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

[Zhongyongdaoist]

 

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. (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

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.

 

If Frater UFA is referring to this book:

 

Kabbalistic Cycles & the Mastery of Life

 

Then he must be referring to this book:

 

Self-Mastery and Fate with the Cycles of Life

 

Which Albertus did use in his teachings, and was very open about his source, so Lisiewiski might have written on it, though it is AMORC and not Church of Light.  I never cared much for the system and I have not read Lisiewiski's book, so I cannot comment further and leave it to someone else to confirm or refute the charge of plagiarism.

[noonespecial]

If Frater UFA is referring to this book:

 

Kabbalistic Cycles & the Mastery of Life

 

Then he must be referring to this book:

 

Self-Mastery and Fate with the Cycles of Life

 

Which Albertus did use in his teachings, and was very open about his source, so Lisiewiski might have written on it, though it is AMORC and not Church of Light.  I never cared much for the system and I have not read Lisiewiski's book, so I cannot comment further and leave it to someone else to confirm or refute the charge of plagiarism.

 

Yup, I actually have a copy of that book on my computer, and he goes into quite some detail about the AMORC system and the differences, neither is my cup of tea either, but it seems to be a quality work. Anyway I should also mention that during our correspondence, neither of us not once made mention of his occult celebrity, which he surely must habe known I was aware due to the titles I was selling, neither did he expect any 'deals' didnt make a hassle over my pricing, and blunder I made in describing the item. Hence my comment, seems like a very upright guy.

[FraterUFA]

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.

 

So in other words, we shouldn't raise legitimate concerns that might place an author in a negative light, if they aren't here?

 

Is that because you did business with him or because he is a understanding, patient and courteous person?

 

The Amazon reviews of his book (mentioned below) are verifiably manipulated and the publisher denies having done it. I am an author and I'm inclined to believe that no reputable publisher would do this knowing full well they would get caught, so that leaves one likely suspect. I will leave the claims about his PhD to others to unravel. A bit of searching will find you far more information than that which I've described here.

 

 

If Frater UFA is referring to this book:

 

Kabbalistic Cycles & the Mastery of Life

 

Then he must be referring to this book:

 

Self-Mastery and Fate with the Cycles of Life

 

Which Albertus did use in his teachings, and was very open about his source, so Lisiewiski might have written on it, though it is AMORC and not Church of Light.  I never cared much for the system and I have not read Lisiewiski's book, so I cannot comment further and leave it to someone else to confirm or refute the charge of plagiarism.

 

No. Lisiewski rejects the AMORC system in his book. I am referring to "Horary Astrology" by C.C. Zain and published by the Church of Light. 

 

So on to Lisiewski. He is very confident in his system and makes quite a claim early on using marketing copy that could work equally well for building your real estate empire with no money down. His words:

 

 

Those of us who have employed the principles of this Kabbalistic Cycles and the Mastery of Life System as I called it throughout the years, have not only found it works consistently and accurately, but we have also found it gives us priceless insights into the motivations of others. In short, it provides us with the tools with which we can chart our own course in life, and be much more than relatively or fairly certain of the results. If you have had enough of all the ‘ologies,’ ‘isms’ and ‘ics’ out there, and are still looking, then look no further. You have finally found the System of life mastery that can make all the difference in your personal, professional, and spiritual or psychic life, as I will refer to this part of your nature throughout this book. And I am very, very serious about this.

 

His contributor, Christopher Hyatt says the author discovered this system and as it is included in the book, the author supports that claim:

 

 

When Joe originally presented his work on this Kabbalistic Cycles System (which he began working on in 1966) to Regardie in 1978 and again in the years to follow, their conversations on this matter would always end on the same note. Regardie always had his hands full with other things, but he still felt that people needed a better way to use the occult forces that exist “out there” and in their own psyches to aid them in their daily lives. So, since he didn’t have the time, he would always encourage Joe to figure this one out. Joe took Regardie’s encouragements seriously, trying to determine if such a system could indeed be either found or constructed. It would take him another eleven years after our 1987 discussion before he had all of the proof he needed that the system he discovered— as he insists, not constructed— was complete, and had been thoroughly tested.

 

How good is this system?

 

 

To the best knowledge of Dr. Lisiewski, my own, and so many others to whom he privately taught this Kabbalistic Cycles System, there is no other occult system or method like it in the world, past or present. This system is completely new. It is unique. And it is a true discovery.

 

So, we have here a new, unique, virtually foolproof system that anyone could use to harness the forces of the universe in accordance with their will. Such a system would not be easy to find and according to the Foreword, it took the author 33 years to discover it.

 

The system? Planetary hours overlaid with certain paths of the Tree of Life, a "discovery" that could be fully described in a page or two.

 

Lisiewski claims that Agrippa came up with a similar system but that it is too complicated to use for horary purposes. He then proceeds to describe in Chapter 7 a simpler version using equal day & night hours.

 

This same system was laid out by CC Zain nearly a century earlier. Here is the original table. If you follow along, you will see that there is a blind in it (which stands out like a sore thumb to anyone who sees how this table is constructed). With the exception of the blind, this system and all attributions are identical to Lisiewski's.

 

 

 

So what we are left with at the end of our read is that the author took 33 years to "discover" a system of horary astrology that is virtually identical to that described in great detail by CC Zain - in the public domain - long before. Lisiewski arguably added the attributions of the Tarot trumps via the Tree of Life to certain of these hours, though that is hardly a major innovation, in that it simply conflates what is already a fairly straightforward system (Does one really need Key 10, The Wheel of Fortune, to tell them that a Jupiter hour on a Venus day is a fortuitous sign?).

 

BTW, if you think I am leaving something out, go read the Amazon reviews or purchase the book for yourself (you can read it in an hour). 90% of it is utter fluff and consists largely of telling the reader how great the system is.

 

Best,

UFA

 

[FraterUFA]

Yup, I actually have a copy of that book on my computer, and he goes into quite some detail about the AMORC system and the differences, neither is my cup of tea either, but it seems to be a quality work. 

 

You must be reading a different book. I would be interested to know exactly what you find in this title that constitutes quality.

 

UFA

[noonespecial]

Thanks for the more in depth analysis of the system UFA. I suppose when youre an author you willingly put yourelf out there for that type of critique, especially in nebulous fields such as the occult. What I saw was a character assesment that did not at all match my experience with the man, simple as that.

[noonespecial]

"You must be reading a different book. I would be interested to know exactly what you find in this title that constitutes quality."

 

UFA

 

Thats a polite way of saying 'it was just ok' - not hot steaming garbage, neither a game changer of any sort. I found it lies in step with much of modern occult literature, wherein an older system such as Trithmesius, Dee/Kelly or in this case, I thought Agrippa (until you mentioned the Church of Light) is 'updated' whether for better or worse - and publsihed as new. I am also aware that the book industry is a very competitive market, and it is ultimately a business, and the book struck me as title that was written for the layperson, perhaps someone with a casual interest in Kabalah (NOT QABALAH) sees the title and picks it up on a hunch at Barnes & Nobles, and I'm sure any unscrupulous actions taken on behalf of the publisher do not necesarily represent the wishes of the author.

 

By the way, you mentioned youre an author, where can we find your work?

Edited May 6, 2015 by noonespecial

[FraterUFA]

By the way, you mentioned youre an author, where can we find your work?

 

Most bookstores. :-)

 

UFA

[noonespecial]

Most bookstores. :-)

 

UFA

 

......thats helpful.

[FraterUFA]

......thats helpful.

 

My answer is tongue in cheek obviously. The real answer is that I wish to remain anonymous. My books are not on esoteric subjects anyway.

 

UFA

[noonespecial]

My answer is tongue in cheek obviously. The real answer is that I wish to remain anonymous. My books are not on esoteric subjects anyway.

 

UFA

 

Got it.

[Nungali]

Well, in the realm of 'occult authors' .....  one need not construct a system ... one just needs to open a copy of some earlier magical 'pop-obscure' book that most  modern persons would not be bothered to read ... and discover  something.

 

And write it up as your own ... as much as this sucks .... errrmmm ,  it isnt that rare a thing in 'occult writings'  

 

As for the hype ...  yeah, marketing, turning a buck, .....  There has always been something about the Hyatt hype that bugs me.

 

The quotes above about how great the system is reads like the back of a Llewellyn publication. 

[Nungali]

My answer is tongue in cheek obviously. The real answer is that I wish to remain anonymous. My books are not on esoteric subjects anyway.

 

UFA

 

 

 You're Frank Kafka  ? ! ?  

 

 

 

( (     ...     http://thedaobums.com/topic/38295-before-the-law-by-frank-kafka/         )

Edited May 6, 2015 by Nungali

[EFS White]

Thanks to everyone keeping this discussion alive and interesting.

--

@FraterUFA
 

 

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

 

You couldn't be more wrong.

 

Well, yeah, I am really glad you came back later when you had more time for a more elaborate response. Above statement, even if you are right, is not very instructive or well-argued. If you examine how you have attained everything you think you know and everything you believe in, do you not find that everything had, if it something you consciously believe in at some point to be passed by your internal BS-filter? Deciding whether x is something you do indeed or do not believe. Is it merely a misunderstanding of words or does that sound like a subjective assessment and re-composition? Hence, "subjective synthesis"?
 

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.

(...) there are two crosses (Taus) and two serpents in there as well.

 

 

SMTWTFS

This input of yours is very intriguing. If we assume "Wednesday" as the day of the (alchemical) wedding, union of opposites, it indeed is interpretable as a sort of mirror for the week: with two "s"-s at either end of the scale, then "m" (Monday) and "f" (Friday), which I would love to read as masculine and feminine -- which however doesn't correspond very well with the assumption that the moon is more of a female energy. However, one could consider the Moon and Freia (Venus) days as the feminine, and the two crosses (Tyr and Thor) as the two masculine days. So yeah, makes for a nice mirroring. And I do find it more than intriguing to thereby "oppose" the Sun and Saturn (the black sun) at two ends of the spectrum. Hmm. Very interesting indeed.

--

@noonespecial

 

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.

 

So, well, I must have interpreted this term wrongly. But thank you for clariying your point of view on this. Possibly, however, we are not as far apart in interpreting this terminology. I agree, the way I see it there are most certainly objective realities out there. The reason the term had appealed to me is that I believe as human beings it is extremely difficult to be truly "objective", as everything is filtered first by who we are. I find it very interesting that these aspects become so apparent in scientific work as well, where no matter how professional and methodical someone tries to be very often we do see that scientists do bring a bias to their work, that distorts whatever "objective reality" they are trying to investigate through their subjective lenses.

As for the 72 -- hm, I guess what's difficult for me is that I would like to trace back how this number originated to its position of prominence in so many traditions, and what underlying "objective reality" there is that made people recognize this phenomenon. At times mysteries and their neverending veils and riddles truly drive me nuts.

Anyway, thanks for the input. I hope one day it will start to make more sense to me.

--

 

@FraterUFA
 

Again, thank you for taking the time for a more in-depth commentary.

 

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.

 

I agree, it could be wise to view these traditions as parallel and mutually exclusive as to avoid confusion. My study started out predominantly in the Eastern mysteries, and then it appeared to me that Western Alchemical traditions (and others) could be talking about the exact same thing -- especially, for instance, in terms of internal cultivation, Daoist Neigong and the philosophy of lead-into-gold, the Philosopher's Stone etc.

 

Even if this assumption were not plainly wrong and there are indeed a few similarities, I do see how deciding exclusively for one mystery tradition has its advantages.
 

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.

 

The fact that mystery traditions love cyphering their wisdom so that non-initiates will be unable to attain it seems that we do not need the additional confusion of even more traditions with even more veils and metaphors and symbolisms to block us from insight. The reason I see it as a blessing is that I fundamentally do not like when information is controlled via one institution, as this might just put -- as it has more than once throughout history -- these guardians of information in an undue position of power over others. Secondly, I see this availability of information from other cultures as a great benefit as the West, both in terms of economic reasoning as well as their scientific world-view seems to have adopted a very much mechanistic and quantitative view, and often all too easily ridicules notions outside of its own scope of comprehension, while the Eastern traditions (that's a blanket statement, I am aware) overall seem to allow for a more energetic and qualitative reasoning and view of the world.

I have been raised mostly against a protestant christian backdrop and along those lines I had never felt to have truly had access to an authentic spirituality. Hence for me it was a great benefit to seek and find Buddhist and Daoist literature in order to find my own entry to spirituality. In many way it seems that now, via this detour, I am understanding Christianity much better than before.
 

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.

 

I personally do not think of this in terms of a person, no matter how interesting that proposition is you are making. The way you are framing the argument here is the make it seem that some Satan (opposer) is well aware of "the truth" but deliberately pulls a fruit-of-the-tree-of-knowledge kind of number on us in order to confuse us and lead us astray.

But I suggest that this quite depends on the reason why one wants to uncover the mysteries. Is it for power and self-serving? Or is it because some of us share a feeling that there is more to life and we want to learn our true place in this world?

I can well see how people will flock to the occult in hopes to attain magical power to dominate others and fulfill all their desires. Well, I find that the more I strive to learn and understand the occult, there more it humbles me and puts everything in perspective.
 

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.

 

Can you tell me how you know they are mutually exclusive? I have come across someone's research who had tracked back the importance of the numbers 7 and 14 to the Egyptian mystery traditions and claims to have found that the Egyptians believed there were 7 invisible forces (each with two polarities) that were affecting human beings. Which is simply a notion that seems to have appeared time and again, when for instance learning of the Daoist 7 corporeal souls, the 7 deadly sins, the 7 adventures of Sinbad etc. I haven't had the time to have a look at it, but supposedly the Book of Bahir is another source that claims to underline the import and meaning of the number 7.

What is my motivation? I want to understand. I believe that wisdom traditions are man's attempt to ever pass on what they have learned and acquired during their lifetimes to be true of the world around them. Can I fully explain my motivation for that? Probably not, as for all I can tell it has always been with me, from childhood on. But to the best of my ability I would say it is about the feeling that there is more to this world and this life and I want to try my best to find answers and truth.

+++ will expand later, gotta go +++




 

[FraterUFA]

Good questions, EFS White.

 

Well, yeah, I am really glad you came back later when you had more time for a more elaborate response. Above statement, even if you are right, is not very instructive or well-argued. If you examine how you have attained everything you think you know and everything you believe in, do you not find that everything had, if it something you consciously believe in at some point to be passed by your internal BS-filter? Deciding whether x is something you do indeed or do not believe. Is it merely a misunderstanding of words or does that sound like a subjective assessment and re-composition? Hence, "subjective synthesis"?

 

"Subjective synthesis" as you've described it here is simply a fancy label for the ordinary function of the rational mind (intellect). There is nothing particularly special that is denoted by this term. Most people on the planet use it every day of their lives.

 

The problem is that this part of the mind in the average, untrained person exhibits a pathology that is nearly invisible and pernicious. The intellect itself cannot see it or deal with it.

 

Because of this pathology, nearly everything one believes or reasons about is false or based on unfounded assumption. If you critically examine the contents of your rational mind, how much can you say that it knows for certain?

 

 

I agree, it could be wise to view these traditions as parallel and mutually exclusive as to avoid confusion. My study started out predominantly in the Eastern mysteries, and then it appeared to me that Western Alchemical traditions (and others) could be talking about the exact same thing -- especially, for instance, in terms of internal cultivation, Daoist Neigong and the philosophy of lead-into-gold, the Philosopher's Stone etc.

