16
Hi, Andrew

why not to use the term "lunar occultation"? Or, if you don?t like the term, or think it doesn?t correct say what you want to express, why don?t you invent a completely new term?

you know how internet is... eventually we will see people talking about "lunar cazimi" and then they will say that yes it is a traditional concept.

I think every astrologer has the right to invent the concepts they seem apropriate, but I don?t think this right extend to modify concepts that are very old. If the ancients wanted to use the word "cazimi" for the moon, we sure would have find some reference to it. As there is none, I would argue that the term "lunar cazimi" is misleading, and will probably create in the future confusions like people who think that a planet void of course is "peregrine".

Best regards
Y
Meu blog de astrologia (em portugues) http://yuzuru.wordpress.com
My blog of astrology (in english) http://episthemologie.wordpress.com

17
why not to use the term "lunar occultation"? Or, if you don?t like the term, or think it doesn?t correct say what you want to express, why don?t you invent a completely new term?
You are onto something there, Yuzuru, but the Moon did not occlude Jupiter yesterday as she past 1,4 degrees north of the planet. However, I believe in projecting the planets position onto the ecliptic and judging them from that. Occultations are special, but in general practice I make no difference.

I haven't come up with any suggestion for a new phrase for a 'lunar cazimi' at present, but gathering some observations on this potential phenomena seems to be a good starting point. If it does come to the point of inventing a new phrase I do think that the idea of a planet being placed in 'The Heart of the Moon' is covering. The Moon may have a diametre of between 29'33" and 33'30" of arc. This means the the orb to be alotted a planet shall vary beween 15-17' of arc for the planet to be judged as under this condition.
http://www.astronor.com

18
Andrew Bevan wrote:
why not to use the term "lunar occultation"? Or, if you don?t like the term, or think it doesn?t correct say what you want to express, why don?t you invent a completely new term?
You are onto something there, Yuzuru, but the Moon did not occlude Jupiter yesterday as she past 1,4 degrees north of the planet. However, I believe in projecting the planets position onto the ecliptic and judging them from that. Occultations are special, but in general practice I make no difference.

I haven't come up with any suggestion for a new phrase for a 'lunar cazimi' at present, but gathering some observations on this potential phenomena seems to be a good starting point. If it does come to the point of inventing a new phrase I do think that the idea of a planet being placed in 'The Heart of the Moon' is covering. The Moon may have a diametre of between 29'33" and 33'30" of arc. This means the the orb to be alotted a planet shall vary beween 15-17' of arc for the planet to be judged as under this condition.
What about a "quasi lunar occultation"? Covering the fact that the planet would have been occulted provided the planet had the same latitude as the Moon.