Triplicities and How They Work

1
I've been studying triplicities for the past couple of days and how the quality of life is affected depending on which/where the day and night triplicity rulers are. This seems like a very difficult topic to cover or even find thorough information on throughout the web, as most of the helpful stuff I've found has been on Skyscript and the Wiki.

Moving down to the basics: I know that the diurnal rulers (most of the time) are Sun, Jupiter, and Saturn, while the nocturnal rulers are Mars, Venus, and the Moon. I have come down to about a 29.5 year period of rulership for each of these rulers over an individual's quality of life (at least that is what most people seem to agree upon more or less, the actual precise number is obviously speculated). That being said, I want to cover the meat of my post here. While these planetary bodies govern the quality of life over a given period, I have hardly found anything dissecting *how* these rulers act under a given sign/degree/aspect/circumstance within a natal chart.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/52 ... 01150.gif/

This is my birth chart. Honest to goodness, I still do not know whether I am born diurnal or nocturnal. Some folks say that when the Sun is under the horizon lines it is nocturnal and diurnal when it is above, but, other sources I have read speculate that even if the Sun is SLIGHTLY above the horizon and you can still see a squeak of daylight it is considered a diurnal chart. Persians and other folks like that, I believe. My birth record states that I was born on 8:08pm. I am not sure how I feel about that (see below). I have noticed that the sunset on my particular date and time of birth is 8:07pm where I was born. However, in Janus, it claims it is a diurnal birth only on 8:02pm and before. If I am born in the day, the Sun in Leo gets a triplicity. If at night, I am fairly certain the Moon and Mars get a triplicity for the Moon being in Mars' rulership (I am not claiming 100% right-ness on this, that is just my observation from Janus).

Moving through that into my previous topic, I am asking about this only because I haven't found books regarding what the quality of life is supposed to be like for triplicity-fortified planets. Taking my Sun in theoretical triplicity, how would it feel different in quality of life compared to a non-triplicity Sun? The obvious question, I'm sure, would be, "It would be more Solar-like," but again, what does that mean insofar as "quality of life" for a birth chart? The same thing goes for the Moon and Mars. "More Lunar, or more Mars-like," but I am still having difficulty stamping out just *what* sort of qualities such triplicities would give.

If, say, I am a nocturnal birth, that would mean the Moon would shine the light instead of the Sun. The Moon is in Scorpio and Mars rules Scorpio in the Water triplicity so that means Mars rules the first part of my life (if judging by nocturnal). Mars is in Virgo in my chart, angular in the 7th house. Because it has no essential dignity there (SIGH) I haven't really been able to get just what that would mean as far as my quality of life were Mars to rule the first segment of my quality of life as far as triplicities go. Being peregrine, would that signify a bit of wandering about, not sure what to do? I have been thinking about my life in all honesty and trying to take a good hard look at what I want to do. I really have not had any hardships or 'fights' with people. Most people come easy and I really haven't had to fight for what I want or need. It doesn't feel like Mars at all.

On the other hand if I look at my chart as if it were diurnal, that would mean that my Sun is in triplicity, rulership, and angular in the 7th. Again, it is probably painfully obvious to some in ways where the Sun would be more "fiery"; perhaps they would regard themselves as special, or important, or self-centered (honestly just shots in the dark since I haven't found viable information) and one would know exactly what they want to do with their life (at first I wanted to be a motivational speaker and make people happy, rally them to feel good and optimistic about life, and then I just sort of stopped thinking that once I got into college...but it is still what I have always wanted to do). I've even looked online regarding how babies are technically alive once they first draw in their VERY first breath at birth; thus, most time records need to be pushed back several minutes because the mother and father and doctors are too busy trying to make sure the mom is alive and well while she delivers a healthy baby into the world.

But, 8:08pm down to 8:02 seems like a great load of minutes to shave off, but I feel as though it has never been more important in determining how my life will go. Most people, who know their birth time, or even those who don't, have a definite "oh I'm born in the day/night". Even then, they can look at their lives and decide what their quality of life has been.

BASICALLY what I am asking/discussing is, when it comes to triplicities, how do they work in my case? How do they work when pitting them in signs, as well as during the day or the night depending on what the rulers of the triplicities are? Rather, how SHOULD one with a Moon/Mars triplicity have as a quality of life at 22, and how SHOULD one with a Sun triplicity be feeling as far as a quality of life at 22. It's just a thought that maybe will get folks considering more deeply about triplicities, I really feel as though this old technique should be covered more.

