How to Understand Whether the Direction Will Take Effect

Primary directions only sometimes produce events. There is a rule: "The more the significator and the promittor create/destroy things, the greater the probability that they will produce an event."

For example, if Mars, the natural significator of wounds and violence, were in a bad celestial state (debilitated, affected by evil aspects, conjunct violent stars, etc.) and were in the 8th house, it would signify violent death. And if it also ruled the 7th house of conflicts, with which it has affinity, it would further enhance the prominence of violent death at the hands of an enemy.

And if Mars also ruled the 1st house of life, to which violent death is adverse, it would further intensify the destructive effect of Mars. Therefore, Mars is a bright significator of violent death because it has many similar indications.

The more a planet unites in itself an incompatible (celestial and terrestrial) nature, the less it is inclined to produce something noteworthy in primary directions. For example, if the same Mars were in triplicity, ruled the 3rd house, and was also the 5th house, it would neither be a bright malefic nor a bright benefit, and it would not be particularly associated with the meaning of the 3rd and 5th houses. So it cannot act against these houses, bor it can support them. Mars is indifferent to the houses.

An example of an effective significator and promittor in directions

Let's provide an example of an effective direction that undoubtedly brings an event.

Significator

Suppose we have a significator - the MC in Cancer. When the significator is a cusp, we evaluate its effect based on its ruler. Let the ruler of the MC (the Moon) be in fall in the 6th house. The natural meaning of the Moon does not coincide with or oppose the sense of the 10th house.

We can only see a weak similarity between the Moon and the 10th house: the Moon is naturally benefic, and the 10th house is naturally favorable.

However, although the Moon is a natural benefic, its unfavorable terrestrial and celestial states make it an accidental malefic. The accidental nature of the Moon is now opposite to the favorable nature of the 10th house of fame and success. Here, the Moon signifies exiles, captivities, serious illnesses, etc., in the worst forms, since by its position, the affairs of the opposite 12th house condition the Moon. All these particular significations contradict fame and success.

In addition, let's assume that the presence of the detrimental Mars in Cancer afflicts the 10th house. Moreover, let the cusp of the 10th house receive a square from the malefic. It further weakens the potential for success.

With such indicators, the MC as a significator does not promise fame. On the contrary, it effectively destroys or cancels it. Even if the best promittor comes to the MC in a particular direction, it will only create episodic and short-term success but will not bring fame. That is, the MC is a bright significator of failures in actions.

Promittor

Let's give an example of a bright promittor. Suppose the dexter square of Mars is the promittor for events in the 10th house. Let's examine the meaning of the square of Mars and, most importantly, whether its action is consonant or opposed to the sense of the 10th house of success.

• The natural meaning of the planet, casting an aspect. Mars is a natural malefic whose nature tends towards conflict rather than the sympathies of people necessary for recognition. Its nature is adverse to the affairs of the 10th house.
• The celestial condition of the aspecting planet:
  • Essential dignity. Mars is in a detriment in Cancer, which makes Mars even more toxic and conflictive, thus increasing the dissonance with social recognition.
  • Close aspects. Let's assume that Mars receives a square aspect from Saturn, the ruler of the 8th house. It adds even more destructive energy to Mars. Mars now becomes very dangerous and is most opposed to the 10th house.
  • Conjunction with stars. Let's assume that Mars is conjoined with a destructive star on the circle of positions, on the equator, or on the zodiacal circle. It further strengthens the evil of Mars and creates dissonance with the meaning of the 10th house.
  • The terrestrial state of the aspecting planet and its dispositor. Furthermore, suppose Mars rules the 12th house of exile, disease, and secret enemies. It is also contrary to the nature of the 10th house. Neither exiles nor enemies contribute to recognition and fame—on the contrary, they harm them. The dispositor of Mars, the Moon, is in the 6th house, which further exacerbates the situation.
  • The nature of the aspect. The promittor is the square of Mars. The square further strengthens the evil of Mars.
  • The sign and house where the degree of the aspect falls. Let's assume that the degree of the square falls in the 7th house, which shares the same meaning with Mars—open enemies. Moreover, the square of Mars falls in Taurus, where Mars is in exile. It makes battles and conflicts exceptionally destructive. Brutal conflicts, open enemies, and legal disputes oppose success.

As you can see, Mars' square (a promittor) is a very strong malefic, contradicting the matters of the 10th house. It brings disgrace and loss of status due to conflicts and opposition with enemies. When the primary direction brings this malefic to the MC, which itself shows failures in actions, this direction will bring destruction.

The directions will give the event easily and without delay, if Mars rises before the Sun and after the Moon, moves quickly, and is located close to the ecliptic.

But what if Mars were not such a prominent malefic? Or what if Mars promised destruction, but the MC was indifferent to the success? What combinations are possible in this case?

The Effect of Direction and Promittor-Significator Combinations

Given a promittor and significator, there are six possible combinations:

1. They both agree in conferring the affairs in question. The effect will be prominent.
2. They both agree against the affairs in question. The effect will be prominent.
3. The significator acts in one way, and the promittor acts the contrary. The promittor has the last word. It produces a moderate effect according to its action.
4. They are both ineffective in bringing good or evil into the affairs in question (they are both indifferent). Middling good and bad at the same time, or nothing will happen.
5. The significator is indifferent to the affairs, but the promittor effectively produces good or evil. The promittor has the last word. It will produce the effect it promises.
6. The significator effectively acts, while the promittor is indifferent. Nothing prominent will happen.