Tzaddi is not the Star
-
@PatchworkSerpen said
"This also raises the question of which of the other correspondences attributed to the two paths are swapped. In one edition of 777 it is stated that only the correspondences of the Tarot and the Zodiac are swapped between צ and ה.
What of the rest of the associations attributed to the paths?"We are bringing 776 1/2 back into print in the near future. It has most of this worked out in detail. (It's a long answer. In general, Divine names and zodiac-based associations make up most of the correspondences, and these travel with the zodiacal attribution.)
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@PatchworkSerpen said
"This also raises the question of which of the other correspondences attributed to the two paths are swapped. In one edition of 777 it is stated that only the correspondences of the Tarot and the Zodiac are swapped between צ and ה.
What of the rest of the associations attributed to the paths?"We are bringing 776 1/2 back into print in the near future. It has most of this worked out in detail. (It's a long answer. In general, Divine names and zodiac-based associations make up most of the correspondences, and these travel with the zodiacal attribution.)"
93
Thanks for the heads up - one more thing:
With his 'double loop' diagram (page 11, The Book of Thoth), Crowley asserts that the original Lust-Adjustment swap is balanced by the new Emperor-Star swap. It seems though that the former 'disrupts' the sequence of astrological signs and hebrew letters only as far as the order of the Tarot is concerned (retaining the internal consistancy of the hebrew letter/astrological attribution), whereas the latter swap does not change the order of the Tarot but does in fact 'disrupt' the hebrew letter/astrological attribution.
How can these be considered to balance each other when the nature of the swap itself is different in each case?
All of the other arguments as to why they ought to be swapped make perfect sense to me, but this minor point prevents me from accepting the notion wholeheartedly.93, 93/93
-
@PatchworkSerpen said
" Thanks for the heads up - one more thing:
With his 'double loop' diagram (page 11, The Book of Thoth), Crowley asserts that the original Lust-Adjustment swap is balanced by the new Emperor-Star swap. It seems though that the former 'disrupts' the sequence of astrological signs and hebrew letters only as far as the order of the Tarot is concerned (retaining the internal consistancy of the hebrew letter/astrological attribution), whereas the latter swap does not change the order of the Tarot but does in fact 'disrupt' the hebrew letter/astrological attribution.
How can these be considered to balance each other when the nature of the swap itself is different in each case?
All of the other arguments as to why they ought to be swapped make perfect sense to me, but this minor point prevents me from accepting the notion wholeheartedly.
93, 93/93 "The diagram on BoT P11 represents what I call the "Old Crowley" ordering, where he put the Emperor with Tzaddi and the Star with Heh, but balked at exchanging the Zodiac signs.
Even this has a kind of symmetry, albeit, that as you say "the nature of the swap is different" at the two ends.
http://www.lashtal.com/gallery/albums/userpics/14483/normal_Crowley_Tarot_1.jpg
When he made up his mind that the Emperor had to be Aquarius and the Star Aries, he produced a "New Crowley" pattern that looks more symmetrical.
http://www.lashtal.com/gallery/albums/userpics/14483/normal_Crowley_Tarot_2.jpg
The diagrams were made by me some time in the 1980s, when trying to sort all this out for myself.
Hope the "full-colour" presentation is useful.
OP
-
"When he made up his mind that the Emperor had to be Aquarius and the Star Aries, he produced a "New Crowley" pattern that looks more symmetrical."
93
So you're implying that Crowley's ultimate conclusion was that the Emperor was Aquarius and the Star Aries? That sure goes against everything that's been said before now... It is however backed up by a table near the back of The Book of Thoth that gives these attributions. This does seem to make a great deal more sense than carrying the astrological attributions with the Tarot Trumps. This swap, retaining the astrological signs to their respective Hebrew letters would be exactly symmetrical to the Lust/Adjustment swap, unlike the original Emperor/Star swap that carries the attributions with the Trumps.
'Course the only hang-up now is attributing the Emperor to Aquarius and the Star to Aries. What gives?
93, 93/93
-
"Don't get it twisted."
-
The only way the heh-tzaddi switch makes sense is if the zodiac sign stays with the letter, in keeping with the Sefer Yetzirah. That way, the Emperor is Tzaddi/Aquarius, and the Star is Heh/Aries.
This is exactly what was done when Waite switched Strength and Justice; the letters stayed with their zodiac signs, but were moved to fit cards whose symbolism he thought was more appropriate, (scales for Libra, Lion for Leo). If you want to 'balance out' what Waite did, you have to make the same kind of change, that's all.
The real mistake is moving ONLY the letter, as if the zodiac and the Tarot were linked and immovable, and the letter was changeable. This places too much importance on the tarot sequence, IMO.
The tarot is far younger than the Sefer Yetzirah, and there is no evidence it was a factor in the design of the original decks. This didn't happen for three centuries, until the French occultists started mapping the Hebrew onto the trumps.
To make the Tarot be the basis for the Hebrew alef-bet and it's attributions is rather silly. The letters are fundamental, not the tarot cards.
If switching the letter & sign together between two cards messes up your Tree of Life, then too bad for the Tree of Life. Perhaps you should use a different design. The one used by Kircher, the Golden Dawn, et al, is certainly not the oldest or most authentic, its just the one you choose to use. It works well for some things, not as well for others.
I think the real problem comes down to a confusion of which categories are most fundamental.
-
@hreefold31 said
"The only way the heh-tzaddi switch makes sense is if the zodiac sign stays with the letter, in keeping with the Sefer Yetzirah. That way, the Emperor is Tzaddi/Aquarius, and the Star is Heh/Aries."
No, you have it backwards. The main thing is that the zodiacal attribution is divorced from the letter. The zodiacal attribution remains with the Tarot card, which was especially designed in conformity with it.
"This is exactly what was done when Waite switched Strength and Justice; the letters stayed with their zodiac signs, but were moved to fit cards whose symbolism he thought was more appropriate, (scales for Libra, Lion for Leo). If you want to 'balance out' what Waite did, you have to make the same kind of change, that's all. "
That's the wrong comparison because the Waite swap was an error. Things "straighten out" either if you make the make the Waite swap or the Crowley swap - not both. Each was trying to solve the same problem, but did it in mutually exclusive ways.
-
No I don't have it backwards. I understand exactly what AC did. But divorcing the letter from the zodiac is what ignores the sefer yetzirah attributions, which are followed in every other case for the zodiac. Now if you want to say that its perfectly fine to ignore the SY, then so be it, that's an aesthetic choice. But Waite did NOT ignore the SY attributions, he switched letters, AND signs, to match better with tarot images.
My point is that to think the tarot is fundamental, and that the zodiac goes with the tarot, rather than the hebrew letter, is to ignore about two thousand years of hebrew qabalah in favor of a dubious and never-proven relation between the tarot and the zodiac signs.
I don't see how it is the wrong comparison. My point is exactly as you said, you can't make BOTH changes because they're different kinds of changes. So I think we agree on that.
IF the Waite swap is okay, then Crowley's should have matched it. Since it wasn't, Crowley's swap doesn't 'balance' anything, as he claimed it did in the double-loop drawing.
So I hear you saying that Waite was in error, thus the VIII card should be Justice and XI card Strength, which is how Crowley has it in TBOT. If that's the case, then ignore the dubious double-loop argument. But also, that leaves Crowley's swap to stand alone. If that's the case, where's the justification for divorcing letter from sign when both the letter AND the sign are more fundamental than the Tarot? Obviously there was a zodiac long before the tarot, and there was a hebrew alef-bet long before the tarot, so why should the tarot take precedence?
You say that the zodiac sign can be divorced from the letter? Then why does Crowley keep Lamed with Libra, but put them BOTH with Justice in position VIII? If it was all about the zodiac/tarot lining up, he could have moved just the sign, not the letter, and left Teth with the VIII card and Lamed with the XI card.
Liber AL says only that Tzaddi is not the star. It says nothing at all about the zodiac.
-
In case I wasn't clear enough, basically I'm agreeing with Oliver P that tzaddi can be the Emperor, but that makes the Emperor Aquarius. And heh can be the Star, but that makes the Star Aries.
