Aeclectic Tarot
Tarot Cards & Reviews Free Tarot Readings Tarot Books Tarot Card Meanings Tarot Forum

The "Celestial Globe" in The Star

  > Aeclectic Tarot Forum > Tarot Special Interest > Thoth Tarot


 
RavenDarkWind's Avatar
RavenDarkWind  RavenDarkWind is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 18 Mar 2014
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 147
RavenDarkWind 

The Book of Thoth mentioned something about how straight lines were just infinite parabolas, didn't it?
Top   #21
Aeon418's Avatar
Aeon418  Aeon418 is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 30 Sep 2003
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,342
Aeon418 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenest View Post
yeah ... that was me trying to be brief ... I should have said ; what do you make in the different depictions of the form of the stars, , the one in Venus having every third point joined instead of every second?
Ah! I see what you're missing. Take a look at the Golden Dawn paper, Polygons and Polygrams, in Regardies GD brick. On page 508 of my copy the Babalon type star is described as "the Heptagram reflected from every 3rd point." (You start the point-count from where you begin.) The relationship to the number 3 is what links this particular form to Binah and Babalon.

The star in the sphere on the other hand reflects from every 4th point. You can see this for yourself by looking at the mis-labled diagram on page 11 of The Book of Thoth. (Upper right corner)
The shift from a 3rd point reflection to a 4th point reflection is what leads me to believe that the star in the sphere is a reflection of the Star of Babalon, but it has been 'stepped down' and become manifest in the world of four.
Top   #22
ravenest's Avatar
ravenest  ravenest is offline
ravenator
 
Join Date: 02 Feb 2006
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 13,835
ravenest 

Ah yes ... the 3:4 'Abyss cross' .... thanks
Top   #23
RLG  RLG is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 19 Mar 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 318
RLG 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenest View Post
What do you make of the variations in depictions of the star ( the 'Babalon type' ones, and the 'Therion type' one) in the Celestial Sphere ?
Dwtw

I think the two stars/septagrams are two different ways of marking the polar axis. IMO, the large globe on the Star card is the Earth. This identification provides the card with a new name, as per Liber AL I:57.

My thesis is much too long to post here, but can be read on scribd if you like:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/235644104/...-Liber-AL-I-57

In a nutshell, the idea is that verse I:57 indicates certain paths on the Tree of Life, namely the three horizontal ones of Dalet-Tet-Peh, (which coincidentally indicate the Three Grades of Thelemites). When these three paths are activated on the Tree of Return from the Lurianic Kabbalah, they point to a symmetry that involves the paths of Yod/The Hermit, and Kaf/the Wheel. In turn, the symbolism of Tzaddi/The Star is implicated.

The Star of trump XVII is, in one sense, the pole star, the fixed axis of the heavens. But when Hipparchus discovered the precession of the Equinoxes, that meant that the pole star was not fixed. In fact there is no pole star. The pole is the axis of the Earth itself. So the name of the card is changed from the Star to the Earth. This makes the three bottom paths on the Tree of Return attributed to the cards of The Moon, the Sun, and the Earth.

It is not the celestial globes that rotate around the Earth; it is the Earth that spins through the heavens. The axle of this wheel, the Hadit point, is the center of the Earth, and the North and South Poles are the poles of spin. Note that the letter-name Tzaddi means 'fish-hook', and this hook is seen on the Universe card, hanging from the radiating eye of the Cosmos, acting as an anchor point, like the imaginary pole star. Also cf. the Book of Lies cap. 28, symbolizing the 28th path of the ToL, i.e., Tzaddi.

There is a third septagram inside the upper bowl that the virgin pours over herself. This indicates that the flow from the top to the bottom bowl is also a type of axis, around which the forces spin. And while this one and the other one on the globe are true polygons, the one in the 'sky' seems to be more of a polyhedron, which appears from a certain perspective to show the outline of the 'star of Babalon'. It actually has the other septagram drawn inside it, and the combination of both types gives it more of a three-dimensional appearance.

As an aside, Crowley noted that if one draws a heptagon and marks the seven points with the planets in the Chaldean order, then drawing along every 4th point with a septagram gives the days of the week. He does not mention that the other possible septagram, (using every third point, i.e., the Star of Babalon) indicates the order of the planets based on the atomic number of their alchemical metals: Iron-Copper-Silver-Tin-Gold-Mercury-Lead, or 26-29-47-50-79-80-82.

The total of these atomic numbers is 393, which has an interesting gematria resonance in Trigrammaton qabalah:

393 = Every man and every woman is a star.



Litlluw
RLG
Top   #24
ravenest's Avatar
ravenest  ravenest is offline
ravenator
 
Join Date: 02 Feb 2006
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 13,835
ravenest 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RLG View Post
Dwtw

I think the two stars/septagrams are two different ways of marking the polar axis. IMO, the large globe on the Star card is the Earth. This identification provides the card with a new name, as per Liber AL I:57.
here it referred not to AA, or anything but ; " Most prominent among its features is the seven-pointed Star of Venus."
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLG View Post

The Star of trump XVII is, in one sense, the pole star, the fixed axis of the heavens. But when Hipparchus discovered the precession of the Equinoxes, that meant that the pole star was not fixed. In fact there is no pole star. The pole is the axis of the Earth itself.

Well, even if I accept that it is the pole star (and not Sirius) ; Ok so far ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by RLG View Post
So the name of the card is changed from the Star to the Earth.

Whoa! bit of a quantum leap there !

Quote:
Originally Posted by RLG View Post
This makes the three bottom paths on the Tree of Return attributed to the cards of The Moon, the Sun, and the Earth.

It is not the celestial globes that rotate around the Earth; it is the Earth that spins through the heavens. The axle of this wheel, the Hadit point, is the center of the Earth, and the North and South Poles are the poles of spin.
hang on ... Once the celestial globe is not considered we are not in a geo centric view. Once we see the earth 'spinning through the heavens' there is no celestial globe. The axle of any wheel based on this is the earths axis not centre. An axle is a line not a point. Unless I am totally missing something ?
Top   #25
RLG  RLG is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 19 Mar 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 318
RLG 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenest View Post
hang on ... Once the celestial globe is not considered we are not in a geo centric view. Once we see the earth 'spinning through the heavens' there is no celestial globe. The axle of any wheel based on this is the earths axis not centre. An axle is a line not a point. Unless I am totally missing something ?
Dwtw

Yes, an axle would be a line such as the imaginary one connecting the Earth's Poles, but I was referring to Hadit's use of the term 'axle of the wheel', and reducing the axle that goes through the wheel to it's point in the center, the 'still point' that doesn't move, the Hadit-point at the center, i.e., the point where the axis intersects with the equatorial plane of spin.

There is only one point around which the Equator turns, and that is at the center. Other latitudes rotate around other portions of the Earth's axis.

I should have been clearer with the nomenclature, but the basic idea is still the same - that the pole of spin is within the Earth, not without.

Litluw
RLG
Top   #26
ravenest's Avatar
ravenest  ravenest is offline
ravenator
 
Join Date: 02 Feb 2006
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 13,835
ravenest 

I still dont get your point... every point on a line that is an axle is a centre of a rotating circle - equatorial or on a latitude, if you were standing on a latitude of 90 degrees you would be rotating on the end of an axle and not 'circling' around a wheel - they are all 'still points that dont move' ( they do actually move, they rotate) all along the axle, there is no difference between them. I cant see why any point around which the equator turns becomes significant or different (other than attention was drawn to the equator.


Unless you are talking about the axial tilt in relation to the plane of the solar system and its motion that makes precession ... in that case, over a loooong period, where it can be seen that each pole (when extended to the celestial sphere) makes an opposite moving circle ... THEN one could say the centre of the axis is stable and set at a central pivot point in relation to other points on the axle (that are slowly rotating in a circle ) ... Is that what you mean ?


If your idea is " the pole of spin is within the Earth, not without." ... well, of course; that's basic science we learn at primary school. Like we all know as well that the earth spins and not the stars around us. But the whole concept of the celestial globe is a based on the geocentric view, the CP is an extension of that by imagining the earths axis extends into space and locating that in the celestial map. Once you step off earth and view from the outside - celestial poles and spheres dissolve (except in relation to your new point of view and rotation).

I cant see how adopting a geocentric view ( that allowed you to see and understand the idea of a celestial Sphere) now has this Cosmo-centric (or 'scientific' ) view that, really, the earth is rotating and not the cosmos (which we all know) so therefore the pole of the imagined Celestial Sphere is in the earth .... and by some extension of that, that makes the Pole Star (which you say isnt really the pole star -due to its circularly rotating nature over time of the CP ) a point of the Earth's axis in space, and since it is the earths axis the star is really the Earth.

Sorry .... It just dont add up ... you seem to be multiplying apples by oranges . To me anyway.
Top   #27
RLG  RLG is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 19 Mar 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 318
RLG 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenest View Post
I still dont get your point... Unless you are talking about the axial tilt in relation to the plane of the solar system and its motion that makes precession ... in that case, over a loooong period, where it can be seen that each pole (when extended to the celestial sphere) makes an opposite moving circle ... THEN one could say the centre of the axis is stable and set at a central pivot point in relation to other points on the axle (that are slowly rotating in a circle ) ... Is that what you mean ?
Yes, that is what I'm getting at - you explained it better than I did. And I'm more concerned about the Earth's equator as the plane of spin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenest View Post
If your idea is " the pole of spin is within the Earth, not without." ... well, of course; that's basic science we learn at primary school. Like we all know as well that the earth spins and not the stars around us.
Yes, we know that now. I don't believe that was common knowledge in Egypt in 136 B.C. The belief was that the heavens spin around the Earth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenest View Post
But the whole concept of the celestial globe is a based on the geocentric view, the CP is an extension of that by imagining the earths axis extends into space and locating that in the celestial map. Once you step off earth and view from the outside - celestial poles and spheres dissolve (except in relation to your new point of view and rotation).
I'm not talking about stepping outside the geocentric view. I'm saying that discovering precession made it clear that the 'firmament' wasn't so firm. That the stars were not fixed. This has nothing to do with stepping outside the geocentric view. it's about refining the geocentric view. Although Hipparchus did not know what caused precession, he could certainly see the result of it. and that began a change in how we viewed the cosmos.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenest View Post
I cant see how adopting a geocentric view ( that allowed you to see and understand the idea of a celestial Sphere) now has this Cosmo-centric (or 'scientific' ) view that, really, the earth is rotating and not the cosmos (which we all know) so therefore the pole of the imagined Celestial Sphere is in the earth .... and by some extension of that, that makes the Pole Star (which you say isnt really the pole star -due to its circularly rotating nature over time of the CP ) a point of the Earth's axis in space, and since it is the earths axis the star is really the Earth.

Sorry .... It just dont add up ... you seem to be multiplying apples by oranges . To me anyway.

It's clear that you are misunderstanding my position, probably because I didn't explain it clearly enough. Long ago humans thought the heavens revolved around the earth, and that the stars were fixed, while the planets 'wandered' (thus their name). That idea meant that the north 'celestial pole' was a fixed point in the heavens, occupied by a 'pole star', (let's say Thuban).

The discovery of Precession disproved the notion of fixed stars. So the pole star was not any more permanent than any other star. The 'celestial globe' of course still existed, but slowly changed over time. Eventually astronomers realized that it is the Earth that is rotating, not the stars/celestial globe. And we all learn this today, as you pointed out, but it was not common knowledge in ancient Egypt.

The upshot of discovering that the stars are not fixed is that we understood the rotation of the heavens to be caused by the Earth. So the celestial pole is simply a side effect of the earth's rotation; it is secondary, not primary. The true pole is not in the heavens, its in the earth - the axis of spin running from north to south pole. So the symbolism changes from the Pole Star to the Pole Earth, so to speak.

I further pointed out that in terms of the Equator, the neutral point of that rotation is in the center of the Earth, but in fact as you pointed out, any point along the polar axis can be considered the focus of the rotation, which of course is why its called an axis in the first place.

One need not leave the Earth to discover precession, so when you suggest that this view is somehow 'celestial' and not terrestrial, that is now what I'm discussing at all. Hipparchus and others found out that the stars are not fixed, and they found that out from the surface of the Earth. That is the main point to consider. Humans found out that the heavens were not permanent, that the pole moved over time.

But besides all that technical stuff, the huge globe on the Star card, which is the subject of this thread, certainly can be construed as the Earth, which would make it a viable name for the card. Other viable names might be the Virgin, the Maiden, the Vessels, the Stars, the Galaxy. Any name change whatsoever would be the simplest solution to the injunction that 'tzaddi is not The Star'.

Anyway, I hope I explained it better this time…


Litlluw
RLG
Top   #28
Aeon418's Avatar
Aeon418  Aeon418 is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 30 Sep 2003
Location: Earth
Posts: 4,342
Aeon418 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RLG View Post
Any name change whatsoever would be the simplest solution to the injunction that 'tzaddi is not The Star'.
If that's the simplest solution where does that leave the cards that Crowley did rename?
Top   #29
Ross G Caldwell's Avatar
Ross G Caldwell  Ross G Caldwell is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: 07 Jul 2003
Location: Béziers, France
Posts: 2,649
Ross G Caldwell 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeon418 View Post
If that's the simplest solution where does that leave the cards that Crowley did rename?
Right - such a solution, whatever name is chosen, would also ignore the first part of the sentence, which is "All these old letters of my book are aright, but (Tz) is not the Star."

It doesn't say "All these old names/titles of my book are aright..."

So Crowley had it right - the letter Tzaddi is not correctly attributed to the Star, but some other letter should be.
Top   #30




 


 


Tarot Cards & Reviews Free Tarot Readings Tarot Books Tarot Card Meanings Tarot Forum
Aeclectic Tarot Forum Links
· Tarot
· Tarot Special Interest
· Beyond Tarot
· Forum Library

Aeclectic Tarot Categories
· Angel Decks
· Dark & Gothic Decks
· Goddess Decks
· Fairy Decks
· Doreen Virtue Decks
· Beginner Decks
· Cat Decks
· Pagan & Wiccan Decks
· Ancient Egyptian Decks
· Celtic Decks
· Lenormand Decks
· Rider-Waite Decks
· Marseilles Decks
· Thoth Decks
· Oracle Decks
· List All Decks
· Popular Tarot Decks
· Available Decks
· Tarot Books
· What's New

Copyright © 1996 - 2019 Aeclectic Tarot. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy. Contact us.