The meaning of burned planets?!

IleneK

Premium Member
Referring to KM's chart, I believe from a traditional astrology viewpoint, when a planet is combust the Sun, generally speaking, there is no planet more dominant than the Sun. The planet that is combust with the Sun is, as Moog, described, "lost", totally combusted, cannot be seen.

There are ameliorating circumstances, though.

The first circumstance is that a planet applying to a conjunction with the Sun is more affected than one separating from the Sun. And of course, the closer to exactly conjunct with the Sun, with the exception of being very close [cazimi], the more the Sun obscures. So in KM's chart, with Jupiter separating by 6 degrees, it is just about out of the Sun's combustion. But it is still under the sunbeams and suffering some injury.

Another circumstance, according to Frawley, involves a planet in its own sign, in its dignity, like Venus in Taurus combust Sun. In this instance, the planet has power of the Sun by dispositing or ruling it, while the Sun has power over the planet by combustion. So combustion does not harm the planet. In KM's chart, Jupiter is in its exaltation not its dignity, so I am not sure it is protected. If it is not, then it is diminished by being combust the Sun, hidden and not properly "seen", but less so than if it were in orb by 6 degrees, but applying to the Sun.
 
Last edited:

Cypocryphy

Well-known member
Just to clarify, in regard to the planet being more dominant, I interpret a planet that is strengthened by the zodiac sign it is within to fare better when suffering from "combustion." I look at the planet as if it has a "solar shield." Is that what you mean by "dominant"?

When a planet (such as Jupiter) is in a state of superior combustion, then I interpret "cazimi" to be the opposite of what it would be when in a state of inferior combustion. The whole energy of the planet is frustrated. But a planet in a state of superior combustion, but at such a point as to be considered "within the beams," I will not negate the planets influence but interpret its state as being frustrated.
 
Last edited:

dr. farr

Well-known member
Some of the earliest Hellenic authors (CORRECTION! Dorotheus of Sidon, Antiochus of Athens, Maximus) gave variable distances from the Sun for each planet, as indicating combustion (depending upon the qualities and nature of the specific planet) rather than the later doctrine of a set number of degrees from the Sun generically for all planets. I follow this "variable combustion" concept, and I base it upon the elemental quality of the planet involved: eg, Water element planets (Moon, Venus) I consider most resistant to combustion (and count combustion only under 3 degrees), then Earth element planets (Mercury, Saturn) are next resistant (and I count combustion only at 3/4 degrees or less); next Air (Jupiter) which I regard as combust only at 5 degrees or less, then most susceptible (because of being of the same element as the Sun), Fire (Mars) which I regard as combust at 6 (perhaps even 7) degrees.
 
Last edited:

tsmall

Premium Member
There is traditionally another consideration with burned planets (which is why the Sun is considered sometimes to be an accidental malefic) called "returning." It has to do with applying planets "pushing" something onto the other planet whether it be management, nature or power. When a planet is combust or burned it is unable to receive what is being pushed and so returns it back to the applying planet, often times in a worsened state or corrupted somehow.

To speak a bit more to what IleneK posted, in Hellenistic astrology a planet was considered free from combustion if it was in any of its own places...domicile, exaltation, term, triplicity. A bit like being in a safe zone, it is called being in its chariot. So in KM's chart it would appear that Jupiter is freed from combustion.

Mars is actually more interesting in her chart, because it is retrograde but in exaltation. Revoking, or returning also happens with retro planets, and in this case the Sun is applying to Mars but Mars' retrogradation prevents him from accepting what the Sun has to offer and so he will return it. Thankfully Mars is very well behaved and the Sun is fit to carry the extra burden being supported by an exalted Jupiter in MR with the Moon. It could be a bit of a headache at times since Mars is the out of sect malefic and so might get up to the dickens every once in a while.
 

Cypocryphy

Well-known member

my natal chart:smile:

Well, the image expired! Shoot. I'm going to have to go on memory now.

