Hooey Thoth Astrology
cheekyinchworm said:
So, you think modern Astrology has devolved into something you consider to be hooey, and that modern Astrologers by and large dismiss what you consider to be a more authentic and valid astrology. One which might be described as "magical".
[Ah what the heck, I'll just stick it here.]
After re-reading the material I thought it better to just explain what I mean in different words.
I believe astrology was and still is, in most places and throughout most times and in most cultures a system related to the movements and positions of stars and heavenly or celestial bodies. That is, it is a system that uses a direct and real image of the heavens as they appear, however they may appear in time and varied cultures or, as some say, they used a sidereal system, based on stars and constellations and their positions in the sky.
Tropical western astrology does not do this, it uses signs. I wont go further into this as this is too far off into astrology, except to say that many western astrologers are adamant that astrology does not use constellations nor stars but ‘signs’ (except for one star - the Sun) yet every definition of astrology I find it talks about using the stars and constellations. As well as saying hooey to this I can see the benefit of signs in calculating an Earth based seasonal system but for me it does not fill the widespread and current understanding of most people regarding what Astrology actually is, nor does it compare with a multitude of other cultural systems from the present or past, nor is it exclusively suitable to my uses, especially in ritual.
See BoT p.27 where Crowley says:
(Various confusing things about signs and constellations, seeming to interchange them, including) “When one says that the Sun enters the Sign of Aries, one means that if a straight line were drawn from the Earth to the Sun and prolonged to the Stars, that line would pass through the beginning of that constellation.” This only makes sense if you take it in the context of G.D. astrology where; “ … the tarot method of reckoning from the star named Regulus has, it will be seen, the effect of making the Signs and the Constellations coincide.” (‘The Tree of Life as Projected in a Solid Sphere.’ Note by S.R.M.D. Para 4.)
Now what sort of astrology are we talking about in the Thoth deck? There are lots of suggestions that the astrology of the Thoth deck is based on the astrology of the GD system and hence, GD Tarot deck [Crowley attributing Court cards to signs (?) or constellations on the ecliptic AND part of another constellation off the ecliptic (e.g. Knight of Wands – part of Hercules, Knight of Cups – part of Pegasus), the concept of Princesses sitting on Ace thrones about the North Pole. The cards ruling segments of the Earth starting at the Great Pyramid.]
Also see the charts in the back of the BoT, some seem like simplifications of the G.D. attributes. Yet the G.D. system goes on to attribute every constellation to a card by assigning the cards with ‘star groups’ e.g. “King of Cups. Rules from the Ecliptic to 45 deg North Latitude and from 20 deg of Aquarius to 20 deg of Pisces. Star Group. Body and tail of one of the Pisces and part of the band. Body and wings of Pegasus, head and arms of Andromeda, The Triangle, hand and left arm of Cassiopeia, the winged instep of Aries.”
It can be seen how the Thoth summary of the Knight of Cups seems to be a part of these attributions …. but not all of them.
One can see how it gets difficult when using those charts in a Thoth system, i.e. considering the changes Crowley made with the Thoth deck, often these changes seem not to be shown in the charts, partially shown in the charts and confusedly shown in the charts (e.g. I want to look up the colors for Aquarius, So I go to the chart on p.278 and see that Aquarius is Key Scale 28. I go to p. 279 – the Scales of Colour - Key Scale 28 = Scarlet red, red, brilliant flame and glowing red ??? – Ehhh? The charts on p.282 are presenting some rather interesting information with no real explanation anywhere (unless you have access to old Equinoxes or Golden Dawn material). Perhaps the whole process of the book was never completed properly and the source material was put together by someone without considerations of what was actually being said?).
So my question is; did Crowley know the difference between the 2 types of astrology or did he just assume that people didn’t, so why complicate the issue? (Most people … or the Astrological ‘layman’ believe that if they ‘are an Aries’ then the Sun was in the Constellation of Aries when they were born … it probably wasn’t – as the signs are nearly 28 degrees out (and one sign is 30 degrees) from the constellations. Although, as quoted above, Crowley says they are not – which is VERY strange (unless he was assuming the G.D. system) because Crowley must have known about the process that is causing this shift – the Precession of the Equinox – as his whole system is based on this precessional shift, generating the doctrine of successive ‘Aeons’ and ages of ‘World Initiation.’
Maybe Crowley WAS a good astrologer; he might have been great with the G.D. astrology, he might have also been able to draw up a Buddhist or Hindu horoscope (all Sidereal systems which calculate for equinoctial precession) maybe when it came time to do the astrology for Thoth he used a simpler system … but why drop the ‘hints’ (?) about Pegasus, Hercules, Princesses attributions, etc.? What do people think when they read that?
All I know is, and my original point was (although maybe not made clearly) that if someone looked deep enough into the Thoth astrology, or Crowley’s presentation of astrology in the BoT, or even astrology (Western tropical) generally … and said this is hooey, I could agree with them.
However, yes, you are right, you will get a lot of understanding from it however you approach it and however you interpret those astrological signs on the Thoth Cards will increase your understanding of a card.
Could a comprehension of the Constellation Pegasus help you to understand the energies that make up the Knight of Cups? If not, then 20 deg Aquarius to 20 deg Pisces perhaps?
Too hard, ahhh what the heck, just see it as Cancer then…
So really, don’t worry about it; I’m just an old fusspot complaining about how many of these old magical systems will change into whatever is the current dominant magical paradigm or slowly disolve into the mish-mash of modern new age exoterica including numerous published attempts to do the same with the Thoth deck.
