Hello All:

I was thinking about the fact that a planet always seeks to perform the topic of the house it rules through the house it is in.
Let?s suppose that a planet in the 9th rules the 3rd: we can say that formal studies, trips, stay abroad, religion, etc manifest themselves through the 3rd house, kin, brothers, etc.
In the same way a planet in the 1st house manifests through its rulership of another house what comes to the native, so if the planet rules the 10th, glory will come to him (it depends of the nature of the planets, of course)
This all is pretty clear to me.
But what happens if a planet ruling a house is not in any aspect with it, and there is not any planet linking it to its domicile. Let?s suppose that Cancer is in the 11th and the Moon is in the 6th. No planets link both. Is it right to suppose that if none of the planets having rulership in Cancer is able to aspect the sign they rule the two houses became not connected and the link between will depend only on eventual transits, as when Jupiter will be transiting through the 9th, for example.
The above idea is the one I have been adopting but I wanted to check it out with you!

Thank you in advance for your thoughts

Cl?lia

Clelia Romano wrote:Let?s suppose that a planet in the 9th rules the 3rd: we can say that formal studies, trips, stay abroad, religion, etc manifest themselves through the 3rd house, kin, brothers, etc.

I see it the other way around Clelia, if the ruler of the 3rd is in the 9th to me it means that the 3rd house ruler will use 9th house stuff to express itself. For example it might mean one has ties with neighbors that come from abroad, or live in a neighborhood mainly composed of religious orthodox people; early education might have been in a strict religious school, etc.

As far as the ruler [or exalted ruler] not connected to one's house, it might create some problems, but in my opinion not major. Maybe as in your example a transit might create a connection: I dunno about that, I never checked it out.

james

Hi James:

Thanks for your reply!

I see it the other way around Clelia, if the ruler of the 3rd is in the 9th to me it means that the 3rd house ruler will use 9th house stuff to express itself. For example it might mean one has ties with neighbors that come from abroad, or live in a neighborhood mainly composed of religious orthodox people; early education might have been in a strict religious school, etc.

Sometimes both answers can be true, mine and yours, but as a general rule in Medieval astrology, if the ruler of a house is in a house he does not rule he will show by its locatinp the area of life its own house?s topics will be realized or focused.

As far as the ruler [or exalted ruler] not connected to one's house, it might create some problems, but in my opinion not major. Maybe as in your example a transit might create a connection: I dunno about that, I never checked it out

.

Cl?lia

Hello Clelia, James and others,

Clelia:

Is it right to suppose that if none of the planets having rulership in Cancer is able to aspect the sign they rule the two houses became not connected and the link between will depend only on eventual transits, as when Jupiter will be transiting through the 9th, for example.

When I first studied medieval astrology, I was told that: ?the predictive methods viz. firdaria/circumambulation/decennials/solar revolutions/transits do not create new things. They only activate that which is promised in the natal chart. All that you asked of a predictive work is when and not what? ? or something to this effect!

If you subscribe to this view and if marriage is not promised in the natal chart, then the native will never marry regardless of the motions and activations of the transiting planets (or other predictive techniques). This gives us a problem in horary as we immediately would think that a horary query is invalid without checking the natal chart first e.g. it is pointless to ask a horary question concerning marriage when a natal chart has already predicted otherwise! But we horary astrologers almost never check the querent?s and/or quesited natal and progressed charts. Perhaps this is why questions related to natal chart are not supposed to be answered using a horary chart e.g. ?when will I marry?, ?will I ever be rich?, etc. The rule of not answering ?universal? and ?indeterminate? questions probably stem from this problem (but then some horary astrologers do answer some of these questions and seem to be successful!).

If you do not subscribe to this view, then there is no point in looking for ?unrealized? things from a natal chart because it a thing is ?unrealized? in a natal chart, it could still be realized through predictive work e.g. it is pointless in concluding that there is no marriage in a natal chart due to certain natal configuration because the transits (or other predictive methods) will somehow ?connect? the ?unconnected? at least in a certain period in native?s life. Consequently, the question ?whether there is or there isn?t? cannot be answered from a natal chart! But then we have many examples where ancient astrologers start with ?whether there is? when delineating a natal chart. The most striking example would be finding ?whether there is life in this chart? by delineating to which differentia a chart belongs to.

Now, come back to your questions of unconnected houses. Generally, when a domicile, exalted or triplicity lord of a house is in aversion to the house, the outcome of the house cannot be determined using the domicile or exalted lord of the house. In your example, Cancer is in the 11th and Moon (domicile lord of Cancer) happens to be in the 6th, which is 8th from 11th. So, Moon can?t manage matters of the 11th house but she would still manage matters of the 9th house because she is exalted lord of Taurus which at the 9th house. We then look at Jupiter (exalted lord of 11th) whether it aspects the 11th. If it does not, then Jupiter cannot manage matters of the 11th as well. We then look at the triplicity lord of the 11th. If that planet is also in aversion to 11th, then we look at any planet that aspect the 11th and Moon. This planet will not manage the 11th house for the benefits of the 11th house but rather to the benefits of what it rules. Imagine that we have Mercury in Cancer in 11th in a day chart (while Moon, Jupiter and Venus do not aspect the 11th). Mercury in Cancer would decide matters on 11th house AS WELL AS its outcome (the beginning to the end). But if Mercury is in Cancer in the 11th and Moon aspects the 11th house, matters concerning the 11th house will be decided by Mercury in the ?first part of life? or in the beginning and Moon will take over and decide on the outcome as Moon is the domicile lord of 11th and aspects 11th and Moon happens to be also the dispositor of Mercury.

I think this exercise is also to answer the question ?whether there is or there isn?t? (though not exclusively). It is difficult to realize matters signified by a house when no rulers of the house is in the house or aspects the house (by whole sign).

A planet located in a house and it has no share in the house i.e. not a domicile, exalted or triplicity lord of the house (and the rulers of the house do not aspect the house and, of course, do not aspect the planet in the house) will only use materials in the house for its own benefit and rulership. If that planet is in its own term or face, at least it does not damage the house itself. If that planet is undignified i.e. peregrine it loots the house! (think of peregrine planet in angular house as a candidate of thief in horary astrology).

If there is realization (any rulers of the house aspects th house) but both the house and its lord are afflicted, matters concerning the house will be realized but then will be afflicted.

First case scenario: Imagine that there is simply no planet in the seventh house or planet that aspects it. It is difficult to see how matters of the seventh (e.g. marriage can be realized ? excluding third party intervention).
Second case scenario: Imagine that we have domicile lord of the seventh aspects the seventh but both the seventh house AND domicile lord of the seventh are afflicted by Mars. So, matters of the seventh house will be realized but then there will be afflictions!

But then which matters of the seventh house that will be unrealized (in the first case) or afflicted (in the second case). Is it spouse, marriage, associates, duels, open enemies, end of life period, etc.?
This is where the Lots come in for the Lots are designed for one topic only (unlike houses where each house covers an aggregate of topics). The same technique can also be applied to the Lots and their lords (realization and afflictions).

Hello Astrojin:

I will answer your post ( raising important issues, btw) later, since I?m in my way to lunch with some friends.

See you later!

Cl?lia

Hello Astrojin and All:

When I first studied medieval astrology, I was told that: ?the predictive methods viz. firdaria/circumambulation/decennials/solar revolutions/transits do not create new things. They only activate that which is promised in the natal chart. All that you asked of a predictive work is when and not what? ? or something to this effect!

If you subscribe to this view and if marriage is not promised in the natal chart, then the native will never marry regardless of the motions and activations of the transiting planets (or other predictive techniques).

