Hello Mark C.

I would suggest it is not. Rather in an effective consultation we are doing nothing less than communicating with the divine.

Let's see if we can logically puzzle out what "the divine" may be. Often this means we think we are talking with God, or to some high representative who has his ear. But why would this be so?

It's also been suggested that "the divine" is merely our own individual soul. If so, then wouldn't this be deflating to our precious egos?

Consider that if God wants to talk to us, then He will presumably talk to us in a God-like fashion. He will talk to us on a peer-to-peer level, to the extent such a thing is possible.

Since God is said to be Eternal, then it seems to me that he would be most likely to talk to the eternal part of ourselves, rather than a flimsy physical body that hardly has a chance to last a full century. What's a century to God?

Therefore it seems likely to me that God usually talks to souls, not to the individuals to whom the souls are attached.

So on those rare occasions when we reach our own soul, we can then download whatever messages God may have left for us.

On the other hand, on the soul level all is peace & love & truth & beauty & justice & joy, so if we could just reach our own individual soul, we have probably also reached the great Soul Collective. Which could just as well be mistaken for God the Almighty & Absolute, except for the fact that all the various comologies say it isn't. But for us carbon-based creatures that cannot outlast the great sea turtles, reaching the soul level would be a pretty good feat.

We know the soul connects to the physical through two threads: The sliver, to the crown chakra, and the gold, to the heart chakra. A vegetative state results if the silver thread is cut, death ensues when the gold thread is cut. Which also cuts the silver, if it's not already been cut.

Since these are threads we may presume that they, like all threads, vibrate. So we may use vibration as a means of signaling to whatever is on the other end, and perhaps hearing whatever it may have to say in return.

Vibration is rhythm, and rhythm is often accompanied by pitch & tone. In other words, music. I don't know what Buddhists may do, but all religions of which I am aware make intense use of music as a way of communicating with "the divine", which, if I am correct, is actually a way of aligning us with our individual souls.

I once saw K.N. Rao speak. Before he did so, he stood in front of us & sang a song / chanted a prayer (I have no idea which). As I mentioned on my K.N. Rao page, I was fully aware why he did so. I did not mention that he had a young lady chanting with him, and that her sex & her age intensified his (not her, not their) song/prayer, factors which I was also aware of at the time.

He certainly wasn't doing this in the hopes that "God" would speak through him. He is, overall, rather crabby. It was certainly the case that he had learned, perhaps by trial & error, that when he was so prepared, he gave better talks, which implies soul-alignment, not God-alignment.

You will think I am fussy, but I like words with precise meanings.

For ancient Greek astrologers like Vettius Valens to be able to be effective astrologers we needed the guidance of our guardian spirit or 'daimon'.

This, of course, would be the same thing: The soul. In discussing the Greeks we need to be aware we are discussing another Astrological Age & be mindful of the differences between Ages.

I think going down the mythic/post-modernist approach exclusively marks a total retreat from the spiritual roots of astrology.

Nah! For the most part, the astro-mythology crowd simply lack intellectual horsepower. They are more noise than anything else.

Dave

Hello Mark C,

In simplistic terms there are 3 possible theories to explain 'the moment of astrology'. In essence:

1 Unintentional cold reading by the astrologer/Tarot card reader

2 Creative participation/co-operation by the client /astrologer generating meaning from the signs/symbols that present to their consciousness.

3 A use of psychic ability / sharing of auras.

In my view, the astrologer is a bridge between astrological energies, taken collectively, and the individual client, which includes his soul and his aura, which itself can contain relics from many other people. More than a bridge, the astrologer is a transformer, stepping down & concretizing astrological energies so they may be understood & accepted by the client.

He does this in one of two ways, or perhaps by blending both: Via the head chakras, and the heart chakra. Both are then run through the solar plexus chakra, which is essential for all forms of human interaction. Far more than the brain, but I digress.

Head energies we can generally reduce to prose words on paper. Heart energies can only be described in poetry or music & are often taken as religious or quasi-religious, which is not always accurate. Once we accept our inability to express heart energies in concrete head terms, we can learn to better work with the heart's various "black box" techniques, of which there are many, and which can be taught. Unlike head interactions, all heart-based interactions require the active interplay of teacher & student, or peer and peer. Literacy is their great enemy.

Dave

Hello Dave,

You state:

Let's see if we can logically puzzle out what "the divine" may be. Often this means we think we are talking with God, or to some high representative who has his ear. But why would this be so?

A perfectly valid point to raise. I have a Christian friend who seriously disapproves of my interest in astrology because he believes I am opening up myself to 'evil spirits' . Actually, that view of astrology goes right back to St Augustine. Equally, maybe I am just deluding myself in thinking astrology is a rainbow bridge to the devas. Clearly, the potential for ego delusion and spiritual megalomania exists. Other alternatives leave us with a secularised astro-mythology or spirit possession from the lower realms.

More than a bridge, the astrologer is a transformer, stepping down & concretizing astrological energies so they may be understood & accepted by the client.

I go along with that. Although the client is a participant in that process too . They have to be willing to creatively engage too in making it apply to their specific circumstances. However, I see the astrological symbols/signs as the rainbow bridge referred to above.

Clearly we are all struggling to find our way here. I am not coming at this discussion with any sense of having definitive 'answers'. Rather I am offering my own provisional understanding of the way this issue looks to me from my partial and limited perspective. I am grateful to get a chance to explore these issues further than I usually do. Most astrologers I know are completely uninterested in discussing this kind of issue.

Hello Mark C

maybe I am just deluding myself in thinking astrology is a rainbow bridge to the devas.

There is every reason to belive in astrological devas, since we know there are devas for all sorts of things. How to make best use of them?

A music deva will play beautiful music in our heads, but only if we are in attunement with the deva on its level. And even if we are, it will do us no good if we cannot tell a C from a C#. Since devas enjoy having humans to work through, an inability to express what they give us would probably result in their searching for some other head to amuse. I do know that devas drift away unless they are tied down in some fashion. The constant attention the Chinese give to their house devas gives us ideas.

A healing deva, of the great purple line, can heal through us, and, as I am personally aware, they can do so without our having any idea they are there. The requirements are a genuine desire to help others, a good working knowledge of our particular healing craft, and a reasonably stable emotional nature. (Violent emotions, negative emotions, push them away. It's as if you were trying to conduct a conversation with someone who is shouting at the top of his lungs.) Or, a desire to help people & a good supply of people who need help. Healing devas work equally well with surgeons in the operating room, illiterate peasants laying hand on others, and preachers shouting, "Jesus! Heal!" Which is an exception to the rule that shouting sends them away.

If there is such a thing as an astrological deva, it seems to me they would be a branch of the healing devas. If your clients feel healed after they have been in your hands, we may take this as evidence that devas may have been about.

Dave

Hi Dave,

Very interesting. Where are you getting all this material on devas from?

Garry's article on Theravada Buddhism and divination has some very useful information too. In Buddhism the view is that the devas find most worldlings smelly and repulsive. In contrast realised beings give off a sweet aura they find highly attractive. As I understand it though there are various levels of devas in the Buddhist pantheon at least. Clearly only the lower order ones would be interested in an astrological consultation.

mmm not sure my aura is that sweet smelling. Perhaps I should be working on that rather than buying more astrological texts........

Mark

Hi Mark

Very interesting. Where are you getting all this material on devas from?

The abstract stuff is from Theosophical literature. Leadbeater & Hodgson (Kingdom of the Gods) were both helpful. The day to day stuff was the result of clairvoyant investigations with Victoria in the late '80's - mid '90's. I would often sit her down & have her look for the neighborhood deva & then ask her 20 questions while she had its attention.

For example, at Chimayo, NE of Santa Fe, New Mexico, there is a healing shrine in a corner of a small church. Locals think it's Our Lady of Guadeloupe, or perhaps one of her outposts. Around 1989 we spent our birthdays in Santa Fe, and while there, we went to Chimayo, and while at Chimayo, each of us stood in the magic healing spot (not 12 inches in diameter) where the deva is concentrated. I went first.

When Victoria finished, I asked her for its name. It's a funny thing but people don't think to ask a question like that.

"Chia", she said.

This set off bells. Watch this:

The healing shrine dates from about 1819, when it was "discovered". The town, as an Indian / Spanish settlement, is older. If we think of "Chia" as Chia-mother, or Chiya-Maya, with Maya being mother, or material world, or illusion, and then we think of the town's name as Chimayo, we realize the town was named after the deva! Even though the town seems to have been established well-before the deva "turned up". (This may be true of many place names, by the way.) On the walls there were many hand-made representations of a Virgin with "flames" around her. Most of them showed her in a blue robe. A few insisted on green. I wondered why.

Which was it, I asked?

Green, she replied. Without hesitation.

This is why I think dyadic clairvoyance, such as that of Gurudas some years ago, to be superior to an individual working alone, such as Cayce.

This does not mean Chimayo is "nice". There are hardly two thousand souls, very thinly spread on the ground. There are one or two murders annually, which is very high.

We quickly got to the point where we searched out the deva whenever we went traveling. The commanding deva, for any given geographic region, is invariably directly over the principle landmark that defines the region. This can be a mountain, it can be a fertile valley, it can be - and often is - a man-made object, such as a tall building. And, in fact, we found a very Mayan-looking deva atop the pyramid at Chichen Itza. We knew there was one atop the Empire State Building in New York. At the time, the World Trade Center did not have one, though I am certain it does now.

Mamooji once gave us a tour of the United Nations, and while we were in the basement waiting on him to finish an errand of some sort, I directed Victoria to look for the UN deva, as I was certain there was one there.

Her eyes opened wide. "It's the biggest one I've ever seen!" she gasped. (Hard to make her do that, by the way.) It was directly over the General Assembly. NOT the Security Council. This, by the way, probably confirms what Bailey said long ago about a great planetary deva in New York. Its presence does not guarantee we won't blow ourselves up, as our free will is absolute, but it does mean that the gods & devas are trying very, very, VERY hard to help us avoid that.

In Buddhism the view is that the devas find most worldlings smelly and repulsive.

That's true. Stop eating meat. Victoria has been a vegetarian since she was a kid. Just never had an interest in the red meat stuff. A great disappointment to her father, who loved his steaks. On the other hand, booze makes no difference. Lots & lots of highly developed clairvoyants are virtual drunks. I think most of them drink in order to shut down their sensitivity, to have some control over it. I was vegetarian from 1983 to 2003, when I started eating fish. Both Victoria & I consume large quantities of dairy. It isn't just the coarseness of the meat, but that it's decomposed & soaked in urine by the time it reaches you. Milk, though it is a meat by-product, is fresh by definition.

As I understand it though there are various levels of devas in the Buddhist pantheon at least.

Many different kinds, many different levels. The deva over Chichen Itza was in charge of all the lesser devas, of all the various sorts: The flower devas, the healing devas, the devas in charge of cleaning up the nearby well where human sacrifices were thrown, etc. Can take many centuries to clean up a site like that. Which is one reason why I know there's a whole squad of devas at WTC, as there's a whole lot of trauma & lost souls who need help. That work has barely begun. If we were intelligent, we could easily assist. So far, we haven't.

Clearly only the lower order ones would be interested in an astrological consultation.

No. Logically speaking, there should be an entire range of astrological devas, from quite advanced (and difficult to contact by mere humans) to ones who flit about in our studios. Presuming our studios are of interest to them. If you want to attract one, study how Chinese Kitchen Gods work, and pattern a small shrine after that. I suspect that if you could maintain a shrine for two or three decades, that not only would the relationship between you & the deva grow stronger & stronger (even if you were not consciously aware of it), but that the deva itself would grow stronger & stronger, as a deva. This would be an aid to its own development, and hints at what I've heard, that humans & devas can help each other quite a lot.

Dave

MarkC wrote:

In simplistic terms there are 3 possible theories to explain 'the moment of astrology'. In essence:

1 Unintentional cold reading by the astrologer/Tarot card reader

2 Creative participation/co-operation by the client /astrologer generating meaning from the signs/symbols that present to their consciousness.

3 A use of psychic ability / sharing of auras.

In regard to the approach I am suggesting (3) is irrelevant (tho it may be true), (2) does not generate meaning because it is there to start with, and the moment of astrology draws (some of the) implications. (1) I don't understand - unless it's like a shaman doing witchcraft by accident, perhaps. There is no "moment" to explain sociologically.

GarryP wrote:

I quote Vaihinger

?It must be remembered that the object of the world of ideas as a whole is not the portrayal of reality ? this would be an utterly impossible task ? but rather to provide us with an instrument for finding our way about more easily in this world.?

I am sorely tempted to hack this as I see about half a dozen ambiguities in it at first glance. But the obvious criticism would be how could we find our way about the world without our ideas portraying reality? If our ideas are not mimetic then how can they reasonably be termed instrumental?

A non-scientistic account of astrology must include the conceptual framework astrologers use. If that framework cannot be explained in epistemic terms (i.e. as bad, or proto-science) then it needs some explanation, otherwise what's to distinguish an astrologer's insight into the "divine" from anyone elses?

Hello Coder,

what's to distinguish an astrologer's insight into the "divine" from anyone elses?

I would suppose the quality of the individual results to be the only relevant distinguishing factor, and that subjective judgment of them to be absolute, at least as far as the party(ies) making the judgment are concerned. How else could the two be distinguished?

Why the talk of the divine? We merely make our best guess, take our best shot. Every now & then, we shame ourselves, or if we are lucky, we amaze ourselves. Is there anything different here than what we might find on the Beatles' White Album, for example, which is to say, hits & misses? With the precise value of "hit" or "miss" in the ear of the listener, and what he brings to the music?

Dave

Hello Coder,

There is no "moment" to explain sociologically.

That may be the case and that is why sociology is unsatisfactory in providing an explanation for divinatory astrology since it excludes the reality of consciousness. Only social interaction and the cultural myths that sustain it seem relevant to you as a providing a sense of meaning? Or am I misrepresenting your views?

On the contrary I think phenomenology is at the heart of this discussion. The quantum approach described by Garry leads us to the conclusion that we live in a participatory universe. If I have understood your perspective you seem to be adopting a model where understanding the sociological myth of astrology is identical to the experience ( or amounts to the same thing). In my view it is not. If you study thinkers like the quantum physicist David Bohm consciousness itself is part of the reality of the universe. The issue for me is not providing a socially acceptable myth to justify astrology but rather experiencing its magic experientially.

The first example I used was a placatory example that I thought sceptics might use. I wasn't seriously proposing it as an explanation. As I said before in the case of example (3) the I ching provides an excellent example of a divinatory tool where little or no psychic ability is required to derive meaningful answers from the 'oracle'. However, as with astrology we need to creatively engage with the symbolism. This is all ABC top of the head stuff though. Clearly this needs more thought. I must re-read The Moment and Astrology as Cornelius puts all this in a far more coherent and subtle way.

A non-scientistic account of astrology must include the conceptual framework astrologers use. If that framework cannot be explained in epistemic terms (i.e. as bad, or proto-science) then it needs some explanation, otherwise what's to distinguish an astrologer's insight into the "divine" from anyone elses?

Well of course the chance of getting a group of astrologers to agree on any common perspective seems a lost cause to begin with! I don't think we are short of explanations. It is just finding a consensus that is the problem.

I am aware this is hardly going to satisfy Dean, Kelly, etc but in reality I don't think there is anything astrologers could do or say to satisfy sceptical opinion. Plus I don't think astrology is as unique as some astrologers assume. It is simply one amongst several divinatory tools. It offers more structure than perhaps a dream or a meaningful co-incidence but I don't suggest it is the only way to communicate with the divine. Far from it. If you accept we live live in a meaningful universe signs and symbols can be accessed in other ways. Jung's work explored this thoroughly.

As I stated earlier, we are in the same position as followers of spiritual traditions who cannot prove their experiences to others. In that case astrologers are open to the criticism that where we perceive astrology working experientially, someone else experiences a meaningful encounter with pink elephants. So I guess we could be accused of a solopism or to use Garry phrase 'a tinkerbell effect' that only believers can see or perceive.

If you decide to remove human consciousness from the equation as most of modern science , psychology and philosophy does you end up inevitably in materialism. Giving meaning to human conscious experience takes us in a spiritual and yes risky position of choice. What do we choose?

I have a friend who is wedded to a scientific materialist perspective and doesn't trust anything unless it has been replicated in a lab. I have tried pointing out the limitations of scientism but to no avail. He told me once he was concerned he would make a 'mistake' and go for a belief that was proved wrong. It doesn't seem to worry him that scientism itself could be the biggest 'mistake' of all. Not choosing is a choice too.

Without a conscious decision on our part to work and believe in the signs and symbols presenting to us divinatory astrology cannot happen.

Mark

ps Are you an academic philosopher by any chance? You write like one!

Hello Mark

Plus I don't think astrology is as unique as some astrologers assume. It is simply one amongst several divinatory tools.

Among all methods of forseeing the future, astrology is unique in that it lays claim to all the energies of the universe. Most if not all other methods are limited to thoughtforms lodged in auras.

I have a friend who is wedded to a scientific materialist perspective and doesn't trust anything unless it has been replicated in a lab.

Reminds me of a guy I knew in college. Rick was an undergrad geology student. Brilliant. I asked him why geology & not the social sciences & he admitted he was afraid of variables that had no precise resolution, or some such. He was from Fond du Lac & I suppose that's to be expected when you come from the bottom of things.

It doesn't seem to worry him that scientism itself could be the biggest 'mistake' of all.

But that's what he's staked his identity on, so he dares not change. This is the grasping method, and few are free of it. Gold responds to grasping, but concepts & ideas do not.

Without a conscious decision on our part to work and believe in the signs and symbols presenting to us divinatory astrology cannot happen.

But we need none of this. Stream of consciousness is by far the best divination method of all. Symbols, be they astrological glyphs, or tarot cards, or freshly killed entrails (human are said to be best!), or drugs, etc., are merely props.

In this regard, education is a great hindrance. We cannot think our way to this, nor reason it out. Gurdjieff is correct when he says the moving center is far faster than the reasoning center.

My daughter's chart is a good example. When she was first born, I could not read it. Now that she is six, I looked at it again & found I could. What happened? The chart did not change, nor did my ability to read it. She grew up. She was the magic key. Not the chart, nor the moment.

Since I don't have problems reading newborn charts generally, the reason for the six year delay must be because her chart was a part of me & until she had distanced herself from me, I could not see it clearly.

So here's another factor: What is strange is read differently from what is familiar.

Dave

Among all methods of forseeing the future, astrology is unique in that it lays claim to all the energies of the universe. Most if not all other methods are limited to thoughtforms lodged in auras.

Astrology certainly has unique features. The precision of its predictive approach ( when it works) and its very wide range of applications spring to mind. However, what do you mean by 'energies of the universe'? The focus is cosmic is that your point? I tend to agree with Geoffrey Cornelius when he says astrologers tend to see astrology as unique because its the first symbolic system they have worked with.

The I Ching has some unique features too. It feels far more like communicating with a person/spirit than astrology which is more abstract. Also there is a more established sense of ritual and reverence around the I Ching. Most importantly unlike Astrology or Tarot it directly challenges your ignorance/delusion.It is a tool of self knowledge in a very benign way. I don't agree with you that all other divination systems are all about auras. The I Ching certainly isn't. What about geomancy?

In contrast some people frequently use astrology to escape their issues. The 'Neptune heads' as a heavily earth person I know describes them! The I Ching will not indulge your fantasies.

Stream of consciousness is by far the best divination method of all. Symbols, be they astrological glyphs, or tarot cards, or freshly killed entrails (human are said to be best!), or drugs, etc., are merely props.

I agree all these systems are props. However, we are not all heavily phlegmatic/lunar so the experiences you take as given aren't the reality for all temperament types. The fact is most of us need props like astrology.

One disappointing thing I find about astrology is that it does not necessarily lead people to greater tolerance. It teaches us that different elemental balances /temperaments will inevitably see life differently yet frequently people insist on only looking at life through their own parallax view.

I suppose its a question of free will. Astrology like any spiritual tradition doesn't guarantee a change in consciousness. We need to make the effort to bring out its (and our) highest potential. I forget Lilly's exact words but didn't he say something to the effect that the more developed the consciousness of the astrologer the better the astrology?

Hello Mark,

However, what do you mean by 'energies of the universe'? The focus is cosmic is that your point?

I thought that obvious: Energies from Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Caput Agol, the Pleiades, etc., as filtered through a bizzare set of signs, houses, aspects & midpoints, all of which (the filters, I mean) are unique to the earth, and point strongly to a resonance theory of astrology.

I tend to agree with Geoffrey Cornelius when he says astrologers tend to see astrology as unique because its the first symbolic system they have worked with.

A weak point. It's not true of all of us. I started astrology towards the end of my initial phase of occult studies. My early days in astrology ran parallel to some intense Theosophical reading.

The I Ching has some unique features too. It feels far more like communicating with a person/spirit than astrology which is more abstract.

I confess that Chinese methods are a mystery to me. I have managed to decipher acupuncture meridians, which is hardly a start.

Also there is a more established sense of ritual and reverence around the I Ching. Unlike Astrology or Tarot it really challenges your ignorance/delusion very directly. It is a tool of self knowledge in a very benign way. Its also got nothing much to do with auras so I disagree with you there Dave.

Here I just don't really know. I do not want to make an exception to Chinese methods generally or the I Ching in particular. I want to see them work in ways similar to how most other methods work. However the broken & unbroken lines are determined, it is elements in your aura that do it. However, given the repetition & the "sixness" factor & properties of six itself, one could very well be achieving a result that is not available to more simplistic divination methods. More study is needed.

For example, the Star of David, if I am not mistaken, "hooks into" both the upward anti-clockwise spiraling, and downward clockwise spiraling energies. Individually, these energies are shown by the swasticas, in their left-handed & right handed varieties. This may possibly become clear if you think of a Star of David in three, not two dimensions, but in any case, it brings up too many issues for most of us. Collectively, the fusion of these energies (plus a small amount of a mysterious third force) is responsible for all physical manifestation, including our individual incarnations. So there might be a reason why the I Ching has six lines, not four or five or seven or eight. If each number is a door to specific place, then six may be the door to creative manifestation itself. Can the lines of the hexagram be redrawn as a Star of David, and if so, what can the various straight & broken lines in the Star tell us? What if we incorporate that into the Kabalistic Tree of Life, as broken/unbroken links between the various centers?

The odd thing I find about astrology is that so few people learn much tolerance from it.

That's a simple matter. I had it resolved long ago. Astrology is unique in the way that it exploits the mind & brain, almost always before the brain is ready for it. The brain under mental duress is almost always crabby. Mind & brain are two different things. Simple tests have been devised to help the individual tell one from the other, though at the moment they are distant in my memory.

Dave