View Full Version : Med. on the Tarot - Letter 1
Following some comments made in the thread on Meditations on the Tarot (http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4520), I thought that it may be easier to discuss certain aspects of this book through other threads, hence this one.
In his first letter, regarding the Magician, the essence of the card appears to be encapsulated for the author by this sentence:The first Arcanum - the principle underlying all the other twenty-one Major Arcana of the Tarot - is that of the rapport of personal effort and of spiritual reality.This indicates, in some ways, the complementarity between the gnosis achieved through one's own efforts, and the grace received from the spiritual dimensions.
Oh, I would have loved to join in for the discussion, but I don't have the book! :( It sounds really interesting, and I've put it in my basket at amazon. It's currently on order, but hopefully they'll have it when I return from my holiday.
~aeonx~
there is some of the book here, i believe it's not all, i just discovered this and i haven't looked at it in depth.
maybe jmd or someone who has the book can take a look and tell us if it's good enough to use for participation in these discussions?
http://www.medtarot.freeserve.co.uk/
kaz
Thank you Kaz. The site you give is the one I also mentioned in my review, which contains some extracts (http://www.medtarot.freeserve.co.uk/excerpts.htm) from the book.
As with any extracts of a book such as this, the selection will be a reflection, to some extant, of the person so choosing. In this instance, the extracts I have checked on the site are certainly sufficient for participation and discussion.
On page four of the 1993 edition, the UA ('unknown author') mentions that the Major Arcana of the Tarot are authentic symbols, and that as such, they should be approached in a state of deep contemplation.
Mentioning that they are 'authentic symbols' implies that some symbols cannot be so-called. Being authentic, then, implies that they have certain characteristics which go beyond what semiologists or semioticians would be happy with. The 'authenticity' label is applicable to Tarot precisely because its images have the ability to effect magical, moral, mental and spiritual operations upon the contemplator.
Each card is able to both 'conceal and reveal their sense at one and the same time according to the depth of meditation' (p4).
I should also note that the translator has, of necessity, translated the French Jeux de Tarot, the normal French appelation for the deck, as game of Tarot. It is worth pointing our that this ambiguity and word play in the French has been lost through the selection of one of its three possible forms in the English: Tarot Deck vs Game of Tarot vs Game from (location=) Tarot.
Jeannette
20-06-2002, 22:33
jmd:
I have finally finished my review of Chapter 1. Thanks for finally getting me off my rear end, and back into studies so sadly neglected for so long.
To me, the central concept of this chapter is, not surprisingly, that of "As above, so below." In-and-of-itself, this could hardly be considered a grand revelation to a semi-schooled student of Hermeticism or metaphysics. What I find interesting, however, is the author's in-depth examination of this concept -- its implications and applications, and in particular, how it should be considered within the framework of Christian theology.
In the Christian teachings that I received in my youth, there was a strong tendency to portray the story of Adam and Eve -- i.e., "The Fall" -- as representing a clear point of separation between man and God. The message I get from reading this chapter, however, is a reaffirmation of the belief that our perception of separation is, in large part, a fallacy. "The Fall" may represent a transmutation of the Divine, but the result is not separate from it. The author cites the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Bonaventura as supporting the position that "the visible world symbol of the invisible world." Therefore, the argument goes, if the Church accepts such writings as representing a sound, valid theology, then such conclusions regarding the connection between the mundane and the Divine cannot be considered heretical.
Furthermore, the author seems to be arguing that the "effortless understanding" of this principle -- that is, the ability to naturally discern the Divine within the ordinary -- is both the lesson and goal of the Magician.
The recap I've presented here is my personal interpretation of the author's comments. It's admittedly a [i]highly simplified summary of what I see to be some of the "core" concepts presented, and perhaps I'm way off base here. But I'll start with the generalities as I see them, and perhaps we can move to some specifics as others join the discussion and add their views.
-- Jeannette
http://www.tarotgarden.com
Jeanette, thank you for your excellent contribution.
There are two concepts which you mention which I think are so important in this great Letter. The first is the Hermetic maxim from the Emerald Tablet (or the Tabula Smaragdina):That which is above is like that which is below and that which is below is like that which is above, to accomplish the miracles of the one thing.This is also reflected, again as mentioned by the author, in the Zohar:For as it is above so it is below [...]The other concept of clear importance in the Letter of this card is, as you mention, that of discernment, and your comment of the effortless ability, which is, of course, progressively achieved, of discerning the Divine within the ordinary, beautifully captures an aspect of the higher forms of the Magician.
This 'effortlessness' is mentioned a number of times by the author, in which he specifically talks of 'concentration without effort' finding 'expression in the whole picture of the Card'. Analogy, then, (again paraphrasing the author) can lead, in some aspects effortlessly, to the uncovering of deep and essential spiritual truths - but, to be sure, one must also keep in mind that analogies can also lead to illusions.
The Magician, then, is very much 'at play', for the work is playful.
Given that others are reading this book, I thought I would add from my re-reading of it (though this time in the French).
Analogical thinking has a long and important tradition in not only Hermeticism, but the esoteric arts generally. In this letter, the UA also makes much of two categories of analogical thinking. On the one hand, the vertical typological - which links that which is above and that which is below; and on the other hand the horizontal mythological, which connects in time - or rather, out of timelessness - Ürphanomen - stories of the eternal present.
Given our current world situation, it is also quite worth reflecting on his comment that the Biblical story of Cain and Abel reflects, mythologically, the human condition of all warfare - by, though worshipping the same God, nonetheless rejecting what the UA views as highly important (as does, for that matter, Western esoteric tradition): hierarchy.
TemperanceAngel
10-01-2004, 17:56
*Aaaahhhh I see*
Worthwhile book?
XTAX
I personally think it is an astounding book...
Another person we both know (S.K.) has also recently (last year) read it... and I believe his view is quite similar to mine.
My review from a couple of years ago is also here on Aeclectic (http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/meditations-on-tarot/)... in case you wish to read it.
TemperanceAngel
10-01-2004, 19:34
Maybe I will borrow off S if he has it....
$500- of College books to buy for my next semester, and here I am looking at all these other books??
That's why I don't come in this forum very often.......
XTAX
punchinella
11-04-2004, 03:25
I have just started to read this book. I aquired it today, started reading the first letter & could not put it down until I came to the very end. It's . . . to say it's gorgeous is a sad understatement. It's breathtaking, it stops my heart. Particularly the first 'practical' portion of the letter, the discussion of silence.
It's interesting to read other people's synopses of significant points, since what different people choose to emphasize varies so much (from, at least, what jumped out at me in this first reading . . . ) I am reminded of a classroom.
Jmd, I too was quite taken with the initial definition of symbols that you mention in your post (dated 19-06-2002). &, as I mentioned above, with the discussion of silence/concentration. The logical connection between this--which UA characterizes as 'practical'--& the discussion of analogy, which s/he characterizes as 'theoretical', at the moment eludes me. To quote:
"As concentration without effort finds expression in the whole picture of the Card--as well as in all its details--and thus constitutes the practical Arcanum here, one also finds expressed in it the method of analogy, which constitutes the theoretical Arcanum. For, seen from the level of the intellect, the practice of the method of analogy corresponds completely to the practice of concentration without effort. Also, it appears there not as 'work' but as 'play.' "
I suppose the connection must be, simply, not so much logical as procedural: the mind can only 'see' analogy when being as a whole is concentrated & relaxed. --Not understanding this connection the first time through (well, I still don't really understand it, above was just a guess) did plague my reading to a certain extent.
On a more superficial (?) level, I would very much like to know:
1) Who UA is--specifically, & generally (gender?) --It strikes me that this is a major piece of writing, & posterity needs to be able to identify its author. (If UA really is U, which I have trouble believing, work should be done on this before the trail goes cold.)
2) Which deck, specifically, s/he is looking at (card described in detail on page 7 of my edition)--It strikes me that color might indicate a particular deck, although, Marseilles newcomer that I am, I'm totally underequipped to identify it myself . . . if such identification is even possible.
Perhaps this thread is really too old for resurrection. On the other hand, I know I'm not the only one who has recently taken this book up (I got the idea from--was it Moongold??)
Anyway, it'd be great to hear from other people also reading UA.
Punchinella
:)
Great to see you found the book and are thoroughly enjoying it.
With regards to the author's identity, and since you ask, it is generally not written for it allows for the author's wish to remain. I will personally avoid typing it within discussions on the specific letters, but do not hesitate to include it elsewhere (I'll post in another thread his name - which I also previously have, by the way).
With regards to the identification of the author for posterity, this is precisely what the UA wished to somewhat leave behind... though he clearly marks with his authorship his other works (which are, by the way, as good).
There is a modern tendency to want to identify the messenger, rather than focus on the message. In line with a number of more famous texts within his native Russia, some especially more mystically oriented texts tend to avoid the author's name, and various mediaeval texts are so left, or ascribed (in ways we these days view as fraudulent) to another.
Does posterity need to know the name of an author who wishes to maintain anonymity?
With regards to the deck used, and irrespective of the image included, he clearly refers to the Marteau/Grimaud within the text. Small bits of precise description, as to colouring as well as to detail, point in that direction. I cannot now remember where these are, for it was when I first read the book a few years ago that I took the time to try to isolate the deck from which came the descriptions - if I have kept those notes (which I doubt), I'll refer to them...
...but to finish this post by quoting part of your own quote: 'the method of analogy corresponds completely to the practice of concentration without effort'... and then some more:'If one wants to practise some form of authentic esotericism - be it mystical, gnosis, or magic - it is necessary to be the Magician, ie, concentrated without effort, operating with ease as if one were playing, and acting with perfect calm.'[p11 of the Element 1993 edition, pp30-31 of the French Aubier 1984 edition]
Interestingly, by the way, another translation of the same passage may be rendered differently, somewhat thus:'In other words, if we will the authentic practice of esoteric form - whether mysticism, whether gnosis, whether magic - one must be Bateleur, concentrating without effort, operating with ease as though playing, and doing with perfect calm.'I note this for two especial reason: the first is that he uses the term 'Bateleur', though one of the activities mentioned is magic. Thus, the Bateleur is seen to be not so closely connected to any of those three terms, but rather to all three by the nature of his inner activity; the second is that translating will inevitably lose some of the connotations - which is, of course, unavoidable. The translation of some words has become, however, unfortunate.
