Hello all,

I was curious if other astrologers might share any information on "the bendings," which is when a planet is placed in a T-square with the nodes? I see that Lee Lehman has an instructional CD on this topic, and wonder if it is more so a favorite of hers or if it was a traditional method to use this in interpretations. If so, what sorts of information does this provide (apparently it is not very positive, generally)?

I found this in The Mountain Astrologer:
http://mountainastrologer.com/tma/at-the-bending

Planets at the South Bending are related in meaning to the South Node, that is, they signify a point of release ? experiences are internal and have difficulty being expressed outwardly. The North Bending resembles the North Node, which is a point where energy comes in; events and experiences will manifest in the outer world.

Feel free to provide examples, if you have any. You might want to look back at old charts to see if it was occurring with any primary significators.

Thanks!

The Nodes IMHO are overrated, as well as the Part of Fortune. I'm not saying they're useless but I personally consider the Nodes only if the principal significator is in partile conjunction with the NN or the SN. Which is not often.

So no bendings for me. I'm not bending that way.

Besides, what does it even mean -- 'a point of release' (which is internal for some reason, internal release?), 'experiences manifest in the outer world'? This stuff is more for the natal astrology, who cares if the keys we are looking for have internal experiences, with all due respect to Lee Lehman.

Tanit

I know that Ptolemy mentions the bendings though I don't have a reference for it.
I'm not sure I've ever read any other sources mention it. It's possible they'd say "square the south node" for example, or "square the nodes".

Hi Tanit and all,

It is good to be back on the forum!

I consider nodes in Horary, but mostly by their placement (NN more beneficial, SN less beneficial), if I see a moon applying by trine to NN for e.g. I'd consider at a beneficial factor. I have not read much on the nodes in horary, but in my experience they have considerable significance in natal astrology, and therefore I consider them in horary, but not as intently as the main significators for e.g. In my natal chart, I have a tight square of Saturn to my nodes, and it certainly has a lot of meaning for me! It signifies the delay in expressing myself and my true aspirations (NN in 1st H in Aquarius) by paying attention to duty, obligation and security (Saturn). On the other hand, over the years, I think that my life forces me in the direction of NN 1H and forces me to abandon the wishes of my SN in the 7th. A bit off the topic but just a personal example. So along these lines, perhaps the planet that squares the nodes in horary indicates some impediment (in accord with the planetary nature) to the expression/outcome/manifestation desired by the individual? Just a thought and would be interesting to see if you have any example of that in a horary chart.

elumen wrote:Hi Tanit and all,

It is good to be back on the forum!

I consider nodes in Horary, but mostly by their placement (NN more beneficial, SN less beneficial), if I see a moon applying by trine to NN for e.g. I'd consider at a beneficial factor. I have not read much on the nodes in horary, but in my experience they have considerable significance in natal astrology, and therefore I consider them in horary, but not as intently as the main significators for e.g. In my natal chart, I have a tight square of Saturn to my nodes, and it certainly has a lot of meaning for me! It signifies the delay in expressing myself and my true aspirations (NN in 1st H in Aquarius) by paying attention to duty, obligation and security (Saturn). On the other hand, over the years, I think that my life forces me in the direction of NN 1H and forces me to abandon the wishes of my SN in the 7th. A bit off the topic but just a personal example. So along these lines, perhaps the planet that squares the nodes in horary indicates some impediment (in accord with the planetary nature) to the expression/outcome/manifestation desired by the individual? Just a thought and would be interesting to see if you have any example of that in a horary chart.

elumen, great to see you back! And thanks for sharing your experience of how Saturn tightly square your nodes works, as personal experience is always the best tool for learning (IMO). Plus I also happen to have that myself and can certainly relate to your comments.

Your mention of planets square the nodes perhaps generally indicating some 'impediment' reminds me of how some evolutionary astrologers (Steven Forrest for one) have described this placement, i.e., "people who have 'vexed' you" in past lives as well as the present one.

And I think Lee Lehman (on a tape I have) used the term 'crises' in describing how this placement works in horary, so it seems pretty similar IMO. If I get a chance, I'll go back and listen to the tape again and see if I can get more meaningful details and report back.

Hi again everyone,

For anyone interested, here is a little more information on the use of the bendings in horary:

1) The Nodes themselves and their bendings are all part of a cycle and represent certain kinds of crises or turning points for the planets conjunct those points, esp. the Moon in horary.

a) The NN is the crisis of starting something new.

b) The NN bending (90 degrees from NN going counterclockwise) is the crisis of going too far in a certain direction, a building up to extremes, "crazy" etc.

c) The SN is the crisis of needing to rethink the whole process, change directions, turn around, adapt.

d) The SN bending (90 degrees from SN going counterclockwise) is the crisis of being the scapegoat or blamed for stuff you didn't start.

2) The nodal cycle in and of itself isn't enough to determine an answer in horary, but sometimes if the odds are about even, it can tip things over the edge.

3) Planets conjunct the bendings can sometimes explain the reason for a 'no' answer.

Here is an example, which I hope Ms. Lehman won't mind my using:

Woman asked if it would be good idea for her to study the martial art of tai kwan do (approxmate chart data: Feb. 11, 2001, 12:40 p.m., universal time, 74 W 23, 40 N 42, Asc. 8 Pisces).

The answer seems to be no since querent/Jupiter is in detriment in Gemini and in opposition to Mars/9th/higher learning. However, the course seems to be a very good one, i.e., Mars in dignity in Scorpio in the 9th, and the woman is very eager to take it and wonders why the answer is 'no.'

This is explained by the partile opposition of Moon in Libra in the 7th and Venus in detriment in Aries in the 1st, conjunct the NN bending and SN bending respectively, i.e., crises of dangerous injuries that are likely to occur due to her being new to combat sports, angry and out of control or "liberated" when it comes to sparring.

Lee explained it all a lot better of course, but hopefully this summary is a little bit useful to some.

If we consider the square aspect, we must consider other aspects as well (unless the square suddenly becomes very special), which just creates a confusion -- what if two or three planets make aspects to the nodes? Planets have wide orbs in horary, so that can happen quite often.

Can the planet applying to the bending be prohibited? If a planet conjunct the bending can be the reason for a 'No' -- if that planet makes an aspect to a Jupiter/Venus, does it lessen the negative effect? Can mutual reception help? What is the orb of the bending -- we know the orb of combustion -- and is it still in effect if a planet is separating from the exact square with the nodes?

Take two virtual points and based on their position calculate another virtual point. Never say never but right here right now -- not convinced.

Seiko wrote:If we consider the square aspect, we must consider other aspects as well (unless the square suddenly becomes very special), which just creates a confusion -- what if two or three planets make aspects to the nodes? Planets have wide orbs in horary, so that can happen quite often

.

No, as I understand it, we DON'T consider other aspects as well. The reason why the bendings/squares to the nodes are important is not that they happen to square the nodes but rather because they're crucial points in and of themselves, i.e., if you start with the NN on the Asc., the maximum latitude north is the NN bending, and the maximum latitude south is the SN bending, both turning or "crisis" points around the circle of the chart.

And I think it's just the Moon we first look at to see if it conjuncts either bending, which represents the crisis, since that was the case in all the examples she gave. And then if the Moon makes any partile squares or oppositions to other planets, that just adds to the description of the crisis.

Can the planet applying to the bending be prohibited? If a planet conjunct the bending can be the reason for a 'No' -- if that planet makes an aspect to a Jupiter/Venus, does it lessen the negative effect? Can mutual reception help?

As I said above, the only time she mentioned other planets, they seemed to be in partile opposition or square to the Moon, and that seemed to be a requirement, so my guess is there wouldn't be room for any prohibition. And no, nothing was mentioned about soft aspects, mutual reception, or some planets being less negative in effect.

What is the orb of the bending -- we know the orb of combustion -- and is it still in effect if a planet is separating from the exact square with the nodes?

That is a very good question--size of orbs of planets square the nodes (and more important, conjunct the bendings), but unfortunately this wasn't mentioned, and I didn't have the chart handouts to check, just her comments describing the charts. But in the example I gave, it did happen to come out that the orb of the Moon square the Nodes was about 5 1/2 degrees (so also 5 1/2 degree-conjunction with the bending) while Moon Opp. Venus was partile.

The main thing I wondered about was whether a querent's main significator conjunct the bendings would count for as much as the Moon, but this wasn't mentioned, so I'm inclined to think it may be just the Moon that's involved for the initial assessment of "crisis."

You bring up a lot of good points, and as you can see I'm definitely not 100% clear on everything, but hopefully I haven't made things even more confusing.

Some corrections, history, and a little more clarification (hopefully):

As I understand it, the main thing Lee is doing is showing how she uses the nodal cycle in horary, and the starting point is the Moon because it is basically always the co-significator of the querent and the situation itself, and the nodal cycle of course deals with the lunar (Moon) nodes.

In developing this process she has combined the works of Ptolemy and Rudhyar with her own experience. What first got her attention and captured her imagination was Ptolemy's statement that "people born with Moon at the bendings were monstrous births."

This is of course a little too radical for modern times, so she combined that with Rudhyar's work on the lunation cycle and nodal cycle. Rudhyar said that the nodal cycle was similar to the lunation cycle, but it was a cycle involving latitude. However, with both cycles, each quarter point (square) around the circle of the chart represented a crisis, as described in my previous posts.

My impression is that Lee developed the particular descriptions of the different crises from her own personal experience in association with Rudhyar's and the actual scientific anatomical positions of the nodes and their bendings (described earlier).

Regarding corrections: Earlier I said she hadn't mentioned orbs, but this was incorrect. She said you use your usual orbs for the Moon and main significators, i.e., their positions to each other or conjunct the nodes or bendings. And the only reason for the partile aspects mentioned earlier was that these planets were NOT main significators of the question, so had to be exact and "in your face" to warrant using them as part of the horary answer.

Also, I said earlier I thought maybe it was just the Moon you counted as conjuncting the bendings, but in further review it seems the main significators conjuncting the bendings would be just as important, if not more so, in interpreting the chart. It just happened that this wasn't the case in any of the sample charts.

So the main thing I get is that in using this added tool for horary, you get added information to help delineate the chart, i.e., the different crises represented by Moon and main significators conjunct the bendings, but you then read the chart just like you normally would, including using receptions, dignities, aspects, etc.

So hopefully I've presented this a little more clearly and accurately this time (apologies to Lee Lehman if not).

P.S.: And thanks to Seiko for making me realize how fuzzy my understanding of all this was and compelling me to clear it for myself if no one else!

I'm not sure how apply it to horary but I've natally Moon in square to Nodes and was interested in subject for while. Some old sources called Moon's "on the bendings" position something like "Dragon's belly", referring to Dragons Tail and Dragon's Head. Natally that means some extra flexibility in tough situations or etc. And for Moon it's better than for other Planets (or positive meaning only applied to Moon).
So, If Moon so important in horary it may be useful meaning.

Hello everyone

Tanit, I don't have many of my own horary charts to look through but I had a gander and found none with this, sorry. I also checked through one of my horary books but so far didn't find any unfortunately.

Elumen, welcome back to the forum!

Carol, I enjoyed reading what you wrote and found it very clear all the way through, so thank you for telling us about it!

Regards

H.

handn wrote:Hello everyone

Tanit, I don't have many of my own horary charts to look through but I had a gander and found none with this, sorry. I also checked through one of my horary books but so far didn't find any unfortunately.

Elumen, welcome back to the forum!

Carol, I enjoyed reading what you wrote and found it very clear all the way through, so thank you for telling us about it!

Regards

H.

You're welcome, handn, and thank you for the feedback. I was beginning to think maybe "you just had to be there" in person in Lee's lecture to understand it. Also, she had a lot of other great sample charts (which my guess is are probably also in her instructional CD that Tanit mentioned) that really brought the concept to life even better.