Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - starsgaze

Pages: [1] 2
Classic, Medieval, Vedic / out of sign aspects
« on: June 25, 2024, 08:47:27 AM »
Hi Ed
Understand you are busy with the greek module.
Can I ask if out of sign aspects option (similar to the main module) can be used also in the medieval module? So one can include it

the lowest value i can change is only 0.1

Hi Stargaze - thanks for the message.

All aspects are within sign.

I tried to work out some code to deal with receptions and aspects, but I found it mighty complex. I think I reverted to just showing receptions by dignity. I will try again some time, but this is a low priority I'm afraid.

Thanks. Ed

Hi Ed,
can there be option to include out of sign aspects in your module like what it is currently for the default module?

As for the reception listings, thank you for the effort nevertheless. Atm, I use another free online s/w for this.
I look forward to your electional module.

Thank you

How to disable declination orb for fixed stars in the Options>Settings>Fixed Stars?

Under Horoscope>Fixed Stars, im able to set the declination orb to 0. But I wanted to set it for 0 as well for the main screen horoscope where fixed stars are listed beside the horoscope.

thank you

Hi Ed,
Can i confirm the current rules used for the column under Mix Receptions and Single Receptions:
1. they are regardless whether the planets have or do not have an aspect between them, as long as there are exchange of dignities, they will appear in this column.

2. For the single receptions column, only domicile rulership is being considered currently.

Also, for the Traditional Module, the aspects for this module does not include out of sign aspects? e.g. Moon 3 degrees Aquarius, Sun 27 degrees Taurus.

Thank you

Planetdance for windows / Mirror Antiscia Toggle Bookmark missing
« on: April 13, 2024, 09:11:15 AM »
When toggle bookmark for Horoscope-Extra-Mirror-Antiscia, the bookmark do appear in the Bookmarks, but nothing happens when clicking on the bookmark.

So I tried to toggle off, check the Bookmarks, it correctly disappear.
Go back to Options/Bookmarks to toggle on, Press Ok to exit. And i go back again to Options/Bookmarks to check, the Toggle is automatically set to off. Seems it did not save the settings.


OK - this is where I've got to:

On the screenshot below, you will see under mutual receptions, the Jupiter/Saturn reception is identified as (O-lap) - overlapping moieties.
The Moon/Saturn reception is identified as (Gen.) - generosity.

The first pair are in aspect, albeit weak; the second pair are not in aspect, but in each other's face/decan.

Is this helpful?

This could be replicated for the mixed reception column.


I think your suggestion of the checkbox will be better. Else in this case, does the 'gen" indicator have to appear for all moon Saturn listings in the mixed reception column?

Thanks. I've done some work on this but the terminology is very confusing. One of the things I have to consider is the usability of the module for others. I need to give some thought how I can balance your needs and the needs of a more general user.

I'm sorry to keep asking you for clarification, but I need to have your terminology explained in terms of something I understand.

Does your terminology (generosity, reception) map in any way on to my mutual and mixed reception. I can't see where the two sets of terminology correlate.

You will see what I have done below. This is Trump's chart.

One source of confusion is identifying the added value in showing that `Mars is received by the Sun as ruler` if the pair are already shown as being in two forms of mixed reception. It just seems to obtuse to me, and not particularly helpful, particularly for users who may be less well versed in medieval methods and terminology.

I can add a check box to eliminate mutual/mixed receptions that are not in aspect if that would be helpful. I also have a way of eliminating the listing of a 'simple reception' if the pair are already identified as being in a mutual or mixed reception.

Any clarity you can add would be helpful.


Great! The listing on the "simple receptions" is very helpful.
As you said, Sun and Mars are already being shown in the mixed receptions column.
For this , need to go back to exactly what's the definition behind the mixed/mutual reception columns. It is if planet A is in B's any dignity, and B is also in A's any dignity, regardless whether they are in aspect.

If one is going to use Masha Allah's method of horary, or say, any natal interpretation of the medieval techniques,seeing whether a planet is being received will be quite prominent. And in this case, the use of reception often implies being in aspect.

Hence the checkbox you mention, option should be exclude those that are in aspect. If you exclude those that are not aspect, planets that are in generosity/exchange will not be shown.

