I have a pet peeve, do you?

OK I've got a beef and I might as well admit it.

I get peeved when people bring in Kabbalah and other stuff into tarot. I mean----why???

Like---taking all the cards and adding them up and then reducing the number down. If you didn't get the card the number is reduced to in the reading, then why drag it into the reading by doing that?

And Kabbalah---why bring that in?

And I Ching----it's its own divination system, so why drag that into a pack of tarot cards?

And those dignities---if you're not reading with a Golden Dawn deck, leave dignities out. Although with this one, I do kind of see the reasoning and I agree it can add another level of meaning to the reading. I've tried that one myself. But if you're not using a Golden Dawn deck or whatever, it doesn't really necessarily belong.

"Shadow" cards aren't quite as bad for me. At least they're a tarot card. But I really don't see the need of them for myself. Personal preference there.

And astrology. Again, that's its own system, so if you want an astrological reading, go to an astrologer.

All this extra gobbledygook makes it really hard for a beginning reader to learn the basics, for one thing. And for another, isn't it just a means of making a reader seem like a very learned to their sitter and anyone else within earshot?

OK, just take me out and whip me now. Or make me sit through a reading with all this "stuff" thrown in. But that's how I feel at this point.

No offense meant to anybody who uses this "stuff". I hope I didn't offend anyone. My rant was done half in jest. But the other half would really like to discuss this and have some answers.

I suppose it is only natural for people to look for "the one ring to bind them all". By combining as many esoteric, religious and even scientific fields as one can grasp, at least at a superficial level, maybe people feel they are getting closer to that ilusive "true truth".

Lyric said:

OK I've got a beef and I might as well admit it.

I get peeved when people bring in Kabbalah and other stuff into tarot. I mean----why???

Like---taking all the cards and adding them up and then reducing the number down. If you didn't get the card the number is reduced to in the reading, then why drag it into the reading by doing that?

And Kabbalah---why bring that in?

Click to expand...

blame it on Eliphas Levi

Lyric said:

And I Ching----it's its own divination system, so why drag that into a pack of tarot cards?

Lyric said:

blame it on the 20th century publishing industry.
I prefer yarrow stalks myself.

Lyric said:

And those dignities---if you're not reading with a Golden Dawn deck, leave dignities out. Although with this one, I do kind of see the reasoning and I agree it can add another level of meaning to the reading. I've tried that one myself. But if you're not using a Golden Dawn deck or whatever, it doesn't really necessarily belong.

Lyric said:

it's the publishers being naughty again.
embellish embellish embellish. too much is just enough.

Lyric said:

"Shadow" cards aren't quite as bad for me. At least they're a tarot card. But I really don't see the need of them for myself. Personal preference there.

Lyric said:

I like Shadow cards, discovered that one on my own.

Lyric said:

And astrology. Again, that's its own system, so if you want an astrological reading, go to an astrologer.

Lyric said:

more embellishment

Lyric said:

OK, just take me out and whip me now.

Lyric said:

shame on you. this isn't that kind of forum

Lyric said:

No offense meant to anybody who uses this "stuff". I hope I didn't offend anyone. My rant was done half in jest. But the other half would really like to discuss this and have some answers.

Lyric said:

wow I totally screwed this up LOL

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Personally, I am not against any of those techniques. Some I have found deeply helpful, including dignities, though not Kaballah. That last only because I do not know the system.

I do know I Ching and occasional get an insight of correspondence during a particular reading which illuminates that reading for me, but in general I don't find it works that well (for me, anyway).

Elizabeth Hazel, in her book Tarot Decoded, makes a statement or two that made me smile in agreement:

"Nevertheless, my preference for an unbounded tarot should not be confused with capitulation to mumbo-jumbo spiritualism or so-called clairvoyance. Quite the opposite, learning to interpret tarot is a form of specialized intelligence that hones and facilitates the intuition. Without the intellectual criteria for assessing card relationships, the intuition lacks a foundation of guidance and is prone to sloppy, inconsistent results. That is what dignity methods provide for the reader, and mastery of these techniques results in the presentation of seemingly other-worldly knowledge about a querent."

If you are not interested in learning the techniques, that is fine. But unless you have learned them and from knowledge are able to say they are not useful, then I agree with you that it is just a semi-humorous venting.

