the primary significators have to take precedence. Yes the Moon is moving at the fastest rate but as you note, Mars has no direct relevance, ruling the ninth and the fourth houses (unless the areas covered by these houses were part of your question). With a one degree separation this is a good indicator of success. Though Sun in the sixth, in its Detriment is an argument for the matter not coming to success. The existence of an aspect doesn't guarantee the outcome, you would also want other supporting testimony. Saturn in the Sun's triplicity could be such evidence, though as the Sun is below the horizon, rulership has passed to Jupiter. I wouldn't cancel the link on that basis but I would reduce the strength of the link, so it remains a favourable one but not sufficient to produce the outcome, with that aspect.

I've not checked the minor dignities, but you might find support at that level. If both significators are fast, then again there's support for the matter coming to fruition, in this chart, Saturn is slowing towards the Station Retrograde. This weakens Saturn's orientality of the Sun (which is good) because Retrogradation is a bigger debility than orientality is a dignity.