Strength of Planetary Joys

MSO

MSO

Well-known member
Rebel Uranian said:
Your comment reminded me of this article.

I've actually been trying to find out what the actual best conditions and placements for planets are. The Moon in Cancer is good, at least if it's afflicted by malefics but not really otherwise, and really all that does is improve the condition of the malefics for the native and certainly not the condition of the Moon. There's a lot of weird and counter-intuitive, counter-common-belief stuff out there that I can totally see working more than what is commonly held as true.
Click to expand...

That's a great article!

This is a different strand of thought, but I figure what the heck. While studying humours of the planets, I found that Jupiter is in detriment in Gemini even though they're both of the hot and moist nature. It makes me wonder if it fares well in Libra and Aquarius either, being of the same nature.
 
RaptInReverie

RaptInReverie

Well-known member
MSO said:
Good points, all of them.

However, what you're explaining sounds a lot like the planets being in their own rulership. Leos are superficial, egocentric, etc. The Sun does well there. Same for the Moon being in Cancer, it leads to them being insecure, and Cancers are known horders (security in material possessions). And so forth with Mars in Aries/Mars in 5th House.

So I wonder if domicle rulerships are indeed "good" if the joys I've described aren't.

And let it be noted that I fight for my created philosophies until I'm proven wrong, but I hold nothing against people who do the proving. It's all part of the process, putting forth an idea and letting others bash it to prove it's worth! :lol: That's why my sig says what it does!
Click to expand...

I understand. The Sun will bring Leo-esque qualities to whatever house it occupies. It just so happens that it most closely resembles its domicile in the first house. I wouldn't consider them to be the same, only similar. Likewise with the Moon. It will bring Cancer-esque qualities to whatever house it rules, but I wouldn't consider having the Moon in the 2nd the same as having the Moon in Cancer.
 
Moog

Moog

Well-known member
MSO said:
That's a great article!

This is a different strand of thought, but I figure what the heck. While studying humours of the planets, I found that Jupiter is in detriment in Gemini even though they're both of the hot and moist nature. It makes me wonder if it fares well in Libra and Aquarius either, being of the same nature.
Click to expand...

Too much heat and wetness creates too much-ness. Jupiter is thought of as a benefic and a fertile planet, but you can have too much of a good thing.

It's rulerships are the hot and dry Sagittarius, and the cold and wet Pisces, each of which balances one or other of it's elemental qualities. Something to think about.

I would agree with your line of thinking.
 
MSO

MSO

Well-known member
Moog said:
Too much heat and wetness creates too much-ness. Jupiter is thought of as a benefic and a fertile planet, but you can have too much of a good thing.

It's rulerships are the hot and dry Sagittarius, and the cold and wet Pisces, each of which balances one or other of it's elemental qualities. Something to think about.
Click to expand...

Initially I thought the same thing. But then you have Saturn which is cold and dry, which domicles in cold and dry Capricorn. And Aries hot/dry which domicles in hot/dry Aries.

Both are malefics, and then there's the Sun and Moon which are "neutral" in terms of good/bad, but both domicle in signs that double the energies they naturally have.
 
Moog

Moog

Well-known member
Yeah, it's a pretty wacky schema really, the more you look, the more you find strange inconsistencies which don't make sense.

In the sect concept, Mars is considered better when cooled and moistened by being in a water sign, in a night chart, or under the earth. Saturn is 'better' when warmed and moistened.

So maybe a planet in a dignity doesn't mean it has a 'good' effect but it does mean 'powerful'?

I think these separate qualities are oft confused, and oft confuse me :lol:
 
Last edited:
byjove

byjove

Account Closed
Moog said:
So maybe a planet in a dignity doesn't mean it has a 'good' effect but it does mean 'powerful'?

I think these separate qualities are oft confused, and oft confuse me :lol:
Click to expand...

You've hit something, I've read that. No where...it was something old like Valens/Ptolemy...one of them said this...to remember that dignity represents power...power for achieving our happiness is our first instinct, yet killers etc. get the same power just use it in a different way.