 

Right there is the problem. You started off with a belief and then you overlaid it on a different set of symbols. By doing so, you eliminated all possibility of hearing what those symbols had to say for themselves and instead, you saw only a mirror.

 

Alchemical traditions are not talking about neigong, internal cultivation (in the Taoist sense), or chakras. One doesn't need to be connected to the tradition to see that, one only has to look with open eyes.

 

Even if this assumption were not plainly wrong and there are indeed a few similarities, I do see how deciding exclusively for one mystery tradition has its advantages.

 

One cannot come to illumination on their own. One must find help.

 

To gain illumination, one must work with someone who is already illuminated, under the constraints of not only a mutually agreed upon end goal, but also a mutually agreed upon method towards attaining that goal. Brothers and sisters who share both the destination and the path.

 

What does that imply about those who try to synthesize their own systems and practices, especially when you factor in that when we are starting out, our minds are essentially a chaos?

 

 

The fact that mystery traditions love cyphering their wisdom so that non-initiates will be unable to attain it seems that we do not need the additional confusion of even more traditions with even more veils and metaphors and symbolisms to block us from insight.

 

Yes, precisely.

 

The reason I see it as a blessing is that I fundamentally do not like when information is controlled via one institution, as this might just put -- as it has more than once throughout history -- these guardians of information in an undue position of power over others.

 

One of the reasons for the veils, allegories and clever ciphers used in the west is to ensure the accurate transmission of said knowledge to future generations, despite efforts to control it.

 

I personally do not think of this in terms of a person, no matter how interesting that proposition is you are making. 

 

You've introduced an assumption: Who said I was referring to a person?

 

The way you are framing the argument here is the make it seem that some Satan (opposer) is well aware of "the truth" but deliberately pulls a fruit-of-the-tree-of-knowledge kind of number on us in order to confuse us and lead us astray.

 

That is not what I said.

 

If one considers that:

 

   A) There is a western esoteric tradition operating behind the scenes,

    There are political and religious forces which seek to stamp out that tradition,

   C) That the students who are capable of receiving that transmission are few and far between

   D) The adepts of this tradition have to pass their teachings surreptitiously in order to have a hope of reaching them

   E) The teachings themselves must contain a test in order to lead the unripe astray...

 

Then it follows that the footprints of this underground current must be hidden in plain sight. The solution is both humorous and ironic, fitting of the Hermetic adepts: the people themselves are utilized for this purpose. The Bible, tarot, astrology, architecture... all carry bits of truth (mixed with many superstitions and fantasies) and they are eagerly consumed by the masses.

 

All of that was my way of telling you to go read Genesis. It contains a clever cipher for the wet path, as well as a relatively straightforward exposition (though not literal) of the origin and current state of man. 

 

But I suggest that this quite depends on the reason why one wants to uncover the mysteries. Is it for power and self-serving? Or is it because some of us share a feeling that there is more to life and we want to learn our true place in this world?

 

That is a critical question.

 

I can well see how people will flock to the occult in hopes to attain magical power to dominate others and fulfill all their desires. Well, I find that the more I strive to learn and understand the occult, there more it humbles me and puts everything in perspective.

 

That's a good attitude.

 

Can you tell me how you know they are mutually exclusive?

 

Simple. I was raised Catholic. Believing in Taoist teachings (paganism) will earn you eternal damnation. They teach this in Sunday school!

 

Keep in mind though that I am speaking of the exoteric Roman Catholic Church. Not the esoteric tradition behind it.

 

UFA

[EFS White]

Just to let everyone, and you commentators in particular, know: I am buried in work right now and will have to postpone my further research of this topic. I am hoping to resume this thread some time next week.

[noonespecial]

I stand corrected, the origin of the 36 decans seems to originate in Egypt -

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decans

 

36+36=72 (each hour has 3 deacons, there are 24 hours in a day)

 

Here is a great link on the Shem -

 

http://www.hermeticgoldendawn.org/leitch-shemhamephoresh.html

Edited May 25, 2015 by noonespecial