Skyscript Astrology Forum

Posted: **Sun Jun 05, 2011 7:47 pm**

As I mentioned in the previous post, this is "in practice" i.e. my own practice. I do not wish to publish my own methods in public. If you like, please pm me.

Well I respect your reserve. Such ideas are probably not appropriate here anyway. Still I have always found your thoughts very interesting and insightful. I am curious how you work this out practically. I have sent you a PM on this.

Mark

Posted: **Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:17 pm**

Hi, Astrojin
For the dispositor of the planet to help mitigate aversion, it wasn?t usual for the arabs to demand that he would be angular? Even for the new helenistics, I would expect that the dispositor would need to be of the same sect then the planet. The way you describe, aversion becomes a very rare ocurrence indeed.

Posted: **Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:57 pm**

Yuzuru wrote:
For the dispositor of the planet to help mitigate aversion, it wasn?t usual for the arabs to demand that he would be angular? Even for the new helenistics, I would expect that the dispositor would need to be of the same sect then the planet. The way you describe, aversion becomes a very rare ocurrence indeed.

I thought astrojin expressed the view that other than through an effective domicile or exaltation ruler aversion would basically manifest. It was simply a question of whether another planet could help mitigate this situation to some extent?

At least that is what i took from this comment by him:

What if primary motivation is not fulfilled directly or indirectly? We then move the exalted lord of the ascendant (in our example, it would be Moon). We would then observe if primary motivation is fulfilled directly or indirectly. If this fails, we could then go to the lower dispositors of ascendant, term, triplicity and face but fulfilment of primary motivation is going be very difficult (I only use domicile and exalted rulers. If primary motivation is not fulfilled directly or indirectly via domicile or exalted rulers, I would say that fulfilment would be very difficult indeed).

Clearly, one could continue with a minor dignity ruler such as triplicity or bound rulers. Certainly, the early astrologers gave a lot of importance to bound rulers. Still, it seems unlikely a bound or triplicity ruler could operate as effectively over the affairs of a house.

I dont follow why these rulers need to be in angular houses though and in the same sect to the domicile rulers when no such requirements are necessary for exaltation rulers? For example, Mars the exaltation ruler of Capricorn is in the opposing sect to Saturn. The same applies to the domicile/exaltation rulers of Aries, Pisces, Cancer, and Libra.

Mark

Posted: **Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:02 pm**

However, why do these rulers need to be in angular houses and similar sect (to the ASC sign or domicile ruler?) when no such requirements are necessary for exaltation rulers?

Hmmm, I promise that I did not invented that... :-P It is somewhere in Sahl... but thinking about it, he doesn?t say that it has to be a dispositor, I think any planet will do, if he is in an angle, and reflecting light back to the ASC

Posted: **Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:25 pm**

Hmmm, I promise that I did not invented that... :-P It is somewhere in Sahl... but thinking about it, he doesn?t say that it has to be a dispositor, I think any planet will do, if he is in an angle, and reflecting light back to the ASC

No no I wasn't accusing you of inventing stuff. This is the traditional forum after all.

I suppose this might explain it since a non-dispositor would have no obvious connection to the house. Setting higher criteria for a connection makes some sense. Although, I find it hard to accept a non-dispositor acting as a caretaker over a house. I suppose it would help if the non-dispositor planet was a universal significator for the mattter concerned. For example, in an instance where Lord 2 was in aversion to its house Jupiter aspecting the second house could be seen as a lower level mitigation. However, as you suggest if we concede numerous mitigations to aversion the notion will rather lose its power.

I have meant to study more Sahl. A good time to get my copy of Benjamin Dykes Works of Sahl & Masha'allah out.

Mark

Posted: **Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:51 pm**

Although, I find it hard to accept a non-dispositor acting as a caretaker over a house.

Just to clarify, the planet in an angle would not act as a caretaker, but as a transmiter?, messenger?

And, I believe Sahl said that they both had to be joined, so whole sign aspects won?t do.

Posted: **Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:56 am**

Hello,

Yuzuru

For the dispositor of the planet to help mitigate aversion, it wasn?t usual for the arabs to demand that he would be angular? Even for the new helenistics, I would expect that the dispositor would need to be of the same sect then the planet. The way you describe, aversion becomes a very rare ocurrence indeed.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I do not consider the three mitigations (like engirding, equal power or equal rising) in the case of fulfillment of primary motivation. In the case of dispositors of ascendant, I usually look to the domicile ruler and if primary motivation is not fulfilled directly or indirectly, then to the exalted ruler. I do not consider the lower dignities. On the indirect fulfillment of primary motivation, I will look if the domicile/exalted ruler is in applying aspect to another planet that aspects the ascendant sign (yes, you are right! It should be applying aspect).

Generally:
I still think that a planet should have a share in the sign and looking at it to manage it. So, if a domicile or exalted lord of a house/sign does not see the house, it does not manage it. If a planet sees a house/sign but does not have a share in it, it can't manage it. If a planet is in the sign/house but does not have a share in it, it can manage it simply because it has made that house/sign its temporary residence (when both domicile and exalted lords can't manage it). I still consider the trip lords but they only rule part of the house (unlike domicile and exalted lord) but they must aspect the house.

Posted: **Thu Jun 09, 2011 11:59 pm**

Hello:

astrojin wrote:Hello,

Now I suppose I just have to test it out in practice.
In practice, I find that the primary motivation is not extracted only from the ascendant (as I was taught before) but in some charts, the primary motivation is best answered through the strongest from among the big three viz. sun, moon or ascendant (we should not always default to ascendant). Do consider this in your practice.

I have a client with Scorpio Ascending in the 4th degree. The second house is Sagittarius where he has in longitude: Mars, Jupiter, Moon and Venus. In Capricorn he has Mercury, and the Sun is in the 2nd degree of Aquarius in the 4th.

The Sun has no dignity at all in Scorpio but I found your opinion interesting, because I imagined that the Sun,(one of planets you called " big"), even not being the luminary of the sect was responsible for fulfilling the native?s PM. Saturn is in Taurus in the 7th, but it is at 15 degrees of Taurus, more distant in degrees than the Sun.
Anyway the Sun and Saturn are in an angle and Saturn receives the Sun by domicile. I think that probably the Sun is one of the ways by which the native fulfills his motivation in life.
Is this in the same line of your thoughts?

best wishes

Clelia

Posted: **Fri Jun 10, 2011 9:30 pm**

Hi Clelia,

Yes, based on the information you supplied, sun is where pm is extracted and it seems that his pm is fulfilled via domicile.

However, we should always confirm our theoretical analysis with the native in real life. No matter how good the theoretical analysis is, it means nothing to the client if it does not reflect the native's life. It is like making predictions. We make some retrodictions to confirm that we are looking at the right predictive technique for this native (there are many predictive tecniques to choose from!) e.g. finding key years that important things happenened to the native and when our client confirms this, we can then proceed to the predictions. In the case of pm and its fulfillment, if the strongest of the Big three is Sun in Aquarius in the fourth, the client should also potray an Aquarian life that centers on the fourth.

Posted: **Fri Jun 10, 2011 10:57 pm**

astrojin wrote:Hi Clelia,

Yes, based on the information you supplied, sun is where pm is extracted and it seems that his pm is fulfilled via domicile.

However, we should always confirm our theoretical analysis with the native in real life. No matter how good the theoretical analysis is, it means nothing to the client if it does not reflect the native's life. It is like making predictions. We make some retrodictions to confirm that we are looking at the right predictive technique for this native (there are many predictive tecniques to choose from!) e.g. finding key years that important things happenened to the native and when our client confirms this, we can then proceed to the predictions. In the case of pm and its fulfillment, if the strongest of the Big three is Sun in Aquarius in the fourth, the client should also potray an Aquarian life that centers on the fourth.

Agreed Astrojin

It?s like an horary question: if it does not reflects the real situation maybe it is not radical.

Other thing I want to mention is that the ASC is at 4? Scorpio, Mars at 1? of Sagittarius and Jupiter at the same degree. The Sun is at 2] of Aquarius.
So the Sun is not able to translate the light from Mars to the ASC.
By whole sign, yes, but by aspect the quality of the Sun is what counts here, since the sextil aspect between Sun and Mars is separative. Even being a natal chart I understand that the translation is not occurring but in the past. What we have actually right now is the Sun applying to the ASC.

I have been using this kind of situations between planets (as applying or separating) to calculate the years given by the alcocodem, for example.
Let?s say that Mars is the Hyleg and Jupiter the Alcocodem( because Mars is applying to Jupiter and Jupiter has domicile in Mars sign). Mars is separating from Saturn.
Then, Jupiter will give his years depending on his angular or succedent position and he will not get deprived from the less years of Saturn because Mars is in between them.
This is the way I have been able to reach more sound results.

I?m telling all this because I had the sensation you was doing a similar thing. Correct me if not!

Clelia

Posted: **Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:19 am**

Other thing I want to mention is that the ASC is at 4? Scorpio, Mars at 1? of Sagittarius and Jupiter at the same degree. The Sun is at 2] of Aquarius.
So the Sun is not able to translate the light from Mars to the ASC.By whole sign, yes, but by aspect the quality of the Sun is what counts here, since the sextil aspect between Sun and Mars is separative. Even being a natal chart I understand that the translation is not occurring but in the past. What we have actually right now is the Sun applying to the ASC.

I have to disagree on this point

If the positions of the planets are really exactly as you've stated, than the Sun is actually a strong helper(especially if angular by quadrant division) and it enables Mars to "see" his domicile Scorpio. Since Mars is the slower of the two, the only way the Sun(or any other faster moving planet) may play a role of 'helper' is to be separating(not applying to) from Mars and thus rendering his light to the ascending degree.
The only two other candidates which would be able to reflect Mars's light back to the ASC by application(I mean Mars's application to them) are Jupiter and Saturn, hence slower moving planets than Mars.

Goran

Posted: **Sat Jun 11, 2011 8:16 pm**

cor scorpii wrote:
Other thing I want to mention is that the ASC is at 4? Scorpio, Mars at 1? of Sagittarius and Jupiter at the same degree. The Sun is at 2] of Aquarius.
So the Sun is not able to translate the light from Mars to the ASC.By whole sign, yes, but by aspect the quality of the Sun is what counts here, since the sextil aspect between Sun and Mars is separative. Even being a natal chart I understand that the translation is not occurring but in the past. What we have actually right now is the Sun applying to the ASC.

I have to disagree on this point
The positions of the planets are really exactly as you've stated, than the Sun is actually a strong helper(especially if angular by quadrant division) and it enables Mars to "see" his domicile Scorpio. Since Mars is the slower of the two, the only way the Sun(or any other faster moving planet) may play a role of 'helper' is to be separating(not applying) from Mars and thus rendering his light to the ascending degree.
O Gore, I agree on your disagreement! I said something really silly, since the Sun is translating the light from Mars/Jupiter to the Ascendant! ( where is the blushing emoticon?)

The only two other candidates which would be able to reflect Mars's light back to the ASC by application(I mean Mars's application to them) are Jupiter and Saturn, hence slower moving planets than Mars
.

Well, Saturn is already seeing the Ascendant, since he is in the 7th, at approximatelly 15? of Taurus, and Mars does not aspec Saturn in this sign, so I did not get your point here.

Thanks for warning me!
Clelia

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Aversion and the 2nd house?