Feral Planets

tsmall

Premium Member
I've asked about this in a couple of other forums and have yet to receive a definitive answer. The best I got, as always, were conflicting opinions as to whether or not it was even possible for planets other than the Moon to be wild, especially in natal charts.

The parameters for a feral planet differ depending on which authority, and age of astrology we choose to look at. Morin seems to be the only one I have found reference to who attempted to offer a way to delineate a feral planet.

will act simply in accordance with its own nature...[and] indicates something unusual--good or ill--depending on the nature of the planet

Here is a chart in which the Sun appears to be feral. We have Sun in Cancer in the 12th with Leo rising. Mars is in Sagittarius in the 5th, intercepted. Moon in Aquarius as Sun's ruler pretty tightly applying to the descendant. Venus, Saturn, Mercury and Jupiter are all in Gemini in the 11th (also intercepted.)

The Sun's last aspect would have been a conjunction with Jupiter.


***Mistake. Sun's last aspect was the prenatal lunation which was an opposition to the Moon in Capricorn.***

However, as this is a natal chart, the Sun is completely unaspected. So the question is, are we indeed looking at a feral Sun? And if not, why? I can only think of two reasons. The first would be that since Sun is <barely> still within orb of of Jupiter if you use 17* for the Sun, then technically Sun is not unaspected, and certainly wasn't unaspected when it entered Cancer.

The second way was proposed by a friend, and involves the Moon, and why it was important to consider phasis in natal charts. In trying to understand why some traditional astrologers today say that only the Moon can be wild, yet faced with a chart in which this didn't appear to be the case...Moon will aspect the Sun within 7 days of the nativity, in this case by trine once Moon gets to Pisces.

Opinions?
 

Attachments

  • Feral Sun (2).jpg
    Feral Sun (2).jpg
    68 KB · Views: 89
Last edited:

dr. farr

Well-known member
Although personally I do not account for a "feral" state (just as I personally do not account for a "peregrine" state), nonetheless in considering the various historical opinions about this I must point out that the potential "feral" planet ALSO CANNOT be in DECLINATIONAL aspect, that is, it would be excluded from being "feral" IF, although not in any longitudinal aspect with any other planet, yet it is in Parallel of declination with some other planet, than it would be excluded from being "feral"...
 

tsmall

Premium Member
Although personally I do not account for a "feral" state (just as I personally do not account for a "peregrine" state), nonetheless in considering the various historical opinions about this I must point out that the potential "feral" planet ALSO CANNOT be in DECLINATIONAL aspect, that is, it would be excluded from being "feral" IF, although not in any longitudinal aspect with any other planet, yet it is in Parallel of declination with some other planet, than it would be excluded from being "feral"...

And now we have a discussion on how to mitigate aversion.

You would think, after the twists and turns you and I went through getting me to understand parallels, that I would remember it all. Sigh.

Ok, parallel in declination is a tight degree, correct?

Sun is at 22*33' N. What were the orbs we allowed? Jupiter is at 23*8' N. I'd like to see Sun closer to Mercury, which is at 19*59 N...

I was actually, back when I first discovered the possibility of a feral Sun here, looking at the relationship between Cancer and Sagittarius. Ptolemy called them signs commanding and obeying, but that diverges from everyone else's definition of commanding and obeying. At the very least, we can classify Cancer and Sagittarius as signs of equal ascension...which would be signs that can hear each other?
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
Parallel orbs: anciently 1degree30 minutes (Modernists = 1 degree*)
So the Sun and Jupiter are within the (oldtime) orb of Parallel of declination (defacto conjunction)
Sun could not be considered "feral"...

(and eclectic Dr. Farr uses a maximum orb of 2 degrees and finds it works very well!)
 

BobZemco

Well-known member
Here is a chart in which the Sun appears to be feral. We have Sun in Cancer in the 12th with Leo rising. Mars is in Sagittarius in the 5th, intercepted. Moon in Aquarius as Sun's ruler pretty tightly applying to the descendant. Venus, Saturn, Mercury and Jupiter are all in Gemini in the 11th (also intercepted.)

The Sun's last aspect would have been a conjunction with Jupiter.


***Mistake. Sun's last aspect was the prenatal lunation which was an opposition to the Moon in Capricorn.***

It's a Preventional Chart. Good for you for catching that.

However, as this is a natal chart, the Sun is completely unaspected. So the question is, are we indeed looking at a feral Sun?

Yes.

And if not, why? I can only think of two reasons. The first would be that since Sun is <barely> still within orb of of Jupiter if you use 17* for the Sun, then technically Sun is not unaspected, and certainly wasn't unaspected when it entered Cancer.

I don't see that as an aspect.

I think part of the confusion for people where Sun is concerned are the concepts of Combustion/Under Beams.

Combustion/Under Beams is a condition, and it isn't contingent on Signs --- either the Planet is not Under Beams/Combust (and you can see the Planet in the sky), or the Planet is Under Beams/Combust (and you cannot see the Planet....unless you crank the Hubble Space Telescope around or use special filters on your lenses).

Being Combust/Under Beams doesn't have any relation to being joined by body to the Sun, which requires a Planet to be in the same Sign as the Sun. There are a couple of examples I have seen, one in Bonatti and few elsewhere and it is clear they don't use "out-of-Sign" aspects, even when the "aspect" is a "conjunction."

Actually, I'm glad you brought this up, because with respect to being joined to Sun, there are only three positions: Under Beams, Combust or Cazimi (well, I guess five if you count the outbound Combust and Under Beam positions). It kind of just donned on me that people might not be aware of that.

The second way was proposed by a friend, and involves the Moon, and why it was important to consider phasis in natal charts. In trying to understand why some traditional astrologers today say that only the Moon can be wild, yet faced with a chart in which this didn't appear to be the case...Moon will aspect the Sun within 7 days of the nativity, in this case by trine once Moon gets to Pisces.

Opinions?

I'm not sure that's a correct view. Remember when you asked about Mercury going stationary?

Phasis is sort of a condition of a Planet as it Stations, goes Direct or goes Retrograde, or you have what you call an heliacal-rising, where a Planet rises just before Sun and is visible (hence the Crescent as a symbol for Islam, except that is Venus.....not Moon....Venus appears as a crescent when rising just ahead of Sun...and so Venus is a significator for Islam in Mundane Charts ---and just think....conventional wisdom says they didn't have telescopes way back then....how did they know?).

Having said that, to the best of my knowledge, Phasis does not involve aspects of any kind, and it only concerns the three Superiors (Mars, Jupiter & Saturn).

So Phasis doesn't apply to Moon, Mercury or Venus (and not Sun either) --- which doesn't mean Moon, Mercury or Venus cannot have an helical-rising (they certainly can -- as well as change Direction), but that would mean that Moon and Venus would not be in-Sect.

Most of this is related to determining if a child will live (the first three states) and/or for determining length of life, and if I remember, some used it as the Chart Ruler (that is if one of the 3 Superiors made an heliacal-rising it was chosen as the Chart Ruler).

Also if I recall correctly, this Phasis is 7 days either side of the birth-date.

The logic for that seems to be that when the Superiors change Direction, they go Retrograde for months and months and months on end, not just a couple of weeks like Mercury/Venus, and that holds greater weight.

Feral is related to Void of Course, and I apply to all Planets, plus I'm of the opinion that both definitions for VOC are correct.

To be VOC in a Sign, holds a particular signification.

To be VOC in a Sign, and then for the next 30° has a different meaning.

When you have a Feral Planet, like Sun in this chart, what impedes it?

Nothing, but then by the same token nothing helps it either.

A Feral Planet can pretty much do whatever it wants to do within the limits of its condition. Sun at 15° Cancer is going to be Peregrine as well.

What is unique here is that Sun is also Ascendant Ruler and is disjunct to not only the Ascendant and every freaking Planet in the Chart, but also in aversion to the Lot of Fortune.

Is this person still alive?

I ask because Sun in 12th cannot be Hyleg. I don't consider Moon in a Day Chart, not that it matters, because if Moon was Hyleg, they'd already be dead. Since the Chart is Preventional, we can rule out the Ascendant and have to use the Lot of Fortune, or we'd have to find a Planet that has Dignity in the appropriate places, and that would probably be Saturn or one of the others in Gemini.

You understand that the Sun in the 12th protects against Secret Enemies, right? Except the Sun rules the 1st, so they are their own worst enemy.

To help delineate the Sun, I'd use antiscia and Lots.
 

tsmall

Premium Member
What is unique here is that Sun is also Ascendant Ruler and is disjunct to not only the Ascendant and every freaking Planet in the Chart, but also in aversion to the Lot of Fortune.

Pretty neat, hunh?

Is this person still alive?

Proof of life?

Yes. This is a female nativity. The twelve year old native is in and always has enjoyed excellent health. I just spent the last hour going through all of Masha'Allah's methods to recognize if the native will prevail or not and I'm still trying to sort that out.

I ask because Sun in 12th cannot be Hyleg. I don't consider Moon in a Day Chart,

Just today alone I've read in the same book conflicting views on if the Moon should be considered in a day chart. It looks like Ptolemy and Bonatti and Abu'Ali allowed for it. Indeed, even my software gives high certainty that Moon is predominator. Honestly I haven't been invested enough to learn and test all the methods.

not that it matters, because if Moon was Hyleg, they'd already be dead.

I've been puzzling over that one. Because Moon is in the descendant in a masculine sign and beseiged?

Since the Chart is Preventional, we can rule out the Ascendant and have to use the Lot of Fortune, or we'd have to find a Planet that has Dignity in the appropriate places, and that would probably be Saturn or one of the others in Gemini.

I would like to make sure I understand. If we use LoF, don't we then need the planet that has most dignity in the degree of Lot of Fortune and is in aspect? Because yes, Saturn has the most dignity where Lot of Fortune is. Saturn trumps all the other planets for dignity in all the hylegical places and comes out as Almuten of the chart. So LoF as hyleg and Saturn as alcocoden?


To help delineate the Sun, I'd use antiscia and Lots.

Sun's antiscion is at 15* Gemini. Hardly anyone uses antiscia. Do you read it the same as you would if the Sun were actually at 15* Gemini, except that obviously those planets would still be free from the beams?

Which Lots?
 

BobZemco

Well-known member
Pretty neat, hunh?

Enough to merit study.

Proof of life?

Yes. This is a female nativity. The twelve year old native is in and always has enjoyed excellent health. I just spent the last hour going through all of Masha'Allah's methods to recognize if the native will prevail or not and I'm still trying to sort that out.

Didn't mean to frighten. Saturn rules the 6th.

Saturn is in Hayz, and more than that, in a Masculine Bright Degree, plus in a Masculine Quarter.

Saturn is highly competent ---- 110% competent -- to perform the task it has been given.

Saturn would be Besieged by Benefics, but Mars breaks that with is rays. The Rx Mars/Saturn opposition is the only thing that would impede Saturn, who is fine in his own Triplicity.

Just today alone I've read in the same book conflicting views on if the Moon should be considered in a day chart. It looks like Ptolemy and Bonatti and Abu'Ali allowed for it. Indeed, even my software gives high certainty that Moon is predominator. Honestly I haven't been invested enough to learn and test all the methods.

I don't trust the software. Solarfire incorrectly calculates the Hyleg in my chart.

I've been puzzling over that one. Because Moon is in the descendant in a masculine sign and beseiged?

The Ascending Degree and Midheaven are "visible," but the IC and Descending Degree are not. Just as the Ascendant Point/Degree is Life, the Descendant Point/Degree is the opposite of life. And to clarify, we're not talking about the 7th Sign or 7th House, rather the actual Descending Degree.

Aquarius is a Sign of Short Ascension (from Capricorn to Gemini) and Planets or Points in Quadrant II moving to the Descendant Point move very fast, much faster than Signs of Long Ascension.

I would like to make sure I understand. If we use LoF, don't we then need the planet that has most dignity in the degree of Lot of Fortune and is in aspect? Because yes, Saturn has the most dignity where Lot of Fortune is. Saturn trumps all the other planets for dignity in all the hylegical places and comes out as Almuten of the chart. So LoF as hyleg and Saturn as alcocoden?

There's a lot of confusion with that.

Bonatti's method comes via the Arabs/Persians, and Ptolemy's method is something else entirely.

The theory behind Ptolemy's method (which isn't even his), is based on the connection to Life.

So we have to take off all of our Astro-Hats and Astro-Glasses and put on our Astro-Life/Death Hat and Astro-Life/Death Glasses (I don't think Ray-Ban or Versace make any special frames for those).

Below Earth is Death, Above Earth is Life, and so Hyleg can only be Above Earth.

Hyleg must be in Sign Aspect to the Ascendant to establish a connection with Life, so that rules out the 8th and 12th Signs, which even though Above Earth are in aversion to the Ascendant.

Life is also represented by the Sect Light, so in a Day Chart, that is Sun.

Effectively, in a Day Chart, you take Sun and any Planet except Moon (which is actually a Light) that is in the 7th, 9th, 10th or 11th Signs, and they are candidates to be Hyleg.

Now you score them, even though it appears that Ptolemy seems to suggest that Sun is automatically Hyleg in a Day Chart if situated in 7th, 9th, 10th or 11th Houses.

Scoring is by Dignity in the Ascendant, Sun and Longitude of the last pre-Natal Moon (Full or New).

People err here, because they use a weighted scoring system like Lily's. It's just one point per Dignity --- Domicile Ruler, Exaltation Ruler, Triplicity Ruler, Bound Ruler and Decan Ruler.

It is unclear if Ptolemy uses the Sect Triplicity Ruler or not, meaning in a Day Chart Sun is Sect Triplicity Ruler for Fire....so ignore the Night Ruler (Jupiter in Ptolemy's Ptriplcity Scheme).

I use Dorothean Triplicities, and use the Sect Triplicity Ruler and Participating Ruler with stellar results so far (ignoring the non-Sect Triplicity Ruler).

1 point each.

In the chart you have, Moon is not the Sect Light, Sun is in the 12th, so that leaves Mercury, Venus, Jupiter and Saturn as Hyleg candidates.

Ascending Degree (4° Leo):

Mercury: 0
Venus: 0
Jupiter: 1 (Bound Ruler)
Saturn: 1 (Joint Fire Triplicity Ruler)

Sun (15° Cancer):

Mercury: 1 (Face Ruler) + 1 (Bound Ruler) [2]
Venus: 1 (Triplicity Ruler) [1]
Jupiter: 1 (Exaltation Ruler) [2]
Saturn: 0 [1]

Pre-Natal Full Moon (13° Capricorn)

Mercury: 0 [2]
Venus: 1 (Triplicity Ruler) [2]
Jupiter: 1 (Bound Ruler) [3]
Saturn: 1 (Domicile Ruler) [3]

So we have a tie between Jupiter and Saturn.

Both sextile the Ascendant. Both are in Hayz. Neither are Combust or Retrograde. Jupiter is Peregrine, Saturn is not. Jupiter is in Detriment, Saturn is in his own Triplicity. Saturn is in a Diurnal Air Sign --- Hot & Moist -- which tempers his nature -- Cold & Dry. Saturn is Oriental of Sun.

Saturn is Hyleg.

Sun's antiscion is at 15* Gemini. Hardly anyone uses antiscia. Do you read it the same as you would if the Sun were actually at 15* Gemini, except that obviously those planets would still be free from the beams?

Antiscia is kind of like a passive Transfer of Light.

We already established that the pre-Natal Moon was a Full Moon at 13° Capricorn. There was also a partial Eclipse two days prior to birth at 13° Capricorn. You have Retrograde Mars casting his shadow at 13° Capricorn.

Contra-antiscia are bad, and Mars casts his at 13° Cancer, and likewise Sun casts his at 14° Sagittarius.

Which Lots?

1st and 12th House Lots.

A couple of other things to help you....

Moon and Alpheratz rose together at 9:44 PM

Betelgeuse is with Jupiter at 28° Gemini

Part of Spirit sits at 14° Capricorn.

That Mars/Saturn opposition never perfects. About 12 days later Mars goes On-Station.
 

DreamingTheSeas

Well-known member
I know its out of theme but...

Bob

We found the Hyleg planet or point, and we bring that to the Dsc. In Tsmall 's examble, we calculate Saturn to Dsc which 4'18 Aquarius and its 174,7. Saturn conjuct Dsc at 174,7.
Mars square Dsc at 39', Saturn square Dsc at 34'

174,7-39'-'34 = 101,7 That's a long life span.
 

BobZemco

Well-known member
I know its out of theme but...

Bob

We found the Hyleg planet or point, and we bring that to the Dsc. In Tsmall 's examble, we calculate Saturn to Dsc which 4'18 Aquarius and its 174,7. Saturn conjuct Dsc at 174,7.
Mars square Dsc at 39', Saturn square Dsc at 34'

174,7-39'-'34 = 101,7 That's a long life span.

Ah, well how stupid am I. I forgot to explain the whole premise behind the two theories.

Okay, this Egyptian Method Ptolemy relates is Angle/Pivot-based.

If the Hyleg is found in Quadrant II -- a Feminine Quadrant comprising the 7th, 8th and 9th Houses --- then the Hyleg and any Planets in the 7th, 8th or 9th Houses, are directed to the Descendant Point. The Arc of Direction is the "base years" and the Arcs for Benefics/Malefics in Quadrant II add/subtract to that.

If the Hyleg is in Quadrant I -- a Masculine Quadrant of the 12th, 11th and 10th Houses, then, uh, well, here's where Zoller and a few others are going to have a cow.

Most say to direct the Hyleg and Planets to the MC. That isn't exactly what Ptolemy says; they confused the technique of directing with the technique for determining life span; that would be really hard to do since they didn't use the MC for a long time; and even when they were using the MC, it was actually the 0° Point of the 10th Sign.

You actually direct the Ascending Degree in Primary Motion (clock-wise) to the Planets in Quadrant I.

Anyway, there are like some 50+ surviving manuscripts of Ptolemy's work, and no, Ptolemy did not write them, rather other people copied them from other manuscripts, including the original manuscript. All manuscripts have variations and deviations from one extent to another, including the chapters being arranged out of order and amendations and deletions to the text.

So, now we can see how doctrines and concepts get messed up in translation and misunderstanding over the centuries (and even recent days apparently).

As I mentioned on another thread, Ptolemy retells a method of calculating a Conception Chart, and from this Conception Chart, Ptolemy claimed one could determine the Native's future rank or station in life, whether the birth would be a single birth, or a multiple birth (like twins) and whether the child would be born deformed or have birth defects.

Someone copying Ptolemy's manuscript re-arranged the order of the chapters to make it appear that Ptolemy was using the Natal Chart to determine the Native's rank and station in life....instead of the Conception Chart.

Fast forward a few centuries, and you have Jewish and Arab astrologers pulling out their hair....or maybe their beards...trying to figure out why they keep failing when using Ptolemy's...on a Natal Chart....because they don't understand that Ptolemy was using a Conception Chart.

So they try to crow-bar a new scheme of "body-guarding" to conform with Ptolemy's method.

That fails...obviously...so a few centuries later, they try to crow-bar a second scheme of "body-guarding" into the Natal Chart.

That failed, too.

So here we all are.....centuries later.....still trying to figure out how to determine a person's rank and fame in life.

That same sad story repeats itself with the Hyleg.

From 1900 BCE to 1700 CE, the Human Race actually got really dumb before they started to get smart (or I suppose less dumb), and they still ain't really all that.

Armed with really bad copies of Ptolemy's work containing amendations, errors and omissions, and not knowing a thing about math and how to calculate ascensional differences and things, the Latins, Jews and Arabs are trying to figure out Ptolemy's scheme of longevity predicting....they can't do it....maybe they're looking for short-cuts.....so they crow-bar another technique on top of Ptolemy's Egyptian Method, and that's how we end up with the Hyleg & Alcochoden.

Like Math and Science, in Astrology, you can get the right result for the wrong reasons.

Their work-around for the Egyptian Method of longevity prediction works....for awhile, and then it breaks down, and when it does....that's when people start creating "exceptions to the rules"....now you can have the Sun in the 8th and the Moon Below Earth in the 3rd House and blah, blah, blah, blah....except that each new "exception to the rule" only creates more exceptions, because the method keeps breaking down.

So here we all are.....centuries later.....still trying to figure out how to determine a person's longevity.

The Hyleg & Alcochoden Method is very arbitrary and highly subjective, which is why it sometimes gives the correct answer, and sometimes not.

The Hyleg Method with Primary Directions is based on math and science, is much less subjective, and consistently yields more accurate results.
 

DreamingTheSeas

Well-known member
First of all THANK YOU for making things clearly even for a person astrologically idiot like me!

Second: When the Ascendant or any other Hyleg planet or point which is in 1st house house, how to calculate?

Third: The benefic and the malefic planets we handle the same? I mean if my Jupiter or Venus are in the quadrant II we direct the Ascendant degree to that planet to see what give or abstract us ?

Fourth: When the Hyleg is Jupiter or Venus and or Mars or Saturn do you still add or abstract?

For everyone who maybe get annoyed with this discussion about longevity : if you dont want to get wet, dont go the sea.
 
Last edited:

tsmall

Premium Member
Enough to merit study.

You had mentioned before, and I think others agree, that feral planets are rare in natal charts.



Didn't mean to frighten. Saturn rules the 6th.

That was actually a joke. Because obviously I know the native is still alive. I was looking at the methods for proving that the native will survive because, you know, proof of life. I got totally and completely lost, but my intention was to learn to show why the native was still alive.

I don't trust the software. Solarfire incorrectly calculates the Hyleg in my chart.

Which is why we need to learn the reasoning behind everything, and then compare it to what the software says. Instead of relying on a computer program to do everything for us.



The Ascending Degree and Midheaven are "visible," but the IC and Descending Degree are not. Just as the Ascendant Point/Degree is Life, the Descendant Point/Degree is the opposite of life. And to clarify, we're not talking about the 7th Sign or 7th House, rather the actual Descending Degree.

Is this then why planets in the descendant are considered to be unfortunate? Because you see reference to that idea, but then everyone is like "oooh, that planet is angular which is way cool."

Aquarius is a Sign of Short Ascension (from Capricorn to Gemini) and Planets or Points in Quadrant II moving to the Descendant Point move very fast, much faster than Signs of Long Ascension.

All right. And now I can say I'm very glad that Moon isn't Hyleg. You know what is interesting though is that she had a proven case of Scarlet Fever (she was quarantined at the ER and everyone had to come and see...wearing gloves and masks of course) at the age of 6. $1.46 worth of penicillin took care of what could have been a case of the nasties.



There's a lot of confusion with that.

Bonatti's method comes via the Arabs/Persians, and Ptolemy's method is something else entirely.

The theory behind Ptolemy's method (which isn't even his), is based on the connection to Life.

So we have to take off all of our Astro-Hats and Astro-Glasses and put on our Astro-Life/Death Hat and Astro-Life/Death Glasses (I don't think Ray-Ban or Versace make any special frames for those).

Below Earth is Death, Above Earth is Life, and so Hyleg can only be Above Earth.

Hyleg must be in Sign Aspect to the Ascendant to establish a connection with Life, so that rules out the 8th and 12th Signs, which even though Above Earth are in aversion to the Ascendant.

Life is also represented by the Sect Light, so in a Day Chart, that is Sun.

Effectively, in a Day Chart, you take Sun and any Planet except Moon (which is actually a Light) that is in the 7th, 9th, 10th or 11th Signs, and they are candidates to be Hyleg.

Now you score them, even though it appears that Ptolemy seems to suggest that Sun is automatically Hyleg in a Day Chart if situated in 7th, 9th, 10th or 11th Houses.

Scoring is by Dignity in the Ascendant, Sun and Longitude of the last pre-Natal Moon (Full or New).

People err here, because they use a weighted scoring system like Lily's. It's just one point per Dignity --- Domicile Ruler, Exaltation Ruler, Triplicity Ruler, Bound Ruler and Decan Ruler.

It is unclear if Ptolemy uses the Sect Triplicity Ruler or not, meaning in a Day Chart Sun is Sect Triplicity Ruler for Fire....so ignore the Night Ruler (Jupiter in Ptolemy's Ptriplcity Scheme).

I use Dorothean Triplicities, and use the Sect Triplicity Ruler and Participating Ruler with stellar results so far (ignoring the non-Sect Triplicity Ruler).

1 point each.

In the chart you have, Moon is not the Sect Light, Sun is in the 12th, so that leaves Mercury, Venus, Jupiter and Saturn as Hyleg candidates.

Ascending Degree (4° Leo):

Mercury: 0
Venus: 0
Jupiter: 1 (Bound Ruler)
Saturn: 1 (Joint Fire Triplicity Ruler)

Sun (15° Cancer):

Mercury: 1 (Face Ruler) + 1 (Bound Ruler) [2]
Venus: 1 (Triplicity Ruler) [1]
Jupiter: 1 (Exaltation Ruler) [2]
Saturn: 0 [1]

Pre-Natal Full Moon (13° Capricorn)

Mercury: 0 [2]
Venus: 1 (Triplicity Ruler) [2]
Jupiter: 1 (Bound Ruler) [3]
Saturn: 1 (Domicile Ruler) [3]

So we have a tie between Jupiter and Saturn.

Both sextile the Ascendant. Both are in Hayz. Neither are Combust or Retrograde. Jupiter is Peregrine, Saturn is not. Jupiter is in Detriment, Saturn is in his own Triplicity. Saturn is in a Diurnal Air Sign --- Hot & Moist -- which tempers his nature -- Cold & Dry. Saturn is Oriental of Sun.

Saturn is Hyleg.

This part is awesomesauce.

Antiscia is kind of like a passive Transfer of Light.

That already makes a ton of sense, and I still need to ruminate on the idea for a bit.

We already established that the pre-Natal Moon was a Full Moon at 13° Capricorn. There was also a partial Eclipse two days prior to birth at 13° Capricorn.

Yes. Not much of a surprise there. Other than that you noted it. Most astrologers seem to disregard eclipses and eclipse points in natal charts. Since the year that I was born there were five eclipses, and each one conjuncts an important planet or point in my chart...I pay attention.

You have Retrograde Mars casting his shadow at 13° Capricorn.

Contra-antiscia are bad, and Mars casts his at 13° Cancer, and likewise Sun casts his at 14° Sagittarius.

This is the part I most need to think about. Thanks.



1st and 12th House Lots.

A couple of other things to help you....

Moon and Alpheratz rose together at 9:44 PM

Betelgeuse is with Jupiter at 28° Gemini

Part of Spirit sits at 14° Capricorn.

That Mars/Saturn opposition never perfects. About 12 days later Mars goes On-Station.

This is why I originally started exploring this chart. I'm not keen on trying to find out if my children will survive me. I have enough to worry about, thank you very much. So DreamingTheSeas

For everyone who maybe get annoyed with this discussion about longevity : if you dont want to get wet, dont go the sea.

Discuss longevity to your heart's content. Let's just leave this chart out of it? Otherwise I'll have to stick my fingers in my ears and sing "lalalalalala, I can't hear you..."


Kiddo has a feral Sun, which according to Morin will act entirely within it's own nature. What is the nature of a peregrine Sun in Cancer, ruling the ASC but in aversion to it and so possibly the author of her own destruction, with retro Mars intercepted in the 5th applying to an opposition with Saturn...which never perfects. We have...anger and temper issues that boarder on life and death over trivial matters whenever her autonomy is threatened.

There are days when she is the most glorious child you ever met, and then there are days when I wonder if she will be a serial killer, starting with her own sisters (and for those of you worryworts, that was a joke.)

Bob, thank you for your comments. I'm glad to know that the Sun is indeed feral here, and yes, I got over the freak the freak out about it a bit ago.

You do realize that I'm about to go and try to figure out body guarding? Because I believe that if I remember correctly the body guards don't have to be in the same sign.
 

tsmall

Premium Member

Someone copying Ptolemy's manuscript re-arranged the order of the chapters to make it appear that Ptolemy was using the Natal Chart to determine the Native's rank and station in life....instead of the Conception Chart.


I have...issues with the conception chart. Because I don't think, based on personal experience, that it actually works. I tested it with all three, and I'd have to go back a couple of years to my arguments with JUPITERASC about the prenatal Epoch to find my replies...

But it worked in none of the times.

My third was concieved on Dec. 25th 2004. If I remember correctly, her "conception chart" was off by at least a month.
 

DreamingTheSeas

Well-known member
..... So DreamingTheSeas



Discuss longevity to your heart's content. Let's just leave this chart out of it? Otherwise I'll have to stick my fingers in my ears and sing "lalalalalala, I can't hear you..."


.......

Tsmall i'm so sorry for using this chart as an example. I sincerely apologize.

ohhh the thing about wet and sea was not for you, just for everyone who would say how unethical is to determine life and death things.
 
Last edited:

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I have...issues with the conception chart. Because I don't think, based on personal experience, that it actually works. I tested it with all three, and I'd have to go back a couple of years to my arguments with JUPITERASC about the prenatal Epoch to find my replies...

But it worked in none of the times.

My third was concieved on Dec. 25th 2004. If I remember correctly, her "conception chart" was off by at least a month.
QUOTE FROM THE PRENATAL EPOCH by E H Bailey - currently available on amazon


'…..Many people ask, why do astrologers study birth charts, why do they not study the moment of conception? This is not a new question. The reason against conception is that it's darn hard, in most cases, to figure out exactly when that was. You need a technique.

The standard technique, which was not new to Bailey - nor Sepharial, his muse - was to go back nine months, interchange ascendant & moon, and call that the Epoch, or moment of conception.

THIS IS AS FAR AS IVY GOLDSTEIN-JACOBSON EVER TOOK IT

THE PROBLEM WAS THE SIMPLE INTERCHANGE DID NOT WORK IN ALL THAT MANY CASES.....'



'….The solution, which both Sepharial & Bailey gradually arrived at,

was an additional three epochs :smile:

Which one applies to you depends on where the moon is by house, and the angular relationship it has to the sun.

As to the various goodies in this book, the prenatal epoch is a factor in rectification, twins & multiple births, and birth defects. It can also be used with directions, primary directions & more. Which amounts to an entire school of astrology, if anyone wants to push it.....'



TOWARDS THE END OF BAILEY'S LIFE (1876-1959), HANS NIGGEMANN - OF URANIAN ASTROLOGY FAME - GOT HIM TO ADMIT:

THERE SHOULD BE EVEN MORE RULES & EPOCHS,

BUT UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE IS SO INSPIRED, E.H. BAILEY'S WORK IS THE STANDARD WHICH ALL OTHERS MUST MEET
http://www.amazon.com/The-Prenatal-Epoch-E-H-Bailey/dp/1933303247
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member

Anyway, there are like some 50+ surviving manuscripts of Ptolemy's work,
and no, Ptolemy did not write them,
rather other people copied them from other manuscripts, including the original manuscript.
All manuscripts have variations and deviations from one extent to another,
including the chapters being arranged out of order and amendations and deletions to the text
.


So, now we can see how doctrines and concepts get messed up in translation and misunderstanding over the centuries (and even recent days apparently).

As I mentioned on another thread
Ptolemy retells a method of calculating a Conception Chart
and from this Conception Chart, Ptolemy claimed one could determine the Native's future rank or station in life, whether the birth would be a single birth, or a multiple birth (like twins) and whether the child would be born deformed or have birth defects.


Someone copying Ptolemy's manuscript re-arranged the order of the chapters to make it appear that Ptolemy was using the Natal Chart to determine the Native's rank and station in life....instead of the Conception Chart.

Fast forward a few centuries, and you have Jewish and Arab astrologers pulling out their hair....or maybe their beards...trying to figure out why they keep failing when using Ptolemy's...on a Natal Chart....because they don't understand that Ptolemy was using a Conception Chart.....

snipped
.......So here we all are.....centuries later.....still trying to figure out how to determine a person's rank and fame in life....

snipped
......From 1900 BCE to 1700 CE, the Human Race actually got really dumb before they started to get smart (or I suppose less dumb), and they still ain't really all that....

snipped
.....Like Math and Science, in Astrology, you can get the right result for the wrong reasons.
I have...issues with the conception chart. Because I don't think, based on personal experience, that it actually works. I tested it with all three, and I'd have to go back a couple of years to my arguments with JUPITERASC about the prenatal Epoch to find my replies...

But it worked in none of the times.

My third was conceived on Dec. 25th 2004. If I remember correctly, her "conception chart" was off by at least a month.
Good idea to read Abu Bakr and then deduce as to whether the techniques he describes
to find the time of projection of seed into the womb aka Pre-Natal Epoch aka Conception Chart
are applicable or not - in particular to the charts you are studying

i.e.

PERSIAN NATIVITIES
Vol II Ben Dykes Translation

ABU BAKR
On Nativities :smile:
page 85
Chapter 1.2 On the projection of seed into the womb.

Page 89
Chapter 1.3 On the native's stay in the mother's womb

page 91
Chapter 1.4 On knowing the namudar and the hour of the projection of seed into the womb

    1. First Method
    2. Second Method
    3. Another way concerning the native's stay in the mother's belly [Ben Dykes notes that '….This seems to be a way of determining whether the birth was premature or not, to help in judging the date of conception. See Appendix C....']

page 93 to page 101
Chapter 1.5 Detailed planetary disposition of the months
[Ben Dykes notes that:

'...Here we see more clearly that this is the astrological equivalent of genetics, since the native's attitudes and abilities will be signified while already in the womb and not through teaching or experience after birth. This must be why Abu Bakr reports that these months are considered by some to be more important than the nativity – at least in terms of the native's behavior and character....']
 
Last edited:

BobZemco

Well-known member
Kiddo has a feral Sun, which according to Morin will act entirely within it's own nature. What is the nature of a peregrine Sun in Cancer, ruling the ASC but in aversion to it and so possibly the author of her own destruction, with retro Mars intercepted in the 5th applying to an opposition with Saturn...which never perfects. We have...anger and temper issues that boarder on life and death over trivial matters whenever her autonomy is threatened.

There are days when she is the most glorious child you ever met, and then there are days when I wonder if she will be a serial killer, starting with her own sisters (and for those of you worryworts, that was a joke.)

Do you remember our discussion on Aspect Application and its significations?

Both Planets Direct: one is chasing after the other; chasing someone or something?

One Planet Direct/One Retrograde: one is colliding with someone/something; running headstrong into someone/something?

Both Planets Retrograde: one Planet is fleeing...attempting to escape....to runaway from someone/something?

Do you recall our discussion on Aspects in the Natal Chart not perfecting?

And the symbolism?

I'm sorry, which House does Mars rule in the Chart?

10th Sign/House, plus the MC, right?

And Saturn rules the 7th (and 8th).

Retrograde Mars colliding in opposition to Saturn will always push the limits...but never actually step over the line....because Mars never perfects....more importantly, the reason Mars never perfects is that Mars goes On-Station.....comes to a complete stop.

.
 
Last edited:

Paul_

Account Closed
The parameters for a feral planet differ depending on which authority, and age of astrology we choose to look at.
...
Here is a chart in which the Sun appears to be feral. We have Sun in Cancer in the 12th with Leo rising.
...
However, as this is a natal chart, the Sun is completely unaspected. So the question is, are we indeed looking at a feral Sun? And if not, why? I can only think of two reasons. The first would be that since Sun is <barely> still within orb of of Jupiter if you use 17* for the Sun, then technically Sun is not unaspected, and certainly wasn't unaspected when it entered Cancer.

I suppose it depends on how you define a feral planet, but for me, no, the sun is not feral - because it has been aspect with a planet during its tenure in the sign in which it is in.

I know others have responded that it is indeed feral, but I do not know which authority they are using to form that conclusion. According to Al Biruni, Ibn Ezra, Johannes Shoener and so on then it would not be considered feral.

The definition of feral would be if a planet makes no aspects during its tenure in a given sign - it's normally only the Moon that will do this.
 

Paul_

Account Closed
Being Combust/Under Beams doesn't have any relation to being joined by body to the Sun, which requires a Planet to be in the same Sign as the Sun. There are a couple of examples I have seen, one in Bonatti and few elsewhere and it is clear they don't use "out-of-Sign" aspects, even when the "aspect" is a "conjunction."

Whilst I agree that combustion is not dependent upon signs and is an observable phenomena, I would put a question mark regarding the idea that being joined by body requires the two planets to share the same sign. I'm thinking of people like Sahl Ibn Bishir* who certainly does allow for out of sign conjunctions. Perhaps it depends on what we think joined by body means - for me it's when both are in the orbs of one another (rather than a partile conjunction). Obviously planets can only perfect in the same sign - that probably goes without saying.

So Phasis doesn't apply to Moon, Mercury or Venus (and not Sun either) --- which doesn't mean Moon, Mercury or Venus cannot have an helical-rising (they certainly can -- as well as change Direction), but that would mean that Moon and Venus would not be in-Sect.

I was not aware of this, I thought Venus could make a phasis as well. Where did you learn this from? I am pretty certain that many hellensitic astrologers allowed for Venus to make a phasis so I'm curious if I've misunderstood it or if there's some other approach/authority who popularises that only the superior planets can make a phasis.


*EDITED after double checking this, it is MassaAllah and Ibn Ezra who allow out of sign conjunctions
 
Last edited:

BobZemco

Well-known member
I suppose it depends on how you define a feral planet, but for me, no, the sun is not feral - because it has been aspect with a planet during its tenure in the sign in which it is in.

I know others have responded that it is indeed feral, but I do not know which authority they are using to form that conclusion. According to Al Biruni, Ibn Ezra, Johannes Shoener and so on then it would not be considered feral.

The definition of feral would be if a planet makes no aspects during its tenure in a given sign - it's normally only the Moon that will do this.

Sun never made an aspect in Cancer.

Sun can only aspect 3 Planets: Mars, Jupiter & Saturn.

Sun joined Jupiter at 23° Gemini, and then Sun separated from Jupiter. Having done so, Sun has disregarded Jupiter and is no longer in aspect.

Retrograde Mercury joined Sun, then separated, blocked Jupiter, and then joined Jupiter.

Moon joined Mercury, then Jupiter, then Sun.

Many Greeks and Egyptians would use a 3° orb, in which case Sun is not in aspect. Still others would use a 6° orb, and so Sun is not in aspect. Even with a 12° orb --- and that's pushing the limits of absurdity --- Sun is not in aspect.

What we're looking at is the action of the Feral Planet, not how other Planets act on the Feral Planet.

Since Sun entered Cancer, Sun has not, and will not make any applying aspects to any Planets -- that, plus the fact that Sun is in aversion to nearly everything in the chart (except the MC -- which isn't a Planet) makes Sun Feral.

I suppose if people want to get technical, there was a New Moon at 0° Cancer 10', but that isn't addressed in the texts.

Whilst I agree that combustion is not dependent upon signs and is an observable phenomena, I would put a question mark regarding the idea that being joined by body requires the two planets to share the same sign. I'm thinking of people like Sahl Ibn Bishir who certainly does allow for out of sign conjunctions.

But I believe Zael considers a Planet within 5° of the Cusp to be in the succeeding House anyway, so that would make sense.

A conjunction is not an aspect -- it's two bodies being joined, which is not the same as an aspect. I'll have to look at Zael and think about that.

Well, actually in Introduction Zael says a "conjunction" is two bodies within 12° in the same Sign. I'll have to think about that, too, because most authorities consider an Assembly when two [or more] Planets are within 15° in the same Sign, so now I'm wondering what Zael actually meant.

I was not aware of this, I thought Venus could make a phasis as well. Where did you learn this from? I am pretty certain that many hellensitic astrologers allowed for Venus to make a phasis so I'm curious if I've misunderstood it or if there's some other approach/authority who popularises that only the superior planets can make a phasis.

I'm pretty sure it's Zoller. Or Schmidt. I get them confused. It's one of those two. I got the "R" part right. Doesn't Schmidt run Hindsight? I think that's where I saw it.
 

rox

Well-known member
Is the Sun at 17° (16° new) in Aries, 11th h., which does not aspect any planet in the chart, still considered feral?
 
Last edited:
Top