Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

I have two configurations in my natal that are pretty much the same. They are both constituted of three planets each, one or more of which is a benefic, two of which are angular, and each of the angular planets form a partile opposition. Every other aspect formed in conjunction with the opposition, in both cases a trine and sextile, is either less than or within one degree. And the configurations are as follows:

Configuration 1):
Moon opposite Jupiter (0°31')
Moon sextile Venus (0°46')
Venus trine Jupiter (1°17')

Configuration 2):
Mercury opposite Pluto (0°15')
Mercury trine Uranus (0°29')
Uranus sextile Pluto (0°45')

What I don't understand is how despite that configuration 1 includes a luminary, one in the sign of its exaltation and configured closely to the ascendant I might add, its effects seems much less "punchy," much less palpable, than configuration 2. I don't really "feel" configuration 1 much at all despite that the moon and its sign and aspects largely determine the course along which our personalities are expressed.

I have some theories for why this might be. One is that, given the above, given that the moon plays such a large part in who we are, it's hard to see what constitutes ourselves, as nothing is harder to clearly see than what we have great familiarity with. Perhaps configuration 1 is such an integral part of my person that, just like my own breathing, I rarely notice it.

Another theory is that my inability to "feel" configuration 1 is due to what might be considered an over-involvement of benefics. Which is to say that, like our bodies, we rarely notice we have one until something with it has gone wrong, and I assume similar reasoning can be applied to our behavior. We rarely notice our own behavior unless it causes turbulence in our fleeting interactions and intimate relationships. I assume that the behavioral courses which the benefics set us on are so smooth that there would rarely ever be an instance where a turning back of awareness, a need for self reflection, would become necessary. And in that case behavior goes unnoticed. The influence of such aspects might be all but transparent. With respect to configuration 2, the neutrality of Mercury and Pluto allow for behavior to perhaps swing from a genial state to one that might be considered brusque, inconsiderate, abrasive, and would therefore, as a result of causing conflict, be much more noticeable to me. But again, since in this configuration there is neither the involvement of a luminary nor contiguity with a powerful angle (Mercury being on the EP and Pluto being on the DSC), we would expect its influence to be much less pronounced than that of configuration 1.

Any feedback or thoughts on the matter is warmly welcome

I think you've nailed it. While reading just far enough to know your question, and before getting to your proposal of an answer, my first thoughts were,

(1) Really, you don't discern the Moon-Jupiter + Venus in yourself? It seems evident to me in your overall style and it's probably so "settled in" that it doesn't stand out to you.

(2) Mercury-Pluto etc. IS a punchier, harder-hitting aspect than Moon-Jupiter etc. It is likely to "demand a voice" (Mercury pun not intended, but suitable), while the other is gentler etc.

(3) If you are aligned closer to your Sun-sign - recognize yourself more in terms of your personal core than your outer, adaptive mask - then, as an Aries, you're going to value, more easily recognize, and "run with" Mercury-Pluto etc. more than with Moon-Jupiter. In fact, I wonder how many of the Mercury-Pluto etc. traits you observe are also basic Sun in Aries traits.

Don't forget that your Pluto is roughly as angular as your Moon-Jupiter: Pluto is 1°10', Moon 1°04', and Jupiter 0°21' from the angles. Mercury is 0°13' from Eastpoint. So Mercury & Pluto are almost exactly as angular as Moon & Jupiter, while Venus and Uranus are both comparably background (Venus 11° from a cadent cusp in the mundoscope, Uranus 8° from a cadent cusp).

Jim Eshelman wrote: Sat Sep 22, 2018 11:34 am I think you've nailed it. While reading just far enough to know your question, and before getting to your proposal of an answer, my first thoughts were,

(1) Really, you don't discern the Moon-Jupiter + Venus in yourself? It seems evident to me in your overall style and it's probably so "settled in" that it doesn't stand out to you.

It's hard for me to see Mr. E, but I think you pinpoint why here:

(3) If you are aligned closer to your Sun-sign - recognize yourself more in terms of your personal core than your outer, adaptive mask - then, as an Aries, you're going to value, more easily recognize, and "run with" Mercury-Pluto etc. more than with Moon-Jupiter. In fact, I wonder how many of the Mercury-Pluto etc. traits you observe are also basic Sun in Aries traits.

But this does raise the question of whether a cadent condition of a Sun has significant impact on personal identification with its traits. Which is to say that, since my Sun is cadent (and without aspects to boot), I assumed I'd have an easier time identifying with the Moon and aspects congenial to its needs and nature, that the traits of my Sun would be loosely identified with.

(But perhaps even if the Sun is cadent, when positioned in Aries, its traits still shine through?)

Don't forget that your Pluto is roughly as angular as your Moon-Jupiter: Pluto is 1°10', Moon 1°04', and Jupiter 0°21' from the angles. Mercury is 0°13' from Eastpoint. So Mercury & Pluto are almost exactly as angular as Moon & Jupiter, while Venus and Uranus are both comparably background (Venus 11° from a cadent cusp in the mundoscope, Uranus 8° from a cadent cusp).

And about this. I was kind of bummed when I found out I had both Mercury and Pluto angular. Isn't that way too much? 5 angular planets in total? How do I handle all of this?

sotonye wrote: Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:41 pm But this does raise the question of whether a cadent condition of a Sun has significant impact on personal identification with its traits.

I think it doesn't at all. Not in the slightest. In terms of solarness, sure. But not in terms of Ariesness.

The most common recurrent "rule" that I see pop up over the years that I unequivocally deny and dispute is that the angularity of a luminary has something to do with the power of its sign position. Sun-sign and Moon-sign are important for everyone equally. Solarness and lunarness in the personality are another thing altogether.

I was kind of bummed when I found out I had both Mercury and Pluto angular. Isn't that way too much? 5 angular planets in total? How do I handle all of this?

You've handled it all your life.

My mate has Sun, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Uranus, and Neptune foreground, Pluto tightly aspecting both planets, Jupiter more weakly aspecting Sun, and a stationary Saturn. It's just who she is

Jim Eshelman wrote: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:14 pm I think it doesn't at all. Not in the slightest. In terms of solarness, sure. But not in terms of Ariesness.

The most common recurrent "rule" that I see pop up over the years that I unequivocally deny and dispute is that the angularity of a luminary has something to do with the power of its sign position.

Ah thank you, I've been wondering about this for a while.

Sun-sign and Moon-sign are important for everyone equally. Solarness and lunarness in the personality are another thing altogether.

But how do we separate Solar and Lunar "intensity," let's say, and the traits attributed to luminary sign position?

My mate has Sun, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Uranus, and Neptune foreground, Pluto tightly aspecting both planets, Jupiter more weakly aspecting Sun, and a stationary Saturn. It's just who she is

Whoa whoa! What the heck! This is baffling and incredible?

Hmmm

In the middling advantage resource it was said that succeedent types are generally congenial, and I'm wondering now about the characters of angular types and the impressions that they make on us?

sotonye wrote: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:50 pm

Sun-sign and Moon-sign are important for everyone equally. Solarness and lunarness in the personality are another thing altogether.

But how do we separate Solar and Lunar "intensity," let's say, and the traits attributed to luminary sign position?

Sun in Aries in the background mans you are very Aries and not very solar. Sun or Moon being in a constellation loudly accentuate that constellation as being a primary keynote of your nature regardless of any other consideration in the chart.

In the middling advantage resource it was said that succeedent types are generally congenial, and I'm wondering now about the characters of angular types and the impressions that they make on us?

I don't have a formal study of it, but I do have casual observations. It does seem that such people are more "out there," externalizing their natures into the world, more openly driven by self-expression. In the average case, peoplke in general have a bit of a sense of "too much!" from primarily foreground people, of "Too little" from primarily background people, and "Just right!" for middleground predominance people - but that's averybroad-stroked generalization.