Most elevated planet

Saturn also appears strongly in my vedic reading as the ruler of my nakshatra and in my numerology as it is the ruler of my life path number 8. This leads me to believe maybe it is my leading planet and I just can't see its effects.

And yes I agree. Other factors in the birth chart could explain the effects of most elevated planet.

Since katydid has a lot info about birth charts patterns and leading planet, she could enlighten us on the subject matter.

conspiracy theorist said:

The examples that I have in mind of people that have Saturn in the 10th house could be characterized as controversial, "bad" people. Some personal examples and some more public like Hitler, Lucky Luciano, Azealia Banks and USA being seen as the international police isn't the most amenable reputation you'd want to see.

Authority issues which would have effects on any job you're employed in, Employment problems, a problem with dogmatic religion are some of the things that I'd say off the top of my head.

Click to expand...

So, an elevated Saturn makes one controversial with a bad reputation and authority issues? That makes a lot of sense, actually. Even look at my reputation on this site. It's not how I want it to be but it is what it is.
I don't think of myself as much of an authority figure though nor do I respect authority*, which I had imagined to be the case with an elevated Saturn. There are authority figures who I respect but that respect has to be earned. I could never respect someone just because they're in authority which is usually what is expected.

Sidenote: Azealia Banks has a Leo Mars in the 3rd house too. Hers is closer to the IC, and some astrologers would consider it "4th house" as a result but I can see some similarities.

conspiracy theorist said:

I see you as mainly Mercurial with your 3rd house Mars being apparent in the way you communicate. You have both your luminaries in Venusian signs but you don't come across that way to me.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I would imagine. An elevated Mercury would make a lot more sense. But then again it is, after all, my chart ruler.

Yeah, I'm definitely more of a "brains" person than a "beauty" person. My luminaries are both in Venusian signs but my Venus is debiliated (retrograde, detriment, 6th house), which explains why I don't come off that way. I do feel like I'm becoming a lot more Venusian as I get older, which makes sense with the North Node conjunction, and not to brag about how sexy and powerful I am or anything, but the Scorpio energy in me seems to be prominent and I think this is largely due to the double Venus rulership. Even then, however, my idea of beauty probably isn't a "conventional" one. I wouldn't call it particularly unconventional (how can I when these days the so-called unconventional is conventional?) but if you're looking for a blonde cheerleader type, don't waste your time with me.

Oh, and I will say this: that career analysis you gave me way back when was 100% spot on.

conspiracy theorist said:

Alongside your other chart placements, it could be a contributing factor. Oppression is a Saturnine word so that could also be relevant to your life.

Click to expand...

I guess what I'm mainly asking is, do you think an elevated planet could represent forces from the outside rather than the inside? In the case of Saturn, this could represent oppositional forces such as authority figures and groups that want to protest how problematic you are, etc.

katydid said:

No, I don't think so. But it is hard to say, I suppose. Because it depends upon the context of our meeting/interaction.


I have Jupiter in Taurus tightly conjunct the Ascendant. And Jupiter aspects just about every planet in my chart. [ The Mars makes very few aspects.] So I think the Jupiter is very powerful in my life.

And I think that when people meet me, and socialize with me, they see that bubbly, socially gregarious, welcoming, enthusiastic side. People see me as outgoing, expressive and optimistic.

Click to expand...

It is difficult to know exactly how other people see us. I have jupiter conjunct MC. Initially, it seemed like it had no effect. If anything, I feel unlucky. Then a few people mentioned how nothing every bothers me and I'm always in good spirits. Even family members have mentioned this. It shocked me, because I don't see it that way at all. I see myself as moody and cynical. Over time I realized that my behavior is completely different when interfacing with other people. In fact, I would say that I even feel more jupiter like during those moments. At any other time I relate more to my scorpio sun. So, it seems like my most elevated planet affects my public reputation more than my career.

craft94 said:

Yeah, that's what I would imagine. An elevated Mercury would make a lot more sense. But then again it is, after all, my chart ruler.

