Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

SteveS wrote:Do we allow our siderealists principles/guidelines for angularly to apply to these charts?

SteveS wrote:Jim wrote:

But what PASSES for angles are the Moon's hard aspects.

Yes, upon further searching, I found some more Fagan words from ‘Primer of Sidereal Astrology’ with his discussion about the Novien/Navamsas charts:

It must not be supposed as our Hindu brethren would have us believe that the novien chart is a secondary geniture. It is nothing of the sort. It is just an aspectarian-vernier. It permits the user to measure micro-aspects that may not be otherwise apparent (with the natal chart), especially to the Moon, always remembering that here we are dealing with micro-ecliptical mutual configurations, and not with the mundane sphere. Remember an orb of merely one degree in the birth chart is equivalent to an orb of nine degrees in the novien, so it is not difficult to see how sensitive and critical the novien can be. Philogistically, it would appear that the ayanamsas had their origin in ancient Egypt, for the Egyptian phonetics for the new Moon psd (peshed), and for the number nine were identical. It would seem the antiquated Egyptians had solved “in minutes” this problem of symbolics some 6000 years before Messrs, Franklin and Carter had “progressed” to that idea.

Therese Hamilton wrote:Fagan is off base with his history in this quote, but he did discover new ways of using the navamsa/novien chart. The traditional Indian way of using the navamsa is different, however. The chart was used as a supplemental marriage chart. But its main importance was to indicate a 'second sign' for natal planets. It was especially good if a natal planet was vargottama, in the same sign as a natal planet. If for example, Jupiter was in its fall in Capricorn in the natal chart, but exalted in Cancer in the navamsa, then Jupiter received extra strength in interpretation.

Traditionally in India neither aspects nor degrees were used in the navamsa. The chart was always set up as signs only, and the ascendant was the navamsa sign of the natal ascendant.

I've done a lot of work with the navamsa over the years and have discovered degrees to be very important. Only the conjunction, square and opposition aspects within the navamsa chart seem to be effective, and the degrees must be fairly close. They cannot be only sign-to-sign.

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:

Therese Hamilton wrote:Fagan is off base with his history in this quote, but he did discover new ways of using the navamsa/novien chart.

When Fagan said "our Hindu brethren would have us believe that the novien chart is a secondary geniture," I believe he was talking about Hindu astrologers contemporaneous to himself and with whom he was corresponding. Can't point to anything in particular on that point though. Just a vague memory of having read something about that somewhere, likely in AA magazine.

The traditional Indian way of using the navamsa is different, however. The chart was used as a supplemental marriage chart.

I think he got that. That whole thing about calling it a sexascope.

But its main importance was to indicate a 'second sign' for natal planets. It was especially good if a natal planet was vargottama, in the same sign as a natal planet. If for example, Jupiter was in its fall in Capricorn in the natal chart, but exalted in Cancer in the navamsa, then Jupiter received extra strength in interpretation.

I don't understand. You say It was especially good if a natal planet was in the same sign as a natal planet, then give the example of Jupiter being in the opposite sign from it's place in the natal chart. I must have missed something.

Therese Hamilton wrote:I've done a lot of work with the navamsa over the years and have discovered degrees to be very important. Only the conjunction, square and opposition aspects within the navamsa chart seem to be effective, and the degrees must be fairly close. They cannot be only sign-to-sign.

Jupiter Sets At Dawn wrote:OK, that makes some sense. A few definitions help a lot. I don't speak Hindi, or whatever that is.

I have to admit, I skipped a lot of Fagan's discussion of Indian astrology. At the time I was having enough trouble dealing with the "signs" and eventually dropped them altogether except for the luminaries. It's only after spending time on solunars I've found any interest in them at all.

If the Navamsa is a form of aspectarian, that's more interesting to me. Can you suggest a book that has some basic information on the structure and how it's used?

Oh, and thank you for taking the time to explain it.

Therese Hamilton wrote:Impressive!! (Even though it hasn't been demonstrated before that fixed stars have a relationship to navamsa positions.) At least we're getting closer to the truth of the Aries zodiac. I have always thought that comparing fixed stars to their navamsa longitudes would be an interesting study. Does a star with a supposedly Venus nature fall in a Venus ruled navamsa segment, for example?

Should conjunctions to primary angles be taken into account in Navamsa?

My Navamsa-chart gives Pluto & Uranus on ASC (orbs 01*01' and 02*58', respectively), and when I think about it, Ebertin's key-words for UR-PL do resonate with my own self-perception; but on the other hand, it's not really something that could not be concluded from natal chart alone.

Jim Eshelman wrote:Start with a couple of things: Look at any conjunctions, oppositions, and squares within 3 degrees and no more than 5. Consider the Moon's sign.

SteveS wrote:I have some questions about Fagan’s writings in his book ‘A Primer of Sidereal Astrology’ about the Novien/Navamsa.

First, Fagan writes:

Moreover, the positions of the luminaries and planets in the navamsas seem to bear little or no connection with the actual dispositions and environment of the native, and failed to reveal, as claimed in the nadi literature, the date of birth of the marriage partner.

And then after Fagan re-examined the ‘validity’ of the navamsas as computed by Garth Allen, Fagan writes:

The astute reader will soon discover the navamsa of the Moon thus calculated ( see table on page 143 with Allen’s sidereal zodiac) not only intimately describes one’s innermost disposition and the type of environment one was brought up in, but the 2nd or 3rd navamsa of the Moon, if not the first case, for the ladies; and the Sun in the case of the men, often indicates the birthday of the husband or the wife, according to the linganioni system of selecting one’s matrimonial partner. In the matter of intimacies and antipathies, the navamsa quite frequently show a planetary relationship not obvious from an examination of birth charts.

Am I to understand with this thread no one has done enough research to offer their opinion as to the possible truth of what Fagan says with his above words? I have done some work with the navamsa and see a-lot of potential describing an important aspect with one’s personality not see in the birth chart, but Fagan completely looses me about this system ‘indicating the birthday of the husband or wife.’

SteveS wrote:Am I to understand with this thread no one has done enough research to offer their opinion as to the possible truth of what Fagan says with his above words?

I have done some work with the navamsa and see a-lot of potential describing an important aspect with one’s personality not see in the birth chart, but Fagan completely looses me about this system ‘indicating the birthday of the husband or wife.’

SteveS wrote:Fagan writes in the same above writings about the Novien/navamsa:

Philogistically, it would appear the navamsa had their origin in ancient Egypt, for the Egyptian phonetics for the new Moon, psd (peshed), and for the number nine were identical!

Also, we can see in the western occult tradition with the link below, the so-called Magical Square of the Moon is based on squaring principles of the number 9. I know one thing for sure, my study of sidereal astrology has taught me the tremendous importance of Moon symbolism, particularly with SSR’s. IMO, we are definitely dealing with something here with the Moon & the Number 9 with lost arcane knowledges.

http://altreligion.about.com/od/western ... e-Moon.htm

zhivio wrote:A couple of questions arise for me regarding the calculation process.

Does one calculate to account for a parallax moon?

If so... Does one than calculate for natal, relocation or both?

My Moon is calculated to be 1AQ39... however my parallax moon for natal is 1AQ14 and currently my relocated parallax moon is 1AQ34....

My Natal Navamsa(Parallax) Moon is 11LI06 (Saturn14Li56)
My Relocated Navamsa(Parallax) Moon is 14LI09 (Saturn14LI56)
My Natal Novien(Parallax) Moon is 11AQ06 (Saturn11AQ56)
My Relocated Novien(Parallax) Moon is 14AQ09 (Saturn14AQ56)
My Natal & Relocated Navamsa Moon is 14LI52 (Saturn14LI56)
My Natal & Relocated Novien Moon is 14AQ52 (Saturn14AQ56)

When I did a search on this forum for information on parallax I came to the conclusion that it has not been addressed... I would be interested in learning from others their experience with their research into the question of utilizing parallax or not.

Having a prominent Saturn (10th house- 5 degrees from MH) is something that i am well aware of.... tends to make me a 'worker' of sorts....

SteveS wrote:I did not know Bradley wrote a book on the ‘parallax’ issue in astrology. I assume he wrote his ‘parallax’ book before he discovered Sidereal Lunar Returns.

SteveS wrote:I did not know Bradley wrote a book on the ‘parallax’ issue in astrology. I assume he wrote his ‘parallax’ book before he discovered Sidereal Lunar Returns.

SteveS wrote:Thanks Jim, and a well written review by you on Amazon.

Arena wrote:Can people in her confirm or dismiss Fagan's idea that the placement of the Sun in the novien is the same sign as the Sun in the natal chart of the marriage partner? I find this very interesting indeed as it proves right in the only case I have married.

Jim Eshelman wrote:The pattern I can confirm most from my own experience is that, just as the most common Moon sign of significant partners has been my natal Moon sign or its opposite, so has the most common Novien/Navamsa Moon-sign been my own Novien/Navamsa Moon-sign or its opposite.

StarAgeWiz wrote:Prince's Navamsa Moon 10Sag26 aspects Natal Mars 6PI20

Prince's Novien Moon 10Aries26.... conj. Natal Venus 13Aries40 well describes is love of music and people.

To my mind Novien Moon conjunct Natal Venus is a much better character indicator.

Arena wrote:

Price's Novien Moon 10Aries26.... conj. Natal Venus 13Aries40 well describes is love of music and people.

To my mind Novien Moon conjunct Natal Venus is a much better character indicator.

But this is what we are told not to do.
We are told not to compare the Novien or harmonic charts to the natal chart, but rather look at it on it's own. And this harmonic chart does show Moon-Neptune conjunction square Jupiter which can also describe his success (Jupiter) and musical talent and drug addiction (Moon-Neptune)

Arena wrote:Yes I saw that in Fagan's writings, but I don't think I've seen it elsewhere and most of what I've read so far about it is that harmonic charts should not be compared to the natal.

If anyone in here has explored this field in detail and thinks he/she has some kind of solid evidence, it would be great to see that. I do not see Fagan do that in his book PSA.

In my view if I just use rational thought, comparing one harmonic chart to the natal is taking the chart out of it's context to put it where it does not belong.

Speaking of vargottama, one of the most fascinating characteristics of the Navamsa - in stark contrast to the Novien - is that, for the Fagan-Bradley ayanamsa, the three chief defining stellar markers of the zodiac are all vargottama. Additionally, the next two most important markers, though not in the same Navamsa sign as in the "harmonic 1" zodiac, nonetheless show a phenomenal structure with the first set. Here are the zodiacal and Navamsa positions of the following stars, using today's longitudes…
Besides the sign-dignity of the first three, I find it astounding that the Navamsa positions of Aldebaran, Antares, Alcyon, and Regulus are, respectively,
15°27' Taurus
15°09' Scorpio
15°45' Aquarius
15°45' Taurus

When calculating noviens there are eight degrees of the zodiac that are the own noviens: 0 Hub and 15 Spoke. There are nine degrees which have a novien of 0 Ta: 0 Ta itself, 10 Gem, 20 Cn, 0 Vir, 10 Li, 20 Sc , 0 Cp, 10 Aq, and 20 Pi, and again 0 Cp is the only Rim ingress in the group. I suspect the primacy of the Capricorn Ingress is related to 9H, and take note that since Ta is the first sign, Cp is the ninth.

SteveS wrote: Sun Jan 09, 2022 4:40 pm ...no one here in the WEST seems to know for sure what the Vedic branch was doing with # 9 specifically with the Sidereal Z, or for that matter in whole, specifically, with Native's Charts

A couple of days ago Mikestar posted an observation about the number 9 in a discussion about a possible WHY the Capricorn Ingress is the Master Mundane Astrology chart in the Sidereal Zodiac?

Just to be clear, he was quoting me from several earlier posts. I'm sorry you hadn't seen it before. I think I'd mentioned it in the same thread, in response to one of your questions.

Jim Eshelman wrote: Wed Jan 05, 2022 3:55 pm The more it seems that Taurus is the proper "first sign of the zodiac" not just symbolically and historically but in ways that matter to the structure of the zodiac (e.g., Noviens counting from 0° Taurus, not Navamsas counting from 0° Aries), it stirs the question of why Rim constellations should be the pivotal ingresses. (Why not Hub? And yet, having run Hub and Spoke ingresses for categories of event with nothing to show for it, we know it is not the Hub constellations but, rather, the Rims.)

Over time, I've settled into the idea that this is because the Rim constellations are (at least in some small way) like angles: Their nature of action and, especially, the Rim is the outermost part of the wheel. Tre starting point or origin may indeed (as it seems to be) be Hubs, and it makes way more sense for the constellations to go Hub, then Spoke, then Rim - from the inmost point of the wheel to the outermost - so the pattern of expression, action, movement is naturally Rim.

Of course, this is all a theory. It's all interpretive symbolism, so there's no way to prove it IS a real thing. But I'm comfortable with it and, in particular, it explains to me why Rims are the basis of the ingress model. It also does a jiffy job moving us from the old "Aries is first" idea because Rims are obviously the LAST of the three groups in the sense of being the outcome, the outermost, of that impulse which started at the inmost center of the Hub.

Ah... and there is another spin on the old metaphors. It's not just that the hub is the center of the wheel, but the impulse has to begin at the very center of the hub; and it is at the inmost center of the hub - the bull's-eye - that the zodiac was first marked. Not just any old place ibn the hub but the inmost center of it, at 15°00' Taurus.

I think this is important to the current question in another sense: A 9th harmonic wave, the foundation of the Novien and something that increasingly seems important, may be part of the mathematical structure defining the zodiac because a 40° wave, though going nine times around the zodiac, catches up with itself - laps itself - not every 40° but every 45°. An origin not at 0° Taurus but at 15° Taurus - the inmost center of the Hub - spikes at every 15° Hub AND every 0° Rim.

All of that said... I already know that you are convinced that these ingress points are rightly 0° Rim, and perhaps the foregoing gives something to anchor that.

But I bet you still have a question in your mind.. perhaps wondering why, of four possible Rims, Capricorn is the one that seems to come out in the lead. Yes?

Jim Eshelman wrote: Thu Jan 06, 2022 10:58 am BTW, having the zodiac measured from 0° [Taurus] would complete the picture on why 0°Capricorn is the Master Point IF we had proof that the Nakshatras are important - which, however, we don't have (yet? ever?). The Nakshatra and Novien/Navamsa models are part of the same structure (four Navamsas/Noviens = one Nakshatra), and a 'mansion' structure originating from 0° Taurus would complete its 120° pattern at 0° Virgo and... 0° Capricorn. In that speculative universe, Rimness in the 'solar zodiac' and the structural wave of the 'lunar zodiac' would converge at 0° Capricorn.

I do agree with you, Steve, that there are a lot of hints that the number 9 is important in the structure of the zodiac.

So, obviously 9 is a prophetic numeral.

But with the Navamsa charts it is otherwise. Actually this is nothing else but an aspecterian-vernier, which shows the configurations between celestial bodies deemed to be valid and not those existing in the Natal chart at all. In all probability this may have been the original and authentic method of determining effective aspects in vogue in ancient Egypt, Babylon, and India and may indicate existing methods of doing this are false. …Whereas the novien is a more intimate and personal chart, depicting the true destiny of an individual by means of the mutual aspects subsisting between the planets, which are frequently not at all apparent in the birth chart. Perhaps our astrology will be more meaningful should we revert to this ancient usage.

I'm sure astrologers in India are missing the point because, first of all, they are 120° off on Navamsa positions, and then they treat the Navamsa with highly questionable methods. If we approach it simply, using what we already know of astrology, we'll be on a much more correct path.

But you might get some new information from Novien Saturn square natal Venus. (I'm not sure. Does this seem accurate to you?)

Jim Eshelman wrote: Mon Jan 10, 2022 10:55 am
Surely the strangest thing is that while Novien-to-Natal aspects work, Novien-to-Novien seem worthless. You'd expect they'd work in the same framework but they don't. You'd think they work just because they uncover hidden 10°-multiple aspects, but they don't. (In fact - never thought of this - that might be why: To the extent the Novien is substantially a kind of aspectarian, these may be aspects that don't work in synastry, just as we ignore or majorly underplay trines and sextiles.)