-
You've misunderstood several of my points - probably because I was hasty and brief, which in turn was because this has been covered much more thoroughly earlier in this thread and numerous other places.
You've misunderstood my intent concerning zodiac vs. Tarot cards. Of course the zodiacal attributions are more basic to the Qabalistic structure, and the Tarot cards were a slightly later representation of that. My main point, though, was that the zodiacal attributions of the Tarot cards are primary, and severing those is a mistake.
You misunderstood the importance I place on the Sepher Yetzirah. I regard it as fundamental.
However, in this one instance - the alleged correspondence of Heh and Tzaddi to Aries and Aquarius respectively - it is wrong. I can take a sidewise approach to justifying this by (again and redundantly) pointing out that The Zohar asserted that the correct attributions of Tzaddi were intentionally withheld and distorted until a later era; but, mostly, I simply assert that The Book of the Law indicated an error regarding Tzaddi and its attribution.
You mistake my meaning regarding Waite (again, because I was quite brief on a matter explained repeatedly in the past). Waite and Crowley both recognized that there was an apparent error of some sort reflected in the attribution of the number 8 to the Lamed-Libra card, and 11 to the Teth-Leo card. Waite thought the correction needed was to swap their numbers. This was his error. Crowley eventually realized that the real error was that the complementary reversal - Aries and Aquarius, lying opposite Libra and Leo - also needed to be made. With that true correction, all the numbers, zodiacal attributions, and the rest feel correctly in place.
@hreefold31 said
"IF the Waite swap is okay,"
That's the point... it's not OK. He goofed. He took the simpleton's solution and it was the wrong solution. The Leo-Teth card (Strength, Lust, whatever) is No. 11, not 8; and the Libra-Lamed card (Justice, Admustment, whatever) is No. 8, not 11.
"So I hear you saying that Waite was in error, thus the VIII card should be Justice and XI card Strength, which is how Crowley has it in TBOT."
It's how every pre-Waite source had it - not just Crowley. That also means that it's how Crowley and Waite both learned it in the Golden Dawn.
"If that's the case, then ignore the dubious double-loop argument."
Why? It's brilliant. More brilliant than even Crowley knew. It also encodes quite a number of additional things he didn't catch, including the fact that the diagram is a true Sidereal Pisces Age map. The horizontal split axis is Pisces-Virgo - the actual location of the equinox axis since 220 AD - and the apex and antapex of the diagram are Gemini and Sagittarius, the actual solstice locations in the same period. (And there's more besides solving the Tarot mystery, but that's a good start.)
-
"However, in this one instance - the alleged correspondence of Heh and Tzaddi to Aries and Aquarius respectively - it is wrong. I can take a sidewise approach to justifying this by (again and redundantly) pointing out that The Zohar asserted that the correct attributions of Tzaddi were intentionally withheld and distorted until a later era; but, mostly, I simply assert that The Book of the Law indicated an error regarding Tzaddi and its attribution.
You mistake my meaning regarding Waite (again, because I was quite brief on a matter explained repeatedly in the past). Waite and Crowley both recognized that there was an apparent error of some sort reflected in the attribution of the number 8 to the Lamed-Libra card, and 11 to the Teth-Leo card. Waite thought the correction needed was to swap their numbers. This was his error. Crowley eventually realized that the real error was that the complementary reversal - Aries and Aquarius, lying opposite Libra and Leo - also needed to be made. With that true correction, all the numbers, zodiacal attributions, and the rest feel correctly in place."
93
This was my issue with the swap. The attribution of Aquarius to ה and Aries to צ seems logical to me however the nature of the swap is not symmetrical.
The double loop diagram in and of itself seems correct - minus the tarot and hebrew letter attributions. The point of contention is this:
On the Leo-Libra swap the tarot number is swapped.
On the Aries-Aquarius swap the hebrew letter is swapped.On further meditation it seems that this asymmetry is implicit in the verse of Liber Legis: It states that "צ is not the Star", and so it is claimed outright that the hebrew letter/tarot attribution is swapped. This is already in opposition to the Leo-Libra swap, which retains the hebrew letter/tarot attribution.
