PDA

View Full Version : The 'New' Zodiac



Kiorionis
04-02-2016, 01:51 AM
I recently heard of this, and thought I'd post it up to see what those interested in astrology think of it.
Is there is a larger, macrocosm clock ticking away which ought necessarily progress the signs through our preconceived notions of 'months' and 'years'?



According to the Minnesota Planetarium Society, here is where the real signs of the Zodiac should fall. Get ready for your world to change forever.

Capricorn: Jan. 20-Feb. 16.
Aquarius: Feb. 16-March 11.
Pisces: March 11-April 18.
Aries: April 18-May 13.
Taurus: May 13-June 21.
Gemini: June 21-July 20.
Cancer: July 20-Aug. 10.
Leo: Aug. 10-Sept. 16.
Virgo: Sept. 16-Oct. 30.
Libra: Oct. 30-Nov. 23.
Scorpio: Nov. 23-29.
Ophiuchus: Nov. 29-Dec. 17. (Yep, this one is new — read all about the Ophiuchus way of life here (http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/01/13/ophiuchus-what-all-saggitarius-and-capricorns-need-to-know-about-their-new-zodiac/?iid=nfmostpopular))
Sagittarius: Dec. 17-Jan. 20.
-source (http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/01/13/horoscope-hang-up-earth-rotation-changes-zodiac-signs/)

zoas23
04-02-2016, 02:34 AM
My opinion: Bullshit.

This is a scientific misunderstanding of what Astrology is actually about.

If you go back to the early Greek sources (Manilius, Aratus, Ptolemy, etc)... ALL of them where 100% conscious of a few facts:
1) That the signs are symbolical.
2) That the axial precession had made the Signs of the visible heaven no longer match the IDEAL heaven that Astrology uses (yes, by their time the signs had already "moved" in the visible sky).
3) That the visible signs do NOT divide the 360 grades of the sky in equal portions of 30 grades... and yet the IDEAL sky of Astrology has signs that divide the sky in "perfect" portions of 30 grades.
4) That the IDEAL sky of Astrology follows the regime of the Equinoxes and Solstices (i.e, that when the Sun touches the 0 of Aries it's the northern Spring Equinox)... even if whilst watching the visible sky they clearly saw that the equinox was not matching the 0 of Aries.
5) The "classical" astrologers have always been 100% conscious of the fact that they were working with an IDEAL sky and not with the "visible" sky (they even said it explicitly).
6) The Zodiac follows a "seasonal" myth (that matches the North Hemisphere and not the South Hemisphere).

If we are talking about Astronomy, then they can say whatever they want... but modern Astronomers don't understand the logic of Astrology and probably have never read the "classics" who were already aware of this "problem" (that is not a problem) and were not naive about it.

Kiorionis
04-02-2016, 03:10 AM
Interesting. But I'm curious. Astrology is supposed to interpret the influence of the position of the stars on the material matter -- whether political, communal or individual. How can an astrologer disregard the actual, physical locations of the stars and consellations and make up some 'ideal' calendar?

zoas23
04-02-2016, 04:15 AM
Interesting. But I'm curious. Astrology is supposed to interpret the influence of the position of the stars on the material matter -- whether political, communal or individual. How can an astrologer disregard the actual, physical locations of the stars and consellations and make up some 'ideal' calendar?

What you are talking about is called "Sidereal Astrology" and is mostly an XX century invention... whilst Ophiucus in the Zodiac is something that began to be a "fashion" in the 70's and became a "hit" in the mid 90's...

But, in my opinion, both sidereal astrology and "Ophiucus" in the Zodiac are a huge misunderstanding of Western Astrology.

Western Astrology has always followed an IDEAL sky... and a SEASONAL myth (the 4 cardinal signs match perfectly the Equinoxes and Solstices in this "IDEAL Sky", which also has signs that have 30 grades).

A lot of the modern scientific criticism of Astrology comes from persons who never understood these simple facts.

"Tropical Astrology" (let's call it "Idealist Astrology") NEVER worked with the "real" position of the Signs... in the first place because they never had 30 grades.

And yet our subconscious happens to follow this "seasonal myth".

If you want to get very Empiric... let's understand it this way.
I will assume that you live in the Northern Hemisphere (which I think is the case, if I'm wrong, you'll follow the explanation anyway).

When the Spring Equinox takes place, we call that Empiric fact "the zero grade of Aries"... and Aries has a "myth" that is very related to the beginning of Spring, the "new life" that begins in that moment.

Then we divide the Spring in 3 equal parts... the first part of the Spring, we call it "Aries", the second part of the Spring, we call it "Taurus", the last part of the Spring, we call it "Gemini". Each one of these parts of the Spring has an "unconscious myth" attached to it. The signs of the IDEAL sky represent that myth. Same thing with the other 3 seasons.

So Astrology is actually very Empiric, except that not in the sense that modern Astronomy thinks.

A silly example: when the Spring begins, we'll probably see that the animals begin to look for a partner to copulate... We have a name for such thing: Aries!

If we follow this "new zodiac" then we should assume that this empiric fact would be called Pisces... Pisces, a myth that represents Aphrodite and Eros hiding as two fishes as to avoid being captured by Typhon. The sign represents the "new life" (Aries) that is remaining hidden (the last phase of the winter), but is about to unveil itself (in Aries).

For an astrologer this "new zodiac" makes as much sense as explaining an Alchemist that Mercury is "Hg" and that what he is calling "Mercury" in most cases is not Hg.... The Alchemist will simply laugh and say: "yes, I know it... and ALL the Alchemists have known it... it's just that you don't understand alchemy and you are thinking as a chemist!".

