Qabalah

[JustLikeYou]

I think one of the greatest challenges is accepting that there is no single system of correspondences which is "correct"

I'm prepared to accept this if it is true, but I don't think I've reached a level of mastery where I can say one way or another. Until I'm very comfortable moving between the two systems, I'm happy to leave my judgment on this one up in the air.

there is a common principle underlying the use of the glyph itself, just as with the Tarot the consistency of there being 22 archetypes does not always yield the same archetypes in the same places.

Of course. There is a component to the study which is necessarily subjective: we each have a unique perspective on this structure whose dimensions are beyond the scope of our total grasp. But the structure itself exists and can be measured. Surely there is some means of measurement that we can commonly use (even if I don't know what it is). The boundary between the subjective and objective in any subject needs to be careful teased out. I've noticed that conversation about the archetypes doesn't always associate the same name with the same concept complex and I've often seen people (including Qabalists) mistake lesser deities for greater deities, so to speak.

So although I can accept the possibility that the systems are simply not directly compatible, I'm not yet convinced that this is so.