More Morin confusion. Help? ( # 3)

RohanMenon

I've found a paragraph where the principle elucidated and the example given seem to diverge.

Book 21 Chapter 5 - How a planet ruling one house but located in another combines the meanings of both houses

"Fifth. A planet ruling one house and placed in another acts not only through the house it occupies as well as the one which it rules over, but also through any planets located in this latter house. "

My understanding: A planet (say Jupiter) in the 5th but ruler of the 1st manifests effects relating to the fifth house (by location) or the first (by rulership). If there are any planets in the 1st (say Mars) Jupiter also (somehow) works through Mars.

Now the example given just after this sentence reads thus

"For example, the ruler of Mercury in the first house shows good mental qualities, even though Mercury is not itself in the first house"

Huh? How does this work? Is he assuming a specific horoscope here? Or is he using the joy of Mercury being the 1st house?

In either case this example doesn't seem to have anything to do with the principle elucidated in spite of starting with "for example"

Morin continues

" And the ruler of the Sun in the tenth—honors and prestige, and so on."

This also doesn't seem to illustrate the principle stated.

"This is because any planet has an influence on the native through both the celestial and terrestrial state of its ruler. And so if Mercury's ruler is in the first and in good celestial state, Mercury's influence will be felt in the affairs of the first house and especially on the mental qualities because of the analogy;"

As far as I can make out there are two distinct principles here.

(1) A planet can act through any planets located in the house(s) it rules.

(2) any planet has an influence on the house occupied by its ruler. (which seems a little strange)

The examples seem to be about principle (2) and not principle (1) in spite of following immediately after the statement of (1).


To summarize, now Morin seems to be saying that a planet has influences in and manifests affairs of
(1) the house it is located in
(2) the house(s) it rules (and any planets in these ruled houses)
(3) the house occupied by its ruler (by domicile only ?)

I think I understand the first two . Still trying to wrap my head around (3)

Correct? Or am I missing something?
 

Minderwiz

Although I understand the point Morin was making, and it's a fairly standard one, I had to read the paragraph several times till the penny clicked.

Morin says

"Fifth. A planet ruling one house and placed in another acts not only through the house it occupies as well as the one which it rules over, but also through any planets located in this latter house. "


Morin's example makes sense when you realise that "Mercury's ruler", is the principle planet ("a planet") he's referring to, even though he doesn't specify which of the seven it is, and Mercury is the secondary planet, the one which is in "this latter house"

If he had said 'For example, if Jupiter is in the Ascendant and it rules Mercury in Sagittarius, in the fifth, then Jupiter also acts through Mercury and brings Mercury qualities to the first house. That would have been much clearer to the modern reader.

The same would be true if Jupiter (keeping to my chosen planet) also ruled the Sun and Jupiter was placed in the tenth house. Jupiter not only brings its own qualities to the tenth but also those of the Sun, through its rulership of the Sun.

Incidentally earlier on in the Book, he's also indicated that not only would it bring the Sun's natural characteristics but it could also bring the Sun's accidental characteristics. That is if the Sun were in turn the ruler of the twelfth (or eighth or sixth) it would be an accidental malefic and Jupiter would bring some of the twelfth house (or other house) to its placement in the tenth.

My own feeling is that Morin is a little back to front here. Mercury might well need the support of its ruler, and a ruler placed in the Ascendant together with one that is in its own dignity brings a great support. Mercury will be able to act through the well placed Jupiter but it would be when we are assessing Mercury that we would take note of this, not when we are assessing Jupiter.
 

RohanMenon

wow Minderwiz

"If he had said 'For example, if Jupiter is in the Ascendant and it rules Mercury in Sagittarius, in the fifth, then Jupiter also acts through Mercury and brings Mercury qualities to the first house. That would have been much clearer to the modern reader."

This is *extremely* clear. Thank You! I was going crazy trying to figure it out. So Jupiter would be in Cancer here (assuming no interceptions etc)

" Mercury might well need the support of its ruler, and a ruler placed in the Ascendant together with one that is in its own dignity brings a great support. Mercury will be able to act through the well placed Jupiter"

This is the 'planet(Mercury) acting through its ruler(Jupiter)' idea, (# 3 in my list - in my original mail) vs the ruler(Jupiter) acting on/via the ruled planet (Mercury) (#2 in my list) idea.

Thanks again, This is a great help.