Tarot and other Divinatory Systems

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 29 Apr 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Macavity	29 Apr 2003
Having started with Hebrew Letter (Major) and Astrological (Minor) assignments, it is notable that correspondences between Tarot and other Divinatory systems have been (eagerly?) sought. ;) The Haindl Tarot is one case in point, with yet further Runic assignments (for Majors) and I-Ching assignments (for Minors). I suppose the ultimate for like-minded(!) enthusiasts might now be the "Quest" Tarot: http://www.aeclectic.net/quest/ where the author adds yet FURTHER to the list of (imo rather inspired) Haindl assignments... I think though, these (or ANY) correspondences might merit discussion here? The "1:1" correspondence of the Thoth Minors with astrology is moote? Given (my) limited (almost zero?) knowledge of astrology: Would it be fair to say that, except for some highlights, the MEANING correspondence is NOT good between Crowley's system and every day astrology - Unless YOU know otherwise? Perhaps the real question is: Are there any grounds for EXPECTING simple relationships between one divinatory system and another... unless by design? }) Perhaps a more "valid" approach is that of Haindl, in making correspondences based on (often notable!) similarity of MEANING shared between two systems, rather than individual ORDERINGS in either? Use of I-Ching with the Haindl minors does (IMO) lead to rather "improved" meanings! That is perhaps true of the Runes with the majors but, in THAT case, some semblance of Runic ordering is retained. Yet I hear "dark mutterings" (in another place) AGAINST this: "Runes are NOT quite the same" was the murmur? And I wonder myself. Certainly Haindl opened up new vistas (or lifetimes?) for "research" into other divinatory systems! Yet the question arises: Do all these additional correspondences add something "extra" to Tarot? Opinions are sought! :D Macavity P.S. For those interested in the correspondences of "everything with everything", I came across a (known) source of a PDF version of Crowley's Liber 777 e.g. http://www.hermetic.com/crowley/ Hours (sic) of Fun for all? ;)

jmd	30 Apr 2003
I will not comment on all of Macavity's post, for it contains so many wonderful opportunities for various discussions that a couple of aspects on my part will be more than I can handle at the moment. Firstly, and as I mention seemingly too often, Tarot, as Tarot, is independent of properly investigating and using astrology, the Kabbalah, or the I Ching... Nonetheless, in the creation and development of Tarot, syncretist tendencies undoubtedy played. That is all, however, the correlation which 'properly' exists. But let me come the the Haindl deck for a short while. I was first attracted (and obtained) this deck many years ago. Having myself also developed what I consider meaningful correspondences between the pips and the 64 hexagrammes, I was interested to see what someone else had done apart from Crowley. I too had used the I Ching (independently of Tarot, and with both the 3-Coin and the 50 Yarrow stick methods - the latter of which I prefer). For correlations, I had already noted that the 64 hexagrammes are of 36 'archetypal' forms, most of which have a different appearance (hence different hexagramme) when reversed. For example, the 'archetypal' l:ll:l (viewed sideways) produces one hexagramme either 'upright' or 'reversed', whereas ll:::: produces two different hexagrammes. The whole gammut of the 64 hexagrammes have, then, a quantitative correlative possibility with 36 of the 40 pip cards (as far as I'm concerned, the 36 apart from the Aces). Not only this, but a meaningful correlation can be made. In my personal opinion, the Haindl deck, which does not make use of the 64 hexagramme, just doesn't quite make proper usage of the I Ching - in either the I Ching's proper divinatory meaning nor in its completeness. If one is going to correlate systems which have, in any case, a proper independence of each other, then the integrity of each 'system' must be maintained. For this, each is best first properly investigated independently. The Tarot's richness is already so vast, that rather brisk, in my view, correlations take away rather than add to its richness...

Macavity	30 Apr 2003
Ah JMD, I was indeed HOPING you might "take this one on", (one life) time permitting? I did anyway (try to!) add the word "correspondences" to the thread title, in the hope that this might be a little clearer. I was not sure how any discussion of this scope might pan out, but it seems to be doing OK thus far... :) Leaving aside other observations, your initial point regarding the I-Ching is indeed WELL MADE! Perhaps Haindl exposed a rather obvious (but new to me) fact in that there are only so many UNIQUE Hexagrams under reversal. In fact, as you indeed note, there are 36 from a simple geometric perspective: An interesting (tempting!) observation already? I admit I had made NO attempt to assign correspondences myself, other than on the fly, but I am INDEED with you in a general feeling that (probably) the integrity of ANY system should be preserved? Haindl, as you rightly observe, didn't really do so. Certainly it's also clear that Haindl didn't e.g. use Crowley's system. I suspect the latter might indeed have "gone for it" re. preserving those integrities and probably overridden any "small" anomalies in the meanings? Heheh :D Yet, on reading the Book of Thoth, despite various mutterings, Crowley only refers to three(?) SPECIFIC correspondences between the I-Ching and his minors. How DID his system work, I wonder? Liber 777 e.g. left me still rather in the dark. There are tantalising hints, in Liber Trigrammaton that Crowley was also working on something more extensive - with "tri-state" tri-grams (sic) giving 3x3x3=27 or 22 Trumps + five elements? Certainly outside ancient traditions, but intriguing nevertheless! :) Great stuff, JMD. I too wish we all had more time. And we still haven't got as far as astrology or the runes... Macavity

Macavity	04 May 2003
As a postscript to the above, I've just found a "30 day" Concordance program for Windoze on: http://www.rjcw.freeserve.co.uk/ It's quite fun to type in (no way!) or rather scan in portions of your favourite Tarot book (copyrights observed) and then find out the frequency of certain words - e.g. for minor arcana. I'm also trying this with various I-Ching translations to see if there are any interesting correspondences. The problem is, of course, that not merely are the traditions different, but also (obviously) the language used! Maybe I'll try a copy of Karcher's more modern translation in this? Perhaps I might have more luck with the Runes? Anyway it's quite fun for (this) "keyword" addict and already finds some interesting INTERNAL card "pairings" for the Tarot :) Macavity

jmd	04 May 2003
If 'Haindl exposed a rather obvious [...] fact in that there are only so many UNIQUE Hexagrams under reversal', he didn't appear to make use of it, as unique 'archetypal' hexagrammes appear on more than one card. If you're interested, I can attempt to outline the system I developed which 'works'.... even though it is different to what others have done. There is a similarity of thinking beyond my I-Ching correlations and Mathers's astrological pip correlations, in that each begins with what are really quite simple ideas, and result in correlations appearing far more complex and puzzling than they really are. If I here briefly mention the pip astrological correlations, it should be obvious how the process works. On a 'standard' astrological wheel, divide each sign into its decans (ie, divide each sign into three). As the pips being considered exclude the Aces (as they also do with my I-Ching ones), begin with the 2 in the first decan of Aries, 3 in the next, etcetera. As the pips finish at 10, restart with 2 after this is reached, and repeat the process until the whole wheel is complete (10 in the last decan in Pisces). So far, I have not mentioned which suit these refers to - there is no need, as the astrological element will determine such. Now, using the seven traditional planets in their ptolemaic order, begin with Aries's ruler (ie, Mars). As we will go around the wheel by first descending towards the IC, the order will also be a ptolemaic descent from Mars, repeating the pattern (& hence ending with Mars in the third decan of Pisces). Just for ease of reference, and for the sake of completion, the ptolemaic order is Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Sun, Venus, Mercury, and the Moon. I suspect that Mathers probably tried a few different arrangements. Irrespective, he would have ensured that the pattern(s) he used had a simple (but not simplistic) order, as is normal for magical and ritualistic thought. __________ Now the I-Ching correspondences I developed proceed also from simple patterns, but the verbal explanations are more difficult. Firstly, the eight tri-grammes need to be considered, as the hexagrammes are made-up of pairs of trigrammes. Of these, four are cardinally placed (I use what is referred to as the Fu Hsui pattern, which I consider more elementally correct). Irrespective of their names and their Chinese meanings (which in any case correlate), I suggest to draw a wheel with Fire at the top, Earth at the bottom, and (if the the northern hemisphere) Air on the left and Water on the right hand sides. With Fire is lll; with Water :l:; with Earth :::; and with Air l:l. The 'cross-quarter' positions are, from the Air quarter to Fire, ll:; from Fire to Water :ll; from Water to Earth ::l; and from Earth to Air l::. I'll continue later if anyone is really interested...

HOLMES	04 May 2003
jmd i pmed you a question about iching information i forgotten but figured i could ask it here in greater detail i recall that there are 64 hexagrams, and in a hexagram there was a possiblity to make a special clarifying hexagram i forgotten how that worked. (and can these special variations of the hexagram be considered major arcana hexagrams or will the hexagram variation just be one of the other hexagram?) my question which i asked on a differnt thread but never got answered there and so is no harm asking it here given the thread title. what other systems could be applied to the tarot besides what we looked at so far, that being iching, colour, symbolism, astrology , kabbalah, numerology, elements,psycology, religion aspects. archtypes... sacred geometry, these we all looked at up and are studying tarot from some of these angels *(take a lifetime to study it from all of these angels eheh ) but there must be more that could be applied ?

Macavity	04 May 2003
Well, *I'M* always interested JMD. Perhaps we should leave this one to simmer and give it a stir occasionally? I am aware of the time and effort put into the replies and it would be nice (for me anyway) to ponder this latest one and maybe even "have a go" myself. I think, as a general observation, these "comparisons" are fascinating. I certainly have a more positive view of them now - even mismatches become interesting? It becomes almost like forced harmony and dischord to the musician? My enthusiasm is, of course, tempered (bad pun!) by a realisation that *I* (doubtless) need to understand ONE system of divination as a first stage. But hey, I'm never going to be THAT much of a taroist... Aside - My enthusaism for I-Ching has been part due to purchase of the Holitzka: http://www.spiritone.com/~filipas/Masquerade/Reviews/ichingh.html No, not I-Ching per se., but fans of Rorschach ink blots might like this one! ;) Macavity Now how does that D13b5b9 chord go? :D

Macavity	04 May 2003
Quote: Originally posted by HOLMES but figured i could ask it here in greater detail... Certainly welcome to do so, Holmes... while I take some (rare) sunshine? :) Most of my I-ching "insights" come from the (classic) "Book of Changes" by Richard Wilhelm. A lot there - nuclear trigrams etc. etc. Finding the time to read it all is the challenge? Also, with all this I-Ching'ery, one starts sounding a little like David Carridine after a while? :D Macavity

HOLMES	04 May 2003
forced harmony, :O) that brings up to mind the whole sum of what those who are against tarot and systems, clarifying it for me. here is another famous musican quote "i never heard a wrong note just one that wasnt' to my liking" which can shed some light on it as well. i think coming a pure tarot point of view, the beginner gets a tarot book, starts to read the description of each card, and starts to think of where did they get this information? and so begings to think that in order to know the tarot on a deeper level, one has to study all these systems, (in a way when one does it becomes enlightening, and gives one deep thoughts :O) i have yet to see a tarot book coming straight from a "tarot" point of view, of course i havent' read that many, so that is where the modern "syncretist tendencies" start for us in the modern age i do believe. we need the super tarot book that descends from the sky (such a book be about 2000 pages eheh ) that puts everything in laymans terms (like eden gray did to tarot in her books for example, of course that was my first tarot book) eheh or we need the "pure tarot" book but that would be impossible I think, for even if we were to journal without looking at a book we would begin to look towards our life experiences to understand the pictures ( putting the tarot into our own system and that may be totally off base, yet work for us, and we end up making new system i guess ) so being devil advocate what is the pure tarot ?(eheh should that be a new thread, or was it answered already )

Keslynn	04 May 2003
It's interesting that they're using decans in determining the astrological meanings of the cards. As far as I know, decans play only a minor role in modern psychological astrology. However, this makes more sense when you see that decans were really important in Hermetic magic talismans. In the work of Cornelius Agrippa, each decan has it's own magical image that can be used for specific purposes. I think it's also important to point out that most Hermetic magicians of the period were not concerned with tarot, especially as a metaphysical entity. I can see why someone would try to apply those magical correspondences to tarot, but the big question is: does it work? I'll have to dig out my Thoth and its book. The Tarot Handbook by Angeles Arrien has the astrological correspondences for Thoth. Another question is: does every deck that uses astrology also use decans, or are there decks that use more modern astrology?

Minderwiz	04 May 2003
The Astrology/Tarot correspondeces debate seems to be raging at the moment. I agree with JMD if I read him correctly, the integrity of the divinatory method must be maintained so it is important that Tarot does not become an adjunct of Astrology (or vice versa) with rules laid down in one system being taken as read in another. I don't think there are correspondences between symbols or systems - except to the extent that a symbol in one evokes some link to a symbol in another when a reading is underway and that this leads to an insight on the part of the reader. The correspondences are therefore personal rather than objective - though many people may see the same correspondence and use it or write about it. Its the case in Astrology that planets, for example, can have quite distinct and different personae depending on which sign they rule (let alone modification for which sign they are in). Venus rules Taurus and there is more aking to the Empress, than other Tarot cards, She also rules Libra and may be more aking to Justice or possibly Lovers in the Major Arcana. Even here there is no full correspondence. Venus is neither Empress or Justice or indeed any other card. Within Astrology there is single set of rules. Taking Decans, some assign them in Chaldean order, others allocate signs to Decans in elemental order. If Astrology cannot agree on how decans work how can you successfully transpose a correspondence to Tarot?

jmd	05 May 2003
I agree with Minderwiz's post... With regards to the way the decanates were used by the Golden Dawn - or rather, the way in which (very likely) Mathers determined the correspondences with the pip cards, I do not think there is a need to go back and research what mediaeval Arabic astrology also did. Mathers was certainly a master at combining disparate systems into a syncretic mesh, whether we agree with the result is another question. It sufficed that one may divide the astrological signs into three parts (each of ten degrees - a number which would only have added to the proposed correlations as warranting this division), and that an efficient means was found to allocate both the pips, and thence the planets. Though it should be added that, as Keslynn points out, there already existed a tradition which made the decans magically important - these were not, of course, correlated to the Tarot. Nonetheless, Mathers would have been aware of this, and would have been encouraged to research it via, if nothing else, his membership (and high profile) in the SRIA. With regards to the question as to whether every deck which makes astrological correspondences also makes usage of decans, I would have thought that most did not - but that, rather, the GD derivatives may - and even there, I say 'may', for I suspect that some have not taken the time to investigate this correlation which appears, at any case, somewhat arbitrary. I'll leave this fascinating discussion for now, and check other posts...

The Tarot and other Divinatory Systems thread was originally posted on 29 Apr 2003 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.