Pluto into Aquarius: Are We on the Brink of a New Age?

Hey everyone, this is Adam Elenbaas from Nightlight Astrology. Happy Monday, everybody. Today we're going to start taking a look at Pluto's upcoming entrance into the sign of Aquarius. Easily one of the biggest events of the year, along with Saturn's entrance into Pisces, which also happened this month, we started taking a look at Pluto into Aquarius several months ago. So if you go back into my archives, you'll find a number of different videos where I talk about this transit, and you'll find a few more this week, and there was one last week as well. So there's a lot of content on my channel already made, which you could certainly go back in and dig into if you wanted.

Today, we're going to be asking the question, Does this signal a new age? One of the most frequent questions I have received over the past year actually the past couple of years since we had the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction and the early degrees of Aquarius back in 2020. Since then, I've had people ask did that signal the New Age, The Age of Aquarius. Does this entrance of Pluto into Aquarius coming back over that degree signal that we're entering the Age of Aquarius?

So there are a lot of questions and a lot of confusion about the Age of Aquarius and whether that's a thing and is somehow related to this. So I'm going to try to explain what the Age of Aquarius is and its place in astrological history today, and hopefully, that'll be enlightening for everybody. Tomorrow, we're going to look at some of the mythology of Aquarius through one of my favorite passages ever written on the subject. So that will be tomorrow. So a little teaser. So today, is this a new age? What is there? What's the deal with ages in astrology anyway? So we'll take a look at that as we get into it.

Before we do, don't forget to like and subscribe. Share your comments in the comment section and your stories. If you have a story to share, use the hashtag grabbed or email us your story grabbed@nightlightastrology.com. Put hashtag grabbed, and then put Pluto into Aquarius. And then tell us a little bit about how you have noticed that transit showing up in your life, especially if you have, you know, some of the times when these planets ingress. You know, people have remarkable examples of planetary symbolism show up, and I aggregate those and use them for storytelling episodes. So if you got one, feel free to share it with us; we'd love to hear it. You can find a transcript of today's talk on my website, which is nightlightastrology.com.

I'm also really excited to announce the beginning of a one-week pop-up sale, which I started telling you guys about last week. Basically, we have people after the Kickstarter is over, and we run all of those discounted tuition packages for my online programs. We have people emailing us saying, well, I missed out, and could I get the deal and we say just wait if we have enough people ask, we'll do a reboot sale for a week in the spring. Sure enough, we have, and so if you go over to my website, which is nightlightastrology.com, and you click on the Courses tab, you'll see the first-year and second-year training and certification programs in Hellenistic astrology, the horary astrology course these three begin in June.

So whether you're a returning student or you're just beginning your adventure with learning ancient astrology, you can check those courses out; when you click on them and go down to the bottom of the page, you're going to see that the sale price is listed there. So it's about $400 off the early bird payment, which is 50% off the total price of the course if you use a normal payment tuition plan. So it's a really great deal for people to save with.

If you look at the comment section or the description of this video, you'll find a link that will take you to special offers for two and four-class passes, which also take the savings up significantly, so you'll save a lot more money if you bundle two of my programs together and you save the most it goes up to about 75% off almost 75% off when you get a four class pass. Now the other courses I offer year one always start in June and November. Year two and horary always start only once yearly in June. Reading the passages starts in January of every year. Masterclass series also starts in the winter of every new year, and Roots and Spheres also start at the beginning of every new year.

So you could purchase and join late for any of those or purchase classes for next year's program if you want to get ahead on a good sale rate for next year. You know you're going to attend routes and spheres again in 2024 or the Masterclass series next year or whatever. It's a great way to save a bunch of money on those and make your astrological education a little bit more affordable. So if you have any questions at all about our programs or the sale, email us info at nightlightastrology.com.

So today, we're going to ask this question that I've been getting over and over again. Pluto into Aquarius, especially After Jupiter and Saturn conjoined in that early space of Aquarius, does this mean that we're on the brink of a new age? Is this the Age of Aquarius? As I've heard about that, is that kind of what this is? No, that's the short answer. That's not what this is. But it's not nothing, either. So let's try to understand it. We're gonna take a look at a few passages from one of my favorite books that clarified some of these questions for me at an earlier point in my education. And I hope you'll enjoy it and actually read it. It's called Astrology and Popular Religion in the Modern West: Prophesy Cosmology and the New Age Movement. It's by Nicholas Campion.

