Qabalah & Astrology

[TheLoracular]

So different sources attribute the planetary energies to different sefirot in different ways.  A lot of more modern books throw the more modern planets up too.  I personally stick to just the classic seven and the three modalities; the three modalities are very much the concept of "how to divide up reality" that Jewish mysticism had in mind.  The sefirot spellings I'm using on this tree are the ones used at MyJewishLearning.  

I am so NOT an astrologer.   I have respect for astrologers and how they read charts.  I have studied a ton of psychological/spiritual astrology and how the planetary energies manifest inside the psyche vs. how the planets and zodiacal systems move about and interact.  Mars and Venus are not gold for any occult reason;  I cut & paste those astrological symbols from WIkipedia and they got input there that way.  

The Tree I'm including this time is one of my own.  The way the planets -- sefirot line up is conventional.   The way they line up on the paths is one of my personal truths.  I do it this way because to me, it simply makes sense that each sefira could emanate energy "upwards" and since there are exactly 7 vertical paths, those should very much be the planetary energies. 

I go back and forth on using the three modalities (Mutable shares the same symbol as Mercury the planet) for the supernal triangle because that's where all the core archetypes live or applying Cardinal to Binah-Hokmah,  Mutable to Gevurah-Hesed, Fixed to Hod-Netzach.

I skipped my personal zodiacal associations for this tree.   They do not hold up well on the conventual Kircher style tree.   I've been using the Natural Array glyph (often called the Gra Tree of Life) which has no Da'ath and is more of a mandala, represents creation as symmetrical rather than the shape it has in what is now the conventual glyph.  

But here are the planets and the modalities as a conversation starter.   There's no One True Right Way to do this  🙂    Just the way that is most useful to you, just like 100 authors will tell you 100 things about every tarot card but at the end of the day, the best insights will always be the ones that come as you stare at a card in a reading and things just flow from there 🙂

 

[blue_crow_laura]

Thanks for posting this! I have a question, though: you say the sephira attributions are traditional; to which tradition are you referring? 

 

I've never seen the quadruplicities attributed like this. Even traditional GD has Chokmah as fixed, Binah as cardinal (hence, Kings are fixed, Queens are cardinal, as we all learn early on.) You did say you don't use the modern attributes, with the outer planets, but I can't remember ever running across these. 

 

A little help...?

 

Edited to say: ...at least, I think what I am saying is true. I could absolutely be wrong! 🙂

Edited February 5, 2021 by blue_crow_laura
to clarify my position, i.e., I'm not certain!

[TheLoracular]

17 hours ago, blue_crow_laura said:

Thanks for posting this! I have a question, though: you say the sephira attributions are traditional; to which tradition are you referring? 

I want to say Qabalah as Regardie, Wang, Garreth Knight and such teach this but this afternoon?  I will go into the other room and look to see for sure!  Starting with Book T and moving down from there maybe.   So a better answer this evening 🙂

 

Quote

I've never seen the quadruplicities attributed like this. Even traditional GD has Chokmah as fixed, Binah as cardinal (hence, Kings are fixed, Queens are cardinal, as we all learn early on.) You did say you don't use the modern attributes, with the outer planets, but I can't remember ever running across these. 

 

A little help...?

 

Edited to say: ...at least, I think what I am saying is true. I could absolutely be wrong! 🙂

So ... look at the Tetragrammaton and how GD attributes the court cards there with the Kings as Yod/Fire, Queens as Heh/Water, Knights as Vau/Air, Pages as Final Heh/Earth.  So the King of Wands = "Fire of Fire" in the GD tradition and therefore not fixed in the slightest as far as my brain go and of all the Kings in the RWS deck?  He looks most ready to me to leap forward.    

The Tria Prima  are represented in Kabbalah ala the Sefer Yetzirah in a way so that  Shin (Fire) =Cardinal, Sulfur, in astrology/alchemy, as Mem (Water-Earth) = Fixed, Salt in astrology/alchemy and Alef (Air) = Mutable, Mercury (as substance vs. planet) in astrology/alchemy. 

