Wow. You're good!
Thanks!
:-)
Cheers,
Matt
On 26-Jun-06, at 6:19 PM, Jeffrey S. Kupperman wrote:
> Several, depending on your source. For Jewish correpsondences I would
> recommend taking a look at Areyh Kaplan's translation of the Sefer
> Yetzirah. In the case of the GD, I believe the attributions of the
> lower sefirot, from Malkhut to Tiferet, are discussed in the Z1 paper,
> vol 6 of the Complete GD, begining on page 56 of my edition, under
> "The Symbolism of the Temple"
>
> Malkhut is to the West, and takes up most of the western part of the
> Neophyte hall, the altar is in the eastern part of Malkhut. Between
> the the altar and the station of the Hegemon is Yesod and the Hegemon
> is between the pillars which are Hod and Netzach. Tiferet is beyond
> the portal to the East. So, from a Hall of the Neophytes perspective
> the directions on the Tree would be:
>
> Malkhut: West
> Yesod: Center
> Hod: East
> Netzach: North
> Tiferet: East
>
> peace
> -jeffrey
>
> Matt Habermehl wrote:
>> Jeffrey,
>>
>> Now that I look at it again, I had indeed seen the diagram of "The
>> Reflection of the Elements Down the Tree" before. My mind was working
>> against me because I was trying to figure out directional
>> correspondences. Do you happen to know if the sefirotic system has
>> any directional correspondences?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Matt
>>
>> On 26-Jun-06, at 5:44 PM, Jeffrey S. Kupperman wrote:
>>
>>> Matt,
>>>
>>> The sefirotic elemental system works, roughly, thusly: the sefirot
>>> along the middle pillar, with the exception of Malkhut, are
>>> associated with the element of air, Malkhut is earth. Fire and water
>>> cross back and forth on the two side pillars. Fire is associated
>>> with Chokmah, Gevurah and Netzach, water with Binah, Chesed and Hod.
>>> You will find this in volume three, page 86, of the Complete GD (I'm
>>> looking at a 5th printing from 1994, I don't know if previous
>>> printings are different).
>>>
>>> re: the four winds. on pg 283 of Regardies The Golden Dawn, in the
>>> paper on the ritual of the pentagram it reads:
>>>
>>> The elements vibrate between the Cardinal points for they have not
>>> an unchangeable abode therein, though they are allotted to the Four
>>> Quarters in their invokation [sic] in the Ceremonies of the First
>>> Order. This attribution is derived from the nature of the winds. For
>>> the Easterly wind is of the Nature of Air more especially. The South
>>> Wind bringeth into action the nature of Fire. West winds bring with
>>> them moisture and rain. North winds are cold and dry like Earth. The
>>> S.W. wind is violent and explosive - the mingling of the contrary
>>> elements of Fire and Water. The N.W. and S.W. winds are more
>>> harmonious, uniting the influence of the two active and passive
>>> elements.
>>>
>>> Er, to cross index, this is on page 12 of volume 4 of the Complete
>>> GD. That same section goes on to discuss the cardinal directions and
>>> the elements, which is brought up again in the next paper on the
>>> hexagram.
>>>
>>> peace
>>> -j
>>>
>>> Matt Habermehl wrote:
>>>> Jeffrey,
>>>> Very helpful - thanks.
>>>> I have a version of Book One of Agrippa's sitting here beside me,
>>>> but it's not Tyson's edition - though I think I can get Tyson's
>>>> from a friend. I will most certainly check that out. Also, I will
>>>> review the hexagram ritual. I'm not sure where to look regarding
>>>> the attributes given to the lower sefirot, but I have Regardie's
>>>> Complete GD System here, so I'll give that huge volume a browse ;-)
>>>> Now, you mention the one according to the for winds... Is there a
>>>> place in any GD literature where it explicitly says that this is
>>>> how they've arranged the elements?
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> matt
>>>>
>>>> On 26-Jun-06, at 4:46 PM, Jeffrey S. Kupperman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Matt,
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a fairly good overview of this sort of elemental theory
>>>>> in Tyson's edition of the Three Books of Occult Philosophy
>>>>> (appendix III). In this he goes over both Aristotle's and Ocellus'
>>>>> quite similar thoughts on the matter. Its relatively in depth for
>>>>> an appendix and you might want to give it a look over.
>>>>>
>>>>> It might also be useful to point out that the GD, when conjoined
>>>>> with the RR et AC, used at least three different elemental
>>>>> systems, one according to the four winds, on according to the
>>>>> attributes given to the lower sefirot and an astrological one
>>>>> using the cardinal signs, which is found in the hexagram rituals.
>>>>>
>>>>> peace
>>>>> -jeffrey
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt Habermehl wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks Jeremy,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've heard this idea before too, and I wonder about it. Most
>>>>>> specifically, I wonder about relating the qualities of hot, cold,
>>>>>> moist and dry to fire, earth, water and air respectively.
>>>>>> I'm about to plunge into more research to confirm this, but I
>>>>>> believe that - at least in Aristotle - the dominant qualities of
>>>>>> the elements were as follows:
>>>>>> Earth - Dry
>>>>>> Water - Cool
>>>>>> Air - Moist
>>>>>> Fire - Warm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I realize that this is a counter-intuitive arrangement, but it
>>>>>> works excellently in the elemental square of opposition.
>>>>>> Water is cool and moist
>>>>>> Earth is dry and cool
>>>>>> Fire is warm and dry
>>>>>> Air is moist and warm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the primary qualities of the elements were as Ptolemy's winds:
>>>>>> Earth - Cool
>>>>>> Water - Moist
>>>>>> Air - Dry (?)
>>>>>> Fire - Warm
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then no matter what the secondary quality was for each element,
>>>>>> Air would still need to be a dry element.
>>>>>> This, unfortunately, conflicts with the GD's first knowledge
>>>>>> lecture, which lists the elements with their standard qualities,
>>>>>> and Air as "Heat and Moisture". Now, you did point out that Air
>>>>>> was a special case, so there may be a complication here that I'm
>>>>>> not aware of...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But if the Aristotelian primary qualities are assigned to
>>>>>> Ptolemy's winds, we would have:
>>>>>> Water = North
>>>>>> Air = West
>>>>>> Fire = South
>>>>>> Earth = East
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyways, this is the mystery I'm looking to solve by finding out
>>>>>> the origins of the GD system. Thanks for your input!!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>> Matt
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 26-Jun-06, at 2:03 PM, Jeremy Glick wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jun 26, 2006, at 7:56 AM, Matt Habermehl wrote:
>>>>>>>> Does anyone know of any sources that discuss the rationale or
>>>>>>>> the history of the adoption of the Golden Dawn's directional
>>>>>>>> elemental attributions (Earth = N, Air = E, Fire = S, Water =
>>>>>>>> W)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Matt,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The rationale I remember hearing is that it corresponds to the
>>>>>>> classical four winds, and this seems to fit. Ptolemy, for
>>>>>>> example, writes in Tetrabiblos (the classic text on astrology)
>>>>>>> about the four winds, called Apeliotes (east), Notus (south),
>>>>>>> Zephyrus (west), and Boreas (north): see
>>>>>>> http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Ptolemy/
>>>>>>> Tetrabiblos/1B*.html#10.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now, these don't correspond exactly to the elemental
>>>>>>> attributions, since Ptolemy doesn't use the four elements model,
>>>>>>> but rather the four properties of hot, dry, cold, and moist.
>>>>>>> Still, he states that Notus is "hot and rarifying", Zephyrus is
>>>>>>> "fresh and moist", and Boreas is "cold and condensing". The
>>>>>>> only major point of divergence is that he refers to Apeliotes as
>>>>>>> "without moisture and drying in effect", when Air is typically
>>>>>>> thought of as being hot and moist.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Still, the correspondence is pretty close, and I'd imagine that
>>>>>>> this is the source of the attributions, though I don't have any
>>>>>>> direct evidence to support that. So I guess this isn't much
>>>>>>> help in figuring out the history of the Golden Dawn's use. For
>>>>>>> what it's worth, the Wikipedia article on the four cardinal
>>>>>>> winds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anemoi) doesn't mention any
>>>>>>> classical connection to the elements, though that doesn't mean
>>>>>>> too much by itself. Anybody know for certain?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also thought I'd take this opportunity to introduce myself,
>>>>>>> since I haven't posted to the list before. My name's Jeremy
>>>>>>> Glick, and I'm a soon-to-be grad student in psychology, focusing
>>>>>>> on neural network models of mind. The study of magic is a side
>>>>>>> pursuit of mine, one which I greatly enjoy, but it's not where
>>>>>>> most of my academic credentials lie. I hope to learn a great
>>>>>>> deal from the conversations on this mailing list; I've enjoyed
>>>>>>> what I've read so far. Thanks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yours,
>>>>>>> Jeremy
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|