Interesting, I have never seen eastward used to indicate anything other than a direction. Can you explain the association with antiquity?
"There has been no movement in any direction as
Then why was eastward chosen out of the 4 cardinal directions?
According to this tradition, God has placed Adam in the
"garden" or center encompassing the bisected horizontal and
vertical ("the tree of life also in the midst" [Gen 2:9]),
and establishes the four cardinal points radiating or flowing
OK so he's eastward but in the center, can you explain?
"The mandala has a very nice correspondence to this,
> > Day 4: Finally, back to Chapter 1, the rule to chart
> > progress is established with "the greater light to rule the
> > day, and the lesser light to rule the night . . ." (Gen
> >>Sun and Moon or Sol and Luna, defining opposites.
> No, no opposition. Difference, perhaps, as in day and night;
> "greater" and "lesser." But no opposition. If anything, it
> describes a correspondence in function.
> > Day 5-6: It is only after this basis by which to chart the
> > unkown -- this basis by which to KNOW -- does God create the
> > variety of "moving creature that hath life" (Gen 1:20-31).
> >>Ok the opposites have been defined and have an
> interrelationship in action.<<
> Again, no opposition (wait for it, Steve :-) ).
> Interrelationship in action, certainly; but no opposition.
Sorry It sounds like I'm implying enimity, I don't. but there are opposites.
> > Enter the serpent, who convinced Adam and Eve after the
> > foundations were laid that their basis by which to chart the
> > unknown -- their basis by which to KNOW things -- should be
> > themselves. Perhaps a clue as to the symbolism of the dual
> > serpent superimposed and intertwining the straight shaft?
> >>I agree, it represents the division of unity (the central
> staff) into a duality that is active (the two serpents). A
> reduction of what is infinite to finite. Read the comments on
> Kundilini yoga and the 3 major forces in that thread I linked
> to. Think about the magic dual between Moses and the Egyptian
> priests where his one staff devoured the 2 others. It's
> mentioned on the that thread also. Theres an interesting
> similarity in the symbolism.<<
> Yes, finally, it is at this point that Adam and Eve have been
> divided from their unity with God. Here is where opposition
> comes into play; but the central staff (the tree of life),
> according to my reading of this tradition, is now removed to
> the periphery. Adam and Eve's division from God came
> consequent to their believing the serpent, in opposition to
> God, and their subsequent partaking of the fruit of the tree
> of the knowledge of good and evil. It is this "staff" of
> death, symbolized by the wings and dual serpents (if you
> like), that has supplanted the "staff" of life at the center
> of man's universe. As above; so below.
What is your reference for the staff of hermes being a staff of death? It's the first time I'm I've heard it refered to as such. Are you associating this new condition of adam and eve (the two serpents) and the central portion of the staff with the above and below of the Emerald Tablet?
> Hmmmm, yes, the duel of magic between Moses and the Egyptian
> priests. Well, it may be that the Supernatural board would
> be the more appropriate place to discuss such matters;
> however, perhaps I can allude to it:
Why would you exclude this reference from the rest?
> "And then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil,
> blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind
> and dumb both spake and saw. And the people were amazed, and
> said, Is not this the son of David? But when the Pharisees
> heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils,
> but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils. And Jesus knew
> their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided
> against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or
> house divided against itself shall not stand: And if Satan
> cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then
> his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by
> whom do your children cast them out? Therefore they shall be
> your judges. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God,
> then the kingdom of God is come unto you" (Mt 12:22-28)
So is this in a sense saying that the magic of Beelzebub was natural and therefore inferior to the magic of Christ?
> The people, in witnessing this duel, identified Jesus with
> the "son of David," or Solomon, reputed to be a master of the
> arcane and esoteric got of his many wives.
I'm sorry, what dual with Jesus?
> evidently offended by this comparison, countered by accusing
> him of being a minion of Satan. In both cases, the eyes of
> the witnesses were filled with the magic, or manifestation of
> power, rather than the source of that magic. Likewise, it
> seems to me, when the Egyptian priests fell down and
> acknowledged Moses' "god" as being the superior, they had
> their eye on the single serpent of Moses -- and not God.
The single serpent, if we're following this line of reasoning is associated with the divine, so how do you see it as 'not God'?
>It then makes much more sense (to me) that, in the wilderness,
> in order for the children of Israel to be spiritually healed,
> the serpent, deader than a doornail, had to be lifted up for
> all to see.
It's interesting that there is the reference to the serpent being raised in a verticle line, similar to the ascent of the kunilini force in yoga. It the verticle ascent that is associated with enlightnent and completion.
> Perhaps you can understand why then, informed as I am by THIS
> tradition, a Yogic encouragement of their initiates to invite
> a metaphorical serpent to occupy their chakra points speaks
> more to me of an obstruction to spiritual enlightenment -- an
> obstruction to spiritual unity -- than anything else.
Well if you read the original post I linked to you'll see that it is considered by them to be the opposite as I just mentioned. It is the return of those divided forces (ida and pingala = the two serpents) to the central unified force that defines completion and enlightenment. the serpent isn't a static symbol to the yogi is context sensitive as we've discussed at length.
> Of course, if their tantric practices relate more to physical
> union (as it often seems . . .), then the symbolism of the
> serpent makes more sense, IMHO. As I mentioned in a prior
> post, I don't have a problem with phallic mysteries.
I'm not really upon Tantric yoga, I understand it has to do with a concept of balancing energies between a man and a woman, it certainly isn't the only school of yoga. Others are strictly 'zips up'.
> Warm regards,
Same to you Mark, interesting talk!