Well, I can tell you this, you are one sensitive person (girl)! (I'm going to assume that you are a girl. Please don't get upset if you are not. :sideways:) I bet you can just feel what a person is thinking when you are in his or her company. I bet your intuition is off the charts. Just out of curiosity, are you clairvoyant in any way? With your water emphasis in conjunction with the nature of your grand trine, it seems that you would be.

As for the issue of your Jupiter being combust, I would say that you do well financially. But I think you are doing well because of your partner. So, in a sense, with the Sun's influence, you'll find yourself being dependent on your loved one for financial security. Additionally, your finances should be very stable, and should not wane since you have a wonderful aspect from the other luminary and that it's fortified by a harmonious interaction with Saturn.

Aside from finances, your Jupiter is in Cancer, so it, of course, has that harmonious influence with its energies. But it is also combust with the Sun, and so its beneficial influence is minimized. Nonetheless, you should have an extremely caring nature about you. You will give all of yourself with compassion and sincerity. This caring nature really shows itself when you are with children. And despite the combustion, your heavy elemental emphasis of water fortifies this quality within yourself.

Anyway, the chart is gone, and I think I'll just leave it at that. Is any of this accurate?

All the best!
 
Last edited:

Kaiousei no Senshi

Premium Member
Some of the earliest Hellenic authors (eg Firmicus Maternus) gave variable distances from the Sun for each planet, as indicating combustion (depending upon the qualities and nature of the specific planet) rather than the later doctrine of a set number of degrees from the Sun generically for all planets. I follow this "variable combustion" concept, and I base it upon the elemental quality of the planet involved: eg, Water element planets (Moon, Venus) I consider most resistant to combustion (and count combustion only under 3 degrees), then Earth element planets (Mercury, Saturn) are next resistant (and I count combustion only at 3/4 degrees or less); next Air (Jupiter) which I regard as combust only at 5 degrees or less, then most susceptible (because of being of the same element as the Sun), Fire (Mars) which I regard as combust at 6 (perhaps even 7) degrees.

The term "combust" does not appear in any of Firmicus Maternus's eight books. At least in the Bram translation, I understand Holden has done a more recent one.
 

ExtremeRose

Active member
I can't give you a picture of my chart,i'm on my phone, right now.but i will appriciate if you look at it :)) 23.8.1991 belgrade,serbia 7:16 am...kisses
 

Cypocryphy

Well-known member
I have uploaded your charts Rose. So now everyone can have a look. :smile:
 

Attachments

  • Rose Extreme.jpg
    Rose Extreme.jpg
    75.2 KB · Views: 35
  • Extreme Rose.jpg
    Extreme Rose.jpg
    73.9 KB · Views: 36

dr. farr

Well-known member
The term "combust" does not appear in any of Firmicus Maternus's eight books.


This is quite correct!
In fact, "combust" (or "combustion" or "combust zone") does not appear in ANY of the Hellenist authors:pinched:! The only concept (doctrine) found in Hellenist astrology relating to this issue was that of "Under the Sunbeams", ie, the Hellenists did NOT differentiate between "Under the Sunbeams" and "combust": for the Hellenists, the debility of a planet occured once it entered this "SUNBEAM" zone and continued until after the planet left the "SUNBEAM" zone. The doctrine that there existed a "Sunbeam" zone AND, within it, a more intense "COMBUST" zone, did not develop until early Islamic transitional era times.
For the Hellenists, there was only "Under the Beams" (and "the heart of the Sun", "Cazimi", first elaborated by Antiochus of Athens in the 2nd century); now, Dorotheus of Sidon (50 AD, before Ptolemy and Valens) spoke of this "Sunbeam" zone as VARIABLE relative to the planet in question (NOT as a "set zone" or set degree-area before and after the Sun, the same for all planets generically) This VARIABLE "Sunbeam" zone concept was also taught by Antiochus of Athens (2nd century) and Maximus (4th century), the latter author correlating the quality of the planet with the variableness of its becoming "Under the Sunbeams".

