Thursday, March 3, 2011

Rulers in Astrology - an unconventional opinion

For me rulers make no sense. Astrologers are just linking planet similarities to signs (Jupiter for Sagittarius, Saturn to Capricorn, Uranus to Aquarius...). Just like they link houses to signs (e.g, second house to Taurus, third to Gemini).

Why does Mars rule Scorpio or Aries? You could argue for Pluto ruling Aries, or for Mercury ruling Aries, Neptune ruling Cancer, or for Neptune ruling Sagittarius. Or Moon ruling Pisces!

It's just affinities. I don't think there are rulerships.

Everything is a concept invented by humans. Let us go beyond the mental illusions of humans, reality is much more strange to understand!

Signs actually blend one another, there are no clear cut divisions. A person born in 25 June is somewhere in a spectrum between Gemini and Cancer, just like the musical note scale, the colors of the rainbow, or the electromagnetic spectrum.

Just like the scale goes in same energetic pattern, from spring equinox to spring equinox (Aries to Pisces), so goes the pattern of houses one next to the other, after the rising sign: fire, earth, air and water.

In reality, it's all about geometry, that relates to that sequence of four elements of inner and outer transformation. I am not 100% sure about this, nonetheless I guess this is possibly a pretty close understanding of the astrological reality.

Trines relate to same element. Sextile relate to same compatible energy. Square relates to same mode of operation (mutable, cardinal or fixed) but different energies. Opposition to complementary but contrasting energies. So, go the houses, like between 1st, 5th and 9th, or relationship between the angles and the following houses, 2nd, 5th, 8th and 11th.

Planets do not seem to relate closely to this sequence. If I relate the Sun to first house, I cannot relate Mercury to the second house, or Venus to the 3rd house. If I relate Sun to the 5th house, I would have to relate Mars to the 8th house, Neptune to the 12th house, and how about the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th houses?

Same thing goes to signs. If I relate the Sun to Leo, then I relate Mercury to Virgo, Venus to Libra, and until Neptune to Pisces, and how about between Aries and Cancer. Cancer could relate the Moon, and Pluto with Aries, but what about Taurus and Gemini?

As I said before, it is still very interesting to see these patterns between a sequence of signs and a sequence of planets in our solar system, but at a certain point the sequence does not seem very linear.

Comments are welcome.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Thank you the critical analysis... I've been reading a lot about how Astrology is supposed to work over the past six months, now I'm looking for a more critical view.

Other things that bother me. Varied house systems... how do we know which house system works? Do houses even matter? I seem to think that fixed house sizes would be more logical than the common system. Also, the composite chart for relationships... I don't really see how that's supposed to work, seems a bit arbitrary to average out people's natal placements. The other thing is progressions... I don't see why 'a day for a year' is supposed to work.... please, if you know of any proper explanations of how those concepts tie in to core Astrology tenants, let me know.