What about the Sun?

[Minderwiz]

The Rising sign vs Sun sign as to how people see yout/how one 'is'.

I have always heard the opposite. That is, people 'see' you as your Rising sign, because that sign 'colors' the First house, which you 'project' to the outside world.

The Sun is how you 'are', or, as ihcoyc said, the Sun refers to your drive, motive, "what you REALLY want".

Yes, that 's a fairly standard psychological interpretation, However it's only a view that has come into Astrology over the last 50-60 years. It is still the dominant perception but it's not the original perception, nor is it universally held. Once you begin to explore Astrology, you begin to see the varied and disperate strands that now exist. What you should be looking for is the reasons and explanations that underpin such views and compare them with the alternatives.

Don't be surprised if your views change more than once, as your exploration continues.

 

[MareSaturni]

While the Sun does indeed have the INNER and OUTER characteristics that I indicated (others can be included or substituted), I feel that much of the Sun's power is DIRECTED through the planets it aspects or has relationships with. [...] We do not understand these and other possible influences --- yet. But, we can measure and observe these influences through Astrology. So, back to my premise. The Sun, by its very presence in our sky and the seasonal cycles, has a basic organizing principle that operates upon us. The Sun also works through the planets, energizing them according to their nature and interrelationships with each other. There is a parallel process going on here.

The original theory of aspects had the reflection of light as the essence of an aspect. Now in order to reflect light there needs to be a source of light and that source in Astrologynis the sun. So if Saturn aspects Jupiter, it means that the Sun's light is reflected by Saturn to Jupiter. I think this ties in closely with Dave's point, as without the Sun, Saturn could not aspect Jupiter, or any planet aspect another body or point, nor could we identify the rising or setting of stars and planets. Without the Sun, there can be no Astrology!

Hum... that's interesting. I hadn't seen it from this point of view, but I think both of you are right. The Sun is indeed a central force in our SOLAR system, and although in Astrology we use a geocentric view, the Sun is still an important factor. Depending on the aspect planet forms with the Sun, this will also change the amount of light it is getting... maybe also influencing how the planet will show itself.

This could tie with what Cardlady said:

Would the concept of a Director (movie or play) be at all appropriate here?

But instead of a Director, I think the Sun would be the central Conductor of the celestial orchestra. The planets rotate around it, following its gravitational pull, and as it influences the Planets, it's also influenced in return.

I like this idea of the Sun as a unifying factor in the chart, although I am not sure how this will apply when I am analyzing a chart.

Minderwiz, I am curious... I took a look at Lilly's "Christian Astrology" (a friend gave me the PDF until I can find a print copy ) and it's very clear he does not attributes many 'meanings' to the planets, but rather a sort of influence (a well-dignified Sun makes one faithful, prudent, majestic etc., a ill Sun arrogant, disdainful, restless etc.). How do you see the Sun in your charts, since you practice Traditional Astrology and it doesn't give the 'keyword attributions' used by most in Modern Astrology?

 

[dadsnook2000]

For Marina, again

You noted, " I took a look at Lilly's "Christian Astrology" (a friend gave me the PDF until I can find a print copy ) and it's very clear he does not attributes many 'meanings' to the planets, but rather a sort of influence (a well-dignified Sun makes one faithful, prudent, majestic etc., a ill Sun arrogant, disdainful, restless etc.)."

This sparse definition approach to a planet's role is to be admired. It is something that I do, yet I am not considered a Traditional Astrologer. Simplicity permits one to find clarity. Relying upon a planet in a sign and house definition from a book will yield several or many pages of words. All of that crap is useless. If talking with a client or a friend about their chart, how much of those several pages for one chart planet could you remember, how much time is availble to expouse it, how would you choose which of fifty statements to make and which to not mention? Again, simplity permits one to find clarity.

The "unifying" role of the Sun comes from seeing only those planets it has aspects to in terms of their roles and how the Sun strengthens their positive and negative or neutral roles. Once you understand that part of the chart, one might choose to look at the Moon in terms of 1) how one deals with change, 2) how the Moon defines primary needs, fears, feelings, 3) how one's past, family and women play a role in our life.

