JUPITERASC
Well-known member
PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED AT Https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=641571#post641571I read your earlier post but don't know what other opinion you are talking about. And what exactly you mean by concurrent? Of course Saturn is responsible for everything we experience and it is even claimed that all the great things that have advanced humankind (probably by melancholics) are because of only one planet Saturn. Reasons could be anything but people with strong Saturn are forced to focus on one thing till they acquire mastery and mastery takes time like years and decades, astrology, alchemy, magic, anything that takes time has to be dealt with Saturn's discipline and growth.
Contentious aspects of the astrological agesHm...I thought Tropical astrologers would be happy to know they can have their own version of the Aquarian Age--one that actually moves through the Tropical chart. After posting a method that makes it possible in the R&D forum, I expected responses, both positive and negative, but that hasn't been the case. Actually, I'm getting the impression that people have lost faith in the promise of the Aquarian Age altogether; I get that--it's definitely a slow train coming, and Future Vision is a rare ability. Also, after the "Mayan Calendar" prophecy, which had so much going for it, failed to materialize any discernable results, the Aquarian Age prophecy lost some credibility as a result. At this point in time, we're still immersed in the "old" Age preceding the Aquarian, whether it be the Sidereal Age of the lower Piscean fish (the Goatfish, Capricorn) supported by it's fellow Earth-sign Virgo, or the Tropical Age of Capricorn itself. Sort of like living in a cave with electric lights, and feeling as though it's the only version of Reality that can ever be.
Definitive details on the astrological ages are lacking, and consequently most details available about the astrological ages are disputed. The 20th century British astrologer Charles Carter stated that
"It is probable that there is no branch of Astrology upon which more nonsense has been poured forth than the doctrine of the precession of the equinoxes." (precession of the equinoxes as the root cause of the astrological ages)
In 2000 Neil Spencer in his book True as the Stars Above expressed a similar opinion about the astrological ages. Spencer singles out the astrological ages as being "fuzzy", "speculative" and least defined area of astrological lore. Derek and Julia Parker claim that it is impossible to state the exact date for the start of any astrological age and acknowledge that many astrologers believe the Age of Aquarius has arrived while many claim the world is at the end of the Age of Pisces.
Ray Grasse states in Signs of the Times - Unlocking the Symbolic Language of World Events that "there is considerable dispute over the exact starting and ending times for the different Great Ages." Paul Wright in The Great Ages and Other Astrological Cycles believes that much of the uncertainty related to the astrological ages is because many astrologers have a poor understanding of the meaning of the astrological symbolism and "even poorer historical knowledge" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrological_age