What Planet Rules Astrology? The Case for Family Rule

I have often wondered what planet or combination of planets could rule astrology; not just the study or practice of it but the mechanism of astrology, which is the solar system. The orbiting planets are the primary symbolisms for astrological dialogue. This is especially true in consultancy work. If you are not talking about the planets then you are not talking about your client.

What is unusual about this rulership though is that any planets would have to rule over themselves too because they are inescapably part of a system that requires them to be so.

My first impulse was Uranus rules astrology. But when I began to reflect on the question I wondered if my position was maybe really more of a herd response. It seems to be a consensus correspondence in the Age of Aquarius. We can be sure that it is a relatively modern correspondence since Uranus was only discovered in 1781, hence Mercury’s traditional rulership of astrology. 1781 is still quite a long time ago and its discovery occurred during a period in history when astrology was in a state of intellectual decline, but when we consider that astrology has been kicking around for millennia, Uranus is practically brand new.

Still it makes pretty good sense that Uranus could rule astrology. Uranus is said to rule vast systems and the solar system is vast. Sir Isaac Newton, the dour and redoubtable 17^th century physicist, said of the universe, “…this most beautiful system could only proceed from the Dominion of an intelligent and powerful being”. Nowadays it is almost unthinkable to hear a scientist admit to intelligent design underpinning observable phenomena but Newton did not see the physical world as lifeless and inanimate or as a creation lacking a Creator. His is almost a ringing endorsement of Uranus ruling astrology. Mercury is impressive too, especially in his ability to move effortlessly between realms but perhaps lacks the weight to shoulder the entire solar system.

Sometimes astrologers speak of the ‘Higher Mind’ when talking about Uranus. I’m not exactly sure what that means at an individual level but it is an evocative definition.

The ancient Greek poet Homer wrote, “tis true, ‘tis certain; man though dead retains Part of himself; the immortal mind remains."

The Hindu concept of Atman might be what some astrologers are talking about when they speak of the Higher Mind. Atman is the immortal aspect of mortal existence, the self, which is hidden in every object of creation including man. It is the microcosm, representing the macrocosm in each of us, imparting to us divine qualities and possibilities and providing us with the reasons to exist and experience the pains and pleasures of earthly life. This description has its analogue in early Gnostic Christianity too.

The ego is Atman’s poor cousin, the false centre, which assumes the position of control and ownership, whereas in actual reality it is a mere reflection, a product of illusion and a mental projection, born out of sensory experiences and the accumulation of memories and thoughts. While the basis of Atman is reality, permanence and Bliss, the nature of ego is illusion, impermanence and suffering.

We actually see this setup in the scheme of the Zodiac. Leo, ruled by Sun, and Aquarius, co-ruled by Saturn and Uranus, are opposite signs and fixed signs too. This sets up a natural intransigence between the rulers which the comparison of Atman and ego conveys very nicely.

We may have no choice but to include Saturn as a ruler of astrology too because its very principle is the permanence of a permanent reality. So something immortal like Atman must be edified by Saturn. That places Saturn and Uranus side-by-side.

My first concept of the solar system as the mechanism of astrology was very saturnine too. I thought it was a giant clock and to be honest I still think of it that way most of the time because it is practical and sidesteps philosophical arguments of free will versus determinism.

Yet Charles Harvey, borrowing from quantum physicist David Bohm, wrote of a universe that is more like a great mind than a great machine, a universe in which consciousness and matter are an unbroken whole. The affinity and sympathy between Uranus and Saturn is deeply strengthened in this kind of cosmological model.

I believe that world events are not as capricious as they often appear to be but rather are the culminations of celestial pressures which build up over very long periods of time. These processes speak to the nature of astrology. Interlocking cycles of planetary pairs, which range from the 492 year Neptune -Pluto cycle to the 12 year Jupiter-Pluto cycle, and their intersections which permit the transmission and priming of the Ideas associated with these cycles, into the progressively shorter cycles of the inner planets and the transiting angles, until an Idea is finally released into the world as a demonstrable event.   

And these intersection points between the synods of the five outer planets have always been there, embedded and then rolled out through the regular motions of the planets in their orbits since eternity began. I do not think we are solely in Uranus territory anymore. This is the handiwork of Saturn.

The Argentinean poet Jorge Luis Borges said, “Time is the substance from which I am made.” If you stick with astrology long enough it becomes nearly impossible not to acknowledge determinism or fate as part of the greater reality we live in. Saturn has often been associated with karma and the administration of justice. Astrology might be the celestial embodiment of karma’s timetable.

Uranus in Greek mythology was not just the god of the skies. He was the sky. I found it difficult at first to imagine how the sky could be a God. I used to think that if you could remove all the matter we can see and all the matter we cannot see in space that all that would be left would be nothingness with no physical characteristics. But new advances in science are proving that empty space actually does have physical characteristics. It can be bent and twisted by the gravitational forces of the stars and planets. This was predicted by Einstein and later proven by sophisticated gyroscope technology sent into space. So a sky deity is maybe not such a stretch of the imagination after all.   

In myth, Uranus was the first ruler of the universe, created by Gaea when she emerged from Chaos. Uranus, with Gaea, became the father of the Titans, the Cyclopes and the Hecatoncheires or hundred-handed ones.

Uranus was afraid that some of his children would rebel against him, so he imprisoned them within Gaea's earth womb. Kronos or Saturn to the Romans, the youngest of the Titans, freed his siblings by castrating his father. The irony of this myth is that rebellion has become an important feature of Uranus symbolism and Saturn is now the harbinger of old age.

Uranus's blood gave birth to the Furies, and Aphrodite or Venus to the Romans was born of the discarded member when it fell into the foaming sea.

I love the Greek myths because they make even the most dysfunctional human family seem normal. It must not have been easy to be a god and castration is a nasty business but there is definitely a familial connection between Uranus, Saturn and Venus so why not consider all three members of the family firm as rulers of astrology.

Venus is not an obvious choice yet astrology to me is first and foremost a relationship and Venus is the connective tissue, the mediator between sky and earth which makes each of us in our humanity the very same as our unique and unrepeatable orientation to the sky above us.   

Can we really have astrology without the human side of the equation? I am not sure that is possible.

Plato said the heavenly bodies were the first born thoughts of God. Their lives unfold perfectly and symbolically so perhaps there is meaning for them in their incessant orbits, in the conflict and resolution of different aspects formed up between them and experienced in a way which we cannot possibly understand. But is that by itself astrology? When I read the myths I am often struck by how much the gods seemed to need humans, just so they could be gods to us. Some mortals in the myths like Odysseus, the major protagonist of Homer’s Odyssey, impressed the gods because they remained resolute in their heroism despite the deities’ vagarious torments, and others were elevated to godhood through a process which the Greeks termed apotheosis, like Heracles and Asklepios, who was a student of Chiron, and is today the patron saint of medical doctors. Incidentally apotheosis has not just been extended to Greek heroes. Freemasons for instance, believe George Washington, the 1^st president of the United States, was elevated to godhood, an event which is depicted in the fresco in the eye of the Rotunda of the U.S. Capital.

For the rest of us mere mortals Venus is the mirror which reflection edges us closer to our better angels and them to us. We may never be equal to the gods we carry within but we need each other, and the relationship has endured even after thousands of years.

Uranus may be its rhythm and Saturn its meter, but Venus is the harmony in the vast system and the music of the spheres. T.S. Eliot said you are the music while the music lasts. Gerard Manley Hopkins, the 19^th century English religious poet said, “ Give beauty back, back to God, beauty’s self and beauty’s giver.” Perhaps it is just a Venus conceit to include her as ruler alongside her father and brother, but which I hope you might take under advisement.

By Martin Lipson D.F.Astrol.S.