Moon Rx, Lilly says *Sometimes*

1
I came across this in CA while studying a particular horary of which Luna is the lord of the Matter.

So do we regard Luna as Rx and read it as if she were?

Clinton states:
In CA I, Chapter XIII, page 80, Lilly states:

"...Moon when she is slow in motion and goeth less in 24 hours than 13 degrees and 10 minutes she is then equivalent to a rectrograde planet."

In this particular horary Luna is at a speed of 12 degrees and 29 minutes 55 seconds, far under the 13 degrees and 10 minutes that Lilly speaks of so the Moon who never rectrogrades is read as if she does from this horary and she is the lord of the 9H of long distance travel.
The quote is from the 6th post taken from:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7727

Have many of you met with such a horary and what is your oppinion on the *Lilly Rx Moon*?

Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise truly know how little they know

2
It's well known that a slow Moon is less productive. This is true of planets as well when they are slower. The only problem I see with this is that stationing planets are sometimes considered to be very productive of effects, but that may be due to making a "phasis".
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC

3
So if we are utilizing Lilly's 'Point Count' method, found in CA I on page 115 do we give Luna in this condition the same points Lilly did give Rectrograde planets?

And can anyone tell of any experiences they have had in horary when Luna was in this condition, as Lilly says she is read as Rx when she is traveling less than 3 degrees and 10 minutes in that 24 hour period?

Does Lilly have an example of this rare phenomena in CA or other documents Lilly wrote or documents of the Ancients before him?


Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men truly know how little they know

4
perhaps someone would like to explain the idea of 'less productive' using an example? i don't think it's relevant..
if applied to '''natal''' astrology, oprah winfrey and steven speilberg are just a couple of charts that confirm a 'slow moving' moon..
perhaps one would like to consider how productive, or unproductive they or william lilly were? the rate of speed for lillys natal moon at the time of his birth is a daily rate of 11 degrees and 49'..

unless astrologers are able to back up their 'theories' in some significant way, i view this one as mostly background 'noise' and nothing else..

maybe it can work in horary and not in natal.. anything is possible i suppose!

5
James_m stated:
if applied to '''natal''' astrology, oprah winfrey and steven speilberg are just a couple of charts that confirm a 'slow moving' moon..
perhaps one would like to consider how productive, or unproductive they or william lilly were? the rate of speed for lillys natal moon at the time of his birth is a daily rate of 11 degrees and 49'..
Well as one reads Lilly they will eventually find that Lilly utilized much of his horary data found in CA I in his natal astrology.

And Lilly was not stating that people or planets Rx in a horary or natal are not functional.

James if you look in CA, page 115, you'll find Lilly's point count method, where he weighs out different testimonies within a horoscope of the horary, and a Rx lord of the matter is given a lot of negative(-) points by Lilly's method.

What I'm wondering is the moon in this state read as Rx for purposes of point count and where Lilly speaks of the lord of the matter being rectrograde is so unfortunate.

james_m said:
maybe it can work in horary and not in natal.. anything is possible i suppose!
It's hard to say because Lilly uses much of his horary lore in his natal astrology and one wonders is this his own discovery or did he borrow this from another, an Ancient source?


Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men truly know how little they know

6
Clinton Soule wrote:So if we are utilizing Lilly's 'Point Count' method, found in CA I on page 115 do we give Luna in this condition the same points Lilly did give Rectrograde planets?
Why not?
. . . this would be 5 debilities then.

7
james_m wrote:perhaps someone would like to explain the idea of 'less productive' using an example? i don't think it's relevant..
if applied to '''natal''' astrology, oprah winfrey and steven speilberg are just a couple of charts that confirm a 'slow moving' moon..
perhaps one would like to consider how productive, or unproductive they or william lilly were? the rate of speed for lillys natal moon at the time of his birth is a daily rate of 11 degrees and 49'..

unless astrologers are able to back up their 'theories' in some significant way, i view this one as mostly background 'noise' and nothing else..

maybe it can work in horary and not in natal.. anything is possible i suppose!
Oprah's chart is one that lacks retrogradation if I recall correctly. Along with a number of other charts of famous people this seems to be an eminence indicator. So which factor is it? We have no way to isolate them scientifically (no alternate universes to use as control groups).
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC

8
curtis,

thanks for your response.. if someone makes a comment on characteristics associated with 'slowness of moon', i'd view that separately from the idea of eminence and absence of retrograde planets. fwiw oprah has jupiter retro, along with the 3 outer planets beyond saturn. i don't know that i would make that connection with retrograde planets either!

take a look at tiger woods chart that was posted in the general astro forum.. retro mars prominent on the midheaven, with saturn also retro - 2 of the 3 planets above the horizon in a nocturnal chart.. i suppose we can debate about whether woods is eminent or not, but i happen to think he is.

not to derail the thread, but one other comment i would like to make about retrograde planets is that apparent retrograde motion is much less of an occurrence then direct motion.. mars retrograde period is approx 72 days(approx 2.3 months) every 25.6 months.. having mars retro or retro planets in general in a chart is much less common.. how does that factor in when astrologers are looking at charts of those who are eminent? some type of statistical factor would have to account for this if it was going to try to be objective..

