wizzle
When I first started studying tarot and the qabala I mentioned to a friend that the voice of women in religion and magic was conspiculously absent. The age of the priestess is long past and until perhaps 150 years ago, women were given little education and certainly were not encouraged to contribute to philosophical or religious thinking much less writing. One has only to look at the male/female literacy rates in in third world countries to see it operational today
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html
Having completed several books on the qabala, I believe I've identified two serious metaphysical errors resulting from the inevitable polarity of male-dominated metaphysics. While the principles I'll discuss are metaphysical, and clearly not personal, I believe they are easiest to understand when we examine sexuality. However, my discussion is not meant to personalize the issues, mearly to make them accessible to those who don't care to read lengthy metaphysical tracts.
1. My reading of the qabala is that the female/cup/binah principle is seen only in terms of a receptical and gestator. In sexual terms, this would be viewed as putting the sperm in the proper place and you get a child. Certainly this is understandable because from the male standpoint of the old testament qabalists, this is what they could see and what happened. Sperm, very visible, was put into the receiving female. The result was also visible in the swelling of the female and the resultant child. All well and good. The missing piece here is the ova, not visible to those fellows who were jacking off on their own theories. Hence, they made the metaphysical error of believing that the female/cup/negative/yin principle had nothing of its own to contribute beyond serving as a receptical. The contribution of an ova/egg is not recognized metaphysically anywhere that I can see. Only the passive/receptive part played by the female is given metaphysical life or thought.
2. While the sacrifice of a dying god (or object) is recognized in Tipareth and by most religions, the living sacrific of the mensus is totally ignored. It is very clear that blood, metaphysically, is a sacrifice. The monthly magic that allows an entity to sacrifice blood and yet live is wholely overlooked and I think this is just male sour grapes and metaphysical myopia.
In support of my conclusions, I offer the fact that all of the magical images on the middle pillar above Malkuth are male. Thus, translated metaphysically, only the sperm ensouls or produces equilibrium.
I believe I'm correct when I note that all of the arch angels are male. I recognize that the Elohim are male/female, yin/yang, whatever.
[size=+1]As above, so below unless of course you get to write the book. [/size]
Looking forward to your thoughts on these issues.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html
Having completed several books on the qabala, I believe I've identified two serious metaphysical errors resulting from the inevitable polarity of male-dominated metaphysics. While the principles I'll discuss are metaphysical, and clearly not personal, I believe they are easiest to understand when we examine sexuality. However, my discussion is not meant to personalize the issues, mearly to make them accessible to those who don't care to read lengthy metaphysical tracts.
1. My reading of the qabala is that the female/cup/binah principle is seen only in terms of a receptical and gestator. In sexual terms, this would be viewed as putting the sperm in the proper place and you get a child. Certainly this is understandable because from the male standpoint of the old testament qabalists, this is what they could see and what happened. Sperm, very visible, was put into the receiving female. The result was also visible in the swelling of the female and the resultant child. All well and good. The missing piece here is the ova, not visible to those fellows who were jacking off on their own theories. Hence, they made the metaphysical error of believing that the female/cup/negative/yin principle had nothing of its own to contribute beyond serving as a receptical. The contribution of an ova/egg is not recognized metaphysically anywhere that I can see. Only the passive/receptive part played by the female is given metaphysical life or thought.
2. While the sacrifice of a dying god (or object) is recognized in Tipareth and by most religions, the living sacrific of the mensus is totally ignored. It is very clear that blood, metaphysically, is a sacrifice. The monthly magic that allows an entity to sacrifice blood and yet live is wholely overlooked and I think this is just male sour grapes and metaphysical myopia.
In support of my conclusions, I offer the fact that all of the magical images on the middle pillar above Malkuth are male. Thus, translated metaphysically, only the sperm ensouls or produces equilibrium.
I believe I'm correct when I note that all of the arch angels are male. I recognize that the Elohim are male/female, yin/yang, whatever.
[size=+1]As above, so below unless of course you get to write the book. [/size]
Looking forward to your thoughts on these issues.