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

'Comparison' significators
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Horary & Electional Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Part of Fortune



Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 317

Posted: Mon Apr 29, 2019 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Serene, thanks for your message.

I'm not sure this is the question you are asking. Confused



If I’m not mistaken (offhand from my memory):

Trial:
H1 = person(s) who started lawsuit
H2 = their lawyer
H7 = adversary
H8 = their lawyer

Sport:
H1 = home team or favorite (critics or most $$ betting)
H2 = underdog
or
H10 = Defending champion
H4 = challenger

Politic:
H1 = your favorite candidate(*)
H7 = opponent
or
H10 = incumbent
H4 = challenger

(*) I tried this method on SF Mayoral race and I miserably failed.
I will look up my horary books later to verify the above (can’t guarantee my memory).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Part of Fortune



Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 317

Posted: Mon Apr 29, 2019 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Serene wrote:
A very good thread with informative links!! Thanks to everyone who contributed.

So in case there are just 2 options where the astrologer decides to use the 1st house vs 7th house method , how do we appoint the choices A and B to houses 1 and 7? Should we go by how the querent has worded the question and choose the first mentioned choice as Lord1? OR is it better to appoint Lord1 to to the choice which is personally more favoured /prefered by the querent ?

Regards


I think I understood your question this time:

On politics:

I took my favorite candidate as H1 and that person lost but the chart said that person would win (see my previous post). What if I have two that I like equally? I then have to go by which person came to my mind first.

So if it is a personal question, I would probably take your first question: How the querent has worded the question, and choose the first mentioned choice as Lord1.

Well, let me think it over more. Say, this is the sort of question a certain member might like to participate in . . . I wonder??
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Part of Fortune



Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 317

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 12:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Part of Fortune wrote:

I took my favorite candidate as H1 and that person lost but the chart said that person would win (see my previous post). What if I have two that I like equally? I then have to go by which person came to my mind first.

So if it is a personal question, I would probably take your first question: How the querent has worded the question, and choose the first mentioned choice as Lord1.



I'm wondering if the answer is correct (see above).

If it is politics, there is another choice -- don't vote. But if I must vote (I'll get a huge penalty, for instance) then I will think and think until I come up with a favorite.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Part of Fortune



Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 317

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Part of Fortune wrote:
Part of Fortune wrote:

I took my favorite candidate as H1 and that person lost but the chart said that person would win (see my previous post). What if I have two that I like equally? I then have to go by which person came to my mind first.

So if it is a personal question, I would probably take your first question: How the querent has worded the question, and choose the first mentioned choice as Lord1.



I'm wondering if the answer is correct (see above).

If it is politics, there is another choice -- don't vote. But if I must vote (I'll get a huge penalty, for instance) then I will think and think until I come up with a favorite.


But then there's another step. After choosing the favorite, make sure he or she will match the Lord 1 such as physical description, etc. My mistake was I failed to match the planet (L1) and my favorite. The reason my favorite lost his mayoral election was he was L7. His opponent was L1. (I learned this from our current moderator by the way).

The above method applies not just to people but to objects of your choice as well. If necessary, turn the chart so L7 becomes Ascendant (derived H1).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Serene



Joined: 24 Jul 2017
Posts: 206

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Part of Fortune yes you understood my question. I was asking about the criteria to assign the different choices (or candidates) to different planetary significators according to 1st vs 7th house method or even Dorothean triplicity method. I think broadly there can be 4 ways in which this can be done--

1) Assign in order of preference with the most favourite or prefered option getting the 1st house lord or the first (day) triplicity ruler, the second getting the 7th house lord or the night triplicity ruler.

2) Assign in order of which one comes to mind first

3) Assign on the basis of description. So if choice A matches well with the 7th Lord and choice B with the 1st Lord, then assign them likewise

4) Assign the current choice (candidate) to L1 or in the Dorothean method assign it the first (day) triplicity Lord . For example if we have to choose between 2 candidates for election and one of them is currently serving in power, then this candidate should be made L1 or given the day triplicity Lord .


Last edited by Serene on Tue Apr 30, 2019 5:43 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Serene



Joined: 24 Jul 2017
Posts: 206

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 4:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Part of Fortune

So if I understood you right, what you are basically saying is that one should give preference to how well the description of any candidate /choice is matching to a planet and assign on the basis of this.

The matters are complicated further in case there are more than 2 options. Say someone wants to decide which diet is better for them. Diet A is what they are already having. But this diet plan has now become redundant and so they wish to now choose a new plan and the choice is between B and C.

So now if we apply the Dorothean triplicity method , should diet A be given the 1st triplicity Lord as it shows the most recent diet? Or should we ignore diet A since it won't be suitable now and directly assign Lords to B and C?

Hope what I write makes sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Serene



Joined: 24 Jul 2017
Posts: 206

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 4:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How about intercepted signs? Suppose someone wants to choose a college out of two choices and there are 2 signs in the house 9 , say Virgo and Libra . Can we then choose Mercury and Venus to signify our two options. Do any horary sources/ authors recommend this method?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Serene



Joined: 24 Jul 2017
Posts: 206

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was reading Frawley and he recommends different methods in his book ---

1. He says the prefered option should be appointed the Lord of the concerned house . And other planets should be assigned to other options based on their descriptions. So if there are 3 colleges to choose from, the most favourite would be assigned L9 and for the other two the astrologer should search which planets are the best fit.

2. He talks about another method in case a person is faced with only 2 choices. Suppose one has to decide between two jobs A and B. Frawley recommends taking 10L for the prefered job and derived 7th from 10th ie, L 4 for B. But he says this method is not very good because the inherent logic here is that the 2 jobs are rivals of each other.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Part of Fortune



Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 317

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Serene wrote:
Part of Fortune

So if I understood you right, what you are basically saying is that one should give preference to how well the description of any candidate /choice is matching to a planet and assign on the basis of this.

The matters are complicated further in case there are more than 2 options. Say someone wants to decide which diet is better for them. Diet A is what they are already having. But this diet plan has now become redundant and so they wish to now choose a new plan and the choice is between B and C.

So now if we apply the Dorothean triplicity method , should diet A be given the 1st triplicity Lord as it shows the most recent diet? Or should we ignore diet A since it won't be suitable now and directly assign Lords to B and C?

Hope what I write makes sense.



If it were my choice, I would do just between B and C because A is no longer a competitor.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Part of Fortune



Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 317

Posted: Wed May 01, 2019 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A while ago, someone asked about how to choose dog food. Below is an excerpt from one of my replies to that thread (I added the link on the bottom). The part I'm interested in is highlighted in blue:

Part of Fortune wrote:


The dog is 6th house. His food is 7th house (2nd from 6th -- choice A). So by skipping to 9th house (sibling of 7th) it would be choice B and so on.

Or choice A (food) for 7th house (2nd from 6th) and choice B for 8th (2nd from 7th). Here, applying the same method as house hunting; 4th (current) and 7th (4th from 4th) for prospective next house.

One problem I could see in the sibling method above is if the choice is changing from puppy to adult food then choice A (puppy food) might not able to apply to choice B (adult food) because of a different content.



So, at the time, I wondered should I treat A & B as dog foods in general (regardless that one is for puppy and other is for adult) and do A vs B using sibling method?

But now I will definitely treat them as a competition and use lord 1 vs lord 7 instead of sibling method.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10224
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Part of Fortune



Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 317

Posted: Wed May 01, 2019 2:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Serene wrote:
I was reading Frawley and he recommends different methods in his book ---

2. He talks about another method in case a person is faced with only 2 choices. Suppose one has to decide between two jobs A and B. Frawley recommends taking 10L for the prefered job and derived 7th from 10th ie, L 4 for B. But he says this method is not very good because the inherent logic here is that the 2 jobs are rivals of each other.


Hi Serene,
Again, thanks for your message.

The excerpt below is one from this thread earlier (page 1) and I thought you might be interested to find out (via PM) Lehman's amazing conclusion. She uses a different approach than Frawley (above) on which job to take when her client was offered choices between two jobs (A or B):

Part of Fortune wrote:
In Lehman’s The Martial Art of Horary Astrology (Chapter 13) she uses Triplicity and Rulership (also dignity, etc.). I enjoyed reading various interesting charts in this chapter. In one of the charts the querent was asking which job (two choices, here Lehman used Triplicity method) and both significators were in the same house but one was conjunct South Node. There was a confusion on the part of the querent regarding which job was offered first and based on that the result came as . . . well I don’t want to give it away if anybody is planning to read her book.


I will send you a PM later of the details from her book.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Part of Fortune



Joined: 29 May 2017
Posts: 317

Posted: Sat May 04, 2019 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Serene,

I've just sent you a PM (sorry for the delay!) Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Serene



Joined: 24 Jul 2017
Posts: 206

Posted: Sun May 05, 2019 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Part of Fortune, thank you for sharing your prefered working methods
It helps to know how others approach
And absolutely no problem and thank you so much Part of Fortune
Will just check it.

I will also post an excerpt from Frawley on the thread as soon for anyone who may be interested.

Thanks again Thumbs up
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