Skyscript Astrology Forum

Tycho Brahe:

"In an introductory oration to the course of lectures he gave in Copenhagen in 1574, Tycho defended astrology on the grounds of correspondences between the heavenly bodies, terrestrial substances (metals, stones etc.), and bodily organs. He was later to emphasise the importance of studying alchemy and astrology together with a pair of emblems bearing the mottoes Despiciendo suspicio - "By looking down I see upward" - and Suspiciendo despicio - "By looking up I see downward." As several scholars have now argued, Tycho's commitment to a relationship between macrocosm and microcosm even played a role in his rejection of Copernicanism and his construction of a third world-system."

from: http://www.hps.cam.ac.uk/starry/tychoastrol.html

Big thanks to Faye Cossar for this.

Garry,

Have you investigated the division of matter and spirit that occurred during the rise of Gnostic thought? While this will not point to the very origins of the principle, I believe it does mark the divide between Neo-platonic "static" realms, and Aristotean/deamonic magics. In examining Gnostic texts there seems to be a wrestling over the "goodness" of the orders of the universe. As Jewish apocalyptic beliefs did not produce the hoped-for salvation from Roman oppression, -the last revolt occuring around 136 AD I believe- the new Christian inheritance of these beliefs were faced with a certain disillusionment. The 7 archons (the planets) now came to represent the material realm, which was created and run by, either an ignorant or malevolent demi-urge (in some texts the god of the Jews Yahweh), which fit neatly into neo-platonic models the gradation of the divine. These Gnostic beliefs are of course extremely heterogeneous, but I believe that this is a turning point in Western History. Aristotelian materialism, -the "scientific" examination of the laws which matter "obeyed" became melded with Levantine daemonolgy in which spirits controlled matter through the order of the planets. And while Gnosticism would not be accepted directly into the cannon of Western thought, it did give impetus to the division of the material and spiritual realms. Already in the thinking of Philo and Clement of Alexandria, and then in Plotinus, there is a spiritualization where Neo-Platonism seeks to transcend these lower realms as pale shadows, rather than investigate and control them. I believe right here is where "magic" got its new bad name, for it dealt with the lower powers and its Saturn/Satan/demi-urge figure. Ironically, it was not until Aristotle returned to Europe through Averroes, did the legacy of magic present itself once again, now through a line of thinking that would become "scientific materialism", the control of matter through discoverable laws, which would drown-out the flourish of Platonism of the 16th century. You rightly mark the difference between "As above so below", and the desire to affect the above through what is done below.


Sincerely, Kevin

Hi Kevin,

Well it's kind of weird that you should mention Gnosticism just now. Yesterday on a train journey my friend James Frazier was telling me about Simon Magus. And (according to the Encyclopedia Britannica):

The first Gnostic about whom something can be said with confidence is Simon Magus, a 1st-century Jewish heterodox teacher who introduced the fundamental Gnostic conception that evil resulted from a break within the Godhead.

Now, I don't know anything about Mr Magus and not much more about Gnosticism, but a bit of Googling turned up a site with the text of GRS Mead's Simon Magus:

http://www.fullbooks.com/Simon-Magus2.html

On this page we find the following:

This brings us to a consideration of the teachings of Simon with regard to the Lesser World, the Microcosm, Man, and to the scheme of his soteriology. Evidently Simon taught the ancient, immemorial doctrine that the Microcosm Man was the Mirror and Potentiality of the Cosmos, the Macrocosm, as we have already seen above. Whatever was true of the emanation of the Universe, was also true of Man, whatever was true of the Macrocosmic Aeons was true of the Microcosmic Aeons in Man, which are potentially the same as those of the Cosmos, and will develop into the power and grandeur of the latter, if they can find suitable expression, or a vehicle. This view will explain the reason of the ancients for saying that we could only perceive that of which we have a germ already within us. Thus it is that Empedocles taught:

By earth earth we perceive; by water, water; by aether, aether; fire, by destructive fire; by friendship, friendship; and strife by bitter strife.

And if the potentiality of all resided in every man, the teaching on this point most forcibly has been, _Qui se cognoscit, in se omnia cognoscit_--He who knows himself, knows all in himself--as Q. Fabius Pictor tells us. And, therefore, the essential of moral and spiritual training in ancient times was the attainment of Self-Knowledge--that is to say, the attainment of the certitude that there is a divine nature within every man, which is of infinite capacity to absorb universal Wisdom; that, in brief, Man was _essentially_ one with Deity.

With Simon, as with the Hermetic philosophers of ancient Egypt, all things were interrelated by correspondence, analogy, and similitude. "As above, so below," is the teaching on the Smaragdine Table of Hermes. Therefore, whatever happened to the divine Epinoia, the Supreme Mother, among the Aeons, happened also to the human Spiritual Soul or Monadic essence, in its evolution through all stages of manifestation. This Soul is shut into all forms and bodies, successively up to the stage of man.

So, thanks for a most excellent lead!

I just had a rare opportunity to read a very interesting discussion between such knowlegable astrologers.
By the way, there is a question I would like to ask you (if you don't mind), but I'm going to raise the issue in another forum: NATIVITIES & GENERAL ASTROLOGY. It is about the SUN SIGNS.

Luis

Anyone who found this thread interesting will almost certainly want to see a paper by Judy Hall, which argues (with an abundance of historical reference) that the principle of 'as above, so below' can be traced back to Egyptian cosmology and religion.

It's available at:

http://www.astrozero.co.uk/articles/Correspondence.htm

Hi Garry,

It is very good. I read it quickly the other day and have printed a copy to read more closely when I have more time. Let's hope it gets taken seriously in all the right places, so we can drop the argument that there is no evidence to support the view that this philosophy is ancient. Then we can argue about whether Ptolemy actually wrote the Tetrabiblos himself, or whether it written by someone else called Ptolemy who lived in the same place at the same time.

I also have to say that it was good to see the skyscript forum mentioned more than once in the references to the article. It's reassuring to know someone is paying attention to our ramblings.

Nice one Judy!