quesited and querent same planet?

J

JoZi15

Well-known member
tikana said:
essential-dignities.jpg


we havve covered receptions many many times
https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?p=630258#post630258

https://tonylouis.wordpress.com/2017/04/12/puzzling-receptions-in-a-horary-chart/
Click to expand...

I just asked this question in the technique forum! Thank you, this is so clear. Being new and not having a mentor, I read everything with the same hungry eyes and in the rare instances when I understand enough to notice that some may sometimes contradict each other (Lilly, Frawley, Bonatti, etc.) I chalk it up to “I must have misunderstood that the first (or second or third) time.”

So my question was: was I (once again) misinterpreting Frawley or is his explanation of reception different than Lilly’s?

So then, if I follow Frawley and Al Qabisi, Venus in Capricorn likes Mars. If I follow Lilly and Bonatti and many others, Mars welcomes Venus into his home and treats her like an honored guest and tries to please her.

Is that right?
 
J

JoZi15

Well-known member
waybread said:
On Tikana's side is most traditional horary astrology re: perfecting aspects.

My view is slightly different. If you have two planets in mutual reception. or even in strong conditions of reception, they will help each other out, even with no aspect. I mean, if they applied to a nice aspect, why even look at mutual reception?

One thing to watch out for, though, is that planets may have reception yet be in the signs of one another's fall or detriment. For example, Venus in Virgo and Mars in Taurus can make a trine, but Venus in her fall and Mars in detriment are kind of the blind leading the blind.
Click to expand...

Ah. So you might consider a nice aspect without mutual reception. And similarly, you might consider mutual reception without an aspect.

Without any aspect? Or more like a really wide aspect that would not be considered in orb under any of the Traditionalists’ recommended orbs?

I like the story that the chart tells when you read for the Moon and the Moon’s last and next aspect too. Sometimes it’s about me, the querent, but just as often, I find it describes the situation in general.

This is so different from what I’ve read from Lilly and Frawley. Who do you study or what might you recommend reading?

Thank you in advance, Waybread!
 
J

JoZi15

Well-known member
neptune910 said:
thank you for the explanation jozi! i wish i could cast another chart for this situation because i have so many mixed feelings about it :( there is one thing i have a question about, i dont know if i am confused please correct me if i am but if planet A is in planet B sign of exaltion, would this not mean that planet B is positive towards planet A? and if planet B is in planet A sign of detriment, wouldnt this mean planet A dislikes planet B? or that planet B would bring something negative to planet A in general? x
Click to expand...

Another chart so soon won’t bring anymore clarity. And I would guess that if I were you, maybe a new chart about this situation probably shouldn’t be cast unless something new actually happens like you run into each other or something because I think in these situations we try to think of questions we think are new but are really about the same thing and so it’s just like asking the same question repeatedly.

As for reception, I am learning that there are two schools of thought (or probably way more!) among well revered astrologists. There are those who interpret reception one way and another who interpret the opposite.

The interpretation of Venus in Capricorn liking Mars is an example of John Frawley. The interpretation of Mars treating Venus (in reply to Tikana’s later post) as a guest in his home whom he tries to please is an example of William Lilly.

You can read both (or many others!) and decide who resonates with you. You can also try to look objectively at the chart and name our bias (acknowledge where we may not see clearly) and really see what the Horary is trying to tell us.

It’s hardest when it doesn’t seem clear. And that’s usually when I post a question on the forum. So it happens that many questions will have outcomes I didn’t want to be true. But this forum is great for helping to get past that and learn about myself in what I wanted to see or didn’t want to see.

So, if you want to reach out to your ex, reach out. We still have free will no matter what Horary tells us. And we can rely on our own efforts to determine whether or not we should try something.

I wish you much luck in whatever you decide 🤗
 
tikana

tikana

Well-known member
Jozi

You cant call mars/venus as "mutual reception" since mutual reception requires an aspect.
This is called generosity.

Id suggest you to read christian astrology or any trad horary book.

