Tree of Life - [c]Hockmah

just today i found this quote:

"As we have already noted, the Tree of Life is a diagrammatic representation of the Universe on which the positive and negative, male and female aspects are represented by the two flanking Pillars of Mercy and Severity. It may seem strange to uninstructed thought that the title of Mercy should be given to the male or positive Pillar, and that of Severity to the female Pillar; but when it is realised that the dynamic male type of force is the stimulator of upbuilding and evolution, and that the female type of force is the builder of forms, it willbe seen that the nomenclature is apt; for form, although it is the builder and orginaser, is also the limiter; each form that is built mustin turn be outgrown, lose its usefulness, and so become a hinderance to evolving life, and therefore the bringer in of dissolutuon and decay, which lead on to death,. The Father is the Giver of life; but the Mother is the Giver of death, because her womb is the gate of ingress to matter, and through her life is ensouled in form, and no form can be either infinite or eternal. Death is implicit in birth."

Dion Fortune - The Mystical Qabalah


***

and it was just such an Aha! moment for me so i thought i would share
i really love this book by the way, Dion Fortune has such a clear and lucid way of writing that even i can understand her.

Athought about chockmahs origins. Would the original [primeval] tree 'birth' have taken the lightning path? In such would it move kether-chockmah- binah, then strike across 'the abyss' to chessed? Have the paths, and the gateway they give linking Chockmah directly to chessed and tiphareth, only have significance when viewed from assiah? How 'real' are the pillars?

a question of energies

i was reading in my qabalistic tarot book that the chockmah is considered masculine, ( i always wondered why they associated the chockmah with the king instead of the kether)

would it be safe to say then that 2 is qabalah/speaking male and three is femine ?
that would explain why the emperess is three and emperor is four,
and the high priestress is seated not revealing any body for it is really a guy .

correct to say
1, is not male but the all, manifested
2. is the male extension of that all as created,
3. is the female extensions of that all as manifested, ?

jmd said:

The Golden Dawn itself didn't link Hockmah to any planets, but rather to the sphere of the zodiac (hence, the eighth ptolemaic 'star' sphere). However, it does seem that many Golden Dawn derivatives did indeed make the association mentioned by AmounrA.

Click to expand...

In looking for a thread related to the Tree of Life correlation for the "modern" planets as a result of the diagram shown in Lon Milo DuQuette's "Understanding Thoth" book, I came across this one. Back in the 1970s, before a comprehensive source of GD material was readily available to us (and before Israel Regardie's monumental effort to publish all of it), we used to debate where the (at that time) "modern" planets should go on the Tree. As astrologers, it seemed obvious to us that they completed the system of planetary correspondences, but where to put them? All of the literature I had assigned the Primum Mobile to Kether, the Sphere of the Zodiac to Chokmah, and nothing to Da'ath. It seemed intuitive that Pluto, due to its "transcendence" of the solar system via its highly eccentric orbit, would be a good fit for Kether. Rather than Neptune in Chokmah, however, we felt that Uranus, as the planet associated with astrology and all things zodiacal, seemed to belong in Chokmah, and Neptune's nebulous nature seemed to resonate with the hidden sephira, Da'ath. We never got any deeper than that with our considerations, and in the intervening years I never came across a thorough discussion of this subject. Can anybody point me to one?

Deleted.