skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

J.B. Morin on Combustion and Cazimi
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Martine



Joined: 03 May 2009
Posts: 70
Location: France

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 8:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Il see two reasons why combustion should not affect the inner quality of a planet.

1) Combustion is an accidental debility, so it lessens the strength or power of the planet, but not its quality. Therefore a man having Mercury combust will just as intelligent as if his Mercury was not combust.

2) The combust planet being near the Sun, they will mix their qualities. But the Sun has a considerable part to play in shaping the native's character. Therefore what the combust planet represents will be important in the native's personality.

I have been looking through a small collection of 60 to 80 charts of celebrities which I have for reference. It appears that about 50% have at least one planet combust.

In my opinion, a combust planet will bring troubles to the native, related to what this planet means generally and in the chart. I agree also on the hidden character of the things connected with this planet. Regarding Morin's combust Mercury (but is it combust ?), it is true that his grand work, the Astrologia Gallica, took him 30 years to write and was only published 5 years after his death. So it can be said this book remained hidden for a long time. And later, it remained unread for very long, due to the decline of astrology.

Many intellectuals have a combust Mercury. This is not so surprising, since Mercury meets the Sun 3 times a year. Here are a few names : Louis Pasteur, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Marcel Proust, Beethoven. But Heinrich Von Kleist has Mercury in cazimi. By the way, Karl Marx has the Moon (which means the people) combust.
_________________
Martine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I mentioned this some time back on another thread (it didn't go over well), but I do think that Morin had a bias against combustion due to his natal chart. With Venus and Jupiter combust,


Like all astrologers he had lots of biases. I can't read his mind, but if he were simply anti-combustion because to admit it would make his own chart weaker, he wouldn't be the first to rationalize like this. The thing is in his chart, both Jupiter and Venus are not only in great dignity, but they besiege the Sun in a friendly way. I think he could have found enough loopholes in theory to both allow for combustion and rationalize why it didn't apply to him if he wanted to. It's no secret that he had a high opinion of himself.

It is always better to criticize the idea not the man. His ideas make sense to me. I've never been too comfortable with combustion since I've seen charts delineated by people who treat combustion as the worst thing that can happen, yet they ignore it when it suits them in delineation. It's tough to take that sort of thing seriously.

I'm also wary of treating visual astrology as though it trumps everything else, when we want it to, but we can ignore those aspects of visual astrology when it suits us as well. I understand why the ancients may have considered combustion a problem, but I'm not certain that we are obligated to accept that simply because the visual aspect is so plain to see. That the origin of combustion is visual is obvious. It just doesn't follow that it is such a powerful accidental dignity that it overpowers essential dignity.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
###



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1380

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Like all astrologers he had lots of biases. I can't read his mind, but if he were simply anti-combustion because to admit it would make his own chart weaker, he wouldn't be the first to rationalize like this.


I'm sure he wasn't so worried about his chart, but about his image, the image he projected. His fellow astrologers would know the historical arguments of weakness and powerlessness concerning combustion. I say this was shaky ground for him, and that he was trying to lead those who were astrologically savvy away from seeing his possible weakness. As you said, his high opinion of himself is (and was) no secret. Of course it's much more subtle than this and would have been unconscious on his part. And frankly, I'm not sure I'm delineating it correctly. But I do feel that his anti-combustion opinions are connected with his 12th house combust planets, which are aspected by his ASC ruler.


Quote:
The thing is in his chart, both Jupiter and Venus are not only in great dignity, but they besiege the Sun in a friendly way.


Now were into that argument! Do combust planets in domicile or exaltation really have “great dignity”? It's hard to imagine them able to do anything friendly when they're consumed in flames. I'm not sure yet how to work with it, but I do tend to favor the idea that the Sun is 'burning them up' and taking their qualities unto itself. This is why I'm not sure I'm delineating Morin's combust planets correctly. His Sun would seem to be stronger by taking on the qualities and abilities of the combust planets [*], so that would appear to make Morin stronger . But there are 'consumed' planets in his chart and they are in charge of houses and need to be acting as able lords. That could provide feelings of weakness and vulnerability. Perhaps it's Morin's Sun that we're hearing – the consuming Sun that then turns around and speaks against combustion because it knows there are vulnerable spots.

Yes, we could carefully consider the ideas of the man and not the man himself. However, it's reasonable to approach the ideas carefully if a proud and arrogant man possibly developed those ideas in order to lead others away from seeing his faults.



[*] Or is it simply a Sun that pilfers qualities, a Sun that can end up over-stuffed and propped up against the fence? Not much true strength there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see your point but .... (you knew that was coming).

Quote:
Do combust planets in domicile or exaltation really have “great dignity”?


Great essential dignity. Jupiter in Pisces is in domicile and Venus in Pisces is in her exaltation. This is great dignity, and if they wrapped themselves around the ruler of my second house in such a fashion I would expect to be wealthy and popular and sexy. Furthermore both these planets disposit or "rule" a peregrine Sun. They can't do either if they are consumed by the Sun. This is the problem with the "powerless" argument. If the argument is correct, then this weakened Sun is stronger than these two highly essentially dignified planets. Some astrologers would make the argument that the power of the Sun is so great by comparison to the other planets, no matter how dignified they are, the Sun does render them powerless or at least makes them a lot weaker. But then, if the argument holds, the Sun has no dispositors in this chart.

Quote:
It's hard to imagine them able to do anything friendly when they're consumed in flames.


But are they "consumed in flames?" That is the issue. I don't accept that. I like the idea of hidden better because that is what is happening. We can't see the planets therefore the symbolism is something hidden not something burnt. I don't know enough about his life to be sure if this works in his chart. The bulk of the biographies are written in French. If he is correct then the things represented by Venus and Jupiter would be hidden (leave the others out for a moment) by Morin. The fact that the "combust" planets are posited in the house of hidden things complicates the delineation. Jupiter is in and rules the 12th house as well as the 8th and 9th (Regiomontanus cusps - his preferred house system). Venus rules the 7th and Taurus is intercepted in the 1st. He considered Venus a co-ruler of his ASC.

What did he hide? I can't be sure, but I never read a peep about his marriage if he had one or not. I was told by Robert Corre that he was known to do a bit of bed hopping and he is silent on that, but I would expect that under any conditions since the partners were often married. He mentions illnesses and I think it was Corre who told me he suffered from an occasional dose of a venereal disease or two, something he would keep secret.

I can't be sure that the above is valid astrology or biography. I can't help thinking that his observation in book 16 that "combust" planets indicate something the native will keep hidden, was based on his own experience.

Morin does what a lot of modern astrologers do, and that is cite their own charts as examples of their astrology. I've done it, too, but I try to avoid it since the astrologer is a little too close to the subject for objective conclusions.


Quote:
His Sun would seem to be stronger by taking on the qualities and abilities of the combust planets


This is what Morin and others would argue happens with any conjunction: the stronger planet influences the weaker one - not vice-versa or far less so. But the the symbolism of the Sun consuming in flames is said to be more of destruction of the planets rather than strengthening the Sun.

I think the difference here is that you and I see combustion a bit differently and we each draw our conclusions from a premise the other doesn't accept.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
###



Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 1380

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 12:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm .... hidden or burnt? I'm still trying to figure out what to do with combustion (if anything), but I do like the 'hidden' idea. But 'burnt' isn't so bad either. It's important to keep in mind that it's part of a process and the chart depicts a moment in that process. The planets aren't being destroyed, but are going through a periodic regeneration, so it's ultimately a beneficial process for them. After combustion comes the oriental phase that the superior planets are so fond of. If we freeze the process in time by grasping on to a motionless chart, thereby viewing the combust planets as being permanently weakened, maimed or destroyed, then we're going to have the wrong idea of what's going on.


Quote:
But the the symbolism of the Sun consuming in flames is said to be more of destruction of the planets rather than strengthening the Sun.


The trouble with this is that we all probably have seen the Sun conjunct, say, Mars, Jupiter or Saturn in natal charts and have found the conjunction to be very descriptive of the person. If the Sun merely weakened or destroyed the planet then the person wouldn't and couldn't take on the planet's traits. A Sun-conjunct-Mars person couldn't be extra assertive or aggressive and a Sun-conjunct-Saturn person couldn't be extra dour, serious or disciplined. The Sun would be conjunct a defeated and powerless planet. This is why I said that the Sun takes something for itself from the planet. It's kind of like the Sun holds the planet's clothes while the planet takes a flame shower. ... Confused ... I should probably stop for now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 1:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The planets aren't being destroyed, but are going through a periodic regeneration, so it's ultimately a beneficial process for them.


How about purification by fire? Keep in mind, Morin, whose idea started this thread, did believe planets went through a periodic regeneration, but that regeneration took place when the planet conjuncts its original position at the beginning of the world, and that position was not known except for the Sun's regeneration at 0 degrees Aries where it was at the beginning of Creation. He is a tad vague on how he knows this.

The other regeneration in natal astrology takes place when the planet returns to its original place in the birth chart. Of particular importance is the regeneration of the Sun or solar return. He would not look at combustion as a period of regeneration, and if we do, Mercury must be the most energized planet in the solar system.

Now if other astrologers adopted this regeneration idea, I've missed it, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. Perhaps there are authorities who make this claim. It doesn't seem unreasonable.


Quote:
If we freeze the process in time by grasping on to a motionless chart, thereby viewing the combust planets as being permanently weakened, maimed or destroyed, then we're going to have the wrong idea of what's going on.


This is a good point and it is covered by authorities who are of the "burnt up" persuasion. It is also valid for things other than combustion. We "freeze" the chart in order to get a handle on the nature of the individual. How that individual develops or how that life unfolds is shown by primary directions and/or secondary progressions. Moderns might wish to toss in solar arc directions.

Planets just entering combustion are more trouble than planets about to leave it as they "disintegrate (for lack of a better term)" over time as the life plays out. Planets leaving combustion will one day be free of it. The imprint is still there in both cases, but the effects are different.

But again Cardan and others said those planets combust in a natal chart are "powerless." That's destruction and it is what makes their argument difficult to sustain, in my opinion.


Quote:
The trouble with this is that we all probably have seen the Sun conjunct, say, Mars, Jupiter or Saturn in natal charts and have found the conjunction to be very descriptive of the person.


True. We of the hidden persuasion are not arguing that there is no effect by conjunction. I think that is the point, that the conjunction has an effect, but the burning up of the planet is not valid. That conjunction cannot have influence if one planet is powerless. Although it can have a weakened effect, if it is only weakened and not rendered powerless.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
sasha_i



Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Posts: 288
Location: Bucuresti

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 6:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello,

Tom said:
Quote:
True. We of the hidden persuasion are not arguing that there is no effect by conjunction. I think that is the point, that the conjunction has an effect, but the burning up of the planet is not valid. That conjunction cannot have influence if one planet is powerless.


Sorry for entering in Morin’s sanctuary with my speculations, but I saw that the discussion is, in this moment, more about personal conviction (a conviction that after all Morin’s idea is quite plausible and different). So, considering this I thought that it won’t be such a big deal if I will present my own conviction. If this is not the case please announce me and I shall retreat.
So, you say that hidden is better, and that hidden is another thing, different from powerless. Here I have a problem at the simple level of logic, without getting involved in a discussion about testimonies or experience.
How can, say for example Mercury, become hidden in its action, if its power to manifest it’s not obliterated? Isn’t in fact this idea with hidden just the same with saying it is without capacity to manifest, or a dysfunctionality?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a fair question. I'm using the word "hidden" as a catch-all for something Morin said in Book 16. I did not mean that everything the planet signifies is kept from view. Here is the quote that I refer to when I use the word "hidden:"

Quote:
Nevertheless it must be known that the things signified by a combust Planet -- either habits and intelligence, or actions, etc., -- are not conspicuous entirely, at least to everyone, and for the great part they are unnoticed. And so, those persons for whom Mercury is combust, and the significator of intelligence, do not disclose to all either their own intelligence, or what they have in mind, but something is always reserved, or revealed in the smallest things they keep back in themselves. And the reasoning is the same for the rest [of the Planets].


