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:
The Life & Work of Vettius Valens
by Deborah Houlding
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 zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Two property search charts with positive outcomes
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Horary & Electional Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
johannes susato



Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 1579

Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2021 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The second chart
has the Moon in the Via combusta, and “it is not safe to judge, when the
Moon is in Via Combusta.“ Lilly, p.122.

Nevertheless it's interesting to see the appication of the Moon to the trine of
Mars, significator of the landlord of the quesited flat.

Here Jupiter, lord of the beloved pet, in the 5th, is a potential prohibition, that
actually does not work, for whatever reason.

But here too the immediate application of the general rules is more
convincing than the construction you prefer to explain the outcome that you -
not to forget - had forseen!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmeliaS



Joined: 07 Apr 2020
Posts: 258

Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2021 6:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To clarify, Johannes, the first chart concerned a few houses I had formally applied for to rent. It was no small effort to prepare the dossier and for the personal interviews, and any of these three or four houses working out would have made me happy. This was no curious or empty question.

If you insist that this isn't a specific question, then see that for Bonatti, a question like mine (in your understanding) would have been called an "absolute question". ("Will I marry?") A question with a specific object was called a "determinate question". ("Will I marry so and so?") To him both were equally valid and he dealt with both in his rules.

It was in this spirit Bonatti read horary charts for questions regarding general wealth: whether the querent would acquire "substance" which is quite abstract—it didn't have to be specific substance by a specific means. In fact, he thought the chart should hint at by what means the querent could acquire wealth. (Liber Astronomiae, Part 4, page 35)

Now, Robert Hand isn't even sure that such a distinction is important. He says, as notes to Bonatti's book:

"Yet as important as Bonatti seems to feel this distinction to be [for method of delineation], and as fundamental as he seems to assume it to be, I have seen no such distinction in the works of the 17th Century English. Only time and practice will tell whether the issue of absolute versus determinate questions will prove to be a major or unimportant distinction in horary astrology."

Here Hand implies two things: (1) absolute questions can be asked, and (2) for later astrologers, both types of charts were delineated the same way. They were unlike Bonatti who thought the methods had to be slightly different.

Now Lilly, one of those 17th century astrologers, had rules for reading horary for general questions of marriage. "Will I marry", "What manner of person he or she is", "Who is more noble, man or woman", "Will my future wife be rich or not", for example. To me it was implied that no object was specified; otherwise why asked? The only clear thing was, the querent would have loved to get married, and if possible, to a socially respectable or wealthy person. And I very much loved to rent a nice house.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johannes susato



Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 1579

Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2021 2:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johannes susato wrote:


Your first chart
is concerning a group of some concrete houses or flats. In my experience
(and to my regret I cannot quote any authority to confirm my own ex-
perience) you cannot ask, if one or more matters of a bundle of issues will
come to perfection, even if they are of the same kind, because you'll ne-
ver be sure to have the right answer in the horoscope. You have to specify
the matter you are asking about to one concrete thing.


To get a valid answer, one should not ask if one (or more than one) thing
of a concrete group of things will come to perfection, yes or no.

Other, if you ask in abstract about potential things (houses, jobs, lovers),
that are not yet concrete.


Amelia, there is a great misunderstanding as to my text, because I never
doubted that your question was as sincere as ot ccould have ever been!

Both of your quotations, that of Bonatus and that of Lilly (and not to
forget, that of Robert Hand too), support my own understanding and do
not contradict my own experience in the least, because they don't even
mention the case of your question (the first chart), that we discuss here.

You asked about a group of four concrete houses (see my my words in
bold), i.e. house A, house B, House C, house D.

Other than the subject of the teachings of your authors, who speak of
questions about
a) the possibility to get the (one) concrete or specified thing, or
b) the abstract possibility to get a thing of the wished kind, a thing not
being concrete already,
your question is of another kind, because it is neither about one concrete
thing, nor about any potential, not yet known, thing of the quesited kind.

So to ask, Will I get this concrete house? is a valid question in the same
way as to ask, Will i get a house in this city?

