Skyscript Astrology Forum

As I think of it, the various auras are all part of the astral, which is itself the sixth body, counting downwards from God=1, Monad=2, etc. Therefore any attempt to impose "sixness" on it would automatically align it to its larger environment, showing us a bigger picture.

While one could imagine a "fiveness" to unlock the mental, or a "sevenness" for the physical, imposing sixness on the astral would give unique results, inasmuch as the astral is the seat of effective human consciousness.

I was once associated with clairvoyants who could help resolve questions like this, but now I must raise the questions & puzzle them out myself.

Dave

Hi Dave

Actually one could argue the essence of the I Ching is its eight trigrams. Beyond the basic division of yin and yang we have the eight trigram energies or Gods as the ancient Chinese no doubt perceived them. Many now think the broken or open lines of the I Ching go back to its divinatory orgins where ox or turtles bones were heated until cracks appeared. I don't think we in the west can be too superior about this coming as we do from a tradition that has its roots in liver divination.

These eight Trigrams appear everywhere in east asian culture from activities like Tai Chi, chinese medicine and of course Feng Shui or chinese geomancy. The trigrams even appear on the flag of South Korea! Although only four are represented for the four directions. The Chinese invented the compass and its eight points were synonymous with the trigrams. I have done quite a lot of work in comparing these to western astrological symbols. I was pleased to note Kim Farnell's book on the I Ching came up with very similar associations. Her book is worth having for its introduction (The I Ching Decision Maker). Then tackle the more substantial translations by Stephen Karcher who has re-emphasised the divinatory and shamanistic orgins of the I Ching. Karcher is a poet and has a very approachable writing style. He represents the other extreme from the conservative neo-confucian approach of the Wilhelm translation. Although I have been into the I Ching since my teens Karcher opened up a new dimension for me in understanding the I Ching in divinatory terms. Naturally it happened during a Neptune square to my ascendant!

I feel I may have been badly representing the sophisticated position of Geoffrey Cornelius. For anyone else still reading this thread who hasn't got around to reading his classic book 'The Moment of Astrology' take a look at this short article from him which first appeared in the Mountain Astrologer in 1998:

http://cura.free.fr/quinq/01gfcor.html

Mark

"I don't think we in the west can be too superior about this coming as we do from a tradition that has its roots in liver divination."

I agree.
And the liver is a Jupiter-Luna dimension.

However, the West functions largely and primarily under a solar construct, which is one geared towards manifesting things, externalizing and exposing to light of day for it to be considered true, real and of value.

The other side of this, eg. gestation, because it goes largely unseen is no less real.

The old traditions dealt with 3 sides of the coin in maintaining a balance.

Which one appeals I believe depends a lot on culture, culture = nature = latitude upon earth, which finds a parallel alignment within the celestial sphere.

No matter how global things become, local latitude is of prime significance, especially applicable for those of a scientific bent seeking to conduct experiments within clearly defined parameters.

"given the repetition & the "sixness" factor & properties of six itself,"

"one could argue the essence of the I Ching is its eight trigrams."

The ancient Babylonians had the 'Lunar Six' for predicting phenomena on the horizon (the horizon view), the lunar six being characteristic time intervals between Moon rise/set and Sun rise/set in the days around conjunction and opposition, collected over 60 consecutive months.

8 is also the 8 phases of the Moon.

The Chinese invented the compass and its eight points were synonymous with the trigrams.

I have not done enough work with the IChing, however if I remember rightly it's said the circular arrangement of the trigrams were found by studying the scales of a tortoise back.

A tortoise is representative of the bounds of nature's time, primarily Moon, the nocturnal dimension.

The Moon seems to have lost a certain significance in some modern astrological streams, it's still brought forward in horary tradition and was primary to ancient calendars.

Broken and unbroken - corporeal and incorporeal?

Inventing compasses involves an understanding of earth's magnetics, gravity etc upon which both Sun & Moon exert an influence, as does anything encircling earth or in range of the ecliptic. If I recall rightly, they also invented spaghetti, gunpowder and waged a war against importation and trafficking of drugs very early in the peace.

