Skyscript Astrology Forum

Lunar Cazimi - Can a Planet be in the Heart of the Moon?

In a general sense the planets are described as weakened by any location within 15 degrees of the Sun, at which time they are said to be under the Sun's Beams. The debilation is further worsened when the planets come within 7 degrees of the Sun and termed 'combust', the simple reason being that the planets are overpowered and obscured by the brilliance of the Sun. However, when a planet is within 16' of the Sun it is all turned around; the planet enters a state of cazimi, being placed in the heart of the Sun, and wonderfully strong. This orb agrees approximately with the radius of the apparent body of the Sun. It would appear that 2' of arc was added to either side of the Sun's diameter for activity in the Sun's corona.

When planets appear with the Moon the siutation is slightly different. We have no condition called being 'Under the Moon's Beams', although we might give the idea some thought. I was thoroughly looking forward to the Moon moving through the Pleiades earlier this winter - but when the event occured there was nothing to see - all the stars were 'blacked out' by the brilliance of the Moon.

From an astronomical perspective the presence of a luminous Moon in the sky presents a major hazard. The moonlight captured and spread by the Earth's atmosphere is enough to destroy the night for any serious stargazer. When Herschel discovered Uranus on March 13. 1781, the discovery was made during the final scoop of the sky that evening, just before the brilliant Moon would rize in the horizon at 11 pm and destroy conditions for Deep Sky Exploration. http://www.astronor.com/uranus.htm

As the Moon climbs into the sky the visability of the stars are greatly changed. This is not so bad when the Moon is either New or Waning, but notice the brilliance of the Moon around those days when it is full and how the starry heavens will tend to fade. Lilly terms both luminaries being located beneith the horizon as an unfortunate condition, but from the perspective of astronomical research or a romantic walk in the park - this is an occasion that really turns the starlights on!!

I have never heard anyone talk of a planet 'Under the Moon's Beams' before. Has anyone heard of this possibility? Certainly the Full Moon is so brilliant that either of the superiours Mars, Jupiter or Saturn, may pass unnoticed when within 2 degrees of the Moon.

The major question I ask, and that I have chosen as a title for this thread, what happens when a planet is within 14' of arc of the Moon (no atmosphere or corona) and in the Heart of the Moon? Do we have a Lunar Cazimi??

The symbol of the Sun is the Circle and represents the Spirit and the divine, but we should not forget that the Moon is the Semi-Circle, the Soul and that what is half-divine. Give the matter some thought; Is there any difference when a planet is joined to the illuminated part of the Lunar disc in contrast to that which is in the Dark? I would like to hear some ideas!

Cazimi is a concept that only has any meaning with the sun, because of the combustion effect.

I believe the word you are looking for is "occultation", isn?t it ?

Modern astrologers like Bardault, if memory doesn?t fail me, were very fond of the occultation of the fixed stars by the moon.

I confess I don?t see any logic at all in "moon beans". The moon cannot make another planet invisible, as only the sun can.

I don't see any logic in it either.

The moon only reflects light, not creates it. So its beams can't damage in the way the Sun's can. The Moon is like the image of a person with a knife in the mirror, they can't hurt you; whereas the Sun is like the person behind your shoulder with the knife, who can. Well sort of like that.... without the blood and gore.

I believe the word you are looking for is "occultation", isn?t it ?

The Sun does not have to 'occult' a planet, nor does an inferior planet have to transit the solar disc for it to be reckoned cazimi. Is a planet within 14' of arc of the Lunar centre worthy of some higher distinction?

Is a planet within 14' of arc of the Lunar centre worthy of some higher distinction?

Well, as I said, some modern astrologers take in great regard the occultations (occulted by the lunar centre if you will) of the fixed stars by the moon. For mundane matters mostly.

But I don?t remember now if there is any traditional basis in that, either. Probably not

This is an interesting concept. Even though the Moon only reflects the Sun's light the effect that stars and planets near the Moon get invisible. However I hardly look at the combustion of planets by the Sun. Not that I don't like it but I simply never payed much attention to it. Still interesting to think about it.

Another interesting issue would be that when the full Moon would be very near Saturn the planet wouldn't be visible anymore. But if the full Moon is near the nodes then there will be an eclipse during which Saturn will be visible.

Another remark is that if (in)visibility of a planet close to the Moon is a criterion, this won't apply for Uranus and Neptune etc. However this is not really a problem for traditional astrologers.

Andrew Bevan wrote:I was thoroughly looking forward to the Moon moving through the Pleiades earlier this winter - but when the event occured there was nothing to see - all the stars were 'blacked out' by the brilliance of the Moon.

Note that the Pleiades are about 4? north of the ecliptic. With the lunar North node in Aquarius, the Moon is a couple of degrees north of the ecliptic too and very close to them during these years. Several times there have been occultations of the Pleiades. In nine years the Moon will be far from them and even when in conjunction, the chance that they are visible is increased. Aldebaran is 5? south of the ecliptic and still might be visible when the Moon is in ecliptical conjunction because the angular or 'real' distance is about 10?. In nine years Aldebaran will be occulted/too close to the Moon regularly.

Hi.There's an interesting article about how ancient japanese astrologers interpreted planet's occultations.

http://qhdc.org/venus.htm

Also, in Babylonian times occultations were a matter of interest for astrologers.Some omens were derived from fixe stars and planets by the Moon.
Fox Example,in The reports of the magicians and astrologers of Nineveh and Babylon, in "Omens from stars"(192) :
http://www1.lib.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/eo ... &object=62


"When the Moon occults Jupiter,that year a king will die"
I made some research with this,applying to Jupiter-Saturn grand
conjunction charts. Of course this is not definitive in conclusions nor to be aplyied as a stand alone method.I lost data last year when my PC colapsed,but i remember also some relation in my research between occultation of Jupiter on the thereat of impeachment that affected Bill Clinton...

All the best
Gerson

Hello,i found a text about the subject that i wrote in 2007:

In 1963,an occultation of Jupiter by the Moon occurred,visible in
USA(visibility according to astronomy happens when the occultation is
above the horizon).Data of Jupiter's occultation: September,06,1963
5:46 a.m (9:46 GMT)-Alchabitius .I cast the chart for washington DC:
Asc:1 Virgo 14 / M.C:26 Taurus.Jupiter's occultation falls at house 8.
Sun,Venus,Ascendant,M.C and Fortune all in the triplicity of the Moon.
Venus,lord of house 10(president) in fall and combust,and send an
antiscion to house 8,near Jupiter's occultation.

The link between charts of Great conjunction:
Jupiter rules M.C of the Jupiter-Saturn chart calculated for
Washington DC, 1961 year -Moon/jupiter falls near Venus,ruler of 8
house of death
(February,19,1961 O:01 GMT.Also rules and falls at M.C. of
Jupiter-Saturn chart of 1762(March,18,1762 4:41 P.M. GMT),chart
preceding USA independancy.

More interesting,this chart shows
Jupiter/Saturn in Aries,same sign of occultation.Saturn rules house 8
of death,and Jupiter house 10 -Arise an interesting question:
Death of president Kennedy was destined to be one of the most
important events in the history of United States of America?
Moon/Jupiter falls at house 7 of Kennedy's birth chart,the house of
the setting Sun,showing end of life.I don't have a realible chart for
Kennedy,but Libra was his ascendant,isn't it?
One chart of him,has Libra 20 degrees,therefore it would be 2 degrees
from the opposition with the Moon/jupiter occultation.
All the best
Gerson

Thank you for the link to "Omens from Stars". That text has been on my wish list for a while.

Matthew

"When the Moon occults Jupiter,that year a king will die"

Thanks, Deeptiman
From what you refer it would appear that the occlultation has a negative effect and is comparable with an eclipse, although a planet cazimi the Sun is opposite and fortified.

The occultation appears to be given a local effect, although we know that eclipses are alotted a global effect whether they are locally visible or not.

Then the cazimi condition is granted a planet even if it has latitude (or at least I thought so). In fact, due to latitude, Venus can be cazimi the Sun and visible both before dawn and after sunset.

I am positive to the feedback and thought everyone has given this issue. In any case I think I will keep my left eye open for any special effects from planets within 14' of the Moon, anyhow, and see what turns up. It seems to be a thing from Lilly, to see whether the luminaries are joinded the fortunes... etc... or whether they are connected infortunes.

I like this question. Every time I come to this forum I find this kind of purposeful and rational enquiry going on.

I?ve noticed the 30-35 degree orb of the "Sun?s beams" where in fact the sky is far brighter and lit to a sort of white luminosity, living in the tropics this Sun is the strongest possible, so it?s no surprise to me that any planet in this area should be in certain suffering condition. It?s difficult to look at.


The Moon though, has also got "Beams" and it?s the same kind of orb in the night sky as the Sun has in the day sky, probably due to the fact of their apparent equal size in relation to the Earth?s distance from them... That they have the same orb size in the sky.

Those Moon Beams are bright and block out the visibility of stars, though not of the planets. I have no opinion of this lumination of the Moon except perhaps that Moon has a great orb of influence, just like the Sun.

Perhaps it might be useful to look at a few known examples of "cazimi Moon" in order to prove of disprove your theory. I am interested in the idea, but can?t think of any off the top of my head.

Thanks Nightsky!

yuzuru wrote:Cazimi is a concept that only has any meaning with the sun, because of the combustion effect. I believe the word you are looking for is "occultation", isn?t it ?

Modern astrologers like Bardault, if memory doesn?t fail me, were very fond of the occultation of the fixed stars by the moon.

I confess I don?t see any logic at all in "moon beans". The moon cannot make another planet invisible, as only the sun can.

These comments from yuzuru are perfect in terms of magnifying the problem. The Sun combusts a planet in a way the Moon does not. Maybe the the Sun combusts a planet in a diurnal sense, but can a planet come under the Moon's beams in a nocturnal sense. The Sun has an apparent magnitude of -26,7 while the apparent magnitude of the Full Moon is - 12,6. I don't remember how they worked out 'brightness', but I do recall from my astronomy days that 1 point on this scale of magnitude represents a difference of 2,5x in luminocity.

The interesting thing about luminocity is that sometimes we interpret it and other times we don't. In this sense we make a distinctual difference between traditional and outer invisible planets. - And we do catalogue a planet for its condition of being under the Sun's beams. However, during daylight all the planets except the Sun, Moon and sometimes Venus are invisible anyhow and all the planets below the Earth are gone for the eye, too. So invisibility is not the entire issue. Visibility does not explain it all.

The magnitude and brilliance of the planets may vary greatly in their apparant travel round the Sun. We do in at least traditional astrology take note of whether the planets are swift or slow of motion and Lilly does often refer to the Moon increasing in light, but it slips my ear to hear of an astrologer refering to Venus increasing in light, only two days before its maximum, or the like.

As Yuzuru points out, the Moon does not combust the planets in the same way as the Sun. And that was my point, too, but is there a muffling to be taken into consideration, or does the planet enter into the domain of the Moon, or more close to the core of my query; Is there any comparable quality of cazimi that occurs when a planet is in the heart of the Queen of the Soul and Lady of the Night?