Download Traditional and Modern Astrology Dialog

Traditional and Modern Astrology:
Getting the Dialogue Going
Charlie Obert
Page 2
Copyright 2015 Charles Obert. All rights reserved.
http://studentofastrology.com
Please email me at, [email protected] with comments, questions
or feedback. Thank you.
Page 3
Introduction
The astrology community today has a world-wide scope, and we have the
opportunity to be exposed to more different ways of practicing astrology than
ever before.
This is partly a product of the extensive multi-cultural
communication we have, thanks largely to the Internet and other forms of
electronic communication. I think this is also related to the nature of astrology
itself - it is a symbolic language, and it lends itself to more than one
interpretation by its very nature.
It is now increasingly common to have people, like myself, who have been
exposed to different ways of practicing astrology, and think that there are good
things to be found in each of the different ways. When you have a multi-school
astrology background like that, it can feel unsettling and uncharitable having
other astrologers insist that their way of doing it is Right while criticizing other
schools of practice.
Partly from habit, and partly from communication problems due to different
meanings attached to astrology language, there is sometimes misunderstanding
between different schools of astrology, and sometimes the schools unfairly judge
and dismiss each other.
I think that the astrology community would be better served by recognizing that
there can be very different approaches to doing astrology which can each be valid
and have their strong points. We have a lot to gain by respecting and listening to
each other, and learning how other people view their practice. Also, we stand a
chance to gain new and unexpected friends that way.
Purpose
The purpose of this little book is to start to bridge some of the splits I see in the
astrology community, especially between those practicing different kinds of
modern astrology, and those practicing traditional astrology.
Here is what I wish to accomplish.
First, I want to explore a way of thinking about astrology that makes sense of the
fact that multiple systems are valid and work. There is no one single true
astrology system; astrology is a multi-faceted and weird animal that can express
in different working systems, some of which have very different starting premises
and interpretation rules.
Second - the different styles of astrology ask very different questions of a chart, so
they come up with different answers, and I think those answers can complement
each other. I want to explore the questions and perspective of mainstream
modern astrology, of traditional astrology, and of the very popular modern school
called evolutionary astrology, to examine the questions they ask and the
Page 4
assumptions they make, and look at how this colors the techniques they use. I
wish to sympathize with the point of view of each school, allowing each to speak
on its own terms, to define what it is trying to accomplish.
Third - I am convinced that part of the misunderstanding between traditional and
some different modern schools is that they are using some of the same astrology
terms, but they mean very different things by them. Part of the communication
problem is just a language barrier. I want to look at some of those differences in
language use to encourage sympathy for what each side is trying to do. Similarly,
evolutionary astrology has its own distinctive terminology, and I think this can
cause misunderstanding from astrologers who are not familiar with that school.
Fourth - some of the arguments between traditional and modern astrology in
terms of technique and vocabulary arise because they are not clearly
differentiating two very different activities - the activity of chart analysis, and the
activity of chart presentation to the subject. I want to talk about the very different
kinds of skills and techniques that are used in each of those phases.
And finally - I am convinced that the different approaches to doing astrology are
also complementary, and that having different perspectives, asking different
questions of a chart, can give us additional useful information, and help us
become aware of the limitations and blind spots of our favored school or style.
Just as we are increasingly becoming a multi-cultural world community, I think
we are moving towards becoming a multi-school, complementary astrology
community, where it is increasingly common for astrologers to be comfortable
practicing in more than one system.
I think that we traditional astrologers, we modern astrologers, we evolutionary
astrologers have a lot to learn from each other. Yes, I can and do identify with
each of these schools and can and do study and work with each of them. I think
there are good things to each of those systems, and I would not want to limit
myself to any one of them.
As part of the larger astrology community, I think there is a need to break down
some of the remaining misunderstanding between the schools, build more
mutual respect and sympathy, and get more of a dialog going.
I want to help further that dialog.
Page 5
Asking Different Questions
Different Systems that Work
I want to start this chapter by presenting experiences I have had, where differing
systems of looking at a chart each produced valid readings and insights. I then
want to spend some time examining why it is that different, contradictory
systems can each be valid and work.
1. I saw a presentation by the traditional astrologer Estelle Daniels on horary, and
the example charts that she presented used the Koch house system. At the end of
the presentation we took one of the charts and re-cast it using Whole Sign
houses. The house placements and rulerships changed, but the chart as a whole
gave the same final response. In fact, the two charts each picked out different
details that applied to the situation. They complemented each other.
2. At a seminar on horary astrology presented by Deb Houlding, she described an
incident where Rob Hand was in the audience. She presented the chart using
Regiomontanus houses, a system often favored by astrologers who look to
William Lilly as their main source of authority. Rob Hand took the same chart
and re-cast it with Whole Sign houses, and again, he came up with the same basic
answer. In this case, note that Deb Houlding uses a system of minor dignities or
rulerships that goes back to Ptolemy, and Rob Hand uses a different system of
dignities that goes back to Dorotheus. Their house systems varied, their systems
of rulership attribution varied, and both systems worked and gave the same basic
answer.
3. There was an instance in my own practice where I drew up and analyzed the
chart of a person I know quite well. Drawn up with Whole Sign houses, the chart
emphasized that she was a professional nurse. Drawn up with Placidus houses,
the chart emphasized her strong devotion to her children, friends and family.
These are both very prominent parts of this person's life, so in this case neither
chart reading was quite complete without the other. The two complemented and
brought out different aspects of her life.
Note that I examine this chart in detail in a journal post on my site,
http://studentofastrology.com/2014/08/a-multi-map-reality/ , and in a chapter
in my book on traditional astrology.
In these examples, the different systems were very close in a lot of ways, and had
just technical differences of detail - Koch, Placidus or Regiomontanus vs Whole
Sign Houses, or differences in assigning minor dignities in the example with Deb
Houlding and Rob Hand. The different systems came up with the same basic
answer, obviously referring to the same person or situation, and in some cases
the different systems added complementary details.
Page 6
In the next two examples the differences between the astrology systems are very
pronounced, and include differences in technique, in philosophy, and in basic
viewpoint.
4. A good friend of mine came to the traditional astrology study group that I have
been hosting, and had her chart read using all traditional techniques. We used
whole sign houses and only the classical seven planets, stopping at Saturn and
not including the three modern outer planets. I talked with her afterwards and
she said that the reading was accurate and did give her some new perspective on
her life. She also mentioned that she had once had her chart read by the
evolutionary astrologer Mark Jones, and his reading brought up some of the
same main points that our traditional reading had focused on. The evolutionary
astrology system uses Porphyry houses and relies very heavily on the three outer
planets, Pluto, Uranus and Neptune. Traditional and evolutionary astrology have
very different starting points, and different methods of chart delineation.
5. In my own personal experience, I originally read and experienced my own
natal chart as a modern psychological astrologer, using Placidus houses and the
modern planets. After that, I then switched for several years to doing traditional
astrology, using Whole Sign houses and omitting the outer planets. Both systems
gave valid readings, but they each emphasized different aspects of my life. On top
of those two perspectives, I recently had a chance to have my chart read by an
evolutionary astrologer friend of mine. That reading was very accurate and
insightful, and it pinpointed some central values and directions of my overall life
in a way that neither mainstream modern or traditional astrology had picked up
on. Again, three very different systems, three valid and overlapping readings,
each giving complementary information.
How can this be?
How can multiple, very different ways of astrology each work? And, in some
cases, how can these different systems come up with overlapping answers despite
the differences in philosophy and technique?
Part of the apparent problem here is that we are used to assuming that there
must be a single correct way of doing things. There is an unexamined
assumption that, for astrology to be valid, it must be true in the same sense that
a physical science is true. There must be a single "correct" house system, or set of
rulerships, or set of meanings for the planets, and so on.
