49
OK, I think I have a nice example which explains the sect and retrograde difference.

Because the subject is a tricky one, I will not expose the whole charts, but only the fragment of which we are talking about.

These are two charts of two young ladies who have Jupiter in 7th in dignity.

Lady 1:
Image
Lady 2:
Image
The first chart is diurnal and we have 'healthy' Jupiter, not retrograde, not afflicted by a malefic planet nor Sun's rays, and right there on the angle.
This is a person who married very, very rich man, who is known in the city.

Second chart is nocturnal. We have Jupiter afflicted by retrogradation, contrary to the sect in favor, falling from angle but still in the 7th sign and is touching the 7th angle with his orbs of influence. It is inside 8 degrees from an angle (requirement by, I think, Bonatti?).
She also have a [long term] boyfriend who is famous in the city, and is hanging out with rich people, but he is not reach!
There are more characteristics of that guy of which I'm not supposed to talk publicly.

With Sect we ask "How Much", with Retrogradation-Direct [and similar affliction] we ask "How well"? "How much and how well" in a sense of delivering what is promised by that Jupiter. In this case the promise is wealthy and well-known husband (Jupiter ruler of 7th in 7th).

Jupiter in the first chart brought a very rich men, in the second chart not a rich man, but one who is well known. So, the 'how much', is stronger in the first case.
In the first case the relationship directly and very straightforwardly went to marriage. In the second case, still not after many years spending together. So there is something holding in suspense, something behind the scene. The "how well" in the first case was more stronger then in the second case.

Of course, someone will object that in the second case Jupiter is falling from angle, and I would say yes, but that and also the retrogradation, make the "how well" not so strong as in the first chart.

So, the "unusual expression" of the retrograde planets I don't take to be: a) "well it will be ok just the same as in the case of direct planets, but will be realized in an unusual way". I take it to be: b) "well, it will not be so ok as in the case of direct planets, and will be realized with more difficulties and obstacles and probably would not last or will be transitory, taking into account the other fortitudes or debilities of the same planet".

This is, in my opinion, the difference between the expression in an unusual way of the retrograde planets.
And of course, we can't judge anything for sure on one testimony only. But the retrogradation would add to the whole picture, as I hope, I have explained above.

50
Ile,

thanks for your example. it seems like a pretty good one without knowing the rest of the chart. my first of a few questions would be what is the situation of venus in the nocturnal persons chart? as you mention ("we can't judge anything for sure on one testimony only") it's helpful to have more then one position pointing towards something to confirm something.

ben dykes book 'introductions to traditional astrology' based on the work of abu ma'shar and al-qabisi has some interesting comments to make on retrograde planets pointing out that it is a bigger problem for the inferior planets then the superior planets, especially if they are also under the suns beams. another comment that would apply to the 2nd chart with the retro jupiter is that jupiter is setting in the west after the sun, as opposed to chart 1 which while we don't know where the sun is, we know it has not set yet, and that it is probably going to set sometime before the sun sets - in other words - a stronger jupiter via the planetary phase position of jupiter.
Last edited by james_m on Fri Feb 08, 2013 6:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

51
James,

In Astrology and especially in astrological analysis there always can be "If", "but", "what if", "if this is so" et cetera. If we take Venus in consideration, then we should take Part of Marriage into consideration too and its Lord; then we should take the Almuten of Marriage, and then Mars or Sun in women's charts and so on. Then someone with a modern approach would add midpoints or some other technique.
There is no end.

I think that the example I have provided is self explanatory. In the first chart Jupiter is in sect and stronger, in the second chart is contrary do the sect and weaker.
Yes I said "we can't judge anything on one factor only", but I didn't provided in depth analysis of their relationship status, just a general note.

And of course, there are sometimes some segments of the chart which can be judged on one factor only. For example, the student of Abu Ma'shar is testifying that Abu Ma'shar said to him, how a person with afflicted lord of 2nd never acquire significant wealth in life.
So, here it is, based on one factor only.

This kind of discussions can go on and on without any consensus in the end. I think that I have nothing else to add to what I have already said providing the example and the quotes previously. That is my take on the subject and my two cents in the discussion.

Ile,

52
Ile wrote:
It is clear that the old ones regarded the retrogradation as a weakness, how much and in which way this weakness will manifest is another question; but if a benefic retrograde is less able to offer help, then it is also true that the same planet will function in a weaker way in bringing its own significations with easiness and unobstructed.
Thanks for your previous post Ile. I enjoyed reading the extensive sources you marshalled to set out the medieval take on retrograde planets.

I have no argument with your general take on medieval astrology in regards retrograde planets. I was well aware of medieval astrology's view on retrograde planets when I made my previous comments. As you conceded this is not the traditional forum and our opinions dont need to conform to any traditional maxims here.

Actually, I can go along with much of what you have stated. Retrograde planets can certainly indicate delay or reversals of fortune and I love the Cardan notion of retrograde planets as 'rebel' planets! This fits very much into my own experience too.

The interesting questions for me are what retrogrades mean in terms of quantitative and qualitative factors?

I do dispute your mainstream medieval assumption that all the astrological wisdom of the past supports your view that retrograde planets are 'weak'.

Does hellenistic astrology support the view that retrograde planets are weak or strong? I confess my research is still provisional on this topic but it seems to me that the hellenistic sources are not all entirely consistent with the medieval view.

I note the quote you give above from Valens from his Anthology. In that case Jupiter was in its fall so the delineation fits with or without a retrograde state. Moreover, my provisional take is that the Rx state tends to undermine planets that are already debilitated. So I would not have any problem with Valens delineation.

Going back to an older source than Valens we see retrograde planets described as actually strong not weak. In particular the astrologer Serapio of Alexandria (probably BCE) states:
He says that the stars are powerful when they are square or opposite the Sun, and if they are not in ineffective houses.

Porphyry the Philosopher Introduction to Tetrabiblos and Serapio of Alexandria Astrological Definitions p67 Translated from the Greek by James Herschel Holden
Robert Schmidt thinks Serapio was one of the earliest systematizers of hellenistic astrology.

Serapio therefore suggests that the Moon and superior planets are powerful in opposition to the Sun. We all know that the full Moon is seen as the most powerful state in its phase to the Sun. Equally, the superior planets Mars, Saturn and Jupiter are retrograde and at their brightest in the sky when opposing the Sun.

This view may well originate in a more visual astrology stemming from the Babylonians. Hence the focus on visual physical astrology being seen as more powerful than purely symbolic astrology. Thus the focus on physical phenomena like eclipses, full Moons, comets, and planets and stars when they are brightest in the sky are all seen as more powerful than purely symbolic factors.

In many respects the Indian astrological tradition adopted an approach to retrograde planets very similar to Serapio. However, they also extended the notion of retrogrades being powerful to the inner planets Mercury and Venus.

I think sources like Serapio may help to explain the apparent paradox that two astrological traditions dating back to hellenistic astrology came up with quite different conclusions about what retrograde planets mean. It seems possible that the two traditions were influenced by different source texts from the hellenistic era.

Of course there are several other explanations. Indian astrology may have had its own indigenous tradition of retrograde planets or may have been influenced by Babylonian astrology before its encounter with hellenistic astrology. However, such explanations are not strictly necessary and a purely hellenistic influence is probably most likely.

There seems to be a consensus in modern Indian or Jyotish astrology that retrograde planets are strong. Whether for good or ill is another issue entirely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vakri_grahas

There are actually several approaches in Indian astrology to retrograde planets beyond this point. For example, one popular view is that retrograde planets reverse the dignity of a planet. Hence dignified planets become less effective and ill dignified planets are exalted in influence.

The main traditional text supporting this view is the classical Indian astrological text known as the Phaladipika by Mantreshwara
"Even if a planet be in his sign of debilitation [fall in Western astrology], he is vested with full strength if he is retrograde...." The Phaladipika by Mantreshwara, 4:4''
This article by the Indian astrologer Komilla Sutton sets out a common Indian interpretation of what the Phaladipika means in regards retrograde planets:

http://www.komilla.com/pages/library/vakri_grahas.cfm

I personally relate much more to the stance of Hart DeFouw and Robert Svobodoa in their book Light on Life: An Introduction to the Astrology of India

Here is a rather lengthy quote which sets out these authors insightful take on retrograde planets:
Retrogression: Remember that Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus and Saturn sometime appear to move backwards against the background of the fixed stars . This seeming backward movement is retrogression. While combust planets are furthest from the Earth retrograde planets are nearest to us and so are said to be strong, on the analogy of the nearby being more influential than the faraway. This is also the case for the two inner planets, which alone amongst the grahas can be simultaneously retrograde and combust; Mercury and Venus when retrograde and combust are not as weak when they are when direct and combust. While it has become popular for Western astrologers to say that retrograde planets indicate ?karma?, in Jyotish every planet in the horoscope indicates past karmas, because the entire horoscope is a map of the natives karmas. When a retrograde planet shows a particularly strong karmic influence, it does so simply because it is strong.

Natural benefics when retrograde gain ability to influence beneficently, while natural malefics when retrograde gain ability to do so maleficently. Although a few statements in the classical works imply that a retrograde planet carries a weakening effect, there are many more statements that insist that retrograde planets are strong, though not necessarily good or beneficial; they simply strengthen whatever they indicate by house ownership and by natural signification in the horoscope, be it good or bad. Saturn as eighth lord when retrograde thus affects other planets and houses by its aspect and occupation in a much more malefic way than does Saturn as eighth lord when it is merely direct.

Because planetary effects are cumulative in Jyotish, a retrograde planet loses a certain amount of strength when debilitated. Such a planet can give some desirable results if it owns good houses, though these results will be less if it were retrograde and exalted. A debilitated and retrograde planets which owns bad houses likely to give adverse results. Phaladipika states that a debilitated but retrograde planet is equivalent to an exalted planet, a statement which is misunderstood to be literal truth. Our Jyotish guru taught us that Mantreshwara may have meant this to illustrate that retrograde planets, while strong (like exalted planets), still need to be evaluated in the overall context of the entire horoscope. This seems to be bourne out by experience.

Mantreshwara also says that exalted planets when retrograde act like debilitated planets, which is likely to be a cautionary statement for situations like this one: a retrograde malefic who owns detrimental houses may create detrimental results even when exalted because of the cumulative results due to the combination of exaltation and retrogression. That Mantreshwara?s statement is not true of all retrograde exalted planets becomes clear when we examine the horoscope of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa (see Chapter 12).

Like other texts written to be taught by a guru who would elucidate matters for the student, Phaladipika often does not bother to make clear ,unambiguous statements. Because this sort of interpretation can only be had from a guru, try as the uninitiated may to guess the meaning of such passages they will never be able to do so, for they lack that interpretive guide which the guru holds.

Light on Life: An Introduction to the Astrology of India, by Hart DeFouw and Robert Svobodoa, p270-272.
I would describe my own take on this subject as integrative as I have incorporated insights from hellenistic, medieval, Indian and modern astrology into my personal approach to retrograde planets.

I would accept your point vs the modern astrology on retrogrades that not all planets are personal in significance. Still dating back to Ptolemy and right through renaissance astrology we have the use of planets as general significators. In terms of potential Rx planets Mercury, Venus and Mars are used extensively in medieval and renaissance astrology as general significators. For example, I have heard Benjamin Dykes himself discuss the influence of Venus and Mars as significators of sexuality in men and women.

Ile wrote:
In Horary astrology (although these rules apply to natal too) we can see that planet applying toward another planet which is retrograde, can't push anything to the second (nor nature, power or management) since it is debilitated and can't hold to what was pushed to her. This is the doctrine of Returning, she returns what was pushed to her from the first, applying planet.
I dont entirely accept your take on medieval and renaissance horary that a planet being being retrograde has no power to allow perfection. It all depends on context of the question. Looking at several of William Lilly's comments in Christian Astrology retrograde planets can permit perfection which may come swiftly, unpredictably, or with excessive delay. Still, Lilly does give us examples to demonstrate it can indeed occur with retrogradation.

See these rather mixed references to retrograde planets in Christian Astrology taken from the Skyscript dictionary:
Retrograde

- From the Latin "to step backwards", this term is applied to the apparent backward motion of the planets through the zodiac as they decrease in longitude as viewed from the earth.

When significators are retrograde, delays, recurrences, returns to previous conditions and reversals of events may be shown.

