Sidereal and Tropical, each for their intended use! More Info Here.

Age of Aquarius?

Written on


1. Do you believe there could be any sort of Aquarian age, or is it completely a farce from fence-sitters who want to ascribe some importance to the sidereal concept of the zodiac?

Reality is something we participate in creating. If we decide there is such a thing as an Aquarian age, that goes a long way to creating such a thing.

However, since reality is created by consciousness, the more profound the consciousness the more profound its influence in creation of reality. This is why the perceptions and conceptions of beings like Indra and Agni, and even more so Brahmā, and even more so still, Shiva and Vishnu are much more significant and effective in manifesting reality.

For the most part, we humans should try to perceive in harmony with them, rather than try to create something of our own, out of harmony with them.

Brahmā did not envision a system that includes a concept identical to the hippie-era-popularized concept of the “Age of Aquarius.”

2. Do you regard there being any sort of Ages in play that are symbolically resonant almost as a collective-dasha for all humanity and life on earth?

The whole aim of the Purāṇas and similar texts is to inform us about how the Gods and, ultimately, Paramātmā Vishnu envision reality – so that we can exist comfortably in harmony with it. The Purāṇas and astronomical siddhāntas, including Sūrya Siddhānta very clearly explain all the time cycles, which include ages.

Soon I will release a basic translation of the first chapter of Sūrya Siddhānta, on YouTube – to share all that.

In short, time has a cycle centered around mutliples of 1, 12, and 30. It extends from very short periods up to very long periods. 30 days in a month, 12 months in a year – on a terrestrial scale. This scales up by using sunrise over the ecliptic (i.e. equinox) instead of sunrise over the horizon, and it becomes 1 year becomes an ecliptical day. And then the pattern repeats. 30 in an ecliptic month. 12 of those in an ecliptic year. Now the scale becomes huge. Multiply, by 1000. 12,000 ecliptic years form an “Age” (caturyuga). The age has four sub-parts to it. The first has 4/10ths of the full duration. The second has 3/10ths. The third has 2/10ths and the final part has 1/10th. These sub-ages are what we usually call yugas. And in English we usually sloppily refer to yuga as “Age” – dropping the adjective of which part of the age it is (is it the four-fourths part, three-fourths part, etc.).

These durations are very long 1/10th of the Age lasts 432 thousand terrestrial years.

The Surya Siddhanta teaches how to use astronomy to locate where you currently are in all these ages, after you have some information about the general location – which you can only get from the Purāṇas and take them at their word.

People mistake the ages to be based on astrological timing, but they are not. They span periods of time during which the earth doesn’t even exist. They are based on a time unit called prāṇa (“breath”), the main scope being the prāṇa of Vishnu. Time is caused by consciousness, which works through breath. Hence breath propels time. This is why we can’t determine where we are in cosmic history by astronomy. But once we have been given some information that is not obtainable emperically, about where we are within the scope of Vishnu’s breath pattern, then we have narrowed down the cosmic clock, and then we can use astronomy to figure out the rest, indirectly, because astronomy lets us know how much time has passed.

3. Do you have any sort of predictive methods to apply to the collective situations in humanity which might be useful as markers for the passing evolutionary cycles we are living through?

There is no need to predict that summer is hot and winter cold. We know it because we have been through many summers and winters. Similarly, the universe is a cyclic entity, and everything that goes on in it has already gone on many many times, although never in EXAAAACTLY the same minute detail.

So we don’t need a predictive technique as much as we need a general principle defining the “cosmic seasons” – somewhat similar to the four sub-ages in an age. The 4/4ths age (kṛta-yuga) has 4/4th dharma (integrity). In other words the world is at “full power” during that age. The nutrition is perfect, the air is perfect, hence the lifeforms are perfectly nourished, and therefore tend to be raised perfectly well, and thus behave perfectly properly and have peace and prosperity. This diminishes by 1/4 in each successive subage.

Once you know this, you know the general context. Then you can use astronomy and astrology to get the finer details about exactly “when” and “what” – if for some reason you need to.

4. For example, have you regarded the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, and the progression of their conjunction cycle into Aquarius, with any specific regard? 

I don’t see the relation of this question to the previous, but that is OK.

Yes, the Jupiter ~ Saturn conjunction (which also involved Mars much of the time, and also began in coincidence with an eclipse at the southern solstice WITH Jupiter and Saturn is a signature for widespread health problems – we saw it in famous pandemics, like the Black Plague. And it was the main thing indicating the Corona Virus being in its very dangerous phase.

Since that conjunction has dispersed, Corona Virus has become relatively weak and the death rate has almost ceased.

5. Or would you say it is generally useless to cherry-pick predictions for the general populace, and we are better off looking at our own charts for predictive analysis as nothing in the collective can ever be conclusive?

I don’t think it is useless, if you take the “cherry-pick” phrase out of your question. I think it is useful. Honestly, it is probably closer to the originally intended use of astrology.

6. You may have already answered this in some vids so no need to elaborate, but in case i’ve missed it, what is your stance on the Kali yuga, if you do have one?

I supposed you mean do I believe we are in Kali-Yuga or not? Because a prominent voice, Shree Yukteshwar gives the opinion that we are not. Yet most other prominent voices give the opinion that we are. So you are asking which group I side with?

As I mentioned, the first chapter of Sūrya Siddhānta defines the yugas – and it is a book about such things (about the subject of time and how to measure it). All the other Astronomical Siddhāntas give the same definition of the yugas. All the Purana’s which have sections dedicated to astronomy (which is most of them) also give the same definition. They all declare a yuga is a collection (the basic meaning of the word “yuga”) of ecliptical years. Specifically it is a collection of 12,000 ecliptical years. Since one ecliptical year is formed by 360 terrestrial years, they all agree that a yuga is 4.32 million terrestrial years. Thus they all agree that kali-yuga (the 1/10th yuga) is 432 thousand terrestrial years.

All of these also all agree that the age started with a theoretical mean conjunction of planets in roughly 3,100 B.C.E. Also, they all agree that ages take 1/10 of their duration to “dawn” and the same to “dusk.” So the gradual shift into kali-yuga began about 5 thousand years ago, and has about 38 thousand years still to go. In other words we are just starting to shift into kali-yuga.

One might wonder where Shree Yukteshwar got his idea.

There is one solitary text, Manu-Saṁhitā, which omits the “ecliptical” from the statement that a yuga is a collection of 12,000 years. Omitting this makes the 1/10 yuga (kali yuga) last only 1,200 years. Unfortunately it would also reduce the duration of the existence of a given “universe” from c. 311 trillion terrestrial years to less than a trillion – which we find rather impossible to believe if we consider any of our current astronomical observations.

Anyhow, Shree Yukteshwar liked this idea that Kali-Yuga ended in 1900 B.C.E – but that also didn’t seem to make too much sense because clearly we are not in the “golden age” Kṛta-yuga. So he invented an entirely new system. (as far as I know his system is not found in any Vedic text). He said that after the ages “descend” from 4/4th to 1/4 they then reverse and “ascend” from 1/4th to 4/4th. So he claims that the “descending kali-yuga” ended around 1900 B.C.E. and the “ascending kali-yuga” started then, and ended at about 700 B.C.E. at which time the “ascending dvapara-yuga” started, and endured until about 1700 C.E. (being 2,400 years long). And then the “ascending treta-yuga” started and will last until 5,200 C.E.

He claims that historical events match this – but I find that dubious. The current conditions in the world are nothing at all like the conditions that are characteristic of Treta-Yuga (very opulent nutrition and air quality, creating extremely long-lived, tall, strong, humans with extremely refined and peaceful intellect – and very very little war and argument). Instead the currently observable conditions seem to be an exact match for the “dawn of the age of Kali” – conditions becoming increasingly more hostile, as the ecology becomes increasingly deprived.

He also likes his system because it fits with the sidereal zodiac artifact. 12,000 years is almost half an equinoctial precession. So he is thinking that the yugas can be timed by the “age of aquarius” etc. In this he has completely departed from the Purāṇas and Siddhāntas.

His followers will be upset with me for saying that, but a fact is a fact and should not be disputed. His followers should follow him if they think he is a better authority that the countless spotless sages who authored the Purāṇas and Siddhāntas. They should not pretend that the Purāṇas and Siddhāntas agree with Shree Yukteshwar. One should own one’s stance fully.

7. What is your stance on Uranus, Neptune and Pluto? Do you ever use them, or would you say they are a consequence of Western astrologers being bored with their superficial grasp of the fundamentals of astrology, and trying to licientiously expand outside of those fundamentals?

I believe the concept that Uranus, etc. etc. are astrological factors is an artifact of general confusion about the fundamental basics of what astrology is. “Western” “Northern” “Southern” or “Eastern” doesn’t make a difference. The confusion is universal.

Astrology is an interpretation of the sky, and all the symbolisms are derived from what is visibly and perceptibly obvious about the planets, and cardinal directions (the teresstrial directions are the root of the house meanings, and the ecliptical directions are the root of the sign meanings).

Certain things in genuine astrology are not visible, but are derived from things that are visible. But Uranus, etc. are not in that category. They are entirely invisible and their location cannot be derived from other visible things alone. Hence they are not a part of the sky visible to humans.

I did a series on YouTube called “Astrology is Beautiful.” In it, I talk a lot about the negative side effect of appending new non-essentials into essential roles.

I think because astrology is one of the sciences that falls into disarray in kali-yuga we have to expect this sort of thing, along with the confusion over whether the zodiac is sidereally or tropically anchored.

8. Have you ever considered or looked into the nodes of those so-called outer planets? (They are a phenomenon highly regarded in Evolutionary Astrology). For example, it is being commonly regarded that the south node of Pluto is currently in Capricorn, and will enter Aquarius around 2600, which some regard as the “True” age of Aquarius.


Sūrya Siddhānta defines “nodes” for the Sun, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn – so I think it would be unchaste of me, a student of the sages, to go try to make a relationship with other nodes before I have even availed of these.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: