Do Outer Planets Determine VOC Moon?

1
I have started studying electional techniques and the VOC Moon appears to be very important. But now I need to decide on what determines VOC.

I?ve seen that most traditional astrologers don?t use the outer planets as significators in horary work (I?m all for that), but many of them will still factor in an influence from a prominent Outer in interpreting a horary chart. Do those of you who practice traditional techniques use the outer planets as determinants for VOC Moon? Today the Moon sextiled the Sun and then sextiled Pluto before going VOC. Would you say that VOC started with the aspect to the Sun or to Pluto? I personally feel that the invisible Outers are just that?they?re ?way out there? and don?t have the same tie to Earthly matters as the traditional bodies. To me the Moon making aspects to the visible bodies is what most directly affects material life here below. The Outers have their uses, but I?m not sure that determining VOC is one of them.

I?m looking for as many opinions on this as I can get from you forum members and from the authors you have read such as Frawley, Barclay, Lehman, Watters, etc.

2
I had a discussion about this last week with a fellow astrolger and he put it to me that you treat the outer planets as if they were fixed stars. They don't collect or translate light, or prohibit and I wouldn't count aspects to them when figuring out if the Moon is Void of Course. This guy was taught by Lee Lehman if that helps any.
Mark F

VOC and outer planets

3
This is very interesting. I also have wondered what effect the outer planets have when considering if the Moon is VOC and Mark, your explanation makes a lot of sense in reviewing a chart I did in June, where the Moon was making only one aspect, a conjunction to the Retrograde Pluto. (Even though the significators were applying to a square, nothing actually happened, at least nothing negative, as one might have expected.)

However, on Maurice McCann's website, if I remember this right, he says that the outer planets do count in determining frustration, where a slower significator applies to an outer planet, but NOT for prohibition, where the faster significator applies to an outer planet. (I hope I got this straight!)

P.S. I also am studying Lee Lehman's CD series on relationship horaries.

4
I've been thinking about this recently too. I definitely never use the outer planets as significators but I do use them as further information - especially if they are conjunct significators or on the angles. But the question of whether they are relevant for VOC and for frustration etc have bothered me.

I am convinced that either they should be used for both VOC and frustration etc or neither. Personally I am inclining towards the neither as if they can't be significators of anything and what is signified is what prohibits etc then how can the outer planets prohibit? - ie it would be impossible to say what kind of person/object/event would create the prohibition. Similarly for VOC - if the last aspect of the moon is to pluto then it is making no aspects to anything that is concrete and identifiable through the rules of horary- so it can't count.

5
Very interesting and educational for me, I am going back to re-read some old lessons.

So Pluto cannot collect light? I have a chart with that exact situation, no perfection between the Moon and Mercury except a possible collection of light by Pluto.

On VOC Moon, I have another chart with the Moon at 23Lib22, Void of Course and in Via Combusta, but conjoins Spica, my readings say "unexpected honor beyond all hopes". I don't know what to make of it.

6
Thanks for the great replies.

I may be posting prematurely and haven?t really absorbed what you others wrote. There is also a good chance that I don?t completely understand collection and translation of light. As I wrote, I?ve been interested in electional work, but horary seems to be the necessary basis.

Here is an example of what currently has me in a tizzy: All applying Lunar aspects made from the sign that the Moon occupies are said to be important in electional charts?the last aspect from that sign being the most important in affecting the outcome. So in a hypothetical electional chart we may have the Moon applying trine Jupiter and then opposition Uranus, followed by no other Lunar aspects from that sign. You know, I just couldn?t work up the courage to ignore that Uranus opposition and say that this was a very promising electional chart! But if I do count the Uranus opposition as the important last aspect, then I can?t say that the Moon went VOC after its trine to Jupiter.

Now I don?t think I?ve fallen into the trap of trembling before the outer planets. It?s just that I, like most others, have seen that Uranus does have an influence. Is there a way of using that Uranus opposition but retaining the Jupiter trine as the important last aspect and the beginning of VOC?

Ok, so is this where the idea mentioned by Mark of Outers treated as Fixed Stars comes in? Astrologically they just aren?t planets?- they are in their own category? It does seem so. However, this doesn't really tell me what the influence of the Moon-Uranus opposition might be in that electional chart. (But the topic here is specifically on the Outers and the VOC Moon.)

Mark,
I appreciate your mentioning that the other astrologer studied under Lee Lehman. I like to hear about who is influencing whom and what they are teaching.

7
I wouldn't place a lot on that whole idea that the Moon's last aspect is super important. Why should it be? Especially if it's not a significator.

In an election you want to have the 1st house and its ruler strong, and the ruler of the house of the thing you want strengthed too. But your ASC should be the stronger of the two. And you want to have the Moon translating light between the two of them. That means that you want to have the Moon's most recent aspect to have been to your ASC ruler, and it's next aspect to the ruler of the thing you want. You don't want to have any intervening aspects. You also want to have some reception, either between your two planets, or the Moon and the ruler of the house of the thing desired.

Another great thing is to tie the time of election into your natal chart. Like match the degree rising with the degree rising in your election chart. The art of elections is the art of picking the best choice, you can't have everything right.

The best thing I ever heard about elections is what Frawley said about John Dee's election for the time of Queen Elizabeth's coronation. He said if Dee had waited for the perfect time, he'd still be waiting now.
Mark F

Outer planets and the Moon

8
I suppose the outer planet would count if they are being used as significators of something like Airlines (Uranus) or Ocean Liners (Neptune) or the Nuclear Industry (Pluto). Then any aspect the Moon makes to one of these significators should count, I think.

However, I noticed that the McEvers book actually uses the outside significators for people at times, but from what I can tell, it's not consistant ly applied.

Very confusing!

9
My opionion of the outers is that unless we want to add three more days to the week and add three more planetary hours too, that they should be treated differently. For airlines I'd use Mercury, ocean liners are the first house (Lilly gave a number of examples of ship horaries) and nuclear power would be Mars.
Mark F

10
Mark,

So do you ignore Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto altogether in a horary chart? their positions and their movements. I know you said to treat them as fixed stars. I understand fixed stars play fairly minor roles most of the time.

I find these outer planets to be significant when in the 1st house. They also help describing or clarifying the matter, especially when they aspect the Moon.

11
I use the outer planets when they are in a close aspect with one of the main significators, or when they are angular. But they are a supporting layer and not the first thing to look at.
Mark F

12
I wouldn't place a lot on that whole idea that the Moon's last aspect is super important. Why should it be? Especially if it's not a significator.
I?m with you in questioning that. I am getting it from ?Electional Astrology? by Joann Hampar, which is reviewed on this site. It?s not a book that I could eagerly recommend; it?s filled with statements that would curl the toes of many traditionally-oriented astrologers (such as Venus is the natural significator of money). In talking about Lunar aspects on page 3 Ms. Hampar writes:

?The Moon is allowed all applying aspects until she leaves the sign she is in. In other words, the Moon is not confined to an orb of influence. Each applying aspect will describe something about the unfolding of the electional matter. The final aspect of the Moon shows the outcome of the election, and is a major consideration. A positive last aspect is very important if the elected matter is to end well.?

Since the author doesn?t quote or refer to other authors and sources it?s hard to know if this is the commonly-held thought.

Further down the same page the author writes:
?The Moon void-of-course is to be avoided when selecting an election date. Actions taken when the Moon is void will not turn out as planned.?

Hence my question of using the Outers in determining VOC (which Ms. Hampar does).