windyvenus
Active member
file:///C:/Users/christopher/Pictures/New%20folder/astro_2at_01_am_i_still_on_his_mind_hr_70203_19389.gif
What is Rogue wave style, BC I think that's what I want to do! Don't worry 8thstellium my kids and fiancé aren't going to be involved I know you disagree, please don't be mad.
The way I understand receptions is that, a planet is a subject to the ruler of the sign he is currently in. If you take the ruler of the sign as the "king", and the transiting planet as a temporary guest, that would mean that during its stay on the sign, the planet is subject to the laws and will of such king.
For example, right now, venus is in Sagittarius. This means Jupiter is venus dispositor, or that Jupiter rules venus. In a way, venus (while it goes through sagi) is bound to the will of jupiter, or belongs to jupiter.
Most modern/ancient authors have different ways of looking at reception.
Now if you use this receptions to show feelings, in this example, what ever venus is feeling, belongs to jupiter. (as in:"of course I love his majesty! he is my king!").
Mostly, it can show if the person feels "something", and if this is a negative or positive thing.
Now to exactly pin point if it is love, infatuation, friendship, attraction, liking, indifference, dissapointment or hate is something most authors do based on the "scale" given to the essential dignities.
Of course its not an accurate measure for small receptions, but it does work for most cases. I personally find it hard to read specially with the minor dignities, but it generally shows some sort of "affection".
For example, john frawley, in his horary textbook describes the reception with this type of feelings:
- regency = love
- exaltation = infatuation
- triplicity = friendship
In my opinion, you can't really describe this as accurate. For example: Triplicity might not just mean "friendship", it could mean "sexual attraction", or any kind of positive feeling.
To me its better to look at things if they are "positive" or "negative" , specially when it comes to triplicity, term and face.
Obviously sign rulership as the strongest reception, could be close to "love", but with the weaker dignities I believe it's best to take it as a positive feeling, rather that trying to describe the exact intensity of it.
But thats my opinion, I'm still new to this anyway so I miss a lot
Right, which means that no matter what, Jupiter has to allow Venus to do what she wants. That is the key to traditional reception. What Venus wants will depend on Venus' condition.
You had me up until this point. What if Venus is an anarchist? What if Venus is L8 and Jupiter is L1? Then we have L1 receiving L8, and having to allow her to carry out her duty? Meaning that the lord of the first receives the lord of death, and is not in mutual reception?
Frawley? This sounds a lot like Frawley's ideas on reception. Note, I am not passing judgement, just continuing the conversation...
Ah, now I understand where you are coming from...
I had a similar conversation recently with someone else about Frawley's ideas on reception. I appreciate your thoughts. I would encourage you though to research further before you decide about reception. I'm in no way saying that you are wrong. Just offering a differing opinion for you to explore.
Planets that are received are allowed. If there is no mutual reception, and if without mutual reception those planets are peregrine, or in depression or exile, then these ideas of love for the king will have to be cast aside. If planets are in exile and peregrine, often they will grasp at straws, but it is important to understand that they grasp at straws while trying to preserve themselves. In times the ideas presented by Frawley do work, because a planet needs resources, but at other times they don't, because planets can be willing to kill the king to survive.