i am almost finished reading "the judgments of nativities" abu 'ali - holden 88 translation. one of the main themes i come away with from this book is how boxed in some astrological concepts are! i would like to get some feedback and perspective from other posters on this.

the idea that a person born in the day ( and i am generalizing here based off my impression of this book) is going to fair better then a person born at night seems a bit lopsided! has that been anyone's observation on this forum? could you make this generalization which i get from this book?

also - if a planet is retrograde, it is a bad thing.. this seems a bit harsh as well, but if you read the book you can't help but pick this general theme up! i was thinking how it would be one thing to have a planet like saturn that is supposed to be a challenge where ever it is in the chart anyway - to be less challenging when it is retro, but no - all the bad stuff remains in tact and is just multiplied when it is retro!! maybe the early astrologers had a thing for speed. they could have been car salesmen in a previous incarnation! this thing can really go fast, so if you are a guy you are going to want it! i have to try for humour, as i am baffled why it automatically means if the planet lacks speed, or heaven forbid - is going backwards as viewed from earth - that is a bad thing.

i seem to recall mark pointing out how indian astrology seems to have a different concept on retrograde planets. that would be refreshing! i wonder if anyone has published a book on retro planets to challenge this general view held in western astrology on retro planets. why not something more like - they operate differently then the norm and may exhibit some more individual and unique forms of expression, as opposed to - retro=bad. ?

thoughts?

if this needs to be moved to the philosophy section, let me know. thanks.

James_M wrote

the idea that a person born in the day ( and i am generalizing here based off my impression of this book) is going to fair better then a person born at night seems a bit lopsided! has that been anyone's observation on this forum? could you make this generalization which i get from this book?

Does it really state that?? Its been several years since I last looked at the book. However, I recall he judges charts by the condition of the triplicity rulers of the sect light. Thats not the same as saying that day is more favourable than night or vice versa. Obviously, some day charts have poorly placed triplicity rulers.

It might help if you provide a quote to support your point.

Mark

James_M wrote:

also - if a planet is retrograde, it is a bad thing.. this seems a bit harsh as well, but if you read the book you can't help but pick this general theme up! i was thinking how it would be one thing to have a planet like saturn that is supposed to be a challenge where ever it is in the chart anyway - to be less challenging when it is retro, but no - all the bad stuff remains in tact and is just multiplied when it is retro!! maybe the early astrologers had a thing for speed. they could have been car salesmen in a previous incarnation! this thing can really go fast, so if you are a guy you are going to want it! i have to try for humour, as i am baffled why it automatically means if the planet lacks speed, or heaven forbid - is going backwards as viewed from earth - that is a bad thing.

Any quotes? Just being selfish as I am researching this topic and would appreciate more references!

This is something I somewhat differ with traditional western astrology about. However, the logic is not that hard to understand.

I can imagine in medieval society this was seen as very negative. These were societies based on hierarchy where everyone had his/her place. So a planet out of its natural movement would be the astrological equivalent of a rebel or heretic. Remember what these societies did to rebels and heretics?

A Rx planet is apparently going against the what would be seen as the natural order of things. As it slows it literally stands out from the crowd and when it goes Rx it sets itself apart. Curtis Manwaring gave a nice analogy for this of one bird in a flock separating from the rest and flying in the opposite direction. Hard to miss isn't it?

If a planet was dignified the medievals saw Rx as at best reducing, and mitigating the potential of that essential dignity. If a planet was already ill dignified (imagine an out of sect, Saturn in fall or detriment that is Rx!) the negative implications of retrogation were strongly emphasized.

By the way I have read that Saturn becomes more malefic when it speeds up. The logic is presumably that as the slow moving malefic the speed increases its potential to cause destruction?

Interesting to compare all this to Indian astrology where Rx planets are seen as strong and strongly emphasized. This matches my actual experience. Of course the outer planets (Mars, Saturn, Jupiter) are likely to be much brighter when Rx to the Sun.

I personally, dont think being retrograde is necessarily weakening for a planet. As I see it Rx motion adds to the prominence and possible unconventionality of how a planet expresses itself. A Rx planet usually stands out. However, I dont consider it genuinely negative on this criteria alone. For that we need to look at factors like sect, essential dignity, house placement and aspectual connections.

One could certainly explore the traditional idea that Rx planets represent delays or set backs in an area of life. In horary of course Rx planets quite literally can mean returning to an old situation related to the question. Modern astrology suggests that in retrograde planets the energy of the planet is internalised. This gives the topic more psychological insight rather than a fatalistic dismissing of a planet's potential.

Having said all that if you have a heavily debilitated planet and it is also Rx then watch out!

James_M wrote:

i seem to recall mark pointing out how indian astrology seems to have a different concept on retrograde planets. that would be refreshing! i wonder if anyone has published a book on retro planets to challenge this general view held in western astrology on retro planets. why not something more like - they operate differently then the norm and may exhibit some more individual and unique forms of expression, as opposed to - retro=bad. ?

Actually, Indian astrology has several schools of thought on Rx planets. Its something I meant to open a thread on in the Indian forum.

Regarding modern astrology the major book on the subject is by Erin Sullivan: Retrograde Planets : Traversing the Inner Landscape.

http://www.amazon.com/Retrograde-Planet ... 1578631807

Mark

hi mark,
thanks for your overview on retro planets. as for quotes, it is just a general impression i walk away with from the book, but to give one example which shows how at this point in astrology - 9th century, or as holden suggests is also possible 6th century near the end of his book(see appendix 1 page 79, as there is some uncertainty as to who wrote the book!) he mentions saturn in a day chart verses saturn in a night chart and - i don't think sect factored into this material much if at all.

one example, which doesn't do my view justice, but will have to suffice for now. "The same saturn in diurnal nativities located in the domicile of the sun declared good fortune for the native and good circumstances for his father and augmentation of the natives assets. And if it is a nocturnal birth, it signifies the affliction of illness for the native and his father." page 63.

you would never get that for a quick view on saturn in leo from the medieval period. on the other hand - you get it if it is a nocturnal birth!! it really isn't hard to walk away with this impression from the book, in spite of my lack of wanting to make a few hundred quotes to establish the basis for my view..

I added to my post while you were typing. See my update on Indian astrology and Erin Sullivan's book.

James_M wrote:

The same saturn in diurnal nativities located in the domicile of the sun declared good fortune for the native and good circumstances for his father and augmentation of the natives assets. And if it is a nocturnal birth, it signifies the affliction of illness for the native and his father." page 63.

you would never get that for a quick view on saturn in leo from the medieval period. on the other hand - you get it if it is a nocturnal birth!! it really isn't hard to walk away with this impression from the book, in spite of my lack of wanting to make a few hundred quotes to establish the basis for my view..

With respect I dont think he is saying that diurnal charts are better at all. It seems he is heavily influenced by the hellenistic use of sect so he delineates a diurnal planet ( Saturn) as far better in a day chart than a night chart. Nothing revolutionary there. However, his heavy emphasis on sect at the expense of essential dignity does seem a bit extreme and you wouldn't find this kind of emphasis in later medieval astrology.

Mark

hi mark,

it is a very black and white thing as i see it based on just reading the book.. nocturnal births are essentially viewed negative compared to day births. one just has to read the book to walk away with this.. same thing for retro planets. if my example wasn't enough, re-read the book. it is a short read. yes, he talks about the triplicity rulers and the importance of them and where they are, but there is an overall tone to this book that pans night births and retro planets. it really is as simple as that for me after reading it the past week or so.

my question to you and others here is this - have you found anything of this nature to have any merit? same for retro planets.. i recall noel tyl having a flat world view on saturn retro as well.. anyone with saturn retro has some missing father figure in their life or some other stupid such generalization. here i was thinking how saturn can be retro 1/4 of the year anyway, so 1 in 4 will have a problem with their father, lol.. one can't make this up to sound more whacked out, as it is already out their in the astro lingo for some.

James_M wrote:

i recall noel tyl having a flat world view on saturn retro as well.. anyone with saturn retro has some missing father figure in their life or some other stupid such generalization. here i was thinking how saturn can be retro 1/4 of the year anyway, so 1 in 4 will have a problem with their father, lol.. one can't make this up to sound more whacked out, as it is already out their in the astro lingo for some.

Lets hear what Noel Tyl himself actually has to say on the subject of Saturn Rx:

http://www.themetaarts.com/archives/200304/noeltyl.html

A key part of the article:

Retrogradation suggests a counterpoint, a modification of a principle theme, something going against the norm. In the case of Saturn-rx, the aberrance in development will focus upon the father, the father-figure, the paternal principle, the relationship with the father; the leadership dynamic of authoritative love.

When someone in the Western world is born with Saturn-rx, we can expect -with highest probability-- that the father was somehow taken out of the picture early in development, was there but passive, or was so tyrannical so as not to have given the child the guidance of authoritative love during development. We often see early divorce between the parents, early death of the father, the father totally cowed by the mother and therefore passive, the father drunk into passivity with alcohol or drugs, the father absent continually (military service, overwork), or the father projecting onto the child his own painful shortcomings from his own childhood regimen.

Interestingly, even some of Noel Tyl's students dont find the theory that convincing in their practical experience:

http://noeltyl.com/discussion/index.php?topic=4585.0

Looking at this from a traditional perspective Saturn is only the natural significator for the Father in night charts. Tyl seems to be unaware of this. Many astrologers would also object that Tyl is relying too much on the role of Saturn as the natural significator for fathers. What planets are located or rule the 4th house?, What of the part of the Father? Is this a night chart ?

On a practical level it does seem a bit silly to suggest such a mechanistic approach when Saturn spends so long in the Rx phase at a time.

For example this year Saturn will be retrograde during this period:

18 Feb 2013 11SC32'Rx SATURN Stationary Retrograde
07 Jul 2013 04SC49' SATURN Stationary Direct

Tyl seems to be making the highly improbable (and rather fatalistic) assumption that every child born in that period will have father problems.

Mark

james_m wrote:it is a very black and white thing as i see it based on just reading the book.. nocturnal births are essentially viewed negative compared to day births. one just has to read the book to walk away with this..

No, that's not right. It is entirely a matter of sect, as Mark stated: if the triplicity rulers of the sect light are well placed, the native is fortunate. See, for instance, the nocturnal nativity on p. 15 of the 1988 edition (p. 19 of the 2008 edition), ultimately from Dorotheus; Abu 'Ali states that:

this man was great, of high degree, and steady in prosperity until a golden crown was placed upon his head, and a silver one with pearls and precious stones, and his praise was in the mouths of all men.

I think you will find that whenever Abu 'Ali describes a chart, whether diurnal or nocturnal, as unfortunate, he gives other astrological reasons for it, mainly to do with the triplicity rulers. If you have any examples to the contrary, please do post them.

the examples are countless, but if someone says i am not right, lol..

chapter 39 page 63
"when saturn is in his own domicile in diurnal nativities, it signifies friendship with noble and magnates, and accumulation of property, especially if it is in the ASC or with the pof. and if the nativity is nocturnal, in its own house, signifies hard work and a long stretch of it and much sickness."

or

"and if it is in a domicile of jupiter in diurnal nativities, it signifies beauty, and an abundance of riches, and truth. but if the nativity is nocturnal, he will be an arranger of things for kings and magnates, and his father may be killed."

or chapter 42,

"when the sun especially in a diurnal nativity, is in a domicile of saturn, he will be closemouthed, laughing, a deceiver, successful in all his undertakings, and, if it is a nocturnal nativity, he will get angry quickly, he will be inconstant in his own things, despising all thing, and a man of incessant change."

or,

"but if the sun is in a domicile of jupiter, he will be skilled in the cause of his own law, good, not sluggish, and greater than all his own people. but if the nativity is nocturnal, it signifies good rearing and connection with nobles; beside which, he will be a fornicator, engaging in iniquity with the wife of his own father or the wife of some other one of his close relatives."


"when the sun is in its own domicile in diurnal nativities in an angle or in the succedent of an angle, he will be beloved, ruling, rich, great, and strong, and riches will come to him from highly-placed men, and from leasing lands, and from managing country estates. but in nocturnal nativities, it sigifies that his father will have little talent, and he will be an orphan, and he will be captured while traveling, and it may signify that the native will wish to be separated from his parents."


how many examples would you two like?

if you can't see this and would prefer to tell me i'm wrong, - have at it!
i noticed neither of you challenged my view on retrograde planets being treated negatively across the board. i am glad that appears to stand unquestioned.

back to my question - is this the way either of you two ( moderators) happen to see it? you have my curiousity as to whether this is your own personal experience in astrology..

James_M wrote:

the examples are countless, but if someone says i am not right, lol..

As I see it the author is very like late hellenistic authors like Firmicus Maternus or Rhetorius. Have you had a chance to study them? Like them he gives heavy emphasis to sect in delineating a chart. Frankly, all the quotes you provide actually support that view. So no I dont agree with your view here that the author has a black and white view vs nocturnal charts. All the examples you give are actually fully consistent with instances where a diurnal planet is favoured in a day chart and ill favoured at night. In that respect they actually bolstor the point Martin and myself have made.

I dont have the text to hand but are there no examples of nocturnal planets (Moon, Venus, Mars) being favoured in night charts? I seem to recall there are.

chapter 39 page 63
"when saturn is in his own domicile in diurnal nativities, it signifies friendship with noble and magnates, and accumulation of property, especially if it is in the ASC or with the pof. and if the nativity is nocturnal, in its own house, signifies hard work and a long stretch of it and much sickness."

So Saturn (a diurnal planet) is much better in a day chart.

or

"and if it is in a domicile of jupiter in diurnal nativities, it signifies beauty, and an abundance of riches, and truth. but if the nativity is nocturnal, he will be an arranger of things for kings and magnates, and his father may be killed."

Is this referring to Jupiter or Saturn? In either case they are diurnal planets. One would expect them to be better in a day chart.

or chapter 42, "when the sun especially in a diurnal nativity, is in a domicile of saturn, he will be closemouthed, laughing, a deceiver, successful in all his undertakings, and, if it is a nocturnal nativity, he will get angry quickly, he will be inconstant in his own things, despising all thing, and a man of incessant change."

So the Sun (diurnal sect light) is less favourable at night. As we would expect. He is focusing on the Sun in a domicile of Saturn (Capricorn or Aquarius). As Saturn is a diurnal planet the Sun is even more out of sect if the domicile ruler ( here Saturn) is out of sect at night.

or,

"but if the sun is in a domicile of jupiter, he will be skilled in the cause of his own law, good, not sluggish, and greater than all his own people. but if the nativity is nocturnal, it signifies good rearing and connection with nobles; beside which, he will be a fornicator, engaging in iniquity with the wife of his own father or the wife of some other one of his close relatives."

Again one can see the Sun is out of sect at night so less favourable. Plus Jupiter itself is also out of sect at night. So Sun in a Jupiter ruled ruled sign is less favourable in a night chart.

"when the sun is in its own domicile in diurnal nativities in an angle or in the succeedent of an angle, he will be beloved, ruling, rich, great, and strong, and riches will come to him from highly-placed men, and from leasing lands, and from managing country estates. but in nocturnal nativities, it signifies that his father will have little talent, and he will be an orphan, and he will be captured while traveling, and it may signify that the native will wish to be separated from his parents."

Sun better in day chart again. Especially when not cadent. Totally consistent with hellenistic astrology. Even for those that use sect a lot these delineations are rather heavy handed.

However, many of these authors give the most extreme examples to make their point. Take a look at Firmicus Maternus for such delineations. You dont have to go as far as this to accept the basic point that certain planets perform better in the daytime or at night.

James_M wrote:

how many examples would you two like?

Much better ones that show a nocturnal planet strong in a day chart!

if you can't see this and would prefer to tell me i'm wrong, - have at it! i noticed neither of you challenged my view on retrograde planets being treated negatively across the board. i am glad that appears to stand unquestioned.

Well you know I have issues with the western astrological take on retrograde planets this. But I confess that is an idiosyncracy of mine.

back to my question - is this the way either of you two ( moderators) happen to see it? you have my curiousity as to whether this is your own personal experience in astrology.

I work a lot with sect. I cant claim decades of experience in this area. However, I notice how useful it is pinpointing issues in charts. For example the malefic out of sect.

Mark

i have read fm and rhetorius. that doesn't mean i know them inside out. i seem to recall being challenged in a similar conversation about primary directions with martin a very short time ago along the same lines - 'did you read my book?' and etc etc.. we all process information differently.

let me give an analogy that i think applies here. i play drums and piano. do i know much about how the instruments were made or would i be able to replicate them in order to continue to play them? no. i play music with them and don't get involved in the mechanics of how they were made. the same thing happens when i use astro software. i don't know all the in's and outs of how the data is gotten. hopefully i understand some or most of the theory, but more importantly i want to see symbolic connections with the different methods at my disposal for the events under examination, or for future consideration. i play astrology if you will, just like i play an instrument. do i need to know the mechanics of it to be able to do this? no. would it be helpful to have some basic understanding of this? yes i think it would, but it is not my focus for doing astrology..

abu 'ali may or may not have a similar approach to fm and rhetorius. my '''superficial'' impression is different however.

did i read abu 'ali's book? yes. did i come to some conclusions on it? yes. maybe some don't enjoy or share my conclusions as it suggests a particular bias beyond the astrology. it would be very convenient if my position was failing to take note of sect or the planets in question and what sect they happen to be, but i am afraid that doesn't apply here... let me give some examples using the nocturnal planets which are not written up as thoroughly and which is another part of my reasoning for my conclusions here.

chapter 43

"when venus is in a domicile of saturn, the native will have a wife who has been phlebotomized, or he will consort with whores, and he will be criticized for this, and he will be a corrupter of married women, and he will profit from this in his own affairs.. but in nocturnal nativities, he will be a person of much fornication, and condemned lewdness, and he will have many disputes because of this. and when he enters old age, he will be enriched by the death of his wives."

when venus is in a domicile of jupiter, it signifies an increase in the native's dignity, and the acquisition of beautiful clothing, and he will profit in some way from women and through some type of work connected with women, thought comrades and relations, and through the wives of nobles, or through some work that he does for them.. and his own family will act against him with hatred. but if it is a diurnal nativity, that which i just said will occur, but diminished in some way..

james note - hard to know what is being diminished here - his family acting against him with hatred, or the profit he gets from connections with women..

chapter 45

"the moon in a domicile of saturn indicates sicknesses from an excess of wind. bad things will be said about him. but if it is diminished in light, it signifies an infirmity marked by a cough and cold, and pains in teh kidneys, especially if it is a nocturnal chart.. but if it is diurnal, anything of these maladies (that develop) will be mitigated."

unfortunately as i have said here, the examples on the sun, saturn and jupiter are much more plentiful then the examples offered on mars, venus or the moon and how they fair in diurnal verses nocturnal charts. that is probably why i happened to start the quotes where i did too.. hey - don't believe me still? LOL - to quote a famous astrology author - read the book!!!

mark,

thanks for taking the effort to dig a bit on tyls position on retro saturn. i had only given a superficial take on it, but as you note, it seems to be lacking in many ways while sect is not a part of his vocabulary..
that is a 4 1/2 month period this year saturn will be retrograde. surely one must come up with a better idea on retrograde saturn then what he suggests. it is like tarring and feathering over 1/3rd of those born this year! sorry kids - you have a problem with your father. this isn't good promo for tyl, so we better stop talking, lol..

Mark wrote:James_M wrote:

i recall noel tyl having a flat world view on saturn retro as well.. anyone with saturn retro has some missing father figure in their life or some other stupid such generalization. here i was thinking how saturn can be retro 1/4 of the year anyway, so 1 in 4 will have a problem with their father, lol.. one can't make this up to sound more whacked out, as it is already out their in the astro lingo for some.

Lets hear what Noel Tyl himself actually has to say on the subject of Saturn Rx:

http://www.themetaarts.com/archives/200304/noeltyl.html

A key part of the article:

Retrogradation suggests a counterpoint, a modification of a principle theme, something going against the norm. In the case of Saturn-rx, the aberrance in development will focus upon the father, the father-figure, the paternal principle, the relationship with the father; the leadership dynamic of authoritative love.

When someone in the Western world is born with Saturn-rx, we can expect -with highest probability-- that the father was somehow taken out of the picture early in development, was there but passive, or was so tyrannical so as not to have given the child the guidance of authoritative love during development. We often see early divorce between the parents, early death of the father, the father totally cowed by the mother and therefore passive, the father drunk into passivity with alcohol or drugs, the father absent continually (military service, overwork), or the father projecting onto the child his own painful shortcomings from his own childhood regimen.

Interestingly, even some of Noel Tyl's students dont find the theory that convincing in their practical experience:

http://noeltyl.com/discussion/index.php?topic=4585.0

Looking at this from a traditional perspective Saturn is only the natural significator for the Father in night charts. Tyl seems to be unaware of this. Many astrologers would also object that Tyl is relying too much on the role of Saturn as the natural significator for fathers. What planets are located or rule the 4th house?, What of the part of the Father? Is this a night chart ?

On a practical level it does seem a bit silly to suggest such a mechanistic approach when Saturn spends so long in the Rx phase at a time.

For example this year Saturn will be retrograde during this period:

18 Feb 2013 11SC32'Rx SATURN Stationary Retrograde
07 Jul 2013 04SC49' SATURN Stationary Direct

Tyl seems to be making the highly improbable (and rather fatalistic) assumption that every child born in that period will have father problems.

Mark