Interesting information about the qabalah Thats of interst to some

blanks, most notably scrapping the lineal sequence of the Trumps and the Hebrew
alphabet, as they applied to the Paths on the Otz Hhayim or Tree of Life, in favor of
a geometric one which is for the first time consistent with the verbal descriptions
given in the Sepher Yetzirah, Chapter Six. Further, Gen has here been reassigned to
Chesed; Dui to Netzach; Kun and Neptune to Binah; Yang and Kronos to Kether;
and Yin and Pluto (and Gaia) to Malkuth. The system of assignments to the Decans
of the Signs has been replaced by a system using Planets-in-Signs and Sephirothin-
Worlds. There is not enough space here for further explanation or apologies, but
note the geometry of these on the Xian Tian grid in Dimensions. This geometry
carries into the inherent geometry (or grammar) of all four of these languages. For
example, the Yijing correspondences will exhibit bilaterally symmetrical patterns
when graphed onto the Tree of Life of the Qabalah*. There has, over the centuries
in each of these systems, been a lot of mindless and thoughtless reassignment and
transposition of correspomdences. This amateur tinkering is usually done by one
versed in only one of the systems. The attempted rectification taken up here has not
been undertaken lightly or in haste.
The heart of this system, as it relates to the Yi, lies in the Yi’s Ban Xiang, or
Half-Image dimension, and in the meanings of the Zhen and Hui Gua, as discussed
in the Dimensions. The combining of two symbols into one, which the astrologer
Marc Edmond Jones called Portmanteau Analysis, is a common feature to all four of
these languages. The term Portmanteau, a suitcase with pockets on both sides, was
used by Lewis Carroll’s Humpty Dumpty to describe the blending of two words
into one.
It is important to note in this context that correspondence (ying) means “to
resonate with” and not “is equal to.” It would be more of a loss than a benefit to
equate these four languages. The four systems raise similar issues, deal with parallel
themes, and use nearly interchangeable metaphors, but each has its own unique
identity and history. The common denominator is not some prior Rosetta Stone, or
even Jungian archetypes. It is, ultimately, early humanity’s struggle to understand
resonance: between the mind and the world, and between both of these and Number
(this is discussed in more detail in Xiao Gua). The differences in points of view
between the systems remain significant. One of the ways to appreciate these differences
is by way of an analogy with our own eyes: two differering images are sent to
the brain. It is by way of the differences between the two images that depth is best
perceived, by a brain which integrates the two rather than choosing between them.
This phenomenon is called retinal disparity. In other words, to resolve these differences
“perfectly” would be to flatten the image and texture and lose some of our
dimension of depth.