Cosmic symbolism

by Sepharial

But among other things he quotes the Numbers of the planets and the signs of the zodiac. The numbers as given by him are the same as those given by Heydon, and for convenience may be repeated here—

Sun, 1 or 4; Moon, 7 or 2; Saturn, 8; Jupiter, 3; Mars, 9; Venus, 6; Mercury, 5.

Godfridus does not distinguish between the numbers 1 and 4 attributed to the Sun, or those of the Moon 7 and 2. It is important to know that 1 is the positive number of the Sun, and 7 that of the Moon, while 4 is the negative number of the Sun as 2 is that of the Moon. That is to say, if the Sun is in an even sign at any epoch, or enumeration is made concerning a male entity, whether man or animal, the number 1 must be used, while if the Sun be in a female sign, or enumeration has respect to a female, then the number 4 is used. Similarly in regard to the numbers of the Moon.

These numbers have been exploited in several books recently as if original with the author, who indeed has gone so far as to claim for them the authority of a Guru from whom he professes to have received them. It is a fact, however, that they have no representation in the East, neither among the Shemitic people nor the Aryans, and they are, as I have plainly stated elsewhere, traditional among the Kabalists. The fact that Heydon printed them and Godfridus also, and that these books are to be found in the British Museum Library, clearly indicates the source of inspiration, and locates the Guru in this case as residing solely in the fertile imagination of the author of The Mysteries.

Godfridus gives also the numbers attaching to the signs of the zodiac as follows—

Aries, 7; Taurus, 6; Gemini, 12; Cancer, 5; Leo, 1; Virgo, 10; Libra, 8; Scorpio, 9; Sagittarius, 4; Capricornus, 3; Aquarius, 2; Pisces, 11.

There is a special significance attaching to the order in which, these numbers are given, and it will repay the astute reader to give the matter a little study. I may here say that they were originally attached to the Twelve Houses, and became associated with the signs of the zodiac corresponding with these Houses at a later date. They should be studied in their prime significance.

Leaving this point for the time being, I would point out here that these numbers have been used in connection with the Signs by the author of Natural Law Versus Chance, who shows considerable faculty for painstaking research. Without referring to the source of his information, he clearly shows that the names of competitors may be enumerated by means of this zodiacal gamut, and brought under the unit value of one or other of the planets, which, if ruling at the time, is capable of conferring success.

That which appears to vitiate the scheme presented by him is the fact of his using the artificial instead of the natural Hours, for if it be allowed that the planets are associated with the days of the week and that the quadrants mark the natural divisions of the day, as from sunrise to noon, noon to sunset, sunset to midnight, and midnight to sunrise, then the Planetary Hours must be in terms of these natural divisions, and, irrespective of the season of the year and the consequent variation of the diurnal and nocturnal arcs, there will be six such “hours” from sunrise to noon, six from noon to sunset, and six in each of the other quarters of the circle. In fact, if “natural law” is to rule in the matter at all, it must be consistently carried out, and artificial divisions of the day will continue to befog the student of these arcana and prevent him from getting at the truth of the matter so long as they are employed. This putting of “new wine into old bottles” has effectually vitiated both the Natural Law system and that propounded in The Mysteries. If any student cares to work out the percentages of results derived from a strict following of the rules as given in either of those works, there will remain no shadow of doubt that a good thing has just been missed, for lack of a little regard to traditional usage.

But the climax of inconsistency is reached in the suggestion contained in The Mysteries, where it is said that the planets Mercury and Venus are misnamed, that Mercury is the antithesis of Mars and Venus that of Jupiter, and that their numbers are interchangeable! It is, in fact, calmly suggested that at some remote period of history not named by the author, the name-plates of Venus and Mercury became detached, and as a result the one planet was thereafter mistaken for the other! I can imagine sober astrologers directing the planet Mercury to a conjunction with the Sun for the event of marriage, or predicting travels from the conjunction of the Ascendant with Venus. In effect we are asked to regard the signs Libra and Taurus as the signs of Mercury, while Venus in exchange takes Gemini and Virgo. This may not appear so terribly inconsistent to such as are ignorant of the disposition of the signs and planets as to others, but I think that any one would jib at the idea of Venus as the significatrix of travel and trade. And when I speak of Venus in this connection I mean Venus and not Mercury in disguise. Yet one would have supposed that the very order of the days of the week and the planetary sequence from which it is derived would have given the author pause to think. So far from that, however, it seems to be set up as an unique discovery of the utmost importance. It is time, therefore, that the matter should be set straight, and the need for this seems the more urgent since I have actually known persons, intelligent and conservative of the truth in these matters, but keen to follow up any new clue, actually transposing the planets Mercury and Venus in their horoscopes and willing to believe, on the authority of an Occultist of some distinction who in a weak moment was induced to write a preface to the book, that the astronomers have all been wrong for many ages, and that in following the course of the planet Venus they were unwittingly pursuing that of Mercury! The position would be incredible were it not a fact in cold print.