“..such a planet is strong, that is, exercising its potential”. Here it is Robert Schmidt’s brilliance in action. I mean, how many times we hear that a planet is ‘strong’ but rarely have explanation of what ‘strong’ actually means. Strong planet is a planet that is ‘exercising its potential’, while a ‘weak’ planet, being weakened in any way (accidentally or essentially) is a planet that is having difficulties realizing or exercising its potential. Sometimes in such ‘small’ wordings, the greatest truths are hidden.
Advertisements
Thank you very much!
I agree. Words that may be interpreted in a few ways should always be defined. As the author of a Critical Thinking book of mine puts it, “A word can be vague, but it should never be ambiguous!”
These days, I understand it the same way. If Saturn is strong, it means he can make his significations come true better; if he is weak, his significations will materialise less often and/or with less intensity. This way, a strong planet is neither good nor bad; the goodness or badness of the nativity depends on the nature of the stars (that are strong)!
If we think about it, most non-trivial things in life are signified by the stars, and different things will often be signified by different stars. When the strength of these stars differ, we can see in turn how certain things appear in our life often, while others not so often, if at all.
Ile, in which text did you find this?
Definitions and Foundations 🙂
In the section where he speaks about the places conducive and places non-conducive to business, commenting upon the Serapio’s passage.
Thank you!