skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Orbs of the aspects according to Haly Abenragel
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 148
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:44 am    Post subject: Orbs of the aspects according to Haly Abenragel Reply with quote

Here is my translation from Haly Abenragel about the orbs of aspects.Translation was made from the Spanish translation (Ali Ben Ragel, El Libro Conplido en los Iudizios de las estrellas, Indigo, 1997, Book 1, Part 6, p.63) and this translation was compared with Latin translation (Albohazen Haly filii Abenragel libri de iudiciis astrorum, Basel, 1551 p.20) because I noticed that the Spanish translation has some minor problems.Here's the translation:

These are the orbs of planets:
The Sun, 15 degrees,
The Moon, 12 degrees,
Saturn and Jupiter, each, 9 degrees,
Mars, 8 degrees,
Venus and Mercury, each, 7 degrees.

When two planets are joined in a sign and exists these distances that we said among them, it says that they are arriving to conjunction.
Moreover the contacts by aspect do not take place to a greater distance of three degrees. And within the aspect, when a planet exceeds to the another in one degree, it’s called separation aspect, because it separates from it.
Dorotheus says: When between a planet and another one there are 12 degrees, it is already application.
And Ptolemy, Vettius Valens and Hermes say: By more then 3 degrees, there is no application (1) yet .


(1)The translator from old Spanish used the Spanish word “llegamiento” (approximation). In the Latin translation we found the correct term “ applicatio” or “application”.In arabic the term is ʾittiṣāl.

What do you think about this text?
_________________
http://www.astro-art.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1369
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2011 1:32 pm    Post subject: Re: Orbs of the aspects according to Haly Abenragel Reply with quote

astroart wrote:


What do you think about this text?


I remember the 3 degree rule from Schmidt compilation.

It's interesting Aben Ragel handles conjunction different from other aspects

margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Estebon_Duarte



Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 134
Location: West Coast USA

Posted: Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for a skillful translation-

To me the text seems to read as though the orbs of the planets are only used for bodily conjunction in one sign by al-Rijal and his contemporaries, as he presents the opinions of others to contrast. I would really enjoy more of Rijal's work.
thanks again
_________________
Western Predictive Astrology by Estebon Duarte Independent Researcher AMA MACAA
Natal Chart & Annual Solar Revolution Reports
www.organic-astrology.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tzadde



Joined: 07 Apr 2011
Posts: 137

Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2011 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There was a strong opinion back then, i.e. the conjunction was not considered an aspect by itself, but something else to be treated differently than an usual aspect, which is within narrower orbs.
_________________
Amor ordinem nescit.
Love does not know order.
- Saint Jerome -
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clelia Romano



Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 353
Location: São Paulo

Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 3:07 am    Post subject: Re: Orbs of the aspects according to Haly Abenragel Reply with quote

margherita wrote:


I remember the 3 degree rule from Schmidt compilation.

It's interesting Aben Ragel handles conjunction different from other aspects


I remember of having read in some place that he Hellenistic astrologers besides the aspect by sign used to give importance also to aspects by degree and the distance allowed was 3 degrees.

As for Astroart quotation I understood that Al Rijal gave to the planets an orb that is generally accepted by all the Arab-Medieval astrologers up to the time of Lilly.

Clelia
_________________
http://www.astrologiahumana.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Clelia Romano



Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 353
Location: São Paulo

Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 3:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Estebon:

Estebon_Duarte wrote:
Thank you for a skillful translation-

To me the text seems to read as though the orbs of the planets are only used for bodily conjunction in one sign by al-Rijal and his contemporaries, as he presents the opinions of others to contrast. I would really enjoy more of Rijal's work.
thanks again


I´m looking forward a copy of Al Rijal,too, and it is difficult to obtain!

Sometimes when an author quotes Al Rijal often we have some different and personal points of view.

Maybe a Brazilian bookstore will be able to import the book from Spain, so I ordered it and paid it in advance as a garantee, but they do not know yet if the book will be available.
I know that Amazon is selling it but through independent sellers.

Clelia
_________________
http://www.astrologiahumana.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Clelia Romano



Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 353
Location: São Paulo

Posted: Sun May 01, 2011 3:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tzadde wrote:
There was a strong opinion back then, i.e. the conjunction was not considered an aspect by itself, but something else to be treated differently than an usual aspect, which is within narrower orbs.


Hello Tzade:

Your point is important because it is a common mistake ( a modern one) that the orb is related to aspects and not to the planets involved in it.

In the middle of the rays ther is the planet which " hurls the rays" and the capacity to hurl its rays at some distance bigger or small distance is probably due to its visibility after combustion. For example, the Moon can be seen after 12º after her combustion under the Sun, and 12 degrees is her orb.

As for the conjunctions, it is kind of funny because the conjunction was not considered an aspect but all the aspects were conjunctions ( coming from the same root of carnal conjunction) and this conjunctions can be by body, by trine, by square, by opposition or sextile. Smile

Clelia
_________________
http://www.astrologiahumana.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 148
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Sat May 07, 2011 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that the answer of this question can be found in the Hellenistic astrology.Hellenistic astrologers had two different teachings for conjunctions and aspects.The first one is a “static” teaching and this teaching is more related with the natal chart reading.The second one is a “dinamic” teachning and this teaching is related to the electional/horary chart reading.

The terms which Greeks used for the first teachnig are “look at”( blepō) and contemplate(theōreō) and for the second teachnig: “application”(sunaphē) and “separation”(apporoia).The conjuctions/aspects formed in the frames of first teaching can not cross the boundries of the signs, while the conjuctions/aspects formed in second teaching can to cross the boundries of the signs.

The orbs of action of first or "static" teaching was the entire sign:
-if two planets are in one sign they are in bodily conjuction(Jupiter in 2° Aries is in conjucntion with Mars in 28° Aries)
-if two planets are in signs which aspects each other-these planets are in aspect too(Mercury in 3° Aries aspects Saturn in 28° Gemini)

Text of Haly Abenragel deals with orbs of planets in the second or “dinamic” teaching-teaching about application/separation.From the text we understand that the orbs of planets(15 ° for Sun , 12° for Moon and etc.) are applicable for bodily conjucntion in the frames of the sign.The rule of 3° orb is applicable for aspects of planets, which are in different signs.
_________________
http://www.astro-art.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clelia Romano



Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 353
Location: São Paulo

Posted: Sat May 07, 2011 11:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Astroart:

Quote:
The terms which Greeks used for the first teachnig are “look at”( blepō) and contemplate(theōreō) and for the second teachnig: “application”(sunaphē) and “separation”(apporoia).The conjuctions/aspects formed in the frames of first teaching can not cross the boundries of the signs, while the conjuctions/aspects formed in second teaching can to cross the boundries of the signs.


Sahal and Ibn Ezra were the only ancient authors to accept the out of sign conjunctions and they were Arab Medieval and not Hellenistic authors.
I don´t have any Hellenistic source accept the out of sign aspects. I will really appreciate to know where you found out this concept. Confused
I wrote an article about time and space in Medieval and Hellenistic astrology, taking into account different philosophical point of views that both cultures had and pointing out that Hellenistic philosophy based on Plato´s teachings admitted boundaries between degrees and seconds, not to mention the boundary between signs! BTW this is in agreement with the modern Physics. You can find the article in my website: http://www.astrologiahumana.com/Aspectsbetweenplanets.pdf

Clelia
_________________
http://www.astrologiahumana.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 148
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Sun May 08, 2011 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I don´t have any Hellenistic source accept the out of sign aspects. I will really appreciate to know where you found out this concept.


Late Classical Astrology:Paulus Alexandrinus and Olympiodorus with the Scholia from later commentators, ARHAT, 2001, Ch.17, p.33
_________________
http://www.astro-art.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clelia Romano



Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 353
Location: São Paulo

Posted: Sun May 08, 2011 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clelia:
Quote:
I don´t have any Hellenistic source accept the out of sign aspects. I will really appreciate to know where you found out this concept.


Astroart:
Quote:
Late Classical Astrology:Paulus Alexandrinus and Olympiodorus with the Scholia from later commentators, ARHAT, 2001, Ch.17, p.33[/


Hello Astroart:

I do not understand that Paulus and Scholia are taking aplication and separation as aspects in SPACE. They are using the last and future aspects of the planets to think about time.

Quoting my own article:( sorry for quoting but it was easier than to write my ideas again in different words Laughing )

“The Hellenistic idea was that each sign is a barrier: there are no doors or windows to let in the light from one room to another.
The current theory of quantum in physics is the modern equivalent to the Greek concept.
For example, if we break a stone, we have two stones, but if we divide a person we will have two pieces of meat: the essence is lost, the quality and identity no longer exists. A living being is not deductible to the sum of its parts. Likewise, the signs were considered as living beings possessing a not divisional unity: they were seen as a whole being.
So, when a planet changes signs he does exactly what happens when the electron changes of energy level within an atom. A planet is never between two zodiac signs at the same time. Instantly he goes from one sign to another. This notion is totally foreign to us and it was only recovered by the quantum mechanics that restored the Greek notion of unity.
When a planet will complete some aspect to another, but to do so he will have to change signs, it will happen a big, total, complete change of direction and quality, because the planet will be in a different domicile, ruled by another master.
Although we are accustomed to think that all happens in a continuum, there is instead a discontinuity, a jump from a quality to another. Actually there are groups of discontinuous entities. Therefore we calculate a chart of the Ingress for the Sun in Aries at 0 ° 0 '0''. This is precisely because of this kind of rationale; a single second in time changes everything.

For example, if we use the twelvefold division of the sign (dodecatemoria), a procedure that is equivalent to multiply by 12 every degree, minute and second of a chart, and compare the charts of twins born seconds apart, you will notice differences in the position of the planets, explaining important differences in their lives.
The sign and the division´s extent are a “quantum”.

The word “moira” means degree in Greek and we can find in all ancient languages a common philological root when we want to refer to destiny. Moira is the portion pertaining to each one in life. Pars is the Latin word to moyrae in Greek.
Therefore we say that an event will change when a significator that was intertwined with another one, in con juntio with it changes its grade. If the planets are still moiricon or "partile" they change together. If not, not.
Therefore there are not aspects out of signs because it does there is not any continuity after the end of each sign.
That does not means that a planet in the last degree will not aspect the other immediately in the following sign: he will, for better or worse, but the important here is that it change entirely the essence of the matter.
In horary astrology this fact is seen often and clearly. “


Now, lets imagine that the Moon is in Aries and her last aspect was a conjunction with Saturn in Pisces and her next aspect will be a square with Mars in Capricorn. We consider the Moon sitiated, even if she is not doing an aspect to Saturn anymore, because this situation shows hindrances, difficulties and it is not favorable to a good outcome, so we are talking about TIME.

The article again:

“Such changes in a planet cannot be attributed to the permeability between signs.
What we can see is that aspects in traditional astrology are seen mostly in time and not in space.
In Mesopotamia, for example, the notion of time was of a constant flow; hence they do not have horoskopus which is a special point in the first house, a certain degree.
The Hellenistic also had the same idea: the time flows and it was more important than space. So if we have one planet applying to another one it is worth to apply the notion of time when the conjunction will be perfected, even if in another sign.One should not confuse this idea with the permeability between signs, which are still seen as separate spaces of different qualities. The next moment is totally different from the present one, and nobody ever swim in the same water.
Heraclitus, the Greek philosopher, discussed this idea a lot.
Plato says about Heraclitus: "He compares things with the current of a river - you cannot bath twice in the same water", the river flows and we touch every time different waters.
Heraclitus´ successors said that you even can´t get two times the same river, because it changed into another river.
Aristotle claims that Heraclitus teaches that only the ONE remains (and I compare the One to the sign unity), and all the things are always changed and transformed, everything besides this One flows, and nothing is firm and nothing last.
The fact is that only after the nineteenth and twentieth century there was a return to the philosophical level that was characteristic of the Hellenistic age.

Persian-Arabic and Medieval astrology emphasizes the time factor: hence the prohibitions, the frustrations, and other accidents described in the works of Abu Mashar, Alchabitius and Bonatti. “


Clelia
_________________
http://www.astrologiahumana.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
margherita



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 1369
Location: Rome, Italy

Posted: Sun May 08, 2011 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Clelia & Dimitar

Clelia Romano wrote:

Sahal and Ibn Ezra were the only ancient authors to accept the out of sign conjunctions and they were Arab Medieval and not Hellenistic authors.
I don´t have any Hellenistic source accept the out of sign aspects. I will really appreciate to know where you found out this concept. Confused


In TARES volume 2 there is this, from Serapio:

"That if one of the stars chances to be in the first three degrees of an image it has its power in reference to the image behind, just as again if one of the stars chances to be in the last 3 degrees of an image, it has the power of its rendering in relation to the next image..... If some star chances to be upon the section of 2 images, it is quite powerful and immoderate in regard to its working."


The same Schmidt mentions as a modern "out-of-sign-aspect" and this agrees with what they teach in Cieloeterra: an "out-of-sign" aspect is allowed but it bestows some immoderate quality.

margherita
_________________
Traditional astrology at
http://heavenastrolabe.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
astroart



Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 148
Location: Varna, Bulgaria

Posted: Sun May 08, 2011 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I do not understand that Paulus and Scholia are taking aplication and separation as aspects in SPACE. They are using the last and future aspects of the planets to think about time.


In the Greeks we find two concepts: one that is associated with the space, and second one which is associated with the time.The first one I have called a “static” teaching and the second one – “dinamic” teaching.The first concept is the concept of aspects, the second- concept of application / separation.Of course is not correct to say that the second concept is the concept of aspects(I used incorrectly for second teaching “conjunctions/aspects” only because in modern astrological thinking is not clear distinguishing between these two concepts and for the convenience of the readers of this forum- see for example: Robert Hand, Aspects in Medieval astrology, part I &part II, Mercury Direct, Issue No2&No3, 2000).

These are two different teachings.In the Middle ages these two concepts are mixed together and elements belonging to the second teaching are applied to the first teaching.For example what we call now the “orb” of planets is a part from the second doctrine, but not from the first.And that’s why we don’t can to speak about “orbs” of aspects. This one I wanted to show with the example from Haly Abenragel.
_________________
http://www.astro-art.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clelia Romano



Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 353
Location: São Paulo

Posted: Sun May 08, 2011 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

margherita wrote:
Hello Clelia & Dimitar

Clelia Romano wrote:

Sahal and Ibn Ezra were the only ancient authors to accept the out of sign conjunctions and they were Arab Medieval and not Hellenistic authors.
I don´t have any Hellenistic source accept the out of sign aspects. I will really appreciate to know where you found out this concept. Confused


In TARES volume 2 there is this, from Serapio:

"That if one of the stars chances to be in the first three degrees of an image it has its power in reference to the image behind, just as again if one of the stars chances to be in the last 3 degrees of an image, it has the power of its rendering in relation to the next image..... If some star chances to be upon the section of 2 images, it is quite powerful and immoderate in regard to its working."


margherita


Hello Margherita!

Your quote is talking about movement and not out of sign aspect.
Aplication and separation refer to things that happened in the past or will come to be.

Bonatti, many centuries later, says that a star in the last degree of a sign has power over the next sign and not in the sign it is in.
This "power" in my point of view is related to events and not to delineation.
I can´t imagine that a native with the Moon let´s say in the last degree of Scorpio can be considered as having a Sagittarius Moon. Wink

But we do have to take into account that if the Sun is at 0 degrees of Aries, in the example above, the Moon´s next aspect will be a trine with him. However this trine will not produce the same kind of thing as it was able to do if happened with the Moon still in Scorpio: when the Moon changes signs the scene changes totally.

At least this is what I have been reading and my consultations examples point out in the same direction, too.

regards

Clelia
_________________
http://www.astrologiahumana.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Clelia Romano



Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 353
Location: São Paulo

Posted: Sun May 08, 2011 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
[quote="astroart"]
Quote:
I do not understand that Paulus and Scholia are taking aplication and separation as aspects in SPACE. They are using the last and future aspects of the planets to think about time.


In the Greeks we find two concepts: one that is associated with the space, and second one which is associated with the time.The first one I have called a “static” teaching and the second one – “dinamic” teaching.The first concept is the concept of aspects, the second- concept of application / separation.Of course is not correct to say that the second concept is the concept of aspects(I used incorrectly for second teaching “conjunctions/aspects” only because in modern astrological thinking is not clear distinguishing between these two concepts and for the convenience of the readers of this forum- see for example: Robert Hand, Aspects in Medieval astrology, part I &part II, Mercury Direct, Issue No2&No3, 2000).


I was looking for Robert Hand´s text but I was unable to find it! Do you have any idea if the text is still avaible?

Thank you
Clelia
_________________
http://www.astrologiahumana.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated