This is a brief 6 minute video I made, that shows how to pick the lunar phase out of an astrology chart. It is a simple skill, and a very useful one.
Category: Traditional Astrology
Using Two House Systems
This post started with a discussion I had with Anthony Louis, who wrote this piece about using multiple house systems. He uses quotes from Masha’allah that refer to houses in two different ways – by whole sign, which were referred to as ‘by counting’, and by a quadrant house system, probably Porphyry according to Anthony Louis, which he referred to as ‘by measurement’, meaning measurement from the two angles, Ascendant and Midheaven.
Quadrant house systems take the Ascendant as the cusp of the first house, and the Midheaven as the cusp of the 10th house. For a long time they have been by far the dominant form of house system at use in Western astrology until fairly recent times. Placidus, Koch, Regiomontanus, Porphyry and many others are all examples of popularly used quadrant house systems. They all agree about the four quadrants of the chart, and each have different methods of dividing up the space between the angles to find the intermediate house cusps.
I have been aware for some time that both kinds of house systems appear in the works of Masha’allah, Sahl, Abu Mashar and other Arabic astrologers. References to both kinds of house systems appear widely in their works including those translated by Ben Dykes, and in a conversation with Ben I confirmed that the two kinds of house systems, by counting and by measurement, are all through their works.
What fell into place for me here, was the notion of using both kinds of house systems at the same time. Prior to this I had thought in terms of these astrologers sometimes using one house system and sometimes the other.
That was the new piece that set me on fire. It helped me realize I have been heading in that direction in my own practice for a long time, without really realizing it.
Prior to this I thought along the same lines as Ben Dykes, Demetra George and other traditional astrologers, that whole sign houses signify topics and quadrant houses signify angularity and relative strength. I do think that relative strength, angularity, is best measured by quardrant house.
What we are doing here is something beyond that, using both house systems for topic symbolism, at the same time.
Consulting the Divine – The Practice of Astrology
This post is a meditation on the purpose of astrology, what conditions need to be in place to have a good and valid reading. It is also a description of how I go about doing a reading.
I do not think astrology is primarily about prediction or fortune-telling. I also do not think that astrology is something that the astrologer does as a solo performance, putting on a kind of miracle show while the client just sits back and watches.
I am convinced that astrology is not well suited for for vague “tell me what’s going to happen to me” readings. Astrology is a sacred art, a consultation with the Gods, and we can use this predictive tool because the ordered and symbolic movement of the heavens mirrors the divine order. When we study astrology we are contemplating divine order – we are peering into the mind of the Holy.
Astrology works best in response to a heartfelt need for guidance from the Gods. The medieval astrologer Guido Bonatti lays this out very clearly in the first sections of his 146 Considerations chapter from his landmark compilation, The Book of Astronomy, and William Lilly echoes that in his little book that is an earlier translation of Bonatti, The Art of Astrology.
Here is what Bonatti has to say – this is quoting from the Ben Dykes translation of Bonatti’s 146 Considerations.
“…he must observe this manner of asking, plainly that he ought to pray to the Lord God, from Whom every good beginning leads, and to entreat Him (with all devotion and with a contrite spirit) that it should fall to him to reach an understanding of the truth of those things about which he intends to ask. Then with this truth he ought to go to the astrologer with intention concerning that about which he is going to ask, …and the intention for which he retains in his heart for a day and a night (or more), not touched by just any motion of the mind.
…the beginning statement of which, however, is always the name of the Highest; for certain people sometimes do otherwise, and for that reason they come to be deceived in themselves, and they sometimes pressure the astrologer – or rather, they often lie; for a stupid querent makes the responding wise man deviate sometimes; and men, not knowing the folly of him who asks poorly, sometimes defame and revile the astrologer when the astrologer is not guilty…”(p 265)
Consider the implications of this lovely statement of Bonatti’s.
Continue reading “Consulting the Divine – The Practice of Astrology”
Living Crone
Earlier this year I did a series of posts exploring the symbolism of Saturn as feminine and as an old Crone figure. This was based on a reference in Dorotheus classing Saturn as one of the feminine planets, and Dorotheus is one of the earliest sources we have for our Western astrology.
Saturn as feminine seems to strike a chord with a lot of people, and I received some strong responses from both readers and friends.
After one of the posts, a comment suggested that I consider looking at how Saturn as feminine could be used in chart interpretation. That is what I will look at here.
As I thought about it, I was surprised to realize that I already had a very good example of Saturn being feminine, in the chart of a client of mine.
Detriment and Fall
It is common to hear modern astrologers criticize the traditional astrology concepts of debility, detriment and fall.
For those of you who do not use these interpretive terms, a planet in a sign opposite to the one it rules is in detriment, and a planet opposite its exaltation sign is said to be in fall. To be in rulership or exaltation is called being dignified, and to be in detriment or fall is called being debilitated. In traditional astrology both detriment and fall will tend to hinder or create problems in the expression of that planet.
There is much criticism of the negative connotations of these terms, and much insistence that a planet in a debilitated state can be a strong asset in a chart. Let a planet just be as it is; any sign placement of any planet can be used positively.
What I maintain here is that the concepts of debility, detriment, and fall can give useful information as to how a planet will play out in a person’s life. They can provide useful information on how to deal with the planet’s expression.
To illustrate that, I want to take a detailed look at a debilitated planet I know very well from experience – Mercury in Pisces in my own natal chart.
A Study in Aversion
This post is about the traditional astrology concept of aversion, and how it plays out in interpreting a chart. I used this example in the webinar I did for Kepler on October 24 of this year, and it intrigued me enough that I want to study it a bit more closely here.
In traditional astrology aspects are primarily by whole sign, and the only aspects that are used are the classical Ptolemaic aspects – sextile, square, trine, opposition.
Signs that are not in a classical aspect with each other – either 30 degrees or 150 degrees – are said to be in aversion, meaning they are turned away from each other, out of the line of vision and hence out of contact.
Aversion as an interpretive concept can play out in some interesting and significant ways, and here we are going to look at the chart of the founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud.
Ladder of the Planets
My practice of astrology today is based on what I learned during a period of several years in which I confined myself to rules and techniques from traditional astrology. As part of that, I eliminated the 3 modern outer planets from my practice. Obviously this also means that I used only the traditional rulerships, where Mars rules Scorpio, Saturn rules Aquarius, and Jupiter rules Pisces. There is a beauty, symmetry and power to the traditional rulership system, with the planets arranged in pairs around the two lights, Sun and Moon, in the order of their distance from the Sun.
During the past year I have been exploring, and re-discovering, some of the techniques and viewpoints of modern western astrology. Along with that study, I now place a very high priority on having the different approaches to astrology all respect and learn from each other. While at one point I was convinced that traditional astrology was superior, I now think that was arrogance on my part, and that the different astrology systems are each different points of view, and have their own respective strengths and weaknesses.
So, as a (mostly) traditional astrologer, I want to be able to dialog with modern astrologers, speak their language, and use the best of their techniques and insights.
That means coming to terms with the modern planetary rulerships, where Scorpio is now ruled by Pluto, Aquarius is ruled by Uranus, and Pisces is ruled by Neptune. That is the system used by most of the astrologers I know. The problem is, introducing those new rulers disturbs the symmetry and integrity of the traditional system, and that is far more important than you might think if you don’t have experience in traditional astrology.
However, if I am going to dialog with modern astrologers, I need to be able to speak the language of modern rulerships, so I always have my eye out for a framework in which I can make sense of modern rulerships while still keeping the symmetry of the original system intact.
I think I have found an interesting and possibly fruitful approach, and I want to examine it here.
Letting Death Back In
Modern astrology, like much of our modern culture in general, does not welcome open talk about death. It is sometimes even taboo to use the word.
Never mention death when delineating a chart – some astrologers consider that immoral to mention – obscene might be a better word.
Always say something positive!
Death is a strong word, and a strong, emotionally charged topic, and yes we need to proceed with care and concern when we discuss it.
But – leave out talking about death – and you are excluding people who are dealing with, or have dealt with, the death of a loved one.
There is a pain in their heart they are not allowed to talk about, which adds a sense of isolation and even uncleanness to the hurt.
In earlier posts in this journal – for instance, this post on my two saturn returns – I mentioned that my wife died of cancer in November 2009, so I know this hurt and isolation firsthand.
I need to talk about Death here, out in the open.
Your Lot in Life
Accepting your lot in life – that is a lot of what an astrology reading is all about, and that is a lot of what I am learning from studying traditional astrology.
I did a reading around a month ago, with a chart that was extremely severe – in technical terms, the sun was beseiged by Saturn and Mars, one by conjunction and one by opposition, within less than a degree. It was brutally hard.
I asked the woman if she had any questions, and she gave me a list, and one after another of her questions was picking up on all the really difficult things going on in her chart. Continue reading “Your Lot in Life”
Focus on the Question
I’ve read a lot of astrology charts for people, especially over the past few years. Some readings go well, some meander, and some are just dead-on accurate.
I am now convinced that the single most important factor in how well a reading goes, is the focus and intent of the person I am reading for.
The quality of the question determines the quality of the reading. Continue reading “Focus on the Question”