Does it matter that this messes up the symmetry?
93, 93/93
P.S. Jim, I sent you a PM a few days ago and as yet you haven't replied- would it be better if I posted the question in the forum?
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"You've misunderstood my intent concerning zodiac vs. Tarot cards. Of course the zodiacal attributions are more basic to the Qabalistic structure, and the Tarot cards were a slightly later representation of that. My main point, though, was that the zodiacal attributions of the Tarot cards are primary, and severing those is a mistake."
Dwtw
I see what you're saying, but the point is that without the hebrew letters, you wouldn't have the zodiacal assignments to the tarot in the first place. The only reason the zodiac is spread all over the tarot and not assigned to 12 sequential cards is because the zodiac is spread all over the hebrew alef-bet. Someone wanted to map one series onto the other, thus you have the 9th card, Justice, being attributed to the 9th letter, Teth. And this looks wrong because of the tarot imagery.
So I understand that you want to keep that zodiac with the tarot, but it only got there because of hebrew in the first place. With that being said, later changes were made precisely because hebrew doesn't seem to map 'sequentially' onto the tarot@Jim Eshelman said
"However, in this one instance - the alleged correspondence of Heh and Tzaddi to Aries and Aquarius respectively - it is wrong. I can take a sidewise approach to justifying this by (again and redundantly) pointing out that The Zohar asserted that the correct attributions of Tzaddi were intentionally withheld and distorted until a later era; but, mostly, I simply assert that The Book of the Law indicated an error regarding Tzaddi and its attribution."
I can see that, but TBOTL only mentions the attribution to a card, not a zodiac sign. You have to presume that the sign must stay with a given card. That's fine, except that it doesn't happen in the case of VIII and XI.
@Jim Eshelman said
"You mistake my meaning regarding Waite (again, because I was quite brief on a matter explained repeatedly in the past). Waite and Crowley both recognized that there was an apparent error of some sort reflected in the attribution of the number 8 to the Lamed-Libra card, and 11 to the Teth-Leo card. Waite thought the correction needed was to swap their numbers. This was his error. Crowley eventually realized that the real error was that the complementary reversal - Aries and Aquarius, lying opposite Libra and Leo - also needed to be made. With that true correction, all the numbers, zodiacal attributions, and the rest feel correctly in place."
But the so-called complementary reversal doesn't complement anything if its not the same kind of reversal. Crowley has both the letter and sign for Libra and Leo switched, but he only has the letter for Aries and Aquarius switched.
"If that's the case, then ignore the dubious double-loop argument."
@Jim Eshelman said
"Why? It's brilliant. More brilliant than even Crowley knew. It also encodes quite a number of additional things he didn't catch, including the fact that the diagram is a true Sidereal Pisces Age map. The horizontal split axis is Pisces-Virgo - the actual location of the equinox axis since 220 AD - and the apex and antapex of the diagram are Gemini and Sagittarius, the actual solstice locations in the same period. (And there's more besides solving the Tarot mystery, but that's a good start.)"
I understand the sidereal aspect, but the double loop implies reversals that were not made. Yes, the signs for Leo and Libra were swapped, but the signs for Aquarius and Aries are still in their normal order, assuming that Heh simply becomes the Star and Aquarius, while Tzaddi becomes the Emperor and Aries. You've yet to demonstrate how this part of the 'double loop' is actually a loop. It's only a loop in the letter order, not the zodiac order. Obviously I'm not the only one to see this fact.
When you break it all down, you have three sequences. Assume the tarot is inviolable, and is correct as in TBOT. Then the hebrew letters are swapped in two places, for this 'double-loop'. But the zodiac order, (which is originally based on the SY attributions of hebrew, and is meaningless without that correlation) is only swapped in one place, not two.
My only essential point is that the zodiac should be swapped in two places also, or else there really is no double-loop.
If you don't want to swap the signs, then fine, but that means there is no double-loop, and you have an asymmetrical alignment. Which is fine by me. I don't see that as a big problem. The real problem underlying all this is the fact that people think in such a linear fashion, when the universe appears to be radial and not linear
And isn't the point of a loop, double or single, to show this very fact?Litlluw
RLG -
"On the Leo-Libra swap the tarot number is swapped.
On the Aries-Aquarius swap the hebrew letter is swapped. "In my imagination, it has more to do with learning the lesson of the question of the swap.
With Leo-Libra, the question becomes which is better to have at the center of the Tarot Tableau (BOTA terminology). Libra there suggests that balance connects the symmetries of the tableau - it's more intellectual. When Leo is there, it shows the method of equilibrating - it's more practical. Another image in my mind is that of "gas" and "brakes."
The symbolism of Case's Leo vs. Crowley's Leo also emphasizes either the stimulating or equilibrating power of Leo.
With Aries-Aquarius, the question of gender/activity vs passivity as the symbol of Self as it is calculated in the new aeon according to the Hebrew gematria and spellings of the passing aeon. Comparisons of each could be performed and compared to understand the current changes of the age.
So, in my mind at least, the leo 11 serves more to teach the symbolism of stimulating and manipulating psychic energy, libra 11 of equilibrating it.
A.C.'s Aquarius-Aries switch presents this same sort of idea for the purpose of providing a second version of meditation on the old Hebrew names.
Our minds and spirits are exercised and developed by the alternation of the opposites in our minds. Think of it as a chess game played through time by Initiates. If I make THIS change, what meditation will that provide for students? Once that takes root, what other change will serve as a meditation to break up the old way of thinking and revitalize the conversation.
One serves as the original in the mind, the other serves as the new meditation. The changes don't have to be completely consistent precisely because they are to be compared with the other version.
I see Perdurabo and Perseverantia serving as the two towers of Key/Atu 18, as we head further into our development in Aquarius.
I also see the two version of Tarot as a sort of machine or logic circuit, with the changes being expressions of either moving pieces or on/off switches.
Peace.
-
@PatchworkSerpen said
"This was my issue with the swap. The attribution of Aquarius to ה and Aries to צ seems logical to me however the nature of the swap is not symmetrical.
The double loop diagram in and of itself seems correct - minus the tarot and hebrew letter attributions. The point of contention is this:
On the Leo-Libra swap the tarot number is swapped.
On the Aries-Aquarius swap the hebrew letter is swapped."On both of them the numbers are switched. That is, by straight zodiac sequence, with the Tarot card numbers 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, and 18, one would expect (by straight sequence) that Heh is 4, Teth is 8, Lamed is 11, and Tzaddi is 17. But, instead, 4 and 17 are interchanged and 8 and 11 are interchanged. It's exactly the same.
What makes this confusing is that the Teth-Lamed issue was never out of whack (until Waite "broke" it). The early Kabbalists (or God, if you take the word of the early Kabbalists) had need to veil and obscure Tzaddi's meaning, but not that of Teth or Lamed. It was only the Heh=Aries and Tzaddi=Aquarius blind that had to be pierced; the other pair was always correct.
"Does it matter that this messes up the symmetry?"
See above. It doesn't. It perfects symmetry.
"P.S. Jim, I sent you a PM a few days ago and as yet you haven't replied- would it be better if I posted the question in the forum?"
I avoid looking at PMs whenever possible and keep wishing I could turn them off - but others like them a lot. But yes, if the matteri s appropriate for public posting, then I recommend that.
-
@hreefold31 said
"I can see that, but TBOTL only mentions the attribution to a card, not a zodiac sign. You have to presume that the sign must stay with a given card. That's fine, except that it doesn't happen in the case of VIII and XI."
See my post of a few minutes ago about 8 and 11. Yes, it all works just the same in both pairs.
I don't have to presume that the sign must stay with the card - Liber L. says that the Prophet will communicate this, and he has. It's res judicata, so to speak. The rest is all confirmation from experience.
"But the so-called complementary reversal doesn't complement anything if its not the same kind of reversal. Crowley has both the letter and sign for Libra and Leo switched, but he only has the letter for Aries and Aquarius switched."
No no no no no. You're missing the picture entirely.
I laid this out in one way in the post that probably will be right above this present answer; but let's try it even more explicitly. We won't start half-way through (where the Leo-Lamed pair was always correct until Waite "broke" it), but we'll start back at the beginning, as if we were designing the Tarot ourselves back in the 12th Century.
Write down the 12 Simple Letters: Heh, Vav, Zayin, Cheth, Teth, Yod, Lamed, Nun, Samekh, A'ayin, Tzaddi, Qoph.
Now, immediately under these, write the Tarot card numbers that are available for them: 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18.
This would be the expected attribution list if the pattern were linear. However, someone made the decision back at the beginning to represent this differently. (I have theories on why, but the Why doesn't really matter. Just the What.) The variance from linearity is exactly matched. Instead of Heh=4 and Tzaddi=17, switch them. Instead of Teth=8 and Lamed=11, switch them. It's exactly matched.
"When you break it all down, you have three sequences. Assume the tarot is inviolable, and is correct as in TBOT. Then the hebrew letters are swapped in two places, for this 'double-loop'. But the zodiac order, (which is originally based on the SY attributions of hebrew, and is meaningless without that correlation) is only swapped in one place, not two."
No. See above. The loop is done by plotting the Hebrew letters and the Tarot card numbers. You're confusing yourself by introducing the zodiac to it.
-
@Frater_AVV said
"With Leo-Libra, the question becomes which is better to have at the center of the Tarot Tableau (BOTA terminology)."
Thelemites have their own Tarot tableau implicit in Liber Tav. Change the arrangements: Instead of pulling Aleph out of the set, pull Tav out. Then put the cards (the pages of the Book of Thoth, so to speak) right to left and top to bottom; that is, Aleph, Beth, Gimel, etc. right-to-left across a top row, Cheth etc. on the second row, etc.
With this elegant, simple shift, the center becomes neither 8 nor 11, but 10 - The Wheel, or rota (R.O.T.A.) from which Tarot got its name - and it sits in the very center so that the entire rest of "the wheel of Tarot" spins about it.
"With Aries-Aquarius, the question of gender/activity vs passivity as the symbol of Self as it is calculated in the new aeon according to the Hebrew gematria and spellings of the passing aeon. Comparisons of each could be performed and compared to understand the current changes of the age."
Let's start with simple ones, then. Heh has, from the foundation of Kabbalah, been the letter of the Mother. End of story. (Supplementally, Tzaddi is a sound related etymologically to words pertaining to paternal authority.)
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
No. See above. The loop is done by plotting the Hebrew letters and the Tarot card numbers. You're confusing yourself by introducing the zodiac to it."Dwtw
haha, that's a good one. When my point all along has been that the zodiac is not switched to effect any balance. It's no wonder you think I'm misunderstanding you when you keep ignoring my main point.
I GET that the letters switch. That's obvious. Its the whole point of the exercise. The whole question is whether the zodiac goes with the letter or the card. And as you say the zodiac stays with the card. Right? except that when it stays with the card, it is out of order.
Isn't it true that Libra is VIII and Leo is XI in TBOT? Yes. And that is not zodiacal order. Since Aries stays with IV and Aquarius stays with XVII, that *is *zodiacal order. The two switches are not symmetrical.
Yes, the letter switch, by itself, is symmetrical. But divorcing it from the zodiac means that the zodiac is not symmetrical.
I'm not sure why you ignore the fact that there are indeed three sequences at work here. Of these, two of them have elements that switch; the letter sequence and the zodiac. The letter switches are symmetrical. Anyone can see that. But the zodiac signs that switch are not symmetrical, (unless the zodiac goes along with the letter).
Okay, I shan't waste anyone else's time here. There's no point in both of us continuing to repeat what should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence. Thanks for the discussion. Sorry if it was redundant for you.
Litlluw
RLG -
"Isn't it true that Libra is VIII and Leo is XI in TBOT? Yes. And that is not zodiacal order. Since Aries stays with IV and Aquarius stays with XVII, that is zodiacal order. The two switches are not symmetrical. "
Nope. In BOTA tarot, Leo is 8, Teth, and Libra is 11, Lamed.