This is a tricky question. It is true that if something is not promised in the natal chart transits will not be able to provide it their own.
Bu it I is also true that nobody asks about a matter that is not in the natal chart. Bonatti says this in his book and Masha?allha delineates an horary absolute chart in the same way that it was a natal chart. We are in the divination field so I think that we have to give a big importance if some topic is told to be fortunate in an horary chart, even if it is not promised in the natal chart
If we have a good outcome in a horary chart that is not in the natal chart it is the moment to revise our natal delineation on this issue, because the natal chart is almost infinite, and we possibly missed some item, like, for example to delineate the chart departing from the Part of Fortune.
I?ll tell you: horary charts can be as radical as natal charts. In some ocasions however we really have to stick with the natal chart?s predictions.

This gives us a problem in horary as we immediately would think that a horary query is invalid without checking the natal chart first e.g. it is pointless to ask a horary question concerning marriage when a natal chart has already predicted otherwise

!

Interestingly I got into an horary chart in which the querent asked if she would get pregnant some day. She was 45 year old and tried many ? in vitro? fertilizations with no success. Finally she adopted a child. The boy was 6, when she asked me the question. The answer was positive: she would be able to get pregnant if she got into another fertilization?.but the couple had no money left to try it.
This is a tricky question about destiny and free will.
In this case fate looked like to be more powerful, since she did not answered a question when her husband and her had enough money to pay for the fertilization. And it appears that the natal sterility of her chart won over the opportunity she was facing.
Fate is a sad picture.

But we horary astrologers almost never check the querent?s and/or quesited natal and progressed charts. Perhaps this is why questions related to natal chart are not supposed to be answered using a horary chart e.g. ?when will I marry?, ?will I ever be rich?, etc. The rule of not answering ?universal? and ?indeterminate? questions probably stem from this problem (but then some horary astrologers do answer some of these questions and seem to be successful!).

Masha?allha says that we can answer universal questions in the same way we answer other kind of questions. This statement is based on the fact that no questions is able to come to the querent?s minds and lips if the question still did not rely in the natal chart.

If you do not subscribe to this view, then there is no point in looking for ?unrealized? things from a natal chart because it a thing is ?unrealized? in a natal chart, it could still be realized through predictive work e.g. it is pointless in concluding that there is no marriage in a natal chart due to certain natal configuration because the transits (or other predictive methods) will somehow ?connect? the ?unconnected? at least in a certain period in native?s life.
Consequently, the question ?whether there is or there isn?t? cannot be answered from a natal chart! But then we have many examples where ancient astrologers start with ?whether there is? when delineating a natal chart. The most striking example would be finding ?whether there is life in this chart? by delineating to which differentia a chart belongs to.

And they were right. But nowadays the medicine brought the opportunity to live even with few living resources, and, even if living like this is a mess, 2nd and 3rd differentia continue alive.

Now, come back to your questions of unconnected houses. Generally, when a domicile, exalted or triplicity lord of a house is in aversion to the house, the outcome of the house cannot be determined using the domicile or exalted lord of the house. In your example, Cancer is in the 11th and Moon (domicile lord of Cancer) happens to be in the 6th, which is 8th from 11th. So, Moon can?t manage matters of the 11th house but she would still manage matters of the 9th house because she is exalted lord of Taurus which at the 9th house. We then look at Jupiter (exalted lord of 11th) whether it aspects the 11th. If it does not, then Jupiter cannot manage matters of the 11th as well. We then look at the triplicity lord of the 11th. If that planet is also in aversion to 11th, then we look at any planet that aspect the 11th and Moon. This planet will not manage the 11th house for the benefits of the 11th house but rather to the benefits of what it rules. Imagine that we have Mercury in Cancer in 11th in a day chart (while Moon, Jupiter and Venus do not aspect the 11th). Mercury in Cancer would decide matters on 11th house AS WELL AS its outcome (the beginning to the end).
But if Mercury is in Cancer in the 11th and Moon aspects the 11th house, matters concerning the 11th house will be decided by Mercury in the ?first part of life? or in the beginning and Moon will take over and decide on the outcome as Moon is the domicile lord of 11th and aspects 11th and Moon happens to be also the dispositor of Mercury.

I agree, but I was erecting an imaginary figure where there was no planetsin the 11th and no planets with dignity in the 11th aspecting the 11th.


I

think this exercise is also to answer the question ?whether there is or there isn?t? (though not exclusively). It is difficult to realize matters signified by a house when no rulers of the house is in the house or aspects the house (by whole sign).

A planet located in a house and it has no share in the house i.e. not a domicile, exalted or triplicity lord of the house (and the rulers of the house do not aspect the house and, of course, do not aspect the planet in the house) will only use materials in the house for its own benefit and rulership

[/quote]

I totally agree! But if there is no planet in the house and the lords of the house do not aspect the house? This house and its topics will have little or no opportunity at all of manifestation, or being of some use.
I think we have the same opinion, and this is an ideal supposition.

Thanks for helping me to think about the matter!

Hello Cl?lia,

I had one question:
In general, for a planet unconnected to a house, do you consider aversion mitigation techniques?
For example, Aries in the 11th and Mars is in Scorpio in the 6th. Even though Mars doesn't see (aspect) the 11th, it will have some linkage to 11th since both signs have same ruler - 'agreeing in path'.

In your example (Cancer in the 11th and Moon in Aquarius in the 6th) there doesn't seem to be any aversion mitigation at work.

Vasanth

Hello Vasanth!

I had one question:
In general, for a planet unconnected to a house, do you consider aversion mitigation techniques?
For example, Aries in the 11th and Mars is in Scorpio in the 6th. Even though Mars doesn't see (aspect) the 11th, it will have some linkage to 11th since both signs have same ruler - 'agreeing in path'.

Agreeing in path means that both planets have equal days and nights and it is called antiscia. In your case Mars send its antiscia to Aquarius, not to Aries.
But if they had antiscial agreement, as for example the existing antiscia between Virgo and Aries, and in this case Mars would be in Virgo, not Scorpio, it would happen some " mitigation of aversion". And Mars at the same time would aspect Scorpio by a sextile.
The antiscia works as a hidden conjunction but it would be necessary, in my point of view and in many traditional author?s point of view, as well, the existence of a planet in Aries in a perfect position to perform the antiscial relationship with Mars (orb is of 1 degree).

In your example (Cancer in the 11th and Moon in Aquarius in the 6th) it does not have any "aversion mitigation" avaiable.

I agree.
In my case:
According to Firmicus the Moon?s antiscia would fall in Scorpio, which does see through a trine aspect Cancer. But as I said above Firmicus is the only traditional author to consider antiscial aspects .

Cl?lia

Hello All:

I came across Robert Zoller?s lessons on delineation and he says in lesson Eight of the DMA?s course.

"The 3 operations of planets

:::::::
item 3:
According to their rulership....or when Venus, as the ruler of the 3rd conjoins the MC, she connects communications/consultations/educations with the native profession. When such a planet transit the natal 3rd( or any other house) it may produce an effect conforming to its house rulership,i.e. 3rd house"

I quoted this special part of the course because MC and 3rd house are not connected, since, at least by whole signs the 3rd is the 6th of the 10th.

Some time ago I raised a question on this same subject but looking it by another point of view. The topic where the original question is has the name" is reception always good?" or something like that. http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6072
I wrote:
?Imagine Mars is in Sagittarius in the 8th house and Jupiter in Scorpio in the 7th house. What happens? The 7th house matters are the reason of the 8th house( partner's money, inheritances, but also death). The 7th House is the house of partnerships and open enemies, and is in opposition to the ASC. Jupiter, a benefic is there, but ruled by Mars. This is a case in which Jupiter is a accidental malefic (for being opposed to the ASC and ruled by a malefic in the 8th, to which he obey)
On the other hand, the 8th House, i.e. inheritance, death, taxes, etc.., has its reason in the partnership and open enemies, matters of the 7th house. They do whatever the other wants for good or bad.
What I want to say in a nutshell is that reception is a positive thing between planets in a good houses (now putting aside celestial dignities) Otherwise, the reception may be harmful. Imagine Mars is in Sagittarius in the 8th house and Jupiter in Scorpio in the 7th house. What happens? The 7th house matters are the reason of the 8th house( partner's money, inheritances, but also death). The 7th House is the house of partnerships and open enemies, and is in opposition to the ASC. Jupiter, a benefic is there, but ruled by Mars. This is a case in which Jupiter is a accidental malefic (for being opposed to the ASC and ruled by a malefic in the 8th, to which he obey)
On the other hand, the 8th House, i.e. inheritance, death, taxes, etc.., has its reason in the partnership and open enemies, matters of the 7th house. They do whatever the other wants for good or bad.
What I want to say in a nutshell is that reception is a positive thing between planets in a good house (now putting aside celestial dignities) Otherwise, the reception may be harmful.?

Many of your manifested against my idea because it was necessary to have an aspect between planets in order to use reception.

Well: If you look to my present question, namely if a house is not aspected by its rulers and none brings the light of some of its rulers to the house, the house would be by her own and with no conditions to give any result.
Maybe I got obsessed with the question of a house being aspected by one of its ruler and perhaps this is not necessary, at least as I was taught in Zoller?s lessons.
The question I brought in the past topi about reception can be explained simply as a question of rulership and not of reception, because it is true, traditionally reception needs an aspect to work!

On the other hand a planet ruling a house can manage the topics of the house provided that it is not cadent and not if it aspects its house or not.
I think this is an important issue to have in mind.

Probably the necessity of being aspected is linked with longevity?s issues since that in order to have an alchocodem, we need a planet aspecting and receiving the hyleg.
But In general delineation the house?s ruler is not supposed to aspect his house to bring into effect the matter of the house, since the ? good or bad of the house depends of the ruler of the house?.

Cl?lia

Hi Cl?lia,

Just some thoughts:

In your example of Venus, (as the ruler of 3rd conjoins the MC), if 3rd is Libra and if Venus is in Taurus the 10th, then even-though Libra and Taurus don't see each other, this might be a case of aversion mitigation since both Libra and Taurus share the same ruler - Venus.
Of course if 3rd is Taurus and Venus is in Sagittarius the 10th, this would not be true. [I am not sure if 3rd being Pisces (exaltation of Venus) and Venus in Libra in 10th would apply]

I am referring the article by Steven - http://www.astrologycom.com/livingsigns3.html which talks about aversion mitigation concepts, but I am not sure how important it is to your initial question.

On the other hand a planet ruling a house can manage the topics of the house provided that it is not cadent and not if it aspects its house or not.

Should we add that the planet should also have some essential dignity?
[I am thinking -> A planet being dignified and the affairs of the house ruled by it being in ruins doesn't go well together]

Vasanth

Hi Vasanth!

Just some thoughts:

In your example of Venus, (as the ruler of 3rd conjoins the MC), if 3rd is Libra and if Venus is in Taurus the 10th, then even-though Libra and Taurus don't see each other, this might be a case of aversion mitigation since both Libra and Taurus share the same ruler - Venus.
Of course if 3rd is Taurus and Venus is in Sagittarius the 10th, this would not be true. [I am not sure if 3rd being Pisces (exaltation of Venus) and Venus in Libra in 10th would apply.I am referring the article by Steven - http://www.astrologycom.com/livingsigns3.html which talks about aversion mitigation concepts, but I am not sure how important it is to your initial question.

On the other hand a planet ruling a house can manage the topics of the house provided that it is not cadent and not if it aspects its house or not.

I?ll read the article, thanks for sharing it!
I?m afraid Zoller was not thinking in mitigation. He was simply trying to stick with the notion that a planet rules his own sign.

Should we add that the planet should also have some essential dignity?
[I am thinking -> A planet being dignified and the affairs of the house ruled by it being in ruins doesn't go well together]

Vasanth[/quote]

If the planet has position but does not have essencial dignity he will be able to perform the affairs of the house but with troubles or, after perfecting the matter, he will destroy it So the ideal is that the ruler by domicile, or exaltation or triplicity (at least one of the 3) would be able ( by celestial and by house position) to perform perfectly the matters of the house.
Cl?lia