Tzaddi is not the Star

Q&A and discussion on the Hermetic Qabbalah

Moderator: Moderators - Public

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Jim Eshelman » Sun Dec 21, 2014 4:25 pm

Yes. I've also said that the picture is screwed up :)
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9577
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Modest » Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:30 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:Putting it in Hebrew letter order, we get:

17 Star, Aquarius: Heh
5 Hierophant, Taurus: Vav
6 Lovers, Gemini: Zayin
7 Chariot, Cancer: Cheth
11 Strength, Leo: Teth
9 Hermit, Virgo: Yod
8 Justice, Libra: Lamed
13 Death, Scorpio: Nun
14 Temperance, Sagittarius: Samekh
15 Devil, Capricorn: A'ayin
4 Emperor, Aries: Tzaddi
18 Moon, Pisces: Qoph

By "off-diagram" I literally mean that the zodiac issue is not on the diagram. It's a consequence of what IS in the diagram but is, itself, not on the diagram.

(The astrological attributions are off-diagram - this loop diagram has nothing to do with them.) Your wish for a zodiacal-number flip is exactly what I've said from the beginning isn't here. It's a trump number - Hebrew letter flip.


Okay, Jim, I see the letter - number double loop, thanks. Now how do you explain the astrological attributions off-diagram if you can't deduce them from the diagram? If you could do that, please, because I don't understand this paragraph:
Jim Eshelman wrote:The result is that Aries (Trump 4, The Emperor) and Aquarius (Trump 17, The Star) loop around to highlight Pisces (Trump 18,The Moon), just as Libra (Trump 8, Adjustment) and Leo (Trump 11, Lust) loop around to highlight Virgo (Trump 9, The Hermit). Since this was conceived about the time the equinoctial points had reached the centers of Pisces and Virgo, I find it fascinating that this highlights a Pisces-Virgo horizontal axis and places Gemini at the highest declination and Samekh at the lowest - which was astronomically correct.


Now if the the astrological attributions are off the diagram discussed - what kind of diagram are you using to write the paragraph above? I would like to see it, please. :) Because I don't see that Aries and Aquarius loop around Pisces just as Libra and Leo loop around Virgo. It is certainly not in the order of attributions that I quote you in this post. How did you deduce that?

I am confused because you say there is no double loop in the zodiac and another time you write that there is a double loop in the zodiac? How come? :)
Modest
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:14 am
Location: Lithuania

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Jim Eshelman » Tue Dec 23, 2014 2:02 pm

Modest wrote:Okay, Jim, I see the letter - number double loop, thanks. Now how do you explain the astrological attributions off-diagram if you can't deduce them from the diagram? If you could do that, please, because I don't understand this paragraph:

The diagrams aren't for derivation, they're for demonstration. The correspondence of astrological signs to Hebrew letters has been documented for over 2,000 years, except that two were (intentionally, as I read the old texts) reversed. That's the core information given to Crowley as Magus. It's really only the numbers that have any mystery about them.

Really, this stuff is incredibly simple once you see it. Just go with the attributions as we know them, don't get hung up on something somebody jotted on the back of a napkin once, and the whole thing is pretty awesome.

Jim Eshelman wrote:what kind of diagram are you using to write the paragraph above? I would like to see it, please.

I don't do pictures. Give me a pen and napkin if you see me in person sometime. (I'll have to reread the thread, I'm certain I've described how to do this more than once on this forum.)

Let me see if I can find a clearer way to explain it. (Not sure where I'll get the time right now, but I'll try.)
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9577
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Jim Eshelman » Tue Dec 23, 2014 2:11 pm

I actually did this before - much earlier - but let's try it again from the top.

Take the 12 simple letter names, in order:
Hé, Vav, Zayin, Cheyth, Teyth, Yod, Lamed, Noon, Samekh, A'ayin, Tzaddiy, Qof.

Take the 12 Tarot trumps numbers that are available for them:
4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 1u

Draw the loop figure - a flattened horizontal vessica piscis more or less, with a circle on either end.

Starting in the lower left (below the left circle), write the Hebrew letters as listed above, following the curve. Thus, H will be below the left circle, V Z Ch arched across the top, T below the right circle, Y outside right, L above the right circle, N S O from right to left along the bottom, Tz above the left circle, Q outside left.

Next, start in the upper left (with Tzaddiy) and put the numbers of the cards as listed above, going clockwise around the outside of the figure. Thus, 4 through 8 across the top, 9 on the right, 11 through 17 coming back across the bottom, 18 at the far left.

This is the correct attribution of the Tarot trump numbes to the Hebrew letters.

Next, add the zodiacal signs according to their attribution to the Hebrew letters. Aries is above left, Aquarius below left, wrapped around Pisces. Libra is above right, Leo is below right, wrapped around Virgo at far right. The others flow in between.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9577
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Gnosomai Emauton » Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:59 pm

Tarot Double Loop.jpg
Tarot Double Loop.jpg (60.16 KiB) Viewed 6584 times
Go in all ways contrary to the world.
User avatar
Gnosomai Emauton
Ultimate Spark of the Intimate Fire
Ultimate Spark of the Intimate Fire
 
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:28 am

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Modest » Sun Dec 28, 2014 8:16 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:This is the correct attribution of the Tarot trump numbes to the Hebrew letters.

This part I understand as in my post above. Sorry if my writting is hard to undersand.
Jim Eshelman wrote:Next, add the zodiacal signs according to their attribution to the Hebrew letters. Aries is above left, Aquarius below left, wrapped around Pisces. Libra is above right, Leo is below right, wrapped around Virgo at far right. The others flow in between.

This part I don't understand as in my post above. It clearly does not "loop" as in your post before (below) but "wrap" may be a good word for this "ugly" arrangement in your diagram which does NOT form a Zodiac double loop nor a circle - does not follow the Zodiac order as the Hebrew letter double loop. So, as I understand I should not care about that in this diagram?
Jim Eshelman wrote:The result is that Aries (Trump 4, The Emperor) and Aquarius (Trump 17, The Star) loop around to highlight Pisces (Trump 18,The Moon), just as Libra (Trump 8, Adjustment) and Leo (Trump 11, Lust) loop around to highlight Virgo (Trump 9, The Hermit). Since this was conceived about the time the equinoctial points had reached the centers of Pisces and Virgo, I find it fascinating that this highlights a Pisces-Virgo horizontal axis and places Gemini at the highest declination and Samekh at the lowest - which was astronomically correct.
Modest
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:14 am
Location: Lithuania

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Gnosomai Emauton » Sun Dec 28, 2014 4:35 pm

Is this post referencing the diagram i posted just prior? I only ask because that diagram does correctly show the double loop, the outer path of the zodiacal and numerical attributions, and the wave-like distribution of the Hebrew attributions. I'm failing to see where the confusion still lies.
Go in all ways contrary to the world.
User avatar
Gnosomai Emauton
Ultimate Spark of the Intimate Fire
Ultimate Spark of the Intimate Fire
 
Posts: 653
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:28 am

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Heru » Mon Dec 29, 2014 2:27 am

Gnosomai Emauton wrote:Is this post referencing the diagram i posted just prior? I only ask because that diagram does correctly show the double loop, the outer path of the zodiacal and numerical attributions, and the wave-like distribution of the Hebrew attributions. I'm failing to see where the confusion still lies.

I think the confusion arises due the lack of a 'double loop in the zodiac' in the diagram. Following the natural order of the signs, starting from Aries on the left, a jump is required to reach Taurus. The natural sequence continues until Cancer and then you 'loop' down to Leo, Virgo, Libra, before rounding the bend and coming back via Scorpio, Sagittarius, and Capricorn. But to reach Aquarius one is required to 'jump' off the track again.
there are many that swim, and find no boats.
User avatar
Heru
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:45 am
Location: On the outside looking in.

