My Theory. Discuss this....

hello i'm new to astrology, this is what i got:


cardinal sign: aries,cancer,libra,capricorn----tend to be selfless/helper person(light)

fixed sign: aquarius, leo,taurus,scorpio.====tend to be selfish/ego person(dark)

mutable sign:virgo,pisces,gemini,sagitarius--neutral

fire--choleric--leader
earth-melancholy-planner
air-sanguin-popular
water-phlegmatis-peace


-aries-fire
-leo-fire
-virgo-fire- not earth,bcs virgo good on speaking. and polar of pisces what is water


-capricorn-earth
-scorpio-earth,not water, bcs scopio loner and secretive that like melancholy. and energetic that water ussually lack.
-sagitarius--earth, not fire. the reason is just this is gemini opposite(that clearly is an air sign)

air
-cancer; bcs cancer is talkative and changeable(moody),innovative that like air sign and polar of capricorn.
-taurus; bcs well on talking and good charisma and polar of scorpio. why he is considered being stubborn? maybe bcs his fixed sign?
---or aquarius?

-gemini, that's clearly enough...that's why the opposite must be earth--sagitarius


water

-libra;not air sign, bcs more like peacemaker...and polar of aries
-aquarius...sometimes it's not like water sign bcs of it's ego character, maybe that's why it become eccentric?
--or taurus?
-pisces, that clearly enough.....the opposite must be fire



this is my opinion..
what is yours?
sorry for bad english...

 

I like your creative approach to western astrology, it's refreshing. And I like how you consider water and fire to be more opposite rather than fire and air, you're taking the element into more consideration. Interesting!

 

One of the problems in modern metaphysics in general (including astrology) is the belief that one's opinion should be perferred above experience.

Before modern psychological astrology, we had 2000 years of written instructions and experience and thousands of charts to show that those techniques worked. Plus, all of the signs and planets and fixed stars were delineated according to a certain logic and reason that were not haphazzard. Everything was there for a reason.

Modern astrologers tend to like to change things on the fly and keep adding planets and asteroids due to a lack of understanding of the fundamental rules of astrology. Somehow the logic seems to be that the more astrological points added, then more details will emerge. Instead you get a cosmic mush.

The reason why Scorpio is a water sign is because first of all it's feminine. Water is ALWAYS feminine. Second, the signs follow a certain progression and pattern. If you look at them in order you see a pattern emerge. Third, it is Mars' night sign. All night signs. This is traditionally Mars' preferred sign because it tempers Mars' wrath since it has an opposite nature (the same reason why Capricorn is Saturn's preferred sign).

Astrology isn't simply memorizing a bunch of Sun signs and elements. In fact the training I am going through right now forces you to be able to make a rough chart for any date without tables or computers - using only the knowledge of new and full moons and the Sun's entry into the signs for a particular year. The reason why you go through this kind of trouble is that you really learn how astrology works and you recognize cycles. Astrology is a complex system that seems to relegated to amature astrologers who happen to write books. If astrologers spent more time actually learning astrology as opposed to theorizing and changing things willy-nilly, you might actually learn something!

 

I have a cute little theory of my own that I think is fun; Not sure if its true, or if it really is an astrological law, but here's what it pertains to:

The symbols for each element are a triangle, but they vary.
Fire and Air are positive(masculine). Positive triangles point up, because fire burns upward, and air is associated with the sky.
Fire's triangle is a regular, upward pointing triangle.
Air's is the same, but with a line through it.

Earth and Water are negative(feminine). Negative triangles point down, because earth lies beneath our feet, and water is restricted to the ground by gravity.
Water's triangle is a regular upside down triangle.
Earth's is also pointing downward, but with a line through it, like Air.

Now the theory is, and I got thinking about this because one day I looked at the symbols, and wondered what the true symbolic meaning pertaining to personality could be behind the difference between the four triangles, is that the four elements each have a special link if you draw it out. (I'll try and upload, say, a drawing on paint perhaps, to show what I mean..) Here's the facts:

Earth and Fire are direct opposites.
Water and Air are direct opposites.
Water and Earth are negative feminine.
Fire and Air are positive masculine.

Now here comes the theory:
Earth and Air are logical elements.
Water and Fire are emotional elements.

This is what I think the line could possible represent in Earth and Air's triangle symbols... The line could be symbolic of the separation of logic from emotions, to keep a thought process dominated by facts and reasoning. This makes sense because the Air and Earth signs all seem to share an aspect of logic to them. The Air signs are idealist-logical and the Earth signs are practical-logical.

