Astrology: Overlaying Four Directions, Zodiac Signs & ... the Tarot?!

EFS White · April 17, 2015

Hi everyone.

I hope to find here some among you who have accumulated solid astrological understanding and are willing to share their understanding with me and explain how such astrological understanding can be used and incorporated into energetic practice (in my case Qi Gong and Nei Gong).

--

I am fairly new to studying anything astrological, and frankly, the only reason I have begun to look into this is because I read tons of books on various subjects but astrological references seem to keep popping up throughout whatever it is I am researching.

It started with books I read on Feng Shui years ago; meanwhile I have deepened my studies of Qi Gong, Nei Gong and mystical traditions (I read some Gurdijeff, some about the Essenes, the Egyptians, the Kabbala, some Western Hermeticism and Magick, the Bible, the Tarot etc etc) and somehow all of these traditions or knowledge systems seem to point to an understanding that each direction and / or constellation exudes distinct kinds of energy or vibrational influences.

So here are some of my questions:

- If we are indeed dealing with natural universal forces there should be strong correlations ascribed to distinct directions and / or constellations throughout these traditions. Is this understanding correct?

- Thus, should it not then be possible to sort of "overlay" the various teachings of the energetic qualities of the four directions (or six directions in some traditions) with the signs of the Zodiac and other knowledge systems? Do you know of researchers who have done this?

- I am curious whether or not the archetypes of Tarot, the "24 Elders", the "72 Names of God", the angels of the Key of Solomon, can be correlated to an astrological system as well -- and if so, how so? Any pointers? (Again, my basic assumption here is that we are dealing with a physical or metaphysical reality with distinct energetic qualities, and that these qualities therefore must be / should be the same throughout all systems)

- If there is indeed an energetic grid surrounding us and its energies affect us and can possibly be used how do you zero and align this grid? For instance, the pole star (which is mentioned very often) only appears to us a point of stillness due to earth's rotation around itself; so must we not anchor the grid to the stars and constellations themselves? How is this done in practice? How do you practically align yourself with distinct energies?

- Lastly, I know we are dealing with matters here that are considered "metaphysical". Nonetheless, my line of thinking is that if these energies correlate directly to distinct directions in our celestial dome we can very well interpret these energies as "physical", no? Have any of you found something that could qualify as an "understanding in terms of physics" to explain astrology?

--

As you can see my questions are very broad, limited in understanding, and all over the place. As I would really like to deepen my understanding here, I would welcome all of your input, personal experiences, links to good resources and recommendations for books.

Thank you.

Zhongyongdaoist · April 17, 2015

You certainly know how to open a nice wiggly can of worms don't you?

There is a great deal to be learned from studying "astrology", this is because astrology is based on traditional cosmology and thus whether you want to accept the idea that astrology works, which it does whether one wants to accept the idea or not, a great deal of traditional information is contained in it and it must be studied in order to access that information.

To begin with I would like to point out something I have said elsewhere:

Now most people just stop here and say, well they can't all be right, but the conclusion to which I came very early, like before I was twenty, was that they could all be right to a certain extent, by which I mean, that if we look at their logical/systemic forms as being like a lens that when it brings somethings into focus, but blurs other things, or like a color filter that separates out "information" about a single color, each of these might be viewed as complementary systems that bring out different aspects of reality, just as the experiments of quantum mechanics brings out the wavelike and particlelike properties of “particles” on very small scale. For some of these it may even be possible to do what I mentioned here in regard to alchemy and chemistry . . . (Emphasis added, ZYD)

I advise you to look at the whole post from which I am quoting and remain very open minded in pursuing this type of study because culturally China, Indian and Europe have somewhat different cosmological models which represent different but complementary paradigms and investigating them is a complex study which can hardly be undertaken in a format like this one, but it is one which is of great value on several levels.

I don't really have time now to enter into a long discussion about this, but did want to point out that you will gain a lot by being open minded and paying attention to the formal, "logical" structure of the different systems that have been worked out over the years, because in a very real sense they are complementary.

First the Chinese and Western systems are the most different and thus the most fruitful to study in terms of widening ones "intellectual bandwidth". The Indian system is much more similar to the Western system and shares so many commonalities while at the same time a different emphasis in the details, that familiarity with one is very useful for understanding the other, as long as one remains open minded and keeps the big picture in mind.

So, as long as one avoids the mistake of assuming that one of these big systems is better than the other, one can definitely gain from this type of study, they are complementary and bring different aspects of reality and experience into focus. If one starts to get sectarian about it, well, the boards are full of acrimonious rants about why one system is a the absolute truth and another the height of folly.

For myself, I have put most of my time and energy into understanding the Chinese and Western systems and I value what I have learned from each. I am sure others here will enter into the discussion, bear in mind what I have said about "filters" and pray for an intellectual "babel fish".

sasblamthanb · April 17, 2015

Start at

The Round Art of Astrology

book by A.T. Mann

(Fakipedia info re the auther at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._T._Mann )

also, it looks like he wrote book re your questions

The Mandala Astrological Tarot

... Re your tarot ?'s ... through the years, the cards’ ‘meanings’ derived from classic texts never resonated with me. Then it occurred to me the 78 cards may be a developmental ‘journey map’ ... most of which are prenatal ! --ie only a few cards relate to / map post natal ‘developmental archetypes’

Have fun...

Edited April 17, 2015 by sasblamthanb

Nungali · April 18, 2015

Firstly, I may not be much help here as I am not practising any Chinese system and any solid understanding I have may be relative.

Secondly, I like Donald's quote of Donald; I often see these different systems, ways of understanding, etc , as facets of a crystal / gem , it all depends which 'angle' one comes from .... get 'far enough back' ( have a wide enough field of view) and you will see the gem .... of 'great worth'.

Hi everyone.

I hope to find here some among you who have accumulated solid astrological understanding and are willing to share their understanding with me and explain how such astrological understanding can be used and incorporated into energetic practice (in my case Qi Gong and Nei Gong).

--

I am fairly new to studying anything astrological, and frankly, the only reason I have begun to look into this is because I read tons of books on various subjects but astrological references seem to keep popping up throughout whatever it is I am researching.

I think this is because, potentially, we all have access to that map (or all used to, nowadays, some rarely have access to an unpolluted sky - especially with light pollution) and astrology seems, in part, a system that can link across many of these different other systems, we are all familiar with its components .

It started with books I read on Feng Shui years ago; meanwhile I have deepened my studies of Qi Gong, Nei Gong and mystical traditions (I read some Gurdijeff, some about the Essenes, the Egyptians, the Kabbala, some Western Hermeticism and Magick, the Bible, the Tarot etc etc) and somehow all of these traditions or knowledge systems seem to point to an understanding that each direction and / or constellation exudes distinct kinds of energy or vibrational influences.

So here are some of my questions:

- If we are indeed dealing with natural universal forces there should be strong correlations ascribed to distinct directions and / or constellations throughout these traditions. Is this understanding correct?

Its an assumption I made quiet early, but many modern astrologers disputed with me on this.

There are two sides to this ; one is that it is a cultural system that uses comparisons and symbolism relevant locally (ie. projected onto the cosmos from the culture)

the other side is that there is some intrinsic energy 'out there' locally (in that 'sector' ) and the local culture is influenced and developed by that ( see below *) - projected on to the culture from the cosmos .

- Thus, should it not then be possible to sort of "overlay" the various teachings of the energetic qualities of the four directions (or six directions in some traditions) with the signs of the Zodiac and other knowledge systems? Do you know of researchers who have done this?

Some things overlay and some dont.

* one example I have found is that one of the stories from indigenous culture here, about the forming of the asterism we know as Scorpio , is the most 'Scorpionic' themed story I have heard anywhere ... and it is an absolutely outrageous one for Aboriginal culture ... each one of the most sacred taboos are broken, one after the other, not just broken, but stomped and ground with the heel!

Of course, there was absolutely no contact with the Aboriginals and the Greeks or Persians before they 'got' this story here.

Then you have other stories that dont fit the same way; like in Wardaman culture (further north) based on a series of stories about a little boy that bit the dogs ear and the dog ran off along the Milky way. Its a whole mytho-poetic cycle of, individuation, initiations, and tribal law.

Some are so different to be unrecognisable at first. In desert cultures (or any with really bright skies) here , often shapes and symbols are seen in the spaces where there are no stars, as there are so many stars elsewhere, they virtually all blot together in a blaze of light . In a way, it is a total reversal of our 'pareidolia ' .

Then you can compound that with a totally localised seasonal astrology to do with hunting gathering or agriculture husbandry;

When these line up (in a certain direction ) one would be 'allowed' to gather emu eggs

So, they may be similar modes being used all over the place, but depending on what mode, the components may be arranged differently or the details of the theme totally different. or a different theme.

The ancient Egyptians used the night sky as a measure of passing hours via decans at night . The Persian system was different, the 'earlier Zoroastrian ' different again, although unknown, postulated to be a pre-cursor.

Now, put all that in a blender.

It will be a lot harder to nut out, IMO, using standard, modern, western, mundane, tropical astrology.

- I am curious whether or not the archetypes of Tarot, the "24 Elders", the "72 Names of God", the angels of the Key of Solomon, can be correlated to an astrological system as well -- and if so, how so? Any pointers? (Again, my basic assumption here is that we are dealing with a physical or metaphysical reality with distinct energetic qualities, and that these qualities therefore must be / should be the same throughout all systems)

Sort of. A lot is loose correlation. The way the Tarot was first associated with astrology and Kabbalah was a pretty loose correlation.

As far as them 'should' being all the same system - see my comments above.

Where they all are one system is in the original form, the cosmos itself, any interpretation of that will be a step down and viewed and used through our own lenses' time, place, culture, self. But at times, parts of them do seem to correlate in interesting ways.

If you have a map of the territory, inner and outer - cosmos and psyche - and it is internally consistent, and it works for you .... . Usually it is best to settle on one system and stick with it until certain basics are realised.

There are a few 'Tables of Correspondences' out there. I guess they are 'relative' to, to an extent.

I think the 'Tarot of Ceremonial Magicians' tries to correlate some of things you mentioned above together. Not that I recommend it.

I suppose any 'directional' overlay with tarot, astrology and ('early' ) Kabbalah would be

But that is 'just' a system (and some debate endlessly on these things ) .

- If there is indeed an energetic grid surrounding us and its energies affect us and can possibly be used how do you zero and align this grid? For instance, the pole star (which is mentioned very often) only appears to us a point of stillness due to earth's rotation around itself; so must we not anchor the grid to the stars and constellations themselves? How is this done in practice? How do you practically align yourself with distinct energies?

yes, a can of worms indeed!

IF one is going to 'examine the intellectual validity' of a geocentric view and then try and work astrology on 'literal assumptions' (when they might actually have a very high 'emotional / imaginative' aspect needed to work ? ) then we have to eliminate asterisms and constellations as well, as they are a geocentric POV construct as well.

Going back to space and direction, I think we need to deal with the basic 3 , which would equate to , firstly, east west - the obvious day and night cycles, (hence markers of significant, bright stars or asterisms would be sought that were near or on the ecliptic; Regulus, Vega, etc. The Persians had 4 'royal stars' so marked, for the seasons ... where does the year start?

That too depends where you are, and like the start of the day, in different cultures can be midnight, dawn, sunset.

then north south - the seasons - there you have the 'crossroads' and can pinpoint a location.

For example, the Egyptians had the east west symbolism going strongly ( the rotation of the 'heavens' ) , the Nile supplied the focus of a main civilisation's river running north south (unusual, usually east west - sort of) and the culmination, and both sort of tending towards a pole star ( or one that was 'immortal' - never set below the horizon) AND 'agriculturally' due to their specific area - the flooding of the Nile, the 'starting point' was based on Sirius (in the position / time of its rising with the Sun).

I feel it is all relative.

- Lastly, I know we are dealing with matters here that are considered "metaphysical". Nonetheless, my line of thinking is that if these energies correlate directly to distinct directions in our celestial dome we can very well interpret these energies as "physical", no? Have any of you found something that could qualify as an "understanding in terms of physics" to explain astrology?

The most obvious is with 'seasonal astrology' - which all actually does relate to real celestial mechanics.

Then there are the 'cultural aspects', some I outlined above.

Then the issue of what type of astrology are we talking about? Modern astrology might be trying to postulate something like that, but in the context of an understanding of modern science. It might be better to get (at least also) the 'old' view of the cosmos that was held when these astrological principles were developed.

Otherwise one might find themselves adopting a principle that was based on a concept entirely different than those we are trying to 'prove' it with ... or at least trying to explain it with ?

--

As you can see my questions are very broad, limited in understanding, and all over the place. As I would really like to deepen my understanding here, I would welcome all of your input, personal experiences, links to good resources and recommendations for books.

Thank you.

I would suggest a run down on the main influences that appeared throughout time that led to 'modern' types of astrology.

I am partial to Liz Greene and her 'psychological astrology' approach, for a modern perspective.

Two great sites and tools ;

http://www.constellationsofwords.com/ (actually it is like a constellation of worlds

" This study is based on the belief that each constellation has its own unique clusters of related concepts, and that the etymology of the names and associated key words will express their essential meaning."

and

http://www.astro.com/

(good for casting your own various types of charts and some good articles - I ignore the 'commercial stuff' there )

.... seek the gem ( crystal ) of 'great value'.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Nungali

EFS White · April 18, 2015

Wow, thank all of you very very much. These are fantastic pointers for further research.

@Zhongyongdaoist aka Donald

I understand you do not have much time right now. I just wanted to say I loved your very elaborate post and wanted to follow up on two questions in particular:

I liked your comment about how astrology works regardless of whether one believes in it or not. This is actually very close to my understanding of what it should be like if we are indeed talking about natural universal forces, i.e. gravity doesn't care whether you believe in it or not. Can you elaborate on what you mean by that statement, though? When you say "astrology works" what has been your experience with it, and how to you practice astrology or as what kind of a tool do you use it (I would guess character assessment, horoscoping, anticipating cyclical changes etc.)?

I guess I still have a hard time grasping the concept of how astrology works in our lives. So, is it possible for you to give examples of how astrology (or the knowledge thereof) has worked for you?

Btw. I do appreciate your "babel fish" warning. This is actually my viewpoint as well: I believe that through both comparative studies AND open minded full immersion into individual systems I can gain the deepest learning and understanding.

--

@sasblamthanb

Thank you, this guy sounds like a great source of info indeed. The Wiki says his work is based around the concept of a "logarithmic time scale" and, as you say, developmental archetpyes. Could that be similar to Joseph Campbell's work about how myths and story structure mimic stages of human development? Or is it more centered on cosmology and earth history than individual human lives? What is your grasp of these concepts?

Thank you for the book titles anyway, they sound very intriguing.

--

@Nungali

Thank you for your very elaborate response, it is much appreciated.

The difficulty in exploring astrology, in my opinion, is indeed that when one first sets out on this quest it is a very difficult area to understand because somehow one thinks the term "astrology" refers to one thing when in fact it unites so many dozens of viewpoints and philosophies and intellectual constructs.

For instance, the concepts presented in, I believe, the "Key of Solomon" -- with its 72 angels and invoking the four directions, its changing rulers during the hours of the day and days of the week etc. -- would lead one to picture astrology as an intricate system representative of cosmological forces that can be summoned and employed for distinct means. This of course is a radically different understanding from saying that the ancients, for instance, may have coded distinct events of their culture to the current constellations (of the great year, precession of the equinoxes) with myths spun around them.

I think I can best sum up my personal "understanding" (as of this moment) like this --

I had read somewhere that the chinese Trigrams originally coded the day, lunar month and solar year, and this made a lot of sense to me as these three are the most immediate natural cycles we, as human beings, are experiencing: And it is much like Donald had said -- it doesn't matter whether or not you believe in the power of these cycles, they very much WILL work exactly like they do and have a very real influence. The sun will rise every morning, like clockwork, the sky will be bright, then the sun will go down again and it will be dark. The moon IS GOING TO go through its waxing and waning like clockwork, the seasons of the solar year will follow one upon the other.

I like these three because they are so immediate and easy to grasp, and they do account for the vagueness that I often see in astrological teachings. For instance, we know that the solar year brings The Four Seasons (which I read somewhat like astrological "influences") — so this does not mean that there could not possibly be a hot and sunny day in February or a harsh, cold, even snowy day in June.

As all of these progressions of influences (daily, lunar month, solar year etc) can be mapped as cycles nested within one another, it makes a lot of sense to me that other greater or qualitatively different cycles would also exude a distinct influence that ancient civilizations may have found a way to sense and track. Hence the whole concept of astrology -- which appears always to be based on such cyclical layouts -- is indeed convincing to me (despite the fact that I am not really understanding it yet).

--

More questions, if anyone feels compelled...

For the past few months I have been trying to sensitize myself to the phases of the moon and see if I can feel a qualitative difference in my personal experiences. I find this very hard and confusing, as sometimes I seem to feel certain trends (like introversion at new moons and extroversion at full moons) but then again sometimes it feels waaay off and doesn't seem to make much sense.

Is this how any of this works??! "Am I doing it right?"

And while the lunar month is a very easily visible cycle to track, how does one go about attuning to "invisible cycles" (to the untrained human eye) such as planetary influences. I would even find saturn or pluto with a telescope, I am sure. In how far are you guys sensible to these influences and what cycles are you aware of or which do you follow?

--

At any rate, thank you very much for the resources you have pointed out. A mindful review of all these will keep me busy for quite a while.

Michael Sternbach · April 18, 2015

Hi everyone.

I hope to find here some among you who have accumulated solid astrological understanding and are willing to share their understanding with me and explain how such astrological understanding can be used and incorporated into energetic practice (in my case Qi Gong and Nei Gong).

--

I am fairly new to studying anything astrological, and frankly, the only reason I have begun to look into this is because I read tons of books on various subjects but astrological references seem to keep popping up throughout whatever it is I am researching.

Yes, the context of the spiritual literature before the Copernican revolution is always the astrological cosmology of Aristotle/Ptolemy (based on even earlier models). This was also the common denominator for the Christian, Islamic and Jewish scholars. Much like modern cosmological ideas are accepted among intellectuals globally nowadays.

It started with books I read on Feng Shui years ago; meanwhile I have deepened my studies of Qi Gong, Nei Gong and mystical traditions (I read some Gurdijeff, some about the Essenes, the Egyptians, the Kabbala, some Western Hermeticism and Magick, the Bible, the Tarot etc etc) and somehow all of these traditions or knowledge systems seem to point to an understanding that each direction and / or constellation exudes distinct kinds of energy or vibrational influences.

As ZYD highlighted, once we embrace the Oriental (Chinese) system, we are on a ground somewhat different from the Occidental Platonic/Aristotelian/Hermetic system. Both systems form a fairly coherent and consistent framework for the respective alchemy, magic, medicine etc. of their culture.

Their perspectives are neither mutually exclusive nor can they simply be superposed. ZYD's quantum analogy is particularly apt. For illustration, quantum chemistry continues using about three diverging descriptions of the orbital shells of an atom, as each offers a particularly good computational approximation to some of the observations. However, what an atom "really" looks like nobody can tell. It is often rewarding in scientific research to compare and connect different outlooks to each other if done with the adequate care; .even if a full unison ultimately can't be achieved, a lot of insight is gained on the way.

So here are some of my questions:

- If we are indeed dealing with natural universal forces there should be strong correlations ascribed to distinct directions and / or constellations throughout these traditions. Is this understanding correct?

There are, and always have been, different perspectives on these things, even within the boundaries of a single system. You will probably find sooner or later that many views are valid in their own right and coincide with certain others to form a more complete scheme. This in itself is a most fascinating and rewarding study if you are scientifically inclined. It may contribute to the evolution of a metaphysical system. (Yes, the metaphysical sciences are evolving like any other sciences, they are not set in stone. For example, Western astrology was synthesized from a fusion of elements originating in different times and cultures.)

Your questions touch on varied and wide topics, and deserve consideration far beyond what I am able to provide right now. I am however currently working on a book that addresses several of them.

Here are some threads on your topics that provide useful links and other information.

Astrological associations of the Tarot:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8589

The 36 decans and the Tarot:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8480

Zodiac with 24 sectors, Western and Indian version:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8117

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8248

Relation of the Chinese zodiac to an early Occidental system:

http://thedaobums.com/topic/37872-origin-of-the-chinese-zodiac/?hl=zodiac

Western and Chinese astrology compared (planets and elements in the Western and Eastern systems):

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8289

You may also want to download:

http://www.golden-dawn-canada.com/pdf/shemhamphorash.pdf

And perhaps some other books from the website of the Golden Dawn Canada. It is a true cornucopia.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Michael Sternbach

Nungali · April 18, 2015

More questions, if anyone feels compelled...

For the past few months I have been trying to sensitize myself to the phases of the moon and see if I can feel a qualitative difference in my personal experiences. I find this very hard and confusing, as sometimes I seem to feel certain trends (like introversion at new moons and extroversion at full moons) but then again sometimes it feels waaay off and doesn't seem to make much sense.

I have a lot of Cancerian / Moon energy in my chart and moon cycles are indeed interesting ( and I also show some physical signs of change at times ! ) but I have also found that, with myself, and working with nature ( agriculture and animal husbandry) that other cycles of the Moon seem to have more significance .... that is why (when they correlate with the 'Moon Phase' ) sometimes they seem associated to that phase ... but then it goes ' out of sync' .

The most influential 6 Lunar cycles seem to be ;

New / Full Moon - 29.5 days
Perigee / apogee - 27.5
Moon opposition Saturn - 27.3
Asc /Dsc Moon - 27.3
Moon in Zodiac sign - 27.3
Moon's Nodes - 27.2

Here is an example of the influence of Moon in animal husbandry ;

http://biodynamics.net.au/wp-content/uploads/1HowToUseAstroCalendar_v1403web.optim_.pdf

(hit the link on that page to 'cow cudding times'

Edited April 18, 2015 by Nungali

EFS White · April 19, 2015

@Michael Sternbach

Thank you, I greatly appreciate your input and the links. Will take a while.

--

@Nungali

I am humbled by the information you have just posted. Thank you. I have to admit I have only ever thought of the "moon cycles" as the waxing and waning phases aka degrees of surface illumination by the sun. The perigee and apogee cycle as well as the moon's ascension and descension I have never made myself consciously aware of but I can totally see how this would be highly significant.

As for the oppositions (and alignments, I suppose) with Saturn, when I reflect this against my current level of comprehension I can equally fit it into my quasi-physical model: How heavenly bodies exert a distinct qualitative influence (that I would somewhat liken to a gravitational pull), and how these influences amplify or dampen each other depending on their angles of alignment. A similar mechanism I assume to be true for the directions of the celestial dome (aka signs of the Zodiac).

What I missed is what the moon's "nodes" are? Can you elaborate on that?

Anyway, I just meant to say, the examples given in the pdf (of gardening and cow cudding) are very illuminating.

Thank you.

Zhongyongdaoist · April 19, 2015

I figured that Nungali and Michael Sternbach would weigh in here and overload your mental circuits, so I wanted to wait before making any reply. As a change of pace from some of the things on which I have been working, I thought I might take some time here to ask some annoying questions and point in some odd directions that will make clearer some of the things that I have already posted, in particular my posts in the section on Cornelius Agrippa and his work. So let's start with some annoying questions about this:

I liked your comment about how astrology works regardless of whether one believes in it or not. This is actually very close to my understanding of what it should be like if we are indeed talking about natural universal forces, i.e. gravity doesn't care whether you believe in it or not. Can you elaborate on what you mean by that statement, though? When you say "astrology works" what has been your experience with it, and how to you practice astrology or as what kind of a tool do you use it (I would guess character assessment, horoscoping, anticipating cyclical changes etc.)?

Can you elaborate on what you mean by that statement, though?: I suspect that what you want is some anecdotes about using astrologer for character analysis, event prediction, etc., which taken as a whole would demonstrate it. I can certainly provide them, but I am more interested in a bigger view and I hope that you will indulge me, and then I may give some interesting anecdotes.

This is actually very close to my understanding of what it should be like if we are indeed talking about natural universal forces: There is for example this notion of “universal forces” and you use gravity as an example. Do you know what a “force”, universal or otherwise, is?

Let's dig a little deeper into that can of worms that I mentioned. In the worldview in which astrology arose, during the Hellenistic period, a worldview that was largely Platonic/Aristotelian, the logical implications of that worldview were not, “how could astrology work?”, but “How could astrology not work?”. In other words the worldview of the educated elite of the Hellenistic world made astrology a “no brainer” in terms of providing a logical and well formed rationale for its existence and efficacy, the problem was to find space within these implications for things like “free will” and self-determination. In other words, “Where is astrology not going to work, so that I can see myself as free, rather then a slave of some form of astrological determinism?” A very different conundrum isn't it?

