09-11-2011, 09:10 PM
How glad I am that I can participate in this thread!
I have comments for both Tenet and Carl.
Tenet, what strikes me most about these two decks is their origins. Whereas Ra states right out that the deck in the Law of One was given by Ra to the Egyptian priests (though, I imagine they certainly added their own biases to it), the Rider-Waite deck must have come from Waite's own personal connection to Intelligent Infinity. It is for this reason that I give more credence to the very specific symbols in the Egyptian deck than I do to the Rider-Waite deck. With all Tarot decks except the Egyptian, my practice has been to seek the intended feeling of the card rather than the precise symbolism.
That said, my grasp of the Choice card can be expressed thus: This card represents the entity fully committed to seeking one of the two paths. In this sense, the entity must completely release the other path, which will give that entity the appearance of foolishness. For in this world, common believe suggests that wisdom makes use of both STS and STO principles: give, but protect yours and your own; love your friends, but hate your enemies; release your inhibitions, but only sometimes; etc. To polarize is foolish to everyone who does not so choose. This card is also a unifying card (as Ra points out), and as such it can be seen as representing the mind/body/spirit complex totality and its journey rather than an a single part of it or a single picture of its evolution (note: consider that the Significator cards can be seen as representing the mind, body and spirit complexes individually, while the other 18 cards can be seen as the movements and growth patterns within the mind, body and spirit complexes). I think that this card is appropriately placed that both the beginning and the end of the deck because one begins a naive fool and ends a wise fool.
As far as the specific symbols of Ra's card:
1. As always, in our illusion, the left-hand path (your right, the seeker's left) is easier to see. This world is very difficult and it is easy to think that only path of growth is to let go of all love for others and simply gain for oneself. The message Christ taught is not an obvious one and it takes examples like him to get anyone to believe that it really works.
2. I think there is actually a crocodile in this card instead of a dog. This croc has its mouth open and is pictured to the seeker's left (your right). The croc is often thought of as very aggressive in Egyptian symbolism, which brings out the foolish nature of the seeker. Either he has no idea what crocodiles do or he knows something that we don't. Think of the late Crocodile Hunter -- that man was a fool and eventually got eaten by a very physical yet very metaphorical crocodile. The support from below (rather than a precipice) seems to underline the comedic nature of 3-d experience. It seems tragic to those who are not foolish and it seems comedic to those who are. Turns out the foolish got this one right. You're not going to fall off the cliff; the worst that will happen if you fall is you hit the ground -- of course, the crocodile can be seen as taking on the same kind of symbolism as the cliff, so this point could be somewhat moot.
3. I don't really understand what you are saying on this one.
4. This suggests to me the downhill nature of the path of seeking. The further you go, the more energy you have to commit to this path. Think of the "Law of Squares" or the Law of Doubling (in our mathematical system): each step doubles the total metaphysical inertia the seeker has.
5. The most obvious aspect of the sun/eclipse symbol is the choice between light and dark. Anyone who looks at this card in connection to the Ra Material can see this. The vesica piscis, however, is robust with the most sublime of symbolism. It is worth mentioning that this shape is found prominently in the flower of life, suggesting great mathematical import here.
CarlS: Ra's proclamations of "O student!" during the archetype discussions suggest to me that Ra gets great pleasure out of the opportunity to teach these archetypes. This suggests that the Archetypes are where Ra wanted to go all along, but Ra was waiting for Don to show some interest.
So consider the fact that every single person in the world understands love differently. Do we therefore not speak about love? On the contrary, it is one of the most written about aspects of human experience. We may all have access to different facets of the archetypes, but this does not render discussion thereof to be worthless. Rather, it is only a qualifier which one must keep in mind: Beware that in exploring the Archetypical Mind, you are not going to find the One Absolute Truth. You will only get a perspective of the Truth of this particular Logos.
For what it's worth, Carl, I've been exploring Ra's concepts of these archetypes for some time now and the more I explore them, the more I find that this is not bullshit at all. My way of describing and viewing these archetypes may be unique, but that doesn't mean I can't shed light on them for others as Ra has shed light on them for me. Hell, every teacher's method is unique regardless of the subject. Is not history all bullshit in the same sense? And psychology? And sociology? Even science is bullshit because scientists will only find what they are looking for.
