Re: Primary Directions

2
varuna2 wrote:1) Is the naibod ascension table found on this site, in a tutorial by Deb, used to Primary Direct every planet/point the same amount for the amount of years and days of life? In other words, when using Primary Directions is every point in the natal chart progressed the same amount of degrees and minutes at any given point in time? From what I understood of the tutorial, all we have to do is add the naibod table to the natal positions and this is the Primary Directed position for the event?
I am not sure which table you are thinking of, as the ones taken from Naibod do not deal with ascensions but with degree/year conversion; but in any case the answer is No: what you describe is not how primary directions are calculated.

Three kinds of ascension are used in classical Ptolemaic directions: right, oblique, and mixed. The example in Deb's article deals with a direction of the ascendant and therefore uses only oblique ascensions. Directing the midheaven (in right ascension) is actually simpler; but all directions involving two points not located exactly on the angles are made in mixed ascensions, which is a more complex procedure.

Because primary directions are not based on motion through the ecliptic, directing the nodes (or retrograde planets) backwards is not correct. Some astrologers using primary directions today do in fact move every point both forwards and backwards, as if the earth rotated in two directions at once, but this has nothing to do with the nodes; it is based on a misunderstanding of the term 'converse motion' which crept in during the 19th century (after the 'great sleep' of astrology in the 18th, when many things were forgotten).
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

Re: Primary Directions

4
varuna2 wrote:If I can bother you to ask one more question: if a planet is exactly square the Ascendant/Descendant axis in longitude below the horizon but not on the IC, is this the nadir and can it be Primary Directed using only right ascension, or do you mean a planet exactly on the MC/IC and Asc/Dsc? If the birthtime is correct there are three planets which are exactly angular, one of them exactly square the Asc/Dsc axis like this, so I should be able to Primary Direct those three planets using only the right ascension, or only the two on the Asc/Dsc and IC/MC angle degrees?
Only the actual MC/IC axis, and planets or points located exactly on this axis, can be directed in right ascension. This is because the apparent rotation of the celestial sphere (actually caused by the rotation of the earth around its axis) moves all planets, etc, towards the meridian at right angles. All points with the same right ascension will reach the meridian at the same time, but they will not rise, set, or pass some intermediate point at the same time.
https://astrology.martingansten.com/

5
Hello varuna2

Re: "Has someone through experience, noticed more accurate timing of events with the true or mean node? The theoretical basis of the true node seems to be an error to my current understanding, since the nodes move in a retrograde direction and are not to move forwards, but maybe the true node should be used(?)"

I use Primary Directions extensively and always with the Mean Node.

Whether this is a recommendation or an indictment, you'll have to be the judge. ;)

Since you are new to Primary Directions (ie. don't have pre-consideration bias), might I suggest that you try the free Astro program. It does Primary Directions using Topocentric houses. It is an older DOS-based program, so you will need a Dos-wrapper such as DosBox to use it on newer machines, but don't be intimidated by this...it is easy to set up.

Re: Direct and Converse

Yes, go ahead and use converse! It can be easily observed that Transits, Secondaries, etc. work equally well as their direct counterparts. It is the same with Primary Directions. Empirical investigation will reveal this statement to be true. Don't allow philosophical arguments to lead you down the wrong path, when a few short moments of experimentation will validate the methodology.

I have a very tightly timed birthchart. It has been rectified 1 min 16 secs from my birth certificate (and newspaper article about my birth) by both myself and Isaac Starkman, arriving at the same answer. Based on 4 out-of-sample major events, this time has been confirmed.

Here are a few examples of converse Primary Directions...

When my Mother died, the Node had by converse Primary Direction moved to conjoin my Ascendant. (2 days from event!)

When my Father died, the MC had by converse Primary Direction moved to conjoin natal Jupiter (sizable inheritance). (Same day as event!)

When the Moon contacted my 5th House cusp by converse Primary Direction, my Son was born. (9 days from event!)

When the Part of Fortune contacted Saturn by converse Primary Direction, my step-Father died. (Same day as event!)

When Jupiter contacted my 3rd cusp (common for retirement/resignation) by converse Primary Direction, I resigned from a job I had 16 years. (2 days from event!)

If you will make sure that your birthtime is absolutely correct and then look at the (Topocentric) Primary Directions for major events in your life, you will find relevant symbolism and tight orbs (less than 0? 11' at event!) with both direct and converse Primary Directions.

My advice is to examine this yourself rather than take anyone's opinion on it. If you look yourself, you will know. If you take someone's opinion, you will only think you know. ;)

Good luck in your explorations!

James

9
Hello varuna2

Interesting message... ;)

Re: "hereby declare Atlantean to be innocent of the 'crimes against humanity' of using the True Node with Primary Directions and other such matters."

I would have to be innocent of that charge, since I use the mean node exclusively. (not because I want to, but because it works) ;)

Re: "Converse: Differing opinions are expected by now, and welcomed, but not comforting in this type of situation."

That's okay...just think of it as time runs in both directions... if that's too simplistic, then how about "the future and the past are holograms"?

Re: "I am assuming neither of us believe any natal chart will work due to astrology being strictly and only subjective divination."

You are correct, I agree. It is because it is more than a little bit objective. Anything with any level of objectivity can't be seen as subjective in the whole.

Re: "The question is which rules and when to apply them."

Find as many systems as you can that give viable charts. The ones that don't, either find out why and fix it or just drop those methods.

So far, the list of reliable ones includes (at least):
Image
[Additionally, all of the above work in converse motion as well.]

Re: "I agree about thinking for oneself."

Bravo! The folly of getting one's opinions from "experts" can be readily seen, for instance in Solar Returns. Visit one forum and you'll be told overwhelmingly that Tropical Solar Returns are the ones that are valid. Visit another forum and you're likely to be told that precession-corrected Solar Returns are the way to go. As both methods demonstrably work, either instruction on the fallacy of the other method; is, in itself, a fallacy. ;) It's even possible to have both opinions forcefully represented on one forum, depending on whom you ask.

Learn as many methods as possible... using your own secure data, separate the chaff from the wheat.

Peace

James

11
if you want to read a philosophical discussion on primary directions check out morins book 22.. i am just reading it now and can tell you, you'll get more then enough to keep ya busy..

12
Hello varuna2

Re: "I posted questions about Primary Directions on this site knowing there are people here who know things about them, therefore the assumption of learning on this forum was already present in the act of posting this thread."

Yes, of course. My point was, having seen observably incorrect things being stated about primary directions, that it is the best idea to take it all with a grain of salt and take your best data and try out the things that you read before really believing any of it. Not related to any receptivity (or possible lack thereof) for that particular "tip", it is still the proper advice to give.

Re: "...if we take, for instance, the ordinary view of the past disappearing and the future not yet existent, then nothing exists."

That doesn't follow. The past could instantly disappear and the future could be (at present) not yet existent and yet this exact moment now can still be completely present and "existing" as it is concurrently observable to be.

Personally, I would say relative to the idea of converse motion, that the most important point isn't a philosophical one; but that it IS deeply "pragmatic", which is that it is empirically observable. Still, being a 9th House Jupiter "type", I must admit that I like contemplating the underpinnings of all things so found it interesting reading... thanks!

Peace

James