When I use the word "hidden," I'm referring to all of the above. Mercury combust does not mean that all intelligence is hidden, but rather that the native holds some of it back or reveals it in small ways. Another way to look at it might be (I'm not sure) that there is more potential in the combust planet than observers and perhaps the native realize. If we say the planet is burnt up and powerless however, then it would follow that all intelligence is destroyed. That can't be, and that is part of Morin's argument against a combust planet being considered powerless.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Estebon_Duarte



Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 134
Location: West Coast USA

Posted: Fri May 29, 2009 5:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

great topic-
i used to post here years ago and forgot how much good info is available.
thanks for sharing Morin's views-


Kirk wrote:


There could be clues in the power of ancient kings and rulers. The absolute power of ancient rulers (represented by the Sun) is well-known. They literally got away with murder. Their word and whims dictated. But they needed assistants, those who took charge in various areas. Those men were very powerful, but also very weak – they were under the thumb of the ruler and could be eradicated at any time by a displeased ruler simply because of false gossip and the schemes of others. But as long as they were in the ruler's favor they could carry on their tasks – and, through the power given them, make life a living hell for others beneath them. Whether they had power depended completely on the ruler.

Is this the ancient astrological model?


I think this falls in line with ancient astrological analogy, in that the combust planet is dependent on the sun for realization of its affairs. ibn Ezra says in the Beginning of Wisdom that a planet in Cazimi is like a person "sitting with the king in one chair." A combust planet is literally sitting next to the king (Sun), their zodical state and agreement (or lack there of) with each other will decide the effect.
Mercury is impressionable, changeable by its aspect with other planets and by sign placement. The effect of combustion relies on many other factors. Regardless, when dealing with power or strength, the result is often hidden or withdrawn. Whatever the combust planet represents is 'consumed' by what the Sun signifies, both naturally and accidentally.

Martine wrote:


1) Combustion is an accidental debility, so it lessens the strength or power of the planet, but not its quality. Therefore a man having Mercury combust will just as intelligent as if his Mercury was not combust.



I recently delineated the chart of a medieval mathematician and astronomer. He was born at exactly sunrise with Gemini rising. Venus and Mercury are combust in later degrees. Mercury is in domicile while combust (retrograde as well!) in the first house. He wrote groundbreaking works on algebraic equations way ahead of his time, revised the Persian calendar to a more accurate version 500 years before the Gregorian and was the court physician to the most powerful caliphate in medieval islam. He was from a modest background and commented that patronage was the only way for him to attain his learning. His greatest achievements were made possible by and dedicated to the most powerful sultans, vicars and nobles of the age.
He wrote a treatise on Music and its relation to number which was lost to history (Venus/Mercury combust) and was later made famous again, this time after his death as a poet, which was a past-time kept hidden from his achievements (Venus/Mercury combust).
_________________
Western Predictive Astrology by Estebon Duarte Independent Researcher AMA MACAA
Natal Chart & Annual Solar Revolution Reports
www.organic-astrology.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Fri May 29, 2009 11:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
He was born at exactly sunrise with Gemini rising. Venus and Mercury are combust in later degrees. Mercury is in domicile while combust (retrograde as well!)


But is Mercury combust in domicile? Could not the intellectual accomplishments be related to a powerful Mercury dispositing an essentially weaker Sun and Venus?

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Estebon_Duarte



Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 134
Location: West Coast USA

Posted: Fri May 29, 2009 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tom wrote:
Quote:
He was born at exactly sunrise with Gemini rising. Venus and Mercury are combust in later degrees. Mercury is in domicile while combust (retrograde as well!)


But is Mercury combust in domicile? Could not the intellectual accomplishments be related to a powerful Mercury dispositing an essentially weaker Sun and Venus?

Tom


exactly. Mercury in domicile on the Ascendant? he should have his skills and abilities acquire all that he strives for with no help. The furthering of his education and gathering knowledge (Gemini rising) was not possible without the direct help from and association with the King (Mercury combust in domicile). The strength of his intellect is not in the least bit marred by combustion, his ability to use his skills to their fullest is dependent on those with power (and accidentally, his own fame).
So Morin too was not intellectually stunted, but what did the display of his intellect earn him? what was the quality of his communicating that intellect?
_________________
Western Predictive Astrology by Estebon Duarte Independent Researcher AMA MACAA
Natal Chart & Annual Solar Revolution Reports
www.organic-astrology.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3435
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote


By tciii

The above is an example only. It is a real chart in that it was cast for a specific time and place, but it is not of any known person male or female. Note Mercury in Gemini on the ASC and Sun in Gemini in the first house but Mercury is not combust. Ignore Mars.

Estebon wrote:


Quote:
Mercury in domicile on the Ascendant? he should have his skills and abilities acquire all that he strives for with no help. The furthering of his education and gathering knowledge (Gemini rising) was not possible without the direct help from and association with the King (Mercury combust in domicile).


This is not a challenge but rather I'm seeking clarification. The above statement implies that Mercury in domicile needs the help of a peregrine Sun because of Mercury's proximity to the Sun. If Mercury in Gemini were conjunct any other planet, it would be Mercury assisting the weaker planet. Here, however, it is the essentially weaker Sun assisting the essentially and accidentally stronger Mercury. In order for this to be true, it must also follow that a seriously debilitated Sun is almost and perhaps always stronger than everything else in the chart. His presence simply overwhelms any and all present. This is a valid medieval analogy, but I'm wondering if it is valid astrologically.

Now if the Sun were in Leo and Mercury in Leo, I can see the Sun helping Mercury whether Mercury were combust or not.

In the above chart, is Mercury so strong due to the lack of combustion, that he now helps the Sun, but if Mercury were closer, he needs the Sun's help?

Finally, is this, to anyone's knowledge, the position of Morin? I get the feeling Morin just ignored combustion under any conditions. For natal astrology I'm about to do the same thing.

Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
GR



Joined: 14 May 2005
Posts: 451
Location: USA

Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tom wrote:

Ignore Mars


At your peril! Very Happy

This is an odd chart, Mercury is only barely under the beams of the Sun, if that mattered, and heading out of them due to retrograde motion. Mercury is also in his joy as well as his domicile and right on the Ascendant. That's some power right there, though the retrograde state is going to be an issue, and its future with Mars. Wink

Don't know if it's been mentioned already, but I do believe it is in either/both Serapio and Rhetorius(that being part of the Antiochus text) that a planet in its chariots(i.e. its domicile or exaltation sign or any of its confines[terms]), it cannot be under the Sun's beams. I forget if its anywhere else.
_________________
Gabe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Estebon_Duarte



Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 134
Location: West Coast USA

Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mis-communication tom,
I was using the example as to illustrate quality versus power, consumed versus burned up and how combustion creates co-dependency between the planets involved.
your example has to do more with reception. The interplay between reception and combustion is what i thought was the issue in Morin's chart (and opinion).
The other conditioning factors create the extremity of combustion.
I have seen Mercury 18 minutes from the Sun in Leo in the 7th and the person tested as mentally disabled and could not finish primary education.
Morin was denying the ancients assertion that a combust planet was useless. That is only the case without mitigating factors.
_________________
Western Predictive Astrology by Estebon Duarte Independent Researcher AMA MACAA
Natal Chart & Annual Solar Revolution Reports
www.organic-astrology.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eddy



Joined: 04 Feb 2009
Posts: 922
Location: Netherlands

Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What about Saturn in Virgo in the example chart? Could this be seen as Mercury as Virgo's ruler/exaltation in being affected by Saturn. Saturn is also in square aspect with Mercury. This all could color the interpreation of the meaning of the Sun and Mercury position.

At first sight my interpretation would be that the owner of this chart may have some problems in (tactfull) communication. This because of the Mercury, Mars and Ascendant conjunction in square with Saturn rather than something with the Sun. Maybe to have made a virtue of necessity in later life through the trine to Jupiter close to the MC.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated