Discussion of Frank's Article Essential didnities

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

Is there a purpose for this?

[lillyjgc]

Thankyou Frank for posting your well written Article on The Ed. Board.
Here is where the discussion of it can take place and the two posts are now linked:
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17099
(Sorry about the typo in heading- should be *dignities* of course!)

Pallas-trine Mars and Mr Hyde: Unfortunately with the new format, I don't have the authorisation to *move* your posts from the Ed Board to here so I had to delete them.The Ed Board is only for Articles, a new thread must be opened in the relevant Board for the discussion.
Cheers
Lillyjgc

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

Well, not that it's not well-written or that there's anything wrong with self-promotion, but it just seemed kind of presumptuous to assume that people would want to read a lecture, and a dated one at that, on a board or that we would need to, this is an astrology board already so I would guess that if people are posting here they either already have some background information of astrology or they know where they can get it. Besides, AstrologyWeekly already has astrology tutorials.

If the discussion is going to be here, shouldn't you close the other thread, Lilly? The QR things are still viewable on the other one.

I like the new templates, I'm using the "alauddin" one. :)

[katydid]

Well, not that it's not well-written or that there's anything wrong with self-promotion, but it just seemed kind of presumptuous to assume that people would want to read a lecture, and a dated one at that, on a board or that we would need to, this is an astrology board already so I would guess that if people are posting here they either already have some background information of astrology or they know where they can get it. Besides, AstrologyWeekly already has astrology tutorials.

If the discussion is going to be here, shouldn't you close the other thread, Lilly? The QR things are still viewable on the other one.

I like the new templates, I'm using the "alauddin" one. :)

Why would it be presumptuous for someone to submit an article to the education board?
Isn't that what it is set up for?:sideways:

And it looks like it has been read over 40 times already. So apparently there is an audience for it. :wink:

[katydid]

Hey Katydid, my problem with this article is not like Pallas-trine-Mars just said....That its bad written or something, the problem i have with this is that in the whole The Education i see article written by Shinning Ray 1604 posts / Archergirl 2725 posts / lillyjgc 1641 posts / Aquarius7000 1514 posts....... and here comes Frank with 3 post (he just registered 5 min before) and copies this article from his site and post it here.BTW the 40 views are All Mr.Hydes work (i could not believe it:surprised::surprised::surprised:)Dont you think its kind of strange ??

Well, I have no problem with it because I read his introductory post beforehand. He is a speaker and lecturer at ISAR and AFA and an author. So I was happy to have him onboard.
Especially because he specializes in classical astrology and how to merge it with modern.
I think the Education Board is open to anyone who has an interesting aticle or lecture ready to post. :smile:

[katydid]

Mr Hyde,
I love your new cartoon sig. Very Nice.

[Niplan]

well i took something out of it, Thanks for the definition on peregrine! that helped alot, now i know what to do with those clueless things.

besides why does it matter post count or seniority?

A bum with a great idea is still a great idea, Or a 80 year old man studying astrology since 20, just learning to use a computer... you never know, Don't discredit wisdom based on the source, until you've thought the concept through your self.

[Frank]

One of the reasons I posted the article early on was so people would know where i was coming from astrologically. Much of my other work refers to material in that article. In fact, many of my lectures include a short introductory section that goes over that same material.

Think of it as a little introduction on the "Frank Way" to do things.:biggrin:

[lillyjgc]

Well Frank, most of us appreciate what you've donated to the Ed Board.There's no requirement that a contributor to the Ed Board must have a certain post count before being eligible! In fact one's post count is not an indication of anything other than *that a person posts a lot* and says nothing about the quality of the posts.
Also pallas and Mr Hyde you've both been here long enough to know not to post your comments ON the Ed Board. We always create a link from there to another Board.
I really can't see what your problem is.
Cheers
Lillyjgc

[dreamtimez]

Thanks :smile: this is a very useful article. Looking forward to more such posts from you.

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

Ooh, I didn't know we had a new celebrity! :biggrin: Haha welcome all the same, Frank.

To not realise that a planet rules over two signs is to lose half the qualities of that planet. That's the thing, planets only have ONE nature. That nature is complex, but it doesn't change between signs, houses, sects, direction, specified degrees or anything like that. Those things can affect how easily the planets energy is utilized and possibly indicate obstacles to the planet, but nothing changes a planet's nature or the things it's after.

For instance Saturn in Capricorn is like Saturn by itself: It's skeptical, works alone, but Saturn in Libra takes on some of the optimistic, social and romantic -- but still cool and serious nature of Libra and it's tendency for the negative is tempered. Saturn is still Saturn, but is a bit different because of the sign it's in, not of its own doing. But Saturn never has the bold, deeply in need of variety, friends and erratic nature common in Aquarius, unless aspected by some other planet to indicate that Saturn's nature would be used for these things in cooperation with that planet.

At least in the case of Aquarius, Saturn's diurnal and according to just about all ancient astrologer's, prefered sign, the stubbornness and coolness is probably contributed more to that fixed sign by Saturn's than Uranus.

[Frank]

That's the thing, planets only have ONE nature. That nature is complex, but it doesn't change between signs, houses, sects, direction, specified degrees or anything like that.

I would disagree with this statement and give the example of normally Benefic planets becoming functional Malefics and normally Malefic planets becoming functional benefics depending on individual charts and configurations.

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

I would disagree with this statement and give the example of normally Benefic planets becoming functional Malefics and normally Malefic planets becoming functional benefics depending on individual charts and configurations.
Oh, so now we're discussing Vedic, are we?! Well, I think benefic and malefic natures remain the same, it's just that the planet can't utilize it well. One example is Capricorn, fall of Jupiter which is also a functional malefic to that sign. Capricorn is a minimal nature, they don't aim high, desire great things or even lean to optimism because they know how fickle fortune can be and how easily life can take all of these things away or how a blessing, like a promotion at work can become a curse, such as having to be in charge of lay-offs and having to make increasingly difficult decisions which could have bigger consequences and possibly for even more people if the wrong ones are made.

Mars is a functional benefic to Cancer, the sign of its fall. Usually Cancer is considered a timid, sometimes vaccilating nature preferring safety, and this can cause people to underestimate them and devalue their needs. A little Mars energy and Cancer can begin to assert itself, stand up for its rights and protect what's theirs.

Then there's the weird cases like Mars and Venus being functional malefics to their non-moolatrikae (if that's a word ;P) signs. Mars is easy for me to understand, it just makes the already fixed, brooding, sensitive and jealous nature of Mars become even angrier and focused and fixated on that anger and because of the usually slothful nature of the sign Scorpio the anger has no outlet. Venus in Scorpio is bad also because Scorpio doesn't like having to play all of those games to pacify society and Scorpio becomes so jealous at the vague and fickle nature of Venus and retains those slights (I read somewhere that Venus in Scorpio likes to take this frustration out as humor).

Venus and Taurus is a little more tricky since so many astrologers take such an unanalytical approach to astrology and just decide Venus rules Taurus, so it's great there. But again, Venus can be very fickle, enticing you one moment, dumping you for the next person she lays her eyes on the next; this is bad for the stable and loyal Taurus which believes that if anything is important it will last. Taurus is also the sign of acquisition and having, meaning Venus can act even more like a gold-digging parasite than usual (it doesn't seem uncommon to hear musician with Venus in Taurus going on about getting money then getting the girls).

Then there's the really weird ones like Venus and Virgo, the sign of its fall but it's a functional benefic? And Pisces, the sign of its exaltation, but it's a functional malefic! Virgo can have self-esteem issues (probably caused by bad Venus experiences) and later focus on work to ignore their own desires feeling it can't work out for them, but they are romantics and they do want to succeed in love just as much as any other and they do enjoy it when they get the chances and courage to be part of it. Pisces (this one is hard to figure out!) can idealize romance so much and will definitely be disillusioned when they see things they might've turned their eye away from and like with Scorpio the scars remain long after. Impulsiveness could get them an STD. Succumbing to peer pressure. Too much usage of booze to "get lucky" (it is Venus' sixth house I guess, bad health)...

Of course if you ask real Vedic astrologers they'll tell you something different (and probably more about destiny than psychology), these are just some of my thoughts; can't wait to hear yours.

For those that don't know, the traditional planet that rules the 6th, 8th or 12th sign (if these signs are the planet's Moola Trikona, meaning preferred house to Vedic; the rationale is generally easy to understand, they usually perfer the planet of their own gender, Mercury's is Virgo because it can be there while the Sun's in Leo. Why the Moon's is Taurus and Gemini has no functional malefic I don't know) from another sign is considered a functional malefic (http://www.mywebastrologer.com/knowyourplanet.asp). All others are functional benefics. I wonder if a planet should be considered a functional malefic in it's own 12 house as well (consider for instance Mars and Pisces, Sun and Cancer, Saturn and Sagittarius... Even modernly Pluto and Libra and Uranus and Capricorn... don't seem like very great matches to me)

I still say planets have but one personality. :)

[Frank]

No, we're not discussing Vedic.

[lillyjgc]

:smile:

(this is, of course, an astrological comment in a visual format)

:smile:
Lillyjgc

[Frank]

To expand upon my assertion that Luminaries and Planets can have more than one nature, let's use one of my favorite metaphors - astrology as a language and the Luminaries and Planets are the verbs. Signs are adverbs. Houses are Nouns. Aspects are adjectives. As most metaphors are, it's imperfect, but a good way to think about theparts of the chart.

Let's take the verb "attack" for example. There are many differnt ways to attack. One can attack directly. Or indirectly, verbally, psychologically stealthily, savagely, professionally, disceetly, etc.

Yes, they are all attacks - but the nature of each is different.

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

No, we're not discussing Vedic.Uh, ok... I'm confused now, I've never heard of 'functional malefics and benefics' in Western astrology, can you explain please? Do you mean when a planet is slow, negatively aspected or in a debilitating sign or something?

[Frank]

The concept of functional benefics and malefics (although that specific term may not have been used) is and always has been prevalent in Hellenistic, Medieval, Classical, and other forms of astrology besides Vedic.

[Frank]

To elaborate, let's take a look at what William Lilly says in Book I of "Christian Astrology" [1647] about Saturn and Jupiter (his work is in the public domain - no copyright issues):

Saturn:
[Manners & Actions, when well dignified.] Then he is profound in Imagination, in his Acts severe, in words reserved, in speaking and giving very spare, in labour patient, in arguing or disputing grave, in obtaining the goods of this life studious and solicitous, in all manner of actions austere.

Jupiter:
[WHEN ILL.] When Jupiter is unfortunate, then he wastes his Patrimony, suffers every one to cozen him, is Hypocritically Religious, Tenacious, and stiffe in maintaining false Tenents in Religion; he is Ignorant, Carelesse, nothing Delightfull in the love of his Friends; of a grosse, dull Capacity, Schismaticall, abating himself in all Companies, crooching and stooping where no necessity is.

----

If those excerpts don't confirm for someone that the Western astrological tradition shows that Malefics like Saturn can be functional Benefics and Benefics like Jupiter can be functional malefics, I don't know what else to say.

[starlink]

Frank, I very much appreciate your traditional astrology contribution as in this Forum the balance between Modern and Traditional is very un-equal.

Since I delved into Horary astrology, I slowly but surely have become more fascinated with the traditional view but dont know all the ins and outs. I read your article and could follow it well as I think I understand the dignities and debilities by now, but when I got to the part with the multiple dispositors explanation, I had to read slower and then re-read and I learned something new again. I am delighted that we finally have someone who shows us this approach to astrology even though I studied modern astrology. The more info we can get from a chart, the better!

Pallas-t-Mars,

You said:

but it just seemed kind of presumptuous to assume that people would want to read a lecture, and a dated one at that, on a board or that we would need to, this is an astrology board already so I would guess that if people are posting here they either already have some background information of astrology or they know where they can get it. Besides, AstrologyWeekly already has astrology tutorials.



I think that you did not really grabbed the purpose of the Education Board when you wrote this. Of course the articles are written by members who already know about astrology. Newbies and those who are not experienced cannot post here!

This is an Education Board, specially designed for newbies and those members who have not yet enough basic knowledge, in order to learn the basics. The more complicated subjects, like the one Frank has posted, is for those who do know quite a lot of astrology, but want to learn more and Frank has given us more.

Finally, we have some astrology tutorials written by some members, but nothing about traditional astrology.

I have no difficulty at all in understanding that a benific planet can act malific and a malific planet can do good. I have always thought of this possibility. Everything has his opposite, so a good planet can show its negative side and vice versa. I believe that the planets can change their basic energy according to interference by other planets . I usually look at the aspects it gets and the background it has in order to see if the basic good qualities of a planet will indeed be expressed like they should or whether aspects/background can change it. Likewise with a malific planet. Placed in a good house, with the right background and well aspected, it can show courage (Mars) or nobility(Saturn), not always doom and gloom. I am not an intellectual and approach everything as simple as possible but it should be clear to me. That's all. And this is.

Starlink

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

To elaborate, let's take a look at what William Lilly says in Book I of "Christian Astrology" [1647] about Saturn and Jupiter (his work is in the public domain - no copyright issues):

Saturn:
[Manners & Actions, when well dignified.] Then he is profound in Imagination, in his Acts severe, in words reserved, in speaking and giving very spare, in labour patient, in arguing or disputing grave, in obtaining the goods of this life studious and solicitous, in all manner of actions austere.

Jupiter:
[WHEN ILL.] When Jupiter is unfortunate, then he wastes his Patrimony, suffers every one to cozen him, is Hypocritically Religious, Tenacious, and stiffe in maintaining false Tenents in Religion; he is Ignorant, Carelesse, nothing Delightfull in the love of his Friends; of a grosse, dull Capacity, Schismaticall, abating himself in all Companies, crooching and stooping where no necessity is.

----

If those excerpts don't confirm for someone that the Western astrological tradition shows that Malefics like Saturn can be functional Benefics and Benefics like Jupiter can be functional malefics, I don't know what else to say.
I saw this on RenaissanceAstrology.com a while back, but I still disagree that the planet's nature has changed. If you look at how Lilly described Mars (http://www.renaissanceastrology.com/mars.html#I), he NEVER considers it benefic, only bad or worse (and while it could just be that modern females are different than ladies of his time, but I think his description of Venus is seriously lacking, and maybe he should've done archetypal differences by gender too...).

As far as the differences between benefics acting like malefics and vice versa I still think that it's probably just due to an [un]fortunate placement or aspect. For instance, Saturn is ALWAYS serious, when well-placed or not, the difference in a good placement from a bad placement could cause Saturn's pessimistic tendencies to overtake him or it could have the patience to turn that negativity into pragmatism as you mentioned.

The 'bad' Jupiter to me seems like a Jupiter that has lost perspective. Instead of being able to see the possibilities and the good, it has fixated on something that it sees as morally wrong (IMO this seems a bit like a reaction to Neptune, an angry stage of grief for loss of an ideal) or is stuck in a mode where it focuses on the differences instead of the similarities of people (perhaps a Venus or Saturn issue?), but it is still Jupiter, seeking truth, understanding and to do what seems to be 'right' to it, it's just that in this case it's under stress. If a usually nice person is having a bad day and is snapping at people, does that mean that the person has changed?

Starlink, again, at the time it seemed presumptuous to me that he just posted a lecture with no real reason for it. I mean, if someone had posted a question asking for someone to explain how traditional astrology works that would've been an intirely different thing! ...But whatever... At least we got this good discussion out of it. :)

[starlink]

the example of normally Benefic planets becoming functional Malefics and normally Malefic planets becoming functional benefics depending on individual charts and configurations.
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/images/futura/misc/progress.gif


As far as the differences between benefics acting like malefics and vice versa I still think that it's probably just due to an [un]fortunate placement or aspect.


Isn't this the same?

I would also like to add that I dont look at planets being "bad" or good". Nothing can be utterly bad or utterly good, unless there is absolutely no influence coming from anywhere else (like a square from Mars to Saturn, causing it's energy to become really unpleasant to say the least.)

This would possibly be the case whereby a Venus in house 5 (traditionally )and in house 7 (modernly speaking) and in Taurus or Libra or Pisces (exaltation) would be unaspected. Or am I seeing this totally wrong?

[Frank]

I saw this on RenaissanceAstrology.com a while back, but I still disagree that the planet's nature has changed. If you look at how Lilly described Mars (http://www.renaissanceastrology.com/mars.html#I), he NEVER considers it benefic, only bad or worse....

So, you account bravery as "bad or worse"?

Mars:

"[MANNERS WHEN WELL DIGNIFIED.] In feats of Warre and Courage invincible, scourning any should exceed him, subject to no Reason, Bold, Confident, Immoveable, Contentious, challenging all Honour to thenselves, Valiant, lovers of Warre and things pertaining thereunto, hazarding himself to all Perils, willingly will obey no body; nor submit to any, a large reporter of his own Acts, one that fights all things in comparison of Victory, and yet of prudent behaviour in his own affaires."

For instance, Saturn is ALWAYS serious, when well-placed or not, the difference in a good placement from a bad placement could cause Saturn's pessimistic tendencies to overtake him or it could have the patience to turn that negativity into pragmatism as you mentioned.

Then why is Saturn given to "Clowns" (whch means not just what we condsider clowns these days, but comic actors)?

