Tanit3333 wrote:

If the SO is mercury though she is combusted by the sun so she is incredibly weak in this moment of time. Can we draw the insight that things are rocky at this present time or that a part of him is hurting her right now?

Mercury often lords young people and could represent his children. My own pull is that Sun is the spouse but I could be misreading it. These planets are intercepted in his house. Intercepted planets are like a hidden house - a house within a house. This emphasizes that the querent is not aware of his personal life and is jumping to conclusions. The Sun is the strongest planet in the chart and lords the quesited so I am not seeing this as a weak relationship. Again, these are fixed signs too, which suggests lack of change. The fact that the querent is so debilitated helps me with this judgment call though since it suggests she is in error.

Also, the sun doesn't receive mercury outside of the conjunction. There's a good aspect but not additional reception. According to Bonatti though that's enough to hold them together, right?

Even if you took Sun as the quesited and Mercury as the spouse, Sun does of course receive Mercury in a sign of Sun's domicile and yes Bonatti would say reception is not required for conjunction.

The other school of thought I've seen is that the significant other is represented by a conjunction, right now the sun and mercury have a 0 degree separating (but considered applying) conjunction. I would assume this would have to be his partner.

They are separating and not considered applying but it is a partile conjunction, which suggests a current influence and not ending (IMO), although an approaching new moon chart (waning) is generally unfavorable for a querent as far as a positive change or moving forward with something. It suggests a conclusion to a matter rather than beginning something (Moon increasing in light is usually more favorable for a question on romance or anything where we want to gain something).

The fact that an incorrect time was posted and a sidereal chart was used makes me feel iffy about this chart but I am just calling what I am seeing.

Whether or not he is moving forward with divorce, which seems unlikely given the fixed indicators and intercepted planets in aversion to the ascendant and the ascendant lord, the querent shows zero interest in this chart for the querent, so it is kind of a moot point in the end, assuming the chart is radical.

The only thing remotely saying something for the querent is Mars received Sun/Mercury and is translating their light to Saturn. However, square aspects between two malefics are pretty negative, although Mars does receive Saturn. To me this seems to be talking about the communication that was probably misinterpreted. Saturn is retro anyway and aspects with a retro planet tend to show reversals or change of heart. They are not very good at bringing a matter into fruition. Mars-Saturn square is also what we call "frustrated desires" whether that is for either or both parties.

Well that isn't true. You are conflating Indian astrology with the sidereal zodiac. There are a few of us around who use the sidereal zodiac and most of the standard techniques you'll find in early Traditional astrological texts.

By the way, Saturn is not in bad dignity. Its dignified but RX.

A Retrograde Planet, or one in his first station, Significator in Question, denotes ill in the Question, discord and much contradiction.

If the Fortunes signifie any thing, and are cadent, or ill placed in Dignities, or behold not the Ascendant, or are Retrograde, then are they impedited, and shall performe little, if not received

Isn't the sun automatically the co-ruler of the man? Or is this not definitive?

Tanit3333 wrote:

Well that isn't true. You are conflating Indian astrology with the sidereal zodiac. There are a few of us around who use the sidereal zodiac and most of the standard techniques you'll find in early Traditional astrological texts.

We have a sidereal section clearly defined. Again, this isn't the sidereal section.

If you want to ban the use of the sidereal zodiac here, then do it, but, please,, unlike the Traditional forum and Tom's censorship, acknowledge that it isn't a decision based on either historical or contemporary practice, but rather the views of the particular moderator.

Tanit3333 wrote:

Isn't the sun automatically the co-ruler of the man? Or is this not definitive?

Deb Houlding states (via her research) that the Sun and Venus are read on their own (how they relate to one another only) as a descriptive factor in romance horaries. That is not the same thing as a co-ruler. Both planets can lord other things in a chart.

If you follow Frawley that is a different, I believe (I have not followed his own techniques, which he developed). He might allow them to perform perfection, if you use his techniques.

Those of us who respond use our own schooling and you can agree or disagree with them. Ultimately, this is your delineation as the astrologer of the chart. It sounds like you agree with me anyway regarding result, regardless of methods.

Tanit3333 wrote:

If you want to ban the use of the sidereal zodiac here, then do it, but, please,, unlike the Traditional forum and Tom's censorship, acknowledge that it isn't a decision based on either historical or contemporary practice, but rather the views of the particular moderator.

Did I ban anything? I said there is a sidereal section for sidereal charts and there is. I didn't realize that is a form of oppression for you or anyone else.

The fact of the matter is that Stellar Tiggy is likely to end up talking to herself if she only posts sidereal charts here. I have yet to see you offer a sidereal reading.

Maybe post something constructive instead of criticizing everyone else? Being a moderator is a thankless task as it is. If you would like to volunteer, help yourself.