Dawn Resh
-
I know this might be splitting hairs a bit... but having the morning Resh at "dawn" seems a little off to me.
Sunset, Solar Noon, and Solar midnight are pretty clear, unambiguous times. But "dawn" is a rather arbitrary and ambiguous term. The first pre-sunrise light of day can start several hours before sunrise, gradually growing until it reaches "dawn" (which could refer to civil, nautical, or astronomical twilight). This could easily be 1/2 hour to an hour or more before sunrise, depending on latitude.
To me it makes much more sense to do morning Resh at sunrise, or to interpret "dawn" to mean shortly before sunrise. Am I splitting hairs, misguided, or missing something important here?
-
93,
Dawn here is equivalent to Sunrise - the moment when the center of the disk of the Sun crosses the horizon. Twilight doesn't count.
In order not to become neurotic, most people allow themselves some practical leeway so that they're not getting up two hours early in June. (Three hours if you live in Scotland or Scandinavia). The rationale is on the lines of: I just rose, so it's dawn.
93 93/93,
EM
-
@Edward Mason said
"The rationale is on the lines of: I just rose, so it's dawn."
I love it! An eminently practical application of Frater Achad's Stepping Out of the Old Aeon and Into the New: "Look at things from the point of view of the Sun."
Steve
-
@Steven Cranmer said
"
@Edward Mason said
"The rationale is on the lines of: I just rose, so it's dawn."I love it! An eminently practical application of Frater Achad's Stepping Out of the Old Aeon and Into the New: "Look at things from the point of view of the Sun."
Steve"
93 Steve,
This might be off subject a bit, but I have been contemplating the message of Achad's essay in light of constructing a new astrological system which is heliocentric, as opposed to the outdated geocentric model. In this way, one would have an earth sign rather than a sun sign, & of course the actual position of all of the planets against the constellations would appear differently. This model is more in line with astronomy & science, & I would love to explore it further, but I don't know even where to begin...
...it accomplishes the task of placing the Magician on the sun (in the center) rather than the earth under the false perception of its station as central ...possibly a more 'Thelemic' astrology.
-
93
"This model is more in line with astronomy & science, & I would love to explore it further, but I don't know even where to begin..."
See: Sidereal Astrology
93, 93/93
A.
-
" I have been contemplating the message of Achad's essay in light of constructing a new astrological system which is heliocentric, as opposed to the outdated geocentric model. In this way, one would have an earth sign rather than a sun sign, & of course the actual position of all of the planets against the constellations would appear differently. This model is more in line with astronomy & science, & I would love to explore it further, but I don't know even where to begin...
...it accomplishes the task of placing the Magician on the sun (in the center) rather than the earth under the false perception of its station as central ...possibly a more 'Thelemic' astrology."
I think I came across the same, or at least quite similar, concept in the book ''Solar Biology'' by Hiram E. Butler . it had been published in 19th cent. (1887 or so)
-
@Red Eagle of Death said
"
@Steven Cranmer said
"
@Edward Mason said
"This might be off subject a bit, but I have been contemplating the message of Achad's essay in light of constructing a new astrological system which is heliocentric, as opposed to the outdated geocentric model. In this way, one would have an earth sign rather than a sun sign, & of course the actual position of all of the planets against the constellations would appear differently. This model is more in line with astronomy & science, & I would love to explore it further, but I don't know even where to begin... "
"
"Then again, we aren't born on the sun. Thankfully.
