Different Thoth Correspondences and Attribution Methods

[Flegetanis]

As printed in The Book Of Thoth, that double loop in the Zodiac makes no sense. It's like Crowley tried to make two corrections where only one was needed. His self-defeating solution is a weird proof that 2=0, but I'm not sure about 0=2.

Tzadi may not be The Star, but it's certainly Aquarius. You can swap cards all you like, but you can't just change the attributions in Sefer Yetzirah around to fit an aesthetic preference. You can't change both correspondences; pick one. 

 

"The galley proofs of my book look okay, but $ is not the Star;   
I think it's a squashed bug.
Leave it in; it will keep people guessing."

[Aeon418]

10 hours ago, Flegetanis said:

You can swap cards all you like, but you can't just change the attributions in Sefer Yetzirah around to fit an aesthetic preference. 

 

Of course you can. The history of the Sepher Yetzirah is proof of that, with multiple attributions being changed as different revisions and recensions of the text were produced by a variety of editors over the course of several centuries. 

[Flegetanis]

1 hour ago, Aeon418 said:

 

Of course you can. The history of the Sepher Yetzirah is proof of that, with multiple attributions being changed as different revisions and recensions of the text were produced by a variety of editors over the course of several centuries. 

 

Well, actually, the only attributions that change from version to version are the specific correspondences of the planets to the 7 Double letters. The division of the letters, and the elemental & zodiacal correspondences are pretty well fixed. However, the actual placement of the paths - connecting the sefirot - can vary, specifically in regards to the 12 diagonal paths; there are at least three different functional Jewish versions! So, in that regard, I often joke that Tzadi is The Star, but it's definitely not Path 28.

[Scandinavianhermit]

2 hours ago, Aeon418 said:

 

Of course you can. The history of the Sepher Yetzirah is proof of that, with multiple attributions being changed as different revisions and recensions of the text were produced by a variety of editors over the course of several centuries. 

 

37 minutes ago, Flegetanis said:

 

Well, actually, the only attributions that change from version to version are the specific correspondences of the planets to the 7 Double letters. The division of the letters, and the elemental & zodiacal correspondences are pretty well fixed. However, the actual placement of the paths - connecting the sefirot - can vary, specifically in regards to the 12 diagonal paths; there are at least three different functional Jewish versions! So, in that regard, I often joke that Tzadi is The Star, but it's definitely not Path 28.

YES! THIS is something I rant about repeatedly. Everyone should stick to any system they find useful, but everyone should at least be aware of, that there exist several alternative systems, either because of text-critical variants in the past or intentional tampering by one or another individual or organisation more recently. Very well done, @Flegetanis, to make these diagrams available. I haven't understood why Westcott, the translator of Sefer Yetzirah via the Latin translation by Rittangel, personally used another set of correspondences than the ones found in his translation. Westcott influenced Crowley, of course.

[Aeon418]

40 minutes ago, Flegetanis said:

Well, actually, the only attributions that change from version to version are the specific correspondences of the planets to the 7 Double letters.

 

Yes, that's correct. But the precedent is still there. Despite the fact that only one particular set of attributions was repeatedly altered by different editors, it demonstrates that alterations can be made. However, I am aware that this is not a popular view these days, where it seems the Sepher Yetzirah must now be "set in amber" with no further alterations allowed.

 

Where does this leave the version of the Sepher Yetzirah favoured by the Golden Dawn? The planetary attributions they used have absolutely no provenance outside the modern Western Mystery Tradition. Does this matter? Well, I am sure it is viewed as sacrilegious by some traditionalists and a complete invalidation of anything related to the Golden Dawn, including Crowley. But in my opinion, all versions of the Sepher Yetzirah are synthetic constructs and self-referential symbolic maps. But they are not the territory itself. Maps and models can be altered and refined simply because they are intellectual constructs and not the reality they presume to represent.

 

Quote

Crowley - "But discussions of the details of purely imaginary qualities are frivolous and may be deadly. For the great danger of this magical theory is that the student may mistake the alphabet for the things which the words represent."

     

[Flegetanis]

2 hours ago, Aeon418 said:

 

Yes, that's correct. But the precedent is still there. Despite the fact that only one particular set of attributions was repeatedly altered by different editors, it demonstrates that alterations can be made. However, I am aware that this is not a popular view these days, where it seems the Sepher Yetzirah must now be "set in amber" with no further alterations allowed.

 

Where does this leave the version of the Sepher Yetzirah favoured by the Golden Dawn? The planetary attributions they used have absolutely no provenance outside the modern Western Mystery Tradition. Does this matter? Well, I am sure it is viewed as sacrilegious by some traditionalists and a complete invalidation of anything related to the Golden Dawn, including Crowley. But in my opinion, all versions of the Sepher Yetzirah are synthetic constructs and self-referential symbolic maps. But they are not the territory itself. Maps and models can be altered and refined simply because they are intellectual constructs and not the reality they presume to represent.

 

     

 

Well, I have found that the HOGD attributions work, after a lot of trial & error. There actually is a logic to it, but the irony is that it doesn't make sense with the Athanasius Kircher Path attributions. The whole "Tzaddi is not the Star" thing has just never worked for me. The "double loop" as printed is a double negative, and doesn't correct anything. If one only swaps the letters between the cards, with IV: The Emperor as Tzadi and Aquarius, and XVII: The Star as Heh and Aries, there's no problem. But if you switch the attributions of the letters and the Arcana associated with the letters, it makes no sense. In that regard, no; changing the attributions has no precedent or merit.

 

Another way of saying it is that the astrological attributions follow the letters, not the Tarot Arcana. If you just swap letters, the astrological correspondence moves with the letter, and it works on the Double Loop. If you change both, it defeats the whole purpose of the Double Loop. So it has nothing to do with the "historical" aspect of versions & editions of Sefer Yetzirah. 

 

Edited February 28, 2024 by Flegetanis

[Flegetanis]

3 hours ago, Scandinavianhermit said:

 

YES! THIS is something I rant about repeatedly. Everyone should stick to any system they find useful, but everyone should at least be aware of, that there exist several alternative systems, either because of text-critical variants in the past or intentional tampering by one or another individual or organisation more recently. Very well done, @Flegetanis, to make these diagrams available. I haven't understood why Westcott, the translator of Sefer Yetzirah via the Latin translation by Rittangel, personally used another set of correspondences than the ones found in his translation. Westcott influenced Crowley, of course.

 

The Path system I use is very similar to the GR"A version, with one difference that can be found on the AR"I Tree of Life. All arrayed on the more traditional Tree of Life diagram.

[Aeon418]

42 minutes ago, Flegetanis said:

The whole "Tzaddi is not the Star" thing has just never worked for me. The "double loop" as printed is a double negative, and doesn't correct anything.

 

Believe me, I know where you are coming from. I've been down these same rabbit holes myself and got twisted in knots But eventually I came to realise that the never ending quest to find intellectually satisfying patterns and symmetries was just a game of juggling meaningless tokens that were rooted in nothing but thin air. Mere castles in the sky or mental masturbation. With that in mind I took to heart a quote from Liber 418. 

 

Quote

28th Aethyr: "....when thou hast understood thou mayest make symbols; but by playing child's games with symbols thou shalt never understand."

 

In the context of the 28th Path, Crowley assigned various practices. Whether it be the raising of Kundalini energy (Yesod to Netzach) or the fixing of willed desire within the subconscious (Netzach to Yesod), you can gain actual practical experience and then decide which Tarot symbol - The Star or the Emperor - these experiences are best symbolised by.     

[Misterei]

I never got the whole Emperor and Star thing. Crowley had his obsessions with the Trumps, so did Waite, and Eteilla before them. I've come to a personal belief that this is a feature not a bug. You can ALMOST make Tarot fit into some kind of perfect system ... but it never quite goes. There's always "something" that doesn''t quite fit.

 

Feature not a bug 😉 Part of the magic. Part of the mystery and romance that makes tarot compelling to me even after 45 years. I'll never get "all of it" and that's the joy. But it's fun to watch Crowley trying. Fun to see Tarot made even Crowley bang his head against a wall.

Edited February 29, 2024 by Misterei

[Aeon418]

1 hour ago, Misterei said:

I never got the whole Emperor and Star thing. 

 

One way that I have come to view it is that Emperor represents an early stage of "illumination" in which the source of the spiritual Light (L.V.X.) appears to come from a source other than, and external to one's self. While the Star is a later stage in which it is realised that the source of the Light was oneself all along. Although the whole notion of "Self" must be realized as something far more universal or cosmic than the little ego we routinely imagine we are. "Every man and every woman is a star."

 

Just like the loop of the Adjustment and Lust cards, the Emperor and the Star represent different aspects of the same thing. However, mapping an interrelated process onto a linear sequence like Tarot can result in what 'appear' to be contradictions.

 

Beyond that there is the incredibly deep subject of Thelemic Messianism that has been covered in detail by J. Daniel Gunther. He contends that the correspondences and the card swap aren't the real secret, they merely point to it.

 

Quote

J. Daniel Gunther: "It indicates a vital point of doctrine which has been, and still remains, closely guarded. It is this underlying doctrine which is truly “revealed to the wise,” not the correspondences which shield it and, ultimately, serve to reveal it. Crowley himself could never discuss this openly in print, for he was bound by a certain Oath that touches directly upon the central mystery. Even concerning those things not bound by Oath, he remained for the most part silent."

 

Edited February 29, 2024 by Aeon418

[Flegetanis]

12 hours ago, Aeon418 said:

 

Beyond that there is the incredibly deep subject of Thelemic Messianism that has been covered in detail by J. Daniel Gunther. He contends that the correspondences and the card swap aren't the real secret, they merely point to it.

 

 

Where's the quote from? I haven't made it far into The Angel & The Abyss.

 

Part of the problem is that I don't even use that Path system, I sped right through Initiation In The Æon of the Child, but it's slow going, now. However, it has been helping me develop my own Grade degree rituals.

[Flegetanis]

18 hours ago, Aeon418 said:

 

Believe me, I know where you are coming from. I've been down these same rabbit holes myself and got twisted in knots But eventually I came to realise that the never ending quest to find intellectually satisfying patterns and symmetries was just a game of juggling meaningless tokens that were rooted in nothing but thin air. Mere castles in the sky or mental masturbation. With that in mind I took to heart a quote from Liber 418. 

 

 

In the context of the 28th Path, Crowley assigned various practices. Whether it be the raising of Kundalini energy (Yesod to Netzach) or the fixing of willed desire within the subconscious (Netzach to Yesod), you can gain actual practical experience and then decide which Tarot symbol - The Star or the Emperor - these experiences are best symbolised by.     

 

"I came to realise that the never ending quest to find intellectually satisfying patterns and symmetries was just a game of juggling meaningless tokens that were rooted in nothing but thin air. Mere castles in the sky or mental masturbation."

 

Don't take this the wrong way, but that's why I don't even bother reconciling it. "I think it's a squashed bug; leave it in, it will keep them guessing." 😆

[Aeon418]

1 hour ago, Flegetanis said:

Where's the quote from? I haven't made it far into The Angel & The Abyss.

 

It's in Initiation in the Aeon of the Child, chapter 5 - Christeos Luciftias.

 

In the entire book, chapter 5 is probably the one can't be skimmed or speed read. The chain of symbolism laid out by Gunther that describes the nature of V.V.V.V.V. is quite dense and draws upon many different threads within the Holy Books of Thelema that were received by Aleister Crowley.

 

Since the book was first published in 2009 I've seen some strange interpretations and mis-readings of this chapter. With some people claiming that Gunther is trying to hint that he is V.V.V.V.V.. And others claiming that Messianism plays no part in Thelema. And this is despite the messianic language used in the Holy Books and foundational writings such as Liber XXXIII, An account of A.'.A.'., where V.V.V.V.V. is described in blatantly messianic terms. 

 

Ultimately I feel that some readers of the book have missed an important symbolic link. While the Star may indeed by the symbol of Messiah in the New Aeon, it must also be remembered that "Every man and every woman is a star."  

 

Incidentally, Gunther briefly mentions the card swap in his second book, The Angel and the Abyss (p.214), in the context of Crossing the Abyss.

Edited February 29, 2024 by Aeon418

[Aeon418]

1 hour ago, Flegetanis said:

Don't take this the wrong way, but that's why I don't even bother reconciling it.

 

That's fine. But if you scrap the interpretive framing device of interlinked associations and correspondences, usually going by the catch-all term "Tradition," nothing has really changed. Except you now have to build up a whole new chain of associations all over again, just framed in different ways to say exactly the same things as before. You can do pretty much the same thing by applying the Tarot cards at random to the Tree of Life. Frater Achad did this after a fashion when he turned the correspondences up-side-down. Can this be done? Sure it can. But you've got to re-frame everything to accommodate this new symbolic language. But that begs the question: Why re-invent the wheel?   

Edited February 29, 2024 by Aeon418

[Flegetanis]

1 hour ago, Aeon418 said:

 

That's fine. But if you scrap the interpretive framing device of interlinked associations and correspondences, usually going by the catch-all term "Tradition," nothing has really changed. Except you now have to build up a whole new chain of associations all over again, just framed in different ways to say exactly the same things as before. You can do pretty much the same thing by applying the Tarot cards at random to the Tree of Life. Frater Achad did this after a fashion when he turned the correspondences up-side-down. Can this be done? Sure it can. But you've got to re-frame everything to accommodate this new symbolic language. But that begs the question: Why re-invent the wheel?   

 

You do realize I'm using path attributions that are older than the Zohar, right? I'm not changing anything around. I'm far more conservative than you may realize.

[Flegetanis]

6 hours ago, Aeon418 said:

 

It's in Initiation in the Aeon of the Child, chapter 5 - Christeos Luciftias.

 

In the entire book, chapter 5 is probably the one can't be skimmed or speed read. The chain of symbolism laid out by Gunther that describes the nature of V.V.V.V.V. is quite dense and draws upon many different threads within the Holy Books of Thelema that were received by Aleister Crowley.

 

Since the book was first published in 2009 I've seen some strange interpretations and mis-readings of this chapter. With some people claiming that Gunther is trying to hint that he is V.V.V.V.V.. And others claiming that Messianism plays no part in Thelema. And this is despite the messianic language used in the Holy Books and foundational writings such as Liber XXXIII, An account of A.'.A.'., where V.V.V.V.V. is described in blatantly messianic terms. 

 

Ultimately I feel that some readers of the book have missed an important symbolic link. While the Star may indeed by the symbol of Messiah in the New Aeon, it must also be remembered that "Every man and every woman is a star."  

 

Incidentally, Gunther briefly mentions the card swap in his second book, The Angel and the Abyss (p.214), in the context of Crossing the Abyss.

 

Well, I've got all three of them here, somewhere. I'll have to restart at Paroketh! 😜 As a Jewish Thelemite, I definitely see a strain of Messianism in the Holy Books, and it's quite possible that a good part of whatever affinity I have for Gunther - and I don't have any problem with him (Facebook killed the O.T.O.) - can be due to this. And, in line with your point about the Star, the trick is that everyone is the Messiah. If a Thelemite is waiting on someone else, they might want to reread Liber AL; they definitely missed something. That's how I see the Aeon playing out, anyway.

Edited February 29, 2024 by Flegetanis

[Flegetanis]

10 minutes ago, Flegetanis said:

As a Jewish Thelemite....

 

Just yesterday, I wrote somewhere else:

 

"Did you ever notice the Torah is all in future tense? No one's actually done it yet. We all have to 'Pass the River' into our own 'Promised Land.' My Thelemic reading of the Torah (& Na"Kh) is a beautiful allegory for the Knowledge & Conversation of a whole bunch of HGAs."

Edited February 29, 2024 by Flegetanis

[Aeon418]

On 2/29/2024 at 6:00 PM, Flegetanis said:

You do realize I'm using path attributions that are older than the Zohar, right? I'm not changing anything around. I'm far more conservative than you may realize.

 

Yes, I understand that. But mere path attributions, irrespective of how old they are, are not what I mean by 'tradition.'

 

Looking at the diagram you posted above we can see the lower section of the Tree of Life, with the spheres Netzach, Hod, Yesod, and Malkuth. And then there are the connecting Paths in-between that express the dynamics and energetic relationships between the sephiroth. So far, so good. The Golden Dawn, Crowley and yourself are all in agreement.

 

Now lets focus on one individual section of the diagram. We will use the Path between Netzach and Malkuth as our example. The Golden Dawn, and therefore Crowley, chose to express the dynamics of this Path through the symbolism of Atu XVIII - The Moon. To this end they also developed a 'tradition' of associated symbolic links that reinforce this correspondence. You, on the other hand, have chosen to represent the dynamics between Netzach and Malkuth through the imagery of Atu XVII - The Star. This obviously necessitates the creation of an entirely new 'tradition' of associated links, possibly from the ground up.

 

But in both cases the Path between Netzach and Malkuth is the common denominator. The only difference is the interpretive framing mechanism applied to the Path to express the dynamics of this common relationship.

 

Objectively there is no right or wrong way. But I fail to see the practical utility of adopting an entirely new system of classification in the absence of a supporting tradition. Unless, of course, interested parties approach you for personal instruction.

 

Quote

Robert Wang: "A system, whether cult, religion or meditative program, is an access pattern into inner worlds, one agreed upon and strengthened by generations of use. It is a path into the unknown paved with culturally-determined, though universally applicable, symbols. And within any given school, the symbols may be manipulated and variously applied. Certainly, I have no quarrel with those who have virtually turned the Tree of Life upside down with their combinations and permutations of ideas. But to do so mitigates the powerful group effort called "tradition," and potentially creates a new Path. Expressed in another way: It is the agreement over time on the meaning of a set of symbols which makes a system a Path. To this end I have given only those attributions which are now commonly accepted. This is not to imply that such attributions are immutably correct, rather to suggest that their accepted interlock is of greater immediate utility to the student than some of the many divergences."

 

Edited March 2, 2024 by Aeon418
Typo

[gregory]

You know - I have read Liber T, Wang, Snuffin, DuQuette (Thoth and Chicken Quabalah) and Banzhaf.  (And Arrien, but - well, just don't as also Ziegler.) And I have followed Aeon418  and a couple of other actual Thoth scholars I respect on many forums for many years.

 

I really think Crowley's own writings are the way to go; why do people have this need to superimpose their own stuff on it ? Hit me - but he created it; I actually think he knew what he was doing.

Edited March 2, 2024 by gregory

[Flegetanis]

21 hours ago, Aeon418 said:

 

Yes, I understand that. But mere path attributions, irrespective of how old they are, are not what I mean by 'tradition.'

 

Looking at the diagram you posted above we can see the lower section of the Tree of Life, with the spheres Netzach, Hod, Yesod, and Malkuth. And then there are the connecting Paths in-between that express the dynamics and energetic relationships between the sephiroth. So far, so good. The Golden Dawn, Crowley and yourself are all in agreement.

 

Now lets focus on one individual section of the diagram. We will use the Path between Netzach and Malkuth as our example. The Golden Dawn, and therefore Crowley, chose to express the dynamics of this Path through the symbolism of Atu XVIII - The Moon. To this end they also developed a 'tradition' of associated symbolic links that reinforce this correspondence. You, on the other hand, have chosen to represent the dynamics between Netzach and Malkuth through the imagery of Atu XVII - The Star. This obviously necessitates the creation of an entirely new 'tradition' of associated links, possibly from the ground up.

 

But in both cases the Path between Netzach and Malkuth is the common denominator. The only difference is the interpretive framing mechanism applied to the Path to express the dynamics of this common relationship.

 

Objectively there is no right or wrong way. But I fail to see the practical utility of adopting an entirely new system of classification in the absence of a supporting tradition. Unless, of course, interested parties approach you for personal instruction.

 

 

 

You're not the first Thelemite with whom I've had this conversation. One of the most obstinate, yes. 😉 In regards to this exact situation, Lon DuQuette merely said "grownups can have chocolate and vanilla." I think you're way too invested in this.

However, my only innovation is the addition of Tarot to a set of path attributions that can be traced back at least as far as the Saadya Gaon in the 10th Century. If you're familiar with Sefer Yetzirah, you should be able to easily recognize how and why the Paths were drawn where they were. That set of Path attributions certainly is Tradition, in the very original sense of the word, 

קבלה

 

Edited March 3, 2024 by Flegetanis
finish senstence

[Flegetanis]

20 hours ago, gregory said:

You know - I have read Liber T, Wang, Snuffin, DuQuette (Thoth and Chicken Quabalah) and Banzhaf.  (And Arrien, but - well, just don't as also Ziegler.) And I have followed Aeon418  and a couple of other actual Thoth scholars I respect on many forums for many years.

 

I really think Crowley's own writings are the way to go; why do people have this need to superimpose their own stuff on it ? Hit me - but he created it; I actually think he knew what he was doing.

 

You see, the irony for me is just who is superimposing "their own stuff" on this? I'm working with a system I learned in Rabbinical school; it goes back at least to the 10th century. All I did was add the extra layer of Tarot. The entire Golden Dawn system is built on a foundation constructed by a 17th century Jesuit (Athanasius Kircher) that veers wildly away from Hebrew sources. The whole premise of what I thought would be a bit of humor in an old topic is that, when it comes to Qabalah, I simply give preference & deference to Hebrew sources over Crowley. It is hilarious to me that people have a problem with that.

Edited March 3, 2024 by Flegetanis

[gregory]

WELL - Crowley didn't create his deck based on rabbinical school, nor did he create it in the 10th century, or even the 17th - so - I'd say deferring to Hebrew sources over the deck's creator is doing the superimposing. Just as I would if you decided to impose them on my deck -which mercifully you will never have seen, so....

 

I'm sorry you see it as hilarious that anyone would find it wrong to superimpose their preferences over Crowley's - of ALL the thoroughly thought out decks, I'd say he put the most i to it. Why not create your own rabbinical deck ? Leave Crowley's to him - and to those of us who really value all he put into it.

 

And if you see your doing this as injecting "a bit of humour into an old thread" - I hadn't seen your system as particularly amusing, but to each his own.

[Flegetanis]

20 minutes ago, gregory said:

WELL - Crowley didn't create his deck based on rabbinical school, nor did he create it in the 10th century, or even the 17th - so - I'd say deferring to Hebrew sources over the deck's creator is doing the superimposing. Just as I would if you decided to impose them on my deck -which mercifully you will never have seen, so....

 

I'm sorry you see it as hilarious that anyone would find it wrong to superimpose their preferences over Crowley's - of ALL the thoroughly thought out decks, I'd say he put the most i to it. Why not create your own rabbinical deck ? Leave Crowley's to him - and to those of us who really value all he put into it.

 

And if you see your doing this as injecting "a bit of humour into an old thread" - I hadn't seen your system as particularly amusing, but to each his own.

 

Resorting to insult doesn't help your point.

[Flegetanis]

1 hour ago, Flegetanis said:

 

You're not the first Thelemite with whom I've had this conversation. One of the most obstinate, yes. 😉 In regards to this exact situation, Lon DuQuette merely said "grownups can have chocolate and vanilla." I think you're way too invested in this.

 

 

I want to retract my statement "I think you're way too invested in this."  🤣🤪 There's clearly a scale.

 

I was, of course, talking about this conversation, not the Thoth Tarot in general. 

Edited March 3, 2024 by Flegetanis

[gregory]

35 minutes ago, Flegetanis said:

 

Resorting to insult doesn't help your point.

 

Where's the insult ? You asked who was superimposing; I answered that in my view you were; you had said you were trying to bring in a bit of humour and I said I wasn't amused. And I suggested you create a rabbinically sourced deck which might actually be rather interesting. No insult there. Believe me, if I want to insult someone it will be far more obvious than anything I have said - and I will be modded for it.

 

I happen to prefer using Liber T and Crowley to understand the deck that Crowley created.