Now look at all the traits associated with Chokmah and what kind of energy flows from Keter to Chokmah,  Now look at all the traits associated with Binah and what kind of energy flows from Keter to Binah.  And decide for yourself which is the more "masculine", "yang", "dynamic" and which is the more "feminine", "yin", "receptive" because Cardinal is the Yang and Fixed is the Yin.   

I always hesitate on using the word "correspondences" vs "associations" because I don't think the concepts of  Atziluth-Chokmah-Yod-Fire-Kings-Sulfur-Jungian Intuition-Wands-Yang-Masculinity are identical, but when I look at traits and ideas applied to all of them in different systems that show up in tarot and elsewhere?  I see a pattern where the same kind of idea is being expressed, just in different language and context.   Now, at this point I could be having HUGE cognitive bias and I just see what I want to see.  -nodnod- 

I also cringe with my new 2020+ sensibilities in applying for myself gender or biological sex into association strings but sometimes its just inescapable when talking about esoteric tarot.  And I respect people who still do.  Its been the way its been done practically forever.  But I've noticed a lot of tarot authors are moving away from it now.  
 

Edited February 5, 2021 by TheLoracular

[blue_crow_laura]

Okay, I think I see where you're coming from. But here's how I understand it, starting from a broad perspective. I'll leave aside the non-sephiroth paths for now, because without a good working ability to discuss the main sequence, we're just confusing each other with too much info, I think! 🙂 

 

On a very basic level, the series of ten sephira are a map of how potential energy manifests in the physical world. The right-hand column (pillar) is male, also positive in nature but rigid and sometimes tyrannical. The left-hand column (left pillar) is feminine, negative in nature but changeable and catalytic. The central column represents point of balance along the way. An energy or impulse or idea moves downward along a very specific path, in numerical order from One (Kether) to Ten (Malkuth.) There's no movement from Kether to Binah, not in the main sequence. It goes from Kether to Chokmah, from Chokmah  to Binah, and so on. 

 

So...an idea or impulse starts in Kether. It wants to manifest, and the only way it can go is to the right and down, to Chokmah. Chokmah is the first manifestation of an idea, all fiery and self-driven, still very energetic (these are the Twos and the Kings.) Two is a stable number itself, balanced, but the energy still wants to descend. It seeks balance.

 

So, it swings waay to the left, to Binah. Binah is the Threes and the Queens, which are inherently more unstable than the Twos, because the energy has had to make such a radical swing from far right to far left. It takes on a deep, even dark tone; it's a culmination but with a definite sense of...teetering, of something impending. 

 

So...the energy descends again and corrects itself, swinging wide back to the right, to Chesed. Not only has our idea or impulse swung back to the right, it's descended into a less-perfect, less-energetic state (the middle triad of 4,5 &6.) The fours are solid, fixed, since they're definitely on that fixed male side, and while they are stable, they can also be self-centered, too "stingy" or grasping.

 

And another wide swing back to five, to Geburah. This is a big swing to the negative, and the Fives reflect this; the Fives of the deck are often seen as the most negative of the cards. It's just the nature of the energy; it's had to break away from that radical grasping of the Four, and it goes too far.

 

And finally, though, the energy moves to the Six, to Tiphareth. It finds a point of balance at last! The Sixes are almost always positive cards, and this is why: the energy is at an almost perfectly balanced position, in the center of the Pillars and the center of the Tree. It's a good place to be. But...it can't say forever. There's still gravity!

 

So, the energy swings to the right again, to Netzach. The sevens are less ideal (this is the lowest triad, the furthest from Platonic perfection and the closest to the imperfect "real world") but still have some of the right-hand column's positive nature. The sevens are a first tentative move away from Tiphareth's balance, toward maybe "improving" things? But....

 

...no! Improvement efforts often muck things up even more! So there's another radical swing back to the Eights, to Hod. By the time the energy has made it all the way here, it's almost manifested; this course correction toward changeability is more neutral, in most cases.

 

And then it moves to Yesod and the Nines. This really is a point of culmination; the Tens, when the ideal actually manifests in Malkuth, is almost an afterthought. Both are in balance, but the nines hold pretty much all that's left of the original impulse or energy, at least in its ideal form. Once it goes to Malkuth, it's exhausted and ready to be recycled back into the Ain, the pre-Tree void.

 

This is how I was taught to align the Tree with the Minors, at least, and the Court Cards. The associations, if you will, with the right-hand upper triad are usually characterized as "the root of fire" or as Pluto, as far as I can tell, while Binah is associated with the Root of Water or Saturn (which never made much sense to me on a correspondence level...on the "Saturn is really feminine," sure, I agree.) The traditional astrological associations of the court cards follow from this: Queens are cardinal (Queen of Wands is Aries, Queen of Cups is Cancer, for instance) and Kings are fixed (King of Wands is Leo, and King of Cups is Scorpio.) 

 

I think we could both list all the associations in the world, if we want, and they'll all be different, but will they help us? Should we just pick a system and go with it? I have Hulse's "Eastern Mysteries" which gives associations from pretty much every system out there, and we could agree to pick one of them, the one that makes the most sense...?

 

 

Edited February 5, 2021 by blue_crow_laura
because I managed to misspell "energy" three times

[blue_crow_laura]

Okay, having considered this, I really feel like we're all sort of talking past one another on this, and bombarding each other with information. I know I want to further explore the Qabalah through its association with the Tarot, and that's a really big subject! Nobody agrees! Hooray! 😄 

So, in the interest of actually being able to talk like peers or friends do, I have a proposal: we pick one existing system, do our best to strip it down to its barest associative roots, and then talk about why we think it fits or doesn't. Then, after a week or two or four, we can move on to a different system and do the same.

 

I'd like to really understand the rationale behind the fact that, for instance, Thelema gives Kether to Pluto, Chokmah to Neptune, and Daath to Uranus, while Dion Fortune gives Kether to Neptune, etc.. To me, memorized correspondences don't mean much unless I've carefully considered the why. I may not agree, but at least I can understand! 

 

Here's a quote from said Fortune, just to illustrate what I hope to discuss. This is just an illustration; I'm fine looking at the non-modern systems too. But can we do them sort of one at a time? Systematically, lol?

 

Anybody on board?

 

Quote

If we carry the policy of the ancients a step further in assigning the planets to the Sephiroth in the order of their distance from the Sun, we shall attribute Uranus to Chokmah and Neptune to Kether. The nature of Uranus, as described by Dane Rudhyar, fits well on Chokmah, functioning in polarity with Binah, but traditionally Uranus is a space-god, and as such would naturally be attributed to Kether, nor is traditional symbolism lightly to be ignored. According to such symbolism, however, Neptune is the sea-god, and among the titles of Binah is that of ‘The Great Sea’. Nonetheless Binah is traditionally assigned to Saturn, and the symbolism works so well that the attribution can hardly be questioned. On the other hand, Neptune, though the Lord of Illusion in his lower aspect, and as such an infortune, is, according to Dane Rudhyar, the Lord of Ecstacy in his higher aspect, and the supreme ecstasy of Divine Union is given as the Spiritual Experience of Kether in the ‘Golden Dawn’ system.

 

Pluto is called by Dane Rudhyar the Sower of Celestial Seed, and Max Heindel in his system of esoteric astrology names him as the ruler of the subconscious levels of the mind. Astronomers have queried whether the comparatively small and very remote Pluto really derives from the Solar Nebula at all, or may have been drawn into its sphere of influence from outer space. All this fits well enough with the Qabalistic conception of Daath as a Sephirah on another plane of manifestation, as was taught by the ancient Qabalists, or as consciousness, as was taught in the ‘Golden Dawn’ in the days when I knew it. Those days were prior to the time when Freud’s doctrine of the unconscious mind had become a household word, and I think we should do no violence to the spirit of either Freud or the Qabalists if we equated Daath with subconsciousness instead of consciousness, for it is obvious that consciousness at such a primitive level as that of the Supernal Triad could hardly equate with what we know as consciousness today, but rather with what is for modern man subconsciousness.

 

I therefore give my vote for the attribution of Uranus to Chokmah, where its dynamic nature fits well as the opposite number of the static, feminine Binah, the Giver of Form, for the attribution of Neptune, Giver of Ecstasy, to Kether, the place where the vision of God face to face is seen*, and of the mysterious Pluto, ruler of the subconscious mind and Sower of Celestial Seed, to the equally mysterious Daath, wherein occurs the dawn of mind and the beginnings of the archetypal man, whose symbol is the five-pointed Star, its apex resting on Daath, its lower limbs on Netzach and Hod. 

 

Dion Fortune: The Outer Planets and the Tree of Life

Edited February 5, 2021 by blue_crow_laura

[TheLoracular]

@blue_crow_laura

So I will respond to all of that above tomorrow.  I'm looking forward to it.  I'm going to hold off for now though. 

This particular topic I'd started was just the astrological associations for the sefira and "one" way to look at the seven vertical paths along the three pillars 🙂   There's so much else to unpack.

But on your original questions, I made it through an hour of sitting in a normal chair at a normal table with paper books in front of me before the fibromyalgia said that was it for today.  The books I grabbed were:

Whitcomb's The Magician's Companion starting p. 159
Wang's The Qabalistic Tarot p. 55
The Ciceros' Self-Initiation of the Golden Dawn p. 61-70
Compton's Archetypes On The Tree of Life starting p. 18
Regardie's Garden of Pommegrantes starting p. 90

I also looked at Wirth's Tarot of the Magician and Papus' The Qabalah just to see but they don't provide planetary associations for the sefirot at all.  

All the authors attribute Kether as "Monad", Chokmah was "Supernal Father"/force and Binah as "Supernal Mother"/form.   So the archetypes of Yang as Chokmah, Yin as Binah are sound GD stuffs.

Regardie and Compton attribute Uranus to Chokmah.   Everyone attributes Saturn to Binah and no classical planet at all to Malkut.  Malkut is just planet Earth, the Four Elements. 

So the pulling of Saturn down to Malkut is a me thing and not a conventional thing.  Why to associate Saturn as Binah makes sense to me, but its not useful to me personally if I am working with the Supernal Triangle as  Yin-Yang-Wholeness in mental alchemy and the seven lower sefira as the planetary energies which are not the pure Yin or pure Yang, just a spectrum running from Tiparet as the most Yang/dynamic/forceful of the seven to Malkut as the most Yin/receptive/formative of the seven.  Binah is Yin expressed beyond the material to me, Chokmah as Yang expressed beyond the material to me; Tiparet is the least material of the lower 7 but still material sphere to me; Malkut is the most material of the 7 and literally physical reality, Assiah.    
----------
All five texts above attribute Saturn to Binah, Jupiter to Chesed, Mars to Geburah, Sun to Tiparet, Venus to Netzach, Mercury to Hod.

Tetragrammaton-wise, Four Suit-wise?  Chokmah is Yod/Fire/Kings (or Crowley's Princes); Binah is Heh/Water/Queens, Tiparet is Vau/Air/Knights (Crowley's Princes) according to those five authors though Wang was the only one to specifically link the court vs. just linking the other elemental/tetragrammatonic associations. 

And I look forward to more chat but that is the end of my capacity to sit and type today before I take some pain meds and nap.   But I enjoyed doing it and I have to script the next Tarot Esoterica episode tonight which is exactly this topic so it was a win-win for me doing it,   🙂

I will read your additional posts from today again with my fresh morning brain tomorrow! 

[TheLoracular]

17 hours ago, blue_crow_laura said:

Okay, having considered this, I really feel like we're all sort of talking past one another on this, and bombarding each other with information. I know I want to further explore the Qabalah through its association with the Tarot, and that's a really big subject! Nobody agrees! Hooray! 😄 

So, in the interest of actually being able to talk like peers or friends do, I have a proposal: we pick one existing system, do our best to strip it down to its barest associative roots, and then talk about why we think it fits or doesn't. Then, after a week or two or four, we can move on to a different system and do the same.

