obsidianmineral
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2016
- Messages
- 551
So this might be a bit more lengthy than a regular casual post on here, but I’ve been giving a lot of thought to the signs of Aries and Leo (which are the signs where the Sun has dignity) and also on rulerships. I think rulerships are overrated. If there’s disagreement on any part of astrology it’s on signs. And truthfully, I don’t think that there are better signs than others. Traditionally, the Babylonians assigned the rulership of the Moon and the Sun to Cancer and Leo simply because they were at the point of the year where the days are the longest and they simply gave the most important celestial bodies their signs there… but there’s no logic or coherence behind it. Why would the watery and cold Moon be assigned to a sign that is at the hottest part of the year? And not to mention, if you were to assign the Sun a sign, it would be Cancer, not Leo, considering the summer solstice occurs at around June 23rd which is when Cancer begins. From that point on the days get increasingly shorter. It seems that the Egyptians were the first to pinpoint Leo as the sign of the Sun… and the reason simply was because the bright fixed star Sirius had its heliacal rising back then in Leo and that’s it. And all of this not to mention that the constellations move with the passing of the centuries and that (and here’s the elephant in the room) the seasons heavily depend on where you are on earth. Seasons are flipped on the southern hemisphere. So yeah. No sense. What remains regardless of all this is the planets. I think the huge mistake of astrology nowadays is giving so much importance to signs and not the planets. I don’t wanna get too much into depth here but there’s a human reflexology zodiac theory created by a French astrologer which basically evens out all of what I said and still gives similar characteristics to the signs even though it doesn’t consider rulerships nor their traditional meanings. But digressing, I wanted to talk about how every sign can be good or bad and there are NO OBJECTIVELY good/bad signs. It’s fun and enticing to delve deep into the meanings of the signs, like into the meaning of Aries and Leo. Aries is the first sign of the zodiac and its ruler is Mars, but it’s also the exaltation of the Sun and many festivities where held by ancient cultures celebrating the start of the spring. Leo is fixed fire and Aries is cardinal fire. And I think that if you start to understand the meanings of the modalities you get that cardinal signs thrive off of the impending need to start, initiate, to sort of bring back into balance the four elements. Fixed signs on the other hand hone in on the element without any other reason than just doing it. And it makes a lot of sense for the Sun to have its rulership in Leo, the fixed fire. Where you purposefully swear loyalty to the fire within you - the core spiritual meaning and life that lives inside you - the core of your identity is something that requires full attention and force of will. Aries on the other hand represents the need to explode into action, to just declare into the world “I am”. In terms of archetypes, Aries is the typical hero that has to save the princess and defeat the dark lord. Aries is the journey of becoming the best and the champion. The objective of the hero. And Leo is the self-discovery and the questioning of identity, the exploration of potential. Think of Harry Potter and his journey for truly embracing who he is, his origins and connections to Lord Voldemort. That is a very Leo-like journey. (no wonder the author, actor and character are all Leo’s). But anyway, what I wanted to say with all this is that the way the sign is manifested is extremely dependent on the chart, the circumstances and the life you get to live. While at its purest both of these signs sound nice and heroic, the truth is that there are many levels where these energies can be manifested and more often than not, they’re expressed in a very common, rather un evolved manner. Aries, being cardinal Fire, becomes more often than not the impulsive, aggressive urge to just impose oneself almost like an animal instinct. It can be quite villainous. It’s the abusive sexist boss that has a short temper and is intimidated by everyone and therefore is constantly defensive and cruel. And Leo, being fixed fire, is all about finding one’s limits and one’s own “territory” becomes nothing more than a pathological narcissist. Someone who thinks everything and everyone revolves around themselves. Leo is the one who reacts to every comment and assumes everything as a threat, the covert narcissist thinking he or she is an extremely talented and misunderstood genius in his time. At average levels, neither of these signs are good per se. Leo tends to make a show of itself and hide its own selfishness through the pretentious act of social niceties and images. And the fact of the matter is that these expressions are more common than the “ideal” ones. That’s the way things are. That’s how human beings are. What horoscopes name for Aries “always is impatient and wants to do it his way” and for Leo “loves being the center of attention and bossing around” are nothing more than the childish manifestations of a much deeper energy. And these signs, like any other signs, only bring out the best in them in mature, selfless ego development. For a Leo to be heroic he or she needs to drop pretenses and find its core, and Aries needs to question his or her impulse for action is nothing more than an insecure self-assertion of strength or the true course of action for the right noble cause. But the large majority of people sadly do not bring these good qualities to light. Most people are rather stuck on a self-indulging mental banter on why their sign is the best above all else, which is ironically the kind of person that expresses the crappy and immature version of their own sign. And I think that the signs, rather than being the place where a planet is the “strongest” are rather just the parts of the zodiac that embody the kind of temperament that represents the archetypal nature the most closely, but not that they’re “their rightful place” or anything at all. The Sun is possibly the most important planet in the chart, and guess what, the Sun can be in any sign. And therefore our most inner identity and sense of purpose and destiny takes many forms - and rightfully so - but the signs can have different planets. So I don’t think there is a right place for the planets. They simply express themselves through the signs. And any experienced astrology will tell you how this is true. That our psychology isn’t born in the signs - it’s the planets which actually describe us the most.
|
| ResponderReenviar |
Last edited:
