DDonovanKinsolving wrote:To open up the discussion on the difference between Sidereal Solar Returns proper and precessed Solar Returns.
It may be helpful first to discuss what a Tropical Solar Return is. From a Siderealist perspective, a Tropical Solar Return is not at all a return of the Sun to its natal position. In reality, it is the return of the Sun to the natal arc between the Sun and the Vernal Equinox. Once that little shift of perception is thoroughly absorbed, I think it may be easier to proceed.
General Discussion on Solar & Lunar Returns matters for which a specific forum does not exist
7 posts • Page 1 of 1
Jun 22, 2015
QUID VOLIS ILUD FAC
DDonovanKinsolving wrote:Or to put it another way, it is the phase angle return of the Sun and Vernal Equinox.DDonovanKinsolving wrote:In reality, it is the return of the Sun to the natal arc between the Sun and the Vernal Equinox.
Since the Vernal Equinox moves through the sidereal zodiac, it follows that the phase angle point of the Sun moves also (i.e., precesses.)Arena wrote:I was not sure at all what would be the difference, but I think I am getting closer now.
A Precessed Solar Return is a Sidereal Solar Return, which is then presented in Tropical longitudes. In this case, if you compare the longitudes of the natal Sun and the Precessed Return Sun in the Tropical Zodiac, they will be different. They are, of course, different by the amount of precession.
There are many problems with this, not least of which is consistency in the framework one is working in. Another is evaluating orbs of contacts. Precession-correction in longitude is certainly an option if one should choose it; it's mandatory for working with Right Ascensions and Declination and the methods that depend on them. It must be carried through consistently, however. Solutions could be precessing the natal planets to match the current SVP. Or the reverse, correcting present longitudes to the natal SVP. To my mind, this whole rigmarole keeps missing the point that the Sidereal Zodiac is the basis for the raison d'etre of the SSR to begin with. Just speaking for myself, the practical inconsistencies of working with SSRs this way are too complex to bother with, and the logical inconsistencies give me a headache.
QUID VOLIS ILUD FAC
SteveS wrote:Quoting Jim’s words from his book ‘Interpreting Solar Returns’:
A Solar Return computed in the Tropical Zodiac without correction for Precession will be six hours in error by age 18, twelve hours in error by age 36, and an entire day off by the time a person attains the age of 72.
As we can see/understand, this makes a huge difference in the correct clock TIME for a Solar Return.
All we have to do is understand the vast difference in our Return angles and our Return Moon’s to see this astronomical timing difference withour 24 hour clocks. To see this timing difference in your current Solar Return, compute your Tropical Solar Return without correcting for Precession and then compute your Tropical Solar Return correcting for Precession. Solarfire allows one to compute Tropical Solar Returns correcting for Precession, or not. Note the difference in the angles and your Solar Moon’s. Of course, when we compute our Solar Returns in the Sidereal Zodiac it will match the clock TIME of the one computed in the Tropical Zodiac correcting for Precession. This normally confounds the Tropical Astrologer who continues to bury their heads in the sand with this clock TIME difference with true astronomical/astrological understanding.
QUID VOLIS ILUD FAC
Sep 23, 2015
Arena wrote:Back to this topic again since I do want to get my head around it. I am not sure however how to calculate tropical SR's with precession in Solarfire, I have to explore that in order to compare it to SSR's. I have been reading about tropical astrologers who are insisting on using precession in their SR's and emphasizing that this is the only correct way to do it and is more accurate. What I am now wondering about is that they must know that this is a sidereal method? And I am also wondering if there is maybe a little bit of difference to the chart if they are not using sidereal natal to start from? I thought it would be better to start from a sidereal framework to have the planets in the "right" place according to this method? Does it not matter? Will the tropical precessed SR's deliver the exact same results as the SSR's?
Bob Marker f.ex. (http://www.bobmarksastrologer.com/19.1Birthdays.htm) writes about precessed SR's being more accurate, but I have not seen any of them talk about casting a mundoscope of that SR's to get a more accurate picture of the placement of planets (angularity).
Bob is writing on how he advices people to travel for their birthday to get a different SR. But I would think that one has to stay in that location to get that effect for the whole year. Would you agree on that? It is not enough to just travel for a week around your birthday and expect your SR to remain on those relocated angles when you get back home. I remember Steve has written in this forum that he tried this, but found that the effect only lasted while he stayed at the relocation. But I think I've also seen something from Jim where he thinks that those relocated angles might have some kind of effect even after you get back home.
I would also like to add a question in here about whether one can travel at a later date (not just around his birthday) and then get the effect of a relocated SSR in that place if he stays there? I would think it doesn't really matter if you are there on your birthday, the angles of the SR will move according to your move around the wolrd.
I can also see that Bob is using demi-solar as well. He states that SR lasts only for 6 months and then another "half-SR" takes place.
QUID VOLIS ILUD FAC
Jim Eshelman wrote:Start with a Tropical natal. Do a Solar Return as normal, but check the box that says "Prec. Corr."Arena wrote:I am not sure however how to calculate tropical SR's with precession in Solarfire, I have to explore that in order to compare it to SSR's
As a test that you got the right result, it should be for the exact same moment as the Sidereal Solar Return. It should have no difference whatsoever except the zodiac it's shown in.
Yes, because they are really using the Sidereal Solar Return without having to take the horrifying, catastrophic step of actually using the Sidereal zodiac. <g>I have been reading about tropical astrologers who are insisting on using precession in their SR's and emphasizing that this is the only correct way to do it and is more accurate.
BTW, just as a technicality, this is often wrongly referenced as "adding precession," though it's really "deleting precession."
Some do, some don't. Don't presume that astrologers (especially those that practice Tropical astrology as usually taught) necessarily have technical skills. In many cases, they know what they are doing; in many others, they are simply following directions.What I am now wondering about is that they must know that this is a sidereal method?
The difference comes when you compare it back to the natal chart for transits. These will be displaced by precession. However, if the calculations are done right, there should be no difference at all in the exact moment the chart occurs. That's the whole point.And I am also wondering if there is maybe a little bit of difference to the chart if they are not using sidereal natal to start from?
Sure. Great way to spend a holiday. Pop over to where the SSR and current SLR look good at the moment. SKippy Pyle wrote in American Astrology around '75 about how she did this when a whole pile of Jupiters piled on her Solunars angles for Las Vegas, so she headed there and won a miraculous amount of money one evening. The main point is that, like a natal horoscope, the "birthplace" of the SSR (where you are when it occurs) is permanent, the chart is in constant relocation as you move about.I would also like to add a question in here about whether one can travel at a later date (not just around his birthday) and then get the effect of a relocated SSR in that place if he stays there?
That would be overstating it. The Demi is valid, but nowhere near as strong as the full solar and, in any case, doesn't displace it. (Is he interpreting them by the same criteria we do? If not, then that might explain the discrepancy.)I can also see that Bob is using demi-solar as well. He states that SR lasts only for 6 months and then another "half-SR" takes place.
QUID VOLIS ILUD FAC
Arena wrote:Ok thanks Jim. I think it is getting more clear to me now.
Yes, Bob seems to use the DSR as the chart that takes over 6 months after your birthday, at least I read this from his writings on his website. He suggests people to relocate for good birthday angles, and then again on DSR, 6 months later. I would think the SR to be the stronger chart and just look into the progressions of the Moon and the angles (don't you look into progressions of the angles of the SSR as well?) because if a Demi-solar would be just as strong as a period chart, why not just the lunars as well? I do not see the lunar charts as very strong in my own case yet. The SSR prevails to me as a period chart. Maybe that's because I just want to keep things a bit simple while learning
Interesting ... did you notice if she stated which angles were activated - just any angle?SKippy Pyle wrote in American Astrology around '75 about how she did this when a whole pile of Jupiters piled on her Solunars angles for Las Vegas, so she headed there and won a miraculous amount of money one evening.
In technical terms for me to play around a bit - is this just done by casting an SSR and then relocate that chart to different places? And maybe run the world map to see where planets fall on angles? Just the same as with the natal when relocating?
QUID VOLIS ILUD FAC
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest