Ben Ezra and the first house (horary)

Hello, astrologers.
I have a question about Ben Ezra’s horary method
I know this would be better in “Horary Techniques”, but I want opinions from traditional views.

It’s about the first house. Here a fragment from the Book of Interrogations:

“The first place. Know that there is a great disagreement among astrologers about interrogations. Some say: if the querent poses a question about another person, always look at the ascendant because it is the root, and pronounce judgment according to what you have observed. Others said that the ascendant sign always corresponds to the querent and the seventh place to the object of the interrogation. But the truth is what I will tell you now: if the querent poses a question about himself, take the ascendant sign for him; if on behalf of one of his brothers, whether he will meet him and what will happen to him, take the third place and the position of Mars, and pronounce judgment from there. If he poses a question about the father, observe the fourth place and its lord, and proceed likewise if he poses a question about a son, a slave, a woman, a king, a lover, or an enemy. If the querent poses a question about another person who has no ties of kinship with him, look at the ascendant sign; if he poses a question about a quarrel, look at the seventh place and its lord; and for the querent look at the ascendant sign and its lord, as I will explain in the seventh place. Likewise, if he poses a question about a king who is not favorably inclined to him, look at the position of the Sun and the ascendant sign, but if he is favorably inclined to him look at the tenth place”.

The most of the authors that I’ve read say that the ascendant corresponds to the querent, only to the querent. But Ben Ezra says, as you can see, if the querent ask about someone unrelated to him, then we should use the ascendant anyway.

He take this in consideration especially when it comes about a medical question. If I ask about the health of anyone (a friend for example), I have nothing to do with the matter, it isn’t my body that is sick. So, the astrologer should look at the first house and not at the XI of friends, because this question is not about my friend and what he has to do with me, because his illness doesn’t affect me at all. If the question were: “Will my friend come to see me?”, then it would be a I – XI houses matter, but as I don’t appear on the scene (his sickness), it is a first house question and what afflicts it.

What is your opinion, astrologers, should we look at the first house when the question is about someone unrelated to us?

From experience I have found Ben Ezra's method for persons unrelated to the querent to be very effective. Always use the first house for anyone unrelated. I have tried questions of this sort using both the 7th and first and the 7th usually fails. This is often used for missing person questions. If you get good at it you can tell if they are alive or dead, and if alive where they they are located. Now some books will say to use the 7th house if looking for fugitives, but I have found that the first house works much better even for that. In addition the first is used for missing ships and aircraft. The most important key to effective horary is to find the correct house for the quesited.

The issue with this is several-fold. Perhaps the biggest is the warnings from the Arabic astrologers (Masha'allah, Sahl, al-Tabari, etc, even Bonatti joins them in this several hundred years later) that we shouldn't even be asking questions about people who have no relation to us.

"Nor should one respond except to earnest and definite questions, or for someone who, with the greatest concern and care for himself (or for another with whom he concerns himself very much, he being a concerned inquirer), approaches himself or through another messenger" -Masha'allah.

Sahl is a bit more forceful in his language suggesting that we should not accept questions unless they are about the querent or about "someone he loves as much as himself". This became the dominate philosophy in horary for some time as it helped avoid many of the messy problems such endeavors typically dig up. This is why all horaries about other people in Arabic texts (and Bonatti) are read by turning from the First house, because it's understood that the querent is someone directly and emotionally involved (these are not the same thing) with the individual they are asking about.

He take this in consideration especially when it comes about a medical question. If I ask about the health of anyone (a friend for example), I have nothing to do with the matter, it isn’t my body that is sick. So, the astrologer should look at the first house and not at the XI of friends, because this question is not about my friend and what he has to do with me, because his illness doesn’t affect me at all. If the question were: “Will my friend come to see me?”, then it would be a I – XI houses matter, but as I don’t appear on the scene (his sickness), it is a first house question and what afflicts it.

Click to expand...

Bonatti would say that if you had "nothing to do with the matter" then you probably shouldn't be asking such a question. That's just being nosy. However, Bonatti is also pretty clear (sorry, I just really like Bonatti and his philosophical outlook that he carries over from Al-Imrani's works) that we need to understand who the sick individual is and who is asking the question, because if the sick individual sends someone to ask an astrologer for them then we use the First for the infirm, but if not then we need to find the infirm's house in relation to the individual who is asking the question, presumably without their knowledge.

I, on the otherhand, am always following the opposite of Culpeper and of what Ibn Ezra says (even though he was a kabbalist).

For me, the first house is always who comes to ask me something, and it doesn't matter if the querent is related or not to the object of the question, if he/she is being nosy or not, if he/she is asking just out of curiosity, because he/she was ordered to ask (sent as an emissary) or if he/she is involved with the question.

Therefore, in your example, if someone would come to me ask about a 3rd person who is sick, this 3rd person, if described as "someone" or by name, would be the 7th House. If the person would come to me and say "my friend is sick", then I would look at the 11th.

Personally, I think it's very odd to "take out of the equation" the person who is asking me something, even if unrelated to the matter. I also find it odd to ascribe the querent to the 7th house, like some astrologers would do in the example you gave (someone asking about a sick person). I find it very odd for this someone to be in the 7th.

Best Regards