skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Squares and oppositions always mean no?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Horary & Electional Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
voyagergirl



Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Michigan, USA

Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 7:13 pm    Post subject: Squares and oppositions always mean no? Reply with quote

I just recently began reading, "The only way to learn horary astrology" and the author says that squares and oppositions always mean "no." I don't have a problem with this, except she says that for example, if you were to ask the question, 'Will I get divorced?" and the chart had your significator in opposition to the 7th house ruler, the answer would be "No, you're NOT getting divorced."

The problem with this is that I asked this very question and the horary moon in 29 Taurus exactly squared the 7th house significator in 29 Scorpio. It past a square to my ruler, Venus. My reading of the chart said I would be divorced and it proved true. (This was six years ago.)

My understanding of squares and oppositions is that it means a negative outcome. So if the question is of a dismal nature, as mine was, the opposition means the outcome will be negative, in other words, not what you might wish it would be.

So if the chart I'd cast for my own divorce question had been full of applying trines and a Mars/Venus conjunction for example, I would have interpreted the chart as having a positive outcome, meaning I would not be divorced. But the author of this book explains trines always mean "yes." So in her interpretation good aspects would mean I "yes" to my question about getting divorced.

I hope this isn't too confusing.

Does anyone else have the same take on this as the book's author? Because I have not found it to work this way.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
voyagergirl



Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Michigan, USA

Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 7:17 pm    Post subject: Oops, I mean "opposed" Reply with quote

In the first post, I meant to say the Moon in 29 Taurus exactly OPPOSED the ruler of the 7th house in 29 Scorpio, which told me I would be divorced, which I was.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ben



Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 167
Location: Minneapolis, MN USA

Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Voyagergirl,

This must be part of the McEvers/March series? If that is what they say, they are wrong. Horary questions are largely qualitative, they are not simply yes/no answers. A similar thing goes in Tarot, when some say that reversed cards mean "no." Just as you have to see what the cards actually are, you have to see what is actually signified by the significators.

Squares and oppositions can prevent something from happening, or destroy it after it is thought to be in order. But they can also make something perfect, albeit with difficulties and complications. Often, for them to show real success, there must be a reception between the significators.

My advice would be for you to start studying Lilly and some of the traditional sources available through this site. Instead of looking to simple "yes" and "no" answers, and try to figure out what is being helped or hindered, or who is being brought together or separated, and how. Often, after answering yes/no, a client will ask "Why?" Then you really have to read the chart!

Hope this helps,
Ben
_________________
www.bendykes.com
Traditional Astrology Texts and Teaching
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
voyagergirl



Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Michigan, USA

Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 9:44 pm    Post subject: I agree Reply with quote

Thanks, Ben!

This is exactly what I thought and is, in fact, how I was taught (before the McEvers series) to read a chart.

It's also turned out to be accurate.


The whole notion that squares and oppositions always mean "no" when you're asking about a negative situation (implying a "yes" answer because now there's a double negative) seems goofy.

But I'd be curious to know if any other astrologers have found the McEvers approach to work for them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sue



Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 945
Location: Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm afraid that there is very little of the March/McEvers horary book that I would take seriously. They appear to be very credible modern astrologers but when it comes to horary they have some ideas that are so far removed from traditional astrology that it is almost laughable. One is the giving of rulerships to the outer planets and using them as significators. But one of the most ridiculous things is their idea that a named person always gets the 7th house regardless of the relationship to the querent. For example, if someone asks 'Will I see Fred tonight?' they give the 7th house to Fred because he was named. It doesn't matter whether Fred is the partner, the son, the brother, the friend or the dog. This makes absolutely no sense at all. According to March and McEvers, if the querent had said 'Will I see my brother tonight?' he would get the 3rd house, which is how it should be. But to give the brother the 7th house just because the querent said Fred belies belief.

The best advice for anyone wanting to learn the proper methods of horary astrology is to do exactly what Ben has recommended above. Begin with Lilly and the other traditional resources and perhaps the lessons on this site. Once you know the foundations it becomes much easier when reading the more modern authors to ascertain what has a genuine traditional basis and what has become a distortion. This does take some effort but it is definitely worth it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
voyagergirl



Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 333
Location: Michigan, USA

Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 3:14 pm    Post subject: I agree Reply with quote

I also thought it odd that simply because someone was named rather than simply referred to as "my brother" that you would use the 7th house rather than the third.

I wouldn't do this either.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Horary & Electional Astrology All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated