skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Aversion and the 2nd house?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:24 pm    Post subject: Aversion and the 2nd house? Reply with quote

Hi,

I've been doing a little thinking about some of the things I've been reading/hearing about aversion.

As far as I understand it, we can garner the native's primary motivation from the house which the ASC ruler occupies and the ability of the native to manage the aspect of life the ASC represents is dependant on the ability of the domicile lord to "see" the sign it rules, among other things.

Now if the native's primary motivation is wealth, using whole-sign, doesn't that make everyone with that feature have trouble in managing the affairs attributed to the ASC as being in the 2nd house automatically means that the lord of the ASC cannot see the ASC? Of course the same appplies for the 6th, 8th and 12th houses.

The native having a difficult "being" when positioned in those other houses makes sense to me as they rule pretty negative things but I'm having trouble putting the 2nd house into the same catergory; does that mean that the chasing of wealth is an inherently difficult existence for the native?

I was also reading Paulus where he states that like-engirding and contra-antiscia can alleviate aversion, so why not antiscia? I'm also not so sure that both of these conditions can completely alleviate it as they still cannot "see" in the strictest sense, so am I right in thinking this is more of a "backdoor" method for the native to be more concious of their motivation rather than a palpable one?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 5006
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Konrad,

Quote:
I was also reading Paulus where he states that like-engirding and contra-antiscia can alleviate aversion, so why not antiscia?


Quite so. Whether described as equal in power/ daylight or antiscia this was viewed as an additional mitigation to aversion by hellenistic astrologers.

We got into an interesting discussion on mitigated aversion a few years ago on the forum. Steven Birchfield made some very interesting comments on this issue.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4266&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15&sid=55432e4b0723fd859fe449eda500bee8

Also have you read these articles by Steven on this subject?

http://www.astrologycom.com/livingsigns1.html
http://www.astrologycom.com/livingsigns2.html
http://www.astrologycom.com/livingsigns3.html
http://www.astrologycom.com/livingsigns4.html

I have been reading Ben Dykes Introductions to Traditional Astrology:
Abu Ma'shar & al-Qabisi
and it seems clear that these ideas carried on to Persian/Arab astrology in the understanding of reception.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
astrojin



Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 469

Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,

The ancients (especially those who follow Empedocles, Aristotle, Ptolemy, ...) believe that all things are made up of the four elements in different mixture. In inanimate things, this mixture produces different physical characteristics. In humans, the mixture produces different physical as well as psychological characteristics (or temperament, after all temperament is mixture!). This is why in any astrological chart, the most important points i.e. the angles (signs of the 1st, 4th, 7th and 10th) all fall on four different signs of four different elements! This is true if you use whole sign house system. Under whole sign house system, we are all different mixtures of the four elements. This is probably one of the reasons the traditional astrologers are not comfortable with having MC/IC axis not on the signs of 10th/4th because the whole chart will have a total imbalance of elements. Observe that using the whole sign house system, you not only have all four different elements on the signs of the 1st, 4th, 7th and 10th but you would also have the same quadruplicities or modes (all are moveable/cardinal, fixed or common/mutable).

The most important angle is, of course, the sign of the first house which determines the native’s personal life. We could say that the most important element in the determination of the primary motivation of a native is the element of the rising sign! The “what” is answered through the element. So, if a native has a rising sign of the earth element - he seeks material security, water element – he seeks emotional security (both earth and water use the term “seek” as they are the cold, nocturnal, feminine, introverted, inward direction of energy), fire element – he goes for action and power and air element – he goes for freedom of thoughts and expression/communication (both fire and air use the phrase “goes for” as they are hot, diurnal, masculine, extroverted, outward direction of energy). As the combination of element and mode/quadruplicity makes a sign unique, the difference between two signs that have the same element can be differentiated using the mode e.g. both Capricorn and Taurus are earth, so both seek material security but through material things for Taurus (mode = fixed) and through power for Capricorn (mode = cardinal).

The “how” is answered through the sign and house of the lord of ascendant. The fulfilment (or lack of) is observed from the aspect made by the lord of ascendant to ascendant. If the lord of ascendant aspects the ascendant, there is fulfilment of the primary motivation (otherwise, not). The concept of primary motivation hinges upon the concept of elements. Hence, we could make a conjecture that this concept was devised by Ptolemaic/Aristotelian astrologers and these astrologers would explain almost everything using the elements (and or nature i.e. hot/cold, wet/dry) – see esp. Al-Kindi and Abu Ma’shar. Hence, their concept of aspects would be partially explained through the interactions of elements and modes, and not through the sides of harmonious/disharmonious polygons.

The nature of Fire is to go up and the nature of air is to go up and sideways. The nature of Earth is to go down and the nature of water is to go down and sideways. Hence, the elements of Fire and Air are compatible (due to the sharing of upward, diurnal, masculine, hot nature) and the elements of water and Earth are also compatible (due to the sharing of downward, nocturnal, feminine, cold nature). We could say that signs that share the same temperature i.e. hot or cold (which of course include signs that share the same element) are supportive of one another (Fire-Fire, Air-Air, Air-Fire, Earth-Earth, Water-Water and Water-Earth). Similarly, signs that share the same modes are also compatible to a certain extent (Cardinal-Cardinal, Fixed-Fixed, Mutable-Mutable).

Now, it just so happen that the signs that aspect a particular sign are compatible by elements or modes. Assume that we have Fire sign rising: Air sign would be in opposition (compatible element), Fire signs would be in trine aspects (same and therefore compatible element), Air signs would be in sextile aspects (compatible element) and square aspects would have the same mode (btw, this is probably why some Ptolemaic astrologers regard square as worse than opposition because squares do not share the same elements as oppositions do and for them elemental compatibility is more important. The early Hellenistic astrologers would say that opposition is worse because it has the resemblance of the greater malefic, Saturn, through Saturn ruled signs being in oppositions to the signs ruled by the luminaries in the Thema Mundi). The signs that flank the rising sign and their opposites neither have compatible elements nor modes. Hence, if the lord of the ascendant is in the signs that flank the sign of the ascendant or their opposites, primary motivation is not fulfilled. The lord of the ascendant must be posited in a sign that has certain compatibility for it to work to the ascendant (primary motivation) benefit/agenda.

Now, we return to konrad's query. The signs that flank the ascendant sign and their opposites are also associated to certain topics in the native’s life. Does this mean that these topics will never be supportive to the native’s primary motivation? Well, not really. An example: Assume that we have Taurus rising. The primary motivation of the native is to seek material security (simplification!). If Venus is located in the second sign (Gemini), primary motivation is not directly fulfilled. So, on this token, the primary motivation is not going to be directly fulfilled by matters connected to the second house/sign. Observe the term “directly”. Primary motivation could still be fulfilled indirectly. Assume that we have Taurus rising with Venus in Gemini in the second and Mercury (lord of the second) is in Aquarius in the tenth. Mercury in the tenth is lord of the second and it aspects Venus in the second (Lord of the first) and Mercury also aspects the first (ascendant). So, in this case primary motivation can still be fulfilled indirectly via Mercury who without which the ascendant lord (Venus) will have no connection to the Taurus ascendant (some astrologers would argue that we must have Mercury separating from ascendant point and applying to Venus or Mercury separating from Venus and applying to ascendant point – but you get my point!).

What if primary motivation is not fulfilled directly or indirectly? We then move the exalted lord of the ascendant (in our example, it would be Moon). We would then observe if primary motivation is fulfilled directly or indirectly. If this fails, we could then go to the lower dispositors of ascendant, term, triplicity and face but fulfilment of primary motivation is going be very difficult (I only use domicile and exalted rulers. If primary motivation is not fulfilled directly or indirectly via domicile or exalted rulers, I would say that fulfilment would be very difficult indeed).

On the mitigation:
Now, assume that we have Gemini rising and Mercury is located in the eighth house in Capricorn. Can Mercury being in the sign that has equal rising to Gemini mitigate the non-aspect relationship between Gemini and Capricorn and hence, the ability to fulfil the primary motivation? Can any relationship between signs of equal power, equal rising or like-engirding be included in this criterion of fulfilment of primary motivation? I am not sure about this! I am very reluctant to include these mitigations into this primary motivation framework because a planet must aspect its sign to have the authority of managing that sign directly or through other planets (indirectly). I only use these mitigations when two planets are not in signs that aspect each other. In that case, the two planets do their own things but somehow results in outcomes that are similar when they are in signs that do not aspect each other but has one of the mitigations mentioned above. For example if a planet is in Capricorn and another planet is in Aquarius, these two planets have their own agenda but the outcome would be somehow similar (Saturnian agenda because both planets are located in the signs that are like engirding i.e. ruled by the same planet viz. Saturn). Another example: One planet in Pisces and another in Aries (equal rising signs). Although these two planets are not connected, both will be activated at the same time in predictive work because the ascensional times for Pisces and Aries are the same.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark, Astrojin, thanks for all the information! I'll give it a read over a couple of times and share any thoughts I have on it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2011 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Astrojin,

you mention that a planet aspecting a place in aversion can be the "middle-man" between that place and it's lord. Say we have Mercury in Scorpio. Mars is in Capricorn. Mars is aspected by Mercury while he is in a sign of equal ascension with Gemini. Can he act as the go between here, or does the "middle-man" have to be in a position to "see" the sign he his helping?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
astrojin



Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 469

Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,

I think, conceptually, we should only allow aspects (seeing) for both directly (domicile or exalted ruler) and indirectly ("middle man" like the way you put it) managing a house for one cannot manage (directly or indirectly) without seeing what one is managing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

yes, I think I agree. Now I suppose I just have to test it out in practice. Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
astrojin



Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 469

Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,

Quote:
Now I suppose I just have to test it out in practice.

In practice, I find that the primary motivation is not extracted only from the ascendant (as I was taught before) but in some charts, the primary motivation is best answered through the strongest from among the big three viz. sun, moon or ascendant (we should not always default to ascendant). Do consider this in your practice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 5006
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I asked Ben Dykes privately about this issue of mitigated aversion at a recent workshop I organized. Its been bugging me for a while. It was asked outside the workshop itself so the answer was a bit brief and informal. If the house lord was in aversion to its sign he suggested looking straight to the exaltation ruler as Astrojin (and the traditional sources) suggest. Failing an exaltation ruler providing this role we didn't get into any other options.

In practical terms Ben doesn't seem to give a lot of weight to the ideas of common ruler, equal daylight or equal ascension providing significant mitigation to aversion. Unfortunately, I never thought to ask him about the 'middle man' concept (nice term Konrad!). As Astrojin seemed to suggest a middle man planet would need some degree of dignity (bound, triplicity) to be of much practical assistance. A planet in fall or detriment or even peregrine wouldn't be the kind of planet the owner would want to take care of his house while he was away!

Still, I do think there can be other mitigations too depending on the house in question. Looking at the second house we are considering moveable resources and the natives ability to make money on their own efforts and skills. These were discussed in the old thread I gave the link too. I gave the example of my own chart where lord 2 (mercury) is peregrine in Capricorn and in aversion to own house in Gemini. However, it is closely conjunct Venus (Lord 1) in Capricorn in the 9th. Both are in partile trine to the ascendant and Jupiter which is located right on the ascendant. Jupiter is a natural significator for wealth.

In my chart there is an angular Jupiter, in sect and in its term closely trining the MC /Mercury/Venus. While it doesn't aspect the second it does seem to have a generally protective role in my chart and seems to save me from the worst financial scenarios. Other factors might be that the POF is in the 11th in Pisces, disposited by Jupiter and obviously can see the 2nd house. Also as sect light the Sun is forming a sextile to Jupiter and is trining the second house by whole sign.

I am certainly not wealthy and often wish I had more money to go off to astrology conferences or exotic holidays. Very Happy Having Mercury, as Lord 2, peregrine on a cardinal MC has inevitably led to a lot of changes work wise. Perhaps thats the most distinctive feature. Without a strong house lord I seem to subject to a lot of variations in my earning capacity. It lacks the solid continuity one might desire which a strong house Lord would presumably provide.

I mention all this to demonstrate that even a lack of a domicile or exaltation ruler aspecting the relevant house doesn't imply the affairs of that house will be completely negative for the native in every instance. As Ben suggested though it can lead to a lot of fluctuations and uncertainty as the native is going through different profections/time lords/transits.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

astrojin wrote:
Hello,

Quote:
Now I suppose I just have to test it out in practice.

In practice, I find that the primary motivation is not extracted only from the ascendant (as I was taught before) but in some charts, the primary motivation is best answered through the strongest from among the big three viz. sun, moon or ascendant (we should not always default to ascendant). Do consider this in your practice.


