Four Circles and a Point
Four circles and a point are very, very simple. But providing evidence, or proof, that such a model can describe all of existence, or that it should even exits itself by natural means, is not always that simple. In the book All Things Are Numbers, I present a long and complex logical "proof" for how this simple model of existence might have come to be. The long logical analysis is there for those seeking that kind of "proof" - or something like it. But, for those who don't require such elaborate means in order to believe something, there is a much simpler method that anyone can use to create the same theoretical model, using just two simple, seemingly obvious concepts. These two simple concepts stand in direct opposition, however, to many of the spiritual philosophies of the world, who consider dualistic thinking to be uninspired. But... this study of tarot and existence theorizes that dualistic thinking actually has a proper time and proper place in which it can serve a vital purpose, and that philosophies that preach total abandonment of all notions of duality do our minds a dis-service. Thus, with at least some temporary leniency toward the use of a dualistic mindset in mind, this study of tarot and existence asks us to consider the following:
1) Things exist... or they don't.
Existence vs. Nothing. There are actually three parts to that equation; "existence," "nothing" and "vs." The "vs." part represents the presence of a line of demarcation between existence and nothing. You could draw that line on paper as a diagram, with all the bias that goes with it. But the interesting part of all this it how you don't need to. It's just there. Invented and owned by no one... no cultural, religious or personal bias.... just abstract ideas infinitely drawn nowhere. Very archetypal!
Existence displaces the continuum of nothingness to create a reference frame. Outside the reference frame is nothing, inside the reference frame is something. OK, here's a diagram... which is of course a linear, two dimensional representation of an idea that is to be imagined three dimensionally:
That seems simple enough. But where does it lead? Here is the second of our two simple, seemingly obvious concepts:
2) Every thing that exists, has an inside and an outside.
Within the area of existence, there is a manifest entity with its own line of demarcation between its insides and outsides. Here is another diagram:
These are the fundamental parameters of this simple model of existence. Nothing... and something. Insides... and outsides. Pretty simple.
From these two simple concepts, a model is conceived. And from these parameters, important lines of demarcation are realized. Between nothing and something, there is a line of demarcation. Between insides and outsides, there is a line of demarcation. Between the left and the right of center, there is a line of demarcation, or axis of symmetry.
The Axis: Every manifest entity has some kind of discernible presence, that's what makes them manifest. That presence exists around a central point of confluence that resides inside the discernible presence.
The Surface: The discernible presence defines the mass of the manifest entity. The point where the insides and outsides of the mass meet is a line of demarcation - the surface of the thing, whatever the thing might be, and however indistinct that surface might be. There will always be some point at which you are no longer inside, but are outside.
The Reference Frame: Existence continues on, outside the mass and surface to the extent of the reference frame. The "sphere of influence" of any mass tapers off, like heat radiating, or atmosphere dissipating, or gravity diminishing, or sound fading. The point at which it becomes unmeasurable we again cross the line of demarcation between something and nothing.
If we add a line of demarcation to this diagram, to indicate the axis, middle, or center... lo and behold, four circles and point magically appear! When these various lines of demarcation, and the stuff they demarcate, are labeled with numbers, a number line of 9 stages magically appears! Every idea I put forth about the nature of existence and tarot symbols and icons is derived from these lines of demarcation and the stuff they demarcate.
Icons of Tarot
It only took TWO simple, obvious, abstract concepts to create a model of existence. If you are a manifest entity displacing the continuum of nothingness that surrounds us all (and I think you are), it is possible that these two simple concepts, working together, might be influencing you. What if they are? From the point of view of a tarot deck, it might explain the "why" of a few things. For example, have you ever considered the possibility that...
Maybe we connect, through The Empress (3), to the theoretical skin of this model's surface to conjure up ideas like sensitivity and the touching of surfaces. Maybe we connect, through Temperance (14=1+4=5), to the infinite inbetween nature of the center to conjure up ideas like reciprocity, alternation and temperance between sides. Maybe we connect, through The Hermit (9), to the all encompassing reaches of this model's reference frame to conjure up ideas like totality and vast amounts of knowledge about the universe that lies just beyond our reference frame or sphere of influence. Maybe we connect, through The Emperor (4), to the mass or guts of this model to conjure up ideas like substance, integrity and the power of a coagulated mass existing in space.
I define an archetype as a primordial pattern that is timeless and transcendental in form, and from which all symbols and icons are derived, either consciously or unconsciously. For example, most people agree that The Magician and The Hermit are both icons of intellect. The Magician is young and clever. The Hermit is old and wise. To me, this simple pattern of 4 circles and a point explains why they are so similar - they share the same sphere of influence!
You can illustrate "clever" and "wise" 1,000 different ways, using the icons of 1,000 different cultures. People do. But WHY do we? Why are the iconic personifications we use archetypal? It's not JUST because they appear again and again across cultures - that's like looking at the symptom and not the cause. I think it's because they express fundamental, primordial patterns that define our very existence. The ones that do this the best, in the purest form, are the ones that get repeated most often and are most easily recognized across cultures and ages of time.
In the early days of tarot, the sequence of the trumps changed several times between various card makers. Sometimes the Popess was the 4th card, next to the Pope. Sometimes the virtues traded places with other cards. With this in mind, we could theorize that: regardless of what story someone might have set out to tell with these images, the two most popular sequences that have come down to us today represent a kind of settling of consciousness into the expression of a universal, archetypal pattern. What is that pattern? And just how close do the two most popular sequences of tarot come in illustrating that pattern?
The All Things Are Numbers approach to tarot believes that an in depth look at primordial patterns can help explain the essence of all archetypal personifications, both the pure and less pure. If the idea of examining primordial patterns that might explain the essence behind archetypal personifications excites you, then read on! I would suggest continuing on to the essay The Invisible Body.
-----
Two Simple Steps Mandala
Here is a mandala you can use to meditate on this idea of two simple concepts creating a theoretical model of existence that the study of tarot, being presented on this site, believes to be a fundamental, elemental, primordial, archetypal armature to which ALL the icons of tarot connect. This is the universal pattern that this study of tarot believes has been unconsciously chosen, over years of development, by the various "inventors" of tarot - past and present, and for the future.
In this mandala, the center point has been expanded to reveal a Mobius-like symbol that represents the paradox of recursive singularity (a concept explained in detail elsewhere on this site). The outer ring of dots, the ones that can be read as spiraling in either of two directions, also hints to the indeterminable nature of paradox as it contains the nothing and something of a universe within. The spiraling lines that can be seen as going one way around, actually have the same arc of convergence upon the center as the indeterminable lines outside, thus representing the idea of the emergence of nothingness from paradox, prior to the emergence of something from nothing that we see with the solid white circles (another concept that is explained in detail elsewhere on this site).
The Cosmic Consciousness of Life is an unbroken Unity. Like a hurricane, whirlpools and eddies twist the fabric of spacetime to make the invisible, visible through broken symmetry (another concept that is explained in detail elsewhere on this site). The web of superconscious interconnectivity is nothing and something at the same time. Nothing is Anything & Everything is Nothing! Let's start there...
 |
|
The Cosmic Consciousness of Life is an unbroken Unity. Like a hurricane, whirlpools and eddies twist the fabric of spacetime to make the invisible, visible. The web of superconscious interconnectivity is nothing and something at the same time. Nothing is Anything & Everything is Nothing! Let's start there...
|
|