On a similar (historical) note, we also fail to find the doctrine of "essential detriment by sign" in Firmicus Maternus (or in other Hellenist authors"), ie, that a planet in a sign opposite its domicle = the detriment of that planet.
For the Hellenists, there was only domicile (in later times called "rulership"), exaltation and fall: like the doctrine of "combust" (as being distuniguished from "Under the Sunbeams"), so too did the doctine of "essential detriment by sign", develop after Hellenist times (during the early Islamic transitional era)...
 

Moog

Well-known member
On a similar (historical) note, we also fail to find the doctrine of "essential detriment by sign" in Firmicus Maternus (or in other Hellenist authors"), ie, that a planet in a sign opposite its domicle = the detriment of that planet.
For the Hellenists, there was only domicile (in later times called "rulership"), exaltation and fall: like the doctrine of "combust" (as being distuniguished from "Under the Sunbeams"), so too did the doctine of "essential detriment by sign", develop after Hellenist times (during the early Islamic transitional era)...

That's quite interesting.

Vedic astrology also doesn't have the 'detriments'. The domiciles, exaltations and falls are the same as in western astrology. Essential Dignity otherwise depends on a planets relationship with the lord of the sign.
 

!4C

Well-known member
I follow a more alchemical outlook regarding combustion: I do not consider the planet "destroyed" by the Sun, but rather that the Sun has absorbed (temporarily) the qualities of the combust planet, and that a mixture of Sun+planet qualities and influences are then present (predominanted, however, by the solar qualities)
After reviewing the topic and looking at examples, I'm with Dr. Farr.

Combustion appears to be best viewed as an extension of disposing. The closer a planet is to the sun, the more it will be obligated to serve the sun. The planet can function normally, but it must answer to the king when summoned. Obviously, being within sight and shouting distance of the boss means less chance of freedom.

The sun rules conscious thought. While most nervous system functions operate independent of conscious thought, conscious thought has the ability to temporarily override many of these functions. So it guess makes sense that the sun would have such elevated power status in a natal chart, at least in terms of psychology.
 
Last edited:

Bina

Well-known member
I have Mars (11°18) conjunct Sun (12°12) in Taurus, 3rd house, also both are closely parallel (26') and have often wondered about this conjunction. Since both Sun and Mars are fiery by nature would the combustion weaken Mars?? How would the parallel aspect affect the combustion? How can the energies of those two planets so closely linked play themselves out?

I have to add that I can be very stubborn and strong-willed. I can have a lot of energy once i get going on a project and can be very determined to see things through, I don't give up easy on anything. :whistling:
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
I have Mars (11°18) conjunct Sun (12°12) in Taurus, 3rd house, also both are closely parallel (26') and have often wondered about this conjunction. Since both Sun and Mars are fiery by nature would the combustion weaken Mars?? How would the parallel aspect affect the combustion? How can the energies of those two planets so closely linked play themselves out?

I have to add that I can be very stubborn and strong-willed. I can have a lot of energy once i get going on a project and can be very determined to see things through, I don't give up easy on anything. :whistling:


From my perspective there would be an amplification of Fire (since both Sun and Mars are Fiery), with an emphasis on Solar qualities over Martial, but Mars still quite influential in the sense that those qualities of Mars and those qualities of the Sun which are SIMILAR to each other, would be very potently expressed; the Parallel tends to make Sun and Mars more equal in this mixture (since combustion is determined from considerations regarding longitude/ecliptic, moreso than from equatorial declination)
 

dr. farr

Well-known member
Could you people,please look at my chart,which Cypocryphy uploaded?:'((


From my perspective:
-Mercury is combust
-Jupiter is "barely combusted" (and therefore, in my opinion, only mildly detrimented by this)
-Venus is close enough for me to consider as Cazimi (and therefore significantly dignified)
 
Top