Hello,

Tom said:

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?

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:"

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

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).

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

Tom wrote:

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?

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:

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

Tom wrote: Ignore Mars

At your peril!

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.

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.

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.

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.

Tom wrote:
Third: He rejects the idea of cazimi as ridiculous (his word, not mine) on the grounds that all the older astrologers say the closer a combust planet is to the Sun the weaker it gets. So, if say, Jupiter continues to get weaker as it gets closer to a partile conjunction, how can it all of a sudden gain great strength once it reaches the center? That?s a fair question.

My mum has saturn conj the sun in cancer. Cazimi to the second.

Now, I would have thought that this would produce someone who fulfilled even the most rigorous responsibilities, especially in relation to the family. In fact, I was fostered.
I love my mum, but she is more weighed down by responsibility than enhanced by it. She is quite insecure. She herself was adopted and though she has traced her mother, the woman refuses to give any details about her father.
After the age of about 40 she became a professional foster carer, giving scores of children a home who would otherwise have been in institutions.. which could be the signature manifesting?

Any thoughts on delineating cazimi saturn in cancer? (If it exists..)

Tom wrote: Fourth: Mercury is combust a lot, yet all the astrologers attribute great things (the powers of mind) to Mercury, a planet that is habitually weak according to the doctrine of combustion,

Well, there ARE a lot of very stupid people in the world!

PallasAthene wrote: Any thoughts on delineating cazimi saturn in cancer? (If it exists..)

Saturn is still in Cancer, his worst detriment, so the accidental dignity of cazimi probably won't be enough to help.

Cazimi and Combustion being an "accidental" dignity/debility need other mitigating factors like sign placement and support from their dispositor or the benefics to display their potential.

Interesting is its differing use when applied to different techniques, for example, in Abu Ali's On the Judgements of Nativities (pg.299,dykes) concerning the native's "Significator of Mastery" (Professional Significator);

"And if the Sun aspected it or were with it, so that he would even burn it up with his rays, it signifies he is a high master, and of the greatest loftiness, and a writer for kings, and of great value among them, with a noble mastery and much teaching."

now here we are not to be concerned with other dignities or debilities, just the fact that the Sun is in aspect to the Significator of Mastery, (similar to my example above). If there were another significator combust in a chart then this debility might be considered a different way.

If there were another significator combust in a chart then this debility might be considered a different way

Another thing that I believe is that, what is good for the significator of profession may not be as good for the significator of love or children, etc. So, the same mercury combusted could have a pretty different result for his profession and his children (for instance).