An Interesting Horary Question

[Barleywine]

Virtually all the Horary books this century have used the Traditional planets only. Generally though you don't have to use all the planets, not even all the visible planets. You should only use those house rulers relevant to the querent and the quesited and any planet that is either in the relevant house or aspects the relevant significator for better or worse. Other than that, you only check to see if another planet will frustrate the perfection of the matter (usually by aspecting one of the significators before the other significator does).

The problem with going beyond the significators from the question is that you can lose sight of what matters because you start to examine non vital factors in detail.

Clearly if someone asks you 'Will I get the job I applied for and will the salary be good?' then there are potentially three planets involved in answering the question. The significators for 'Will I get the job' and if you decide that they will, then the significator for their income or cash flow (Lord 2).

Other planets would only be considered for signification if the question was more complex. This of course does not nullify aspects from benefics or malefics, either by nature or by accident.

So if the significator of job and querent are applying to a trine but Lord 6 aspects the querent's significator first, that might signify that he or she will be too ill to go to the interview, or fail the medical (if there is one) for the job.

Thanks for the tutorial here. I had forgotten that the planetary aspects aren't "frozen" like a natal "snapshot," but are instead moving toward or away from "perfection." "Applying" and "separating" I got, but not the "next aspect" thing, except in a vague way. This has been a good learning exercise.

 

[Minderwiz]

Thanks for the tutorial here. I had forgotten that the planetary aspects aren't "frozen" like a natal "snapshot," but are instead moving toward or away from "perfection." "Applying" and "separating" I got, but not the "next aspect" thing, except in a vague way. This has been a good learning exercise.

Modern Astrology does indeed take the natal aspects as 'frozen'. The trouble is that view is derived entirely from the 'character analysis' view of Astrology. As we're only dealing with the 'here and now', it apparently doesn't matter if aspects are applying or separating.

Once you start looking at prediction, you quickly realise that it does matter.As with horary, separating aspects signify the past and applying aspects signify the future. Assuming that someone does indeed have a future, following birth, even a diehard Jungian, who believes that transits only signify 'inner' events, will work with applying transits not separating ones (or at least the latter only in the sense of looking at the aftermath of a transit that applied and then perfected).

Natal applying aspects are (generally speaking) far more important than natal separating aspects. Unless you believe that someone is born with their character and personality fully formed and immune from environmental factors (Nature rather than Nurture), the difference between between applying and serparating is literally vital.

Despite rumours to the contrary, the tradition is far more dynamic in its Astrology than is most modern stuff.

 

[Barleywine]

The querent had his meeting with the customer. He said it was "productive, and possibly profitable." He tactfully brought up the subject of the Denver meeting to see if she would reveal anything of what transpired. Her reply was that she saw "no reason to touch on that topic at the present time." Not a categorical vote of confidence, but not exactly a "parting handshake" either. Because she was being so cagey, he decided to push ahead with opening up new accounts in that territory for his other competing product lines. I had given him the revised outlook that resulted from our discussion here and on another astrological forum, and he agreed that was how it panned out for the most part. It may not be over yet, judging from his customer's reticence, but the staus quo reigns at the moment.

 

[Minderwiz]

The querent had his meeting with the customer. He said it was "productive, and possibly profitable." He tactfully brought up the subject of the Denver meeting to see if she would reveal anything of what transpired. Her reply was that she saw "no reason to touch on that topic at the present time." Not a categorical vote of confidence, but not exactly a "parting handshake" either. Because she was being so cagey, he decided to push ahead with opening up new accounts in that territory for his other competing product lines. I had given him the revised outlook that resulted from our discussion here and on another astrological forum, and he agreed that was how it panned out for the most part. It may not be over yet, judging from his customer's reticence, but the staus quo reigns at the moment.

So it looks like the revised question

'Will Ms P end our business relationship at our forthcoming meeting?'

would have worked out correctly.

Given the proximity of the horary and then the meeting, it's quite likely that Ronia's initial feeling was correct. The late Ascendant indicated that the matter had already been settled before you cast the chart.

The question as it was asked was a dangerous one to take, with no time scale and the use of emotive terms. When he asks again, as he will, try and ensure that you have a clear time scale, that corresponds to any meetings with Ms P (or other clients) that are planned and it's couched in practical observable terms. Whilst it's possible to speculate on why she made a decision, the important thing for the question is accurately forecasting what the decision will be. Technically it doesn't matter whether she chooses to break the relationship because she doesn't like him personally or because she has a better offer, as long as the chart suggests that the relationship will end.

Similarly, as with this chart, it doesn't matter why she chose to stay for 'the present time'. To me the chart indicated a 'No' answer (though to what was obscured by the phraseology of the question). She might like the smell of his aftershave or she might know a good deal when she sees it. She chose not to end the relationship.

That chart is now dead. So we know she's staying with him for the time being but as you quite rightly recognise that's not exactly a promise of eternal (business) love. She might still leave in the future. That's why I see him coming back if he scents a change in her attitude.

In many instances the chart does provide a fairly clear guide to motives but don't get hung up on them. Look to see whether the chart gives a 'yes' or 'no' answer, assuming the question is basically the same. Then worry about motives.

Now if the question is 'Will she agree a new contract with me?' you move into different territory and you're looking for a clear indication of agreement between them. That means an applying aspect, big mutual reception or favourable action by Moon or Antiscia.