Entering the Age of Aquarius – on 21st

December 2020

László Wladimir Orosz – founder of Synoptical Astrology

Part I

Problem interpretation and proposal for solution within the system of sidereal astrology

As we know, the Earth is subject to the effect that any object – like a peg or a whirligig –
spun around its own axis of symmetry shows. We can see that its axis moves along the
surface of a cone. The movement that the Earth of ’geoid’ shape makes is determined by the
Moon periods of about 18.6 years together with the torque of the Sun and the planets orbiting
on planes not coinciding with that of the ecliptic. (Picture 1)

Picture 1: The results of the torque by the Sun and Moon applied to the Earth: the precession
and the nutation (on the left); the stations in the ’migration’of Earth’s north axial pole (top
right); the joint illustration of the equatorial and polar precessions (bottom right)

In this complicated system the cycles can’t be equally long. In an interval of thousands of
years it is self-evident for the actual axial skew of about 23.5 degrees to change and to take a
measure between 22° and 24.5° in tens of thousand of years. The intersections of the Ecliptic
and the Equator (the Spring and Autumn Equinox Points are significant points of reference
and we can connect the creation of ’World Ages’ to their progress rhythm. However, their real
1
movement is different from the periodicity, which we know as the symbolic tracts of ’Platonic
year’ (25920 years), ’Platonic month’ (2160 years) and ’Platonic day’ (72 years). (Picture 2)
Of course, this doesn’t mean to deny the symbolic validity but it makes way to an approach
we will need later.

Picture 2: The segments of Fagan–Bradley’s sidereal zodiac as ’World Ages’ just as

illustrations for now to show that the ’Platonic months’ are most often different from the
symbolic periods of 2160 years.

When establishing the framework of sidereal zodiac the astrologer must face a problem that
is unknown in the tropical astrology: where to start the zodiac of equal (30°) sidereal sectors?
It is because the ’seasonal cross’ doesn’t exist for the sidereal astrologer; that is the cusps of
cardinal signs designated in the most accurate way by the equinoctial and the solsticial points.

In the sidereal zodiac, the 0° of the sign Aries – which would be situated ’somewhere’ around
the constellation of Aries – is not necessarily the starting point. Sidereal astrologer can take
the beginning of any zodiacal sections as starting point – and we can’t take any of them at the
same time – because of its pure ’uranicity’ (‘Jyotisha’ meaning Light) this system doesn’t
contain the ’cyclic drama’ and doesn’t follow the permanent rituals of Birth / Prosperity /
Decline / Death, which we are obliged to experience every year – in succession of the
seasons, within the tropical framework.

Accordingly the sidereal aspect needs some reference entity – it is known as ’fiducial point’ –
to measure the equal 12 sectors from. In Cyrill Fagan and Donald A. Bradley’s system this is
two at once as they assigned for this aim a ’celestial axis’ marked out by stars of ’top priority’
– the axis of the Aldebaran and Antares, which face each other with a difference of few arc
minutes. These stars are situated in the very centres of the Taurus and Scorpio constellations
according to more archaic astrological tradition, thus the solution is obvious for them: the
Aldebaran must be put to the 15° of the 30-degree-long sidereal sector of Taurus. (Although,
the Aldebaran is located a few arc minutes away in their system. )

This way we can draw all the 12 sidereal sectors, we can find the sidereal 0° of the Aries. As
the Spring Equinoctial Point (tropical 00 of Aries in the northern hemisphere) is basically
always generally known, we can get an important reference point of time: this is the exact
coexistence of the two zodiacs, which is – by the spring equinox receding into the 30-degree-
long sidereal Pisces – the starting point of the ’Pisces Age’ at the same time. (Picture 3)

2
 Picture 3: The Fagan–Bradley’s sidereal system in the state of ayanamsha = 0°, that is at the
time when the tropical and the sidereal zodiacs coincided – as these astrologers thought. That
is: the spring equinox of the northern hemisphere, the 0° of the tropical Aries, is situated in
just the very position of the astral background that defines the 0° of the sidereal Aries in this
system. (The zoodiacs of the horoscope from the inside out: tropical, sidereal and the true
constellations with inequal extents).

At this point we must see a new technical term: ’ayanamsha’, which means ’the measure of
progress’ in Sanskrit. This number gives – in arc degrees, arc minutes and arc seconds – the
difference of the Aries points between the two zodiacs. In other words, it shows the distance
(in arc degrees / minutes / seconds) of the tropical Aries 0 point’s moving back from sidereal
Aries. It means that when saying: ayanamsha 0 (ayanamsha zero) or ayanamsha =0°, then the
zodiacs coincide exactly. But when the numeric value of ayanamsha = 30°, then the spring
equinox is just about to enter the sidereal Aquarius.

The ayanamsha 0 happened in 221 AD in Fagan-Bradley’s system, while in the N. C. Lahiri’s

sidereal zodiac (which is, these days, perhaps the most popular system of Jyotisha astrology
and the official base of setting the religious holidays in India since 1955) in 285 AD.
Nevertheless, not everone – nor the author of these lines – can accept that Lahiri places his
primary ’fiducial star’, the Spica (Citra) to the 0° of sidereal Libra (in contrast with the last
degree of the Virgo by Fagan). (Picture 4)

3
 Picture 4: The 0 ayanamsha state of Lahiri’s zodiac, that is the date when the tropical and
sidereal zodiacs coincided, according to the author (who refers to the Hindu astrological
tradition, but some say he violated it) and his followers

Making a calendar, it might be a comfortable idea to consider this star of outstanding

importance as the beginning of the sidereal Libra, but it is completely unacceptable from a
spiritual point of view, since it manifests as undeniable part of Virgo’s astral principle. Those
must be right, who argue that there is not a word about ’Libra-Spica’ in Surya Siddhanta, the
basic work of Hindu astrology, which Lahiri also refers to. Anyway, the Lahiri zodiac has had
some (slightly modified) versions since then – reflecting the problems that arise.

But there are much more ’precipitous’ systems that suppose an even later date for ayanamsha
= 0°. Despite the fact that these sidereal zodiacs should be classified as ’nonsense’ at first
sight, there are some who evaluate the sidereal horoscopes in such ’patterns’. They do so
certainly because they never took the trouble to ’visualise’ the contellation
background.

A good example for it is the system attributed to Hipparchus, which is quite popular in some
astrologer groups. Hipparchus was an excellent astronomer and philosoper of his time. Not
only did he make a star catalogue, which is considered as reference base up to this day, but he
was the first in Europe to write about the phenomenon of precession so it is certain that he
had solid astrological knowledge – like all astronomers in those days. Accordingly it is
completely inconceivable that he created such a ’freak zodiac’.

For the interpretation we need a technical term: the ’marker star’. To refine it the author of
these lines proposes another distinction: let’s distinguish ’primary marker star’ and ’secondary
marker star’. Primary marker star is the astrologically most significant star of the given
constellation, which is the brightest one there at the same time in the vast majority of cases.
4
We consider secondary marker star the one that is less important than the primary marker star
on the base of astrological traditions, but yet this star (star-cluster or group of stars) markedly
manifests the essence of the given constellation.

Our point is clean and clear: the primary marker star of a given constellation never can get out
of the 30-degree-sector of the given astral quality, that is it can not slide into any adjacent
sidereal sector. What is more, we also should make sure when making sections that the
’secondary markers’ positions must be similarly ’positioned’ – as far as the astronomical facts
make it possible.

Let’s see what happens on the sky when we put the date of the ’0 ayanamsha’ in 545 AD, and
this way the entrance (i.e. regression) of Spring Equinox in the section of sidereal Aquarius
gets as late as 2697 AD! (Picture 5)

Picture 5: A zodiac generally assigned to Hipparchus, in the state of the ’0 ayanamsha’,

which definitely can not come from this excellent astronomer, as the division seriously
violates the principles themselves of the sidereal astrology; it is like a ’veterinary horse’: it
allows demonstrating the way it must not be divided into sidereal sections.

Starting from the constellation of Leo, we can see that the Regulus is absolutely correctly kept
inside its sidereal section, but the Denebola – considered as secondary marker at the ’tail of
Leo’ – is passed on to the Virgo. We are not very happy about it, but we do not classify this as
an untenable disability of the system yet. This way this secondary ’Leo-marker’ goes to the
Virgo, which lets its own ’primary marker star’ get into the sidereal section of Libra, on the
other hand. The least we can say that it is scandalous but Lahiri has similar solution so let’s go
on. The Libra’s markers commendably stay inside their section.

5
 The Antares of the Scorpio is right, but the stars of ’the tail’ together with the Shaula
and Lesath, the actual ’Venom Sting’ – considered as star group the ’secondary marker’ of
this constellation – ’passed on’ to the sidereal section of Sagittarius. (Anyway, this is common
weakness of all popular sectioning.) Sagittarius is all right, but the Deneb Algedi on the ’tail’
of Capricorn slides into sidereal Aquarius, although we think that it is a ’secondary marker’
here. Aquarius partly ’covers’ Capricorn constellaton in the sky so when mapping to Ecliptic,
one sector boundary must be violated inevitably. Although it is more reasonable for the
dividing intention to ’save’ the principle of Capricorn, this discerption is still justifiable and
permissible.

The constellation of Pisces is generously ’sacrificed’, as usually in most sidereal

sectioning. Its ’most valuable’ part together with the primary marker star Alrescha (which is,
in fact, the meeting point of the two ’ribbons’ or ’ropes’) is passed on to the section of Aries.
At least this latter does not suffer any harm like the Taurus does not either, for which we can
be satisfied with the position of both the Pleiades and Aldebaran. (Its horns getting in the
section of Gemini we don’t take too strictly because in Egyptian zodiacs the Taurus is looking
in just the opposite direction…..)

But what is really unacceptable, the primary markers of Gemini constellation, Castor and
Pollux transferring into the sidereal section of Cancer…… Well, such an untenable situation
is generated by ’pushing too far ahead’ in time the date of ’0 ayanamsha’, probably not even
thinking about the problem. We think that this attitude not only makes sidereal astrology
frivolous but also eliminates it.

For the author of this treatise, the only acceptable sectioning is the one that keeps all ’marker
stars’ in their own sidereal equal sectors. So we need a sidereal zodiac where Alrescha, the
primary marker star of the Pisces, stays in the sidereal section of Pisces, furthermore all the
’tail-stars’ of the constellation Scorpio are positioned in their own sidereal sector. At the same
time we can not go back in time beyond a certain limit to fix ’0 ayanamsha’ as we must take
care that the Regulus can not ’slide’ into the sidereal section of Cancer. On first approach ’0
ayanamsha’ could not happen earlier than 156 BC. If it happened in this year, the Regulus, the
most important fiducial star of the sidereal system we proposed, would stand on 0° of sidereal
Leo ’on tick’.

But the real situation is more complicated than that. Just because we want to save the Regulus
in its dignity, it can not be put ’on tick’ to the 0° of its own sidereal sector. Why? – As a
matter of fact, what we know about the relation of tropical and sidereal zodiacs that is about
the so-called ’Fixed stars’ movements of forward direction in the tropical zodiac, due to the
receding motion of Spring Equinox – is only slice of it, not the whole truth.

This is the time to refer back to the problem that the length of World Ages (Platonic Months)
is actually different from the ’ideal’. Because when studying the celestial mechanics we must
experience that nothing is ’round’ and regularly recurring. It is inevitable that everything in
the Universe is moving and changing – so what seems to be constant and fixed over a
lifetime, is not that on the scale of World Ages. As we are thinking in perspectives of this
latter one, it is important to know that the ’Fixed Stars’ do not stand still either, but have their
’self-movement’.

Our central star, the Sun, moves towards a certain point of the Universe (at an approximate
speed of ~14 km/sec). Its planets orbiting around can be considered as objects presenting a
spiral motion pattern – from a hypothetical ’distant, external point of view’. The direction of
6
movement aims at a point in the constellation of Hercules, to the south-west under the
constellation of Lyra, called ’Solar Apex’ – mainly in astronomical contexts. (Its tropical
position mapped to Ecliptic is now 2° 26’ of Capricorn).

What is essential here for us: the stars, examined over large time horizons, change their
position both in ecliptical longitude and latitude depending on their distance from Earth and
their position in relation to Ecliptic. This change can be very considerable in the time of a
’Platonic month’ (cca. 2160 years); in case of Regulus e.g. more than 8 arc minutes retrograde
direction expressed in ecliptical longitude. (Just for comparison: both Aldebaran and Antares
have their own self-movement of less than 1 arc minute expressed in ecliptical longitude
during a Platonic month’s interval.)

It is clear now that Regulus can not be put in 0° 0’ 0’’ of sidereal section of Leo at the date of
’0 ayanamsha’ because watching it after a ’Platonic Month’ we would see Cor Leonis, the
primary marker of Leo principle, staying in 29° 51’ of Cancer sidereal sector; and the
unsuspicious spectator would be really amazed: how it could happen to a ’Fixed Star’ in its
declared fix framework?

This is why the author of this treatise in his sidereal system puts Regulus as his chosen
’fiducial star’ at 0° 16’ of sidereal Leo in the date of ’0 ayanamsha’. Because of this it would
„leave” its fixed sector after 2000 years from our present time, around the end of ’Age of
Aquarius’. But we don’t have to deal with that anymore, because the all-consuming ’pralaya-
forces’ would disrupt the cognitive functions to a level that all the consciousness of the
’human world’ will cease to exist – so there would be no more ’problems’ at all.

Picture 6: Regulus = 0LEO sidereal system of ’0 ayanamsha’, which this author suggests to
take into account.

7
 Picture 7: Regulus = 0LEO sidereal system in state of ayanamsha = 30°, in other words: in
the (symbolic) moment when the Spring Equinox enters the equal-sectorial sidereal
Aquarius, on 21st December 2020.

It must be emphasized that in defining such ’entrance dates’ there will always be some
’symbolic’ elements as these are not more than ’index-dates’. Then how did we get to this
result? Our most important principle is to keep the marker stars inside their own sidereal
sector and this rule defined an interval for the ’0 ayanamsha’ event: it could not happen
earlier than 138 BC (because of the Regulus problem expounded above) and could not happen
later than 111 BC either (because in that case, the Alrescha, the primary marker of the Pisces
principle, would have been passed into the sidereal sector of Aries.) As a consequnce of all
these, the entrance of Spring equinox into the Aquarius sidereal sector must happen sometime
between 2020 and 2044.

First we looked for some confirming-activating astrological event and found the Great
Conjunction, which takes place at a time very close to Winter Solstice additionally, to be
properly marked; and it defined for us the exact date of the ayanamsha 0, as well.

Either the specific date of Winter Solstice in 2020, or the „Golden Conjunction” itself, not to
say the exact date(s) of Pluto entering in the tropical Aquarius (2023-2024) may serve as a
basis to ’index horoscopes’ to define the beginning of sidereal Aquarius age. What is more,
actually any emblematic astrological events up until 2044 as index date would set an
ayanamsha = 30° date that would be absolutely acceptable for us.

Overall we can say that by accepting Regulus = 0 Leo ayanamsha we could only win as a
result of three reasons. First, all the 12 zodiac qualities could keep their own essential dignity
in the sidereal sectioning, too, by having their important constellation markers in the adequate
sidereal sector. Secondly, we could get a fiducial star that is the best we could find; it is not
8
only because of its primus inter pares royal quality but its positioning, as well. It is namely the
marker star located the nearest to the ecliptic and it was standing right on the Ecliptic in
around 5000 BC and its own shift, in ecliptical latitude, is still less than 30 arc minutes, so it
does not reach the average diameter length of the Moon disc. Thirdly, but not least, this
system offers the chance to put the beginning of Aquarius Age (ayanamsha = 30°) sometime
between 2020 and 2044 and this would add appropriate ’reading’ to the specific world history
events of our days. It’s hard not to see that we’re going through a transition (of Ages) and this
would be accompanied by an appropriate astrological indication, rather close in time to the
famed Mayan forecast of 2012.

As for tne problem of ayanamsha 0 in 138 BC, well, we can conclude that it was inside
Hipparchus’ lifetime. We find it very realistic that the Greek philisopher who analyzed the
phenomenon of precision so persistently – put the coincidence of the tropical and sidereal
zodiac on this or a very close date, instead of one almost 700 years later.

Furthermore, at that time some remarkable works of Fine Art emerge ’out of thin air’, which
show the figure of a fish-fined Centaur-like creature. How could we explain the appearance of
this hybrid creature – called Ichthyocentaur – more witfully than by theorizing the spiritual
artistic sensitivity that reflects the Spring Equinox and Winter Solstice positioned in the
sidereal Pisces and Sagittarius? (picture 8)

Picture 8: Descriptions about Ichthyocentaur – first appeared just in 2nd century BC

9
Picture 9: Detailed presentation of the first quarter in Regulus = 0Leo sidereal system at the
state of ayanamsha = 30° – on 21st December 2020. Small blue symbols: tropical signs, big
gold symbols: sidereal sectors; magenta sign: Autumnal Equinox point; red square: one of
the quadrate points of the chief marker Regulus

Picture 10: Detailed presentation of the second quarter in Regulus = 0Leo sidereal system at
the state of ayanamsha = 30° – on 21st December 2020. Our system is the only one where the
Acumen (open cluster M7), which is in fact the ’poison’ released by the ’venom-thorn’, keeps
its position in the ’Scorpio sector’, while the ’arrowhead’ (Spiculum, M8) aiming at the heart
of the Scorpio has its place in the sidereal Sagittarius – by the order of things. The red signs:
quadrate point and opposition point.

10
Picture 11: Detailed presentation of the third quarter in Regulus = 0Leo sidereal system at
the state of ayanamsha = 30° – on 21st December 2020. Magenta sign: Spring Equinox; red
signs: opposition point and quadrate point (this latter one assings a ’secondary fiducial
entity’, of not just any kind, close to the geometric mean of the star-cluster Pleiades!)

Picture 12: Detailed presentation of the fourth quarter in Regulus = 0Leo sidereal system at
the state of ayanamsha = 30° – on 21st December 2020. Red sign: quadrate point (at the
Pleiades).

(to be continued)

11