Then we attempt to picture how the Sun's attitude, vitality, decision making works with/against our Moon's needs, feelings, past and women we associate with. This often covers much of the chart. Those planets and the angles that are not involved with the Sun and/or Moon need to be looked at in a similar way. It doesn't take much to get a good initial grasp of a chart. As you work with a chart its details clarify, you reasses and change your views, and finally the ways in which it either comes together or reflects disparate portions of a personality becomes clear. Dave

 

[Minderwiz]

Digression on Lilly Part 1

This sparse definition approach to a planet's role is to be admired. It is something that I do, yet I am not considered a Traditional Astrologer. Simplicity permits one to find clarity. Relying upon a planet in a sign and house definition from a book will yield several or many pages of words. All of that crap is useless. If talking with a client or a friend about their chart, how much of those several pages for one chart planet could you remember, how much time is availble to expouse it, how would you choose which of fifty statements to make and which to not mention? Again, simplity permits one to find clarity.

The thing that struck me most when I first revad Lilly and frankly shocked me (though pleasantly) was the brevity of his descriptions. Christian Astrology covers both natal and horary branches, together with some medical Astrology. Lily also did some mundane and event Astrology, so his descriptions are meant to cover all five branches. Yet he still covers signs in a third of a page for each. Houses are even briefer but planets get two or three pages each. However, this is not cook book style planets in signs. The natal component is about a page at most, covering, behaviour, physical characteristics and possible health issues. For behaviour (Lilly calls it manners) he gives but two situations, one for a well dignified planet, the other for ill dignified - just two things to remember. What's more the student is given a general statement of the nature of the planet, so as they get better they should be able to work out the 'well' and 'ill' for themselves.

I remember that you once posted your own brief descriptions for the planets and to the classic 7, they are similar to Lilly's, though in more modern language. The main difference is that Lilly's indication of when to choose between the planet behaving well and when it will behave badly depends on essential dignity as well as it's place in the chart.
There's
Strictly speaking, not every planet in the chart determines 'manners' so the student also has to follow a few simple rules to determine whether the planet has a significant effect on behaviour. So instead of wading through material on ten planets in each of twelve signs and then trying to turn the relevant paragraphs or pages into a coherent description, the student simply checks to seeif there's a planet in the Ascendant and takes that planet or planets s the principle significator of manners. I think you to would take a planet in the ascendant as being of prime importance. The difference would be that you would also look for other angular planets, whereas Lilly would next look at planets aspecting Mercury and/or the Moon, as both of these signify the mind and behaviour is related to the state of mind (some psychology here LOL) Failing planet or planets in the Ascendant or aspecting Moon or Mercury, he would take the Ascendant ruler.

So, follow the checklist, identify the relevant planet or planets, check their dignity (tables provided) and modify the description accordingly. Of course if more than one planet is involved, some blending is required.

Now that might sem rule based but the book is written for students and beginners need some rules and a set of procedures to get started. Progress through reading many charts will lead to personal modification of these rules and the recognition that there are always exceptions. As an author yourself you know that the book can only deal with general principles and procedures. Lilly often quotes or refers to other authors and then relates his experience using their method - the implication being that methods and rules end up yielding to experience.

 

[Minderwiz]

DIgresion on Lilly Part 2

Minderwiz, I am curious... I took a look at Lilly's "Christian Astrology" (a friend gave me the PDF until I can find a print copy ) and it's very clear he does not attributes many 'meanings' to the planets, but rather a sort of influence (a well-dignified Sun makes one faithful, prudent, majestic etc., a ill Sun arrogant, disdainful, restless etc.). How do you see the Sun in your charts, since you practice Traditional Astrology and it doesn't give the 'keyword attributions' used by most in Modern Astrology?

What are 'keywords?

They are a means to convey the essence of something as briefly as possible. The descriptions that you quote above are 'keywords' or 'key descriptions' , which can be modified to meet the individual chart. It,s very unlikely that everyone who has the Sun as their prime significator of manners exhibits everyone of the characteristics Lily mentions ( even allowing for 'well or 'ill placed). Lilly is simply giving us some ideas to work on.

Now my own approach to Sun in chart would be:

Temperament; The Sun is used by season of the year and thus contributes to overall temperament. It might also contribute if it's I the Ascendant, or aspects it or one or more planets the or it aspects the Moon.

Manners; IF the sun is a significator of manners, I would use the descriptions you quote from as the basis for my description. But there is no fundamental reason why it must be a significator. See the above post for how to determine the significator.

Mind; Only if it aspects Mercury or the Moon.

Fortune and Health; Here the condition of the Sun (and Moon) are important. A strong Sun and Moon show an ability to deal with the things that befall us (Fortune) of which sickness is the best example. If you like Sun and Moon say something about our constitution. The Sun shows our Spirit - the ability to resist the bad and to take advantage of the good and the Moon shows the physical side - the strength of our bodies.

Career; The condition of the Sun is a good indicator of career success - the nature of the carer coming from the tenth house.

Elsewhere the Sun will be involved through its house placement and rulership and it as a role to play in assessing the marriage prospects of a woman.

The 'key bits there are the role of the Sun in our general constitution and career success. The Sun helps to set the 'tone of the chart and therefore the, 'tone of the life'. But remember that for much of this it does so in partnership with the Moon. For modern Astrology the Sun rules, for traditional Astrology Sun AND Moon rule.

 

[dadsnook2000]

Simpleness

Starting with something "simple" doesn't mean that most charts will end up falling into a few basic categories. Simplicity helps us to get focused, to grasp a "wholeness" in the chart --- or in some cases --- to recognize that the subject has a fractured chart in which the pieces need to be pieced together, if poossible.

But, once we have a grasp of the natal chart, we can next address specific concerns. If one has a relationship problem, then we can nuance the meanings of the planets.
** SUN might relate to your will, the forcefulness you push into the relationship, the attitude towards relationships. Sun can represent the male for a woman.
** MOON will show where changes can upset you, how your needs are met. How one feels about compromise.
** MERCURY indicates the means of communication. Aspects show problem or ease areas.
** VENUS points to what you like and desire. Are these realistic in this relationship.
** MARS points to sexual energy as expressed by males, as expressed by females.
** JUPITER tells us of expectations, how relationship goals can be defined.
** SATURN offers a view of our limitations and responsibilities that need to be shared or how we feel that we, individually, are burdened within the relationship.

These shifts in perception of planet-meanings are what helps us be astrologers. Dave

 

[MareSaturni]

This sparse definition approach to a planet's role is to be admired. It is something that I do, yet I am not considered a Traditional Astrologer. Simplicity permits one to find clarity. Relying upon a planet in a sign and house definition from a book will yield several or many pages of words. All of that crap is useless. If talking with a client or a friend about their chart, how much of those several pages for one chart planet could you remember, how much time is availble to expouse it, how would you choose which of fifty statements to make and which to not mention? Again, simplity permits one to find clarity.

I completely agree with you. Clarity and simplicity is something I am seeking in my studies, however, the books are not always helpful in this regard. I suppose that some concepts (like the full potential of each planet) also take a while to be fully internalized... to be fully understood. To keep a subject simple and to the point one must know it very well, in my opinion.

Now my own approach to Sun in chart would be:

Temperament; The Sun is used by season of the year and thus contributes to overall temperament. It might also contribute if it's I the Ascendant, or aspects it or one or more planets the or it aspects the Moon.

Manners; IF the sun is a significator of manners, I would use the descriptions you quote from as the basis for my description. But there is no fundamental reason why it must be a significator. See the above post for how to determine the significator.

Mind; Only if it aspects Mercury or the Moon.

Fortune and Health; Here the condition of the Sun (and Moon) are important. A strong Sun and Moon show an ability to deal with the things that befall us (Fortune) of which sickness is the best example. If you like Sun and Moon say something about our constitution. The Sun shows our Spirit - the ability to resist the bad and to take advantage of the good and the Moon shows the physical side - the strength of our bodies.

Career; The condition of the Sun is a good indicator of career success - the nature of the carer coming from the tenth house.

Elsewhere the Sun will be involved through its house placement and rulership and it as a role to play in assessing the marriage prospects of a woman.

The 'key bits there are the role of the Sun in our general constitution and career success. The Sun helps to set the 'tone of the chart and therefore the, 'tone of the life'. But remember that for much of this it does so in partnership with the Moon. For modern Astrology the Sun rules, for traditional Astrology Sun AND Moon rule.

Thank Minderwiz, this is very helpful to me. You know, despite Lilly's complicated old English, I found him very objective and easy to understand - I mean, his ideas are put in a very clear manner. He wrote a great book for students... it's just a bit daunting because of the style.

Starting with something "simple" doesn't mean that most charts will end up falling into a few basic categories. Simplicity helps us to get focused, to grasp a "wholeness" in the chart --- or in some cases --- to recognize that the subject has a fractured chart in which the pieces need to be pieced together, if poossible.

But, once we have a grasp of the natal chart, we can next address specific concerns. If one has a relationship problem, then we can nuance the meanings of the planets.
** SUN might relate to your will, the forcefulness you push into the relationship, the attitude towards relationships. Sun can represent the male for a woman.
** MOON will show where changes can upset you, how your needs are met. How one feels about compromise.
** MERCURY indicates the means of communication. Aspects show problem or ease areas.
** VENUS points to what you like and desire. Are these realistic in this relationship.
** MARS points to sexual energy as expressed by males, as expressed by females.
** JUPITER tells us of expectations, how relationship goals can be defined.
** SATURN offers a view of our limitations and responsibilities that need to be shared or how we feel that we, individually, are burdened within the relationship.

These shifts in perception of planet-meanings are what helps us be astrologers. Dave

Thank you Dave!

I think I still do not have any fluency in the language of Astrology. I have to keep going to a dictionary in order to understand what I am seeing in the chart, and this makes my view of them a bit crystallized for the time being. I have not learnt well enough the full idea behind every Planet, in order to be able to shift my perception of them depending on the chart and the situation. I suppose this will take a lot of study and practice... just like with a foreign language.

I also think that there's a lot of preconceptions culturally attached to every planet, that makes it hard for us to see their full potential. We end up having a limited view of them, Venus becomes Love, Saturn becomes Obstacle, Uranus becomes Changes and a lot gets lost in translation. Keeping it simple doesn't mean being simplistic or dogmatic.

 

[MareSaturni]

I was re-reading everyone's answer for this thread, and I noticed that was a big emphasis on how the Sun connects and influences the other planets through its aspects with them. Then I wondered... what happens when the Sun has no Major Aspects with any planet or angle? Does this make the Sun automatically weak or ill-dignified in a chart?

I read a bit about it in Marion D. March & Joan Mcevers' book The Only Way to Learn Astrology (vol. 2, I think) and they said that in such cases either the Sun has a subtle and insecure expression, or it tries to 'appear' in extreme ways. But it didn't take in account the Sun's important role as a unifier/energizer of the other planets.

I'd like to know your view on this, since aspects with the Sun tend to be important in a chart.

 

[dadsnook2000]

For Marina

You quoted . . . "in such cases either the Sun has a subtle and insecure expression, or it tries to 'appear' in extreme ways" . . . and noted "But it didn't take in account the Sun's important role as a unifier/energizer of the other planets."

The Sun is not a static body, it moves through the chart a day and a degree at a time. In the natal chart it still represents vitality, will, decision making, attitude . . . and it will express these through the house where it resides. On a daily basis, as a transiting body, it will play this same role but in a more active sense as it comes in contact with natal and transiting bodies through its aspect patterns.

From a "big picture" view, if the Sun isn't a party-player, then which "planet" is? Does the Moon shift the focus to one who operates on feeling, emotions, interactions, dealing with change? There are all kinds of people, personalities and ways of moving through life. Didn't Donna Cunningham write a book about being a lunar type in a solar world?

I'd be more concerned with a chart that had no angular planets or T-Squares or squares to act as "drivers" and "shapers" of character and personality. Dave

 

[MareSaturni]

The Sun is not a static body, it moves through the chart a day and a degree at a time. In the natal chart it still represents vitality, will, decision making, attitude . . . and it will express these through the house where it resides. On a daily basis, as a transiting body, it will play this same role but in a more active sense as it comes in contact with natal and transiting bodies through its aspect patterns.

I was thinking in the static view of a Natal Chart, but you are right - the Sun moves, and it'll form aspect with the other planet in Transits, and still influence the person's life. I think my problem is that I forget that planets move, like we move and don't remain in the same state we were when we were kids.

From a "big picture" view, if the Sun isn't a party-player, then which "planet" is? Does the Moon shift the focus to one who operates on feeling, emotions, interactions, dealing with change? There are all kinds of people, personalities and ways of moving through life. Didn't Donna Cunningham write a book about being a lunar type in a solar world?

Agreed!
Now I wonder if it's possible for someone to have both a weak Sun AND Moon... but for some reason I think people still walk and live even with the weird (or most stigmatized) placements, they just face a challenge that is different from other people's. I haven't read many works by Donna Cunningham, but I remember reading two articles in which she "destigmatizes" Saturn and Mars... she seems to be good at providing another angle to factors usually seen as bad.

I'd be more concerned with a chart that had no angular planets or T-Squares or squares to act as "drivers" and "shapers" of character and personality. Dave

My chart has almost no squares... and you are right about its effects .
I am coming to the conclusion that the real problem is isolating one element... Sometimes a weak part is supported by another stronger one, or another part of the chart shows a way to deal with the weaknesses. And also... there's no one-true-and-tried universal way to live your life and use your potentials...