Interpreting my 1st House

The thing about the Suskin book is that it's not something that can be used alone by a beginner. It doesn't explain all traditional terms, doesn't go into the elements or nature of the signs, etc. There is no introduction to traditional astrology in general. It does have charts in the Appendix for determining dignity, and the 43 detailed rules for interpretations, and a bare-bones example at the end. It's mostly for the student who has learned the basics (or has resources for those) who is in need of a clearly delineated, systematic way of going through a chart. Since the older texts can seem overwhelming, especially due to their language, I think this book does fill a gap as a procedural outline for how to use the works of earlier authors.

Chanah said:

Had a quick look at Google Books, and there are some decent previews there, with 30-50 pages you can read online. So if you want to have a look at Abu Ali Al-Khayyat, click here: https://books.google.co.in/books?id=rR8iTR5hfbsC&num=14

One of my personal favourites is Sahl ibn Bishr's Introduction to the Science of the Judgment of the Stars, also translated by James Holden, and you can find it here: https://books.google.co.in/books?id...CCAQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=sahl ibn bishr&f=false. It's a horary text, but I love Sahl for his clarity - and signs, houses, planets, and aspects mean pretty much the same things in both horary and natal.

Click to expand...

Minderwiz said:

I've got both the Holden and the Dykes translations. Holden to me sacrifices literal accuracy for clarity and that makes him a great translator Dykes ends up with a host of footnotes in his translation of Sahl's On the signification of the time for judgement most of which boil down to he doesn't know what Sahl means. Holden is readable and makes some sense.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the links to the excerpts in Google Books, and for the reminder about Sahl. I've almost purchased a Sahl translation a few times, but couldn't decide on which one, so it was interesting to see your comments about them here. I've been drawn to Holden's clear and simpler language, and you both seem to echo that. I guess my question would be if the Masha'allah segment of Dykes' translation makes his version pull ahead any? His introduction seems long and potentially useful. Any thoughts on that?

Chanah said:

The big gap in interpretation I think is because way back when if you were studying astrology, you learnt horary first - it's easier, because you're only dealing with a few planets and houses in a given chart, pertaining to one question. You got a chance to really see how astrology operates by focussing on only a few things in any given chart. Then you picked up natal, already having a background in how a chart works generally.

Click to expand...

Yes, this seems right on the mark.

Chanah said:

Add in the outer planets if you must for extra information, but they shouldn't contradict anything you see using the classical seven. I won't say that they're worthless (though I haven't used them in years in my own work), but I've seen so many modern chart readings completely derailed because it's all blamed or credited on some obscure aspect or transit of Pluto, which seems to be responsible for all things, ever. And that's just bad astrology.

Click to expand...

Minderwiz said:

Rant
Yes, the almost religious worship of Pluto by the Modern crew is amazing. Coupled with a belief that Pluto is an irresistable force of fate, and you wonder about the criticisms of the tradition as being over concerned with fate. I've not seen anything in a traditional text to rival that belief in Pluto's omnipotence. The trouble is these ideas continue to be passed on by Astrologers who either don't know about the traditional challenge or who are so sure of the rightness of their approach that they ignore it.
End of Rant

Click to expand...

You guys are cracking me up. But so true what you're saying about Pluto, his omnipotence, and minor Pluto aspects being overblown and responsible for everyhing in modern astrology. (And I say that as someone with a soft spot for some psychological astrology and more prediction-oriented modern astrologers.)

kalliope said:

The thing about the Suskin book is that it's not something that can be used alone by a beginner. It doesn't explain all traditional terms, doesn't go into the elements or nature of the signs, etc. There is no introduction to traditional astrology in general. It does have charts in the Appendix for determining dignity, and the 43 detailed rules for interpretations, and a bare-bones example at the end. It's mostly for the student who has learned the basics (or has resources for those) who is in need of a clearly delineated, systematic way of going through a chart. Since the older texts can seem overwhelming, especially in their language, I think this book does fill a gap as a procedural outline for how to use the works of earlier authors.

Click to expand...

I bought the Kindle copy and I'm about a quarter of the way through. The author states that he's written it for his students, so it's not surprising that some things are missing. I could knit pick on some of the things in it up till now but apart from Karma, it's a reasonably good text. Nowhere in the history of Western Astrology does Karma (as opposed to fate) show up until the New Age movement. I don't see anything wrong with a belief in Karma, he may well be correct in his belief. But having echoed Chanah and me on the preversion of Astrology by making it a tool of psychology, he then does exactly the same thing and makes it a tool of Karma.

However up till now, it's not become too karmic in nature and the student can always discount it. He's a former student of Zoller, a towering figure but one who has some religious quirks.

Kalliope said:

Thanks for the links to the excerpts in Google Books, and for the reminder about Sahl. I've almost purchased a Sahl translation a few times, but couldn't decide on which one, so it was interesting to see your comments about them here. I've been drawn to Holden's clear and simpler language, and you both seem to echo that. I guess my question would be if the Masha'allah segment of Dykes' translation makes his version pull ahead any? His introduction seems long and potentially useful. Any thoughts on that?

