Book IV Study Group

[βαθμιαίος]

To me, the female (mover) is quiescent except through her attention. She is the "mover" because she beckons the one to be moved with her charm and allure. It is through her attraction and attention that the male (moved) is motivated to take action.

I'm wondering about the difference between "mover/moved" and "in motion/regulating motion." I think your understanding of Potentiator of the mind as beckoning the Matrix is right on, but I'm not sure it's relevant to the Matrix and Potentiator of the body. Ra said that the seated female figure (Matrix of the body) is always active with no possibility of being inactive, while the standing male (Potentiator of the body) is that which regulates activity. I'm still not clear why a seated figure is associated with activity/motion (as opposed to inducing motion as in the Potentiator of the mind), but in looking at the image it certainly does seem that a lot of activity is occurring.

Recall that the cards represent both polarities and more importantly relate the characteristics of the archetype to familiar, 3D roles and experiences. Are not positions of power and powerful people familiar characteristics to us all? That is why I like your observation, it adds another dimension to my understanding of the cards. As such, I think it is perfectly appropriate to view the relative power represented by aspects of each archetype as an aid in explicating them.

OK, but taking the Matrix and Potentiator of the body again, it's hard to say that the Potentiator is less powerful than the Matrix given that he apparently regulates her activity. In the case of the Matrix and Potentiator of the mind, it does seem appropriate to think of the Matrix going forth to court the Potentiator in a suppliant and seeking manner, on the positive path at least.

If I suppose for a moment though, that the male is able to move independent of an external source, then would it perhaps be his free will that causes the movement? This is consistent with the concept of turning one way and then the other, and also relates back to the Fool who blindly wanders where angles fear to tread.

Yes, I think so.

Let us try then to tie this together in a tentative thread through the archetypal mind. The Great Way chooses environments, which, based upon the past free will choices, have produced polarizing experiences. Until the Transformation abandons one path for the other, however (initially through Foolish choices, but later based upon past experience), the Great Way cannot optimize environments based upon a preferred type of fruit.

Once an environment is selected, then the root of the mind through the Transformation selects how it will be manipulated (positively or negatively). This then colors how the experience is presented to the Significator, and the rest flows as stated earlier.

Although I am sure Ra is shaking his head and laughing right now, this does at least attempt to tie together the first seven with the Fool to form an "evolution model" for the mind.

What do you think?

I like it. I share your sense that Ra may consider it to bear little of sense, especially because they always seemed to disagree whenever Don tried to tie the cards together by saying things like "the Significators ... are acted upon by the Catalyst" (88.17), but hey, we gotta bumble through somehow and they're unfortunately not currently available to answer our questions. Can we do the same for the body and spirit?

Thanks, I will refer to it. Thanks also for all the excellent effort you have put into making the Law of One more accessible to its students.

You're very welcome, but that one I can take no credit for. It was put together by a woman named Brandy Rox.