Saturn
"[QUALITY OF MEN.] In generall he signifieth Husbandmen, Clowns, Beggars, Day—labourers, Old-men, Fathers, Grand—fathers, Monks, Jesuits, Sectarists."

Preliminary reasearch I've done shows Saturn is prominent is the charts of comedians and comic actors.


Pigeon-holing planets into just a single nature seems to me to be very limiting. Even in a system which deals with just the planets, such as Ebertin's Cosmobiology which discards Signs and Houses, each planet's expression changes when in combination with other planets.

[Pallas-trine-Mars]

[MANNERS WHEN WELL DIGNIFIED.] In feats of Warre and Courage invincible, scourning any should exceed him, subject to no Reason (irrational), Bold, Confident, Immoveable (stubborn), Contentious (angry and hateful), challenging all Honour to thenselves, Valiant, lovers of Warre and things pertaining thereunto (Do I really need to explain that one?), hazarding himself to all Perils (self-destructive/a danger to himself/reckless), willingly will obey no body (arrogant, immodest and rebellious); nor submit to any, a large reporter of his own Acts (braggart), one that fights all things in comparison of Victory, and yet of prudent behaviour in his own affaires." ...And according to Lilly, that's Mars at its best, and I agree with him (the good aspects too).

Hmm, Saturn ruling actors? I think modern astrologers usually associate actors and such with Neptune, idk.. I could see Saturn ruling comics, they usually make social commentary, which would involve a bit of a cynical view of society. Look at "Everybody Hates Chris," if the show is an accurate representation of Chris Rock's childhood, he seemed to be pretty Saturn-ly as a kid, always with a lot of duties, very little power, options, assistance and surrounded by hazards, obstacles and stern authority figures, yet he made a career out of his misery. Jupiter is often considered the "laughing" planet, so maybe it has some involvement, too?

Starlink, yes and no.We sort of agree, but I think he's seeing the condition of a planet fatalistically. The way I see it, a planet is always the same, it's just that it can be strained, the way he started it was either bad or good. My original point was that a planet has a specific nature and that it unrealistic to expect it change to suit both signs that it rules, which to me is why it makes sense to assign planets to the sign that it has most in common with to me. I don't see this as pigeon-holing, I just want to understand the psychology of the planets and how the houses and signs interact with each other, I don't mean to belittle someone's system, I'm just trying to find out what works.

[starlink]

Starlink, yes and no.We sort of agree, but I think he's seeing the condition of a planet fatalistically. The way I see it, a planet is always the same, it's just that it can be strained, the way he started it was either bad or good. My original point was that a planet has a specific nature and that it unrealistic to expect it change to suit both signs that it rules, which to me is why it makes sense to assign planets to the sign that it has most in common with to me. I don't see this as pigeon-holing, I just want to understand the psychology of the planets and how the houses and signs interact with each other, I don't mean to belittle someone's system, I'm just trying to find out what works.


Thanks for noticing my small contribution Pallas!:) I must say that overall, I find traditional astrology also quite fatalistic but of course in those days these things were quite like that. In our modern days, most of the horrible qualities attributed to stars and planets have been modified considerably of course. I think that we should try to not too become too rigid by only holding on to traditional meanings. I take the parts that still work well also now and do not take too much notice of certain things like :Mars in the 5th means death of a child and Algol conjunct your Sun that you will be hanged! although in certain primitive countries it might still be true. Think of Saddam Hussein......

To me Saturn ruling Aquarius has always been difficult for me to perceive, precisely because Uranus means freedom and Saturn the opposite. But I once did read an explanation, oh boy, forgot where, and for a moment I did see some meaning there, but for the life of me I cannot remember it anymore.

Anyways, I am still fascinated by all the newness (for me) of the old traditions.

[CJN]

So, we know how to calculate the strength of the classical planets, but how would we do with Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. We know their own sign and detriment, but what about the rest?

For triplicity, terms and faces I would use Uranus=Saturn, Neptune=Jupiter and Pluto=Mars. However, then there's the question of what to do with exaltation and fall.

[Frank]

So, we know how to calculate the strength of the classical planets, but how would we do with Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. We know their own sign and detriment, but what about the rest?

For triplicity, terms and faces I would use Uranus=Saturn, Neptune=Jupiter and Pluto=Mars. However, then there's the question of what to do with exaltation and fall.


You don't use Uranus, Neptune and Pluto in the Classical Dignities system. I use them in charts, but do NOT assign them Essential Dignity becuase they don't work in the system.