Traditional vs modern. state your case

wilsontc

Staff member
outer planets, to Kaiousei

Kaiousei,

You said:
I don't feel Uranus in Capricorn, Neptune in Capricorn, or Pluto in Scorpio...Would there be a difference if say...Pluto was Squared from Taurus instead of Scorpio or Neptune was Trine was from Taurus instead of Capricorn?...where does Scorpio end and Pluto begin

I've already talked about Scorpio modifying Pluto, so let's talk about Capricorn (duty, also authority) modifying Uranus (friends, also astrology). This suggests that you want to be an "authority" in astrological things. Now let's compare how it would work if Taurus (physical, also personal values) modified Uranus. This would indicate you would would focus on astrology through an issue of your personal values. However, since you have Capricorn (not Taurus) modifying Uranus, you don't argue from a sense of personal values, but from a sense of "authority". So you look to "authorities" to back up your astrological views. I have Virgo (daily work, also analysis) modifying Uranus, so my approach to astrology is through analyzing how it works in daily life...I don't rely on "outside authorities" or someone's "say so". Continuing this idea of the importance of the sign ruling the outer planets, a person with Taurus modifying Pluto (instead of Scorpio) wouldn't be so strongly focused on the need for "pure" research...they would be more likely to trust their personal values in their research.

As to "where does Scorpio end and Pluto begin"...surely you jest ("I DON't jest and don't call me Shirley!" ;) )! Scorpio is a SIGN and Pluto is a PLANET. A SIGN is NOT a PLANET. A sign MODIFIES a PLANET. So, even though they have the same KEY WORD, a sign and a planet have a different FUNCTION in the chart. The sign affects the way the planet is expressed. Planets in their own sign are more strongly expressed than planets in different signs. I'm PRETTY sure you know all this...so maybe you are only testing ME? ;)

Out there, ;)

Tim
 
Last edited:

mdinaz

Well-known member
Re: outer planets, to Kaiousei

wilsontc said:
I've already talked about Scorpio modifying Pluto, so let's talk about Capricorn (duty, also authority) modifying Uranus (friends, also astrology). This suggests that you want to be an "authority" in astrological things. Now let's compare how it would work if Taurus (physical, also personal values) modified Uranus. This would indicate you would would focus on astrology through an issue of your personal values. However, since you have Capricorn (not Taurus) modifying Uranus, you don't argue from a sense of personal values, but from a sense of "authority". So you look to "authorities" to back up your astrological views. I have Virgo (daily work, also analysis) modifying Uranus, so my approach to astrology is through analyzing how it works in daily life...I don't rely on "outside authorities" or someone's "say so". Continuing this idea of the importance of the sign ruling the outer planets, a person with Taurus modifying Pluto (instead of Scorpio) wouldn't be so strongly focused on the need for "pure" research...they would be more likely to trust their personal values in their research.

Well that made more sense for me, as I have Uranus and Pluto in Virgo as well. I'll study on this further. Thanks.
 

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
Re: outer planets, to Kaiousei

You can't just say Pluto in Leo is not personal because it is never alone it is somewhere in the chart connected to other planets and placed in a house in your personal natal chart - some people are more tuned in to the outer planets because they have them on angles and inner planets aspect them.

And this is the entire point. We can say that *insert Outer here* in *insert Sign here* are not personal because they usually do aspect an Inner. However, I'm sure many of us here have an unaspected planet. What if that unaspected planet is a member of the Outers? That would make it less personal. I'm pretty sure we all agree on this, but what the main thing seems to be now, is how much a Sign matters to an Outer in Nativities. Pluto in Leo, not very personal unless he is aspected by an Inner.

mdinaz, again, you and I are in agreement. Very nice points, by the way.

This suggests that you want to be an "authority" in astrological things.

Or perhaps this is my Leonine Mercury? I want to be King. ;) Hehe.

However, since you have Capricorn (not Taurus) modifying Uranus, you don't argue from a sense of personal values, but from a sense of "authority". So you look to "authorities" to back up your astrological views.

Or perhaps we can argue this as Mercury conjoined to Mars. I bring in the Royal Guns.

My personal views of things run rampant in my astrology, most obviously where my groupings of planets are as Lights, Guardians (combined to make the Inners), Outers, and the Quartet. Views on the Tenth/Fourth and Mother/Father are at odds in astrology, modern views it one way and traditional views it the other way, however it is not that one group says it's one way that I agree with a camp of thought, it's that I can use my own brand of logic that just happens to coincide. Everyone has their personal views locked into their astrology, so we must all have Uranus in Taurus. Something that strikes me as odd is that I didn't expect modern astrology to interpret Uranus in Capricorn as a docile little puppy, answering to a master of authority, what with Uranus being the rebellious little rascal he's noted to be.

As to "where does Scorpio end and Pluto begin"...surely you jest

Not at all.

Scorpio is a SIGN and Pluto is a PLANET. A SIGN is NOT a PLANET. A sign MODIFIES a PLANET. So, even though they have the same KEY WORD, a sign and a planet have a different FUNCTION in the chart. The sign affects the way the planet is expressed. Planets in their own sign are more strongly expressed than planets in different signs. I'm PRETTY sure you know all this...so maybe you are only testing ME?

It wasn't a test and I didn't think you'd take it in that way as if I were asking it in an elementary fashion. After two years in astrology, one begins to understand how Signs and planets work around one another. :p The idea of it is, though, that the Outers have - unfortuntaely - been heavily embraced in the idea of the once mentioned X=Y=Z mentality. That meaning Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto have become so intimately connected with Aquarius and the Eleventh house, Pisces and the Twelfth house, and Scorpio and the Eighth house that it is hard to rip them apart from one another to see where Pluto ends and Scorpio begins. I guess my own nativity must be the biggest Plutonian mess of all, as my Pluto in Scorpio resides in my Eighth house. Squaring my Lights, goodness, I must be more Scorpion than I thought! ^.^
 
Re: outer planets, to Kaiousei

Hi everyone....calming down a bit from my own personal worries, has allowed me to come back to this thread.......for one, you are all very knowlegeable and your posts have a lot of value to the newbies to astrology..

I particularly liked Starlinks comment:
"If the antique Astrologers would have been able to see Uranus, Pluto and Neptune, they would have, just like the modern one's, used them accordingly."

I think this statement has a lot of truth to it.............and think its really worth pondering.

Thanks everyone for your posts........
Have a great day
 

wilsontc

Staff member
Whole lot of Scorpio going on, to Kaiousei

Kaiousei,

You said:
Pluto in Scorpio resides in my Eighth house. Squaring my Lights, goodness, I must be more Scorpion than I thought

And that is the value of an astrologer talking to another person about the effect of signs in their chart...it opens them up to a whole new way to understand themselves!

Making a breakthrough? ;)

Tim
 

starlink

Well-known member
Re: Whole lot of Scorpio going on, to Kaiousei

YES!!! Tim, you hit the nail on the head. I have even seen a chart without obvious Scorpio signs like an Ascendant or Sun, whatever, but a chockeblock full 8th house with Sun, Merc, Venus, Jupiter, Moon etc. all in there and the sign was not Scorpio. Nevertheless a strong Scorpionic trait was evident in this person and he felt more of a Scorpion than anything else.
Houses really show how a planet's energies are expressed (it's almost as if the ruler tells them: got there, to the 8th house and see how you cope! It will teach you some insight and courage!
Starlink
 

starlink

Well-known member
Re: outer planets, to Kaiousei

Hi Tim, I think Kaiousei is rightly surprised with this last part of the otherwise very good deduction of Uranus in Capricorn:
So you look to "authorities" to back up your astrological views.
Personally I dont think Kai looks up to anyone really. He has his own very unique ways of expressing himself, with friends and/or through Astrology in an authorative way. But maybe we understood this last remark wrongly. Maybe you meant to say that he gets his astrological knowledge from only looking at other astrologers who are authorities in this field?
Starlink
 

lillyjgc

Senior Member, Educational board Editor
Firstly I think it is counter productive to view any natal aspect in isolation of the chart as a whole, and so Tim, I think, unless you have access to Kai's entire chart, no astrologer can reasonably shed light on Kai's *personality* as defined by a particular aspect/placement. I would have strong objections if anyone took an aspect *out of context* from my chart and extrapolated on that...

As far as I'm concerned, all the known bodies *count* to a greater or lesser degree, depending on their aspectual (new word?) involvements.
When I analyse a natal, I look at overall patterns first, what connects to what.... Like most astrologers (aren't we an egocentric lot!), I studied my own chart in depth first- still going on that after 20 or so years! To me my chart made much more sense after chiron was discovered- Chiron is very prominent in my chart, a definite *key player*..Until Chiron was included, my chart did not make sense.
(I'm not mentioning chiron to stir you up, BTW, Kai- I respect your right NOT to use Chiron and hopefully you respect MY right to include it.Simple)...There doesn't need to be a *gulf war* between the traditionalists and the moderns. To tell you the truth, until I joined this forum had i been asked whether I was a *traditionalist* or a *modern* , I honestly would not have known what to say- I hate being pigeon-holed too.

In my own chart all the outers are involved in personal relationships with my inner planets. So when I studied my own aspects obviously I could not just leave out the outers-they were all very much involved in my chart.
I rarely see *unaspected planets* in charts...but on the rare occasion that it turns up I see it as a very important planet/asteroid/star/whatever, BECAUSE it is unaspected-thus free to exert a *pure* effect in the house its in and behave like the sign its in.

For horary it was logical for me to include the outers if they were prominent or conjoined with significators of the question...I don't apologise for *not sticking to the rules* here because in horaries on this forum even where the traditional system has been used the answer was sometimes WRONG and the chart done including the outers was RIGHT. (Like I think it was Gaer said *the proof of the pudding is in the eating*.)

Actually it amuses me to see posters vehemently claiming there is only one way to read a chart then getting it wrong with the method they have vigorously advocated!THere is just no room for arrogance in astrology yet I am disturbed to see it creeping in...

I don't have any astrological *gurus* as such- I think most astrologers who preceded us have contributed to the general wealth of knowledge and thus to a certain extent become *authorities* to which one can take recourse in a debate. No single astrologer, past or present had ALL the answers.We are now *the authorities in the making*- we can take from the works of the past but also from the works of the present. Surely?

I don't think its a clear cut case of *there are differences in approach therefore someone is wrong*!..There is more than one recipe to bake a cake.

On the issue of *generational planetary placements* surely it is obvious that everyone in ones peer group HAS the placement or aspect- say Pluto sextile neptune. Surely the FACT that a certain generation shares this aspect gives a sort of *common ground*-We've all heard of *the generation gap*-well whos not to say that that very phenomenon is not one that arises out of differences in the *generational* settings...In which case it brings those outers right into the sphere of personal influence- our peers would have to be a very significant influence in our lives and therefore in our charts.
I think it was Starlink who earlier said something like, if a planets in a certain part of the chart (even if unaspected), it forms part of the big picture.Its THERE. I would be very interested to have someone accurately read MY chart without including the outers...it would simply NOT tell the story of my life-I've tried it..

Maybe if anyone is having trouble trying to work out *what sort of astrologer* they are they should delineate their own natal using BOTH methods-and see what tells the story the most accurately.
As Robin Williams said in the film the *Fisher King* "Work out what you really are and BE THAT as best you can"..
Cheers Lillyjgc
 

starlink

Well-known member
Hello Lilly! You are a good writer, I always like reading your posts.
You wrote:
My Uranus conjuncts my I.C. Also Uranus in 3rd Scorpio squares my Mars in Aquarius 6th house, do you think I come across as challenging or rebellious concerning my views.
I would like to see this in context with your chart, like you wrote to Tim (I guess he has Kai's chart by the way, I do too because I think, when it was Kai's Birthday, he was concerned about the Solar Return and posted his chart after I asked for it because I told him that I cannot see anything in SR charts without his natal next to it).
Purely on what you wrote, a Scorpion Uranus (very much astrological I would say) in trine to your Moon/Mercury in 7, does just that: it communicates your astrological insights to the public in a very insightful, deep psychological way. Now that square to Mars?? Have you seen the mutual reception between Mars and Uranus?,( that is, if you take the traditional ruler of Scorpio.....) Mmmm, are you intensely, almost fanatically tidy? or could it be that being involved so deeply with astrology you would like to also include medical astrology? Or maybe doing so much astrology makes you forget to eat and you get ill!! for all I know LOL!!! or the other way around, if you cannot do astrology, you get sick (this is a bit my case really, astrology is medicine for me). You could have an extremely intense need to organize things around yourself and in your head as well otherwise you cannot get going? Mars in 6 often lacks taking the initiative .You could get mad at people who want YOU to do their dirty work in the office or generally. Astrology can be a good outlet for your anger. But these are all separate interpretations and I have no birthchart which makes for guessing games.
Now this one I find înteresting:
Until Chiron was included, my chart did not make sense.
It depends on what you thought you saw in your chart. I think that it is more a certain aspect in your chart which did not make sense without Chiron.
If you talk about helping people through astrology, then I think that the trine from Uranus to Moon/Merc shows that, especially because Mars and Uranus are in mutual reception and Mars being in the 6th house of service to others.
Personally I have Chiron in Scorpio in the 12th house in opposition to Mercury in Taurus in the 6th and Mercury rules my 8th house and my 11th house.
What boggles me is that I still cannot remember the "wound" I got , even though I can see it with that Moon in 12 as well, square Pluto and opposed to the Sun. I MUST have felt bad, maybe so bad that I probably burried it so deep, I dont remember it anymore. I cant remember anything up till I was 12. Everything I know is from photo's. It does show my dramatic birth.

I don't apologise for *not sticking to the rules*
I use them the same way as you do, it makes sense to me.

There is more than one recipe to bake a cake.
This goes for natal and horary astrology both!

on the rare occasion that it turns up I see it as a very important planet/asteroid/star/whatever, BECAUSE it is unaspected-thus free to exert a *pure* effect in the house its in and behave like the sign its in.
I totally agree with you.

Cheers, Starlink
 

lillyjgc

Senior Member, Educational board Editor
Starlink- I'm glad you enjoy my writing- I love writing ).I'm a bit confused-your first paragraph refers to a quote-but the quote is from Shining Ray- (I dont have uranus on the IC- just clearing that bit up first.)
Chiron is in my first house- it creates an opposition from Uranus/jupiter conjunction in h8 cusp which is also part of another major configuration in my chart. Mars is right next to Chiron....I have had to deal with life-death issues most of my life...Mars BTW is not conjunct Chiron enough to create a double opposition- orb of 9 degrees but its *influence* is there. Without Chiron, in saturn's sign in my chart, the *wounds would not be described, nor my response to them.As a child, adults injured my body..Mars in my first house doesn't describe this because mars has only positive aspects to it- the presence of chiron there brings in a whole new dimension- the opposition of chiron to uranus/jupiter very well describes the abuse I suffered as a child.
In your own chart, Chiron being in your twelfth may well describe a *past life* or kharmic wound- or one so well hidden it doesn't need to come up in this lifetime.
I guess the main point I am making is if you can see how a planet/star/asteroid/whatever plays out in your own chart it inclines you more to apply it when looking at others' charts.
I think you and I approach astrology very similarly star.
Cheers, Lillyjgc
 

wilsontc

Staff member
authorities, to star

star,

You said:
He has his own very unique ways of expressing himself, with friends and/or through Astrology in an authorative way...Maybe you meant to say that he gets his astrological knowledge from only looking at other astrologers who are authorities in this field?

That is another way to say it. Although I wouldn't use the word "only" and instead suggest "mostly". The other part of that "authority" issue is Kai wanting to become an authority on astrology.

Agreeing,

Tim
 
Last edited:

wilsontc

Staff member
personality, to lilly

lilly,

You said:
Tim, I think, unless you have access to Kai's entire chart, no astrologer can reasonably shed light on Kai's *personality* as defined by a particular aspect/placement.

My goal is to show how signs work with outer planets. Kai's sign placement emphasized "research" and this fit in with what Kai has revealed of his astrological methods on this grouplist. So I suggested the importance of "research" as a way for him to personally "connect in" with the importance of sign placement to his outer planets. I deliberately kept the interpretation general, with no indication of Kai's "personality" at all.

Keeping it general,

Tim
 

gaer

Well-known member
lillyjgc said:
Firstly I think it is counter productive to view any natal aspect in isolation of the chart as a whole, […]
I agree with you. It's necessary to simplify things when trying to explain what we are doing to people who are just learning the essentials, but the people involved in this discussion are all experienced. :)
When I analyse a natal, I look at overall patterns first, what connects to what.... Like most astrologers (aren't we an egocentric lot!), I studied my own chart in depth first- still going on that after 20 or so years!
Actually, I think it's more polite to use our own charts to make points than to make comments about the charts of others unless they have specifically asked us to do so. :)
To tell you the truth, until I joined this forum had I been asked whether I was a *traditionalist* or a *modern* , I honestly would not have known what to say- I hate being pigeon-holed too.
As a Libra Sun/Moon, it won't surprise you that I'm looking for a balance between tradional and modern views. :)
I rarely see *unaspected planets* in charts...but on the rare occasion that it turns up I see it as a very important planet/asteroid/star/whatever, BECAUSE it is unaspected-thus free to exert a *pure* effect in the house its in and behave like the sign its in.
I have also found it very rare to find an outer planet that is not in aspect with an inner one. I would pay little or no attention to an unaspected outer planet when working without an accurate birth-time. But that's because then we would have no houses. We are already working with too many handicaps when trying to read a chart lacking an accurate time of birth.
On the issue of *generational planetary placements* surely it is obvious that everyone in ones peer group HAS the placement or aspect- say Pluto sextile neptune. Surely the FACT that a certain generation shares this aspect gives a sort of *common ground*-We've all heard of *the generation gap*-well whos not to say that that very phenomenon is not one that arises out of differences in the *generational* settings...In which case it brings those outers right into the sphere of personal influence- our peers would have to be a very significant influence in our lives and therefore in our charts.
In fact, this may also give us a clue as to why we do not get along with people of our own generation, in general, and find more in common with another. If we place great importance in Pluto's sign, then I would be out of sync with those born after 1984, Pluto in Scorpio. However, if for a number of reasons I am atypical of the people of my own generation, I might find myself at war with the values of people my age and very much in tune with people under the age of 21. So with Mars and Mercy in Scorpio in my own chart, with Mars itself square to my own natal Pluto, that might explain my own continuing personal battle against dogma and blind acceptance of ideas of any nature. :)

One final thought: in my experience, astrology charts are mysteriously redundant. By that I mean that there will usually be multiple indications of the same basic character traits, and this is why several fine astrologers, all coming at the matter with a different approach, often end up with surprisingly similar results. Different ways to make the cake, but the cake still tastes good!

Gaer
 

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
Re: personality, to lilly

And that is the value of an astrologer talking to another person about the effect of signs in their chart...it opens them up to a whole new way to understand themselves!

It was a joke, I'm not Scorpion at all. However, in the eyes of Modern astrology I must be, as Pluto, Scorpio, and the Eighth house are inseperable, and I have Pluto in Scorpio in the Eighth.

As far as I'm concerned, all the known bodies *count* to a greater or lesser degree, depending on their aspectual (new word?) involvements.

Well...I don't know about all that. Just because it's there doesn't mean it's useful or doing anything. I mean...just look at the president for an example. What's he really doing? Just standing there; something to look at. ;)

I'm not mentioning chiron to stir you up, BTW, Kai- I respect your right NOT to use Chiron and hopefully you respect MY right to include it.Simple

-.-' Why do people expect me to explode over mentions of...Chiron? Bleh. I don't like it and I'll never speak of it positively, but it doesn't mean I'll take every chance I get to sneak a snide at it...

That is another way to say it. Although I wouldn't use the word "only" and instead suggest "mostly". The other part of that "authority" issue is Kai wanting to become an authority on astrology.

I've four planets in Leo, being on top of things is what I do, regardless of the newfound gentleness of Uranus. Saturn in Capricorn helps too.

Kai's sign placement emphasized "research" and this fit in with what Kai has revealed of his astrological methods on this grouplist.

But you see, it can be explained alternatively. As for my 'research', I don't take the Scorponic approach and delve into the study of charts myself, psh, I'm a Leo, I don't do dirty work. ;) I go to people I respect as astrologers to point me in the right direction and then I'll run from there. So, I don't really 'research' at all, I just ask around. Now, is this Uranus in Capricorn? I personally don't think so and would mostly place this on Saturn's residence in his domicile. I have yet to embrace Uranus as the significator for astrology, and in doing so I still use Mercury as I feel it is more appropriate for me. Mercury in Leo, I want to be king, the authoritative voice. Conjoined with Mars and this is where I obtain my stinger, my defiant and argumentative tone, and the power to back it up.

We've all heard of *the generation gap*-well whos not to say that that very phenomenon is not one that arises out of differences in the *generational* settings...In which case it brings those outers right into the sphere of personal influence- our peers would have to be a very significant influence in our lives and therefore in our charts.

That's not personal, that's a stereotype, which I daresay would be about as opposite as you can get. Obviously the generation gap is going to be shown here, but this isn't personal. One generation being unable to see eye-to-eye with another generation isn't a personal phenomena, it's a social circumstance. Would this be reflected in astrology? Well, yeah, just about everything is. So, it's not that a generation cannot understand individuals within another generation, but that they do not necessarily agree with the supposed ideals associated with that generation collectively, which again is not personal. So I don't really see how that works.
 
Re: personality, to lilly

Gaer, you said, "I agree with you. It's necessary to simplify things when trying to explain what we are doing to people who are just learning the essentials, but the people involved in this discussion are all experienced. :)"

I disagree, I am not experienced, and considering I started the thread, feel I am part of the discussion.
 

gaer

Well-known member
Re: personality, to lilly

Liquid Green said:
Gaer, you said, "I agree with you. It's necessary to simplify things when trying to explain what we are doing to people who are just learning the essentials, but the people involved in this discussion are all experienced. :)"

I disagree, I am not experienced, and considering I started the thread, feel I am part of the discussion.
Good luck! The problem for you might be that we have really wandered over a lot of territory. The simple answer to the problem of traditional vs. modern astrology is that there is no simple answer. It REALLY gets complicated. :)

If you have questions, just ask. I'll try to answer them, if I can. :)

g
 
Re: personality, to lilly

Thanks Gaer,
Its great getting so many different opinions......I understood in the beginning that this was gonna be a tough one....and i also knew there would be no right answers.......I like gettting lots of view at a topic before heading on into it.....It is necessary for my personality to question everything (which is probably the reason i know heaps of info on heaps of different subjects, but am master of nothing!).....you are all masters for sure and although dont agree, all have good reasons for believing what you do..........From the discussion so far, I am leaning more towards the modern approach.....;)
will have to reread a few times to ask some more questions
 

blueheron

Well-known member
Re: generational and personal, to mdinaz

wilsontc said:
mdinaz,

You said:


I think the outers are both generational and personal. While they do have generational effects because of their slow movements, they can have very strong personal effects as well. However, not everyone is "tuned" into these planets. But for those who have many aspects to these planets or if it hits any of the 4 points in the chart (i.e., Ascendant, Midheaven, Descendand, and IC), these energies are very strongly felt.

Strongly,

Tim

I fully concur. I like Rudhyar's way of looking at the outer planets as "Emissaries of the Universe," to lead us out of our Saturn-bound world into higher realms. That they do so with style (the Uranian 2 X 4 to bash out of an unhealthy rut; the Neptunian labyrinths until the spiritual path is accessed; and the Plutonian purge of Self-limiting patterns.)

mysticalforest.jpg
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
Eclectic: a very heavy Hellenist and (mostly early/Arabic times) traditionalist influence, but with a substantial amount of Modernist ideas and concepts as well (mostly those of Charles Carter, Vivain Robson, and Manly P. Hall) I have also been influenced by Jaimini (a lesser known branch of Vedic astrology), but not in using the sidereal zodiac-however, several Jaimini techniques work beautifully within our Tropicalist framework. And, relative to Time as an important astrological element, I have also been much influenced by certain concepts involved in Chinese astrology.
 

Kannon

Well-known member
I used to frequent another forum.......based on psychological astrology...

Here i am seeing a definite, new amount of information, on traditional astrology.

I dont know what to follow.....i cant study both at once i dont think....

Anybody who would like to state why they prefer one over the other, or perhaps to share some problems with the style not chosen would be great.....all opinions are valid....

And please dont fight....i hate starting threads that turn into war zones.....nobody will be getting any prizes;)

I personally don't think its an "either-or" choice. I think traditional astrology has things that we can learn from. I've studied some of it, even though I'd be labelled as a modern astrologer. I don't hold to any limits as to what modern astrology is.

So first, don't put yourself into a category (box). Its limiting. Go with what attracts you. Mix and match and create a quilt work of your own approach that makes best use of your natural bent. If a modern approach attracts you, it doesn't mean you can't learn from traditional/historic astrology.

What has guided me has been an interest in Truth, not methodology. I'm genuinely interested in the Truth of human beings and our Spiritual essence, our Intentions and Purpose in living. If you study astrology mostly as craft and don't stay intent on Higher Truth in the overriding sense, then you will be diluting your ability in my opinion.

Traditional or historical astrology has things to teach us. This doesn't equate to the belief that older/original-is-better. There are reasons why things have developed the way they have. Astrology practice has mostly evolved and progressed into something better. This doesn't preclude that something valuable and helpful may've been left behind unnecessarily.

So be intent on Truth and putting your own natural ability to use as you develop it. Observing and Listening to People is just as important as studying books and astrological principles. Sometimes we astrologers do a bit too much talking and not enough listening.
 
Last edited:
Top