THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: thelema93-l@bitsy.hollyfeld.org
From: tyagi@HOUSEOFKAOS.ABYSS.COM (xiwang mu)
Subject: Crowley, Thoth and Attributions
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 01:15:11 -0800 (PST)

kaliyuga
49960218 intending to post this with my previous tzaddi post; object via email


BillS@VAV-NUN.COM (Fr. Also) and I continue our exchange concerning the 
 switch of Emperor/Star:

|>The blind of the Emperor/Star switch catches many a tarot-reader, and while
|>there are surely 'elegant' motives and explanations for their displacement,
|>I have never found one which persuaded me of their value.  Mostly on the
|>strength of one paradigm/association-schema do I reject it as extreme and
|>only indicative of Crowleyania, the one to which Crowley himself points:

|>        Emperor => Ares
|>        Star    => Aquarius

|I don't follow your point above. What is unique about the association of
|Emp=Aries/Star=aquarius?

Hmm, I'd thought this was so obvious that I could leave it for newbies,
but here you go.

[thoth-based attributions according to element, planet and zodiac:]

	==============================================

	Trump				Attribution

	Fool				Air
	Magus				Mercury
	Priestess			Moon
	Empress				Venus
	Emperor				Ares
	Hierophant			Taurus
	Lovers				Gemini
	Chariot				Cancer
	Lust				Leo
	Hermit				Virgo
	Fortune				Jupiter
	Adjustment			Libra
	Hanged Man			Water
	Death				Scorpio
	Art				Sagittarius
	Devil				Capricorn
	Tower				Mars
	Star				Aquarius
	Moon				Pisces
	Sun				Sun
	Aeon				Fire
	Universe			Saturn

	============================================

Now, if you can't figure out some necessary sequence of which the 
aforementioned two cards are a part, then I will sigh and wonder 
what is required of folks to study the tarot of late.
 
To be noted, I think this entire construction is flawed inasmuch
as it only makes use of the planets of the Ancients and even then
it both omits the earth element and the planet (I'm sure there is
some rationalization for the omission, though I found it more
expedient to merely revise the tarot trumps and the rest of the
deck if truth be known) and sequences the planets in an order 
that I find difficult to justify.

Further note: the LBPR is usually a banishing of earth.


|>|I do not buy any of his arguements ...

|>What *were* these arguments?....  

|The arguements you refer to, such as they are.

That's *it*?  And people take this (cal) seriously?  I begin to wonder
of what the Thelemic community is composed if it accepts such schlock as
meaningful and convincing.  I suppose if one is taken by the Priestly 
Prophet and his adorers in one's heart (or if basic instruction has been 
bypassed), then the head may be persuaded against logic.


|>Why does doing what is common sense to the mathematician (placing
|>0 at the start) make "the whole meaning of the Tarot luminous",
|>while doing the same wrt the Star Trump requires some sort of
|>'Secret Attribution'?  

|The attribution [AC] refers to is the order of the zodiac. 

Very lovely, but follow out the logic completely and see if he is
still at all convincing.  I'd love to be able to understand him
differently so as to prove his last works were indeed his best and
supported entirely by rational criticism, and since I'm told he
was coherent, that leaves intentional blinds or my own ignorance.


|This change illuminating the entire Tarot is a bit of a stretch-I'll give
|you that! (Though come to think of it, the Fool DOES illuminate/create the
|entire Tarot, perhaps Crowley's just dropping hints with that line)
|a simpler solution is to remove that twist rather than add a matching one!  

Precisely, and this comes 'naturally'.


|>What was the original justification of placing the Juggler/Fool in the 
|>position between XX and XXI (or any of the other spots aside from 
|>before I)?

|...I don't know about those other guys, but i see the Fool and the
|World cards as identical after a fashion, perhaps this is why. Though i do
|like it as Zero and now it is simply after the World instead of before it.

I think they NUMBERED it 0 while placing it between XX and XXI,
which doesn't really make your suggested rationalization clear at all,
though from my previous studies I think I presumed the intentional
blind theory, rationalized to correction mathematically as by AC.
I don't remember offhand the excuse given for the blind, but I'd 
appreciate some suggestions from the audience before I look in the 
library again. :>


|>What ever happened to 'the method of Science, the aim of Religion'?

|>Why does Crowley claim here that 'Tzaddi is "The Emperor"'?  His
|>mention of the double-loop seems rather disappointing after his
|>approbation of common sense and 'what comes natural' wrt the 0
|>and VIII and XI Trumps.

|He is stuck with it and comes up with a tenuous etymology to suggest the
|Atu name. 

Please elaborate on this etymology.  I think it went over my head.


|Your double-loop disappointment i share whole-heartedly. I can
|still remember reading that in dismay almost 20 years ago. I have tried to
|love it, as a good Thelemite, but have finally given up that quest;>:>

WHY?  What do you mean by 'a good Thelemite'?  Isn't that a kind of
ridiculous attitude?  Are Thelemites 'supposed' to do certain things?
I have heard such silly cal in offline company, but I'd hoped it was
the blatherings of lunatics.  Is this a common attitude within Thelemic
society, or are you being somewhat sarcastic here?

I recommend that all such notions of 'good Thelemite' be abandoned,
while coming up with alternative understandings of the true will/orbit
metaphysic.


|>|I believe he was eager to find a new trump for tzaddi and came up
|>|with that as a best guess.

|>That's it?  Above he at least goes into a nonpersuasive argument
|>wrt the double-loop (illustrated somewhat sloppily in my copy of
|>_The Book of Thoth_ between pages 9 and 10, btw).

|Sorry, i didnt think it was that important. I don't really know why since i
|don't grasp it.

I suggest it is more elegant to merely *change the name of the tzaddi
trump* so as to greater reflect its Aquarian nature (the graphics seem 
adequate).


|>...he arrived at the attribution-conclusion posterior to the 
|>construction of that work (and thus only changed it in later 
|>works like ABBA).

|I believe this is the answer. I also saw a copy of Liber Aleph with the
|chapter on De Arte Alchemistica describing one of the virtues as the
|influence from the Emperor. Current copies all have the Star inserted with
|a slight change of that forces description.

Fascinating.  It just goes to show how malleable and fluid is this
supposed 'self-consistent, truth-revealing esotericism'.  Generally
I see it to be merely a gloss to support the hierophants in charge,
sometimes without thought or comprehension (show me why I'm wrong).



|>I say throw out all the people, set up the attributions of the tarot
|>in a table (here, in this elist) and think for yourself logically about it.
|>See what conforms to 'elegance' and to 'logic' for you....  

|...a very foolish suggestion which i love. 

I've started it since you appeared confused by my rhetoric.  


|...could some of you discourse about the existance of competing tree 
|path designs?

I've designed one which approximates the popular tree though
incorporates additional paths so as to fit with Romanization 
(26-letter alphabet).  Here's the URL:

	ftp://ftp.hollyfeld.org/pub/Avidyana/Plebe/rtol.tn


|Is there a hierarchy of 'rightness' ? 

In a cosmic sense?  No.  In a personal sense?  I think that for some
people there might be, yes.  A sort of mirror-reflection of the state
of the individual who is deriving their true path-structure (that is,
it is 'true' to their present state of mind/being), which you seem to
be pointing out at the bottom of this here post.


|How do yall choose a tree to work with? 

I can't claim to really 'work with' a tree.  I've created it and assigned
various attributions as it seemed comprehensive, syncretistic and logical,
but so far I have not found the inspiration to do any sort of visualiza-
tion work or the like (is that what 'work' you mean?).


|How do you validate a particular arrangement?

Due to its internal consistency and the relation to our knowledge.
Since knowledge changes over time, space and consciousness, the
validation must be re-established every so often by an individual mage,
lest we work with the shells of our former selves (or worse, those of
others, sort of like eating people's excrement).


|>...utilize what resonated most with my own mind, which produced a ]
|>sufficient quantity of satisfaction....

|...The symbol is drawn or appropriated by oneself to describe something, 
|make it sensible and descriptive and artful. Trust that resonance, 
|demand it!

Hmm, very nice.  Resonance with what?  One's psyche?  Doesn't this kinda
require an ability to accurately perceive this?  How can we assess our
ability to perceive such a close-in element of ourselves, if so?

xiwang mu
tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com