Question on The book of thoth?

Hi, I have the book of thoth, and was wondering if it can be used to interpret the Golden Dawn Magickal Tarot. There are a lot of similarities, would it be accurate enough to use? Sorry for the stupid question, but I really am curious. Thanks,

p.s. Didnt know where to put this thread, move if neccesary, sorry

Serpenta

I don't have the golden dawn magical tarot, but I have pictures of Wangs GD tarot in a book. I am assuming they are similar.

Clearly there are a few cards that are quite different. The lovers and temperance being the most obvious, but I think that most of the symbolism, and the structure behind the symbolism is the same.
They both came from the same tradition, they both use the same elemental/kaballah correspondances (apart from the tzaddi thing) so I would think that a lot of what is in the book of Thoth would be relevant to the golden dawn decks.

So even when 2 cards are different in the GD tarot and the Thoth, they would both be illustrating the same basic things, like fire in geburah, or the path between kether and tipareth, or whatever.
So, mostly the thoth book should do for the gd deck, I would think.

yes, i think you can use the book of thoth to read the golden dawn magical tarot. i find a lot of correspondences. i haven't studied the astrology side too much, but from what i can recall there are overlaps, ie king of cups = cancer if you're into that kind of thing. some of the pip cards even have the same titles.

Yes, I was going to mention that and forgot.

The titles.
They both work from the same titles.
Like the 2 cups is The Lord of Love.
Crowley changed some, but that seems to be because they were two word titles and he wanted them to be all one word names.
So shortened force becomes interference, and so on.


It's really just two versions of the same basic thing.
The same system.

I presume, as have Lillie and seemingly BrightEye, that the 'Book of Thoth' SerpentaAzothi refers to is Crowley's book by that title, rather than using Etteilla's much earlier deck by that title, or the still earlier essay by C. de Gebelin describing Tarot in general as the 'Book of Thoth', and providing guidelines as to symbolic meaning.

I must admit that when I saw the title of the thread, my first thought was not Crowley's book, but rather de Gebelin's essay and, perhaps with even more importance, the ensuing essay by C. d. M*** within the same book.

On de Gebelin, see the entry in Tarotpedia here.

The C. de Mellet's essay even begins his first section with the title 'Book of Thoth', and provides within the overall essay clear suggestions for divinatory interpretion of Tarot.

Could these be usefully applied to a deck such as the Cicero's GD deck? I would think that the text has much to offer in assisting to understand Tarot in general, especially in the weavings of views that have developed over the past 200 years.

Yes.

I was assuming it was Crowleys book that was meant.
But it's true, the name is not exclusive to that book.

So, if something else was meant, ignore me.

Hi guys, thanks guys I thought it might work. I just wanted to confirm it. Jmd, sorry I should have said Crowley. Thanks for the replies everyone, I will step up and use the same ideas, thanks.

Serpenta

Lillie said:

So even when 2 cards are different in the GD tarot and the Thoth, they would both be illustrating the same basic things, like fire in geburah, or the path between kether and tipareth, or whatever.

Click to expand...

Where would I find "A" as in Aleph?

Fulgour said:

Where would I find "A" as in Aleph?

Click to expand...

I have no idea.
I looked all over for it.
Couldn't find it anywhere.
I think I might have put it somewhere safe.
So that means I'll never find it.

To be honest. I don't know. It's all greek to me (or should that be hebrew?)
I don't take any notice of that stuff.
Tarot and the tree of life.
Interesting combination.
Fit them together this way or that way, or ignore it all together.
I do the latter.

As is likely to already have been known by Fulgour who asks, in the context of Crowley's preferred attributions, Alef correlates to the Fool, that he, following the GD, numbers as zero and thus places at the beginning of the series.

That others prefer to place the Fool, as un-numbered, between XX and XXI, or in 22nd position, only makes the variety more evident.