What constitutes a serious question, or a correct question in Horary?
Bonatti defines it very clearly.
What do the rest of you think?
It doesn't matter what I think.
The Rules are The Rules.
Who defines if the question is frivolous, and what definitions would we use to determine this?
The first step in Horary is to receive the Question.
The second step is to cast the chart.
Step #3 is identifying the Hour Ruler.
Step #4 is using the Hour Ruler -- that you identified in Step #3 --- to determine if the chart is Radical.
A non-Radical Chart cannot be read.
Note that Strictures have nothing to do with whether or not a chart is Radical. Strictures are merely advisories and warnings to the astrologer to very carefully weigh all factors, as it relates to the Stricture.
Aside from that, it's easy to tell if a Question is frivolous.....just read the Chart.
All the books I have all say that if its important to the poster its not frivolous.
Then you might want to consider throwing those books away, since they're not worth the paper they're printed on. That contradicts at least 7,000 years of Horary Doctrine.
The Querent is the least qualified to determine if a question is frivolous, if for no other reason than the Querent is biased/prejudiced.
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.
"I wanna know what my 'Ex' (whatever) is doing...."....fine, but if your "Ex" wanted you to know what they were doing, they would have called, faxed, texted or sent (via priority mail) a detailed itinerary, and since they haven't, then you'll have to call your "Ex" and ask them what they are doing, because you can't use Horary for that.
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.
So, yeah, sure, to a Stalker, the question of where is my "Ex" and what are they doing (so they can hunt them down and stalk them) is probably important to them,..... but the question is still frivolous.
But what about other questions?
Like what?
One is not allowed to know things for the sake of knowing.
Deleted by moderator
You're entitled to know something, if, and only if, it has a substantial impact on you, and "substantial impact" is defined by the most rational person, not the least rational.