So jupiter in aquarius, in detriment of sun...sun in virgo, in detriment of jupiter.
They "hate" each other. Can this give a positive outcome if jupiter is querent and sun is quesited?

But how do you think should this give a positive outcome being there neither perfection of aspect between the signficators nor a mutual reception?

There is no reception by debility as J.Frawley is repeating to postulate. How can planets receive one another in a place they don't have any power in that means when this place is their detriment or fall?

Frawley is giving no explanation at all (to my knowledge) for his claim and that is not enough as he wants to affirm against all classical teachings.

Johannes

Nothing to do with Frawley.. I saw a chart on another forum about an exam. The poster claims her sister passed the exam, but the sister and the exam had the significators described above. How did she pass? I don't think she did.

So you are saying that mutual reception by detriment or fall doesn't exist?
Great! All my lovers are really into me after all : )

Hi PallasAthene,

First off, I agree with Johannes, "reception by debility" is not found in old sources and appears to be a Frawley-an innovation. It never made any sense to me.

Now, it would help if there were some chart data, or a chart for that matter. While the significators, if they are in fact the proper ones, are averse to each other, the Moon might be bringing the matter to a successful conclusion. So I'd say that it could be possible, but not through these significators.

OK.. do you mean that for reception to occur, the planets must behold each other.. and with debility this is impossible?

So a more accurate description would be a comparison of dignity? To see what the significators "think" of each other? (This may well be abhorent to the scholars of the forum, but for me as a learner, the personification helps).

Aspects are obvious in the chart, receptions need to be checked with a table, at least at my level. It seems a bit strange to just ignore a correlation/relationship.. a link. Sun is in the sign of jupiter's detriment and vice versa.. surely that has significance?

I can't really post the chart as it isn't mine, I just replied on a different forum. Moon is at 5 leo and as you are probably aware of the current degress of sun and jup, is not translating. Nor is any other planet. Nor is there a collection of light. It is a current chart and libra rises 9:27.

You are right, Gabe, perhaps the Moon or other signficators have saved the judgement. I would be very curious to see some of these charts! Can you produce please one or another, PallasAthene?

Johannes

Johannes the details are above.

PallasAthene wrote:OK.. do you mean that for reception to occur, the planets must behold each other.. and with debility this is impossible?

The problem whether for reception there is the need of an aspect is not the problem here. The problem is, that it is a contradiction to speak of reception as to debility. You can receive someone in your house. But you cannot receive someone in a house that doesn't belong to you, where you are strange. As Gabe suggests, no one of the ancients would define reception in the strange way Frawley does (who else, by the way?).

PallasAthene wrote: I can't really post the chart as it isn't mine, I just replied on a different forum. Moon is at 5 leo and as you are probably aware of the current degress of sun and jup, is not translating. Nor is any other planet. Nor is there a collection of light. It is a current chart and libra rises 9:27.

Sorry, I had not yet read that you can't quote the chart. So this is your decision. But it is very difficult to argue by examples, you can't schow . . . As Gabe has already said, it remans still possible that the choice of the significators was problematic or the Moon did more than has been aware of.

Johannes

So should we call it rejection in this case ?

Obviously, if we had any aspect...

Looking at the pseudo-chart that your info provides (Asc of about 9 degrees of Libra, Moon at 5 degrees Leo, all other planets as they are now), this person is giving Jupiter to her sister and then Saturn as her exam by being ruler of the 3rd from the 3rd? Honestly, sounds quite shaky to me. Turning and re-turning houses is a quick way to madness.

By whole sign, taking Venus (possibly the Moon, but not quite for this) for the sister (yes, the querent is asking about the sister, but through this she is identifying with her and thus I would give the sister to the rising sign and its lord). I feel comfortable giving the exam to the Moon as she is domicile lord of the 10th sign, because the exam is something she must take, or do, and thus the success of her action is the question here, though I would understand that many would take the lord of 9th, by sign Mercury (which has the benefit of being a natural significator of studies and learning), as the lord of the matter. Those wishing to engage in perversity can take the 9th from the 3rd, the sign of Leo, and make the Sun lord of the quesited, but my degeneracy only goes so far.

Looking at the perfection of aspects, the Moon will next aspect Jupiter, a strong sign of successful completion of the matter (though with he being retrograde, I wonder if she passes the exam but ends up leaving the class or changing majors or whatever is more appropriate). Then the Moon will conjoin Venus, so her passing the exam makes sense to me. Let's see what Johannes and others say.

Thanks for your input GR. I obviously need to pay more attention to the moon in my judgments. Your response has been most helpful.

Johannes, I do apologise if it was possible to read my post as argumentative as that was not my intention. I'm here to learn not argue. And it seems that I've stumbled over something important. Since Frawley appears to be questionable, could you recommend another modern writer to a beginner? I have his Sports Astrology book so maybe I picked up this idea there. But for any questioning mind, wouldn't this relationship cause pause for thought?

As mentioned already, it seems like a mutual..something.. that should be noted. Because it is mutual, complimentary, an exact crossed over pairing. As you can see I'm struggling to get my point across. But is it that difficult to see how a student would fall over here, or to see the pattern that I can see? I'm a student not an expert and it's through our mistakes that we learn. As said, my aim was not to "argue" any point but verify, or not, my thinking/technique. So please be gentle with me : )
And a truly mutual reception ie by 2 planets receive each other by the exact same dignity, be it rulership, exultation, term etc.. seems to me to be a relatively rare occurance. It doesn't happen every day, or in every chart, far from it. So, it is the "mutual" that makes me stop and stare.

I still don't get why it is such a contested idea?

There are lots of cases where you could be in a bricks and morter house that you don't own.

I am at a party at a friends house.. I don't live there.. I open the door to another guest because the host is busy..it's someone I don't know.. so I close the door again. Or it is someone I know is invited so I let them in.

Or I might be an estate showing a house that isn't mine, or a burglar and a nosey neighbour calls at the house while I'm ransacking it.

O dear, maybe it's the whole "house" analogy that is confusing.

Could you just confirm for me, that if you saw significators in each other's mutual detriment or fall, you would ignore it? You seem to be saying that it is irrelevant because it is not mentioned in the original texts, at least that is what I am reading. Many thanks for your patience and input.