Understanding Tarot Attributions
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
@Joshua said
"In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH). "
The tables in the back of The Book of Thoth are screwed up in various small ways, abnd there are numerous typos throughout the book. It was possibly his lead proofread book.
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
@Patrick Ossoski said
"
@Liber Legis, I:57 said
"All these old letters of my Book are aright; but ׊ is not the Star. This also is secret: my prophet shall reveal it to the wise."
"Thanks, never read this before -.- . . .
The picture on the Rider-Waite tarot draws an obvious connection between XVII and Aquarius.
http://www.learntarot.com/bigjpgs/maj17.jpg
http://0.tqn.com/d/altreligion/1/0/E/1/-/-/pentagram_and_human_body_agrippa1.jpg
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
Yes, but that didn't address the OP's question about why different publications that are based on the "Tzaddi is not the star" verse have different zodiac correspondences listed.
-
In some sources (Liber Theta, Liber 776 1/2), XVII is given as "Aquarius", but in the Book of Thoth XVII is given as Aries(but both give XVII as HEH).
I was wondering why this distinction was made/corrected from Crowley's, or is there intentional deception going on at one end or the other?
<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://heruraha.net/viewtopic.php?p=3184#p3184">viewtopic.php?p=3184#p3184</a><!-- l -->
<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://heruraha.net/viewtopic.php?p=5474#p5474">viewtopic.php?p=5474#p5474</a><!-- l -->
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better ð
Register Login