Natural Significators

[Guest guest]

Anny wrote:

 

Still it needs more consideration of me to think about how to put it into

actual practice. You do?

 

Sari:

 

No, for me it's not chrystal clear how to put it in actual practice. But

I've tried to get a better grip of the actual nature of the whole sign

houses and I've experimented with models like that. I wouldn't personally

ignore the vedic natural significators, not at least for the moment, and for

me they make sense. But one thing I know and it's that I'm not satisfied

with the usual Aries = 1. house, Taurus = 2. house formula.

 

What I like in putting any of the fixed signs as the 1. house is that then

you get the signs and the exaltation signs of the Sun and the Moon around

the axis. If Scorpio is the 1. house, then the debilitaton sign of the Sun

is the 12. house and the debilitation sign of the Moon is the 1. house; both

signs ruled by Saturn get around the axis between the 3. and the 4. house,

the exaltation signs of the Sun and the Moon get around the axis between the

6. and the 7. house and the own signs of the Sun and the Moon make the 9.

and 10. house. There's something symmetrically beautiful in that, that's

absent in the usual model. Of course, if we follow the early siderealist

model of Taurus as the first sign, we get the same result.

 

Best, Sari