lashtal.com

Astrology - Chokmah Days

Azidonis - Sep 09, 2007 - 12:50 PM
Post subject: Chokmah Days

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

Upon doing a bit of research into the idea of Sidereal Astrology, I became more than a little interested in the Precession of the Equinoxes. A good overview can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession ... _equinoxes To quote one phrase, "Currently, this annual motion is about 50.3 seconds of arc per year or 1 degree every 71.6 years."

It takes approximately 25,765 (358x72=25,776?) years in order for the process to be complete, for the Vernal Equinox to travel a full 360 degrees. This entire process is known as a Great Year. As a subdivision of this Great Year, the 360 degrees are separated into 30 degree parts. Each 30 degree part is called a Great Month, a period lasting approximately 2150 to 2160 years.

Crowley, in _The Equinox of the Gods_ and elsewhere, states that every 2,000 years or so the Age of Man changes, and a new Magus, Logos, and Word come into the World for the benefit of the Evolution of Mankind. Corresponding with the Age of Pisces we have the Word Agape, and of course this Age of Aquarius has it's Word Thelema.

Crowley also sates, in _The Urn_ I believe it was (Chapter 72 of Confessions), that his Initiation into the Grade of Magus took his life through quite a few cycles specifically marked by 72 day periods. He called these periods "Chokmah Days".

As common Western Astrology (as well as the Thelemic Calendar and the system of Thelemic Dating) are in line with the idea of the Tropical Zodiac, these things don't fit much into this equation. However, the Vedic idea of the Sidereal Zodiac seems to fit quite comfortably with some of Crowley's other ideas. Since the Sidereal Zodiac has been around for thousands of years, there's no way he didn't know about it. Perhaps he had a different intention for its use than common everyday horoscopes though.

To sum it up: the Vernal Equinox moves 1 degree every 71.6 (rounded - 72) years. Crowley's Magus Initiation was in cycles of 72 days. The Great Month's change every 2150 - 2160 years, leaving the Great Month of Aquarius-Leo either here or on its way (those more well-versed in Astrology may knw the exact dates). At any rate, the "cusp" of the Great Month is a period of roughly 720 years (360+360, no doubt), which is 72 x 10. The Equinox of the Gods arrived, as we know, on April 8,9, and 10, 1904 ev. How near or far to the actual date of shifting is something I don't know, but 720 years is a long time, which may be one reason Crowley knew it would take quite a while for Thelema to pick up pace. The idea is obviously a question of macrocosmic astrology, whereas the Tropical Zodiac and Thelemic Dating refer to microcosmic, or everyday astrology.

My question then, is does anyone think that Crowley's own knowledge of the Great Year may have had some impact on His Work? If so, in what way? Since we don't have the public knowledge of anyone else attaining to the Grade of Magus (that I'm aware of anyway, completely discrediting Frater Achad here), is there any solid indication that anyone attaining to this lofty Grade would undergo these same 72 day cycles, or Chokmah Days?

As always, feedback is more than welcome.

Love is the law, love under will.

Az

ianrons - Sep 09, 2007 - 01:50 PM
Post subject: RE: Chokmah Days

Except it's 73, since ChKMH = 73.

Azidonis - Sep 09, 2007 - 02:54 PM
Post subject: RE: Chokmah Days

93,

Damn... well, it was a good idea nonetheless. Serves me right. I read Confessions two years ago lol

93 93/93

Camlion - Sep 10, 2007 - 09:44 PM
Post subject:

93 Az,

Might still be a good idea... Have you ever tried dividing the years of your life into five equal periods of 73 days each, beginning on the date of your birth? I've seen some interesting results for myself and others using this method.

93 93/93
Cam

nlwrykyy - Jul 31, 2008 - 06:01 PM
Post subject:

An interesting "trick" related to what you mentioned, Camilion.. dividing the years of your into periods of 73 days and then dividing these periods by five will always give you the years in periods of 365 days... any thoughts (or knowledge) on this?

Erwin - Jul 31, 2008 - 06:16 PM
Post subject:

nlwrykyy wrote: › An interesting "trick" related to what you mentioned, Camilion.. dividing the years of your into periods of 73 days and then dividing these periods by five will always give you the years in periods of 365 days... any thoughts (or knowledge) on this?

It just proves that D / (73 * 5) = D / 365, which isn't a particularly "interesting" revelation.

