Do you know where you stand? Where would you else go? Worldly truths rely on dogmas, but no foundation exists when dogmas are elevated. Only that cell which sees its function in the whole can fathom that by which it is nourished.
Astrology must be based on the reality that we see and live in, including what we can perceive and understand through reason and intuition. Institutional belief systems have no place here, neither ‘scientism’. Corruption and pundits are everywhere. An awake person trusts his own feet, listening and learning as he walks. We all know that we live in a mystery, and we all know that money cannot buy the answer, and we all know that invested prestige is a blind alley.
Yes, it must be said, there are elements in astrology that cannot be categorized and put into narrow, defined confines, that cannot be quantified. And why should they? Research is fine, but science as ideology does not have the credibility today as it once may have had. Many bright minds through history have contributed to science, but they were not solely scientists. Who knows where insights come from? It is sobering to read the history and involvement of science. If I were forced to say whether astrology is an art or a science, I would say that it is a substantial and intuitive art. We go into ancient history, mythology, fables, etymology, semiotics, and semantics, just to mention a couple.
The philosophical and existential perspectives found in astrology – and please forget the glossy thirteen-in-a-dozen reads – is on par with any level of curriculum offered in established society. Astrology is in contact with the very essence of existence. It is very relevant to a.o. climate, biology, genetics, and informatics. Fractals and crystallography are also in the picture. In and by itself astrology is a meta-discipline, multi-faceted, containing all lanes of study. In this context, it is immaterial which explanatory paradigm is in vogue and now for a time sits in the high seat.
It is a fact that our craft has become irrevocably interwoven with nearly all branches of psychology and therapy. Well, not so much in the cold, systematized approach that we find in institutional practices where economics is the regulating factor, more so than a genuine interest in the living person. And I’d better not get started in commenting psychiatry, which today is more discredited than ever before. Do I have to mention the ridiculous, mechanical long, long handbooks of predefined ‘diagnoses’ and the opportunistic need to keep ranks? Is it necessary to remind you of the deep, often quite sinister, ties to the pharmaceutical industry? I read once one who said – in simple words – that the last thing that suits the interests of medicinal companies is the well-being of the human population.
Astrology is about insight. Astrology is more about quality than quantity. There are no experts in astrology. Astrology is about our world – in toto. Astrology is about us. Are we apart from nature?
As a young man, I set out to write an essay on the depths of astrology set in contrast with the rigid attitudes against it that is so commonplace in the ‘scientific’ community, which seldom is impartial. Today I think I’m a bit wiser, and I can see that such a project is much in vain. First of all, Money is involved, and what is politics? This life here has an end, and as I find it evident that astrology transcends arbitrary walls, I now spend my time watching Reality.
Many have made the effort of communicating the essence of our Craft, and there is an extensive, solid literature on genuine astrology – enough for a lifetime study. We should be very thankful for the monumental work that has been done by qualified researchers: in history, and in modern time, based on our history.
I have given up on astronomers in general. In fact, plain astronomy is largely quite irrelevant to our subject. To cut it short: I have little use for any of the many astronomers who repeatedly and publicly have displayed no understanding of the fundamental difference between the tropical and sidereal zodiacs…
I really appreciate photographs from Mars (?), and many a modern convenience, but they have little impact on the subjects discussed in these pages.
That might go for other ‘objective sciences’, too.
Through my research, I see the Static-Dynamical Model reinforced. It is the theory on which I build. I may be wrong, but I don’t think that the way forward is to incorporate all conceivable hypotheses and any pebble. I think the way ahead is to clear the building blocks so that we can see the building, so that we can achieve certainty that there is true knowledge in our field, paired with intuition and art. I also appreciate the value of the Vedic tradition (with context), though I am a Western astrologer.
Few days go by where I don’t ask myself why I am doing this, thinking that the whole thing about astrology is absurd, that the tenets are indefensible, that it is a relic from the past. Every time I go back to it for the simple reason that it works, and not least on a personal level. As practitioners, we know that there is no other discipline that like astrology can be of real help for people in their life situation, that it surpasses establishment practices in many ways, and that we reach insights that otherwise would be unobtainable.
What we see and do in astrology is a depiction of information, and whether we want or not to heed that knowledge is our choice.
I sincerely think that allegories in lore far surpass what we today find in the establishment’s study of the mind. Astrology is a study of Consciousness, of Life. Compare that with psychotropic drugs and profits.
We are at a crossroads now. After the expansive revival of astrology in the West through the 20th century, when symbologists of all colors went far out on limbs, we are now facing traditionalists who think that some ‘rules’ are valid just because they’re old. We know that real astrology is the vessel of self-realization through all times, and it is not defined through books and fellows.
That said, it is impressive and important how old writings have been brought to light in recent times. Those who did this Herculean task will be duly referred to. We can clearly understand that originally astrology was entirely different from what we may have thought, and what was accepted as substantial a few years ago was too light-footed or to some extent ideologically based. However, astrology has always evolved and is still evolving. My stance is that astrology mirrors Reality, and therefore a.o. Celestial Mechanics must be an integral part.
As we know, there are all sorts of possible and impossible techniques, some of recent origin, well-founded or not so well-founded, and a plethora of old teachings brought back to light. I do not think that because some theory or practice in our field is old means that it necessarily is true. And I do not think that every modern ‘invention’ is grounded in astrological tradition, or even logically consistent. Just look at some charts presented today: every tiny pebble is drawn in – there are so many factors to consider, that if I were in the woods, I wouldn’t find the trees.
And there are diverse ‘meaningful’ points that move through the zodiac – some mathematical, some speculative, some based in tradition – and some clearly with no grounding. With these, it is important to scrutinize whether they are defined in relation to initial conditions, especially where a fast-moving Ascendant is involved – i.e. mathematical coherency. I do not want to elaborate on this – I am sure you see my argument. There certainly are good ideas presented at any given moment in history, but I don’t believe that rigid ‘rules’ is the way to go.
Neither do I quite see why I would work extensively with approaches such as regressions, though I do see the mirror. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone surmised quantum theory or a good explanation from Chirality. I would never participate in a practice in any vocation where retroactive responsibility is condoned. I am enough amazed as it is that charts of prominence are still ‘working’ decades after natus is gone.
Wisdom is what I would prefer to seek – such as celestial lore, and modern counterparts, where specific ecliptic degrees or parts of the sky have genuine relevance. We must never believe that we as humans were more stupid before, or that we are less stupid today. What we today label psychology existed in olden times, I think even more profoundly, but with different names; even traditional fairytales are part of that! An insight into how deep that goes, with reference to allegories and more, is exactly what you will find by visiting the many wise and real astrologers out there.
The qualified discussion among astrologers has to a significant extent bypassed traditional outlets and has moved on to the Web. The bold political analysis and colorful texts found through astrological websites surpass in many ways the discourse in glaring media. Astrology is rich in mythology, folklore, and etymology, and we as astrologers know that symbology goes deep. Rarely at large do you see such ‘stellar’ allegories, beautiful illustrations, and cogent commentary with structural and societal insights. Troves may be available where least expected. No-one should be judged by the first visage, although it is in our reach to ably distinguish.
I will warn against certain strains that are quite common in astrological milieus. They are mostly recognizable by exceedingly enticing pictures, where it is more about the alluring pictures themselves than about actual contents. It is a balancing act for you to decide, but you will often know when also accompanied by loosely defined or otherwise stringent scientific terms. Appearance. Behind the alluring facade, there is no real grounding, no ethics with consequence. With shallow thought and self-delusion, as always an age-old theme, this active variant is in effect unwittingly supporting and serving exactly those who it purportedly opposes.
The meaningful illustrations of yore referred to at first, to art, have long since been an integral part of humanity’s visualization of insights. Those are of another kind – they are treasures carried over to us as the sum of former knowledge, just like proverbs are.
I must briefly mention the purely religious dimension, and especially what is broadly called ‘spirituality’. If you prefer group rituals, you may not enjoy this Cauldron. To my mind, there is little Responsibility, and much narcissism, abounding. Compared to humanity’s plights and merits throughout the world, and the forces and conditions that rule us, I will not shy away from calling out those who wear borrowed garments from astrology. There are enough detached inventions disconnected from our vocation. We need deliberate action, and not insignia in dreamy states. Real, substantial work is to accomplish – not deterring from Reality.
There are innumerable pages to be read, further links to follow. There are many methods. Don’t take my word for anything. Trust your instincts. May this be a road sign by day, and a lamppost by night. The Cauldron speaks for itself. By observing professed ‘skeptics’ you will soon see absence and that ‘willfully ignorant’ is an appropriate term. Don’t take anything for granted. We are on a contextual route, with uncounted variables in an existence.
It is nigh impossible to encompass all, and it is not easy to pay everyone justice. I write freely explaining my methods. The nomenclature used is broad, and readers should preferably be well versed in astrological terminology and basic concepts. Those of you who only recently have delved into the manifolds and fundamentals of our fascinating craft, or are just curious, can start with ‘Links’. In a short while, you will see the vastness and beauty of astrology; definitions and clues to categories; and better follow and discover perspectives and opinions. Astrology is descriptive.
This whole Cauldron is an open project – everything here is published as it develops. Some pages will be preliminary or indicative sketches showing pending issues.
After many years at my desk, I now find this approach the most effective and inspiring way of working – albeit not all in my scribbles & snippets during editing would like a bright day.
There will be jottings, drafts, outlines, quick thoughts (and briefly outright nonsense) – at any rate quite unplanned, but regular as time allows – with diverse reflections, perceptions, particulars, and systematic work. The menu items do not have a specific format – I observe tidbits as they come, and I sometimes edit, insert, or write even, retrospectively, which is fine, because we are in a puzzle. It is not implied in every instance that there will be an extensive analysis by me, though any page may well be revisited. There are inherent overviews, and there are interspersed links; altogether an attempt to give topical, applied astrology a face.
The above and the Workbench together elaborates on technicalities: on what constitutes this craft called Astrology (along with some negations).
And yes, no, these pages are not ‘politically correct’. I do not seek comfort in a flock, nor do I mean to stir: I strive to understand. It is up to you how and how far threads should lead. It is easy to get lost in mazes. Some links could make you noticed by certain watchers; on the other hand, it is vital to be awake and try and decode the world. My own stance in countering the all-encompassing Eye is to be a Watcher myself, leaving selected crumbs and snares to be found.
I consider the information herein relevant and of value. We must be responsible, intent and wise, contribute and be elaborate, being aware of the mystery that surrounds us, and of genuine ancient history, with a mind that sees.
My comments are subjective. They are not facts, but evaluations as I see them at this stage, with the knowledge that I have now. Tomorrow may be different. What we think about past occurrences may also change. There are few constants in this flux. I cannot say what you should do. All I can say is that each morning I wake up anew, and what I see out my window depends on what I can see within. I’m looking at my own compositions. If they are entangled, I should start loosening the knots.
This is an ongoing work from a variety of sources. No text is final, no part is complete. A full scope of this material is seen by having your software of choice running and exactly probe technical or other issues. Permission is hereby granted to make use of the data herein for your own projects – I like the Open Source Philosophy. It would be nice if you link to my original contents. All weblinks have been tried at the time of writing.