Mitigated aversions

[Martien Hermes]

Dear Forum

I have two questions concerning aversions.

In another post, Mr. Schmidt alluded to the fact that in the case of Planets in Images, it is not a problem if the dispositor of the Image is not able to see its image and the planet there. The planet residing there is still able to use the attributes at its disposal.
That was very helpful because it cleared up some of the confusion I have regarding aversions (but not all). My previous understanding was that whenever there is an aversion, something is amiss, as if the planet in the Image is somehow malfunctioning or something like that.

So my first question is: what do aversions do actually? Can we differentiate their effects to several different investigations of a given chart? If so, how?

This seems to refer to an issue that has puzzled me quite a while now.
In Hellenistic astrology there seems to be a sort of ‘compartmentalization’, for lack of a better word, of the several doctrines. When used and applied to one issue, it cannot be used in the (exact) same manner when applying it in another context. Like in the case of aversions.
Is this true?
I know for instance that when using Zodiacal releasing, aversions have the nature of a discontinuation in the time description in the order of the follow up of the Images. This is of course something entirely different than delineating an aversion in – say – the topical analysis.

If so, what differentiations are known at this moment concerning this?

[Patrick Watson]

If any of you contacted me to receive a planetary divisions spreadsheet calculator, I sent you an update that will now give the correct dates. If you would like to receive the updated calculator, email me at patrickianwatson@gmail.com.

[Patti Frabotta]

For Mr. Schmidt and/or other Hindsighters:

Are we talking 360-day years, or modern calendar years? Many times I assume 360-day years are
called for, but I'm not sure on this one. Does Valens actually clarify this, or do we try both ?

Mr. Schmidt, I know you are quite busy these days; perhaps Mr. Manwaring or another Hindsighter
can help here.

Thank you.

Patti J. Frabotta

[Patti Frabotta]

Of course I mean when using planetary periods and ascensional times for Planetary Activation.
And is it different when performing circumambulations..... or is this 360-day rate always
used for planetary periods and ascensional times, no matter what technique or method we are
using????

Thank you.

Patti Frabotta

[Patti Frabotta]

Me again.

I later thought that perhaps you combine the two "keys"..... If the planetary periods are
based on synodic cycles/solar-related cycles, then the 365 solar year should be used.
Since the ascensional times are degrees of arc, and there are 360 degrees in the zodiac
(or any circle, of course), then the 360-day year should be used for them.

Thus, when combining planetary periods and ascensional times for the purpose of determining
the activation of planets, figures, etc., try it with first converting the ascensional arc values
to a 360-day year (multiply by 360/365.2422), then combine these new values with the
appropriate planet period values.

Let me know what you think.

Patti

[Abd-Allah Meyers]

Greetings,

May I try to rekindle yet another thread here?

When reading the list of eight possible planetary period combinations, divisions by factors, etc., the thought arose if, perhaps, one can 'explain' everything with them but predict nothing. Excellent hindsight, severely impaired foresight?

Who has meanwhile worked with them and might report her/his findings?

Best regards,

Abd-Allah Meyers