Probably a face palm question - Sun

I have a question in regards to the Sun in a chart, and something that has always confused me, and I have never found an explanation.

This is very basic astrology 101, I guess, but it confuses me.

So, obviously Sun sign = Zodiac sign, so in my case Aries. What I don't understand is, the Sun is the ruler of Leo, but it can only ever be represented in your own Zodiac sign.

So my Sun is in the 10th House in Aries, my second House is in Leo. Thus the ruler of the second House is in my 10th House by default, because I am an Aries.

But how does that represent the ruler of Leo? This only represents my actual Zodiac sign, which is Aries and not the Ruler or qualities of the sign Leo itself? This of course applies to all Zodiacs, not just mine, and it's confusing.

I hope I am not making this too complicated, but all other planets have their own rulers, but since the Sun is by default always connected to the Zodiac sign, how is Leo represented in the chart, other than being tied to the Zodiac, and the House that happens to be in the sign Leo in your natal chart?

And how is the quality of Leo expressed in this? Why would the ruler of Leo be tied to all 12 Zodiacs vs the actual ruler of your Zodiac sign?
Or, to simplify: How come Leo does not have his own ruler like all other signs and is connected to the Zodiac by default?

Leo does have its own ruler - the sun. Just like Cancer is ruled by the moon, Gemini and Virgo by Mercury, and so on.

Don't get too tied to your sun-sign as identity - for most people that isn't the case.

Sun in 10 (especially as it's exalted in Aries) ruling 2 would focus on career and money.

That's the short answer, at least, but I'm not sure I properly understood your question.

Thanks for your reply. I don't think this might be as clear to others as it is in my own head.

You said: "Leo does have its own ruler - the sun." And that is exactly what confuses me. Leo's ruler is always connected to the Zodiac sign in a chart.

Now, if you're Zodiac is in Scorpio, your Sun (Ruler of Leo) would always be in Scorpio. Why does it have to be connected to the Zodiac by default?

Let's use another example: My ascendant is in Cancer. The ruler of Cancer is the Moon, and my Moon is in the Fifth House in Sagittarius.The ruler of my ascendant is not in my first House Cancer by default, and taking this thought further, this goes for all other planets and signs, except for the Sun.

And that is exactly what I don't understand, why is the Ruler of the sign Leo always connected to your Zodiac sign, and not the actual ruler of the Zodiac in question? Or, why does Leo not have a separate ruler that is not connected to your Zodiac sign by default?

Okay, let's try to define some terms, then maybe we can better understand each other.

The Zodiac is the circle of all twelve signs. Aries, Taurus, Gemini, Cancer, Leo, Virgo, Libra, Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricorn, Aquarius, Pisces.

The astrological planets are: Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn (add in Uranus, Neptune, Pluto if you do modern astrology).

Each of the planets rules one or two of the signs. E.g., the moon rules Cancer, the sun rules Leo, Mercury rules Gemini and Virgo, Venus rules Taurus and Libra, and so forth.

Signs don't rule anything. Planets rule signs, not vice-versa.

Your sun-sign is whichever sign the sun is in when you're born.

Does this make sense? Where are we mis-communicating?

To understand the natal chart in its entirety you're going to have to get rid of the thought that "you" are your Sun sign. The crux of your issue is that you are over-emphasizing the sun as "who you are", which isn't always the case. Although very important in both traditional and modern astrology for different reasons, the Sun is still apart of the schema of the planets and therefore follows the same rules as the other planets.

The Sun will always have significance to the cusp of Leo in any chart. This is the same with any other planet for it's domicile (meaning: the sign it rules)

You aren't your "zodiac" as the zodiac is the 12 signs that encircle the chart.

Your ideas gotten from "popular astrology" are clashing with ideas of the more in-depth astrology of the modern and traditional branches.

Thanks, I get that.

Why is the ruler of Leo - The SUN - by default connected to the sign under which you are born?

Yes, the Sun rules Leo and not the other way around. No misunderstanding here. I was intentionally trying to use the term Zodiac sign, which is commonly used to the sign under which we were born and avoiding the use of the term "Sun Sign".

What is the rationale for the Ruler of Leo to be connected to the ruler of the sign under which a person is born? By default. Or same question, different angle: Why is Leo ruled by a planet that is by default connected to the sign under which a person is born, but no other signs are automatically and by default connected to any rulers of a different sign.

I think this may be the mix-up, but I'm not sure.

Say you have Gemini on the second house cusp, and Mercury is in Pisces. That still makes Mercury the ruler of your second house because Mercury rules Gemini. Same as the sun ruling Leo on the 10th, even if the sun is in Scorpio in the first house.

The way it was explained to me is because Leo is during the hottest time of the year.

But ultimately it makes much more sense if you do not consider the sun sign to be the be-all-to-end-all of astrology.

Antigone said:

Thanks, I get that.

Why is the ruler of Leo - The SUN - by default connected to the sign under which you are born?

Yes, the Sun rules Leo and not the other way around. No misunderstanding here. I was intentionally trying to use the term Zodiac sign, which is commonly used to the sign under which we were born and avoiding the use of the term "Sun Sign".

What is the rationale for the Ruler of Leo to be connected to the ruler of the sign under which a person is born? By default. Or same question, different angle: Why is Leo ruled by a planet that is by default connected to the sign under which a person is born, but no other signs are automatically and by default connected to any rulers of a different sign.

Click to expand...

Every planet is connected by default to the sign it's in. Sometimes that's the sign it rules. More often than not, it isn't. If any planet, including the sun (for astrology purposes, the sun is a planet, and so is the moon--the definition of planet here is a bit different from the scientific one) is in a sign it does not rule, it has a connection to both (or all three) signs.

Modern and traditional astrology have somewhat different rationales for why which planet rules which sign(s). In modern, it simply means that planet vibes especially well with that sign. The sun is all about ego development. Its placement tells you what you need most for your own growth--that is, the growth of your core personality, over your lifetime.

Aries is the warrior and pioneer of the zodiac. An Aries sun needs to be challenged, to fight (not necessarily with fists--that could just as easily mean something like activism or competitive games or simply enjoying a good debate), and/or to start new things. The sun's house placement tells us something about the area of your life where you need this growth to take place. A tenth house Aries is likely to need to be highly visible (tenth house is the highest part of the chart), a leader, someone people know and look to, someone who leads in starting new things, captain of the team, that kind of thing. Probably, it is, or will be, extremely important to you to have a career that helps you grow in that pioneering and competitive way.

Leo is the sun's home (domicile, in astrological terms) because it is the sign of ultimate ego growth. Its message is essentially the same as the sun's. While all suns in all signs are personalities that need to grow, a Leo sun is a personality that really, really needs to grow. The sun message is amplified in Leo, but unlike other signs, which modify that growth message with a "here's how," Leo just says, "Grow! Be all you can be!" The modification of the Leo message depends on the house placement, probably more than all other sun signs.

I'm not as clear on the traditional rationale for sign rulership, although my understanding is that which planet vibes best with which sign plays a part. It also has something to do with the planet's distance from us and from the sun, using an earth-centered point of view (keep in mind, astrology was developed in a time when it was believed that all heavenly bodies revolve around the earth), compared with the sign's distance from Leo (sun's native sign) and Cancer (moon's native sign).

Sun and moon rule one sign each; Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, rule two. The remaining planets weren't discovered until relatively recently, so, while modern astrology gives them a place, traditional astrology, which developed without them, leaves them out.

In your case, your sun is in Aries and the tenth house, but it rules your second house. That gives your sun a particular say in second house matters--personal finances, personal values, security, self esteem, possessions, how you make money. It's kind of like your sun is an absentee landlord: the second house is the house it owns but doesn't live in; the tenth house is where it lives. If you have planets in your second house, they're the tenants. Just like the people living in a home have more of an effect on it day to day than an absent landlord does, your second house planets have a strong message in how those second house matters work for you--but just like a landlord can make decisions about a house they own, and changes in their situation may change things like how often and how timely repairs are made, what rent is charged, things like that, your sun also affects it.

If you don't have any second house planets, your second house is untenanted. So, for interpreting second house matters for you, we would look first to your sun. It adds an Aries/tenth house message to your second house.

In contrast, for someone with a Leo sun, their Leo house is an owner occupied home. If there are other planets there, too, they're like roommates, but the ruler has the most say. In that case, all matters involving that house are most strongly affected by the sun.

graay ghost said:

The way it was explained to me is because Leo is during the hottest time of the year.

Click to expand...

It's not the hottest time of year everywhere.

Signs are not about local seasons. They're about seasons of the earth--much more all encompassing than just the local climate.

Here is the traditional philosophy behind sign rulership.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/rulership.html

Osamenor said:

It's not the hottest time of year everywhere.

Signs are not about local seasons. They're about seasons of the earth--much more all encompassing than just the local climate.

Click to expand...

It's the hottest time of the year where they invented Astrology, so tell them, not me.

So Cancer and Leo aren't any more influential than any of the other signs; everyone has these two placements somewhere in their chart.

I know it might seem this way, the reason that other Suns besides Leo still have potential to be just as equal as any other Sun is because everyone has Leo in their chart.

Same with Cancer/The Moon.

Try to find a Leo Moon/Cancer Sun and see what you notice... A Cancer Moon/Leo Sun might have a super chart, sure. But, my point is they are just regular people also.

Antigone, based on what you've revealed about your Chart, you would do well to channel your Fire-sign energy into a career in art, a field in which you can express emotion cancer:Asc.) in a forceful way, and get paid for it. Sun-sign [IMO] is indicative of how you function best (apply your personal energy). Sun in Aries tends to highly identify with functionality, therefore identifying so strongly with the Sun-sign, it appears to dominate the entire Chart.

Dubyadude1986 said:

So Cancer and Leo aren't any more influential than any of the other signs; everyone has these two placements somewhere in their chart.

I know it might seem this way, the reason that other Suns besides Leo are still just as equal is because everyone has Leo in their chart.

Same with Cancer/The Moon.

Click to expand...

However, anything domiciled is extra influential for the chart's native. For people with Leo sun, ego growth is especially influential in their lives. For Cancer moon people, moon things--emotions, home, security, roots, family--are highly influential. That doesn't mean non-Leo suns and non-Cancer moons are not influential, because they are, just that their influence is amplified (for better or worse!) if they're in their own sign.

If a planet is not domiciled, it might be influential in some other way--it rules the ascendant, is placed on an angle, is part of a stellium, aspects the sun and/or moon, some such thing. Being domiciled just pumps it up some.

Wow, thanks for all the input, you guys are great! And thanks for the great links to the rulership information.

I'll explain my confusion a bit more, I hope you're with me.

"Sun
The Sun tells us of the actual core of a person, the inner self, of that which is of central concern. It also shows us the general vitality and the ability to assert oneself, it describes a general tone of being which colors everything else.
Sign equivalent: Leo" Source: Astro.com

Sign equivalent: Leo. Equivalent definition: Equal, identical, same.

This emphasizes the confusing part to me, and oftentimes when reading about planets, there is little distinction made when using the planet and the sign(s) ruled by the planet. If the Sun is equivalent to Leo, then following the thought logically, your natal Sun would have some "Leo" influence, which doesn't really make sense to me.

No other planet is connected to the Planet under which you are born by default. There are some limitations in regards to location, such as Mercury with up to 3 different signs, but the astrological Sun must always be in the sign under which we were born. And when you look at the way Rulers and Signs are oftentimes used interchangeably, it becomes confusing.

I am not worried about the actual importance of the natal Sun sign and its significance, I know this depends on the chart as a whole.

@gray ghost - The hottest time of the year actually makes sense, since astrology is ancient.

@David Starling - WOW! Just WOW. You literally just blew my mind - and that is not easy to do. If only you knew how right you are with your assessment. You have pretty much summarized a gigantic part of my only major life problem in 3 paragraphs, and this is insane! Astrological people always tell me that I should do something "nurturing" - Pisces - duh, but it's soooo not me. People in real life tell me to do something analytical, or teach, because as you can see, I need to understand everything in an obsessive compulsive way, pick things apart, and put them back together, until it makes 100% sense to me, but that's a hobby, not something I want to do professionally. I haven't checked my "Read my chart" post yet, but I would love, love, love, to talk with you more. I actually "need" to talk to you more.

You guys are really great. Thank you to all of you for taking your time to figure out my confusion, and all the great input. I hope I made sense.

Antigone said:

Wow, thanks for all the input, you guys are great! And thanks for the great links to the rulership information.

I'll explain my confusion a bit more, I hope you're with me.

"Sun
The Sun tells us of the actual core of a person, the inner self, of that which is of central concern. It also shows us the general vitality and the ability to assert oneself, it describes a general tone of being which colors everything else.
Sign equivalent: Leo" Source: Astro.com

Sign equivalent: Leo. Equivalent definition: Equal, identical, same.

Click to expand...

Equivalent does not mean identical. Identical is a synonym of equivalent: close, but not the exact same thing.

If I eat a veggie burger, I'm eating the vegetarian equivalent of a hamburger. That does not mean that what I'm eating is the exact same thing as a hamburger.

I have two friends who are named Raquel and Rachel, respectively. Raquel's name is the Spanish equivalent of Rachel's. Rachel's name is the English equivalent of Raquel's. But their names don't sound exactly alike. They are not the exact same name. Mutual friends don't think I mean Rachel if I mention Raquel, or vice versa. That confusion would potentially ensue if they were both named Rachel (or both named Raquel). If I called Raquel Rachel, she wouldn't like it because that's not her name. I couldn't get away with saying they're really the same thing, nor should I.

Sun and Leo work the same way. They carry the same meanings, but they are not exactly the same thing.