How do I learn astrology?

Hi I am Here to know about astrology please suggest me how I can learn it .

Re: Hello all

Start with a good few books. Ones that make sense to you, but are well reviewd.

Welcome

The way I learned it was first generating my birth chart online on different websites and reading the interpretations of my Sun sign, Moon sign, Mercury sign, etc.
I recommend cafeastrology.com, I like their chart generator the best and it gives detailed interpretations.

Then I started watching videos that went into further depth about them (on Youtube, KRSchannel is very entertaining and informative about astrology! Western and Vedic astrology.)

Then I started learning about what do houses and aspects mean. That helped to start put the pieces of the puzzle together.

But I'm just a beginner! I'm still learning a lot too!

I hope this helps!

I would recommend these books:

Astrology: A Cosmic Science by Isabel Hickey

The Inner Sky by Steven Forrest

These two are both excellent for beginners.

Also, you can listen to Mark Husson and C.A.Brooks for free at 12radio.com. They are both very competent and knowledgeable.

After you get the basics of natal astrology, then read anything by Rob Hand especially his Planets In Transit, Also anything by Liz Greene especially her books titled Relating, Saturn and Astrology for Lovers.

Keep in mind that anyone can post to the internet and call themselves an astrologer. Not everything you read there is valid. best to start with a couple of real pros like those mentioned here.

Hope this helps,

Barb at thelivingsky.wordpress.com

When I was first learning about Astrology in the 70's - I read two books first:

Linda Goodman's Sun Signs & Joseph Goodavage Write Your Own Horoscope.
They were the very basics and Goodavage book helped you to figure out what your planets were and importantly, what the planets looked like in glyphs and descriptions. It also had an asc. index and it was the first time I learned about the ascendant and it's time frames. The 'Red Bible' as I call it - The American Ephemeris of the 20th Century/21st edition nowadays) is a great thing to have at a glance without having to go to a website to see the chart and planets if you are just wanting to look up someone's basic signs.

Then I later got Linda Goodman's Love Signs & Deb Kempton Smith's Secrets from a Star Gazers Notebook in early 80's when I was interested in relationship synastry.

Those books alone got me onto my modern journey - the gave just enough info to you so that you would want to learn more and then delve further. There may be more modern equivalents today - but if those books are still in print, you might check them out.

Early on book learning was no different than today's Googling - when you read something new about something - even in tidbits - if you're interested in knowing more - you investigate further. and further. and further. Basically there is no end to any of it until you reach the point that you're satisfied with what you learned. Then apply it. Do charts for your friends and family and read about planets and aspects in their chart. Read about their ascendant. Pay close heed to the trinity - Sun Moon Asc and see if it matches your notions of them or if you pick up on truths.

I'm in my 50's now - I'm good enough on the internet to find info - but nothing was ever better than sitting at my desk as a high school and college student with my pen and pad and astrology books all around and going at it.

It kept me out of trouble too. Once someone finds a sustaining passion, they'll do whatever they need to do to become good at it.

Good Luck!

The caveat with older books is that they're going to spend a lot of time teaching you how to erect a chart (the Linda Goodman stuff excepted, but I wouldn't recommend her for someone learning astrology - still, they're light, and fun).

These days we all use computers. Should you learn how to do charts by hand? Oh yes, it will help you a lot. But probably not at the very beginning.

Books like Astrology for Dummies or for Idiots, most modern astrology texts, will be fine to start, because they'll give you some basic concepts (and even though I am of a traditional bent, this is what I tell people).

Once you've got your head around what a chart looks like and what it represents, then you can start doing charts and reading more critically, and getting into whatever type of astrology that interests you most.

The two books I recommend for beginners are Steven Forrest, The Inner Sky, and Robert Hand, Planets in Youth. I believe both are in print and available through amazon. And just be patient with yourself. It may take a few years to develop facility with astrology.

What I like is that both authors take a dynamic, constructive approach to astrology-- vs. the ones that interpret people as inexplicable skin-bags of seemingly arbitrary and static personality traits.

Neither one of these books expects you to construct a chart by hand.... and some of the older authors offered to construct a chart for you, for a small fee.

I think the best free automatic chart construction service is at Astrodienst www.astro.com . I find their charts much easier to read than the others. Try to find your birth time before you input your data, as it is the basis for astrological houses. If you can't get it right away, just input your birth time as "unknown." You'll get a chart without houses, but at least they won't be incorrect.

This is so helpful. Thanks to everyone.

The more stuff there is to analyze, the more I like astrology. I guess that makes me naturally more interested in modern. I know traditional astrology does not recognize everything that modern astrology does.

Is there a way to learn both in a way that doesn't cloud a person's objectivity of a chart? Are there people that look at charts using both to see which one paints the most accurate picture or to see how many similarities can be found using both?

Modern doesn't look at half of what tradition does, either. Modern has more stuff, tradition has more technique.

But yes, there are some people who use a blend of modern and trad. A few of them are very good at it. It'll take some time to learn, though.

@raj: I started with Steven Forrest's The Inner Sky. Very readable, and he offers a good way to break it down to the simplest parts to get started. Once you understand signs, houses, and planets, you can start fitting it together, and then move on to aspects.

Only the last chapter in that book covers aspects. The first time I read it, the aspects part sounded like gobblety gook. I put the book away, lost interest, and didn't look at it again for a couple of years. Then I came back--after I'd had my chart read by a professional astrologer, and gotten my curiosity whetted--and suddenly the aspects part started making sense. But, I quickly found that there was only so much I could do with what I learned in a book, and that's when I joined this site.

If you have any real world opportunities to meet with and learn from astrologers, that's another avenue to explore. Without knowing where in the world you live, I have no idea if you have this option, but in my area, there are a couple of astrology groups available through meetup.com, and they have lectures on a regular basis. I've now talked to one of the astrologers I met there about studying with her, so I might be doing that within the next year.

@Dubyadude: There was an article series in The Mountain Astrologer, an issue or so back, where a modern astrologer and a traditional astrologer both interpreted the same solar return chart, without seeing each other's interpretations. Interestingly, they both drew very similar conclusions, although there were some differences in the details.

I don't think you'll ever get perfect objectivity with astrology, because there's plenty about it that's subjective and open to interpretation. Modern or traditional, astrologers argue constantly over the finer points and the meanings of things. If this forum is any indication, it's even worse when modernists and traditionalists get into a debate with each other... enough mud gets slung for several years of political campaigns.

I would say the truth is whatever resonates, and whatever helpful messages you get out of it.

Dubyadude1986 said:

This is so helpful. Thanks to everyone.

The more stuff there is to analyze, the more I like astrology. I guess that makes me naturally more interested in modern. I know traditional astrology does not recognize everything that modern astrology does.

Is there a way to learn both in a way that doesn't cloud a person's objectivity of a chart? Are there people that look at charts using both to see which one paints the most accurate picture or to see how many similarities can be found using both?

Click to expand...

I don't see a problem in blending the two systems: today there are more "hybrid" astrologers. It's just that it's a lot to learn at once. I think the best advice is to start with modern, because it is analogous to learning to drive a car with automatic transmission before learning a stick shift. But some people quickly discover a preference for one or the other-- or Vedic (jyotish.)

Although modern astrology does have its share of modern techniques, not just "more stuff" (harmonics, minor aspects, midpoint pictures, horoscope patterns, Sabian symbols, &c) these methods are best introduced at a more advanced level.

A good textbook on traditional astrology that assumes no prior astrological knowledge is Avelar and Ribeiro, On the Heavenly Spheres. I picked up this book after years of studying modern astrology and was pleased that I already knew about 1/3 of the material simply because the two systems overlap. An interesting hybrid sort of book is Demetra George, Astrology and the Authentic Self. Also, some authors translate ancient concepts into modern idioms, such as Stephen Arroyo's book, Astrology, Psychology, and the Four Elements.

Astrology appeals to people who are fascinated by complex systems. While linear thinkers sternly warn against too many data bytes, some of us say, "Bring it on!" However, it is really helpful to work with a kind of rubric or protocol.

There are different diagnostic systems to follow, such as starting with the basic sun-moon-ascendant triad before moving on.

I think it helps to consider astrology like a grammar or sentence structure.

planet: the subject of the sentence. Your emotions (moon.) Your sense of self (sun.) &c.

sign: how or in what manner a planet operates (like an adjective or adverb) Here the elements and qualities come into play.

house: where or in what domain of life a planet operates (like a prepositional phrase)

aspect: how or in what manner two or more planets function with one another. (harmoniously, stressfully, &c)

So if you find a placement like the sun in Taurus square Mars in Leo, you might read it as, "His persistent and practical sense of identity is constantly goaded by his more authoritarian confrontational side."

waybread said:

I don't see a problem in blending the two systems: today there are more "hybrid" astrologers. It's just that it's a lot to learn at once. I think the best advice is to start with modern, because it is analogous to learning to drive a car with automatic transmission before learning a stick shift. But some people quickly discover a preference for one or the other-- or Vedic (jyotish.)

Click to expand...

Agreed about the analogy of learning to drive automatic before stick. I think modern astrology is easier to jump right into. With modern, you can start interpreting charts with just a very basic sense of signs, planets, and houses, although it takes more learning before you can do very in depth chart interpretations. If you're someone like me, who learns more by doing than by reading about it, the best way to learn is to try your hand at it, starting with just the most basic pointers.

Traditional astrology is so much more complex, I think, when it comes to how to interpret a chart, that you need much more background before you can begin to do it. Another caveat with traditional astrology: traditional astrologers, and traditional texts, use lots of negative language. They say things like, "The moon is unhappy, Mars is in detriment, Venus is stressed...." Lots of beginners hear that and freak out, thinking they're doomed to a horrible life because they have such a bad birth chart.

A crucial difference between traditional and modern is that modern astrology associates the birth chart with the individual's personality and psychology, while traditional interprets it as the circumstances you face in life. Birth charts can and do reveal both of those things, but modern astrology relies more on predictive methods, ie transits, to determine the circumstances you face, while traditional just isn't concerned with personality and psychology.

waybread said:

I think it helps to consider astrology like a grammar or sentence structure.

planet: the subject of the sentence. Your emotions (moon.) Your sense of self (sun.) &c.

sign: how or in what manner a planet operates (like an adjective or adverb) Here the elements and qualities come into play.

house: where or in what domain of life a planet operates (like a prepositional phrase)

aspect: how or in what manner two or more planets function with one another. (harmoniously, stressfully, &c)

So if you find a placement like the sun in Taurus square Mars in Leo, you might read it as, "His persistent and practical sense of identity is constantly goaded by his more authoritarian confrontational side."

Click to expand...

That is a modern astrology kind of interpretation. A traditional astrologer would probably describe that same placement as circumstances, rather than as an internal personality conflict. Both interpretations may hold true, but in both cases, it's a question of interpretation. It's possible that the subject actually experiences his Taurus sun/Leo Mars square in a different way from what the astrologer will come up with, although it's guaranteed that however he does experience it, the themes of sun and Taurus will be "squaring off" with the themes of Mars and Leo.

I am an unapologetic modern astrologer! Yay!!!

Another but different analogy for any horseback riders out there, is whether you learned on a western or English (eastern) saddle, and their different reining systems. There are all kinds of arguments in favour of the English method, but I learned to ride as a kid with western tack, and picked up a few "English" lessons later on. Western is just what I would feel more comfortable with were I to ride again.

Astrology is sort of like this, because the facility in chart-reading comes with some facility with the methods: if you're always having to think about what you're doing, it's just that much harder.

And absolutely some of us learn by doing. There is no substitute for hands-on reading of real charts for real people in real time, not just textbook examples.

But I think we should be building bridges rather than barricades. In my spare time, I do read traditional astrology. Just now I'm working my way through Joseph Crane's book on Hellenistic astrology. It's a slow tough read, but having read some of the Hellenists in the original (OK, in translation) makes it easier to follow.

If you can buy a literature, I advice the books by Charles Carter. For experience made me think he had done an enough coherent synthesis of tradition and modern informations. (which I consider rather rare in astrological literature).

I don't believe in certifications. I think if one learns all the signs, and has practice reading charts, then this is enough imho to gain traction. The issue is developing accurate readings, and a cert alone cannot help in that. Most top astrologers were/are self-taught or taught by family. Look at Astrolada or Nadiya Shah, both didn't become proficient alone through getting training.

raj2121 said:

Hi I am Here to know about astrology please suggest me how I can learn it .

Click to expand...

There are multiple astrological methodologies to choose from, for example http://forumonastrology.com/foa/newmain.html