9
james_m wrote:curtis,

thanks for your response.. if someone makes a comment on characteristics associated with 'slowness of moon', i'd view that separately from the idea of eminence and absence of retrograde planets. fwiw oprah has jupiter retro, along with the 3 outer planets beyond saturn. i don't know that i would make that connection with retrograde planets either!

take a look at tiger woods chart that was posted in the general astro forum.. retro mars prominent on the midheaven, with saturn also retro - 2 of the 3 planets above the horizon in a nocturnal chart.. i suppose we can debate about whether woods is eminent or not, but i happen to think he is.

not to derail the thread, but one other comment i would like to make about retrograde planets is that apparent retrograde motion is much less of an occurrence then direct motion.. mars retrograde period is approx 72 days(approx 2.3 months) every 25.6 months.. having mars retro or retro planets in general in a chart is much less common.. how does that factor in when astrologers are looking at charts of those who are eminent? some type of statistical factor would have to account for this if it was going to try to be objective..
Muhammad Ali has several retrograde planets and seems also eminent. The point is how do you isolate factors to tell what is doing what? The supposed reason for slowness of the Moon having an effect on events for the earth is probably due to that statement that the Moon regulates the "effluents" coming from the other planets into our earthly realm. Personally I have observed for many years the slowing down of events when the Moon reached the void coursing (my opinion is that there are degrees of coursing through the void and that it is not a strict Boolean variable), however there may have been in each instance other explanations for why less happens during such episodes.
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC

10
Johannes pointed out:
Clinton Soule wrote:
So if we are utilizing Lilly's 'Point Count' method, found in CA I on page 115 do we give Luna in this condition the same points Lilly did give Rectrograde planets?

Johannes:

Why not?
. . . this would be 5 debilities then.
That is what I thought, but this being my first horary with this condition I needed to hear what many have experienced before I assumed anything.


Clinton Garrett Soule

Wise men truly know how little they know

11
Horary Astrology and Natal Astrology are different in approach to each other. In my earlier studies in Natal Astrology, I had been told by my Teacher (Guru) that rules of Horary can not be applied to Natal Astrology. The natal system which was taught to me treats Combustion, Retrogradation, Cadency and angularity quite different from Horary Astrology.

The experiments in Horary astrology might help in refining the symbolism used in natal astrology. For example Moon could be significator either querent or quesited in Horary Astrology. And we can see what its slowness indicated in a specific question.

Referring from Christian Astrology, when Lilly talks about 'Fugitives'

(Pages 328 & 329)

Of the Moon
For Fugitives, have respect to the Moon, being natural significator of them......

The Moon increasing in light and number, he shall be long in search; decreasing soon found, and with less labour........

About 'Clinton's suggestion, of point system, the table already mentions 'slow in motion' and 'swift in motion' which could be applied to moon.
Regards

Morpheus

https://horusastropalmist.wordpress.com/

12
zoidsoft wrote:The point is how do you isolate factors to tell what is doing what?
this is the beautiful thing about astrology - i don't think you can! some will think they know something based on some bit of information (slowness of moon, retrograde planets, etc.etc. - fill in the blank,) but when it is put in context with all the other factors that can to be taken into account, it is impossible to know the significance of these isolated factors.. instead many will work with ''point systems'' to give them an answer! it's so much simpler even if the answer is wrong!

maintaining a position of ignorance or ongoing curiousity is difficult to do.. most people find it embarrassing, lol... i tend to see the relativity in a lot of astrological theories myself. while an idea might have some merit based on astronomical realities (apparent slowness of moon or retrograde motion- to continue with the theme), putting it in context with all the other data and theories on the data could drive a person crazy.. this is the appeal of ''point systems''.. no need to go crazy - just refer to a system - any system, lol..

Morpheus wrote:Horary Astrology and Natal Astrology are different in approach to each other..... The natal system which was taught to me treats Combustion, Retrogradation, Cadency and angularity quite different from Horary Astrology.

About 'Clinton's suggestion, of point system, the table already mentions 'slow in motion' and 'swift in motion' which could be applied to moon.
thanks morpheus.. i often think one difference between natal and horary is wanting to take a somewhat scientific approach verses taking an approach based on divination.. i am moving towards this position based on reading geoffrey cornelius's ideas, the author of 'the moment of astrology'. i might be out to lunch with this idea, but it seems the 2 different branches of astrology appeal to different parts of our mind.

i like how you've brought the conversation back to the basic idea of the point system and how this idea of a slow moon is already captured in the point system..