These are questions about one concrete thing, or about a potential thing or
the abstract possibility to get a (not yet concrete but potenial) thing of the
desired sort. And only questions of these two kinds your authors write
about.

And that these authorities don't even mention the third kind of a
(concrete) group question that you asked and we are discussing here
makes me believe in the cogency of my experience: To get a valid answer
you cannot ask whether you'll get any thing out of a concrete group of
concrete things, as long a you do not specify this quesited thing, for only
then you are on the ground of both of the rules you have quoted.

_____________________________________________________________
Could you please give links to the other charts on the forum you mentioned above?
Thanks in advance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johannes susato



Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 1579

Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2021 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

johannes susato wrote:
johannes susato wrote:


Your first chart
is concerning a group of some concrete houses or flats. In my experience
(and to my regret I cannot quote any authority to confirm my own ex-
perience) you cannot ask, if one or more matters of a bundle of issues will
come to perfection, even if they are of the same kind, because you'll ne-
ver be sure to have the right answer in the horoscope. You have to specify
the matter you are asking about to one concrete thing.


To get a valid answer, one should not ask if one (or more than one) thing
of a concrete group of things will come to perfection, yes or no.

Other, if you ask in abstract about potential things (houses, jobs, lovers),
that are not yet concrete.


Amelia, there is a great misunderstanding as to my text, because I never
doubted that your question was as sincere as ot ccould have ever been!

Both of your quotations, that of Bonatus and that of Lilly (and not to
forget, that of Robert Hand too), support my own understanding and do
not contradict my own experience in the least, because they don't even
mention the case of your question (the first chart), that we discuss here.

You asked about a group of four concrete houses (see my my words in
bold), i.e. house A, house B, House C, house D.

Other than the subject of the teachings of your authors, who speak of
questions about
a) the possibility to get the (one) concrete or specified thing, or
b) the abstract possibility to get a thing of the wished kind, a thing not
being concrete already,
your question is of another kind, because it is neither about one concrete
thing, nor about any potential, not yet known, thing of the quesited kind.

So to ask, Will I get this concrete house? is a valid question in the same
way as to ask, Will i get a (any) house in this city?

These are questions about
a) one concrete thing, or about
b) a potential thing (the abstract possibility to get a not yet concrete but potenial thing of the desired sort).

And only questions of these two kinds your authors write about.

And that these authorities don't even mention the third kind of a
(concrete) group question that you asked and we are discussing here
makes me believe in the cogency of my experience: To get a valid answer
you cannot ask whether you'll get any thing out of a concrete group of
concrete things, as long a you do not specify this quesited thing, for only
then you are on the ground of both of the rules you have quoted.

_____________________________________________________________
Could you please give links to the other charts on the forum you mentioned above?
Thanks in advance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AmeliaS



Joined: 07 Apr 2020
Posts: 258

Posted: Tue Sep 14, 2021 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But the main point was never to categorise my question. It was that if even a question about an indefinite range of options can be sorted out, that a chart's descriptive power is enough to take care of even that, then what makes a question that defines a reasonable range of options invalid? By "reasonable" I mean taking into account actions and circumstances the querent can be expected to be aware of at the time of the question.

If "Will I marry anyone, and if possible, please describe the person" can be asked, why does horary suddenly lose its power when someone just isn't completely clueless and has factored in his own actions and the circumstances? (Which, by the way, is one sensible way to ask a horary question?) Perhaps he has just proposed to three women who like him, and he wants to know whether any of these women would say yes? Assuming he is no deranged stalker of course, and he has good reasons to believe what he believes.

If none of the women would actually marry him, the chart should show that anyway. If one of them would say yes, the chart would show that too. He could even devise Bonatti's rule of triplicity rulers and find out how each woman would respond. How is that an invalid question?

I really don't understand the bother about the number of objects or at least what it has to do with radicality. In any case I feel like we are going down rabbit holes a bit. I might still post my other charts but perhaps another day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Horary & Electional Astrology All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
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