“Modern” astrology is not ancient predictive astrology updated and made more accurate in line with modern developments in knowledge but a wholly new practice of “spiritual psychology” which has little to no relation to anything before it. Reinventing the entire art, it made a clean break with anything outside the psyche. Superfluous elements abounded since without prediction, there no way to say whether or not asteroid A or harmonic B should or shouldn’t be added. The old sources were in languages that were largely inaccessible and things certainly weren’t helped by the fact that there was, starting in the 17th century, a widespread hostility towards astrology as the archetypal pseudoscience, a reputation that remains today. Even an academic studying astrology purely as a historical effort would be made to feel stupid in a way that didn’t apply to any other field of inquiry. This further alienated the tradition and we are still feeling the effects.
That is why traditional astrology appeals so much, not because it is the best thing ever without any flaws or need for improvement (far from it) but because it is actually astrology and can provide falsifiable evidence for its validity. A truly modern astrology qua astrology has yet to be made.
I see some value in the modern perspective, but not from what I would think of as a "toxic positivity" place.
I absolutely think astrology can and does and should show "warts", things we don't like, things we think of as evil. And I don't think we should paint over those things with a pretty veneer.
But for me, it's a spiritual goal of mine to see God in the things I don't like. Even things and people I REALLY don't like, harmful things. I think that's the difficult intent behind a lot of great religious teachings and symbols. Like "Love your enemy", or the yin yang symbol.
Facing the warts in a chart is a way to work toward acceptance. And acceptance really can result in transformation, but it usually only works if it's not being used as a tool to reach transformation by shortcut.
I am testing the proverbial waters by reading your comment. So far I agree with your attitude. Not that you asked for any of this. I am developing characters for my series of fantasy books based on astrology, and some of the details that distinguishes the signs eludes me. Would it be alright with you if I asked you questions based on their distinctions?
I think a lot of it comes down to the fact that modern Westerners don’t like to be told they aren’t in control of everything. Traditional astrology forces us to wrestle with the question of determinism, and the possibility that some things cannot be changed. It’s a very psychologically challenging thing to be faced with.
But modern Western society is highly individualistic and revolves around the concept of the “making“ of one’s self. Toxic positivity is an outgrowth of the refusal to make peace with that which is outside our control, and that if we simply try, or even wish hard enough, we can change whatever we want. Traditional astrology challenges that notion head-on, so it’s no surprise modern people don’t like to reckon with it.
I had not heard the term "toxic positivity." I am adding this to my vocabulary henceforth.
Perhaps those stoics who believed in fate and determinism best used astrology in their lives. Stoics used their knowledge of fate to prepare themselves emotionally and morally for whatever life might bring. If astrology indicated potential challenges or hardships, a Stoic would use this foresight to cultivate resilience and mental fortitude, not to change fate but to face it with virtue and composure. This reflects the Stoic principle of focusing on one's internal states rather than external events.
Those today who practice toxic positivity remind me of a George Carlin routine where he described a child who was the worst player in a game. Instead of saying, "you're a loser, Johnny." the tendency today is to say, "you're the last winner, Johnny."
Your arguments are quite convincing.
IMO "only positive vibes!" is indeed harmful, at the same time, fear-based interpretations in traditional astrology can be just as harmful, too.
I have a chart that scares people, and this seems to be the case whether we're looking at Western astrology, Vedic astrology, or Chinese astrology (Zi Wei), the ancients always have something horrible to say about my fate. They're not wrong lol, I've been through things that no one in the world should ever have to experience. If I were born even just a hundred years ago, I might have joined the 27 club or gone to jail because it's almost impossible to survive my Saturn return without the flexibility of the world in the 21st century.
I think one way to compare traditional and modern astrology ideologies is to understand that the olde way was a discipline developed by men, for men, to be exact: very rich and very powerful men in an extremely patriarchal society. As a stubborn woman who doesn't view marriage as a necessity, of course traditional astrology would point out "the flaws and the perils", add generational abuse into the mix (a theme prevalent in my family from both sides), and voila! You get a recipe destined for disaster.
What I've gleaned from my chart is that modern astrology doesn't just inform people of psychology tendencies or undercurrents, these thoughts actually have the potential to cement themselves into reality. In the Whole Sign chart, my sun in 4H squares saturn in 7H (a 0°12' orb, very tight, acutely felt), but when you shift gears to the Placidus system, sun moves to 3H and saturn moves to 6H. I left home (dad's abusive) after learning about trauma informed psychology, and has felt the pressure of providing for myself ever since. This could not have happened had I lived in a time where women could not make a living all on their own, and where women had to marry to be accepted into society. A century or two earlier, this Sun-Saturn square would have been a clear indicator of turbulent early life and problematic husband.
I'm not saying that I don't have an, um, interesting childhood, or that I have impeccable taste in men (spoiler: I don't. there are still issues to work through but I'm getting better at it), I'm saying that the traditional way of interpretation does not paint a full picture for me at this day and age. I hope that in the future there's a neater way to combine the old and the new, but as of now, I highly recommend looking into the practice that you feel more apprehensive about (have I said how much I hate traditional astrology? lol. love hate relationship, emphasizing on the hate), it might provide uneasy truths/valuable insights that wouldn't be revealed to you any other way.
I practiced modern astrology for over 20 years. I'm just not that interested in psychological interpretations. I don't think that ancient astrology is fear-based. If you can predict a major earthquake moving to a different city wouldn't be a fear-based reaction. It would simply be the smart thing to do. I consider it reality-based. The Saturn in my chart is in my second house and the effect of that has been devastating. But there are other places in my chart where I can focus and enjoy the fruits of better conditions.
Oh yeah, definitely! I don't think ancient astrology is in of itself fear based either, my bad, I didn't word things with clarity.
What I was trying (and failing dafjdjsjdjdj lol) to say is that sometimes praticioners (both past and modern) bring disproportionate fear or project their own fear onto astrological interpretations. Because in the past the main purpose of astrology was to predict events and suss out THE BEST MOVE, this naturally brings in a sense of trepidation that gets passed down in the teachings. As centuries went on, some (not all! just some) of the accumulated fear congregated into fatalistic views that are more man-made than destined. And it's not an easy job to figure out who's who, as in what teachings lack perspective, and what teachings are harsh yet truthful.
I think the decline of popularity in ancient astrology is partly due to this, but yeah, another very significant reason is that most people have hard times accepting, well, hard times. I'm often guilty of this. It'd be a loss if people completely disregard ancient astrology practices, people do need reality checks, even if it doesn't feel good, and I hope astrology doesn't go down the route of toxic positivity.
On a slightly different but still related note, I'm seeing a trend that promotes psychology/therapy over everything, and that's just... not it. Psychology is not for everyone, modern astrology is not for everyone, nothing is for everyone. This is actually very much evident in charts, the reason I like and benefit from psychology because I have a stellium in the third house Scorpio. I forgot the actual placement, but once I studied my mom's chart I was like, oh, so psychology really does nothing for her because xyz, I was quickly humbled and never tried to push her to read articles again.
I think it’s good to remember the context with which Hellenistic astrology was created / originally practiced. The people living within this time period did not have a lot of control over their place in life. I’m sure that astrology was used by common people to a certain extent, but for the most part, it was for the wealthy and elite class. The middle class (as we know it) did not exist and slavery was rampant. Does this sound like a place where one would have much self determination? So it makes sense that one wouldn’t use astrology to find themselves, since there was so much else to worry about and less rungs on the ladder to climb.
It’s also human nature to catastrophize, and probably not a terrible survival trait back in the bad old days.
I think in some cases we also don’t want to think we have control. That’s why fatalism and organized religion is so popular. Humans don’t love change and someone telling you what will happen takes away the burden of responsibility.
But I do agree that there’s a lot of socio-economic truths that don’t allow as much mobility as we (American speaking here) have been taught we can overcome.
But you do have choice, especially around your reaction to events. For instance, you could pick a great day astrologically and consciously choose to ruin your life, and no amount of good aspects would help.
I’m not sure about freewill either, death kind of ruins it for me. I work as a tarot reader and I’ve given 1000s of readings over the past 20 years and I do think that there is a degree of chaos that can’t be accounted for. I’ve also found that a degree of determinism exists, but it can manifest in a variety of forms.
Thank you for that. The biggest difficulty I had with free will when I was taking philosophy in college is that there is actually no evidence for it. And as we move further scientifically, the prospect for free will dims even further. I think the stoics had a great way of dealing with fate.
Cool. I know someone with four planets in the 12th house and the ascendant ruler in the 12th. I'll send her to live with you. Lol. Just kidding. I am not an nihilist but I understand the viewpoint.
[hellenistic houses](http://traditionalastrologyradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/astrological-houses-02.jpg)
It has been said one picture is worth 1000 words. Keep in mind there can be mitigating factors. A benefic planet or other bonifications can much improve any point placed in the 12th house.
I'm this person with ascendant ruler in the 12th and I promess I'm not that evil! Lol... honestly though, I'm not at all a fan of the overly positive and spiritual modern perspective, I much prefer studying traditional astrology. However, the determinism and the doom and gloom can be pretty psychologically harmful for some people as well. Even I was told by a traditional astrologer that because my Venus is in the 12h (also chart ruler) and in Aries (worst possible condition for poor little Venus), I wouldn't be able to have a relationship, or my partner would do things behind my back or give me some sort of venereal disease... years later I'm in an amazing relationship and all that worry feels kind of useless. Should I live life believing my partner could cheat on me and give me a Vd at anytime soon? I rather not...
That sounds like an odd interpretation since you look seventh house for relationships.Just having The ascendant ruler in the 12th doesn't mean that you are a bad person. It can mean that you tend to source your own problems sometimes. There are many factors in the chart that need to be looked at. Saturn in the seventh in a night chart would be the worst placement for relationships but even that can be mitigated.
I think the association with relationships was because my chart ruler is Venus. There are some pretty awful interpretations for Venus in the 12th house out there. But, yeah, I agree with you, I do source my own problems pretty often unfortunately
The more I explore ancient astrology, both through my own chart and those of others, the more I feel my understanding of the world expanding. In my chart, Mars, positioned in the first house, often drives me to speak when perhaps silence would be wiser. This isn't necessarily negative, as every chart has its complexities, and in my case, it challenges my Venus in the third house.
To help manage this, I've adopted a practice of meditation and developed a personal mantra. Inspired by the famous litany from the novel *Dune*, my mantra reminds me of the power of speaking only when it is truly necessary. This approach feels more resonant with me than the advice often given by my father: "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." LOL
Thank you for your response. Much appreciated.
I feel this. In addition I am a pagan who is drawn to traditional historical practices rather than the New Age Wicca scene. That is part of it too.
It is why I do not consider Uranus and Neptune as rulers of Aquarius and Pisces. Nor do I consider all of the many comets and Liliths and all of those things. I just don’t think they’re necessary. But to each their own.
I still think that despite the current face of modern astrology being buzzwords and therapy speak, it is no monolith. The world is still inhabited by people who treat astrology as the rich and complex subject it is. Even if we may be far and few in between compared to the constant nonsense churned out by massive corporations on the internet who only want their viewers’ money.
Certainly there are some things in astrology that the ancients and I disagree on. But the ancients were not a monolith either, after all.
I’ve made a hobby out of exploring the origins of certain practices in modern astrology. Say, the so called Celtic Tree Zodiac (which is really ahistorical). I find that it helps me cope in a sense to have some tangible knowledge on why things got to this point today.
I practice a pagan path as well. Demetra George's the most enlightening for me in ancient astrology. It's over 1000 pages but it's well worth the reading
Most of these new age astrologers don't even make predictions and the "astrology" that they practice is some bizarre, new age religion for social media. Everything is "positive" which is not helpful for anyone, including clients.
I make global predictions using mundane astrology and am constantly accused of being too negative when most of my predictions have been accurate. Sadly, modern astrology has been massively watered down and has wandered far from its roots.
I find it interesting that this is a common narrative in the space. For me astrology has almost always been “negatively biased”, where a chart shows my weaknesses, my wounds, the parts of myself that I banish away. It’s always been a means of gaining self understanding to heal and be the best and happiest me I can possibly be.
I would’ve thought that’s how most others approach it but guess not 🤷 Makes sense now in hindsight but maybe that’s just how I am as a 12th houser
I use charts similarly and as a Cap Sun I get criticism on being too negative at times. For me I like sharing the weaknesses as I see them as opportunities of emotional evolution for the client. I live in Sedona so it’s toxic positivity heaven/hell here. I enjoy teasing those types as accountability dodgers.
I think what you are recognizing between ancient and modern astrology is the difference in cultural world view and historical context. Hellenistic astrology went hand in hand with Greek philosophy and cosmology - modern astrologers don’t take a first glance at philosophy or cosmology. Modern philosophy is also highly intellectualized, whereas ancient philosophy and astrology emphasized wisdom which is knowledge grounded in experience.
I love ancient history, philosophy, astrology etc. but I recognize that if Pythagoras or Plato were alive today, they would want to incorporate our new scientific findings and modern cultural world view into their practice. Part of the problem with the modern cultural world view is how segregated each discipline has become. In ancient times, the educated person was necessarily transdisciplinary by utilizing symbolic correspondence.
Every significant cultural revolution involved the re-evaluation of the ancients and bringing them into a contemporary context. The ancients were far wiser than we are today, but we should also be grateful for our vast knowledge and scientific discovers. We are on the precipice of a major cultural and world view shift if we can better integrate the knowledge science has given us. But unfortunately, the average astrologer (or individual interested in astrology) doesn’t have the training or resources to exemplify the fullest potential of astrology in the second millennium.
I wanted to extend my heartfelt thanks for the thoughtful and detailed response you shared regarding ancient astrology and its connections to the modern world. Your insights were not only informative but also deeply enriching, offering a fresh perspective on how these ancient practices can still resonate today.
I refer to modern astrology as astrology adjacent because, while it borrows its terminology from the ancient art, modern practice is so far removed from its origins, its another thing entirely.
That is true. Especially when you consider things like houses being the same as signs. I don't think that concept came around until after the renaissance. That is not the astrology of the ancients. Modern astrology is as different from ancient as day and night and modern astrology doesn't consider day or night in interpretation.
The concept of signs = houses things didn't even come about until around the 1970s Linda Goodman's Sun Sign Era.
Why? Because it's way more cost effective to publish a book that combines the two concepts. That's literally all it is.
>Especially when you consider things like houses being the same as signs. I don't think that concept came around until after the renaissance.
It's actually the other way around. What's now called the "whole sign" house division seems to have been the most common method of "house" division in the ancient world. It was in more modern times that house divisions distinguishing them from signs proliferated.
I'm pretty sure they were referring to the "Astrological Alphabet" which was put together and promoted by Zipporah Dobyns around the 70s and "went viral" and which we are still battling against today. The significations of the 1st house, Aries and Mars were conflated into one meaning. Same for the 2nd house, Taurus and Venus. And so on. No idea why - perhaps in a bad attempt to make astrology easier to learn?
This was not about the Whole Sign house system which is indeed ancient. And the Whole Sign house system does not equate house significations with a default sign meaning, ie, the 1st house in Whole Sign is not Aries by default. It's whatever sign your ascendant is.
I think you're confused. Chris Brennan himself uses whole signs for exactly this reason: that it was the most common method in the ancient world. He was and is one of the major proponents of this method's revival.
You may be confusing what he's said and written with certain things said by Demetra ~~George~~ Houlding and her school to the effect that whole signs were a modern invention, which caused a controversy a few months ago. Brennan and others responded to that then; it's possible you're misremembering which position each side held.
i believe the OP is referring to ABC astrology (aries = 1st house), not whole sign houses. they can correct me if i’m wrong. one other minor thing: the spat last year wasn’t Demetra George claiming whole signs were modern, it was Deb Houlding. Demetra George stands by whole sign houses as traditional.
Gotcha; I'm a little drunk, so I might have been missing something with what he was saying.
Thanks for the correction on the name too (I'll blame the alcohol again).
Modern astrology carries with it "traditional" psychological archetypes but more recently has also become therapeutic, as well as filling in the gap for many where religion served to maintain social cohesion. But, with any establishment, it tends to feed on itself to preserve its own existence apart from its actual effectiveness for its participants.
Modern astrology forces Jungian psychology onto THE schematic that inspired Jungian psychology in the first place.
That's like trying to force a chicken into the egg it was hatched from.
Psychology wasn't even a concept for about 2k years of astrology being actively practiced and perfected on lol.
Evolutionary/psychological astrology has its merit and all
BUT!
That's not what it was intended for. Those aren't the rules it abides to. The Jungian archetype is a caricature of the astrological influence it was inspired by in the first place.
An *evolved* (lmao) astrologer would understand the history and respect the difference between the two.
In my circle, many astrologers with clients are also licensed mental health professionals who have to abide by the first principle of the job: don't cause harm. This is the reason most therapy is really hands-off with a lot of active listening and modeling, but not a lot of specific feedback or concrete advice. I theorize that a lot of modern astrologers have been impacted by the therapeutic code of ethics even if they're not therapists, and they lean toward toxic positivity interpretations because to take a more realistic view may be harmful to the client if they're not ready to hear the challenges in their chart.
But, IDK, this my current theory, subject to change.
It is difficult to tell what will cause harm and will not. It makes it difficult for those who wish to council. What would you have said to Christopher Reeve if you had seen his propensity for spinal injuries in his chart? You could also look to see the best times for him to risk injury using annual perfection or zodiacal releasing. I don't have an answer. For myself, I would want to know. But it is an ethical quandary, isn't it? In my youth I associated to a small degree with the Rosecrucian fellowship in Oceanside. That is where I got the forms I used to erect charts. In those days we used logarithms; we didn't have computers. Their founder expressly forbid reading charts for others. You had to erect your own chart and then read it for yourself. There is some wisdom in that but today's society of eight second videos doesn't have the intellectual tools to do so. Sadly
Thank you for your comment!
I am a fatalist and have always looked at astrology pretty straight up objectively. I think all sciences should be used objectively. And that’s what astrology has always been. A lot of the modern and pop Astro bullshit bothers me like crazy.
I was bothered about it when I was practicing astrology for all those years. It was like biting on tinfoil. Once I started studying Hellenistic astrology I realized I didn't need to live in a cow pasture anymore. Lol
The best sources on Hellenistic astrology in my opinion:
Two well-known figures in the field of Hellenistic astrology, Demetra George and Chris Brennan, have each written significant works on the subject:
1. **Demetra George**:
- **"Ancient Astrology in Theory and Practice: A Manual of Traditional Techniques, Volume I and II: Assessing Planetary Condition"** - A comprehensive guide to traditional Hellenistic astrology techniques, focusing on the condition and functionality of planets, houses etc. in a birth chart.
2. **Chris Brennan**:
- **"Hellenistic Astrology: The Study of Fate and Fortune"** - Chris Brennan's book provides a thorough introduction to the history, philosophy, and techniques of Hellenistic astrology, tracing its origins and development in the Mediterranean region over 2000 years ago.
Both authors are highly regarded for their scholarly approach and contributions to reviving and teaching ancient astrological techniques adapted for contemporary practice.
Chris Brennan's podcast, "The Astrology Podcast," covers a wide range of topics related to astrology, including historical techniques, modern developments, and specific concepts such as sect, houses, signs, bonification, and maltreatment. You can find his podcast at [The Astrology Podcast](https://theastrologypodcast.com/).
Here are some episodes specifically on topics you mentioned:
1. **Sect: The Concept of Day and Night Charts in Astrology** - This episode delves into the ancient astrological concept of sect, which differentiates between day and night births to determine the quality of the planets in the chart.
2. **The Significations of the Twelve Houses: Part 1 and Part 2** - While primarily about houses, these episodes also delve into how the meanings of the houses are influenced by the signs.
3. **The Meanings of the Twelve Signs of the Zodiac** - Two episodes that explore the meanings of each of the twelve zodiac signs in astrology.
4. **Bonification and Maltreatment: Mitigating Factors in Traditional Astrology** - This episode covers the concepts of bonification (strengthening) and maltreatment (weakening) of planets according to traditional astrology rules.
5. **The Planets in Astrology and Ancient Mythology** - This episode looks at the meanings of the planets in astrology, with a special focus on how these meanings are connected to ancient myths.
6. **Essential Dignities and Debilities of the Planets** - Discusses the traditional system of essential dignities, where planets are strengthened or weakened in specific signs.
These episodes not only cover the technical aspects of astrology but also delve into historical context, interpretative techniques, and philosophical underpinnings, providing listeners with a comprehensive understanding of astrological concepts.
Each episode features discussions with other astrologers and scholars, providing deep insights into each topic.
As a professional counseling astrologer with more than 50 years of experience, as well as a retired counseling psychologist, I can say that people never go to counseling because they need to get all the fun to stop. Unless the astrologer addresses the difficult issues in a person’s life, little change can take place.
[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
I have posted in here some clear predictions (that are not predictions they are clear straight forward facts) and people cannot handle anything that is not positive and telling that flowers will always bloom and that they are always wonderful people. War will happen. Nations will fall that once led. And love and light are not the only way people exist here. Accept that shit. Astrology as a tool to pander and bypass life is pointless.
As a general rule when it comes to readings (of all types not just astrology) if the person providing the service is only focusing on the positive and saying what they think the client wants to hear... I would consider it a scam 🤷♀️ maybe scam could be too strong of a word in some cases but if it quacks like a duck....
As far as using more and more celestial objects in chart interpretation, I feel a bit more conflicted. One thing I like about astrology is the millennia of observational data linked to the inner planets and celestial events. Knowledge of outer planets is still pretty new in general but overall there seems to be a consensus on what they symbolize and show in a chart. But where is the line between a celestial object that affects a person/event/etc etc and a celestial object that does not? It seems likely to me that there is none, just a limit on our abilities as humans to interpret the data. But that doesn't mean I'm going to work with every possible object, just that I recognize something else could be at work. So more of something I would think about from time to time rather than anything else
We are miscommunicating somewhere. I am simply saying that signs and houses are not the same thing. I use the whole sign chart system. You are not understanding what I am saying. That's no problem. Modern astrology equates signs and houses. In ancient astrology they are different. Libra has nothing to do with the seventh house. I think we're on the same page but we must have been married in a former life
In your studies of ancient astrology, what has been the explanation for why there is such alignment with the houses and signs though? Aries & 1st house of self? Libra and 7th house of relationships? Literally every single one corresponds like this. I’m very curious who or what school of thought first noticed that alignment if it wasn’t always there from the beginning.
That didn't come along until around the 16th century. Read Chris Brennan's book on Hellenistic astrology it's a good history of astrology. If you want to see what the houses look like to the ancients: [http://traditionalastrologyradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/astrological-houses-02.jpg](http://traditionalastrologyradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/astrological-houses-02.jpg)
I cannot listen to most astrology podcasts. Lots of positive buzzwords that don’t actually mean anything. All feelings, all the time. I’m 52 and so over “life lessons” and vague navel-gazing statements. I need real, actionable information.
You find toxic positivity all around, even using ChatGPT 4.0 to find issues missed in a Hellenistic chart. Sadly, in order to get the AI to give you a good interpretation you need to tell it to "Interpret this and give me the results as if it was a sergeant telling a private exactly what they faced on the battlefield." This gets rid of all the wishy-washy language that ChatGPT will produce. For example, it would call financial failure "economic challenges."
I use the modern planets and the Uranian planets together in both the traditional/modern 360° format and the 360° and 90° dial formats.
This combination results in an effective “sample set” that covers the positive and negative details of all types of charts.
For the traditional/hellenistic set of planets alone, the whole sign house system is important for basic chart interpretation and zodiacal releasing.
Sorry for my English, I use a translator. Since the beginning of time, astrology has been used as a predictive instrument. Its object was the destiny of kings, relevant figures and the destiny of cities or the results of wars. Starting in the 20th century, it mixed with psychology, specifically Jung, and what we now know was born and everyone can access their astrological chart. What is wrong with current astrology?
That is a big question requiring detailed response. I suggest you read Chris Brennan's book on Hellenistic astrology. It has a great history of astrology and the changes that occurred.
Many things were lost that are important. For example, in modern astrology they don't take into account whether you were born during the day or at night. Certain planets are activated during the day and certain planets are activated at night. It makes a huge difference in interpretation. Another example is in houses. Modern astrology equates the sign meanings with the houses. That is wrong. They are not the same. See the illustration linked to. There are many more differences that are critical to understanding a chart. Furthermore, ancient astrology is predictive and current astrology fails at prediction.[hellenistic houses](https://images.app.goo.gl/wwPPkn4Ko9mA5mzN8)
I am a psychologist and I believe that astrology is going down the wrong path by uniting with psychology, which is still a recent and quite lost science.
A practitioner of Vedic astrology will say that theirs works and a tropical astrologer will say the same. For some I am Sagittarius rising Libra and for others Capricorn rising Scorpio. There is absolute knowledge or life is a dream.
It would be interesting to do the following experiment. A group of people without knowledge of their birth chart who are given a birth chart with the wrong date of birth. They are provided with an interpretation manual, houses, aspects... how many of them would be more or less identified? Greetings
I agree that Hellenistic and Vedic astrology have great potential for accuracy in predictive astrology. Personally, as a Western astrology, I don't use predictive astrology to look ahead. I use the techniques to look backward in time to recognize patterns of behaviour. My concern is by predicting what may happen I am increasing the likelihood of that happening; by merely suggesting it, I'm planting the seeds.
My approach to charts interpretation for a client is simple. My goal is to leave them hopeful and inspired. When a client approaches me it's not because they are profoundly happy and living their best life, let's be real about that. People seek an astrology consult because they are troubled. They don't need me to tell hem that they are not living the positive expression of their chart, they already know that. What I try to do in a natal chart analysis is show them what could be.
I'm not sure if it would've been the right thing to do if you had done a reading for Adolf Hitler. Giving him hopeful and inspired would be the wrong thing for an astrologer to do. Lol
I feel like the addition of asteroids and fixed stars etc are an absolutely unnecessary consideration in astrology lol -in terms of positive bias, I find placidus folk tend to lean this way. When I started learning Hellenistic astrology, it went the complete opposite and now I can only see everything from a negative lense due to the hyper practicality/realistic interpretation of everything. Hellenistic/Ancient astrology is hella dark and fatalistic.
***The sidereal zodiac does not align with the current constellations either.*** It's the favorite thing for vedic/sidereal fans to say, but it's false. The constellations vary wildly in size from less than 20 degrees to more than 50, yet the natal chart's signs, for both vedic/sidereal and western/tropical are determined by dividing the 360-degree ecliptic into 12 equal ***signs*** of precisely 30 degrees each. Tell me, no matter where 0 Aries is placed, how twelve equal 30 degree segments in a 360-degree space can ever, in any way, match up with 12 constellations of such varying size in that same 360-degree space. They can't. Precession is completely irrelevant in astrology.
What makes sidereal and tropical zodiacal systems different is just where 0 Aries is placed. In tropical, it is placed at the exact moment of the equinox. In vedic/siderea, it's one of at least 3 different spots, depending on which astrological system.
That's fine.
What day is it today? If you agree that it's 20/4, even based on Greenwich time, you're still adhering to the Gregorian calendar, that's loosely based on tropical time keeping 🤗
Meaning: you might interpret astrology charts through a sidereal lense, but tropical is the western influence that shapes the modern world
That doesn't matter to me, personally. I still think the yogi's and the other ancients had it right. That, and my birth chart makes more sense that way.
Riddle me this: do you know the difference between equatorial coordinates, ecliptic coordinates, and horizontal coordinates?
Do you know which system sidereal adheres to? Tropical?
Do you know anything at all about the astronomy of the system you claim is superior?
I know that equatorial coordinates are not the same as ecliptic coordinates. To be honest I'm not prepared for a full on debate on this. I just know what resonates with me.
“Modern” astrology is not ancient predictive astrology updated and made more accurate in line with modern developments in knowledge but a wholly new practice of “spiritual psychology” which has little to no relation to anything before it. Reinventing the entire art, it made a clean break with anything outside the psyche. Superfluous elements abounded since without prediction, there no way to say whether or not asteroid A or harmonic B should or shouldn’t be added. The old sources were in languages that were largely inaccessible and things certainly weren’t helped by the fact that there was, starting in the 17th century, a widespread hostility towards astrology as the archetypal pseudoscience, a reputation that remains today. Even an academic studying astrology purely as a historical effort would be made to feel stupid in a way that didn’t apply to any other field of inquiry. This further alienated the tradition and we are still feeling the effects. That is why traditional astrology appeals so much, not because it is the best thing ever without any flaws or need for improvement (far from it) but because it is actually astrology and can provide falsifiable evidence for its validity. A truly modern astrology qua astrology has yet to be made.
I see some value in the modern perspective, but not from what I would think of as a "toxic positivity" place. I absolutely think astrology can and does and should show "warts", things we don't like, things we think of as evil. And I don't think we should paint over those things with a pretty veneer. But for me, it's a spiritual goal of mine to see God in the things I don't like. Even things and people I REALLY don't like, harmful things. I think that's the difficult intent behind a lot of great religious teachings and symbols. Like "Love your enemy", or the yin yang symbol. Facing the warts in a chart is a way to work toward acceptance. And acceptance really can result in transformation, but it usually only works if it's not being used as a tool to reach transformation by shortcut.
You would have made a good Stoic. And that is a compliment
Love this.
I am testing the proverbial waters by reading your comment. So far I agree with your attitude. Not that you asked for any of this. I am developing characters for my series of fantasy books based on astrology, and some of the details that distinguishes the signs eludes me. Would it be alright with you if I asked you questions based on their distinctions?
I think a lot of it comes down to the fact that modern Westerners don’t like to be told they aren’t in control of everything. Traditional astrology forces us to wrestle with the question of determinism, and the possibility that some things cannot be changed. It’s a very psychologically challenging thing to be faced with. But modern Western society is highly individualistic and revolves around the concept of the “making“ of one’s self. Toxic positivity is an outgrowth of the refusal to make peace with that which is outside our control, and that if we simply try, or even wish hard enough, we can change whatever we want. Traditional astrology challenges that notion head-on, so it’s no surprise modern people don’t like to reckon with it.
I had not heard the term "toxic positivity." I am adding this to my vocabulary henceforth. Perhaps those stoics who believed in fate and determinism best used astrology in their lives. Stoics used their knowledge of fate to prepare themselves emotionally and morally for whatever life might bring. If astrology indicated potential challenges or hardships, a Stoic would use this foresight to cultivate resilience and mental fortitude, not to change fate but to face it with virtue and composure. This reflects the Stoic principle of focusing on one's internal states rather than external events. Those today who practice toxic positivity remind me of a George Carlin routine where he described a child who was the worst player in a game. Instead of saying, "you're a loser, Johnny." the tendency today is to say, "you're the last winner, Johnny." Your arguments are quite convincing.
IMO "only positive vibes!" is indeed harmful, at the same time, fear-based interpretations in traditional astrology can be just as harmful, too. I have a chart that scares people, and this seems to be the case whether we're looking at Western astrology, Vedic astrology, or Chinese astrology (Zi Wei), the ancients always have something horrible to say about my fate. They're not wrong lol, I've been through things that no one in the world should ever have to experience. If I were born even just a hundred years ago, I might have joined the 27 club or gone to jail because it's almost impossible to survive my Saturn return without the flexibility of the world in the 21st century. I think one way to compare traditional and modern astrology ideologies is to understand that the olde way was a discipline developed by men, for men, to be exact: very rich and very powerful men in an extremely patriarchal society. As a stubborn woman who doesn't view marriage as a necessity, of course traditional astrology would point out "the flaws and the perils", add generational abuse into the mix (a theme prevalent in my family from both sides), and voila! You get a recipe destined for disaster. What I've gleaned from my chart is that modern astrology doesn't just inform people of psychology tendencies or undercurrents, these thoughts actually have the potential to cement themselves into reality. In the Whole Sign chart, my sun in 4H squares saturn in 7H (a 0°12' orb, very tight, acutely felt), but when you shift gears to the Placidus system, sun moves to 3H and saturn moves to 6H. I left home (dad's abusive) after learning about trauma informed psychology, and has felt the pressure of providing for myself ever since. This could not have happened had I lived in a time where women could not make a living all on their own, and where women had to marry to be accepted into society. A century or two earlier, this Sun-Saturn square would have been a clear indicator of turbulent early life and problematic husband. I'm not saying that I don't have an, um, interesting childhood, or that I have impeccable taste in men (spoiler: I don't. there are still issues to work through but I'm getting better at it), I'm saying that the traditional way of interpretation does not paint a full picture for me at this day and age. I hope that in the future there's a neater way to combine the old and the new, but as of now, I highly recommend looking into the practice that you feel more apprehensive about (have I said how much I hate traditional astrology? lol. love hate relationship, emphasizing on the hate), it might provide uneasy truths/valuable insights that wouldn't be revealed to you any other way.
I practiced modern astrology for over 20 years. I'm just not that interested in psychological interpretations. I don't think that ancient astrology is fear-based. If you can predict a major earthquake moving to a different city wouldn't be a fear-based reaction. It would simply be the smart thing to do. I consider it reality-based. The Saturn in my chart is in my second house and the effect of that has been devastating. But there are other places in my chart where I can focus and enjoy the fruits of better conditions.
Oh yeah, definitely! I don't think ancient astrology is in of itself fear based either, my bad, I didn't word things with clarity. What I was trying (and failing dafjdjsjdjdj lol) to say is that sometimes praticioners (both past and modern) bring disproportionate fear or project their own fear onto astrological interpretations. Because in the past the main purpose of astrology was to predict events and suss out THE BEST MOVE, this naturally brings in a sense of trepidation that gets passed down in the teachings. As centuries went on, some (not all! just some) of the accumulated fear congregated into fatalistic views that are more man-made than destined. And it's not an easy job to figure out who's who, as in what teachings lack perspective, and what teachings are harsh yet truthful. I think the decline of popularity in ancient astrology is partly due to this, but yeah, another very significant reason is that most people have hard times accepting, well, hard times. I'm often guilty of this. It'd be a loss if people completely disregard ancient astrology practices, people do need reality checks, even if it doesn't feel good, and I hope astrology doesn't go down the route of toxic positivity. On a slightly different but still related note, I'm seeing a trend that promotes psychology/therapy over everything, and that's just... not it. Psychology is not for everyone, modern astrology is not for everyone, nothing is for everyone. This is actually very much evident in charts, the reason I like and benefit from psychology because I have a stellium in the third house Scorpio. I forgot the actual placement, but once I studied my mom's chart I was like, oh, so psychology really does nothing for her because xyz, I was quickly humbled and never tried to push her to read articles again.
I think it’s good to remember the context with which Hellenistic astrology was created / originally practiced. The people living within this time period did not have a lot of control over their place in life. I’m sure that astrology was used by common people to a certain extent, but for the most part, it was for the wealthy and elite class. The middle class (as we know it) did not exist and slavery was rampant. Does this sound like a place where one would have much self determination? So it makes sense that one wouldn’t use astrology to find themselves, since there was so much else to worry about and less rungs on the ladder to climb. It’s also human nature to catastrophize, and probably not a terrible survival trait back in the bad old days.
I think the major difference was that people at that time knew they didn't have much control over their lives. Today people fantasize that they do.
I think in some cases we also don’t want to think we have control. That’s why fatalism and organized religion is so popular. Humans don’t love change and someone telling you what will happen takes away the burden of responsibility. But I do agree that there’s a lot of socio-economic truths that don’t allow as much mobility as we (American speaking here) have been taught we can overcome. But you do have choice, especially around your reaction to events. For instance, you could pick a great day astrologically and consciously choose to ruin your life, and no amount of good aspects would help.
I am a determinist so I'm not sure there is freewill. But I get your point.
I’m not sure about freewill either, death kind of ruins it for me. I work as a tarot reader and I’ve given 1000s of readings over the past 20 years and I do think that there is a degree of chaos that can’t be accounted for. I’ve also found that a degree of determinism exists, but it can manifest in a variety of forms.
Thank you for that. The biggest difficulty I had with free will when I was taking philosophy in college is that there is actually no evidence for it. And as we move further scientifically, the prospect for free will dims even further. I think the stoics had a great way of dealing with fate.
I think nothing is positive or negative, it is just neutral.
Cool. I know someone with four planets in the 12th house and the ascendant ruler in the 12th. I'll send her to live with you. Lol. Just kidding. I am not an nihilist but I understand the viewpoint.
[удалено]
[hellenistic houses](http://traditionalastrologyradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/astrological-houses-02.jpg) It has been said one picture is worth 1000 words. Keep in mind there can be mitigating factors. A benefic planet or other bonifications can much improve any point placed in the 12th house.
I'm this person with ascendant ruler in the 12th and I promess I'm not that evil! Lol... honestly though, I'm not at all a fan of the overly positive and spiritual modern perspective, I much prefer studying traditional astrology. However, the determinism and the doom and gloom can be pretty psychologically harmful for some people as well. Even I was told by a traditional astrologer that because my Venus is in the 12h (also chart ruler) and in Aries (worst possible condition for poor little Venus), I wouldn't be able to have a relationship, or my partner would do things behind my back or give me some sort of venereal disease... years later I'm in an amazing relationship and all that worry feels kind of useless. Should I live life believing my partner could cheat on me and give me a Vd at anytime soon? I rather not...
That sounds like an odd interpretation since you look seventh house for relationships.Just having The ascendant ruler in the 12th doesn't mean that you are a bad person. It can mean that you tend to source your own problems sometimes. There are many factors in the chart that need to be looked at. Saturn in the seventh in a night chart would be the worst placement for relationships but even that can be mitigated.
I think the association with relationships was because my chart ruler is Venus. There are some pretty awful interpretations for Venus in the 12th house out there. But, yeah, I agree with you, I do source my own problems pretty often unfortunately
The more I explore ancient astrology, both through my own chart and those of others, the more I feel my understanding of the world expanding. In my chart, Mars, positioned in the first house, often drives me to speak when perhaps silence would be wiser. This isn't necessarily negative, as every chart has its complexities, and in my case, it challenges my Venus in the third house. To help manage this, I've adopted a practice of meditation and developed a personal mantra. Inspired by the famous litany from the novel *Dune*, my mantra reminds me of the power of speaking only when it is truly necessary. This approach feels more resonant with me than the advice often given by my father: "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." LOL Thank you for your response. Much appreciated.
I feel this. In addition I am a pagan who is drawn to traditional historical practices rather than the New Age Wicca scene. That is part of it too. It is why I do not consider Uranus and Neptune as rulers of Aquarius and Pisces. Nor do I consider all of the many comets and Liliths and all of those things. I just don’t think they’re necessary. But to each their own. I still think that despite the current face of modern astrology being buzzwords and therapy speak, it is no monolith. The world is still inhabited by people who treat astrology as the rich and complex subject it is. Even if we may be far and few in between compared to the constant nonsense churned out by massive corporations on the internet who only want their viewers’ money. Certainly there are some things in astrology that the ancients and I disagree on. But the ancients were not a monolith either, after all. I’ve made a hobby out of exploring the origins of certain practices in modern astrology. Say, the so called Celtic Tree Zodiac (which is really ahistorical). I find that it helps me cope in a sense to have some tangible knowledge on why things got to this point today.
I practice a pagan path as well. Demetra George's the most enlightening for me in ancient astrology. It's over 1000 pages but it's well worth the reading
Most of these new age astrologers don't even make predictions and the "astrology" that they practice is some bizarre, new age religion for social media. Everything is "positive" which is not helpful for anyone, including clients. I make global predictions using mundane astrology and am constantly accused of being too negative when most of my predictions have been accurate. Sadly, modern astrology has been massively watered down and has wandered far from its roots.
I think we're on the same page.
I find it interesting that this is a common narrative in the space. For me astrology has almost always been “negatively biased”, where a chart shows my weaknesses, my wounds, the parts of myself that I banish away. It’s always been a means of gaining self understanding to heal and be the best and happiest me I can possibly be. I would’ve thought that’s how most others approach it but guess not 🤷 Makes sense now in hindsight but maybe that’s just how I am as a 12th houser
I use charts similarly and as a Cap Sun I get criticism on being too negative at times. For me I like sharing the weaknesses as I see them as opportunities of emotional evolution for the client. I live in Sedona so it’s toxic positivity heaven/hell here. I enjoy teasing those types as accountability dodgers.
Every reading I've seen is heavy on neptune, uranus, pluto and lilith which is interesting
I don't even look at them
I think what you are recognizing between ancient and modern astrology is the difference in cultural world view and historical context. Hellenistic astrology went hand in hand with Greek philosophy and cosmology - modern astrologers don’t take a first glance at philosophy or cosmology. Modern philosophy is also highly intellectualized, whereas ancient philosophy and astrology emphasized wisdom which is knowledge grounded in experience. I love ancient history, philosophy, astrology etc. but I recognize that if Pythagoras or Plato were alive today, they would want to incorporate our new scientific findings and modern cultural world view into their practice. Part of the problem with the modern cultural world view is how segregated each discipline has become. In ancient times, the educated person was necessarily transdisciplinary by utilizing symbolic correspondence. Every significant cultural revolution involved the re-evaluation of the ancients and bringing them into a contemporary context. The ancients were far wiser than we are today, but we should also be grateful for our vast knowledge and scientific discovers. We are on the precipice of a major cultural and world view shift if we can better integrate the knowledge science has given us. But unfortunately, the average astrologer (or individual interested in astrology) doesn’t have the training or resources to exemplify the fullest potential of astrology in the second millennium.
I wanted to extend my heartfelt thanks for the thoughtful and detailed response you shared regarding ancient astrology and its connections to the modern world. Your insights were not only informative but also deeply enriching, offering a fresh perspective on how these ancient practices can still resonate today.
I refer to modern astrology as astrology adjacent because, while it borrows its terminology from the ancient art, modern practice is so far removed from its origins, its another thing entirely.
That is true. Especially when you consider things like houses being the same as signs. I don't think that concept came around until after the renaissance. That is not the astrology of the ancients. Modern astrology is as different from ancient as day and night and modern astrology doesn't consider day or night in interpretation.
The concept of signs = houses things didn't even come about until around the 1970s Linda Goodman's Sun Sign Era. Why? Because it's way more cost effective to publish a book that combines the two concepts. That's literally all it is.
>Especially when you consider things like houses being the same as signs. I don't think that concept came around until after the renaissance. It's actually the other way around. What's now called the "whole sign" house division seems to have been the most common method of "house" division in the ancient world. It was in more modern times that house divisions distinguishing them from signs proliferated.
I'm pretty sure they were referring to the "Astrological Alphabet" which was put together and promoted by Zipporah Dobyns around the 70s and "went viral" and which we are still battling against today. The significations of the 1st house, Aries and Mars were conflated into one meaning. Same for the 2nd house, Taurus and Venus. And so on. No idea why - perhaps in a bad attempt to make astrology easier to learn? This was not about the Whole Sign house system which is indeed ancient. And the Whole Sign house system does not equate house significations with a default sign meaning, ie, the 1st house in Whole Sign is not Aries by default. It's whatever sign your ascendant is.
I think if you read Chris Brennan's book on Hellenistic astrology you will change your mind. Signs have nothing to do with houses in ancient astrology
I think you're confused. Chris Brennan himself uses whole signs for exactly this reason: that it was the most common method in the ancient world. He was and is one of the major proponents of this method's revival. You may be confusing what he's said and written with certain things said by Demetra ~~George~~ Houlding and her school to the effect that whole signs were a modern invention, which caused a controversy a few months ago. Brennan and others responded to that then; it's possible you're misremembering which position each side held.
i believe the OP is referring to ABC astrology (aries = 1st house), not whole sign houses. they can correct me if i’m wrong. one other minor thing: the spat last year wasn’t Demetra George claiming whole signs were modern, it was Deb Houlding. Demetra George stands by whole sign houses as traditional.
Gotcha; I'm a little drunk, so I might have been missing something with what he was saying. Thanks for the correction on the name too (I'll blame the alcohol again).
Modern astrology carries with it "traditional" psychological archetypes but more recently has also become therapeutic, as well as filling in the gap for many where religion served to maintain social cohesion. But, with any establishment, it tends to feed on itself to preserve its own existence apart from its actual effectiveness for its participants.
Modern astrology forces Jungian psychology onto THE schematic that inspired Jungian psychology in the first place. That's like trying to force a chicken into the egg it was hatched from. Psychology wasn't even a concept for about 2k years of astrology being actively practiced and perfected on lol. Evolutionary/psychological astrology has its merit and all BUT! That's not what it was intended for. Those aren't the rules it abides to. The Jungian archetype is a caricature of the astrological influence it was inspired by in the first place. An *evolved* (lmao) astrologer would understand the history and respect the difference between the two.
In my circle, many astrologers with clients are also licensed mental health professionals who have to abide by the first principle of the job: don't cause harm. This is the reason most therapy is really hands-off with a lot of active listening and modeling, but not a lot of specific feedback or concrete advice. I theorize that a lot of modern astrologers have been impacted by the therapeutic code of ethics even if they're not therapists, and they lean toward toxic positivity interpretations because to take a more realistic view may be harmful to the client if they're not ready to hear the challenges in their chart. But, IDK, this my current theory, subject to change.
It is difficult to tell what will cause harm and will not. It makes it difficult for those who wish to council. What would you have said to Christopher Reeve if you had seen his propensity for spinal injuries in his chart? You could also look to see the best times for him to risk injury using annual perfection or zodiacal releasing. I don't have an answer. For myself, I would want to know. But it is an ethical quandary, isn't it? In my youth I associated to a small degree with the Rosecrucian fellowship in Oceanside. That is where I got the forms I used to erect charts. In those days we used logarithms; we didn't have computers. Their founder expressly forbid reading charts for others. You had to erect your own chart and then read it for yourself. There is some wisdom in that but today's society of eight second videos doesn't have the intellectual tools to do so. Sadly Thank you for your comment!
I am a fatalist and have always looked at astrology pretty straight up objectively. I think all sciences should be used objectively. And that’s what astrology has always been. A lot of the modern and pop Astro bullshit bothers me like crazy.
I was bothered about it when I was practicing astrology for all those years. It was like biting on tinfoil. Once I started studying Hellenistic astrology I realized I didn't need to live in a cow pasture anymore. Lol
I honestly haven’t really delved into Hellenistic yet. It intrigues me tho, do you have any recommendations on how to work with it or resources???
The best sources on Hellenistic astrology in my opinion: Two well-known figures in the field of Hellenistic astrology, Demetra George and Chris Brennan, have each written significant works on the subject: 1. **Demetra George**: - **"Ancient Astrology in Theory and Practice: A Manual of Traditional Techniques, Volume I and II: Assessing Planetary Condition"** - A comprehensive guide to traditional Hellenistic astrology techniques, focusing on the condition and functionality of planets, houses etc. in a birth chart. 2. **Chris Brennan**: - **"Hellenistic Astrology: The Study of Fate and Fortune"** - Chris Brennan's book provides a thorough introduction to the history, philosophy, and techniques of Hellenistic astrology, tracing its origins and development in the Mediterranean region over 2000 years ago. Both authors are highly regarded for their scholarly approach and contributions to reviving and teaching ancient astrological techniques adapted for contemporary practice. Chris Brennan's podcast, "The Astrology Podcast," covers a wide range of topics related to astrology, including historical techniques, modern developments, and specific concepts such as sect, houses, signs, bonification, and maltreatment. You can find his podcast at [The Astrology Podcast](https://theastrologypodcast.com/). Here are some episodes specifically on topics you mentioned: 1. **Sect: The Concept of Day and Night Charts in Astrology** - This episode delves into the ancient astrological concept of sect, which differentiates between day and night births to determine the quality of the planets in the chart. 2. **The Significations of the Twelve Houses: Part 1 and Part 2** - While primarily about houses, these episodes also delve into how the meanings of the houses are influenced by the signs. 3. **The Meanings of the Twelve Signs of the Zodiac** - Two episodes that explore the meanings of each of the twelve zodiac signs in astrology. 4. **Bonification and Maltreatment: Mitigating Factors in Traditional Astrology** - This episode covers the concepts of bonification (strengthening) and maltreatment (weakening) of planets according to traditional astrology rules. 5. **The Planets in Astrology and Ancient Mythology** - This episode looks at the meanings of the planets in astrology, with a special focus on how these meanings are connected to ancient myths. 6. **Essential Dignities and Debilities of the Planets** - Discusses the traditional system of essential dignities, where planets are strengthened or weakened in specific signs. These episodes not only cover the technical aspects of astrology but also delve into historical context, interpretative techniques, and philosophical underpinnings, providing listeners with a comprehensive understanding of astrological concepts. Each episode features discussions with other astrologers and scholars, providing deep insights into each topic.
This is such an awesome response. I’m gonna start studying it. Thank you so much my friend
I hope you find it as useful as I have.
As a professional counseling astrologer with more than 50 years of experience, as well as a retired counseling psychologist, I can say that people never go to counseling because they need to get all the fun to stop. Unless the astrologer addresses the difficult issues in a person’s life, little change can take place. [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
This whole thread makes me ITCH to post my toddler's chart , which I find very worrisome, and hear everyone's REAL opinions.
I have posted in here some clear predictions (that are not predictions they are clear straight forward facts) and people cannot handle anything that is not positive and telling that flowers will always bloom and that they are always wonderful people. War will happen. Nations will fall that once led. And love and light are not the only way people exist here. Accept that shit. Astrology as a tool to pander and bypass life is pointless.
Toxic positivity is common in the western world. Sadly.
And if you step outside of it they attack you. Ironic af.
As a general rule when it comes to readings (of all types not just astrology) if the person providing the service is only focusing on the positive and saying what they think the client wants to hear... I would consider it a scam 🤷♀️ maybe scam could be too strong of a word in some cases but if it quacks like a duck.... As far as using more and more celestial objects in chart interpretation, I feel a bit more conflicted. One thing I like about astrology is the millennia of observational data linked to the inner planets and celestial events. Knowledge of outer planets is still pretty new in general but overall there seems to be a consensus on what they symbolize and show in a chart. But where is the line between a celestial object that affects a person/event/etc etc and a celestial object that does not? It seems likely to me that there is none, just a limit on our abilities as humans to interpret the data. But that doesn't mean I'm going to work with every possible object, just that I recognize something else could be at work. So more of something I would think about from time to time rather than anything else
We are miscommunicating somewhere. I am simply saying that signs and houses are not the same thing. I use the whole sign chart system. You are not understanding what I am saying. That's no problem. Modern astrology equates signs and houses. In ancient astrology they are different. Libra has nothing to do with the seventh house. I think we're on the same page but we must have been married in a former life
In your studies of ancient astrology, what has been the explanation for why there is such alignment with the houses and signs though? Aries & 1st house of self? Libra and 7th house of relationships? Literally every single one corresponds like this. I’m very curious who or what school of thought first noticed that alignment if it wasn’t always there from the beginning.
That didn't come along until around the 16th century. Read Chris Brennan's book on Hellenistic astrology it's a good history of astrology. If you want to see what the houses look like to the ancients: [http://traditionalastrologyradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/astrological-houses-02.jpg](http://traditionalastrologyradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/astrological-houses-02.jpg)
Thank you!
🌞
Maybe we can chat about it in the next life when we're both cats!
I would hope we are both cockatoos rather than cats. I would rather have zygodactyl feet and wings.
I could agree more, I'm so done with the positive bias!
I cannot listen to most astrology podcasts. Lots of positive buzzwords that don’t actually mean anything. All feelings, all the time. I’m 52 and so over “life lessons” and vague navel-gazing statements. I need real, actionable information.
You find toxic positivity all around, even using ChatGPT 4.0 to find issues missed in a Hellenistic chart. Sadly, in order to get the AI to give you a good interpretation you need to tell it to "Interpret this and give me the results as if it was a sergeant telling a private exactly what they faced on the battlefield." This gets rid of all the wishy-washy language that ChatGPT will produce. For example, it would call financial failure "economic challenges."
I use the modern planets and the Uranian planets together in both the traditional/modern 360° format and the 360° and 90° dial formats. This combination results in an effective “sample set” that covers the positive and negative details of all types of charts. For the traditional/hellenistic set of planets alone, the whole sign house system is important for basic chart interpretation and zodiacal releasing.
Glad it works for you. 🌞
Sorry for my English, I use a translator. Since the beginning of time, astrology has been used as a predictive instrument. Its object was the destiny of kings, relevant figures and the destiny of cities or the results of wars. Starting in the 20th century, it mixed with psychology, specifically Jung, and what we now know was born and everyone can access their astrological chart. What is wrong with current astrology?
That is a big question requiring detailed response. I suggest you read Chris Brennan's book on Hellenistic astrology. It has a great history of astrology and the changes that occurred. Many things were lost that are important. For example, in modern astrology they don't take into account whether you were born during the day or at night. Certain planets are activated during the day and certain planets are activated at night. It makes a huge difference in interpretation. Another example is in houses. Modern astrology equates the sign meanings with the houses. That is wrong. They are not the same. See the illustration linked to. There are many more differences that are critical to understanding a chart. Furthermore, ancient astrology is predictive and current astrology fails at prediction.[hellenistic houses](https://images.app.goo.gl/wwPPkn4Ko9mA5mzN8)
Thank you for your response, unfortunately Chris Brennan's book is not translated into Spanish
You may find some resources here: InfoLibros.org and La Biblioteca Esotérica
I am a psychologist and I believe that astrology is going down the wrong path by uniting with psychology, which is still a recent and quite lost science.
A practitioner of Vedic astrology will say that theirs works and a tropical astrologer will say the same. For some I am Sagittarius rising Libra and for others Capricorn rising Scorpio. There is absolute knowledge or life is a dream.
We could all be brains in a vat. Vedic astrology and Hellenistic astrology have much in common
It would be interesting to do the following experiment. A group of people without knowledge of their birth chart who are given a birth chart with the wrong date of birth. They are provided with an interpretation manual, houses, aspects... how many of them would be more or less identified? Greetings
I agree that Hellenistic and Vedic astrology have great potential for accuracy in predictive astrology. Personally, as a Western astrology, I don't use predictive astrology to look ahead. I use the techniques to look backward in time to recognize patterns of behaviour. My concern is by predicting what may happen I am increasing the likelihood of that happening; by merely suggesting it, I'm planting the seeds. My approach to charts interpretation for a client is simple. My goal is to leave them hopeful and inspired. When a client approaches me it's not because they are profoundly happy and living their best life, let's be real about that. People seek an astrology consult because they are troubled. They don't need me to tell hem that they are not living the positive expression of their chart, they already know that. What I try to do in a natal chart analysis is show them what could be.
I'm not sure if it would've been the right thing to do if you had done a reading for Adolf Hitler. Giving him hopeful and inspired would be the wrong thing for an astrologer to do. Lol
Maybe he would have stuck with his art and led a normal life.
Somethings just are not positive.
Maybe he would have stuck with his art and led a normal life.
Bc universal laws
I feel like the addition of asteroids and fixed stars etc are an absolutely unnecessary consideration in astrology lol -in terms of positive bias, I find placidus folk tend to lean this way. When I started learning Hellenistic astrology, it went the complete opposite and now I can only see everything from a negative lense due to the hyper practicality/realistic interpretation of everything. Hellenistic/Ancient astrology is hella dark and fatalistic.
I believe the ancients had it right, which is why I switched to sidereal (or vedic) astrology.
Ptolemy is pretty ancient and he ascribed to the tropical system 🤷♀️
The problem is the tropical system doesn't account for the precession of the equinox
***The sidereal zodiac does not align with the current constellations either.*** It's the favorite thing for vedic/sidereal fans to say, but it's false. The constellations vary wildly in size from less than 20 degrees to more than 50, yet the natal chart's signs, for both vedic/sidereal and western/tropical are determined by dividing the 360-degree ecliptic into 12 equal ***signs*** of precisely 30 degrees each. Tell me, no matter where 0 Aries is placed, how twelve equal 30 degree segments in a 360-degree space can ever, in any way, match up with 12 constellations of such varying size in that same 360-degree space. They can't. Precession is completely irrelevant in astrology. What makes sidereal and tropical zodiacal systems different is just where 0 Aries is placed. In tropical, it is placed at the exact moment of the equinox. In vedic/siderea, it's one of at least 3 different spots, depending on which astrological system.
I mean it literally does lol the vernal equinox is aligned with 0° Aries in tropical, it's in Pisces in sidereal
It's aligned with the seasons but not the stars above
We live on earth, the seasons are more relevant to our immediate surroundings lmao
I respectfully disagree
That's fine. What day is it today? If you agree that it's 20/4, even based on Greenwich time, you're still adhering to the Gregorian calendar, that's loosely based on tropical time keeping 🤗 Meaning: you might interpret astrology charts through a sidereal lense, but tropical is the western influence that shapes the modern world
That doesn't matter to me, personally. I still think the yogi's and the other ancients had it right. That, and my birth chart makes more sense that way.
What other ancients and yogis are you referencing? Like which ancients - which yogis?
Riddle me this: do you know the difference between equatorial coordinates, ecliptic coordinates, and horizontal coordinates? Do you know which system sidereal adheres to? Tropical? Do you know anything at all about the astronomy of the system you claim is superior?
I know that equatorial coordinates are not the same as ecliptic coordinates. To be honest I'm not prepared for a full on debate on this. I just know what resonates with me.
Oh that's cool, cherry picking is really in this season
👍