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Modest » Mon Dec 29, 2014 3:28 pm

Gnosomai Emauton clearly you made the diagram so you can see that the zodiac is out of Its natural sequience in the diagram. That's what bugs me. Thanks, Heru, you get the point.
I see in Waite's arrangement a harmony of letters, numbers and zodiac forming a circle. The double loop in Jim's arrangement has the harmony of letters and numbers but not the zodiac. So for me it means theoreticaly Waite's arrangement is better.

The counterchange could be not the Waite 8, 11 cards but 4, 17 so if we do that we get a harmony in the double loop by 4 being Tzaddi, Aquarius, The Star/The Emperor, 17, He, Aries The Emperor/The Star, 8, Lamed, Adjustment, 11 Teth, Lust.
The problem was that the GD letter, number, zodiac attributions were not harmonious with the French Tarot so Waite counterchanged 8 and 11 and Crowley (may be) did the 4 and 17 instead or just the attributions for them. Those are the only possible 3 solutions to reach a harmony in all three attributions. The third one would require to redraw the two cards so we have only 2 solutions left, one of them being Waite's arrangement we have only one solution left.

To clear things up I'm looking at the tarot from a theoretical design point of view. The design has to be uniform, harmonious. I understand that in practice it may be not so. I just see 4 Tzaddi, Aries, the Emperor, 17 He, Aquarius, The Star, 8, Lamed, Adjustment, 11, Teth, Lust as a theoretical design flaw with noone to explain why. Clearly from a theoretical standpoint Waite's arrangement is in order/harmonious while Crowley's is not. I still don't understand why...
Last edited by Modest on Mon Dec 29, 2014 4:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Modest
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:14 am
Location: Lithuania

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Jim Eshelman » Mon Dec 29, 2014 3:59 pm

Modest wrote:Gnosomai Emauton clearly you made the diagram so you can see that the zodiac is out of Its natural sequience in the diagram. That's what bugs me. Thanks, Heru, you get the point.

Oh, I see: You wanted a literal zodiacal sequence all the way through the 12. Yeah, you're right, I don't think it's important that it isn't quite that.

The technical match is numbers vs. Hebrew letters. The signs go along with the letters. The key demonstration is that the axis is Virgo-Pisces with Aries-Libra and Leo-Aquarius (where the seeming "flips" occur) distributed on either side of them.

I see in Waite's arrangement a harmony of letters, numbers and zodiac forming a circle.

Unfortunately, it's wrong. His biggest weakness was in being overly mentally formal (i.e., stuffy).

The double loop in Jim's arrangement has the harmony of letters and numbers but not the zodiac.

Exactly. The letters vs. numbers pattern seems to be what matters. (Think of it from the point of view of Tarot's designers.)

The problem was that the GD letter, number, zodiac attributions were not harmonious with the French Tarot so Waite counterchanged 8 and 11 and Crowley (may be) did the 4 and 17 instead. Those are the only possible 2 solutions to reach a harmony in all three attributions.

Exactly right on the last part.

To clear things up I'm looking at the tarot from a theoretical design point of view. The design has to be uniform, harmonious.

For the sake of discussion: Why would this necessarily be so? (There actually are orderly patterns in the Double Letters and Simple Letters if you know where to look, but the Mother Letters are out of any sequence recognizable from the Sefer Y'tziyrah.)

I just see 4 Tzaddi, Aries, the Emperor, 17 He, Aquarius, The Star, 8, Lamed, Adjustment, 11, Teth, Lust as a theoretical design flaw with noone to explain why.

I think you don't like the explanation you've been given.

Going with what it appears we know: First of all, the correct attribution of Tzaddiy was intentionally hidden, according to the Zohar. Not "a mistake," not "evolved from one model to another," but intentionally hidden and not to be disclosed correctly until long after. Second, that all happened when the equinoxes were almost precisely at 15° Virgo-Pisces, while the profane world was sinking deeper into adopting a false zodiac that defined the vernal point as the start of Aries for ever and ever (Amen!). I'm fascinated that just at this juncture in time Tarot was invented using a pattern of the Hebrew simple letters that gave Pisces-Virgo as the horizontal axis, Gemini (where the summer solstice actually occurred) at the apex up the up-arching curve and Sagittarius (where the winter solstice actually occurred) at the bottom of the down-arching curve; that allowed the Tzaddiy attribution to remain obscured by not making the loop one of zodiacal signs (which would have given it all away) but, rather, making the interacting streams be the Trump numbers and Hebrew letters (the two separate sequences that exist in the deck - the zodiacal sequence is indifferent to them).
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9577
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Modest » Mon Dec 29, 2014 4:32 pm

For the sake of discussion - humans create harmonious, symetrical, alphabetical etc theoretical/practical systems/models because they seek, see perfection in that. A messy system/model is not the aim of any creator - centuries old or new. Of course Nature/God is more difficult than that...
Thanks Jim for the astrology part - I have been looking forward to understand it. I need to research that more - can't comment about that now. Thanks, again. I can't understand yet what does Tzaddi have to do with the zodiac signs you mention in your post, because the problem is in Aquarius and Aries change...

Sorry, I edited/added some text to my previous post while you were writing an answer.
Modest
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:14 am
Location: Lithuania

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Jim Eshelman » Mon Dec 29, 2014 5:01 pm

I dispute "change." I don't think anything actually changed. I think the correct attributions are newly disclosed.

You don't understand what Tzaddiy has to do with it? Tzaddiy is the Hebrew letter previously (wrongly) believed to be attributed to Aquarius and Atu XVII, and now known to be attributed to Aries and Atu IV.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9577
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Hermitas » Mon Dec 29, 2014 9:54 pm

Isn't there a quote from one of the old Sephers about something about Heh being hidden?

See, as I understand it, switching those attributions makes Heh more receptive, more feminine. It makes a holy sexual relationship within the Divine Name, YHVH.

Now if you know your Hebrew Scriptures, you know that the Covenantal agreement was the relationship of servant to King. AGLA. You'll also remember that those worshiping the Star Goddess out in the groves or on top of the ziggurats were condemned.

It seems like a blind they would choose.
User avatar
Hermitas
Nothing
Nothing
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:49 am

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Heru » Tue Dec 30, 2014 4:07 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:Oh, I see: You wanted a literal zodiacal sequence all the way through the 12. Yeah, you're right, I don't think it's important that it isn't quite that.

How so? In the Book of Thoth (p.9-10) Crowley claims the double loop in the zodiac is the "most convincing evidence possible that the Book of the Law is a genuine message from the Secret Chiefs." The diagram on page 11 really does show a double loop in the zodiac. Unfortunately it messes up the Hebrew letter and card sequences.

The diagram that Gnosomai Emauton posted is in reality not much different from Crowley's. It gets the Hebrew letters and card sequence right but at the expense of the zodiac. It's just an inverse image of Crowley's diagram but with the same fundamental flaw. It's the exact same data set just displayed in a different way.

The fact of the matter is that it is not possible to have perfect symmetry in all three sequences, Tarot, Zodiac, Hebrew, on one double loop diagram because the two swaps, VIII & XI, and, IV & XVII, are not the same. In the former case the letters and signs stayed with each other. In the latter case they didn't. The net result is an unbalanced asymmetry that can be shown in two different ways. Crowley's diagram and the one Gnosomai Emauton posted are proof of this. Both diagrams contain the exact same asymmetry but in different sequences.

Aleister Crowley wrote:For "The Star" is referred to Aquarius in the Zodiac, and "The Emperor' to Aries. Now Aries and Aquarius are on each side of Pisces, just as Leo and Libra are on each side of Virgo; that is to say, the correction in the Book of the Law gives a perfect symmetry in the zodiacal attribution, just as if a loop were formed at one end of the ellipse to correspond exactly with the existing loop at the other end.

The problem with the above statement is that the "correction in the Book of the Law" only mentions cards and letters. But according to Crowley this 'correction' also has a knock on effect on the zodiac as well. But this would only be true if the IV-XVII swap exactly matched the VIII-XI swap. It's a very simple point of logic proven by both diagrams.
there are many that swim, and find no boats.
User avatar
Heru
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:45 am
Location: On the outside looking in.

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Takamba » Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:11 am

It seems rather simple to me, I don't understand the argument against it. Here's what I'm seeing (the blue arrows represent the order of the signs and numbers, the red arrows show the order of the letters). This seems quite beautiful to me.


Image


*edited as I had confused my colors while posting
Last edited by Takamba on Tue Dec 30, 2014 10:18 am, edited 3 times in total.
"If we are to have Beauty and Love, whether in begetting children or works of art, or what not, we must have perfect freedom to act, without fear or shame or any falsity."
User avatar
Takamba
Nothing
Nothing
 
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:19 pm

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Modest » Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:17 am

Heru, also:
Crowley's post-CCXX New Comment:

The New Comment (c. 1921) chap. 1 line 57 wrote:
Tzaddi is the letter of The Emperor, the Trump IV, and He is the Star, the Trump XVII. Aquarius and Aries are therefore counterchanged, revolving on the pivot of Pisces, just as, in the Trumps VIII and XI, Leo and Libra do about Virgo. This last revelation makes our Tarot attributions sublimely, perfectly, flawlessly symmetrical.

So Crowley thinks the zodiac atributtions have to be counterchanged too? That would be the same change as Lust and Adjustment.
Modest
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:14 am
Location: Lithuania

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Heru » Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:27 am

Takamba wrote:It seems rather simple to me, I don't understand the argument against it. Here's what I'm seeing (the blue arrows represent the order of the signs and numbers, the red arrows show the order of the letters). This seems quite beautiful to me.

Take a second look. Since when did the order of the zodiac go from Cancer to Libra or from Leo to Scorpio? :wink:
there are many that swim, and find no boats.
User avatar
Heru
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:45 am
Location: On the outside looking in.

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Jim Eshelman » Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:39 am

Heru wrote:
Jim Eshelman wrote:Oh, I see: You wanted a literal zodiacal sequence all the way through the 12. Yeah, you're right, I don't think it's important that it isn't quite that.

How so? In the Book of Thoth (p.9-10) Crowley claims the double loop in the zodiac is the "most convincing evidence possible that the Book of the Law is a genuine message from the Secret Chiefs."

<sigh> We're just going in loops, here, so I'm probably about ready to stop responding.

He just had the wrong loop. It isn't in the zodiac, it'/s in the relationship of the trump numbers to the Hebrew letters. The Book of Thoth is the worst-proofread major work Crowley ever wrote. There are numerous errors, little slips and goofs all the way through it. The essential work is sound - it just never had an editor or even solid proofreading.

The diagram on page 11 really does show a double loop in the zodiac. Unfortunately it messes up the Hebrew letter and card sequences.

Yes. It's a goof. The final result, however you draw it, has to reflect (the zodiacal parts of) the following table:

0 -- The Fool -- Air -- Alef
1 -- The Magus -- Mercury -- Beyth
2 -- The Priestess -- Moon -- Gimel
3 -- The Empress -- Venus -- Daleth
4 -- The Emperor -- Aries -- Tzaddiy
5 -- The Hierophant -- Taurus -- Vav
6 -- The Lovers -- Gemini -- Zayin
7 -- The Chariot -- Cancer -- Cheyth
8 -- Adjustment -- Libra -- Lamed
9 -- The Hermit -- Virgo -- Yod
10 -- Fortune -- Jupiter -- Kaf
11 -- Lust -- Leo -- Teyth
12 -- The Hanged Man -- Water -- Meym
13 -- Death -- Scorpio -- Noon
14 -- Art -- Sagittarius -- Samekh
15 -- The Devil -- Capricorn -- A'ayin
16 -- The Tower -- Mars -- Peh
17 -- The Star -- Aquarius -- Hé
18 -- The Moon -- Pisces -- Qof
19 -- The Sun -- Sun -- Reysh
20 -- The Æon -- Fire -- Shiyn
21 -- The Universe -- Saturn -- Tav

The diagram that Gnosomai Emauton posted is in reality not much different from Crowley's. It gets the Hebrew letters and card sequence right but at the expense of the zodiac. It's just an inverse image of Crowley's diagram but with the same fundamental flaw. It's the exact same data set just displayed in a different way.

It correctly portrays the pattern, which (despite that badly worded phrase in The Book of Thoth) is about the Tarot trump numbers and the Hebrew letters.

The fact of the matter is that it is not possible to have perfect symmetry in all three sequences

Exactly! That's what I've said all along. The one that is not rigorously mapped is the zodiac (though, even there, the essential pattern is evident).

Aleister Crowley wrote:For "The Star" is referred to Aquarius in the Zodiac, and "The Emperor' to Aries. Now Aries and Aquarius are on each side of Pisces, just as Leo and Libra are on each side of Virgo; that is to say, the correction in the Book of the Law gives a perfect symmetry in the zodiacal attribution, just as if a loop were formed at one end of the ellipse to correspond exactly with the existing loop at the other end.

Yes, as you've correctly quoted before. But it's wrong (as I've said before). It's bad proofreading (though it does make his broad point well enough.)

The problem with the above statement is that the "correction in the Book of the Law" only mentions cards and letters.

Yes, because that's what's actually looping rigorously.

But according to Crowley this 'correction' also has a knock on effect on the zodiac as well.

Yes, his statement is sloppily composed.

But this would only be true if the IV-XVII swap exactly matched the VIII-XI swap. It's a very simple point of logic proven by both diagrams.

Your "simple point of logic" collapses when one of its veiled premises collapses: You are presuming that the passage in The Book of Thoth is correctly written. It isn't. You are building an argument on an invalid premise.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9577
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Takamba » Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:32 am

Heru wrote:
Takamba wrote:It seems rather simple to me, I don't understand the argument against it. Here's what I'm seeing (the blue arrows represent the order of the signs and numbers, the red arrows show the order of the letters). This seems quite beautiful to me.

Take a second look. Since when did the order of the zodiac go from Cancer to Libra or from Leo to Scorpio? :wink:

It doesn't, you're looking at the wrong arrows. It goes from Leo to Virgo and Libra to Scorpio (red arrows the Zodiac, blue arrows the letters). It's a symmetry of two different motions. You look again.
"If we are to have Beauty and Love, whether in begetting children or works of art, or what not, we must have perfect freedom to act, without fear or shame or any falsity."
User avatar
Takamba
Nothing
Nothing
 
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:19 pm

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Heru » Tue Dec 30, 2014 9:21 am

Takamba wrote:
Heru wrote:
Takamba wrote:It seems rather simple to me, I don't understand the argument against it. Here's what I'm seeing (the blue arrows represent the order of the signs and numbers, the red arrows show the order of the letters). This seems quite beautiful to me.

Take a second look. Since when did the order of the zodiac go from Cancer to Libra or from Leo to Scorpio? :wink:

It doesn't, you're looking at the wrong arrows. It goes from Leo to Virgo and Libra to Scorpio (red arrows the Zodiac, blue arrows the letters). It's a symmetry of two different motions. You look again.

Take another look now that you've changed your mind about the arrows. You've simply swapped one problem for another. On the red arrows you've now actually got a double loop around Virgo. Great! :)
But at the other end you've got a mess. Capricorn going to Aries! :?: And Aquarius going to Taurus. :?:
there are many that swim, and find no boats.
User avatar
Heru
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:45 am
Location: On the outside looking in.

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Modest » Tue Dec 30, 2014 9:45 am

Jim Eshelman wrote:<sigh> We're just going in loops, here, so I'm probably about ready to stop responding.

Yeah, I know. Most of the points you repeat I know but some new things/questions pop out sometimes.

Jim Eshelman wrote:Exactly! That's what I've said all along. The one that is not rigorously mapped is the zodiac (though, even there, the essential pattern is evident).

I would not call that a pattern because it does not repeat - it's just a zodiac circle crippled at 1 point.

Heru wrote: But this would only be true if the IV-XVII swap exactly matched the VIII-XI swap. It's a very simple point of logic proven by both diagrams.

Jim Eshelman wrote:Your "simple point of logic" collapses when one of its veiled premises collapses: You are presuming that the passage in The Book of Thoth is correctly written. It isn't. You are building an argument on an invalid premise.

I would say you, Jim, are building an argument on an invalid premise because (see my post from before) Crowley's post-CCXX The New Comment (c. 1921) chap. 1 line 57 talks in same words about the topic as The Book of Thoth. They both can't be wrong can they? Crowley even tells us that he changed not only the letters but the zodiac signs too making 4 Tzaddi Aquarius The Emperor, 17 He Aries The Star. I got the same in my 2007 Book of Thoth print on page 278.

Sorry if I'm disturbing someone, I am just trying to make factual arguments in the discussion and see what are others factual arguments.
Modest
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:14 am
Location: Lithuania

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Takamba » Tue Dec 30, 2014 10:58 am

Heru wrote:Take another look now that you've changed your mind about the arrows. You've simply swapped one problem for another. On the red arrows you've now actually got a double loop around Virgo. Great! :)
But at the other end you've got a mess. Capricorn going to Aries! :?: And Aquarius going to Taurus. :?:


Oops, haste makes waste. Here's the corrected diagram (Gnosomai's design with my arrows)

Image

Below is using the order Crowley drew them in

Image
"If we are to have Beauty and Love, whether in begetting children or works of art, or what not, we must have perfect freedom to act, without fear or shame or any falsity."
User avatar
Takamba
Nothing
Nothing
 
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:19 pm

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Jim Eshelman » Tue Dec 30, 2014 11:04 am

Modest wrote:
Jim Eshelman wrote:Exactly! That's what I've said all along. The one that is not rigorously mapped is the zodiac (though, even there, the essential pattern is evident).

I would not call that a pattern because it does not repeat - it's just a zodiac circle crippled at 1 point.

You can't say it doesn't have a pattern just because it has a different pattern than the one you want to see. (And you're only using one half of your cerebral cortex. Get the right hemisphere in play. Don't be so left-sided.)

I would say you, Jim, are building an argument on an invalid premise

Start with the attributions (see table in my last post). Then see what patterns exist in them.

I got the same in my 2007 Book of Thoth print on page 278.

The Book of Thoth is not reedited when it is republished. None of the many small errors have ever been fixed.

Sorry if I'm disturbing someone, I am just trying to make factual arguments in the discussion and see what are /others factual arguments.

I'm rather lost on what your goal is. I thought it was to understand the pattern. It seems, instead, that you are trying to prove some position of your own instead.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9577
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Modest » Tue Dec 30, 2014 12:15 pm

Sorry if I'm disturbing someone, I am just trying to make factual arguments in the discussion and see what are /others factual arguments.

Jim Eshelman wrote:I'm rather lost on what your goal is. I thought it was to understand the pattern. It seems, instead, that you are trying to prove some position of your own instead.

I think I understand now the pattern you are trying to show/advocate but I can't see enough factual arguments for me to endorse it myself. I don't have a position myself - I just like to compare/discuss/understand various positions on the topic. Thanks for your help. :)
Modest
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 11:14 am
Location: Lithuania

Re: Tzaddi is not the Star

Postby Hermitas » Wed Dec 31, 2014 5:48 am

Well, I can't find that quote. I wanna say it was instead in some rabbi's commentary, but since I can't produce it and since nobody else seems to recognize it, I'll stop brining it up.
User avatar
Hermitas
Nothing
Nothing
 
Posts: 1056
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:49 am

PreviousNext

Return to Qabbalah

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests