The word 'Tradition' is firmly establishedNew thread to present to everyone a new scheme of rulerships and exaltations, which includes Neptune Uranus and Pluto, and 2 still unknown objects-planets called X and Y. They represent the feminine creative power (X) and the time and its movement (Y); the scheme includes 2 more planets because, analyzing the mechanism of the placements, it was found that to respect every mathematical rule, the scheme needs 2 more planets. One of this two new planets was traced in 2016 and now scientists concur that there are still many mysteries hiding in deep space, so one day we'll be forced to introduce the new elements into our calculus, like we did for the other planets.
This is an updated version of the placements that takes into account the rules of tradition, and thanks to them introduces 2 new planets that resulted from the analysis.. Do you see it working?
Aries: Mars, Pluto and exaltation of the Sun
Taurus: X, Venus and exaltation of Jupiter
Gemini: Mercury, Y and exaltation of Pluto
Cancer: the Moon and exaltation of Venus
Leo: the Sun and exaltation of Y
Virgo: Y, Mercury and exaltation of Uranus
Libra: Venus, X and exaltation of Saturn
Scorpio: Pluto, Mars and exaltation of Mercury
Sagittarius: Jupiter, Neptune and exaltation of X
Capricorn: Saturn, Uranus and exaltation of Mars
Aquarius: Uranus, Saturn and exaltation of Neptune
Pisces: Neptune, Jupiter and exaltation of the Moon
This is the scheme used in the Italian tradition from 40 years, since nobody in this forum knows of it, I thought it was cool to share.
I believe that the long established (Western) dignity/detriment model
was developed upon the framework of 12 signs and 7 planets,
and that this model works perfectly well
within the context of the Hellenist and Traditionalist whole system models.
I also question the practicality of attempting to fit other cosmic factors (the outer planets)
into that specific model.
However, concepts such as dispositorship-like influences, elemental qualities, etc
can be applied to these other cosmic factors (the outer planets),
although upon an experimental basis
(until several hundred years of such uses,
and the collection of results from such uses,
have been accumulated)...
I use such considerations (dignity, detriment as traditionally defined)
only as secondary, modifying factors,
and I have borrowed from ancient Vedic astrology the evaluative method called ashtakavarga
(8 sources of energy)
in making my primary estimations of how well each planet (or sign)
will be enabled to express its specific nature and influence,
ie, if a sign or planet is in fact "dignified" or "detrimented" (to use more familiar terms)
I will present the following Modernist allocation
of (traditionally understood) sign, triplicity, sect, joy, term, face affinities of the outer planets: t
hese affinities are followed by a certain group of esotericists I know,
in their various astrological delineations,
to make their determination of "dignity and detriment" in chart analysis.
I present this material without further comment,
and perhaps its will be of some interest
to AW members following a Modernist astrological approach:
Note:
the following allocations clearly are based upon the concept of Pluto being similar to Mars,
Neptune being similar to Jupiter
(which is somewhat different than most Modernist opinion,
which usually makes Neptune similar to Venus),
and Uranus being similar to Mercury.
ELEMENTAL ALLOCATIONS
Pluto: Fire + Earth
Neptune: Water
Uranus: Air
SIGN AFFINITIES
Pluto co-domicile in Scorpio (Mars primary dispositor of the sign)
Neptune co-domicile in Pisces (Jupiter primary dispositor of the sign)
Uranus co-domicile in Aquarius (Saturn primary dispositor of the sign)
Pluto: detrimented in Taurus; falls in Cancer; exalted in Capricorn (similar to Mars)
Neptune: detrimented in Virgo; falls in Capricorn; exalted in Cancer (similar to Jupiter)
Uranus: detrimented in Leo; falls in Pisces; exalted in Gemini (similar to Mercury, except that Mercury is exalted in earthy Virgo)
TRIPLICITY AFFINITIES:
Fire Triplicity: day + night co-participant = Pluto
Air Triplicity: day + night co-participant = Uranus
Water Triplicity: day + night co-participant = Neptune
Earth Triplicity: day + night co-participant = Pluto
SECT:
Pluto = nocturnal
Neptune = diurnal
Uranus = both (like Mercury)
JOYS:
Pluto in 6th house (sorrows in 12th house)
Neptune in 11th house (sorrows in 5th house)
Uranus in 1st house (sorrows in 7th house)
PLANETARY ORBIT SCHEDULE
(clearly an extension of the original Chaldean Order)
Pluto
Neptune
Uranus
Saturn
Jupiter
Mars
Sun
Venus
Mercury
Moon
....then back to Pluto
FACES:
Aries: 0-9= Mars; 10-19 = Sun; 20-29 = Venus
Taurus: 0-9 = Mercury; 10-19 = Moon; 20-29 = Pluto
Gemini: 0-9 = Neptune; 10-19 = Uranus; 20-29 = Saturn
Cancer: 0-9 = Jupiter; 10-19 = Mars; 20-29 = Sun
Leo: 0-9 = Venus; 10-19 = Mercury; 20-29 = Moon
Virgo: 0-9 = Pluto; 10-19 = Neptune; 20-29 = Uranus
Libra: 0-9 = Saturn; 10-19 = Jupiter; 20-29 = Mars
Scorpio: 0-9 = Sun; 10-19 = Venus' 20-29 = Mercury
Sagittarius: 0-9 = Moon; 10-19 = Pluto; 20-29 = Neptune
Capricorn: 0-9 = Uranus; 10-19 = Saturn; 20-29 = Jupiter
Aquarius: 0-9 = Mars; 10-19 = Sun; 20-29 = Venus
Pisces: 0-9 = Mercury; 10-19 = Moon; 20-29 = Pluto
TERMS:
Each sign is equally divided into 10 terms of 3 degrees each. The first term of each sign begins with the dispositor (primary dispositor) of that sign, then each following term is of the planet next in order in the Planetary Orbit Schedule (note that these "terms" include the Sun and Moon, which is like the ancient monomoiria planetary allocations of the West, and the triamsha varga allocations of Vedic astrology)
ARIES: Mars-Sun-Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn-Jupiter
TAURUS: Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn-Jupiter-Mars-Sun
GEMINI: Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn-Jupiter-Mars-Sun-Venus
CANCER: Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn-Jupiter-Mars-Sun-Venus-Mercury
LEO: Sun-Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn-Jupiter-Mars
VIRGO: Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn-Jupiter-Mars-Sun-Venus
LIBRA: Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn-Jupiter-Mars-Sun
SCORPIO: Mars-Sun-Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn-Jupiter
SAGITTARIUS: Jupiter-Mars-Sun-Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn
CAPRICORN: Saturn-Jupiter-Mars-Sun-Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Pluto
AQUARIUS: Saturn-Jupiter-Mars-Sun-Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Pluto
PISCES: Jupiter-Mars-Sun-Venus-Mercury-Moon-Pluto-Neptune-Uranus-Saturn
It means exactly what you just said, nothing changes in the meaning from english to this updated scheme; a placements is a placement, exaltations mean exaltations and domiciles mean domiciles.
This revolutionizes the entire scheme, I'm sure it creates some problems at first ^^
I didn't get a single thing out of this, lol. yeah I know of Mercury myth
Great point on Pluto/Mercury, and indeed they are associated to 2 signs: Gemini and Scorpio. And it's quite surprising nobody ever noticed these two signs similarities. It's great that you analyze the myths too, they were indeed left in the shadows for a long time, we have to thanks the Junghian archetypes theory for this "re-discovery". And at this point, with psychology, we see well that nothing new was made, it was all there under "our eyes", we were just not ready to give it a name
.....
@waybread
I said nothing changes in the meaning, domiciles and exaltations are the same thing. The revolution is in the "correct" dispositions of the old (they always existed SO the Zodiac must have contained them already...)planets.
Can you show a worked-out example using a chart?
Gemini and Scorpio have little in common-- mutable air and fixed water.
Pluto and Mercury have little in common. Or to put this differently what precisely do you see as their commonalities?
Your comment to me is still self-contradictory. You are assuming something that you could better articulate.
That's a distraction from the CORE issue
Traditional Astrology is based on PATTERNS
formed by the use of the 7 clearly Visibles
Three viable options:
(1) Stick with these patterns ONLY (which are concise and very impressive),
and reject entirely any new patterns formed using planets beyond Saturn.
(2) Forget about patterns and simply add in more planets in a way that "feels right".
(3) Respect the traditional patterns, leaving them in place, while using additional markers
(including the planets beyond Saturn) to create NEW patterns as an addition to Astrological knowledge.
Btw, this Thread has a much catchier title than "A Treatise on the Fundamental Nature of Astrology",
which is really what's being proposed.
That's a distraction from the CORE issue
which is
Modernist astrology IS UNABLE to logically add new planets
to the two thousand year old accepted TRADITIONAL DIGNITIES TABLE
all attempts by Modernists to do so have indubitably
only
rendered any MODERNIST DIGNITIES TABLE risible
IN CONTRAST
for at least two thousand years
traditional astrology has successfully agreed VISIBLE planetary domiciles
that continue to provide coherent delineative methodology to the present day
BUT
"modernist astrology dubious alleged rocket science"
has FAILED to present any MODERNIST ESSENTIAL DIGNITIES TABLE
reconciling modern invisible planetary claimed "domiciles"
with the two thousand year old accepted
visible planetary domiciles and exaltations
ESSENTIAL
DIGNITIES TABLE - TRADITIONAL
And yet, WITHOUT Modern Astrology, Traditional Astrology would have been consigned to the dustbin of History.
Modern-astrology has grabbed the attention and imagination of millions around the world,
and has brought new life to the ancient practice,
which has been characterized as "archaic superstition" by Modern-science.
Just as an historical interlude that some people may find interesting,
it's note worthy that modern rulerships were assigned
not because of some arduous research and investigation
- as you often hear from many modern astrologers,
but instead by astrologers of the time, cogniscant of the tradition of rulership,
basically went ahead and followed Ptolemy's logic,
by assigning the next planet out with the next sign out.
So flowing from the Sun is the rulership scheme which normally reflects back to the Moon,
but breaking this they just carried on projecting out from the sun.
So the next out from the Sun is Mercury, then Venus, then Mars,
then Jupiter and then Saturn,
and then when Uranus was discovered
we see astrologers explicitly invent the rulership to Aquarius
because Aquarius is the next sign out after Capricorn,
then when Neptune comes along it's assigned the next one out which is Pisces.
This is explicitly stated in the very earliest sources we have for modern rulership.
So the outer planetary rulerships came about
by trying to stay true to the tradition at large,
and absolutely not by channelling
or study of numerous charts.
Then Pluto was discovered and by this stage in the history our understanding of astrology,
already getting watered down by the time of Uranus' discovery,
find itself in a time where astrology is no longer in the hands of the educated as it once was,
but in the hands of the masses, during a time when it was already simplified
and watered down
and projected through a pseudo-religious lens of the Theosophical movement.
Pluto is discovered and the pattern continues.
It is assigned to Aries and there is a conference in Germany to discuss the matter more fully.
UNANIMOUS agreement dictates that Pluto rules Aries,
and the counter idea, that some were positing at the time,
that it should rule Scorpio are squashed.
Until someone beats them to print,
and writes up the attributions of Pluto
and that it rules Scorpio.
The author beat them to print
and published a successful book
and the rest is history.
It stuck, and from that day forth
Pluto magically started ruling Scorpio.
I point this out
because in the context of rulership even the modern rulership scheme bows to the traditional logic as much as it can.
It does not reinvent anything,
instead it recognises the superiority of the traditional schema
and tries to accommodate itself into it as much as it can.
The only exception is
that the general lack of understanding of the broader tradition by the time of Pluto amongst the basic astrologer,
thanks to a deliberate watering down of astrological technique
coupled with the unlucky timing of Pluto coming out when the astrological world
was still struggling to emerge from the mini-dark period it underwent
meant that one of the outers went to another sign.
Vedic, Chinese, Tibetan and other astrology methodologies flourished for centuries
and continue to flourish
without the dubious "assistance" of so-called Modernist astrology
scrabbling around in the Dustbin of History for Traditional working techniques
to rename
for example
the ancient astorlogical SOLAR REVOLUTION
has a makeover Modernist style as THE SOLAR RETURN
the fact is
re: WESTERN MODERNIST ASTROLOGICAL HISTORY
GEMINI from THE ANTHOLOGY by Vettius Valens http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/vettius%20valens%20entire.pdf
@waybread
It's pretty obvious,
Gemini is the sign associated to lies, the theater, masking oneself;
SCORPIO = tricky, base, thieves, murderers, traitors, incorrigible
Scorpions are the great occultists instead, nothing's clear with them,
they hide the truth, the same thing that an actor has to do.
Of course they can't be the same thing...
prove to anyone that dwarf planetoid pluto is allegedly a planet
Pluto and Mercury have probably one of the most dualistic symbolism in myth,
it was Mercury, the messenger, to accompany the dead souls to the underworld (Pluto),
and it was Pluto to give to Mercury the invisibility helmet that he used to hide himself (Pluto character).
Both characters are expressed in both signs: Mercury/Pluto in Gemini is the "innocent" lies,
to create an entertainment that hides the truth
(but they do so censoring their innermost deep part, Pluto),
in Scorpio is Mercury that accompanies the natives in their quest for the deeper truth..
and they achieve it without anyone noticing, hiding themselves.
There are many other reasons but I'm quite you can make get them yourself.
What charts example do you need?
Can you prove me why is Jupiter exalted in Cancer? Can you show me a chart for that?
I answered your Pluto non-sensical controversy in the other forum already,
why do you follow me around repeating the same things?
Why didn't you answer there,
where I already explained you that you make no sense?
This system doesn’t work “because it creates the holes it cannot fill”. Those holes were already there, passed unobserved by the traditional scheme we’ve been using for millennia. The theory I’m presenting you in no way puts those planets (X and Y) there, to fill the holes; the procedure indeed is reverted: because the Zodiac follows rigorous mathematical and geometrical rules, which are: the anti-clockwise motion, (respected in the succession of the seasons where astrology comes from), the doubling of the planets (think of the luminaries Sun and Moon that oppose Saturn AND Uranus, but first of that think of the double domiciles that only some signs have the privilege to have), and ultimately, the mirror effect for which to every element in the Zodiac there’s its opposite; then, for this, if you have two holes in there, you are missing two pieces. It’s logic. We have 12 signs, in 12 houses, and 10 planets. Only 10, why? This not only creates holes in the chart, but it makes the entire logic of the Zodiac crumble. We must have 12 planets. The last 3 planets that we now commonly acknowledge and use have been discovered, over all, not much before than 100 years ago. I’m not surprised there are still many differing interpretations about such planets. We’re still studying them, and we’re the first to see them work. Anyway, I really suggest anyone in this forum to spend a google visit looking for the rulership of the “new planets” (Uranus, Neptune and Pluto) and you’ll see that the official “English” astrology agrees on the Neptune rulership for Pisces, the Uranus one for Aquarius, and the Pluto one for Scorpio. They’ve not been given arbitrarily, the discourses were long and for a time they took into account the characters of the signs too, so it was even believed that Neptune was ruling over Taurus, or Uranus over Scorpio. But since the Zodiac is built on logic, it was understood (it was a French guy called Andrè Barbault) that the way to follow was another: the planets are placed following their progressive distance from the Sun, which is our reference point inside the Zodiac system; if Saturn, the old “furthest” star, occupies the opposite placement facing the Sun, as it does in Aquarius opposing the Sun domicile in Leo, then the “new” planets (Uranus, Neptune and Pluto) must follow the same logic. And it was followed, it is now commonly applied, but not fully. The author I’m translating went further. Not only she gave a double domicile to all the “new” planets, because logic says every planet has two domiciles (the Sun and the Moon are not planets and their role is very special for the entire system, SO they act differently) but following all the rules that the Zodiac presented along the way, she found the correct exaltations too. By finding the exaltations, that, like the name suggests, denote a movement, she discovered something incredible: the Zodiac was moving, just like a wheel. Try to apply any “classic” domicile-exaltation scheme to the Zodiac, nothing happens. But I don’t want you to try do any of this “magick”, I know all of this sounds crazy to you. Instead, apply any “classic” domicile scheme to the Zodiac, and analyze it, but analyze it well. Why are the opposing signs not owning opposing planets? Why do the planets follow different paths? Why are some signs “blessed” with more planets and others left empty? And the same for the houses. Why are schools of thought diverging from each other? Mathematic is not a matter of opinions. Neither science.
Now I’d like to note something particularly important, that you point out but don’t seem to quite explain to yourself well: Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto, that i keep calling “new” planets, have always been there. We couldn’t see them, but they were there. And do you think we’re arrived at the end of our findings? We’re not far maybe, but we’re not there yet, in terms of our solar system discoveries. Inform yourself, it’s proven, there’s another major planet beyond Pluto.The most experienced scientists think that others are there too. They’re playing a role even now that we can’t see them and are more concerned about what to eat for breakfast tomorrow, they don’t stop existing just because we are not ready for those. Same thing for logic. Same thing for the Zodiac. They don’t stop working just because you can’t understand them.