Erwin

amadan-De - Jul 31, 2008 - 06:19 PM
Post subject:

...or 73 * 5 = 365

Camlion - Jul 31, 2008 - 06:43 PM
Post subject:

Camlion wrote: › 93 Az,

Might still be a good idea... Have you ever tried dividing the years of your life into five equal periods of 73 days each, beginning on the date of your birth? I've seen some interesting results for myself and others using this method.

93 93/93
Cam

My notion, from many years ago, was that each individual, being unique, might have a discernible rhythm to the events in their life, and that this might be an interesting pattern to explore, beginning with one's date of birth. (Yes, it would also apply to 73 lessor periods of five days each.) I think that Ian has a similar more general application outlined somewhere, beginning with the Spring Equinox. (I'm sorry, I don't recall exactly where, but perhaps he will point to it.) My own date of birth happens to be June 2, so it aligns with Ian's application. Erwin, the only way to test this would be to observe the events of your own life with reference to the suggested pattern. Otherwise, dismiss it out of hand, as you Will.

Erwin - Jul 31, 2008 - 07:04 PM
Post subject:

Camlion wrote: › Erwin, the only way to test this would be to observe the events of your own life with reference to the suggested pattern. Otherwise, dismiss it out of hand, as you Will.

Firstly, as we've been through several times before with regards to other topics, the fact that one may be able to identify significant events in one's own life at 73 day intervals does nothing to demonstrate any actual significance in such an interval, so it's no good pretending that observing the events of one's own life with reference to the suggested pattern is going to "test" anything other than one's own susceptibility to suggestion, regardless of what the "results" might be. If you really wanted to "test" such an idea, you'd have to do it with a sample significantly greater than one, and you'd have to use several other intervals as control groups.

Secondly, go back read my post and the associated quote more carefully, because neither had anything to do with what you're talking about here, but with an attempt to read some kind of significance into the fact that dividing something by 73 and then again by 5 is mysteriously equivalent to dividing it by 365. This is a lesson in susceptibility to suggestion in itself, for you.

Erwin

nlwrykyy - Jul 31, 2008 - 07:08 PM
Post subject:

Erwin wrote: ›

It just proves that D / (73 * 5) = D / 365, which isn't a particularly "interesting" revelation.

Erwin

A skeptic will come in here and claim that numerology is just a bunch of "uninteresting" coincidences. Wink

Of course I'm not concerned with them.

Camlion - Jul 31, 2008 - 07:12 PM
Post subject:

Erwin wrote: ›

Camlion wrote: › Erwin, the only way to test this would be to observe the events of your own life with reference to the suggested pattern. Otherwise, dismiss it out of hand, as you Will.

Firstly, as we've been through several times before with regards to other topics, the fact that one may be able to identify significant events at 73 day intervals does nothing to demonstrate any actual significance in such an interval, so it's no good pretending that observing the events of one's own life with reference to the suggested pattern is going to "test" anything other than one's own susceptibility to suggestion, regardless of what the "results" might be. If you really wanted to "test" such an idea, you'd have to do it with a sample significantly greater than one, and you'd have to use several other intervals as control groups.

Secondly, go back read my post and the associated quote more carefully, because neither had anything to do with what you're talking about here, but with an attempt to read some kind of significance into the fact that dividing something by 73 and then again by 5 is mysteriously equivalent to dividing it by 365. This is a lesson in susceptibility to suggestion in itself, for you.

Erwin

As you Will. I am not actively advocating this notion. Wink

ianrons - Jul 31, 2008 - 07:16 PM
Post subject:

Quote: › Firstly, as we've been through several times before with regards to other topics

Quote: › Secondly, go back read my post and the associated quote more carefully

As usual, Erwin, you want to turn this conversation on to the subject of how right you are.

Quote: › it's no good pretending that observing the events of one's own life with reference to the suggested pattern is going to "test" anything other than one's own susceptibility to suggestion

Just because you can't think of a mechanism by which certain currents of events could have a period of 73 days, doesn't give you the right to be so condescending in your remarks. There are plenty of other periodic events in nature, such as larval periods of some animals that happen in prime numbers of years, the yearly cyle of the four seasons, etc. But you always take this attitude whenever you disagree with someone -- it's a poor show, and more than usually narcissistic for the internet. Please calm down or you'll get kicked from the board again.

Erwin - Jul 31, 2008 - 07:18 PM
Post subject:

nlwrykyy wrote: ›

Erwin wrote: ›

It just proves that D / (73 * 5) = D / 365, which isn't a particularly "interesting" revelation.

Erwin

A skeptic will come in here and claim that numerology is just a bunch of "uninteresting" coincidences. Wink

Of course I'm not concerned with them.

It's not a "coincidence" that 73 * 5 = 365, however more mysterious basic arithmetic might make you feel if you take a contrary view.

Erwin

Erwin - Jul 31, 2008 - 07:23 PM
Post subject:

ianrons wrote: › Just because you can't think of a mechanism by which certain currents of events could have a period of 73 days, doesn't give you the right to be so condescending in your remarks. There are plenty of other periodic events in nature, such as larval periods of some animals that happen in prime numbers of years, the yearly cyle of the four seasons, etc.

Another one who needs to read more carefully instead of paying attention to his emotions. Whether there are "plenty of other periodic events in nature" is beside the point; you can't conclude that a larval period is a particular period of time by studying the development of a single larva, and you certainly can't do that if you are that larva.

ianrons wrote: › Please calm down or you'll get kicked from the board again.

Do what thou wilt; it's no skin off my nose either way, as you conveniently seem to forget each time you attempt to ineffectually threaten me.

Erwin

ianrons - Jul 31, 2008 - 07:41 PM
Post subject:

No Erwin, you were and are in fact wrong to utterly deny the probative value of personal experience in such condescending terms:

Quote: › it's no good pretending that observing the events of one's own life with reference to the suggested pattern is going to "test" anything other than one's own susceptibility to suggestion

You assume that the combined experiences of more than one human are qualitatively different from those of one. There is, in fact, nothing inherently true about this assumption; rather, it would seem to be prima facie true that personal experience is in fact the only experience for any of us. To utterly dismiss it is to dismiss everything as subjective in a big puff of smoke; but if everything is subjective, then experiencing life in 73 day periods exists as one equally valid experience amongst an infinite variety. You cannot, finally, deny the value of the experience any more than you can the validity.

Looking at it from an objective perspective, there would seem to be -- contrary to your assumed belief -- every reason to suppose that, in fact, human experience can see the Truth. It may be that we are glimpsing something so deep that no survey group or study (as you apparently propose) will ever touch upon it.

So no, I wasn't being emotional. And I wasn't inviting an argument. You will be kicked from the board if you continue being such a condescending little twat. You're welcome to express your views if you can succeed in refraining from the kind of argument you always seek to provoke; but I am here to tell you that you will be booted off immediately if you don't pay attention to the criticisms of me and the other board members who find your style repugnant.

P.S. I've just noticed your final comment. Hmmm. Bye then.

Camlion - Jul 31, 2008 - 07:47 PM
Post subject:

Thanks, Erwin, for your ceaseless diligence in defending us from delusion. Rolling Eyes

Camlion - Jul 31, 2008 - 10:52 PM
Post subject:

93 nlwrykyy,

My own attitude toward this subject is much the same as that expressed by Crowley in the subchapter on Magical Memory in MTP: "Genuine recollections almost invariably explain oneself to oneself."

93 93/93
Camlion

ianrons - Aug 01, 2008 - 11:02 AM
Post subject:

93 Camlion,

You referred to a little article on The Magickal Review back there -- I don't want to go back over my juvenilia, but wanted to ask you if you found anything interesting looking at things that way? Remember also that AC talked about the "seasons of death" too in Liber 418, which have a different periodicity. It would seem to depend on the A.'.A.'. grade. I wondered if the 73x5 thing had more universal application, but now I feel it doesn't unless you want it to.

93s
Ian

Camlion - Aug 01, 2008 - 04:28 PM
Post subject:

93 Ian,

ianrons wrote: › 93 Camlion,

You referred to a little article on The Magickal Review back there -- I don't want to go back over my juvenilia, but wanted to ask you if you found anything interesting looking at things that way? Remember also that AC talked about the "seasons of death" too in Liber 418, which have a different periodicity. It would seem to depend on the A.'.A.'. grade. I wondered if the 73x5 thing had more universal application, but now I feel it doesn't unless you want it to.

93s
Ian

Yes, that's right, I saw your article in The Magical Review. When I first considered the possibility that the Chokmah Days might have an application for each person individually, commencing on the date of birth, it was in the early eighties and I already had over ten years of daily journals under my belt, which were not written with any preconceived notions of such a pattern. These recorded a very wide variety of events, magical, mystical and mundane. So, I analyzed the records with an eye toward such a pattern and found the results to be very interesting, to me.

93 93/93
Cam

ianrons - Aug 01, 2008 - 04:47 PM
Post subject:

I take it you don't care to elaborate on the nature of the pattern? ("results")