If mercury is in fall in Pisces, what does it mean if Mercury is in cazimi with Sun?
- Thread starter Dew9
- Start date
First I'll say that, if you follow the traditionalist approach, go 100% with what Olivia has posted above.
But I have a different outlook relative to cazimi; its probably because of my alchemist connections and studies coupled with my decidedly symbolist outlook relative to astrology. For me, cazimi rescues from any and all debilities and detriments-period!
You will find a high appraisal of cazimi in some of the older (mostly Arabic era) astrological literature, but its symbolic quality is extolled among the alchemists (there is a great deal of "hidden" astrology in the alchemical literature, if you know how to see it) The only time cazimi is lessened in its salutary effects, is if the Sun/cazimi planet is in a pitted degree, and even there the cazimi "shines from its pit" to a significant extent. In addition to this theoretical/philosophical outlook, I (believe) I have seen the reality of this outlook validated (in charts) on numerous occasions-I really believe I am correct in this view of cazimi.
Another point is the issue of Fall. Today (and for at least the past 900 years) the Fall of a planet is considered to be the entire zodiacal sign. This was not always the case. In the Greco/Roman astrological literature (and early Vedic literature as well) the entire sign was NOT considered to be the Fall of the planet: only a couple degrees before and after the exact Fall degree, was considered to be the Fall of the planet; if the planet were in that sign but not in or near the Fall degree, it was NOT considered in Fall, nor, in fact, even in detriment. By the time of Al-Biruni (1058 AD) this subject was STILL not definitely decided. In his "Elements of Astrology", Biruni mentions that there was controversy over the issue of Exaltation and Fall: he stated that some considered only the exact degree and a couple degrees before and after it (as did the Greco/Roman astrologers before them), that others considered the degrees of the sign prior/up to the exact degree as being in Fall (or Exaltation), and that still others believed that the entire sign was the Exaltation or Fall for the planet concerned. By the 12th century (in the West at least) the matter was settled and everyone since then has considered the entire sign the Fall (or Exaltation) of the planet (in Vedic astrology this is not the case; only the specific degree areas of Fall-or Exaltation-are given credit, just as in the old Greco/Roman times)
So, to my mind, these historical considerations add more question to this specific example of a cazimi planet in the sign of its Fall: what would I do? I would see if the Sun/cazimi planet were in or within a couple degrees of the specific Fall degree: if so, then I would downplay the benefit of the cazimi state. If not, however, I would count the cazimi state as a DIGNITY and not consider the Fall to exist, for that planet, at all...
PS
What do I do in practice relative to this Fall (and also Exaltation) matter? In almost all situations I do what everyone else does and consider the entire sign to be the Fall or Exaltation sign, and delineate accordingly. With one exception: regarding Sun in Libra I only regard its Fall within the actual degrees of the Fall; especially do I follow this in natal: I could never accept that ALL Librans have a dejected, Fallen Sun-never made sense to me, so I apply the 5 degree-area (2 before, exact and 2 following) of the specific Fall degree of the Sun in these nativities. And I often question to myself-can the Sun ever really be in Fall? After all its not a planet nor a satellite=it is a star, and many of us believe the stars to be "above" such mundane modifying forces as dignity and debility-that often bothers me, with the Sun, but I still follow the generally accepted attitude and practice re to the Sun and its "Fall"...
But I have a different outlook relative to cazimi; its probably because of my alchemist connections and studies coupled with my decidedly symbolist outlook relative to astrology. For me, cazimi rescues from any and all debilities and detriments-period!
You will find a high appraisal of cazimi in some of the older (mostly Arabic era) astrological literature, but its symbolic quality is extolled among the alchemists (there is a great deal of "hidden" astrology in the alchemical literature, if you know how to see it) The only time cazimi is lessened in its salutary effects, is if the Sun/cazimi planet is in a pitted degree, and even there the cazimi "shines from its pit" to a significant extent. In addition to this theoretical/philosophical outlook, I (believe) I have seen the reality of this outlook validated (in charts) on numerous occasions-I really believe I am correct in this view of cazimi.
Another point is the issue of Fall. Today (and for at least the past 900 years) the Fall of a planet is considered to be the entire zodiacal sign. This was not always the case. In the Greco/Roman astrological literature (and early Vedic literature as well) the entire sign was NOT considered to be the Fall of the planet: only a couple degrees before and after the exact Fall degree, was considered to be the Fall of the planet; if the planet were in that sign but not in or near the Fall degree, it was NOT considered in Fall, nor, in fact, even in detriment. By the time of Al-Biruni (1058 AD) this subject was STILL not definitely decided. In his "Elements of Astrology", Biruni mentions that there was controversy over the issue of Exaltation and Fall: he stated that some considered only the exact degree and a couple degrees before and after it (as did the Greco/Roman astrologers before them), that others considered the degrees of the sign prior/up to the exact degree as being in Fall (or Exaltation), and that still others believed that the entire sign was the Exaltation or Fall for the planet concerned. By the 12th century (in the West at least) the matter was settled and everyone since then has considered the entire sign the Fall (or Exaltation) of the planet (in Vedic astrology this is not the case; only the specific degree areas of Fall-or Exaltation-are given credit, just as in the old Greco/Roman times)
So, to my mind, these historical considerations add more question to this specific example of a cazimi planet in the sign of its Fall: what would I do? I would see if the Sun/cazimi planet were in or within a couple degrees of the specific Fall degree: if so, then I would downplay the benefit of the cazimi state. If not, however, I would count the cazimi state as a DIGNITY and not consider the Fall to exist, for that planet, at all...
PS
What do I do in practice relative to this Fall (and also Exaltation) matter? In almost all situations I do what everyone else does and consider the entire sign to be the Fall or Exaltation sign, and delineate accordingly. With one exception: regarding Sun in Libra I only regard its Fall within the actual degrees of the Fall; especially do I follow this in natal: I could never accept that ALL Librans have a dejected, Fallen Sun-never made sense to me, so I apply the 5 degree-area (2 before, exact and 2 following) of the specific Fall degree of the Sun in these nativities. And I often question to myself-can the Sun ever really be in Fall? After all its not a planet nor a satellite=it is a star, and many of us believe the stars to be "above" such mundane modifying forces as dignity and debility-that often bothers me, with the Sun, but I still follow the generally accepted attitude and practice re to the Sun and its "Fall"...
Last edited:
Culpeper
Premium Member
Although various authorities disagree as to the effectiveness of cazimi planets, I have found them to be very powerful and effective no matter what other condition they may have. I use them as main significators or ascendant rulers in electional charts. However, they should be just as effective in other types of charts. In a cazimi election matters go amazingly well, opposition melts away and unexpected help is offered.
For anyone who would try this, the Moon is not recomended as a cazimi significator. Nevertheless, I used it once. I was unemployed and in financial difficulties at the time. I received a call for a job interview with a company. The time they wanted had the Moon void-of-course--no good. So I said I could not make it then and suggested 10 May 1994 at 1:00 pm a few days later.That was just fine with them. The time was for a new Moon and annular solar eclipse visible directly overhead in Ohio. I was hired and am still employed by that company.
The chart indicated that the job would be financially rewarding and that has happened beyond all expectations. However, on the down side I have hated just about every day I have worked there. This is shown by both the 6th and 12th houses in the chart.
For anyone who would try this, the Moon is not recomended as a cazimi significator. Nevertheless, I used it once. I was unemployed and in financial difficulties at the time. I received a call for a job interview with a company. The time they wanted had the Moon void-of-course--no good. So I said I could not make it then and suggested 10 May 1994 at 1:00 pm a few days later.That was just fine with them. The time was for a new Moon and annular solar eclipse visible directly overhead in Ohio. I was hired and am still employed by that company.
The chart indicated that the job would be financially rewarding and that has happened beyond all expectations. However, on the down side I have hated just about every day I have worked there. This is shown by both the 6th and 12th houses in the chart.
Dew9
Well-known member
This is really very enriching information, thank you Dr Farr. But exactly what do u mean by the fall degree- what does that mean? Is there a specific degree for the fall of Mercury in Pisces or it is the same degree for all the planets?
Yes, each of the 7 (traditional) planet has an exact "Fall degree" in a particular sign, anciently ascribed to it: this specific degree refers only to the specific planet. In the case of Mercury its specific Fall degree is 15 Pisces (no other planet has this Fall degree, and no other planet has its Fall in Pisces)
As I have posted elsewhere on AW, even as late as 1058 AD Al-Biruni astrologers had not yet decided exactly how to determine the Fall (and indeed also the exaltation) of each planet: Al-Biruni tells us that there were 3 outlooks regarding this matter:
1) some only used the exact Fall degree, and 2 degrees before and after that degree
2) some used the degrees of the sign preceeding up to (and including) the exact Fall degree, but no degrees beyond that degree (eg, in this outlook Mercury would be in Fall from 0 Pisces through 15 Pisces, but would not be in its Fall in any Pisces degree beyond the 15th)
3) some used the entire sign as the Fall of the planet
By the 12th century it appears that the 3rd approach (using the entire sign as Fall for the planet) had become dominant, and this outlook has been followed ever since (however, in Vedic astrology they still use only the exact Fall degree for each specific planet)
As I have posted elsewhere on AW, even as late as 1058 AD Al-Biruni astrologers had not yet decided exactly how to determine the Fall (and indeed also the exaltation) of each planet: Al-Biruni tells us that there were 3 outlooks regarding this matter:
1) some only used the exact Fall degree, and 2 degrees before and after that degree
2) some used the degrees of the sign preceeding up to (and including) the exact Fall degree, but no degrees beyond that degree (eg, in this outlook Mercury would be in Fall from 0 Pisces through 15 Pisces, but would not be in its Fall in any Pisces degree beyond the 15th)
3) some used the entire sign as the Fall of the planet
By the 12th century it appears that the 3rd approach (using the entire sign as Fall for the planet) had become dominant, and this outlook has been followed ever since (however, in Vedic astrology they still use only the exact Fall degree for each specific planet)
astrologer50
Banned
---
“For technical purposes, in Western astrology, most ancient and medieval authorities considered a planet combust or burnt when its position was within 5-8 degrees on either side of the Sun. However, a planet will continue to be weakened by the Sun until it has elongated by 15-17 degrees from it. (Lilly says 17 degrees on p. 113 of Christian Astrology.) This positioning is said to be under the beams of the Sun, and although it may be stronger than being combust, it will still cause a noticeable weakening in a planet's effectiveness.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combust_(astrological_aspect)
“Venus combust may take away the strength to achieve, but when in a particularly close conjunction with the Sun it produces the condition sometimes termed nymphomania. Mars combust is always the man who fights for what he wants; and so with each planet according to its intrinsic nature.
Wilson says "there seems manifest a difference in genius and propensities of natives, according to the distance of their Mercury from the Sun; and that those whose Mercury is combust have little wit or solid judgment, though they will persevere in business and frequently with good success.”
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/dictionary/combust.php
Cazimi/combust
“So for a modern astrologer, Mars either cazimi or combust the sun is strengthened because Mars is considered fiery and hot, and thus benefits from meeting the fiery heat of the sun. But cold and dry Saturn would weaken when either combust or cazimi, because the nature of the sun is damaging to Saturn. Modern astrologers usually make no distinction between a planet being combust the sun or cazimi.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combust_(astrological_aspect)