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
>>>
>>
>>
>
|