Yeah, I'm definitely more of a "brains" person than a "beauty" person. My luminaries are both in Venusian signs but my Venus is debiliated (retrograde, detriment, 6th house), which explains why I don't come off that way. I do feel like I'm becoming a lot more Venusian as I get older, which makes sense with the North Node conjunction, and not to brag about how sexy and powerful I am or anything, but the Scorpio energy in me seems to be prominent and I think this is largely due to the double Venus rulership. Even then, however, my idea of beauty probably isn't a "conventional" one. I wouldn't call it particularly unconventional (how can I when these days the so-called unconventional is conventional?) but if you're looking for a blonde cheerleader type, don't waste your time with me.

Click to expand...

Brains, that's it. Some people take longer to grow confident in their sexuality. You're by no means alone in our deplorable generation. In what ways do you identify with Scorpio? I'll rest assured that you won't be giving me any of the trite **** regarding the sign.

Now I'm wondering how I come across on the forum

craft94 said:

Oh, and I will say this: that career analysis you gave me way back when was 100% spot on.

Click to expand...

I had a hunch it hit you between the eyes but you didn't give away much from your reply to me

craft94 said:

I guess what I'm mainly asking is, do you think an elevated planet could represent forces from the outside rather than the inside? In the case of Saturn, this could represent oppositional forces such as authority figures and groups that want to protest how problematic you are, etc.

Click to expand...

It's generally seen in traditional astrological practice that every point does not point to a person's character or psychology. Planets can definitely indicate outside forces that play upon the life. Your Saturn, not being the asc ruler, moon ruler, mercury ruler, or even temperament ruler indicates that Saturnine traits won't be important in your personal conduct.

conspiracy theorist said:

It's generally seen in traditional astrological practice that every point does not point to a person's character or psychology. Planets can definitely indicate outside forces that play upon the life. Your Saturn, not being the asc ruler, moon ruler, mercury ruler, or even temperament ruler indicates that Saturnine traits won't be important in your personal conduct.

Click to expand...

That's very interesting. Not that I don't feel intuitively like you are correct in your reasoning, but what makes you say that Saturn not having those rulerships is the cause behind it becoming externalized? Have you just experienced/seen this, or is this a concept that is actually more well-known?

conspiracy theorist said:

Brains, that's it.

Click to expand...

I hope you're not being sarcastic, here. If not, thanks

conspiracy theorist said:

In what ways do you identify with Scorpio? I'll rest assured that you won't be giving me any of the trite **** regarding the sign.

Click to expand...

Well, what you said about Venus & Jupiter in Scorpio in that career analysis was very spot on.

It isn't so much that I identify with it though as much as others identify me with it.

I'm very emotional, for one, and since Scorpio is a fixed sign, it takes me a real long time to get over things. I'm very obsessive and people say I'm paranoid (I don't necessarily agree) and I know it's shocking to hear but most guys do not find paranoia to be a sexy trait lol. I need to be in control (this doesn't mean I always am) and I'm generally more reserved and private than I appear on the forum; I try to be guarded but with a Gemini Rising, this doesn't always work out. On the more positive side, I want to connect deeply with others and I'm good at investigating things. I'm more "Scorpionic" about relationships and my aesthetic (I tend to like "darker" things) than any other area of life but because I've got that double Venus rulership, these things are important to me, at least internally.

conspiracy theorist said:

Now I'm wondering how I come across on the forum

Click to expand...

Online, I see a lot of Jupiter in you.
Your Venus in the 1st house is very prominent too. I mean, it is the 1st house: you come across as very charming and likeable. Rumor has it a lot of the girls on this website have a crush on you (not me...for all I know you could be a 500-pound anime-obsessed lesbian living in your mother's basement... no offense... I mean, so could I...I could be a man... you never know lmao)

conspiracy theorist said:

It's generally seen in traditional astrological practice that every point does not point to a person's character or psychology. Planets can definitely indicate outside forces that play upon the life. Your Saturn, not being the asc ruler, moon ruler, mercury ruler, or even temperament ruler indicates that Saturnine traits won't be important in your personal conduct.

Click to expand...

That makes sense.

sylph said:

That's very interesting. Not that I don't feel intuitively like you are correct in your reasoning, but what makes you say that Saturn not having those rulerships is the cause behind it becoming externalized? Have you just experienced/seen this, or is this a concept that is actually more well-known?

Click to expand...

Both. When I've focused on the asc, it's ruler, moon and it's ruler and Mercury to an extent I've been able to get a good grasp on character without any recourse to the wider horoscope. I've also noticed this in the charts of the people I know. In modern astrology practice, oppositions indicate some distancing with the planet or point that is more "remote". At one point I was in a relationship with a girl who had Mercury opp. Jupiter and Venus opp. Pluto and my chart happens to have both Jupiter and Pluto strains strong.

To the concepts bit, IIRC correctly there are a number of techniques given by different astrologers over the years which mostly gear character delineation toward a few points in the chart and not much else. Lilly's manners takes planets in the 1st house, asc ruler, or any planets that are interacting with the Moon and Mercury to get a handle on personality, Ptolemy chronicled a technique whereby focus was placed primarily on Mercury and Moon, and I think Abu Mashar also focused on the ASC, Moon and Mercury paying much attention to the modality of the points in question.

Traditionally too within the chart, the houses are seen as differentiated areas of life and any planets placed within would be descriptive of that area. While in modern it seems as though the planet signifies the subjective experience that one has regarding a particular area of life. In practice, both reasons often end up aligning.

craft94 said:

I hope you're not being sarcastic, here. If not, thanks

Click to expand...

That's the succinct and normal way to put all that astro-babble, so no, I wasn't this time around.

craft94 said:

Well, what you said about Venus & Jupiter in Scorpio in that career analysis was very spot on.

Click to expand...

I just reviewed that thread. I used to put so much more effort in my forum interps.

craft94 said:

It isn't so much that I identify with it though as much as others identify me with it.

I'm very emotional, for one, and since Scorpio is a fixed sign, it takes me a real long time to get over things. I'm very obsessive and people say I'm paranoid (I don't necessarily agree) and I know it's shocking to hear but most guys do not find paranoia to be a sexy trait lol. I need to be in control (this doesn't mean I always am) and I'm generally more reserved and private than I appear on the forum; I try to be guarded but with a Gemini Rising, this doesn't always work out. On the more positive side, I want to connect deeply with others and I'm good at investigating things. I'm more "Scorpionic" about relationships and my aesthetic (I tend to like "darker" things) than any other area of life but because I've got that double Venus rulership, these things are important to me, at least internally.

Click to expand...

I've never found paranoia to be a sexy trait, but I must admit I get a dopamine kick anytime a women starts becoming jealous over something innocuous I said or did.

And looking at your chart again, That Taurus Moon opp. Scorpio Venus/Jupiter conjunct the SN/NN looks very packed with potent energy. No wonder you wig out all the time.

craft94 said:

Online, I see a lot of Jupiter in you.
Your Venus in the 1st house is very prominent too. I mean, it is the 1st house: you come across as very charming and likeable. Rumor has it a lot of the girls on this website have a crush on you (not me...for all I know you could be a 500-pound anime-obsessed lesbian living in your mother's basement... no offense... I mean, so could I...I could be a man... you never know lmao)

Click to expand...

No offense taken. Ah, so it looks like my Libra MC works well even over the webs.

The closest planet to my MC is the Sun. Does anyone else also have this? Sounds like a positive influence, so I just couldn't hold myself from bragging about it,


Of course it depends on other conditions aswell, right? I could go off on a rant, talking about how planets are actions and what is the correct way to understand them. In my life, I believe I've only somewhat experienced how Saturn, Mars and Moon actions are like. I wanna know how it's like to experience Sun-like events in one's life. Anybody kind enough to shed some light on this subject?


Now that I think about it, if the Sun is the solar system's center, and the Sun is like the heart of an animal, which regenerates and gives life to all of the organs, does that mean that both the light and the darkness that's experienced in our lives is a result of the presence of the Sun? Maybe the best thing that the Sun can bring is power and emphasis on one aspect of life, rather than actual good fortune (which would come from Jupiter). The Sun controls the light and the darkness, because in reality, all of the other planets function only because the Sun's there. The Sun is like the soul experiencing all of the good and the bad throughout its lifetime. When the Sun stops working, so does everything else. When you combine the forces of the benefics and some powerful planet, maybe you can truly say that the Sun is making your life shine. So, for me, what strikes me the most about the Sun is its importance. It's not necessarily a benefic or malefic planet. It may have a slight inclination towards being benefic, though.

Whaddyaguysthink?

Ancients considered the Sun a neutral planet: benefic if far away from a given planet, malefic is close by a given planet (they had 2 classifications for planets near the Sun: one was called "under the sunbeams" and was considered a minor debility; the other was combust-within 8 or so degrees of the Sun-which was considered a major debility) For me, I don't consider "under the sunbeams" but I do consider combust-my orb, though, is 5 degrees.
In my delineations when a planet is combust I consider it to be absorbed by the Sun-and I use the Sun for that combust planet's position in delineation of that chart (this is not an orthodox delineative procedure, but it "works for me"...)

dr. farr said:

Ancients considered the Sun a neutral planet: benefic if far away from a given planet, malefic is close by a given planet (they had 2 classifications for planets near the Sun: one was called "under the sunbeams" and was considered a minor debility; the other was combust-within 8 or so degrees of the Sun-which was considered a major debility) For me, I don't consider "under the sunbeams" but I do consider combust-my orb, though, is 5 degrees.
In my delineations when a planet is combust I consider it to be absorbed by the Sun-and I use the Sun for that combust planet's position in delineation of that chart (this is not an orthodox delineative procedure, but it "works for me"...)

Click to expand...

That makes me think about some stuff. Wouldn't it be best if a planet was at just the right distance from the Sun? If too far away, then the planet can't receive the Sun's heat and warmth, which is much appreciated, traditionally speaking. Also, I thought that most people considered any planet conjunct the Sun to have its energy absorbed by the Sun. Is that what's unorthodox about your chart delineations? Or did you mean that you actually consider the Sun to assume the rulership of whatever the other planet ruled?

What happens when the Sun is conjunct a malefic? What about a benefic? If the were conjunct , would the big star take all of the old man's restrictions and limits and put a spotlight on those things? I'm thinking of the Sun as the laws that rule each person's universe. What would be of Saturn in that case? Does Saturn just stay like a burned out, useless piece of space rock? What happens when the Sun conjoins a benefic, like ? Following the proposition "The Sun creates the laws of each person's universe", would a Jupiter conjunction make things work out in a way that the native gets away with stuff? Or would the Sun just make Jupiter more important? Why is it considered a combustion as the worst kind of influence if the Sun just absorbs all of the energy?


Maybe the natal chart doesn't consider actual distance to be the most important. If the Sun is 120º apart from another body, it can give a lot of its warmth and light onto it, even more than it does when it's only 60º degrees apart.

Because in combustion the Sun absorbs all of the energy of the planet-that's why if that happens, I use the SUN FOR ALL OF THAT ABSORBED PLANET'S CONNECTIONS IN THE CHART (that's what is unorthodox in my delineation when I deal with a combust planet; the orthodox-traditionalist-delineation would be of the combust planet in a very detrimented state due to the combustion; Modernist delineation would not count the combust state as a factor at all, and would consider a combust planet not to be afflicted by the Sun in any way, a straight conjunction of the planet with the Sun would be delineated) Then there is cazimi, when a planet is in the heart of the Sun: now the Sun magnifies the cazimi planet's influences, particularly it benefic qualities, and makes it as if 2 of that planet were operative in the chart! Again, this is traditionalist perspective, most Modernist practitioners don't count cazimi as being any different than a mere partile conjunction of the planet with the Sun-here I follow traditionalist orthodoxy and regard cazimi as a very significant dignifying condition.
One thing to remember-the Sun actually is not a "planet"-its a "fixed star"-and so I believe that special considerations must be given to the Sun which are not accorded to the "real" planets (here including our satellite the Moon)

NOTE: as with much else in my approach to astrology, I am considering this matter re to the Sun and combust/cazimi from a SYMBOLIC perspective; in objective scientific reality the combustion of a planet is not really occuring out in space, it appears to be occurring from out geocentric point of observation only-so the Modernist outlook here is the "scientifically correct" one: only an apparent conjunction from our point of view is happening, there is no actual (objective) combustion of the planet by the Sun.
But, as I said, I follow a highly symbolic approach to astrology, so the actual objective astrophysical facts are not of primary importance to ME...

^What does it mean for the planet's effects for its energy to be "absorbed" by the Sun?

Larry King is an interesting case. Chart

The planet closest to his midheaven is mercury. It is retrograde and combust, yet he excelled at public communications.

sibylline said:

^What does it mean for the planet's effects for its energy to be "absorbed" by the Sun?

Click to expand...

The Sun takes over and substitutes the planet's influences with its own (SOLAR) influences, and its as if the planet is not in the particular chart-

NOTE: I want to emphasize again that this is MY OWN outlook regarding delineation of a combust planet and it is not followed either in traditional, nor Vedic, nor Modernist astrological doctrine.

!4C said:

Larry King is an interesting case. Chart

The planet closest to his midheaven is mercury. It is retrograde and combust, yet he excelled at public communications.

Click to expand...

Good supporting example for the Modernist position against considering combustion a factor.

However in the reference chart I myself would in fact have considered Mercury to have been absorbed by the Sun, and would ascribe to the Sun the benefic effects relating to King's excellence at public communications.

dr. farr said:

Good supporting example for the Modernist position against considering combustion a factor.

However in the reference chart I myself would in fact have considered Mercury to have been absorbed by the Sun, and would ascribe to the Sun the benefic effects relating to King's excellence at public communications.

Click to expand...

Dr. Farr, I have a logical problem considering Retrograde important (in the Natal-chart ONLY). The Natal-chart is a "snapshot", in which there is no movement in either direction, and is the STATIONARY foundation for the native, and remains so for an entire life-time. Transits and SRs are measured relative to the unchanging Natal-chart configuration. Horary is a different matter, because it's a projection into the future, and Retrograde makes perfect sense for that. I realize nearly everyone is convinced it's an important factor for Natal, but there's no way of proving it, as far as I can tell--Aspects can explain its supposed effects just as well. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind about this, just interested in your opinion based on your experience. (Again, Natal only!)
Btw, Moderns can be just as touchy about their own chosen Astrological beliefs as Traditionalists! I tread lightly, even in the Modern Forum.

david starling said:

Dr. Farr, I have a logical problem considering Retrograde important (in the Natal-chart ONLY). The Natal-chart is a "snapshot", in which there is no movement in either direction, and is the STATIONARY foundation for the native, and remains so for an entire life-time. Transits and SRs are measured relative to the unchanging Natal-chart configuration.

Click to expand...

What are your thoughts on progressions? Do you think they are a useful tool in regards prediction? A consideration in progressions would be the change of a planet's direction, and based on what people report, the effects are noticeable. Does this affect your thinking on the acknowledging of natal Rx planets in any way?

conspiracy theorist said:

What are your thoughts on progressions? Do you think they are a useful tool in regards prediction? A consideration in progressions would be the change of a planet's direction, and based on what people report, the effects are noticeable. Does this affect your thinking on the acknowledging of natal Rx planets in any way?

Click to expand...

A Natal-chart is for life. Progression is about changing from one snapshot to another, based on the snapshot Natal-chart. I think people read something into Retrograde/Direct that might not be there, because it's a compelling idea. I did a little experiment (very little ) with the charts of two colonial personalities, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. A known introvert, very awkward in in social situations, and an extreme extrovert, socially very comfortable in any social situation. Retrograde Mercury is supposed to be withdrawn and inward-thinking, but it was Jefferson with Merc direct in Pisces, and Franklin with it retrograde in Aquarius. The Signs explain it, movement in a "still-life" photo doesn't. Funny, if it had been as conventionally expected, I probably would have changed my mind! Convention has its own momentum. Considering all the factors involved in reading a snapshot Natal-chart, ignoring Retrograde-motion where there isn't any movement evident, really isn't much of a loss.[IMO]
Of course if a Chart had Sun or Moon Retrograde, I would definitely view THAT as important!

Grant Lewi shunned progressions. He said, if they work for you use them but I dont.
His predictive measures are recorded in astrology for the millions.

Personally I use them but I also see his reasoning