Because the line is absent in the triangle symbols for Fire and Water, this could show the flooding of logic and emotions into each other, representing the fact that while Fire and Water can also be logical, they are predominantly ruled by their emotions. Fire is emotionally expressive and powerful, while Water is emotionally nurturing and receptive.

Does this make sense?

 

Not to dismiss your experience or the methodical training process that you're going through, Enlil6, but your approach to astrology strikes me as being somewhat rigid. Although I actually agree that many modern astrological approaches are too speculative or theoretical, I don't think that strict adherence to technique provides an effective solution to the problem. You are correct that 2000 + years of experience offers some value, but you also have to remember that those same 2000 years offered an equal if not greater amount of dogma, superstition, and exploitation of the naive in the name of astrological knowledge.

My feeling is that astrologers have lost a sense of the fundamental origins of astrology. Astrology isn't founded in conceptualization, but in energy. Concepts are bound by our ability to grasp them cognitively and can't be experienced in a visceral, spontaneous way. They are pale reflections of phenomena that when experienced on deeper levels of our beings are awe-inspiring and mystical in the purest sense of the word. That's why any attempt to create an interpretation approach that prioritizes conceptualization over intuition is fundamentally flawed, simply because the energies represented by astrology actually exist. It would be like trying to enjoy the experience of eating an apple simply by hearing a description of an apple's taste, texture, and consistency.

In my opinion, the training that astrologers are truly in need of involves energetic attunement. We need astrologers that are more mystics than they are scientists, more poets than statisticians. Only then will we discover astrology's true nature.

Travis

 

Yes it is rigid.

I'm not sure what you are talking about here. Usually when I hear this argument, it is from people who haven't actually read and/or understood what traditional astrologers were doing. Read Bonatti (influential medieval astrologer) and we'll discuss again how much superstition was practiced in traditional astrology.

This exact idea is in traditional astrology - except they usually call it spirit or planetary spirits.

This is a common argument, and is a bit of a copout frankly. I think of traditional astrological delineation as creating a series of sentences until a composition is produced. Signs, houses, planets, aspects and fixed stars have specific meanings, and when combined created a delineation. If one understands what these meanings are, then delineation is quite simple actually. If you know astrology, you don't need intuition.

Remember that until the modern era, astrologers were also philosophers, magicians, alchemists, scholars, mathemeticians, and doctors. It was one part of a system of learning called the quadrivium. One of the great textbooks of the time as an astrological alegory called "The Marriage of Mercury and Philology" that was the core of all learning using astrological symbolism. This was duing the so-called dark ages.

In other words, until the modern era, astrologers were the great thinkers and scientists of the time. Today astrologers are supposed to be part psychic. The fact of the matter is that most astrologers today think they are part of an ancient art where in fact they are stuck in the Victorian era's vision of mysticism (ala Blavatsky) which has nothing to do with anything mystical before the 18th century except by name.

 

Energy isn't rigid. It's malleable and incorporeal. Your concession here invalidates the majority of your remaining post, because "planetary spirits" can't be communed with using "delineations". Not only should intuition be employed when interpretating a chart, directly relating with the energetic emanations of the planet or sign in question is dependent upon it.

Sorry to be blunt, but you're very naive indeed if you don't think that astrology suffered from the same plight as organized religion did and still does to a great degree, i.e. manipulating people with an idea of salvation or pacifying their discontent with false knowledge. This has nothing to do with any particular astrologer, but with cultural norms that had been established for centuries and that we're now just beginning to overcome.

I'm afraid the only copout being made here is thinking that being a proficient astrologer has something to do with being able to make a rough chart using knowledge of new moons, which is something that can be learned by anyone with a middle-of-the-road IQ. The real challenge is attaining the degree of ego transcendence required for the establishment of legitimate (non-conceptual) energetic attunements.

I'm sorry you had such a reactionary and adversarial response to my post. As I tried to make clear initially, I wasn't trying to detract from or ridicule your methodological approach, only to point out that ultimately, authentic astrology can't be conceptualized.


Travis

 

sss

 

before i learn astrology, i learn about psychology and personality.
and in my childhood i like playing game. in the game of tactic ogre there is 4 element. ---all symbol can be conceived only with 2 triangle.
and L(light),N(neutral),C(chaos). that's total of 12(4*3)


it impressed me about divide human into 4 element.
choleric,melancholy,sanguin,and phlegmatism. like in the game about fire,air,earth,water.

and after read the zodiac sign. and it was describe human character. i thought it could divide into 4 element too.--like psychology--
and 3 character(L,N,C).
and i was impressed after read about cardinal sign , fixed sign, and mutable sign. then i thought my theory is right about divide 12 zod sign into 4element and 3 character.
if you learn about personality you can so sure that :
fire is choleric.-optimist,extrovert,power.
earth is melancholy-pessimist, introvert,power.
air is sanguin.-optimist,extrover,social.
water is phlegmatism-pessimist,introver,social.

compare with it's characteristic.

the biggest incompatibility is scorpio is water and taurus is earth???