Page references are given below for ways that William Lilly interpreted retrograde planets in Christian Astrology:

When the Moon applies to a good aspect of a Retrograde Planet, it brings the matter to an end one way or another speedily, and when least suspected - p.164

In timing, aspects involving retrograde planets occur more suddenly - p.198

The Lord of the 7th retrograde or Saturn retrograde in ascendant is a warning against judgement - p.122

Asc-ruler retrograde or otherwise afflicted can suggest shortness of life - p.130

The significator of lost item retrograde shows the return of it - p.468

A retrograde planet as a significator of a journey shows a need to return to the place of departure - p.160 & 406 (Barbara Watters notes that retrograde planets never seem to end up where they are going)

A sudden return when not expected - p.406

In questions concerning receiving or inheriting something, a retrograde planet shows that the querent will get what he wants but more suddenly than expected, or with some hindrance attached to it - p.211 & p.406

In illnesses, retrograde planets show a slow recovery and recurring illnesses - p.252, 284

In imprisonment, retrograde planets show a slow release - p.462, 419

In contests. the Lord of the Ascendant retrograde shows weakness of querent - p.373

In purchases. 10th-ruler retrograde shows the price will fall.

Two planets retrograde in an ill application is an argument of the question suddenly perfecting or breaking off - p.107

Two retrograde planets together shows something quick and unexpected - p.468

As something returning - p.357, 390, 406, & 468

As something happening suddenly - p.198, 211, 406

As a hindrance - p.107 (in the example both planets are retrograde)

As a prolongation of illness - p.252
We commonly see this operating in many types of horary such as lost property (recovery indicated) or relationship horaries (where a querant or partner are indicated returning to each other). I find Lilly's emphasis on the unpredictable nature of retrogrades very interesting. I tend to apply this to nativities too.

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

53
Mark, let me first tell you that it is very nice to argument with you on any topic of astrology. I appreciate your in depth answers and the tone of discussion. On many places I said that I learn from you and from all other astrologers on this wonderful forum. I am really grateful for being given the opportunity to discuss astrology with some of the best astrologers in the world here, cause I really love and enjoy studying this Art.
I do dispute your mainstream medieval assumption that all the astrological wisdom of the past supports your view that retrograde planets are 'weak'.
First of all, I didn't said that. Nor I assumed something in generality applying the "all" factor.

I said "later authors" clearly distinguishing the Hellenistic from Persian-Arabic and Medieval astrology. This is what I said:
Later authors regarded the retrogradation as affliction of the planet, among other factors of affliction
And,
Retrograde planet is listed into the "weaknesses" of the planets in almost all of the "lists" of traditional authors.
I intentionally applied the "almost" factor, because of the simple reason that I just can't be so arrogant to say that I have read it all. Even if I have read all we have in our disposal, I would still leave a room for the books lost and would be (hopefully) discovered in future.
Speaking of "lists", I was speaking about the lists of Abu Ma'shar, Bonatti, Sahl et cetera, who are clearly later authors and this is why I applied the term "later" in my answer. They have a lists of weaknesses of planets, retrogradation is listed there. Actually I am not quite sure Abu Ma'shar has it in his list of "Misfortune of the Stars" but it is clear what opinion he had from the quotes I provided, and I will add a few more later.

The thing is that you want to discuss the Hellenistic sources.
Let me first tell you that I am not of opinion that Hellenistic astrology was the "right one" and all later development was aberration of the same.
I think we need to be clear about the basic premise we have in mind when we approach the tradition.

About your quotes of Indian astrology, I can't comment, because I am not familiar with the same. However, I just want to make a note, that the Perso-Arabian authors were familiar with Indian astrology and this is obvious from many places in their work. So, just as you are familiar with some of the Indian text right now, so was Abu Ma'shar, and he still didn't take retrogradation lightly.

The quote from Serapio didn't mentioned anything about retrogradation. You draw conclusions from his saying that they are most bright when they are in opposition to the Sun and made a distinction of visual and symbolic astrology. Well, there is clearly distinction, since if Serapio says that planets are most powerful when they are in opposition to the Sun, Abu Ma'shar would not agree with him; he listed the conjunction, square and opposition to the Sun as "Misfortune of the stars". Was Serapio "better" and "more reliable source" then Abu Ma'shar? As I said, I don't view it like that.
But after all, what "powerful" means? And, what is the Greek word used for "powerful"? Powerful for what? Opposition to the Sun doesn't necessarily means "retrogradation". Ask Valens to see what he means about Mars opposite Sun in day charts, and Saturn in night charts. They bring ruins. So, they may be powerful, but they are powerful for destruction. And yet, we still don't speak about retrogradation here, not per se.

Valens is maybe not the earliest source, but he draws from many of the earlier or earliest like Abraham, Timaeus, Nechepso and Petosiris and others mentioned in his book.

So, if the example to which I referred (from Valens) is not quite clear that he took retrogradation as problematic, let me quote some more.
If Accomplishment is in opposition to Daimon, they bring failures of enterprises, loss, and damage, if they do not have benefics in conjunction. If the ruler of Accomplishment is in opposition to Accomplishment, it makes wealth useless. If it happens to be malefic, so much the worse. If benefics are retrograde, they do the same thing [that is, they turn the good into bad, which rings a bell to the example from book IV I already provided above], and in such circumstances they cause disasters.
(Riley p.39)
If the star is setting or proceeding with a retrograde motion, it will be harmful and hazardous. It will not be considered a benefic at all, even if it happens to be at an angle during this period.
(p.62)

And here it is the example of which we talked about:
His wealth was transitory [Schmidt's translation: 'didn't last"] because Jupiter was found to be retrograde and in its depression <Capricorn>.
So "retrograde" was part of the package. I think this is one of the examples which led Schmidt to the opinion that retrograde planet takes back what was given at a later time. I am not sure if he still holds this opinion. I read this at Curtis' site, but it is an article of an older date.

The word used in the last example is "aphairetikos" (???????????).
The exact same word was used in the previous examples.
Schmidt has translated it as "subtracting in numbers", but for the last example he says that what Valens meant here is surely a "retrogradation".
Riley translated it as simply "retrograde".

In the chapter of Phases and Transits of the Stars (p.82) Valens says:
If the stars are passed the first stationary point and are found to be retrograde, they delay expectations, actions, profits, and enterprises. In the same way they will be rather weak and thwarting when in opposition to the sun; they hold out only appearances and hopes.
Here is Valens disagreeing with Serapio. And it is not the first time, he disagrees with many of his earlier sources which he elaborates in Anthology.
Schmidt here translated it as "retrograde" instead of "subtracting in numbers" as he did previously. It is the same word though, aphairetikos.

There is one intriguing example which makes exception.
In book IX. in chapter "A Method Concerning Propitious and Impropitious Times and Lifespans with Respect to the Moon" Valens clearly says that this is the method "according to his own experience" instead of assigning the name of some of his predecessors behind it. I haven't studied the chapter thoroughly, but it seems that in the following passage Valens is speaking about Jupiter transit:
As I have said before and must now make clear, it is necessary to examine the star of Jupiter to see if it is in aspect from the right with the Ascendant (to the degree), i.e. whether it casts its rays within its (the Ascendant?s) degreesor beyond them. If Jupiter is ahead <of> and is found to have a retrograde configuration, its beneficial effect will be strong because it is being carried /338K/towards the position of the Ascendant. If it is behind <the>, it will be naturally better. If it is turned away from the Ascendant, it is bad. In so far as it beholds any aphetic place or the place of a star
or sign at the change of the chronocratorship in question, it must be considered a benefic. Whenever it leaves a sign or degrees in either a direct or a retrograde phase, it becomes malefic and harmful.
So, this is one of the exceptions where Valens speaks about retrograde planet having beneficent influence, because when it is in the left from the ascendant, by going retrograde, the planet is carried toward the ascendant. When it is from the right, Valens says it is naturally better because it is traveling toward the ascendant according to the secondary motion.

But this is a special technique and as I said, I haven't studied it thoroughly.

The point I am making with all these quotes (with exception of the last) is that retrogradation was regarded, symbolically, as something bad, something which brings problems, reversals et cetera. I am still not clear whether Valens regarded the retrogradation as weakness as to "how well" factor I mentioned above. Further investigation needs to be made on that subject.

But I will again quote some of the later authors to which I referred in the first place.

Abu Ma'shar in Libri Mysterium:
You have to know that these five stars have two different arrangements in their motion: they stop in order to retrograde after and then they stop again in order to proceed by direct motion afterwards; and each of these arrangements has its own meaning. In truth, the star that reaches the first station, by which I mean the station from which it will start to recede afterwards, is similar to an ill man whose strength is failing, his vigour and energy weakened by the illness.
This star is falling in vigor and energy, it is weakened as an ill man. Among other things, this is why I regard retrogradation-direct as to how well the planet will operate.
However, the superior stars are different in their receding and in their stations as well as in their burning and in other distresses: in fact ,when Jupiter recedes it is similar to a rich man subjected to a lot of bondage and therefore distressed or to a wise , sensible and careful man who submits to the mediocre anxieties of the rational part of his mind;as for Saturn it debases itself completely in its receding and it is similar to a slave who escapes and who is caught by his master again and put in chains.
Abu Ma'shar clearly distinguishes the symbolism of the inferior and superior planets. But notice how he uses the terms as "bondage", "chains" and etc., which again points us to the "how well" planet is operating.
Later in the text, Abu Ma'shar says that the stars are particularly offended if they are in a bad place or aspected by some malefic planet, which again brings us back to what Valens said about Jupiter retrograde in Capricorn.
But he says "particularly", which means that they are most offended in that way, and not free from affliction when the double factor is not implied.

When examining the Solar Revolutions Abu Ma'shar suggest us to pay particular attention if some planet is in good or bad state. What this means, to be in good or bad state? Abu Ma'shar gives a list of characteristics which make the planet to be characterized as being in 'bad state':
"But if the Lord of the Year is unencumbered with respect to the horoscope [at the beginning] of the nativity, and good, but impeded or bad in the revolution, again if it is retrograde, or under the rays, or that it would touch an alien place, or that it would be occidental, or that it will be conjoined to the malevolents by body or aspect, or that it appears outside of its own sect, and the like, it signifies that [the native's] operations in that year will be obscure, weak and infirm, according to the proportion of the misfortune touching it by the above-stated dispositions."
What "according to the proportion" means? I think that Abu Ma'shar refers to the amount of bad significations planet has. The proportion of Jupiter in Gemini (alien place) and out of sect is one proportion, adding retrograde and afflicted by malefic is yet, another proportion. So, retrogradation adds to the "proportions" of the negative significations, and it is an amplifier of the negative state of a planet.

Al-Biruni in his treatise on transits, testifies to us that Abu Ma'shar based his astrology in great deal on Valens. And one who want to take a close study into the both authors would find many similarities indeed.

I am not trying to add black and white thinking here, there are circumstances when the Rx of the planet is mitigated to some extent.
When they are in some rulership at the place in which they go retrograde, or while they recede the planet moves from a malefic toward a benefic star.
The stars cause offence particularly if in their receding they are in a foreign place or in their adversities or in their humiliations and especially if they are afflicted with a malevolent star in their receding: then, they are similar to an ill man whose strength is failing and who is seized by another bad thing at once.Indeed, the stars which recede alter their nature and therefore they complete their operations in a weak way.
Abu Ma'shar says that the planet in retrograde motion "alters its nature". So, if the planet in that receding is harmed in some other way of those which add to the "proportion", more badly corrupted her nature will be, and will operate in weaker ways. But if it is applying toward benefic and is not in an alien place, then, her corruption will not be in such measure as in the first case. In any case, it is a weakness, just how much will be, depends on the circumstances. And I am speaking especially about the first station, when planet goes retrograde. The second station was regarded somewhat better, as an ill man recovering from his illness.

But Abu Ma'shar is not the only "later" author who regarded retrogradation as weakness.

Ibn Ezra:
"Standing toward retrogradation is like a nervous person on account of fearing bad things in the future."
Sahl:
"A retrograde planet signifies disobedience and contradiction, and turning back and taking back, and diversity of discord".
Sahl here agrees with Schmidt and Valens, the "taking back" factor.

I think that the tradition I am trying to follow, is holding the retrograde planet as a planet which brings reversals and weakness.
So we have the quality and quantity factor applied here. I think the retrograde planet brings both, or signifies both.