It’s quite mind blowing to think that our zodiac system already knew of those planets before they were discovered, and I can agree that that’s something better left to some very interested and scrupulous archaeologist or biologist to find out; but if we take for valid that the Zodiac works, and we know it does, we must respect its logic. Every discovery is followed by a correction of the previous established thought-structure, so how can you expect to keep finding planets in the solar system and keep all the old data as if nothing had changed?
Some things must be corrected, and it will be for the better; only when we’ll find the new object we’ll be able to name it, but we’ll be able to name better the Sun too and the Moon and Mercury, and so on. That’s how all the developments in astrology, and in the history of humankind have always worked. And, we here know, the times must be ready, then we’ll be able to accomplish our “destiny” (Just think of the psychology field, and quantum physics relationships with astrology). However universal it might be.
“Our” system, I mean the Zodiac, says that, logically, we must have other two planets beyond Pluto. I’m not objecting against it, I can’t.
Mercury fits well in Scorpio for the very reasons you described, lol. Scorpio is the “trouble-maker” (lol sorry Scorpios) of the Zodiac, how could it be so without Mercury giving its best in here? Scorpio is even the sign related to money, like the 8th house, and by affinity Mercury was the god of thievery and commerce, if you can make money, you need that detached brain. Indeed it’s even the coldest, the most “logical” of all the watery signs, and I’m sorry, that’s not just because of Pluto and Mars.
Uranus instead is considered the satellite of Saturn, the anti-luminary opposed to the Sun, so that the opposite of the Moon is Uranus (Cancer-Capricorn), indeed its symbology is all about technology and action, symbols in direct contrast with the soft, sugary moods of the Moon.
The example of Pisces-Mercury is a good one, in facts Pisces is double ruled by Neptune and Jupiter. So Pisces is indeed lacking Mercury, and the attentiveness of Virgo, but here you get confused; Mercury is quickness, and so it’s “reception”, like antenna, Mercury is the ears. Not the tongue, that’s Jupiter. And that’s just why Taurus and Sagittarius are such talkers. Taurus in facts has the exaltation of Jupiter.
I’m sorry for the denomination of the “weaker” and “stronger” domicile, but it was used in my translation of the Morpurgo theories, maybe I should change the name because Morpurgo calls them “primary” and “basic” domiciles. They correspond to the “day” and “night” ptolemaic positions, but my denomination was used just to make the process behind this particular phenomena more clear:
why are there 2 domiciles for each planet if the 2 characters-signs are so different? That’s the explanation behind the ptolemaic denomination of the“day” and “night” domiciles, but saying that doesn’t underline the part I wanted to refer to, id est, motion: every position of every planet inside the Zodiac is in motion, from the “weaker” or Morpurgo says “basic” or Ptolemy would call it “night” domicile, to the exaltation. The “weaker” planet is even the one that manifests itself less powerfully for a sign. Venus is stronger in Libra, a very raffinate sign, Taurus instead could be described as a good tempered mother, lacking a real polish that is given by its dominant X, but even by a lack of the opposed Mercury (Scorpio), that makes them so recruiting to futile movements and close to everything that would challenge their stability, in other words very fixed.
I’m not expecting anyone to switch to this system, and I don’t want to, but explain me why your system works instead, because if you apply strict logic to it, you’ll see it rusty in some pieces, and you can soon find yourself using some “esoteric” force. I’d like to avoid that.
_I edited the typos_
Including or not including Pluto would be indeed a lesser problem for this scheme, since we know we are still missing some planets. Anyway it is a matter about what astronomy wants to consider a planet then, but astrology doesn't take such classifications into consideration, and the de-classification of Pluto still leaves many doubts inside the astronomical circle itself. Yes the Sun and Moon are exceptions and always been in our symbology, they are no planets too. They were all called all planets once, I'm aware of that.
Those holes were already there, passed unobserved by the traditional scheme we’ve been using for millennia.
The theory I’m presenting you in no way puts those planets (X and Y) there, to fill the holes
the procedure indeed is reverted: because the Zodiac follows rigorous mathematical and geometrical rules, which are: the anti-clockwise motion, (respected in the succession of the seasons where astrology comes from), the doubling of the planets (think of the luminaries Sun and Moon that oppose Saturn AND Uranus, but first of that think of the double domiciles that only some signs have the privilege to have), and ultimately, the mirror effect for which to every element in the Zodiac there’s its opposite; then, for this, if you have two holes in there, you are missing two pieces.
We have 12 signs, in 12 houses, and 10 planets. Only 10, why? This not only creates holes in the chart, but it makes the entire logic of the Zodiac crumble. We must have 12 planets. The last 3 planets that we now commonly acknowledge and use have been discovered, over all, not much before than 100 years ago.
Anyway, I really suggest anyone in this forum to spend a google visit looking for the rulership of the “new planets” (Uranus, Neptune and Pluto) and you’ll see that the official “English” astrology agrees on the Neptune rulership for Pisces, the Uranus one for Aquarius, and the Pluto one for Scorpio. They’ve not been given arbitrarily, the discourses were long and for a time they took into account the characters of the signs too, so it was even believed that Neptune was ruling over Taurus, or Uranus over Scorpio.
Why are the opposing signs not owning opposing planets?
Why are some signs “blessed” with more planets and others left empty?
Now I’d like to note something particularly important, that you point out but don’t seem to quite explain to yourself well: Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto, that i keep calling “new” planets, have always been there. We couldn’t see them, but they were there.
Inform yourself, it’s proven, there’s another major planet beyond Pluto. The most experienced scientists think that others are there too.
Every discovery is followed by a correction of the previous established thought-structure, so how can you expect to keep finding planets in the solar system and keep all the old data as if nothing had changed?
Mercury fits well in Scorpio for the very reasons you described, lol.
Scorpio is the “trouble-maker” (lol sorry Scorpios) of the Zodiac, how could it be so without Mercury giving its best in here?
Scorpio is even the sign related to money, like the 8th house, and by affinity Mercury was the god of thievery and commerce, if you can make money, you need that detached brain.
Indeed it’s even the coldest, the most “logical” of all the watery signs, and I’m sorry, that’s not just because of Pluto and Mars.
Uranus instead is considered the satellite of Saturn, the anti-luminary opposed to the Sun, so that the opposite of the Moon is Uranus (Cancer-Capricorn), indeed its symbology is all about technology and action, symbols in direct contrast with the soft, sugary moods of the Moon.
The example of Pisces-Mercury is a good one, in facts Pisces is double ruled by Neptune and Jupiter. So Pisces is indeed lacking Mercury, and the attentiveness of Virgo, but here you get confused; Mercury is quickness, and so it’s “reception”, like antenna, Mercury is the ears. Not the tongue, that’s Jupiter. And that’s just why Taurus and Sagittarius are such talkers. Taurus in facts has the exaltation of Jupiter.
The “weaker” planet is even the one that manifests itself less powerfully for a sign. Venus is stronger in Libra, a very raffinate sign, Taurus instead could be described as a good tempered mother, lacking a real polish that is given by its dominant X, but even by a lack of the opposed Mercury (Scorpio), that makes them so recruiting to futile movements and close to everything that would challenge their stability, in other words very fixed.
I’m not expecting anyone to switch to this system, and I don’t want to, but explain me why your system works instead, because if you apply strict logic to it, you’ll see it rusty in some pieces, and you can soon find yourself using some “esoteric” force. I’d like to avoid that.
Waybread, what's your take on "Yods"? (It's relevant.)
@waybread
It's pretty obvious, Gemini is the sign associated to lies, the theater, masking oneself; Scorpions are the great occultists instead, nothing's clear with them, they hide the truth, the same thing that an actor has to do. Of course they can't be the same thing...
Pluto and Mercury have probably one of the most dualistic symbolism in myth, it was Mercury, the messenger, to accompany the dead souls to the underworld (Pluto), and it was Pluto to give to Mercury the invisibility helmet that he used to hide himself (Pluto character). Both characters are expressed in both signs: Mercury/Pluto in Gemini is the "innocent" lies, to create an entertainment that hides the truth (but they do so censoring their innermost deep part, Pluto), in Scorpio is Mercury that accompanies the natives in their quest for the deeper truth.. and they achieve it without anyone noticing, hiding themselves. There are many other reasons but I'm quite you can make get them yourself.
What charts example do you need? Can you prove me why is Jupiter exalted in Cancer? Can you show me a chart for that?