relative strengths of planets

[Guest guest]

François wrote:

> ...I have just remembered that the zodiac was rather a place for

dignities and debilities (strengths, weaknesses and rulerships

though) and had very few " qualities " of its own, according to ancient

and medieval astrology (go to Lilly's for instance).

 

Hi Francois,

Yes, but what is a dignity or a debility? It's the relative strength

of a planet according to its placement by sign. The quality and

strength of a planet will be different in each sign because every

sign has a distinct quality. You can't account for these differences

in the planet itself; the planet doesn't change. A rulership is the

home or most natural placement of a planet by sign; the sign is the

only thing that determines this. This is consistent with Lilly, who

I have studied extensively.

 

> Also, I think it is sad to see astrologers that think that

astrology just has to do with " psychology " ....

 

I agree with you. I think it's sad to see astrologers limiting the

scope of their studies in any way.

 

> I strongly believe the chart shows both what the man is (his

psychology) AND what happens to him and he does (his destiny). That

is valid whether we use tropical or sidereal astrology.

 

No disagreemnt here on that point.

 

Thanks for your comments.

-Greg

[Guest guest]

At 04:46 PM 1/13/05 -0000, Greg wrote:

>

>Yes, but what is a dignity or a debility? It's the relative strength

>of a planet according to its placement by sign. The quality and

>strength of a planet will be different in each sign because every

>sign has a distinct quality.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Uh huh...right! And this is where we should be doing our zodiac research.

Both sets of signs aren't going to come out the same for the planets. THIS

is the key.

 

I posted a note on the youngastro list about the early classical terms

(planetary degrees) of the signs--not traditional in either western

sidereal or Jyotish. But preliminary work shows that they may work

amazingly well in the sidereal zodiac. The post is below.

 

Therese

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Hellenistic students,

 

I've just begun to investigate the terms. I believe that up to this time

astrologers who use the terms have looked at them in the Tropical zodiac.

Since my computer is set for the sidereal zodiac (Krishnamurti), I thought

I'd look at the Egyptian terms of the angular planets for the

quake/tsunami. (Dec 26, 2004 0:58:51 GMT, 3N18 095E47)

 

Sidereal Terms Tropical Terms

 

Ascendant 26 Taurus = Mars 22 Cap 17 = Saturn

Descendant 26 Scorpio = Saturn 22 Cancer = Jupiter

Saturn 1 Can 33 = Mars (conj desc) 25 Cancer = Jupiter

Jupiter 23 Virgo = Mars (near zenith) 17 Libra = Jupiter

Ketu (conj MC) 4 Lib = Saturn 28+ Libra = Mars

MC 3 Libra 30 = Saturn 27 Libra 20 = Venus

 

The sidereal terms are all Mars and Saturn, malefic. The Tropical terms are

mixed, but with four positions in benefic terms.

 

In addition: Sidereal *Mars* is ultra strong. (Solar Fire gives it a +11

score) Mars is its own sign, triplicity, term and face. Wouldn't we expect

a powerful Mars for one of the most powerful quakes on record? Tropical

Mars gets a score of -5p (peregrine, lacking dignity)

 

Sidereal Jupiter and Saturn both get a score of -10p peregrine--lacking any

dignity

(Tropical Jupiter gets a +11--very strong. Tropical Saturn -1)

 

Now this is only *one* hugely tragic event. But it would indeed be

interesting if the planets in similar charts of tragedies showed the same

zodiacal/term results.