Transformation of the Mind - Lovers

[Infinite Unity]

Hi all,

I'll start with a reply to the original question.

In this card, does the female on the right turn the mind towards the right by pulling the left hand of the mind towards the right with her left hand, and the female on the left do the opposite?

...This may not be only symbolic, but may have a relation to the daily ordinary energy balance of right/left. In he material, there are references to toppling/falling towards a direction in other points not relevant to tarot or this card.


It may be so that the feeling/orientation one have in his/her body and the balance of energy in left and right hand side may relate to polarities.

I don't think the images for the archetypes of mind should be understood as indicating sensations in the body. Rather, I think that would be the domain of the archetypes of body.

I do, however, have an interpretation of the crossed arms.

In the first place, it may well be that the intention is just to create the pretzel shape. If you imagine that the male's arms are not crossed, and that he holds a hand of each woman, he has much more range of motion.

The question, as I understand it, is this: why does the prostitute hold his right hand and the virgin his left? Is there meaning in this configuration beyond the fact that it makes binds the male in a pretzel?

If so, here is my interpretation: it is easy to feel drawn toward one polarity when you experience the pleasures belonging to that polarity. The feeling of power and control brings pleasure, as does the feeling of connection and unconditional support. The hard part is to accept that the pleasures of one polarity become the pains of another. The virgin wants us recognize that our attempts to control her are cruel. Likewise, the prostitute wants us to acknowledge that she is contemptuous of our propensity for compassion. Abandoning one of the paths requires that we accept and face the pain of doing so.


Here are some other comments.

the image to me doesn't show any abandonment at all. I think that's why I saw the archetype itself as prior to the choice, not the act of choosing to abandon

I think this image shows the necessity of abandonment, rather than the event itself. I think you probably appreciate the difficulty of showing a dynamic event with a static image. If the image showed the actual event of abandonment, then the male would have to have chosen one of the females, but that would send the wrong message to the student: that one of the paths is right and one wrong.

is choice something that we create, or is choice an expression of deeper bias that we channel?

In this archetype, I think the choice has to happen consciously. The unconscious offers itself in two forms and the conscious mind enjoys the privilege of choice. I also think this matches our experience. I think throughout our lives we feel a pull both toward a part of ourselves that wants to be used for gratification and another part of ourselves that wants to be cherished and appreciated. This often comes up for me in my writing and other creative work: sometimes I ruthlessly demand production from myself, and other times I want to follow the urge of the muse without forcing anything. What makes the difference is whether, in becoming aware of these opposing pulls, I consistently decide to let go of one approach in favor of the other. This can also be applied to relationships with others, of course.

I think frustration is the characteristic emotion of this archetype. We get frustrated when we feel that we are stagnating in manifesting the reality we want. But we typically fail to grasp that inconsistency in our choices with regard to this archetype is what causes the stagnation. It's not at all intuitively obvious that abandoning all effort to force myself to create something will open the way forward into greater realms of creativity. I think it is very tempting to judge that both of these approaches to the unconscious mind are useful and neither should be abandoned.

While it may be true that there is a deep-down, innate, axiomatic bias that effects the choice of polarity

I don't think there is such an innate, axiomatic bias. If there were, then it does not seem that we can be called free. Rather, I think what you are describing is the development of bias over many lifetimes that is then carried into the current incarnation.

It is the entity which is going to turn himself around.


And for that to happen, he will let go of one hand - aka one principle that governs the use of deep mind.

This would mean clenching and pulling with his left hand, whereas opening and letting go with his right hand.

This strikes me as a near contradiction. I think that to abandon one path requires the letting go, regardless of the chosen path. Or, to put it another way, to clench and pull with the left hand is just to choose the left hand path and abandon the right. If you attempt to drag the virgin along with you, you will look back to discover she was actually a prostitute all along. I'm not so much disagreeing as pointing out an oddity of self-reference (which usually causes problems for logic).

Totally agree, and the reason I self identify as a pirate. The crew's family, and we get swirvy, or rather scurvy. Its just True, and have had experiences, and pulls toward both. Sometimes you want to make Love, and some times you want to f***.