How do you garner the strength of the ASC? Do we look to aspects made to it, or the position of it's ruler?

I presume that you look to the houses that the Sun and Moon rule as well as those they are placed in, in regards to primary motivation?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Konrad



Joined: 01 Nov 2009
Posts: 685

Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2011 6:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:
Still, I do think there can be other mitigations too depending on the house in question. Looking at the second house we are considering moveable resources and the natives ability to make money on their own efforts and skills. These were discussed in the old thread I gave the link too. I gave the example of my own chart where lord 2 (mercury) is peregrine in Capricorn and in aversion to own house in Gemini. However, it is closely conjunct Venus (Lord 1) in Capricorn in the 9th. Both are in partile trine to the ascendant and Jupiter which is located right on the ascendant. Jupiter is a natural significator for wealth.


I'm sure I have read somewhere that Robert Hand looks to the 10th to fatten up the picture of the native's earning power too.

I was thinking along the same lines in regards to your example of aversion. Say if someone's primary motvation is to attain wealth (ASC ruler in the 2nd house and also ignoring Astrojin's suggestion of the Sun and Moon for now). Let's say it's Jupiter in Capricorn, so the native will have some discomfort there. What if Saturn is exalted in the 11th house in a dirunal chart. Surely that would aid the native in their primary urge?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
astrojin



Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 469

Posted: Sat Jun 04, 2011 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello again,

Konrad:
Quote:
How do you garner the strength of the ASC? Do we look to aspects made to it, or the position of it's ruler?

You don't. the ascendant is the default when sun or moon cannot be the place where primary motivation can be found.

As I mentioned in the previous post, this is "in practice" i.e. my own practice. I do not wish to publish my own methods in public. If you like, please pm me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 5006
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2011 7:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
As I mentioned in the previous post, this is "in practice" i.e. my own practice. I do not wish to publish my own methods in public. If you like, please pm me.


Well I respect your reserve. Such ideas are probably not appropriate here anyway. Still I have always found your thoughts very interesting and insightful. I am curious how you work this out practically. I have sent you a PM on this.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
yuzuru



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 1393

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, Astrojin
For the dispositor of the planet to help mitigate aversion, it wasn´t usual for the arabs to demand that he would be angular? Even for the new helenistics, I would expect that the dispositor would need to be of the same sect then the planet. The way you describe, aversion becomes a very rare ocurrence indeed.
_________________
Meu blog de astrologia (em portugues) http://yuzuru.wordpress.com
My blog of astrology (in english) http://episthemologie.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 5006
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yuzuru wrote:
For the dispositor of the planet to help mitigate aversion, it wasn´t usual for the arabs to demand that he would be angular? Even for the new helenistics, I would expect that the dispositor would need to be of the same sect then the planet. The way you describe, aversion becomes a very rare ocurrence indeed.


I thought astrojin expressed the view that other than through an effective domicile or exaltation ruler aversion would basically manifest. It was simply a question of whether another planet could help mitigate this situation to some extent?

At least that is what i took from this comment by him:

Quote:
What if primary motivation is not fulfilled directly or indirectly? We then move the exalted lord of the ascendant (in our example, it would be Moon). We would then observe if primary motivation is fulfilled directly or indirectly. If this fails, we could then go to the lower dispositors of ascendant, term, triplicity and face but fulfilment of primary motivation is going be very difficult (I only use domicile and exalted rulers. If primary motivation is not fulfilled directly or indirectly via domicile or exalted rulers, I would say that fulfilment would be very difficult indeed).


Clearly, one could continue with a minor dignity ruler such as triplicity or bound rulers. Certainly, the early astrologers gave a lot of importance to bound rulers. Still, it seems unlikely a bound or triplicity ruler could operate as effectively over the affairs of a house.

I dont follow why these rulers need to be in angular houses though and in the same sect to the domicile rulers when no such requirements are necessary for exaltation rulers? For example, Mars the exaltation ruler of Capricorn is in the opposing sect to Saturn. The same applies to the domicile/exaltation rulers of Aries, Pisces, Cancer, and Libra.

Mark
_________________
‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly


Last edited by Mark on Tue Jun 07, 2011 7:18 pm; edited 7 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 1 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated