Auxiliary angles in the background

[Freya]

Sep 09, 2013
How would be best to interpret a planet partile conjunct an auxiliary angle in the background? Because it's an angle, is it foreground even if it's in the background, or maybe should I consider it as being middleground because the background somehow dulls the effect of the angle?

[Freya]

How would be best to interpret a planet partile conjunct an auxiliary angle in the background? Because it's an angle, is it foreground even if it's in the background, or maybe should I consider it as being middleground because the background somehow dulls the effect of the angle?

This is almost never going to occur except with the Vertex, and then it's kinda "built in," because the basic characteristic of the Vertex is compatible with nonangularity. (The historic treatment of it as meaning "fated events" really means "unconsciously motivated events.")

Besides that, the fact that a planet is on an angle - example, on the Zenith or Nadir - means you treat it as if it's foreground. That is, its angularity has all the characteristics of "foreground-ness." No difference in interpretation. It is not lessened in any sense.

[Freya]

THANK YOU JIM