Awani
04-02-2016, 10:22 AM
A zodiac without the Serpent is not a zodiac in my book.

:cool:

Andro
04-02-2016, 11:41 AM
In my experience with Astrology, all models are approximations, some being much 'better' than others in certain areas.

For the best general/overall 'readings', I have found this Western Astrology model most useful and accurate: Geocentric, 12 signs, Placidus Houses.

I have also found that this model is best complemented by Draconian Astrology (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dp-vA6UkD6k), also known as 'Esoteric Astrology', 'Karmic Astrology' or 'Astrology of the Soul'.

To spice it up and get extra angles, it can be interesting to complement with Vedic, Chinese, etc... Or even with other ancient Western models.

But for me, the first model I mentioned is the best overall winner when confronted with the 'reality' of the person whose Horoscope we are casting.

zoas23
04-02-2016, 02:49 PM
A zodiac without the Serpent is not a zodiac in my book. :cool:

If you go deep into Astrology, then the constellation of Draco, that is more a Serpent than a Dragon, is the true "ruler" of the Zodiac... whilst the Zodiac is Draco biting its own tail in another plane...
Whilst the lunar nodes are the "tail of the Dragon" and the "Head of the Dragon" (Cauda Draconis and Caput Draconis)... and the way in which a person "enters" into the "Ouroboric" circle and his "escape route" (to get out of the karmic circle).



In my experience with Astrology, all models are approximations, some being much 'better' than others in certain areas.

For the best general/overall 'readings', I have found this Western Astrology model most useful and accurate: Geocentric, 12 signs, Placidus Houses.

I have also found that this model is best complemented by Draconian Astrology (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dp-vA6UkD6k), also known as 'Esoteric Astrology', 'Karmic Astrology' or 'Astrology of the Soul'.

To spice it up and get extra angles, it can be interesting to complement with Vedic, Chinese, etc... Or even with other ancient Western models.

But for me, the first model I mentioned is the best overall winner when confronted with the 'reality' of the person whose Horoscope we are casting.

I didn't know this system called "Draconic Astrology" (though I would say that the "traditional western system" is already "Draconic"). The video didn't explain much too me, but I used google to find a technical explanation and I got how it works (it seems that it is based on making Aries coincide with the Cauda Draconis or the Ascending node). Interesting.

I only use the "classical" system (the one you called "the first") and in my case I only use the classical 7 planets (no pluto, uranus and neptune).

In my opinion a good reading should include the horoscope (AKA "Natal Chart") and an eventual chart... The "right time" of the eventual chart is, in my opinion, the moment in which the other person asks you about the specific issue that interests him... and an even more complete lecture can include an analysis based on the Schemhamphorash (I do prefer the system that places the 72 angels beginning in Leo, but some people makes them begin in Aries).

I know nothing about Vedic Astrology, nor about Chinese Astrology... but I don't use them because I believe that a right understanding of a system should involve a vast knowledge of the subject (i.e, that it doesn't make any sense to use these systems unless you have a "hardcore" knowledge of Hinduism or Chinese Philosophy, which I certainly don't).

For a complete reading I use Astrology (including the Schemhamphorash and the so called "Golem Tablet") + Tarot + Geomancy + (in certain cases) a system of circular mantras which is similar to the Abulafia system of permutations*

*A Qabalah-based system of permutations that let's you find out where you get "stuck" or where the *energy* is not circulating... it often works better if it is done by a group acting as a "choir", because it becomes obvious in which points the "choir" gets out of tempo or confused.

__________________________________________________ ___________

Anyway, when it comes to Western Astrology (I can't give any opinion on Vedic or Chinese Astrology), I think they KEY is to have a good understanding of the "classics"... instead of learning from "modern" XX century sources (it is funny for me that it is you the one that made me realize that this same thing is true for alchemy).

Kiorionis
04-02-2016, 05:13 PM
Interesting stuff i didn't know, about how the astrological system is designed. I had it set up differently in my mind. Thanks.

zoas23
04-04-2016, 12:24 AM
Interesting stuff i didn't know, about how the astrological system is designed. I had it set up differently in my mind. Thanks.

The study of Astrology is fascinating because quite often it is one of the BIG keys to understand some myths (The 12 works of Heracles, the myth of the Golden Fleece of Jason and the Argonauts -the Fleece is, of course, Aries).

I would suggest you the books by Manilius and Aratus... Ptolemy is very technical, but Manilius and Aratus are very easy to read and focus a lot on the "Myth" of Astrology... and they are very pleasant to read (they were very much like the equivalent of Carl Sagan for the ancient Greeks... the English term for his genre would be "divulgation science"... Manilius and Aratus were like his *ancestors* and they didn't write for an "Elite of Astrologers", but for a general audience... explaining Astrology in an easy way and focusing on the myths associated with it, but without going too far into the technical side).

The "modern corrections" of Astrology (like the one you posted in the first post) mostly ignore the basic principles of Astrology and destroy all the connections it has with our own unconscious myths... under the false belief that Astrology would be more accurate if it becomes similar to modern Astronomy.

Kiorionis
04-30-2016, 02:13 AM
I'll have to look into those authors then. Also, Mr. Z, do you know of any Eastern authors of astrology? I'm very much into the taoist perspective.

So, the "new zodiac" is clearly a manipulation away from proper understanding of astrology. Interesting how that happens these days.