In the traditional Horary Literature we read about the sacred Moment of asking the Horary Question. – In a free (invitational) Horary Webinar – Astrologer in Bergisch Gladbach bei Köln – Germany – December 6th, 2021 – started at 19/00 hrs. – I had the chance to ask my Horary-Question at 19:20:00 after 2 other Horary-Questions had been answered. – The Asc was in Cancer with Moon in Exile in Capricorn. – By then for me it was obvious, that the Asc. would change into Leo and because of the delineation by the Horary-Astrologer on the 2 Questions before me I had learned quite a lot about the Horary-Quality of time. – Remembering the old texts in Horary I had the feeling, that I would violate the Rules of Sacredness and because of that feeling I did’nt ask my Question.
Steven Ellis Birchfield – https://birchfieldastrology.com/__trashed/
Quote:“Sitting in video conference asking question after question reminds me of something Sahl said in his book on Questions. I will quote it here:
4 And do not take up a sought matter you are not asked about, in a matter which you have already been asked about, for you will introduce confusion into your soul: for example, one who asks about marriage, [and] when you looked into it, he asked you about another matter that came to him [at that moment]…. “Here Sahl is talking about spur of the moment questions during a reading. That does not necessarily mean more than one question cannot be asked. For he qualifies his statement by saying,“And if it (the new question) is concealed [by him] prior to the judgment on different matters, then it is all right that you take each sought matter from its own heading.” –
So it is ok, according to Sahl, to take different questions in one meeting however they are not spur of the moment questions resulting from a reading on one matter. However he further qualifies this by adding:
“6 And it is not allowed that you ask [about] two matters for any inquiry, when their approach is one [and the same].” – In other words if the same houses would be used in a new question in the same way as the previous question then you shouldn’t take those questions because obviously the significators would remain the same and it is no longer an answer specific or dedicated to your personal question. – The whole idea of a “sacred moment” to ask a question is not necessarily a “religious” connotation but rather one that is your moment in time to ask when you have given due thought and consideration of the question to ask. As Sahl goes on to say, “16 And do not let it frighten you if you were asked about different questions under a single Ascendant: for if the sought matters differ, then if their enumeration was in conformity with a condition of misfortune or good fortune, it will be that for them.” – This is tied to the last point because different matters would involve different significators but we would still be using the same constellation of planets in the chart. – If you knew the significators would be the same because the questions were similar in nature and approach, then that probably gave rise in your heart the resolve to not ask as it wasn’t the right moment. I also believe that is what is intended with a “sacred moment” that is yours and no others. In that same thought then, if your question was different in approach and the ascendant changed during the course of taking the questions in their order then it seems to me that it was providence that made the order so that your question would come up at the change. In other words given all the factors, even if your question had been similar in approach to finding the answer, then the fact it changed signs because of the order of the questions, may have been that sacred moment. – …. It is up to the astrologer to consider the questions as they come and know the differences and perhaps to participate in any decision to wait and not just take questions like in a game show. There is a lot of good counsel from Sahl in the first chapter of his Book on Questions. – The word “sacred” means worthy of respect or dedication. So it is always a matter of is the question worthy of respect and commitment to answer. There are times it is not and times it is and I think that was the intention in Sahl’s counsel.“