There is far too much discussion on techniques and members own charts

So which bits are we allowed to ask questions about? Or are you suggesting the forum should be for practising astrologers only ?

I studied for a while with Mr Frawley and he encourages you to practically set yourself up as a Horary consultant from day one to enable you to get the practice and experience of working with people whilst gaining the knowledge. There's just no other way around it.

So much for the care of the client and the reputation of proficient and caring practitioners.

So which bits are we allowed to ask questions about? Or are you suggesting the forum should be for practising astrologers only ?

Not at all. The idea for a forum is to exchange ideas and learn astrology. In my often less than humble opinion this is best done without any reference to one's own chart. It's less personal. Let's say that someone is just beyond the beginner stage and has, oh I don't know, a Saturn Venus square. An individual who is interested in astrology is more likely to ask about Saturn, or Venus, or squares and then apply what's learned to his or her chart. Someone more interested in themselves will ask, "I have a Saturn Venus square in my chart. What does that mean?" This may help with the particular chart, but doesn't yield information much more useful than that. All Saturn Venus squares are not alike.

If, after a serious effort is made at understanding about something in one's own chart, and the student still doesn't get it, (I can't figure out the Lord of the Geniture in mine, for example. There are two strong candidates), then perhaps a specific question is in order, but even then I think it wold be better to couch the question as a principle. "What does one do when there are two strong candidates for Lord of the geniture, both in good houses?"

The forum is to help learn astrology. Astrology helps us learn about ourselves,

Tom

There is far too much discussion on techniques and members own charts

How many techniques does one need?
Sorry Sungem for expressing my opinion. I do not need to get into an argument here, anyhow, I probably wouldn't be able to defend my corner as well as many of you who participate on the forum. REMEMBER! This is just my opinion based on nearly 25 yrs of studying astrology. "One cannot hope to gain experience until one works with clients".

So much for the care of the client and the reputation of proficient and caring practitioners.

Perhaps I should have said that Mr Frawley encourages his students to practice, practice and practice. He does provide a supervisory service (a fee is involved) for his students who start working with clients of their own. A sort of safety net if you like. Noel Tyl offers the same sort of service for those who need help with the chart.

John Nelson Hall

Hi Sungem,

I?ve just put an announcement into the horary forum to address some of the issues that have been of concern to me lately. I am worried that a lot of members will take the criticism to heart when in fact, they are not the kind of people I have in mind at all. As far as I can tell you have always made the effort to describe the charts you are calling for discussion on, and I don?t question your commitment to learning more about horary.

Personally I have been interested in hearing other people?s views and feedback about this because lately I have felt unable to enjoy participating in the horary forum as much as I once did. I don?t care about the horary forum being popular, I only care about it being useful and generating more understanding of the positive things that horary can do. I would rather have only one good post a month, than 1000 posts that suggest horary can be called upon at the drop of a hat. My announcement was also a request for more feedback on the threads that have been started, because there is nothing more frustrating than when someone calls for opinions on an issue that is personal to then, and then doesn?t bother to let anyone else learn from the discussion by revealing the outcome or the resolution to the problem.

With regard to John?s comment, one point to bear in mind is that if anyone is studying under John Frawley, they are likely to be taking horary very seriously indeed ? knowing that they have subscribed to a rigorous course which will expect a lot of time, effort, study and dedication. I run a similar course and it is hard work. No one that wants a quick route to easy bucks is going to get past lesson 1. There is a lot of emphasis on exploring your own motivation as an astrologer and understanding how you can help someone, or where it is appropriate to use horary. Providing someone has the right intention and is willing to treat their charts seriously, I would also encourage students to get hands-on experience with other people?s issues rather than working on their own. Usually it is better to opt for unpaid work involving friends and family to begin with. You only have to explain to people you feel comfortable with that you are trying to build up your experience and can?t offer any guarantees of success but would appreciate the opportunity to get involved. Some people will think they are never ready for this, and that they are better off getting lots of ?practice? through their own charts ? but actually it is the worst way to learn horary techniques, because either the question is not a genuine cause for concern, or if it is they are too affected by concern to read the symbolism objectively or to recognise the unexplored options.

Apologies for interrupting the general theme of this thread, but the widespread assumption that horary will very easily and very firmly tell us what is going to happen, and anyone can pick up a few techniques and use it this way, is part of the issue under discussion. Many people accuse traditional astrology of being fatalistic, and point to the way that horary is often demonstrated as proof of that.

Deb

But there is a difference, even a small one, between those who want to know oneself and those who want to know nothing but oneself.

Beautifully put!

There are people who think that horary can only answer yes or no questions, that one cannot ask about someone else except under very special circumstances, etc.

Yes but this is (more often than not) because (like me at one point) they read books like "The Only Way (!) To Learn Horary Astrology" by March and McEvers which repeatedly stressed that horary charts can answer *only* yes or no questions; and that beyond saying "yes" or "no" the horary astrologer is to say absolutely nothing else about the chart, ever. As I recall, the authors of that book decided to come up with their own rules on horary, because the traditional rules were too complicated, they were asked to do too many charts to justify spending all that time working with the traditional rules, etc., and their system "got results." They also decided that Uranus definitely rules Aquarius, Neptune definitely rules Pisces, but Pluto may or may not rule Scorpio, because they hadn't come to a decision about it yet! So students cannot be faulted for learning horary from books written by "recognised authorities" in astrology published by major astrological publishing houses, and this sort of thing is still going on, with no one batting an eyelash about it.

So students cannot be faulted for learning horary from books written by "recognised authorities" in astrology published by major astrological publishing houses, and this sort of thing is still going on, with no one batting an eyelash about it.

I agree completely. Students are not at fault for what they don't know, and if they accept someone who appears to be an authority, it is not the student's fault if that person is lacking in background and skill.

My reference to the lack of understanding was not aimed at students, but rather at my favorite whipping boy, modern astrology of which March and McEvers were representative. That being said, some of the books in that series were fine for beginners, but you have to grab the students before they buy into too much of it

Tom

Sue wrote:I have found that horary astrology has become almost like a party trick in some circles.

From "Horary Astrology" by Robert DeLuce (pp. 168-169):

"Astrology is a divine science and therefore we exhort the student who would practice any of its branches to treat astrology with the reverence it deserves. In no branch of astrology is this reverent treatment more necessary than in horary astrology. At the very foundation of the whole subject is the fact of the correspondence and sympathy of the mind of the artist with the mind of the cosmos. Therefore it is to be realized that the cautions given in regard to the moral aspects of questions proposed for solution by horary astrology are to be taken seriously and constantly kept in mind while practicing the art.

"There is nothing more destructive of the higher powers of the mind and soul, such as prophecy, intuition, clear seeing, and right judgment, than vanity. Let the artist beware of allowing his judgment to be warped and his intuition to be destroyed by the subtle vice of vanity. Let the artist realize that he is to refrain from prying into matters in which he has no right or interest, nor lightly undertake to solve weighty matters beyond his capacity or experience. It is not to be understood that experiment or conjecture are forbidden, but in so doing the artist should remain quietly content to watch the outcome of his forecasts in such cases and let time prove the reliability of his judgment before he advises others or publishes his conclusions to the world.

"Common experience proves that knowledge is power. Where there is power there is danger. The danger to be avoided in the practice of astrology is the degradation of the spiritual part of man to the blind service of his sordid desires or instincts. The proper name for this sort of action is superstition. Astrology is to free men from superstition by teaching and demonstrating the unity of all that is, which properly is called God. Anything less than this tends towards superstition which is the denial of the rulership of God. God is spirit, intelligence, soul and substance. Moreover God is personal in the sense that the universe includes personality, and the relationship between man and God is necessarily personal in that man can only receive or understand through his own personality. Therefore God possesses personality but is not limited by personality.

"In practicing astrology the artist is coming into intimate contact with the highest part of his own nature. Let him see to it that the highest part of his own nature shall be master over the lower faculties, instincts and desires. By so doing he will advance his own regeneration and assist the regeneration of all mankind."

So many valuable points in that great quotation, Andrew.

"Knowledge is power" - so true, but if we've been practising astrology or other divinatory techniques for a long time, it's easy to forget that. "Familiarity breeds contempt."

Let's face it, as astrologers/practitioners we can find out so much information about other people, it's pretty scary. "Knowledge is power," and that can also be power over others. By finding out a person's strengths and weaknesses from their chart, I have gained a position of power over that person.

With just the birth date of someone I've just met at a party, I can rush off to a room, cast a chart, and discover all kinds of private things about them that they have not revealed to me....but should I?

To be honest, seldom do I ever ask myself: should I ask that question? Do I really need to know this information? Could it be an invasion of their privacy?

Deb, Tom, Taurus, Andrew et al

Seems I was feeling a bit fragile yesterday . . . but for the concern detected in your responses, thank you, it was both touching and reassuring.

I had followed the discussion and did understand where people were coming from. It must be frustrating to go over old ground again and again ? and granted, there are some positively inane questions (even by my standards!?!) asked by people who obviously haven?t spent any time exploring this site and whose only interest is in getting a quick, free reading. Half an ounce of effort and a smidgen of common-sense on their part should?ve convinced them to go elsewhere, as they no doubt post the same question/birth data on several forums in the hope that someone will take it up.

Deb: Personally I have been interested in hearing other people?s views and feedback about this because lately I have felt unable to enjoy participating in the horary forum as much as I once did. I don?t care about the horary forum being popular, I only care about it being useful and generating more understanding of the positive things that horary can do.

I?m not a forum-hopper, I never found one to interest me enough to even post anything until I discovered Skyscript and even then I spent a couple of weeks exploring both the site and the threads before I felt enough shaky confidence to get involved realising even as I did, that one of the requirements was to contribute. What I found was a forum divided into sections to cover almost all interests.

In addition I discovered interesting, intelligent, articulate, funny, tolerant, experienced and knowlegable people willing to encourage and share their expertise with those less advanced. The only proviso being that you had some knowledge of astrology and a willingness and desire to learn more, particularly in the area of traditional astrology, and were willing to put in some effort and give as well as take. I also realised that some participants love the in-depth discussions on astrological philosophy, literature and technicalities and aren?t particularly interested in taking part in the horary forum even though they sometimes drop by to see what?s going on.

It was obvious from the outset that while not everyone participates in the horary forum, Deb and many others keep a watchful eye on it in order to let us learn from our own efforts and each other, while ensuring that there is a safety net to catch and correct discrepancies and misguidedness as well as plain old misinformation.

I?ve benefited from that willingness to share and for that I thank you, sometimes a paragraph in a book will raise more questions than it answers, and those able to elaborate will usually do so.

Deb: My announcement was also a request for more feedback on the threads that have been started, because there is nothing more frustrating than when someone calls for opinions on an issue that is personal to then, and then doesn?t bother to let anyone else learn from the discussion by revealing the outcome or the resolution to the problem.

Announcement: If you post a horary question, you are expected to be capable of leading the discussion regarding what the horary chart means. This is because the act of asking a question is not the same as the act of creating a horary ? which requires that an astrologer is involved in the definition of the question and its moment of selection.

As someone still finding their feet in horary I?ve found one of the most instructive things is the ability to share in an analysis of a chart and have consequently read a lot of old threads to see how the judgement evolved from the original when different viewpoints and approaches were put forward. Some of Mark's excellent examples such as the recent lost glasses are a case in point.

Deb:I would also encourage students to get hands-on experience with other people?s issues rather than working on their own.

Point taken.

I also realise there are so many ?goodies? in the threads and I just know I?ll never be able to find them again!! (sigh)


Taurus

Sorry but . . .

There is far too much discussion on techniques and members own charts.

...set me off because (apart from feeling fragile/guilty ), for me the discussion of techniques is a very important part of what I find here and yes, granted, sometimes I use my own data.

How many techniques does one need?

About 250,000??? Alright ? so I?m exaggerating again. Doesn?t the Art of Horary consist of the myriad of techniques ? combustion, almutens, antiscions, significators and their houses, signs, planets, aspects - properly understood and applied? And Taurus, no one minds you expressing an opinion ? I did too in my own way didn?t I? What remains important to remember is that we argue the point, not the person. I had images of JF and NT letting loose hordes of newly-papered horary astrologers onto the unsuspecting public, it?s nice to know they keep a watching brief on their students too if required.

Deb: I run a similar course and it is hard work. No one that wants a quick route to easy bucks is going to get past lesson 1.

Yes M?am ? I have absolutely NO doubt about this whatsoever!

Tom: The idea for a forum is to exchange ideas and learn astrology.

The forum is to help learn astrology. Astrology helps us learn about ourselves,

Andrew:
Quote:
But there is a difference, even a small one, between those who want to know oneself and those who want to know nothing but oneself.


Beautifully put!

I agree with you both. (Yes, it?s a worry I know ).

Andrew: Yes but this is (more often than not) because (like me at one point) they read books like "The Only Way (!) To Learn Horary Astrology" by March and McEvers which repeatedly stressed that horary charts can answer *only* yes or no questions; and that beyond saying "yes" or "no" the horary astrologer is to say absolutely nothing else about the chart, ever.

And it?s very true?it depends so much on where and how you start. I bought the M&M book and discovered Skyscript about the same time fortunately, I decided there was more information here than I was ever probably going to find in a book of that nature. Not just in what is contained on the site itself but also the pointers in articles and threads to further references.

Tom: My reference to the lack of understanding was not aimed at students, but rather at my favorite whipping boy, modern astrology of which March and McEvers were representative. That being said, some of the books in that series were fine for beginners, but you have to grab the students before they buy into too much of it

Hope you?ve still got your catcher?s mit on!

Oops! Went to post this only to discover we?d advanced again and I can only agree with Kurgal this time and not only the sentiments expressed in his post but also that there are:

So many valuable points in that great quotation, Andrew.

(. . . to borrow from TS:)

In appreciation
Sungem

From "Horary Astrology" by Robert DeLuce (pp. 168-169):
"Astrology is a divine science

Really?? This is merely his opinion, yet he states it as fact. I've heard astrology described as many things, the best of which, in my opinion, is "a craft". He is probably well-intentioned, but comes across very "holier than thou".

Astrology is to free men from superstition by teaching and demonstrating the unity of all that is, which properly is called God.

This is hilarious. What is a belief in God if not superstition?

I think his approach is far too serious and verging on the precious. Let's not forget the fun in astrology. Good gracious, it's a wonder Lilly wasn't struck down by some "divine" thunderbolt for doing something so frivolous as to have people go round hiding objects merely so he could draw up horary charts to find them.

All just my opinion of course

Fi

Yes, there is that.

I?ve often thought of the amusing contradiction between Olivia Barclay teaching ?horary is not a parlour trick? and Lilly finding objects and identifying moles for fun, proving that it can be a parlour trick if it wants to be.

But I think that when you are essentially respectful to horary (as Lilly certainly was) and are driven by a powerful intent; neither considering yourself too ?precious? but at the same time having a genuine desire to help people in the best way you can, (and committing yourself to studying it properly); you generate the ability to do all sorts of things with it, in keeping with the occasion. And some of that responds to your own natal influences ? I?ve been able to do fun things with horary under positive Jupiter contacts that I couldn?t replicate at other times. I doubt you can rely on it in the way you can rely on a chart to give you a clear vision when someone has a very immediate problem. In the same way many beginners have a powerful insight, because they are responsive to transits that are making them keenly aware of their latent potential.

When you think about the great mystics and ?divines? of the past, not everything they did was altruistic, but their approach to their craft, and the sincerity by which they regarded it generally was. So they might have toyed with it on occasion when they?d built up the skill and ability to do so, but they didn?t take a flippant attitude to the study itself.