I'd love to talk more bullshit if anyone is interested, by the way. ;-)
I have comments for both Tenet and Carl.
Tenet, what strikes me most about these two decks is their origins. Whereas Ra states right out that the deck in the Law of One was given by Ra to the Egyptian priests (though, I imagine they certainly added their own biases to it), the Rider-Waite deck must have come from Waite's own personal connection to Intelligent Infinity. It is for this reason that I give more credence to the very specific symbols in the Egyptian deck than I do to the Rider-Waite deck. With all Tarot decks except the Egyptian, my practice has been to seek the intended feeling of the card rather than the precise symbolism.
That said, my grasp of the Choice card can be expressed thus: This card represents the entity fully committed to seeking one of the two paths. In this sense, the entity must completely release the other path, which will give that entity the appearance of foolishness. For in this world, common believe suggests that wisdom makes use of both STS and STO principles: give, but protect yours and your own; love your friends, but hate your enemies; release your inhibitions, but only sometimes; etc. To polarize is foolish to everyone who does not so choose. This card is also a unifying card (as Ra points out), and as such it can be seen as representing the mind/body/spirit complex totality and its journey rather than an a single part of it or a single picture of its evolution (note: consider that the Significator cards can be seen as representing the mind, body and spirit complexes individually, while the other 18 cards can be seen as the movements and growth patterns within the mind, body and spirit complexes). I think that this card is appropriately placed that both the beginning and the end of the deck because one begins a naive fool and ends a wise fool.
As far as the specific symbols of Ra's card:
1. As always, in our illusion, the left-hand path (your right, the seeker's left) is easier to see. This world is very difficult and it is easy to think that only path of growth is to let go of all love for others and simply gain for oneself. The message Christ taught is not an obvious one and it takes examples like him to get anyone to believe that it really works.
2. I think there is actually a crocodile in this card instead of a dog. This croc has its mouth open and is pictured to the seeker's left (your right). The croc is often thought of as very aggressive in Egyptian symbolism, which brings out the foolish nature of the seeker. Either he has no idea what crocodiles do or he knows something that we don't. Think of the late Crocodile Hunter -- that man was a fool and eventually got eaten by a very physical yet very metaphorical crocodile. The support from below (rather than a precipice) seems to underline the comedic nature of 3-d experience. It seems tragic to those who are not foolish and it seems comedic to those who are. Turns out the foolish got this one right. You're not going to fall off the cliff; the worst that will happen if you fall is you hit the ground -- of course, the crocodile can be seen as taking on the same kind of symbolism as the cliff, so this point could be somewhat moot.
3. I don't really understand what you are saying on this one.
4. This suggests to me the downhill nature of the path of seeking. The further you go, the more energy you have to commit to this path. Think of the "Law of Squares" or the Law of Doubling (in our mathematical system): each step doubles the total metaphysical inertia the seeker has.
5. The most obvious aspect of the sun/eclipse symbol is the choice between light and dark. Anyone who looks at this card in connection to the Ra Material can see this. The vesica piscis, however, is robust with the most sublime of symbolism. It is worth mentioning that this shape is found prominently in the flower of life, suggesting great mathematical import here.
CarlS: Ra's proclamations of "O student!" during the archetype discussions suggest to me that Ra gets great pleasure out of the opportunity to teach these archetypes. This suggests that the Archetypes are where Ra wanted to go all along, but Ra was waiting for Don to show some interest.
So consider the fact that every single person in the world understands love differently. Do we therefore not speak about love? On the contrary, it is one of the most written about aspects of human experience. We may all have access to different facets of the archetypes, but this does not render discussion thereof to be worthless. Rather, it is only a qualifier which one must keep in mind: Beware that in exploring the Archetypical Mind, you are not going to find the One Absolute Truth. You will only get a perspective of the Truth of this particular Logos.
For what it's worth, Carl, I've been exploring Ra's concepts of these archetypes for some time now and the more I explore them, the more I find that this is not bullshit at all. My way of describing and viewing these archetypes may be unique, but that doesn't mean I can't shed light on them for others as Ra has shed light on them for me. Hell, every teacher's method is unique regardless of the subject. Is not history all bullshit in the same sense? And psychology? And sociology? Even science is bullshit because scientists will only find what they are looking for.
I'd love to talk more bullshit if anyone is interested, by the way. ;-)
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)