Thanks for any thoughts/inputs!

EDIT: Strangely enough while looking for more on triplicities, I found a website from Paulo Alexandre Silva; basically, he notes how Guido Bonatti does not think of sects like Lilly does. According to him in his site, Bonatti is saying that SECTS are unimportant if a planet is within its triplicity. Take a look for yourself, I'm not sure if I am reading that right. Honestly, that really is cool if true, but it doesn't seem to hold a lot. That would mean that EVERY person born with the Sun in a fire sign would get a triplicity, or every person with Jupiter in a fire sign would get a triplicity, among all the others out there. That's quite a lot, and seems a bit optimistic...javascript:emoticon(':brows')

http://www.astrologiamedieval.com/Triplicities.htm (this is his website)

(Begin quotations from his website) ?We will make use of illustrations for the diagnosis of the above matters [his discussion of the Triplicities and their rulers], setting a notable nativity at the beginning. Let the Sun be in Scorpio, the Moon in Cancer, Kronos in Aquarius, Zeus in Sagittarius, Ares in Scorpio, Aphrodite in Libra, Hermes in Scorpio, the Horoskopos [the Ascendant] in Libra. Since, then, the nativity is nocturnal, I seek the Moon [because the Moon is the luminary ruling the nocturnal sect]. This happens to be in Cancer in the trigon of Ares. [Valens calls it the triplicity of Mars because Mars is the nocturnal triplicity ruler] We found the star of Ares [Mars] to be post-ascending [succedent] in its own house and trigon [triplicity] and in its own sect [Mars is in his preferred nocturnal domicile, in a nocturnal chart and nocturnal quadrant]; then we find the star sharing with this, Aphrodite, to be marking the hour in its own house [The diurnal ruler, Aphrodite, ?shares? in the triplicity rulership in her domicile in the 1st]; third, the Moon to be culminating in her own house [the Moon is the third ruler of this nocturnal triplicity in a nocturnal chart and all three triplicity rulers confer virtue in this delineation, just like with Dorotheus]. It is clear beforehand, then, that the nativity is an estimable one, since the rulers [the three triplicity rulers] are suitably figured [they are all in their domiciles in ?good? houses]. By seeking, I find the Lot [of Fortune] to be in Aquarius. Its lord [Saturn] is upon this zoidion [sign], occupying the Good Fortune [the 5th house] in its own house and trigon [triplicity!!].? [17]



This chart is particularly relevant to this discussion because had Valens only considered the sect triplicity ruler to be in dignity and only in the proper sect of the chart, he would never had said, ?Its lord ? in its own house and trigon? when speaking of Saturn, which is the diurnal triplicity ruler of Aquarius in this nocturnal chart!

The same is found in the later Arabic astrologers where they applied the triplicity lords not only to the signs but also to the ?signs? defining the cusps of the houses. We can read in Ibn Ezra the rational extension of the original purpose.



?The fourth house denotes the father, land, houses and fields, and regions, and building, and hidden treasures and all hidden things, and the end of any matter. The first ruler of the triplicity signifies the father; the second [ruler signifies] land; and the third [indicates] the end of all matters.? [18]



The advancing of one ruler over another, depending on whether or not the nativity was nocturnal or diurnal, was only a ?prioritising? in order to judge which planet had rule over the first, second and third years of the natives life or a specific signification of a house. It did not exclude a planet from virtue just because it was the ruler of the opposite sect. Regardless of the charts sect, a planet in its triplicity has virtue!

The Sun, Jupiter and Saturn have dignity when in a sign belonging to the fire triplicity regardless of the sect of the chart. Saturn, Mercury and Jupiter are in their dignity when in a sign belonging to the air triplicity, regardless of the sect of the chart! The Moon, Venus and Mars are in their dignity when they are in a sign belonging either to the water or earth triplicities, regardless of the sect of the chart!

In the question of fortitude of the triplicity rulers, Lilly warns the student, ?but herein you must be cautious?; namely in the chart sect.

Bonatti on the other hand throws all caution to the wind, not even bothering to tell his students the sect of the chart and simply declares that a planet in his triplicity has honours there.



?The Moon was in said 3rd degree of Aries and Jupiter, which is the lord of the first bound of Aries, was in the 5th degree of Gemini, Cancer, or Leo before the Moon, or in the 5th degree of Aquarius, Capricorn, or Sagittarius after the Moon; at this time the Moon was joined to Jupiter by aspect, and Jupiter himself received her by his bound and triplicity, and he committed his own virtue and disposition to her as if he received her from domicile or exaltation [because the Moon is in two of Jupiter?s dignities, namely triplicity and terms].? [19]



This is typical of Bonatti, who shows no concern at all as to the sect of the chart when assigning virtue to a planet in its triplicity. The Moon was in Jupiter?s triplicity, regardless of the sect of the chart and Jupiter received her there because they are his dignities, regardless the sect of the chart!

So, is sect important? Should we beware as Lilly warns? There is no support for this in the record, where regardless of sect, the rulers all contributed their virtue to a chart. Neither is there support for this in the man who most influenced the return of Astrology to Europe in the middle ages, Guido Bonatti.

My conclusion based on the weight of evidence leads me to say that with all due respect, Mr. Lilly here has made a mistake in his understanding of the Triplicity Rulers. As I said in my foreword to the minor dignities, ??understanding the signification of these dignities helps us to understand the essential nature of those dignities?. (End quotations from his website)


I haven't read much of Bonatti but it certainly seems like he may be on to something, but then why would Lilly, Ptolemy and all the others arrange them in such a way for Day and Night, only to hear Bonatti is basically saying "Ehh it doesn't matter, technically is it still within triplicity since it is within its elemental trigon, regardless of whether it is diurnal or nocturnal."

Also, if I have repeated anything from previous posts, please let me know. I am wondering, if this all is true, why is it not made public. And if it is NOT true, well then, that'd answer my previous question.

2
I am curious as to why the arbitrary adjustment of birth time from 8:08 to 8:02. With a recorded time of 8:08, someone was clearly being conscientious in trying to record an accurate time of birth.

In horary astrology there is a (perhaps unspoken) assumption that the question is "born" at a particular moment due to some powerful psychological urge on the part of the querent (the chart will be more apt if this holds true.) It seems to me that, barring evidence to the contrary (such as rectification) this 8:08 time should be accepted as one of those "significant coincidences" in life.

With regard to the "light of the luminaries" shining over the horizon, even though they are below the horizon by body, you might consider this anecdote from a woman's chart I once did.

She had the Sun just below the eastern horizon, not yet physically risen. The Moon had just set, but was also right at the horizon. The mother and the father of this young woman still lived in the same house, but were for all intents and purpose divorced, because the father had walled off his quarters from the rest of the house (inaccesible) and had a separate entrance. The neighbors knew of this arrangement of course (it had been going on for years) but no one spoke of it. -- The opposition of Sun and Moon spoke of the separation, but being just below the horizon with the "twilight" of each visible...you can see the symbolism. Pehaps the story will give you insight into that sort of situation.

I offer you nothing regarding the triplicity question. But with the Sun parked solidly on the horizon, whichever birth time you choose to accept without rectification, he is certainly has the starring role in your life's drama due to his angular position, and furthermore is powerfully dignified by being in his own house, lord of all he surveys. In addition to this, we might notice that all of the planets lie on one side (summer and fall) of the defining Jupiter - Saturn opposition: Jupiter and Saturn, both diurnal sect planets, "contain" the rest. And to add even more emphasis to this, Saturn is dignified by domicile and Jupiter exalted. Jupiter also stands out as the solitary planet below the horizon, a condition that invests him with a great deal of power in the life, while Saturn enjoys the same sort of position in the east.

On the other hand, the doubly-dignified but intercepted Mercury disposes the nocturnal sect, with both Venus and Moon in Fall and Venus (with Mars) intercepted. It seems to me that with this accumulation of evidence the dirunal sect should be seen as dominant.

3
Dave,

Thank you for your thorough and insightful inputs. I am actually a little shocked you mentioned that woman's chart. My parents actually went through the EXACT same situation -- mom stayed in the bedroom and watched over me and the house on weekdays, dad came home super late in the evenings and I hung around him on the weekends. He stayed in the addition of our house, but it was not nearly so extreme as to create a completely new entrance and shut off the old one. That is just astonishing.

Technically though, if I were to cast this chart at 8:08pm, the Sun would be RIGHT underneath, just as with 8:02 it is RIGHT above -- I don't like how the programs don't allow for planets to be right ON the cusps, such as my Sun. I'd like for Jupiter to be the only one in the nocturnal sect (and again I almost hesitate to refer to sects after reading Paulo's document on triplicities) but at the same time I honestly could not definitively say which (day or night) it may be.

I think when people refer to the lights and luminaries when it comes to the Sun, it isn't a difficult thing to think about because in most cases it isn't such a difficult speculation; it either is, usually, day or night, end of story.

Are you saying that, because Saturn and Jupiter sort of "contain" (very good word, by the way, I didn't even think of that in all my times looking at this) all of them, it adds to the claim that this chart may be diurnal? At first, I was very disappointed to think that it was a night chart, simply because Saturn, Jupiter and the Sun are much more dignified than the Moon, Venus, and Mars. With the former of the mentioned planets, I'd think it would be much more reasonable to assume they hold more power than the nocturnal rulers.

...However, in your final paragraph, I don't quite understand.
the doubly-dignified but intercepted Mercury disposes the nocturnal sect, with both Venus and Moon in Fall and Venus (with Mars) intercepted. It seems to me that with this accumulation of evidence the dirunal sect should be seen as dominant.
I haven't gotten to studying dispositors yet, but I just looked up the word *and* the astrological term. It seems as though you mean that somehow Mercury is either doing away with the nocturnal sect or somehow ruling it or overcoming it? Please correct me if I'm wrong, it's just a guess, but I'd really like to know why with that stack of evidence you feel as though the day sect would be dominant. This is really helping me a lot with my studies, and understanding of the basics of the traditional methods too. There is always more to consider.

4
First, I am not a "traditional astrologer" in the strict sense. I'm something of a maverick who, because I never had a personal teacher, was forced to figure things out and develop my own methods. They seem to work pretty well.

Mercury "rules" Virgo, where Mars and Venus are found, and Mars rules Moon in Scorpio. Moon rules Jupiter (but as mentioned in the earlier post, he is exalted.) So this "chain of disposition" (rulership) goes back to Mercury, who ends up ruling that whole string of planets. He is in his own sign of Virgo, where he is both dignified by domicile and is exalted. So Mercury is very powerful; but he is intercepted in the 7th House (I use Placidus Houses). Lilly considers interception to be one of the strongest of afflictions. Basically, intercepted planets have no direct outlet for their energies, and therefore mut operate indirectly in some fashion.

Something I noticed earlier and didn't mention. Think of the word "Ambiguity". Look at your posts. And then the Sun is in an "ambiguous" position, uncertain whether he's fish or fowl (diurnal or nocturnal). Mercury is an ambivalent planet, and is powerful. Jupiter and Saturn form a positive/negative pairing (one expand, the other contracts, etc.). The whole chart has an air of ambiuoity about it, and this is expressed in you yourself and your uncertainty with regard to the Sun.

Yes, I would take this chart as dirunal. The three dirunal planets -- all three of them -- are "featured" in the chart; by essential dignity, by either hemisphere position or angularity (accidental dignities, each quite powerful), and both Saturn and Sun are "independent" by sign position...they are in their own signs. Meanwhile the nocturnal planets are afflicted by sign (in Fall, except for Mars), are either intercepted themselves or ruled by the intercepted Mercury.... This does not mean that these planets cannot act quite powerfully; I think they can indeed, but their action will not be so open, objective, direct and so on as is the case with the diurnal sect. Once again we see this ambiguous character in the chart, this time as a notable gathering of the planets into two sort of warring gangs.

From another point of view, we can say that the Sun is setting (no matter which side of the horizon he physically occupies) and that his light will be immediately extinguished, while Moon is high in the sky, growing in light, ruler of the powerful Jupiter....that is not a bad argument for a nocturnal chart. I personally don't hold that view of this chart, but would not argue with anyone who does.

I think that at the end of the day, given two astrologers of "equal competence" who have different perspectives, use different methods and so on....you would end up with pretty much the same interpretation of the chart as far as its essential "meaning".

If I were you I would simply allow the horoscope to speak to me, and then go forward with full confidence in myself and the chart. I think the hallmark of a good astrologer is that he or she holds to a clear mental discipline. Astrology is a discipline. The rules of astrology (such as those regarding the triplicities) are in a sense designed to provide us with a framework on which to hang our own mental discipline. But in parallel with our strict discipline we must also develop flexibility and a willingness to "listen to the chart;" the chart itself will tell you what to do.