For the most part, much of western astrology today takes its messages from the planets (the intermediary bodies) and the 12-fold division starting with the 0 degree point of the ecliptic, an entrance to the earth plane, materialization.

Stars from which alignments were initially drawn are rarely factored in (although that's re-remerging) ... the alignments changing in cross-cultural transmission, and that from which the nature of things were initially divined was lost sight of.

In this respect, astrology and all that it's utilized might be thought to have become somewhat land-locked in places as instead of commencing with the unspoken name (eg. the all creative force/source) which resides both beyond and infuses the celestial sphere, containing or giving birth to all within it down to earth, it commences with the earth point.

But if the divine is considered to be the sanctity of the whole, it hasn't lost its universal connection, just perhaps something of its origins due to transmission.

As alignments drift and reduce, so do perceived connections with the divine via customs and various climes.

Free will is an interesting concept ... however freedom is directly related to responsibility. If society is reliant upon provision of life's basic necessities, such as water, by a third party, then freedom is contingent upon commercial supply. Commerce is also an outreach of one's clime. We have a choice in that we may choose not to drink, but that choice also has its ramifications for which we are responsible.

Divination as relates to the answering of a question in astrology I see as reliant upon how we perceive the order of nature's time and all it's representatives in relation to life upon earth at a particular locale ... the better the order is understood the more clear becomes that being divined for that particular person at that location.

We may not consciously register all the things we're actually playing a participatory role in while focusing on technique ... however, I think that's part of the purpose of technique, the discipline of focus which stills the mind from other distractions and opens up one's receptivity.

Communing with the divine involves some sort of grounding ... can help to avert motion sickness in traversing the high seas.

Good on you for bringing up the I Ching Mark, thats exactly what I thought when I read Dave's statement on divination.

Then tackle the more substantial translations by Stephen Karcher who has re-emphasised the divinatory and shamanistic orgins of the I Ching. Karcher is a poet and has a very approachable writing style. He represents the other extreme from the conservative neo-confucian approach of the Wilhelm translation. Although I have been into the I Ching since my teens Karcher opened up a new dimension for me in understanding the I Ching in divinatory terms. Naturally it happened during a Neptune square to my ascendant!

Ha! I actually just picked up Karchers book, "Total I Ching" about 2 months ago. Its a great commentary, but for interpretation I often synthesize his annotations and translation with the classic Willhelm. I have recently been studying the I Ching both as a divinatory device and as a "Grand ole book of Chinese wisdom", so to speak. For those of you who have never experiemented with it I highly suggest you do. It is a fabulous tool. And you are correct in that it does feel like you are talking with a person, it is a very personal oracle, and it doesn't beat around the bush. If you are wrong, it will tell you you are wrong, but it will also lead you to the right direction to realize the Dao of the situation. The Dao or "way" is essentially acting according to circumstances. If you always act correctly with the "way" you will always have good fortune. This isn't to say that bad things won't happen, for the true wisdom of the I Ching is that there is a time for all things, A time to reap and sow, weep and laugh, etc. The "superior man"(to use the confucian lingo) by using the wisdom of the I Ching will realize these things at the time and therfore stay connected to the Dao.

The I Ching is also supposedly the basis for the binary code. 01010101, Yin, Yang, Yin, Yang, Yin, Yang. Nothing could be more simple than two numbers, yet within it you can describe anything. According to Martin Schonberger in his book, "The Hidden Key to Life", he notes that the 64 hexagrams of the I Ching correspond exactly to the 64 DNA codons, the basic code of life.

Actually one could argue the essence of the I Ching is its eight trigrams. Beyond the basic division of yin and yang we have the eight trigram energies or Gods as the ancient Chinese no doubt perceived them.

In between the basic Yin/Yang seperation and the eight trigrams we have the four "Bigrams?", which are Yang/Yang, Yang/Yin, Yin/Yin, Yin/Yang.

The thing about the I Ching is that it teaches you that things are not set in stone. It will tell you how to act in order to follow the way, but you actually have to do it. For instance sometimes it will tell you that the correct way to bring success in whatever your query is to be still, at peace, don't force anything with the situation. If you go in guns blazing like a mad choleric the matter is sure to fail. So the bottom line still lies with you and your ability to be "firm and correct" and to "persevere" within the chaos of the situation. If you can't do these things, then you cannot follow the way, and you will be cut off. Trap! The way closes. But if you can summon the will to act in accordance with the way, "Good Fortune, nothing would not further. No Blame."

Anyway, I love the I Ching. Though it does feel a bit strange to base important life decisions on the flip of a few coins, I've had too many moments of understanding, comfort, and revelation though its use to ever not consult it on an important matter.

Oh and Uranus in the 12th is trining my Sun right now, for what its worth.

The paper on Buddhism, theurgy and divination...

http://www.astrozero.co.uk/articles/theravada.htm

that's been mentioned occasionally in this thread is going to be taken down in a day or two, so as not to upset the publishers. So if anyone wants a copy, get it now is the advice!

Thought this might also be of interest in view of what's been discussed in this thread.

http://www.biogeometry.com/english/quality.php

Kind regards,
TS

GarryP wrote:I just posted a paper which looks at the relationship between modern science (quantum physics and so on) and astrology, with a particular emphasis on astrology seen as divination. It was originally in Correlation earlier in the year.

The link is: http://www.astrozero.co.uk/articles/modern_science.htm

That's three enormous papers I've posted in January. Don't worry, I'm going to lie low for a long time after this...

The opinon of a Physicist:


I am (was) a quantum physicist. People which misuse quantum physic as I read in some of the link, should be forced to eat their own dog food, printed on A4 side, then spoon fed one crumpled sheet after the other.

What is said is meaningless, taken out of context. Nutty.

Idunno you take the small exit and say science isn't really your department. But frankly, wonder this : why keeping speaking of quantum physic, without saying what the quanta of they are speaking ? What wave function ? What energy level ? They aren't using ANYTHING from quantum physic, they are not applying ANYTHING to any macroscopic or microscopic system.

Quantum physic make pretty straightforward prediction. Even in the case of the Heisenberg uncertainly principle, a lot of experiment can be done. But some of the article (I did not read it all) misuse it as a way out to explain their own inability to get results.

The bottom line is that the article you cited (some) were junk. I bet the rest is of the same nature. ETA: No time to read it now, time for bed.

Hi Garry

this is what one of the rserachers told me about your article

It seems that nowadays quantum physics has come to the rescue of
people who foster ideas that are not in line with mainstream science.
The problem is that people who bring QP up usually have no idea what
QP is truly about. Therefore I can understand the anger of this
quantum physicist Because when he says that Garry is wrong in this,
then most probably this physicist is right

woodwater wrote:Hi Garry

this is what one of the rserachers told me about your article

It seems that nowadays quantum physics has come to the rescue of
people who foster ideas that are not in line with mainstream science.
The problem is that people who bring QP up usually have no idea what
QP is truly about. Therefore I can understand the anger of this
quantum physicist Because when he says that Garry is wrong in this,
then most probably this physicist is right

HI Woodwater,

I'm glad you posted the physicist's comments although it would be helpful if you identified who they were.

Basically, I agree with the view that all the recent chaos theory and quantum uncertainty along with the scourge of postmodernism have become convenient ideological cover for astrologers (and other new age adherents) who refuse to get results, possibly because they can't. The fact that science can't exactly predict the location of every particle with 100% certainty allows the astrologer to pretend that he is cut from the same cloth and that science is somehow catching up to astrology and producing a more coherent view of reality. This seems deluded to me since astrology can't predict at anywhere near Newtonian levels. Most of things we take for granted in the modern world, from cars to computers to ipods don't have anything to do quantum uncertainty. They all work because they are based on science's ability to predict outcomes. Astrology simply can't do that in its present form.

If I may get back to the original post, Garry, and address some of the points you are making in the Modern Science article.

Regarding the two models of astrology, p.12: I firmly believe that certain claims of astrology can be demonstrated using the scientific method. This doesn't deny the possibility of model 2 (astrology as divination), but argues against your statement under model 1 (astrology as empirical science):

So the challenge facing astrologers who adhere strictly to this model of astrology is to address the critique of Dean et al, which (given this model) they have to accept as largely valid. For instance, they would need to explain why astrology has not performed better in the tests so far conducted; why the lives of twins and time-twins do not follow more obviously similar courses; why different astrologers use very different systems of astrology; and so on. The task, so far as I can see, is impossible. And I would suggest that the astrological community should show far more gratitude than is normally evident [14] to Dean et al for demonstrating that this model of astrology is simply not viable as a complete explanation.

Let me state that I'm not an astrologer but merely a student in astrology, and that I don't necessarily adhere strictly to model 1 but have an interest in demonstrating that it is a viable model for parts of astrology. Nevertheless, I can address the criticism by Dean et al, and I do not subscribe to their current anti-astrology position at all. What I'm claiming is that some of astrology can be explained as an empirical science. I am privileged to my own research in that respect, which I hope to publish soon.

Why hasn't astrology performed better in the tests so far conducted? Dean et al answer this on p.7 of Recent Advances: the number of genuine researchers is very small; published astrological research is not true research; chaos of theories and techniques; preoccupation with complex areas; inadequate tools. Most if this still applies today, and only the last point has changed drastically with the availability of computers and astrological software. This however cannot compensate by itself for the other shortcomings. Answers to the other two questions are also implied here.

I disagree that the task to demonstrate astrology's validity scientifically is impossible. The road simply lies in the direction Dean et al have already outlined 30 years ago: more researchers will need to conduct genuine research using proper tools and methodology, concentrating on the simpler areas of astrology. The objection that astrology can only be tested by employing the entire arsenal of techniques is nonsense. Just because no-one so far has been able to demonstrate the effectiveness of signs, for example, it doesn't follow that signs do not operate in some fashion and that this cannot be shown using the scientific method. Even the great Michel Gauquelin fell into this trap of fallacious reasoning.

In due course, I will show one by one the efficacy of signs, houses, planets, aspects, etc, using the scientific method. Will my research be published in scientific journals? The odds are heavily against this, and such resistance to new ideas by the establishment (i.e. a priori rejection of the "impossible") has been one of the main obstacles to advance in areas outside of the overall scientific paradigm. Time will tell.

Whatever the outcome, we should never lose faith in worlds beyond the material, and astrology in a sense is a demonstration of this in my view. Which is an interesting paradox in itself because I do believe that the effects of a spiritual world on the material can be shown using "materialistic" means (i.e. using "scientific" methods - and this terminology, or the hijacking of the word science by the establishment, would be another fruitful topic for a philosophical article).

Jim Eshelman launched a new forum last autumn and there's a couple of especially interesting articles; the other of them discusses statistical research, the sidereal zodiac and the Gauquelins. If the things Eshelman says here are true, they are phenomenal evidence indeed of the validity of statistical research with signs.

http://www.solunars.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=60

Thanks for bringing this other forum to our attention, Papretis. I've quickly looked at the articles you cited, and they do not qualify as serious research, at least not in the way they are being presented. It's not possible to tell from the text what the figures represent; there are no control groups; there is no control for astronomical artifacts, etc. It may be an honest effort, and there can even be something to it, but this is not apparent from the articles.

I'm also strongly of the opinion that the focus of astrological research should move away from rehashing the Gauquelin data to presenting original projects. As we have witnessed for example with the dialog between Dean et al vs. Ertel et al on especially the Mars effect, the discussion quickly degenerates into a shouting match and focuses on semantics, the writers' motives, etc, rather than talking about the real issues at hand. Which is not really constructive to creating a new world from the ashes of modern astrology.