Now that I've slept and at the top of my coherency game (always an adventure lol)... 

By system, I think you mean a specific author?  I'm absolutely willing to do that.  Anything that would make things easier and less confusing or frustrating for others.  Would you like to pick one for us?  We could even do a chapter a week, sort of like a mini-book club. 

[blue_crow_laura]

6 hours ago, TheLoracular said:

Now that I've slept and at the top of my coherency game (always an adventure lol)... 

By system, I think you mean a specific author?  I'm absolutely willing to do that.  Anything that would make things easier and less confusing or frustrating for others.  Would you like to pick one for us?  We could even do a chapter a week, sort of like a mini-book club. 

 Yes, I think that would work. 

 

When I say "system" I guess I am calling out specific authors. I just sat in on a course this morning, in fact, on "Tarot Correspondences" where brought up the differences between Wirth, Case, and Crowley and how they attribute the Majors....and they're all basically Golden Dawn. Then there's the modern Kabbalistic systems that use the outer planets (I think you mentioned Jonathan Clark.) I tend to be most familiar with Crowley's system (through Book 777) and then the general RWS system that has been presented in most of our modern literature, such as B. Wen's Holistic Tarot.

 

Books I have that are might be candidates for starting with:

 

Wang's Qabalistic Tarot

Crowley's Book 777 and Book of Thoth

Pamela Eakin's Kabbalah and Tarot of the Spirit

 

Peripheral or possibly helpful books:

David Hulse's Key of it All (Eastern & Western Mysteries)

Duquette's Chicken Qabalah 

Kalpan's trans. of Sefer Yetzirah

 

and others that might be helpful occasionally.

 

I would also be willing to acquire something new (oh no, not an excuse to buy books! 🙂 ) if you have recommendations or have a better place in mind for starting.

 

 

[TheLoracular]

9 hours ago, blue_crow_laura said:

Books I have that are might be candidates for starting with:

 

Wang's Qabalistic Tarot

Crowley's Book 777 and Book of Thoth

Pamela Eakin's Kabbalah and Tarot of the Spirit

 

Peripheral or possibly helpful books:

David Hulse's Key of it All (Eastern & Western Mysteries)

Duquette's Chicken Qabalah 

Kalpan's trans. of Sefer Yetzirah

That is a fabulous list!  I think Wang is really near and dear to the subject so maybe we focus on that but use others as reference.  

I'm going to take a two day holiday from Net Life.  Several very close friends had some real tragedies hit this week so I'm going to take a couple of days to just be good support for them.   If you start something, I'll happily jump in when I get back on Tuesday-Wednesday. 

[blue_crow_laura]

10 hours ago, TheLoracular said:

I'm going to take a two day holiday from Net Life.  Several very close friends had some real tragedies hit this week so I'm going to take a couple of days to just be good support for them.   I

I'm sorry to hear that. Please, take all the time you need. 🙂

 

I probably won't be daily all the time either; I've taken on a few new tasks this month and I may also be away at times. I also hope other join in eventually too. 

[WildWoman71]

Quote

Okay, having considered this, I really feel like we're all sort of talking past one another on this, and bombarding each other with information. I know I want to further explore the Qabalah through its association with the Tarot, and that's a really big subject! Nobody agrees! Hooray!  

So, in the interest of actually being able to talk like peers or friends do, I have a proposal: we pick one existing system, do our best to strip it down to its barest associative roots, and then talk about why we think it fits or doesn't. Then, after a week or two or four, we can move on to a different system and do the same.

 

 

I agree, I think if we focus on the sephirot and not necessarily if we prescribe to working up the tree or down the tree we will be able to integrate what resonates with us and then we can apply our own perspectives of how it relates to the 22 pathways and Majors.

 

Let's talk the Triangle of Divinity...Kether Binah Chokma - we can all agree this is the top of the tree.  I have come to understand that this trinity will change based on our beliefs....the divine (personal God/Goddess), the divine self (me), the divine consciousness (collective).  ie.father, son, holy ghost; brahma, vishnu, shiva, maiden, mother crone.

 

Interestingly enough the human mind can be broken down into 3 areas too - Conscious (Binah), Sub Conscious (Chokma), Collective (Kether).

 

As I understand it Qabalah believes that there is only a direct link to Kether (Collective) through Chokma (subconscious) - and that everything starts with the mind in Kether - and our WILL and INTENTION once we have the thought/action moves into Binah for action - and manifestation - creating the idea.

[blue_crow_laura]

On 2/7/2021 at 9:10 AM, WildWoman71 said:

 

I agree, I think if we focus on the sephirot and not necessarily if we prescribe to working up the tree or down the tree we will be able to integrate what resonates with us and then we can apply our own perspectives of how it relates to the 22 pathways and Majors.

 

 

I agree! And the supernal triad, or triangle of divinity, seems like a good place to start. I do like all of your associations, and I can definitely see them fitting, at least into my understanding of the process.

 

This is the Qabalah & Astrology thread, though, and so maybe we could start another thread, something like "Theory of the Sephiroth" or something? And leave this one for how Qabalah and astrology overlap?

 

I'm at that place in my studies where I'm trying to line up the cosmological/philosophical theory behind the Kabbalah/Qabalah (both) with the systems that later Western esotericists have found within (or imposed upon) it. There are a lot of them, and since astrology is a cornerstone of Western esoteric theory, many of them try to interweave the philosophical theories of astrology with the Kabbalah to get...Qabalah, as studied and practiced by folks like the Golden Dawn, B.O.T.A., and lots of others. That's the thing about "correspondences" though: all these systems ( @TheLoracular also mentioned alchemy) have solid philosophical narratives underpinning them; getting them to line up is a serious challenge sometimes. 

 

I'm not a person easily satisfied with memorizing facts; I have to know why. Why is Binah paired with Saturn in System A, when Malkuth is given to Saturn in System B? I can make a great case for either (spolier: I like Saturn for Malkuth, and Neptune for Binah, but that's just my current opinion) but I myself learn the most when I can understand the rationale behind both. 

 

I think that's why I'm having some trouble with Wang's book. He's pretty "cookbooky" and just wants to tell you what's what, without actually illuminating the underlying philosophy very well. Am I maybe not giving him enough credit here?

 

[TheLoracular]

19 hours ago, blue_crow_laura said:

I'm at that place in my studies where I'm trying to line up the cosmological/philosophical theory behind the Kabbalah/Qabalah (both) with the systems that later Western esotericists have found within (or imposed upon) it. There are a lot of them, and since astrology is a cornerstone of Western esoteric theory, many of them try to interweave the philosophical theories of astrology with the Kabbalah to get...Qabalah, as studied and practiced by folks like the Golden Dawn, B.O.T.A., and lots of others. That's the thing about "correspondences" though: all these systems ( @TheLoracular also mentioned alchemy) have solid philosophical narratives underpinning them; getting them to line up is a serious challenge sometimes. 

You are in a fun place but oh gosh, is it ever daunting.  When you throw in the "This was written in 1650 (or 1850) by a devoutly spiritual person talking about both their own mystical experiences AND quoting from 20 different religious/philosophical texts"  the challenge is The Challenge!  LOL.  

 

19 hours ago, blue_crow_laura said:

I'm not a person easily satisfied with memorizing facts; I have to know why.

Same 🙂   And then I have to go "This is how they saw this part of the universe; how do I see it?  Okay, if its really different because I'm this 50 year old American woman living in 2020s and they were (example) a 50 year old English man living in London in 1890s.. what part of their personal truth still makes sense to me?  Where is the shared truth?" 

 

 

19 hours ago, blue_crow_laura said:

I think that's why I'm having some trouble with Wang's book. He's pretty "cookbooky" and just wants to tell you what's what, without actually illuminating the underlying philosophy very well. Am I maybe not giving him enough credit here?

I think "cookbooky" is a pretty good description.   I love the idea of a philosophy of the Sefirot thread.  For some more astrology though I'm going to throw in a second post here, grabbing what the Westcott translation of the Sefer Yetzirah had to say.  I think that is most meaningful for tarot.  

[TheLoracular]

My favorite online pdf of Westcott's translation.  This is all public domain. 

So the very first time the Sefer Yetzirah refers to the astrological planets it is in Chapter 4 and its in regard to the 7 double letters.   This section makes a lot of associations including the classical planets to these seven letters.   The first is straight from original text.  The second includes a note from Westcott that these aren't "original" associations.  I think he was translating from Saadia?  Maybe Gra?  I don't know off top of my head which were different but this laid the stage for how things were introduced for the seven Major Arcana the GD associated the double letters with, what helped influence those seven cards in how they were designed by the various GD authors/artists including Waite-Smith.

 

[blue_crow_laura]

First, a little update: a rather synchronistic opportunity to join a Tarot/Qabalah Pathworking group appeared a few days ago, and I jumped on it. I've added a new book or two into the mix, and now I've been working back and forth between J.M. Greer's Paths of Wisdom, Pamela Eakins' Tarot of the Spirit, and using Kaplan's translation of the Sepher Yetzirah and Duquette's Chicken Qabalah as reference and backup. I feel like my brain might leak out of my ears, but between these references, I feel like I might be getting glimpses of a structure I can grab hold of. 

 

Now I can add the translation you suggested too, and have another point of nuance to absorb. 🙂 

 

On 2/10/2021 at 8:28 AM, TheLoracular said:

So the very first time the Sefer Yetzirah refers to the astrological planets it is in Chapter 4 and its in regard to the 7 double letters.   This section makes a lot of associations including the classical planets to these seven letters.   The first is straight from original text.  The second includes a note from Westcott that these aren't "original" associations. {....but} helped influence those seven cards in how they were designed by the various GD authors/artists including Waite-Smith.
 

 

I see. I think it's these second attributions that keep tripping me up. I've made a moderately deep study of astrology, and these aren't the pairings that I think many astrologers would make. I can't quotes sections of the images, so I'll make a list.

 

Wescott's trans. SY:

 

Beth: Wisdom/Folly=Moon

Gimel: Health (Riches/Poverty?)=Mars

Daleth: Fertility/Solitude=Sun

Kaph: Life/Death=Venus

Peh: Power/Servitude=Mercury

Resh: Peace/War,Evil=Saturn

Tau: Beauty (Grace/Indignation?)=Jupiter

 

 

So, given the traditional associations of the classical planets, I'd probably do a quick back-of-the-napkin attribution thusly:

 

Beth: Wisdom/Folly=Moon

Gimel: Health (Riches/Poverty?)=Mercury

Daleth: Fertility/Solitude=Jupiter

Kaph: Life/Death=Sun

Peh: Power/Servitude=Saturn

Resh: Peace/War,Evil=Mars

Tau: Beauty (Grace/Indignation?)=Venus

 

You could certainly argue a few of them; for instance, the "riches/poverty" dichotomy could also be Jupiter or even Venus, for instance. But Mars? I don't see it.

 

I wonder if the original author of the second part of this had actually studied much theoretical astrology. There's no reason that ancient authors weren't just as prone as we are to hand-waving and making "I'm certain!" statements from shaky background knowledge. Waite and other GD authors certainly had a decent background in it, though, and for them to carry this forward says something. Could it be blinded? (Though, on the other hand, I think at least some attributions have shifted among esoteric scholars, as more eyes fall on the pages and notice the discrepancies. It might just depend on how willing you are to question the Word of the Ancients, if you know what I mean.) 

 

For now, I'm going forward with the attitude that there's something to learn here, even from (maybe especially from?) attributions that don't make complete sense to me. But I plan to argue! My marginalia will be bold and copious! There will be extra exclamation marks!! 😀