I wonder, with all the differing signs, the differing house sytems, the varying aspect calculations, dicovery of new "planets", decanate division, asc+desc positions, solar return charts as well as Lunar ones, sidereal charts vs Tropical chart etc.
How does one discern/ keep abreast of what is true?
A wise drag queen once said that sometimes, we -as people- put so much attachment in the labeling of things and so little on how they feel. She said:
" Look at the tree, all it is to you is just a tree but have you ever familiarized yourself with the "feel" of what you call a "tree"? Do you even know the difference in feel between what you call a "tree" from a "bush"?
Indeed, it seems that words seek to minimalize or categorize things to a point that we cease to appreciate their beauty, their infiniteness and profound existence.
Perhaps this is the illusion where we find ourselves as people; Quickly identifying ourselves as our skin, our religion or even as signs of the zodiac that we miss the infinite splendor of our divinty, which can never be boxed. "
I found this statement profound and it got me thinking; As much as I like to read that I am Sag with moon in cancer and asc in Taurus etc... I found that upon reading EACH AND EVERY SINGLE SIGN OF THE ZODIAC there was a "piece of me" that I could identify with in each.
I am sometimes assertive and forthright like Aries
I cam be stubborn and possessive like Taurus
I can be witty and chatty like Gemini
I can be emotional and defensive like Cancer
The list goes on..
Are sun signs really an ilusion that serves to differentiate us from each other; so that we are able to label "Ariens" as "Strong and assertive" and "Pisceans" as "weak and passive"?
Nowhere have I seen this distinction between "good" and "bad" so blatant as it is on this site called:
librarising.com
The site editor is even bold enough to suggest that "masculine" signs are more "beautiful" and "pleasant" than "feminine" signs -who are seen as "bad" and "ugly".
The platform is open.....