Temperance and the septenary

Ruby Jewel

Got it, thanks. :)

Looking at this book again, it is possible that is in Chapter 6. Ternaries (3 cards) are the triangles and septenaries are made up of a positive and a negative ternary. There are 3 septenaries and an extra ternary at the end which is the ternary of transition. I have to say that I had to lay all this out on a big sheet of plywood in order to understand it. It is too difficult to try to envision it.....but once you see the whole thing laid out...and of course go through the process of laying it out.....then you will see the brilliance in it. Not necessarily in term of the Kabala and the Tree of Life, ......which I know nothing about....., but in terms of how the septenaries show the path and evolution of the Fool as he goes through the process of enlightenment.
 

Richard

By the way, there is a quickie way to obtain the theosophic reduction. The time consuming part is finding what Case calls the theosophic extension, which is the sum of the digits in a number. For example:

The theosophic extension of 6 is 1+2+3+4+5+6 =21. The fast way to find this is to multiply the 6 by the next larger number 7 and then divide by 2. 6x7 = 42, and 42 divided by 2 is 21. (The reduction is then 2+1 = 3.)

Here is another famous example: The theosophic extension of 12 is 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12 = 78. The shortcut: Multiply 12 by the next larger number 13, 12x13 = 156. The division of 156 by 2 is 78. (This reduces to 7+8 = 15, which reduces to 6.)

Try it a few times. It always works. It is easy to show why it works, but this is not a maths forum.
 

Ruby Jewel

By the way, there is a quickie way to obtain the theosophic reduction. The time consuming part is finding what Case calls the theosophic extension, which is the sum of the digits in a number. For example:

The theosophic extension of 6 is 1+2+3+4+5+6 =21. The fast way to find this is to multiply the 6 by the next larger number 7 and then divide by 2. 6x7 = 42, and 42 divided by 2 is 21. (The reduction is then 2+1 = 3.)

Here is another famous example: The theosophic extension of 12 is 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12 = 78. The shortcut: Multiply 12 by the next larger number 13, 12x13 = 156. The division of 156 by 2 is 78. (This reduces to 7+8 = 15, which reduces to 6.)

Try it a few times. It always works. It is easy to show why it works, but this is not a maths forum.

Interesting...I'll remember that if I ever need to use theosophic extension....I am left to wonder, however, for what purpose this knowledge might be useful. Papus put it to an interesting use, but how rare is that?
 

Abrac

Oftentimes while reading Waite, a sentence will jump out that seems to shed light on a particular Tarot card. This was the case as I was reading the "Biographical and Critical Essay" in his The Mysteries of Magic—A Digest of the Writings of Éliphas Lévi, 1886. It's toward the end and he's summing up:

"He has taught us to conciliate those opposing forces, physical and spiritual, whose equilibrium is life and immortality;"​

I can't help thinking he had this in mind for Temperance.
 

Ruby Jewel

Oftentimes while reading Waite, a sentence will jump out that seems to shed light on a particular Tarot card. This was the case as I was reading the "Biographical and Critical Essay" in his The Mysteries of Magic—A Digest of the Writings of Éliphas Lévi, 1886. It's toward the end and he's summing up:

"He has taught us to conciliate those opposing forces, physical and spiritual, whose equilibrium is life and immortality;"​

I can't help thinking he had this in mind for Temperance.

In the sense that tempering is the process of blending two opposites, such as oil and water, to create an even dispersion of the two, in a state of suspension.....such suspension represents an equilibrium. But, keep in mind that both terms, suspension and equilibrium, represent stasis....and stasis is death. Therefore, positing physical and spiritual as opposing forces, seems to me to be an error in assumption. Hegel sure started something with his "dialectical" resolution of opposites. We tend to try to turn everything into opposites. I somehow find the statement obscenely intellectual.....pompous, if you will. I can find nothing meaningful in it. Can you?
 

Abrac

Define "meaningful."
 

Ruby Jewel

Define "meaningful."

Sounds intellectual on a surface level, but when I try to figure out what he is saying, I can't make any sense out of it.
 

Abrac

Waite had a saying he was fond of repeating: "The Mercury of the Sages is that which must be fixed and volatilised—naturally it is fluidic and wandering." The process of fixing the volatile, and volatilizing the fixed, doesn't produce stasis, it produces the best of each, the fixed and volatile. Fixing alone would produce stasis, it must also be volatilized.
 

Ruby Jewel

Waite had a saying he was fond of repeating: "The Mercury of the Sages is that which must be fixed and volatilised—naturally it is fluidic and wandering." The process of fixing the volatile, and volatilizing the fixed, doesn't produce stasis, it produces the best of each, the fixed and volatile. Fixing alone would produce stasis, it must also be volatilized.

I guess I'm a bit of a strange bird, but I paint, write, and think straightforward and simple. For me, that is the true measure of intelligence, understanding and wisdom which is found in essences rather than esoteric meandering jargon. Mercurial and fluidic mental wanderings are a bit too self-indulgent for me. Waite, for my taste, seems rather enamored with himself.
 

Abrac

I don't really have an opinion one way or another about Waite personally. My interest is only in his philosophy and so I try to stay objective. I find him a little arrogant and condescending at times but many of the occult types of the period were. Not defending him, but I don't think he was as arrogant as some people make him out to be, people who usually know very little of his work.

I'm on the record as one who doesn't subscribe to Waite's philosophy; I have my own beliefs, but I think it's important to know where he was coming from, at least for me it is. He often stressed the importance of not mistaking the symbol for the thing symbolized. In other words, all the confusing symbolism and jargon is just a smokescreen for the spiritual reality. Nowadays spirituality is more straightforward, people are turned off by puzzles; but back then it was critically important to confuse and discourage all but the most sincere and dedicated aspirants. :)