Nicholas Campion is one of the world's most famous historians of astrology. And he is responsible for writing a two-volume treatise on the history of Western astrology, which are also fantastic. So anyway, he writes in this book a lot about the history of the new age in the Age of Aquarius and how they're similar and different. So I want to read you a few portions from his text as a way of trying to address this question about whether or not we're entering a new age.

Since the early part of the 20th century, the millenarian terms new age and age of Aquarius have often been used as synonyms. They are not in spite of the many writers who regard them as identical, the same, so they're not the same. As an astrological prophecy. The Age of Aquarius is based on the idea of the gradual shift of the stars and constellation in relation to the Sun's location at the Spring Equinox, usually, on 21st March, a phenomenon known as the precession of the equinoxes, the consequences of the gradual separation of the so-called tropical zodiac used in Western astrology from the sidereal zodiac, which is based on the actual stars, for example, the Western zodiac sign of Pisces no longer occupies the same portion of the sky as the classical Greek constellation of Pisces.

So, first of all, he is saying that the Age of Aquarius and the new age are often conflated, but they are not identical to one another culturally or historically. So he's going to do some careful differentiating of their difference. Then he goes on to say that most people think of the Age of Aquarius. So the way that it's defined is as the shifting of an astrological era that is measured, the shift is measured roughly by the precession of the equinoxes and the gradual realignment of the Spring Equinox with new signs of the zodiac.

The astronomical details need not concern us here, for they're just a vehicle on which to hang a certain kind of apocalyptic belief. One version of modern astrological theory holds that significant shifts in human civilization conform to major movements of the constellations or zodiac signs in relation to the equinox. According to the theory, the next age, the age of Aquarius, will be inaugurated when the Sun rises in Aquarius on 21st March and can, therefore, at least in theory, be dated exactly, even if there is considerable disagreement about the exact year.

In actuality, there is a fair degree of confusion about the precise methodology by which the ages inauguration should be measured. That said, the astronomical foundation for the theory of astrological ages lends them an aura of objective reality. The new age, by contrast, is a phase of history whose existence in time is defined by humanity's near-universal psychological inclination to anticipate an imminent transformation in society, the world, or the entire universe.

Like the Parousia, the New Age is always imminent but never comes. As we have seen, apocalyptic events were traditionally measured by planetary cycles, chiefly Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions. There is, though not a single excellent example of the use of precession of the equinoxes to predict the future by astrologers until the late 19th century. There are indeed arguments that precession was used by astrologers in the ancient world, but they are based entirely on the retrospective interpretation of circumstantial evidence and lack any textual support. The origin of the belief that the Age of Aquarius is imminent is relatively modern and can be traced to three separate but interleague interlinked strands in 18th-century European thought.

The first was the attempt central to enlightenment ideology to establish a common origin to religion. The means by which this was to be accomplished was the study of comparative religion, the deliberate aim being to diminish Christianity's claim to unique status.
The second was the theory that the shared origin of all religion lies in worship of the celestial bodies, especially the Sun became a model of all male deities and mythical heroes.
The third was the use of the apparent shift of the stars called caused by the precession of the equinoxes as a means of dating the history of the Indian sacred texts, the Vedas. The theory that religion and astronomy shared common origins was developed in the revolutionary atmosphere of 1790s France.

He goes on to talk about some of the thinkers and works. Anyway, then he goes on to say that the twin concepts of the Sun is the origin of all male anthropomorphize religions. And the shift of zodiac signs through the precession of the equinoxes as a guide to the changing character of religious observation circulated among both atheists and occultists through the first half of the 19th century.

So, for example, you have people pointing to the precession of the equinoxes and astrological ages as a way of trying to make all religions rooted in the same kind of thinking. But this was being done by sort of like secular atheists, skeptics, scholarly skeptic atheist kind of mentality, which I'm not judging it at all. It's just exactly what he's saying here. And then he says that, on the other hand, you have occultists picking up on the same theory about the precession of the equinoxes and starting to take it very seriously. It's kind of funny. Anyway, he goes on to talk about different people who picked up on this thinking in particular, like Madame Blavatsky and others in the theosophy movement.

In the end, he talks a lot about the conflation of becoming of a Cosmic Christ with the Age of Aquarius, which was prevalent among some early astrologers and theosophists, and stuff like that in the modern era. But then he ends with this there are two crucial features of Aquarian Age historiography. First, its crisis-laden language, sometimes fearful but generally hopeful, stands exactly in the lineage of astrological Apoc apocalyptic literature, which can be traced back to the ancient Near East, especially to the Old Testament.

Second, all the documentary evidence indicates that the use of the shift of the constellations as a technical basis for such prophecies appears to be a product of late 18th-century atheism, filtered through theosophy and then adopted by astrologers; we are therefore dealing with a clear example of an invented tradition, but one which has deep roots in the western mentality.

So the Age of Aquarius, in other words, is something that the prediction of the future and astrological ages by the precession of the equinoxes in the way that it's presented when you hear people talk about the Age of Aquarius is a very recently developed idea. And it wasn't even developed initially by astrologers. So it's adopted by astrologers. It was initially developed as a way of talking about the history of religion and what sort of all religious communities may have shared in common, which in this case, would be the worship of the stars, and so on and so forth. So it's just it's interesting.

There is not historical writing about well when the precession of the equinoxes changed, then that age has changed. But that's like a modern concept. He also says but the roots of such thinking about ages and apocalypse and utopia and massive shifts in consciousness and the sort of kind of the idea of a change in the universe or a change in consciousness itself for all of humanity. This actually is very old and dates back to millenarian and apocalyptic thinking, which has been present in many different religions and traditions around the world, including the astrological tradition at times.

For example, you have the Yugas in Indian astrology. You have different ages, through I think it was Zoroastrians and or the Persian astrologers. They were not generally measured by the precession of the equinoxes. There were different forms of measuring, and it wouldn't be according to those measurements; there's not like a well the next stage is, you know, Aquarius, snow wouldn't have been like that.

There's a great another great book that Nicholas Campion wrote called The Great Year, which goes into great detail about the history of eras and ages and apocalyptic thinking relative to planetary cycles, which is a super fascinating read. But one of the important things to recognize is that there's no like history of astrology saying that right now, we're on the brink of the Age of Aquarius; that's a very recently developed idea.

Not to say it's not true because new things can, new ideas, and schools of thinking can come up; it's not like, well, the only truth is things exist in the past. But it is interesting that it's like a very recently modern, you know, like a, a recently developed idea that is often projected backward as though it has historical basis when it doesn't know it does have historical basis insofar as it you know, certain astrologers, throughout time have paid attention to great planetary cycles as indicators of changes in historical eras or important changes in government or, you know, the rulers or leaders or, you know, things like that.

For example, the cycles of Saturn and Jupiter, as they cycled gradually through the signs of the same element and then change into a new elemental family, I think it's like 270 years or something like that; if someone knows the exact number, remind me, but I think it's around 270 years. It is significant, for example, that Jupiter and Saturn just had a great conjunction in Aquarius and that they are shifting into air signs as I mean, they had conjunction and Libra in, you know, the early 80s. This shift that happens of the great conjunctions of Jupiter-Saturn into new plant signs of the of a new element that for ancient some ancient astrologers was an indication that yeah, that is a new age, it's a new era.

There may have been various apocalyptic or utopian projections put onto those cycles. And that's, you know, that's that is there is a rich history in in in in terms of astrologers looking at planetary cycles and the development of historical narratives. So we can't begrudge people for looking at Pluto and Aquarius and wondering how it will impact the collective narrative because, of course, it will. And we can't balk at the fact that the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction is indicating a shift of the trigun's of the Jupiter-Saturn cycles and that that conjunction is happening at the same place that Pluto is ingressing. So I do think those things are really significant.

Significant how? I don't know, you know, like just; I'm a reader of astrological data, you know, an interpreter and an educated guesser. And that's what astrologers are doing. And at our best moments were diviners, but, really, what I want to make sure that people understand is that all of saying all of that is very different than saying that we are on the brink of the Age of Aquarius, as defined by this idea that's very recently developed about the precession of the equinoxes through the signs, and so on and so forth. So hopefully, that makes sense to everyone and clears up some confusion that it seems like a lot of people are having right now.

The other thing that he says here, I want to pick another quote. He says this New Age culture is not static. It flourished in esoteric circles in the early 20th century, combined with countercultural radicalism in the 1960s and 70s, and became commercialized in the 1980s. The label was then simultaneously rejected by many of its proponents, while many of its ideas and practices went mainstream. In the first decade of the 21st century, apocalyptic hopes of a transition to an astronomically derived new age were transferred from the age of Aquarius to the supposed end of the Mayan calendar in December 2012.

The underlying cultural patterns though continue new ageism, is a species of Millenarianism. Possessing all the characteristics of apocalyptic belief, including Messianism, the idea that like a messiah or something messianic will, will happen or occur, something to save us or maybe a second coming or something like that. Astrology and the expectation of an imminent historical transformation. Combining this with the Gnostic notions of the inner divine, it adds other features to the transformational matrix, relativity, personal development, and self-ethic; I would add quantum physics which seems to be a part of it too.

The New Age movement, as it exists today, has an apocalyptic core and a wider cultural impact. Even though it draws widely on nonwestern spiritualities, it also has a profoundly Christian dimension, so much so that it may be considered an integral part of a 2000-year lineage of Christian apocalyptic thought, although a more quietus contemplative form than that favored by more militant forms of Christian Millenarianism. Like Jesus is coming, the guy standing on the corner, the rapture is coming. The question I shall consider is whether, as so many commentators assume, it provides an explanatory model for the nature and popularity of modern astrology, which is a fascinating part of the rest of his book if you want to read it.

What I think is really important that he's doing there is He's helping us unpack where we may stand consciously or unconsciously in relation to the planets, like there is going to be an always has been a subsection of people who look at any and all planetary movements, especially major movements from slower moving planets as potentially indicating some major shift in historical trajectory.

Usually, there are two extremes that get projected onto that, which are the optimistic hopes for utopia or salvation or some revealing or leap forward....in society. Okay, so there's rejection of some hopeful thing that sweeps up society in, you know, delivers us, or there's usually the negative or pessimistic view that like everything's going to shit and that these transits could mean our downfall. And then you have people that kind of straddle the two and say, well, it could go either way, but it all rests on us, you know. I'm making fun of it only because it's just like having you all heard these stories a million times.

So, what do I want to say about that? I mean, like, because people asked me like, you know, first of all, like, I know, you know that Pluto entering Aquarius is going to bring utopia or is it going to bring dystopia or, you know? Where do you stand? Is it is Pluto and Aquarius a new age? Or is it a dystopia? Or, like, what the hell will it be? Is this the Age of Aquarius?

So A, I think we've established it is not the Age of Aquarius, the age, the age of Aquarius; that whole concept is relatively new. And so me personally, I'm going like, Nope, I'm not the Age of Aquarius thing is, a modern popular idea that I don't think is rooted in that rich and deep enough history of astrology that I find it to be like a compelling thing.

I don't think we were in the Age of Pisces, and we're going to the Age of Aquarius, and I tend to view that model and thought about ages as not very well, like sort of half-baked and very recent. But, you know, I don't mean that sounds shitty; I just, that's just where I stand. I do believe that there is a history of looking at cycles of ages.

You can see that historically that astrology has always been thought of in relation to eras and ages of culture or history. I do think that there's something to that, though. I'm more compelled by the fact that Pluto is entering Aquarius and hitting the Jupiter Saturn point. I don't tend to project onto that great hopes or great fears, great salvation and utopia or dystopia. I just think history. Like the seasons, you know, changes the end, we have different seasons like we're entering an airy season. And that could mean a million different things.

Tomorrow I'm going to be doing a video on the mythology of Aquarius and reading a passage that I really love on Aquarius, where I think I'll try to open that up a little bit more like, well, what would an age rooted in air look like? Especially sort of the Pluto and Aquarius as maybe the opening of a very long cycle of 270 years, I think it is, of Jupiter-Saturn working their conjunction through air signs, like what could an airy age look like. But to me, that's not the same as projecting onto it the idea of some massive leap, or the returning of a messiah or the, you know, a portal opening up or whatever. So, you know, and for me personally, the reason that I can't get on board with either great hopes or fears about historical and collective developments in the planets is because when the 2012 stuff came about, I was writing for a web magazine called Reality Sandwich and Reality Sandwich was like a hub for all sorts of really interesting thoughts about 2012 and what it might represent. And I kind of drank that Kool-Aid and went down that path. I don't regret it. It was super interesting.

