Right? š Just add double squares from the malefics I guess to turn it fully into exaltation (with a new definition of exaltation where it's so bad it becomes comically so)
I've heard this from some obscure siderealist's who draw from modern Vedic literature, I have not seen any classic text based evidence for it.
There are also ideas that Rx planets are stronger than direct planets. There is some logic here as a slower body has more permanent affects.
So a stationed body may very well have an intense accute and permanent effect but an Rx planet is unstable.
The problem is the modern Vedic astrologer never shares sources, is unwilling to explain logic, or otherwise often has no clue about the underpinnings that actually lead to the logic, ehem math, astronomy, history, and philosophy.
So when a planet is at about it's max speed Rx it means it's near it's perigee/perihelion meaning it is much closer to earth. Vs when it is at about top speed direct that is it's apogee. The latter is prefered absolutely.
A close pass to earth may be powerful, just look at Moon for obvious physical answers to that, but is a close pass really a "good" thing in a chart?
Philisophically speaking it seems a rather not too great thing.
This comes from Vedic astrologers. In Vedic astrology, a retrograde planet is considered to have increased strength or a more pronounced influence, which can mitigate its debilitated status. This does not mean that the planet becomes exalted, but it is generally viewed as being stronger and more effective than a non-retrograde debilitated planet. (Keep in mind Vedic is inherently sidereal)
The issue is that many modern Vedic astrologers have taken this interpretation to an extreme that is unsubstantiated, reaching the false conclusion that debilitated planets that are retrograde will behave like they are exalted. These astrologers are exaggerating the extent to which a planet's strength changes due to mitigating influences like retrogradation. Because while such factors may improve a planet's condition, they do not completely nullify its inherent challenges. If they did, theyād be included as neecha bhanga yogas (yogas of cancelled debilitation).
My guess is that a Hellenistic astrologer heard it from a Vedic astrologer and started trying to apply it to tropical placements in their own practice, or an astrologer who practices both ended up influencing their colleagues, eventually spreading the idea around. This seems to happen a lot. I see a ton of ideas espoused by Hellenistic astrologers that donāt come from Hellenistic astrology.
The vedic point of view actually does make a lot of sense. Retrograde planets have a much bigger influence during their transits as it is seen in the world events of mundane astrology. The transits of the inner planets are often near insignificant in direct motion and in most cases it is the retrogradation that turn these into game changers. I could give several examples of world events for every single planet. According to some vedic authors retrograde planets have three times more influence (probably due to the three conjunctions during the retrograde period). A retrograde planet indicates a past desire that needs to be fulfilled relative to the natural significations of that planet. Direct planets act like the luminaries while retrograde planets act like the shadow planets. A direct planet moves with the zodiac (solar path of the objective world) while a retrograde planet moves with the fixed stars (cosmic path of the inner world). When a planet is retrograde it is getting closer to the inferior conjunction with the Sun and this sets up a new cycle of awareness (Sun). The start of any cycle is always an important place of power as it is seen with the conjunction of synodic cycles. Once again the western view focuses more on material gains (Rahu, the Sun, direct motion) while the vedic view focuses more on spiritual gains (Ketu, the Moon, and retrograde motion).
So what are you arguing? Are you saying they would act exalted according to the view of āsome Vedic authorsā?
Towards the end of your paragraph, your extrapolation is excessive and unsupported. For instance, in Vedic tradition, the Moon is not regarded to be more āspiritualā than the Sun. Drawing that comparison reveals a fundamental lack of understanding on your part. The Moon is seen as the soul descended into the material realm, which, if anything, should be considered more āobjectiveā and materialistic given the perspective you appear to be adopting.
I am not arguing anything. Actually quite the opposite, my post was agreeing with you and the fact that retrograde planets have more influence despite still not considered exalted.
>*The Moon is seen as the soul descended into the material realm, which, if anything, should be considered more āobjectiveā and materialistic*Ā
As vedic astrology says, from a universal perspective the Sun is the soul (natural atmakaraka) and the Moon is the human mind (manas). But planets are not solely spiritual significators or deities, sometimes they also have more basic medical and psychological significations which have been examined thoroughly in the western tradition. From a purely psychological point of view some charts (chandra lagna, D1, D4, D27) are used to study exclusively the mind (manas). In this limited context the Sun reflects the rational mind and its ego (Ahamkara) and the Moon reflects the irrational mind and its feelings (Samskara). This lines up with the modern jungian western interpretion of the luminaries.
I have this placement too! I was actually thinking about it today, so funny the post came up. How does this placement show up in your life/ communication style?
Hm not quite like that, but close--
Exaltation means the planet is inspired to be its best self.
Retro means that the planet strongly calls to its issues (whatever issues it is experiencing by virtue of placement, aspectation, disposition, and house ownership) because it's at the point of its orbit where it is closest to earth. It's like an exclamation point on that planet.
It may not be inspired to act like its best self, but it strongly urges you to make sure you fix it this time around. And astrological advice for fixing debilitation is to mimic its behavior in exaltation. So while it may not naturally behave like it is in exaltation, you have to continuously nudge to do this (even without retrograde on it, but even more so with retrograde).
This is a bit of a silly idea, and I'd be interested to know where it comes from.
The reason it's silly is debility is an essential condition and retrograde an accidental one - one cannot alter the other, as the two perform different functions in determining a planet's behaviour.
I believe it comes from jyotish. In that tradition rx planets are considered stronger. However, I wouldn't agree with the notion that a debilitated planet magically becomes exalted just because it's rx. When I do Vedic astrology, planetary condition via its placement in rasi is the most important to me.
I have a natal Pisces Mercury rx & it definitely does not feel like an exalted placement (I have 2 planets in domicile & 1 exalted elsewhere in my chart). Obviously not speaking for everyone else, but in my experience communication has always been a challenge!
I have a retrograde Cancer Saturn in a night chart. This is an actively debilitating influence on my life and it's all too easy to regress when trying to move forward with the challenges associated with the placement. It absolutely isn't dignified.
This is nonsense. Rx plus in debility is quite bad. If it's also combust it can hardly get worse.
Right? š Just add double squares from the malefics I guess to turn it fully into exaltation (with a new definition of exaltation where it's so bad it becomes comically so)
That's what I thought! It didn't sound right to me either, but I've seen it continuously repeated. I wonder where that came from.
I've heard this from some obscure siderealist's who draw from modern Vedic literature, I have not seen any classic text based evidence for it. There are also ideas that Rx planets are stronger than direct planets. There is some logic here as a slower body has more permanent affects. So a stationed body may very well have an intense accute and permanent effect but an Rx planet is unstable. The problem is the modern Vedic astrologer never shares sources, is unwilling to explain logic, or otherwise often has no clue about the underpinnings that actually lead to the logic, ehem math, astronomy, history, and philosophy. So when a planet is at about it's max speed Rx it means it's near it's perigee/perihelion meaning it is much closer to earth. Vs when it is at about top speed direct that is it's apogee. The latter is prefered absolutely. A close pass to earth may be powerful, just look at Moon for obvious physical answers to that, but is a close pass really a "good" thing in a chart? Philisophically speaking it seems a rather not too great thing.
It can definitely get worse if the ruler of said planet is also debilitated, e.g. Aries Saturn squaring a Cancer Mars
hiii so what effect would that have? my Jupiter is literally in Capricorn RX ruled by Aries Saturn. Us mid 1996 babies really got it all
**that ain't good**
Wait so jupiter rx in gemini no es bueno?
This comes from Vedic astrologers. In Vedic astrology, a retrograde planet is considered to have increased strength or a more pronounced influence, which can mitigate its debilitated status. This does not mean that the planet becomes exalted, but it is generally viewed as being stronger and more effective than a non-retrograde debilitated planet. (Keep in mind Vedic is inherently sidereal) The issue is that many modern Vedic astrologers have taken this interpretation to an extreme that is unsubstantiated, reaching the false conclusion that debilitated planets that are retrograde will behave like they are exalted. These astrologers are exaggerating the extent to which a planet's strength changes due to mitigating influences like retrogradation. Because while such factors may improve a planet's condition, they do not completely nullify its inherent challenges. If they did, theyād be included as neecha bhanga yogas (yogas of cancelled debilitation). My guess is that a Hellenistic astrologer heard it from a Vedic astrologer and started trying to apply it to tropical placements in their own practice, or an astrologer who practices both ended up influencing their colleagues, eventually spreading the idea around. This seems to happen a lot. I see a ton of ideas espoused by Hellenistic astrologers that donāt come from Hellenistic astrology.
Yep this is where that comes from. I think it has to do with retro planets being more visible in the sky
Yes, in addition to speedā slower planets are considered to expend more effort and are therefore seen to be stronger.
The vedic point of view actually does make a lot of sense. Retrograde planets have a much bigger influence during their transits as it is seen in the world events of mundane astrology. The transits of the inner planets are often near insignificant in direct motion and in most cases it is the retrogradation that turn these into game changers. I could give several examples of world events for every single planet. According to some vedic authors retrograde planets have three times more influence (probably due to the three conjunctions during the retrograde period). A retrograde planet indicates a past desire that needs to be fulfilled relative to the natural significations of that planet. Direct planets act like the luminaries while retrograde planets act like the shadow planets. A direct planet moves with the zodiac (solar path of the objective world) while a retrograde planet moves with the fixed stars (cosmic path of the inner world). When a planet is retrograde it is getting closer to the inferior conjunction with the Sun and this sets up a new cycle of awareness (Sun). The start of any cycle is always an important place of power as it is seen with the conjunction of synodic cycles. Once again the western view focuses more on material gains (Rahu, the Sun, direct motion) while the vedic view focuses more on spiritual gains (Ketu, the Moon, and retrograde motion).
So what are you arguing? Are you saying they would act exalted according to the view of āsome Vedic authorsā? Towards the end of your paragraph, your extrapolation is excessive and unsupported. For instance, in Vedic tradition, the Moon is not regarded to be more āspiritualā than the Sun. Drawing that comparison reveals a fundamental lack of understanding on your part. The Moon is seen as the soul descended into the material realm, which, if anything, should be considered more āobjectiveā and materialistic given the perspective you appear to be adopting.
I am not arguing anything. Actually quite the opposite, my post was agreeing with you and the fact that retrograde planets have more influence despite still not considered exalted. >*The Moon is seen as the soul descended into the material realm, which, if anything, should be considered more āobjectiveā and materialistic*Ā As vedic astrology says, from a universal perspective the Sun is the soul (natural atmakaraka) and the Moon is the human mind (manas). But planets are not solely spiritual significators or deities, sometimes they also have more basic medical and psychological significations which have been examined thoroughly in the western tradition. From a purely psychological point of view some charts (chandra lagna, D1, D4, D27) are used to study exclusively the mind (manas). In this limited context the Sun reflects the rational mind and its ego (Ahamkara) and the Moon reflects the irrational mind and its feelings (Samskara). This lines up with the modern jungian western interpretion of the luminaries.
Got it. Thank you so much for the help!
Natally I've got Mercury retrograde in Pisces and I can assure you, it does not behave like an exalted planet in my chart :')
+1 for my Mercury Rx in Sag. As evidenced by my piggybacking on your comment. Concise communication does not come naturally to me š©
I have my Mercury Rx in Aquarius. AND SAME. On the plus side, when everyone else is crying during mercury Rx I am vibing and thriving šāāļø
I have this placement too! I was actually thinking about it today, so funny the post came up. How does this placement show up in your life/ communication style?
Me too, girl. Mercury Rx in Pisces & Jupiter Rx in Virgo mutual reception. A strange loop that cannot stop thinking.
no basis
Hm not quite like that, but close-- Exaltation means the planet is inspired to be its best self. Retro means that the planet strongly calls to its issues (whatever issues it is experiencing by virtue of placement, aspectation, disposition, and house ownership) because it's at the point of its orbit where it is closest to earth. It's like an exclamation point on that planet. It may not be inspired to act like its best self, but it strongly urges you to make sure you fix it this time around. And astrological advice for fixing debilitation is to mimic its behavior in exaltation. So while it may not naturally behave like it is in exaltation, you have to continuously nudge to do this (even without retrograde on it, but even more so with retrograde).
This is a bit of a silly idea, and I'd be interested to know where it comes from. The reason it's silly is debility is an essential condition and retrograde an accidental one - one cannot alter the other, as the two perform different functions in determining a planet's behaviour.
I believe it comes from jyotish. In that tradition rx planets are considered stronger. However, I wouldn't agree with the notion that a debilitated planet magically becomes exalted just because it's rx. When I do Vedic astrology, planetary condition via its placement in rasi is the most important to me.
I have a natal Pisces Mercury rx & it definitely does not feel like an exalted placement (I have 2 planets in domicile & 1 exalted elsewhere in my chart). Obviously not speaking for everyone else, but in my experience communication has always been a challenge!
This isn't mathematics where two negatives make a positive xD Rx is hard. Debility is hard. The two together are like David and Goliath.
I have a retrograde Cancer Saturn in a night chart. This is an actively debilitating influence on my life and it's all too easy to regress when trying to move forward with the challenges associated with the placement. It absolutely isn't dignified.
Thank you all so much for your help! This didn't sound right to me but I thought I'd come to others who had a bit more knowledge. I appreciate it!
As in like 2 negative numbers is positive?? lol I donāt think thatās how it works in this situationā¦
Rx is an accidental debility. Zodiacal debility is essential debility so it's double debility, actually.
Greetings L, Who is writing this nonsense? \~V\~
Twitter!
I guess it makes sense if you look at retrograde like a kid going āItās Opposite Day!ā But thatās Not A Thing
No, RX and combust/debilitated is always challenging even if the planet is exalted.