Wow. This has evolved into an amazingly interesting discussion. I do have an update, however.

The relationship did, in fact, deepen although not in a carnal sense. I discovered that there is no other woman at all. Both the quesited and the querent have been, in fact, overwhelmed with feeling for each other. Nevertheless, each side is bound by convention. It is very unlikely that this relationship will progress beyond a deep friendship.

Thank you all for your comments.

I have a comment about this combustion matter. I've had to think long and hard about it.

It helped me to consider the reception(s) involved. So in this question we have the Sun in domicile and triplicity, so strong he can overwhelm and/or damage any person he chooses. Yet the Sun by nature is also a benefic and being in so much dignity may strengthen his ability to be gracious.

The Sun is dealing with planets who are visiting his domicile, at one time this included Mercury, Venus, and Saturn. These planets were in the Sun's sign and the Sun must receive all visitors to his house. He will pay due attention to them, and because they are in his domicile he may or may not do harm to them. I think the Moon and the aspects will give clues to whether combustion will really hurt or not. For instance Mercury is so often combust it's like an uncomfortable place, but one he knows very well.

Further, I worked out a hypothetical for myself, the Sun at 23 Leo applying conjunct Saturn in Leo with Saturn say at 27 degrees. In a daytime chart the Sun receives Saturn very strongly, and though concerned with himself, the Sun will pay attention to what Saturn brings to his house (=applying aspect). Saturn is in detriment there with the Sun and does not receive the Sun. Saturn's weak, uncomfortable in the Sun's house, but because he is ruled by the Sun, it could be said that Saturn is strengthened a little by his proximity to so dignified a ruler. All planets benefit when their rulers are strong. Sort of like being a courtier to the King: at times, it's downright uncomfortable, but one may benefit by being so close to power also.

I think one might consider reception here principally because there is debate as to whether combustion continues once a planet has moved out of the same sign as the Sun. I think we also have to consider which planets the Sun receives when we a judging the extent of damage combustion may inflict. I can't help but think that being combust in Libra (Sun's fall sign) is much worse than being combust in Leo. Sure the Sun can hurt Saturn in Leo, but this may be lessened somewhat since the Sun receives Saturn so strongly via domicile and triplicity.

In any case Saturn cannot be seen, that's really bad for any planet. I had also overlooked that these combust planets are very close to Regulus, a dignity which Lilly gives +6 dignity points. Saturn is direct and moving quickly, another dignity. These combust planets might have accidental dignity in a chart, which in Saturn's case might illustrate that he is in a situation where at best he can show his conservative, parsimonious malefic, detrimented nature.

There's some very interesting symbols going on here. I don't know if I've come any closer to a definitive answer to the combustion in Leo question but when I return to reception to parse the logic, things get usually clearer.

Cheers

Very interesting. Being combust is one of the worst afflictions and if the planet is weak in the first place, as in Saturn in Leo, unless it's in cazimi, I doubt it can be strengthened by the Sun, even though a diginified one. I agree that it's important to consider reception; in this case, Saturn is uncomfortable in Leo, as being pointed out. For example, the Sun and Mars conjunct in Aries: wouldn't Marsian qualities be further enhanced, because they have affinities whereas the qualities of the Sun and Saturn are adverse to each other?
If Venus is combust in Libra for example, even though it's momentarily blinded by the domineering guest/tenant in her own house, Venus has the final say in matters concerning her own house after all. So I think it depends on the strength of the planet being combust.

Hi, Gem

I really see your point but I'm not in complete agreement.

When I consider the protocol of planets, it seems to me that Venus is simply no match for the superior power of the Sun, whether Venus is in domicile or not. It would be an interesting chart to see her as having final say over the Sun in any matter where she is combust. Combustion indicates that Venus' rays cannot be effectual in the outcome. And as you point out the natures of the Sun and Venus are so different: hot and dry vs. cool and moist. There is a catergorical unease between them, as with the Sun and Saturn who are natural enemies. But perhaps if Venus were 4H end-of-the-matter ruler with the Moon applying trine from the ASC, I would think differently.

I see a better affinity and less chance for outright destruction in the conjunction of the Sun and Mars in Aries, yours is an excellent example of what I was thinking of when it comes to receptions and determining the extent of combustion. I remember reading once that a planet strong in essential dignity yet accidentally detrimented indicates a good person in a difficult situation, and such would likely be the scenario with a combust Mars in Aries. A similar case could be made for Saturn in Leo, especially if he's angular and conjunct Regulus, there are signs of strength and weakness in Saturn. The Sun though burning Saturn nonetheless receives him in sign and triplicity, that's major reception! The Sun either really likes and wants whatever paltry tidbits Saturn in detriment and combust would offer, or the Sun has total sway and authority in overwhelming whatever Saturn represents.

