©2013
J. Lee Lehman, PhD
In
my book, EssentialDignities, I addressed
the question of how the three trans-Saturnian planets were assigned
rulerships, which is really
an indirect answer to the
question, how are rulerships assigned? Specifically, I performed an
experiment: I compared the Medieval al-Biruni's rulerships to those
of the modern work by Rex Bills. I looked for all those cases where
Bills gave a rulership to Uranus, Neptune, or Pluto, and the same
concept could be found in al-Biruni. By
seeing which traditional planet rulership was assigned to which outer
planet, we are actually mapping attitudes about the nature of those
outer planets. This was specifically set up to address the modern
belief that the three outer planets are the higher octave of Mercury
(Uranus), Venus (Neptune), and Mars (Pluto). The results are shown in
Table 1.
- PlanetUranusNeptunePluto
Sun 411Moon 051Mercury 121Venus 144Mars 405Jupiter 202Saturn 276
Table
1. Attributions in
al-Biruni which are ruled by Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto in Bills.1
The
results for Neptune and Pluto show a strong conversion of Saturn
words, which suggests the obvious idea that these two outer planets
are malefics that have taken over some of the Greater Malefic's
traditional words. Uranus is more complex, but the dominance in the
transfer of Sun and Mars words does suggest that Uranus is hot and
dry in nature. In Neptune's case, the large number of Moon and Venus
words might suggest wet, while the Moon and Saturn words would give
cold. Pluto is more complicated: Venus and Mars are polar opposites
in qualities as well as signs, suggesting that perhaps Pluto's
qualities are more situational than intrinsic,
When
I ask astrology audiences to classify the outer planets by quality,
the results are consistent with what we have just seen. Uranus is
easily classified as hot and dry (increasing the energy of a system,
but tending to break things apart), while Neptune is easily
classified cold and wet (decreasing the energy of a system, but
intensifying the connections). Pluto is always troubling for people
to classify, and there is seldom agreement.
This
little demonstration suggests a use of the qualities of the planets
as being an important component of their rulerships. I know that the higher octave theory is very appealing aesthetically: it's just that this study indicates that the higher octave theory truly is more theory than practice.
_______
Sources
for table:
al-Biruni,
Muhammad ibn Ahmad, and Robert Ramsay Wright. The
Book of Instruction in the Elements of the Art of Astrology.
London,: Luzac & Co., 1934.
Bills,
Rex E. The Rulership Book; a Directory of Astrological
Correspondences. Richmond,:
Macoy Pub. & Masonic Supply Co., 1971.
6 comments:
My wife, who has two degrees in music, pointed out another problem with the "higher" octave theory: if the trans-Saturnians are heavier, more ponderous, and given the fact that they move much more slowly than the traditional planets, then they really ought to be lower octaves, not higher. The modern idea that they are higher octaves of smaller planets directly contradicts wave theory.
Chris, I came to the same conclusion, and started referring to that very issue - that we should use the term "lower octave." It's the only term that makes sense in wave theory. I think the point is that "higher" sounded better.
Nice to see such a comparison done without trying to support a foregone conclusion...
Thank you, Rodney. At the time, I would have been satisfied with any result.
Thanks for throwing some light on those far off planets. Whenever I hear folks talking about higher octaves it just sounds off key to me.
Nice comparison, I will definitely look for your book, best
Post a Comment