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

Who is the best astrologer and the best living?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mike



Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Posts: 72

Posted: Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:52 pm    Post subject: Who is the best astrologer and the best living? Reply with quote

There could be many not only one. I can think of William Lilly, Morin and Ptolemy as canditates for best astrologer in history. As for living, the only uber-astrologer I know is Robert Hand. Any ideas of how to improve or expand my list?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tumbling Sphinx



Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 247

Posted: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Any ideas of how to improve or expand my list?


A visit here http://www.skyscript.co.uk/texts.html would be a start.

Kind regards,
TS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Morpheus



Joined: 21 Mar 2007
Posts: 764
Location: Rawalpindi/Islamabad (Pakistan)

Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Best Astrologer with respect to Practice or Book writing?

Ptolemy Work Tetrabiblos appears to be a compilation, especially Book III and IV.

Anyway, i am not that familiar with Western writers. I can only tell with reference to my part of world and Muslims. List is in order of reputation.

Current Astrologer-----None.

Past Astrologer---------

Abu Rehan Al Bairuni--- with respect to practice (limited practice). He was commanded various times to demonstrate his horary prowess in the full Royal Court.

Omar Khayyam---with repsect to practice (limited). A mathematician and of Rubayat fame.

Khawaja Naseer-ud-din Tusi---with repsect to knowledge. A minister to Halaku Khan (mongol conquerer).

Masha'Allah--With respect to practice and books.
_________________
Regards

Morpheus

https://horusastropalmist.wordpress.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 2:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For both categories it is probably impossible to say – astrologers are not always directly comparable because of differing styles and types of knowledge. Historically, for technical expertise I would rank Kepler as well as Ptolemy as amongst the best. It would be better to aim for a list of greats, who were all admirable in their own way. But even such a list would have to be quite comprehensive, and at the very least would have to include Valens, Dorotheus, Masha’allah, Bonatti, Cardan, Gauricus, Culpeper, Lilly, Morin (oh, it’s endless really).

Amongst the living, all I would say is be wary of anyone who claims to the best – such a person is almost certainly suffering from delusions. Rob Hand is not only one of the world’s best known astrologers, but he has consistently contributed his understanding over a long period of time. He is known for his hard work and generosity to other astrologers, and you don’t see him marketing himself in a guru-type fashion, all of which marks him out as deserving a lot of respect. I also like the fact that he does not demand blind adherence to what he says, and remains open to the growth of his own understanding. So I think Rob Hand could legitimately be described as having one of the best, if not the best reputation amongst living astrologers. I’m not saying I agree with him on everything, but yes, I’d give him my vote.

According to this site though, its Elbert Wade: http://www.elbertwade.com/page9.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mike



Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Posts: 72

Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 3:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good advice Deb. Someone who claims to be the best,
is showing his insecurity and inferiority of his capacities.
There are many charlatans who claim to be the best in
the world, however there are the so called gurus that you
mention, that are geniunely more developed than most of
us, nevertheless they seem a little deluded in thinking they
are the best, this makes me think of the excessive ego of a
Buddha or Jesus.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mike



Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Posts: 72

Posted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Besides Robert Hand, I can think of John Frawley, Noel Tyl ?,
and Liz Greene. I think they are all fine, however I'm not sure
about Noel Tyl. I would like to know what traditional astrologers
think of him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gem



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 954

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been learning most of my astrology from Skyscript since 2004 and for me Deb is the astrologer I admire and respect most. My vote for the best living astrologers will also go to Tom and those learned and experienced members of this forum with their valuable contributions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mike



Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Posts: 72

Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I admire Skyscript as well. Deb is indeed a very good astrologer.
Tom seems very good as well. However to call them the best living astrologers may be a little hyperbolic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deb
Administrator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 4130
Location: England

Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tis a sad things to be raised so high and then dropped so quickly. Don’t get the business card changed yet Tom. (Though, strictly speaking, all experienced members of this forum could now get away with putting ‘reputed to be …’ if they pretended they didn’t see the second post).

Thanks for the sentiment Gem (but we already knew that Cool )
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mike



Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Posts: 72

Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The best astrologer alive is Andre Barbault or Robert Zoller.
Robert Hand is second best to me now, so don't worry Deb
you are not the only one to be dropped.

Oh, I'm going to tell everyone I'm the greatest astroger in
the world. No, it was just a joke.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3438
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I think they are all fine, however I'm not sure about Noel Tyl. I would like to know what traditional astrologers think of him.


I don't know much about Liz Greene except that the type of astrology she does holds no interest for me. I studied with Noel, however. Tyl has some very good points. He tirelessly promotes astrology to the benefit of all of us. He is prolific, and while being prolific is not necesarily the same as being good, his books wouldn't sell if many people did not find value in them.

Astrologically his strongest point in my view is the fact that he utilizes and teaches a system. His students look at a chart and know what to do with it. This is one of the biggest hurdles for beginners, and he provides the necesary instructions. Like most modern astrologers his system is slanted heavily towards the use of aspects, but even this is done somewhat judiciously. He doesn't bother so much with soft aspects and he is mostly interested in hard aspects that between Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto and the inner planets. Again this is part of his system, and an interested student can look at what he's offering and make his or her own decision about it.

Like all moderns Tyl devotes nearly all of his time to natal astrology and his readings emphasize the outer planets (Plus Saturn) In my opinion he does this at the expense of more creative and important uses of the inner planets. Mercury is important, guys. But these objections are typical criticisms by a traditionalist of the modern approach. If a student is more disposed toward modern astrology than traditional, Noel's system is a good way to go. And although some have been critical of his personal style, it should be remembered that he has done a great deal to promote astrology, and none of us can please everybody.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Justin



Joined: 21 Jun 2007
Posts: 6

Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I too would rate Deb amongst the very best. I have a long time been a fan of her articles and magazines, I dare say even before Skyscript was a twinkle in her eyes!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mike



Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Posts: 72

Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deb is my guru!
Hooooraaaaaay!

Joking aside, Skyscript is a fine site.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gem



Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 954

Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've failed to take Machael's reply to my post as magnanimiously as Deb and Tom. Evil or Very Mad

Well, I shall take his insulting remark as a result of his ignorance of the work and contributions they've done and made. It's understandable considering Michael seems to be more inclined towards modern astrology.

As for his favourite Tyl, I can never take any astrologer seriously who insists calling unaspected placets 'peregrine' despite the error being pointed out repeatedly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GarryP
Moderator


Joined: 23 Oct 2003
Posts: 213
Location: UK

Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Michael,

I'd have to agree with some of the other replies, that there's something a bit odd about the word 'best' in this context. In the immortal words of John Lydon, it's not a game of Monopoly.

If you mean, which astrologers are worth reading books by, going to lectures by, studying with, having your chart read by - these are all valid questions. But for me, the suggestion that we're talking about 'who is best' just muddies the waters. It isn't as if it's - say - an 800 metre race, where we might agree on who was the fastest at any given time. We're inevitably looking at different kinds of astrology, and different personal styles, so that different people will inevitably find they click with one astrologer rather than another. It isn't just about the astrologer, it's about the person approaching the astrologer as well. So to this extent the question is like asking 'who is best, Bach or Beethoven'?

I'm not convinced that it's a question that belongs under 'Philosophy and Science' either. But if we just take it as a question about 'who is interesting/worth knowing about', I think it might prove interesting.

Garry
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 -> Philosophy & Science All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
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