Click to expand...

Dykes introduction is excellent but once on to the translation it struggles. I'm lucky in that I have Kindle Unlimited and could borrow the book rather than buy it. I would think long and hard about paying for it.

Masha'allah is also translated by Holden, it's not an identical coverage but it has six of the main Astrological writings.

I have to agree with Minderwiz on the translation. If it's a matter of convenience or money, the Dykes text is available as an ebook for $9 or $10, and it does have a very good introduction. Or read it for free if you have a kindle subscription.

For readability, though, I'd definitely go for the Holden translations. Also, Holden's Dorotheus is a lot easier to read than Pingree's (I was skimming through the Dykes introduction, and he talks about Dorotheus quite a lot, that's what brings it to mind).

kalliope said:

The thing about the Suskin book is that it's not something that can be used alone by a beginner. It doesn't explain all traditional terms, doesn't go into the elements or nature of the signs, etc. There is no introduction to traditional astrology in general. It does have charts in the Appendix for determining dignity, and the 43 detailed rules for interpretations, and a bare-bones example at the end. It's mostly for the student who has learned the basics (or has resources for those) who is in need of a clearly delineated, systematic way of going through a chart. Since the older texts can seem overwhelming, especially due to their language, I think this book does fill a gap as a procedural outline for how to use the works of earlier authors.

Click to expand...

Hi, Thank you all. I will go for the Suskin book as as you well said, I need a systematic way of going through a chart. I have several books about all that is not explained on Suskin book, what I need is a guide, so I'm going to take a look.

The exercice on my studies is quite simple. Just pick the house main meaning and the sign main meaning and try to deduct a meaning. That's all.
Is a magical course in which on the first module is a lesson very simple on astrology. But I just wanted to made the exercise the better I can, so I got a book, and then another book, and then more questions, and here I am. Making everything as complicated as possible.

I came across this article on Skyscript when I was hunting for more information on Robert Zoller. The interview surrounds the nature of Magic and the relationship of Magic to Astrology. Hopefully you can make use of it as you progress through your course.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/zoller.html

I'm going to go with the Holden translation, then, since readability is what I'm after. And I think I remember the ebook being cheaper before, like you said, Chanah, but it's $20 now. So I'll skim through Dykes' intro in the Look Inside for now, and will order the Holden. Someday I might try the Amazon Unlimited subscription, but I don't get through as much fiction these days, and so wonder if it would be worth it.

Minderwiz, it's funny that the karma bit really stood out for you -- I'd completely forgotten he mentioned it! I obviously just ignored it, and as I'm sure you've seen, it's more of a brief worldview thing than something that affects his astrological technique or approach that I can see.

If anyone especially enjoys that interview with Zoller on the Skyscript site, you should check out Garry Phillipson's book (he's the interviewer), Astrology in the Year Zero. It contains 30 interviews w/ astrologers and a few skeptics, some of which can be found on the site, like Zoller's. It was an interesting read. I bought it a few years ago when used copies weren't as expensive. There is also his website, which contains many articles and interviews on astrological philosophy and topics.

Ivanna, I hope you find the Suskin book useful! Good luck with your magical course, too.

Yes, I agree that Suskin's method is actually a good example of late medieval approaches. The reference to Karma stood out because I have read Schmidt's article on Astrology and Fate in Hellenistic Astrology - which points out both the similarities and the differences with and from Karma. Yes, the native's life is interwoven with destiny/fate but there's no reincarnation as in Karma, so there's no burden of Karma that we bring into life, as Suskin explicitly claims. So whilst the two views are closely linked there's a difference.

Suskin goes on to claim that Karma underpins Astrology. If fact there's no reference to it. Firstly because the Greeks did not share the concept and secondly because any Medieval Astrologer advancing it would be guilty of heresy. Both Islam and Chritianity don't except the concept. Now that's not a practical deal breaker with the book. It's a good, if overstructured method. I can't really fault it on that. Firstly it's aimed at his students and it does contain frequent references to them developing their skills. Secondly, late Medieval and Seventeenth Century Astrology is highly prescriptive in the methods. So there's nothing wrong with the content at all.

I'd like to add it to the reading list. Are you up for writing the review or would you prefer me to do it and then comment on it?

Minderwiz said:

I'd like to add it to the reading list. Are you up for writing the review or would you prefer me to do it and then comment on it?

Click to expand...

I was out most of yesterday afternoon and evening. I see you went ahead and wrote a review for it, thanks! I was going to say that someone with more knowledge and experience might be a better choice for a more even-handed review. But I'll definitely add my own comments to your thread from my perspective.

kalliope said:

I was out most of yesterday afternoon and evening. I see you went ahead and wrote a review for it, thanks! I was going to say that someone with more knowledge and experience might be a better choice for a more even-handed review. But I'll definitely add my own comments to your thread from my perspective.

Click to expand...

Yes please add your own thoughts and experiences and don't be afraid to disagreee with what I've said, if your experience was different. I had some free time today, which is probably the only time that I could write one in the next few days. But make sure you add your thoughts.