Astrology does not match sky, conspiracy? (Page 2 of 2)

In the same thread of 'stalinization' of astrological knowledge, Blavatsky and Steiner point ot that Chaldean astrologists has intentionally inverted the names Venus and Mercury in order to keep the profane unknowledgable and even more ignorant of the true meaning of these planetary spheres. (However it does not pertain to astrology as we know it but to planetary spheres.) This was protection of initiatic knowledge. We must differenciate between righful concealment of mystery wisdom from the profane (don't give pearls to pigs) and the stalinization/suppression/rewriting of true occult knowledge by black magicians and space-time STS manipulators.

fixed Stars
-
Saturn
-
Jupiter
-
Mars
-
Sun (in the middle, joining the macrocosm of mars-jupiter-saturn to the microcosm of venus-mercury-moon)
-
Venus (Chaldeans called it Mercury. Occult Venus in the orbit of the physical planet that we call today Mercury) 
-
Mercury (Chaldeans called it Venus. Occult Mercury is in the orbit of the physical planet that we call today Venus)
-
Moon

The Earth is our conciousness passing through all the planetary spheres.

This is explained by Steiner in his cycle of lectures Microcosm/Macrocosm

Thus, in astronomy, we have mercury closest to the sun, then venus, then the earth (including moon), then mars, then jupiter, saturn, uranus, neptune, pluto.

But in astrology, the names of mercury and venus have been interverted:
thus in the macrocosm venus (that astronomists call mercury) is clostes to the sun, then there is mercury (the venus of astronomy) and then there is the moon. The microcosm is all what is between us earth and the sun. the macrocosm is between us earth and the fixed stars: mars, jupiter and saturn. Uranus Neptune and Pluto do not enter the picture in the old traditional astrology, but the discovery of these planets by astronomists coheres with new steps in human spiritual development (in the case of these three planets, it is linked to technoscientific development): electricity (Galvani) and uranus (end of XVIIIth century), magnetism (Maxwell) and Neptune (second half of XIXth century), nuclear/atomic power and Pluto in the 1930's.

One might also analyse the influence of solar Eclipses, like the one that happenned august 11 1999. According to anthroposophists, such solar eclipses opens up the Abyss pit, so evil can enter the world through this window, during the time the planet is in darkness. However, when evil manifests, progressive forces also have an opportunity to enter our hearts, When the veil is lifted, both powers, retarded and progressive gain access top earth and souls.

If you are interested in creating Astrology Charts in both topical and sidereal, the best Astrology program I know of is the Astrolog freeware. I have used it for years and it is the best. The author also provides interpretations and frequent updates.

It is on the web at

http://www.astrolog.org/astrolog.htm

On a personal note I have discovered that I seem to get a more accurate description of who I am with Sidereal Astrology, but you can try it out yourself and see how it works for you.

On the subject of topical being more about the seasons than the actual constilations, I remember that Sun Bear had a book out in the 1980s where he used the seasons to analyze a person's personality, so that might be an area to explore if you are so inclined. I think it was called Native American Astrology.

Hope this helps,

WizardT

Astrology is not about the stars, per se. When you look at the stars, you can approximate your present orientation on Gaea. When you're born, you are born on Gaea, not way off from some star, and what affects your soul are the energies of Gaea as they are organized at your time of birth. The nature of these energies can be extrapolated by looking at the stars in two ways, first in the sense that you understand precisely where Gaea is in relation to the Sun and its own axis, and secondly in relation to all other cosmic bodies. Remember that when you look up at stars, really you are seeing the light of the stars from billions of years in the past. If a star dies, in other words, its light will still shine in our night sky for years to come because it takes that long for the image to get to us (speed of light). Now if Gaea over the ages has rotated onto a slightly different axis, if its orbit has changed a bit, then what in the world does this matter? It's not as if our planet is fixed and the entire universe around us has moved a bit, screwing the whole process up... the energies that radiate from star to star, planet to planet, cosmic body to cosmic body, etc, they still come to Gaea on time as always, even though Gaea has moved a tad... so, what's the big deal? The specific constellations of the zodiac, in terms of drawing patterns in the stars ala connect-the-dots, this is merely symbolic of the nature of the respective influences of the astrological energies... astrology in zodiacal terms is a wealth of information independant from how the pattern of stars in the sky changes, operating rather in terms of archetypes of principals of universal creation... universal procession (r)evolves constantly in cyclical, zodiacal fasion.. astrology still *works*, although in the specific case of one's birth chart, perhaps particular shifts in Gaea's rotation need to be taken into consideration... I'm sure the good astrologers do take these things into consideration... but astrology is more than just birthcharts... i.e. just because our orbit shifts, it doesn't mean we miss the entrance into the Age of Aquarius come 2012.

So, just to clarify we are in agreement then.

The constellations were only every symbolic of the knowledge contained in the signs, the signs being archetypes of universal creation that can still to this day be extrapolated from the stars (which are different than in the past). So the constellation Scorpio came up *approximately* when the *specific* energy of that *archetype* took effect, that the nature of this energy may be symbolized metaphorically in the image of a Scorpion... this still holds true today even if the stars are placed differently, because it was only an analogy... we could make up new analogies today that accord with present constellations, but as you say, that would be impractical. I say that the constellations are approximate even though astrology is down to the minute, because clearly if a star off in the distance were moved one mile here or there, to us it would make virtually no difference, in terms of perspective.

The point I wanted to make was that the figures drawn in stars over the ecliptic aren't the point. the ecliptic itself is, when the round was decided they lined up with the areas of the ecliptic whose influence they were to represent.

Those places are the same, saggittari are born in the same part of the year, even if the stars behind the sun are no longer that constellation.

The constellations didn't define the zodiac, the zodiac suggested the constellations.