 

i think the scorpio must be earth.

bcs-
1. it's feminin if what you describe feminin is about introvert
2. it's energetic that melancholy had--power.
3. scorpio more like being melancholy to me. not phlegmatism(water).
bcs it rather career more than social.

 

I'm being entirely consistent. Astrology is part of the Hermetic sciences. One of the classic Aabic books on traditional magic said "Magic is spirit on spirit, astrology is body on spirit, and alchemy is body on body." Astrology is the link for all metaphysical operations and in addition to doing birth charts and horary I use if for magic as well.

The reason why astrology works is because it's predictable. Every sign and planet has specific qualities and cycles, and the various combinations will have predicable effects.

You talk of astrology having "real effects". I agree. However I think you are projecting what passes as astrology today onto what astrology was 500 years ago. Mosern astrology is psychological and traditional is predictive. In my mind while it's nice to pay someone to tell you about past lives and intuitive flashes about personality, what people really want to know is if they are getting married, having babies, how long they will live, and so on. Traditional provides this. In addition horary astrology will give you fast accurate answers to most questions. I have seen this personally done over and over again and intuition is never used. In fact intuition gets in the way of traditional technique.

Intuition IS good for certain other divinatory practices such as tarot. In traditional astrology, if you want to find out how many kids someone will have, you always check the same things every time, which of course have very unique outcomes for each person, but still the technique stays the same. This is why you rarely see traditional astrologers argue about technique.

Again I'm not sure what you're referring to. If you actually read the astrological books from the time you'll know what I'm talking about. The only major departure is that we know the planets don't run in circular orbits. Most astrologers knew the world was round. In fact this was discovered during the classical period.

This has nothing to do with the church. The church wanted astrology (except medical astrology) outlawed. Some people got away with it. The Arabs (i.e. Muslim world) on the other hand took it to a new level, and were very sophisticated.

I mentioned Bonatti as an example. If you want to nitpick, then I can provide you with a complete list, but I decided not to since I'm already writing a long post. If you want a bibliography I can provide you with one.

The ability to make rough charts based on patters is an important skill. It's sort of like learning anatomy in art school. The reason why this is done is so that you can learn what the cycles of the planets are. For example you will know that the Moon has a 19 year cycle and that Jupiter moves in just under a sign a year. It's also handy if you for some reason need to pull out some information quickly and don't have a computer.

I am not saying you need to be a genius to do this. It's simply memorization. So are most skills, and I doubt you will tell a doctor that they "don't have to be a genius to be a doctor". In fact memorizing New Moons is quite easy. However most astrologers today, traditional and modern, are so disconnected to what is happening in the sky, and few people really understand what part of the sky we are talking about when we are looking at a chart. Do you understand the difference between terrestial longitude and latitude versus celestial latitude and longitude? How are they different than altitude and azimuth? How are those different than right ascenscion and declination? What does your chart use and why? Why do we use the astrological signs that we use? This is all part of astrology.

I could very easily say that modern astrology is in need of ego transcendance because modern astrologers seem to believe the stars will bend to the will of us lowly humans. At least traditional astrology aligns itself to the will of the divine and the stars - not the other way around.

I know you aren't. In fact I am not criticizing you as a person since I don't even know you. You asked for opinions, and I find the logic of changing astrological truths because one "feels" it isn't right is flawed. Who are we to say they are wrong?

Isn't that rigid thinking?

Edit: I apologize. When I was writing this, for some reason I was thinking you were the OP. So any reference to that disregard.

 

I kinda thing you're taking astrology a bit too seriously man..

Or at least maybe for this forum, anyway. I'm sure there's probably a forum out there somewhere about people who like the kind of astrology you do, but in the mean time, your views only seem to confuse people on this forum, because they tend to be irrelevant to what the rest of us are talking about...

I'm not being sharp with you or anything, I mean everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, but you shouldn't put people down because you feel "astrology has strayed from what it really is" I think this is more a type of place for astrology to be discussed in a more lighthearted manner.. yknow?

I mean, what harm can come from playing with the rules a bit? :]

 

they're just exchanging point of views, i have to say it's a hell of a good read

 

Yeah nothing personal! People should be able to do this without being nasty. I have a good friend who's a psychic, and we spar all the time. We're still friends.

As far as me taking this too seriously, why shouldn't I? This is a multi-level discipline and I think it benefits from deep learning. I don't take this lightly, and I can state my position.

 

The inconsistency I was attempting to point out was that you simultaneously acknowledged the existence of energy (or planetary spirits as you called it) as well as the fact that your approach to astrology is indeed rigid. From the perspective of energetically-oriented astrology, this is a disparity that is beyond reconciliation, because a rigid mentality is in direct opposition to one's capacity to align themselves with astrological energy.

It seems to me that you have confined astrological interpretation the what might be considered a horizontal axis that doesn't acknowledge the existence of a vertical axis. In this case, the veritical axis is the continuum of consciousness that every human being experiences as their own consciousness ascends towards self-realization. Surely you must be aware that every sign can manifest at different levels of consciousness, and that the level they are manifesting at directly effects the behavior that they will exhibit. A Virgo (for example) that is deeply entrenched in an ego-paradigm will very likely be anal-retentive, obsessed with order, overly critical, and probably in possession of a martyr complex. An enlightened Virgo on the other hand would be altruistic in the purest sense of the word, brilliant at devising systems and procedures, and the embodiment or purity and good-will. How do you intend to apply your "predictable" methodologies to something as ambiguous as the spectrum of consciousness? The answer is simple: You can't. An approach that's dependent on technique is inequipped to address it. The flexibility and perceptual subtlety inherent in an intuitive understanding of astrology is required.

Choosing to answer questions like these invalidates an individual's free will. Astrology can illuminate our tendencies and the driving motivations behind our psyches, and can therefore indicate patterns that are unfolding as a result of our past decisions as well as the transits that will either reinforce or stifle them. However, no one is condemned to a certain course of action simply because a horary chart suggests that it will occur. Free will allows us to disrupt patterns, change "destinies", and defy fate, and is transcendent of any predictive system such as tarot and astrology. When a person asks such fear-based questions as "will I ever get married?", choosing to answer them in any form simply enables them to continue to maintain a victimization mentality that is no doubt preventing them from realizing their full potential. This is also a perfect example of how astrology was and still is being applied in a dysfunctional form and is sabotaging people on a spiritual level.

All of this is great stuff, and I agree that it should indeed be an aspect of astrological training. However, it should not in any way take precedence over the cultivation of intuition and energetic attunement.

Let me clarify: I'm not in any way defending modern astrology, and for me this isn't a debate about modern vs. traditional astrology. For me, this is about what contitutes an authentic approach to astrology, and in my opinion, both modern and traditional astrologers are guilty of deviating from that approach.

Travis

 

.

 

(sorry, had some posting issues )

 

How are they at odds? Firstly you can't deny that the celestials are predictible. I'm not sure how you quantify the amount one is aligned to a vague concept such as "energy". How do you know if I'm more or less aligned than you are? Ironically if you were familiar with Hermeticism, you will find exactly the idea of aligning yourself to the stars, and astrology is heavily based on Hermetic principles. If one understands the character of Mars in the 5th degree of Capricorn for instance, isn't that aligning yourself to that energy? In fact the whole idea of traditional astrology is centered on the idea of aligning yourself to the stars which act as the messengers of the divine.

Ahhh here is a fundmental difference. Traditional astrology is not based on character analysis. Period. I have books going back to the 1st century, and there is little on character analysis. Generally there is a small section on this which combines calculating several things based on which planets are more powerful, the condition of Mercury, the ascendant and several other things. Sun signs aren't used at all.

The reason why predictions can't be made in modern astrology is because predictive techniques were steadily stripped away. One of the fathers of modern astrology, Alan Leo, explicitly stated that he thought traditional techniques were too complicated and left them out. Another big reason was influence from Blavatsky who believed all divination was "barbaric". Many of the late 19th and early 20th century astrologers were Theosophists, and astrology hasn't recovered since. Essentially modern astrology is a "dumbed down" version.

One of the major consequences of the lack of technique is the need to add more and more planets and asteroids until you get a cosmic mush. I could argue I can get more detail from 12 signs, 7 planets, and several fixed stars than most astrologers can get from all the asteroids (Robert Hand calls them floating gravel) in the solar system.

I figured you would have brought free will up earlier. What most people think of as free will is actually spontaneity. In reality few people actually practice it.

