Rite or Religion

[Starshower]

... and to each other, and to the whole world / Tao / Oneness.
Re-ligion = re-connectedness. Beautiful.
I feel Tarot can enable that, though in itself it isn't 'a religion', but a system of perceiving & constructing our view of our perceived reality.

 

[nisaba]

If it did become a religion for some (and the tarot then would be its 'sacred book' ) then a 'reading' would become the central rite of that religion.

How can Tarot be both a religion and that religion's sacred book? Christianity is not the sacred book of Christianity - the Bible is. Argh!

 

[nisaba]

But for the hermeticist and an hermetic interpretation, a passing trend or 60s rebellion is insignificant.

I see them as two worlds, and one need not cancel out the other.

Oddly, I find myself in agreement with you here.

 

[Michael Sternbach]

Not necessarily. Some forms of Buddhism doesn't contain worship of deities, and the forms of Buddhism which does, do not consider such worship a constituent or central part of Buddhism (despite its popularity in several Buddhist milieus, including Lankese and Japanese).

Right, this is especially true for Zen Buddhism. A (somewhat surly) Zen priest in Japan reassured me that the whole deity worship was superficial and a thing only for the layman.

It is a tool that may or may not be used within a religious context, but I wouldn't say that it is a religion in itself. Holy water is a tool used by at least Christians, Daoists and Neo-Pagans (It may occur in some other religions as well) when each of them practice their religions respectively, but the holy water itself is not a religion.

Tarot is not necessarily used for divinatory purposes. Some persons use the cards for contemplative or therapeutic purposes.

Interesting that you would mention Daoism. There was a similar discussion like this one not long ago on another forum about whether Daoism is a religion or not. Surely there is a degree of deity worship among the followers (based on magical traditions), but much like in Zen and other forms of Buddhism, this is generally seen as rather peripheral by the advanced practitioner.

There are many parallels between the simple natural philosophy of Daoism (especially as described in the I Ching) and the Tarot. One of them being that the archetype of the eternal "wanderer" is central to both systems.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/occultgeneticcode/tarot00.HTM

Maybe the similarities between the words "Dao" (or "Tao") and "Tarot" is not coincidental.

The I Ching, by the way, is a good example for a Tarot-like system of divination that is at once one of the most sacred texts of a "religion".

It is interesting to note that, overall, in the Eastern religions there seems to be less of a gap between their exoteric and their esoteric levels of expressions.

 

[Michael Sternbach]

Or not.

Tarot are pieces of painted cardboard with pictures that are held to have allegorical significance that varies according to different groups at different times. The Hierophant is a kindly, wise spiritual guide to one group (see Oswald Wirth) and a bastion of dogma and corruption to another (a trend coming out of the 1960s penchant for questioning authority).

Didn't you write a book on reversals? So I guess you can see that what you find to be contradictory meanings is simply the polarity that exists in each card?

Further, I am surprised to hear the opinion that Tarot's symbolism is anything less than universal from the person who popularized the method of calculating personality/soul/annual cards like no other. If that works, doesn't it prove that there is a precise and objective reality underlying the Tarot symbolism?

 

[Frater Benedict]

Right, this is especially true for Zen Buddhism. A (somewhat surely) Zen priest in Japan reassured me that the whole deity worship was superficial and a thing only for the layman.



Interesting that you would mention Daoism. There was a similar discussion like this one not long ago on another forum about whether Daoism is a religion or not. Surely there is a degree of deity worship among the followers (based on magical traditions), but much like in Zen and other forms of Buddhism, this is generally seen as rather peripheral by the advanced practitioner.

There are many parallels between the simple natural philosophy of Daoism (especially as described in the I Ching) and the Tarot. One of them being that the archetype of the eternal "wanderer" is central to both systems.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/occultgeneticcode/tarot00.HTM

Maybe the similarities between the words "Dao" (or "Tao") and "Tarot" is not coincidental.

The I Ching[/b], by the way, is a good example for a Tarot-like system of divination that is at once one of the most sacred texts of a "religion".

It is interesting to note that, overall, in the Eastern religions there seems to be less of a gap between their exoteric and their esoteric levels of expressions.

Since it is a Chinese classic, I Ching (or, rather, Yìjīng) is read by Daoists as well, but it is primarily a Confucian document. Daoism is definitely a religion, although with many roots – and thereby without any particular 'founder'. If I were to choose a 'founder figure' anyhow, I would chose Zhang Daoling in 142 CE (or, rather, his alleged relatives in the 160's). His predecessors didn't call themselves Daoists, but Huang-Lao-philosophers.

There are many misconceptions about Daoism. Louis Komjathy, a convert to Daoism, disentangles these misconceptions here:
http://www.daoistcenter.org/Daoism_Misconceptions.pdf

and here:

http://www.daoistcenter.org/DaoismFAQ_Komjathy.pdf

 

[Michael Sternbach]

I agree with Michael in that RATHER ( it is more of more of a ) representation of the Perrenial Philosophy that stands behind external religion than being an actual external religion itself.

I read his comment and the two things comparatively . And note his 'much of its symbolism' reference, which is different than referring to the whole deck.

Yes, the "two worlds" are interwoven with each other in complex ways, that's why I was phrasing so carefully in order not to simplify things unduly. Thanks for reading me quite as carefully.

The view may change over time and, as we have seen, people can give any meaning to any card whatsoever. With this as a 'rudder', tarot can seem just a set of pictures on card that can mean anything, and tarot devolves (IMO) more to a pop venture.

But for the hermeticist and an hermetic interpretation, a passing trend or 60s rebellion is insignificant.

I see them as two worlds, and one need not cancel out the other.

As I said in my reply to Mary, I think deriving cards from dates of birth and seeing how they play out in an individual's personality and experiences is an excellent way to show that Tarot is based on an at least partially verifiable metaphysical reality, in the understanding of classical Hermeticism. For it is demonstrating to my mind that the same metaphysical realm can be described both in terms of numbers/geometric figures and the Tarot archetypes.

 

[Frater Benedict]

... that Tarot is based on an at least partially verifiable metaphysical reality, in the understanding of classical Hermeticism. For it is demonstrating to my mind that the same metaphysical realm can be described both in terms of numbers/geometric figures and the Tarot archetypes.

But how verifiable is aritmosophy? The neopythagorean system given in Iamblichus' or Pseudo-Iamblichus' 'Theology of Arithmetic', the kabbalistic system given in Gikatilla's 'Gates of Light', the planetary correspondences in Agrippa's 'Three Books' and the system presented by Louis Claude de Saint Martin does not spoke with a unison voice. They could possibly complement each other, though. I have been pondering to make a personal tarot deck the suits of which would present one system of arithmosophy each.

 

[Michael Sternbach]

Or not.

Tarot are pieces of painted cardboard with pictures that are held to have allegorical significance that varies according to different groups at different times. The Hierophant is a kindly, wise spiritual guide to one group (see Oswald Wirth) and a bastion of dogma and corruption to another (a trend coming out of the 1960s penchant for questioning authority).

My second reply to this is a quote from James Wasserman that I just found and which says it perfectly:

"Symbol in the esoteric sense is not to be confused with allegory; symbolic images are the alphabet of the "theory of correspondences" that underlies all the Mystery traditions of the West. This theory recognizes the interdependent relationship of all things and provides, for example, the basis of the belief that the position of the stars in the heavens will influence our thought, emotion, and perception."

 

[Starshower]

Interesting quotation. Do the positions of stars & planets 'above' influence what transpires
here 'below' - or reflect it & vice versa? Influence is a causal connection, whereas correspondence needn't be ... it can be fractal ... the same ideas / energies / concepts / dynamics manifesting in different ways & genres ...

I see Tarot cards as doing that too (and neither predicting nor influencing happenings, except via our reactions to what we see there.) So in a way, it can be a means of re-connection of the parts in & to each other and the Whole, almost like the original meaning of 're-ligion', at a stretch.