Having been down that archetypal road of, like, utopian and dystopian, you know, planetary cycles and calendars and stuff like that. What I came away with from all of that was that in my body, in my mind, and my psyche, I need a temple of mystery. Open-minded, curious, mysterious, like, I wouldn't be surprised. I mean, I guess I wouldn't be surprised. But I sort of, I wouldn't be like, well, that's just out of the question. If you know if, like I said earlier in a couple of talks ago on Aquarius, if aliens landed, told us, we all descended from mushrooms and, you know, guided our civilization into some magnificently better place than we are right now. Like, if that happened, I'd be like, well, I guess I was wrong about the Age of Aquarius, you know, what am I going to do complain at that point, like, oh, well, I just can't accept this because I had to have been right, you know, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

On the other hand, you know, I also don't worry that like these transits are going to, there have been dark eras in history before. There have been really dark moments; there have been dark ages, you know, so it feels largely so out of my control. And so beyond my ability to anticipate what tremendously apocalyptic, you know, positive or negative things could happen. And so I just don't spend my time there because I can't relate to Pluto moving into Aquarius from anywhere, but like, the sort of gentle, contemplative space of like mystery, like, what will this mean? I'm so excited to find out and meditating with the archetypes and images, and symbols and trying to craft meaningful ways of thinking about them for myself and for other people. That's sort of the sweet spot that I live in.

So I just can't take myself out of that space because it's too precious and dear to me to get into, like anticipation and hype about sweeping historical changes that are coming. But that's me that, you know, that's my psyche, and that's where I hang out. And so, for the people who are doomed to listen to my channel, that's the take, you're gonna get from me on Pluto into Aquarius. But I do think like what I'll end with today is just saying that I do think that we're talking about a shift.

There is an Aquarian shift at hand. I don't, I wouldn't call it an Age of Aquarius, and I wouldn't project too much onto it. I suspect that you know, the area, the airy nature, again, of the Jupiter-Saturn conjunctions, it's starting, it's going to develop, repeating in Aquarius and Gemini and Libra, right? As it goes through the airy trigun. I feel like that signals something that's happening. The air signs are humane signs; they're signs of mind. They're signs that often love ideals and things that are perfect and that elevate us through the purity of thought and conceptualize, conceptualizing the best possible things like an architect drawing out the perfect world.

But it's also air signs can be very dissociative, and they can deny or negate the earth and the Great Mother and the body. And so those are the kinds of things that I wonder about when I think about what defines a new age or era, not so much the idea of dystopia or utopia, and I hope that I think for a lot of people, not everyone, I don't want to, like dictate how people think or feel about these events. But I would say for a lot of people, if you find yourself stressed out about the Pluto in Aquarius and new ages, will it be dystopia or utopia? You know, I would just, you might find that it's a lot less stressful to just step out of those that dichotomy altogether. And just approach it personally. For starters, how will it affect you? How is it showing up in your chart? How's it showing up in your life?

So I hope that this has been interesting and educational, that we have differentiated some of the history around the New Age Age of Aquarius, that it's the Age of Aquarius, astronomically not so much a thing within the history of astrology, but the Age of Aquarius and what it's about philosophically and the concern with ages and eras and apocalypse, that has a long history of being involved in religions and within the history of astrology itself.

Does that mean that we should get wrapped up in millenarian and apocalyptic or dystopian thinking? I don't think so. Personally, I wouldn't recommend it. But that's not where I like to hang out. So that's, of course, what I would, I would sort of recommend to others. Take it, and I would love to hear your reflections on all of this and kind of where you land and what your thinking has been like, and tomorrow we will get together again to talk more about the mythology of Aquarius, which I look forward to and we're just going to kind of keep opening up the conversation in layers this week. So more tomorrow; we'll talk to you guys later. Bye.