Astrology doesn't seem to work that way, and many modern astrologers implicitly
assume that different systems can work, even if that is not explicitly stated.
Not all questions have a single answer.
Page 7
Convergent and Divergent Questions
The occult writer John Michael Greer has a very fine blog on the topics of
Druidry, Magic and Occult Philosophy, called The Well of Galabes. In a post
earlier this year (http://galabes.blogspot.com/2015/05/conjuring-in-house-ofmirrors.html) he discusses a concept from the book, Guide to the Perplexed, by E
F Schumacher, about different kinds or classes of questions which he describes as
convergent or divergent.
Science deals with convergent questions, meaning they have one single answer let go of a stone you are holding in your hand and it predictably drops to the
ground, in a way that can be measured.
However, there is another class called divergent questions, where a single starting
question can have multiple usable answers, depending on the perspective of the
person asking it. For instance, the question, what is the best place in town to have
dinner tonight?, will have different answers depending on the person asking,
their tastes, what they had for lunch, what their budget was like, and so on.
Greer makes this very important observation:
Divergent problems are by and large problems of value, while convergent
problems are problems of fact. Put another way, convergent questions ask
about the properties of perceiving objects, while divergent questions relate
to the properties of perceiving subjects. Thus the convergent problem asks,
“what is the world?” The divergent problem asks, “what should I do about
it?”
Questions of value. Questions related to the perceiving subject. Questions of best
course of action.
In other words, the kinds of questions that are asked in astrology.
Causal and Symbolic Order
Another way of approaching this question, is to consider different kinds of order,
different ways of putting things together.
Causal order, cause and effect order, is the kind of connection that our modern
science is built on. Strike a billiard ball with a stick, and the ball will move in a
predictable direction that can be calculated if you knew all the input variables speed of the stick, angle of the contact, topography of the surface the ball rolls on,
and so on. Do A, and B is the result. It is predictable and repeatable.
Symbolic order, by contrast, is a connection having to do with meaning or
significance. To use a vivid and extreme example, if you were in the middle of a
wedding, and right when the couple said their vows there was a clap of thunder,
Page 8
this might have definite significance to the couple, possibly viewing it as a sign of
a turbulent or thunderous marriage. That is very different than saying that the
thunderclap causes strife in the marriage. They are connected, but not causally.
Our symbolic event here, the thunderclap, has a particular significance, and may
mean something very different in a different setting. If you were in a a situation
where lack of rain was a problem, then a thunderclap could symbolize
deliverance, relief from the drought.
Even in our wedding example, the thunderclap might be viewed as an omen of
trouble by the couple, and as a good sign by a relative who disapproved of the
marriage, and viewed the thunderclap as a sign that it would be a troubled and
brief marriage. Same sign, same situation, different significance to different
participants.
Convergent questions are causal. Divergent questions, by contrast, are symbolic.
They depend on context, and on a significance or meaning given by an observer
or participant.
Jung was pointing to one form of symbolic order with his principle of
synchronicity, an acausal connecting principle.
Astrology and Symbol Systems
It is important to realize that astrology is a symbol system. Hence, by definition,
it is divergent - the symbols of astrology cannot be exhausted by any one meaning
or interpretation.
This explains the phenomenon examined above of different systems of astrology
intepretation each coming up with valid answers. It appears that the different
systems are all derived from, or pointing to, some underlying symbolic reality
that can correlate with human experience in a multitude of ways.
It is also important to realize that the symbols of astrology can have meanings at
different levels - there is a psychological level, a level of correspondence to
external events and factual detail, an biological level, a level of spirituality and
meaning, and so on. Each are valid, each are a different focus, and no single one
of them exhausts the meaning of the symbols of astrology.
I think of the different sustems of astrology as each being like a different and
unique set of lenses. The author Robert Anton Wilson uses the metaphor of
reality tunnels, which makes the point that each lens or tunnel defines a
particular view of reality by its focus. For each of the different astrology systems
some information comes into focus, and other material is left out or
unemphasized simply because it is not within the focus of that particular lens or
viewpoint.
Page 9
My Own Model
I think it will be useful here for me to share my own personal perspective on this
topic.
I think the Universe is alive, that it is intelligent and patterned, and that it wishes
to communicate with us. Astrology is one of very many symbol systems that
Universe can use to convey messages to us - Qabalah is another, as is Tarot, and
all those symbol systems can be inter-related.
Staying with that basic idea of the Universe wanting to communicate with us, it is
my observation that, at the time of an astrology reading, the intelligent powers of
the Universe are hip and aware enough to use the particular symbol system and
point of view of the astrologer who is reading, to give the client or subject the
reading they need at that point in time.
When a person sits down with an astrologer for a reading, I do not think that the
Universe first checks to make sure the astrologer is using the correct house
system or system of attributions before it allows the reading to take place. The
reading takes the shape of the vessel which is provided.
Astrology happens in the context of the reading; it does not exist as an abstract
entity separate from that context. Astrology exists as it happens, as it is embodied
in a perceptual event.
I highly recommend the book, The Moment of Astrology: Origins in Divination
by Geoffrey Cornelius, which examines this issue of the validity of astrology in
great and profound detail. I think that is one of the most important books on
astrology ever written, and it has profoundly influenced my own point of view as I
am presenting it here.
To sum up, given that Universe wishes to communicate with us, just what gets
through is very much shaped by our lens, our reality tunnel, our perceptual
system.
Or, to take another metaphor that I will be using in this little book - each of the
schools of astrology asks a different class of questions of the chart, and the
answers that are perceived match the shape of the questions.
Three Astrology Schools, Three Different Perspectives
In the following chapters of the book I want to look at 3 major perspectives, 3 of
the most popular ways of doing astrology that are all quite popular today.
There is mainstream modern astrology, sometimes referred to as humanistic or
psychological astrology.
Page 10
There is traditional astrology, sometimes called classical astrology, that looks
back to earlier models for its practice. Some modern astrologers refer to this as
event-oriented astrology. While I think the term is somewhat misleading it does
point to a focus on measurable external events.
And finally, there is evolutionary astrology, which I view as a specialized offshoot
or descendant of mainstream modern astrology.
There are of course other schools and approaches, but I will use these three as
representative examples to illustrate different points of view.
With each of the systems I want to examine the following.
- the questions they ask.
- the lenses they use, the assumptions they make.
- how this affects their methods and interpretive techniques.
- what kinds of answers they come up with.
- the kinds of things they include, and the kinds of things they leave out.
In all of these I am going to attempt to describe and present each of the schools in
their own terms, using their own values and their own rules. While I do have my
own preferences and opinions about each of these schools, I wish each allow each
of them to speak on their own terms.
The reader will be able to get a sense of what they resonate to, where they find an
affinity and where they see a mismatch between a system and their own chosen
values. This should help you become more aware of what kind of values and
questions you assume in practicing your chosen system. Also, hopefully, the
reader will gain more of an understanding and respect for each of the systems as
trying to accomplish different things.
I am attempting to evaulate each system for what it is trying to do, and not for
failing at doing something it is not attempting. I want to evaluate each on their
own terms.
Hopefully the reader will be able to get a sense of each kind of astrology speaking
to a different kind of audience, a different kind of need, and suiting different
kinds of astrology practitioners, or possibly the same person at different phases
in their growth and career as astrologer. Or, the different systems can each be
useful as showing different facets of meaning in the same chart.
(Note: I am aware that this list is not exhaustive or complete. There are many
other schools of astrology active today, including Symmetrical or Uranian
Page 11
astrology, and Vedic astrology, also known as Jyotish. There is also a scientific
or research slant to some modern astrology, and there are different spiritual
approaches to astrology, some of which trace their influence back to Alice
Bailey's esoteric astrology. I choose to focus here on three of the most prevalent
popular approaches to astrology to make the point of complementary
techniques and focus. )
Page 12
Modern Humanistic Astrology
I am starting with mainstream modern astrology since this is the most popular
form practiced today, and since most people come to the study of modern
astrology first. I want to start by briefly examining the roots and history of
modern astrology, and look at the kind of worldview and values that it embodies.
Astrology as it has been practiced in the twentieth century up through today is
very largely the invention of two men, Alan Leo and Dane Rudhyar.
Alan Leo, who was a member of the Theosophical Society in the early 20th
century, is responsible for the major shift in focus of astrology from describing
events and situations to describe character. Leo coined the phrase, "character
determines destiny", and he is also the inventor of the modern psychologically
descriptive horoscope interpretation. Modern astrology's heavy emphasis on the
signs, and on the importance of the Sun sign, also go back to Leo.
Through his affiliation with the Theosophical Society, Leo is also responsible for
introducing some of the framework and terminology of East Asian philosophy
and religion into western astrology. Today is it commonplace for astrologers to
talk of karma, spiritual development and reincarnation, all of which traces back
to Leo and Theosophy. Much of the terminology and value system of Theosophy
forms a background of value assumptions in modern astrology.
Following Alan Leo, Dane Rudhyar, who was also a theosophist, coined the term
humanistic astrology, and he is responsible for the shift in emphasis from looking
at a chart as a description of events and circumstances, or a static description of
character, to viewing it as a blueprint for the unfolding of the potential of a
human life. Rudhyar's perspective introduced a dimension of direction and of
purpose.
Later in the mid twentieth century, important psychological astrologers like Liz
Greene, Stephen Arroyo and Howard Sasportas gave astrology more of a
distinctly psychological and Jungian slant. After their influence it has become so
common to look at the the planets in the charts as being 'the part of you that does
x', that it is easy to forget that astrology was once viewed in a very different way.
The basically psychological model, where the dimensions of the chart are all
things going on inside of you, is completely ubiquitous.
It is important to recognize that modern astrology is also very much a product of
the early to mid-20th century, which was a time of great economic and cultural
expansion in the west, a general period of progress and optimism. It is influenced
by the assumed cultural belief in Progress, where by definition the new is better
and an improvement on the older, a belief that things are getting better as we
keep moving towards a new, improved future. Notice how often the word New is
used in a positive sense in modern astrology, and how different techniques try to
position themselves as the next step forward.
Page 13
Modern astrology also inherited the 20th century cultural slant towards positive
thinking, emphasizing the power of the mind to focus on positive outcomes and
intents, with a very strong sense of the power of the mind, and a strong emphasis
on free will and the power of choice. For most people growing up in the West in
the mid to late 20th century, the belief in progress, in free will and choice, in the
power of thinking and the human mind to create change, are part of the cultural
air that we breathe, and are so much a part of our thinking that we rarely notice
them. Again, this perspective became ubiquitous during a period of strong
economic growth and expansion, so the general experience of many people
supported such positive assumptions.
Modern astrology also consciously views itself as a reaction against an older,
fatalistic, "event-oriented" astrology that views the human being as powerless
against outside forces. With some modern astrologers, notably Rudhyar and his
followers, there is also an assumption of the individual human being being in a
stance over against a hostile outer reality, so it tends to focus on the individual
and not to dwell on external circumstances.
The Questions It Asks
Given that background, we can examine the approach that modern humanistic
astrology takes, the kinds of questions it asks, the lens it uses.
First, it is primarily psychological, and views the chart as a map of the character
traits of the subject. The chart is all inside the mind, and maps out different parts
of the mind. The planets are all inside you, they are parts of you.
The natal chart is viewed as a map of potential to be developed, and it is common
to look at how the parts of your chart can be used by you. In this view there is a
reaction against the chart as being in any way fated or destined. To use a modern
astrology phrase, it is descriptive and not prescriptive. The chart does not say
what will happen to you, but it gives you the material that you are free to develop
as you will. There is a very strong emphasis on free will and the power of choice.
It is important to realize the implication that, if your life is yours to do with as
you will, then whatever happens to you is your own responsibility. If everything
in the chart can potentially be used in a positive way, then if events turn out
unfavorably this is traceable back to your own choice.
This perspective gives modern humanistic astrology a strongly positive slant. It
makes a point of focusing on what is positive and favorable inthe chart, and it is
looking for best way to interpret what would be considered unfavorable or
difficult aspects.
As a product of 20th century western culture, it assumes the modern emphasis on
progress, that what is new is better than what is old, and that we are continually
Page 14
moving forward and improving. A side effect of this is that it does not have
particular respect or value for the past, for the tradition from which it springs. It
sometimes defines itself as what is new in contrast to or over against what is old.
By definition what is newer is better. There is thus a built in tension or bias
against traditional astrology which very much looks to the past for its source of
authority.
The Methods It Uses
Many of the characteristic interpretive methods and techniques of modern
astrology are traceable back to Alan Leo, who invented the modern "mail order"
canned horoscope, in which pre-written interpretive sections could be assembled
together. This is the origin of what we call the "cookbook" approach to chart
intepretation. This reached its apotheosis in books like Linda Goodman's Sun
Signs - which, by way, is a very good read and has a lot of valid astrological
interpretation in it. Granted that it is an oversimplification, the influence of that
cookbook approach on modern astrology is very strong, and that is where most
people get their start on astrology.
Modern astrology heavily emphasizes what are called the natural significations of
the planets and signs. The Sun is your real self, the moon is your emotional life,
Saturn is your work ethic or where you feel blocked, and so on.
Modern astrology also heavily emphasizes the signs that the planets are in, not as
a weighing of positive and negative dignities as in traditional astrology, but as
largely describing how the planet in that sign will express. In modern astrology it
is commonplace to take the Sun sign as definitive, so you would say that so-andso "is" a Pisces. Signs become more important, houses and dignities become
much less important.
As we mentioned earlier, modern astrology tends to talk about the planets as
psychological abstractions or character traits - the Moon is your emotional life,
Saturn is your fears or your work ethic, and so on. As part of that, there can be a
tendency to take a kind of reductionist approach to the meaning and effect of the
planets, where they become "only" psychological.
Modern astrology is very concerned that material be presented in a positive way
to the client. This is sometimes taken to the point that only positive material is
read from the chart, and negative aspects are either rephrased as positive or
glossed over.
Answers It Comes Up With
The interpretive meaning that modern astrology gives a chart follows from the
nature of the questions it asks.
Page 15
Above all, the natal chart describes YOU - it is internal, inside of you, and it talks
about who you are, what you are like. This is "your" chart, you own it, you can
take it where you will.
Following from this, modern astrology talks about the planets and configurations
of the chart as parts of you to be developed.
Modern astrology strongly emphasizes CHOICE - the chart is yours to do what
you will - so the planets are interpreted like psychological qualities or faculties Saturn is the part that represents your work ethic or where you need to be
disciplined, Jupiter represents the part of you where you want to expand or
where you get lucky, and so on.
Thus, modern astrology is good and strong where you are dealing with situations
where you have choices to make, potentials to be developed, where you are
dealing with understanding what is going on inside you. In correct context it can
be empowering, and can encourage self-awareness and taking responsibility for
your life.
Page 16
Traditional Astrology
Note: for further information on the history and practice of traditional astrology
please see my book, Introduction to Traditional Natal Astrology.
I want to define here what I mean by the term traditional astrology.
Traditional astrology as it is practiced today is a conscious act of researching and
attempting to recover the tools and techniques of astrology as it had been
practiced in earlier Western history.
Traditional astrology as it was originally practiced has its roots in the Hellenistic
era, and it was passed down, through Persian and Arabic culture, through to the
Medieval era, where some of the old texts began to be translated into Latin. There
is a recognizable thread of tradition all the way from the Hellenistic era through
to the early Renaissance and the period of astrologers like William Lilly in
England. After the Renaissance and the Scientific Revolution, with its shift in
worldview, traditional astrology fell into decline, and much of the living tradition
was lost.
Modern astrology as formed by men like Alan Leo is very much a twentieth
century invention. While there are some recognizable aspects of traditional
astrology that have been brought forward, other parts of the practice were lost,
and were replaced by newly created techniques. Modern astrology is a break from
the tradition in many ways.
Throughout this description, keep in mind that traditional astrology as practiced
today looks to the past to recover parts of the practice that have been lost. This is
in stark contrast to modern astrology which very much looks towards the future.
This is a profound difference in values that complicates the dialog between
traditional and modern astrology.
The roots of the modern traditional astrology revival go back to work of horary
astrologers like Olivia Barclay and Barbara Watters, who helped to rediscover
and popularize the work of William Lilly, who is best known for his work in
horary astrology. Consequently much of the most detailed work in traditional
astrology today is in the area of horary astrology, which is concerned with giving
specific answers to specific questions.
J Lee Lehman has done a lot to recover some aspects of what she calls classical
astrology, especially in her work on recovering the traditional approach to
essential dignities, and her work continues to be influential.
In the late 20th century and early 21st century we have the ground-breaking work
of Project Hindsight and the "Rob Trinity" - Rob Hand, Robert Schmidt, Robert
Zoller - who translated many older texts into english for the first time, and who
Page 17
did work to rediscover and test old techniques. During this same time frame there
is also the extensive translation work of James H. Holden.
Today we have the work of people like Ben Dykes (Medieval astrologer and
translator), Chris Brennan and Demetra George (Hellenistic), and Chris Warnock
(Renaissance), Rob Hand and Joseph Crane (Hellenistic), and Deb Houlding
(Renaissance Horary), all of whom are continuing to make the recovered
techniques of traditional astrology living, useful and powerful interpretive tools
available to us in today's world.
As we said, traditional astrology now consciously looks to the past for its tools
and techniques, and for the source of its authority. It judges techniques partly by
their age, and by whether or not they contradict the older system. Older is
considered closer to the root, more authoritative and hence better.
Along with specific astrological techniques, traditional astrology today also
includes a stream of revival of some of the western philosophical context of
earlier astrology. Unlike modern astrology, rather than looking to Theosophy and
Eastern Asia for its religious and philosophical context, there is a renewal of
interest in the western philosophical systems like stoicism, neoplatonism, and
aristotelian philosophy. Many traditional astrologers today also look to their
roots in the western magical and occult tradition, and it is not uncommon for
traditional astrologers to also be practicing occultists.
Questions It Asks
At its root, traditional astrology is very much oriented to evaluating good and ill
fortune, positive and negative signs, rather than the modern emphasis on
character analysis and potential.
Traditional astrology heavily focuses on evaluating the condition of planets, and
many of the categories of traditional astrology such as sect, dignity /debility,
benefic /malefic, are aimed at evaluating how positive or negative the effect of a
planet will be. The elements of the chart are being weighed in a balance.
Traditional astrology focuses on external verifiable conditions and events - so, for
a traditional astrologer, a planet in the 7th house is not how you relate to others,
it is your spouse, or your partner, or your enemy. The chart is not inside your
head, it describes your physical situation, your environment, the events that
happen to you. There is a psychological dimension to traditional astrology, but it
is very much within the larger context of external conditions, and it is not
emphasized anywhere near as much as in modern astrology.
I want to correct a popular misconception here. This does not mean that
traditional astrology is focused on predicting specfic events or outcomes. Even if
you go back to the original source texts it is very clearly stated that what is
predicted is general areas or trends, and not specific events. So, much of the
Page 18
modern criticism of what it calls "event-oriented astrology" is based on a
misunderstanding.
Traditional astrology is very good at weighing up different courses of action, any
place you are weighing positives and negatives in a specific area the tools of
traditional astrology can be very useful. Even much of the focus of horary is as
much about evaluating a system for the best course of action as it is about
describing a specific situation or outcome.
So, traditional astrology is very much focused on looking at the life in its larger
external context. In contrast to modern astrology, in traditional the planets and
the chart are not just inside you, part of your psyche. They are larger than you
and represent all the circumstances in your life.
Also, by definition, I again want to emphasize that traditional astrology looks to
the past tradition for its source of authority and method. Old is better, and the
closer to the source of the tradition the more weight is given to it. This is very
much the reverse of modern astrology which values progress, views new as better
than old, and weighs modern innovation higher than traditional authority. So
there is a built-in source of tension between traditional and modern in terms of
where they look for authority.
Methods It Uses
The methods of traditional astrology tend to be evaluative, rather than being
blending. For instance, if you look at the Sun in Pisces, rather than trying to
blend the flavor of the Sun expressing in a Pisces sort of way, you would evaluate
what kind of condition the Sun is in when in the sign Pisces - does it have dignity,
it is helped, is it hindered.
The evaluative methods of traditional astrology include dignity and debility,
benefic and malefic, positive and negative conditions. In the older texts these can
be presented in terms of extremes, with some conditions be labeled flat out good
and others flat out evil. The source texts of traditional astrology can be painted in
terms of extremes - black/white, positive/negative, good/evil.
There is a heavy emphasis on accurate chart analysis, and modern traditional
astrology does not always emphasize how material can be presented, though
again, even some of the traditional texts speak of sharing the judgement of the
chart in a way that is gentle and helpful to the subject. (We will discuss this point
further in the section on analysis vs presentation.) It can emphasize the
judgement of the chart while not focusing on the needs of the subject.
There is also a distinct difference in traditional astrology in how the meanings of
the signs, planets and houses are interpreted and inter-related. The assumed
modern technique of the 12 letter alphabet, where planet equals sign equals
house, is really a modern invention.
Page 19
In traditional western astrology the planets, the houses, and the signs are each
distinct systems and have different sets of meanings. Viewing them as distinct
you find new areas of meaning where they do not overlap. For a traditional
astrologer the First House does not have a necessary connection to Aries or to
Mars.
If you are a modern astrologer, consider how easy it is to think of the sign Aries as
"naturally" being connected with the First House, and how hard it is to
completely separate the meanings of Aries and the First House in your mind. It is
so much a part of the working alphabet of modern astrology that it is hard for
many astrologers to conceive otherwise. Even after a three year period in which I
attempted to practice only traditional astrology, it is still very hard for me to
separate the house and sign meanings in my mind.
Answers It Comes Up With
When looking at a chart, the answers that traditional astrology comes up with
flow naturally out of its techniques and its chosen focus.
Traditional astrology deals with good and ill fortune, positive and negative
situations and characteristics. It has marvelous evaluative tools.
It can be very good at timing positive and negative times for actions. Traditional
astrology has a very strong set of tools for what is called electional astrology,
choosing a time for an event where the astrological configuration is most
favorable.
Traditional astrology is also very good at tying the chart to concrete verifiable
events and circumstances of your life. At its best it can be realistic, grounded,
verifiable and practical.
It is not as strong at going into psychological depth as is modern astrology. That
is not its focus.
Along with its focus on the life in external context, traditional astrology does not
heavily emphasize freedom of will, or choice, or use of thinking or the mind to
produce change, and that is in stark contrast to the modern, positive thinking,
heavily emphasized free will approach.
This does not mean that traditional astrologers are all strictly fate-based, bt it
does mean that, in general, there is a higher element of fate in their perspective,
and the sense of freedom of the will is often more restricted or constrained than
in modern astrology.
Page 20
Evolutionary Astrology
I am including the school of evolutionary astrology in my survey here because it is
very popular and influential among many astrologers today. It also has its own
distinct viewpoint and vocabulary, and that can create some problems of
misunderstanding with other approaches to astrology.
The historical root of evolutionary astrology goes back to theosophy, and to Dane
Rudhyar, as does mainstream modern astrology. I think of evolutionary
astrology as a specific subset of modern astrology.
The founding work of evolutionary astrology is Jeffrey Wolf Green's book, Pluto:
The Evolutionary Journey of the Soul. That is the source book I will use to
describe evolutionary astrology in this section.
Jeff Green acknowledges the influence of Rudhyar in his sytem.
While Jeff Green's work is the root work of evolutionary astrology, not all people
who call themselves evolutionary astrologers practice exactly the same system.
In a discussion of evolutionary astrology is important to take into account the
work of Steven Forrest, who is one of the most popular and influential
astrologers practicing today. While Steven Forrest and Jeffrey Wolf Green have
written two books together (Measuring the Night: Evolutionary Astrology and
the Keys to the Soul, volumes 1 and 2), their approaches are not quite identical,
and there are differences in emphasis and technique. I think it is fair to say that
their core values and approach are the same, and both embrace the term
evolutionary astrology.
Questions It Asks
Evolutionary astrology is concerned with overall life purpose and context.
It is focused on asking questions about purpose - Why am I here? What is the
purpose of my life? What should I be doing? What direction should I be moving
in order to further my Soul's evolution? I think that is part of the reason for the
popularity of evolutionary astrology, that it addresses deep questions of spiritual
meaning. In some ways it can fill a spiritual void or lack of purpose in our
modern western world.
While the context of traditional astrology is the larger external world, and the
context of modern humanistic astrology is human psychology, the context of
evolutionary astrology is a multiple lifetime frame of reference, where the current
situation is understood as it relates to that larger series of multiple lifetimes.
Evolutionary astrology is not particularly predictive, it is much more internally or
spiritually focused. Evolutionary astrology is concerned primarily with the inner
Page 21
state of the Soul rather than the outer world, and outer circumstances are
interpreted and given meaning as they fit within that inner journey.
Thus evolutionary astrology does have a context, but it is more individual,
spiritual, multiple lifetime, rather than collective or in terms of outer context.
External life circumstances and events are viewed in the context of the Soul's
evolution rather than the other way around.
Like modern astrology, evolutionary astrology does not highly value traditional
methods. Evolutionary astrology pushes some of the tendencies of modern
astrology further in that the source of authority for evolutionary astrology is
within, the divine intuition, speaking to you through your inner experience.
It is characteristic of evolutionary astrology to say that, if you use the system, it
will prove itself to you. It is self-validating by experience.
The founder of evolutionary astrology, Jeffrey Wolf Green, relates that he had
read very few astrology books when he formed evolutionary astrology, and that
the entire system came to him in a dream given to him by his guru Sri Yukteswar.
I think it is fair to say that Jeff Green and many of the practitioners of
evolutionary astrology view the system as divinely inspired. So, evolutionary
astrology places a very heavy emphasis on intuition, divine inner teaching and
inspiration, and internal validation of the truths of astrology. This is mirrored in
their methods of preparation and reading, and in the criteria they use to validate
techniques.
The system of evolutionary astrology does have its own rigorous system,
methodology and training, so that intuition by itself by itself would not be
sufficient to make you a good evolutionary astrology. However, I think it is fair to
say that evolutionary astrology does emphasize individual intuition and
judgement very heavily.
Also, I think it is important to emphasize that evolutionary astrology does not
claim to have a monopoly on the truth. Part of their system is the explicit
recognition that there are many different paths, many different forms of the
ultimate truth, and that any system that claims to have a monopoly on that truth
is mistaken and narrow.
Like modern astrology, evolutionary astrology emphasizes personal responsibility
and power of choice, and often presents itself as focused on positive
interpretations and outcomes. However, with its focus on past life effects on the
current life, it can be focused on negative patterns or traumas from previous lives
that serve as sources of suffering and obstacles in the present life.
I don't think this attitude is quite the same as modern astrology's emphasis on
positive thinking. Using its own terminology, evolutionary astrology tries to
Page 22
interpret events and situations in terms of how they can further the evolutionary
intent of the Soul in this life.
To paraphrase that in non-EA terminology, one could say that events and
circumstances can be viewed and reacted to in terms of how they could best add
quality, meaning or value to ones life.
Methods It Uses
Evolutionary astrology uses a very focused, tightly defined and narrow set of
interpretive principles. There is a specifically defined series of points to examine
when interpreting a chart - the position of Pluto and the point directly opposite
Pluto, the Lunar Nodes and their rulers, and aspects to those points. The main
elements of astrology, the signs, planets and houses, are viewed as 12 archetypes
that are interpreted as phases in a process of evolutionary growth.
These methods are designed to give a multi-life reincarnational context to the
meaning of life. The purpose of evolutionary astrology is to point to the purpose a
person is here, why they have the gifts, challenges and problems they face, and
the direction they should move for maximum meaning - what evolutionary
astrology would call the evolutionary intent of the Soul.
All other features of the chart are viewed within the context provided by that
focus on evolutionary intent.
With its emphasis on an evolutionary journey it views signs, houses and planets
together as a growth and evolutionary sequence that indicates what stage in the
evolutionary process a person is at a given point in time. So, the meaning
assigned to the planets, signs and houses can be quite narrow and focused
compared to other ways of doing astrology. The planets, signs and houses are
viewed primarily as expressions of phases within an evolutionary process.
Done correctly, evolutionary astrology is respectful of the current needs, values
and desires of the subject, since what is appropriate for a person very much
depends upon what stage they are at in their growth process. There is a very
strong emphasis on determining a person's current state and accepting them
where they are in their life process completely without judgement. The reading is
tailored to the person rather than the other way around.
Answers It Comes Up With
The intepretive techniques of evolutionary astrology can be framed in terms of
previous life issues, or previous traumas, so not everything it points to is
verifiable. Since evolutionary astrology uses a multi-life process as its context, it
makes sense for it to look for the roots of the current life situations in past lives.
Page 23
As we said, because this past life material is not necessarily physically verifiable
does not mean it does not have meaning or is not important.
The interpretive past life metaphors of evolutionary astrology do not need to be
factually verifiable in order to ring true, or to give meaning or significance to a
person's life. There is a kind of a Truth that a person can recognize as making
sense of their life's purpose and meaning, and when evolutionary astrology is
done right it can have an uncanny ability to nail really important core issues. The
truth or falsity of an evolutionary astrology past life interpretation lies in its
ability to help a person to make sense of their lives and to give them a sense of
purpose and direction.
Evolutionary Astrology and Natural Law
At its best, evolutionary astrology is like much modern paganism, or like Aleister
Crowley's system of Thelema, in that it is explicitly body-positive, womanpositive, sex-positive, earth-positive. It refers to this as Natural Law, which it
places in contrast to what it calls man-made law that characteristically has a
dualistic, spirit vs body division that is present in most of our culturally inherited
systems of religion and spirituality.
In this respect, evolutionary astrology at its best is in stark contrast to much of
traditional and modern astrology, which still largely assumes the mind/matter,
spirit/body dualism that is embedded in much of our general cultural heritage,
and in the roots of modern astrology in Theosophy and eastern religion.
I think this is one of the great strengths of evolutionary astrology, that it makes
conscious and examines the core values used to structure our lives, and helps
gives us a conscious choice in the values we wish to affirm and live by.
Page 24
Analysis vs Presentation
Some of the problems and apparent disagreements between traditional and
modern astrologers, both humanistic and evolutionary, are because we do not
clearly distinguish betweeen two very different phases of astrology - on the one
hand, the chart analysis and delineation, and on the other hand the chart
presentation, communication, consulting.
I will be discussing language issues in more detail in the next chapter, but here I
want to look at a sample misunderstanding regarding the use of the terms benefic
and malefic
Some modern astrologers object to the term malefic because it is excessively
negative, it judges that the subject is bound to have ill fortune.
The point made applies to the area of presentation, of how the chart is discussed
with the client. In the respect the point is well taken.
However, those traditional astrologers I know who find the terms benefic and
malefic useful - including me - do not use the phrases as part of the presentation
to the client. The concepts are useful during the phase of chart analysis, when the
astrologer looks at the chart to evaluate it. In that phase they can be enormously
helpful in evaluating the condition and quality with which a planet will likely be
experienced.
I am doing a little bit of simplifying to make a point here, but in general I think
we can say that modern astrologers put quite a bit of emphasis on chart
presentation, which is why the strong emphasis on putting things positively and
constructively. Conversely, traditional astrologers typically put quite a bit of
emphasis and attention on correct and powerful chart analysis.
Both phases are necessary, both skill sets are necessary. Putting a positive slant
on a chart while you are analyzing it can screen out useful information. However,
once that phase is done, it is important to consider how the information gleaned
can be most usefully presented to the client.
All schools of astrology have the delicate task of presenting the interpretation of a
chart in such a way as to constructively enhance the value and meaning of the
subject's life in their current situation.
Page 25
Language Barriers and Confusions
In this section I want to examine some key concepts and terms that can be a
source of confusion and misunderstanding between the different schools of
astrology.
There are places where astrologers of different schools use common terms
without real awareness of their meaning, and sometimes they are used
inappropriately. These are terms that can cause misunderstanding, since their
usual assumed connotations often do not apply. As an example of that, I want to
examine some of the meanings of the term Science, and of the term Spiritual.
I also want to examine some technical astrology terms to clear up some
misunderstanding about their meaning and usage.
But first, let's get a demon out of the way.
Predictive Astrology
A common criticism thrown at traditional or "event-oriented" astrology is that it
is predictive - its goal is to tell you specifically what will happen to you. Thus it
assumes a fate, where the power is external to you and out of your control.
That is not how the practicing traditional astrologers that I know understand
their craft.
Barring the occasional bolt of divine intuition - which is not something that most
traditional astrologers I know would ever admit to using - what can be predicted
or outlined is a certain class of events with certain characteristics, which could
then be expressed on any of a multitude of levels.
This is explicitly stated in some of the traditional texts themselves. The
predictive dimension of astrology is usually general and not specific. Astrology
can validly be quite specific only when there is sufficient information on the
subject's actual life circumstances to narrow down the interpretive process to a
specific context.
The old, "event-oriented" astrology that is often criticized and dismissed in much
modern astrology is actually a non-existent paper dragon, a mythical enemy that
is created in order to be attacked and overcome.
Benefic and Malefic
While traditional astrologers use these technical terms, it is common to see their
use criticized in modern astrology books. Being familiar with traditional
astrology, it is obvious to me that the criticism is based on a misunderstanding of
what the terms mean, and how they are used in context.
Page 26
To illustrate this point, here is a quote from Stephen Arroyo’s excellent book,
Astrology, Karma and Transformation. This is the opening sentence of the
chapter on Saturn, which starts on page 71.
“Until recent years, the planet Saturn was usually referred to in most
astrological books as a “malefic” influence, a dimension of experience that
most people would rather not face but which merely had to be endured for
no positive purpose whatsoever.”
That is all well and good, except for one minor problem:
That is not what “malefic” means!
A couple of pages later, in the section on Saturn in the natal chart, he has a good
and complex discussion of the many ways Saturn can be really hard to deal with,
and lists all sorts of negative feeling experiences that we can reap benefits from
only if we face them openly and honestly, and are willing to work at them. These
are often areas and events that are out of our control, that we can only accept and
deal with.
It’s worth reading that section – it is about the best definition and description of
what the term malefic means that I think I have seen. To me as a traditional
astrologer, it is obvious that Arroyo is using what I understand as the concepts
benefic and malefic, without using that terminology.
Benefic and malefic do not mean good and evil, nor does malefic mean that only
negative results can come from them.
To give more of an idea of what the terms do mean I am quoting a section from
my book on traditional astrology.
There are two benefic planets. Jupiter and Venus. The two malefic planets
are Saturn and Mars.
We usually experience the benefic planets as pleasant, comfortable,
growing, life-enhancing. We experience the malefic planets as extreme,
unpleasant, challenging, dangerous, threatening.
As we will see later, a lot depends on the dignity or condition of the
specific planet. Saturn in good shape can have a beneficial effect, and
Jupiter in bad shape can have a malefic effect.
Jupiter, the greater benefic, and Venus, the lesser benefic, are both
moderate in their elemental makup. Their effect tends to be to build up,
expand, combine, relate, interconnect, grow. We usually experience their
effect as pleasant, enjoyable - as good in the usual sense of the term.
Page 27
Saturn, the greater malefic, and Mars, the lesser malefic, are both extreme
in their elemental makeup - Saturn is extreme cold and dry, Mars is
extreme hot and dry.
Notice that both of the benefics are moist, and both of the malefics are dry.
Moist connects and harmonizes, dry separates and distinguishes.
The effect of the Malefics, Mars and Saturn, tends to be to disrupt, block,
separate, contract or cut, decay, fall apart, die. We usually experience their
effect as unpleasant - bad in the ordinary sense of the term. All kinds of no
fun.
Can you see how that is very different from what Stephen Arroyo is criticizing?
I also want to make it clear that traditional astrologers use terms like benefic and
malefic, or dignity and debility, in the analysis phase, looking at the chart and
weighing it prior to talking with the subject. The terms are appropriate in that
phase, but are not appropriate in the presentation phase, the discussion with the
client. Malefic is an interpretive category tool and not a judgemental label.
All of the schools of astrology, regardless of their vocabulary or method, have the
same challenge to present the interpretation to the subject in a way that enhances
the person's reality, and adds quality, awareness and value to their lives.
Dignity and Debility
These are also technical terms, evaluation tools used by traditional astrologers
when weighing up the condition of a planet, seeing how likely it is for its
expression to be smooth and controlled, or disruptive and challenging. It is
largely a measure of ease of functioning and integration.
I think the general point made in the previous section on benefic and malefic
holds here also. Having a planet dignified does not mean its action always works
out well, nor does having a planet debilitated mean that its action always works
out poorly.
Trust me on that one - I have Mercury doubly debilitated in Pisces.
Spiritual
Spiritual - that is such a deeply loaded word, that has so many connotations and
that carries so much baggage!
I think it means very different things in each of the systems we have been
examining. Because it has so many unspoken connotations, I think it is useful
Page 28
here for us to examine some of those connotations, to clear up some
misunderstanding.
Traditional astrology is the school least likely to explicitly use the word. Since
traditional astrology has an emphasis on aspects of reality that can be observed
and confirmed, spirituality is often not an area of focus.
However, for its practitioners, traditional astrology can and does have a strong
spiritual dimension. I am using the term spiritual hear to mean the dimension of
life that deals with ultimate meaning, and with how we fit within the overall
cosmos. All of the practicing traditional astrologers that I know - and I include
myself - have a strong sense of a spiritual context to their practice of astrology.
Often you will see a strong sense of what I would call magical reality, a sense that
the gods are alive, and that astrology is itself a spiritual path, a calling. There is
often a strong sense of astrology being practiced within the context of a larger
order. The roots of the traditional understanding of spirituality go back to the
Hellenistic and Roman philosophies, especially Stoicism, Neoplatonism, and
Aristotelian philosophy.
Modern astrology frequently uses the term spiritual, and my sense is that it
tends to be psychologized. I think that most of the meaning of the term for
modern astrologers was inherited from its roots in Theosophy, and has picked up
some of the vocabulary of Eastern philosophy, concepts like karma and
reincarnation.
As in Theosophy, modern astrology often uses the term with some of the implied
connotations of spirit being opposed to matter, or mind opposed to body - being
spiritual means transcending "lower" earthly desires. Also, to be spiritual is
usually assumed to mean being unselfish. It is also often assumed that 'ego' is
bad, and an ego vs spirit or ego vs soul duality is often set up. (Note that
traditional astrology also usually has this same spirit /matter, mind /body
duality, since it is deeply embedded in our western religious heritage.)
Spirituality is largely understood to be an interior, psychological and private
matter, a matter of personal experience and conviction. To say that someone is
spritual but not religious makes sense in a modern astrology, psychological
model, while that same sentence would not be at home in the world of traditional
astrology.
Evolutionary astrology shares many of the characteristics of modern astrology
we have been discussing.
In evolutionary astrology, some of the terminology can seem to imply that there
is a matter / spirit split, and that somehow being spiritual means having evolved
beyond physical desire. However, if you read their material carefully it is clear
that is not the case.
Page 29
Evolutionary astrology explicitly examines the mind/body, spirit/matter dualism
that pervades much of our societal and religious heritage, and it explicitly teaches
a body positive, sex positive, earth positive value system that it describes as
natural law.
In evolutionary astrology I think that the spirituality has a couple of different
connotations that I would like to examine here.
Spirituality is that which connects us to the totality of the universe
It that in us which is eternal, and which is the source of our consciousness.
Spirituality refers to the overall driving value and purpose of human life.
Spirituality has a very strong correlation with awareness - to be spiritual is to be
awake, very self-aware, very accepting of reality, of oneself, and of others
It is important to realize that spirit is not defined as opposed to, or over against
ego. The ego in evolutionary astrology is understood as a needed point of
conscious focus. Steven Forrest emphasizes that highly spiritual people are
characteristically very distinctly individuals, ie, with a very strong, healthy and
realistic sense of ego, of self-identity. To be highly spiritual is to be completely
and uniquely yourself, and to accept the uniqueness and value of others.
Science
Whenever we use the terms science or scientific to refer to astrology, I think we
need to recognize and admit that astrology is not a science in any sense that a
mainstream western scientist would recognize or acknowledge.
Please note that this has nothing to do with the validity, or accuracy, or
usefulness of astrology. Nor does it deny that some aspects of astrology may be
able to be measured or verified with scientific and statistical methods of analysis.
Astrology is a symbol system, and it is concerned with how these symbols
correlate with experiences in our world - external (events, people, actions), and
psychological, and also in terms of meaning, value or significance.
Western objective science is by definition value-free - it excludes subjectivity,
value, meaning - anything other than verifiable, value-free objective fact.
Science is reductionist and excludes meaning.
When astrologers say that it is a science, I do not think they mean that term in
the value-free, reductionist sense that much of modern science uses the term. I
think they mean something looser - that astrology is valid, that it is verifiable,
Page 30
that it is reliable, that its insights can be repeated and verified by those who are
willing to learn the system and practice it in its own terms and by its own rules.
All of those things are true, but in order to call astrology a science, we must either
redefine astrology, or redefine the word science to include meanings that most
practicing modern scientists will not accept. I do not think either choice is
particularly fruitful or helpful.
I think it is much more fruitful and useful to define astrology in terms that make
sense of how it is actually experienced and practiced. As I said earlier, I think that
Geoffrey Cornelius landmark work, The Moment of Astrology, is a very important
step in that direction. I have tried to offer some other suggestions for useful ways
to think about astrology in this little book.
Page 31
Complementary Questions
At this point we have examined some of the main schools of astrology, let each
speak in its own terms, and cleared up some sources of misunderstanding and
confusion. In this final section I want to look for ways that the different
approaches to astrology can enrich and learn from each other.
Since each asks different questions they each include and exclude different
things. Each gives different information, a different slant or point of view.
I want to use a division from Steven Forrest that I find very helpful.
Think of astrology having 3 dimensions or areas of meaning
- the physical,
- the psychological,
- and what Forrest calls the Spiritual.
I personally think the word spiritual carries too much baggage from our past here
in the West, so I prefer to call that the area of Meaning, or Value, or Purpose who am I, why am I here, why is life worth living - those kinds of questions are
addressed by the Spiritual or Value dimension.
I trust it is clear that the three kinds of astrology we've been talking about each
have their special strengths in one of those areas.
Traditional astrology is very good at tying into the details of the everyday
concrete world, and it is good at examining the significance of those events and
details.
Modern humanistic astrology is all about psychology, character.
And finally, Evolutionary Astrology goes for the Why questions, dealing with
issues of purpose and direction.
I trust it is clear that good astrologers in any of these schools are perfectly capable
of moving between and dealing with the different levels, and each of the three
different schools can span all of those levels. Given that, there is still a distinct
difference in primary focus.
What Can They Offer Each Other
Traditional astrology is strong on being tied to specific events and
circumstances of life. Its scope of questions is verifiable.
It is very strong on evaluating conditions of planets, their relative strength and
weakness, and thus whether they are likely to be sources of perceived good or ill
fortune. The evaluative tools of traditional astrology can also give an idea of how
Page 32
much ease or difficulty the native will experience in dealing with that aspect of
their life.
The more fate-based perspective of traditional astrology be very helpful and
supportive in those cases where the subject is dealing with a situation or event
out of their control - like a debilitating illness, or an accident, or the illness or
death of someone close to them. In those situations it can be helpful and
comforting for the native to accept that there are parts of their lives that they do
not control. Thus they are not to blame, it removes the element of guilt.
This traditional astrology view understands the person's chart in context of the
larger world, and that can be very powerful.
Modern astrology is very strong on psychological and character analysis - what
makes me tick, what are the different parts inside of me. This can be good in
situations where talking in terms of development of potential is useful, those
situations which allow a lot of room for free will. It is also good at promoting
general self-awareness and self-responsibility.
Modern astrology can also be good in situations where the person's attitude or
thoughts strongly influence how a particular planetary influence plays out. It is
good at emphasizing how I am uniquely me, what goes on inside me.
Evolutionary astrology can be useful for addressing questions of overall
meaning and purpose, and life direction.
For some people this approach is helpful for those situations where the native
feels like they are dealing with negative situations, for giving them an explanatory
context in terms of past-life settings.
Typically, past-life memories, like a lot of inner work, tend to be larger than life,
and sometimes a past-life memory can be helpful to get more understanding of
what is going on in this life, and perhaps ways to deal with in terms of inner
changes.
Whether they are true or not in the factual sense is actually not important. The
critical thing is that the story be True in the sense of giving the person a story
metaphor that makes deep sense of their life's context, purpose and direction.
Different Sources of Authority
For these schools to effectively communicate with each other, I believe we need to
realize that each of these schools looks to a different source for its authority, so
the arguments it gives will by definition not be convincing to the other schools. If
this is consciously realized it will make talking together a lot more fruitful.
Briefly, the differences are as follows.
Page 33
Traditional astrology values the past, the tradition. By definition older is better,
and the older texts and their transmission are the source of authority. Newer
practices are judged in terms of whether they continue or diverge from the
tradition.
Modern astrology shares our culture's belief in Progress, that implicit
assumption that newer is better. Consequently part of the purpose of modern
astrology is to discard older superstitious outmoded practices in favor of new,
cutting edge, more modern understandings.
Ultimately, evolutionary astrology looks within for its source of authority. Just
as Jeff Green received the system of evolutionary astrology through dreams
which he believes were given to him by his guru Sri Yukteswar, evolutionary
astrologers look to their inner intuition, their inner connection to the Divine, as
the ultimate source of meaning. It appeals to experience to validate itself - try the
system and it will prove itself to you.
You can see how this can create communication problems when each system tries
to convince the other of why its practices work.
A traditional astrologer is not going to be convinced by a modern astrologer's
argument that one should include the latest findings and progress in their
astrology. By definition traditional astrology looks to the past for its authority.
Similarly in reverse, a modern astrologer is not going to be convinced by an
appeal to tradition since modern assumes the belief in Progress that permeates
modern society, where by definition what is newer is better.
Neither will be particularly convincing to the Evolutionary Astrologer who looks
within to divine inspiration for the source of authority. And, such an appeal to
inner inspiration carries little weight to a traditional astrologer.
A traditional astrologer may criticize evolutionary astrology for its departure
from the tradition in many respects - it judges evolutionary astrology from its
criteria of the past and finds it wanting. The evolutionary astrologer is likely to
think, well, I use this system and I have experienced it for myself, so I know that
it is true and effective. If they would only give our system a chance and
experience it for themselves they would also be convinced that it is true.
Do you see the communication problem here? Each system lays out its argument
in terms of its assumed main value, and the other systems aren't convinced
because they look somewhere else for their source of value and authority.
Look at each of these systems from the inside, from the point of view of their
practitioners, and each is true, and valid, and effective. They are each selfvalidating reality tunnels, lenses that shape the astrological experience.
Page 34
Increasing the Dialogue
How can we increase understanding and dialog between the different systems?
This has to start with the explicit, conscious understanding that astrology asks
divergent questions, questions of meaning, which by definition do not have a
single correct answer. How astrology is practiced, the meaning it gives, very
much depends on the attitude, assumptions and experiences of the astrologer
practitioner. There is no single True school of astrology.
Once we realize that there are multiple valid ways of doing astrology, we can
become aware that each system has its own particular values, its own particular
point of view. Therefore we can choose to have an open-minded tolerance and
respect towards other people's values and viewpoints.
The traditional astrologer can realize that the other systems do not look to the
past for their source of authority. The modern astrologer can realize that
traditional astrologers do not share their belief in progress and that newer is
better. One person's outmoded medieval superstition is another person's
recovered traditional technique. One person's cutting edge discovery is another
person's deviation from the truth of the tradition.
Both traditional and modern astrologers can realize that, ultimately, the
evolutionary astrologer looks to her own subjective experience and intuition for
validation of their system, and the evolutionary astrologer is not swayed by an
appeal to the authority of tradition. In general I think that evolutionary and
modern astrology share a general value of newer being better, but their source of
authority is not quite identical.
Multi Map Astrology
When you are used to looking at a chart with a single system, a single map, a
single lens, there are things you will notice, and there are things that will be
outside of your focus.
Realizing that there are different ways of doing astrology offers you the
opportunity, if you choose, of setting aside your usual focus and trying on looking
at a chart from a different point of view. And, lo and behold, you may see things
that you had not noticed before because you weren't looking for them.
It also gives you a chance to question where there are limitations and blind spots
in your usual way of doing astrology. You may find that your own system has its
own strengths, but also its own weaknesses. It may give you a larger point of
view, and a greater self-awareness.
In this discussion I am deliberately dwelling on the conscious strengths of each
tradition. I do think that each of these schools have their own typical weaknesses
Page 35
and imbalances that are sometimes mirrored in their practice. I prefer to judge
each system on the basis of what it does well in the hands of a mature and
competent practitioner.
So, if you are a traditional astrologer, consider setting your system aside for a
little while and have your chart read by a good modern or evolutionary astrologer
- not to judge how (s)he does it right or wrong, but to allow yourself to enter into
their world, and see what they come up with.
And, vice versa - if you practice evolutionary astrology, consider having your
chart read using traditional techniques, preferably someone who leaves out the
three outer planets. Be open to all of the information you can get out of your chart
without having to include Uranus, Neptune or even Pluto. Or, check out a good
mainstream humanistic astrologer.
You don't need to give up your preferred system, and you can return to it when
you're done. Think of it as being like visiting a foreign country, or like pretending
you're a different character in something like a Renaissance Festival setting. You
temporarily suspend your usual points of view and allow yourself to look at the
world through different eyes.
Think of it as a game you are playing. You can always come back to the "real"
whenever you want... and you may just find that your sense of what is real and
valid in astrology has gotten larger, more multi-dimensional and weirder.
Astrological Maturity
There is one aspect of being human that makes this process really difficult for
most of us. Unfortunately it is something that helps keep us divided from close
relationship to others.
Somewhere, down at the core, there is the hidden assumption that of course, my
system really is better. Yes, I can dialog with you about our systems and talk
about tolerance for differences - but when you come right down to it mine really
is better, you know.
It is the illusion of specialness. The feeling, not just that I am special, but that I
am more special than anyone else. Other people just haven't recognized that yet.
The truth of the matter is, I am special.
The other side of that truth is, so is everyone else.
If you recognize one of those truths, you really need to recognize the other to stay
sane and balanced.
Page 36
I believe that my take on astrology is important. Every other real and dedicated
astrologer on the planet feels the same way. There is no way that I can have an
equal dialog with another astrologer of a different school if I am convinced inside
that my system is superior and theirs is inferior.
I think a sign of real maturity is to recognize ones own value and specialness,
while at the same time recognizing and appreciating the value and specialness of
every other astrologer - nay, every other person - with whom I interact.
That can be a community of equals.
The Universe is large, varied and intelligent enough to include all of us.
Note that I am not saying that all astrologers are equally effective, or that all
systems of astrology do things equally well. I am saying that there is no single
true system of astrological interpretation against which all others can be judged.
We need to allow for an acknowledgement of, and respect for, a diversity of
systems, methods, values and points of view.
Last I looked, the Universe does not check which membership card an astrologer
has in her pocket before a reading can take place. The Universe is intelligent,
benevolent, aware and flexible enough to shape the message and meaning within
the container, the point of view, of the astrologer who is giving the reading. For a
truly meaningful reading, that must also include the reality and point of view of
the person receiving the reading.
Astrology is something that happens in a specific context - a specific astrologer, a
specific client or subject, at a particular point in space and time with a specific
situational context.
Closing
One final point.
When you realize that there are multiple valid ways of doing astrology - different
systems, different points of view, each with their own strengths and weaknesses this gives you an opportunity to experiment with looking at a single chart from
different points of view in your own practice. You take off one lens, and put on
another lens, to see what you notice.
You, as a single astrologer, can have multiple ways of looking at a chart. You can
take them off and put them on in turn to get a different perspective.
That is a multi-perspective, multi-map way of practicing astrology.
And that is the subject of another book. Stay tuned...
Page 37
Afterword
O Freunde, nicht diese Toene!
Sondern lasst uns angenehmere anstimmen
und freundenvollere!
- Friedrich Schiller, An De Freude (Ode to Joy)
The entire population of the human race, with one trifling exception, is made up
of other people.
- John Andrew Holmes
The human mind is like a parachute;
it only works when it's open.
- Frank Zappa
Either that wallpaper goes or I go.
- Oscar Wilde, reputed last words
As I said in the beginning part of this little book, I was motivated to write it by my
desire to further good will and discussion between the different schools of
astrology active today. I have tried to present a framework that can be used to
make sense of having multiple systems that all work, and to show ways that the
emphases of the different systems can complement each other. Their differences
can be a source of strength.
Astrology is a wonderful, precious and sacred subject. We have too much good
work to do, and have too many things in common, for us to be wasting our time
criticizing and putting down each other's way of practicing.
I think we have so much that we can learn from each other, and I think we can
have a lot of fun, and make some very good new friends in the process. Our
worlds can get bigger, and we can be more aware of each others' perspectives,
strengths and limitations.
I want to get a dialog going, and I very much welcome and solicit any thoughts,
comments or feedback you may have on this project. I think this work of dialog
and community building is important, which is why I want to expand this
discussion.
Whatever form, or forms, of astrology you choose to study or practice, may the
Gods go with you on your journey. Blessed Be.