§ Symbols of Analogy

IT might seem strange to some that one can speak of symbols of analogy; for if, as is often said, symbolism itself is founded on analogy, every symbol, whatever it may be, must be the expression of an analogy. But this way of viewing things is inaccurate; what symbolism is founded upon, in the most general way, are the correspondences that exist between the different orders of reality; but not every correspondence is analogical. We understand analogy here exclusively in its most rigorous sense, that is, according to the Hermetic formula, as the relationship of 'that which is below' with 'that which is above'. This relationship, as we have often explained in connection with the numerous cases wherein we have had occasion to mention it, essentially implies the consideration of the 'inverse relationship' of its two terms. This is, moreover, inscribed so clearly and so obviously in the symbols we are about to speak of that one might be surprised that it should so often have passed unnoticed, even by those who claim to refer to these symbols, but who thereby show their incapacity to understand and interpret them correctly.

The construction of the symbols in question is based on the figure of the wheel with six spokes. As we have already said, the wheel is generally speaking, and above all else a symbol of the world, the circumference representing manifestation which is produced by the spokes that emanate like radii from the centre. But naturally the number of spokes, which differs from case to case, adds other more particular meanings to the symbol. On the other hand, in certain derivative symbols, the circumference itself may not be represented; but, in their geometric construction, these symbols must nevertheless be considered as inscribed within a circumference, and this is why they must be regarded as being linked with the symbol of the wheel, even if the wheel's outermost form, that is to say, the circumference which determines its contour and boundary, should no longer be visibly and explicitly apparent. This absence indicates merely that it is not on manifestation itself, and on the special domain in which manifestation is developed, that attention must be brought to bear in such a case, this domain remaining as it were in a state of indetermination prior to the actual tracing of the circumference.

The simplest figure, and that which serves as the basis for all the others, is the one that consists solely of the six radii and nothing more. Each of these is in exact opposition to one of the others so that all together they form three diameters, one vertical and the other two oblique and inclined equally on either side of the vertical. If the sun is considered as occupying the centre, these are the six rays of which we spoke in an earlier study, ^[1] and in this case, the seventh ray is not represented otherwise than by the centre itself. As to the relationship we have indicated with the three dimensional cross, it can be seen at once: the vertical axis remains unchanged, and the two oblique diameters are the projection, onto the plane of the figure, of the two axes forming the horizontal cross. This last consideration, however, while altogether necessary for the complete understanding of the symbol, does not help us to see it as a true representation of analogy; for that it is enough to take the symbol as it is in itself, without any need to compare it with other symbols to which it is related by various aspects of its complex signification.

In Christian symbolism, this figure is what is called the ordinary or simple chrismon. As such it is seen as the union of the two letters I and X, that is, the Greek initials of the two words _Jesous Christos_, and this is a meaning that it seems to have been given from the earliest Christian times. But it goes with-out saying that this symbol, in itself, is much earlier and is in fact one of those that are found everywhere and at all periods. The Constantinian chrismon, which is formed by the union of the Greek letters X and P, the first two letters of _Christos_, seems at first sight to be derived directly from the simple or common chrismon, whose fundamental arrangement it exactly preserves, and from which it is distinguished only by the addition of a loop at the upper part of the vertical diameter to transform the I into a P. The loop, naturally having a more or less completely circular form, can in this position be con-sidered to correspond to the representation of the solar disc appearing at the summit of the 'World Tree'; and this remark takes on a particular importance in connection with what we will have to say subsequently about the symbolism of the tree.^[2]

It is interesting to note that, as regards heraldic symbolism especially, the six radii constitute a kind of general schema according to which the most diverse figures are displayed on the escutcheon. We have only to look, for example, at an eagle or any other heraldic bird, and it is easy to see that the head, the tail, the extremities of the wings and the feet correspond respectively to the points of the six radii; and if we then look at an emblem such as the _fleur-de-lis_, we see the same thing. Nor does it matter, in this last case, what might have been the historical origin of the emblem in question, which has given rise to a number of different hypotheses. Whether the _fleur-de-lis_ is a flower, which would moreover agree with the equivalence of the wheel and certain floral symbols such as the lotus, the rose and the lily (which has in fact six petals), or whether it may have been originally a spearhead, or a bird, or a bee, the ancient Chaldean symbol of royalty (the hieroglyph _sar_), or even a toad,^[3] or yet again, as is more probable, whether it results from a sort of 'convergence' and fusion of several of these figures, reduced to what they have in common and no more, it is always in strict conformity with the schema we are speaking of, and it is this which is of essential importance for determining its chief significance.

On the other hand, if we join the extremities of the six radii two by two, we have the well-known figure of the hexagram or 'seal of Solomon', formed of two equilateral triangles, opposed and interlaced. The six-pointed star, which differs from the seal in that the outer contour alone is drawn, is obviously only a variant of the same symbol. Mediaeval Christian Hermetism saw in the two triangles of the hexagram, among other things, a representation of the union of the two natures, divine and human, in the person of Christ; and the number six, to which this symbol is naturally related, has among its significations those of union and of mediation, which are perfectly relevant here. This same number is also, according to the Hebrew Kabbala, the number of creation (the 'work of six days' of Genesis, related to the six directions of space); and yet again in this respect, the attribution of this symbol to the Word is no less well justified; it is, in fact, like a kind of graphic translation of the _omnia per ipsum facta sunt_ of the Gospel of St John.

Now, and it is especially this point that we have been leading up to, the two opposed triangles of the 'seal of Solomon' represent two ternaries of which one is as the reflection or reverse image of the other; and it is herein that this symbol is an exact representation of analogy. In the figure of the six radii, we can also take the two ternaries formed respectively by the extremities of the three upper radii and by those of the three lower radii; being then situated on either side of the plane of reflection, they are separated instead of being interlaced as in the preceding case; but their inverse relationship is exactly the same. In order to bring out more clearly this meaning of the symbol, a part of the horizontal diameter is sometimes shown in the hexagram (and it is to be noted that it is also shown in the _fleur-de-lis_); this horizontal diameter obviously represents the tracing of the plane of reflection or of the