Marseilles Pips meanings?

I've been reading the Aristotle link you gave Mel, 'On Generation and Corruption'. Also found this 'commentrary' on it:

http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/EA/ARISTOTLEann.HTML

And this link (Aristotle on meteorology) explaining the 'action'/'nature' of Hot-Cold and Dry-Moist.

http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/meteorology.4.iv.html

Here's an extract:

Two of the qualities, the hot and the cold, are active; two, the dry and the moist, passive. We can satisfy ourselves of this by looking at instances. In every case heat and cold determine, conjoin, and change things of the same kind and things of different kinds, moistening, drying, hardening, and softening them. Things dry and moist, on the other hand, both in isolation and when present together in the same body are the subjects of that determination and of the other affections enumerated. The account we give of the qualities when we define their character shows this too. Hot and cold we describe as active, for 'congregating' is essentially a species of 'being active': moist and dry are passive, for it is in virtue of its being acted upon in a certain way that a thing is said to be 'easy to determine' or 'difficult to determine'. So it is clear that some of the qualities are active and some passive.

Click to expand...

But this following link, explains Aristotles 'wisdom' re. the four elements - in modern english (YAY!). And includes Aristotles thoughts of how Metal comes into being.... From Alchemy, the Ancient Science by Neil Powell; pages 26 to 30.

http://fuzzy.snakeden.org/alchemy/aristot.html


Bee

Whoa, thanks, Bee!
I'm going to study that last link tonight...

Re' the last link - it's short (book extract). This link goes on about the Moist/Cold etc. in English:

http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mclennan/BA/RE.html

Bee

EDIT: A very interesting read. Refers to the human qualites (Jung - Luscher) and the Wheel of Fortune. I recommend this link.

Thanks, Bee. I got a lot out of that last link, especially.

After looking again at the element/number correspondences, I'm thinking that
1 = Fire
2 = Air
3 = Water
4 = Earth
5 = Water
6 = Air
7 = Fire
8 = Air
9 = Water
10 = Earth
(Mel's diagram here: http://www.tarotforum.net/showpost.php?p=1562032&postcount=46)
makes more sense to me than
1 = Fire
2 = Water
3 = Air
4 = Earth
5 = Air
6 = Water
7 = Fire
8 = Water
9 = Air
10 = Earth
(Mel's diagram here: http://www.tarotforum.net/showpost.php?p=1555641&postcount=41)
because the transformation is easier: fire (1) to air (2) changes dry to moist only (they share heat), but fire (1) to water (2) changes all qualities (hot to cold, dry to moist), so it's a bigger jump. The second sequence also has an air->earth transformation, which is also a change in all qualities.

However, in these threads, Mel is referring to 3s and 5s as Airy, so he's going with the second sequence, I'd think. Mel, why? I know that you wrote the below:

Mel said:

On the two different diagrams (triangle and square) I give different examples of elemental correspondences to the numbers. In traditional texts, one will find both examples. The difference being in the switching of Air and Water.
1 = Fire
2 = Air or Water
3 = Water or Air
4 = Earth

Click to expand...

Now, the why might be because it better fits the numerological designations you are using - in which case, I'll figure that out as soon as I get a better handle on the numbers More thinking needed...

sravana said:

(Mel's diagram here: http://www.tarotforum.net/showpost.php?p=1555641&postcount=41)
because the transformation is easier: fire (1) to air (2) changes dry to moist only (they share heat), but fire (1) to water (2) changes all qualities (hot to cold, dry to moist), so it's a bigger jump. The second sequence also has an air->earth transformation, which is also a change in all qualities.

However, in these threads, Mel is referring to 3s and 5s as Airy, so he's going with the second sequence, I'd think. Mel, why? I know that you wrote the below:
Now, the why might be because it better fits the numerological designations you are using - in which case, I'll figure that out as soon as I get a better handle on the numbers More thinking needed...

Click to expand...

It is simply a matter of perception really. In the classical order, as given by Aristotle, a logical sequence of 'elemental evolution' is shown.

Fire > Air > Water > Earth


This shows us that Air is the bridge between the classical symbols of duality, Fire and Water. This is an important idea in Alchemy. So as a bridge between the Fire and Water, Air would logically fall between the two. Hence,

1 = Fire
2 = Air
3 = Water


With numbers however, another 'perspective is possible, and necessary to understand them.

______ * ______​

Here we have a single dot. The 1. Clearly symbolic of an undifferentiated unity. Yet it contains the potential for all that follows, so the tradition calls it "God".

______ * ____________ * ______​

Here we see the 2. What is the symbolism? The 2, on it's own, can only represent the duality. So the tradition calls it "division", "relativity" "manifesting separation", "the cause of things which are altogether dissimilar", "admitting of destruction", etc..

The inherent symbolism of the 2 can only be duality, as the 3 has yet to appear, and without a third, no means can exist between a duality.

______ * ____________ * ____________ * ______​

With the addition of a third dot, we can create a means between the duality of two. So, the inherent symbolism of the 3 is as a means or bridge between the proceeding duality. You can not have a mean before you have a duality.

So as Air is the means between Fire and Water, and the 3 is a means between the duality of the 1 and the 2 we can equate that,

1 = Fire
2 = Water
3 = Air


One way to represent the situation is this,

1...3....2


It is confusing isn't it.

In a sort of general overview of things, models showing Fire, Air, Water, Earth seem to work better. Yet when considering applying specific meaning to individual cards, say a 2 of Cups, or a 3 of Swords, only Fire, Water, Air, Earth works, IMO. And yes, I've tried them all.

Thanks so much, Mel. Very VERY good explanation! Perfect.
I will be looking at this later today, and post a reply tonight. For now I'm off to work.

ETA: Okay, I'm back home, and having a second look at this.

Melanchollic said:

::snip::

______ * ____________ * ____________ * ______​

With the addition of a third dot, we can create a means between the duality of two. So, the inherent symbolism of the 3 is as a means or bridge between the proceeding duality. You can not have a mean before you have a duality.

So as Air is the means between Fire and Water, and the 3 is a means between the duality of the 1 and the 2 we can equate that,

1 = Fire
2 = Water
3 = Air

One way to represent the situation is this,

1...3....2

It is confusing isn't it.

In a sort of general overview of things, models showing Fire, Air, Water, Earth seem to work better. Yet when considering applying specific meaning to individual cards, say a 2 of Cups, or a 3 of Swords, only Fire, Water, Air, Earth works, IMO. And yes, I've tried them all.

Click to expand...

Actually, it's not confusing at all the way you describe it. It makes perfect sense, at least as far as 1,2,3 goes. Or should I say: 1,3,2.

As I look at it I don't see how the other numbers reverse as easy - I need to get out some loose pennies and play with them - but you could argue that if the 3 is air, then the 5 -6 and 8-9 need to be reversed as well.

I think I'm just about ready to start formulating some pip meanings, as you posted for the 3s and 5s. In fact, I think I'll start with the 4s!

One more note on the elements and numbers. Iamblichus, the Pythagorean only directly mentions elements for two of the numbers in the decad. He says the 1 is Fire, and the 9 rules Air. This would seem to support the Alchemical ordering -


1 = Fire
2 = Water
3 = Air
4 = Earth
5 = Air
6 = Water
7 = Fire
8 = Water
9 = Air
10 = Earth


This arrangement also has the 'added benefit' of having the gender of the number and the gender of the elements in agreement. This is also keeping in line with Plato that the 5 is the male marriage number, and the 6 is the female marriage number.

sravana said:

Thanks, Bee. I got a lot out of that last link, especially.

After looking again at the element/number correspondences, I'm thinking that
1 = Fire
2 = Air
3 = Water
4 = Earth
5 = Water
6 = Air
7 = Fire
8 = Air
9 = Water
10 = Earth
...

Click to expand...

I commend you for seeing the superiority of the order fire-aire-water-earth to that of fire-water-air-earth.

Number itself is structured such that (based on digital summation) it goes in a cycle: +1, +2, +3, +4, -4(5), -3, -2, -1, -0(9), then +1 again, and so on. Since the natural order is fire-air-water-earth, this shows number to embody the elements and their reflections, plus that of space itself (no-thing).

Add valence to this mix and one has the variation expressed in Coins: 1 is fire or starlight; 2-3-4 are the sun and gas giants, the airy layer, or where air (at its center, the sun) is acted on by fire and then acts on water and earth, respectively; 5-6-7-8-9, then, being reflections, are the watery layer, specifically 5 and 6, which are -4 and -3, are where water acts on earth and on water (meaning itself), respectively, then, switching to valence for water's passive side, 7-8-9 are -3, -2, and -1 valence, respectively (that is, need that many electrons to fill their neon 'shell'), which means they are where water is acted on by water, air, and earth respectively. (10, of course, is earth.)

I think the above makes more sense than fire-air-water-earth-water-air-fire-air-water-earth.

To complicate things just a bit, though, these two orders of elements (fire-air-water-earth and fire-water-air-earth) create a dynamic in the Name (yod-heh-vav-heh) wherein there is tension between air-water and their reversal: the very power in the Name is generated largely by that reversal and the tension thus created, in that the first heh stands for the doer, the water level of self (knower and thinker being its fire and air levels), joining with yod to create a thought, which takes its being in the airy world of the thinker; the vav, then, shows the thinker's (air level's) reaction, wherein it creates experience for its doer, in its watery world, in order to instruct said doer. All this happens within the context of procreation, of course, that being the expression in man of the divine creative power.

I should say that I've been out of town recently, and I haven't gotten to much of this. Will respond later this week (after I go through and DELETE every darned political blog on my RSS feed. What a sewer!)