From thelema93-l-owner@bitsy.hollyfeld.org Mon Feb 19 09:56:54 1996 Received: from nova.unix.portal.com (nova.unix.portal.com [156.151.1.101]) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA17543 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 1996 09:56:54 -0800 Received: from bitsy.hollyfeld.org ([198.70.189.30]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA24567 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 1996 09:56:46 -0800 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by bitsy.hollyfeld.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) id EAA00274 for thelema93-l-outgoing; Mon, 19 Feb 1996 04:20:45 -0500 Received: from nova.unix.portal.com (nova.unix.portal.com [156.151.1.101]) by bitsy.hollyfeld.org (8.6.12/8.6.9) with ESMTP id EAA00269 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 1996 04:19:54 -0500 Received: from jobe.shell.portal.com (jobe.shell.portal.com [156.151.3.4]) by nova.unix.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA29534 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 1996 01:15:13 -0800 Received: (tyagi@localhost) by jobe.shell.portal.com (8.6.11/8.6.5) id BAA11161 for thelema93-l@bitsy.hollyfeld.org; Mon, 19 Feb 1996 01:15:11 -0800 Message-Id: <199602190915.BAA11161@jobe.shell.portal.com> Subject: Crowley, Thoth and Attributions To: thelema93-l@bitsy.hollyfeld.org Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 01:15:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: from "Fr. Also" at Feb 17, 96 02:47:45 pm From: tyagi@HOUSEOFKAOS.ABYSS.COM (xiwang mu) Orientation: House of Kaos, St. Joseph, Kali Fornika, US -- Kali Yuga X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 8878 Sender: owner-thelema93-l@HOLLYFELD.ORG Precedence: bulk reply-to: thelema93-l@bitsy.hollyfeld.org Status: RO kaliyuga 49960218 intending to post this with my previous tzaddi post; object via email BillS@VAV-NUN.COM (Fr. Also) and I continue our exchange concerning the switch of Emperor/Star: |>The blind of the Emperor/Star switch catches many a tarot-reader, and while |>there are surely 'elegant' motives and explanations for their displacement, |>I have never found one which persuaded me of their value. Mostly on the |>strength of one paradigm/association-schema do I reject it as extreme and |>only indicative of Crowleyania, the one to which Crowley himself points: |> Emperor => Ares |> Star => Aquarius |I don't follow your point above. What is unique about the association of |Emp=Aries/Star=aquarius? Hmm, I'd thought this was so obvious that I could leave it for newbies, but here you go. [thoth-based attributions according to element, planet and zodiac:] ============================================== Trump Attribution Fool Air Magus Mercury Priestess Moon Empress Venus Emperor Ares Hierophant Taurus Lovers Gemini Chariot Cancer Lust Leo Hermit Virgo Fortune Jupiter Adjustment Libra Hanged Man Water Death Scorpio Art Sagittarius Devil Capricorn Tower Mars Star Aquarius Moon Pisces Sun Sun Aeon Fire Universe Saturn ============================================ Now, if you can't figure out some necessary sequence of which the aforementioned two cards are a part, then I will sigh and wonder what is required of folks to study the tarot of late. To be noted, I think this entire construction is flawed inasmuch as it only makes use of the planets of the Ancients and even then it both omits the earth element and the planet (I'm sure there is some rationalization for the omission, though I found it more expedient to merely revise the tarot trumps and the rest of the deck if truth be known) and sequences the planets in an order that I find difficult to justify. Further note: the LBPR is usually a banishing of earth. |>|I do not buy any of his arguements ... |>What *were* these arguments?.... |The arguements you refer to, such as they are. That's *it*? And people take this (cal) seriously? I begin to wonder of what the Thelemic community is composed if it accepts such schlock as meaningful and convincing. I suppose if one is taken by the Priestly Prophet and his adorers in one's heart (or if basic instruction has been bypassed), then the head may be persuaded against logic. |>Why does doing what is common sense to the mathematician (placing |>0 at the start) make "the whole meaning of the Tarot luminous", |>while doing the same wrt the Star Trump requires some sort of |>'Secret Attribution'? |The attribution [AC] refers to is the order of the zodiac. Very lovely, but follow out the logic completely and see if he is still at all convincing. I'd love to be able to understand him differently so as to prove his last works were indeed his best and supported entirely by rational criticism, and since I'm told he was coherent, that leaves intentional blinds or my own ignorance. |This change illuminating the entire Tarot is a bit of a stretch-I'll give |you that! (Though come to think of it, the Fool DOES illuminate/create the |entire Tarot, perhaps Crowley's just dropping hints with that line) |a simpler solution is to remove that twist rather than add a matching one! Precisely, and this comes 'naturally'. |>What was the original justification of placing the Juggler/Fool in the |>position between XX and XXI (or any of the other spots aside from |>before I)? |...I don't know about those other guys, but i see the Fool and the |World cards as identical after a fashion, perhaps this is why. Though i do |like it as Zero and now it is simply after the World instead of before it. I think they NUMBERED it 0 while placing it between XX and XXI, which doesn't really make your suggested rationalization clear at all, though from my previous studies I think I presumed the intentional blind theory, rationalized to correction mathematically as by AC. I don't remember offhand the excuse given for the blind, but I'd appreciate some suggestions from the audience before I look in the library again. :> |>What ever happened to 'the method of Science, the aim of Religion'? |>Why does Crowley claim here that 'Tzaddi is "The Emperor"'? His |>mention of the double-loop seems rather disappointing after his |>approbation of common sense and 'what comes natural' wrt the 0 |>and VIII and XI Trumps. |He is stuck with it and comes up with a tenuous etymology to suggest the |Atu name. Please elaborate on this etymology. I think it went over my head. |Your double-loop disappointment i share whole-heartedly. I can |still remember reading that in dismay almost 20 years ago. I have tried to |love it, as a good Thelemite, but have finally given up that quest;>:> WHY? What do you mean by 'a good Thelemite'? Isn't that a kind of ridiculous attitude? Are Thelemites 'supposed' to do certain things? I have heard such silly cal in offline company, but I'd hoped it was the blatherings of lunatics. Is this a common attitude within Thelemic society, or are you being somewhat sarcastic here? I recommend that all such notions of 'good Thelemite' be abandoned, while coming up with alternative understandings of the true will/orbit metaphysic. |>|I believe he was eager to find a new trump for tzaddi and came up |>|with that as a best guess. |>That's it? Above he at least goes into a nonpersuasive argument |>wrt the double-loop (illustrated somewhat sloppily in my copy of |>_The Book of Thoth_ between pages 9 and 10, btw). |Sorry, i didnt think it was that important. I don't really know why since i |don't grasp it. I suggest it is more elegant to merely *change the name of the tzaddi trump* so as to greater reflect its Aquarian nature (the graphics seem adequate). |>...he arrived at the attribution-conclusion posterior to the |>construction of that work (and thus only changed it in later |>works like ABBA). |I believe this is the answer. I also saw a copy of Liber Aleph with the |chapter on De Arte Alchemistica describing one of the virtues as the |influence from the Emperor. Current copies all have the Star inserted with |a slight change of that forces description. Fascinating. It just goes to show how malleable and fluid is this supposed 'self-consistent, truth-revealing esotericism'. Generally I see it to be merely a gloss to support the hierophants in charge, sometimes without thought or comprehension (show me why I'm wrong). |>I say throw out all the people, set up the attributions of the tarot |>in a table (here, in this elist) and think for yourself logically about it. |>See what conforms to 'elegance' and to 'logic' for you.... |...a very foolish suggestion which i love. I've started it since you appeared confused by my rhetoric. |...could some of you discourse about the existance of competing tree |path designs? I've designed one which approximates the popular tree though incorporates additional paths so as to fit with Romanization (26-letter alphabet). Here's the URL: ftp://ftp.hollyfeld.org/pub/Avidyana/Plebe/rtol.tn |Is there a hierarchy of 'rightness' ? In a cosmic sense? No. In a personal sense? I think that for some people there might be, yes. A sort of mirror-reflection of the state of the individual who is deriving their true path-structure (that is, it is 'true' to their present state of mind/being), which you seem to be pointing out at the bottom of this here post. |How do yall choose a tree to work with? I can't claim to really 'work with' a tree. I've created it and assigned various attributions as it seemed comprehensive, syncretistic and logical, but so far I have not found the inspiration to do any sort of visualiza- tion work or the like (is that what 'work' you mean?). |How do you validate a particular arrangement? Due to its internal consistency and the relation to our knowledge. Since knowledge changes over time, space and consciousness, the validation must be re-established every so often by an individual mage, lest we work with the shells of our former selves (or worse, those of others, sort of like eating people's excrement). |>...utilize what resonated most with my own mind, which produced a ] |>sufficient quantity of satisfaction.... |...The symbol is drawn or appropriated by oneself to describe something, |make it sensible and descriptive and artful. Trust that resonance, |demand it! Hmm, very nice. Resonance with what? One's psyche? Doesn't this kinda require an ability to accurately perceive this? How can we assess our ability to perceive such a close-in element of ourselves, if so? xiwang mu tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com