Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

Where Sidereal Astrologers Usually Agree
To help articulate our common ground, we offer the following SIDEREAL ASTROLOGY LANDMARKS. No one has to agree with all points, of course, though we recommend that all site participants be aware of them as a foundation of commonly held views by most Sidereal astrologers. In the spirit of scientific inquiry, these points are subject to modification and open to collegial debate. (Last revised 11/29/2022)


Defining Sidereal Astrology
1. Sidereal Astrology is the name of a school of astrological thought and practice founded by Cyril Fagan, Donald A. Bradley (“Garth Allen”), and their close collaborators. It has both commonalities and differences in methodology with modern Western Tropical astrology and is most distinguished by a different theory of the zodiac. It shares much of its zodiac theory with traditional and modern Indian astrology while differing dramatically in methodology.

2. While we greatly respect Fagan and Bradley’s original work as foundational source literature, Sidereal Astrology is a living, growing study, influenced as much by its founders’ commitment to uncovering truth as to their actual discoveries and teachings. We affirm our commitment to their standards of competent, honest inquiry and investigation.

The Sidereal Zodiac
3. Astrology began from visual observation of the heavens. Fixed stars were the basis of the zodiac’s original frame of reference and continue to reflect its essential framework.

4. The Sidereal zodiac is the original fixed zodiac of constellations of all ancient cultures where a zodiac has been found. It is both an ancient recovery and a modern discovery: Archaeological research into astrology’s origins and statistical research into astrology’s behavior independently disclosed the same boundaries for the zodiacal signs.

5. Now as in antiquity, the zodiac consists of twelve constellations, each exactly 30° wide. Although astronomers have remapped ancient constellation boundaries for their own purposes, their modern definitions are not (and have never been) astrology’s definitions. (The two models overlap more than they differ.)

The Vernal Point
6. The northern hemisphere's vernal equinoctial point (“vernal point” or “VP”) retrogrades (precesses) along the zodiac 0°00'50" per year (1° in about 72 years). Tropical astrologers consider the VP fundamental to defining the zodiac; Sidereal Astrology does not.

7. The Sidereal zodiac, having no reliance on the moving vernal point, is a fixed reference system unmoved by precession. The Tropical zodiac, relying on the vernal point for its definition, is a moving reference system that must be constantly adjusted for precession.

8. Whereas the Tropical zodiac defines the VP as 0° Aries for all time, Sidereal Astrology recognizes that it continuously moves and currently (2024) is at 5° Pisces. Thus, boundaries of the two zodiac models presently differ by 25°. This slowly increasing divergence is known by the Sanskrit term ayanamsa.

9. Sidereal Astrology defines the mean longitude of the vernal point as Pisces 5°57'28".64 for the epoch 1950.0. This definition is called the Synetic Vernal Point (SVP) or, colloquially, the "Fagan-Allen (or Fagan-Bradley) ayanamsa."

Personal and Mundane Astrology
10. Personal astrology (astrology of an individual) requires an astrological chart for the moment and place of the person's birth. Complete, correct birth data (date, time, and place of birth) are paramount for thorough, reliable evaluation. Absence of complete birth data limits the reliability and range of astrological analysis.

11. Sidereal solar and lunar returns were important predictive tools of ancient astrologers. Modern Sidereal astrologers (who term them, collectively, Solunars) regard them as among the most important astrological prediction instruments.

12. Mundane astrology (astrology of the collective) relies on many techniques, foremost of which are maps for the ingresses of Sun or Moon into Capricorn, Aries, Cancer, and Libra. Calculation of these maps relies on knowing exactly where 0°00'00" of the signs falls. The high accuracy and reliability of these maps for portraying mass events (historically and predictively) continue to confirm the SVP definition of the Sidereal zodiac.

Angles
13. Angles of an astrological chart (primarily meaning the horizon and meridian) and planets proximate to these angles are primary analytic considerations in all areas of Sidereal Astrology.

Planets
14. The intrinsic natures of the planets are invariable. So-called "accidental dignities" do not alter them. Traditional characterization of some planets as benefic or malefic, while crude, correctly portrays the most common expressions of these planets.

15. Natal planets reflect an individual's inherent nature, needs, and potential. Progressed planets reflect developments in that inherent nature.

16. Transiting planets most often are experienced as reflecting external circumstances interacting (causatively or responsively) with the personal actions or conditions reflected by aspected natal planets.

Aspects
17. The type of aspect between two planets (the angular separation) does not reflect a positive/negative or fortune/misfortune outcome, which, instead, arises from the planets involved, life conditions, and personal choices.

18. Conjunctions, oppositions, and squares indicate dynamic action, incentive, and movement. Trines and sextiles are placid, quiet, and still.

19. Aspect strength depends on orb. The pressure toward outward expression of an aspect depends on planet angularity.

Planetary Dignities
20. Planets and the constellations they rule or in which they are exalted share common traits. However, we give no importance to so-called house rulers or dispositors.

Astrology is Astrology
21. Neither Fagan nor Bradley set out to found a variant branch of astrology but, rather, to discover what is true in astrology as a whole. Their work forms a distinct school of thought and practice, collegial within a broader field that does not currently embrace many of the above points.

22. Yet, astrology is astrology. Facts of nature exist independent of our opinions about them. If (as we believe strong evidence shows) the zodiac is actual and long misconceived as being tropical, we anticipate an era when astrologers collectively recognize astrology’s inherently sidereal nature. At that point, the “sidereal” adjective will be redundant. Astrologers, united around astrology’s original and still authentic zodiac, will tackle other, newer controversies together.


Registry of Sidereal Astrologers founders Karen Wilkerson and Joan G. Piszek penned Points of Agreement in 1975 "in an effort to establish some common ground." I give the original statement (which we all acknowledged upon joining ROSA) here: https://www.solunars.com/viewtopic.php? ... 116#p20116
Today, more than 40 years later, their work provides a marvelous basis for an updated Points of Agreement (aka, "Where Sidereal Astrologers Usually Agree"). I offer the above, edited mostly for clarity and partly to update technical considerations that have changed over the decades. Feel free to use this thread to discuss the points as you see fit. We can wrangle with these collegially as time passes. - JAE

I have made a first pass on a rewrite. I'm sure that I'm not fully happy with it myself, though it will take time to polish it even for an early pass. Nonetheless... gates are open to discussion.

The type of aspect shows the apparent strength of the aspect: Conjunctions, squares, and oppositions indicate intense, dynamic manifestations. Trines and sextiles denote a more subtle influence. The angularity of the planets determines the strength of the outward expression of the aspects.

I think the closeness of the aspect determines the strength of the aspect. A 0°05 sextile is stronger than a 4°57 conjunction.
I also think the angularity of the planets determines the ease with which the aspect is expressed.
I think the word "strength" is being used multiple ways here.

Also if there are differences between natal astrology and personal predictive astrology and mundane astrology, I think this would be a place to mention it.

Jupiter Sets at Dawn wrote: Sun Jun 17, 2018 7:29 pm

The type of aspect shows the apparent strength of the aspect: Conjunctions, squares, and oppositions indicate intense, dynamic manifestations. Trines and sextiles denote a more subtle influence. The angularity of the planets determines the strength of the outward expression of the aspects.

I think the closeness of the aspect determines the strength of the aspect. A 0°05 sextile is stronger than a 4°57 conjunction.
I also think the angularity of the planets determines the ease with which the aspect is expressed.
I think the word "strength" is being used multiple ways here.

I agree. I was being careful (on a first rewrite) not to just put in my personal spin and language, but to try to keep with a Sidereal historic and current consensus and, for the moment, to leave Faganisms intact. (There are several things I would have written differently if it were just Astrology By Eshelman.)

So, for starters, I agree with you. A question on such a document is how to walk this line, and collective discussion is where I thought I'd start. So thanks for playing.

I know that the original purpose of the original line was to contrast with the Tropical good vs. bad aspects theory - something to distinguish Sidereal astrology from Tropical astrology overall. Tropical astrology in some quarters has moved further from that, though in other quarters it has remained. I think the contrast to the historic (and still evident) Tropical practice is important to keep, but that the way it's been kept has distorted a correct expression of exactly what's so.

I have updated the Points of Agreement, substantially incorporating JSAD's input from yesterday, and generally cleaning up the language.

Overnight, and on reviewing it last night and this morning, I've gotten clear that this isn't a teaching document in the sense of introducing someone to astrology. (That would require a much larger document, most of these bullet points requiring many paragraphs as if they were chapters of a book.) Rather, the parent document was always aimed at people already knowledgeable in astrology for the purpose of clarifying, where possible, this school of thought from others. I suppose it's debatable whether that is the specific document we need but, in any case, it's what this document is at the present time.

I like this post on POA.

On #17, I thought Rims, Spokes and Hubs be mentioned, if they're agreed upon, and I thought they were.

I like the distinction and elaboration of natal, transiting and progressed planets. Also, the updated language on aspect types.

James Condor wrote: Sat Dec 01, 2018 7:35 amOn #17, I thought Rims, Spokes and Hubs be mentioned, if they're agreed upon, and I thought they were.

I might have to find some way to work in your point. The purpose of #17 is different: It's not there primarily to describe the nature of signs but, rather, to explain what we mean by sign rulers. It's intended to convey that we completely accept the traditional idea of planets ruling signs, but only as descriptors, not the way Tropical astrologers most use them, viz., to determine house rulership.

I like the distinction and elaboration of natal, transiting and progressed planets. Also, the updated language on aspect types.

Thank you.

I think including Hub, Spoke and Rim would be excess here. As you pointed out above, this isn't meant to be a teaching document, and most Tropicalists use the Hub-Spoke-Rim concept under other names. Hub-etc is just a clearer set of names for the same concept. A Mutable by any other name.

This morning, I broke the original ROSA Points of Agreement off to a separate thread that is referenced above but not quoted above. That retains them as a historic document that can be discussed in its own right, but makes the current thread less confusing.

The current thread now starts immediately with the current/modern Points of Agreement, making it more of a primary reference document for the site. When someone new appears on the site and wants a basic description of "what we're about," one option is to refer them to here.

Meanwhile, the thread remains in permanently open to collegial discussion on these points.

I just rewrote the former Points 6-8 into four new points, 6-9. (Notice that this bumped everything else up a number.) My purpose was to make the information clearer and to let later statements build on earlier statements. These three points seemed to spiral around each other without a clear starting point, so I added an initial definition and then restructured the information, trimming words where I could and adding them where I had to.

Here is how it appeared before editing:

6. Currently (2018), the northern hemisphere's vernal point is at 5° Pisces. The Tropical zodiac defines the vernal point as 0° Aries. Thus, boundaries of the two zodiac models presently differ by about 25°. This slowly increasing divergence is known by the Sanskrit term ayanamsa.

7. Sidereal Astrology defines the mean longitude of the vernal point as Pisces 5°57'28".64 for the epoch 1950.0. This definition is called the Synetic Vernal Point (SVP). This vernal point retrogrades (precesses) along the zodiac approximately 0°00'50" per year (1° in approximately 72 years).

8. The Sidereal zodiac, having no reliance on the moving vernal point, is a fixed reference system unmoved by precession. The Tropical zodiac, relying on the moving vernal point for its definition, is a moving reference system that must be constantly adjusted for precession.

Here is how they appear after today's editing:

6. The northern hemisphere's vernal equinoctial point ("vernal point" or "VP") retrogrades (precesses) along the zodiac approximately 0°00'50" per year (1° in approximately 72 years). Tropical astrologers consider the VP fundamental to defining the zodiac; Sidereal Astrology does not.

7. The Sidereal zodiac, having no reliance on the moving vernal point, is a fixed reference system unmoved by precession. The Tropical zodiac, relying on the vernal point for its definition, is a moving reference system that must be constantly adjusted for precession.

8. Whereas the Tropical zodiac defines the VP as 0° Aries for all time, Sidereal Astrology recognizes that it is continuously moving and currently (2018) is at 5° Pisces. Thus, boundaries of the two zodiac models presently differ by about 25°. This slowly increasing divergence is known by the Sanskrit term ayanamsa.

9. Sidereal Astrology defines the mean longitude of the vernal point as Pisces 5°57'28".64 for the epoch 1950.0. This definition is formally called the Synetic Vernal Point (SVP).

I also just reversed the sequence of points 10 and 11.

I added a new sentence to the front of (the newly numbered) Point 10, and tweaked the rest, resulting in this:

10. Personal astrology (astrology of an individual) is founded on an astrological chart for the moment and place of his or her birth. Complete, accurate birth data (date, time, and place of birth) are paramount for thorough, reliable evaluation. Absence of accurate birth data significantly reduces the reliability and range of astrological analysis.

I also added a new point to contrast to the above point on personal astrology:

19. Mundane astrology (astrology of the collective) relies on many techniques, foremost of which are maps for the ingresses of Sun or Moon into Capricorn, Aries, Cancer, and Libra. Calculation of these maps relies on knowing exactly where 0°00'00" of the signs falls. The high accuracy and reliability of these maps for portraying mass events (historically and predictively) continue to confirm the SVP definition of the Sidereal zodiac.

I moved the Point regarding angles a little lower, right after the several points on planets. Then I moved the new Point on Mundane Astrology higher on the list (so, if you were keeping up with the numbers, they're much mostly changed).

I then restructured the list by adding headings to break up the points, and will now go back to do some restructuring of the page's code that this requires. (Done.)

That should be enough for today.

Jim wrote:

Sidereal solar and lunar returns (today called Solunars) were primary working tools of ancient astrologers. Modern Sidereal astrologers regard them as among the most important instruments for astrological prediction.

So true I spent 12 years studying Tropical Astrology, and it was not until I discovered Sidereal Astrology and the difference of true timing with solar and lunar returns cast in the Sidereal Zodiac vs the fictitious Tropical Zodiac, that I began to understand the many truths about the true Sidereal Zodiac. The main reason solar and lunar returns was not a main stay for Tropical Astrology was the fact Tropical Astrologers for over 2000 years were not getting the correct TIMED chart by casting a return chart in the Tropical Zodiac. Without this correct TIMED solar or lunar return chart, a Tropical Astrologer is viewing false angles and the all-important true solar moon position with a Tropical solar return. If any new student of Sidereal Astrology on this forum, after studying Tropical Astrology for years needs help in understanding this TRUE TIMING for their return charts with the Sidereal Zodiac vs the Tropical Zodiac, PM me and I will be glad to help you better understand.

This is my first encounter with this website, and with Sidereal Astrology. I came here from a facebook post about football betting. In this "Points of Agreement" post, I was not expecting to encounter an understanding that I should have had all along, but never quite clicked with, and I have been studying astrology for over 45 years. It was #14: Natal planets reflect an individual's inherent nature, needs, and potential. Progressed planets reflect developments in that inherent nature." And then went on to say that transits had more to do with external events. So elegant and simple! Thank you Mr. Eshelman. I will check this out as best I can.

I have slightly polished the language on these and rearranged the order a little (but the Angles section ahead of the Planets section) but, most importantly, added a new section at the bottom: "Astrology is Astrology" has two paragraphs that I think need to be part of our openly stated position as a community.

Excellent addition!