Natal Retrograde Mercury conjunct Sun

[tsmall]

Originally Posted by bubuza_dulce

My first Martial Arts teacher had Mercury Rx conjunct Sun at a less than one degree orb at 29 Sag...

He seemed brilliant, whenever he answered at a question he left silence behind. It seemed there was nothing left to say. He went to the essence of things; he wrote an innovative book about what he taught.

How much less than one degree? I am curious, because camizi, or in the heart of the Sun, is technically defined as 17' or less conjunction. I have a friend, born just three days after me, and his Mercury rx has made it back to within a degree of conjunction though not quite within the orb of camizi. Still, he is the smartest guy in any room. Which makes me wonder if the traditional orb needs to be wider?

[bubuza_dulce]

Originally Posted by tsmall

How much less than one degree? I am curious, because camizi, or in the heart of the Sun, is technically defined as 17' or less conjunction. I have a friend, born just three days after me, and his Mercury rx has made it back to within a degree of conjunction though not quite within the orb of camizi. Still, he is the smartest guy in any room. Which makes me wonder if the traditional orb needs to be wider?

Sun 29 Sag 25'56''
Mercury 29 Sag 50'43''r

But have only the birth day, not the hour.

[Judy_AzVirgo]

Originally Posted by tsmall

How much less than one degree? I am curious, because camizi, or in the heart of the Sun, is technically defined as 17' or less conjunction. I have a friend, born just three days after me, and his Mercury rx has made it back to within a degree of conjunction though not quite within the orb of camizi. Still, he is the smartest guy in any room. Which makes me wonder if the traditional orb needs to be wider?

The word is 'cazimi', and I wonder how the Arabs came up with 17 minutes, exactly. Not 18 or 20 minutes? Also have read that a planet that's cazimi to the Sun benefits from that closeness. How can that be, then a planet that is combust the Sun seems to indicate that the planet kind of burns up being so close to the Sun? Anyone know how that works?

[JUPITERASC]

Originally Posted by Judy_AzVirgo

The word is 'cazimi', and I wonder how the Arabs came up with 17 minutes, exactly. Not 18 or 20 minutes? Also have read that a planet that's cazimi to the Sun benefits from that closeness. How can that be, then a planet that is combust the Sun seems to indicate that the planet kind of burns up being so close to the Sun? Anyone know how that works?

“Cazimi also Casimi, sometimes Zaminium is an Arabic word = "heart of the Sun"/"in the heart of the Sun" therefore a planet in exact conjunction with/very near precise center of solar disc within 17' (arc minutes) partile (exactitude) is considered literally engulfed/fortified by Sol "in the heart of the Sun."

Ancient/medieval authorities defined combustion as within 5º-8º either side of the Sun. However, a planet will continue being weakened by Sun until elongated by 15º-17º degrees from it, a position considered as “under the beams of the Sun” and stronger than being combust, BUT causing noticeable weakening in effectiveness”

source wikipedia

[tsmall]

Originally Posted by Judy_AzVirgo

The word is 'cazimi', and I wonder how the Arabs came up with 17 minutes, exactly. Not 18 or 20 minutes? Also have read that a planet that's cazimi to the Sun benefits from that closeness. How can that be, then a planet that is combust the Sun seems to indicate that the planet kind of burns up being so close to the Sun? Anyone know how that works?

Every time I post in haste and don't proof read...

Combustion is the reason that the Sun can be considered an "accidental" malefic. I think that the idea is similar to that of a hurricane, or a tornado. Once you get to the eye, or the heart you are golden, but around the edges (under the beams) not so much, and a bit closer in is really stormy. The Sun is the most important planet in the horoscope, so perhaps being perfectly "one" with the Sun magnifies the planet?

This is sort of what I was getting at before...when we are looking to define or describe the native and his/her abilities and talents we might read the planets differently than we do if we are looking at prediciting...psychological vs. predictive astrology. Something perhaps like being really gifted at playing the piano, but never actually having a piano to play? Just an idea anyway.