Partile conjunction with South Node as an accidental debility.


I have some doubts surrounding this. Would like to discuss this, with some examples in favour and against. I have found that it seems to work as a marvelous advantage in certain charts. An accidental dignity which is almost equal to that of cazimi.


Please leave me some thoughts, even if they dismiss the idea outright.

Thanks

It's not inherently a debility. The S. Node always subtracts. If it's conjunct a malefic, it subtracts malefic qualities, and if it's conjunct a benefic, it subtracts benefic qualities.

The South node may indicate a vacuum, depression or a ditch. There is likely to be a material weakness and a potential over-load. Therefore, I agree with the debiltation. I also notice that the dispositor of the South Node carries the burden. On the other hand the dispositor of the North Node tends to commute a benefic.

Andrew Bevan wrote:The South node may indicate a vacuum, depression or a ditch. There is likely to be a material weakness and a potential over-load. Therefore, I agree with the debiltation. I also notice that the dispositor of the South Node carries the burden. On the other hand the dispositor of the North Node tends to commute a benefic.

I know this is getting into specifics, but here is the question:

SN ruler is conjunct SN in its own sign. Ruler of the NN is parallel to SN ruler and disposits to it on the SN.

SN conjunct SAG Jupiter.
Mercury is in Sag too, and parallel to both SN and Jupiter.

This is my question. As a debility, it is a debility, but not the same as combustion, or being in house 12. I know what Lilly states on the SN. He is actually contradictory in some places, stating in one place it is evil and unfortunate and in another place, that with the SN the results are positive. I distinctly recall him stating that with Mercury SN produces shrewd and quick witted persons, something to that effect, I can dig it out if necessary.

I know what Lilly states on the SN. He is actually contradictory in some places, stating in one place it is evil and unfortunate and in another place, that with the SN the results are positive. I distinctly recall him stating that with Mercury SN produces shrewd and quick witted persons, something to that effect, I can dig it out if necessary.

I would appreciate it if you could find your reference from Christian Astrology for Lilly stating the SN could be benefic?

My recollection is that he takes the general line of the SN being malefic and of the nature of Mars and Saturn while the NN is presented as benefic by Lilly and of the nature of Venus and Jupiter. As far as I can tell Lilly contrasts to medieval sources such as Bonatti who emphasize the SN diminishes what it contacts while the NN expands what it contacts. Taking this approach Jupiter on SN diminishes its benefic power. In contrast Saturn on the SN reduces its malefic power. On the NN the malefic power of Saturn would be expanded. This approach is quite different to Lilly.

There are also additional approaches to the Nodes in hellenistic and Vedic astrology. The nodes does seem one of the areas where there is no clear consensus amongst the sources. On a practical level I prefer Bonatti's approach.

MarkC wrote:I would appreciate it if you could find your reference from Christian Astrology for Lilly stating the SN could be benefic?

That would be very helpful indeed - and very nice of you, Night Sky! Also your quotations in the thread South Node Evil or Good are very astonishing and really worth to be read in their context by you helping us, if possible!

MarkC wrote:My recollection is that he takes the general line of the SN being malefic and of the nature of Mars and Saturn while the NN is presented as benefic by Lilly and of the nature of Venus and Jupiter.

You can verify the truth of your recollection in C.A. on page 83 at length. The only difference is, that regarding the south node you speak of malefic and of the nature of Mars and Saturn, whereas Lilly specifies the effect only, not speaking of Mars and Saturn formally; but nevertheless the delineated effect is that of the unfortunes.