There is an exception if that planet is going direct in 7 days after the birth. I think this was regarded as significant phase and somewhat strengthening factor, it clearly distinguishes that planet in the chart. Something similar as to the Phasis some planet makes 7 days after the birth. Ptolemy speaks of this as "intensification" factor. This is why, I think, Masha'allah, Umar, and other astrologers who elect the chart of city of Baghdad, left Jupiter to be retrograde in it, because he goes direct 7 days after.

I can't comment on Lilly's quotes since I haven't studied them closely and in the context.

In the end, I doubt that we will reach an agreement on this point. You are clearly following some different path then I am and we - regarding the retrogradation - have quite different viewpoint. I have enough 'proofs' in the tradition to rest my case regarding my practice. I found that applying the retrogradation symbolism as in the example with the two charts above, I am getting good results on a practical predictive level, and which is important for me, I am finding consistency with this approach into the tradition I follow.

Ile,

54
"...it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God."

Ile,

here is my difficulty with your jupiter direct/retro in the 2 charts given above. if one is going to isolate one factor - retrograde planet, verses direct planet, adding an additional consideration -sect, is no longer considering only the jupiter direct/retro in the same area of the chart - pisces/7th. if one believes sect is an important consideration, then one must also acknowledge jupiter is more favoured in a diurnal chart regardless of whether it is direct or retrograde. a more interesting example for me would be both charts diurnal, or nocturnal as opposed to one of each.. there are 4 possibilities while you've presented us with only 2. here are a few more examples of jupiter in pisces in the 7th house area and with pisces descending which removes the additional consideration of sect for the moment, all diurnal charts.

http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Hannah,_John
here is the correct wikipedia link for john hannah - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hannah_%28actor%29
i'm unable to find information on his wife, but perhaps someone more knowledge can comment. here is wikipedia link to a page on his wife joanna roth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joanna_Roth

this 2nd example is of someone born in the day with jupiter in pisces retrograde who happens to have married a university professor. while they may not be living in the lap of extravagance, they are fairly comfortable. - aug 25/62 8:30am nanaimo, canada.

my 3rd example is a different rising sign - gemini, with sag on the 7th ruled by a 10th house direct jupiter in pisces - also a diurnal chart..
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Sheedy,_Ally
while, i have no idea what her marital status is at the moment, one notes that she was married in 92 and divorced in 95.. i am not sure what a direct jupiter in pisces ruling over her 7th house has promised her, but it doesn't seem to have been a bed of roses.

finally a 4th example - steve carell born in the day with jupiter in pisces ruling the 7th, below the descendant line by about 18 degrees - still considered 7th house by wh signs.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Carell,_Steve
he is married to nancy carell - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Carell


these examples do not paint a clear and definitive answer to the significance of jupiter direct or retrograde.. they all share in being 'diurnal births however which puts jupiter in sect whereby we can treat the examples on an even footing by only including one side(diurnal) of this important chart consideration - sect.
Ile wrote:James,

In Astrology and especially in astrological analysis there always can be "If", "but", "what if", "if this is so" et cetera. If we take Venus in consideration, then we should take Part of Marriage into consideration too and its Lord; then we should take the Almuten of Marriage, and then Mars or Sun in women's charts and so on. Then someone with a modern approach would add midpoints or some other technique.
There is no end.

I think that the example I have provided is self explanatory. In the first chart Jupiter is in sect and stronger, in the second chart is contrary do the sect and weaker.
Yes I said "we can't judge anything on one factor only", but I didn't provided in depth analysis of their relationship status, just a general note.

And of course, there are sometimes some segments of the chart which can be judged on one factor only. For example, the student of Abu Ma'shar is testifying that Abu Ma'shar said to him, how a person with afflicted lord of 2nd never acquire significant wealth in life.
So, here it is, based on one factor only.

This kind of discussions can go on and on without any consensus in the end. I think that I have nothing else to add to what I have already said providing the example and the quotes previously. That is my take on the subject and my two cents in the discussion.

Ile,

55
Hello Ile,

Sorry I haven't got back to you yet on your excellent post. I am researching a few points myself. Its a busy week for my association with our AGM so I will probably not be able to post much until thursday.

James wrote:
ben dykes book 'introductions to traditional astrology' based on the work of abu ma'shar and al-qabisi has some interesting comments to make on retrograde planets pointing out that it is a bigger problem for the inferior planets then the superior planets, especially if they are also under the suns beams.
I have rather come to the same conclusion myself. There are firm astronomical reasons for that I intend to discuss. What page do they pick up that topic James? While being invisible under the beams will frequently be a consideration we also need to consider charts where Venus Rx or Mercury Rx are heliacally rising out of the Sun. I have an example of this I want to discuss.

Mark
As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity William Lilly

56
before i respond to marks post, i'd like to come back to an idea that gabe presented earlier that i continue to ponder since he mentioned it and that is the idea of the diurnal and nocturnal planets ruling over 2 signs, (with the exception of sun and moon) - one a diurnal element and one a nocturnal element. a quick example would be jupiter ruling over sagitarrius and pisces - sag a fire sign associated with the diurnal sect, while pisces - a water sign with its association with the nocturnal sect.

i don't know the history on the origins of sect, or the origins of the elements, other then recalling someone making a statement that the elements were a part of greek philosophy more then they were about astrology. i know how these types of topics can overlap, but knowing the beginnings of where these ideas is next to impossible to know.

how do we factor a planet of one sect ruling over an element of the opposite sect? does it lessen its strength in some way? that wouldn't seem to be the case based on the whole idea of the rulers of domiciles.. the only idea i can come up with is that the elements were given to the signs afterwards, or somewhere along the way after the idea of sect, but that is just my first thought.

mark - just seeing your post now - page 220 'introductions to traditional astrology'. i will respond to your comments on retrograde planets up above - later tonight.

57
mark,

i enjoyed reading your post with the numerous approaches taken on retrograde planets. i haven't read serapio's writing yet, but i would like to.
planets in opposition being stronger rings true for better or worse in my own understanding of astrology. that this phase can coincide with planets being retrograde strucks me as more incidental to the fact they are in opposition. i think planets in opposition are powerful signatures in a chart that can galvanize a chart.. whether the person is able to control the energy given off thru an opposition remains to be seen and is not so easy to tell as i see it.

while some might argue the Queen of England's chart doesn't have an opposition between saturn(retro) and the sun, they are in opposition by sign which is given as a traditional description for the opposition from time to time.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Eli ... of_England
her chart is very interesting as even if one opts to not consider the opposition, one is still left with a saturn retro conjunct the midheaven in a nocturnal chart. now, the general description for an out of sect saturn, retro in the trad lit i have read is not considered a favourable signature by a long shot - the opposite would be closer to the way i read it. how does one explain the masterful way in which she has led with grace, dignity and eminence in such a commanding way for such a long time? i would be curious to hear from those (who might appear quick to accept some of the popular ideas of traditional astrology) what the explanation is for her success. her part of fortune and any house positions off the planets don't appear to explain any of it either.. perhaps the part of spirit can explain some of it.

another example, although no longer an opposition but with a retro saturn in the midheaven area and out of sect might be julia roberts who is highly regarded by many.. how does one explain the fact saturn is retro, out of sect, in it's fall and in spite of all this (very negative according to much of traditional astrological literature) she seems to have found a way to rise above the descriptions we find in some of the astro literature.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Roberts,_Julia

for something slightly different, pope john paul 11's has an out of sect, in detriment, retrograde mars in the ascendant. perhaps someone can explain how any and all of the typical descriptions offered on retrograde planets, overlooking for a moment the other typically negative characterizations that go with this particular retro mars, explain just how bad a retro mars is supposed to be in pope john paul 11's example.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Pope_John_Paul_II

i am just not seeing how the descriptions in books connects with the people in real life. i appreciate the idea of planetary phase having some bearing on the 'power' of planets and how retrogression is supposed to be viewed as a 'negative' but i am just not seeing it in my own experience.

Mark wrote:
Going back to an older source than Valens we see retrograde planets described as actually strong not weak. In particular the astrologer Serapio of Alexandria (probably BCE) states:
He says that the stars are powerful when they are square or opposite the Sun, and if they are not in ineffective houses.

Porphyry the Philosopher Introduction to Tetrabiblos and Serapio of Alexandria Astrological Definitions p67 Translated from the Greek by James Herschel Holden
Robert Schmidt thinks Serapio was one of the earliest systematizers of hellenistic astrology.

Serapio therefore suggests that the Moon and superior planets are powerful in opposition to the Sun. We all know that the full Moon is seen as the most powerful state in its phase to the Sun. Equally, the superior planets Mars, Saturn and Jupiter are retrograde and at their brightest in the sky when opposing the Sun.

This view may well originate in a more visual astrology stemming from the Babylonians. Hence the focus on visual physical astrology being seen as more powerful than purely symbolic astrology. Thus the focus on physical phenomena like eclipses, full Moons, comets, and planets and stars when they are brightest in the sky are all seen as more powerful than purely symbolic factors.

In many respects the Indian astrological tradition adopted an approach to retrograde planets very similar to Serapio. However, they also extended the notion of retrogrades being powerful to the inner planets Mercury and Venus.

Mark

58
James,
here is my difficulty with your jupiter direct/retro in the 2 charts given above. if one is going to isolate one factor - retrograde planet, verses direct planet, adding an additional consideration -sect, is no longer considering only the jupiter direct/retro in the same area of the chart - pisces/7th. if one believes sect is an important consideration, then one must also acknowledge jupiter is more favoured in a diurnal chart regardless of whether it is direct or retrograde. a more interesting example for me would be both charts diurnal, or nocturnal as opposed to one of each.. there are 4 possibilities while you've presented us with only 2. here are a few more examples of jupiter in pisces in the 7th house area and with pisces descending which removes the additional consideration of sect for the moment, all diurnal charts.
You started a discussion on "day verses night chart / retrograde planets", I provided you with an example in which both are applied. I intentionally looked for a chart in which both factors are applied.
I always, constantly, repeatedly, accentuate the "part of the package" factor with the retrograde planets which would add to the proportion of debility.
here is my difficulty with your jupiter direct/retro in the 2 charts given above.
I will try to narrow you down, once again, my take on this.
if one is going to isolate one factor - retrograde planet, verses direct planet, adding an additional consideration -sect, is no longer considering only the jupiter direct/retro in the same area of the chart - pisces/7th.
First of all, why to isolate one factor? We are discussing Sect and Retrograde planets here. Retrograde planet ADDS to the proportion of the smaller amount of life benefits this girl received and signified by a benefic Jupiter in dignity in 7th (through relationships and husband). So, BOTH, sect and retrogradation add to the proportion of the amount of blessings signified by Jupiter.
if one believes sect is an important consideration, then one must also acknowledge jupiter is more favoured in a diurnal chart regardless of whether it is direct or retrograde
If one believes falling from an angle is important consideration, then one must acknowledge that Jupiter in the second chart is falling from an angle and the first chart is stronger in that regard regardless the sect and retrograde considerations. Do you follow my logic here? You are trying to isolate factors in one chart, and I am saying that all these negative significations ADD to the proportion. What are you trying to do here is you take sect into consideration but you are having problems taking retrogradation as a weakening factor. And I am saying that retrogradation would add to the weak proportions of the second chart in comparation to the first one.
another example, although no longer an opposition but with a retro saturn in the midheaven area and out of sect might be julia roberts who is highly regarded by many.. how does one explain the fact saturn is retro, out of sect, in it's fall and in spite of all this (very negative according to much of traditional astrological literature) she seems to have found a way to rise above the descriptions we find in some of the astro literature.
Now you are questioning not only the retrogradation, you are questioning the validity of sect consideration and of essential debility.
First of all, we look the celebrities on the screen and can't judge their life based on that. I provided you with an example of two persons who I know. How do we know whether Julia was happy in her career, and how do we know whether or not, that Saturn brought problems to her or not?
And, if retrograde planets and debilitated in the same time (as Valens points out) take back what was given (supposing the planet is in good house and supporting by some other factor as in this case Mars and Saturn are in mutual reception), how do we know that this would not happen later in life? How do we know that that Saturn would not bring infamy or some other problem with her status when would be activated through time governorship?


Let me now give my delineation of Julia?s chart regarding prosperity and career success, since you are alluding on that pointing out that Saturn in 10th by sign, which is actually in 9th by division.
I will first delineate the level of her rank because this is showing us how far this person would get in life, how much power and prosperity would gain.
Image
Valens says about the Exaltation Place (or Lot of Exaltation):
?If it is found to be in the Ascendant or at MC, especially at an angle relative to the Lot, it indicates a royal chart, provided the other stars and procedures point to a basis of greatness for the nativity. In addition, if the nativity is of high rank, and if the exaltation or the houseruler is favorably situated, the native will be exalted even beyond/to leadership, civil or royal office, or other distinguished positions of responsibility.?
In Julia?s chart we can see that Exaltation is in Aries in an angle relative to the Lot of Fortune! But also relative to Ascendant. So, taking into account that Lot of Fortune is also on a stake, we have pretty good testimony about her level of prosperity. Furthermore, Ruler of Exaltation is Mars on a stake in exaltation. It is true that he is falling from an angle but notice how the stakes of the nativity are filled with: 1) Fortune in 4th sign. 2) Exaltation in 10th sign. 3). Lord of Exaltation in 7th sign.
It is clear that the nativity is distinguished. She doesn?t have Caesar?s prosperity, but she has good amount of it and I will point out some further factors of why this is so.

Hephaistio says:
And it is necessary to examine whether the lord of the place at peak is well situated and sees its place.
We have Mars here, Lord of the Peak Place in exaltation and seeing the peak place, furthermore, gives reception to that Saturn (actually it is a mutual reception) and is on the stake in the nativity, and from Fortune! This Mars is also Lord of the Exaltation.

Valens:
If the basis of the nativity is average, and the ruler of the exaltation or the place itself is favorably situated, the native will be successful in the status to which he has been assigned: a craft, a science, or a talent. The houseruler itself and the sign will point out the type of good fortune to be expected, either from its own nature or from the sign in which it is located.
Mars is in 7th sign, Saturn is in 10th sign, and they are both in mutual reception, telling us that they would try to do each other a favor in the matters they signify. Mars rules 10th is in 7th (by sign) and Saturn rules the 7th and is in 10th (by sign), so they would try to give each other some hand in matters pertaining to relationships and career, partnership and status. And don?t forget, Mars is of the sect in favor.

What are her talents or craft to which Valens is referring?
MC is in term of Mercury, Mars Lord of MC is in terms of Mercury, the twelfth part of Mercury falls directly on MC, so we can see here that Mercury would be a part of her craft, and it will be related to something which involves communication, imitation, words et cetera. All that is part of acting!
We could add to this that Mars is with the star Princeps which is found in the spear-shaft of the Herdsman and is of the nature of Mercury according to Ptolemy. Cardan says something very interesting about the stars with 3rd magnitude. He says that they are analogous to Mercury and this is his logic:
The stars of first magnitude are similar to the Sun because of their brightness and pertains to power. The stars of 2nd magnitude are similar to Jupiter and pertain to wealth. The stars of third magnitude are similar to Mercury and pertain to intelligence. So, we have the accent on Mercury doubled from many sides here.

I know that someone would ask now how cold Mercury be part of her skills when he is retrograde and under the Sun's beams and she is so good at it?

This Mercury is not only retrograde but he is in his phase of evening sinking, that is, he entered the Sun's beams by retrograde motion few days before birth. Abu Ma'shar interestingly says that Mercury is not as distressed in this case as Venus:
Venus in particular is offended by receding: indeed, when it retrogrades, it gets burned, that's why we have a kind of double distress: one is given by receding, the other by burning. Mercury is also distressed when it recedes since it gets burned as well, but it is not offended by its receding and by the fact that it is burned as much as Venus.
I think that this is so because Mercury is somehow "used" to this because he does this much often then Venus, since Venus' elongation is greater than that of Mercury. Furthermore, Mercury is in its own terms so his distress is not as much as if he was in debility, or aspected badly by some malefic. Abu Ma'shar is telling us that Mercury is doing better in his sinking and retrogradation then Venus.
Sun and Mercury also receive strength from their ruler Mars who is exalted and on a stake, of the sect.

Furthermore, for the matters pertaining to career and native?s action, we need to look at the planets most closely aspecting the MC, and this is Moon ruler of asc! Moon is in Leo and aspects the MC by trine. She is without dignity there, but she is in the place of her King (the Sun!) and she is aspecting the MC by benefic trine aspect, the place of Sun?s exaltation. Moon is ruler of ascendant, so we can see here how her primary motivation is strongly connected to the matters of career. She has the motivation, she has the talent, she has the resources to do it, and she did it!

Where is Saturn retrograde in the whole this story? I don?t want to sound pessimistic or deterministic, but I think that his time is yet to come. Especially when he would rule the Ages of Man, after her 60?s. In my opinion, he would bring damage to her career and status. But this is a prediction, and we don?t know for sure if this would happen or not.

I would get back to Saturn, I just want to add something more, relating to the basic power of the nativity.

Hephaistio says:
For no small power occurs with the prenatal conjunction whenever it chances to be upon a pivot, especially the Horoscopos and the Midheaven.
(Hephaistio of Thebes ? Apotelesmatics, Book II, Schmidt trans., p. 53)
And Valens:
If the sign of the new or full moon or the ruler of this sign happens to be in the Ascendant or at MC, the native will be fortunate.
(Vettius Valens ? Anthologies Book II, Riley trans., p.38 )
Hephaistio says ?conjunction? but Valens includes conjunction and prevention as well (that is, new and full Moon?s preceding the birth).

Her prenatal preventional syzygy occurred at 24 Aries, so in the sign of MC! It is clear that the nativity is distinguished, talented and has a basic for prosperity. Still, Saturn would not stay up in the MC without giving problems. We should not mistake the prosperity with the problems inside and ruins which are part of that prosperity, because Valens says that the Fate is bringing some people up to prosperity only to put them down at a later time. And in the same manner, Fate is putting some people to the bottoms of the society only to raise them into power. That is life.
The problem is that I don?t know much about Julia?s life. In fact, I doubt that we can know enough to judge some finer points. But let me say that I notice a broken relationship patterns in her life. Her relationships and marriages last less then 3 years [with exception of the last one], and this is done on a repetitive basis. Her boyfriends are related to her career, most of them are actors or related to the movie industry, which is quite descriptive with the 7th - 10th relationship of those Mars and Saturn (Saturn in 9th by division is quite descriptive of her difficult time finding her religion and beliefs, but this is yet another subject).

She was briefly engaged to actor Kiefer Sutherland and they broke up 3 days before the wedding schedule. This is time in which that Saturn was Distributor and is pretty descriptive, since everything good or bad with 7th house or the planets in that house comes from Saturn ? the ruler of the house!

I would add that the retrogradation of this Saturn, in some other case would be even more problematic if the application was with Mars without reception! In this case, Mars is running toward retrograde Saturn, but he is giving him reception, so they try in some way to co-operate. Saturn retrograde and in Aries is more yielded to the corrupted altered nature (as Abu Ma?shar says), but Mars is here trying to welcome him in his domicile, so the harm of the altered nature by retrogradation, of this Saturn, is mitigated. Remember, everything good or bad is coming from the ruler of the house. Mars is ruler of 10th and is in exaltation, is regarding the cross of matter, is on the stake in the nativity and from Fortune ,is ruling the Exaltation! So, the bad qualities of Saturn are somewhat mitigated. And if we take divisions into consideration, Mars is in the house of its joy, and he has more dignity through this then any other planet placed there.

Of course, we can always have different approaches toward a certain chart. In fact, a Chinese astrologer can come and take a totally different approach with using some different tools then these I used.
The point I want to make is that retrogradation is a factor where the planet is more sensitive to yield its nature to corruption. The planet is weak, and if there is more factors for weakness, more bad will be, like an ill man stroked with another two or three bad things at once, as Abu Ma?shar says.

I am against the usage of retrograde planet as they would be somewhat ?distinguished? or ?prominent? in the chart. And I already said why I think this is wrong. My understanding of the continuity of the tradition [since the whole discussion was started with reference to a traditional author, Abu Ali] is that most of the authors, at least those I have read, do not hold this opinion that such a planet is 'distinguished and prominent" or that "adds to the prominence" as Mark pointed out; but that it is prone to altering her nature and corruption. It is weak. In some cases it is a cause of reversals. In some cases more in some cases less, and all this according to the "proportion". But if we put the tradition aside, then anything is possible and acceptable.
Hello Ile,
Sorry I haven't got back to you yet on your excellent post. I am researching a few points myself. Its a busy week for my association with our AGM so I will probably not be able to post much until thursday.
Mark, take your time. :'
Last edited by Ile on Mon Feb 11, 2013 10:51 am, edited 5 times in total.

59
Ile,

first off - thanks for sharing. my intent on this thread is multiple. i wanted to see if anyone had come across any bias favouring the diurnal sect over the nocturnal sect, which is something i am picking up ( between the lines) in the literature that i have been reading. i also wanted to discuss a similar dynamic with regard to retrograde planets and what is more easily recognized as a clear bias in favour of direct verses retrograde planets. although it is not easy to keep these two topics separate, i think it is best in discussing one factor only, so have the issue of sect not also another factor. this is my rationale for giving 4 examples where they were all diurnal charts - some with jupiter retro ruling the 7th and some with jupiter direct ruling the 7th. of course there will be other factors as you pointed out when i first asked for more details on the 2 examples you gave. for privacy purposes i understand why you felt the need to leave this information out as well, although a lot of people can and are born on the same day.

on the other hand i gave 3 charts with an out of sect planet prominent in an angle. it was really enjoyable reading your overview on julia roberts from the point of view of using the different lots, explaining why roberts is as well known as she is, while also not ruling out that the shite' might hit the fan in her life at a later date.. she is about 45 now. anything is always possible. the additional information on the chart was helpful for you, wasn't it? without it, one might be hard pressed to comment only on the retro saturn in her chart. that you might have greater difficulty explaining the other 2 examples of out of sect retro planets in an angle remains to be seen, but regardless your overview on roberts was enjoyable and informative. i note that you made no comment on the examples of jupiter all in the same sect with some retro and some not. perhaps these examples don't conform to your ideas around retrograde planets influence on a chart.

as for following 'the tradition', cutting out 2 or 300 years - the most recent years and proceeding to fall back on the previous 2500 or however many is an interesting thought... of course there are different descriptions that cover some of this - hellenistic, arabic, medivial and perhaps others i am less aware of. what i note is how i base what i use on what my experience has been.. how much of this is based off what someone has told me in a book is a very subjective question that it would be hard to answer. i note in ben dykes book - persian nativities 1 where he has translated the work of masha 'allah - book of artistotle' masha'allah devotes the 1st part of the 1st of 4 books within this book - the very beginning of his work essentially) to "effects of the stars; disagreements among astrologers." clearly even back in the 8th or 9th century when this book was written following 'the tradition' was be no means a 'slam dunk' by any stretch of the imagination. the tradition was and will always be subject to change and differences of opinion. this is as i think it always will be and i think this is a great thing. that 2 astrologers don't agree on the nature of retrograde planets i think is also a great thing. ultimately one is forced to think and experience these nuances for themselves directly thru the astrology, as opposed to following the guidelines in a book..

i am sure you and i and everyone else are doing this to the best of our abilities. ebertin and witte who worked with midpoint pictures for example(which i seem to recall you negating on one of your posts) would have been doing the same thing to the best of there abilities.. that so much '''traditional''' astrology is being re-introduced after such a long hiatus means a number of things, but hopefully it doesn't mean someone can get up on their high horse and claim to be following 'the tradition' while negating others in very recent history from doing the same.. as i see it all these individuals worked hard to come to a better understanding, whether they offered innovative ideas, or fell back on tried and true ideas from those of the past.. we are always doing this and i think it is such a wonderful aspect of human nature - to come up with new and innovative ways to understanding or practicing the art of astrology.

i am keen to know and practice what i learn from these recently introduced books as well, so we are on the same page with many here at skyscript. that i am not interested in dissing anyone who has a different approach may or may not matter to you or others. i would prefer to embrace different approaches, or at least be interested and curious enough to know whether they have merit. the issue of sect is a big one and one i had thought about before robert hands book on this in the 90's.. it seemed like a simple enough observation, but one that i hadn't read about anyone discussing previously. i will save some of this for another thread which i plan on doing. the issue of retrograde planets and how different astrologers view this is another fascinating topic for me personally. i don't abide by what others say about this, or only in so far as it rings true for me. i was thinking of this topic of retrograde planets in opposition when re-examining the solar return for pope benedict XV1 just yesterday as it runs right into our conversation here too.


i appreciate the work you put into your posts and the inclusion of quotes from various authors that have something to say in supporting your views, or generally. keep it up and thanks again for sharing.