How to ask a Horary Question!

Fellow Forum members,

I'm sure this has crossed your mind but there are a lot of people on this Astrology Community Forums who are asking free readings yet they evidently misunderstand we are the horary artists and they are the querant!:rightful:

For the querants are posting the horary charts when they are Not Even horary artists nor in many cases astrologers who can read a horoscope.

1)http://gryphonastrology.com/blog/20...roscope-should-i-stay-home-or-return-to-work/

As always, I have cast a horary chart for the moment that I understood your question. Horary astrology is perhaps the oldest form of astrology; it casts a horoscope for the moment of the question, with the idea that the answer is contained in the horoscope.

2)

http://books.google.com/books?id=pzaPpyZFzpEC&pg=PA10&lpg=PA10&dq='at+what+time+should+a+horary+horoscope+be+cast?'&source=bl&ots=7aA_0D4Zig&sig=TCbNo4jSpT1HD43ajZzsbI_FXpo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dQkIUonvD4m4yQGr5IBo&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q='at%20what%20time%20should%20a%20horary%20horoscope%20be%20cast%3F'&f=false

My point is some of the querants have been posting their horary charts who have not studied horary enough to interpret any horary thus the first to answer their horay if a horary artist, that astrologer should erect the horoscope for the artist's location location Not the querants!
.
 
Last edited:

tsmall

Premium Member
]My point is some of the querants have been posting their horary charts who have not studied horary enough to interpret any horary thus the first to answer their horay if a horary artist, that astrologer should erect the horoscope for the artist's location location Not the querants!
.

I've been thinking about this too. Because it seems like whenever someone tries to recast the chart it goes kerflooy.

Before the advent of the internet or email, the only way to really as an astrologer a question was in person. Even a telephone conversation would be able to be considered in person. Before the early 20th century the only way to ask an astrologer a question was to go and see him. Unless you wrote a letter I suppose...but mostly you went to see him. So the birth of the question was in the location of the querent, which makes sense as it is the querent who is giving birth to the question.

I've seen too many correct answers given to charts cast and posted by people who have no intention of or ability to interpret them to think that the astrologer has to recast the chart. I've also seen a couple of occasions where more than one astrologers did recast the chart and what we ended up with were conflicting charts.
 

Zarathu

Account Closed
My point is some of the querants have been posting their horary charts who have not studied horary enough to interpret any horary thus the first to answer their horary if a horary artist, that astrologer should erect the horoscope for the artist's location location Not the querants!
.

That's great if you are the only one who is answering the question. If multiple astrologers on AC are answering the question, then it takes me back to my objection again. Multiple births for the same question are simply not allowed. There is nothing in astrology that allows you to be born in multiple places at the same time. And the "YOU", imo, applies to people, corporations, countries, and even the birth of questions.

If you disagree, then you have to show me where multiple birth places for the same event, person, corporation, country, etc are allowed in astrology.
 
Last edited:
Tsmall stated:

Before the advent of the internet or email, the only way to really as an astrologer a question was in person. Even a telephone conversation would be able to be considered in person. Before the early 20th century the only way to ask an astrologer a question was to go and see him. Unless you wrote a letter I suppose...but mostly you went to see him. So the birth of the question was in the location of the querent, which makes sense as it is the querent who is giving birth to the question.
Yes, and believe it or Not there are many with web sites putting out such wrong data that it is the time the querant asked the query and their location, I mean we need rulings from horary precedents like Lilly and the Ancients.

What does Guildo Bonatti say?

Zael?

Etc.???

For I was just on a thread where there were over 5 horoscopes that totally are confusing and conflicting!:surprised::sideways::alien::tongue::unsure::annoyed::andy::surprised::surprised:

And this is Not disrespecting Cancer7 at all, I love her zeal for astrology, and many querants are doing this:

http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=63788

I mean Tsmall and forum, it's nonsense to have more than one horary chart per thread.

Best to just create another thread if one has another query for it doesn't belong there if related!
.
.
 
Last edited:

Cypocryphy

Well-known member
As always, I have cast a horary chart for the moment that I understood your question. Horary astrology is perhaps the oldest form of astrology; it casts a horoscope for the moment of the question, with the idea that the answer is contained in the horoscope.

As Chris Brennan (and perhaps Holden) has discovered through his extensive research into the historical underpinnings of astrology, horary astrology is actually one of the newest branches, taking place after the Hellenistic period. It is not the oldest by any means. Indeed, it is probably the newest, following after natal and electional astrology. It primarily flourished during the medieval period.

My point is some of the querants have been posting their horary charts who have not studied horary enough to interpret any horary thus the first to answer their horay if a horary artist, that astrologer should erect the horoscope for the artist's location location Not the querants!

Whether the astrologist casts the chart or the querent does is irrelevant. In the past, when a querent would come to an astrologer to ask a question, he or she was incapable of casting a chart due to lack of knowledge and ability. The astrologer was the only one with the means and skill to cast a chart and interpret it. There was no other option. But the burden of casting a horoscope is no longer the astrologist's alone, so it is a condition that is no longer necessary. Both astrologer and querent now are capable of understanding the question and erecting a chart. Whether one is more skilled at interpreting than the other is a completely separate issue. The only requirement is that the stars accurately reflect the answer. More often than not, the querent will be in the better position to capture the pattern of the stars simply because the querent has the greatest level of urgency and is more connected to the question.

Here, in this forum, you have people fully capable of casting a chart and do so with the greatest sincerity because, for the most part, each question is of the utmost importance to the querent, percolating in their mind until it must seep out in the form of a horoscope. It is at this moment that the planets reflect the given situation, not based on causational factors but symbolically mirroring the conditions that surround the querent and his or her plight. This moment of casting is the culmination of crisis and desperation, leading to psychic connectivity with the universe. And in a very spiritual relationship, the astrologer is able to interpret these symbols so as to make sense of them for the querent. In order to do this, the astrologer as well must connect intuitively with both the querent and his or her own spirit to bring forth the information accurately and efficiently.

This is an art as much as is the reading of tea leaves or ground coffee beans in a cup, or the tarot or some other symbolic representation of life energies. This is not to take away from horary or to make it less than. There is nothing wrong with this branch of astrology's relying heavily on intuition. It is just that as astrologers strive to systematize this area of astrology, or to elevate astrology (in general) to a state of respectability, the inclusion of intuition into its practice leads people to cry heresy. But it really is a fact that intuition, inspiration, psychism; whatever you wish to call it, forms a major component of astrology.

So the answer is that it does not matter who casts the chart or where.
 
Last edited:

Mandy

Well-known member
Clinton: I agree this is a muddy area.

As Chris Brennan (and perhaps Holden) has discovered through his extensive research into the historical underpinnings of astrology, horary astrology is actually one of the newest branches, taking place after the Hellenistic period. It is not the oldest by any means. Indeed, it is probably the newest, following after natal and electional astrology. It primarily flourished during the medieval period.



Whether the astrologist casts the chart or the querent does is irrelevant. In the past, when a querent would come to an astrologer to ask a question, he or she was incapable of casting a chart due to lack of knowledge and ability. The astrologer was the only one with the means and skill to cast a chart and interpret it. There was no other option. But the burden of casting a horoscope is no longer the astrologist's alone, so it is a condition that is no longer necessary. Both astrologer and querent now are capable of understanding the question and erecting a chart. Whether one is more skilled at interpreting than the other is a completely separate issue. The only requirement is that the stars accurately reflect the answer. More often than not, the querent will be in the better position to capture the pattern of the stars simply because the querent has the greatest level of urgency and is more connected to the question.

Here, in this forum, you have people fully capable of casting a chart and do so with the greatest sincerity because, for the most part, each question is of the utmost importance to the querent, percolating in their mind until it must seep out in the form of a horoscope. It is at this moment that the planets reflect the given situation, not based on causational factors but symbolically mirroring the conditions that surround the querent and his or her plight. This moment of casting is the culmination of crisis and desperation, leading to psychic connectivity with the universe. And in a very spiritual relationship, the astrologer is able to interpret these symbols so as to make sense of them for the querent. In order to do this, the astrologer as well must connect intuitively with both the querent and his or her own spirit to bring forth the information accurately and efficiently.

This is an art as much as is the reading of tea leaves or ground coffee beans in a cup, or the tarot or some other symbolic representation of life energies. This is not to take away from horary or to make it less than. There is nothing wrong with this branch of astrology's relying heavily on intuition. It is just that as astrologers strive to systematize this area of astrology, or to elevate astrology (in general) to a state of respectability, the inclusion of intuition into its practice leads people to cry heresy. But it really is a fact that intuition, inspiration, psychism; whatever you wish to call it, forms a major component of astrology.

So the answer is that it does not matter who casts the chart or where.

Horary is a simple calculation of an answer for a specific question. There are rules and the rules work. There is no need for intuition or spirit guides on part of the reader. Astrology is merely a trade. You need only the know-how to give a correct answer.

With that said, casting a chart is not an irrelevant burden. It is a fundamental part of preparation. Timing is key to the chart yielding the correct answer. The conditions of the chart being erected and the validity of the chart are not completely separate issues. They are inextricably linked.

To expand on what tsmall said about the perceived high probability of a valid response based on a non-astrologer chart casting, looking at numbers, firstly, there is the whole issue of how many non-astrologers think of a question whilst having no clue about the existance of horary, then have to re-think of the question on advice of the horarist only to then get an invalid answer. Having to rethink of the question may be considered an artifical setting. It may have been more natural for the horarist to cast a consultation chart. There are several astrologers who work only in this way and have high rates of success. I tried to look for a reference, posted previously by piercethevale, but cant find it (sorry). The reason this is a success sounds perfectly sound to me since the universe conspires to make or prevent things from happening, and this includes a chart reading.

Recently, I tried to send a simple facebook message (that would have caused a stir). You would think a facebook message would have no issue getting through, right? Wrong. :lol: Firstly, facebook told me that the message would not go to the inbox of the person as we are not facebook friends. If I wanted it delivered directly to their inbox, I would need to pay a small charge of £1. I did this. A day later, my bank sends me a text message to tell me about suspicious activity, asking if it was me who paid £1 to facebook. I call the bank and tell them that it was me. They authorise the payment. But facebook didn't want to get involved again given that the payment was originally refused. Clearly, the universe had some BIG reason why this message should stay put. Incidentally, this was reflected in the horary with an additonal VOC moon.

Thus, events which distract from chart casting, from astrologer consulting, conversations which divert the train of thought or which answer the question themselves, are all for a reason and I do not see why a consultation chart, in those special circumstances of a non-astrologer asking would not be a perfectly valid chart. This could be profitably investigated on this forum.
 
Last edited:
Zarathu states:

That's great if you are the only one who is answering the question. If multiple astrologers on AC are answering the question, then it takes me back to my objection again. Multiple births for the same question are simplynot allowed. There is nothing in astrology that allows you to be born in multiple places at the same time. And the "YOU", imo, applies to people, corporations, countries, and even the birth of questions.

I totally agree as that is how I learned horary from respectful authority's with merit such as:

1) http://mithras93.tripod.com/lessons/lesson1/lesson1.html

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I always cast a chart for the time and place that I first understand the question, even if the querent first asked the question at a different time in a different place. This is the only way I can be certain of an accurate "birth time" for the question. It makes sense, of course, that the better time for which to erect a chart would be the moment when the question is first asked . . . so experiment. I find that more often than not, at least as far as divination is concerned, consistency of procedure is often more important than precisely which procedure you favor. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Finally, ask the question only once, unless circumstance have changed considerably, and the situation warrants another chart. If you cast a chart, don't like the answer, cast another chart for the same question, and like the answer . . . the first chart remains the only valid one. [/FONT]

2) http://www.renaissanceastrology.com/horary.html#why

Many clients are confused when I use my time, date and location ("the received time") for the chart of a horary question, rather than using the time, date and place that they asked the question ("the asked time"). Horary uses the birth of a question, rather than the birth of a person, so the issue of when a question is born is key. You have no doubt been thinking about your question for some time, so it would be hard to really pin down when you first thought of it. Our traditional sources and my experience bear out that the question is really born when you ask it of the astrologer and thus when the astrologer receives and understands the question. It is possible to use the asked time and location, but these horary readings are much more subjective and less accurate than using the time and location the astrologer receives the question.
This confuses a lot of people and you can be sure that I would definitely use the asked time and place rather than endlessly having to explain why I use my time and location except for the fact that my time and location invariably gives a more accurate answer!

3) http://www.allthingshealing.com/Ast...-to-Determine-the-Sentence-/4900#.UglJRn_n9kg

The time when I receive and understand the question, according to William Lilly, is the best time for casting the chart. [2]In this case, that time was 5:35 pm, EDT, ...

4) http://gryphonastrology.com/blog/2007/09/01/horary-astrology-free-reading-%E2%80%93-%E2%80%9Cwill-i-get-a-phd-degree-and-when%E2%80%9D/

As in ethics I shouldn't copy the discussion without the owner's permission, so one can view the first post on:

2 Responses to “Horary Astrology: Free Reading – “Will I Get a Ph.D. Degree, and When?””

5) http://www.astrologyweekly.com/more-horary/ben-laden-caught.php

I have cast the horary chart for the time when I first understood your query regarding Osama bin Laden's whereabouts...
Cast for my locality, ....

I think you may understand my point from the above five sources. And think about it, Lilly had people waiting at his door and received letters, but when you get a phone call asking a horary from a querant or an email you as the horary artist may not know where the message came from, the location. And you do know how many querants don't pay strict attention to our methods as they don't have the passion for our art as the artist has!:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin: I mean if you get an email from a laptop or a cell phone message from someone on a bus or jet in transit how do you know the location?

Cypocryphy stated:

Whether the astrologist casts the chart or the querent does is irrelevant. In the past, when a querent would come to an astrologer to ask a question, he or she was incapable of casting a chart due to lack of knowledge and ability. The astrologer was the only one with the means and skill to cast a chart and interpret it. There was no other option. But the burden of casting a horoscope is no longer the astrologist's alone, so it is a condition that is no longer necessary. Both astrologer and querent now are capable of understanding the question and erecting a chart. Whether one is more skilled at interpreting than the other is a completely separate issue.

This is a valid point but if one reads my last comment and the above can you see the 'can of worms' this can become?
.
 
Last edited:

tsmall

Premium Member
This is a valid point but if one reads my last comment and the above can you see the 'can of worms' this can become?
.

There are so many "cans of worms" in horary astrology and astrology in general that yet another one seems superfluous.

If I may, in all kindness, offer a little encouragement? Instead of trying to find all the reasons why a chart can't be read (all the "strictures", as well as this new one about who needs to cast the chart) it might be wise to just read the chart as presented. For practice. That way, you can discover for yourself what actually works and what doesn't.
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
That's pretty much what I did (that led me to my practical perspective re horary) Really the only consistently recurring problem I found was when the SN was posited in the ascending sign of the horary chart: this kept being connected with incorrect delineations of the horary chart, and I wondered why until I read that old Gerard of Cremona (and Agrippa, later) taught that the SN in the ascending sign of a horary chart rendered that chart unreliable: so that explained it to me, and that's been my only real "stricture against judgement" in horary, ever since (although I will shy away from delineating a horary with under 1 degree or over 29 degrees rising: guess this is a residual effect upon me of my previous studies in standard horary practice:sideways:...)
 

Cancer7

Account Closed
Understood!!! However, is the person responding actually casting a NEW chart for the place and time they first understood the question? Or simply using the information from the original chart?
 

Cancer7

Account Closed
Clinton, concerning the moving thread. I explain to you that the charts cast during the thread were for different question. The intial chart was "Will I". The other charts cast were regarding particular properties that i was interested in moving into. The charts were cast when i located the properties and applied for residence. In all, AQ7 was correct when he gave a time frame for my move. It was a lengthy thread, but it panned out.

When you state, dont cast more than one chart for a thread, what if the chart is concerning a different matter related to the topic?


BTW, I wont be casting charts anytime soon. I've moved, and entering a dating relationship. I'm GOOD to GO!!!!:biggrin:
Fellow Forum members,

I'm sure this has crossed your mind but there are a lot of people on this Astrology Community Forums who are asking free readings yet they evidently misunderstand we are the horary artists and they are the querant!:rightful:

For the querants are posting the horary charts when they are Not Even horary artists nor in many cases astrologers who can read a horoscope.

1)http://gryphonastrology.com/blog/20...roscope-should-i-stay-home-or-return-to-work/



2)

http://books.google.com/books?id=pz...e should a horary horoscope be cast?'&f=false

My point is some of the querants have been posting their horary charts who have not studied horary enough to interpret any horary thus the first to answer their horay if a horary artist, that astrologer should erect the horoscope for the artist's location location Not the querants!
.
 

tsmall

Premium Member
Understood!!! However, is the person responding actually casting a NEW chart for the place and time they first understood the question? Or simply using the information from the original chart?

Mostly casting a new chart. Which mucks things up. Stick to the charts you make, even if you aren't completely sure how to read them. Asking the same or about the same (o seemingly different while being the same) question makes the chart even more muddied...and it wouldn't surprise to find there is no hour agreement between the ruler/almuten of the ASC and the triplicity ruler of the ASC.
 

Cancer7

Account Closed
Well, shouldnt the individual just ask the question, and the reader cast the chart for the time and place they first understood the question? Is the individual asking chart really necessary?
Mostly casting a new chart. Which mucks things up. Stick to the charts you make, even if you aren't completely sure how to read them. Asking the same or about the same (o seemingly different while being the same) question makes the chart even more muddied...and it wouldn't surprise to find there is no hour agreement between the ruler/almuten of the ASC and the triplicity ruler of the ASC.
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
I have never applied the hour ruler as a criteria (stricture) regarding horary charts, in the many hundreds of such charts I have delineated (not including the medical horary charts I regularly do in the course of my therapeutic practice over the past few decades)-and, regarding correctness of outcomes ("accurate predictions") I have been quite satisfied with the results I have obtained: my only stricture, really, is the SN in the ascending sign of the horary (or if the ascending degree is under 1 or over 29).
...but then this is just my own experience, so there is nothing at all authoritative here-just thought I'd pass it along to those who might find it of some interest.
 
All I've every studied until I got on this Forum stated it is the time the astrologer understands the query as in:

http://mithras93.tripod.com/lessons/lesson1/lesson1.html

1. Asking the Question & Casting the Chart......

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I always cast a chart for the time and place that I first understand the question, even if the querent first asked the question at a different time in a different place. This is the only way I can be certain of an accurate "birth time" for the question. It makes sense, of course, that the better time for which to erect a chart would be the moment when the question is first asked . . . so experiment. I find that more often than not, at least as far as divination is concerned, consistency of procedure is often more important than precisely which procedure you favor. [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Finally, ask the question only once, unless circumstance have changed considerably, and the situation warrants another chart. If you cast a chart, don't like the answer, cast another chart for the same question, and like the answer . . . the first chart remains the only valid one. [/FONT].[/FONT]

http://books.google.com/books?id=pzaPpyZFzpEC&pg=PA10&lpg=PA10&dq='when+is+the+time+to+cast+the+horary+chart'&source=bl&ots=7aA-5z3Wlg&sig=Oy4cmGJ9w8K-EeTFBRfr24QveX4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=n0seUoXACaqaigKZrYD4DA&ved=0CFsQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q='when%20is%20the%20time%20to%20cast%20the%20horary%20chart'&f=false

But via the the webb there appears much distortion of this concept:

http://www.chrisbrennanastrologer.com/courses-and-tutoring/horary-astrology-course/

What is Horary Astrology?.....
The theory is that since the question exists and is formulated and posed at a specific moment in time, then the answer must also exist at that moment, and this answer is reflected by the alignment of certain celestial bodies in an astrological chart cast for that point in time.
By following a very specific set of rules, the answer to the question is sought to be derived entirely from the chart of the question itself.

http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/211580.html

http://www.theastrologypage.com/archives/horary.htm

What exactly is Horary Astrology?

[FONT=Verdana,arial,helvitica]As I mentioned in the beginning, horary astrology answers a single question. The client asks a question, and the astrologer casts a chart for the moment in time when the question is asked and then does an analysis based on that chart.[/FONT]​


This debate has the answer I think in the first post on this page:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=7253

Many of you realize since astrology is a 9th house activity or matter it can get confusing at times just as there are great confused points that are currently practiced in many Islamic nations regarding their interpretation of the Queran. And in the USA confusion in Christianity is strongly evident in so many Churches claiming they have the answers from their understanding of scripture.

My point is simply do we follow Lilly and the Ancients he studied or do we fall under the spell of Neptune and calculate horaries at any old time we think is convenient?:sad:

I mean there are many via this Forum who are not dyed in the wool astrologers, much less horary artists who are asking queries and posting the time they ask.

Is this a Moderne method?

Do any Traditional sources validate this methodology?
.
 
Last edited:

dr. farr

Well-known member
It has been a tradition going back many centuries that the practitioner can legitimately delineate the horary chart as erected for the time and the place the PRACTITIONER has understood the question, OR as erected for the time and place the practitioner received the question (such as by messenger, etc) This possibility was allowed as far back as the time of Thabit ibn Qurra (mentioned in his "Ghayat el kawkeb") in the 900's AD-I myself have done this on numerous occasions, and my results have been "just fine" using this approach: however, in general I prefer to use the horary chart as erected for the time and place the querent asked the question, as my main approach to horary delineation...
 

poyi

Premium Member
I know that is against traditional practice. However I think the querent election of the horarh chart at his or her own most desperate time which will reflect the energy of the stars much better.
 

Harold

Well-known member
querants are posting the horary charts when they are Not Even horary artists .

Which begs the question, "Who or what is a horary artist?"

Is it someone who has read Bonatti and Lilly and has memorised the Table of Essential Dignities? Is it someone who has passed an accredited examination on their abilities as a horary astrologer?

And what is an astrologer anyway? Deborah Houlding recently said that an astrologer was someone who was passionate about astrology. No more than that. And I, for one, am happy to agree.

When answering a horary question, I would say that the astrologer - "horary artist" - is the person who takes responsibility for answering the horary question using the chart (s)he erected for the moment (s)he understood the question.

If your astrology is not good enough to answer the question from that chart, it is perfectly OK to seek advice on how the chart could be interpreted. But if you choose the horary moment, you are the "astrologer" and the final responsibility on how the question should be answered is yours.

Of course, it helps if you have a good understanding of horary astrology, but I would say that it is not required, or even necessary. You don't have to be a 'Horary Master' to obtain an answer to a horary question, only a responsible person who accepts the responsibility for that answer, however obtained.
 
Harold said:

When answering a horary question, I would say that the astrologer - "horary artist" - is the person who takes responsibility for answering the horary question using the chart (s)he erected for the moment (s)he understood the question.

And that is the traditional standard, all the others may be just another perplexing offshoot that distorts the the reading.

Poyi stated:

I know that is against traditional practice. However I think the querent election of the horarh chart at his or her own most desperate time which will reflect the energy of the stars much better.

Then you admit there is No Traditional source who did such?

Is it possible that this is a Moderne Technique that is Not valid?

Dr. Farr states:

It has been a tradition going back many centuries that the practitioner can legitimately delineate the horary chart as erected for the time and the place the PRACTITIONER has understood the question, OR as erected for the time and place the practitioner received the question (such as by messenger, etc) This possibility was allowed as far back as the time of Thabit ibn Qurra (mentioned in his "Ghayat el kawkeb") in the 900's AD-I myself have done this on numerous occasions, and my results have been "just fine" using this approach: however, in general I prefer to use the horary chart as erected for the time and place the querent asked the question, as my main approach to horary delineation...

The Blue was added by myself for emphasis!

But if someone is in a jet and calls or emails a query we will definitely have a problem unless we have the lattitude and longitude of the query; new mthod with a whole new set of quagmires to confront.
.
 
Last edited:

tsmall

Premium Member
Tsmall stated:

Yes, and believe it or Not there are many with web sites putting out such wrong data that it is the time the querant asked the query and their location, I mean we need rulings from horary precedents like Lilly and the Ancients.

What does Guildo Bonatti say?

Zael?

Etc.???

I believe it.

As to what Bonatti or Zael would have said, who knows. They didn't need to deal with this particular question. And since they didn't need to deal with this particular question, there is nothing in the material that does so. Which means we need to use logic, reason, and fundamental understanding to answer it for ourselves.


I mean Tsmall and forum, it's nonsense to have more than one horary chart per thread.

Which is exactly why it is nonsense (illogical) to have each responding astrologer recast the chart in order to get one for the time he or she understood the question.

It has been a tradition going back many centuries that the practitioner can legitimately delineate the horary chart as erected for the time and the place the PRACTITIONER has understood the question, OR as erected for the time and place the practitioner received the question (such as by messenger, etc) This possibility was allowed as far back as the time of Thabit ibn Qurra (mentioned in his "Ghayat el kawkeb") in the 900's AD-I myself have done this on numerous occasions, and my results have been "just fine" using this approach: however, in general I prefer to use the horary chart as erected for the time and place the querent asked the question, as my main approach to horary delineation...

I'll get back to this in a minute, but dr. farr, I quite agree with the whole post, and most especially the bolded part. For a reason.


When answering a horary question, I would say that the astrologer - "horary artist" - is the person who takes responsibility for answering the horary question using the chart (s)he erected for the moment (s)he understood the question.

I <almost> agree with you here. The problem with this entire thread is that we are placing too much importance on the astrologer, and not enough on the question.

I know that is against traditional practice

No, it isn't, but I understand how the misconception can arrise.

Then you admit there is No Traditional source who did such?

Is it possible that this is a Moderne Technique that is Not valid?

I don't think it's fair to ask someone admittedly not well versed (sorry poyi, this isn't meant against you at all) in traditional methods to confirm or deny your statement.

To answer the question, you are correct...there is no traditional source who did such. At least not that we have extant that I've seen or heard of. The real question, which is why we need to use reason and logic, is...why?

Let's first start with this. Who gets to ask questions of the Universe? Is it only astrologers who can do so? I think not. Anyone has the ability to ask a question of the Universe, but not every one has the ability to understand the language of the stars. An astrologer is merely an interpreter.

One of the qualifications of being such an interpreter in the past was the ability to cast a chart...the question is born (think the reference to natal charts as the births of people, and mundane charts as the births of nations, and event charts as the birth of the event...horary is the birth of a question.) when someone who understands the question and has the ability to cast the chart first does so.

In the time of Lilly, or Zael, or Valens or Dorotheus or Paulus or Abu Mashar...or any one of a hundred members of the Dead Astrologer's Society, casting a chart was a pretty big undertaking requiring an awful lot of advanced knowledge in order to do so by hand.

Today, who can cast the chart, that is, who can directly query the Universe? Anyone with access to a chart casting program...regardless of his/her ability or inability to actually understand the answer.

The inability to understand the chart (that is, the language the Universe uses to respond) does not prevent the chart/query from being valid. It just means that the chart needs and interpreter....er, astrologer, to answer it.

Here's an example. Where I work, we get a lot of tourists from Quebec who only speak French. My French is rudimentary at best, but the questions they ask me are just as valid as those that are asked of me in English. What's more, I can understand French better than I can speak it. In this case, the Québécoise querent is asking me (in this example, the Universe..and no, I don't have delusions of grandure) a question that I understand, but that querent needs an interpreter to help her understand my answer. Let's take this one...

"Est-ce robe parfaite pour un mariage de la journée je participe en tant qu'invité?"

My answer is, "No, that dress is for an evening wedding, you would do better with another."

To which she replies, "Je ne comprends pas."

But, her friend who speaks fluent English, translates my answer, and together we find the perfect dress for an informal afternoon wedding.


I would remind you...

If I may, in all kindness, offer a little encouragement? Instead of trying to find all the reasons why a chart can't be read (all the "strictures", as well as this new one about who needs to cast the chart) it might be wise to just read the chart as presented. For practice. That way, you can discover for yourself what actually works and what doesn't.
 
Last edited:
Top