Astrology: Overlaying Four Directions, Zodiac Signs & ... the Tarot?!

sasblamthanb · April 21, 2015

EFS,

Re: What is your grasp of these concepts?

where words are concerned, my grasp is ‘weak’... just some things I came across and that occurred to me long ago that might give you additional insights and avenues to explore...

Find your own ways!... Counseling seems in order that points everyone to stay with aligning their own ‘directions’/ elements /planets, etc. etc. first ...

then later, if needed, seek correlations and “overlay(s)” with various “knowledge systems”...

Re: “ Or is it more centered on cosmology and earth history than individual human lives? “

My post was much more closely related to individual human development and experience than cosmology and earth history. The "logarithmic time scale" mentioned also refers to the way humans metabolize ‘time’. Quick example - the first ( of 12 (zodiacal) developmental stages) lasts only a short few days in linear time but is experienced as an ‘eternity of bliss’... in childhood a day can seem like a week... but by old age, the passage of a month can ‘fly by’ and it seems like just a couple of days have passed... the first few weeks of life experientially seem to last as long as the scorpio stage which in linear time can last from ~42 yrs old to death-( provided of course you get the full ride on this "logarithmic time scale"... )

"...Our life in time begins at conception; however our time sense changes as we age according to a precise and knowable pattern and mathematics. Our fundamental ideas about time are often incorrect and perpetuate the wounds we carry. In attempting to heal these wounds inflicted by time, we may discover the path which leads beyond time. But first, understand for the time of your life." A.T. Mann

very short utoob

re: “The Wiki says his work is based around the concept of a "logarithmic time scale" and, as you say, developmental archetpyes. Could that be similar to Joseph Campbell's work about how myths and story structure mimic stages of human development?”

Short answer is - Yes. Working with myths in the light of ‘heavy on prenatal’ opens fertile grounds for re-interpretation/re-“grasp” of multiple creation myths and developmental myths...prior to the hero, warrior, feminine, etc etc. myths (that were Campbell’s specialty). Long answer would take books - not even nice long posts would do...

I mentioned that the tarot classically is used as symbols for situations and that I think it might serve better as a developmental map, with most of the cards symbolizing prenatal stages.

Some 'ifs'... if the ‘deck’ developed unconsciously... if our personal history doesn’t go forward, it goes around in circles... if neurosis is reborn each morning... if only ~26 of the cards track post natal development and the rest map prenatal stages and possible prenatal ‘traumas’ (and folks, I used that word for the sake of brevity), etc. ...actually if for ALL those ‘cards’ that are for stages before ‘prefrontal lobe’ maturity, rational ‘talking therapies’ are helpless and useless, then all the ‘re-establishment of body flow’ practices (old and new, from the East, the West, n, and s) we read about in here and eslewhere may be ‘working’ on these otherwise inaccessible ‘barriers’ and work therein would get us much further than studying astrol with / and various “knowledge systems”...... good lord what rambling, big if's ...

More re your OP... re “how do you zero and align this grid?”

It is not ego centric to zero the “grid”(s) at your own ‘center’

( zero and align... here in ‘infinite’ space and now in ‘eternal’ time’ for all the precious ‘thou are that’ters out there ) .

There are many ‘hierarchies’ in astrology ... and ultimately all of them are ‘symbolic’ of something in human experience or potential. ... fields within fields, etc. etc... for example, galactic astrology requests 1)an orientation to galactic center and 2) to where our solar system is in the galaxy , 3) where it is ‘going’ ... and 4++) a whole new orientation to space, time and meaning concerned with individual contributions to the ‘evolution’ of the ‘planet’, etc, etc. - distinct from the geocentric or sideral orientations that form the main paradigms of typical ‘astrol.’ ... and... then at some point, galactic astro also becomes a limiting symbology...

Esoteric ‘bud-ism’ (and esoteric astrology also) teaches that each of the many ‘rulers’ (dhyan-chohans, etc. etc. )of an eon (in relation to the ‘sentient’/ ‘consciousness’ aspects of these long cycles of manifestation, poofing, and coming again) have ‘sides’ that reach into and participate in the material and simultaneously have sides that remain fully ‘spirit(ual)’/ non physical. (This ‘looks’ like a duality. It’s not. The “sides” word was used where really there are no sides.) An individual’s experience typically goes through similar (but not equivalent) progression -starting ‘spiritual’in utero, growing into full participation in the ‘material world’ through childhood and adulthood, then in old age, an inevitable withdrawal from the material... (provided of course you get the full ride on this "logarithmic time scale"... ) (note: again this would take books... see how this whole paragraph omitted the ‘cyclic’ mental and soulful aspects of manifestations? etc.)

So re “Have any of you found something that could qualify as an "understanding in terms of physics" to explain astrology?”

Find your own ways!

For crowd control, “Appearance is always misleading and geared toward concealing the fundamental sameness of things.”

The sun is not what is appears to be. The sun is more than what physics books and currently dominant ‘scientific’ paradigms tell us it is... and...

We are well within/ inside the ‘sun’! ... we are of the sun - not far away revolving around it! see http://www.atmann.net/artdesign.htm#sss

... and ... galaxies are also not what they ‘appear’ to be. ... ‘space’ has qualities non-local, instantaneous, independent of distance.

Biologic ‘entities’ have quantum, plasmic qualities not acknowledged in current paradigms.

If you must have something with “scientific” support - look at torsion fields, cymatics , resonance, superluminal ness(‘faster’ than light) etc. etc -

such ‘nonsense’ might help open the development of your own cosmic synesthesia

ie your own personal ‘astrology’

Find your own ways!

all the best

Zhongyongdaoist · April 22, 2015

Here is an example of reframing a standard time wasting question from the

Scientific Proof that Magic Works(!)

Thread. In it I invert the question and show that magic proves science:

Actually, strange as it may seem, magic is the proof of science.

I say this because in the well-formed definition of magic given by Agrippa in his Three Books on Occult Philosophy all of the positive content of modern science and engineering can be viewed as manifestations of Natural and Mathematical Magic. By positive I mean all those conclusions and doctrines of Science that have been the result of Scientific Method and not those derived from or derivable from the false world-view with which the Scientific Revolution started, the mechanistic/atomistic framework based on the Seventeenth Century revival of Epicurianism, and substantially refuted by both Special Relativity and Quantum Physics, viewed as a reductio ad absurdam proof of such mechanistic principles taken as starting points and a return to explanation in terms of Formal causes as Thomas Kuhn explores in 'Concepts of Cause in the Development of Physics', which can be found in a collection of his essays The Essential Tension, on p. 21.

From part of Kuhn's conclusion:

'What is to be concluded from this brief sketch? As a minimal summary I suggest the following. Though the narrow concept of cause was a vital part of the physics of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, its importance declined in the nineteenth and has almost vanished in the twentieth. ... the structure of physical explanation closely resembles that which Aristotle developed in analyzing formal causes. Effects are deduced from a few specified innate properties of the entities with which the explanation is concerned. The logical status of those properties and of the explanations deduced from them is the same as that of Aristotle's forms. Cause in physics has again become cause in the broader sense, that is, explanation.' (Emphasis is mine) (Kuhn, Thomas; The Essential Tension, p. 28)

Since Magic in Agippa's sense is fundamentally tied to a world-view based on Aristotle's forms, the interpretation of physics in terms of Aristotle's forms, puts them on the same level as Aprippa's explanation of magic, thus magic is the proof of science. QED.

The above discussion is somewhat tongue in cheek, but the fundamental thinking is correct. It was my realization that modern science could be reframed in a Platonic world-view circa 1980, that helped me to adopt Platonism as a fundamental perspective, my 'working model' of reality you might say.

For an interesting view of a thoroughly Platonized universe see:

Max Tegmark on Wikipedia

Who in turn came up with this silly nonsense:

Yep, the universe may be a computable function, but it may take a quantum computer to do it. (On Wikipedia)

Well, the quantum computer is my idea not Tegmark's, I first came up with it about 2000 in my earliest investigation of the idea of Quantum Computing, though in the end I came to the conclusion that consciousness is not a computable function and that Mathematics is a structure embedded, in a sense, in consciousness by which consciousness becomes aware of itself. Or something like that. We are getting into some pretty deep stuff here, though I think it is ultimately compatible with a Platonic worldview.

This is part of what I mean by thinking about science and magic in a different way.

To go back to this:

I like what you have to say about cosmology, as I believe it is easy for one to overlook or unconsciously take for granted the most basic, most foundational assumptions made — through nurture, culture and education— about the nature of our reality. This is certainly true for me, and I can see how my desire to understand astrology is intimately tied to the fact that I am seeking to define a cosmology that appears intrinsically convincing to me. Interestingly, it was my very observation that western rationalism seems to perfectly account for materialism and mechanics but to exclude energetic realities that originally drove me to investigate Eastern concepts. (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

western rationalism seems to perfectly account for materialism and mechanics; What exactly does Western Rationalism have to do with the Seventeenth Century revival of Epicureanism?

it is easy for one to overlook or unconsciously take for granted the most basic, most foundational assumptions made — through nurture, culture and education

This is exactly the point made by E. A. Burtt in his book The Metphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science which I referenced in this post:

Odd that people hold on to 'materialism' in a post Hiroshima age ... where it became all to evident that matter is energy anyway and so perhaps they should put their fundamental belief in 'energy' as the basis of reality rather than matter. Although of course no one really understands what energy actually is - even though we use the term all the time. Pragmatic empiricism is stronger I think as it does not necessarily carry with it a particular view of the ultimate nature of substance even though it might seem to. What is hardest to shake is the idea that the objective world is the 'real real' and all else is imagination (in the weak sense) all our thoughts, feelings and so on just phantasms or noise in the information stream of dull facts.

(had to get that off my chest). (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

What is hardest to shake is the idea that the objective world is the 'real real' and all else is imagination (in the weak sense) all our thoughts, feelings and so on just phantasms or noise in the information stream of dull facts: This is exactly what I have described as 'Closet Cartesianism' and yes it is hard to shake off and for reasons that I have mentioned, it is built into the language of object and subject. One needs to start to speak and think of the world differently.

I became acutely aware of these problems in the late Seventies and early Eighties, the solution which I adopted at the time was to adopt Platonism as my working model of reality. This decision had many benefits, but I cannot go into them in detail here. While I wasn't to read the book from which the following excerpt is taken until circa 2000, I was very familiar with the ideas from other works:

>It may be, however, that Newton is an exceedingly important figure for still a third reason. He not only found a precise mathematical use for concepts like force, mass, inertia ; he gave new meanings to the old terms space, time, and motion, which had hitherto been unimportant but were now becoming the fundamental categories of men's thinking. In his treatment of such ultimate concepts, together with his doctrine of primary and secondary qualities, his notion of the nature of the physical universe and of its relation to human knowledge (in all of which he carried to a more influential position a movement already well advanced) —in a word, in his decisive portrayal of the ultimate postulates of the new science and its successful method as they appeared to him, Newton was constituting himself a philosopher rather than a scientist as we now distinguish them. He was presenting a metaphysical groundwork for the mathematical march of mind which in him had achieved its most notable victories. Imbedded directly and prominently in the Principia, Newton's most widely studied work, these metaphysical notions were carried wherever his scientific influence penetrated, and borrowed a possibly unjustified certainty from the clear demonstrability of the gravitational theorems to which they are appended as Scholia. Newton was unrivalled as a scientist—it may appear that he is not above criticism as a metaphysician. He tried scrupulously, at least in his experimental work, to avoid metaphysics. He disliked hypotheses, by which he meant explanatory propositions which were not immediately deduced from phenomena. At the same time, following his illustrious predecessors, he does give or assume definite answers to such fundamental questions as the nature of space, time, and matter ; the relations of man with the objects of his knowledge ; and it is just such answers that constitute metaphysics. The fact that his treatment of these great themes—borne as it was over the educated world by the weight of his scientific prestige—was covered over by this cloak of positivism, may have become itself a danger. It may have helped not a little to insinuate a set of uncritically accepted ideas about the world into the common intellectual background of the modern man. What Newton did not distinguish, others were not apt carefully to analyse. The actual achievements of the new science were undeniable furthermore, the old set of categories, involving, as it appeared, the now discredited medieval physics, was no longer an alternative to any competent thinker. In these circumstances it is easy to understand how modern philosophy might have been led into certain puzzles which were due to the unchallenged presence of these new categories and presuppositions. p.20-21

The French Encyclopdists and materialists of the middle of the eighteenth century felt themselves one and all to be more consistent Newtonians than Newton himself. p. 21 to 22

The only way to bring this issue to the bar of truth is to plunge into the philosophy of early modern science, locating its key assumptions as they appear, and following them out to their classic formulation in the metaphysical paragraphs of Sir Isaac Newton. The present is a brief historical study which aims to meet this need. The analysis will be sufficiently detailed to allow our characters to do much speaking for themselves, and to lay bare as explicitly as possible the real interests and methods revealed in their work. At its close the reader will understand more clearly the nature of modern thinking and judge more accurately the validity of the contemporary scientific world-view. p. 22 ((E. A. Burtt, The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science, Emphasis mine, ZYD)

The Book was written and published in the late 1920s, but is still considered to be sound history of science.

The worldview which Newton: 'carried to a more influential position a movement already well advanced', was basically a worldview of extended substances which were 'objects (hence 'objective') to which the senses were subject (hence subjective), this worldview was created largely by the work of Descartes and Locke.

Burtt's book is available online and may be accessed from the link above.

The Epicurean materialism that became a fundamental part of post Seventeenth Century Scientific thinking, was never the subject of Rational investigation, rather it became a set of unexamined presuppositions to Western scientific thought and continues to ride upon the prestige of science in a way that makes the Whore of Babylon and her Beast seem the merest of pretenders by comparison. Both Relativity and Quantum Mechanics can rightly be viewed as the working out of a Reductio ad Absudum refutation of materialism, thought people keep on holding on to it as if it were in itself rational. Far from it, convincing counter arguments existed from Plato and Aristotle onward, which is why the real history of Western Rationalism was not based on materialism, but on its early refutation.

Edit: Bolded phrase "western rationalism seems to perfectly account for materialism and mechanics" and copied it out, added (Emphasis mine, ZYD) in quote.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Zhongyongdaoist

EFS White · April 22, 2015

@Michael Sternbach

Thank you for chiming in. Roger Penrose's Conformal Cyclic Cosmology sounds like a very intriguing concept. Although I must say I personally am not convinced of the Bang part of the theory; meaning, I do believe the universe expands and contracts cyclically but a revolving donut-shaped model of the universe appears more probable to me than a contraction to and explosion from one point. And while I am not sure I understand how gravity waves can conserve information I do like the quasi karmic concept this implies. If indeed our existence is a means to experience, then such a retention of information from one cycle to the next appears a must.

I do feel that you are somewhat overloading the OP's mental circuits

Haha, indeed. This is also at least partly due to the volume of dense reponses, which, if you want to follow up on them with any seriousness, would already keep you busy for weeks.

--

@Frater UFA

Thank you for your elaborate and very thought provoking response.

Your underlying assumption here is that because you have read many books which all seemingly agree that there is an energetic nature to the constellations, then surely this must be true.

But what if it wasn't true? Could it be a possibility that every one of your sources could simply based on an mistaken ancient belief and that they've simply parroted some version of that belief forward over two thousand years?

Well, research into the mysteries has to start somewhere and for me it started (and ever again starts) from a place of intuition -- that there is more to life and our experience of it than our quantized, observable, mechanical, physical reality. This intuition leads me to seek out topics of interest, which I do approach as open mindedly as possible. But what degree of objectivity is really possible? As this intuition that drives me is in and of itself already some kind of bias, driven by predominantly non-conscious motives (such as e.g. a latent fear of death) my quest will be equally informed by a latent confirmation bias, I suppose: I am in part a skeptic and probing these theories and accounts and concepts for probability, and partly a seeker, who wants to find proof (or at least circumstantial accounts) that, yes, indeed, there IS more to life.

What does strike me is that so many cultures (for instance Egyptian, Jewish, Christian, Daoist etc) seem to abide to a metaphysical understanding that contains similar elements. This is either because this metaphysical reality is true and observable or could be because these traditions all trace back to the same roots (as for instance the Abrahamic traditions) or crossed paths at some point.

And as for the injection, but what if it wasn't true?, I only feel confident to respond that I trust that wisdom traditions that have been around for millenia in many cultures around the world must have something to them, some merit, some inherent quality, for otherwise people would just have lost interest and burned and buried it all -- much less have bothered writing voluminous books about it.

If they are not natural universal forces, but rather living consciousnesses, then perhaps their so-called directions and associated constellations are entirely unimportant.

I am much inclined to adopt thinking about it like that.

What seems to contradict this understanding is that much ado is being made about when planetary bodies are in distinct signs of the zodiac, that many traditions segment the days of the weeks and the hours (or two-hour periods) of a day in order to distinguish distinct kinds of energies. If we are dealing with living consciousnesses and their directions were altogether not important, then their influences should be omni-present. Why then this intricate system of days, hours, etc?

As for the four directions this is again something that seems to pop up in various cultures. I have read Daoist meditations on the distinct qualities of the North, South, East and West, and this of course seems to blend quite well with the bull, eagle, lion and man, magical traditions that advise to "invoke the spirits of the four directions" etc. My question about this was not infering that I know better, it was actually an open question. I have observed this phenomenon mentioned time and again, and wanted to consult with the community here, what your understanding of "four directions" is.

And even if it is possible, why do you have any reason to believe that such a correspondence is useful? Do you really believe that consciousness or energy has some inherent relationship with physical direction? If so, what is this belief based on?

The reason I am asking questions is precisely because I do not know, hence I do not know what to believe. Do I have reason to believe x? Well, insofar as many traditions seem to make a point of e.g. distinct directions, distinct constellations, distinct time frames etc. The fact that I am testing these assumptions signifies to me that these are indeed not things I believe. They appear to me more like hypothesis.

As facets of this same rhetoric, why do you believe x, seem to be recurring, I cannot address every instance of it in detail. So I would like to state this in more general terms:

I am not tethered to believing either, "astrology must be a physical phenomenon distinctly associated with directions" or "astrology is a metaphysical phenomenon that cannot be grasped in terms of a three- (or even four-) dimensional model of the world".

I see that some emphasis on astrology seems to be placed in various traditions, which prompts me to investigate and ask questions. Insofar I would say I do not believe either or, and I would welcome you to share with me what you believe.

Let us try a thought experiment. Assume for a moment that the speed of light is not a universal constant of physics, but rather an artifact solely of our time-space consciousness. In other words, what we perceive as the inviolate constant c is not inviolate at all, but rather an asymptotic threshold that our objective consciousness is utterly incapable, either directly or indirectly (via measuring instruments), of penetrating. "Asymptotic" in the sense that as the objective consciousness comes closer and closer to this limit, strange and mysterious things begin to happen (such as changes in mass and time dilation).

Now imagine that anything which travels faster than this speed transcends time and space and exists as consciousness in a realm we might primitively call the "astral plane". The phenomena of this realm would be unfettered by the mundane laws of time, mass, space, or gravity. And furthermore, the astrological entities exist in this realm... just as you and I do.

That's the beauty of higher dimensions: They do not violate physical laws, they are actually in accordance with the laws of physics and they are logically sound. Examining the idea of higher dimensions is wonderful, as it also instructs us just why it is near impossible to observe higher dimensional realities from a lower dimensional plane.

--

@Nungali

Thank you, I will look into this.

And about the angular relationships, this is definitely something I have come across before. The waxing and waning of the moon is actually nothing other than an easily visible such revolving angular relationship to the sun as observed from the earth; the tides are an effect of this; the day and night cycle is probably the most prominent such revolving angular relationship between the earth and the sun. What I want to explore is inhowfar these angular relationships extend from that which is physically observable to what we can subjectively experience metaphysically (especially for the physically more minute effects with other planetary bodies).

Thank you for all the links and examples.

--

@Zhongyongdaoist

Many thanks for the marvelous quotes. The general idea seems to be encapsuled in the catchy axioms "that which is above is like to that which is below" or the biblical "seek ye first the kingdom of God", would you say so? What I do wonder, if you may, can you share how you incorporate such wisdom in your practice?

I have experimented, for instance, for the last couple of months, with a practice I have devised of my own of centering in stillness in my heart and identifying whenever one of the forces that could be called the "seven deadly sins" in the christian canon or the "corporeal souls" in Daoism even minutely distort my inner peace, then simply identify this force and let it go.

Can you share how these insights you have mentioned reflect in your practice?

Also, many thanks for the Gödel anecdote. That is very riveting indeed.

What I find very interesting -- and I am not judging, just taking note here -- is that by way of my questioning I seem to give off a very distinct notion of who I am; and what seems reflected back to me by most responses is that I am a still very much materialist skeptic... which is interestingly not much how I think of myself. Curious indeed.

--

@noonespecial

Thank you for chiming in.

Likewise, what if what science calls gravity, the weak and strong nuclear forces, magnetism, light, etc are all actively conscious in varying grades, they are beings beyond our measuring instruments, but beings none the less.

Wouldn't consciousness imply character? As in: subject to change, moods, growth, etc. The reason I do not see this point of view is that to me gravity, magnetism and the likes seem very much constant, unalterable principles. Inhowfar would you say these are consciousnesses? What does that mean?

--

+++out of time; will have to continue some other time.+++

FraterUFA · April 22, 2015

Edited May 14, 2015 by FraterUFA

Nungali · April 22, 2015

The 'four directions' ( relating to N S E W ) seem A system of classification , and they can be a handy system.

But IMO/E most natural 'directions', divisions, processes come via three 'directions' - then a 4th exists because of the arrangement of the 3 ... but in a different manner

Up-down, back-front, side to side. So much of nature (if not all) seems based on developments of these 3 principles. But, again, they only seem relevant in relation to a subjective or objective 'point' . So really N S E W is a combination of two of the principles extremities.

Thats one of the issues, as I see it, the Celestial Sphere has been ( and probably had to be) seen as a flat surface, ( well, a curved , flat surface) the 3rd principle is missing - thats how we get the idea of constellations and asterisms.

Again ;

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=cube+of+space&espv=2&biw=1213&bih=550&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=diA4Vbn7LsLOmwWfpoD4AQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ

[ Eg, a plant requires a correct environment consisting of 3 principles; moisture, temperature, and light ( each defined by the extremities of the field ; wet/dry, hot/cool, dark/light ) , the 4th principle is the growing medium that needs a balanced N P K triangle, the 4th addition to that is micro nutrients, again in the 3 main groups, with a 4th 'attachment' , then there is colour R B Y , but the way they process into the 4 'natural' 'elemental' colours is R B Y G . Its a pattern all though nature - the four forces of physics (and again we see the 4th 'earth' principle as somewhat standing alone - gravity. ]

Edited April 22, 2015 by Nungali

EFS White · April 23, 2015

In my last post I wrote

As facets of this same rhetoric, why do you believe x, seem to be recurring, I cannot address every instance of it in detail

Absolutely, I am aware that questioning and testing one's beliefs, tracking them to their roots and sources, is indispensible and a very much worth-while endeavor. What I meant to say, though, was very much profane: I cannot address every instance of where this applies within the means of a forum discussion -- simply due to time constraints.

@sasblamthanb

Thank you. This was some clarifying and interesting stuff.

The sun is not what is appears to be. The sun is more than what physics books and currently dominant ‘scientific’ paradigms tell us it is... and... We are well within/ inside the ‘sun’! ... we are of the sun - not far away revolving around it! see http://www.atmann.ne...tdesign.htm#sss

... and ... galaxies are also not what they ‘appear’ to be. ... ‘space’ has qualities non-local, instantaneous, independent of distance.

Biologic ‘entities’ have quantum, plasmic qualities not acknowledged in current paradigms.

I love the diagrams on the link and am currently waiting for one of the books you had recommended earlier. Hope this will bring some more insight / inspiration.

About the solar system: Taken in stride with what FraterUFA contributed to the discussion, it is a very intriguing thought indeed to conceptualize the sun and each planet as distinct higher dimensional consciousnesses -- and consider them, quite possibly, as facets of one grand being or organism.

All of this seems very much convincing to me; assuming a fractal or holographic nature to our reality which would liken the solar system to the chakra system in the human body (or possibly other correspondences such as organs, glands, etc.) to the structure of atoms.

--

@FraterUFA

Thank you for your very valuable response.

I would argue that what you've described here is vastly more relevant and important than what you described in your original post, and it is a far firmer jumping off point for esoteric study than astrology or any other practice.

Astrology is by all means not my primary focus; it is actually probably the field that I am least knowledgeable in and have up to now only taken in stride with the topics I was really researching at the time. Just like I said, almost everything I research sooner or later seems to reference, at least to some degree, astrology, which is why I asked the community here for a few primers. All of these, so far, I find very fruitful.

This is largely what motivated my response, eg: the perception that you are not currently capable of seeing just how closed minded you're being. I don't mean that as a slight btw, that is IMO a very important realization to internalize and act upon.

Not taken as a slight. Food for thought.

Or another possibility: that these different traditions had been guided by discarnate intelligences who played a large role in bringing about esoteric wisdom.

Well, this possibility is one very frequently described throughout the literature I have studied. I have become fascinated with the concept of the daemon / genius a few years ago -- with a very good used-to-be-free ebook by Matt Cardin, http://www.teemingbrain.com/2012/05/02/the-secret-to-working-with-a-daemonic-muse-get-out-of-the-way/. The basic concept, as traced back to antique thinkers, is that our creativity is not our own but rather in-spired (spirited) by a genius (genie, jinn), hence a discarnate intelligence. A riveting concept, and with profound implications.

From such a vantage point it is, of course, not far flung to accept that there are varieties of such entities, potentially, as you expound, with cosmic dimensions (or rather an omnipresence -- with an essence transcending our physical realms).

Ah, but there is a well-studied example of this very thing you describe: Alchemy. It has its roots dating back at least two millenia and as we follow the texts through time, we can trace examples of how ancient teachings were twisted, corrupted, and exploited by people who had not received the true spiritual transmission. For instance, this reached its height in the 17th century Germany, and we find many of these texts from this time and place to be poor representations of true alchemical practice.

Another example is the importing of eastern metaphysical systems to the West by Blavatsky and others in the 19th century, resulting in a bastardized mainstream occult tradition which is held in high regard by many to this very day (and even on this forum), despite its track record of delivering no genuine mystical or magical results.

My study of astrology dates back about 15 years now. One of my more interesting undertakings was a statistical study of financial astrology which disproved the effectiveness of astrology as a forecasting tool. So here is a very specific example of an ancient knowledge which has been provably corrupted.

Anyway, after reading my words carefully it should be apparent that I am not so much calling into question the existence of wisdom traditions as a whole (which the Bible is the surest and probably most readily available proof of), but rather, I am focusing attention on the possibility that most of what passes for esoteric wisdom is anything but.

(emphasis added by me)

Sadly, this feels very much true. We are dealing with arcana, and how to unlock them seems the greatest mystery of the mysteries. I have often thought that maybe vagueness and bewildering symbolism -- and even so if there actually weren't any other underlying secret to it all -- could be in an of itself the arcanum: To trigger our subconscious minds, our intuition and our quest for self-knowledge.

Your quote also reminds me of the (sad but) hilarious thing you had written earlier, to the effect of: "As an author of books I can assure you that most of what is written in books is simply not true."

One of the difficulties I see in discussing the metaphysical is that due to its nature being transcendent to our physicality, our perceptible reality, often when we resort to (physical) analogies or metaphor in order to comprehend these concepts we are already making the grave mistake of, in a way, reducing that which is to something lower, something we can experience and (haptically speaking) "grasp".

Hence the need for analogy, parabel, metaphor, symbolism etc., hence the need for interpretation... which can often be misleading. And all of this holds true even if one is good natured and well-intended! Much worse, then, of course, if some groups or individuals deliberately mislead people.

(...)

I hold that throughout history, the challenge of the wise has been how to reach those who are ready to learn in the face of forces which will go to extreme lengths to bury and corrupt these teachings. They have (and continue to) achieve this through myths, allegories, architecture and movies. The days of the week for instance, can be traced back to the mystery religions and bear witness to a greater truth. For instance, if you draw the days of the week on a septagon, you will find that tracing the line gives the ancient order of the planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Sun, Venus, Mercury, Moon). This is coincidentally the same order as the planets on the Tree of Life.

Would love to ask you to expand, if you will: By "forces which will go to extreme lengths to bury and corrupt these teachings" are you implying discarnate beings or something more in terms of political factions? And as for "the days of the week (...) bear witness to a greater truth", I would appreciate if you are willing to extrapolate this further.

To my understanding the days of the week and the ancient order of the planets seem more or less to correspond in this given progression to the ascending order of the chakras (and the characteristics ascribed to them) in the human body. This would lead me to conclude that the days of the week, when related to distinct planets, point to a weekly cycle, akin, maybe, to a biorhythm of sorts. I understanding this forum is not the right place (if ever there is a "right place") to spell out arcane understandings. If you see fit, however, I would appreciate further comment.

I believe that the truth behind astrology is simple, elegant and beautiful. There are seven governors to the world and their physical manifestations are found in the ancient planets. Our souls must travel to these seven "planets" in order to regenerated and stand before God. That is what I believe

Thank you very much, this is greatly appreciated.

In my recent studies I have come to notice that not only do the numbers 7 and 14 seem to be given great significance in the Bible, the doctrine of the "seven deadly sins" also seems to match stunningly well with the characteristics ascribed to the "seven corporeal ghosts" in Daoism.

As I have stated before, I have for a few months established and refined a personal practice revolving around an understanding where I conceptualize these "seven deadly sins" or "corporeal ghosts" as external forces, much akin to the daemon or jinn concept.

What I simply do not grasp so far is why these would correspond to, for instance, days of the week (which seems to be outlined in the writings of, for another instance, Eliphas Levi).

Also, if you are willing to comment, can you share your understanding and personal experience of whether these seven governours of the world manifest their influence cyclically or continuously?

--

@Nungali

Thank you for checking back.

The 'four directions' ( relating to N S E W ) seem A system of classification , and they can be a handy system.

But IMO/E most natural 'directions', divisions, processes come via three 'directions' - then a 4th exists because of the arrangement of the 3 ... but in a different manner

Up-down, back-front, side to side.

The whole Cube of Space thing distinctly reminds me of Walter Russell's cosmology, which is also basically cube-shaped, involving the three axis (front-back, left-right, up-down, and a center point.) or three pairs of opposites.

I believe it is no coincidence that in language each of these directions bears distinct connotations: Up (ascension, positive, development, evolution), down (depression, sadness, heaviness, devolution), left and right (right and wrong, political factions) etc.

In a similar manner I understand that through simple observation of the skies you would get a sense of distinct directions: The direction where the sun rises, where it reaches its highest point, where it sets... and that darn direction where the sun never goes. Hence, it appeals to me to consider that the East would bear connotations of hope, new beginnings, spring, rising etc., the South of bloom, summer, fullness, sovereignty, etc., the West of ending, harvest, decline etc.

What I have been wondering is precisely what Frater UFA had also asked me, whether I seriously believed it: In many instances I have come across writings that say one should invoke (the deities of) the four directions. What does this mean in practice? Can anyone help me toward a better understanding of this?

What else is there to this Cube of Space concept? What is a resource or book you can recommend for looking into this?

--

Thank you all for your contributions.

(repeatedly edited for spelling)

Edited April 23, 2015 by EFS White

noonespecial · April 23, 2015

I think the best thing to do is just stick with one system (set of tools) and let the reality behind those tools (qabalah, tarot, etc) unfold on it's own - overanalyzing causes paralysis, there is more value in working. I like Joseph Lisewski's term, subjective synthesis, in simple terms it's a control group that allows your subcoscious to interface with the inner worlds on a consistent basis, which is what any occult system REALLY is (edit: and yes, some systems are more accurate than others).

I remember a coupe of years back I was arguing internally over which Tree of Life to use, that Hebraic or the Hermetic, that same week during ritual I had a stunning vision, I was in the tree diagram surrounded by these huge spheres as traditionally arranged, they were colored and marked according to the Hermetic system, than the path assignements began switching, finally all the spheres turned white, and then clear (like bubbles blown in the sun) and all the Paths were marked by a 0, all was foolish, all is 0. That really drove the point home for me, I'm unsure if it will make sense to anyone else. Do I still use the assignments, yes, but that was not the point of the vision, I am more than aware one drop of LSD and all that stuff gets thrown out the window all the angelic hierarchies and memory theatre and mental games descend into the simplicity of the glorious spiraling inifinty, sink or swim into the abyss

Edited April 23, 2015 by noonespecial

FraterUFA · April 23, 2015

Hello EFS White,

Would love to ask you to expand, if you will: By "forces which will go to extreme lengths to bury and corrupt these teachings" are you implying discarnate beings or something more in terms of political factions?

Both. There are entities in the esosphere who seek to assist man in his awakening. And there are entities whose goals run counter to this.

And just as these helpful entities make an effort to contact and work with individuals who are ready, so do their counterparts seek to disrupt this awakening in these individuals and to use other individuals to further their own ends.

And as for "the days of the week (...) bear witness to a greater truth", I would appreciate if you are willing to extrapolate this further.

The Hermetic path is predicated on one's finding answers for themselves. Isn't it curious that if you begin at the top of this diagram and trace down to the moon, and then continue tracing, you get the days of the week? And if you trace clockwise around the outside of this circle, starting with Saturn, you get the ancient order of the planets?

What do you suppose could be meant by this? Perhaps these symbols are pointing to something, a deeper truth... no, something more practical... a series of steps to be followed?

One should find it quite interesting that the septagon, the Tree of Life, the days of the week, and the order of the ancient planets all align and support each other in this manner. Clearly something was intended by that.

The path has many signposts, it is up to you to read them.

To my understanding the days of the week and the ancient order of the planets seem more or less to correspond in this given progression to the ascending order of the chakras (and the characteristics ascribed to them) in the human body.

Ugh. You didn't just go there.

This would lead me to conclude that the days of the week, when related to distinct planets, point to a weekly cycle, akin, maybe, to a biorhythm of sorts.

You've redeemed yourself for the chakra comment a bit. Not all of the way though. I want to see more good insights from you.

Biorhythm... time... cycles... repetitions... Interesting.

In my recent studies I have come to notice that not only do the numbers 7 and 14 seem to be given great significance in the Bible, the doctrine of the "seven deadly sins" also seems to match stunningly well with the characteristics ascribed to the "seven corporeal ghosts" in Daoism.

7, 14, and 21... 3x7. 666 is the number of the beast. It is a human number.

Jesus was crucified on a cross, between two other crosses.

Three things of seven are implied here. Interesting.

As I have stated before, I have for a few months established and refined a personal practice revolving around an understanding where I conceptualize these "seven deadly sins" or "corporeal ghosts" as external forces, much akin to the daemon or jinn concept.

What I simply do not grasp so far is why these would correspond to, for instance, days of the week (which seems to be outlined in the writings of, for another instance, Eliphas Levi).

Eliphas Levi was allegedly a French adept who though he was held in high regard (as the French hold any French person of any repute), apparently did not know much of real value when it came to the practical work.

Also, if you are willing to comment, can you share your understanding and personal experience of whether these seven governours of the world manifest their influence cyclically or continuously?

I'm afraid this question doesn't make much sense to me.

Do you manifest your influence cyclically or continually? Does the room you are sitting in manifest its influence cyclically or continually? (The latter might sound like an obvious question, but what if you aren't in the room, or you are sleeping, or the room is destroyed?)

I perceive you are trying to label and conceptualize something which currently lies outside of your realm of experience. The danger is that if you succeed in putting a label on it, you will not be able to experience it.

UFA

noonespecial · April 23, 2015

A BOTA guy, who woulda thought. lol

Edited April 28, 2015 by noonespecial

Nungali · April 23, 2015

( Had a few glitches posting this and lost formatting)

In my last post I wrote

Absolutely, I am aware that questioning and testing one's beliefs, tracking them to their roots and sources, is indispensible and a very much worth-while endeavor. What I meant to say, though, was very much profane: I cannot address every instance of where this applies within the means of a forum discussion -- simply due to time constraints.

.... yeah , I got that, I thought that is what you meant

To my understanding the days of the week and the ancient order of the planets seem more or less to correspond in this given progression to the ascending order of the chakras (and the characteristics ascribed to them) in the human body. This would lead me to conclude that the days of the week, when related to distinct planets, point to a weekly cycle, akin, maybe, to a biorhythm of sorts. I understanding this forum is not the right place (if ever there is a "right place") to spell out arcane understandings. If you see fit, however, I would appreciate further comment.

As I have stated before, I have for a few months established and refined a personal practice revolving around an understanding where I conceptualize these "seven deadly sins" or "corporeal ghosts" as external forces, much akin to the daemon or jinn concept.

What I simply do not grasp so far is why these would correspond to, for instance, days of the week (which seems to be outlined in the writings of, for another instance, Eliphas Levi).

Also, if you are willing to comment, can you share your understanding and personal experience of whether these seven governours of the world manifest their influence cyclically or continuously?

--

In a similar manner I understand that through simple observation of the skies you would get a sense of distinct directions: The direction where the sun rises, where it reaches its highest point, where it sets... and that darn direction where the sun never goes. Hence, it appeals to me to consider that the East would bear connotations of hope, new beginnings, spring, rising etc., the South of bloom, summer, fullness, sovereignty, etc., the West of ending, harvest, decline etc.

IMO its all to do with equating things to 7 ( the 7 'wandering planets' )

and 12 ( and its divisions of 3 and 4 ) and base 10 - the divisions of the human hand.

There is more than one 'chakra' system and we could have had a 10 day week - 7 is arbitrary - except for the 7 visible planets , that is what gives the number significance.

12 is 'handy' due to its many simple divisions and the way of counting base 12 (in 'dozens' ).

'Someone' made 7 days to the week, someone equated the 7 celestial lights to 'spirits of God' - bith 7s , so they must relate (they do, though the original model, but to each other, IMO, arbitrarily .

What I have been wondering is precisely what Frater UFA had also asked me, whether I seriously believed it: In many instances I have come across writings that say one should invoke (the deities of) the four directions. What does this mean in practice? Can anyone help me toward a better understanding of this?

What else is there to this Cube of Space concept? What is a resource or book you can recommend for looking into this?

--

Thank you all for your contributions.

(repeatedly edited for spelling)

Basically the four directions equate to those principles you listed for the diurnal cycle and one affirms or attunes to those qualities (unless you are working night-shift ) .

Not much else to the cube of space, IMO, just the 3 principles, unless you want to get into Kabbalah, the source is in the early traditional writings. I am sure these is a scad on the internut internet.

It might suddenly develop prime importance ... if you are susceptible to seasickness

I am more interested in how the 3 principles manifest in nature themselves without our human projections and divisions put upon them.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Nungali

FraterUFA · April 24, 2015

What else is there to this Cube of Space concept? What is a resource or book you can recommend for looking into this?

If you are interested in following up on this, then you should check out my old teacher and friend's book, "The Cube of Space" (Kevin Townley).

I believe that there is something quite profound hidden in this symbolism, though I do not have any reason to believe that even Kevin knows what it is. I will say however that his book is the best I know of on the subject.

UFA

EFS White · April 28, 2015

Thank you all for your responses. I have meanwhile been travelling and not had much time for further studies. On the upside, A.T. Mann's book has arrived, and it promises to be a very inspiring read.

--

@FraterUFA

Thank you, I appreciate your responses.

What do you suppose could be meant by this? Perhaps these symbols are pointing to something, a deeper truth... no, something more practical... a series of steps to be followed?

One should find it quite interesting that the septagon, the Tree of Life, the days of the week, and the order of the ancient planets all align and support each other in this manner. Clearly something was intended by that.

The path has many signposts, it is up to you to read them.

I like this bit, and I think there is much truth to it. What had surprised me earlier was that you had seemed to ridicule the concept of chakras, as they seem, to me, to blend right in with what was being said.

To my understanding the Kabbala speaks of a "fall of man", and his task to ascend back to a unity with God. In the kabbalistic teaching, this task is mapped on the Tree of Life; the Tarot also seems to indicate a similar path of growth or ascension; as does Daoist teaching (via the transmutation of Jing to Qi, Shen, Wuji and the Dao). I am not implying that these traditions all talk uniformly about the same thing. What I do see, however, is a direction from a current state that is associated with being gross, materialistic, individuated and low, to a future (and original) state that is pure, finer, higher, more subtle, all-encompassing and united. (And as you seemed quite opposed to my mentioning that chakras, to me this is exactly in tune with the previous notion: Leading from the base to the crown, from the instinctual and material, to the inspired and transcendent).

Hence, when you say the days of the week could mark "a series of steps to be followed", I can somewhat interpret this against my understanding of this task of self-cultivation towards transcendence -- which still means, though, I do not understand exactly what you mean by that. Are the days of the week reminders to repeat this structure of the path to our subconscious minds (somewhat akin to the deeply engrained structure of "The Hero's Journey" in mythology and storytelling), or do the days of the week have a distinct and practical function that we must adhere to on these particular days of the week?

Also, if you are willing to comment, can you share your understanding and personal experience of whether these seven governours of the world manifest their influence cyclically or continuously?

I'm afraid this question doesn't make much sense to me.

Do you manifest your influence cyclically or continually? Does the room you are sitting in manifest its influence cyclically or continually? (The latter might sound like an obvious question, but what if you aren't in the room, or you are sleeping, or the room is destroyed?)

My observation is that everything in our experience seems cyclical. The sun, for instance, as perceived from the earth, manifests cycically in terms of day and night, in terms of the solar year; but even when not perceived from the vantage point of the earth, the sun seems to have a pulse of sorts, solar minimums and maximums -- another instance of cyclical manifestation of influence. The moon does so very similarly; hence it seems not far fetched to suppose that the other planetary bodies, even if we conceive of them as entities or consciousnesses, would effect an influence upon us associated with their relative motion to us and possibly inherently through a sort of "pulse" or "biorhythm" of their own.

My real question, however, can easily be tied to the previous reflection of the "days of the week". When we profess that each day of the week is associated with a particular planetary body, my question is whether this implies a practical weekly cycle (and I am also reminded here of the seven days of creation), e.g. distinct things we ought to do on these days, or whether their function is more abstract, e.g. familiarizing us with the structure of the path?

--

@Nungali

Thank you for checking back.

IMO its all to do with equating things to 7 ( the 7 'wandering planets' )

and 12 ( and its divisions of 3 and 4 ) and base 10 - the divisions of the human hand.

There is more than one 'chakra' system and we could have had a 10 day week - 7 is arbitrary - except for the 7 visible planets , that is what gives the number significance.

12 is 'handy' due to its many simple divisions and the way of counting base 12 (in 'dozens' ).

'Someone' made 7 days to the week, someone equated the 7 celestial lights to 'spirits of God' - bith 7s , so they must relate (they do, though the original model, but to each other, IMO, arbitrarily .

Number systems are very intriguing to me. I have, for instance, sunk my teeth into the question why a circle is commonly divided into 360 degrees (which also seems quite arbitrary; and there are indeed other geometrical systems with, for instance, 400 degrees to a full circle). The 360 seems quite arbitrary, but then also, it seems quite close to the 365 days of the year. There is an hypothesis out there, that the earth used to revolve in 360 days a long time ago, and that the division of the circle could be a remnant of that age. This sounds very appealing and would make a lot of sense, as 360 indeed is a great number to unifiy such numbers of recurring importance as 3, 4, 12, 40, 144, and 216.

As for the seven days of the week, well, I see a very distinct approximation of the four most prominent phases of the waxing and waning of the moon with seven days to a week. But I agree, all we can definitively say is that 7 is a very prominent number in traditions throughout the world, and how the original division into a seven day week came about is probably another very deep rabbit hole.

And thank you for expanding of the Cube of Space.

This also goes to @FraterUFA: Thank you for the book recommendation.

noonespecial · April 28, 2015

James said, "Rabbi, are there then twelve hebdomads and not seven as there are in the scriptures?" The Lord said, "James, he who spoke concerning this scripture had a limited understanding. I, however, shall reveal to you what has come forth from him who has no number. I shall give a sign concerning their number. As for what has come forth from him who has no measure, I shall give a sign concerning their measure"

James said, "Rabbi, behold then, I have received their number. There are seventy-two measures!" The Lord said, "These are the seventy-two heavens, which are their subordinates. These are the powers of all their might; and they were established by them; and these are they who were distributed everywhere, existing under the authority of the twelve archons. The inferior power among them brought forth for itself angels and unnumbered hosts. Him-who-is, however, has been given [...] on account of [...] Him-who-is [...] they are unnumbered. If you want to give them a number now, you will not be able to do so until you cast away from your blind thought, this bond of flesh which encircles you. And then you will reach Him-who-is. And you will no longer be James; rather you are the One-who-is. And all those who are unnumbered will all have been named."

1st Apocylapse of James

maldor · April 28, 2015

I think its quite simple. It is psychology. The power of suggestion ... not to be underestimated.

From my various readings I have found that magick is psychology.

Asmo · April 28, 2015

I think its quite simple. It is psychology. The power of suggestion ... not to be underestimated.

From my various readings I have found that magick is psychology.

*irony on*

So you are talking from a standpoint of profound experience and insight ...

*irony off*

FraterUFA · April 28, 2015

Hi EFS White,

I like this bit, and I think there is much truth to it. What had surprised me earlier was that you had seemed to ridicule the concept of chakras, as they seem, to me, to blend right in with what was being said.

The concept of the chakras was imported to the West in the 19th century occult revival. They have no place in the traditional western current as far as I know.

Mainstream occultism would have you pick up a book, any book really, and pretend to teach you some magic techniques that will turn you into a mage. In that world, nothing is wrong, nothing can be disproven. And this has given rise to the ancillary belief that nothing can be proven, a belief which most people who claim to engage in these spiritual practices secretly fear. And fear it they should, because they can't prove anything because most of them are engaging in mere fantasy.

Two reasons mainstream occultism doesn't work are because it is based on wild speculation and a lack of any true connection with genuine spiritual teaching.

To my understanding the Kabbala speaks of a "fall of man", and his task to ascend back to a unity with God.

Can man ever be at Unity with God? Wouldn't he cease to be Man?

Perhaps God is asymptote... an ideal which can never be attained, not until the end of days when the giant reset button in the sky is pressed.

In the kabbalistic teaching, this task is mapped on the Tree of Life; the Tarot also seems to indicate a similar path of growth or ascension;

Development might be a better word. "Growth" implies becoming something more, when IMO it is rather a realization of what you already are which is the challenge.

"Ascension" strikes me as a terrible word really, one of those words that keeps the temple doors firmly locked.

as does Daoist teaching (via the transmutation of Jing to Qi, Shen, Wuji and the Dao).

I couldn't tell you anything about that.

I am not implying that these traditions all talk uniformly about the same thing. What I do see, however, is a direction from a current state that is associated with being gross, materialistic, individuated and low, to a future (and original) state that is pure, finer, higher, more subtle, all-encompassing and united.

This strikes me as a very vague idea hidden in seemingly specific terms.

You talk about a "state". A state of what? Energy? Matter? Consciousness? This is very important. Without this, you can't really proceed any farther.

Gross could mean large scale and without details. Fine could mean, "very small" (but both words have many definitions). Can energy be gross or fine? If not, that could introduce a complication in the so-called (New Age) chakra concept. And I don't think it can. Energy varies in wavelength and frequency of course, but can anyone really make the claim that different types of energy (visible light, x-rays, radio waves, etc) exist locally in the body?

So to me, considerations such as these seem to rule out any idea of a development taking place in terms of energy.

Can matter be course or fine? I suppose at the atomic level, it could... but that doesn't make much sense as we're essentially composed of a relatively small number of elements (C-O-H-N and various metals).

Can consciousness be gross? Sure, but what does that mean? Does it mean morally low-minded? Or do you think it means "dull"? And what of its opposite... can a consciousness be "fine"?

Same questions go for "pure"... can energy be pure? I have no concept of that not being the case. Can the body be pure? No. Can consciousness be pure? Leaving out common moral grounds for such a definition, one has to consider what "purity of consciousness" could actually mean.

So if you continue this exercise, I suspect that your thoughts will eventually come to, if not a firm conclusion, at least a pretty good idea that these paths are dealing with states of consciousness.

(And as you seemed quite opposed to my mentioning that chakras, to me this is exactly in tune with the previous notion: Leading from the base to the crown, from the instinctual and material, to the inspired and transcendent).

So starting with a vague concept of a spectrum ranging between material and spiritual, you made the leap to chakras.

Rather than continue going down that road, let me challenge you with a question: What if the chakras simply don't exist?

I imagine that would represent a major blow to many people's spiritual conceptions. But to me, it simply means that this concept was imported piecemeal into the existing western tradition, something we already know to be true. It also means that the nature of our quest does not lie in chakras. At least not in the West.

Hence, when you say the days of the week could mark "a series of steps to be followed", I can somewhat interpret this against my understanding of this task of self-cultivation towards transcendence

What do you mean by "transcendence"?

-- which still means, though, I do not understand exactly what you mean by that. Are the days of the week reminders to repeat this structure of the path to our subconscious minds (somewhat akin to the deeply engrained structure of "The Hero's Journey" in mythology and storytelling), or do the days of the week have a distinct and practical function that we must adhere to on these particular days of the week?

I believe they are tasks or attainments. Not mere mythological ones. Actual concrete steps and stages which occur in the traditional practice.

My observation is that everything in our experience seems cyclical. The sun, for instance, as perceived from the earth, manifests cycically in terms of day and night, in terms of the solar year; but even when not perceived from the vantage point of the earth, the sun seems to have a pulse of sorts, solar minimums and maximums -- another instance of cyclical manifestation of influence. The moon does so very similarly; hence it seems not far fetched to suppose that the other planetary bodies, even if we conceive of them as entities or consciousnesses, would effect an influence upon us associated with their relative motion to us and possibly inherently through a sort of "pulse" or "biorhythm" of their own.

That's a lot of philosophizing about something really simple. If you go to the moon, you know it. You're standing there, you can reach out and touch it, taste it, see it, smell it and hear it.

It's just a place. Not a place which follows the same physical laws we are accustomed to, so it is a strange place. But a place nonetheless.

My real question, however, can easily be tied to the previous reflection of the "days of the week". When we profess that each day of the week is associated with a particular planetary body, my question is whether this implies a practical weekly cycle (and I am also reminded here of the seven days of creation), e.g. distinct things we ought to do on these days, or whether their function is more abstract, e.g. familiarizing us with the structure of the path?

I think that is getting a little closer. Maybe this will help.

Also look at this... what do you see?

S M T W T F S

UFA

Nungali · April 28, 2015

I think its quite simple. It is psychology. The power of suggestion ... not to be underestimated.

From my various readings I have found that magick is psychology.

'It' ? .... What is quiet simple? How does the power of suggestion work on animals ... 'wild' animals that is ? How does it apply to 'natural magic' ? How does it apply when magic is used on/for another, when that other does not know about it ?

Doesn't the 'power of suggestion' 'take two to tango' ?

How can 'magic is psychology' be valid when psychology is " the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting behaviour in a given context" when magic is a field far much wider and beyond that ?

Or are you saying that all reality is a result of the function of the human mind and behaviour ?

sasblamthanb · April 29, 2015

EFS White,

Re 1,2,3,4,7,12 etc.

Have you read Arthur Young’s books?

The Geometry of Meaning, etc

hth

EFS White · May 3, 2015

@noonespecial

Thank you for your comment. This Apocalypse of James sounds riveting. I can see that the number 72 is another one of those (an octave of the 144, no less) numbers, that pop up time and again in spiritual and mystic literature. I can accept that the consensus seems that there are 72, say, "degrees" or "distinct energies" -- but I am not much closer in understanding them or what to do with that knowledge. If you have a more profound understanding of this already, may I ask you: What are these 12 archons, and do they bear a relation to the 24 elders mentioned in Revelations? These 72 heavens, to your understanding, do they share a relation with the "72 names of God"? What is your practical way of incorporation the knowledge of the 72 heavens in your meditation practice and spiritual life?

At any rate, thank you. A great pointer.

--

@FraterUFA

Thank you for checking back.

The concept of the chakras was imported to the West in the 19th century occult revival. They have no place in the traditional western current as far as I know.

Noonespecial has, in the course of this thread, enriched me with Joseph Lisewski's term, "subjective synthesis", that I would like to rephrase here as "subjective syncretism". You are correct that this is how and when the Western culture has familiarized itself with these concept. Another way of phrasing it, however, would be to say that "the concept of Chakras" has been around for thousands of years in the Eastern cultures.

It is both a blessing and a confusion that today we are able to have a look at all these various, sometimes mutually exclusive, sometimes outright conflicting traditions. Nonetheless, I do strongly believe that "subjective synthesis" is all we have, here. These are knowledge traditions that we are well advised to approach with an open mind and reflect it against our understanding and intuition to see what... well, "synthesizes". My observation had been a very basic one: That the seven deadly sins of the Catholic Church correspond exactly with the character ascribed to the Daoist "seven corporeal souls".

The teaching behind these souls I found to be even more striking and meaningful: (I will repeat this from memory, it may not be entirely correct), in Daoism the human body is inhabited by seven corporeal souls (the "po") which have been given to the body by the earth and after death will return to earth, and additionally three celestial souls (the "hun"), which have been given to the body by heaven and after death will return to heaven. The corporeal souls are said to desire to return to earth even before death and thus try to influence a human being toward behavior that will quite literally kill him -- such as greed, lustful indulgence, anger, etc.

As the character ascribed to the seven chakras (that I am aware of) reflects very well against my personal subjective syncretism, well, I chose to consider it as meaningful.

Can man ever be at Unity with God? Wouldn't he cease to be Man?

Agreed. To my understanding the attainment of unity with God, which would seem the ultimate goal of all cultivation practice, is a stage that is far beyond corporeal existence. Hence, it appears quite coherent that many traditions seem to teach "immortality" -- while not quite always inferring a "physical" or "corporeal" immortality; rather, the ability to transcend the death of the body as consciousness and pass on into the spirit world.

Development might be a better word. "Growth" implies becoming something more, when IMO it is rather a realization of what you already are which is the challenge.

"Ascension" strikes me as a terrible word really, one of those words that keeps the temple doors firmly locked.

Agreed.

About "ascension". Well, this term has been grossly abused in recent years, yes. This was not how I was intending to use the term, really. I mean ascending, as in cultivating one's sensation (and ethical substance) from gross to fine.

Can consciousness be gross? Sure, but what does that mean? Does it mean morally low-minded? Or do you think it means "dull"? And what of its opposite... can a consciousness be "fine"?

Same questions go for "pure"... can energy be pure? I have no concept of that not being the case. Can the body be pure? No. Can consciousness be pure? Leaving out common moral grounds for such a definition, one has to consider what "purity of consciousness" could actually mean.

I believe that all cultivation entails an increase of sensitivity. For instance, when first learning to play the guitar, many have a hard time tuning the strings, because their ears are not trained to distinguish the very fine differences in frequency. With time, practice and re-fine-ment, tuning becomes easy. Similary, when first learning to measure a patient's pulse, freshmen nurses often have a hard time even finding the pulse, let alone feeling a very weak pulse. With experience and "cultivation" of this sensitivity, they will be able to measure even a a very shallow pulse.

These are two examples that I just came up with off the top of my head, and I sure there are better examples out there. But yes, I do believe that this distinction between a gross and a fine matter, energy and consciousness makes sense. In terms of consciousness, though, it may be a matter of becoming more and more aware of one's own consciousness and increasing one's awareness of the ever more subtle instincts, desires and urges that are intruding upon it.

So starting with a vague concept of a spectrum ranging between material and spiritual, you made the leap to chakras.

Rather than continue going down that road, let me challenge you with a question: What if the chakras simply don't exist?

I am not in any way married to the idea of chakras. Literature seems to indicate that the chakras could correspond to distinct glands in the body (testicles, adrenal, pancreas, thymus, thyroid, pituitary and pineal), each with a very specific function, and each, according to my subjective synthesis, easily interpretable against the concept of a spectrum from worldly to spiritual.

What would happen if chakras didn't exist? In the body? -- For me, nothing. I can appreciate the road map that they imply of dealing with sexual urges, emotions, the ego, love, communication, mental and spiritual faculties. Whether they are actually located in the body, hm, hasn't been an issue for me thus far. However, in terms of their stacking up and the direction implied (again, from gross to fine), the notion corresponds very well with the Western idea of speaking of something that is low or base and high or refined, as well as the Daoist concept of the three dantiens.

Hence, when you say the days of the week could mark "a series of steps to be followed", I can somewhat interpret this against my understanding of this task of self-cultivation towards transcendence

What do you mean by "transcendence"?

Transcendence in terms of attaining sovereignty over the basic drives of nature, cultivating the ability to be unstirred by sexual triggers, emotional turmoil, ego identification, and other attachments. Transcendence in terms of identifying fully with consciousness hosted in the physical body but not identical with the body and its urges. Hence, transcendence as the realization of one's true essence as being consciousness.

I want to note here that my synthesis of these ideas is ongoing, it is a process and nothing necessarily has hardened into dogma for me yet. The ultimate goal of the Daoist and Hindu traditions seem to be to overcome all worldly attachment and the need to be reborn, thus attaining a spiritual immortality, and ultimately returning to the union with God. Well. I am personally not quite as lofty. I am currently "laying the foundation", as it's called. Then we'll see where to go from there...

Also look at this... what do you see?

S M T W T F S

About the VITRIOL image. I have come across the "Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem" before, and I read it in terms of Internal, not physical, Alchemy. The attainment of the "philosopher's stone" as the attainment of one's original potential by the integration of all one's latent faculties. Attaining liberation through detachment. I see the union of opposites, fire and water, masculine and feminie (Sun and Moon), the trinity of Body, Mind and Spirit, and a wildly strange cartoon of a newborn human, a unicorn, two birds, a crow and death. Huh.

As for the "SMTWTFS" I only have a very basic observation to offer, Sun-day, Mon- (Moon) day, Tues- (Tyr, Mars?) day, Wednes- (Mercury?) day, Thurs- (Thor, Jupiter?) day, Fri- (Freya, Venus?) day, Satur - (Saturn) day.

I can see that like you said, the numeric value of the planets does not accord to their sequence in a week. The sequence (in terms of numercials) would appear to be 1, 4, 7, 3, 6, 2, 5. Hm.

As you can see, unfortunately I do not seem able to grasp a better understanding of the meaning of the weekly cycle yet.

Any pointers, if you will, are very welcome.

Zhongyongdaoist · May 3, 2015

As for the "SMTWTFS" I only have a very basic observation to offer, Sun-day, Mon- (Moon) day, Tues- (Tyr, Mars?) day, Wednes- (Mercury?) day, Thurs- (Thor, Jupiter?) day, Fri- (Freya, Venus?) day, Satur - (Saturn) day.

Try Latin Days of the Week for a short discussion and convenient summary table. Wednesday is Woden's (Odin) Day, changed to Mitwoch (mid week) in German to suppress the Wodenist cult.

I am sorry that I have not been able to post much recently, but I have been very busy and have not been able to post here as I might wish. I hope to return soon.

FraterUFA · May 5, 2015

Nonetheless, I do strongly believe that "subjective synthesis" is all we have, here.

You couldn't be more wrong.

As for the "SMTWTFS" I only have a very basic observation to offer, Sun-day, Mon- (Moon) day, Tues- (Tyr, Mars?) day, Wednes- (Mercury?) day, Thurs- (Thor, Jupiter?) day, Fri- (Freya, Venus?) day, Satur - (Saturn) day.

Sunday and Monday - The Sun and Moon

Tuesday - A battle

Wednesday - "wedness" day, the day of the wedding. In French, Mercredi, the root of which is Mer, which means "sea"

Thursday - Thors day, Thunder

Friday - The day of the feast

Saturday - The day of rest, the completion of the work.

Edit: I was in a hurry when I wrote this and I didn't have time to mention that there are two crosses (Taus) and two serpents in there as well.

UFA

Edited May 5, 2015 by FraterUFA

noonespecial · May 5, 2015

The quote system here drives me nuts lol, quickly:

On subjective synthesis; this does not mean no-thing is objective, it is fancy speak for saying, 'stick with one system and use it,' this forms a baseline standard on which to perform esoteric experimentation.

On the 72 -

From what I've gathered both through reading, experience and a bit of intuition - is that all of 'this' relates to time, which relates to space, which relate to death and generation (ie. the enemy, the devil is directly equated with death in early church literature, Origen, Augustine, etc). So then the 72 are the subangles of the 12. The quote from Jesus is interesting because the gnostic saw these entities as the enemy, the masters of time, where as in the European extract of hermeticism we tend to entertain these beings as deities, even as gods to be worshiped without making a solid cosmological decision as to their nature.

I have not done a working of the 72. Maybe one day.

FraterUFA · May 5, 2015

I have a few minutes now for some additional commentary.

Noonespecial has, in the course of this thread, enriched me with Joseph Lisewski's term, "subjective synthesis", that I would like to rephrase here as "subjective syncretism".

I presume you mean Joseph Lisiewski. A student of Fr. Albertus, who has been reported by one his other students as having personally admitted to him that he "was not an alchemist". I found Lisiewsky's account of Israel Regardie and Albertus to be a fascinating read but I am very skeptical of him as an authority. For one, he wrote an entire book claiming to be the inventor of an astrological divination system that has been in the public domain for about a century in the Church of Light teachings. Secondly, I know that he engaged in unethical marketing tactics for his book on said subject. Third, there appears to be considerable doubt on many claims he makes about his past, including his claim to have a PhD. His entire body of work is thrown into doubt because there is a strong case to be made that he fabricates and borrows without credit.

You are correct that this is how and when the Western culture has familiarized itself with these concept. Another way of phrasing it, however, would be to say that "the concept of Chakras" has been around for thousands of years in the Eastern cultures.

Assuming this is true, the existence of an authentic teaching of the chakras has no bearing on the existence of a fully active Western tradition, one which has transmitted its current from teacher to student for many centuries. A tradition that I can assure you, does not require interpretation via the aid of outside sources.

It is both a blessing and a confusion that today we are able to have a look at all these various, sometimes mutually exclusive, sometimes outright conflicting traditions.

I don't see how it is a blessing. I submit that it contributes to the confusion and leads serious seekers astray. For instance, how many people believe that the alchemist's red and white are a veiled reference to Ida and Pingala? This is 100% wrong.

Nonetheless, I do strongly believe that "subjective synthesis" is all we have, here. These are knowledge traditions that we are well advised to approach with an open mind and reflect it against our understanding and intuition to see what... well, "synthesizes".

Who is this person who is advising us to approach the knowledge traditions with an open mind exactly?

The fact that he is referring to them as knowledge traditions tells me that he has not clue what he's talking about or he is intentionally messing with you.

I think "he" wants you to synthesize these traditions so that you never figure out who "he" is.

My observation had been a very basic one: That the seven deadly sins of the Catholic Church correspond exactly with the character ascribed to the Daoist "seven corporeal souls".

I think at this point you should be asking yourself what your motivation is in comparing the teachings of the church with Daoism. These two traditions are mutually exclusive.

The teaching behind these souls I found to be even more striking and meaningful: (I will repeat this from memory, it may not be entirely correct), in Daoism the human body is inhabited by seven corporeal souls (the "po") which have been given to the body by the earth and after death will return to earth, and additionally three celestial souls (the "hun"), which have been given to the body by heaven and after death will return to heaven. The corporeal souls are said to desire to return to earth even before death and thus try to influence a human being toward behavior that will quite literally kill him -- such as greed, lustful indulgence, anger, etc.

That's what the Catholic Church would refer to as a pagan teaching, one which would land your soul in hell if you subscribed to it. Or are we not going to acknowledge that inconvenience because it doesn't mesh with your "subjective synthesis"?

As the character ascribed to the seven chakras (that I am aware of) reflects very well against my personal subjective syncretism, well, I chose to consider it as meaningful.

The fact that it reflects well against your personal subjective syncretism counts for absolutely nothing. Just because you believe something to be true, doesn't make it true (or practical). You don't see that you've framed a problem, come up with an eloquent solution and have fallen in love with it. Does it occur to you that the error might lie in how you've framed the problem?

Agreed. To my understanding the attainment of unity with God, which would seem the ultimate goal of all cultivation practice,

That's a controversial statement, which you may not be surprised to find I disagree with.

is a stage that is far beyond corporeal existence.

This is an alleged Eastern teaching that is diametrically opposed to the western esoteric tradition. A similar statement could be made in regards to the western exoteric tradition, however.

I am not in any way married to the idea of chakras. Literature seems to indicate that the chakras could correspond to distinct glands in the body (testicles, adrenal, pancreas, thymus, thyroid, pituitary and pineal), each with a very specific function, and each, according to my subjective synthesis, easily interpretable against the concept of a spectrum from worldly to spiritual.

A lot of people believe that.

...

However, in terms of their stacking up and the direction implied (again, from gross to fine), the notion corresponds very well with the Western idea of speaking of something that is low or base and high or refined, as well as the Daoist concept of the three dantiens.

The comparison to Daoism...

Transcendence in terms of attaining sovereignty over the basic drives of nature, cultivating the ability to be unstirred by sexual triggers, emotional turmoil, ego identification, and other attachments. Transcendence in terms of identifying fully with consciousness hosted in the physical body but not identical with the body and its urges. Hence, transcendence as the realization of one's true essence as being consciousness.

Leads you to Eastern-sounding mumbo jumbo like this.

I want to note here that my synthesis of these ideas is ongoing, it is a process and nothing necessarily has hardened into dogma for me yet.

At what point do you intend to have it harden into dogma?

The ultimate goal of the Daoist and Hindu traditions seem to be to overcome all worldly attachment and the need to be reborn, thus attaining a spiritual immortality, and ultimately returning to the union with God. Well. I am personally not quite as lofty. I am currently "laying the foundation", as it's called. Then we'll see where to go from there...

Sounds like a pretty miserable way to live, trying to transcend all this messy worldliness.

About the VITRIOL image. I have come across the "Visita Interiora Terrae Rectificando Invenies Occultum Lapidem" before, and I read it in terms of Internal, not physical, Alchemy.

A distinction which isn't quite so clear as one might think but you are on the right track.

The attainment of the "philosopher's stone" as the attainment of one's original potential by the integration of all one's latent faculties.

A good insight. Though what of the physical Philosopher's Stone?

Attaining liberation through detachment.

"Subjective synthesis" has grasped defeat from the jaws of victory.

I see the union of opposites, fire and water, masculine and feminie (Sun and Moon), the trinity of Body, Mind and Spirit, and a wildly strange cartoon of a newborn human, a unicorn, two birds, a crow and death. Huh.

Understanding begins with seeing. But you can't see while your intellect is spinning so hard.

Without claiming to understand it fully, this diagram is at least somewhat straightforward and does not (probably cannot) be explained by Eastern teachings. There are some very specific practices indicated by it, practices which are not to my knowledge taught in Daoism, for example.

I can see that like you said, the numeric value of the planets does not accord to their sequence in a week. The sequence (in terms of numercials) would appear to be 1, 4, 7, 3, 6, 2, 5. Hm.

Ruach, Ruach spinning around,

Never does he gain any ground.

Numbers, facts, allegory

Only tell half the story.

Any pointers, if you will, are very welcome.

You need to pick a side: East or West?

UFA

Asmo · May 5, 2015

Ruach, Ruach spinning around,

Never does he gain any ground.

Numbers, facts, allegory

Only tell half the story.

I like that !

noonespecial · May 5, 2015

I presume you mean Joseph Lisiewski. A student of Fr. Albertus, who has been reported by one his other students as having personally admitted to him that he "was not an alchemist". I found Lisiewsky's account of Israel Regardie and Albertus to be a fascinating read but I am very skeptical of him as an authority. For one, he wrote an entire book claiming to be the inventor of an astrological divination system that has been in the public domain for about a century in the Church of Light teachings. Secondly, I know that he engaged in unethical marketing tactics for his book on said subject. Third, there appears to be considerable doubt on many claims he makes about his past, including his claim to have a PhD. His entire body of work is thrown into doubt because there is a strong case to be made that he fabricates and borrows without credit.

Briefly, I did business with him last year, (I had some books he wanted) and he is a really great person, understanding, patient, courteous, etc. You may or may not be correct, either way it's not very cool to defame someones character who is not present to counter such claims.

Astrology: Overlaying Four Directions, Zodiac Signs & ... the Tarot?!

Recommended Posts

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites