Old or New Horary Chart?

Hi all,
I have a question regarding rules and/or technique.

Someone places a question regarding if they would hold their job. The horary chart doesn't provide a definite answer; 50/50 no/yes. The 'yes' is because of a technique called 'the light of a 3rd planet.'

The person loses their job, is replaced , and begins legal action.

After a week the replacement does not want the position anymore. The person is asked to hold back on legal action and apply for the old position. One of three applicants.

As the situation has changed since the original question, does this make the horary still applicable; OR should a new horary be made for the new situation, even though the question is more or less the same?

Frisiangal said:

Someone places a question regarding if they would hold their job. The horary chart doesn't provide a definite answer; 50/50 no/yes. The 'yes' is because of a technique called 'the light of a 3rd planet.'

Click to expand...

Collection? Translation? This could be important.

As the situation has changed since the original question, does this make the horary still applicable; OR should a new horary be made for the new situation, even though the question is more or less the same?

Click to expand...

Ultimately, it should all be seen from the original horary. Are there indications that things get better after being worse in the horary? There shouldn't be a need to reask a question unless a situation has completely run its course or there was some time frame involved in the wording of the question as every event that occurs in relation to that question should be able to be foreseen by applying aspects to or from significators.

That is one way to look at it.

However there is a substantial difference between a horary that suggests a permanent separation and one that suggests a temporary one. This may have also been the reason the OP was unable to come to a conclusive judgment on the matter, as the possibility of a temporary separation didn't come into their mind.

I'll say this:
Using the alternative horary method I do, which gives very succinct answers, I'd say that a new question regarding the modified situation, would be needed.

HOWEVER!
standard (ie traditional Western) horary (when expertly applied) gives much more analytical detail than the simpler (and I think, more direct) method I use: so, I would have to agree with the posts by Kaiousei no Senshi in this thread, ie that the (expertly) delineated standard horary methodology should point to all near term ramifications and even longer term eventualities connected with the original question, and therefore a new horary question (in any way similar to the original question)would NOT be necessary-such ramifications and eventualities should be able to be seen from the standard (traditional Western) horary analysis of the answer given by the original horary chart.

Thank you for the replies.

The question was put to an astrologer who asked the question on the colleague's behalf. That, in itself, was an exercise in the turning of the houses in the horary chart.

My personal thoughts went along with those of Marinka and Dr. Farr. The person did lose the job; end of matter. To my mind a new....or even revised....situation implied a new chart.

K.N.S wrote:

Ultimately, it should all be seen from the original horary. Are there indications that things get better after being worse in the horary?

Click to expand...

In my attempt to answer the horary, I indicated possibilites of a legal -beneficial nature. I was told that I went further than the scope of the original 'yes or no' answer to the question and it didn't count. I've always understood that there can be more to, and in an horary than the scope of the direct question. You appear to confirm that.

'the light of a 3rd planet'.

Click to expand...

'Collection? Translation? This could be important.

Click to expand...

I don't know what its correct term would be called in English. The translation was mine.
The explanation was that, although a harsh aspect indicated a 'no' answer, the planet Saturn made a trine aspect to one of the planets of it. Saturn was 'the light of the 3rd planet' (apparently an old technique). I queried this importance because it didn't aspect the other planet. I was given no answer (student querying teacher????). It was implied that the fact that Saturn is the planet of 'delay' meant a 'yes' answer was possible.

If I am able to place the chart on this horary board (computer illiterate!!), should I place it on this thread or in the career section?

I would suggest the Career section.

Remember too that horary questions do NOT necessarily have to be of a "yes or no" nature; the sought after answer can rather be that of a full explanation (even in the alternative "Ankara" horary method I use, an explanation answer-rather than just a yes or no-can be sought, and certainly so in the much more elaborate standard/traditional Western horary methodology)

Marinka said:

It's been played out ...

You asked whether you would hold your job and you didn't hold it and with that, the chart ended. While there might be more information you could get from the original question chart, it's fitting to ask a new question at the appropriate time.

Click to expand...

As I noted, there is likely more information in the chart but, it's going to be more expedient and likely more accurate to just ask another question (if the question was answered). To explain, as you move past the first layer of answers (and situations) that are given in a horary chart, you can peel back more layers (and situations) from that same chart to get more information. As you do this, it takes significantly more time to analyze the data and to ensure the accuracy of the interpretation. It's always easy to pull out the information after the fact, not as simple before the fact.

If a question is well-formed and uncomplicated, usually the answer will be in the first layer and can be easily interpreted within a few minutes (IMO). To dig out answers in underlying layers takes much time and IMHO, most astrologers will not go there. So while it can be done, who will spend the time to do it.

The 80/20 rule is appropriate here - it could take 20% of the time to get 80% of the answer yet, to get the additional 20% requires 80% more time. In a professional practice - that 80% more time equates to a significant increase in the cost of the service.

So this becomes an issue between what is theoretically possible and what is practical ......

Frisiangal said:

The question was put to an astrologer who asked the question on the colleague's behalf. That, in itself, was an exercise in the turning of the houses in the horary chart

Click to expand...

Ah, someone asking a question about someone they shouldn't have. Always a good time.

In my attempt to answer the horary, I indicated possibilites of a legal -beneficial nature. I was told that I went further than the scope of the original 'yes or no' answer to the question and it didn't count. I've always understood that there can be more to, and in an horary than the scope of the direct question. You appear to confirm that.

Click to expand...

Yes, horary is much more powerful and useful than many people seem to think. A lot of it comes down to a mix of differences in philosophy and experience. Classically horary comes in three stages; 1) yes or no 2) why or why not 3) what can be done about it. These days, people call it quits after the first stage.

I don't know what its correct term would be called in English. The translation was mine.
The explanation was that, although a harsh aspect indicated a 'no' answer, the planet Saturn made a trine aspect to one of the planets of it. Saturn was 'the light of the 3rd planet' (apparently an old technique). I queried this importance because it didn't aspect the other planet. I was given no answer (student querying teacher????). It was implied that the fact that Saturn is the planet of 'delay' meant a 'yes' answer was possible.

Click to expand...

I'm having a hard time visualizing this. Are you saying one of the significators aspected Saturn, and Saturn aspected another planet who was not a significator?

Kaiousei no Senshi said:

Yes, horary is much more powerful and useful than many people seem to think. A lot of it comes down to a mix of differences in philosophy and experience. Classically horary comes in three stages; 1) yes or no 2) why or why not 3) what can be done about it. These days, people call it quits after the first stage.

Click to expand...

This is a terrific answer, Kai.

I think lots of people call it quits after the yes or no because all the OP wanted to know is a yes or no. And secondly, like analysis in other areas, most of us are not willing to spend more than 20 minutes for a free answer.

But you are so right that there is so much more that can be seen, and so much more that can be brought into the scene.

Kaiousei no Senshi said:

Ah, someone asking a question about someone they shouldn't have. Always a good time

Click to expand...

An interesting observation Kaiousei no Senshi

I refer to a comment made by BobZemco on an earlier discussion THE QUESTION IN HORARY thread at http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=482804#post482804

BobZemco said:

Bonatti defines it very clearly.

It doesn't matter what I think.

The Rules are The Rules.



The first step in Horary is to receive the Question.

The second step is to cast the chart.......


.........In a Perfect World™ the Querent would consult with the astrologer.

The astrologer would ask questions to both help the Querent identify exactly what it is they would like to know,
and to determine if the Querent has the authority to ask the question in the first place.

And the reason is so the astrologer can assign the correct significators.


If a woman tells a man, "Go to the astrologer and see if I am pregnant," then the man is a proxy for the True Querent and you use the 1st House, but if a man asks simply because he suspects, then he still gets the 1st House -- since he is the True Querent -- but the woman is the 7th House.


Also, on the issue of having authority to even ask a question,
many professional astrologer associations prohibit 3rd Party Questions,
unless the persons involved have signed a written release form granting permission........



.....In the US and Canada, if you do an unauthorized 3rd Party Horary for Suzy Psycho or Willy Wife-Beater or Chester the Child-Molester and something happens, you as the astrologer are civilly liable.

Depending on the exact State or Province, you could be held criminally liable, too.

One is not allowed to know things for the sake of knowing.

You're entitled to know something, if, and only if, it has a substantial impact on you.......

Click to expand...

So
it would seem then
that as well as whether an old or new horary chart is required
there's the interesting question
of whether or not the original question adhered to accepted/basic horary rules
or not

Kaiousei no Senshi said:

Yes, horary is much more powerful and useful than many people seem to think.

A lot of it comes down to a mix of differences in philosophy and experience.

Classically horary comes in three stages;

1) yes or no

2) why or why not

3) what can be done about it.

These days, people call it quits after the first stage

Click to expand...

Certainly it would seem then that classical horary requires more skill than a 'heads?' or 'tails?' response
because
a 'heads?' or 'tails?' response is correct fifty per cent of the time

As ours is a learning forum, of course many beginners value the opportunity to spend considerable time honing their skills
however
unfortunately learners have no way of verifying their level of accuracy
unless the OP provides feedback

Kaiousei no Senshi said:

I'm having a hard time visualizing this.

Are you saying one of the significators aspected Saturn,
and Saturn aspected another planet who was not a significator?

Click to expand...

The question was put to an astrologer who asked the question on the colleague's behalf

Click to expand...

JupiterAsc.(proxy)
The astrologer would ask questions to both help the Querent identify exactly what it is they would like to know,
and to determine if the Querent has the authority to ask the question in the first place.

Click to expand...

I don't know if the question was asked with or without the person's knowledge.
If asked without person's knowledge and only through colleague's own interest, would it make the horary invalid?

If a woman tells a man, "Go to the astrologer and see if I am pregnant," then the man is a proxy for the True Querent and you use the 1st House, but if a man asks simply because he suspects, then he still gets the 1st House -- since he is the True Querent -- but the woman is the 7th House

Click to expand...

In the horary offered, the 'colleague' was given as the 6th house of the querent 1st house. The houses were turned, and the 6th house became the 1st house of the colleague. Working out the puzzle continued from there.

Other than from Dr. Farr there has been no response on the horary chart placed in the 'career' section .
He also placed 'the colleague' as the 7th house.
Confusiion, confusion.

As ours is a learning forum, of course many beginners value the opportunity to spend considerable time honing their skills
however
unfortunately learners have no way of verifying their level of accuracy
unless the OP provides feedback

Click to expand...

Or the teachers? How can one otherwise accept and put all the theories into practise?

I used the 7th because I was not certain of the actual relationship implied by the term "colleague", so I used the "generic other" significator (7th house) If the colleague had been a good friend, I would have used the 11th; if a co-worker of equal status (as an employee) with the querent (but not really friends), then I would have used the 6th; but without more clarifying data, I chose the "generic other" 7th, which, by the way, seemed to give a correct answer (and which also brought into play 2 retrograde significators, hinting at the possible return of the discharged person to the lost job)