Yeah, there's something we differ on. I like reducing the numbers. For me, it gives SOME readings more depth. Some decks are good to do this with, like the Rider deck.

I am still considering myself a newbie. Maybe I won't always feel this way.

I had to decks that were strongly into the Kabala and I traded one and gave one way to a friend that was talking about the Tree of Life alot.

Lyric, since this is your thread, would you consider making a poll on how many of us reduce the cards? I would be interested to know. Thank you.

Can you make a poll on how many of us use Shadow cards?

I do. I made a spread sheet, it really came out quite nice, and I made a section on it for a shadow card, and wrote, "what's hidden.'

oh, i don't know if it bothers me so much. i mean, i guess it's up to the individual reader. i know some 'cartomancers' probably feel like "why do they need 78 cards to read someones fortune?, isn't 52 - 54 enough for them???"

so, for me, I am always interested in the whys and if it interests me further to the point that I'm drawn to try it--I will. Then, if I'm comfortable with it, sure, I'll include it in my tarot readings, if not, I won't. que sera sera.

I have learned to use clarifying cards a lot more, & occasionally I will add the numbers up to see what I get---but only when my gut instincts tell me to do so, and also only when something really jumps out at me in a reading. I wish I could be interested enough with including astrology in my tarot readings---but gosh, tarot in itself is enough for me right now, especially with these other 'extras' I'm including, so I keep the astrology bit out of it. My sister, however, LOVES astrology & includes it in her readings with amazing results & she only just began doing tarot!

Lyric, QUOTE >> "Like---taking all the cards and adding them up and then reducing the number down. If you didn't get the card the number is reduced to in the reading, then why drag it into the reading by doing that?"

Well i do this, because i view the quintessential card as a "control card", and otherwise use it to TEST my interpretation. So i don't really bring it into the reading perse, but rather simply check the meaning of the corresponding major arcana card to see whether it "supports my interpretation".

Indeed i've had great success with this method. Not to mention, that CHECKING the quint. card can be useful @ times when there is a card that your a lil unsure of re: narrowing down how it could APPLY within the context of the overall spread. Or in otherwords, you can look @ the meaning of the quint./control card & use it to guide you/CLARIFY: how the card in question would best apply to the situation the reading is exploring.

I also believe that tarot is an ordered system .. so the numerical significance of the cards is something that i feel should be taken into consideration.

& For your info. i assign the value of 11 to the Page; 12 to the Knight; 13 to the Queen; and 14 to the King re: court cards. So when i add the values of the cards present in the throw, i also count the courts. However, as i read with reversals, i subtract the value of any reversal that appears. Indeed @ times i am left with a negative value, in which case i read the "negative aspect" of the corresponding major arcana card.

So all in all, the quint card will provide me with an overview of the reading, and in some instances will act as a summary of my interpretation. & The neat thing about referencing this .. is that IF for some reason the quint. card has no relevance to my interpretation, i can often spot the reason when studying the meaning of the control card. Or in otherwords, when i consider the possible applications of the quint./control card, i will often see how i may have erred re: the application of one of the cards that appeared in the original reading. So yes, i find it really USEFUL to "test my interpretation" in this manner!!

None of the other systems fit tarot perfectly . Some of them seem very arbitrary . I think it is just human nature that when something seems almost impossible to understand any other way , we try to impose a system on it that will make it more logical and predictable to us . But by doing that , are we missing something else that was there all along ? Do we care? Probably not . We tend to want some way to make our world understandable , explainable , and orderly .

I think you can impose all kinds of things on the tarot if you want to and it will all reflect your personal preferences and what seems to make sense to you .In the tarot , there are hints of this , and hints of that , but no complete correlation . One also has to take into account that some of those indications might have been placed there to deliberately mislead .

I think the only yardstick you can use is to ask if it is working in your readings . Is it working really, outstandingly well if you dare to look at it objectively and can overcome the tendency for self-blindness that we all have ?

I have seen a lot of readings that have plenty of systems incorporated , lots of applications and adjustments , a whole bunch of verbiage about this meaning and that significance , but in the end they actually said very little of substance and not much that was actually of use to the daily life of the querent and their problems . So it is possible to be making all the "correct" associations and go out of your way to espouse as many helpful systems as possible to try to bring yourself to the great understanding of the "real tarot" as you see it , but in the end the brew can be somewhat flat and ineffective .