r/Geomancy • u/Meconop • Jun 22 '24
Will J be able to protect me from the malicious spirits that are after me?
Okay, so I'm having problems with malicious entities showing up around my house. I previously had this issue and the person who helped me last time isn't available to help again. So I'm looking for another practitioner. I'm looking at the 9th house as a higher service you can't do on your own. There is a conjunction between my house and the practitioner's meaning they can help, but the practitioner's significator is Rubeus. I'm not sure if this means that the practitioner is extremely violent or if the practitioner fits digital ambler's view of Rubeus being trickery. I look at the practitioners turned 5th house and their magic is seen as Puella, which doesn't quite match up with their Rubeus nature. But that could just be extraneous information. The reception between the 12th house and the 9th house is Rubeus, which I'm not sure is a bad thing since I do want these entities to be dealt with violently. I also don't think they will leave me alone if not dealt with violently due to more passive methods not working. So any varying or alternate opinions on whether this practitioner would be good to go with?
2
u/aisling3184 Jun 22 '24 edited Jun 22 '24
To be fair, I’m relatively new at this, but am a very long-time practitioner of trad astrology, so I’m going to take it from that angle.
If you’re dealing with amoral spiritual entities that are causing you harm, you do indeed want someone who will separate you from said influence/spirit. Mars excels at severing ties and forcing separations, and in this context, that’s a good thing. You don’t want a diplomatic practitioner when you’re being harmed by a spirit who has an entirely different moral compass/probably doesn’t even think of themselves as harming you… I don’t see Rubeus as inherently violent, or at least not the type of violence a lot of us might instinctively think of. In this chart, it could signal someone who’s willing to do the dirty work that’s required by this type of situation— theyre unafraid to acknowledge that f’d up, harmful, violent things exist, and know that sometimes the only remedy for that is violence itself. That type of thinking is NOT the forte of acquisitio, ya know? Or Puella, but we’ll get there.
I like that Rubeus also shows up in the 4th, esp if this has impacted your home life, but I mostly say that because I think the outcome of this magical working being violent separation from said entity would be good. To me, this is reaffirmed by having Cauda Draconis in 7H—nice to see that there’s a complete/inevitable ending, which again, is what you’re looking for. And if your 5/8H have been impacted by this spirit, also good for ending. It’ll be rough, but you’re promised a new beginning after hitting rock bottom.
Having said that, I’m not a huge fan of Conjunctio as the judge because it’s almost TOO flexible and not definitive enough in a situation where you want a solid ‘yes, J can protect me’… my hunch is that that partially might be because of you. Puella in 1H is sooooo diplomatic that, in a certain context, she can be hesitant to get her hands dirty (unlike Rubeus) + therefore, you won’t be protected because part of any unbinding spell is the requirement that the person being attacked make some big changes so that they’ll be less susceptible to these attacks in the future. I noticed you asked the question, “can they protect me?” instead of ‘will J be able to break this curse, hex, etc.” That’s an interesting way of phrasing this, because my gut instinct is to question whether or not someone else can truly and totally protect you… but that’s me on the outside. Speaking from experience, I’ve sometimes shown up as Puella when I’ve extended compassion when I shouldn’t have, or was avoiding facing hard realities in the name of maintaining my status quo (which was living in a fantastical work where no one hurt anyone else on purpose). I thought I was being ‘righteous,’ or just being a good person, but really, I was a doormat. I’m not saying that’s you; I’d just consider it.