Age of Aquarius May Not Be So Great

david starling

Well-known member
The Fagan-Bradley setting of the 12 equal (30°) Signs is Sidereal. The Vernal Equinoctial Point's position in this Zodiac is known as the Synetic Vernal Point (S.V.P.), and it precesses (transits) retrograde at the rate of 50.3" of arc per year, or 1° every 71.6 years. Using the S.V.P. as the Age Indicator (if a Sideralist cares to include it in a Chart) results in the start of the Sidereal Aquarian Age in the year 2368, +/- 24 years, allowing for the back-and-forth motion caused by the Moon, called "Nutation". Compare this date to the much earlier ones, like the Year 2000 or 2012 or 2149, bandied about by Tropical Astrologers and non-astrologers alike who aren't using any version of a Sidereal Zodiac for an actual Astrological Chart. Meaning, they're making up a bogus[IMO] setting for Sidereal Signs that they themselves are using for the sole purpose of satisfying their "intuitive sense" that an Aquarian Age will begin centuries earlier than Fagan-Bradley Sideralism (or any other well-known version of Siderealism) says it will. Anyway, according to established Siderealism, what we're experiencing now is the last five or six degrees of the Sidereal Age of Pisces, not the real beginning of the Sidereal Aquarian Age. Make of it what you will, but these are
the facts. Just tellin' it like I see it. Alternative opinions welcome!

Of course, I have that "intuitive sense" of an earlier Aquarian Age myself, and I trust it.
So, for me, it comes down to explaining it without disrespecting the Sidereal Zodiac's S.V.P. and the Vedic ayanamsa.
 
Last edited:

david starling

Well-known member
It just occurred to me that I should clarify three things: First, waybread was just explaining the general opinion, not necessarily agreeing with it, as I might have appeared to imply. Apologies! Second, if the Sidereal setting you're using for Charts is not well-known, or "established", I have no problem with that whatsoever. And third, the reason I believe my comments are in keeping with this Thread is about its description--it doesn't necessarily assert that what we're seeing now actually IS the Age of Aquarius--just "what will it be like when it occurs". And knowing what I know about the Sign Aquarius, it will [IMO] be much, much better than the way the World is now. Proof for me that it hasn't really begun yet.
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
Waybread, these Ages you're talking about are manifestly Sidereal, and I believe you yourself are using the Tropical Zodiac. The Age i:confused:ndicator you just alluded to is the one and only Vernal Equinoctial Point, which locates 0° Tropical Aries. 2148 years from now (from the generally accepted, current rate of Equinoctial precession) it will still be at 0° Tropical Aries. Since it has no Tropical transit, it's of no Tropical value. So, "sorry Tropical Astrology, but, no Aquarian Age for you!" Not if it's based on precession of the Equinoxes. A lot of Siderealists, who could claim the Age of Aquarius for their own Zodiac, don't even bother with it--go figure. Vedic Astrologers don't use the V.E.P. for Ages, even though they could as well. They do have "Yugas" which last many thousands of years, but are calculated in mysterious ways, very likely involving some kind of use of Equinoctial precession. The Kali Yuga, now in it's final stage, is the worst possible Yuga, where we are experiencing the greatest lack of spiritual connection. Some say it began around 3100 B.C.E., and is either nearing an end, or has just ended. Next up...any Vedic Astrologers care to join in?

OMG, David: you're right! :surprised:

I had never thought about this before. But that's OK, I was never taken with the hype from the musical Hair, anyway. ("This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius....") A New Age of peace and love still seems like a distant hope.

From a historical-religious perspective, there does seem to have been a sort-of age of Taurus (cattle worship) ca. 4000-2000 BCE and age of Aries ca. 2000-0 BCE (cf. all the allusions to shepherds in the Old Testament as well as the rise of the Egyptian ram-headed god Ammon.) Interestingly at the dawn of the sidereal age of Pisces, the New Testament has a new divinity, the son of the Good Shepherd who befriends fishermen, walks on water, quells the sea, and multiplies loaves and fishes. The book of Revelation, encoding the constellations as a sort of celestial apocalypse, says "we're going back to the Triumph of the Lamb, and that's that!"

So we get the emergence of the tropical zodiac at a time when astrologers could see the vernal equinox had left the constellation Aries for Pisces. By this time, astrologers were also using signs rather than the constellations.
 

I cee

Well-known member
what we're experiencing now is the last five or six degrees of the Sidereal Age of Pisces, not the real beginning of the Sidereal Aquarian Age. Make of it what you will, but these are
the facts. Just tellin' it like I see it. Alternative opinions welcome!

Of course, I have that "intuitive sense" of an earlier Aquarian Age myself, and I trust it.
So, for me, it comes down to explaining it without disrespecting the Sidereal Zodiac's S.V.P. and the Vedic ayanamsa.

Could that mean then that we are getting close to a critical degree, and the turmoil is maybe hyper negative virgo/pisces neurosis at its worse..
Events are coming to a crisis like they would in a personal chart just before the change of signs, the end of one sign into the next, something happens that eptipimises that sign but we would still see the computer age slowly seeping in.
 

I cee

Well-known member
I cee, maybe you would prefer to be self-employed.
That would be ideal...but I don't know If I could sustain myself.
...all I know is I don't fit......school report is saying "must try harder"
....at what though (shrug)
I am volunteering at a charity shop and I love it, I look forward to....just don't get paid for it (sigh)
I have my progressed sun and venus in aquarius and I think soon or now I have progressed moon too.....so I should be used to that energy by now?(puzzled)
 

Flapjacks

Well-known member
I thought of age of Aquarius today when I read about this: http://www.effectivealtruism.org/

I don't know what it is, but I find so many Aquarian things deeply unsettling instead of "revolutionary". More like indoctrination into a cult... an impersonal, egalitarian one that is spiritually impoverished.

Here is what one chapter of this group says about supporting the arts:

"One of the members, Ben Schwyn, 26, a soft-spoken software engineer, reasoned: “You could attempt to quantify how much supporting the symphony costs or the probability of someone’s life being affected by that and without doing a lot of research, we don’t know what those are,” he said. “But my estimate is that they are not very effective.”

“And yet,” added Pasha Kamyshev, 28, a software engineer, “for the same amount of money you can distribute iodine for malaria through a charity to thousands in the second or Third World.”

When it comes to making the choice between funding the symphony or saving someone’s life? The choice is easy.

“Having your life changed by music is incredibly privileged,” said Van Nostrand. “People whose lives are changed by not dying — that’s a bigger thing.”

I want to punch all these people in the face.
 
Last edited:

david starling

Well-known member
Elitism is not an Aquarian Age trait. Look how long it's been going on--nothing egalitarian or revolutionary about it. The rich turning their backs on the suffering of the poor--nothing new about that either.
Nothing wrong with not liking the Age of Aquarius. It's a Chart thing, and many will feel that way. I don't like the Age we're in now, so for me, the Aquarian Age can't come soon enough.
 
Last edited:

Flapjacks

Well-known member
Elitism is not an Aquarian Age trait. Look how long it's been going on--nothing egalitarian or revolutionary about it. The rich turning their backs on the suffering of the poor--nothing new about that either.

What is elitist here? They are being completely "rational". Use reason to decide how to best help the largest number of people.

EDIT: I've been particularly interested with Uranus lately so I looked at transits and Uranus is coming within range of my NN in Aries, currently trine natal Uranus and square my Mars. Punching people in the face, right? Bahaha. Seems Uranus will be conjunct NN exact right when Neptune finally exits my 10th house and moves to 11th (10th ruled by Uranus, 11th ruled by Pisces). That also means it'll square my Sun-Merc/Moon opposition. Watch out for Flapjacks Christmas 2017..
 
Last edited:

david starling

Well-known member
Elitism's about believing you know what everyone else should do. Like-minded elitists form organizations to promote their agendas. Nothing new or Aquarian about it. Also, Aquarians I know personally tend to support the arts along with environmental causes and humane treatment of other species, in addition to our own. But they aren't of the opinion that everyone has to be like them. Just out of curiosity, what's your basis for determining what an "Aquarian Age" would really be like? There's a lot of anti -Aquarian Age rhetoric out there, from evangelists and Atheists alike. I don't think the "New Age Movement" types are indicative of the upcoming Aquarian Age, although they attempt (pretty successfully) to claim it. Just my opinion.
The "Occupy Movement" had an Aquarian flair to it though.[IMO]
 
Last edited:

craft94

Well-known member
Don't get me wrong, I like Aquarius. I hate to be biased but I'd say they're the sign I get along best with as far as Suns go. I'm not dreading the New Age but I don't expect all of our problems to disappear either. And while some problems might go away, others might arise. I admire the idealism, I want the hype to be true but like, my philosophy is to hope for the best but expect the worst. Don't give up hope, don't give up on your ideals, keep trying, keep aiming towards what you believe to be right, but be prepared because not everything will turn out the way you want to. I'm not like "Anti-Aquarius" or whatever but I think it's good to be critical of EVERYTHING, personally. I guess it's the idealism.

Elitism isn't an Aquarian trait. Aquarius isn't about excluding people but bringing them together. But 'group think' itself can be a problem imo. Aquarius isn't about individuality. Leo is about individuality. Aquarius is about the group and I think that's what Flapjacks was getting at (correct me if I'm wrong). Do what's best for the community (country?) even at the expense of your personal values. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, but what if the needs of the few are greater? What if it's a matter of life and death? Just some thoughts.
 
Last edited:

craft94

Well-known member
When I mention Capricorn, I'm referring to all these ads, and all this government spying. Corruption is nothing new, but the internet is symbolic of Aquarian age, imo, and while the Internet HAS been used to connect people and bring down corruption, it has also been used for governments and corporations to spy on us. I don't know...maybe, hopefully, this will all go away once the age starts really kicking in, but I see it as technology (Aquarius) being used for the wrong purposes (Capricorn). I don't know. My only real concern is the lack of privacy. People are saying it's dead. The Scorpio in my chart is not okay with this but the Libra is happy to be finally entering an age of social justice (if that is what's hapening - still a long way to go)
 
Last edited:

Sweet Pea

Well-known member
Does anyone think it significant that we're moving into the third decanate of Aquarius, which is Libran?

This could play into the social networking, extreme need for relationship but done online and impersonally, extreme focus on beauty, appearance, 'selfies', photoshopping photos to look better, the cult of narcissism that is appearing in the youth of today especially.

And if the entire Aquarius/Leo axis is being "constellated", then the third decanate of Leo is Aries, which brings in the cult of "Me".
 

I cee

Well-known member
Does anyone think it significant that we're moving into the third decanate of Aquarius, which is Libran?

This could play into the social networking, extreme need for relationship but done online and impersonally, extreme focus on beauty, appearance, 'selfies', photoshopping photos to look better, the cult of narcissism that is appearing in the youth of today especially.

And if the entire Aquarius/Leo axis is being "constellated", then the third decanate of Leo is Aries, which brings in the cult of "Me".
Selfies, extreme narcissim and wanting to be famous for 2 seconds is surely the not so good side of Leo.
I also think teenagers need to be narcisstic, its part of growing up and getting to know oneself, there bodies are changing and this, I think makes for acute attention to themselves,..for good or bad.
Sweetpea, how are we in the 3rd decanate of aquarius?
 

Cold Fusion

Well-known member
Selfies, extreme narcissim and wanting to be famous for 2 seconds is surely the not so good side of Leo.
I also think teenagers need to be narcisstic, its part of growing up and getting to know oneself, there bodies are changing and this, I think makes for acute attention to themselves,..for good or bad.
Sweetpea, how are we in the 3rd decanate of aquarius?

Try Capricorn, not Leo:

http://www.constellationsofwords.com/Constellations/Pavo.html

peacockdisplay.jpg


Peacock
 
Last edited:

Sweet Pea

Well-known member
I cee - we're going into the Age of Aquarius backwards, as it were, from the sign of Pisces. So we encounter the third decanate first.:biggrin:
 

craft94

Well-known member
Selfies, extreme narcissim and wanting to be famous for 2 seconds is surely the not so good side of Leo.

My thoughts exactly.

Sweet Pea, what "extreme need for relationships" are you talking about? I see that with individuals but unless you mean an extreme need for attention, I don't see it collectively. I may be biased but I see the exact opposite. Hook-ups are what's popular these days. There's not even a pretense of romance involved.
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
Would it be cost-effective? Just kidding, just kidding.

I think we have to be careful about assigning various ideas to the Age of Aquarius. I am a real Trekkie (TNG only) and disease has been eradicated in the 24th century. Music is widely available to be heard or played.

Maybe the future will include both.
 

Flapjacks

Well-known member
Elitism's about believing you know what everyone else should do. Like-minded elitists form organizations to promote their agendas. Nothing new or Aquarian about it. Also, Aquarians I know personally tend to support the arts along with environmental causes and humane treatment of other species, in addition to our own. But they aren't of the opinion that everyone has to be like them. Just out of curiosity, what's your basis for determining what an "Aquarian Age" would really be like? There's a lot of anti -Aquarian Age rhetoric out there, from evangelists and Atheists alike. I don't think the "New Age Movement" types are indicative of the upcoming Aquarian Age, although they attempt (pretty successfully) to claim it. Just my opinion.
The "Occupy Movement" had an Aquarian flair to it though.[IMO]

Elitism isn't what that group is promoting. Here are values the Effective Altruists promote:

OPEN-MINDEDNESS
Consider all causes and actions, and then act in the way that brings about the greatest positive impact.

CRITICAL THINKING
Apply evidence and reason to determine the most effective ways to improve the world.

GLOBAL EMPATHY
Value all sentient life, regardless of nationality, creed, ancestry, religion, or species.

How can you not see this as Aquarian?

The devil is the details of how to carry out such values, because on the surface they look pretty positive. That is why I gave the example of how actual chapter members are using these values (i.e. deciding that art doesn't help people enough and so should be disregarded as important to support with their money).

The philosophy bothers me because of the slick veneer, and I'm more of a transcendentalist. In today's society, I feel like I am always pushing back against the strong incentives to give myself up to a collective and hive-mind.

Don't get me wrong, I like Aquarius. I hate to be biased but I'd say they're the sign I get along best with as far as Suns go. I'm not dreading the New Age but I don't expect all of our problems to disappear either. And while some problems might go away, others might arise. I admire the idealism, I want the hype to be true but like, my philosophy is to hope for the best but expect the worst. Don't give up hope, don't give up on your ideals, keep trying, keep aiming towards what you believe to be right, but be prepared because not everything will turn out the way you want to. I'm not like "Anti-Aquarius" or whatever but I think it's good to be critical of EVERYTHING, personally. I guess it's the idealism.

Elitism isn't an Aquarian trait. Aquarius isn't about excluding people but bringing them together. But 'group think' itself can be a problem imo. Aquarius isn't about individuality. Leo is about individuality. Aquarius is about the group and I think that's what Flapjacks was getting at (correct me if I'm wrong). Do what's best for the community (country?) even at the expense of your personal values. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, but what if the needs of the few are greater? What if it's a matter of life and death? Just some thoughts.

Yes, this is exactly it. :)

A lot of cookbook astrology paints Aquarius as individualistic, which is exactly opposite of what Aquarius stands for. Individualism is a Leo preoccupation.

If you are going to look at one sign, it is interesting to see what is lacking. When talking about an "age" it isn't only about what is going to be prominent but also what is going to be difficult or absent. Individualism is difficult for Aquarius, but Aquarian ideals are reigning (as Cap will fade away).

A great book that discusses (without intention) this Aquarius vs. Leo dynamic is "You Are Not a Gadget" by Jaron Lanier.
 

david starling

Well-known member
I have rather extreme expectations for the Aquarian Age. Transcendental expectations. This Age is beyond hope, even more-so as it lunges toward its conclusion. Altruism is nice, but it's just a band-aid. [IMO] The AoA will transcend the need for it, because no one will need anyone elses help. We'll all be tapped into the Source. Until then, it's all about Cap.--on the cusp of Aqua., but still Cap. [IMO] My sympathies and admiration for those with Cap. prominent in their charts. Paired with Libra, Capricorn is capable of a tremendous amount of altruism.
 
Last edited:
Top