Thanks CD,
Now I know where Olivia is coming from. I did his horary course many moons ago, before any of his books came out, it was much, much cheaper then.

I'm sure Deb's course would be good for any new student.

Chrissie

Just thought I should say that I feel very flattered by some of the complimentary remarks in this thread, and really appreciate those comments. However, I should also add that I am about at my quota of students and the only course I am currently offering is an advanced study, not really suitable for beginners. I'm not running my certificate course this year - although I plan to make sure there will be at least one residential course next year (probably Glasgow) and hopefully a correspondence beginner's course too by then. But for now I'm not much use to new students. I have heard good things about all the astrology teachers mentioned in this thread and one highly rated name that hasn't been mentioned so far is Sue Ward. Google her course too.
I recommend sending a standard letter of enquiry to several, and then judge by what kind of response you get. If you feel comfortable with the response you get to your course enquiries, then hopefully you'll feel comfortable with the response you get to the course content enquiries.

Good luck,
Deb

Deb

cause you deserve recognition
i know 2 of your students nothing but praise about your teaching skills

Cheers
CD

Yes, but they come with low expectations CD. Let's not ruin that or they'll all be dissapointed in future

(thanks!)
Deb

To tell you the truth, I really wanted to learn Vedic Astrology, but there seems to be a glut of information, and I find it hard to determine who the good teachers are.

Hart Defouw is an excellent Vedic author and teacher. http://www.hartdefouw.com/

Tara

cosmicdolphin wrote:Hey Chrissie

Frawley uses reception backwards

Let's say, you have Saturn in Virgo and Merc *somewhere else*. Lilly says that Merc is interested in Saturn. Frawley says that it is the Saturn that is interested in Mercury.
It is like if you are to ask yourself about another person Lilly's way "where does this person fit in my life?" not Frawley's "where do i put this person in my life?"

Cheers
CD

Actually, if they were in applying aspect, and represented the querent and the quesited in the horary, the Mercury person would be more keen on the matter to hand (that could be good or bad depending on the question, of course) because it's the faster-moving planet. If you really want that job and Mercury's applying to you - wonderful. If you're hoping not to get sued and Mercury is applying to you - rapidly - not so great.

Instead of looking at domicile reception in the sense of 'love and like', if Saturn is in Virgo, think of it as 'host and guest'. Mercury is Saturn's host because Saturn is in Mercury's house, and therefore Mercury is bound by the rules of hospitality to protect Saturn and to cater to Saturn's needs insofar as possible. Which can also be a good or bad thing.

If Mercury happens to be in Pisces, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Mercury is both detrimented and in fall in Pisces - it can't really do anything good for anyone - plus there's an opposition to Saturn.

In a best-case scenario, Saturn might be in its own term in Virgo, giving it a little dignity, but even still nothing good will come of this for either of the parties represented by the planets. The Mercury person may feel a sense of obligation to Saturn (Saturn rules duty), and be miserable (Saturn rules misery, too) trying to provide for it, but finding itself woefully unequal to the task (detriment and fall), and nobody's having a good time. Let's not forget that the opposition is often described as the aspect of perfect enmity.

If Mercury is in Gemini it probably will be able to do some good for Saturn, even though we've got some friction from the square, because Mercury rules Gemini and functions well there. Do they like each other? I wouldn't want to say yes without seeing some serious mitigating circumstances. They probably find each other pretty abrasive, but they can put aside their differences enough to sort the matter out to some satisfaction.

As to whether Saturn 'likes' Mercury - we'd want to look at more than 'it's in Mercury's domicile'. That alone won't give you the story of how the Saturn person feels, and it could really lead you astray in some situations, like the Mercury in Pisces scenario above.

The faster-applying planet (which is not always the quickest planet, but is usually the quickest planet) assuming there's an aspect forming between the two significators, is the one more keen on the outcome. You can't just blank this out and say that a planet in another planet's domicile is the more interested planet - it doesn't work. And if you think about it too much, your brain starts to hurt. Trust me, I have.

Using this, and using aspects and reception properly allows you to build up a more complete picture of what's happening. To say something along the lines of 'Saturn loves the Moon because Saturn is in Cancer' and leave it at that is to court disaster in horary queries. It's also likely to be wildly inaccurate.

As to exaltation, Frawley says that if a planet is exalted, whoever is represented by the ruler of the house it's in exalts what the planet represents. So.....let's make this simple and do it ? la Frawley. It's a love horary. Venus is exalted in 3. Your brother desperately wants you to get married. Or your neighbour. Or some other third-house person.

I've not found this in any traditional sources, nor have I found it in my admittedly informal survey of regular clients. I did ask for a few months, explained to people I just wanted to check something if they had an exalted planet turn up. And none of it matched. So....

I'm also not keen to throw away the considerations before judgement, and no, they were not invented to give astrologers an excuse to not answer horaries they either couldn't answer or deemed impolitic to do so. Avoiding the question wasn't the point at all - it was the chart's way of giving you a red flag or two that something wasn't right with the question, the client wasn't being straight with you, your judgement was off that day, or something else you needed to be aware of - hence considerations before judgement.

With apologies, as this isn't meant to be the let's trash John Frawley thread - he has written some good stuff on traditional astrology, too, you know! But those niggles are what keep me from being able to agree with the way he teaches horary. Though he does have an article here on skyscript about timing in horary that's more than worth your while.

Hello Olivia,

very good post!

I'd like to ask your experience about house placement in this matter. Getting a little ahead, mine has been that the house placement is also of importance to see how the parties regard each other (which is only logical, since a house is to some extent derived from signs, especially if you use whole signs system).

My experience is, and I'll use a hypothetical example, that a planet receiving, say Saturn in Libra, Moon in Aquarius, while Aquarius rises, points several things:

1 - Saturn does receive the Moon, so he hosts the Moon, so he regards her
2 - the aspect forming, say, applying trine, is one of friendship, and the Moon is able to return Saturn's demands (not considering any impediments here)
3 - The Position of the Moon in the 1st house tells that the Moon is strong accidentaly, but also tells us that Saturn does like the Moon very much, for she is in the sign and house most dearer and important to the querent's interest. If The Moon was in the 5th or 11th we could also expect some good consequences out of it, not so much if in the 8th or 3rd (cadency)

So, what's your opinion on this?

If we accept that the astrologer has a 'relationship' with the chart and that often you should choose sigs before looking at the chart and that horary doesn't lend itself well to 'tests' then it's only normal that we would expect Frawleys methods to work well for Frawley and those who follow them. If we're testing those methods we can hardly be surprised that they don't work when horary itself does not lend itself to being tested.

Not quite following you here. If I test horary by asking - what happened to the doll I lost when I was 6 years of age? - and the doll has no meaning to me - then I agree, that's not likely to yield any useful results, or even a useful chart.

But I don't think that's what you mean. I also don't think you mean that we can make up the rules of horary delineation as it strikes our fancy.

So...example, please?

What I mean is that Frawley has obv seen his use of horary to work. Surely we don't think he was just too stupid to understand reception etc. His adjustments are based on his understanding of how things have worked and so when he draws up a chart the chart is relevant to his way of working. Let's not kid ourselves, we're talking about something almost magical. If we accept the logic that the astrologer has a relationship with the chart and all the rest it's not unreasonable to assume that someone with Frawleys experience could have a slight shift of perspective and still work.

As for testing, if you look back at horaries wherin you weren't using those methods at the time, then no wonder they aren't there. What would be interesting would be to be open minded going forward and then seeing, but without trying to simply prove it wrong.

I also don't think you mean that we can make up the rules of horary delineation as it strikes our fancy.

This is something I wonder about a lot... differing methods via house significators, etc. I think the 4th was even once associated with death vs. the 8th, for example? You will hear modern horary astrologers like Anthony Louis say one thing, Frawley another, and others something else. It's not so much that horary rules are at the whim of the astrologer, but the chart is understood by them based on what they know, so there is a personal relationship with the chart (a bias by the astrologer in a way, via what they have learned). Whether or not their techniques are "correct" is debatable, and unfortunately we don't have a horary oracle to say who is right or wrong, we only have ancient sources, which are sometimes conflicting, and our own experiences (and the outcome itself of course). Horary astrology began by meer humans, and the only real way we all learn is via experience (it had to start somewhere). I'd like to think that the celestial bodies "know" the astrologer asking and will permit them to be able to answer the chart based on their knowledge and abilities. It's divination and not test-tube science, but I also have a hard time believing the idea that "this technique works for me, but not for you" kind of thing. If it works for you it should work for me too, but maybe you are seeing something I don't see (or we can even answer it in a similar way). I think it's best to learn as much as we can via ancient sources and our own observations, and let the chart try to tell us what it's saying. Horary is akin to translating a foreign, celestial language. If you think about it like a language, you can say something that means the same thing using different words.

Paul wrote:What I mean is that Frawley has obv seen his use of horary to work. Surely we don't think he was just too stupid to understand reception etc. His adjustments are based on his understanding of how things have worked and so when he draws up a chart the chart is relevant to his way of working. Let's not kid ourselves, we're talking about something almost magical. If we accept the logic that the astrologer has a relationship with the chart and all the rest it's not unreasonable to assume that someone with Frawleys experience could have a slight shift of perspective and still work.

As for testing, if you look back at horaries wherin you weren't using those methods at the time, then no wonder they aren't there. What would be interesting would be to be open minded going forward and then seeing, but without trying to simply prove it wrong.

If I understand you correctly,in effect, you are trying to say that if you follow some method then, by divine providence , only those horaries will come to you that fit with that particular method

PD