As for our Martial example, I also don't want to overlook that in a daytime chart the diurnal Sun has more dignity than Mars throughout the sign of Aries through the dual strength of exaltation and triplicity rulership. The Sun, if it wants, is in a position to make Mars a bit more amenable to being outshined for a time; I think planets in their exaltation demand due attention paid to them, as opposed to planets in sign who are rightly acting according to their nature, combust or not.

1000Camels
Planets who are combust are invisible and they are unable to manifest or express their own qualities externally, they're totally hidden from the view. That, however, doesn't mean they will lose their essential nature or qualities when in combust. They will just have to operate behind the scene.
To take the exampe of the Sun and Satrun conjunct in Leo in a relationship chart. The Sun as a sig would describe an honourable, decent person, whereas Saturn in Fall as a sig would describe a person who may not be so or not very comfortable in the company of the Sun or the relationship. Being combust only describes the state of the particular moment or a situation, not the nature of the planet itself: it may mean that Saturn can't momentarily think clearly being overwhelmed by the brightness of the Sun. Besides there's no cordial reception here.
Nor being accidentally diginifed position wouldn't change the character of a weak Saturn. It only means Saturn happens to be placed in an advantageous position.

Gem, I think we're getting away from my point of focus.

I am not at all disputing debility of a combust and/or detrimented planet. I am not disputing the difference between essential dignity (ability to act) and accidental dignity (environment/opportunity to act). My inquiry is whether the Sun, as a significator in a horary, will damage a planet with which is in conjunction but which it also receives really strongly. How might we determine the likelihood that the Sun will destroy or damage a planet that appears to hold some value and interest for the Sun?

I guess I'm picking up where John Frawley left off, where he writes (and I'm paraphrasing) that when the Sun and a significator are in conjunction, combustion is irrelevant. The conjunction signifies perfection. My interest is in the quality of that perfection. This view of Frawley's goes against traditional teaching, that's clear. And I'm not keen to ignore the condition of combustion.

However, Frawley's views may have some merit when we observe the Sun applying conjunct to Saturn in Leo. This was the essence of Gunhilde's question in an earlier post: How can one have a yes answer in horaries involving the conjunction of the Sun? Horatio too was questioning the Sun's hostility level in terms of combustion at the points of the zodiac where the Sun has dignity. My suggestion was to look at reception to determine the extent of damage.

Nor being accidentally diginifed position wouldn't change the character of a weak Saturn. It only means Saturn happens to be placed in an advantageous position.

Medieval astrologers tell us that reception may abate debility. In my Sun/Saturn example, could the strong reception from the Sun lessen his desire to combust a planet?

Sure, as you point out Saturn is weak to begin with, but if the Sun holds off a little in his combustion because he is obligated to make Saturn comfortable (=reception in domicile) Saturn may still be able to perform, albeit weakly as opposed to not all. The Sun is applying with much fanfare and with the promise of steady attention, but it is applying from Saturn's detriment sign too, to my mind a contingency that what the Sun may want damages Saturn in the end. This despite the Sun's best intentions. Moreover, the Sun in Leo is a benefic. Surely this affects the quality of combustion.

In addition, Saturn's not in strong aspect to other malefic planets at the late degrees of Leo, so he's not pure evil (if he were the 12H ruler, squaring Mars I'd think differently about his detrimented nature! ) In my view, he's a mixed bag. I feel we must assess the planet, before we make blanket statements. That's why I looked at Saturn's accidental dignities and his reception, which helps offset his debilities, not entirely but somewhat.

Regards

Hello again

[/quote]

In my Sun/Saturn example, could the strong reception from the Sun lessen his desire to combust a planet?

The way I see is that there's no reception between them as Saturn is Detriment in Leo but I also see your point that as the Sun is strong it lessens the disadvantage of being combust. Does that mean the combustion is worse and more damaging, when, for instance, the Sun and Saturn conjunct in Aquarius, or the Sun and Venus conjunct in Libra? I personally think they are better off than Saturn in Leo because they have essential diginites while the Sun is weak in those signs but the truth of matter is I have no idea.
Of course you have to look at the entire chart as you pointed out but I'm only talking theoretically here.

Speaking purely about my own chart, I have decided that the tricky answer to the question of Sun/Saturn conjunction is 'yes'. This is a love question: as I noted, the querent (Saturn in Leo) is utterly besotted with the quesited (Sun in Leo): in his house (7th), in his sign, receiving the Sun by conjunction.

The Sun, for his part, is in the 7th house of relationships, (and not, say, on either side of the cusp in the 6th or 8th, for example), and applies to conjunct Saturn, receiving Saturn by domicile. Despite Saturn's inherent debility, the Sun likes him (or her, in this case), and moves toward her. I think the dignity/debility debates are somewhat sidelined here: the crux of the querent's question ("Does he want to be with me?") is reflected in her house placement, her sign placement, and her aspect to the Sun. She *is* overwhelmed by the Sun, but because he applies to her, I don't think this overwhelm equals a 'no': it simply shows her vulnerability and need for his affection.

This is what Frawley was aiming for, I think, in his discussion on combustion. If the Sun were to burn everything up by dint of combustion, for every question, you'd never find anything positive to say in any question where conjunction with the Sun was involved! I think it's contextual.

GH

No, I didn't say that it means that the perfection is denied. The two sigs are conjunct, which will mean 'Yes' but I still can't ignore or turn a blind eye to the very obvious symbolism of combustion.
They will still describe each partner or the nature of the relationship and there're many possible interpretations: the Saturn person may not be able to express his/her nature, or the Sun is the leader in the relationship, the one who's 'wearing the trousers', etc.

I think combustion *can* be mitigated for, if the receiving planet is stronger. If it were, say, Venus in Libra, in the 5th house, but slow in motion, with the Sun in Libra applying to it, Venus' speed would be her only 'weakness', being strong both by domicile and house, while the Sun would be in fall, applying to her. I wouldn't view this combustion as being anything like the Saturn/Sun in Leo example; the Sun being in fall, and Venus being so strong, receiving the Sun by domicile and aspect, is quite a different story. I don't think the Sun can do much damage to such a dignified Venus. In this case, it is the Sun who can't express his true nature, while Venus entirely has the upper hand and wears the trousers in the relationship. Most likely the Sun person would resent this, but be unable to do anything about it!

I just don't think combustion is such a cut-and-dried thing.

I have a question about multiple love interests. Say that the querent must decide between two men as long-term partners, how would you tease out the two men in a horary chart? Would you look to both the 5th and the 7th house?

The replies above were exactly the kind of provocative ideas about combustion I was after.

I tend to think that combustion can be worse in charts where the Sun is impedited or afflicted. Say for example the Sun is beseiged, or separates from difficult aspects with the malefics as it makes a conjunction. Then the Sun in fall or detriment combusting another planet may be carrying the light of serious trouble. Reception might add a great deal of nuance, may even change the picture of a chart.

Does that mean the combustion is worse and more damaging, when, for instance, the Sun and Saturn conjunct in Aquarius, or the Sun and Venus conjunct in Libra? I personally think they are better off than Saturn in Leo because they have essential diginites while the Sun is weak in those signs but the truth of matter is I have no idea.

A debilitated planet only becomes more troublesome when its afflictions begin to add up. Its ability to do harm increases.

If it were, say, Venus in Libra, in the 5th house, but slow in motion, with the Sun in Libra applying to it, Venus' speed would be her only 'weakness', being strong both by domicile and house, while the Sun would be in fall, applying to her.

I'm conflicted here. My gut reaction is that signs where a planet is weak will increase its wickedness. The Sun in Libra or Aquarius could do damage to Venus if only because Venus through reception would be completely open to whatever detrimented nature the Sun would express through its application and combustion, just as the Sun in Leo is open and interested in whatever debility Saturn in Leo will express. Even gentle benefics Venus or Jupiter can play the role of a malefic if say they were 8H ruler Rx and peregrine applying opposite to and being received by a sig.

My conclusion may seem obvious, but it appears we all agree that a planet that has essential dignity will fare better when combust than one who is merely accidentally well situated. An essentially dignified planet may be combust and overwhelmed, but the sig may understand also that things are temporary and that this situation will pass, that they will weather it and be able to figure out how to get out of a mess. A planet only accidentally dignified may be in the perfect environment suited to getting his needs addressed but feels a complete absence of confidence and will to bring the matter to perfection. This is what I think Lilly means when he warns that two significators making an easy aspect but who have no essential dignity may not be able to perfect the promise of that easy aspect. Combustion would only intensify feelings of this sort.

Gunhilde, I totally agree with you: it's quite clear that the Sun is in love with Saturn. I also agree with your assertion that context is key. That's why I look to reception, it can change context in an instant.

Veussquare, you might want to start a new thread for your last question. I've done charts like this. Tricksy business.

While you can look at the 5H and 7H rulers depending the relationship the querent has with the love interest(s), you must look also for reception. Is there a planet the querent receives really strongly? Or who receives the querent? Is there a planet in aspect or strong reception with the Moon? Reception always tells who is who.

You must also understand signification extremely well. A female sig could be Saturn or Mercury and a male could be Venus: there will be reasons for this. I did a chart once where the querent, a female, was torn between a computer technologist and a carpenter. The querent was symbolized by Saturn in Leo Rx the 7H, very bad shape and not very feminine. I looked around the chart and after doing research came to understand that Mars in Capricorn was the carpenter and the Sun in Aquarius was the technologist, but there were no aspects between significators to guide me, only reception. In addition, the carpenter used alot of computer gadgets in his work and the technologist was an executive, it was really confusing. The Sun and Mars usually stand for men in a romantic chart, and while Capricorn and Aquarius may seem like obvious distinctions astrologically, I was not well versed in signification at the time. Things took much longer to figure out.

You guys rock!