My Theory. Discuss this....

battle of the astrology geeks haha

 

Vedic is based on Hellenistic astrology which is loosely based on Mesopotamian. It's funny that Westerners always thing of Hindus as "more spiritual" when in reality Vedic astrology is almost identical to traditional astrology except for the sidereral part. They aren't completely interchangeable, but a Vedic astrologer would be at home with a medieval Western astrologer and would recognize most things. The tie here is Hellenistic astrology. When the Western Roman Empire fell, the Muslims began translating Classical texts and continued developing them. What I am doing is based on Latin translations of books from Arabic astrologers since most of the Arab texts haven't been translated. Vedic astrology is basically using the same sources, and there was a lot of exchange of knowledge between the Muslims and Indians. I don't do Vedic for the simple reason that I'm not Hindu and would pretty much have to learn a new vocabulary.

I'm not anti intuition. I've been studying metaphysics in general for about 18 years now. Intuition is great for tarot and I am an initiated priest in Santeria and am able to do the shell readings there which is pretty intuition -heavy. Astrology is a different animal though.

I think what you are talking about is sort of like what would be approached in astrological magic. Basically speaking I figure out what planet rules the result for which I'm looking for. For example if I want a general good-luck talisman, I would use Jupiter. I then do an electional chart for a time when Jupiter is very powerful. Currently Jupiter is in detriment in Scorpio, so I really can't do a Jupiter ritual until about December or so. Anyway I find that time and make a talisman at that exact time and do a ritual. I did this last year when Jupiter was in Sagittarius. I picked a time when Jupiter was in the 1st house and not afflicted by Saturn or Mars and when the Moon is also strong. Then I have a talisman I can carry with me.

It's no more out there than me doing rituals to planets, but have we really evolved as a species in the last 500 years? Does evolution mean advancement? Personally I don't believe in societal evolution, since frankly I don't think we are any more or less civilized than we were 2000 years ago.

Actually I do subscribe to fate which I wrote about in the previous post. My goal as a metaphysician is to overcome fate. I could get deeper into the traditional explanation of this, but I'm afraid people's eyes are crossing as it is.

Insight is a bit different than intuition - at least in the way most people see it. Today, many people in many branches of metaphysics believe that intuition is better than technique. In the end this amounts to people making guesses.

Insight happens as a result of deep understanding of technique PLUS experience. An example would be a classically trained musician having years of training in music theory and practice which then allows them to convert dead printed notes into something with feeling.

In astrology, if I wanted to look at someone's career, and the ruler of the 10th house (career) is Saturn, traditionally this can mean a farmer, gravedigger, mortician, landlord, and several other things. Based on other elements on the chart I can modify some of this, I can narrow down what this is. In fact this exact configuration came up with a female who was an accountant. I was able to figure out she would deal with real-estate, which unknown to me, she had applied as an accountant at a real-estate firm and was thinking of going into real-estate anyway. She didn't tell me this before hand. Saturn being her ruler of career is absolutely not accounting (Mercury), and she could not be a dancer which she liked to do (Venus), or be a business executive (Jupiter), which she wasn't terribly interested in anyway.

That is the kind of insight that is needed and used in astrology. You use a lot of common sense based on knowledge of technique. Again I am not using any kind of psychic powers at all. In most cases I'll never even meet my clients. In many cases I'll probably not even talk to them, so I'm not doing any kind of profiling. In horary I don't even know the person's birth date, and the only reason why I know a name is because it's by e-mail.

Now if you're talking about being a mystic, then that's when I put on my magician's hat (metaphorically ya jerks! I don't have a pointy hat!).

 

Yes it is indeed. But unless you can report having experiences of direct communion with astrological energy during which cognition has been transcended, then it's an animal you're not fully familiar with.

No, that's not what I'm talking about.

I'm sorry, but that's quite frankly ridiculous. Even in the past 50 years the collective consciousness has made leaps and bounds evolutionarily. We're finally beginning to realize that our true nature's can't be defined by external conditions. It is the first time in human history that the status quo encompasses an awareness of the innate value of all life, as represented by advancements in almost every major sociological field (civil rights, sexual rights, spiritual rights etc. etc.).