The whole modern worldview sees astrology as a fantastic and absurd set of ideas that could not possibly be true, because, “How could the position of Jupiter affect me, when its gravitational pull is miniscule in comparison to that of earth?”, but this very framing of the question is based on a certain way of viewing the world in a way in which everything is disconnected, as opposed to the Hellenistic worldview in which everything is connected.

This so called “scientific” worldview is now taken for granted by nearly everyone, and is the result of cultural trends which I have analyzed elsewhere and to which I will refer. By the way, this worldview doesn't save “free will”, it replaces it with a determinism of atoms, in which all thoughts are merely a flow of atoms and consciousness an epiphenomenal dream that floats above them, powerless as a ghost in a machine. This view that started with the revival of Epicureanism circa 1600, and grew ravenous with Cartesian dualism, and devoured all in its path until 1900 when its unruly child, science, like another unruly child, Zeus, was to rise up and show the problems with this worldview, a revolution that is still unresolved and is being waged around us even now.

So I hope that you don't mind if I dwell a bit on the big picture and then when that is clearer, start telling a few anecdotes which illustrate its details, and yes the discussion will also address such matters of “magic” as are implied in this:

For instance, the concepts presented in, I believe, the "Key of Solomon" -- with its 72 angels and invoking the four directions, its changing rulers during the hours of the day and days of the week etc. -- would lead one to picture astrology as an intricate system representative of cosmological forces that can be summoned and employed for distinct means.

As a preparation for this you might find my thread:

Agrippa and Aristotle: the Aristotelian background of the Occult Philosophy

may help to set the stage along with this quote from another post:

the materialistic scientific worldview does not constitute progress: While scientific methodology is very useful for exploring "natural" phenomena, the materialism that was adopted with it almost acts like an opportunistic parasite that poisons the whole system and clogs it with basically unscientific dogmas derived from unproven materialistic propositions, that are an affront to real reason and a constant hamper to progress. Phrases like "rational scientific materialism" are not true and should at every point be countered, there is nothing essentially rational about materialism, nor is it the result of the application of scientific method.

I could give a qualified yes to each of your questions:

Do you consider that recognizing the value of the older worldviews will lead to technological capabilities that we have forgotten about because they have no place in the modern scheme? Yes, I think it could, could being the operative word, because as long as there is a dogmatic insistence that, such and such cant happen, or cant happen that way then forgotten technologies will remain forgotten. An example is Alchemy. Alchemy is part of a well formed worldview, the existence of a "physical" "philosopher's stone" is a strong implication of that worldview, but whether it is actually possible or not, has not been unequivocally demonstrated and it may in point of fact be impossible, but will never be investigated if it is thought impossible on apriori grounds.

Or is the value of Kuhn's words more about liberating us from the modern constraints?: Yes, to realize that there are many ways that one can look at things is important, for example I favor a revival of "formal" causes for future "science". If one looks at consciousness as a formal cause that organizes information, that solves a lot of problems about knowledge and freewill. Of course one needs to be careful about what one accepts as an irreducible "form", but the case for the irreducible nature of consciousness is very strong and is only denied because materialism requires that consciousness be reducible to a material explanation, but such explanations have never been satisfactory and there is no good reason to believe that they ever will.

(are) . . . there are ancient worldviews that are 'higher' or more comprehensive and you would wish to see a return to them - a paradigm shift back in that direction?: Back circa 1980 I decided that Platonism was the best overall worldview for a variety of reasons. It is basically not dogmatic, Plato describes the cosmology of his Timaeus as a "likely story", thus in a sense anticipating Kuhn's discovery of "paradigms" by 2500 or so years. If Plato were alive today he would be assimilating modern science and turning it into something that supports "spirituality" rather then something that denigrates it. Platonism is also rational and intellectually rigorous, providing in Plato's Parmenides the outline of a "metaphysics of the One" which was explicated by his successors, in particular Plotinus, that provides a powerful framework for "mysticism" in a form that has been aptly described as "the Architecture of the Intelligible World". Since that time I have found Platonism a satisfactory framework for rethinking science, practicing magic, and investigating "mysticism". In all of these endeavors, it has been very fruitful. By the way Platonism was, as I have pointed out elsewhere here on TTBs, definitely a hard sell, I was not at all inclined to it when I first started to investigate it, which I basically did for historical reasons.

That is the short and quick version of my thoughts, I hope that it is helpful.

And I particular draw your attention to “If one looks at consciousness as a formal cause that organizes information, that solves a lot of problems about knowledge and freewill.” And ask “What happens if you view gravity as a formal cause that organizes information?”

EFS White · April 19, 2015

@Zhongyongdaoist

I greatly appreciate your input, precisely for the reason that it is well over my head. I am not versed in scholarly philosophical exploration, which it seems you very much are. Therefore many of the phrases, terms and concepts you are refering to I am not familiar with. For instance, I just had to look up the "causa formalis", just so you know who you are conversing with...

Equally with your last post I am not certain whether all of the questions were indeed rhetorical, and if they were indeed, please ignore what I am about to write. I will take them as an invitation here to reflect and respond.

I like what you have to say about cosmology, as I believe it is easy for one to overlook or unconsciously take for granted the most basic, most foundational assumptions made — through nurture, culture and education — about the nature of our reality. This is certainly true for me, and I can see how my desire to understand astrology is intimately tied to the fact that I am seeking to define a cosmology that appears intrinsically convincing to me. Interestingly, it was my very observation that western rationalism seems to perfectly account for materialism and mechanics but to exclude energetic realities that originally drove me to investigate Eastern concepts.

So to respond to the first of your possibly rhetorical questions:

Do you know what a “force”, universal or otherwise, is?

Again, here, I know there are definitions in terms of natural physics that I could reproduce here and surely there are philosophical definitions I could familiarize myself with. But also in order to stand by my current level of understanding I will answer this in my own words. A force is a potential that is defined by its degree of removal from equilibrium.

What happens if you view gravity as a formal cause that organizes information?

First off, to be frank, I am not versed enough with these terms to claim that I properly understand the question. That being said, and in my own words again, the view of gravity as a formal cause that organizes information feels appealing yet not exactly intuitive or comprehensive to me right away.

If gravity indeed were a formal cause that organizes my first instinct would be to ask: organize to what end? to what purpose? My second instinct would be to try and clarify what "information" is taken to mean here, as "in-formation" seems to imply in itself an organizing force; which again would prompt me to ask: what is the difference, then, between "gravity" and "in-formation"?

I am pretty sure I am not understanding what you were trying to lead me to see. If you can find the time, please do clarify.

Thank you.

Edited April 19, 2015 by EFS White

Nungali · April 19, 2015

@Michael Sternbach

Thank you, I greatly appreciate your input and the links. Will take a while.

--

@Nungali

I am humbled by the information you have just posted. Thank you. I have to admit I have only ever thought of the "moon cycles" as the waxing and waning phases aka degrees of surface illumination by the sun. The perigee and apogee cycle as well as the moon's ascension and descension I have never made myself consciously aware of but I can totally see how this would be highly significant.

Some of these other cycles are quiet old, in some S.E. Asian agriculture there are 'bad moon' days when no agricultural work is done at all. (I think it is when the Moon crosses the Celestial Equator - I am a bit rusty on all this, its been some time since I was 'into it' - for the job I was doing years back ).

I tracked those days on the calendar , a few times international disasters happened on those days - coincidence ? In any case, I could never figure the 'location' aspect .

Often it is a combo of Sun and Moon cycles - as a good fisherman will know

" We can distinguish two types of solunar periods:

Major periods: have approximately 2 hours duration although on certain occasions they may exceed 3 hours. They begin the moment of the lunar transit (when the moon is overhead) and the opposing lunar transit (when the moon is under our feet). Normally these are the moments of greatest fish activity during each day. The most fervent supporters of this theory state that there is not one species of sport fish that cannot be found eating during a major Solunar Period.

Minor periods: are intermediate periods of lesser duration (approximately 1 hour) which coincide with the rising and the setting of the moon. During these periods there is also an increase in fish activity in relation to the rest of the day."

http://www.tides4fishing.com/solunar-tables/solunar-theory

As for the oppositions (and alignments, I suppose) with Saturn, when I reflect this against my current level of comprehension I can equally fit it into my quasi-physical model: How heavenly bodies exert a distinct qualitative influence (that I would somewhat liken to a gravitational pull), and how these influences amplify or dampen each other depending on their angles of alignment.

I think it is based on the idea (I will try to be 'simple' here) that Saturn is the receptor of 'cosmic forces' and these are received by the Moon that cyclically regulates the energy and distributes it to the Earth.

In a Saturn Moon Opposition the earth sits between these two and becomes more of a receiver for 'archetypal' energy (to do with flower, fruit and seed formation - so when one uses a preparation, fertiliser ( P or K based ) or process to do with this cycle or function ) that would be the best time to do it as opposed to ' natural' or 'rampant' growth, regulated by Moon and related more to water and moisture, when different treatments and fertilizer are used ( N based) .

I cant see 'modern physical forces' such as gravity having an influence with Saturn ... but then again, our understanding of 'gravity' may be lacking ?

A similar mechanism I assume to be true for the directions of the celestial dome (aka signs of the Zodiac).

What I missed is what the moon's "nodes" are? Can you elaborate on that?

Anyway, I just meant to say, the examples given in the pdf (of gardening and cow cudding) are very illuminating.

Thank you.

All animals have a similar cycle, what is interesting is that the four 'stations of the Moon' regulate a lot of it . But again that goes in variant cycles .... sometimes a 'quiet period' can last a long time . I have been making interesting observations in my fish tanks and ponds with this, (once I got rid of the goldfish , they never seem to stop going manic, and only have types of catfish. Some times they cant seem to stop eating, other times they have no interest in it at all.

Nungali · April 19, 2015

I am pretty sure I am not understanding what you were trying to lead me to see. If you can find the time, please do clarify.

Thank you.

" I figured that Nungali and Michael Sternbach would weigh in here and overload your mental circuits "

Really ?

Perhaps what is meant that is if we try to understand something that is based on principles other than what our understanding is based on, and use that to try and understand the dynamics of astrology and other 'old' arts and /or 'sciences' .... its a bit apples and oranges.

The old model saw earth at the centre of the Sphere of The Moon , and the Moon at the centre of the next sphere, then inside the Sun and so on, out into the cosmos, and ultimately God (or some such principle), no 'escape' at all. No question of the yolk not being influenced by the white and the shell.

fabricius-fludd-natura-mirror-q75-1111x1

Nowadays .... Saturn is waaaay out there, across a vast expanse of near nothingness, with the only connection being reflected light, some feeble radio noise, and a gravitational influence on celestial mechanics. How on earth could it influence people?

Edited April 20, 2015 by Nungali

Nungali · April 19, 2015

Oh, I left this out in my response and you asked about it

Nungali · April 19, 2015

I just did a quick check, it is when the Moon crosses the ecliptic that is a bad agricultural day, so Moon's Nodes are the days of not doing any agriculture;

" The Moon while crossing in front of the Sun will negate the Sun's beneficient influence for this brief period. This negative influence works into soil being freshly cultivated at the time of the node. Therefore biodynamic farmers do not cultivate the soil, sow any seeds, transplant, prune trees or shrubs, or do any other agricultural or horticultural work on the Node Day. The effect is similar to that of an eclipse of the Sun by the Moon. "

...

" Activities Connected with the Moon Nodes

1. AVOID any agricultural or horticultural work during this time . "

http://www.biodynamics.in/Rhythm.htm

Edited April 20, 2015 by Nungali

EFS White · April 20, 2015

@Nungali

Thank you for your responses. Here is what particularily impressed me about the examples you have offered: That animals seem to be very much in tune with these natural cycles AND that this harmony can just as easily be disturbed or overwritten by artificial human cycles. The prominent example was how cows cud at distinct times relative to the lunar calender but how milking processes can upset this natural rhythm. Very interesting indeed.

I also appreciate the knowledge you are offering about all these lunar cycles, and thank you for following up on the lunar nodes. Another amateur question in this regard: I do have a lunar calender app on my phone but it only shows the moon phases in terms of waxing and waning. How do you (if you do), personally and practically, keep track of ascension and descension, opposition to Saturn, the node points etc.? Is this something you can observe yourself with enough practice or do you need applications for that?

--

One last note I would like to make:

I enjoy this Integra Naturae image you have posted. It reminds me of classes in school when we learned -- with not much depth or consideration -- how the ancients viewed the world. The way I remember those classes was with almost a belittling undertone as if saying, "isn't it cute what these ancient cultures believed, they thought the earth was at the center and that the moon, sun, planets and stars revolved in distinct tracks around it. How naiv."

What I am thinking right now is: What if illustrations such as the one you posted, or this one...

...were never meant to be physical models of our universe but rather schematic illustrations to demonstrate the magnitudes of influence each of the celestial bodies exude upon human experience? In other words: What if it was not the bygone thinkers that had been naive -- but we are being the naive ones in thinking we understanding the depth of meaning of their illustrations?!

Great food for thought, all that. Thank you!

Zhongyongdaoist · April 20, 2015

I greatly appreciate your input, precisely for the reason that it is well over my head. I am not versed in scholarly philosophical exploration, which it seems you very much are. Therefore many of the phrases, terms and concepts you are refering to I am not familiar with. For instance, I just had to look up the "causa formalis", just so you know who you are conversing with...

. . .

the view of gravity as a formal cause that organizes information feels appealing . . . (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

I had already decided that I was conversing with an intelligent person with at least a semi-technical background who was trying to understand these matters in as scientific a manner as possible. The questions were partly rhetorical and partly probes in the sense that how you responded would tell me more about your background. Your response to the first question on what a force is, tells me that your technical background is beyond the semi-technical stage. Your response to the one about gravity organizing information, that it "feels appealing", also tells me something about your unconscious orientation. This one in particular I left very open ended, for example I didn't intend any analogy between consciousness and gravity beyond the notion that they are forms, but I also didn't want to say something so close ended as "gravity is a form that organizes matter". While this might have been more immediately intelligible, I wanted to point beyond that, to implicitly ask what matter might be.

If gravity indeed were a formal cause that organizes my first instinct would be to ask: organize to what end? to what purpose? My second instinct would be to try and clarify what "information" is taken to mean here, as "in-formation" seems to imply in itself an organizing force; which again would prompt me to ask: what is the difference, then, between "gravity" and "in-formation"?

I am pretty sure I am not understanding what you were trying to lead me to see. If you can find the time, please do clarify. (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

By information I am referring to this sort of thing:

The mathematical universe hypothesis suggests a new paradigm, in which virtually everything, from particles and fields, through biological entities and consciousness, to the multiverse itself, could be described by mathematical patterns of information. By the same token, the cosmic void can be conceived of as the absence of material information in space (setting aside the virtual particles that pop in and out of existence due to quantum fluctuations, as well as the gravitational field and the dark energy). Nothingness can be understood then as that within which no space, time, energy, matter, or any other type of information could exist, which would be possible if symmetry and structure break within the manifold of the multiverse (i.e. the manifold would have tears or holes). (Wikipedia on Information, As a property in physics section )

But I don't want to get too involved with that now except to say that it is very Platonic and since the early 80s, I have viewed the "physical world" as something that models mathematics and not mathematics as something that models the "physical world"

Now regarding "causa formalis", I started the thread to which I referred:

Agrippa and Aristotle: the Aristotelian background of the Occult

So that I might refer to it about formal causes and things like that, and have a discussion that was geared to examining things like magic and astrology and also the relationship of these ideas to modern science so I could refer people to it. My exposition is incomplete, but it is a good start, which is why I recommended it. I probably should have made that clear. My bad as they say. In any case if you look at it you should let me know what you think about it.

So, what I am really pointing toward is something related to, but between “consciousness as a formal cause that organizes information” and “gravity as a formal cause that organizes information” and which I will explicitly formulate as “Jupiter is a formal cause that organizes information”, including of course that physical information which we call the planet Jupiter and its orbit, but a whole lot more as well. In more strictly Aristotelian terms "consciousness", "gravity" and "Jupiter" would be "formal causes", which had as their "material causes" certain types of "information".

organize to what end? to what purpose? This of course would refer to the "final cause" aspect and I don't want to go there yet.

I will develop these ideas as we go along, but I think you may start to see why I took an interest in this thread.

I hope this attempt at clarification is helpful.

Michael Sternbach · April 20, 2015

I had already decided that I was conversing with an intelligent person with at least a semi-technical background who was trying to understand these matters in as scientific a manner as possible. The questions were partly rhetorical and partly probes in the sense that how you responded would tell me more about your background. Your response to the first question on what a force is, tells me that your technical background is beyond the semi-technical stage. Your response to the one about gravity organizing information, that it "feels appealing", also tells me something about your unconscious orientation. This one in particular I left very open ended, for example I didn't intend any analogy between consciousness and gravity beyond the notion that they are forms, but I also didn't want to say something so close ended as "gravity is a form that organizes matter". While this might have been more immediately intelligible, I wanted to point beyond that, to implicitly ask what matter might be.

By information I am referring to this sort of thing:

But I don't want to get too involved with that now except to say that it is very Platonic and since the early 80s, I have viewed the "physical world" as something that models mathematics and not mathematics as something that models the "physical world"

Now regarding "causa formalis", I started the thread to which I referred:

Agrippa and Aristotle: the Aristotelian background of the Occult

So that I might refer to it about formal causes and things like that, and have a discussion that was geared to examining things like magic and astrology and also the relationship of these ideas to modern science so I could refer people to it. My exposition is incomplete, but it is a good start, which is why I recommended it. I probably should have made that clear. My bad as they say. In any case if you look at it you should let me know what you think about it.

So, what I am really pointing toward is something related to, but between “consciousness as a formal cause that organizes information” and “gravity as a formal cause that organizes information” and which I will explicitly formulate as “Jupiter is a formal cause that organizes information”, including of course that physical information which we call the planet Jupiter and its orbit, but a whole lot more as well. In more strictly Aristotelian terms "consciousness", "gravity" and "Jupiter" would be "formal causes", which had as their "material causes" certain types of "information".

organize to what end? to what purpose? This of course would refer to the "final cause" aspect and I don't want to go there yet.

Nonetheless, I can't neglect the opportunity to mention the parallels I see here to Roger Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology.

This latest edition of the Big Bang theory (which Penrose had co-founded in the 60s) proposes that prior to the Big Bang there was another Universe that eventually developed to a stage of infinite/zero space-time - thus providing the condition for the Singularity that stood at the beginning of our current Universe. There could then be an infinite series of Universes, or subsequent incarnations of the Infinity that both separates them and manifest itself as them.

In CCC, the only medium that connects the current to the previous Universe is indeed the gravity waves resulting mostly from the collision of black holes in the late stage of the latter. They (in)formed the structuring of matter (dark or otherwise) in our early Universe. Of course, modern cosmology would be able to observe this only on the physical level.

As some Sanskrit comes in handy right now, I think of Karma as information coming over from a past incarnation (of a human being or of a Universe alike), to a degree predetermining and structuring the entity's new manifestation. In between there is a state (or should I say, a non-state) of Pralaya, Chaos or Kabbalistic Infinite Light in both the metaphysical traditions and in CCC.

I will develop these ideas as we go along,

I hope so.

but I think you may start to see why I took an interest in this thread.

I'm saw this all along.

I hope this attempt at clarification is helpful.

As much as I always enjoy reading your posts, I do feel that you are somewhat overloading the OP's mental circuits too.

Edited April 20, 2015 by Michael Sternbach

FraterUFA · April 20, 2015

Hello EFS White,

I hope to find here some among you who have accumulated solid astrological understanding and are willing to share their understanding with me and explain how such astrological understanding can be used and incorporated into energetic practice (in my case Qi Gong and Nei Gong).

Well, that is an ambitious request.

I am fairly new to studying anything astrological, and frankly, the only reason I have begun to look into this is because I read tons of books on various subjects but astrological references seem to keep popping up throughout whatever it is I am researching.

I doubt this response is going to go in the direction you're hoping but we have to start somewhere, so let's see if we can't make an effort at getting to the underpinnings of your question.

The primary difficulty one encounters when approaching esoteric matters lies in its inherent subjectivity. Most of us are trained from a very early age to value the scientific worldview ("objectivity") over the subjective one. This commonly plays out as the effort to explain subjective phenomena via an objective worldview, effectively denying the reality of the former. I view syncreticism, comparative occultism, and the effort to explain occult phenomena in a scientific manner all as insidious manifestations of this mistaken and often unacknowledged belief in the superiority of objectivity.

Conversely, one often comes across the attitude that nothing in occultism can be proven or disproven, and that therefore, anything one says or claims has validity. Surely, you have come across widely varying and conflicting sets of information in those books you've read. They cannot surely all be right. I would venture a guess that they range from the sublime to the downright ridiculous, with most falling somewhere in between. This places you in the impossible position of having to decide what you've read is correct and what is not... without a touchstone to make this decision on.

Though this division between subjective and objective is a relatively modern development in consciousness (perhaps having its invention with Roger Bacon and Shakespeare, who are possibly the same person), we are for the most part untrained and unappreciative of its implications. It is this ignorance (both intellectual and experiential) that undermines the vast majority of investigative efforts into the occult. In fact, scientific investigation is a comparatively easy pursuit due to the fact that it does not attempt to contend with subjective side of the equation.

Where I am going with this, is that in order to answer your question, you must seek a state of consciousness that is capable of correctly perceiving phenomena without the twin filters of "subjective" or "objective". Any serious pursuit of occultism must begin with this goal.

The reason I've gone off on this seeming tangent should become apparent shortly.

It started with books I read on Feng Shui years ago; meanwhile I have deepened my studies of Qi Gong, Nei Gong and mystical traditions (I read some Gurdijeff, some about the Essenes, the Egyptians, the Kabbala, some Western Hermeticism and Magick, the Bible, the Tarot etc etc) and somehow all of these traditions or knowledge systems seem to point to an understanding that each direction and / or constellation exudes distinct kinds of energy or vibrational influences.

Your underlying assumption here is that because you have read many books which all seemingly agree that there is an energetic nature to the constellations, then surely this must be true.

But what if it wasn't true? Could it be a possibility that every one of your sources could simply based on an mistaken ancient belief and that they've simply parroted some version of that belief forward over two thousand years?

Or what if - more likely - everything you read was biased by your unacknowledged worship of scientific materialism? For instance, what if these sources were not hinting at energetic influences, but rather living consciousnesses?

So here are some of my questions:

- If we are indeed dealing with natural universal forces there should be strong correlations ascribed to distinct directions and / or constellations throughout these traditions. Is this understanding correct?

If they are not natural universal forces, but rather living consciousnesses, then perhaps their so-called directions and associated constellations are entirely unimportant.

What direction did your latest thought come from?

- Thus, should it not then be possible to sort of "overlay" the various teachings of the energetic qualities of the four directions (or six directions in some traditions) with the signs of the Zodiac and other knowledge systems? Do you know of researchers who have done this?

Which four directions? The cardinal directions or some combination thereof (for instance, Bull = Southwest)?

And even if it is possible, why do you have any reason to believe that such a correspondence is useful? Do you really believe that consciousness or energy has some inherent relationship with physical direction? If so, what is this belief based on?

- I am curious whether or not the archetypes of Tarot, the "24 Elders", the "72 Names of God", the angels of the Key of Solomon, can be correlated to an astrological system as well -- and if so, how so? Any pointers? (Again, my basic assumption here is that we are dealing with a physical or metaphysical reality with distinct energetic qualities, and that these qualities therefore must be / should be the same throughout all systems)

Certainly they can be correlated. But before we begin the discussion of how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, I suggest we take a deeper look at your assumptions. What reason do you have to believe that there is any value of making such a correspondence? In fact, what reason do you have to believe that any of these systems mentioned have any value whatsoever?

- If there is indeed an energetic grid surrounding us and its energies affect us and can possibly be used how do you zero and align this grid? For instance, the pole star (which is mentioned very often) only appears to us a point of stillness due to earth's rotation around itself; so must we not anchor the grid to the stars and constellations themselves? How is this done in practice? How do you practically align yourself with distinct energies?

I sense here your scientific worldview creeping in. If we aren't dealing with energies but rather living beings, then your question is akin to asking you, "how do we zero and align Mr. EFS White?"

I caution you that phrases like "vibrations" and "energy" are bandied about by most occult practitioners without any real thought given to what they are or even if they really exist.

- Lastly, I know we are dealing with matters here that are considered "metaphysical". Nonetheless, my line of thinking is that if these energies correlate directly to distinct directions in our celestial dome we can very well interpret these energies as "physical", no? Have any of you found something that could qualify as an "understanding in terms of physics" to explain astrology?

So many assumptions here. Why does astrology need physics to explain it? Perhaps physics isn't the right tool to understand consciousness and subjective phenomena because it is based on limiting assumptions. Perhaps astrology is nothing more than superstition. Perhaps it is valid but our modern understanding has gone far astray of the reality behind it.

Let us try a thought experiment. Assume for a moment that the speed of light is not a universal constant of physics, but rather an artifact solely of our time-space consciousness. In other words, what we perceive as the inviolate constant c is not inviolate at all, but rather an asymptotic threshold that our objective consciousness is utterly incapable, either directly or indirectly (via measuring instruments), of penetrating. "Asymptotic" in the sense that as the objective consciousness comes closer and closer to this limit, strange and mysterious things begin to happen (such as changes in mass and time dilation).

Now imagine that anything which travels faster than this speed transcends time and space and exists as consciousness in a realm we might primitively call the "astral plane". The phenomena of this realm would be unfettered by the mundane laws of time, mass, space, or gravity. And furthermore, the astrological entities exist in this realm... just as you and I do.

Now what is interesting about this thought experiment is that you cannot disprove it. It may indeed be an accurate description of our reality. And it depicts a possible universe in which scientific understanding cannot begin to explain occult phenomena (or even certain mundane phenomena such as consciousness). And yet those phenomena have a basis in objective reality and are anything but subjective.

As you can see my questions are very broad, limited in understanding, and all over the place. As I would really like to deepen my understanding here, I would welcome all of your input, personal experiences, links to good resources and recommendations for books.

As an author, I can tell you first hand that most of what you find in books is simply untrue.

Best,

UFA

Nungali · April 21, 2015

@Nungali

Thank you for your responses. Here is what particularily impressed me about the examples you have offered: That animals seem to be very much in tune with these natural cycles AND that this harmony can just as easily be disturbed or overwritten by artificial human cycles. The prominent example was how cows cud at distinct times relative to the lunar calender but how milking processes can upset this natural rhythm. Very interesting indeed.

Those that understand nature make the best hunters or farmers . Its all connected. Check out Sonic Bloom technology; it casts a frequency like a rise in insect noise (this occurs in various cycles throughout the day , at certain times) and it causes plant pores to open, they get sprayed, the tone changes, the pores close sealing up the fertilized spray. Sound can cause change in the animals and plants, at the right time. I have an indigenous friend that 'knows the turtle song', he can go to the right place at the right time and sing the right song (and do other 'stuff') and a turtle will rise up and stick its head out of the water and .... nab!

I also appreciate the knowledge you are offering about all these lunar cycles, and thank you for following up on the lunar nodes. Another amateur question in this regard: I do have a lunar calender app on my phone but it only shows the moon phases in terms of waxing and waning. How do you (if you do), personally and practically, keep track of ascension and descension, opposition to Saturn, the node points etc.? Is this something you can observe yourself with enough practice or do you need applications for that?

For doing complex work, with sidereal constellation astrology I use one of various options in the astodienst site I linked to above.

For insights into personal 'psychology' I map the info onto my own system I developed.

For agriculture, hunting and husbandry I used this

http://www.astro-calendar.com/

(North and South hemisphere versions available

check this for a preview and the info available on it

http://biodynamics.net.au/wp-content/uploads/1HowToUseAstroCalendar_v1403web.optim_.pdf

--

One last note I would like to make:

I enjoy this Integra Naturae image you have posted. It reminds me of classes in school when we learned -- with not much depth or consideration -- how the ancients viewed the world. The way I remember those classes was with almost a belittling undertone as if saying, "isn't it cute what these ancient cultures believed, they thought the earth was at the center and that the moon, sun, planets and stars revolved in distinct tracks around it. How naiv."

What I am thinking right now is: What if illustrations such as the one you posted, or this one...

...were never meant to be physical models of our universe but rather schematic illustrations to demonstrate the magnitudes of influence each of the celestial bodies exude upon human experience? In other words: What if it was not the bygone thinkers that had been naive -- but we are being the naive ones in thinking we understanding the depth of meaning of their illustrations?!

Great food for thought, all that. Thank you!

Just assume they are ... that they are all different way of looking at the same 'elephant'

30pcs-lot-font-b-crystal-b-font-faceted-

Edited April 21, 2015 by Nungali

Nungali · April 21, 2015

I had been avoiding the questions about 'directions' as I was not sure I understood the premise. I thought it was related to constellations or asterisms.

The issue seems to have opened out above.

IN the astro calender, that type of astrology postulates 'beings that reside in the constellations' and give their forces to our system. But on analysis, the workings of it are actually base on correlations between the elements ruling the 'sign' and parts of and types of plants.

I think the original idea is based on an old concept of focusing on what is rising on the east horizon, giving import to the first house . I won't divert to all that, but just say that the more relevant principles IMO in astrology are to do with combinations of energies that have to do with the angular relationships of the planets ... especially in natal chart.

Hence the direction actually now has become a point ... of location .... of the self. Where does the self stand in relation to the 'intersection of the forces'.

Any 'elemental' directions seem based on nature and location. Being in the south hemisphere I can say that most have a northern bias ... where is 'up' on sphere in space ? Attributing fire to the south, down here, seems nuts. Even 'Kabbalistic directions' seem based on the directional winds influence for a place on the eastern Mediterranean . There are 'cosmic directions' - cherubs, but they seem based on the elemental energy of a sign as well.

I feel 'direction' has more significance in that it is all to do with angular relationships between the 'planets' and us - and the 4 stations of Asc MH Dsc IC around us ( the relationship to our position on the earth, the earth and any other body ... as the Moon does with a lot of fauna.

There is an Ancient Egyptian document that lists adorations at these four solar quarters with a different God invoked at each one ... cant remember its title at the moment - it might be in here somewhere ?

http://thedaobums.com/topic/37154-egyptian-pyramids-as-maps-of-the-duat/

Zhongyongdaoist · April 21, 2015

The following two quotes are from my posts in a thread on self-knowledge, the first one deals with a traditional aspect of self-knowledge from the perspective of the microcosm/macrocosm doctrine, the idea that we as microcosms reflect within ourselves the whole of the macrocosm and I quote it both because it is an excellent look at the idea of "Jupiter is a formal cause that organizes information", the first quote in particular brings out the idea that the information is both within us and without us and has many aspects, the rest bring out its origin in Greek epistemology and Platonic metaphysics, a cross cultural manifestation in China and a profound application of it as a metaphysical/epistemological idea applied in practice drawn from the Hermetica:

The notion that all one needs to know is oneself is founded on the Microcosm/Macrocosm analogy, well represented by this quote attributed to Paracelsus:

If I have manna in my constitution, I can attract manna from heaven. Melissa is not only in the garden, but also in the air and in heaven. Saturn is not only in the sky, but also deep in the ocean and Earth. What is Venus but the artemisia that grows in your garden, and what is iron but the planet Mars? That is to say, Venus and Artemisia are both products of the same essence, while Mars and iron are manifestations of the same cause. What is the human body but a constellation of the same powers that formed the stars in the sky? He who knows Mars knows the qualities of iron, and he who knows what iron is knows the attributes of Mars. What would become of your heart if there were no Sun in the Universe? What would be the use of your 'Vasa Spermatica* if there were no Venus? To grasp the invisible elements, to attract them by their material correspondences, to control, purify, and transmute, them by the ever-moving powers of the living spirit—this is true Alchemy." (Burgoyne, Thomas H., The Light of Egypt, H. O. Wagner, Denver, Colorado, USA, 1965, Vol. II, p. 63, I have not been able to otherwise source this quote attributed to Paracelsus)
In the West it became fundamental to Metaphysics and Ontology, but originated as an Epistimological theory:

Like is only known by like in Empedocles

because it solves a lot of problems created both by Parmenides on the one hand and the early Greek Atomists on the other.

This doctrine was worked out by Plato in a very profound way and continued to influence Western Philosophy up to Hegel.

It existed in China as can be seen in this quote from the Confucian, Mencius:

7A:4
萬物皆備於我矣。反身而誠、樂莫大焉。彊恕而行、求仁莫近焉。
(Mencius at The Chinese Text Project)

I prefer this translation to the one on The Chinese Text Project:

"All the ten thousand things are there in me. There is no greater joy for me than to find, on self-examination, that I am true to myself. Try your best to treat others as you would wish to be treated yourself, and you will find that this is the shortest way to benevolence."
(D. C. Lau, Mencius, Penguin Books, 1970, p. 182, Emphasis mine, ZYD)

and was also used in Daoism.

In Plato, as becomes very clear in Plotinus, all things, including our own divine being as already there within us, it allows this type of knowledge of God:

Then, in this way know God; as having all things in Himself as thoughts, the whole Cosmos itself. If, then, thou dost not make thyself like unto God, thou canst not know Him. For like is knowable to like [alone]. Make, [then,] thyself to grow to the same stature as the Greatness which transcends all measure; leap forth from every body; transcend all Time; become Eternity; and [thus] shalt thou know God. Conceiving nothing is impossible unto thyself, think thyself deathless and able to know all,—all arts, all sciences, the way of every life. Become more lofty than all height, and lower than all depth. Collect into thyself all senses of [all] creatures,—of fire, [and] water, dry and moist. Think that thou art at the same time in every place,—in earth, in sea, in sky; not yet begotten, in the womb, young, old, [and] dead, in after-death conditions. And if thou knowest all these things at once,—times, places, doings, qualities, and quantities; thou canst know God. But if thou lockest up thy soul within thy body, and dost debase it, saying: I nothing know; I nothing can; I fear the sea; I cannot scale the sky; I know not who I was, who I shall be;—what is there [then] between [thy] God and thee? For thou canst know naught of things beautiful and good so long as thou dost love thy body and art bad. The greatest bad there is, is not to know God’s Good; but to be able to know [Good], and will, and hope, is a Straight Way, the Good’s own [Path], both leading there and easy. (Corpus Hermeticum XI, "Mind unto Hermes", p. 187-8) (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

as is found in the Corpus Hermeticum. The text which I emphasized above, "If, then, thou dost not make thyself like unto God, thou canst not know Him. For like is knowable to like", emphasizes the epistemological origin of this practice and it is only the Microcosm/Macrocosm analogy that makes it possible. This is a very Western approach approach to God as the fullness of Creation and the unifying One at its root, though the approach to the One as the one itself is also part of Western Philosophy especially in Plotinus. (Emphasis in the original, ZYD)

FraterUFA has brought up the question of Objective/Subjective, and since I agree with his post in general, and see no reason to engage it in detail, I will just quote the following, which makes explicit the point that the microcosm/macrocosm doctrine effectively erases the pernicious dichotomy of objective/subjective:

I might add to the Epistemological nature of the Microcosm/Macrocosm analogy, that it would make the type of long pointless discussion appearing in the thread:

Objective Vs Subjective

completely unnecessary. The terminology involved in "objective" and "Subjective" was created in the Seventeenth Century as a psychology of the senses related to the revival of Epicureanism, a branch of Greek Atomism, that began around 1600. Its primary systematizer was John Locke, whose model of the mind at birth as a "blank slate", also sometimes called the Latin "tabula rasa", meant there was no inborn knowledge and all that one could know in "knowing" oneself was what one had observed or deduced from those deductions. This served his fundamentally Puritan agenda perfectly, because unlike the previous positions of the Catholic Church, based on the Classical Tradition, there could be no inborn virtues, nothing that a man may know, or virtue he might develop on his own, thus he was wholly at the mercy of God for salvation in Jesus.

Subsequent materialism kept these ideas going by taking for granted many things that seem simple because they are "natural", but these days it is clear from the efforts of AI and computing, that things we think are simple are very complex and may even not be computable and if they are not computable, they cannot be mechanical and if they cannot be mechanical then the whole edifice of materialism is revealed as a mere facade and for the shame it is.

This discussion has of course been greatly simplified for brevity's sake. For example "tabula rasa" has Classical and Medieval precedents and Quantum Computing may solve many problems, but with Quantum anything, we are just not in Kansas anymore.

The same knowledge that is outside is inside and all true self-knowledge is base on this "objective" identity of microcosm and macrocosm. I will address some of the issues raised in other posts shortly.

noonespecial · April 21, 2015

Things that came to mind while reading this thread - “Its like a finger pointing away to the moon. Dont concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory.” - Bruce Lee

"A symbol is the manifester of the thing signified, and if the thing signified has already an existence,and if, by experience, we

know that the symbol has expressed that thing many times, then we are sure that there is areal relation between them." - Swami Vivenkananda

Michael Sternbach · April 21, 2015

...were never meant to be physical models of our universe but rather schematic illustrations to demonstrate the magnitudes of influence each of the celestial bodies exude upon human experience? In other words: What if it was not the bygone thinkers that had been naive -- but we are being the naive ones in thinking we understanding the depth of meaning of their illustrations?!

Yes, there is some truth to that. Many illustrations of the ancient geocentric world model are clear as to its metaphysical side which, in essence, remains valid, even though on the physical level, the model is seemingly incorrect. I write "seemingly" because the question of the "correct" center is a philosophically and scientifically intricate one.Some of us talked about it not too long ago here:

http://thedaobums.com/topic/37665-the-location-has-no-center/

noonespecial · April 21, 2015

UFA wrote; "what if these sources were not hinting at energetic influences, but rather living consciousnesses?"

Likewise, what if what science calls gravity, the weak and strong nuclear forces, magnetism, light, etc are all actively conscious in varying grades, they are beings beyond our measuring instruments, but beings none the less. While I do not think it is necessary to apply modern scientific terminology to the occult, neither am I seeing a disconnect if someone chooses to use words like vibrations and energies, unless that is what you are saying?

Zhongyongdaoist · April 21, 2015

As much as I always enjoy reading your posts, I do feel that you are somewhat overloading the OP's mental circuits too.

Yes, I am overloading his circuits, but I am doing it to a well defined purpose, but before that can become clear a little digression into my teenage musings on Gödel's incompleteness theorem are in order.

Sometime around my seventeenth birthday, I made the happy acquaintance of Herr Gödel and his Theorem. To give the very informal summary of it that I made at the time, “Any formal system complex enough to be interesting will either contain a contradiction of the nature both P and not P are true, or there will be other obviously true propositions which cannot be proved within its axiom set.” In honor of Herr Gödel, I named these “P, not P” contradictions Gödel points and more importantly saw these Gödel points as extremely useful, among other things it means it is “back to the old drawing board time”.

To me this had profound implications for science, which since it is the application of these “interesting” mathematical systems to “modeling” experience, must necessarily involve either contradictions or a “palpable” sense of incompleteness. This is one of the reasons why I find the whole notion of a “theory of everything”, laughably impossible and chuckle every time I hear that “we” are only inches from such a chimera. Within those inches is an abyss of the undiscovered just waiting to devour 'our' hubris. Most of the history of science from 1600 has been of the incompleteness type in which more and more phenomena that were assimilated into one of two models, particle mechanics and wave mechanics and this worked fine for a while, but I think that quantum mechanics is a perfect example of a Gödel point in which the micro level behavior of what we call “matter” has been revealed to be “particle, not particle” and “wave, not wave”, as both of these previously fruitful mathematical models reach the maximum of their explanatory value.

This is also why circa 1980, I came to the conclusion that only a complete rethinking of physics would solve the problem. At the time I was reaching the end of my research into the Platonic/Aristotelean background of magic and I saw a potential relationship between ideas/forms and “information”, which is why I thought at the time that a possible direction for resolving the “wave/particle” duality would be through a “reframing” of physics in terms of “information”. Since that time there has certainly be a movement in that direction, and that is why I have emphasized “information” here.

All of which contributes to my overall strategy in these posts. On a fundamental level I see our friend Mr. White in the psychological equivalent of a "quantum superposition" between Hamlet and Horatio and I have attempted a strategic

of Hamlet's rebuke to Horatio, to more fit Mr. White's situation, which I see more like, “There are more things in Heaven and Earth then can be modeled in my axiom system” and I am doing everything I can to lay a firm foundation for a cognitive reframe of his ideas about heaven, earth, physics and magic, because judging by his posts and in particular this:

It started with books I read on Feng Shui years ago; meanwhile I have deepened my studies of Qi Gong, Nei Gong and mystical traditions (I read some Gurdijeff, some about the Essenes, the Egyptians, the Kabbala, some Western Hermeticism and Magick, the Bible, the Tarot etc etc) and somehow all of these traditions or knowledge systems seem to point to an understanding that each direction and / or constellation exudes distinct kinds of energy or vibrational influences.

He doesn't need more of the same, he needs a new way of thinking about these things, which is what I am trying to provide.

Edit: Added "like" to the phrase "more like . . ." above.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Zhongyongdaoist

Astrology: Overlaying Four Directions, Zodiac Signs & ... the Tarot?!

Recommended Posts

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites