04-03-2012, 12:56 AM
(This post was last modified: 04-03-2012, 01:34 PM by abstrktion.)
Thanks for putting up this thread.
I've been thinking a good deal about the polarity of the archetypes. Here are my thoughts (a sort of "rough draft" that I want to refine to put up with my archetype paintings).
Polarity, or rather, duality, begins as soon as there is manifestation—or rather it IS manifestation. In Ra’s terminology, duality, or separation, is called distortion from the unity of the One Infinite Creator. In Fortune’s Qabalah, she tells us that the Unmanifest “concentrated” a point at Kether, a kind of “crystallization.”1 Further, she tells us that “Kether differentiates itself two aspects, Chokmah and Binah, and manifestation is in being.”2 In her terminology, Chokmah is “an active male potency” while Binah is “a passive female potency” and “considering again the two lateral columns of the Tree, we see Chokmah and Binah as Force and Form, the two units of manifestation.”3 So this dynamic seems to be the very basic foundational pattern for all things manifest. In fact, one might see that it is the potential difference in these foundational elements that generates the power or current that enlivens all things.4 I thought JustLikeYou put it very well when he said: “All of reality comes about from the constant separating and combining of these two primal principles, so it would seem that literally every symbol, every concept within the archetypes as a whole can be reduced to a particular way of viewing these combinations.”
However, I believe we would be mistaken to suppose that any one thing is limited to a single side of the polarity dynamic. Indeed, we see this interaction in the Tree of Life where “we must remember that each Sephirah is negative, that is to say, feminine, in relation to its predecessor, whence it emanates and whence it receives the Divine Influence; and positive, masculine, or stimulating in respect of its successor, to whom it transmits Divine Influence.”5 Drawing insight from this paradigm, we can suppose that polarity is, in general, relative rather than fixed or constant. To declare any of the archetypes to be only “masculine” or “feminine,” “static” or “dynamic,” is to grossly oversimplify the archetype, denying part of its essence for the convenience of an easy classification. Indeed, we can even see this pattern in our own natures. Qu’o states that, “it is not enough remembered, however, that each entity carries within itself, whether biologically male or biologically female, both energies.”6 Whatever form we take physically, male or female, our “other half” remains latent on the inner planes, part of the unconsciousness waiting to be sought by the consciousness.
At first, it would seem as though this use of the word “polarity” is very different from that which Ra employed. However, another look at the Significator of Spirit reveals that we are, in fact, talking about a variation on a theme rather than an entirely different tune. The service to self path is absorbant, something which takes light into itself. Fundamentally, this may be equated to “Form” while the service to others path is radiant, that which sends out light from itself. This may be equated to “Force.” It might at first be a stretch to see “Form” as encompassing both limitation and absorption or “pulling within”; however, if we posit that first a Form takes in a Force, and then contains it, we have an adequate analogy. It may be said that a woman draws a man to her through magnetism, takes him within herself, then the energy or Force he provides grows within her, contained, until there is new life born into the world. (Of course, he has first to reach for her--The Magician--or she remains aloof). Further, we can then understand “receptivity” as a Form as well; in fact, we may even posit that a quality of receptivity is a “drawing in.” In fact, I think several posters on this thread noticed this as well.
So how shall the attributes of “Form” and “Force” be assigned to the archetypes?
If one accepts that it is an oversimplification to posit that the archetypes are either one thing or another, then it may be useful to look at all the ways the Form and Force aspects could function in the archetypes in general.
Level 1 – Inherent state of Motion: Dynamic (moving) or Static (unmoving).
Level 2 – Function with regard to Pairings: Activator (the mover) or Activated (the moved/altered).
Level 3 – “Native” Plane or Plane of Activity: Inner (non-3D) or Outer (3D). (This appears to be my own “take” on this; if an archetype’s effect is on what I consider its own turf, I called it a Force archetype.)
Level 4 – Gender in the images on the tarot given by Ra.
Level 5 – Position of the figure on the card: Seated or Standing (thank you to posters on this thread for this last one)
Other variations might be “hidden” and “revealed,” “dark” and “illuminating,” and “receptive” and “projective.”
Another very useful text that discusses the foundational nature of Form and Force relationships is Dion Fortune's Cosmic Doctrine.
__________
1. Dion Fortune, The Mystical Qabalah (York Beach, ME; Samuel Weiser, Inc., 1993, originally printed 1935), Fortune, 38.
2. Ibid., 45.
3. Ibid., 46.
4. JustLikeYou related all this to electromagnetism: “In electricity, there is voltage and current. The voltage is the potential, which Ra frequently implies is the underlying meaning of his usage of the word "potential". When there is a difference in electrical charge between two objects which are connected on a circuit, there is voltage. So one side can be +6v and the other -6v. The two sides are always equal because the circuit must be balanced. Without voltage, there is no current, no movement of charge from positive to negative. The current is the energy, the potential is the precursor to energy. When the light bulb switches on, the energy output is the current flowing through the filament whose resistance to this flow causes energy to stick and thus make the filament glow. The battery or generator creates potential difference, separating the positive charge from the negative charge. The circuit itself then connects the two ends which have this difference and a flow of energy, the current, results as a consequence of the connection of the two opposites, which seek to balance out.”
5. Fortune, 57.
6. January 22, 2011.
I've been thinking a good deal about the polarity of the archetypes. Here are my thoughts (a sort of "rough draft" that I want to refine to put up with my archetype paintings).
Polarity, or rather, duality, begins as soon as there is manifestation—or rather it IS manifestation. In Ra’s terminology, duality, or separation, is called distortion from the unity of the One Infinite Creator. In Fortune’s Qabalah, she tells us that the Unmanifest “concentrated” a point at Kether, a kind of “crystallization.”1 Further, she tells us that “Kether differentiates itself two aspects, Chokmah and Binah, and manifestation is in being.”2 In her terminology, Chokmah is “an active male potency” while Binah is “a passive female potency” and “considering again the two lateral columns of the Tree, we see Chokmah and Binah as Force and Form, the two units of manifestation.”3 So this dynamic seems to be the very basic foundational pattern for all things manifest. In fact, one might see that it is the potential difference in these foundational elements that generates the power or current that enlivens all things.4 I thought JustLikeYou put it very well when he said: “All of reality comes about from the constant separating and combining of these two primal principles, so it would seem that literally every symbol, every concept within the archetypes as a whole can be reduced to a particular way of viewing these combinations.”
However, I believe we would be mistaken to suppose that any one thing is limited to a single side of the polarity dynamic. Indeed, we see this interaction in the Tree of Life where “we must remember that each Sephirah is negative, that is to say, feminine, in relation to its predecessor, whence it emanates and whence it receives the Divine Influence; and positive, masculine, or stimulating in respect of its successor, to whom it transmits Divine Influence.”5 Drawing insight from this paradigm, we can suppose that polarity is, in general, relative rather than fixed or constant. To declare any of the archetypes to be only “masculine” or “feminine,” “static” or “dynamic,” is to grossly oversimplify the archetype, denying part of its essence for the convenience of an easy classification. Indeed, we can even see this pattern in our own natures. Qu’o states that, “it is not enough remembered, however, that each entity carries within itself, whether biologically male or biologically female, both energies.”6 Whatever form we take physically, male or female, our “other half” remains latent on the inner planes, part of the unconsciousness waiting to be sought by the consciousness.
At first, it would seem as though this use of the word “polarity” is very different from that which Ra employed. However, another look at the Significator of Spirit reveals that we are, in fact, talking about a variation on a theme rather than an entirely different tune. The service to self path is absorbant, something which takes light into itself. Fundamentally, this may be equated to “Form” while the service to others path is radiant, that which sends out light from itself. This may be equated to “Force.” It might at first be a stretch to see “Form” as encompassing both limitation and absorption or “pulling within”; however, if we posit that first a Form takes in a Force, and then contains it, we have an adequate analogy. It may be said that a woman draws a man to her through magnetism, takes him within herself, then the energy or Force he provides grows within her, contained, until there is new life born into the world. (Of course, he has first to reach for her--The Magician--or she remains aloof). Further, we can then understand “receptivity” as a Form as well; in fact, we may even posit that a quality of receptivity is a “drawing in.” In fact, I think several posters on this thread noticed this as well.
So how shall the attributes of “Form” and “Force” be assigned to the archetypes?
If one accepts that it is an oversimplification to posit that the archetypes are either one thing or another, then it may be useful to look at all the ways the Form and Force aspects could function in the archetypes in general.
Level 1 – Inherent state of Motion: Dynamic (moving) or Static (unmoving).
Level 2 – Function with regard to Pairings: Activator (the mover) or Activated (the moved/altered).
Level 3 – “Native” Plane or Plane of Activity: Inner (non-3D) or Outer (3D). (This appears to be my own “take” on this; if an archetype’s effect is on what I consider its own turf, I called it a Force archetype.)
Level 4 – Gender in the images on the tarot given by Ra.
Level 5 – Position of the figure on the card: Seated or Standing (thank you to posters on this thread for this last one)
Other variations might be “hidden” and “revealed,” “dark” and “illuminating,” and “receptive” and “projective.”
Another very useful text that discusses the foundational nature of Form and Force relationships is Dion Fortune's Cosmic Doctrine.
__________
1. Dion Fortune, The Mystical Qabalah (York Beach, ME; Samuel Weiser, Inc., 1993, originally printed 1935), Fortune, 38.
2. Ibid., 45.
3. Ibid., 46.
4. JustLikeYou related all this to electromagnetism: “In electricity, there is voltage and current. The voltage is the potential, which Ra frequently implies is the underlying meaning of his usage of the word "potential". When there is a difference in electrical charge between two objects which are connected on a circuit, there is voltage. So one side can be +6v and the other -6v. The two sides are always equal because the circuit must be balanced. Without voltage, there is no current, no movement of charge from positive to negative. The current is the energy, the potential is the precursor to energy. When the light bulb switches on, the energy output is the current flowing through the filament whose resistance to this flow causes energy to stick and thus make the filament glow. The battery or generator creates potential difference, separating the positive charge from the negative charge. The circuit itself then connects the two ends which have this difference and a flow of energy, the current, results as a consequence of the connection of the two opposites, which seek to balance out.”
5. Fortune, 57.
6. January 22, 2011.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)