If you believe in overcoming fate, then you don't subscribe to it...that's all I meant.

Your fixation on semantics here has unfortunately caused you to miss the point, which was that if you have experienced growth as an astrologer in the past, you should allow for the possibility of continued growth in the future. Unless of course you're trying to claim that you currently represent the pinnacle of all astrological knowledge.

Travis

 

Isn't that what I was talking about regarding astrological magic? Really I'm quite familiar with mainstream astrology since that is where I've started, and also familiar with traditional. I think you have this idea that astrologers were ignorant savages before the modern age. This is discussed below a bit though.

Fair enough

Civil rights is indeed a good thing, but this is certainly not a worldwide phenomena, and I don't know how you can quantify that we are more enlightened now than say a 1000 years ago (number off the top of my head). For all the talk of ego trancendence that new age people like to bring up time and time again, it's a rather egotistic claim to say we are more enlightened now than before. First of all there is no way to REALLY know if people are more enlightened now. What does enlightenment even mean? How can you prove that human-kind was less enlightened formally? I'm expecting something more substantial than intuition, guesses, and anecdotes. One of the most enlightened movements I would argue would be the Neo-Platonists which is a hight that metaphysicians have been trying to emulate for 2000 years. Watered-down western versions of eastern mysticism doesn't cut for me.

It's funny Hermeticism actually has many of the elements that New Agers like in a language that many of us are already familiar with, yet when one uses western terms, then it's suddenly ignorant. Would it be better if I said "dharma" instead?

Why is this a contradiction? How can one overcome fate it isn't a condition to overcome?

Words are what we use to communicate, and yes I like to know the meanings of the words I use.

 

I don't know, is it? It seems to me that you're being a bit elusive with regard to your actual experiences.

No, I honestly don't have that idea...I'm not sure where you're getting this from. If anything I have greater respect for classical astrology than I do for modern, simply because so much modern astrology has been diluted by pseudo-psychological interpretations.

It's certainly more pervasive now than at any other time in history.

Ultimately, there's no way we can REALLY know anything (at least conceptually). Speaking in more practical terms however, why not just trust the judgment of our psychics and clairvoyants, the majority of whom have reached a definite concensus on the matter: we're more evolved now.

Transcendence of the subject-object paradigm that characterizes ego-identification.

In that case, I'd suggest relying solely on eastern mysticism. Here's another of my posts concerning legitimate sources of eastern wisdom:
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4072670&postcount=37

There's no contradiction. My point was that you misunderstood my original statement: You don't subscribe to a belief in fate as a result of the fact that your intention is to transcend it. Again, it's a matter of semantics.

Fine, and now that the meanings of the words have been established, you can feel free to address the sentence that those words comprised.

Travis

 

Please back to topic you two.
don't argue on personal experience.

 

If you're interested in an assessment of your theory, then I'd have to agree with Enlil6. Astrology isn't intended to be restructured on the the basis of your own personal experience. This is actually perfectly consistent with my own energetic approach as well, because if you were to develop the capacity to align yourself with astrological energies you would discover that both the triplicities (elements) and quadriplicities (modes of energy) conform to a very symmetrical and balanced pattern that acts as a sort of microcosm for those same qualities throughout the universe. Energetic attunement will leave absolutely no question in your mind that Taurus is indeed a fixed earth sign, Gemini a mutable air sign, etc. etc.

Another glaring deficiency in your approach (I hope you wanted honest feedback ) is that you have assigned positive and negative qualities to the quadriplicities. No sign can manifest in an exclusively positive, negative, or neutral way. Every sign has the capacity to manifest at any level of consciousness, and the implication that any given sign is inherently more selfless or egotistical than any other is a fundamental misinterpretation of astrology.

I'd recommend learning more about the geometric aspects of astrology so that you can begin to recognize the many patterns inherent in its configuration. Otherwise, you'll have a difficult time applying astrological concepts in a way that will yield accurate results.

Travis