Unicursal Hexagram

Stark Raven

Until reading this thread, I hadn't considered the unicursal hexagram in any way. It was a pretty card sitting there. At times I stopped for a moment to consider why it was even there. Now I want to pay closer attention to ito. I am only beginning to work with Thoth. It is a magickal deck to be sure. In so many ways too. And now the suggestion of another facet of that magick peeks out at me from within the hexagram.
 

The Happy Squirrel

My booklet said that the Unicursal Hexagram is Crowley's personal magical (magickal?) seal. So I won't be using it.
 

Zephyros

What booklet is that? Sure, the UH is associated with Thelema and has great significance in it, but it wasn't his personal seal. That can be found on the Prince of Wands' breastplate.
 

The Happy Squirrel

Ah. This is the booklet that came with my new thoth deck I just bought. The current edition by USG.

(Going to inspect Prince of Wands now)
 

Zephyros

I didn't see mentioned in this thread that the UH is made up of the Tree of Life, if all possible lines were joined.

My question is, though, what does "unicursal" mean?
 

Stark Raven

I didn't see mentioned in this thread that the UH is made up of the Tree of Life, if all possible lines were joined.

My question is, though, what does "unicursal" mean?

Unicursal means that the symbol can be written without moving (lifting) the pen away from the paper during the process. I have read that when this symbol was first produced, it was not believed to be unicursal, but later on, that it indeed is was discovered by accident. Whether that's true, who knows...
 

Zephyros

I admit to never having done it myself, but the diagram of all the lines of the Tree joined does make sense and I could see how someone would experiment doing that. I guess that's how Crowley arrived at it.

Its omission from the deck is certainly perplexing. If it had appeared in it, where would it have been? One of the Sixes? Maybe one of the Fives to symbolize Will? Maybe the Hierophant? Magus? Or maybe the Aeon?
 

Stark Raven

I admit to never having done it myself, but the diagram of all the lines of the Tree joined does make sense and I could see how someone would experiment doing that. I guess that's how Crowley arrived at it.

Its omission from the deck is certainly perplexing. If it had appeared in it, where would it have been? One of the Sixes? Maybe one of the Fives to symbolize Will? Maybe the Hierophant? Magus? Or maybe the Aeon?

You've presented a good question. If I had to replace any card by choice with it, it would be the Fool, because it has no specific number and because when you have no expectations, the universe is full of unlimited potential... that's what the unicursal hexagram brings me to envision.

Sometimes I add it to my deck when I read as an extra card.

Now you have got me to thinking whether or not I should replace the Fool with it, it sounds like a great idea to have it as a permanent fixture.
 

Aeon418

I guess that's how Crowley arrived at it.
Crowley would have already been familiar with the unicursal hexagram, or something similar, from as early as 1899. The Golden Dawn 4=7 paper, "Polygrams and Polygons" mentions a figure called the "hexangle", which "symbolizes the presidency of the Sun and the Moon over the four elements united in and proceeding from Spirit."

It is unclear whether Crowley adopted this symbolism for his own "Hexagram of the Beast", but it is assumed that he did because he substituted it for the Rosy Cross in later versions of Liber V vel Reguli. It's got that same sort of Solar-Phallus and Lunar-Yoni vibe to it.

However Crowley wasn't initially a big fan of the unicursal hexagram. In a 1916 letter to Frater Achad he describes the figure as "evil" due to the unequal proportions of the lines. It's not possible to draw an equal sided 2D unicursal hexagram. (Or not one capable of being drawn in a circle.) But he seems to have changed his mind a few years later. Although it's interesting to note that the one appearing in the Book of Thoth looks like an attempt at a 3D hexagram.
If it had appeared in it, where would it have been?
With the Sun and Moon conjoined symbolism in mind, maybe XI Lust would be my choice.
 

ravenest

However Crowley wasn't initially a big fan of the unicursal hexagram. In a 1916 letter to Frater Achad he describes the figure as "evil" due to the unequal proportions of the lines. It's not possible to draw an equal sided 2D unicursal hexagram. (Or not one capable of being drawn in a circle.)
.

???

All you have to do is look at a regular hexagram in a circle and imagine the two horizontal lines crossed, as in a unicursal hexagram, it certainly fits within a circle , with all the point touching the circumference.

Unequal proportions of the lines - yep.

Equal 'sided' unicursal hexagram .... you lost me there ... do you mean the lines that make up the 'outside' of the figure?