As an astrologer and student of the Law of One, I very much appreciated your idea! 
I liked the idea that a sign maybe energy, the planets consciousness and each house material experience.
The cardinal energy is also the seen as the "first one". For instance, when a planet is located in a cardinal house or sign, its energy is very strong and creative. When Uranus transits a cardinal sign there is much more wordly activity (such as in early 1930s, late 1960s, early 1990s, or it will, in early 2010s)
I have a few more details in www.astrotransits.blogspot.com
When Saturn transited my water houses, I had indeed mostly emotional experiences of learning, in air houses, mostly mental and sociable experiences, etc...
This is a very interesting point. How do you see the distinction between Sun located in Aries and in first house? For me, it looks similar, but it is a different energy. Sun in Aries is just an energy, like you said, while Sun in first house is Sun expressed through a self-defining material experience, like you said. There are differences. You could say it's like comparing apples with lemons.
But I see houses as just a conceptual invention of humans. Now I will go very deep.
There is maybe a way through each zodiac energy enters the Earth, and depending on a specific hour (time of a day), it enters with each sign making a specific angle. Square angles reflect a specific pattern of energy, trines another, as above as below, as in signs as in houses. So, each house is nothing more than the pattern of zodiac is aligned down here. It's just positional geometry. Why the ascendant is self, and the descendant is others, I dont know. Maybe an illusion, a concept? Try working with defining the sixth house as the third after fourth (so its about communication and short travel away from your house - fourth house), and so on.
In addition, It's very nice for instance, when you follow the Moon along sucessive months and its daily influence, when located over each sign. The Weather responds so accurately! The energy works independently of humans and apparently even human/animal consciousness.
It's just energy affecting water (clouds, fog), insolation, wind and temperature!
I like to follow Astrology in this way!
Here, I would politely disagree with you.
I see the Sun as a very important center of energies.
After all, it is the center of our Logos, Solar System.
Each planet maybe an archetype. Ra has said that each planet has in fact a kind of multidimensional collective and it's own identity. Maybe it is colored by the density, or the civilizations and beings living there.
I dont see them as desires, although they can incite desires in us. I would see them as catalysts maybe! Mars, for instance, is not war or motivation. It is a much more wide archetype, a seeker, a pusher, a confronter, a very focused beam of energy. It can of course cause war, but it can cause travel, lovemaking, adventure, sport... While Venus is calmer, more colorful, more subtle and refined. The planets do not seem a desire, but rather an archetype which brings catalyst, this is my feeling.
Furthermore, outer planets seem to have definitevely a mode of action more related to collective trends, maybe because the inner ones are more colored by the Self (closer to the Sun) and the outer ones away from it (more related to collective trends, the galaxy)
I look forward for your input!
It's a very insightful post!
And about bringing it with context with the Law of One?
Grateful, peace/light,
I liked the idea that a sign maybe energy, the planets consciousness and each house material experience.
- A few Esoteric astrologers have said (like Alice Bailey), that the energy first emerged from the archetype sign constelations, then was focused/ filtered in our solar system in each planet and directed towards our geometrical alignment in Earth (houses) and influencing our being through our mental, astral and physical bodies, through our chakras.
Quote:The earth universe is the bandwidth we experience through our senses.
The water universe is the bandwidth we experience as feelings or emotions.
The air universe is the bandwith of the mental plane (rational thought).
The fire universe is the bandwidth of insight and intuition.
Astrology is based upon 12 combinations of the four elements and three modes (cardinal, fixed, mutable). When I interpret a horoscope symbol, I always explain it in terms of the universe it occupies. For example, a water event will be an emotional experience, not a physical one.
The cardinal energy is also the seen as the "first one". For instance, when a planet is located in a cardinal house or sign, its energy is very strong and creative. When Uranus transits a cardinal sign there is much more wordly activity (such as in early 1930s, late 1960s, early 1990s, or it will, in early 2010s)
I have a few more details in www.astrotransits.blogspot.com
When Saturn transited my water houses, I had indeed mostly emotional experiences of learning, in air houses, mostly mental and sociable experiences, etc...
Quote:When I first began to study astrology, I found it difficult to understand the relationship between planets, signs and houses. Most text books interpret the Sun in the first house and the Sun in Aries as having the same meaning. Then I read The Inner Sky by Steven Forrest. He teaches that each planet/house/sign combination is the basic unit for interpretation. Once I learned to see it that way, interpretation became easy. I have had further confirmation by reading the Ra material. A photon is intelligence and energy functioning as a single unit.
This is a very interesting point. How do you see the distinction between Sun located in Aries and in first house? For me, it looks similar, but it is a different energy. Sun in Aries is just an energy, like you said, while Sun in first house is Sun expressed through a self-defining material experience, like you said. There are differences. You could say it's like comparing apples with lemons.
But I see houses as just a conceptual invention of humans. Now I will go very deep.
There is maybe a way through each zodiac energy enters the Earth, and depending on a specific hour (time of a day), it enters with each sign making a specific angle. Square angles reflect a specific pattern of energy, trines another, as above as below, as in signs as in houses. So, each house is nothing more than the pattern of zodiac is aligned down here. It's just positional geometry. Why the ascendant is self, and the descendant is others, I dont know. Maybe an illusion, a concept? Try working with defining the sixth house as the third after fourth (so its about communication and short travel away from your house - fourth house), and so on.
In addition, It's very nice for instance, when you follow the Moon along sucessive months and its daily influence, when located over each sign. The Weather responds so accurately! The energy works independently of humans and apparently even human/animal consciousness.
It's just energy affecting water (clouds, fog), insolation, wind and temperature!
I like to follow Astrology in this way!
Quote:The basic point is that we humans have common desires and our behavior is driven by the need to fulfill those desires. The planets represent those desires. A planet's house is the object of that desire. A planet's sign is the behavior (ebergy) used to fulfill that desire.
Here, I would politely disagree with you.
I see the Sun as a very important center of energies.
After all, it is the center of our Logos, Solar System.
Each planet maybe an archetype. Ra has said that each planet has in fact a kind of multidimensional collective and it's own identity. Maybe it is colored by the density, or the civilizations and beings living there.
I dont see them as desires, although they can incite desires in us. I would see them as catalysts maybe! Mars, for instance, is not war or motivation. It is a much more wide archetype, a seeker, a pusher, a confronter, a very focused beam of energy. It can of course cause war, but it can cause travel, lovemaking, adventure, sport... While Venus is calmer, more colorful, more subtle and refined. The planets do not seem a desire, but rather an archetype which brings catalyst, this is my feeling.
Furthermore, outer planets seem to have definitevely a mode of action more related to collective trends, maybe because the inner ones are more colored by the Self (closer to the Sun) and the outer ones away from it (more related to collective trends, the galaxy)
I look forward for your input!
It's a very insightful post!
And about bringing it with context with the Law of One?
Grateful, peace/light,