Dane Rudhyar - Progressions in Astrology
Dane Rudhyar - Progressions in Astrology
Dane Rudhyar - Progressions in Astrology
In Astrology
by Dane Rudhyar
Part One
The Meaning and Use
of Astrological Progressions
One of the many astrological topics which needs clarification and a more revealing and
significant approach is what is usually called "progressions" — or secondary progressions.
According to textbooks being studied today, it is possible, by considering the positions of
the planets each day after birth, to foretell at least some of the basic events that can be
expected each corresponding year after birth. The basic principle is that there is some sort
of correspondence between the daily cycle of the earth's rotation around its axis and the
yearly cycle of our planet's revolution around the Sun.
The moment of the "first breath" of the human organism establishes, as it were, the
person's permanent individual character underneath all subsequent changes; this is the
birth-chart. But changes are incessant after birth. The earth rotates; the Sun, Moon, and
planets move on in their orbits and the astrologer claims that what happens in the solar
system during the 24 hours after birth somehow gives us basic clues to changes occurring
in the human being during the whole first year of his life, each hour corresponding to a
fortnight of actual existence.
Thus, if a person is born on January 1, 1965, at noon Greenwich Time, the positions of
the planets at noon January 2 — called the "progressed planets" — will refer to the person's
development and the basic events of his life on January 1, 1966, and so on. If one wants to
know what the person will face around his 20th birthday (1985), one will write down the
progressed positions of the Sun, the Moon, and the planets for January 21. On that day,
some of the aspects between the planets are different from those on January 1; the new
aspects will be re-referred to as "progressed-to-progressed" aspects. But the new positions
of January 21 can also be related to the positions in the January 1 birth-chart — for
instance, the "progressed Moon" during the morning of January 21 is at 23° 57' Virgo,
making a conjunction with the position Mars had at birth on January 1, 1965. Such a
conjunction will be called a "progressed-to-radical" (or natal) aspect.
My purpose in this article is not to state in greater detail the technique for the
calculation of such progressions, but rather to try to understand why they should have any
validity at all and to what area of predictability they more logically refer. Obviously, the
positions of the Sun, the Moon, and the planets for January 21, 1965, do not refer to
celestial facts noticeable at the time of the 21st birthday (January 1, 1985) of the person
born on January 1, 1965.
The factual positions of the planets on that January 1, 1985, when referred to the
positions of the planets in the January 1, 1965, birthday constitute what are called
"transits." Transiting positions are existential facts; progressed positions are not. If they are
to be considered as facts, it can be so only if they are integrated into a picture of the entire
life process which began even earlier than birth — that is, at the moment of impregnation of
the female ovum by the male spermatozoon.
As I have shown in Part One, "The Meaning and Use of Astrological Progressions", the
real and existential meaning of what astrologers call progressions (or, at times, secondary
progressions) derives from the fact that the normal period of gestation of a human
organism is nine months, while the cycle of the year lasts twelve months. The year in the
ordinary type of geocentric astrology is a "solar" factor, and the Sun is the source of all the
basic energies that circulate throughout the solar system and which make possible life on
earth. A child is a living organism. This organism originates in the union of male and female
genital cells within the mother's womb. The fecundated ovum multiplies itself through a
process of successive division. Each resulting new cell — and there are many billions of
them in the newborn child — carries at its core what has been called a "genetic code" which
directs its particular function in the child's body.
Each human embryo as it develops within the womb is said to recapitulate very
briefly the series of biological evolutionary developments of life forms in the "biosphere" —
i.e., within the very narrow space extending above and below the planet's surface. Once the
embryo has become truly "human," it can be assumed that in a less obvious and perhaps
unrecognizable manner it passes through the stages which led human races to the level of a
biological development characterizing present day humanity.
A human embryo is not "viable" until it reaches about the beginning of the seventh
month of gestation. Then the embryo is completely "human," and there are many cases of
premature births at such a time. If the prematurely born baby survives, it is thanks to
extreme and in a sense artificial care — that is, he survives because human beings have
developed collectively a culture and especially a science which enables them to complete
what "life" (in the biological and planetary sense) has left incomplete and condemned to
extinction.
If the embryo reaching its seventh month of gestation has become potentially
"human", it normally takes three months more for it to complete the expected stages of a
development which will make him potentially an "individual" — that is, a human
organism ready to perform its role in a human society as a would-be individual person
endowed with intelligence and with the capacity to make at least relatively free choices in
answer to the challenges of his environment.
This capacity to operate among his fellow men as an individual person is only potential
at birth; and I have shown how the development of this power which I define as intelligence
is, as it were, "programmed" (or set in its basic pattern of operation) during the three
months following birth. Three months represent about 90 or 91 days; in the astrological
technique of the "progressions," each of these days is made to correspond to one year of
the actual life of the individual. Progressions, thus, refer to the development of this
"intelligence" which I have defined as the power enabling a person to act as a free and
responsible individual as he faces the infinitely complex relationships, challenges, and
opportunities of everyday life.
If this be true, what then could be said actually to happen to the human child-to-be
during the three months preceding birth — the seventh, eighth, and ninth months of
gestation? If we know the basic meaning of these three last months of intrauterine
existence, can we deduce from this an applicable type of astrological knowledge?
Converse Progressions
The idea occurred to astrologers that one might find it significant to "progress backward" a
birth-chart. Just as in the usual type of progressions one day after birth gives basic clues to
the development of the individual person one year after his birth, so in "converse
progressions," one day before birth is said to give valid indications to what will happen to
the person also when one year old. The two procedures are symmetrical; and whether one
moves ahead, let us say, ten days in the ephemeris or one moves backward ten days in the
ephemeris, one obtains in both cases some basic information relating to the person's life
when he is ten years old.
The people who use both methods unfortunately do not differentiate clearly — or at all
— between the two types of information obtained, on the one hand, by direct progressions
(based on the actual motions of the planets after birth) and, on the other, by "converse"
progressions. Yet, obviously, if ordinary progressions are already symbolical in character,
the converse progressions are even far more so. What could be actual in the correlation
between the positions of planets ten days before you are born and what you will experience
at the age of ten? If converse progressions "work" — and they often do — they work as
symbols; but as symbols of what? If astrology has any logical foundation, these converse
progressions obtained by reading the ephemeris backward from the birth moment cannot
refer to the same type of conditions, experiences, or phases of personal development as the
ordinary progressions based on the forward movement of the planets.
Many people have had the experience that what they were living through was actually,
though in some undefinable manner, the consequence of antecedent causes — i.e., of
events of long ago. One may interpret such a strange feeling by accepting the hypothesis of
"reincarnation." This concept of reincarnation can be understood in several ways; but, in
any case, we can well say that our present is at least partially conditioned by the past — by
the past of our parents, by the ancestral traditions and prejudices which have been stamped
upon our receptive mind in early childhood, and by the evolutionary past of mankind.
Most devout Christians believe that man is born with an innately perverted nature as a
result of the "Original Sin" in Eden. Is not this an instance of the manner in which an
immensely distant event can condition a man's psychic development? I have known
personally several persons for whom the realization of the assumed fact that his or her
nature had been inherently perverted by the sin of Adam and Eve brought out in
adolescence or midlife a real psychological crisis — and, in one instance, a passionate
conversion to Catholicism of the most rigid type. Of course, the whole Christian culture —
especially during the Middle Ages, but also later on in the case of great minds like the
French scientist-philosopher Pascal — has been conditioned by this poignant belief in what
they considered to have been a fact of past history.
I knew a wonderful female painter whose life had been tragically overshadowed by a
scandal in the life of a revered and famous grandfather she had hardly ever met. We are
indeed affected most directly and internally by basic occurrences antedating our birth as an
individual person. Carl Jung refers to this when he speaks of the great power of "Archetypes
of the Collective Unconscious." The famous French philosopher of the early-19th century,
Auguste Comte, made the statement that, "Humanity includes as effective presences many
more of the dead than of the living."