For the Sun Mars, though they appear in the mixed receptions column, hence the question is there a need to be under the new column, they are different. The mixed reception main purpose is the exchange of dignities, or generosity if one indicate check box to omit those in aspect. Because Mars do not receive Sun.

Also, under the column of 'simple reception', there should also be two lines which Jupiter received by Saturn, and Saturn received by Jupiter.

Actually I think the mixed and mutual receptions column can be combined into one, as they indicate the exchange of dignity.
Then the other column simply called receptions.

Laptop is not in front of me now, but I recall checking the help tab of your aspects section in medieval trade module, the orbs indicated inside is the same as what I'm using.
I use the mean orbs in the main orbs settings. Let me know if there are differences with your aspects chart

I am using Egyptian bounds

Hi Ed,
Nope, that's simply an aspect between Mars and that dignified planet. More about interpretation.

Hi again - so, Trump's case:

Mars is ruled by the Sun (Mars in Leo), and Mars and Sun are in aspect, hence Mars is received by the Sun. The fact that the Sun only has one count of dignity by face is irrelevant. If the Sun was peregrine (without any dignity) this would also be irrelevant, as long as the aspect is there?

>Yes you are right. This is from Mar's perspective. This is the simplest reception, whereby A receive B. (one way).


If, let's say, Trump's Mars was in Aries, in Ptolemaic aspect to the Sun (within orbs), Mars would be received by the Sun on account of Mars being in the sign of the Sun's exaltation? The Sun does not need to have any dignity for this to be the case?
>Yes, you are right. From these two examples, you can also foresee there are situations there are mutual receptions, whereby A receive B, B also receive A. Bearing in mind A and B are in aspect.


A hypothetical example:

Mars in 21 Libra, in the bounds and face of Jupiter, is received by Jupiter in 21 Gemini by trine, even though Jupiter is in detriment.
>Strictly speaking, Mars is indeed received by Jupiter. Jupiter is in detriment or fall and how it affects the reception, will depends on one's own practice. There are some differences out there on how one interpret this. You can have a look at Morin's text or Zoller for their take on this. But that is interpretative domain, principles wise, Mars is received by Jupiter.


Mars at 16 Libra, in the bounds of Jupiter, would not be received by Jupiter at 16 Gemini, because there is only on count of minor dignity for Jupiter in this position of Mars.
>No, Mars is received by Jupiter. Mars besides being in bounds of Jupiter, is also in the triplicity of Jupiter (Air sign). The three triplicity rulers are taken into consideration.


I may have missed this one, but what about the case, let's say, between an undignified Mars in aspect to a dignified Jupiter. Is there any relationship between these two positions apart from the aspect?
>Do you mean by Mars not in any of Jupiter's dignity or?


I can see that Mars in a dignity (or two) of Jupiter would benefit from being in aspect to a dignified Jupiter (this would be accounted for by either of the generosity or mutual reception conditions).

> "Mars in a dignity (or two) of Jupiter would benefit from being in aspect to a dignified Jupiter"

This would be minimally reception. Jupiter received Mars. Mutual reception will happen if Jupiter is also in Mar's dignity, (or at least two of the minor dignities).

In generosity, it only happens when two planets are in each other's dignity (or at least two of the minor dignities), and without an aspect. this term somehow over time evolve into the more modern definition of mutual reception. In hellenistic, somewhat similar to Exchange.
Regardless, generosity/exchange or how we wish to call it, and mutual reception are distinct. Whether one treats them as the same in his or her interpretative practices, that is one's call obviously.

Hi Ed,
Unsure what you meant by "just about aspect, and any dignity..."

E.g. Jupiter and Sun are in aspect, but there's no reception. Sun is only in Jup's triplicity. Jup is not in Sun's dignity.

Hence, reception by medieval def, is when a planet is in aspect with its domicile ruler, or exaltation ruler, or with it's trip/term/decan ruler (requiring at least two).

E.g. Mercury in 0 degrees of Gemini. In aspect with Jupiter.
Mercury is received by Jupiter.
As Jupiter is the triplicity AND face ruler of 0 degrees Gemini

Hi Ed,
Mara is in Sun's domicile, and they are in aspect, hence Sun receives Mars, i.e., mars received by Sun.


-Moon and Saturn in Generosity

In case one wonders why, Moon is in Saturn's Triplicity, Term and Face.
"...or with the lord of the two of the other minor dignities"

Pages: [1] 2