Not quite....
4th house for present place of living.
7th house for new city/new place of residence.
Now if it's an international move...I am not sure if that changes houses. I don't think so.
CosmicBeing said:
This is from frawley's method. There might be another method that I am unsure of...but if it is international moving I am not sure if that would change.
Actually it isn't quite Frawley's method.
Frawley gives the current location - where I am now - to the First House and the potential new location - where I'm thinking of moving to - to the Seventh. He cites this as the basis for any question on choosing between two alternatives.
The use of the fourth for where I am now and the seventh for the new location is based on turning the chart. The seventh is the fourth house from the fourth. I've seen this used on one or two websites but I don't think this is sound reasoning. Let me explain why.
If I have two sisters and ask a question about their attitude to something, using the third house for sister 1 and the third from the third, the fifth, for sister 2 makes sense because the fifth signifies my sister's sister.
But the fourth from the fourth does not signify my potential new home. it might signify the land that comes with my home, or the land that I'm thinking of buying to add to my home.
Coming back to Frawley. His method is reasonably sound. It is a simplified version of a very old way of answering this question of 'Should I stay or should I go?' and that method originated, as far as we know, with Sahl ibn Bishar.
Using Bonatti's version of Sahl's method, there are three possible stages:
Stage 1: Look at the Moon and see what planet it's separating from, if that planet is a malefic, then it's better to move to the new place. If that planet is a benefic, then it's better to stay. Sahl modifies this to allow for a separation by trine or sextile from malefics where there is reception and the malefic is is oriental, direct and strong and movement to a benefic that is impeded, by square or opposition and there is no reception, then it's better not to do what you want to do, even if it is for good. He then says that if the Moon is separating from such a benefic and moving to such a malefic then it is better to move.
Stage 2: If there's a business deal involved, such as buying a new house, then look at the Lord of the Ascendant. If it is separating from malefics and moving to benfics, then the answer is go and buy the property. If the Lord of the Ascendant is separating from benefics and moving to malefics then the advice is don't touch the deal. If the condition of Lord 7 is better than that of Lord 1 then it's better to move and do the deal. (This is the bit that Frawley uses)
Stage 3: If the balance between Lord 1 and Lord 7 is such that you can't make a decision, then take the degree of the Ascendant and add to it the difference in degrees between Lord 1 and Lord 7. Where that point lies, assess the condition of the Lord of the Sign and make your judgement from that planet.
Note:
Sahl only introduces Lords 1 and 7 if there's a business opportunity. The use of the first and seventh for buying and selling is well established in horary. As moves from one location to another almost certainly involve some sort of business deal - buying or renting property. Frawley's use of this section is perfectly justified.
If it's just a trip with no business connected, then Stage 1 is about as far as it goes.