1

Astrology for the outsiders

There are a lot of things Id like to talk about. There is one in particular that I would like to
delve in. Ill begin with the beginning.
Once upon a time, when people were very different than those of todays world, there was a god
(or a deified man, depending on who you ask) named Hermes Trismegistus (Latinized Ancient
Greek for thrice greatest), whoaccording to several sourcescreated the three fields of
knowledge: astrology, alchemy and magic. Those were called Three Parts of the Wisdom of the
Whole Universe. Two of them got mixed and were called astrological magic while alchemy
depends on astrological notions in order to get everything right.
Any of them, combined or not, are practiced even in todays world, but only a small number of
people do it, compared to the worlds population, probably one percent or less. The number can
be guesstimated to hundreds of thousands of people from all over the globe. So there are web-
sites created specifically for this kind of people. If you are interested, you can look up in any
search engine any technical term derived from any part of the three and you will stumble upon
any site of this kind. The number is limited to those who actually studied and practiced their
chosen field until they got all the layers or most of them. They are astrologers, alchemists and
magicians (or warlocks or wizards, as some would say), allwell, almost all doing what they
love in great secrecy. A very small number choose to go public (like the True Blood vampires
who got out of the coffin) and give counsel to people with their knowledge and experience,
much to the dismay of the skeptics, who believe that their worldview is better than all this su-
perstitious stuff. It is their opinion, although not a very educated one. The todays general
worldview, unfortunately, does not let us recognize the invisible world or realm of spirits and
other beings, unless you speak of religion. In order to understand the spiritual world, you have
to know the basics, which are taught either by yourself or by good teachers. I am one of the
self-educated people on this matter. However, I dont intend to write about the spiritual, invisi-
ble realm.
Oh, just a reminder: there are impostors, too, so beware of them. If you see an unknown name,
try to get reviews from people who got a reading from this name or that person. The usual mis-
take of the skeptic is to label everyone as impostor when in fact there is someone genuine.
I am looking to expand my knowledge and my mind. Sometimes not so much, other times Im
ready to receive new information. My natural state is to be curious about anything. Now I am in
2

a stage where everything new comes filtered by my prior knowledge; after all, I am close to 30.
My favorite field is astrology and I would like to talk about it, but I am wondering whether
people are going to be open to what I say, because I cannot expect them to readily accept what-
ever I have to say. Anyway, Id like to talk about the history of arguments regarding astrology,
which is not like practicing at all, but could be a good start to understand a few things that are
going on since the ancient times.
When did astrology begin? Nobody knows, I guesstimate around four thousand years ago, may-
be earlier. Remembering the Hermes Trismegistus short introduction, we can see that all three
parts of wisdom began in the same time.
Jumping to the Hellenistic era, there were people, some of them renowned for their intellect,
who objected to the validity of astrology on the basis of twins having close birth times and very
different lives (as stated by Cicero), which has been adopted several centuries later by Saint Au-
gustine when he argued why the Bible forbidden the appeal to astrology for answers and its
practice. What I think of it? I agree and I dont, simultaneously. Why? Because, while the twins
may have different lives, their patterns wouldnt differ very much and we will see what I mean.
Lets take a case of two pairs of twins as seen on a documentary. Both pairs were separated
shortly after birth and given to adoption. The first pair, both males, had the same events three
years apart: when the first one had a surgery, the second one had it three years later; when the
first one have wed, the second one have wed three years later and so on, even their deaths hap-
pened in the same time span. The second pair, both females, had the same pattern, only five
years apart. In both cases, the patterns have maintained even after they found each other. I bet
two things: the first pair of twins had birth times of three minutes apart, while the second had
been born five minutes apart. The other thing I bet is this pattern can be seen in both of their
astrological charts using certain techniques.
Another objection, brought up by many intellectuals over the ages, is that planets and stars cant
possibly influence the humankind. Specifically, Favorinus argued that it was absurd to imagine
that stars and planets would affect human bodies in the same way as they affect the tides, and
equally absurd that small motions in the heavens cause large changes in peoples fates. Carneades
argued that belief in fate denies free will and morality; that people born at different times can all
die in the same accident or battle; and that contrary to uniform influences from the stars, tribes
and cultures are all different.
You can see that these objections to astrology are as old as astrology itself and that shows the
saying nothing new under the Sun is true. I agree that stars and planets cannot influence the
3

humankind. It defies the concept of fate and free will, because the latter cannot exist without
the former. Fate, however, can exist without free will, as people are often confused about many
things. Most often, they are confused about other people. They react in certain ways without
thinking through and that creates undesired or unforeseen consequences. Free will can influ-
ence some outcomes. On another occasion, Ive written more extensively on this subject and I
think youll seeand probably likethe article in the close future. Anyway, the concept of fate
should not validate astrology, rather should let us see there is a cause and effect for every event
in our world at large scale and in our lives at small scale. I find it amusing that people believe
frequently that fate and free will are mutually exclusive, when in fact they are not. This philo-
sophical standpoint is called compatibilism, look it up. If people werent creatures of habit,
there wouldnt be fate.
This begs a question. If astrology is not validated by fate and the stars do not influence anyone,
then what validates it? Ill refer to the Kybalion or the seven Principles, designated by the thrice
greatest Hermes (as claimed by the anonymous group signed the Three Initiates in 1908), espe-
cially the Principle of Correspondence, which embodies the idea that there is always a corre-
spondence between the laws of phenomena of the various planes of being and life: As above, so
below; as below, so above. This principle states that there is a harmony, agreement and corre-
spondence between these planes, delineated as physical, mental and spiritual. Now you see that a
planetary influence was never implied and there is a mirroring phenomenon between the Sky
and the Earth, respectively the above and the below. It is funny, though, that many astrologers,
even today, believe in the planetary influences. I think Im in the minority regarding this issue.
Im not saying, though, that all the astrologers in the old times believed in planetary influences,
some of them didnt, and they still were in the minority, from what Ive gathered.
In the modern times, several skeptics took seriously the argument If you didnt study the sub-
ject, you cant have an informed opinion about it. What did they do? They took a book and
tried to apply the information from it on the astrological charts they have stumbled upon. My
first reaction was double: surprised and amused. Surprised, because they tried to study it while
most of skeptics didnt bother; amused, because they said it didnt work. What did they expect?
You cant learn astrology from one single book while there are entire treatises on different
branches of astrology. They tried to learn it in less than a month, while astrologers like me took
very long years to understand it Its like you take a book about law or medicine and then you
try to interpret the law or the medical conditions according to that book alone You know it
isnt possible, right? Its also ridiculous, misleading and kind of dangerous.
4

I would like to talk about the differences between two big sides of astrology, which represent
very different mindsets: traditional (including ancient) astrology and modern astrology. Im on
the traditional side, after Ive studied both and I have better arguments for the old one rather
than the new one. I believe, however, that the people who reject old stuff simply because its old
are confused. It is one thing to throw an old object when it isnt working and cant be fixed
and its entirely different when you see an old field and treat it like an object, when in fact it
isnt. Do I make sense?
You see, there are three astronomical and astrological bodies discovered at different points in
the history of humankind: Uranus, Neptune and Pluto. That is the first difference of these two
sides: the old one does not include them, the new one does. The chanting out with the old, in
with the new is really annoying to me, because this is exactly the argument used by modern
astrologers when they say they work better with these newer bodies. In my mind, the only
reason they do it is because they dont know any better. They focus too much on the outer
planets (in modern astrology, Pluto is a fully fledged planet, not just dwarf), while the classical
ones are almost neglected. Most of the time, they ignore the Moon, unless they see one of her
extreme phases, like New, Full or in eclipses. The old tradition does the opposite: it puts the
Moon on the first place, it observes her phase, her aspects, her position and everything can be
known about her before going to other planets; at least two branches do that, natal and horary.
The above mentioned trio is unknown and it is better to be ignored for philosophical reasons.
There are astrologers who dont ignore the modern planets and integrate them in their tradi-
tional approach, what they do is called neo-traditional astrology. I would go into deeper detail,
but Im afraid that would go beyond the surface of what Im discussing.
There are other differences between the old and new sides. However, the biggest reason of the
existence of the differences lies within the historical events in the 18
th
century, when a group of
scientists and philosophers decided to throw away the old ways, including astrology, and estab-
lish the Enlightenment epoch, based on the Illuminist ideas, as the Illuminati started it in the
first place; illuminati is Latin for the enlightened ones. Because of these events, almost all the
astrology books have been burned or destroyed, along with books of esoteric subjects and any-
thing deemed as superstitious. Thats whyevery time I see a scene of the French Revolution
on any screenIm upset, because that revolution started this entire situation. If we look closely
at the French revolt, it doesnt look so good-natured and for the people anymore.
In the 19
th
century, there were a few astrologers who wanted to do some practice, but all they
had were fragments from the various books that somehow survived the great destruction. Un-
fortunately, these fragments didnt help them much, when they had Uranus and Neptune to
5

work with. Somehow, they had to start from scratch and to reinvent the wheel. One example:
according to the tradition, Saturn rules both Capricorn and Aquarius. One zany astrologer
who wasnt that good, as it turned outproposed to assign Uranus as ruler of Aquarius. Of
course, many astrologers disagreed at first. Someone asked them why they reject his proposition.
Since they couldnt find any good reason to reject it, they had to accept it, so Uranus (significa-
tor of sudden changes) becomes ruler of Aquarius (a steady, fixed Air Sign). Isnt it ironic? A bit
later, in the 20
th
century, Pluto comes to the spotlight and astrologers decide that he rules
Scorpio. The Rosicrucians, a sophisticated group of Hermetic astrologers (the Hermetic part
is their claim, I think), believe that Pluto rules Capricorn.
In the last two decades of the past century, the old astrology books resurfaced and a group of
astrologers started to translate them. A lot of them were from the Hellenistic era, the Middle
Ages and the Renaissance. I managed to read a book in Middle English by a British astrologer,
William Lilly. His Wikipedia entry is really detailed for someone who lived in the 17
th
century.
I believe he was one of the last astrologers, before the modern times, who accurately predicted a
lot of events.
There is a definite split between the astrology before the 18
th
century and the one after it. Also,
another split is between astronomy and astrology in the same century. That astrology/astronomy
dichotomy is what drove the 19
th
century astrologers to reinvent the wheel. Before the great
split, astrology and astronomy were one and the same and it was astrology. That means before
old practicing masters began to delineate some astrological charts, they took into consideration
astronomical details like the altitude of the Sun in daytime or of a particular star in nighttime.
They observed the planets with the naked eye and found meaning in their positions relative to
the Signs and to each other. That was the science of light to them.
And that is all I can think of astrology for outsiders, folks. One last thing: if you dont question
the nature of reality, you dont know anything.

Tzadde