Skyscript Astrology Forum

This is a carry-over from the thread of the same name in the (tropical) traditional astrology forum, using an example proposed by James M.

William Gustafson, 5 year old (brother of Abigail who was used in Martin's example) was murdered on the same day as his sister ? 1st December (chart rated AA astrodatabank): http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Gustafson,_William

A few thought on this event from a sidereal perspective (ayanamsa Krishnamurti, whole sign houses, parallax moon, unrectified ascendant: 18?24' Leo).

I've found Richard Houck's work on death (The Astrology of Death) very helpful and refreshingly open-minded, if not always very systematic. Houck says for timing death "forget the 8th": "the 8th? may give clues about the cause and nature of death, and about deaths occurring in the environment of the chart's primary referent". It is more about "vitality, longevity" [this is in keeping with the Indian tradition] and of course, the possessions of the dead (inheritances), as well as hidden things, sudden unexpected events and strong and/or unusual sexual impulses.

Houck says "Rule#1: A planet becomes a potential killer simply by virtue of ruling (primarily) the 2nd or (secondarily) the 7th house". (This is found in a number of classic Indian texts, where these rulers are known asv"maraka", killers).

I couldn't initially see any significant transits or directions for Mercury, ruler of Virgo (2nd house), but then noticed a contraparallel with the syzygy (Mercury direct to CP prenatal FM at 15?15' Aries, H9), which hits on 27/11/87 with Ptolemy's key (semi-arc method, no latitude). I have read that a contraparallel is said to behave somewhat like an opposition, and I wondered if in this chart the syzygy FM could be the hyleg (the syzygy is one of the five traditional candidates for hyleg, and the 9th house one of the five possible locations ? and here it is natally aspected by whole-sign opposition of five classical planets in the 3rd ? Saturn, Mercury, Sun, Jupiter and Venus , as well as Pluto). It is also aspected within 4? by the classical (Indian astro) trine aspect of the South Node, and by a partile trine of Mars (this is not considered a full Indian aspect, but is OK in Western, and the close orb could strengthen it).

On the day of death (1/12/87) transiting Moon (ruler of 12, dark, waning and out of sect below the horizon in the natal, so not a benefic Moon) is partile conjunct first to transiting retrograde Jupiter (ruler of natal 8th) in 8, then to the preceding SR Jupiter (naturally, since it was just a few days after the SR), before then entering Aries (H9) at 8:56. The syzygy point rises that day at 14:40 (i.e. is then "transited by the ascendant", see following paragraph). As Lihin has pointed out, the court records show: "There was evidence that the crimes were committed sometime between 1:30 P.M. and 5 P.M. A neighbor reported hearing a girl's scream from the direction of the Gustafson home at approximately 3:35 P.M.". Allowing for the disc of the moon and the FM, we could perhaps consider the conjunction still partile at 15:35.

As an aside regarding Indian techniques, it is interesting that the 9th house (Aries) is exceptionally weak or "unfortunate" in ashtakavarga (I think this technique may have Greek origins, which I'll try to post about sometime, to justify mentioning it here?): it gets 19 points out of a possible 64 (the average is 32, below which the house is weakened). The transiting ascendant itself is always exceptionally weak/unfortunate when in Aries: 1 point out of possible 8. Between 13:10 and 13:45 (14:30 if geocentric moon is used), only Saturn (out of the 7 planets + ascendant) gives a positive point (a "bindhu") to "support" the chart (as per their pinpointed transit positions); at about 13:45 (topocentric) or 14:30 (geocentric), the Moon also kicks in with a positive point. Houck has also written on this method ("Digital Astrology"), giving examples of multiple "0 point" transits at times of accident or violent death.

Sorry for having rather spilled over somewhat into some Indian considerations in this forum. That's what I started astrology with, but now I'm getting more interested in the Western tradition.

Graham

Good evening,

By wishing to discuss primary directions within the framework of Indian astrology are we perhaps mixing apples with oranges?

Which pre-modern Indian astrological authors worked with primary directions, please (references to texts requested)?

Best regards,

lihin

Yes, I may be mixing apples with oranges - I rather like that sort of eclectic approach, Richard Houck did as well, and I like his approach. I also like approaches that seem to work.
Then again it may just be oranges and mandarines - most Indian astrology, with the exception of the nakshatra (lunar mansions) looks much like a derivation, via Persia, from Greek (the yavanacharya, Greek masters). And the Hellenistic astrologers used primary directions.
I do have references of early Hellenistic astrologers using what now pass for strictly Indian techniques, so the reverse may also be true. I'll get round to posting some sometime, but there are various sources on the web.
I do not have references of pre-modern Indian astrological authors working with primary directions, but then again so much of the Indian tradition is not based on "authors".
Good evening
Graham

lihin wrote:By wishing to discuss primary directions within the framework of Indian astrology are we perhaps mixing apples with oranges?

Which pre-modern Indian astrological authors worked with primary directions, please (references to texts requested)?

You may not intend it, lihin, but the tone in which you ask for information can be perceived as rather condescending.

Briefly, it is true that directions do not seem to have made the first wave of Hellenistic astrology entering India in the 1st or 2nd century CE. However, the medieval Arabic authors on whom all later western astrology depends were more than happy to combine Greek, Persian and Indian lore (which are, after all, branches of the same greater tradition of horoscopic astrology) in their writings, so why should we be greater purists than they were?

Indians, too, were happy (well, some of them were) to embrace astrological concepts from Arabic sources at least from the 13th century onwards. This included the so-called t?s?ra-da??, from (al-)tasy?r, the Arabic term for direction (Latinized as athazir). I'm afraid I can't direct you (no pun intended) to any translated works here, but t?s?ra is discussed in several T?jika works in Sanskrit, including Balabhadra's H?yanaratna.

I made a couple of slips in writing up my notes, which I have now corrected in the post above about William G. I had muddled transiting Moon and "transiting ascendant" at one point, and forgot to adjust the ashtakavarga Moon transit for parallax.
Sorry!
Graham

Martin
I notice that in the "traditional" (tropical) forum post you do not consider the syzygy as a possible hyleg for William G. Is this because in Alcabitius it's (just barely) in the 8th? In whole sign sidereal or in Placidus houses, it's in the 9th, trine to the ascendant with a 3? orb. Would this make it a valid candidate, or are there other criteria which would exclude it?
Thanks
Graham

I mostly follow Ptolemy, who doesn't include the syzygy as a potential hyleg at all (but does include non-luminary planets instead).

Thank you Martin, I'm sure you know your Ptolemy, but there seems to be some confusion about this on the net: several sites I've found specifically say that it is one of Ptolemy's five choices for the hyleg in the Tetrabiblos (the Skyscript glossary by Deborah doesn't mention this):
http://www.greekmedicine.net/medical_as ... Hyleg.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyleg

These sites may not be well enough researched, but Curtis Mainwaring (normally well up with Project Hindsight) also says it counts, and takes precedent over the ascendant, if it's in a valid place:
http://www.astrology-x-files.com/x-files/hyleg.html

I don't have a copy of Ptolemy to check, but apparently editions differ anyway.

I notice that here the syzygy is aspected by Sun, ruler of the (sidereal) ascendant, as well as being in 9th, trine to ascendant (whole sign, Placidus and Regio).

The ascendant is in a term of Mercury (ruler of 2) until 9 years (Egyptian, Ptolemaic "Chaldean", not in Ptolemy's "old book"). The Syzygy is also in a term of Mercury until about 4yrs 9mnths (Egyptian), when it goes to Mars, and in Mercury nearly 6yrs in "Chaldean" + "old book".

Are there different variants of what Ptolemy wrote on this?
Many thanks
Graham

Good morning,

It appears that Klaudios Ptolomaios included not the 'prenatal syzygy' (full or new Moon) as a candidate for Epikratetor, but only the prenatal New Moon. Here is the relevant text from Tetrabiblos, Book III, Section 10 (translation Prof. F. Robbins) or 13 (translation Mr J. M. Armand), bold emphasis added:

"Of these, 62 by day we must give first place to the sun, if it is in the prorogative places; if not, to the moon; and if the moon is not so placed, to the planet 63 that has most relations of domination to the sun, to the preceding conjunction, and to the horoscope;"

"Among the candidates for prorogation, as before mentioned, by day the Sun is to be preferred, provided he be situated in a prorogatory place; and, if not, the Moon; but if the Moon, also, should not be so situated, then that planet is to be elected which may have most claims to dominion, in reference to the Sun, the antecedent new Moon, and the ascendant;"

May one doubt that 'mixing and matching' various periods, schools, countries and authors will lead to clear delineations and to optimal environments to test effectiveness and efficiency of astrological techniques? Quite probably, however, using widely 'eclectic' approaches one will more easily find some astrological 'explanation' for almost anything and everything.

Best regards,

lihin

lihin wrote:May one doubt that 'mixing and matching' various periods, schools, countries and authors will lead to clear delineations and to optimal environments to test effectiveness and efficiency of astrological techniques? Quite probably, however, using widely 'eclectic' approaches one will more easily find some astrological 'explanation' for almost anything and everything.

If you really want to avoid mixing, there is only one option: go Babylonian. However, it is possible to remain critical and discriminating while acknowledging one's intellectual debt to the astrologers of many eras and cultures.

Graham Fox wrote:Thank you Martin, I'm sure you know your Ptolemy, but there seems to be some confusion about this on the net: several sites I've found specifically say that it is one of Ptolemy's five choices for the hyleg in the Tetrabiblos (the Skyscript glossary by Deborah doesn't mention this):

Here is the source text, in Robbins's translation (now in the public domain).

According to the passages of Ptolemy kindly supplied by Lihin, it would appear that not only is the prenatal full moon excluded, but the new moon as well - the option allowed is the "planet that has most relation of domination/dominion" over the p?int of the conjunction. In this case, that would be perhaps either Venus (ruler and occupant of 3, where the NM falls), or Saturn (exalted and occupant of 3 and close to the NM point) (sidereally, of course, as this is the sidereal forum).
And naturally, one may and should doubt, but the more I study Hellenistic techniques, the less they seem different from traditional Indian ones derived from the same period, so I think I'll just go on going on.
Many thanks
Graham