I just remembered some more. I think this idea was also used to explain why 'positive' aspects don't always work in your favour e.g. trines, which can fall into the area of laziness, expectation etc. instead of natural talent and ability. Likewise, that 'negative' aspects can build a psychological force strong in a native for encouraging modesty, working hard etc. which appear powerful and bad but are actually beneficial.

This might be yet another one of the 'ills of modern astrology' that many well-read traditionalists/hellenists point to when encouraging root and branch rethinking of modern astrology.
 
Last edited:
MSO

MSO

Well-known member
Which leads back to the system of "joys" I use for houses. They may not be "good" there, but certainly powerful.

Maybe we should re-term "rulership" and other words that lead to one thinking a planet being powerful is "good."
 
Rebel Uranian

Rebel Uranian

Well-known member
Moog said:
In the sect concept, Mars is considered better when cooled and moistened by being in a water sign, in a night chart, or under the earth. Saturn is 'better' when warmed and dried.
Click to expand...

Isn't it warmed and moistened?

MSO said:
Maybe we should re-term "rulership" and other words that lead to one thinking a planet being powerful is "good."
Click to expand...

I don't even think dignity is power. I mean, look at Saturn in Libra. Doesn't Saturn resonate better with Taurus (materialistic, stubborn, change-adverse) even though it does more "good" in Libra (dynamic, flighty)? I think dignities are too arbitrary.
 
RaptInReverie

RaptInReverie

Well-known member
MSO said:
Which leads back to the system of "joys" I use for houses. They may not be "good" there, but certainly powerful.

Maybe we should re-term "rulership" and other words that lead to one thinking a planet being powerful is "good."
Click to expand...

Sun in the 1st would definitely be a powerful position, as would Mars in the 5th. From that standpoint, I understand the logic behind your system. The planet would express itself easily, albeit not necessarily in a "good" way.
 
MSO

MSO

Well-known member
Rebel Uranian said:
I don't even think dignity is power. I mean, look at Saturn in Libra. Doesn't Saturn resonate better with Taurus (materialistic, stubborn, change-adverse) even though it does more "good" in Libra (dynamic, flighty)? I think dignities are too arbitrary.
Click to expand...

Heh, what's worse is that Saturn's triplicity is the Air signs. :pinched:
 
D

dr. farr

Well-known member
MSO said:
Heh, what's worse is that Saturn's triplicity is the Air signs. :pinched:
Click to expand...

Yet, in jyotish (Vedic astrology) the tridosha of Saturn is: AIR :surprised:(called Vata in tridosha, ie, Vedic element theory) I think a lot of the problem is with the trucated Aristotelian elemental system of 4 elements (heavily promoted in Western astrology by Ptolemy, but also followed by the other Hellenist authors as well), whereas the original Platonic elemental system is 5 elements (including "ether"), which is similar to the 5 elements in the Vedic tridosha system (Vata = air and ehter, Pitta = fire, Kapha = water and earth) and also to the 5 element Chinese system.

Also, I believe that dignities/debilities have much more than an elemental basis to them...but that is another whole involved subject!
 
Last edited:
byjove

byjove

Account Closed
... I have set up a few threads recently with simple points...yet they keep stirring up rethinking of older concepts...oops:tongue: I don't have a conscious mind to encourage revolution at this time lol so I don't know why it keeps happening :)

MSO: the point about the joys being powerful but not necessarily beneficial, might the houses of sorrow perhaps accommodate the negative?

I can't remember who suggested it, but I think that yes perhaps we should reconsider some of the terms we use, I think they confuse when used in a modern context of today...:surprised:
 
Last edited:
tsmall

tsmall

Premium Member
dr. farr said:
Yet, in jyotish (Vedic astrology) the tridosha of Saturn is: AIR :surprised:(called Vata in tridosha, ie, Vedic element theory) I think a lot of the problem is with the trucated Aristotelian elemental system of 4 elements (heavily promoted in Western astrology by Ptolemy, but also followed by the other Hellenist authors as well), whereas the original Platonic elemental system is 5 elements (including "ether"), which is similar to the 5 elements in the Vedic tridosha system (Vata = air and ehter, Pitta = fire, Kapha = water and earth) and also to the 5 element Chinese system.

Also, I believe that dignities/debilities have much more than an elemental basis to them...but that is another whole involved subject!
Click to expand...

Air = the air we breathe, as well as the wind? Whereas aether = the ambient, and possibly something beyond what we can see/feel?
 
MSO

MSO

Well-known member
byjove said:
... I have set up a few threads recently with simple points...yet they keep stirring up rethinking of older concepts...oops:tongue: where is this leading? we may just start something...

MSO: the point about the joys being powerful but not necessarily beneficial, might the houses of sorrow perhaps accommodate the negative?

I can't remember who suggested it, but I think that yes perhaps we should reconsider some of the terms we use, I think they confuse when used in a modern context of today...:surprised:
Click to expand...

The house of sorrow accommodate the negative? You mean like Sun in 7th House makes a person egocentric? Or do you mean the opposing house balances it out?

Speaking of being confused in modern context, while reading Lilly I was surprised to find out I have a "dark complexion." Since I'm by no means dark, that baffled me for a long time :lol:
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
MSO said:
The house of sorrow accommodate the negative? You mean like Sun in 7th House makes a person egocentric? Or do you mean the opposing house balances it out?

Speaking of being confused in modern context, while reading Lilly I was surprised to find out I have a "dark complexion." Since I'm by no means dark, that baffled me for a long time :lol:
Click to expand...
Malefic Saturn has Joy in the 12th House
Malefic Mars has Joy in the 6th House :smile:
 
Rebel Uranian

Rebel Uranian

Well-known member
I think "accommodate the negative" means that Mars in the 12th wouldn't be able to act in a bad way vs. Mars in the 6th, which would be strong but would be able to.

Doesn't Saturn have Joy in the 4th house not the 12th house? How would it have Joy in both?
 
byjove

byjove

Account Closed
Whoops...

'accommodate' has mislead here, I'll re-phrase that:

rather, I thought that someone was looking for a house where a planet would not perform well - in contrast to a planet in joy in a particular house. With that I mentioned the other dignity/debility - the houses of sorrow, as Dr. Farr mentions earlier in the thread.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Rebel Uranian said:
I think "accommodate the negative" means that Mars in the 12th wouldn't be able to act in a bad way vs. Mars in the 6th, which would be strong but would be able to.

Doesn't Saturn have Joy in the 4th house not the 12th house? How would it have Joy in both?
Click to expand...
the 12th house has negative connotations and nevertheless therefore can "accommodate the negative" in the form of Saturn who Joys in both the 12th and the 4th houses as dr. farr earlier explained

Rebel Uranian the 12th is a Cadent House, therefore as you have said, any Malefic therein would be unable to harm the native (Hellenistic Astrology) :smile:
byjove said:
Whoops... 'accommodate' has mislead here, I'll re-phrase that:
rather, I thought that someone was looking for a house where a planet would not perform well - in contrast to a planet in joy in a particular house. With that I mentioned the other dignity/debility - the houses of sorrow, as Dr. Farr mentions earlier in the thread.
Click to expand...
Saturn, being malefic enjoys the negative connotations of the 12th house :smile:
 
Last edited:
MSO

MSO

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
the 12th house has negative connotations and nevertheless therefore can "accommodate the negative" in the form of Saturn who Joys in both the 12th and the 4th houses as dr. farr earlier explained

Rebel Uranian the 12th is a Cadent House, therefore as you have said, any Malefic therein would be unable to harm the native (Hellenistic Astrology) :smile:


Saturn, being malefic enjoys the negative connotations of the 12th house :smile:
Click to expand...

What's with the cocky responses when you don't even know what you're talking about? :smile:

byjove said:
Whoops...

'accommodate' has mislead here, I'll re-phrase that:

rather, I thought that someone was looking for a house where a planet would not perform well - in contrast to a planet in joy in a particular house. With that I mentioned the other dignity/debility - the houses of sorrow, as Dr. Farr mentions earlier in the thread.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you mean something like... Saturn not faring so well in the 5th House?
 
Top