Personally I connect the "plane" a planet operates upon (should I say rather, primarily or most intensely operates upon) to be rather connected with the elemental affinity of the sign it (and its shadow, ie its dodekatemorion) is posited in. However, every planet operates to some extent upon every "plane"-and this "totality" outlook I consider to be one that gives superior delineative results. Consideration of the elemental sign the planet is in, plus the decan it is in, place the duad (duodenary) it is in, also will give a more complete insight into the "planes" the planet might have operational influences upon...
Essential dignities and their roles in the chart
- Thread starter soratothamax
- Start date
Rebel Uranian
Well-known member
I have a question about peregrinity. This is actually from my chart. With triplicity rulers at night, my Moon (Earth) is in Water, my Mars (Water) is in Air, and my Mercury (Air) is in Earth. The Moon for sure and Mercury depending on terms are not peregrine. Does this lift my Mars and Mercury (if it is) out of peregrine? If my Mars is out of peregrine, does it lift my Saturn out since Saturn is in reception with Mars? If my Saturn is out of peregrine, do my Sun and Jupiter get out of peregrine since my Sun and Jupiter are receiving Saturn? What about Venus, which has another disposition loop with Saturn and Mars?
No-elemental resonance does not count unless there is essential dignity by triplicity.
HOWEVER (and I have elaborated soewhat extensively upon this in previous posts to other past threads here on AW) I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE PEREGRINE STATE!! I completely reject this concept (SO, SHOOT ME
!) I would urge students to do the same (my apologies to our Traditionalist and neo-Hellenist AW members, but this is my definite OPINION, for whatever its worth
)
HOWEVER (and I have elaborated soewhat extensively upon this in previous posts to other past threads here on AW) I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE PEREGRINE STATE!! I completely reject this concept (SO, SHOOT ME
!) I would urge students to do the same (my apologies to our Traditionalist and neo-Hellenist AW members, but this is my definite OPINION, for whatever its worth)
tsmall
Premium Member
No-elemental resonance does not count unless there is essential dignity by triplicity.
HOWEVER (and I have elaborated soewhat extensively upon this in previous posts to other past threads here on AW) I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE PEREGRINE STATE!! I completely reject this concept (SO, SHOOT ME
dr. farr, I have been thinking about this today. I am curious...do you reject the concept of the peregrine state because (I think..I am so often wrong I stopped keeping track, lol) it implies a lack of relationship with other planets in the chart? I can't think of a specific example right away, but a planet is always in some sort of reception with another planet based on various (decan ruler, monomoiria, term, face, et. al) influences, even if it is not directly aspecting that planet? Lily's table of essential dignities indicates that a perigrine planet has no dignity of it's own, but if a perigrine planet has a relationship with another planet that is dignified....might it be like knowing/being friends with someone with some power?
Last edited:
Rebel Uranian
Well-known member
No-elemental resonance does not count unless there is essential dignity by triplicity.
HOWEVER (and I have elaborated somewhat extensively upon this in previous posts to other past threads here on AW) I DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE PEREGRINE STATE!! I completely reject this concept (SO, SHOOT ME
Please respond to tsmall's post first.
There were no planets in resonance involved, only the rulers of the triplicities dispositing each other around in circles.
Peregrine means a wanderer, something with no connections; now, historically this state has been applied only relative to the issue of essential dignity/debility, and is not connected (in its theory) with accidental dignities/debilities, so-looking at peregrine within its defining area of consideration of essential dignities/debilities-the fact that a planet might (will) have connections with other planets (which would be considered among the accidental dignities/debilities) is not why I reject the concept.
Originally, a peregrine planet was defined as a planet without any essential dignities OR DEBILITIES-truly "disconnected" from anything that would uplift it (essential dignity) or that would pull it down (essential detriment) Later (around the time of Bonatti) this definition changed: essential debility was no longer counted as an essential "connection", and so the definition of peregrine changed-expanded-to mean any planet that had no essential dignity: "essential debility does not save from the peregrine state", became the motto. So the concept changed into an essentially debilitated planet (having no essential dignities) also automatically becoming "a wanderer" (peregrine, without essential connections). To me, this substantially altered the original concept and meaning of the term peregrine.
Another reason that I reject the concept is that, even in its original meaning (a planet with no essential dignities OR essential debilities), the occurence of this state must be very rare: essential dignities are given by sign, face (planetary decan), triplicity and term. Well, what about by zodiacal (rather than planetary) decan (whether the elemental decans or the Manilius decans)?And the triplicty of that zodiacal decan? What about the duodenary (duad; 1/12th part of the sign)?
And the triplicity of that zodiacal duodenary? What about the zodiacal monomoiria of the degree the planet is in? And the triplicity of that zodiacal monomoiria? If you are going to include sign subdivisions in your allocation of essential dignities and debilities (and you do when you include face and term), then why not include all the sign divisions (like duodenary and monomoiria)? These subdivisions were widely recognized through medieval times (Bonatti) and even by Lilly (to some extent)-so why limit the field to only 2 subdivisions (face and term)? And why limit triplicity consideration ONLY to the sign as a whole? Each subdivision (zodiacal subdivision) has its triplicity as well-shouldn't these subdivisional triplicities (triplicities of zodiacal decan, zodiacal duodenary and zodiacal monomoira) also come into play in determining essential dignities and debilities?
Finally, while I have often seen (or believed that I have seen) the activity of pitted degrees, elevated degrees and Bright degrees upon planets, I must say that I have never seen anything specific/different about a planet which (according to the "rules") was in a "peregrine" state.
These are my personal thoughts and experiences (my personal OPINIONS) which have led me to reject the peregrine concept as a practical delineative consideration...
Originally, a peregrine planet was defined as a planet without any essential dignities OR DEBILITIES-truly "disconnected" from anything that would uplift it (essential dignity) or that would pull it down (essential detriment) Later (around the time of Bonatti) this definition changed: essential debility was no longer counted as an essential "connection", and so the definition of peregrine changed-expanded-to mean any planet that had no essential dignity: "essential debility does not save from the peregrine state", became the motto. So the concept changed into an essentially debilitated planet (having no essential dignities) also automatically becoming "a wanderer" (peregrine, without essential connections). To me, this substantially altered the original concept and meaning of the term peregrine.
Another reason that I reject the concept is that, even in its original meaning (a planet with no essential dignities OR essential debilities), the occurence of this state must be very rare: essential dignities are given by sign, face (planetary decan), triplicity and term. Well, what about by zodiacal (rather than planetary) decan (whether the elemental decans or the Manilius decans)?And the triplicty of that zodiacal decan? What about the duodenary (duad; 1/12th part of the sign)?
And the triplicity of that zodiacal duodenary? What about the zodiacal monomoiria of the degree the planet is in? And the triplicity of that zodiacal monomoiria? If you are going to include sign subdivisions in your allocation of essential dignities and debilities (and you do when you include face and term), then why not include all the sign divisions (like duodenary and monomoiria)? These subdivisions were widely recognized through medieval times (Bonatti) and even by Lilly (to some extent)-so why limit the field to only 2 subdivisions (face and term)? And why limit triplicity consideration ONLY to the sign as a whole? Each subdivision (zodiacal subdivision) has its triplicity as well-shouldn't these subdivisional triplicities (triplicities of zodiacal decan, zodiacal duodenary and zodiacal monomoira) also come into play in determining essential dignities and debilities?
Finally, while I have often seen (or believed that I have seen) the activity of pitted degrees, elevated degrees and Bright degrees upon planets, I must say that I have never seen anything specific/different about a planet which (according to the "rules") was in a "peregrine" state.
These are my personal thoughts and experiences (my personal OPINIONS) which have led me to reject the peregrine concept as a practical delineative consideration...
Last edited:
soratothamax
Well-known member
So what would YOU call my Sun in Taurus?
With the Venus in Aries Mars in Pisces Jupiter in Cancer Neptune in Capricorn Moon in Scorpio Pluto in Scorpio Saturn in Capricorn?
MSO
Well-known member
So what would YOU call my Sun in Taurus?
I'd call it a hot and wet planet in a cold and dry sign!
These are all good placements. Although Venus is in detriment in Aries, I've met quite a few women with Venus in Aries who were quite attractive and.... proactive about their sexual endeavors
Mars in Pisces isn't too bad. At least the destructive side of the planet is numbed down a bit.
I feel sorry for your Moon being in Scorpio. Life *****, huh? Brood on it.
Jupiter and Saturn are both fine in your chart, assuming they're in decent houses.
soratothamax
Well-known member
I'd call it a hot and wet planet in a cold and dry sign!
These are all good placements. Although Venus is in detriment in Aries, I've met quite a few women with Venus in Aries who were quite attractive and.... proactive about their sexual endeavors
Mars in Pisces isn't too bad. At least the destructive side of the planet is numbed down a bit.
I feel sorry for your Moon being in Scorpio. Life *****, huh? Brood on it.
Jupiter and Saturn are both fine in your chart, assuming they're in decent houses.
Yep Moon in Scorpio is the pits.
Good thing it's in the 12th house...ALL Venus in Aries women I know are explicit.
I'm a shy one, with the Mars in Pis but I'm manipulative. he he My Mars trines Jupiter in the 4th, good in aspect, comfortable in house. Sun trines Saturn...yay...I think. Saturn is an iffy planet for most people.
Last edited:
soratothamax
Well-known member
I'd call it a hot and wet planet in a cold and dry sign!
These are all good placements. Although Venus is in detriment in Aries, I've met quite a few women with Venus in Aries who were quite attractive and.... proactive about their sexual endeavors
Mars in Pisces isn't too bad. At least the destructive side of the planet is numbed down a bit.
I feel sorry for your Moon being in Scorpio. Life *****, huh? Brood on it.
Jupiter and Saturn are both fine in your chart, assuming they're in decent houses.
I thought the sun was hot and dry...
Rebel Uranian
Well-known member
It is hot and dry.