Traditional and Modern Astrology:

Getting the Dialogue Going

Charlie Obert

Page 2

Copyright 2015 Charles Obert. All rights reserved.

http://studentofastrology.com

Please email me at, charlie@studentofastrology.com with comments, questions

or feedback. Thank you.

Page 3

Introduction

The astrology community today has a world-wide scope, and we have the opportunity to be exposed to more different ways of practicing astrology than ever before. This is partly a product of the extensive multi-cultural communication we have, thanks largely to the Internet and other forms of electronic communication. I think this is also related to the nature of astrology itself - it is a symbolic language, and it lends itself to more than one interpretation by its very nature. It is now increasingly common to have people, like myself, who have been exposed to different ways of practicing astrology, and think that there are good things to be found in each of the different ways. When you have a multi-school astrology background like that, it can feel unsettling and uncharitable having other astrologers insist that their way of doing it is Right while criticizing other schools of practice. Partly from habit, and partly from communication problems due to different meanings attached to astrology language, there is sometimes misunderstanding between different schools of astrology, and sometimes the schools unfairly judge and dismiss each other. I think that the astrology community would be better served by recognizing that there can be very different approaches to doing astrology which can each be valid and have their strong points. We have a lot to gain by respecting and listening to each other, and learning how other people view their practice. Also, we stand a chance to gain new and unexpected friends that way. Purpose The purpose of this little book is to start to bridge some of the splits I see in the astrology community, especially between those practicing different kinds of modern astrology, and those practicing traditional astrology. Here is what I wish to accomplish. First, I want to explore a way of thinking about astrology that makes sense of the fact that multiple systems are valid and work. There is no one single true astrology system; astrology is a multi-faceted and weird animal that can express in different working systems, some of which have very different starting premises and interpretation rules. Second - the different styles of astrology ask very different questions of a chart, so they come up with different answers, and I think those answers can complement each other. I want to explore the questions and perspective of mainstream modern astrology, of traditional astrology, and of the very popular modern school called evolutionary astrology, to examine the questions they ask and the

Page 4

assumptions they make, and look at how this colors the techniques they use. I wish to sympathize with the point of view of each school, allowing each to speak on its own terms, to define what it is trying to accomplish. Third - I am convinced that part of the misunderstanding between traditional and some different modern schools is that they are using some of the same astrology terms, but they mean very different things by them. Part of the communication problem is just a language barrier. I want to look at some of those differences in language use to encourage sympathy for what each side is trying to do. Similarly, evolutionary astrology has its own distinctive terminology, and I think this can cause misunderstanding from astrologers who are not familiar with that school. Fourth - some of the arguments between traditional and modern astrology in terms of technique and vocabulary arise because they are not clearly differentiating two very different activities - the activity of chart analysis, and the activity of chart presentation to the subject. I want to talk about the very different kinds of skills and techniques that are used in each of those phases. And finally - I am convinced that the different approaches to doing astrology are also complementary, and that having different perspectives, asking different questions of a chart, can give us additional useful information, and help us become aware of the limitations and blind spots of our favored school or style. Just as we are increasingly becoming a multi-cultural world community, I think we are moving towards becoming a multi-school, complementary astrology community, where it is increasingly common for astrologers to be comfortable practicing in more than one system. I think that we traditional astrologers, we modern astrologers, we evolutionary astrologers have a lot to learn from each other. Yes, I can and do identify with each of these schools and can and do study and work with each of them. I think there are good things to each of those systems, and I would not want to limit myself to any one of them. As part of the larger astrology community, I think there is a need to break down some of the remaining misunderstanding between the schools, build more mutual respect and sympathy, and get more of a dialog going. I want to help further that dialog.

Page 5

Asking Different Questions Different Systems that Work I want to start this chapter by presenting experiences I have had, where differing systems of looking at a chart each produced valid readings and insights. I then want to spend some time examining why it is that different, contradictory systems can each be valid and work. 1. I saw a presentation by the traditional astrologer Estelle Daniels on horary, and the example charts that she presented used the Koch house system. At the end of the presentation we took one of the charts and re-cast it using Whole Sign houses. The house placements and rulerships changed, but the chart as a whole gave the same final response. In fact, the two charts each picked out different details that applied to the situation. They complemented each other. 2. At a seminar on horary astrology presented by Deb Houlding, she described an incident where Rob Hand was in the audience. She presented the chart using Regiomontanus houses, a system often favored by astrologers who look to William Lilly as their main source of authority. Rob Hand took the same chart and re-cast it with Whole Sign houses, and again, he came up with the same basic answer. In this case, note that Deb Houlding uses a system of minor dignities or rulerships that goes back to Ptolemy, and Rob Hand uses a different system of dignities that goes back to Dorotheus. Their house systems varied, their systems of rulership attribution varied, and both systems worked and gave the same basic answer. 3. There was an instance in my own practice where I drew up and analyzed the chart of a person I know quite well. Drawn up with Whole Sign houses, the chart emphasized that she was a professional nurse. Drawn up with Placidus houses, the chart emphasized her strong devotion to her children, friends and family. These are both very prominent parts of this person's life, so in this case neither chart reading was quite complete without the other. The two complemented and brought out different aspects of her life. Note that I examine this chart in detail in a journal post on my site, http://studentofastrology.com/2014/08/a-multi-map-reality/ , and in a chapter in my book on traditional astrology. In these examples, the different systems were very close in a lot of ways, and had just technical differences of detail - Koch, Placidus or Regiomontanus vs Whole Sign Houses, or differences in assigning minor dignities in the example with Deb Houlding and Rob Hand. The different systems came up with the same basic answer, obviously referring to the same person or situation, and in some cases the different systems added complementary details.

Page 6

In the next two examples the differences between the astrology systems are very pronounced, and include differences in technique, in philosophy, and in basic viewpoint. 4. A good friend of mine came to the traditional astrology study group that I have been hosting, and had her chart read using all traditional techniques. We used whole sign houses and only the classical seven planets, stopping at Saturn and not including the three modern outer planets. I talked with her afterwards and she said that the reading was accurate and did give her some new perspective on her life. She also mentioned that she had once had her chart read by the evolutionary astrologer Mark Jones, and his reading brought up some of the same main points that our traditional reading had focused on. The evolutionary astrology system uses Porphyry houses and relies very heavily on the three outer planets, Pluto, Uranus and Neptune. Traditional and evolutionary astrology have very different starting points, and different methods of chart delineation. 5. In my own personal experience, I originally read and experienced my own natal chart as a modern psychological astrologer, using Placidus houses and the modern planets. After that, I then switched for several years to doing traditional astrology, using Whole Sign houses and omitting the outer planets. Both systems gave valid readings, but they each emphasized different aspects of my life. On top of those two perspectives, I recently had a chance to have my chart read by an evolutionary astrologer friend of mine. That reading was very accurate and insightful, and it pinpointed some central values and directions of my overall life in a way that neither mainstream modern or traditional astrology had picked up on. Again, three very different systems, three valid and overlapping readings, each giving complementary information. How can this be? How can multiple, very different ways of astrology each work? And, in some cases, how can these different systems come up with overlapping answers despite the differences in philosophy and technique? Part of the apparent problem here is that we are used to assuming that there must be a single correct way of doing things. There is an unexamined assumption that, for astrology to be valid, it must be true in the same sense that a physical science is true. There must be a single "correct" house system, or set of rulerships, or set of meanings for the planets, and so on. Astrology doesn't seem to work that way, and many modern astrologers implicitly assume that different systems can work, even if that is not explicitly stated. Not all questions have a single answer.

Page 7

Convergent and Divergent Questions The occult writer John Michael Greer has a very fine blog on the topics of Druidry, Magic and Occult Philosophy, called The Well of Galabes. In a post earlier this year (http://galabes.blogspot.com/2015/05/conjuring-in-house-of-mirrors.html) he discusses a concept from the book, Guide to the Perplexed, by E F Schumacher, about different kinds or classes of questions which he describes as convergent or divergent. Science deals with convergent questions, meaning they have one single answer - let go of a stone you are holding in your hand and it predictably drops to the ground, in a way that can be measured. However, there is another class called divergent questions, where a single starting question can have multiple usable answers, depending on the perspective of the person asking it. For instance, the question, what is the best place in town to have dinner tonight?, will have different answers depending on the person asking, their tastes, what they had for lunch, what their budget was like, and so on. Greer makes this very important observation:

Divergent problems are by and large problems of value, while convergent problems are problems of fact. Put another way, convergent questions ask about the properties of perceiving objects, while divergent questions relate to the properties of perceiving subjects. Thus the convergent problem asks, “what is the world?” The divergent problem asks, “what should I do about it?”

Questions of value. Questions related to the perceiving subject. Questions of best course of action. In other words, the kinds of questions that are asked in astrology. Causal and Symbolic Order Another way of approaching this question, is to consider different kinds of order, different ways of putting things together. Causal order, cause and effect order, is the kind of connection that our modern science is built on. Strike a billiard ball with a stick, and the ball will move in a predictable direction that can be calculated if you knew all the input variables - speed of the stick, angle of the contact, topography of the surface the ball rolls on, and so on. Do A, and B is the result. It is predictable and repeatable. Symbolic order, by contrast, is a connection having to do with meaning or significance. To use a vivid and extreme example, if you were in the middle of a wedding, and right when the couple said their vows there was a clap of thunder,

Page 8

this might have definite significance to the couple, possibly viewing it as a sign of a turbulent or thunderous marriage. That is very different than saying that the thunderclap causes strife in the marriage. They are connected, but not causally. Our symbolic event here, the thunderclap, has a particular significance, and may mean something very different in a different setting. If you were in a a situation where lack of rain was a problem, then a thunderclap could symbolize deliverance, relief from the drought. Even in our wedding example, the thunderclap might be viewed as an omen of trouble by the couple, and as a good sign by a relative who disapproved of the marriage, and viewed the thunderclap as a sign that it would be a troubled and brief marriage. Same sign, same situation, different significance to different participants. Convergent questions are causal. Divergent questions, by contrast, are symbolic. They depend on context, and on a significance or meaning given by an observer or participant. Jung was pointing to one form of symbolic order with his principle of synchronicity, an acausal connecting principle. Astrology and Symbol Systems It is important to realize that astrology is a symbol system. Hence, by definition, it is divergent - the symbols of astrology cannot be exhausted by any one meaning or interpretation. This explains the phenomenon examined above of different systems of astrology intepretation each coming up with valid answers. It appears that the different systems are all derived from, or pointing to, some underlying symbolic reality that can correlate with human experience in a multitude of ways. It is also important to realize that the symbols of astrology can have meanings at different levels - there is a psychological level, a level of correspondence to external events and factual detail, an biological level, a level of spirituality and meaning, and so on. Each are valid, each are a different focus, and no single one of them exhausts the meaning of the symbols of astrology. I think of the different sustems of astrology as each being like a different and unique set of lenses. The author Robert Anton Wilson uses the metaphor of reality tunnels, which makes the point that each lens or tunnel defines a particular view of reality by its focus. For each of the different astrology systems some information comes into focus, and other material is left out or unemphasized simply because it is not within the focus of that particular lens or viewpoint.

Page 9

My Own Model I think it will be useful here for me to share my own personal perspective on this topic. I think the Universe is alive, that it is intelligent and patterned, and that it wishes to communicate with us. Astrology is one of very many symbol systems that Universe can use to convey messages to us - Qabalah is another, as is Tarot, and all those symbol systems can be inter-related. Staying with that basic idea of the Universe wanting to communicate with us, it is my observation that, at the time of an astrology reading, the intelligent powers of the Universe are hip and aware enough to use the particular symbol system and point of view of the astrologer who is reading, to give the client or subject the reading they need at that point in time. When a person sits down with an astrologer for a reading, I do not think that the Universe first checks to make sure the astrologer is using the correct house system or system of attributions before it allows the reading to take place. The reading takes the shape of the vessel which is provided. Astrology happens in the context of the reading; it does not exist as an abstract entity separate from that context. Astrology exists as it happens, as it is embodied in a perceptual event. I highly recommend the book, The Moment of Astrology: Origins in Divination by Geoffrey Cornelius, which examines this issue of the validity of astrology in great and profound detail. I think that is one of the most important books on astrology ever written, and it has profoundly influenced my own point of view as I am presenting it here. To sum up, given that Universe wishes to communicate with us, just what gets through is very much shaped by our lens, our reality tunnel, our perceptual system. Or, to take another metaphor that I will be using in this little book - each of the schools of astrology asks a different class of questions of the chart, and the answers that are perceived match the shape of the questions. Three Astrology Schools, Three Different Perspectives In the following chapters of the book I want to look at 3 major perspectives, 3 of the most popular ways of doing astrology that are all quite popular today. There is mainstream modern astrology, sometimes referred to as humanistic or psychological astrology.

Page 10

There is traditional astrology, sometimes called classical astrology, that looks back to earlier models for its practice. Some modern astrologers refer to this as event-oriented astrology. While I think the term is somewhat misleading it does point to a focus on measurable external events. And finally, there is evolutionary astrology, which I view as a specialized offshoot or descendant of mainstream modern astrology. There are of course other schools and approaches, but I will use these three as representative examples to illustrate different points of view. With each of the systems I want to examine the following. - the questions they ask. - the lenses they use, the assumptions they make. - how this affects their methods and interpretive techniques. - what kinds of answers they come up with. - the kinds of things they include, and the kinds of things they leave out. In all of these I am going to attempt to describe and present each of the schools in their own terms, using their own values and their own rules. While I do have my own preferences and opinions about each of these schools, I wish each allow each of them to speak on their own terms. The reader will be able to get a sense of what they resonate to, where they find an affinity and where they see a mismatch between a system and their own chosen values. This should help you become more aware of what kind of values and questions you assume in practicing your chosen system. Also, hopefully, the reader will gain more of an understanding and respect for each of the systems as trying to accomplish different things. I am attempting to evaulate each system for what it is trying to do, and not for failing at doing something it is not attempting. I want to evaluate each on their own terms. Hopefully the reader will be able to get a sense of each kind of astrology speaking to a different kind of audience, a different kind of need, and suiting different kinds of astrology practitioners, or possibly the same person at different phases in their growth and career as astrologer. Or, the different systems can each be useful as showing different facets of meaning in the same chart. (Note: I am aware that this list is not exhaustive or complete. There are many other schools of astrology active today, including Symmetrical or Uranian

Page 11

astrology, and Vedic astrology, also known as Jyotish. There is also a scientific or research slant to some modern astrology, and there are different spiritual approaches to astrology, some of which trace their influence back to Alice Bailey's esoteric astrology. I choose to focus here on three of the most prevalent popular approaches to astrology to make the point of complementary techniques and focus. )

Page 12

Modern Humanistic Astrology I am starting with mainstream modern astrology since this is the most popular form practiced today, and since most people come to the study of modern astrology first. I want to start by briefly examining the roots and history of modern astrology, and look at the kind of worldview and values that it embodies. Astrology as it has been practiced in the twentieth century up through today is very largely the invention of two men, Alan Leo and Dane Rudhyar. Alan Leo, who was a member of the Theosophical Society in the early 20th century, is responsible for the major shift in focus of astrology from describing events and situations to describe character. Leo coined the phrase, "character determines destiny", and he is also the inventor of the modern psychologically descriptive horoscope interpretation. Modern astrology's heavy emphasis on the signs, and on the importance of the Sun sign, also go back to Leo. Through his affiliation with the Theosophical Society, Leo is also responsible for introducing some of the framework and terminology of East Asian philosophy and religion into western astrology. Today is it commonplace for astrologers to talk of karma, spiritual development and reincarnation, all of which traces back to Leo and Theosophy. Much of the terminology and value system of Theosophy forms a background of value assumptions in modern astrology. Following Alan Leo, Dane Rudhyar, who was also a theosophist, coined the term humanistic astrology, and he is responsible for the shift in emphasis from looking at a chart as a description of events and circumstances, or a static description of character, to viewing it as a blueprint for the unfolding of the potential of a human life. Rudhyar's perspective introduced a dimension of direction and of purpose. Later in the mid twentieth century, important psychological astrologers like Liz Greene, Stephen Arroyo and Howard Sasportas gave astrology more of a distinctly psychological and Jungian slant. After their influence it has become so common to look at the the planets in the charts as being 'the part of you that does x', that it is easy to forget that astrology was once viewed in a very different way. The basically psychological model, where the dimensions of the chart are all things going on inside of you, is completely ubiquitous. It is important to recognize that modern astrology is also very much a product of the early to mid-20th century, which was a time of great economic and cultural expansion in the west, a general period of progress and optimism. It is influenced by the assumed cultural belief in Progress, where by definition the new is better and an improvement on the older, a belief that things are getting better as we keep moving towards a new, improved future. Notice how often the word New is used in a positive sense in modern astrology, and how different techniques try to position themselves as the next step forward.

Page 13

Modern astrology also inherited the 20th century cultural slant towards positive thinking, emphasizing the power of the mind to focus on positive outcomes and intents, with a very strong sense of the power of the mind, and a strong emphasis on free will and the power of choice. For most people growing up in the West in the mid to late 20th century, the belief in progress, in free will and choice, in the power of thinking and the human mind to create change, are part of the cultural air that we breathe, and are so much a part of our thinking that we rarely notice them. Again, this perspective became ubiquitous during a period of strong economic growth and expansion, so the general experience of many people supported such positive assumptions. Modern astrology also consciously views itself as a reaction against an older, fatalistic, "event-oriented" astrology that views the human being as powerless against outside forces. With some modern astrologers, notably Rudhyar and his followers, there is also an assumption of the individual human being being in a stance over against a hostile outer reality, so it tends to focus on the individual and not to dwell on external circumstances. The Questions It Asks Given that background, we can examine the approach that modern humanistic astrology takes, the kinds of questions it asks, the lens it uses. First, it is primarily psychological, and views the chart as a map of the character traits of the subject. The chart is all inside the mind, and maps out different parts of the mind. The planets are all inside you, they are parts of you. The natal chart is viewed as a map of potential to be developed, and it is common to look at how the parts of your chart can be used by you. In this view there is a reaction against the chart as being in any way fated or destined. To use a modern astrology phrase, it is descriptive and not prescriptive. The chart does not say what will happen to you, but it gives you the material that you are free to develop as you will. There is a very strong emphasis on free will and the power of choice. It is important to realize the implication that, if your life is yours to do with as you will, then whatever happens to you is your own responsibility. If everything in the chart can potentially be used in a positive way, then if events turn out unfavorably this is traceable back to your own choice. This perspective gives modern humanistic astrology a strongly positive slant. It makes a point of focusing on what is positive and favorable inthe chart, and it is looking for best way to interpret what would be considered unfavorable or difficult aspects. As a product of 20th century western culture, it assumes the modern emphasis on progress, that what is new is better than what is old, and that we are continually

Page 14

moving forward and improving. A side effect of this is that it does not have particular respect or value for the past, for the tradition from which it springs. It sometimes defines itself as what is new in contrast to or over against what is old. By definition what is newer is better. There is thus a built in tension or bias against traditional astrology which very much looks to the past for its source of authority. The Methods It Uses Many of the characteristic interpretive methods and techniques of modern astrology are traceable back to Alan Leo, who invented the modern "mail order" canned horoscope, in which pre-written interpretive sections could be assembled together. This is the origin of what we call the "cookbook" approach to chart intepretation. This reached its apotheosis in books like Linda Goodman's Sun Signs - which, by way, is a very good read and has a lot of valid astrological interpretation in it. Granted that it is an oversimplification, the influence of that cookbook approach on modern astrology is very strong, and that is where most people get their start on astrology. Modern astrology heavily emphasizes what are called the natural significations of the planets and signs. The Sun is your real self, the moon is your emotional life, Saturn is your work ethic or where you feel blocked, and so on. Modern astrology also heavily emphasizes the signs that the planets are in, not as a weighing of positive and negative dignities as in traditional astrology, but as largely describing how the planet in that sign will express. In modern astrology it is commonplace to take the Sun sign as definitive, so you would say that so-and-so "is" a Pisces. Signs become more important, houses and dignities become much less important. As we mentioned earlier, modern astrology tends to talk about the planets as psychological abstractions or character traits - the Moon is your emotional life, Saturn is your fears or your work ethic, and so on. As part of that, there can be a tendency to take a kind of reductionist approach to the meaning and effect of the planets, where they become "only" psychological. Modern astrology is very concerned that material be presented in a positive way to the client. This is sometimes taken to the point that only positive material is read from the chart, and negative aspects are either rephrased as positive or glossed over. Answers It Comes Up With The interpretive meaning that modern astrology gives a chart follows from the nature of the questions it asks.

Page 15

Above all, the natal chart describes YOU - it is internal, inside of you, and it talks about who you are, what you are like. This is "your" chart, you own it, you can take it where you will. Following from this, modern astrology talks about the planets and configurations of the chart as parts of you to be developed. Modern astrology strongly emphasizes CHOICE - the chart is yours to do what you will - so the planets are interpreted like psychological qualities or faculties - Saturn is the part that represents your work ethic or where you need to be disciplined, Jupiter represents the part of you where you want to expand or where you get lucky, and so on. Thus, modern astrology is good and strong where you are dealing with situations where you have choices to make, potentials to be developed, where you are dealing with understanding what is going on inside you. In correct context it can be empowering, and can encourage self-awareness and taking responsibility for your life.

Page 16

Traditional Astrology Note: for further information on the history and practice of traditional astrology please see my book, Introduction to Traditional Natal Astrology. I want to define here what I mean by the term traditional astrology. Traditional astrology as it is practiced today is a conscious act of researching and attempting to recover the tools and techniques of astrology as it had been practiced in earlier Western history. Traditional astrology as it was originally practiced has its roots in the Hellenistic era, and it was passed down, through Persian and Arabic culture, through to the Medieval era, where some of the old texts began to be translated into Latin. There is a recognizable thread of tradition all the way from the Hellenistic era through to the early Renaissance and the period of astrologers like William Lilly in England. After the Renaissance and the Scientific Revolution, with its shift in worldview, traditional astrology fell into decline, and much of the living tradition was lost. Modern astrology as formed by men like Alan Leo is very much a twentieth century invention. While there are some recognizable aspects of traditional astrology that have been brought forward, other parts of the practice were lost, and were replaced by newly created techniques. Modern astrology is a break from the tradition in many ways. Throughout this description, keep in mind that traditional astrology as practiced today looks to the past to recover parts of the practice that have been lost. This is in stark contrast to modern astrology which very much looks towards the future. This is a profound difference in values that complicates the dialog between traditional and modern astrology. The roots of the modern traditional astrology revival go back to work of horary astrologers like Olivia Barclay and Barbara Watters, who helped to rediscover and popularize the work of William Lilly, who is best known for his work in horary astrology. Consequently much of the most detailed work in traditional astrology today is in the area of horary astrology, which is concerned with giving specific answers to specific questions. J Lee Lehman has done a lot to recover some aspects of what she calls classical astrology, especially in her work on recovering the traditional approach to essential dignities, and her work continues to be influential. In the late 20th century and early 21st century we have the ground-breaking work of Project Hindsight and the "Rob Trinity" - Rob Hand, Robert Schmidt, Robert Zoller - who translated many older texts into english for the first time, and who

Page 17

did work to rediscover and test old techniques. During this same time frame there is also the extensive translation work of James H. Holden. Today we have the work of people like Ben Dykes (Medieval astrologer and translator), Chris Brennan and Demetra George (Hellenistic), and Chris Warnock (Renaissance), Rob Hand and Joseph Crane (Hellenistic), and Deb Houlding (Renaissance Horary), all of whom are continuing to make the recovered techniques of traditional astrology living, useful and powerful interpretive tools available to us in today's world. As we said, traditional astrology now consciously looks to the past for its tools and techniques, and for the source of its authority. It judges techniques partly by their age, and by whether or not they contradict the older system. Older is considered closer to the root, more authoritative and hence better. Along with specific astrological techniques, traditional astrology today also includes a stream of revival of some of the western philosophical context of earlier astrology. Unlike modern astrology, rather than looking to Theosophy and Eastern Asia for its religious and philosophical context, there is a renewal of interest in the western philosophical systems like stoicism, neoplatonism, and aristotelian philosophy. Many traditional astrologers today also look to their roots in the western magical and occult tradition, and it is not uncommon for traditional astrologers to also be practicing occultists. Questions It Asks At its root, traditional astrology is very much oriented to evaluating good and ill fortune, positive and negative signs, rather than the modern emphasis on character analysis and potential. Traditional astrology heavily focuses on evaluating the condition of planets, and many of the categories of traditional astrology such as sect, dignity /debility, benefic /malefic, are aimed at evaluating how positive or negative the effect of a planet will be. The elements of the chart are being weighed in a balance. Traditional astrology focuses on external verifiable conditions and events - so, for a traditional astrologer, a planet in the 7th house is not how you relate to others, it is your spouse, or your partner, or your enemy. The chart is not inside your head, it describes your physical situation, your environment, the events that happen to you. There is a psychological dimension to traditional astrology, but it is very much within the larger context of external conditions, and it is not emphasized anywhere near as much as in modern astrology. I want to correct a popular misconception here. This does not mean that traditional astrology is focused on predicting specfic events or outcomes. Even if you go back to the original source texts it is very clearly stated that what is predicted is general areas or trends, and not specific events. So, much of the

Page 18

modern criticism of what it calls "event-oriented astrology" is based on a misunderstanding. Traditional astrology is very good at weighing up different courses of action, any place you are weighing positives and negatives in a specific area the tools of traditional astrology can be very useful. Even much of the focus of horary is as much about evaluating a system for the best course of action as it is about describing a specific situation or outcome. So, traditional astrology is very much focused on looking at the life in its larger external context. In contrast to modern astrology, in traditional the planets and the chart are not just inside you, part of your psyche. They are larger than you and represent all the circumstances in your life. Also, by definition, I again want to emphasize that traditional astrology looks to the past tradition for its source of authority and method. Old is better, and the closer to the source of the tradition the more weight is given to it. This is very much the reverse of modern astrology which values progress, views new as better than old, and weighs modern innovation higher than traditional authority. So there is a built-in source of tension between traditional and modern in terms of where they look for authority. Methods It Uses The methods of traditional astrology tend to be evaluative, rather than being blending. For instance, if you look at the Sun in Pisces, rather than trying to blend the flavor of the Sun expressing in a Pisces sort of way, you would evaluate what kind of condition the Sun is in when in the sign Pisces - does it have dignity, it is helped, is it hindered. The evaluative methods of traditional astrology include dignity and debility, benefic and malefic, positive and negative conditions. In the older texts these can be presented in terms of extremes, with some conditions be labeled flat out good and others flat out evil. The source texts of traditional astrology can be painted in terms of extremes - black/white, positive/negative, good/evil. There is a heavy emphasis on accurate chart analysis, and modern traditional astrology does not always emphasize how material can be presented, though again, even some of the traditional texts speak of sharing the judgement of the chart in a way that is gentle and helpful to the subject. (We will discuss this point further in the section on analysis vs presentation.) It can emphasize the judgement of the chart while not focusing on the needs of the subject. There is also a distinct difference in traditional astrology in how the meanings of the signs, planets and houses are interpreted and inter-related. The assumed modern technique of the 12 letter alphabet, where planet equals sign equals house, is really a modern invention.

Page 19

In traditional western astrology the planets, the houses, and the signs are each distinct systems and have different sets of meanings. Viewing them as distinct you find new areas of meaning where they do not overlap. For a traditional astrologer the First House does not have a necessary connection to Aries or to Mars. If you are a modern astrologer, consider how easy it is to think of the sign Aries as "naturally" being connected with the First House, and how hard it is to completely separate the meanings of Aries and the First House in your mind. It is so much a part of the working alphabet of modern astrology that it is hard for many astrologers to conceive otherwise. Even after a three year period in which I attempted to practice only traditional astrology, it is still very hard for me to separate the house and sign meanings in my mind. Answers It Comes Up With When looking at a chart, the answers that traditional astrology comes up with flow naturally out of its techniques and its chosen focus. Traditional astrology deals with good and ill fortune, positive and negative situations and characteristics. It has marvelous evaluative tools. It can be very good at timing positive and negative times for actions. Traditional astrology has a very strong set of tools for what is called electional astrology, choosing a time for an event where the astrological configuration is most favorable. Traditional astrology is also very good at tying the chart to concrete verifiable events and circumstances of your life. At its best it can be realistic, grounded, verifiable and practical. It is not as strong at going into psychological depth as is modern astrology. That is not its focus. Along with its focus on the life in external context, traditional astrology does not heavily emphasize freedom of will, or choice, or use of thinking or the mind to produce change, and that is in stark contrast to the modern, positive thinking, heavily emphasized free will approach. This does not mean that traditional astrologers are all strictly fate-based, bt it does mean that, in general, there is a higher element of fate in their perspective, and the sense of freedom of the will is often more restricted or constrained than in modern astrology.

Page 20

Evolutionary Astrology I am including the school of evolutionary astrology in my survey here because it is very popular and influential among many astrologers today. It also has its own distinct viewpoint and vocabulary, and that can create some problems of misunderstanding with other approaches to astrology. The historical root of evolutionary astrology goes back to theosophy, and to Dane Rudhyar, as does mainstream modern astrology. I think of evolutionary astrology as a specific subset of modern astrology. The founding work of evolutionary astrology is Jeffrey Wolf Green's book, Pluto: The Evolutionary Journey of the Soul. That is the source book I will use to describe evolutionary astrology in this section. Jeff Green acknowledges the influence of Rudhyar in his sytem. While Jeff Green's work is the root work of evolutionary astrology, not all people who call themselves evolutionary astrologers practice exactly the same system. In a discussion of evolutionary astrology is important to take into account the work of Steven Forrest, who is one of the most popular and influential astrologers practicing today. While Steven Forrest and Jeffrey Wolf Green have written two books together (Measuring the Night: Evolutionary Astrology and the Keys to the Soul, volumes 1 and 2), their approaches are not quite identical, and there are differences in emphasis and technique. I think it is fair to say that their core values and approach are the same, and both embrace the term evolutionary astrology. Questions It Asks Evolutionary astrology is concerned with overall life purpose and context. It is focused on asking questions about purpose - Why am I here? What is the purpose of my life? What should I be doing? What direction should I be moving in order to further my Soul's evolution? I think that is part of the reason for the popularity of evolutionary astrology, that it addresses deep questions of spiritual meaning. In some ways it can fill a spiritual void or lack of purpose in our modern western world. While the context of traditional astrology is the larger external world, and the context of modern humanistic astrology is human psychology, the context of evolutionary astrology is a multiple lifetime frame of reference, where the current situation is understood as it relates to that larger series of multiple lifetimes. Evolutionary astrology is not particularly predictive, it is much more internally or spiritually focused. Evolutionary astrology is concerned primarily with the inner

Page 21

state of the Soul rather than the outer world, and outer circumstances are interpreted and given meaning as they fit within that inner journey. Thus evolutionary astrology does have a context, but it is more individual, spiritual, multiple lifetime, rather than collective or in terms of outer context. External life circumstances and events are viewed in the context of the Soul's evolution rather than the other way around. Like modern astrology, evolutionary astrology does not highly value traditional methods. Evolutionary astrology pushes some of the tendencies of modern astrology further in that the source of authority for evolutionary astrology is within, the divine intuition, speaking to you through your inner experience. It is characteristic of evolutionary astrology to say that, if you use the system, it will prove itself to you. It is self-validating by experience. The founder of evolutionary astrology, Jeffrey Wolf Green, relates that he had read very few astrology books when he formed evolutionary astrology, and that the entire system came to him in a dream given to him by his guru Sri Yukteswar. I think it is fair to say that Jeff Green and many of the practitioners of evolutionary astrology view the system as divinely inspired. So, evolutionary astrology places a very heavy emphasis on intuition, divine inner teaching and inspiration, and internal validation of the truths of astrology. This is mirrored in their methods of preparation and reading, and in the criteria they use to validate techniques. The system of evolutionary astrology does have its own rigorous system, methodology and training, so that intuition by itself by itself would not be sufficient to make you a good evolutionary astrology. However, I think it is fair to say that evolutionary astrology does emphasize individual intuition and judgement very heavily. Also, I think it is important to emphasize that evolutionary astrology does not claim to have a monopoly on the truth. Part of their system is the explicit recognition that there are many different paths, many different forms of the ultimate truth, and that any system that claims to have a monopoly on that truth is mistaken and narrow. Like modern astrology, evolutionary astrology emphasizes personal responsibility and power of choice, and often presents itself as focused on positive interpretations and outcomes. However, with its focus on past life effects on the current life, it can be focused on negative patterns or traumas from previous lives that serve as sources of suffering and obstacles in the present life. I don't think this attitude is quite the same as modern astrology's emphasis on positive thinking. Using its own terminology, evolutionary astrology tries to

Page 22

interpret events and situations in terms of how they can further the evolutionary intent of the Soul in this life. To paraphrase that in non-EA terminology, one could say that events and circumstances can be viewed and reacted to in terms of how they could best add quality, meaning or value to ones life. Methods It Uses Evolutionary astrology uses a very focused, tightly defined and narrow set of interpretive principles. There is a specifically defined series of points to examine when interpreting a chart - the position of Pluto and the point directly opposite Pluto, the Lunar Nodes and their rulers, and aspects to those points. The main elements of astrology, the signs, planets and houses, are viewed as 12 archetypes that are interpreted as phases in a process of evolutionary growth. These methods are designed to give a multi-life reincarnational context to the meaning of life. The purpose of evolutionary astrology is to point to the purpose a person is here, why they have the gifts, challenges and problems they face, and the direction they should move for maximum meaning - what evolutionary astrology would call the evolutionary intent of the Soul. All other features of the chart are viewed within the context provided by that focus on evolutionary intent. With its emphasis on an evolutionary journey it views signs, houses and planets together as a growth and evolutionary sequence that indicates what stage in the evolutionary process a person is at a given point in time. So, the meaning assigned to the planets, signs and houses can be quite narrow and focused compared to other ways of doing astrology. The planets, signs and houses are viewed primarily as expressions of phases within an evolutionary process. Done correctly, evolutionary astrology is respectful of the current needs, values and desires of the subject, since what is appropriate for a person very much depends upon what stage they are at in their growth process. There is a very strong emphasis on determining a person's current state and accepting them where they are in their life process completely without judgement. The reading is tailored to the person rather than the other way around. Answers It Comes Up With The intepretive techniques of evolutionary astrology can be framed in terms of previous life issues, or previous traumas, so not everything it points to is verifiable. Since evolutionary astrology uses a multi-life process as its context, it makes sense for it to look for the roots of the current life situations in past lives.

Page 23

As we said, because this past life material is not necessarily physically verifiable does not mean it does not have meaning or is not important. The interpretive past life metaphors of evolutionary astrology do not need to be factually verifiable in order to ring true, or to give meaning or significance to a person's life. There is a kind of a Truth that a person can recognize as making sense of their life's purpose and meaning, and when evolutionary astrology is done right it can have an uncanny ability to nail really important core issues. The truth or falsity of an evolutionary astrology past life interpretation lies in its ability to help a person to make sense of their lives and to give them a sense of purpose and direction. Evolutionary Astrology and Natural Law At its best, evolutionary astrology is like much modern paganism, or like Aleister Crowley's system of Thelema, in that it is explicitly body-positive, woman-positive, sex-positive, earth-positive. It refers to this as Natural Law, which it places in contrast to what it calls man-made law that characteristically has a dualistic, spirit vs body division that is present in most of our culturally inherited systems of religion and spirituality. In this respect, evolutionary astrology at its best is in stark contrast to much of traditional and modern astrology, which still largely assumes the mind/matter, spirit/body dualism that is embedded in much of our general cultural heritage, and in the roots of modern astrology in Theosophy and eastern religion. I think this is one of the great strengths of evolutionary astrology, that it makes conscious and examines the core values used to structure our lives, and helps gives us a conscious choice in the values we wish to affirm and live by.

Page 24

Analysis vs Presentation Some of the problems and apparent disagreements between traditional and modern astrologers, both humanistic and evolutionary, are because we do not clearly distinguish betweeen two very different phases of astrology - on the one hand, the chart analysis and delineation, and on the other hand the chart presentation, communication, consulting. I will be discussing language issues in more detail in the next chapter, but here I want to look at a sample misunderstanding regarding the use of the terms benefic and malefic Some modern astrologers object to the term malefic because it is excessively negative, it judges that the subject is bound to have ill fortune. The point made applies to the area of presentation, of how the chart is discussed with the client. In the respect the point is well taken. However, those traditional astrologers I know who find the terms benefic and malefic useful - including me - do not use the phrases as part of the presentation to the client. The concepts are useful during the phase of chart analysis, when the astrologer looks at the chart to evaluate it. In that phase they can be enormously helpful in evaluating the condition and quality with which a planet will likely be experienced. I am doing a little bit of simplifying to make a point here, but in general I think we can say that modern astrologers put quite a bit of emphasis on chart presentation, which is why the strong emphasis on putting things positively and constructively. Conversely, traditional astrologers typically put quite a bit of emphasis and attention on correct and powerful chart analysis. Both phases are necessary, both skill sets are necessary. Putting a positive slant on a chart while you are analyzing it can screen out useful information. However, once that phase is done, it is important to consider how the information gleaned can be most usefully presented to the client. All schools of astrology have the delicate task of presenting the interpretation of a chart in such a way as to constructively enhance the value and meaning of the subject's life in their current situation.

Page 25

Language Barriers and Confusions In this section I want to examine some key concepts and terms that can be a source of confusion and misunderstanding between the different schools of astrology. There are places where astrologers of different schools use common terms without real awareness of their meaning, and sometimes they are used inappropriately. These are terms that can cause misunderstanding, since their usual assumed connotations often do not apply. As an example of that, I want to examine some of the meanings of the term Science, and of the term Spiritual. I also want to examine some technical astrology terms to clear up some misunderstanding about their meaning and usage. But first, let's get a demon out of the way. Predictive Astrology A common criticism thrown at traditional or "event-oriented" astrology is that it is predictive - its goal is to tell you specifically what will happen to you. Thus it assumes a fate, where the power is external to you and out of your control. That is not how the practicing traditional astrologers that I know understand their craft. Barring the occasional bolt of divine intuition - which is not something that most traditional astrologers I know would ever admit to using - what can be predicted or outlined is a certain class of events with certain characteristics, which could then be expressed on any of a multitude of levels. This is explicitly stated in some of the traditional texts themselves. The predictive dimension of astrology is usually general and not specific. Astrology can validly be quite specific only when there is sufficient information on the subject's actual life circumstances to narrow down the interpretive process to a specific context. The old, "event-oriented" astrology that is often criticized and dismissed in much modern astrology is actually a non-existent paper dragon, a mythical enemy that is created in order to be attacked and overcome. Benefic and Malefic While traditional astrologers use these technical terms, it is common to see their use criticized in modern astrology books. Being familiar with traditional astrology, it is obvious to me that the criticism is based on a misunderstanding of what the terms mean, and how they are used in context.

Page 26

To illustrate this point, here is a quote from Stephen Arroyo’s excellent book, Astrology, Karma and Transformation. This is the opening sentence of the chapter on Saturn, which starts on page 71.

“Until recent years, the planet Saturn was usually referred to in most astrological books as a “malefic” influence, a dimension of experience that most people would rather not face but which merely had to be endured for no positive purpose whatsoever.”

That is all well and good, except for one minor problem:

That is not what “malefic” means! A couple of pages later, in the section on Saturn in the natal chart, he has a good and complex discussion of the many ways Saturn can be really hard to deal with, and lists all sorts of negative feeling experiences that we can reap benefits from only if we face them openly and honestly, and are willing to work at them. These are often areas and events that are out of our control, that we can only accept and deal with. It’s worth reading that section – it is about the best definition and description of what the term malefic means that I think I have seen. To me as a traditional astrologer, it is obvious that Arroyo is using what I understand as the concepts benefic and malefic, without using that terminology. Benefic and malefic do not mean good and evil, nor does malefic mean that only negative results can come from them. To give more of an idea of what the terms do mean I am quoting a section from my book on traditional astrology.

There are two benefic planets. Jupiter and Venus. The two malefic planets are Saturn and Mars. We usually experience the benefic planets as pleasant, comfortable, growing, life-enhancing. We experience the malefic planets as extreme, unpleasant, challenging, dangerous, threatening. As we will see later, a lot depends on the dignity or condition of the specific planet. Saturn in good shape can have a beneficial effect, and Jupiter in bad shape can have a malefic effect. Jupiter, the greater benefic, and Venus, the lesser benefic, are both moderate in their elemental makup. Their effect tends to be to build up, expand, combine, relate, interconnect, grow. We usually experience their effect as pleasant, enjoyable - as good in the usual sense of the term.

Page 27

Saturn, the greater malefic, and Mars, the lesser malefic, are both extreme in their elemental makeup - Saturn is extreme cold and dry, Mars is extreme hot and dry. Notice that both of the benefics are moist, and both of the malefics are dry. Moist connects and harmonizes, dry separates and distinguishes. The effect of the Malefics, Mars and Saturn, tends to be to disrupt, block, separate, contract or cut, decay, fall apart, die. We usually experience their effect as unpleasant - bad in the ordinary sense of the term. All kinds of no fun.

Can you see how that is very different from what Stephen Arroyo is criticizing? I also want to make it clear that traditional astrologers use terms like benefic and malefic, or dignity and debility, in the analysis phase, looking at the chart and weighing it prior to talking with the subject. The terms are appropriate in that phase, but are not appropriate in the presentation phase, the discussion with the client. Malefic is an interpretive category tool and not a judgemental label. All of the schools of astrology, regardless of their vocabulary or method, have the same challenge to present the interpretation to the subject in a way that enhances the person's reality, and adds quality, awareness and value to their lives. Dignity and Debility These are also technical terms, evaluation tools used by traditional astrologers when weighing up the condition of a planet, seeing how likely it is for its expression to be smooth and controlled, or disruptive and challenging. It is largely a measure of ease of functioning and integration. I think the general point made in the previous section on benefic and malefic holds here also. Having a planet dignified does not mean its action always works out well, nor does having a planet debilitated mean that its action always works out poorly. Trust me on that one - I have Mercury doubly debilitated in Pisces. Spiritual Spiritual - that is such a deeply loaded word, that has so many connotations and that carries so much baggage! I think it means very different things in each of the systems we have been examining. Because it has so many unspoken connotations, I think it is useful

Page 28

here for us to examine some of those connotations, to clear up some misunderstanding. Traditional astrology is the school least likely to explicitly use the word. Since traditional astrology has an emphasis on aspects of reality that can be observed and confirmed, spirituality is often not an area of focus. However, for its practitioners, traditional astrology can and does have a strong spiritual dimension. I am using the term spiritual hear to mean the dimension of life that deals with ultimate meaning, and with how we fit within the overall cosmos. All of the practicing traditional astrologers that I know - and I include myself - have a strong sense of a spiritual context to their practice of astrology. Often you will see a strong sense of what I would call magical reality, a sense that the gods are alive, and that astrology is itself a spiritual path, a calling. There is often a strong sense of astrology being practiced within the context of a larger order. The roots of the traditional understanding of spirituality go back to the Hellenistic and Roman philosophies, especially Stoicism, Neoplatonism, and Aristotelian philosophy. Modern astrology frequently uses the term spiritual, and my sense is that it tends to be psychologized. I think that most of the meaning of the term for modern astrologers was inherited from its roots in Theosophy, and has picked up some of the vocabulary of Eastern philosophy, concepts like karma and reincarnation. As in Theosophy, modern astrology often uses the term with some of the implied connotations of spirit being opposed to matter, or mind opposed to body - being spiritual means transcending "lower" earthly desires. Also, to be spiritual is usually assumed to mean being unselfish. It is also often assumed that 'ego' is bad, and an ego vs spirit or ego vs soul duality is often set up. (Note that traditional astrology also usually has this same spirit /matter, mind /body duality, since it is deeply embedded in our western religious heritage.) Spirituality is largely understood to be an interior, psychological and private matter, a matter of personal experience and conviction. To say that someone is spritual but not religious makes sense in a modern astrology, psychological model, while that same sentence would not be at home in the world of traditional astrology. Evolutionary astrology shares many of the characteristics of modern astrology we have been discussing. In evolutionary astrology, some of the terminology can seem to imply that there is a matter / spirit split, and that somehow being spiritual means having evolved beyond physical desire. However, if you read their material carefully it is clear that is not the case.

Page 29

Evolutionary astrology explicitly examines the mind/body, spirit/matter dualism that pervades much of our societal and religious heritage, and it explicitly teaches a body positive, sex positive, earth positive value system that it describes as natural law. In evolutionary astrology I think that the spirituality has a couple of different connotations that I would like to examine here. Spirituality is that which connects us to the totality of the universe It that in us which is eternal, and which is the source of our consciousness. Spirituality refers to the overall driving value and purpose of human life. Spirituality has a very strong correlation with awareness - to be spiritual is to be awake, very self-aware, very accepting of reality, of oneself, and of others It is important to realize that spirit is not defined as opposed to, or over against ego. The ego in evolutionary astrology is understood as a needed point of conscious focus. Steven Forrest emphasizes that highly spiritual people are characteristically very distinctly individuals, ie, with a very strong, healthy and realistic sense of ego, of self-identity. To be highly spiritual is to be completely and uniquely yourself, and to accept the uniqueness and value of others. Science Whenever we use the terms science or scientific to refer to astrology, I think we need to recognize and admit that astrology is not a science in any sense that a mainstream western scientist would recognize or acknowledge. Please note that this has nothing to do with the validity, or accuracy, or usefulness of astrology. Nor does it deny that some aspects of astrology may be able to be measured or verified with scientific and statistical methods of analysis. Astrology is a symbol system, and it is concerned with how these symbols correlate with experiences in our world - external (events, people, actions), and psychological, and also in terms of meaning, value or significance. Western objective science is by definition value-free - it excludes subjectivity, value, meaning - anything other than verifiable, value-free objective fact. Science is reductionist and excludes meaning. When astrologers say that it is a science, I do not think they mean that term in the value-free, reductionist sense that much of modern science uses the term. I think they mean something looser - that astrology is valid, that it is verifiable,

Page 30

that it is reliable, that its insights can be repeated and verified by those who are willing to learn the system and practice it in its own terms and by its own rules. All of those things are true, but in order to call astrology a science, we must either redefine astrology, or redefine the word science to include meanings that most practicing modern scientists will not accept. I do not think either choice is particularly fruitful or helpful. I think it is much more fruitful and useful to define astrology in terms that make sense of how it is actually experienced and practiced. As I said earlier, I think that Geoffrey Cornelius landmark work, The Moment of Astrology, is a very important step in that direction. I have tried to offer some other suggestions for useful ways to think about astrology in this little book.

Page 31

Complementary Questions At this point we have examined some of the main schools of astrology, let each speak in its own terms, and cleared up some sources of misunderstanding and confusion. In this final section I want to look for ways that the different approaches to astrology can enrich and learn from each other. Since each asks different questions they each include and exclude different things. Each gives different information, a different slant or point of view. I want to use a division from Steven Forrest that I find very helpful. Think of astrology having 3 dimensions or areas of meaning - the physical, - the psychological, - and what Forrest calls the Spiritual. I personally think the word spiritual carries too much baggage from our past here in the West, so I prefer to call that the area of Meaning, or Value, or Purpose - who am I, why am I here, why is life worth living - those kinds of questions are addressed by the Spiritual or Value dimension. I trust it is clear that the three kinds of astrology we've been talking about each have their special strengths in one of those areas. Traditional astrology is very good at tying into the details of the everyday concrete world, and it is good at examining the significance of those events and details. Modern humanistic astrology is all about psychology, character. And finally, Evolutionary Astrology goes for the Why questions, dealing with issues of purpose and direction. I trust it is clear that good astrologers in any of these schools are perfectly capable of moving between and dealing with the different levels, and each of the three different schools can span all of those levels. Given that, there is still a distinct difference in primary focus. What Can They Offer Each Other Traditional astrology is strong on being tied to specific events and circumstances of life. Its scope of questions is verifiable. It is very strong on evaluating conditions of planets, their relative strength and weakness, and thus whether they are likely to be sources of perceived good or ill fortune. The evaluative tools of traditional astrology can also give an idea of how

Page 32

much ease or difficulty the native will experience in dealing with that aspect of their life. The more fate-based perspective of traditional astrology be very helpful and supportive in those cases where the subject is dealing with a situation or event out of their control - like a debilitating illness, or an accident, or the illness or death of someone close to them. In those situations it can be helpful and comforting for the native to accept that there are parts of their lives that they do not control. Thus they are not to blame, it removes the element of guilt. This traditional astrology view understands the person's chart in context of the larger world, and that can be very powerful. Modern astrology is very strong on psychological and character analysis - what makes me tick, what are the different parts inside of me. This can be good in situations where talking in terms of development of potential is useful, those situations which allow a lot of room for free will. It is also good at promoting general self-awareness and self-responsibility. Modern astrology can also be good in situations where the person's attitude or thoughts strongly influence how a particular planetary influence plays out. It is good at emphasizing how I am uniquely me, what goes on inside me. Evolutionary astrology can be useful for addressing questions of overall meaning and purpose, and life direction. For some people this approach is helpful for those situations where the native feels like they are dealing with negative situations, for giving them an explanatory context in terms of past-life settings. Typically, past-life memories, like a lot of inner work, tend to be larger than life, and sometimes a past-life memory can be helpful to get more understanding of what is going on in this life, and perhaps ways to deal with in terms of inner changes. Whether they are true or not in the factual sense is actually not important. The critical thing is that the story be True in the sense of giving the person a story metaphor that makes deep sense of their life's context, purpose and direction. Different Sources of Authority For these schools to effectively communicate with each other, I believe we need to realize that each of these schools looks to a different source for its authority, so the arguments it gives will by definition not be convincing to the other schools. If this is consciously realized it will make talking together a lot more fruitful. Briefly, the differences are as follows.

Page 33

Traditional astrology values the past, the tradition. By definition older is better, and the older texts and their transmission are the source of authority. Newer practices are judged in terms of whether they continue or diverge from the tradition. Modern astrology shares our culture's belief in Progress, that implicit assumption that newer is better. Consequently part of the purpose of modern astrology is to discard older superstitious outmoded practices in favor of new, cutting edge, more modern understandings. Ultimately, evolutionary astrology looks within for its source of authority. Just as Jeff Green received the system of evolutionary astrology through dreams which he believes were given to him by his guru Sri Yukteswar, evolutionary astrologers look to their inner intuition, their inner connection to the Divine, as the ultimate source of meaning. It appeals to experience to validate itself - try the system and it will prove itself to you. You can see how this can create communication problems when each system tries to convince the other of why its practices work. A traditional astrologer is not going to be convinced by a modern astrologer's argument that one should include the latest findings and progress in their astrology. By definition traditional astrology looks to the past for its authority. Similarly in reverse, a modern astrologer is not going to be convinced by an appeal to tradition since modern assumes the belief in Progress that permeates modern society, where by definition what is newer is better. Neither will be particularly convincing to the Evolutionary Astrologer who looks within to divine inspiration for the source of authority. And, such an appeal to inner inspiration carries little weight to a traditional astrologer. A traditional astrologer may criticize evolutionary astrology for its departure from the tradition in many respects - it judges evolutionary astrology from its criteria of the past and finds it wanting. The evolutionary astrologer is likely to think, well, I use this system and I have experienced it for myself, so I know that it is true and effective. If they would only give our system a chance and experience it for themselves they would also be convinced that it is true. Do you see the communication problem here? Each system lays out its argument in terms of its assumed main value, and the other systems aren't convinced because they look somewhere else for their source of value and authority. Look at each of these systems from the inside, from the point of view of their practitioners, and each is true, and valid, and effective. They are each self-validating reality tunnels, lenses that shape the astrological experience.

Page 34

Increasing the Dialogue How can we increase understanding and dialog between the different systems? This has to start with the explicit, conscious understanding that astrology asks divergent questions, questions of meaning, which by definition do not have a single correct answer. How astrology is practiced, the meaning it gives, very much depends on the attitude, assumptions and experiences of the astrologer practitioner. There is no single True school of astrology. Once we realize that there are multiple valid ways of doing astrology, we can become aware that each system has its own particular values, its own particular point of view. Therefore we can choose to have an open-minded tolerance and respect towards other people's values and viewpoints. The traditional astrologer can realize that the other systems do not look to the past for their source of authority. The modern astrologer can realize that traditional astrologers do not share their belief in progress and that newer is better. One person's outmoded medieval superstition is another person's recovered traditional technique. One person's cutting edge discovery is another person's deviation from the truth of the tradition. Both traditional and modern astrologers can realize that, ultimately, the evolutionary astrologer looks to her own subjective experience and intuition for validation of their system, and the evolutionary astrologer is not swayed by an appeal to the authority of tradition. In general I think that evolutionary and modern astrology share a general value of newer being better, but their source of authority is not quite identical. Multi Map Astrology When you are used to looking at a chart with a single system, a single map, a single lens, there are things you will notice, and there are things that will be outside of your focus. Realizing that there are different ways of doing astrology offers you the opportunity, if you choose, of setting aside your usual focus and trying on looking at a chart from a different point of view. And, lo and behold, you may see things that you had not noticed before because you weren't looking for them. It also gives you a chance to question where there are limitations and blind spots in your usual way of doing astrology. You may find that your own system has its own strengths, but also its own weaknesses. It may give you a larger point of view, and a greater self-awareness. In this discussion I am deliberately dwelling on the conscious strengths of each tradition. I do think that each of these schools have their own typical weaknesses

Page 35

and imbalances that are sometimes mirrored in their practice. I prefer to judge each system on the basis of what it does well in the hands of a mature and competent practitioner. So, if you are a traditional astrologer, consider setting your system aside for a little while and have your chart read by a good modern or evolutionary astrologer - not to judge how (s)he does it right or wrong, but to allow yourself to enter into their world, and see what they come up with. And, vice versa - if you practice evolutionary astrology, consider having your chart read using traditional techniques, preferably someone who leaves out the three outer planets. Be open to all of the information you can get out of your chart without having to include Uranus, Neptune or even Pluto. Or, check out a good mainstream humanistic astrologer. You don't need to give up your preferred system, and you can return to it when you're done. Think of it as being like visiting a foreign country, or like pretending you're a different character in something like a Renaissance Festival setting. You temporarily suspend your usual points of view and allow yourself to look at the world through different eyes. Think of it as a game you are playing. You can always come back to the "real" whenever you want... and you may just find that your sense of what is real and valid in astrology has gotten larger, more multi-dimensional and weirder. Astrological Maturity There is one aspect of being human that makes this process really difficult for most of us. Unfortunately it is something that helps keep us divided from close relationship to others. Somewhere, down at the core, there is the hidden assumption that of course, my system really is better. Yes, I can dialog with you about our systems and talk about tolerance for differences - but when you come right down to it mine really is better, you know. It is the illusion of specialness. The feeling, not just that I am special, but that I am more special than anyone else. Other people just haven't recognized that yet. The truth of the matter is, I am special. The other side of that truth is, so is everyone else. If you recognize one of those truths, you really need to recognize the other to stay sane and balanced.

Page 36

I believe that my take on astrology is important. Every other real and dedicated astrologer on the planet feels the same way. There is no way that I can have an equal dialog with another astrologer of a different school if I am convinced inside that my system is superior and theirs is inferior. I think a sign of real maturity is to recognize ones own value and specialness, while at the same time recognizing and appreciating the value and specialness of every other astrologer - nay, every other person - with whom I interact. That can be a community of equals. The Universe is large, varied and intelligent enough to include all of us. Note that I am not saying that all astrologers are equally effective, or that all systems of astrology do things equally well. I am saying that there is no single true system of astrological interpretation against which all others can be judged. We need to allow for an acknowledgement of, and respect for, a diversity of systems, methods, values and points of view. Last I looked, the Universe does not check which membership card an astrologer has in her pocket before a reading can take place. The Universe is intelligent, benevolent, aware and flexible enough to shape the message and meaning within the container, the point of view, of the astrologer who is giving the reading. For a truly meaningful reading, that must also include the reality and point of view of the person receiving the reading. Astrology is something that happens in a specific context - a specific astrologer, a specific client or subject, at a particular point in space and time with a specific situational context. Closing One final point. When you realize that there are multiple valid ways of doing astrology - different systems, different points of view, each with their own strengths and weaknesses - this gives you an opportunity to experiment with looking at a single chart from different points of view in your own practice. You take off one lens, and put on another lens, to see what you notice. You, as a single astrologer, can have multiple ways of looking at a chart. You can take them off and put them on in turn to get a different perspective. That is a multi-perspective, multi-map way of practicing astrology. And that is the subject of another book. Stay tuned...

Page 37

Afterword O Freunde, nicht diese Toene! Sondern lasst uns angenehmere anstimmen und freundenvollere! - Friedrich Schiller, An De Freude (Ode to Joy) The entire population of the human race, with one trifling exception, is made up of other people. - John Andrew Holmes The human mind is like a parachute; it only works when it's open. - Frank Zappa Either that wallpaper goes or I go. - Oscar Wilde, reputed last words As I said in the beginning part of this little book, I was motivated to write it by my desire to further good will and discussion between the different schools of astrology active today. I have tried to present a framework that can be used to make sense of having multiple systems that all work, and to show ways that the emphases of the different systems can complement each other. Their differences can be a source of strength. Astrology is a wonderful, precious and sacred subject. We have too much good work to do, and have too many things in common, for us to be wasting our time criticizing and putting down each other's way of practicing. I think we have so much that we can learn from each other, and I think we can have a lot of fun, and make some very good new friends in the process. Our worlds can get bigger, and we can be more aware of each others' perspectives, strengths and limitations. I want to get a dialog going, and I very much welcome and solicit any thoughts, comments or feedback you may have on this project. I think this work of dialog and community building is important, which is why I want to expand this discussion. Whatever form, or forms, of astrology you choose to study or practice, may the Gods go with you on your journey. Blessed Be.