A birth chart represents the person's destiny. Transits and primary directions, and other things represent actual actions that happen (the ancients call these "accidents"). It is possible to deviate from the chart. All the ancient writers state this. The purpose of any divination including astrology is either avoid the bad stuff you can avoid or prepare for the things you can't, or to position yourself to maximize the good stuff. If there was no way to change an outcome, then there is little point to find out ahead of time.

In fact, in traditional Hermetics, the reason why you should learn astrology, alchemy, philosophy, mathematics, magic, is to acquire wisdom so that one isn't even subject to fate. Most people live their lives according to a pattern - even if they don't know it. Part of astrology (and metaphysics) is to recognize this pattern and overcome it.

Modern astrology is just as fatalistic as traditional - maybe more so. If someone is told they have mommy issues, or they have their heads in the clouds, or are aggressive, then they can resign to that just as easily as if the stars say they aren't getting married.

Horary (and all astrology really) works off the idea that all things are influenced by the sky. The most common horary questions are things like finding lost items or pets, the outcome of a job interview, and things like that. Yes it's very effective. I'm still learning this myself, but I've had them done for me and it's quite remarkable. I know of a few astrologers who do nothing but horary, and if they were wrong most of the time, they would be out of business. I know one man who's done something like 5000 readings.

When I first started with astrology, I thought the same thing. I started doing charts for people, and while most people thought I was great, and I got nothing but compliments, I knew that I was capable of better results. I started noticing that most of the time when I used intuition combined with technique I was wrong, even if the client thought I was right. I observed in their life that I had made mistakes in my readings. I couldn't with good conscience give shoddy readings and charge for them, so I stopped before my name got out more.

Before I stopped entirely, I experimented with doing only traditional technique-based charts (though simplified), and I was shocked at the results. My first minor success was doing a phone reading for someone I never met and from the chart noticed they had a scar on their face. I asked him and he confirmed he had plastic surgery due to a dog attack. My second success was a chart where I saw the client's father was an alcoholic and had been in jail, but was a powerful person in his town, so didn't serve long. I asked the client and she said he was a powerful lawyer and murdered a man. He only spent a short time in jail and was an alcoholic. These are people I never met or saw.

I found I was on to something, so I stopped entirely and am now spending my time refining and researching. I estimate I'll be doing readings in about a year or year and a half. I refuse to bullshit or guess my way through a reading, and will not charge unless I give that person the best reading possible. Plus, I think people really want the kind of readings offered in traditional astrology but don't realize it can be done.

How do you know what you are talking about is authentic? Please state your sources and argument.

 

Same thing happened to me. Yeah I have butter-fingers.

 

I think this statement is probably representative of the crux of our entire disagreement. Clearly you are very well-versed in astrological history and the distinctions between the different branches etc. I doubt I even have 25% of your knowledge with regard to these more scholarly subjects, as you may have noticed. As a result, I'm not aware of any particular sources that could be used to justify my position, although I have a sneaking suspicion that there probably aren't any (except possibly if one were to explore the origins of Vedic/sidereal astrology, which always struck me as being inherently more spiritually-oriented).

I'm basing my entire argument on my personal experiences, which have arisen from the fact that in addition to my interest in astrology, I've also spent the last 7 years of my life pursuing a very intensive spiritual path, which has amongst other things encompassed the establishment of my energetic attunement. As a result of this attunement (which on a moment-to-moment basis relates more to chakras and the energy distribution within my body), I've been able to make the revelatory discovery that one can directly interact with astrological energies. And when I say directly interact, I mean that the mere contemplation of a Gemini can be like being engulfed in a whirlwind -- literally. When you experience astrology on a level that is that palpable and spontaneous, I can guarantee that you will never relate to it in the same way again. I personally believe that a "master astrologer" (and don't get me wrong, I'm not professing to be one) could actually create an individual's chart just by being in the same room with them and consciously "honing in" on every individual placement.

I realize this all sounds pretty "out there", but as a result of my experiences I sincerely believe that the next major evolutionary step forward for astrology will be directly related to this type of energetic attunement.

As far as your own practice goes, it's nice to know that you don't perscribe to a fatalistic belief system, and I think your willingness to abandon your initial approach in favor of a more logically-founded one despite having received positive feedback (which as I'm sure we both know could have been based on a "self-fulfilling prophecy" mentality) is admirable. However, I would also encourage you to keep in mind that just as you discovered that relying on "flashes" of insight interspersed with conceptualization was inferior to your current approach, there may be another development in your understanding of astrology still to come.

Travis