(?) is not the Star
 
Notifications
Clear all

(?) is not the Star  

  RSS

 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
01/10/2006 7:37 pm  

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

In Liber AL I:57 it is said, "...All these old letters of my Book are aright; but Tzaddi is not the Star. This also is secret..."

The problem is that if one looks at the manuscripts for the Book of the Law, one would see that the symbol where Tzaddi is does not really look like a Tzaddi.
I offer an alternative explanation:

First of all, in Hebrew the word LA or Lamed-Aleph means Not, adds up to 31 (like AL, a name of GOD), and is the "Key" of the Book of the Law, All=Not. In Arabic, the letters Lamed and Aleph are called Laam and Alif. When written independently, they are both written as vertical lines (except Laam has a slight curve) but when written next to each other as Laam-Alif (LA), there is a special character for them. The word Laam-Alif or "La" means "No."

In this image, the character in the bottom right is the Laam-Alif glyph where it says "special script: l+alif"
http://www.danielschereck.com/wp2002arabia/arabicimages1/arabic-alphabet-meem-laa.jp g">
Does this character look familiar?

If this is taken to be true, this line reads something like this, "...All these old letters of my Book are aright; but LA is not the Star." This could be taken as an explanation of the Key:

LA/No/31 is Not/0/Naught/Nuit, the Star.

Further, in the Old Comment to Liber AL I:57 it says:
"The last paragraph confirms the Tarot attributions as given in 777, with one secret exception."

Comments?

Love is the law, love under will.


Quote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1126
01/10/2006 7:48 pm  

It's nice to see something that I've been writing about for several years coming around again (as on occultforums.com) as "new". The last time someone claimed to have noticed it for the first time, they were saying it was the "Hebrew" character Lam-Alif. 🙄

I think the most interesting point about this is the ramification for the Tarotic attributions. I for one do not see why the two loops in the Zodiac are right, or even plausible. It seems that the first "loop of the Zodiac" was a misreading of a textual correction in the Cipher MSS. of G.D. and that the double loop is one of those "naughty knots".

http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=1693#1693

I would go further (at the risk of sounding pompous) to suggest that it might even be a test of intellect to realise the absurdity of the "Double Loop Hypothesis". I have generally been met with a wall of silence surrounding the issue, and am struck with the idea that perhaps some folks place more faith in the judgment of Crowley than in their own researches and perspicacity.

It is, BTW, not necessary to think that the squiggly character is Lam-Alif at all. The verse reads perfectly well simply as "[Tzaddi] is not [=LA, 31, etc.], the Star."


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
01/10/2006 9:46 pm  
"ianrons" wrote:
It's nice to see something that I've been writing about for several years coming around again (as on occultforums.com) as "new". The last time someone claimed to have noticed it for the first time, they were saying it was the "Hebrew" character Lam-Alif. 🙄

I think the most interesting point about this is the ramification for the Tarotic attributions. I for one do not see why the two loops in the Zodiac are right, or even plausible. It seems that the first "loop of the Zodiac" was a misreading of a textual correction in the Cipher MSS. of G.D. and that the double loop is one of those "naughty knots".

http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=1693#1693

I would go further (at the risk of sounding pompous) to suggest that it might even be a test of intellect to realise the absurdity of the "Double Loop Hypothesis". I have generally been met with a wall of silence surrounding the issue, and am struck with the idea that perhaps some folks place more faith in the judgment of Crowley than in their own researches and perspicacity.

It is, BTW, not necessary to think that the squiggly character is Lam-Alif at all. The verse reads perfectly well simply as "[Tzaddi] is not [=LA, 31, etc.], the Star."

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

Thanks for your input ianrons, though you DO sound a bit pompous in your first paragraph 😆 I realize now other people have realized this.

I also find the double loop quite perplexing, I don't understand how switching the Hebrew Letters means you switch the Zodiac signs (Aries & Aquarius)...

The verse DOES read perfectly well as Tzaddi is Not, the Star; but having Laam-Alif instead of Tzaddi, it specifically refers to Not as LA & therefore related to 31 whereas without it would simply relate 'not' to 'the Star' which could be 0, 61, etc.

What do you think the little 'c' is above the Tzaddi/Laam-Alif, ianrons?

Love is the law, love under will.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5322
01/10/2006 10:41 pm  

Some may find this useful when following this thread:

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1126
01/10/2006 11:27 pm  
"Aum418" wrote:
I also find the double loop quite perplexing, I don't understand how switching the Hebrew Letters means you switch the Zodiac signs (Aries & Aquarius)...

I think this has been covered in the other thread.

"Aum418" wrote:
What do you think the little 'c' is above the Tzaddi/Laam-Alif, ianrons?

That's just one of the strokes that form part of the character of Tzaddi (or Lam-Alif in fact).

Thanks for the image, Paul. Would someone here be able to upload a hi-res scan of the Cipher MS. page 32 for consideration?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
01/10/2006 11:46 pm  
"ianrons" wrote:
"Aum418" wrote:
I also find the double loop quite perplexing, I don't understand how switching the Hebrew Letters means you switch the Zodiac signs (Aries & Aquarius)...

I think this has been covered in the other thread.

"Aum418" wrote:
What do you think the little 'c' is above the Tzaddi/Laam-Alif, ianrons?

That's just one of the strokes that form part of the character of Tzaddi (or Lam-Alif in fact).

Thanks for the image, Paul. Would someone here be able to upload a hi-res scan of the Cipher MS. page 32 for consideration?

93

Doesn't it look like the Tzaddi/Laam-alif was written and then written over ?

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
frater_cug
(@frater_cug)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 73
02/10/2006 7:47 am  

I can see a resemblance to Laam-Alif but to me it looks more like Tzaddi with a connecting stroke used when your using cursive script.

The main problem that I see with that symbol being anything other than Tzaddi is that the Book of the Law was dictated to Crowley. "... in regard to the writting of Liber Legis, Fra P. will only say that it is in no way "automatic writing" that he heard clearly and distinctly the human articulated accents of a man." If we go by Crowley's words then he must of heard Tzaddi, and not Laam-Alif. However....

"Aum418" wrote:
The verse DOES read perfectly well as Tzaddi is Not, the Star; but having Laam-Alif instead of Tzaddi, it specifically refers to Not as LA & therefore related to 31 whereas without it would simply relate 'not' to 'the Star' which could be 0, 61, etc.

Might I suggest that you think of this theory not as a replacement for Tzaddi but as an addition in a "Change not as much as the style of a letter; for behold! thou, o prophet, shalt not behold all these mysteries hidden therein." way.

oops I see a cloud of pestilence headed this way, gotta run... 🙂


ReplyQuote
frater_cug
(@frater_cug)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 73
02/10/2006 8:04 am  
"ianrons" wrote:
Thanks for the image, Paul. Would someone here be able to upload a hi-res scan of the Cipher MS. page 32 for consideration?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
02/10/2006 1:39 pm  

93, C.U.G.!

And quite a center of pestilence at that...

Fr. C.U.G. has a point though. AC heard tzaddi, but his hand made an equivocable sign. A
sign that works out with the key of it all, at that.

Coincidence? Change not so much as the style of a letter! That's what class A is all about!

The HGA sometimes seems spiteful towards the ego in it's teaching style, maybe having AC's
hand write "the key" though his ego would have to wait to hear it from Achad was Aiwass
having a chuckle at Perdurabo's expense (and for later students wonder)?

Aum418, ianrons--- As for the odd 'crescent' stroke in the tzaddi/lam-alif, note how badly
it fits as either a part of a lam-alif or as a yod-bit of a tzaddi.: "This yod-bit in its
failure is a key to a key..." (ponders navel for a moment, thinks about croissants) wasn't
AC keen on arab qabalah for egyptian workings at the time?

Despite much discussion, the Loops in the Tarot baffle me to this day. One refers to 2 Trump
numbers, the other to Yetziratic and Tarot attributions of two letters, it's not the same
stuff being twisted on either side.

The GD switch (see crossed arrows in cypher MS above) is still unclear, I mean, I know the
GD switched the trump numbers, but in cypher MS the numbers are already switched (while
staying on the path the old numbering gave them) and additionally there are the arrows.

One thought I had for a long time was that maybe the paths should have been switched along
with the numbers, Justice bridging Geburah and Gedulah and Strength going from Tiphareth to
Geburah. It appealed to my sense of logic, but then again so did Achad's tree on first
seeing it.

Is the "textual misreading" as above? Do I pass? 😉

Just some pestilential ponderings..

93/93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
02/10/2006 1:45 pm  

Ianrons---

Crappity crap, I now went to see the "other thread" and saw you've made it all quite clear, and with useful references and a cautionary note the peril of using the authority of unchecked sources. My previous post is now quite useless.

And no, I don't think I passed... 🙁

We live, we learn.

93/93


ReplyQuote
frater_cug
(@frater_cug)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 73
02/10/2006 7:14 pm  

Looks like I'm in the same boat.. He said the same thing I did as well. 😉

Ahh well... But my graphic is bigger 😛


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1846
03/10/2006 12:46 pm  

The statement that Tzaddi is not the Star also flips perfectly into into the proclamation the "He is not the Emperor." The Hook escorts the "Fish" (with its corresponding Aeon) offstage. Enter, the Water Bearer.

And funny, in English Qabalah, "He" = 78, the line up of the Book of Thoth Itself! No longer holding precedence over a tidy and locked-down map of the Universe based on the Stand-by Tree of Life?

No? Yes?

PERHAPS?

Kyle


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
09/04/2007 10:05 am  

Well I'd approach it another way, looking at the meaning of Tzaddi. It is the 18th Hebrew letter and means RIGHTEOUS. I've also heard it translated as "Wise One". 18 is the Tarot trump of the Moon, too.

The Wise One is not the Star.
The Moon is not the Star.

Here we have a dialetic about being govern by the Divine Philospher Kings and/or the Occult. When in this new aeon it is neither. Every man and woman is a khabs, a star.

Khabs is the star.


ReplyQuote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1126
09/04/2007 1:29 pm  

It is the 18th Hebrew letter and means RIGHTEOUS.

You must be thinking of TzDQ. TzDI means "fish-hook".

18 is the Tarot trump of the Moon, too.

XVIII is the Tarot trump of the Moon; but 18 is XVII, "The Star".


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
09/04/2007 6:32 pm  

Well I'd approach it another way, looking at the meaning of Tzaddi. It is the 18th Hebrew letter and means RIGHTEOUS. I've also heard it translated as "Wise One". 18 is the Tarot trump of the Moon, too.

The Wise One is not the Star.
The Moon is not the Star.

Here we have a dialetic about being govern by the Divine Philospher Kings and/or the Occult. When in this new aeon it is neither. Every man and woman is a khabs, a star.

Khabs is the star.

93,

If we assigned every letter (aleph as 1st letter, beth as 2nd) then it would not be the tarot attributions that are currently there (aleph as 0, beth as 1, lamed as 11, etc). Also, how can you be governed by 'the Occult'? Isnt that exactly what AL I:10 says "few & secret" sound like a synonym of 'occult' to me. Also, saying The Moon is not the Star is like saying the High Priestess is not hte Empress - its kind of useless to say such. I strain to see how you find the ide aof 'governance' apparent in those statements at all. Its these very nebulous qabalistic identifications that get you caught up in the pit of Because, in my opinion because they say nothing beyond what you want them to say.

210 & 65,
111-418


ReplyQuote
Proteus
(@proteus)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 243
10/04/2007 2:26 am  

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

I've had an idea of what that character may be for a while. If I ever get the motivation, I'll develop my thoughts and write it all up. Can someone confirm that somebody somewhere along the line has figured this out by now so we can stop discussing it?

John (for now, the whisky calls)

Love is the law, love under will.


ReplyQuote
Proteus
(@proteus)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 243
10/04/2007 2:43 am  

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

I didn't mean for my last post to be so pretentious. I apologize for my foolishness and will flagellate myself accordingly.

John

Love is the law, love under will.


ReplyQuote
OKontrair
(@okontrair)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 501
10/04/2007 11:26 am  

Until the very attractive 'Lam-Alif' idea came along I always thought AC heard "Tzaddi", his Hebrew being a bit rusty wrote "Ayin" (the other roughly 'y' shaped letter), then overwrote in the bottom elbow part of Tzaddi which is the defining difference between the two.

But this might just be the Rorschach stain on the wallpaper of my navel.

OK


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
11/04/2007 10:43 am  

Aum 418

I stand corrected. I meant "dialetic about being govern by the Divine Philospher Kings," as in the old aeonic energies. Shouldn't have used the and/or occult, that was a mistake. I like the way you put that in about the 'secret and few'. Makes sense.

I have always gone by the Fool card is placed at the end of the Tarot trumps, as card 23, rather than the front.

But + or - one is very significant in many systems.

I think there is no one correct answer, because Thelema to me is about diversity and learning, about the crowned and conquering child who learns by stepping out on the path and recognizing true will, rather than in the old aeon where we learned by sacrificing something of ourselves to earn or gain something.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
11/04/2007 10:47 am  

ionrons:

"You must be thinking of TzDQ. TzDI means "fish-hook"."

I hadn't known of this distinction. So TzDQ is a word and TzDI is a letter in Hebrew?

Has anyone heard of the word ZUGOTH?

I heard it in a fascinating dream one night.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
11/04/2007 11:02 am  

Oh, yes, I find the Lam-Alif connection very interesting!


ReplyQuote
belmurru
(@belmurru)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1021
11/04/2007 11:16 am  
"BabelothsRaven" wrote:
Has anyone heard of the word ZUGOTH?

I had it in a fascinating dream one night.

"Zugoth" (or zugot) is a Hebrew loanword from Greek "zugon" (zygon) which means "a pair". In Hebrew, it refers historically to famous pairs of rabbis who interpreted the Law from the 3rd century b.c.e. through the first century c.e.
See e.g.
http://www.bible-history.com/JewishLiterature/JEWISH_LITERATUREThe_Zugoth.htm

Is this your dream?
http://dreamjournal.net/index.cfm?do=getdream&dream_id=54547

If so, if it were my dream and I were looking for a sign, I would guess she is my "pair" - my other side. I would begin to try to find her - in the astral and dream realms, as well as in the flesh. However you take it, it is an interesting and significant word.

Bel Murru


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
12/04/2007 2:52 am  

93
Belmurru:
Thanks. Wow, gotta love the internet. Yes, that is my dream.
Thanks for your information. I will incubate some dreams to meet and talk with her. I think I have actually, but haven't brought them back into waking consciousness yet.


ReplyQuote
Share: