HELP....should i move back to my land?

Right, right...we have to start another thread for this as we are going way out there now.

So, let me just put this in perspective real quick. If you had a chart for theft, would you NOT say that the "peregrine" planet in an angle was the thief because he was in his fall? In other words, a thief really isn't because he is in his fall or detriment? (Assuming no other planet was less "peregrine" in this here example per Morin).

lets start a new thread .. cause poor Fushy will be screaming look at the recommedation thread.. i posted essential dignity stuff there

Cheers
T

Ok, I'll look for the thread.

By the way, as closure for this portion regarding Morin: Morin's book is about horoscopes, not horary. He is dealing with Natal charts and not horary. These are not compatable methods to mix-and-match simply because one guy said something about some other technique. See, this is what gets me about traditional astrology: everyone thinks because someone said it, it must be true without looking at the context in which they said it. I think that pretty much nails it.

Anachiel

they looked the same way at horary and natal astrology back then

look in Lilly's 3rd book. It is exactly as horary book layed out.

Like in 2nd volume .. how many husbands i shall have and in 3rd book the same approach

T

Read that, too. No, it's not treated the same. You wouldn't read a natal like horary, or a horary like a natal, c'mon!

interesting side conversation.

Tikana called me Fushy, I like that!

Aquarius 358....moon in the 9th. No I am not thinking of higher education or going overseas, BUT I have thought of going on an extended trip across North America.

tikana said:

btw
mars is NOT peregrine because it is in fall ... peregrine is when a planet has no essential dignities or debilities at all. Also it is not peregrine when there is complete absense of mixed/mutual reception.T

Click to expand...

_________

Tikana - I have to agree with Anachiel on this one for these reasons:

Lilly at CA 112 under a heading Peregrine gives his definition:
A planet is then said to be peregrine when he is in the degrees of any Sign where he hath no essential dignity.

No mention is made of ‘essential debility.’ He then goes on to give an example:

As Saturn in the tenth degree of Aries, that Sign being not his house, exaltation, or of his triplicity, or he having in that degree neither term or faces, he is then said to be peregrine. Had he been in 27, 28, etc of Aries, he could not be termed peregrine, because then he is in his own term.

Looking closer at Lilly’s example, Saturn in Aries IS in his Fall - so according to you, Saturn at 10Aries would not be peregrine ... ?? ... Yet, Lilly has said that at 10deg he IS ‘peregrine’ - taking no account of the debility of being in Fall to alter the status of peregrine.

On Skyscript, Deb Houlding’s website, in the Glossary, there is this definition: A planet is defined as peregrine when it has no level of rulership over its position. That is, it is not placed in the sign(s) that it rules, nor those where it is exalted, nor does it rule the triplicity, or the terms or face where it is located. [from www.skyscript.co.uk]

Again, no mention of the debilities of Fall and Detriment being taken to mean the planet is NOT peregrine.

Further on, in defining essential debilities, this note in Skyscript’s explanation: A planet in detriment or fall is in a precarious condition, more so if it is peregrine or otherwise afflicted.

So ... a planet can be in its Fall, in its Detriment AND also Peregrine. Lilly notes (CA115) the 3 debilites: a) In his detriment; b) In his fall; c) Peregrine.

If being in detriment or fall altered the status of peregrine, why is there the 3rd category? You can have a planet in its fall AND also being peregrine (ie having no essential dignity). It’s not an argument for the opposite I'm afraid.________

Aqua

you could be right. Out of experience i have never gotten peregrine/fall as a significator of my own charts. In horary, it would be easy to establish the "mood" of the planet.

it s a good discussion nevertheless.

"If being in detriment or fall altered the status of peregrine, why is there the 3rd category? You can have a planet in its fall AND also being peregrine (ie having no essential dignity). It’s not an argument for the opposite, Tik.___ "

good question again. I dont know the answer to that one. We have seen 1 weak + 1 debility = not peregrine... but how do you define/describe detriment/fall peregrine vs peregrine on its own. Not arguing either just saying... sorry my head is spinning at the moment i got something on my hands to solve

cheers
T

Anachiel

look at it yourself ... Number of wives is the number of planets moon is applying to. look at this http://books.google.com/books?id=JB...&resnum=1&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
If a man asks how many women shall i have, logically you would think Moon/venus and 7th? right?
same thing is volume 3

shrug
T

As is known here on AW I do not believe in the validity of the peregrine concept; however, relative to this discussion, the pre-Bonatti horarists (and the Greco-Roman and also the Islamic transitional era astrologers in general) held the doctrine that peregrine means without essential dignity AND also without essential debility: the planet just wanders aimlessly , without resonance (essential dignity) and without dissonance (essential debility), without support (essential dignity) and without resistance (essential debility)...
This doctrine was changed (I think in Bonatti, if not, then very soon after, by the 14th century at the latest) to being simply without essential dignity, the presence of essential debility could not "save" from the peregrine state, and this has become the doctrine (for those who believe in the reality of the peregrine state) ever since...

tikana said:

Aqua
you could be right. Out of experience i have never gotten peregrine/fall as a significator of my own charts. In horary, it would be easy to establish the "mood" of the planet.
it s a good discussion nevertheless.
"If being in detriment or fall altered the status of peregrine, why is there the 3rd category? You can have a planet in its fall AND also being peregrine (ie having no essential dignity). It’s not an argument for the opposite, Tik.___ "
good question again. I dont know the answer to that one. We have seen 1 weak + 1 debility = not peregrine... but how do you define/describe detriment/fall peregrine vs peregrine on its own. Not arguing either just saying... sorry my head is spinning at the moment i got something on my hands to solve
cheers T

Click to expand...

Tik, Sorry to hear you've got some problem-sorting to do ... good vibes coming your way ... and thanks for your reply anyway. It is an interesting question.

The only reason I was wanting to try to understand is because of the adding up of essential dignities & debilities that I was doing for this chart ala Lilly's table ... it's an extra minus 5 by him ... I guess I could always just leave it out of the numerical calculations - which I don't always do I must say - it's too arbitrary and of course takes time!

However, the "lost and wandering" meaning of peregrine is largely agreed upon, methinks.
_______

FushiaFairy - Sounds like a "long distance" trip! and so would fit Moon in the 9th! Look forward to hearing your plans when you decide!_____