OCCULTISM & THE STARS
DION FORTUNE
Issued
as an early reminder of the Dion Fortune seminar at Glastonbury on 24th
September 2016.
For
programme and booking details see Company of Avalon website.
The
following text is taken from letters to
students by Dion Fortune in 1942/3. Also published as part of ‘Principles of
Hermetic Philosophy’ by Dion Fortune & Gareth Knight (Thoth Publications
1999).
It is no intention of mine to add to
the extensive literature dealing with astrological interpretation but to
examine the basis on which the whole elaborate superstructure rests.
Astrological prediction has had some notable successes, but it has also had
much more notable and frequent failures. Nevertheless, the fact that it has
scored many successes beyond those attributable to the law of averages or of
chance means that there is ‘something in it’; not, perhaps, as much in it as
its more ardent exponents would have us believe, but not, at any rate, the
absolute vacuum its denouncers declare. Therefore it is worthy of serious
investigation by serious thinkers.
The only type of investigation of
any value is that which deals with percentages of accuracy over a large number
of cases. Such an investigation was conducted by a well known paper upon the
predictions concerning national affairs, and especially the turn of the war,
appearing week by week in the columns of its contemporaries, and the results
were such as to discourage most comprehensively any serious attention to such
methods of diagnosis as an alternative to common sense, or even guesswork. {The
investigation was probably that featured in ‘Picture Post’ in September 1941,
which drew up a table of spectacular failures in the accuracy of newspaper
astrological predictions over the previous two years. However, the errors were,
without exception, failures to forecast catastrophes. Whether or not the
astrological columnists foresaw the worst or not, it needs to be remembered
that the government of the time was
keenly anxious to preserve the morale of the civilian population. The
astrological columns were regarded as a means whereby to keep the population
optimistic. Indeed had they gone so far as to predict any disasters they would
have been contravening Defence Regulations by spreading alarm and despondency.
GK.}
One astrologer, and one only, has
been noted as scoring any high degree of reliability {probably Edward Lyndoe, who I recall greatly impressed
my mother – which was not easy! GK} and he, unlike his fellows, does not,
curiously enough, give the astrological data on which his opinions are based;
the irresistible conclusion being that his data is not astrological, but of a
much less celestial nature, being derived from ‘information received’ and not
from calculations based on the movements of the heavenly bodies.
On the other hand, there are few
people who have not had in their own experience firsthand knowledge of personal
predictions of remarkable accuracy and outstandingly good delineations of
character made by purely astrological means. Equally, however, I have observed
over a period of years the activities of an astrological friend who never
successfully predicted anything, but could always demonstrate most convincingly
why any given incident had happened after it had occurred, and the demonstrations
were genuinely convincing. There in black and white in her textbooks were the
statements, and there on the chart were the positions of the planets. Her
trouble had been that the textbooks contained such a wide choice of factors
among which as selection had to be made as to invalidate all accuracy until
events themselves indicated which factor was effectual. Once that was
ascertained, it was possible to work an astrological divination backwards in
very evidential manner. This statement is not made in any spirit of irony, but
in order to indicate that there is something in astrology if we only knew
better how to extract it in a pure state.
It may be replied that the skill of
the astrologer is the essential extractive, and that astrology is an art rather
than a science. This proposition may in actual practice prove unanswerable, but
it is not a very satisfactory position. If we are compelled to accept it, then
astrology is in the same position as medicine in the days of Galen, of which
Kipling aptly said: ‘Half of their remedies cured you dead; Most of their
doctrines were quite untrue.’ Much of the early success of homeopathy was due
to the fact that the smallness of the dose avoided drug-poisoning in an age
accustomed to massive dosage, and the consequent drastic after effects. For the
same reason the sceptics are justified in condemning the practice of astrology
because of its disturbing and debilitating effect on great numbers of those who
resort to it. Greater knowledge, however, may reveal the real significance and
proper limitations of astrology, together with factors not as yet taken into
the reckoning when casting horoscopes and which may be accountable for the
uncertainty of the results.
Astrology labours under the added
misfortune of being based in the first place upon a geocentric concept of the
cosmos wherein the heavenly bodies circle around a fixed and flat earth, and in
the second place by the fact that the constellations composing the Zodiacal
Belt have in the course of ages gradually shifted their positions relative to
the earth, so that they no longer occupy the positions assigned them in the
astrological calculations. Nevertheless, the fact remains that accurate
divinations can be made despite these seemingly insuperable obstacles. As
Galileo said when forced to withdraw his statement concerning the movement of
the earth around the sun, ‘Nevertheless, it moves.’ Our conclusion then must be
there is something in astrology, but that the accepted theories of its basis
are not wholly correct. Let us then see whether we can formulate a theory which
will serve to explain the known facts and rule out the sources of error that
render its operations so notoriously unreliable.
Not all astrologers are occultists,
but it is in the occult doctrines that we find certain useful clues to the real
nature of the celestial influences. Examining astrology in the light of these,
we find that many discrepancies are explained and the missing factors
indicated.
Esoteric tradition declares that
different phases of evolution took place on the different planets, and we may
not unreasonably conclude that the kind of development that took place on a
planet determined its ‘temperament’. Into the question of ‘temperament’ or aura
of planets and the phases of cosmic evolution I cannot enter in detail in these
pages, but must presume a knowledge of
them on the part of my readers, or failing that, refer them to recognised
authorities such as Mme. Blavatsky’s ‘Secret Doctrine’ or the many
popular derivatives based thereon. Some information will also be found in my ‘Mystical
Qabalah’. Students of the subject are agreed upon its broad principles, and
I do not feel obliged to re-argue them before proceeding to the discussion of
the matter in hand. Such re-argument could not be satisfactory unless conducted
at considerable length, and would involve the introduction of too much matter
irrelevant to our topic to make it a practical proposition. Unless, therefore,
the reader is prepared to concede my esoteric propositions, the consideration
cannot be pursued, so I shall only write for those who can. The rest must
either seek the evidence where it is set out at length or abandon the quest for
truth in my company.
Esoteric philosophy also declares
that every organism has an aura or field of psycho-magnetic emanations surrounding
it. It will be noted that I use the term organism, not living creature, for to
the esotericist all existence is life in one form or another and there is no
such thing as inanimate matter. On this basis, then, it may be concluded that
the heavenly bodies have auras of varying characters, and that the study of
their nature, changes and radius is not without either interest or practical
value.
Let us consider first of all the
solar system as a whole. It is believed to have condensed out of a solar nebula
that occupied vastly more space than is contained within even the orbit of the
outermost planet, but that the nearest fixed star is at so great a distance
from our sun that even the vast extent of their mutual nebulae when they were
at the nebulous stage of their evolution did not interfere with each other.
Most probably matter in a nebulous condition was at one period of evolutionary
time spread evenly through space, and the nebulae, and the stars and constellations
into which they subsequently condensed, arose through the condensation of this
tenuous, amorphous pre-matter around different centres of attraction. The why
and how of this process concerns astronomy rather than astrology, so we will
not pursue its investigation, as it cannot aid our understanding save as a
background lending perspective. Nevertheless it is useful to assume that the
line of demarcation between our solar system and its next door neighbour in the
vast fields of space is the cosmic watershed, as it were, along which the airy
particles of pre-matter divided, some going one way and some another as the
process of attraction and condensation began to make itself felt among them.
We have no data as to whether
magnetic or psychic influences from one stellar system cross the gulf to
another, but as their light comes to us, it is not unreasonable to conclude
that other influences may do so, even though unobserved and unrecorded by us. Such
influences, in order to pass unobserved by modern science must either be so
subtle as to be negligible for all practical purposes, or so closely correlated
with other phenomena as to have been confused with them. The distinction is an
academic one, therefore, so far as the bearing of astrology on human life is
concerned, and we may safely leave the matter unargued in our present
investigation, it is one of the background factors which we may from time to
time need to refer to in order to gain perspective or use as markers in the
cosmic scheme.
For practical purposes, then, let us
take the solar system as an interacting unit consisting of the Sun and its
planets, and so far as earth life is concerned, with special reference to our
satellite the Moon. Astrology, as an empirical science of practical experience,
declares that the planets influence each
other by virtue of their temperaments and according to their positions relative
to each other in their circuits, and that their influence, thus modified and
permuted, affects our earth. We shall probably express the position with
greater accuracy and relevancy if we take this influence to be psychic rather
than physical and regard it as exerted by the aura of the planets rather than
by their light-rays, for the cloudy sky is not taken into account in casting a
horoscope, though it has to be taken into account in reckoning the ultra violet
rays that reach us from the sun. Let us assume, then, that the Earth has an
aura, and the planets have auras, and that these interpenetrate each other, and
the sum total of the auric influences at a given spot in the solar system
determine the psychic atmosphere of that spot. Some emanations would reinforce
each other, some would modify each other, and some would neutralise each other.
Consequently for beings living on the surface of the earth the calculations of
such influences would naturally be geocentric, and the heliocentric nature of
the solar system would not need to be taken into account, thus disposing of one
great objection to the unscientific nature of astrology.
In addition to the planets, however,
the influence of the Zodiac is taken into account by astrology. The Zodiac
consists of the circle of constellations surrounding the solar system, and in
considering the influences attributed to the twelve segments into which it is
divided, we should ask ourselves whether these influences are due to emanations
proceeding from the constellations which give their names to the twelve
segments, or whether the emanations really proceed from the Sun and create
bands of psychic atmosphere in the earth’s orbit. In the days when the
geocentric theory was held, it was taken for granted that the influences
emanated from the constellations in question, but although I am not prepared to
be dogmatic on this point, it appears to me that some of the difficulties
presented by the translation of a geocentric philosophy of astrology into the
heliocentric one demanded by modern astronomical knowledge are solved if we
look upon the constellations of the Zodiac as markers in the heavens against
whose background we see the sun as we circle round it, rather as sources of
influence. Neither theory affects the practical work of judging horoscopes, but
the theory of solar as opposed to stellar emanations enable us to construct a
philosophy of astrology that does no violence to astronomy.
Finally there remains the factor of
the houses of the heavens to be considered. Viewed from the heliocentric
standpoint, these are not segments of the sky at all, but represent the angle
of incidence of the various influences upon any given spot on the earth’s
surface. This presents no difficulty if considered from the point of view of
esoteric philosophy, for according to its doctrines, the Earth, like all other
beings, possesses an aura which consists of several layers, it also has a magnetic
core, and if the analogy of the auras of other beings is any guide to us, there
will be centres of specialised activity in that core. Influences reaching a
particular spot on the Earth’s surface will then have passed through a grater
or less depth of aura according to the angle at which they enter it. If they
come from low down on the horizon, they will pass through much more of the
Earth’s aura, and enter each layer at a different angle from that which will
prevail if they fall directly upon the earth’s surface from the mid-heaven. We
well know the difference in appearance between the red sun of dawn or dusk and
the golden sun of midday, the difference being solely due to the depth of
atmosphere through which its rays travel. Moreover, the emanations of planets
that are below the horizon will also have to pass through the dense body of the
earth. There is no intrinsic difficulty in conceiving this, in view of what we
know of X-rays and radium. We can quite conceive, however, that certain
emanations would fail to penetrate, and that it is probable that it is only the
more subtle that would get through. The view of some astrologers that planets
below the horizon act on the subconscious levels of the mind would bear out
this hypothesis.
To sum up, I suggest that we
conclude from these considerations that a horoscope map should enable us to
diagnose the conditions prevailing in the psychic atmosphere of the earth at
any given moment. The factors to be taken into consideration are:
1. The natures of the various
planets, which they developed during the phase of evolution which took place in
their respective spheres, and which extends throughout their auras, creating a
psychic atmosphere therein.
2. The effect of the
interpenetrating auras of the different planets at different aspects, each
modifying the influence exerted by the others, so that the psychic condition of
the spot consists of a blend of planetary influences, modifying each other.
3. The effect upon each planet of
its position in its orbit, due to the psychic atmosphere of that section of the
cosmos, whether that atmosphere be derived from the influences of zodiacal
constellations or of emanations from the Sun.
4. The effect of the Earth’s mass
and aura on the emanations reaching any given point on its surface.
If these four sets of factors are
calculated mathematically, and weighed up in the light of observed experience,
which is what astrological tradition really is – for it is an empirical science
like medicine, consisting of practical observations resting upon a very
imperfectly ascertained basis of theory – it should be possible first to
analyse the psychic atmosphere into its component parts, which is a purely
mathematical operation, and then to synthesise the resulting deductions into a
diagnosis or judgement. The latter operation is the real difficulty, for the
factors are so numerous and so subtle that it might well be held beyond the
power of the human mind to assess them with comprehensiveness and accuracy. In
this matter, however, the subconscious mind comes to our aid, just as it does
in learning to read, and there comes a point when we cease to spell out letter
by letter, and recognise words as a whole. So it is with the experienced astrologer
– he interprets the significance of aspects as a whole, and though no doubt he
could analyse his deductions into their component parts and give reasons for
them if required to do so, he does not interpret a horoscope in that laborious
manner, any more than he spells out the columns of his morning paper letter by
letter.
Another factor also comes into the
reading of horoscopes, a factor beyond the rational and empirical. Each chart
forms a glyph or composite symbol; symbols speak to the ultra-conscious levels
of our minds as well as to the intellectual level. By means of subconscious and
super-conscious mentation, the significance of the chart can be interpreted and
findings beyond the range of consciousness used to supplement the work of the
rational mind. It is probable that the best astrologers work in this way.
Needless to say, intuitive readings are no substitute for exact knowledge, but
without such extended interpretations exact knowledge is a barren affair. Who
could appreciate poetry if he had to spell it out letter by letter?
DION
FORTUNE
No comments:
Post a Comment