Skyscript Astrology Forum

Hello Dr Ben Dykes,

Almuten = planet that has most authority over something (asc, mc, house cusp, arabic part, points, planet, etc.) which itself could be srong or weak, effective or ineffective. Wow, I like this definition the most!!! I shall remember this. I have been toying over the definition of almutem and trying to get the right words, and this is it!!! Thank you.

You mentioned that Almuten originated from the arabic word Al-Mubtaz. I thought it originated from the arabic word Al-Matiin (the one with extreme power)?

The idea of authority rather than strength is very helpful and sounds accurate. Strength seems to be more a matter of house placement, such as angular or cadent.

I think I like ?voice? even more than 'authority'. If the almuten is "the winner" it?s easy to imagine that for its prize the winner is granted a voice and a say in matters.

What I would add to this discussion is that the almuten (from the Arabic al-mubtazz, "the winner") does not show strength. It shows authority. An authority can be strong or weak.

OK I can see where some of the misunderstandings might be. The almuten of a degree never changes. It doesn't matter where the planet is, that planet is the almuten of a particular degree. So if the ASC were at 21 Aries in a day chart, the Sun is almuten whether the Sun is in Leo, or Cancer or Libra or even Aries itself. In this way it is like a domicile ruler. The Sun rules Leo, for example, regardless of where the Sun is in a chart.

If the Sun were actually posited at the almuten degree the Sun would be very powerful. In the above example, if the Sun were posited in Libra, the Sun would have no essential dignity, but would still be the almuten of 21 Aries. The almuten degree doesn't make the Sun powerful, it marks the place where the Sun is very influential or as Ben would say "has authority."

Tom

Because in a day chart Jupiter has zero essential dignity at 23 Aries. He is therefore peregrine.

Yes, I agree with you Tom that Jupiter being in a day chart has zero at 23 Aries, but it is also received by Sun in 24 Gemini (sextile, Sun being sinister)

Peregrine planets are weak.

That is true according to your theory.
Jupiter could be weak only in the sense that he isn?t able to act according to his nature.

All the accidental dignity in the chart can?t make an essentially weak planet strong.

Ignoring the different opinions on whether the essential dignity is an indicator of strength or not:

I see that you link accidental dignity with essential dignity.
But I wasn?t able to find the nature of this link.
Now essential dignity is connected to zoidio. accidental dignity is connected to houses, or to relations between planets and sun, etc.

1. On one hand you could say that essential dignity is the general and accidental dignity is exception. But in order to say that, you should have both of them establishing rule to the same reference level, which is not the case. The essential dignity is connected to zoidio and accidental dignity for example, in the case of angularity, to houses. So different plans.
But if so, the accidental dignity could be an exception to essential dignity.

2. On the other hand you could say that essential dignity is the exception and accidental dignity the rule. Ignoring the etymology of the word accidental, you should observe again the differences between zoidio and houses.

3. Last but not least, you could say that essential dignity is the ideal model of dignity, in some way a prototype from the ?mundus imaginalis ? (from Henry Corbin, the Arabic correspondent would be ?alam al khayal?; I don?t know for sure the exact word in english but surely isn?t about imaginary, or fantastic or something like this), and accidental dignity the reality (don?t understand from this, that the mundus imaginalis is not real, differences is about manifestation and essence) of sublunary world, condemned to permanent change, but helped in some way by eternal cycle. So from this perspective (which is, I think, the most interesting) we would find ourselves, in some way, in the first situation. And again the accidental dignity could be an exception to essential dignity.

Conclusion. Why all the accidental dignity in the chart can?t make an essentially weak planet strong?
Pardon me. That?s not a conclusion.

This isn't difficult, and it isn't arbitrary or subject to opinion. Essential dignity can be determined quickly, and accurately in any chart

I congratulate you!!!

Once more: the almuten has a defintion. This definition is not subject to opinion. It is clear as day.

Watch out not to confuse definition with the technique of finding almuten, or even worse, with almuten effects.
And by the way I thought that it was a subject to opinion. The prove is that we do mistakes (aren?t we told from childhood to death what is wrong or what is right? )
But if you wish I will not make any remarks about your opinions.

What I would add to this discussion is that the almuten (from the Arabic al-mubtazz, "the winner") does not show strength.

Yes, I agree with you.
I asked a teacher of Arabic language from Bucharest University, and she told me too that ?al mubtazz? means: the one that is victorious after a battle, combat.
This would give Tom another argument for his former opinion.

But maybe he is somehow debilitated, so that although his rules are the default rules, other family members must take up the slack. They may be competent in their own way, but their authority is weaker. If the teenage daughter has to run the household, this is different from having the natural parent do it, in a variety of ways.

There are no problem for the planets with essential dignity and power.

Discussions could be necessary if almuten is not strong enough to do the job.
In this case it appears to me the following questions:
Is she capable to do all the time, in every situation, exactly what her father told her?
Is daughter going to do what her father wants, all the time?
If she is the one in power, why shouldn?t she be the one who decides?

P.S.:
I?m asking you all this, because I have also in mind a nice example: an authority like Saturn with a daughter like Venus.

If not, then although it is the default authority (and will make a general statement about the native's happiness), it will be less successful, and we will have to look at rulers with less authority (exaltation, triplicity, term, decan). They will not be as authoritative and pervasive and constant, but they will be able to do something.

This is very helpful. So when the authority has no power, (or, I would add, no good relations with the one in power) we should look at planets with power.

Conclusion:
Ideal: if the wisdom and power are the same.
Good: if the wisdom decides and the power acts and accomplishes.
Normal: when the wisdom speaks, and power acts according to its knowledge or will.
Bad: when wisdom doesn?t speak, and power is committing abuses.

Final conclusion:
The authority theory works much better than the one with the strength.

Yes, I agree with you Tom that Jupiter being in a day chart has zero at 23 Aries, but it is also received by Sun in 24 Gemini

The Sun has dignity only by face at 24 Gemini. I can't see that being much help to Jupiter particularly with the Sun in Jupiter's detriment.

That is true according to your theory.

It's not my theory. In fact it isn't a theory at all. This is the definition of a peregrine planet. He has no dignity and it is difficult to act in accordance with his nature.

Jupiter could be weak only in the sense that he isn?t able to act according to his nature.

This is the traditional definition of planetary weakness.

Ignoring the different opinions on whether the essential dignity is an indicator of strength or not:

Yes and the reason I would ignore them is because they are wrong. This is the crux of the matter, isn't it? An American economist, Thomas Sowell wrote a column last month in which he noted (he isn't the first) that in Western culture, and perhaps other places, opinion is considered more important than fact. He noted in the grand scheme of things this is downright frightening. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, at least in law in the democracies. Anyone is free to believe the Moon is made of green cheese should they so desire. But no matter how hard they believe it, no matter how many college professors argue in favor of it, no matter how much relativist nonsense is peddled about it, the Moon is not, never was, nor ever will be made of green cheese. Everyone may be entitled to their opinion, but no one is entitled to their facts.

The fact is that planets wthout essential dignity are defined as peregrine. That's what it means. Planets without essential dignity are weak because, in traditional Western Astrology, strength is defined as a planet with a great deal of essential dignity. With a great deal of essential dignity, a planet acts in accordance with its essential nature. Therefore, a planet without essential dignity (peregrine) cannot act in accordance with its essential nature and is logically, weak. Saturn is slow and plodding. Aries is bursting with energy. Putting a slow plodding kind of guy in a fast paced environment is not going to work out. He needs to be in a place where painstaking precision is required. Therefore he is weak in a fast paced environment, but strong in a precision oriented environment.

These are not my definitions, or my theory, or anyone else's theory. They are the definitions accepted (not invented) by every significant Western astrologer from the Hellenistic era until at least 1700 AD and perhaps until the late 19th century. At that point, these definitions didn't change, but the approach to astrology did. For all my criticisms of modern astrology the "pioneers" of modern astrology at least were aware that they were going a different way. They didn't rationalize the differences or try to change the defintions of what was accepted. That came later.

If the approach to this subject is from the contemporary viewpoint, then of course every opinion is permissible regardless of merit (the very word "merit" is judgmental and therefore anathema to the contemporary astrologer). At that point we no longer discussing astrology, but whatever the astrologer's opinion du jour happens to be.

1. On one hand you could say that essential dignity is the general and accidental dignity is exception.

I dont' recall saying that. I'm not that vague. However I had a few glasses of wine prior to writing, but for the record those are not the accepted definitions. An essentially dignified planet is in signs and/or degrees that he "rules" and the more dignity he has the easier it is for the planet to "act" in accordance with his nature. Accidental dignity (or lack thereof) has to do with placement.

Ignoring the etymology of the word accidental, you should observe again the differences between zoidio and houses.

You should pay more attention to what I write and to the accepted definitions. It would also be a good idea not to personalize the definitions. They are not mine. I am well aware of the differences between essential and accidental dignity. Saturn in Libra is essentially dignified no matter where he is in the chart. Saturn in Aries is essentially debilitated, but posited on the MC is powerfully accidentally dignified. At this point there might be some discussion as to the effects of each placement assuming they were both placed on the MC in a particular chart. However no one would doubt that Saturn in Libra on the MC is an extraordinarily powerful Saturn and Saturn in Aries on the MC could well spell disaster (but not necessarily so).

3. Last but not least, you could say that essential dignity is the ideal model of dignity, in some way a prototype from the ?mundus imaginalis ? (from Henry Corbin, the Arabic correspondent would be ?alam al khayal?;

See below. Essential dignity is not a model or example of anything. It is a defined condition. Jupiter in Pisces may be a model Jupiter, but since no other planet can be Jupiter, this is not a model but a condition.

Conclusion. Why all the accidental dignity in the chart can?t make an essentially weak planet strong?

Essential dignity denotes strength. Let's say I am a world class runner. That is my essence. That does not change with house placement. But let's say I'm trapped in the 6th house. I have a slight injury and I am not at my best. I am still essentially strong,; it is my nature. I am a world class runner. But I am accidentally debilitated so I don't win the race.

Now let's look at the opposite. I am not a world class runner. In fact I lack the speed to be a world class runner no matter how much I practice. But I am entered in the race. I am angular in the chart and all my world class opponents are ill or injured or otherwise indisposed and I win. I am not strong, everyone else is weaker. If the other runners were even mildly dignified, I would finish last. My time is no different whether my opponents are better or worse runners than me. I am essentially weak and no amount of accidental dignity changes that. Accidental circumstances make my victory possible, not my strength (since I don't have any).

It is important that we all understand the definitions if we are to use them, and communicate with one another. This is the problem with Noel Tyl using the word peregrine to mean something other than what the rest of us mean when we use that term. It is confusing and counter productive.

Tom

But there is a large missing factor here. What words were used in Greek, Latin and Arabic that we now translate as ?strength?? Anyone who has studied and worked with other languages knows that there are often lost subtleties and nuances in translation. Things may not be as simple as they seem.

Not only can word meanings be altered or lost, but the concept that was behind the word choice may not be quite the same. The word we translate as ?Necessity? from Greek philosophical thought is a good example.

Hi, friends

Let calculate the almuten of any degree of Mars term in Pisces /night chart/. We put 5 points to Jupiter /ruler/, 4 to Venus/exaltation/, 2+1 to Mars /term & face/.

There is a problem calculating lord/s/ of triplicity.
How many points would you put to Mars - 3 or less!?
Will we put any point/s/ to Moon as participating night ruler!?
In a such case I usually put 2 points to Mars and one to Moon.

But someone will put 3 to Mars /meanwhile I see the popular program ZET puts 3 points to Mars for day and night and neither to Venus, nor to Moon/. Therefore Mars will be the almuten of these degrees because it gains 6 points /Jupiter 5 and Venus 4/. How you see the almuten of that piscean term to be Mars?

By the way do someone put any points to Neptune?

Tom wrote:We're using different definitions. The almuten aka the alutem is the planet that has the most essential dignity in a particular degree of the zodiac. The point system (rulership:5, exaltation: 4; triplicity:3; term:2; face:1) is used to determine that. So if the Sun is 21 Aries in a day chart the Sun gets 4 points for being in exaltation, and 3 points for being in triplicity, and 1 for being in face for a total of 8. Mars, the domicile ruler gets 5 for being the domicile ruler. 8 is more than 5 therefore the Sun is the almuten or strongest planet at 21 degrees Aries. I've never heard of using the parts, house position, or planetary hours since almuten is determined strictly by essential dignity.
Let's say the native has 21 Aries on the MC and is having career difficulties. The chart might show a debilitated Mars, but a stronger Sun. Instead of looking for Mars like positions, the native might be better off in solar type work.

Hmm, in my chart MC is 1Leo. So, 1Leo degree in the day chart gives 8points for Sun and 3 points for Saturn. Obviously the ?Sun type? of work is better for me. But Sun is weak in my chart (in 8th with not much essential dignities). And Saturn is extremely strong ? in Aquarius, in 4th house and with many aspects (including trine to AC, where Saturn is almuten). So, is Sun type of work still be better for me?

Thank you Tom. I wish the traditions regarded relocation charts. In my relocation Sun
Moved from 8th to 11th and precisely sextile relocated AC. And Sun still gain most points of ruling reloc. MC ? in Aries.

Actually Tom, by the way, Sun is not so weak in the natal too. Sun is in the mutual reception with Moon (by exaltation). Sun in Taurus, Moon in Aries and Moon in 7th house, which transfers to Sun some angularity.