Astrologers' Community (https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/index.php)
-   -   Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams (https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=129607)

 Clair Y 09-29-2019 04:10 PM

Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Hi all and thank you for reading.

I have read that Mercury is never 28 zodiacal degrees from the Sun.

Given this information and the fact that 17 degrees and under within the Sun's beams is classed as either Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams, does anyone here know what the probability is of either 'having' a Mercury which is cazimi, combust or under sunbeams or a Mercury that is 'not' cazimi, combust or under sunbeams??

Thanks.

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

I think it's pretty likely that Mercury is combust/under the beams. I don't know enough about Mercury's orbit to give any mathematical precision, but hopefully someone here does.

 Clair Y 09-30-2019 10:10 AM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Quote:
 Originally Posted by waybread (Post 1002368) I think it's pretty likely that Mercury is combust/under the beams. I don't know enough about Mercury's orbit to give any mathematical precision, but hopefully someone here does.
Same here, but if I had enough time on my hands I would definitely research this and give the calculation a go.

I am thinking of learning mathematical probability in depth for the purpose of Astrology, because many things relating to this I would like to know that I also know would be quite complex to handle. For instance, what would be the probability of X, Y and Z transits happening at the same time at any one point in a person's life?

[Deleted reference to Pluto because that's not allowed on the Traditional board. See here. - Moderator]

 JUPITERASC 09-30-2019 12:00 PM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Clair Y (Post 1002168) Hi all and thank you for reading. I have read that Mercury is never 28 zodiacal degrees from the Sun. Given this information and the fact that 17 degrees and under within the Sun's beams is classed as either Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams, does anyone here know what the probability is of either 'having' a Mercury which is cazimi, combust or under sunbeams or a Mercury that is 'not' cazimi, combust or under sunbeams?? Thanks.
CAZIMI discussion includes comments on MERCURY CAZIMI example chart :smile:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewto...ghlight=cazimi

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Clair, I'll bet a good mathematically minded astrologer has worked this out.

But one thing you might do is pull up an ephemeris for a couple of years, and construct a table, with the years on one axis and the categories of cazimi, combust, under the beams, or out-of-orb on the other. I think you could quickly tabulate the number of days per year that Mercury fell into one of those categories. Maybe convert them into percentages.

There is a good free ephemeris on the main page of Astrodienst at www.astro.com.

It would also be interesting to see how many days, per year, on average, Mercury is retrograde. In traditional astrology, that's another debility.

 Clair Y 10-01-2019 10:45 AM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Quote:
 Originally Posted by JUPITERASC (Post 1002418) CAZIMI discussion includes comments on MERCURY CAZIMI example chart :smile: http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewto...ghlight=cazimi
I agree that both the cazimi and combust Mercury are given a boost, despite that combust is said to be interpreted as a weakness. I find it astounding just how many famous singers/ people who communicate brilliantly for their profession have combust Mercury. This is one of the reasons I would love to know the probability.

 Clair Y 10-01-2019 10:51 AM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Quote:
 Originally Posted by waybread (Post 1002472) Clair, I'll bet a good mathematically minded astrologer has worked this out. But one thing you might do is pull up an ephemeris for a couple of years, and construct a table, with the years on one axis and the categories of cazimi, combust, under the beams, or out-of-orb on the other. I think you could quickly tabulate the number of days per year that Mercury fell into one of those categories. Maybe convert them into percentages. There is a good free ephemeris on the main page of Astrodienst at www.astro.com. It would also be interesting to see how many days, per year, on average, Mercury is retrograde. In traditional astrology, that's another debility.
This is a very good idea, thank you. I will most likely return to this.
Thankfully I have the Michelsen and Pottenger's American one so I can use that. Should I come back here to share if I get around to it? (Bearing in mind my personal time-world seems to be much slower than most other people's).

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Yes, please let us know what you find out.

I am also skeptical that Mercury combust the sun is debilitated. The rational for seeing combustion as debilitating is that the visible light of a planet so close to the sun is obscured by the sun's brilliance. However, I have observed many smart, well educated people with sun conjunct Mercury. To the extent that the sun symbolizes one's identity, I think a planet conjunct the sun indicates what the person identifies with.

Traditionally Mars was the one planet not harmed by combustion, because its own nature was so hot and dry.

A few ancient astrologers also thought that a domiciled planet ("in its own chariot") was not harmed by combustion.

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Clair, I just noticed this discussion of combustion at Skyscript:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10595

 greybeard 10-02-2019 10:24 AM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

I've never looked at % of time Mercury is combust, etc. But it is useful to know that Mercury is Rx about 21% of the time.

That is, about 1 of every 5 charts contain a retrograde Mercury....unusual but not rare.

Both Venus and Mars are rx about 8% of the time, or 1 in 12 or so charts....a highly unusual condition, therefore important whenever it occurs.

I take the ephemeris [Michelson], and turn at random to Sept 1947. I will use 8-1/2° as the limit of combustion, applying and separating, and ignore under the sunbeams.

The 1st 7 days of Sep, Mercury is combust. He turns Rx on the 25th Oct while at 21-1/2° extension. He reenters combustion on 3 Nov, and remains in that state until the 10th. He turns Direct on the 15th. He begins catching Sun, and in combustion again on the 20th of Dec. He remains combust until 17 Jan '48...He turns rx on 11th Feb and is combust on 16th.

So, Mercury was combust 42 days out of 155, or about 27% of the time. This is not an accurate figure; a longer period of time should be examined. But we took it through a full rx cycle, so our number is probably in the ballpark. I don't pay attention to Mercury under the sunbeams in practice. I think I missed counting about 10-15 total days (should be 169) so the % of time combust is probably a bit lower than stated (25%).

 JUPITERASC 10-02-2019 10:28 AM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

*

'....In the massive Astrological roots of Hellenic astrology
Joseph Crane says the Greeks had no concept of combustion :smile:
that came later and was used by nearly all medieval astrologers.
I wonder if it were the arabs?!.....'
TT Skyscript comment

 greybeard 10-02-2019 11:21 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by JUPITERASC (Post 1002794) * '....In the massive Astrological roots of Hellenic astrology Joseph Crane says the Greeks had no concept of combustion :smile: that came later and was used by nearly all medieval astrologers. I wonder if it were the arabs?!.....' TT Skyscript comment
Sounds like an Arab trick. But the importance the Hindus place on combustion suggests it may have come from India.

 greybeard 10-02-2019 05:25 PM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Combustion of the Moon as indicating a single life iin a male's chart is mentioned in Tetrbiblos, claudius Ptolemy, (p. 193, Wilson tr.), 2nd century. Probably not an Arab trick.

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

1 Attachment(s)
Adam Schiff has been in the news a lot lately. He's the Democratic member of the USA House of Representatives who is chairing the House Intelligence Committee's impeachment inquiry into Donald Trump. I looked up his chart today.

It's an interesting chart, with Venus cazimi. I post it here merely by way of an illustration of a cazimi planet, not to generate any political discussion. (Which would be inappropriate for this thread.)

Speaking of Venus, because it also never strays more than 47 degrees from the sun, there is also a decent chance of someone having Venus combus/under the beams, or Mercury conjunct Venus. This would be considered an accidental dignity, with Venus as the lesser benefic. But then we would knock off a couple of points if Venus were oriental to (rising before) the sun.

One other thing to consider is that in terms of traditional (Ptolemaic) aspects, Venus and Mercury can only ever have a conjunction with the sun, nothing wider.

Lots to consider!

 greybeard 10-03-2019 06:21 AM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Venus forms an octile (semisquare) when at maximum elongation. The aspect ( 2° orb) remains in effect for around a month, or more, while Venus changes direction.

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Right-- and not a traditional/Ptolemaic aspect.

 greybeard 10-04-2019 09:48 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by waybread (Post 1003437) Right-- and not a traditional/Ptolemaic aspect.
Darn that Kepler...always stirring up the pot.

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Oh, well. If Kepler (1571-1630) used it, fair enough. I'm all for adding quintiles as traditional aspects.

https://www.skyscript.co.uk/kepler.html

 JUPITERASC 10-05-2019 01:01 PM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Clair Y (Post 1002601) I agree that both the cazimi and combust Mercury are given a boost, despite that combust is said to be interpreted as a weakness. I find it astounding just how many famous singers/ people who communicate brilliantly for their profession have combust Mercury. This is one of the reasons I would love to know the probability.
Coley states that a planet is cazimi ONLY IF
it is within 16 minutes of longitude AND latitude of the sun
which makes cazimi a much rarer event :smile:

 AJ Astrology 10-08-2019 11:36 PM

Re: Cazimi, combust or under sunbeams

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Clair Y (Post 1002168) Hi all and thank you for reading. I have read that Mercury is never 28 zodiacal degrees from the Sun.
Hi Clair Y,

That is correct.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Clair Y (Post 1002601) I agree that both the cazimi and combust Mercury are given a boost, despite that combust is said to be interpreted as a weakness. I find it astounding just how many famous singers/ people who communicate brilliantly for their profession have combust Mercury. This is one of the reasons I would love to know the probability.
I think you might have some misconceptions.

It is the planet that is weak, not the native.

Mercury's position is also important. A direct Mercury under the light moving away from Sun is stronger than a direct Mercury under the light moving toward Sun and both are stronger than Rx Mercuries moving toward or away from Sun.

Mercury is not the only significator of communications.

Some signs are voiceless, and some signs speak. You need to look at Mercury's sign, and then to the ruler of that sign and its condition, because Mercury will get strength or not from that planet, plus any aspects to Mercury can strengthen or weaken it.

Ibn-Ezra says a planet under the light is like a person in prison and a planet combust is like a dying person.

We are all imprisoned in something, and being imprisoned in the music industry is not so bad a place to be. Others are imprisoned in court rooms or hospitals, because they're lawyers and doctors and then some are in a real prison.

H1 denotes speech, among things, so you'll want to look at the H1 ruler and planets in H1 and in particular if any of those planets control Mercury.

Anyway, planets don't exist in a vacuum, you have to look at them in their complete context.

 greybeard 10-09-2019 03:44 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by AJ Astrology (Post 1004715) Hi Clair Y, That is correct. I think you might have some misconceptions. It is the planet that is weak, not the native. Mercury's position is also important. A direct Mercury under the light moving away from Sun is stronger than a direct Mercury under the light moving toward Sun and both are stronger than Rx Mercuries moving toward or away from Sun. Mercury is not the only significator of communications. Some signs are voiceless, and some signs speak. You need to look at Mercury's sign, and then to the ruler of that sign and its condition, because Mercury will get strength or not from that planet, plus any aspects to Mercury can strengthen or weaken it. Ibn-Ezra says a planet under the light is like a person in prison and a planet combust is like a dying person. We are all imprisoned in something, and being imprisoned in the music industry is not so bad a place to be. Others are imprisoned in court rooms or hospitals, because they're lawyers and doctors and then some are in a real prison. H1 denotes speech, among things, so you'll want to look at the H1 ruler and planets in H1 and in particular if any of those planets control Mercury. Anyway, planets don't exist in a vacuum, you have to look at them in their complete context.
Good job AJ.

 All times are GMT. The time now is 05:58 AM.