The stones of Chokmah and Binah
-
Why did Crowley name the Star Ruby after the stone of Chokmah and the Star Sapphire after the stone of Binah?
[edit: simplified the question]
-
@he atlas itch said
"Why did Crowley name the Star Ruby after the stone of Chokmah and the Star Sapphire after the stone of Binah?
[edit: simplified the question]"
I don't know that he had this exact equation in mind, even though he knew those attributions.
A star sapphire actually has a six-rayed star in its heart. (Often star diopside passes for star sapphire - if you see one without the six-rayed star, it's likely star diopside.)
I suspect the mental process was something like: Pentagram, Mars force etc., red stone, red star, star red... OK, got it. And a star sapphire has a hexagram in it. Good enuf.
-
Interestingly, a star ruby also has six rays, since ruby and sapphire are both the same stone, corundum. So the mapping is not 100%.
-
@AvshalomBinyamin said
"Interestingly, a star ruby also has six rays, since ruby and sapphire are both the same stone, corundum. So the mapping is not 100%."
I've seen star rubies with different ray structures but, yes, a common one is 6. - As you infer, this isn't a careful differentiation. I think it would be misleading to try to read anything too deep into the naming.
-
Yes, you could feasibly have a 3 point star ruby (or sapphire).
-
Crowley did mention the Star Ruby was the “new and more elaborate” version of the LBRP and the Star Sapphire was the “real and perfect” version of the LRH, but these comments are not explained. He comments "the Star Sapphire corresponds with the Star Ruby...36 being the square of 6, as 25 is of 5. This...gives the real and perfect Ritual of the Hexagram."
Given the SR and SS first appear in 1913 at Cefalu, after Crowley crossed the Abyss, would it be correct to say:
-
The LBRP + LRH (invoking) sequence is the Old Aeon version whereas the SR + SS sequence is the New Aeon version?
-
The LBRP + LRH (invoking) aims at internal union with one’s HGA whereas the SR + SS sequence aims at external union with one’s Scarlet Woman?
-
-
@he atlas itch said
"Given the SR and SS first appear in 1913 at Cefalu, after Crowley crossed the Abyss"
It wasn't at Cefalu - that was years later - but yes, was after he was 8=3.
"would it be correct to say:
- The LBRP + LRH (invoking) sequence is the Old Aeon version whereas the SR + SS sequence is the New Aeon version? "
Perhaps theoreticaslly. It should, though, be taken into consideration that it is the traditional Pentagram Ritual (and not the SR) that Crowley used the rest of his life, and which he recommended to students in California in his last decade.
"2. The LBRP + LRH (invoking) aims at internal union with one’s HGA whereas the SR + SS sequence aims at external union with one’s Scarlet Woman?"
I wouldn't draw that conclusion. The last part doesn't match my experience at all (quite the opposite). - And why would you see the Scarlet Woman relationship as external? (I'm guessing that you're thinking of it as a specific female instead of a Briatic archetype.)
-
Star Sapphire:
Hi Jim - the description of the Star Sapphire does seem to be a thinly veiled description of sex magic.Crowley’s comment “the former being intelligible to all nations who employ Arabic figures” suggests the ritual is designed for either two men to fellate each other in the 69 position or, which I find more likely, one (Set Triumphant) fellates the other (Baphomet) in the center of the circle and consumes the sacrament. Presumably the ritual also works for a man and woman (Magick Rood versus Mystic Rose) notwithstanding his reference to “Arabic figures”.
www.thelemapedia.org/index.php/The_Star_Sapphire
www.hermetic.com/osiris/analysisstarsapphire.htmSo, all things taken into consideration, Crowley’s reference to the Star Sapphire being the “real and perfect” hexagram suggests reference to an actual sexual act that leaves no seed or progeny behind and is thus “perfect”. That noted, however, I have no doubt the Star Sapphire is equally capable of triggering mystical union with one's HGA.
Star Ruby:
I am curious why Crowley did not use the Star Ruby and preferred the LBRP instead. A comparison of the LBRP and SR suggests the following points:-
The SR uses Greek and Chaldean god forms. The Chaldean Oracles place supremacy on the element of Fire (“When thou shalt behold that holy and formless Fire shining flashingly through the depths of the Universe: Hear thou the Voice of Fire“) and in this aspect it mirrors the Yod of the Tetragrammaton ( cf. I Kings 18:36-38 ). But if so, why did Crowley replace the Hebrew divine names of the LBRP with Greek and Babylonian divine names in the SR? The only reason I can think of is that he wanted to create a banishing ritual that was free of any taint of the Old Aeon - following his experience from the Bou Saada Working and Vision and Voice.
-
The LBRP moves clockwise and therefore an invocation rather than true banishing. The SR moves counter-clockwise and therefore is a true banishing.
-
The color red and number 5 of the SR connect it with Geburah/Mars, but on another, not so obvious level, it seems to link with Chokmah and Had. The phallic and aggressively negating character of the SR suggest activation of True Will. This interpretation is reinforced by the fact the names used in the four quarters (Therion, Nuit, Babalon, Hadit) are all associated with the Supernals/New Aeon and sexually pair off.
If you disagree with the above interpretation, I would be interested in your critique.
-
-
@he atlas itch said
"Hi Jim - the description of the Star Sapphire does seem to be a thinly veiled description of sex magic.
Crowley’s comment “the former being intelligible to all nations who employ Arabic figures” suggests the ritual is designed for either two men to fellate each other in the 69 position or, which I find more likely, one (Set Triumphant) fellates the other (Baphomet) in the center of the circle and consumes the sacrament. Presumably the ritual also works for a man and woman (Magick Rood versus Mystic Rose) notwithstanding his reference to “Arabic figures”."
That comment isn't in Chapter 36 of The Book of Lies or in other published versions of Liber 36 (The Star Sapphire). It's in Chapter 69. Now, you can equate those two if you want, but, in any case, it doesn't say anything about the particular question that started this thread. (The Thelemapedia.org link you gave adds supplemental information beyond the actual text of The Star Sapphire, so you're responding to someone's commentary as if it were the original document.)
"I am curious why Crowley did not use the Star Ruby and preferred the LBRP instead."
I can't speak for him (and my own opinions would be irrelevant to your question).
"If you disagree with the above interpretation, I would be interested in your critique."
I've posted a multi-part analysis of The Star Ruby both in Black Pearl and elsewhere on this forum.