Heres another thread
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6632

Tik
 
Last edited:
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
JoZi15 said:
Ah. So you might consider a nice aspect without mutual reception. And similarly, you might consider mutual reception without an aspect.

Without any aspect? Or more like a really wide aspect that would not be considered in orb under any of the Traditionalists’ recommended orbs?

I like the story that the chart tells when you read for the Moon and the Moon’s last and next aspect too. Sometimes it’s about me, the querent, but just as often, I find it describes the situation in general.

This is so different from what I’ve read from Lilly and Frawley. Who do you study or what might you recommend reading?

Thank you in advance, Waybread!
Click to expand...

Thanks, JoZi15.

I practice a very simplified form of traditional horary. I was fortunate to get a bit of a tutorial from a former member who is (or was) the horary moderator at Skyscript. http://www.skyscript.co.uk/ Skyscript also has a good horary tutorial.

My first book was Olivia Barclay, Horary Astrology Rediscovered. I also like J. Lee Lehman, The Martial Art of Horary Astrology. Barclay's advice on cautions and strictures is no longer considered current, but both her and Lehman's books have the advantage of being readable.

For sure Lilly is the Granddaddy of horary astrology. But I find he gives so many indications of when a "yes" or "no" judgement is indicated that it is too easy to end up with a "can't see the forest for the trees" problem, usually a mixed testimony.

Usually I look for applying aspects. (Although separating aspects mean something is passing away.) But then watch out for prohibition, refranation, translation of light, and besiegement. When in doubt consult an ephemeris. Sometimes there appears to be an applying aspect that actually does not perfect.

If no applying aspect, I would look for mutual reception, or at least other significant kinds of reception according to those tables Tikana posted. It just seems to me that, if you have an applying aspect anyway, it's hard to see why mutual reception adds much. However, Tikana has the generally accepted interpretation.

Some astrologers would also look for perfection by antiscia, but I haven't had much luck with it.

I've not gotten into Frawley's horary book, mostly because his smart-aleck criticisms of modern astrology had a lot to do with the bitter and unproductive divisiveness between traditional western and modern astrology in the 1990s.

Good luck with your horary studies! You will improve by giving your intuition time to roam over the horoscope, and with practice.
 
J

JoZi15

Well-known member
waybread said:
Thanks, JoZi15.

I practice a very simplified form of traditional horary. I was fortunate to get a bit of a tutorial from a former member who is (or was) the horary moderator at Skyscript. http://www.skyscript.co.uk/ Skyscript also has a good horary tutorial.

My first book was Olivia Barclay, Horary Astrology Rediscovered. I also like J. Lee Lehman, The Martial Art of Horary Astrology. Barclay's advice on cautions and strictures is no longer considered current, but both her and Lehman's books have the advantage of being readable.

For sure Lilly is the Granddaddy of horary astrology. But I find he gives so many indications of when a "yes" or "no" judgement is indicated that it is too easy to end up with a "can't see the forest for the trees" problem, usually a mixed testimony.

Usually I look for applying aspects. (Although separating aspects mean something is passing away.) But then watch out for prohibition, refranation, translation of light, and besiegement. When in doubt consult an ephemeris. Sometimes there appears to be an applying aspect that actually does not perfect.

If no applying aspect, I would look for mutual reception, or at least other significant kinds of reception according to those tables Tikana posted. It just seems to me that, if you have an applying aspect anyway, it's hard to see why mutual reception adds much. However, Tikana has the generally accepted interpretation.

Some astrologers would also look for perfection by antiscia, but I haven't had much luck with it.

I've not gotten into Frawley's horary book, mostly because his smart-aleck criticisms of modern astrology had a lot to do with the bitter and unproductive divisiveness between traditional western and modern astrology in the 1990s.

Good luck with your horary studies! You will improve by giving your intuition time to roam over the horoscope, and with practice.
Click to expand...

This is fascinating!!! Thank you so much 🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽🙌🏽
 
Top