In the first two posts of this series we contrasted the general aspect doctrine with the Picatrix’s more specific principle of aspected planetary nature. In the third post, we examined the Moon’s aspects to benefic and malefic planets. With all of this background, we are now equipped to begin to examine the Moon’s aspects to the remaining planets. In this post, we examine the Moon’s aspects to the Sun/
The Moon’s Aspects to the Sun
Notably, our initial analysis of the Moon’s aspects in Part I neglected aspects to the Sun and aspects to Mercury. In this post, we turn to the Sun.
The principle of aspected planetary nature tells us in a nutshell that the Moon’s aspects to benefics are beneficial, and that the Moon’s aspects to malefics are harmful. So what about the Sun? Well, right off the bat we can note that the Moon’s aspects to the Sun are complicated to evaluate. Picatrix notes that even among the sources compiled, experts disagreed about which Moon-Sun aspects were most auspicious:
“The sages of Greece and Egypt, meanwhile, agree with what we have already said, that the conjunction of the Sun is the strongest [within one minute], but deny what we have said, that this quality of the conjunction is better; they assign the latter to the opposition between Moon and Sun, that is, when her light is complete.”
—Maslama al-Qurtubi, Picatrix, Book II, Chapter 3 (tr. Greer & Warnock)
Moreover, the descriptions of the qualities of Moon-Sun aspects is frustratingly vague. In Book II, Chapter 3, Picatrix describes the uses and applications of waxing and waning Moons. The text is notable for what gets left out:
“After the Moon separates from the Sun, until her sinister square, and thence until she reaches opposition, she will always be good and appropriate for buying and selling [etc.]… After she separates from opposition, passing by the dexter square and thence to her conjunction with the Sun, she will be good and appropriate for seeking loans that we owe [etc]…”
—Maslama al-Qurtubi, Picatrix, Book II, Chapter 3 (tr. Greer & Warnock)
Here is another place where close exegesis matters. On a surface level, the text seems to be saying that the waxing Moon is good and appropriate for buying and selling, and that the waning Moon is good and appropriate for seeking loans that we owe, etc. But if this is what Picatrix meant, why not simply say that? If it were simply a matter of waxing and waning, the text could read: “From when the Moon separates from the Sun until she separates from the opposition… and from when the Moon separates from opposition until she conjoins the Sun…”
Instead, the author uses very particular language. The phrases “until her sinister square” and “passing by the dexter square” seem to suggest that Moon-Sun squares are inauspicious and to be avoided. This would make sense, given the “moderate hatred” of the square aspect. Similar considerations could be drawn with the opposition, and since we know that combustion is one of the worst afflictions of the Moon, the same would apply to the applying and separating conjunctions to the Sun as well.
Further evidence for this position can be found in Book II, Chapter 12:
“The aspect of the Moon and the Sun by sextile or trine is good in all high works in which you seek treasure, great wealth, royal power, honor and victory.”
—Maslama al-Qurtubi, Picatrix, Book II, Chapter 12 (tr. Greer & Warnock)
Here again, the precise language is telling. It is in the very next paragraph, quoted in Part I of this post, that Picatrix states that the “trine, sextile, square, and opposition aspects of the Moon to Venus are appropriate to all effects.” We can infer, then, that the fact that Picatrix only mentions the sextile and trine aspects to the Sun as positive strongly implies that the square and opposition aspects of the Moon to the Sun are at best neutral and probably modestly harmful.
A similar quotation in Ficino’s Three Books on Life lauds the soft aspects while leaving out the hard aspects:
“[P]lanets fear conjunction with the Sun; they rejoice in his trine or sextile aspect.”
—Marsilio Ficino, Three Books on Life, Book III, Chapter X (tr. Kaske & Clark)
As with Picatrix, this quotation comes at the end of a long passage talking about specific aspects, and so the exclusion of the square and opposition aspects is meaningful and intentional.
We can thus add aspects to the Sun to our spectrum of aspects:
Further Complexities of Moon-Sun Aspects
The matter of how to evaluate aspects of the Moon to the Sun in astrological magic becomes slightly more complex when we bring in some context from slightly earlier in the same chapter. Just prior to the statement of the principle of aspected planetary nature in Picatrix Chapter 12, there are a few paragraphs enumerating various principles for how to construct scenarios that are auspicious for various purposes. These principles are generally of the form, “For X purpose [relevant to the powers of a given planet], Y configurations are positive.”
The section on the Sun reads as follows:
“In every working you do for kings, old men, and nobles, place the Moon in aspect to the Sun in his sign or exaltation, and in the midheaven; when this is done our petition will be fulfilled.”
—Maslama al-Qurtubi, Picatrix, Book II, Chapter 12 (tr. Greer & Warnock)
Again, the specific language is telling. Elsewhere in the same chapter, as we note, Picatrix carefully notes exactly which aspects are being considered. This passage therefore seems to imply that when the Sun is in Leo (his sign of domicile) or Aries (his sign of exaltation), any aspect—not just sextile or trine aspects—will be considered positive.
Symbolically, we can justify this by imagining the Sun as a sovereign to whom we must make a petition or request. A secure royal, happy in their power and in a time of peace and prosperity, will likely receive our petition with benevolence and magnanimity. By contrast, a troubled royal, jealously guarding their power and besieged by war, misfortune, or betrayal, will likely receive our petition with circumspection at best and hostility at worst.
Explication elsewhere in the text supports this view. In the section on planetary petitions, specifically the section on “How to speak with Saturn,” there are instructions about ensuring the essential and accidental dignity of a petitioned planet. The metaphor is striking:
“The most important point (of which you should take diligent care) is that you should see that the planet is in good condition and quality, and remote from infortunes, because when he is like this, he is like a man of good will and a lively heart and a great and ample mind, and if another person seeks something from him, he cannot find it in himself to deny the petitioner. When the same planet is retrograde in his course or cadent from the angles, he is like a man full of anger and ill will, who is most ready to deny a petition.”
—Maslama al-Qurtubi, Picatrix, Book III, Chapter 7 (Tr. Greer & Warnock)
Putting this in the context of Moon aspects to the Sun, we can surmise that when the Sun is essentially dignified (in Aries or Leo, and perhaps when dignified by triplicity), the Sun functions somewhat like a benefic, with any Moon-Sun aspect considered beneficial. When the Sun lacks essential dignity, however, the tradition seems to indicate that only Moon-Sun sextiles and trines are considered positive.
The conditional nature of Moon-Sun aspects gains further support from some text elaborating the piece about Moon-Sun sextiles and trines being positive in Book II, Chapter 12. Immediately following this statement, we find a short list of conditions that are not “good and strong for completing the [Solar talismanic] work,” namely, “when [the Moon] is in the fourth or seventh houses, nor when the Moon is waning or combust of the Sun.” Notably, the Moon in square aspect or opposition to the Sun are not among the factors listed, which implies that these aspects are not unconditionally bad. In fact, they are fine when the Sun’s condition is sufficiently good, as spelled out above.
All of these considerations combined builds a modest case for supposing that the nature of a Moon square Sun aspect hinges on certain essential and accidental dignities of the Sun, rather than the overarching nature of the planet as it does for Venus and Jupiter.
We can therefore elaborate our spectrum of aspects as follows:
As a speculative extension of the principles under consideration, we can consider the opposite conditions. When the Sun is essentially debilitated—that is, when the Sun is in the signs of Aquarius or Libra—or otherwise severely afflicted, the Sun likely functions somewhat more like a malefic planet. If this reasoning is correct, then we could infer that under such conditions, any aspect of the Moon to the Sun would be considered harmful—even Moon-Sun sextiles and trines.
This speculative addition allows for a further refinement of our spectrum of aspects as follows:
Although somewhat nuanced and complex, evaluation of Moon aspects to the Sun mostly derives from the considerations we explored in the previous post on Moon aspects to benefic and malefic planets. It is simply that in the case of the Sun, the Sun’s nature is more contextual than the nature of benefic and malefic planets. And so the nature of Moon-Sun aspects involves an evaluation of the Sun’s condition prior to rendering an assessment.
In Part V of this post series we turn to evaluating the Moon’s aspects to Mercury and the fixed stars.