...now to dig up that older thread :)
punchinella
11-04-2004, 17:48
Yes, I was curious to see throughout the letter the term Magician exclusively used. But I take your post as indication that this reflects translation only.
I am relieved to discover that the identity of the author is indeed known :) . &, thank you for identifying the deck.
I'm still feeling confused by the precise relationship between concentration without effort & analogous reasoning, possibly because I'm looking for something concrete, which may not actually exist. Perhaps it would be better to accept the language & argument in a more holistic manner, rolling with it rather than attempting to master or control it.
Another point that gave me pause over breakfast this morning was UA's assertion that dissolution of heirarchy leads consistently & inevitably to war (I see that you made note of this earlier as well.) This strikes me as strong reflection of a specific ideological/political perspective, worked so smoothly into the texture of the prose that in spite of disagreeing with it (?) I failed to isolate it the first time through :| Knowledge of the writer's identity/social position would, I suspect, help to contextualize this particular claim.
On the other hand, I can see that contextualization for such a purpose may be exactly the sort of thing he wished to avoid, when he chose to go unnamed. There is certainly a logic to this.
Rusty Neon
11-04-2004, 18:03
Esoteric works are notorious to translate. Given the translation problems highlighted by Jean-Michel, I also shudder to think how Paul Marteau's _Le Tarot de Marseille_ would be translated into English.
And imagine, we have all these problems with French, a relatively approachable language of version originale. Imagine a dead language or a non-Western language.
the gabe
20-05-2004, 02:12
Originally posted by punchinella
I'm still feeling confused by the precise relationship between concentration without effort & analogous reasoning, possibly because I'm looking for something concrete, which may not actually exist. Perhaps it would be better to accept the language & argument in a more holistic manner, rolling with it rather than attempting to master or control it.
I just started the book recently and here's a bit from my notes on Letter one about just this.
Analogy, to the intellect, is seen as play, not work. One either sees the Analogy or does not. It has an immediacy beyond intellect.
Don't know if that actually helps anyone understand the relationship between analogy and and effortless concentration, but that's how the whole idea clicked with me.
punchinella
20-05-2004, 02:30
Hee hee gabe :laugh: --since the 'relationship' I'm looking for might also be termed an 'analogy', I guess I simply don't see it!!!
(& welcome, by the way--yeeeah, ANOTHER PERSON READING THIS WONDERFUL BOOK!)
Punch
My copy came in the mail today....I begin...
ty, jmd
terri
I am chuckling to myself. I just did a three page post, quoting parts of Letter I and bringing forth some elements from The Course in Miracles, since some of the concepts overlap.
I hit post and lost the whole thing!
I guess the cosmic author is telling me I said WAY too much.
Anyhow, I'll just do a quick in -my -own -words summary. I like the idea of effortless concentration contained within TheMagician, I.
I also believe quite strongly in the element of "transforming work into play," that Punchinella refers to in her post.
In the Course in Miracles the separation is also described as an illusion since the Spirit cannot perceive and the Ego cannot know. The ego can learn, but learning can be frightening, since learning can lead to the relinquishment of the ego to the light of spirit. Again, the idea that there is only love. Fear is an illusion. One cannot be fearful and experience love. The converse is true. If one is still, one learns that only the spirit, the Unmoved Mover is real. We author fear, not the Zero/the one who created.
Smleite's discussion of the numbers in another thread have also tied this together more for me. Instead of paraphrasing, I will add the link here, since her discussion of Zero and I stand best in her words:
http://tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28304
What I am coming away with as I read Meditations on the Tarot, threads like smeilte's and as I revisit The Course in Miracles
is that no matter how much I "study" literature about reading the Tarot cards, it is the quiet reflection, the understanding that "as is above, so it is below," and the idea of "transforming work into play," that will ultimately be the best "guide" to tapping into that which is there for us if we choose to let it in. The one who has created does not need revelation returned. However, it is perhaps our role to help bring revelation to others. Also, being truly helpful does not mean we are vulnerable, because we are not in the business of protecting our ego, so we cannot be hurt, since ego is an illusion.
Just musings. I have read Letter II. This is not a race, so as I reread it, I may comment more as we go along.
terri
Moongold
10-07-2004, 18:50
I am writing this where I don’t have access to what has already been written so please be understanding if I cover ground which has already been covered.
This book touches again the longings of my child hood and early teenage years for some kind of union with God. Some people say we choose to come back to this life to learn lessons we need to learn. I am in the late afternoon of my life now and think I am just beginning to understand the lessons that perhaps I needed to learn. Every experience in my present life has meaning if I see it thus. I remember the most pure longing as a child for God, experienced as a deep loss and emptiness filled by the things of the world, but still with a sense of loss and seeking.
As a teenager, the life of Teresa of Avila enraptured me, and she appears in the pages of Meditations on the Tarot as well. In my bookcase I found a battered copy of The way of perfection and have begun to read this again.
The UA says:
Learn at first concentration without effort; transform work into play; make every yoke that you have accepted easy and every burden that you carry light.
I thought initially that concentration without effort may have been simply like the zen notion of living completely in the present, and whilst that is partly true, it is in reality much more than this. UA speaks of the silence which is in some way connected I think with what Teresa calls contemplation. She says;
Contemplation is Divine union in which the Lord takes His delight in the soul and the soul takes its delight in Him..
There is much more to it than this of course. Before one gets to contemplation one must know how to be silent, how to hear. The contemplation of which Teresa speaks is a very advanced state of being. Forgive my rambling – these are predawn thoughts on a Sunday morning.
I am interested in the Magician as the Tarot’s symbol of all of the quotation referred to earlier – the fact that he is a joker and a trickster, his position at the beginning of the Tarot, the simplicity of the image representing the sacredness of everyday life, the tools and gifts that he has to live the life of grace ( the symbols of the suits) – the simple grounding things of everyday life. It is interesting indeed that the symbols of our passage through this life and our connection to the Divine should be exemplified in a set of playing cards ……transform work into play ……….
Anyway this is just the beginning. I hope others contribute, and that we continue to go through this book in some way. For people just to contribute their thoughts on this book would be immensely valuable to me.
Just got and began this book. It's been ages since I've committed myself to anything this BIG (:)) and deep!
Oh how I wanna be the Magician (since the translators used this translation I'll go ahead and do so as well, as long as one realizes he's a carnie and not a Merlin!) - effortless concentration - I see this as being so focused on what you're doing, your mind body and spirit truly become one and whatever it is is so easy that it's like play. WONDERFUL! Sounds like HEAVEN to me.
I just struggled through this section on ANALOGY. It's become clear now, but at first he (UA) begins by saying, paraphrasing, that everything, all things, are related, interconnected, basically the whole "all things happen for a reason," rather than being a mosaic of unrelated things, events, et al. This is something I have trouble believing. I actually believe that things are random. I love studying religions and spirituality, but this is a big obstacle that keeps me apart from them.
Now, I just read his use basically the laws of physics to prove there is an afterlife. My brain is still spinning. Perhaps I've been a committed atheist for too long...
Rusty Neon
24-11-2004, 20:53
Pursuant to Moongold's suggestion, I thought I'd get the ball rolling ...
This is a basic introductory post to start off an iconography-as-a-starting-point study of Meditations on the Tarot, beginning with the first trump of the Tarot de Marseille deck.
In Letter I, the 'anonymous author' (UA) draws our attention to various iconographic details of the Tarot de Marseille deck's Magician card.
In particular, UA notes at p. 7 of the 2002 English edition:
"The young man - who is the Magician - holds a rod in his right hand (from the standpoint of the observer) and a ball or yellow object in his left hand. He holds these two objects with perfect ease, without clasping them or showing any other sign of tension, encumbrance, haste or effort. What he does with his hands is with perfect spontaneity - it is easy play and not work. He himself does not follow the movement of his hands; his gaze is elsewhere."
p. 19:
"Just as the magician or juggler has had to train and work for a long time before attaining the ability of concentration without effort, similarly he who makes use of the method of analogy on the intellectual plane must have worked much - i.e., to have acquired long experience and to have accumlated the teachings which it requires - before attaining the faculty of immediate percetion of analogous corresopndences, before beocming a "magician" or "juggler" who makes use of the analogy of beings and of things without effort as in a game."
In contrast, UA notes at p. 20:
"There is Play and there is play, there is the Magician and the magician; this is why anyone who confuses lack of concentration [which describes the charlatan] with concentration without effort [which describes the Magician], and streams of simple mental associations [the charlatan] with the vision without effort of correspondences by analogy [the Magician], will necessarily become a charlatan."
'Correspondences by analogy' refers to the doctrine "as above, so below" of spiritual alchemy. There is an appendix to Letter I, wherein the text of the Emerald Tablet of alchemy is reproduced in various versions.
p. 29 (in Letter II on the Papess, but speaking about the Magician card):
"... the Magician is the arcanum of intellectual geniality and cordiality, the arcanum of true spontaneity. Concentration without effort and the perception of correspondences in accordance with the law of analogy are the principal implications of this arcanum of spiritual fecundity. It is the arcanum of the pure act of intelligence."
Rusty Neon
24-11-2004, 21:22
The Magician is the first arcanum of the Tarot.
p. 7:
"It occupies the first place in the series because if one does not understand it (i.e., take hold of it in cognitive and actual practice), one would not know what to do with all the other Arcana. For it is the Magician who is called to reveal the practical method relating to all the Arcana. He is the "Arcanum of the Arcana", in the sense that he reveals that which it is necessary to know and to will in order to enter the school of spiritual exercises whose totality comprises the game of Tarot, in order to be able to derive some benefit therefrom."
It is mentioned that the function of the Magician is to reveal how to enter the school of spiritual exercises. As noted in the book passages cited in my first post, the Magician card tells us we need to develop our mind. It takes practice and work to develop our mind. Once we have developed it, our mind can easily do things that, prior to such a development taking place, our mind could not even do at all.
Interesting tangent:
This brings to mind the various spiritual exercises of mystics of the Roman Catholic Tradition. For me personally, it brings to mind the Eastern Christian Church's Prayer of the Heart, brought to Western attention in the Russian Orthodox spiritual classic, Way of the Pilgrim. Inspired by St. Paul's challenge in to "pray unceasingly" in I Thessalonians 5:1, the prayer of the heart involves reciting the short prayer "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner".
http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7104.asp
As the article linked above indicates, the Prayer of the Heart is on three levels. Firstly, it starts as a verbal prayer. Secondly, repeated often enough, it becomes a prayer of the mind - "praying without distraction". Thirdly and finally, it becomes a prayer of the heart: "At this stage prayer is no longer something we do but who we are."
Rusty Neon
25-11-2004, 12:49
I wanted to flesh out a couple of points from yesterday's posts.
___________________
Reading Letter I, I enjoyed UA's play between the exoteric and esoteric meanings of the Magician card.
Exoterically, the Magician card has sometimes been seen by commentators as illustrating the mountebank. My Canadian Oxford Dictionary defines "mountebank" as (1) a swindler; a charlatan; (2) hist.: an itinerant quack appealing to an audience from a platform". The UA evokes this exoteric meaning when referring to a charlatan.
Esoterically ... Pre-20th century French occultists, e.g., Wirth, saw the Magician as essentially a mage or, if you will, a ceremonial magician. UA hones this concept to arrive at his Hermetic Magician.
____________________
As regards my tangent on the Eastern Orthodox Christian 'prayer of the heart', I wonder if the 'prayer of the heart' had any influence on the UA in the writing of Letter I. I understand that the UA was a Russian emigré living in France. (I realize, though, that he was Roman Catholic at some point.)
In Covenant of the Heart and in his three volume studies on the Old Testament, New Testament, and Apocalypse (other books by this same 'Unknown' Author), some of his biography is clarified.
There was also a quite early post (early 2002) in which I mention in little more detail some of his biographical sketch - in contrast and comparison to Mouni Sadhu (Demetr Sudowski): marseilles tarots (http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=1983) (further in the thread).
...and thankyou for these, I need to get my own copy returned (it is on loan at the moment), or re-read the French version sitting on my shelf.
Rusty Neon
26-11-2004, 00:24
p. 20, Letter I (Magician):
"His state of consciousness is the synthesis of the conscious and the unconscious - of creative spontaneity and deliberately executed activity."
_______________
Referring back to my tangent, it turns out that UA does mention the Prayer of the Heart. Its mention is in the context of Letter XIV (Temperance), at p. 384. That context is, of course, different from the one in which I situate it. However, UA's words contained therein still fit the discussion on the Magician, to some (albeit a limited) degree.
Some passages at p. 384 are set out below. Refer to that page for more.
"It is a matter of the task of rendering spiritual endeavours turned towards God, such as prayer and meditation, semi-organic, i.e., to transform conscious acts of the self into psycho-vital currents of the subtle bodies."
"The apostolic counsel "Pray constantly" (I Thessalonians, v. 17) is the key here. It is impossible to pray unceasingly in full consciousness, but is certainly possible to carry over prayer from consciousness into the unconsciousness, where it can operate unceasingly. The astral and vital bodies can pray unceasingly - which it is not possible for the conscious self."
Rusty Neon
26-11-2004, 00:42
In Letter VII (Chariot) at p. 164, UA gives a short, handy summary of the first seven trumps, but this time, expressed both in terms of warnings and dangers and in terms of ideals.
On the Magician, he writes (paraphrasing Letter I):
"Thus the Magician is a warning against the intellectual jugglery of the metaphysician, heedless of experience, and against charlatancy of every kind - and at the same time it teaches "concentration without effort" and the use of the method of analogy."
Moongold
27-11-2004, 21:32
"The young man - who is the Magician - holds a rod in his right hand (from the standpoint of the observer) and a ball or yellow object in his left hand. He holds these two objects with perfect ease, without clasping them or showing any other sign of tension, encumbrance, haste or effort. What he does with his hands is with perfect spontaneity - it is easy play and not work. He himself does not follow the movement of his hands; his gaze is elsewhere."
Thanks for your post Rusty. My contribution at this stage will be a little simpler, more personal because I am still a relative newcomer to the Marseilles and to tarot and iconography.
I wish to give my impressions only at this stage, not coming from a background of detailed study of the Marseilles or mysticism. In trying to understand this chapter it occurred that the Magician himself is an analogy which I can interpret in my own way. While I find parts of UA’s narrative fascinating I also think it is beyond the reach of many of us, particularly if we have moved away from Christianity and Catholicism. The more I read UA’s words, the more I find myself struggling for air, an odd situation to be in considering Le Bateleur represents in this study, “the breath of life”
When I look at this Bateleur, I see the common person, not cleric, priest or saint. He could be hermaphroditic. . When UA speaks of “concentration without effort: I think of unconscious competence. Someone knows something so well that s/he does if without effort, could do it whilst doing a dozen other things. Such a person has demonstrated complete commitment to get to this stage. The fundamental simplicity of this commitment of the mind, body, will and spirit is presented in a wonderfully simple way: a strangely dressed person before a plain wooden table bearing the tools of his craft. In terms of analogy, when I look at this I see the common man – my neighbour, the supermarket manager, my mother. Any one of us can be Aleph , this Bateleur, simply by developing detached contemplation.
UA speaks about “detachment of the will” as critical to this state. Perhaps I can give an practical illustration that makes sense from my own life. Many people go into human service work from motives of reparation. They have suffered themselves either personally or vicariously, or they have identified in some way with those who have. These people almost always run into some professional difficulty in the work at some time because their interest and will is not detached. They work with this to become more “aware” and detached. Yet there are some who have this detachment from the beginning and are there simply from love. They manage much better most of the time, but we do need both.
So the message I get from this in common universal terms is that if I hand my will and my life over to the care of whatever God has meaning for me, I free myself to become the mirror of “God” as I understand him or her. Because I am free of outcomes then I am more able to act, to breathe. This commitment can be understood in many ways. Those who have faith probably travel the easier road.
This is profound in its simplicity and is represented as such in this colorful innocent figure. Such faith and detachment enables freedom - transform work into play . I am enjoying this book and will continue to read it and get much from it, but it is difficult. When as I look at these simple colourful cards I see the common man, no more no less.
I would see the magican as the master within us all. he became so by achieving that art of learning mastery. As a thought the master becomes the servant of all. the master becomes so by seeking not to be better, to know better, or be more competant, but by living without reserve. the sucessor is not the successor but the guardian of the teachings of the master. It is for us to accept the teachings of the heart and folllow the teachings of the head of the master. for to become the true magican , he must listen. to the beating of the heart of the heart of the spiritual life of humanity. thus the magican is to serve religion, philopshy and all that is good in man.
the magican doens't do so by work but by play in spirit. the praticality of this is not to be lost on the masses."play without work"teaches to focus without effort and that work becomes play. "my yoke is easy and my burden is light"that focus is without effort, and comes through calm and silence without automation.the art of being silent thus precedes "to know" and "to will" and becomes a prerequist for speaking wisdom. to extend this farther the manners of obsession or rather the passion in which one does this becomes the difference between "a monk asborbed in prayer and a bull asbored in rage". passion entails great focus as well as the magican knows this well. true focus comes from peace, and light , and that is why the magican is such a good juggler.
the mind can not become silent if the will doenst' back it up, the will becomes empthy for all but silent. then the rhytm and intellegence of the body becomes one with the silent will. In this way the magican seeks to become one with the eternal rhytm of infinity. thus does the magican become like clam water that reflects the stars, the moon, or the sun itself. and in this peace the natrual the rhythm of the waves and motions of the universe are truly heard. this state produces the "perpetual service" in all manners of things that magican chooses to undertake, and the state transform all forms of work into the play of the rhythm of the divine soul.
then it becomes experienced which is the basis for all spiritual things. you must become one with yourself totally and you become one with the divine through silence focus by becoming the true magican.
the magican in theory seeks to find truth by reducing everything to it's divine essence. that is the truth, "the divine essence"which is the essence of the creator in everything. if this wasn't true how can we know the creator?
looking at the second verse of the emerald tablet referenced in the letter "that which is above is like that is below" can be shortedn that which is above is that below. in this manner "that which was is as that will be" is shortened to that which was is that which will be.
eternity is infinity the magican knows . and so the theoritical becomes the pratical. the problems of all life becomes due to hierachy not the negation but the installement of it. this myth become reality.
the term "what is here is there, what is not here is nowhere" greatly reminds me of the course in miracles principles
"nothing real can be threatened, nothing unreal exists, herein lies the peace of god"
the beginning is the end and they are both here now in many differnt forms but its divine essence is in all those many differnt forms.
by these principles the analogy of being becomes the enterial visible world as the symbol of the invisible world as well.
since we are the visible and the invisible and the beginning and the end, the above and below, it stands to reason by these principles that all of us are the son and the father. (or daughter and mother ,, or even the sister and the brother).
when we ask of the father , we ask of ourselves. when we give as the father to ourselves , the father gives to himself. so as we give to our brother, we give to ourselves and father or mother give to themselves.
yet how can it be pratical unles it can be experienced by one and all?
by method of correspondnace there comes many viewpoints and it is up to the magican within you who read this if this shall become your analogy or correspondance of being. it is by playing with this concept the teachings of the magican can be realized and why he is the juggler as well.
for we must become like the child who lives within the juggler and yes the magican, to understand the rest of the teachings.
for when children play, it is with the full powers of silenced will with focus without effort. thus the child sees true beauty of divine essence and so shall we. the person seeks become the true magican does not alwasy reach the path.. becomes a chartalan until he once again tries to become the child/father magican.
why is this teaching first ? it is like the introduction of the course in miracles (i quote that due to the passage that so reminded me of its teachings in the letter one)
"it is a required course, only the time you take it is voluntary, free will does not mean you can establish the curriculm, it means only that you can elect with you want to take at any given time"
the teachings of the magican are required as well in whatever form it comes to you. you can take those teachings whenever you want ,, but you do have to take it and that is why this is number one . the free will does mean we can establish the curriculm which means to me that we can' change the principles by which the magican learns or furfills his magican purpose.
what we can choose in all this is which part of the curriculm of what the magian must shall we undertake at this time,, where, when, who , why ,what ,,
but not the essence of what we shall take.
hence the play without work means don't try to change what you shall learn but enjoy the process.
I have reread all of these posts.
The exquisite beauty of these letters are quite deserving of many revisits since each time I see quotes, like those you have all added, I am reminded again, of the simplicity, yet necessity of making work play through quiet reflection and through practice of same.
HOLMES, when I visit the Meditations, I always find myself going back to my Course in Miracles material. I was in a group some 15 years ago with my dear friend, Mary, who introduced me to the Course...(and now I have introduced her to The Tarot.)
The Course is also quite simple, despite the length of the book....There is only love. Fear is an illusion. Both cannot exist at the same time. Only love is real. So when we live in fear, we are in an illusion and when we live in love, then all is real.
I find that if one takes the simplicity of the message in Letter #1....for me it comes to doing the "work" to arrive at the point where all the little and big things we do in our daily life become prayers...it is about "mindfulness," I believe, in all that we do. It is about "flow." It is about being so engaged with the act that nothing outside exists. The spirit is open to receive.
My life has been especially hectic these past few years. Yet, when I am doing sometimes even the simplest of things ...which I can view as daily, repetitive drudgery, I choose to see that each simple action I take, whether at work, home, or play, if done lovingly, becomes a prayer.
So, too, the Magician, is teaching us, I believe that, with concentrated, quiet reflection on the simplest of things, we shall be connected with that which is above. Then, as is above so it is below.
Relating to Tarot and to the many discussions we have had lately about "correctness" of interpretation, I believe, ultimately, that through the quiet contemplation and reflection in the moment, the act of gazing at the images on our beloved Tarot, when done with love and openness, will bring from above that which we need to manifest the Great Work to be done here "below."
Lovely, everyone.
I love rereading the quotes.
And, HOLMES, I still go back to my Course in Miracles, all marked up....to may favorite passages. Your wonderful words and insights have again triggered many of my own memories of connections between the Course and the Tarot. There are correlations between Letter #1 and the Course's discussion of the qualities of The Teacher.
When I have time, I hope to move past Letter #2. I am in no rush with this book.
terri
I tend to take things literally. Which is one big reason I am struggling with this book in general. I am not spiritual, I don't believe in any form of spirit realm, let alone the Christian one, with which I have to deal in in order to read this book. Thus far I find myself agreeing with Moongold's idea the most. I have no idea what this Course in Miracles tmgrl and Holmes are talking about is...and if it deals in exclusively Christian theology I probably won't, no matter how strongly it's recommended.
However, I feel like I "got" Letter 1...La Bateleur exists in the material realm, and this is something I comprehend. He is working, I believe this picture we have of him catches him in the midst of his job - that of entertainer, magician (like Penn & Teller, not like a high priest), troubador, running a shell game...but what his job is isn't what was so important, it's how easily he does it. He doesn't have to think about it, his hands know how to do it without his absolute concentration...something we perhaps all aim for in our work or hobbies. I do like that Holmes mentioned "my yoke is easy and my burden is light." (I'm not ignorant of Christianity, I just don't believe in it.)
Maybe I am kinda dense but I really don't think it goes much deeper than that.
Moongold
09-12-2004, 04:38
I can see what you mean, Shalott. You probably know this but the Book is based on Christian Herneticism which is a kind of system of belief based philosophical mystical and esoteric considerations. Hermetics believe we are on a spiritual journey towards unification with the Divine. I believe that even now, although I am not longer a Catholic or Christian.
Bear with me for a moment. Have you ever gone outside into the garden, or down to the beach, or for a quiet stroll along the river and felt that a sense of immense peace and oneness with the world? Have you every been with family or friends and felt truly loved and respected, connected with them in a magical way? For me, those moments are just as mystical and spiritual as anything else I have ever experienced.
As I read through Meditations...... I experience with interest but increasingly more distance. I can still get a lot from it and can make the right connections. If we look at le Bateleur himself, he is the simplest and most apparently innocent of characters,
I remember going to Midnight mass one night several years ago at a homeless shelter and the Jesuit Priest sat down to say the Mass as a gesture of respect to the nuns who ran the shelter. He was so respectful of their genuine spirituality and goodness that he wanted to diminish the outward signs of male authority in the Church. I was so impressed. He later said when speaking about the meaning of the nativity that Mary was most llikely a peasant woman
I guess my point in all of this is that this is a more humble kind of spirituality with just the same connections to the Divine as that evident in the Meditations .... The Mediitations...... are very intelectualised but the concepts can be transferred to other situationsin a much more pragmatic way.
I am VERY tired and not sure that I have made sense or just rambled :).
I am aware that this book is based on Christian Hermeticism, and I do have a basic knowledge of what they believe. However, I am an atheist, making this very interesting going to say the least. There are times when I seriously ask myself why I am reading it. I can't come up with a very good answer, other than wanting more out of Tarot. No, I have never really felt anything when I have been out and about. And I don't feel like I'm missing anything. I don't feel a gap in my life because of lack of spirituality. I realize that I am WAY in the minority here, particularly on these forums. I realize that Tarot, Marseille specifically, was created by Christians, and therefore, reading this book would give me a deeper insight into what it's all about. But, refering to Letter 2, I am one of the dry eyed types, and very firmly so. I don't think this causes me any problems in life in general, but it makes this book that much more difficult for me.
the book course in miracles does deal wtih christian terminology but it isn't a theology in the sense where it preaches fear based terms like hell, and judgement, and being righteous. it deals with new age concepts , concepts like ego is the basis for the problems in the world and to clear away attack thoughts. for to attack your brother is insane for your brother is you, which makes the ego insane. you can do a search here in spirituality for course in miracles discussion on both sides of the french. i even think i did a reading on it once, in self readings.
the magican does exist in the material realm that is for sure. what i like about him is the teaching behind his juggling, the focused thought without effort. i dont know much about christainity terms i just quoted the book "my yoke is easy and burden is light" but i did like how the magican teaching from the letter sheds new light on it.
we have to take the letters according to our experiences, and thoughts, and ideas. if you have a spiritual life, it will attract you on that level, pratical earth appraoch will bring you to look at the letters in a pratical reader.
it is the true with the tarot, a pratical person wouldn't be concerned with the spiritial growth appraoch but the actual divination of the tarot. yes ?
moongold
i too went to midnight mass, it was christmas eve in town and there was nothing going on,, i felt i had to something so i was walking in the coldest night of the year and there was the light on in the church, i walked in expecting to be told YOU HEATHEN WHAT DO YOU DEFILE THIS HOLY PLACE (
at least that was my fear ) but of course i was welcome and they sang and i felt happy to be there . gee that was almost 10 years ago now.
shalott what might help is a contrast and compare method, which i am not meaning the comparative method taught by valerie sims.
but the contrasting and comparing of how zen, psychology and church, and jesus teachings compare in the tarot.
(that would be the osho zen, buddha, jungian tarot, soul tiding truth cards, and the master tarot ) .
of course i been using this method for a while now but i have't made a great deal of headway and i am still on the major arcana.(i dont' have the buddha tarot )
yet i must say that it has improved my tarot understanding if not my tarot readings.
and so a great study of the mediations will help indeed. what i do is not to mediate on it.. (not yet )
but wrote down my notes of the what the author was saying and adding in some insights of my own or putting what he said in differnt way.
notice in the book , the author says that is above can be like that is below. to which i said , that is above is that is below. a subtle differnce but a big powerful differnce.
of course i was coloured already going into the mediations for i alwasy had an understanding of the magican as the son of the god, and the son of god within ourselves. i am sure if i walked in seeing the magican as the master alien who directs our lives my appraoch to the letters would be differnt indeed ( the alien remark is a joke which just put a smile on my face eheh )
when you say you experience with interest but increasingly more distance.
does that means you are taking a more neutral, spock appraoch from logic to the letters? when before you were more closer and more connected to it from the heart ?.
my approach to the letters so far has been to rewrite the letters to what it means to me.
then i will come back and take a more differnt approach.. perhaps a more mediative approach.
i think i am too distance from the letters or like to think i am. as the ideas hit me in the mind not the heart and i say oh nice and i sit there for a minute in a mental euthporia before starting to write again on my notepad :)
Teehee - THAT'S IT! I'm Spock!
Sorry, Holmes, it has been a short while since I got done with Letter 1, so I didn't recall the "my yoke is easy and my burden is light" quote in there, but that does sum up much of what I got out of Letter 1. Also, the "as above, so below" idea: Le Bateleur would be the "below."
for bringing up the Meditations, I came across this book some time ago and now and then I am still toying with getting a copy of it but could not make up my mind whether I'd try to get a French copy or the German translation (there are 2 large volumes and several split-ups in print but this is done so confusingly I do not trust the German edition, talking about edition a and b???).
Edit: I ordered the large 2 volumes German edition at my book seller to get an idea of the books but found them too Christian for my taste.