Is it true traditional astrologers exclude modern planets?

[Michael]

The assumption that traditional astrologers don't use modern planets doesn't hold up to scrutiny. How many traditional astrologers do you know that ignore the modern planets?

Only Vedic astrologers do this, from what I have seen.

Consider preeminent scholar of Medieval astrology, Robert Zoller, uses the outer planets. Skyscript founder Deborah Houlding also uses them.

Same with Hellenistic astrology, many are using the outer planets, like the scholar Chris Brennan.

Renowned hellenistic astrologer Demetra George uses asteroids.

P.D. Maybe John Frawley could be the exception to the rule, but traditional astrologers are using (and have been using) modern planets.

[Moved this thread from the Traditional Astrology board. - Moderator]

 

[JUPITERASC]

The assumption that traditional astrologers don't use modern planets doesn't hold up to scrutiny. How many traditional astrology do you know that ignore the modern planets?

Only Vedic astrologers do this, from what I have seen.

Consider preeminent scholar of Medieval astrology, Robert Zoller, uses the outer planets. Skyscript founder Deborah Holding also uses them.

Same with Hellenistic astrology, many are using the outer planets, like the scholar Chris Brennan.

Renowned hellenistic astrologer Demetra George uses asteroids.

P.D. Maybe John Frawley could be the exception to the rule, but traditional astrologers are using (and have been using) modern planets.

Note that our Traditional Astrology board is for
- and I quote our rules:
For discussions on Traditional Astrology only.
Note: Typically, traditional astrology is defined as using techniques developed prior to 1700
by astrologers from the Hellenistic, Persian, Hebrew, and Renaissance eras.
Specifically it relies on Ptolemaic aspects
sextile, trine, square, opposition and conjunction
and excludes modern planets
Neptune, Uranus and Pluto
non Ptolemaic aspects, as well as any asteroids.
The focus is less on what would be considered modern psychological chart interpretation and more on prediction.
Members who wish to explore a combination of traditional and modern ideas
should feel free to start a new thread
in an appropriate forum for further discussion.

 

[Michael]

Thanks, but that's not how traditional astrology is practiced today. It only applies to Vedic astrology, but this forum is not about that.

 

[Oddity]

Some astrologers who use traditional practices use the outer planets to a limited degree. Many of us do not. We're still all modern astrologers, really though, we live now, not 1200 years ago or more.

We don't talk about them in this forum, because they really aren't a part of traditional astrology, and the rule to not talk about them in this part of the forum came about because a lot of people felt they had to troll us as some kind of inferior species for not using outer planets.

If you want to talk about the use of outer planets in trad astrology, you can do it in one of the general astrology forums, just not here, because it never ends well.

Cheers.

 

[IleneK]

Thanks, but that's not how traditional astrology is practiced today. It only applies to Vedic astrology, but this forum is not about that.

Hi, Michael.
That is how traditional astrology is formally practiced today among well-known traditional astrologers, such as Robert Hand and Robert Zoller.

As an aside, Rob Hand did a talk a few years ago about reestablishing the links between traditional and modern astrology that be of interest to you?

The link is:

http://theastrologypodcast.com/2013/12/09/robert-hand-reconciling-modern-traditional-astrology/

Wishing you the best,

 

[JUPITERASC]

Hi, Michael.
That is how traditional astrology is formally practiced today
among well-known traditional astrologers, such as Robert Hand
and Robert Zoller.

since 2004 Robert Zoller himself has not given lessons for the past fourteen years

.....Please do, because it doesn't sound like any Robert Zoller I know.

It sounds exactly like Zoller, but it depends which Zoller do you actually know?!

Omni

so who is 'the real Zoller'???

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/forums/v...&start=0&sid=e1a4c24f0e79c13a29859555cf034248
discusses Zoller's illness/health issues 20 June 2010
the most recent post was made there five years ago on 24 August 2012

i.e.

QUOTE:
Deborah Houlding:

'….based on my knowledge of a number of astrological associations
that were made with New Library around the same period of time
my belief is that Robert Zoller made a business deal with them
and then later regretted it
but was bound by the contract.

So I think it's a legitimate site, with a legitimate right to sell his work,
but I'm pretty certain that Robert Zoller is no longer happy about the arrangement
and so no longer endorses the product.
I'm speculating
but its not hard for anyone involved to give a more official clarification if I'm wrong.....'


Chris Brennan:
'….from talking to Zoller
the issue is he hasn't been paid
for any of the products that have been sold through New Library
for years.

So, while they have legitimate right to sell his work
because he signed a contract
Zoller himself is no longer involved
and is not receiving any profits from his courses or books.
I don't know New Library's story.

That being the case, anyone who signs up for the course through them
is being taught with Zoller's materials
and they are basically learning from his course
but they are not being taught by Robert Zoller himself.....'


Clelia Romano:
'....Robert Zoller wrote the CMA and DMA at request of New Library,
particularly Luke Andrews, they both corrected issues in Tools and Techniques.

Luke Andrews studied traditional astrology
but astrology is not his first interest
although he is skilful scholar - he corrected my examination test -
writing important things besides all my answers, and I have them in my mind still now.

Luke Andrews corrects the examination tests
and Zoller himself confirmed personally in 2007
that these were elaborated by Zoller.
I chose not to opt for tuition 2004,
because I heard that Zoller was not stable to give lessons since that time....'

As an aside, Rob Hand did a talk a few years ago about reestablishing the links between traditional and modern astrology that be of interest to you?

The link is:

http://theastrologypodcast.com/2013/12/09/robert-hand-reconciling-modern-traditional-astrology/

Wishing you the best,

 

[aquarius7000]

Hi,

Michael, most traditional Astrologers do not use the outer and impersonal planets, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto as far as rulership of signs goes because the outer planets do not fit in to the table of essential dignities (you can google the table).

Whilst some work completely without the outer planets, others consider only their placement in the natal chart and how they impact (by making aspects) the personal planets during their transits. For instance, I do not consider the outer planets as far as sign rulers go and also not in Horary astrology, but I do look at them in natal astrology just as explained above.

There are also, in the meanwhile, some astrologers that assign multi planets, stars, asteroids and whatnot as rulers to each sign (often without really knowing why), which is mind-boggling, at least for me.

 

[IleneK]

I referred to Rob Zoller as a traditional astrologer.
I regret that the connection between what I said and your comments is lost on me. Whether Zoller teaches or not, we can read his seminal contributions from Project Hindsight.
Would you mind to clarify what you are trying to suggest about Robert Zoller, JA?
Thanks,

since 2004 Robert Zoller himself has not given lessons for the past fourteen years



so who is 'the real Zoller'???

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/forums/v...&start=0&sid=e1a4c24f0e79c13a29859555cf034248
discusses Zoller's illness/health issues 20 June 2010
the most recent post was made there five years ago on 24 August 2012

i.e.

QUOTE:
Deborah Houlding:

'….based on my knowledge of a number of astrological associations
that were made with New Library around the same period of time
my belief is that Robert Zoller made a business deal with them
and then later regretted it
but was bound by the contract.

So I think it's a legitimate site, with a legitimate right to sell his work,
but I'm pretty certain that Robert Zoller is no longer happy about the arrangement
and so no longer endorses the product.
I'm speculating
but its not hard for anyone involved to give a more official clarification if I'm wrong.....'


Chris Brennan:
'….from talking to Zoller
the issue is he hasn't been paid
for any of the products that have been sold through New Library
for years.

So, while they have legitimate right to sell his work
because he signed a contract
Zoller himself is no longer involved
and is not receiving any profits from his courses or books.
I don't know New Library's story.

That being the case, anyone who signs up for the course through them
is being taught with Zoller's materials
and they are basically learning from his course
but they are not being taught by Robert Zoller himself.....'


Clelia Romano:
'....Robert Zoller wrote the CMA and DMA at request of New Library,
particularly Luke Andrews, they both corrected issues in Tools and Techniques.

Luke Andrews studied traditional astrology
but astrology is not his first interest
although he is skilful scholar - he corrected my examination test -
writing important things besides all my answers, and I have them in my mind still now.

Luke Andrews corrects the examination tests
and Zoller himself confirmed personally in 2007
that these were elaborated by Zoller.
I chose not to opt for tuition 2004,
because I heard that Zoller was not stable to give lessons since that time....'

 

[Chrysalis]

**Shocked** I never knew up until just reading this thread, that Modern Astrology was so frowned upon on this forum.

Even in horary i a few times have noticed outers having a say in the chart, especially uranus. In a recent pregnancy chart on here, moon had just left a conjunction with uranus (plus other aspects) when she found out she was indeed out of the blue pregnant.

So were not allowed to discuss outers on AW at all ? is it against the forum rules ?

 

[JUPITERASC]

I referred to Rob Zoller as a traditional astrologer.
I regret that the connection between what I said and your comments is lost on me.
Whether Zoller teaches or not, we can read his seminal contributions from Project Hindsight.
Would you mind to clarify what you are trying to suggest about Robert Zoller, JA?
Thanks,

Zoller is bound by a contract he regrets he made with New Library
and
Zoller DOES NOT ENDORSE NEW LIBRARY products
and
Zoller does not endorse the course New Library are using Zoller's name to sell

Issue is that

Zoller has not been paid for the products sold through New Library for years
and
Zoller has not taught since 2004
due to illness
Anyone doing the New Library course is not being taught personally by Zoller
Zoller does not respond to questions asked by students on the New Library course
Zoller has not updated the New Library course for at least ten years
so the New Library course does not reflect Zoller's current views

Zoller's diploma course is available basically from two sources

one source IS endorsed by Zoller
the other IS NOT endorsed by Zoller

New Library source IS NOT endorsed by Zoller

The alternative course is very expensive indeed
when compared to the price of the New Library course
and is available at this link and IS endorsed by Zoller http://virginastrology.com/library/shop

 

[Oddity]

New Library shut down a couple of years ago, so it's all kind of a non-issue now.

Ilene, none of this has any bearing on the issue to hand.

Zoller is bound by a contract he regrets he made with New Library
and
Zoller DOES NOT ENDORSE NEW LIBRARY products
and
Zoller does not endorse the course New Library are using Zoller's name to sell

Issue is that

Zoller has not been paid for the products sold through New Library for years
and
Zoller has not taught since 2004
due to illness
Anyone doing the New Library course is not being taught personally by Zoller
Zoller does not respond to questions asked by students on the New Library course
Zoller has not updated the New Library course for at least ten years
so the New Library course does not reflect Zoller's current views

Zoller's diploma course is available basically from two sources

one source IS endorsed by Zoller
the other IS NOT endorsed by Zoller

New Library source IS NOT endorsed by Zoller

The alternative course is very expensive indeed
when compared to the price of the New Library course
and is available at this link and IS endorsed by Zoller http://virginastrology.com/library/shop

 

[Oddity]

WTH????

In case you haven't noticed, AW is full of modern astrologers. The traditional forum is for traditional astrology. That's all. If you don't like traditional astrology, stay out of the tiny bit of AW that is devoted to it.

**Shocked** I never knew up until just reading this thread, that Modern Astrology was so frowned upon on this forum.

Even in horary i a few times have noticed outers having a say in the chart, especially uranus. In a recent pregnancy chart on here, moon had just left a conjunction with uranus (plus other aspects) when she found out she was indeed out of the blue pregnant.

So were not allowed to discuss outers on AW at all ? is it against the forum rules ?

 

[Chrysalis]

WTH????

In case you haven't noticed, AW is full of modern astrologers. The traditional forum is for traditional astrology. That's all. If you don't like traditional astrology, stay out of the tiny bit of AW that is devoted to it.

Ermmm whats with the "WTH", i was only stating that this thread seems to be so against outer planets, like as though they should NEVER be used at all.

I use both so i can skip around wherever i want thanks.

 

[Chrysalis]

just not here, because it never ends well.

Yes you said it oddity

 

[Oddity]

Again, this is the trad forum. Read the rules at the top. It doesn't say you can't discuss outer planets anywhere on AW, just that you can't discuss them here.

Do you lack reading comprehension? I ask as you've been here for some months talking about outer planets, as do lots of other people, did you think it was suddenly disallowed?

Just not in this part of the forum.

 

[Chrysalis]

Again, this is the trad forum. Read the rules at the top. It doesn't say you can't discuss outer planets anywhere on AW, just that you can't discuss them here.

Do you lack reading comprehension? I ask as you've been here for some months talking about outer planets, as do lots of other people, did you think it was suddenly disallowed?

Just not in this part of the forum.

What do you mean i've been here for months asking about outer planets, not to my knowledge i haven't, i use outers scarcely and have hardly ever asked about them on this forum.

Do i lack reading comprehension...i actually don't no.

Traditionalists, why you feel the need to disregard another 3 planets just because they were discovered later on, anyway is beyond me.

 

[JUPITERASC]

**Shocked** I never knew up until just reading this thread
that Modern Astrology was so frowned upon on this forum.

on the contrary, Traditional non-use of outers is frowned on
as is clear from a reading of this thread

Here's my 2 cents (which in today's monetary standards, as well as here, isn't worth much...)

If a poster is interested in modern interpretations/discussions only, why does he not have to specify that in the title of the thread? As opposed to someone who is learning/reading using traditional/classical/hellenistic methods needing to make such a distinction? I understand that both modern and traditional astrology use the same or similar charts, but the actual methodology, and even the planets, points, and other esoteric critera used are not the same. Having been a member here for only 5 1/2 months, I can say that the overall feeling, or "vibe" of this forum is overwhelmingly biased toward modern astrology. This is neither good nor bad, just an observation. I recently posted to a thread asking a question about whether or not the ruler of the 12th and 1st could possibly be the same, and diplomatically suggested that some astrologers would consider one instance in which this could occur. A non-diplomatic, anti-traditional response negated that supposition.

The point of this is to quite simply ask, is AW geared toward modern astrology, and should some of us (as has been recommended) look for more traditional based forums to belong to?

tsmall posted that December 2011
six years ago

Even in horary i a few times have noticed outers having a say in the chart, especially uranus. In a recent pregnancy chart on here, moon had just left a conjunction with uranus (plus other aspects) when she found out she was indeed out of the blue pregnant.

So were not allowed to discuss outers on AW at all ? is it against the forum rules ?

Outers are irrelevant ONLY on Traditional board
We have not always had a Traditional Forum
Traditional Forum was created SPECIFICALLY because

I think having just one tiny forum subsection would let us go more in-depth
and members (especially eclectics) could learn more.
We have Vedic and Horary and Chinese and all sorts of other stuff.
I know trad uses the same chart
but people think the forums are only for modern
and generally discourage trad.
If we had a trad section that'd be harder for them to do.

then I commented that

There are no specifically Traditional Astrology areas
therefore Modern Astrologers have more space on this forum.
When Traditional Astrologers post opinions concerning Traditional Astrology
then Modern Astrologers immediately heatedly disagree
- hence 'the fighting' which causes the work that you mentioned for the Moderators.
If there were a Traditional Astrology sub-forum
then Traditional Astrologers would have equal place to articulate their views.

and then on Christmas Day 2011 wilsontc gifted the forum with
a Traditional astrology subforum

All,

You make good arguments.

I agree
and have created a Traditional Astrology subforum
in the "Other Astrology" forum.

This subforum is only for Traditional Astrology discussions
(e.g., it is not for comparing Traditional Astrology to Modern Astrology
Modern Astrology interpretations, etc.).
If you see something in the Traditional Astrology subforum that is NOT Traditional Astrology
please report it to the Moderator Team.

Merry Christmas!

Tim

Cool, nice Christmas pressie

Merry Christmas.

It is a nice surprise.
Thanks to Tim and congratulations to Rebel Uranian. Merry Christmas all around.

Definitely a most generous Christmas pressie, thank you very much!
Peace on all astrological forums and on Earth
live long and prosper... beam to new location...
landing party - out

So in theory I hope this works,

like I said if Trad stay off Moderns thread which is the majority here

The "majority versus minority us and them" mindset is unhelpful. The point is that astrologers when posting on the Traditional sub forum use Traditional astrological techniques and obviously, astrologers when posting on Modern threads use Modern techniques as previously said - anything other than that is ostracism

There are members of this community whose interests are eclectic and who therefore delineate using Modern as well as Traditional techniques and IMO I would infer there to be no problem with any astrologer – Traditional or otherwise – posting comments on the Traditional sub forum when demonstrating exclusively Traditional techniques. Likewise, I would infer there to be no problem with any astrologer - Traditional or otherwise - posting useful comments on Modern Astrological threads, when demonstrating exclusively Modern Astrological techniques.

As I understand the situation, there is no “us and them” situation and therefore the new Traditional sub-forum is simply intended as a place where Traditional Astrological techniques may be discussed freely: at the same time, I would infer that this astrological community remains a place for exclusively Modern astrological comment on exclusively Modern Astrological threads. Therefore Traditional and Modern each have their exclusive areas where techniques relevant to each may be discussed freely by proponents of either methodology.

At the same time, it seems reasonable to infer that other areas of the forum provide areas for more general discussions in which useful contrasts without rancour could lead to a learning process where both Traditional and Modern astrologers benefit.

The difference is
that one can practice "traditional" astrology without using "modern" techniques

but one cannot practice "modern" astrology without using "traditional" techniques.

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43946

Thank you Tim!

I think a major problem with the "traditional" versus "modern" debate here is due to some people who refer to themselves as "Modern Astrologers". I see them giving advice based on nothing but a rising sign or single aspect in a persons chart. I practice traditional but don't think that modern techniques are so simple and misleading, (I certainly hope they're not). As an example..I recently read a post from a senior member giving medical advice based on a persons rising sign. That is scary! I guess the best advice is to question everything here. If someone refers to themselves as a "modern" or "traditional" astrologer it means nothing. They may, in fact, not be an astrologer at all.

 

[JUPITERASC]

Ermmm whats with the "WTH", i was only stating that this thread seems to be so against outer planets, like as though they should NEVER be used at all.

I use both so i can skip around wherever i want thanks.

Not on the traditional board

What do you mean i've been here for months asking about outer planets, not to my knowledge i haven't, i use outers scarcely and have hardly ever asked about them on this forum.

Do i lack reading comprehension...i actually don't no.

Traditionalists, why you feel the need to disregard another 3 planets
just because they were discovered later on, anyway is beyond me.

Traditional means Traditional

 

[Chrysalis]

Yes i get your point/s but i just don't understand why such a big disagreement/divide with regards to this, its stupid.

I'm just assuming there must have been a few disputes in the past, hence now different sections of the forum for traditional/modern.

When really they should be able to combine, they are all planets after all.

 

[JUPITERASC]

Huh? So what?
What point does your extensive listing of other person’s comments contribute to the particular subject at hand?
And what does Zoller’s business deals, failed or otherwise, have to do with his being a traditional astrologer?

read my comments the answer is there