Suns Antiscion

Hi,

Does anyone know if the suns antiscion falls on a planet does this combust the planet. I seem to have problems finding specific answers to this on the web. Any help would be appreciated.

A planet can only be combust if it is in the same sign as the Sun. So the answer is no.

A couple of things I wanted to address in this short thread.

Firstly, I won't outright condemn the use of antiscia in horary, but I will warn that it's a lonely road. Most authors talked about antiscia, but no one used them. William Lilly is a good example of this. He has a section in his first book where he discusses antiscia, but then he only mentions them about four or five more times in his horary text. The context is only in charts of lost ships or illness, but he never demonstrates any techniques with antiscia in any of his example delineations.

Other authors like Bonatti, Sahl, and Jirjis take it one step further by not mentioning antiscia in their horary texts at all. This makes it difficult to determine exactly how they should be used because there are no examples of them being utilized in the horary tradition by the main figureheads of it.

Harold said:

A planet can only be combust if it is in the same sign as the Sun. So the answer is no

Click to expand...

The information Harold provides in the quote above is based on the definition by William Lilly, but it is clear that the earlier medieval astrologers considered planets within 7.5 degrees of the sun to be combust regardless of sign boundaries. Combustion is based on a very real and observable astronomical phenomena where planets too close to the sun cannot be seen through his intense light. No sign boundary prevents this period of invisibility. This is just an example of how Lilly does not always fit into the tradition that came before him.

Combustion is a geo-centric astronomical phenomena (applied in astrology)-ie, the body of a planet becomes (using normal vision from the perspective of a person on Earth) obscured or "hidden" within the light-field of the Sun. However, this observable "astronomical" phenomena does not apply when using symbolic representations (such as antiscion, Egyptian or Pauline dodekatemorion, symbolic directions, etc)

Kaiousei no Senshi said:

The information Harold provides in the quote above is based on the definition by William Lilly, but it is clear that the earlier medieval astrologers considered planets within 7.5 degrees of the sun to be combust regardless of sign boundaries.

Click to expand...

Inherent in this statement is the idea that the earlier the astrological text, the purer and more correct the astrology. This is quite a widespread view these days and runs completely counter to any other 'science' where later texts are deemed to have benefited from more detailed research and greater experience. It is not as though Lilly (and other 17th century astrologers) did not read these medieval texts. He did, and he could read them in their original Latin and Greek!

Hi guys,

Thank you all for participating. Frawley quotes ' It acts there exactly as it does in the degree where it stands bodily, except that contacts by antiscion usually carry a sense of hiddenness.' The client had asked a question concerning the fate and outcome of a man who had abused her when she was a child. She is represented by Jupiter as querent at 20 degrees 32 Cancer in 8th house of sexual activity. He is represented by Sun at 11 degrees 15 Gemini in 7th house of open enemies (The case hit the national papers recently.) A planet combust is combust regardless of whether it is applying or separating. The Sun, as natural significator represents a man in power, (he was a senior family member). The Suns (him) antiscion combusts her (Jupiter) at 18 degrees 45. Combust (abuse), antiscion (secrecy) in 8th house of sexual activity. The abuse was carried out in secret for several years. I am only a mere student of astrology. I have read a lot of serious debates raging between many learned and respected scholars on the subject. I respect all of their opinions. But in the instance of this particular chart I would humbly feel that these placements may seem to be appropriate to the circumstances of the situation. All I will say that is in future I will keep my eyes open for any possibilities where charts are concerned. Many learned men may know many things in this world, but at the end of the day where astrology is concerned they are only theories, and as this chart has shown we should maybe remove ourselves from the technicalities and focus on the symbolism that is shown. I received the clients permission to discuss her chart.

Harold,

Harold said:

Inherent in this statement is the idea that the earlier the astrological text, the purer and more correct the astrology.

Click to expand...

That idea is only inherent in my statement if you wish to put it in there. The point of that statement was to show that Lilly's definition of Combustion does not concur with the general tradition that came before him and honestly does not make sense when compared to the philosophical and astronomical reasoning behind Combustion. Combine these two facts with the fact that Lilly is the only one who defines Combustion this way and it casts doubt on the appropriateness of his definition. Lilly was a good astrologer, but he did not have all of the answers and he did not get everything right (PoF calculation the same by day and night? Whaaaat?).

However, I would like to direct your attention to Christian Astrology Book II, Pg 300, aphorism 26 for further information regarding this matter.

Stargazer,

Thank you for sharing Frawley's information on this. I will add this to my 'Reasons I am Wary of Frawley' list.

Harold said:

A planet can only be combust if it is in the same sign as the Sun. So the answer is no.

Click to expand...

I know Lilly said this, but it really doesn't make sense for combustion to be unable to cross sign boundaries.

Kaiousei no Senshi said:

The point of that statement was to show that Lilly's definition of Combustion does not concur with the general tradition that came before him and honestly does not make sense when compared to the philosophical and astronomical reasoning behind Combustion.

Click to expand...

IMO it also doesn't make sense to say that combustion, which is given a specific number of degrees from the Sun right along with "under the beams" to be unable to cross sign boundaries when aspects can. Lilly (and others) allowed that the Moon wasn't VoC if she applies to another planet while in the sign she finds herself, within orb, even if she has to change signs to complete the aspect. I'm pretty sure that, even with all the "advances" astrologers including Lilly have come up with, they didn't develop a way to erect a combustion barrier between signs. Is that like a sunscreen or something?

stargazer1 said:

The Suns (him) antiscion combusts her (Jupiter) at 18 degrees 45.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. It can't. Because combustion is an effect of physical proximity to the Sun. You mentioned in your OP that you were looking on the web to see if there was anything about antiscia and combustion. Anitiscia is another way of looking at commanding and obeying signs. Try searching your books and the web for that.

Kaiousei no Senshi said:

Harold,



That idea is only inherent in my statement if you wish to put it in there.

Click to expand...

You wrote it, not me....

and honestly does not make sense when compared to the philosophical and astronomical reasoning behind Combustion.

Click to expand...

Well, it does if is your experience is that combustion is not such a dire catastrophe that "earlier" authors cracked it up to be. Then you might want to reduce the orb (effectively) by apply some limiting, mitigating factor. Having a planet combust only within the same sign as the sun does have philosophical precedence regarding aspects in general.

If we just used physical experiential arguments as our guide in astrology, we would pretty soon have to admit that there is no known physical force at work which explains astrology and so abandon it forthwith.

(You were right to withdraw that comment about Lilly being the only author who applied that rule about same-sign combustion, by the way...)

Vedic astrology too considers combustion a "disaster" for the combust planet-and their orbs are even wider than in Traditional Western!

As I have posted on several occasions here on AW in discussions on combustion, I myself hold rather unusual views on the matter and, I myself do not attribute potent negative effects from combustion upon the influence of the combust planet...

dr. farr said:

I myself do not attribute potent negative effects from combustion upon the influence of the combust planet...

Click to expand...

Many present day astrologers (who are held in very high regard) would agree with you. And fine astrologer as Lilly was, (as noted above), he may well have come to the same conclusion, based on his experience.

Harold said:

You wrote it, not me...

Click to expand...

I most certainly did not. I encourage students to explore the origin and foundational philosophies of techniques, that way when they encounter differing or conflicting opinions they are more informed about which opinion stays more true to the original or who is able to make the most compelling argument for why it should be changed.

If we had it your way as suggested by this statement:

This is quite a widespread view these days and runs completely counter to any other 'science' where later texts are deemed to have benefited from more detailed research and greater experience.

Click to expand...

Then we would not be spending time discussing classical techniques, but instead attempting to ascertain some meaning out of Sedna or whatever other god-forsaken space particle is flavor of the month.

Well, it does if is your experience is that combustion is not such a dire catastrophe that "earlier" authors cracked it up to be. Then you might want to reduce the orb (effectively) by apply some limiting, mitigating factor. Having a planet combust only within the same sign as the sun does have philosophical precedence regarding aspects in general.

Click to expand...

Is this a paraphrase of a Lilly quote somewhere or conjecture on your part? I would much like to see the original.

If we just used physical experiential arguments as our guide in astrology, we would pretty soon have to admit that there is no known physical force at work which explains astrology and so abandon it forthwith.

Click to expand...

Spare me this nonsense.

"Astrology has no physical force as understood by science to explain it, ergo all physical and observational astrological techniques and considerations are suspect."

This is only an issue if you accept that there must be a scientific force behind astrology and not all astrologers do.

(You were right to withdraw that comment about Lilly being the only author who applied that rule about same-sign combustion, by the way...)

Click to expand...

I withdrew no comment, but I would be interested in seeing other, pre-17th century sources who defined Combustion in a way similar to Lilly. Do you have those sources?

I also notice you have no comment for the aphorism I pointed you to that defines within the Sun's beams (and thus Combustion) as occurring in "whatever Sign in may".

Thank you everyone for your advice and contributions to my query. As I stated earlier I am only a beginners student of a couple of years. I had just wondered if the chart was just high lighting the psychological impact of the situation on the querent. We know she is not physically combust by this placement, as the bodily position of the planets show, and the abuse happened years ago, but maybe the chart is just stressing the emotional and mental damage left behind. I could clearly see this in discussion with her. She has extreme negative feelings towards this person to this day. I had just figured bodily combustion physical, antiscion combustion (shadow) psychological and emotional (Jupiter as Head). Antiscion combustion as in metaphorical. I had just wondered if a contact by antiscion aspect can produce an event, then could a contact by antiscion combustion not also produce a state of being metaphorically. And she was stressed also about the current situation where trials etc were concerned. I had just wondered about the possibility when I asked the question. At the end of the day should we not as students of any subject be aware of all possibilities. Advances are happening in all fields of life all the time, and even great men like Lilly and others did not always follow their own advice. Maybe until we are all experts on the subject we should keep it flexible. Astrology is based on eventual and symbolic results. But again I thank everyone for their kind advice, and I shall certainly continue to further my reading on this wonderful art.