venicebard said:
...according to the Gra version and the Long version, 'anger' according to Saadia (and the Raavad), 'coition' according to Ramak. And there is one source that stipulates it to be 'thought'. So take your pick.
True, but I backed up my 'pick' of sleep through reference to the correspondence between the number 60 [Sameck] and sleep to be found in other kabbalistic sources [giving a quote from the Zohar]; and upon the relation between death and sleep given in these sources in comparison to the sequential relationship of temperance following death in the order of the TdM pattern. Similarly there are variations in kingship words given for the letter Ayin, of which I would justify that of RVGZ 'anger' in relationship to the Devil on the following grounds:
Ayin - King over RVGZ meaning [source-Jastrow]:
excitement, anger [out of divine anger comes mercy; he began to curse his son's anger], commotion, trouble [the trouble of Joseph came upon me].
root: RGZ [b.h. RGG] to be unsteady, restless, to be agitated.
Hif. HRGIZ
1) to stir, excite, incite to anger, provoke [how long will you sin and 'create anger'; at all times let a man 'stir up' his good inclination against his evil inclination; Satan comes down and leads [men] astray, and goes up and 'arouses [the Lord's] anger', takes permission and takes life; hadst thou no other means to 'provoke thy creator to anger' than through me, making me an object of worship?
2) to be excited, fear [Samuel was frightened, lest it be the judgement day, and I feared myself.]
Nif. NRGZ to be excited, to quarrel;
Pi. RGZ to rage.
RGZ, RGIZ to tremble, to be agitated, angry;anger, wrath, trembling, fearful.
Ayin corresponds to the tarot trump 'The Devil' in the English Hermetic tradition, which in relation the kingship word RVGZ we can perhaps relate to the concept of Satan as provocateur, who 'leads men astray, and goes up and 'arouses anger' in the Lord.
In Jastrow is given an example of the word HRGIZ in the phrase “hadst thou no other means to 'provoke [thy creator to] anger' than through me, making me an object of worship?”
In the tarot trump the devil we see him set upon a pedestal, a high place, symbolic of idolatry.
In kabbalistic morality Anger is an instrument of the 'evil inclination', akin to idolatry, a sin defiling both body and soul. In anger the neshamah leaves the body and is replaced by a 'strange god', an agent of the 'other side' [evil].
quote from Zohar:
'This is the meaning of "He tears his soul in his anger" {Job 18:4}. He tears and uproots his soul in his anger, and allows an alien god to take its place. Hence it is written "Desist from a man whose soul is in his anger", that is, one who tears and defiles his holy neshamah in his anger, "whose soul" is exchanged for "his anger."
"For he is accounted a high place." That man is accounted an idol, and whoever associates with him or speaks with him, associates as it were with a real idol. Why is this? Because idolatry actually exists within him. And moreover, he has uprooted celestial sanctity [his neshamah, soul] from its place, and idolatry, an alien god, has settled there instead.' Zohar 182a-182b.
Samael 'the wicked, head of all the Devils, chief of the tempters, serpent in the Garden of Eden and chief adversary/prosecutor' is identified with the office/personification 'Satan'. He is the angelic archon of the planet Mars and attributed to the fifth sephirah on the pillar of severity. Mars is exalted in Capricorn, attributed to the letter Ayin in the SY, and to the card 'The Devil' in the GD tradition. Capricorn is also ruled by Saturn [which again, like the serpent, is identified with both Satan and the Messiah in kabbalistic literature], and is thus associated with both the Greater and Lesser 'malefics' of traditional astrology [Saturn/Mars]. The Devil looks 'cross eyed' in one of the Marseille pattern decks [Hadar], which is an interesting coincidence in light of the fact that Samael [the great Devil of Jewish tradition] is described as 'cross eyed' in the Zohar.
Mars [the 'lesser malefic'] is exalted in Capricorn [ruled by Saturn, the 'greater malefic']. Capricorn therefore [attributed to the letter 'Ayin' (one of which meanings is 'eye') in the Sepher Yetzira], through its association with both malefics, would seem an appropriate attribution of the 'Devil' card. Added to this is the association of the sign with the goat, which in both Christian and Judaic myth and folklore was an image associated with evil and the devil.
In connection with 'eyes' the 'Angel' of Mars is Samael, who was for Jews in the middle ages the principle name associated with the great Devil and his dominion. He was said to be the demon of blindness, which is interesting in connection with Ayin as 'eye'. Among gnostics he was called the 'Blind God' and 'God of the Blind'. Among the Ophites a 'blind angel' who is evil and satanic, and also called the 'blind dragon'. Among the Sabians of Harran Mars itself was called the 'blind master', interesting that the Angel of Mars shares the attribute of blindness here, and in Jewish lists of Angels Samael is also attributed to Mars. [See: Origins of Kabbalah, Gershom Scholem, page 295].
Of Capricorn and Satan it may be of note that there is in Jewish tradition a connection between Satan and Goats as there is in Christian, for example Isaac the Blind wrote:
"He who lives with herds of sheep, even if it is in high mountains and desert wastes, which are uninhabited, has no need to fear Satan and the evil powers, for no evil spirit rules among them. But he who lives among goats, of him it can be said: that even when he is surrounded by ten houses and a hundred men, an evil spirit rules over them." [Scholem, p. 297]
Satan in nonetheless considered an aspect of God and is considered in respect to 'The left eye of God' that looks downwards. The left being connected with the North as the source of evil, Satan himself being called the Spirit of the North [or may be translated alternatively as 'North Wind']. The root of the name Satan is also connected to the root for 'downwards'. The eye that looks downwards is said to be looking into darkness [hence may be considered 'blind'? As with Samael?]
If you want one more source (one I think is rather authoritative) to add to the above, I myself call samekh aries - which is obviously what the original creators of the letter meant it to be, since it is shaped like a head and pronounced on the tip (top) of the tongue - and tentatively assign it the function 'thought'. Oh, fancy that: I happen to agree with one source above (Kuzari 4:25, according to Kaplan). Whooduhthunk. (Course I doubt that source dislodged it from its sagittary perch in the process.)
That's interesting, I wasn't aware of any variation in the attribution of the 12 singles to the zodiac. Have you got the page number in which Kaplan says Sameck is attributed to Aries in Kuzari? I can't find it. The only reference I can find to Kuzari 4:25 is on the table on p.219, however here Sameck is still attributed to Sagittarius, though it is as you say the kingship word 'thought'. Or do you mean that you are the authoritive source for assigning samekh to aries, and happen to agree with the kingship word of 'thought' applied to samekh given in Kuzari [though in relation there to the traditional association with Sagittarius, not Aries]?
The Shekinah doesn't have legs,
And God doesn't 'literally' have hands or eyes either; but anthropomorphic symbolism abounds both in scripture and in kabbalistic literature. It is meant figuratively, metaphorically, not literally.
Knowledge (Da'at) transcends reason... and desire leads there, sure, once it learns what it truly wants is self-knowledge, not 'things', which is the same thing as saying "sorrow in the transient, ...joy in the eternal." I would distinguish this root desire (for self-knowledge) - which is always present and which one's desire for 'things' attempts to hide or run away from - from mere 'appetite', although the term 'appetitive', I realize, is merely a way of identifying nefesh with the doer, that is, feeling-and-desire (making ruach the thinker and neshamah the knower, I presume).
quote:
"The Dialoghi d'amore of Leone Ebreo,
written almost contemporaneously with Bembo's
Asolani, are praised by several later writers as an
unsurpassed book of love doctrine. Not merely a
treatise on love, they are also a detailed restatement
of Neo-Platonic philosophy. Though broader than any
commentary on Plato's Symposium, Leone's book has
many themes in common with Ficino's Commentary.
The upper and lower worlds join in man's soul, a
microcosm of the world soul. By knowing beauty man
purifies himself, rising in both knowledge and virtue.
Bad desires, as for the Platonic Socrates if not for
Ficino, derive from erroneous judgment rather than
from corrupted will. Man's intellect, like the soul for
Pico in his famous Oration on the dignity of man, is
potentially all things. The ultimate wisdom is to know
God—a goal not fully attainable in this life, where
intimations of intuitive knowledge are achieved only
briefly in a Platonic raptus or ecstasy, which Leone
calls “copulation with highest God.”
This quote from an excellent essay on PLATONISM IN THE RENAISSANCE which I highly recommend to be found online here:
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv3-64
In the soul's 'union' with G-d the divine cannot be 'known' by reason, but is known by 'consumation', which is the pleasure driven urge of the nefesh or appetitive aspect of the soul, whose desire, being rooted in the love of G-d, is insatiable, and thus can only find sorrow in the transient, and true joy in the eternal. Thus 'knowledge' of God is not the knowledge born of reason, which seperates, but of consummation, which unites. The elevation and position of Temperance in the TdM sequence, the virtue corresponding to the 'appetitive' part of the soul, that seeks to 'consume', I would say suggests the influence of the neo-platonic doctrine of Love to be found in Ficino and Leo the Hebrew which had a huge influence both on philosophy and popular culture throughout the late 15th and 16th centuries. A doctrine also related to the image and placement of VI the Lover [Love] and its relation to trumps I, II and III, as I have explained elsewhere. Temperance viewed in this aspect, perhaps one of the alternative kingship words for Samekh, 'coition', could be said to apply.
But I take issue with this "the divine cannot be known by reason" stuff: it is just bleed-over from the rabbis' trying to sell us on G-d being a mystery that cannot be solved, which is silly from the Gnostic viewpoint of course. Of course rabbis aren't Gnostics, so that explains that.
Kabbalah arises from jewish gnostic sources, not rabbinical, and many schools in its history have in fact been anti-talmudic to an extreme.
Kwaw
