Divination vs Fortune telling

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 02 May 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Ruby7	02 May 2004
This is from the Parrott Tarot Book, by Thom Parrott ( deck by Margaret Parrott), "Divination and fortune telling are often confused with one another because they are so similar. The fundamental differences between them arise from the spirituality and situational attitudes of the practitionaer (and to a much smaller extent, the querent). Fortune telling is, as the magazine ads point out, "for entertainment only." As one friend who used to do this said, you start with a vague reference to the image of the card and let the querent fill in the gaps---the practitioner talks as little as possible, letting the subject bring up their own interpretation. Little knowledge is required for this and the results can be anything from enightening to damning. The motive of the reader is generally to produce income. Divination involves reading the cards with and for Divine Guidance, hence the name. The true Diviner has invoked Divine and/or Angelic Powers into the cards and into the process of reading them. The work is done for the benefit of the subject as an evolving Child of God. While some form of compensation may be exchanged, the primary purpose of the reader is to assist a fellow being in his or her growth, thereby enhancing the reader's own." I was reading this today and am curious as to what other tarot readers think of it. I have always said that I am using my intuition (do not claim to be psychic) when I read the cards, I am interpretating the cards in relation to the querent and his/her life. I am not comfortable with the term "fortune teller" since it implies a definitive reading of the future, and I am not that psychic. But maybe I am missing something very important by not invoking Divine Guidance? I do ask the cards for guidance but maybe I should be taking this a step further? Any thoughts or comments are welcome. Ruby7

hedgecub	02 May 2004
I don't think you need to ask for guidance from the Divine in order to be practicing divination. Heck, plenty of people use tarot cards, runes, oracles, and other forms of divination, and are complete atheists. I think you can just as well rely on the guidance of your intuition, the unvoiced knowledge and power of your subconscious mind. In fact, if you look closely at the theory behind Western Ceremonial Macic, a great deal of it is based on the idea that the Divine or Universal Force is within us all as a part of our subconscious. *rambles out her 0.02*

Pook	02 May 2004
I remember that when I got my first deck of tarot cards, I couldn't shake the idea that because I was asking them for guidance, I should pray for truthfulness from my cards and to not be blinded by deceit or misdirection. I wanted divine truth from God himself and if I had to ask him to be in my cards to get that, than that's what I would do. And I thought that was the only way to get accurate readings. But after a while I started trusting in my own instincts more and more and realized that tarot cards are simply a tool to access said truth. I don't need to ask God or anyone to be in my cards...divine inspiration is everywhere and available to anyone who wishes to access it. As far as fortune telling is concerned, I think the article you read is right...'fortune tellers' are mostly more concerned with their own pocket books than anyone else's well-being and probably leave you with more questions and less answers. I guess if this seems rambly to anyone else, I'll put it another way. Asking your cards to reveal truth to you is fine if that is your way. Asking God for guidance is also fine if that is your way. As long as you have honest intentions for both yourself and the person you are reading for and are open to what the cards are telling you, I am not sure there is a wrong way to read tarot cards.....but there are lots of wrong ways to tell fortunes!!

hedgecub	02 May 2004
Of course, these are just terms, and their definitions may vary from person to person and group to group. Some people might define divination and fortune telling the same way, but I get the feeling that here at Aeclectic, differentiating between the two terms is helpful in seperating the honest seekers of knowledge from the reapers of cash profit.

Jeanette	02 May 2004
I agree that there is a difference between the two categories of card readers (and as long as you know up front that the reading is for "entertainment purposes only" I see no harm in it). And I guess if you want to call it "divination" because somehow divine guidance is operating on some level, that's OK too! But, I somewhat disagree about the statement differentiating how the two types of readers let the querent "fill in the gaps." Sometimes letting the querent give their impressions is the most important part of the reading; after all, they're the ones most intimate with their situation. And talking with someone who is objectively listening to their situation can be the most therapeutic thing for some people. I definitely have no psychic powers that I am aware of, or can control, or tap into; but I know that there are folks who can do that type of thing with ease. I'm still working on cultivating those skills!

Shade	02 May 2004
I can definatley see how this would be a very wokable definition for a person to use in their practice and I believe the arguments made for these definitions were well structured. Personally I do not make a distinction between the two. I think one could use the words divination, fortune-telling, prophecy etc., interchngably.

Imagemaker	02 May 2004
To me, divination questions are phrased to empower the querent to choose among options--what are the prospects for a new job, what can I learn from today's events? Foretunetelling makes the querent a helpless object of what comes--implying that s/he has no way to change what the reader sees in the cards. If we believe we have a spark of divinity within that we can contact or use, then the cards can help us see a path. If we feel life is totally predestined, then we wait for the reader to tell us what's coming. For me, the phrasing of the question makes a big difference in what the cards reply.

_N_	02 May 2004
Hummm, this could get to be a rather interesting discussion. In it's own way, what you have brought up asks further questions as Imagemaker has pointed out - is what we or the querent see in the cards "fate" or can it be changed? Does what we believe about that define it as fortune telling or divination? Personally, I believe in the divine which is a part of everyone and everything. Because we are a part of the great unknowable divinity we can tap into that during a reading of the cards, and therefore support the definition of divination. To me, a fortune teller is someone dressed in tacky gypsy clothes whose whole motivation is to fleece his or her querents for as much money as possible, no matter if they do all the talking or the querent does; no matter if they call it divination or fortune telling. As for "can it be changed" I am a strong believer in "nothing is carved in stone" - the tarot may show you what can be, but you can take steps to avoid it, change it, accept it or soften the blow if it's something bad. I agree with what the author of "78 degrees of wisdom" says; people think that because they know something bad is going to come of something, they can just go ahead with their plans and not let the bad thing happen. But if you don't actually take steps to keep it from happening, just thinking that it won't because you know about it isn't the same and it won't change the outcome. You've got to actually USE your free will to make the changes to avoid the problems that the tarot may point out. N

Ruby7	02 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Imagemaker For me, the phrasing of the question makes a big difference in what the cards reply. That's a very good point Imagemaker, Ruby7

Ruby7	02 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Jeanette ! But, I somewhat disagree about the statement differentiating how the two types of readers let the querent "fill in the gaps." Sometimes letting the querent give their impressions is the most important part of the reading; after all, they're the ones most intimate with their situation. And talking with someone who is objectively listening to their situation can be the most therapeutic thing for some people I agree with you Jeanette, I think it is important to let the querent give their impressions and to tune into this. I definitely see the value of a tarot reading as a therapeutic thing for some people. But Thom Parrott was referring to readers whose interest is in making money only. I think that how this is used depends on the intentions of the reader. It could be a "cold reading" where the reader is psychologically reading a client and trying to make it appear that they are using psychic abilities if the reader's main intention is to make money with the pretense of having psychic abilities. Ruby7

Khatruman	03 May 2004
As far as the terms "Divination" and "Fortune Telling", I see a distinction in what one is doing. Fortune telling implies telling about "fortune" or destiny or fate, in other words, what will come about in the future. It has a distinctly fatalistic feel to it, implying that the future, if it can be forseen, is fated to happen. Divination, which has been pointed out in your own post, implies a connection with the Divine, God. It doesn't absolutely imply fate, that things are destined to happen, but it implies a overall knowledge. I think a situation in Milton's Paradise Lost illustrates the philosophy I have on God and Destiny. In one scene of the epic, God and Christ are discussing the fact that Satan is sneaking into Eden to tempt Adam and Eve to the Fall. Christ poses a question to God: If you know that Satan will enter Eden, he will tempt them and he will lead them towards the Fall that will cast them out of Paradise, why don't you stop it? God answers basically that, if he were to interfere and to change that, then he would take away their free will, their ability to make their own choice. Man would no longer be a being in God's own image, he would be merely a puppet. Christ is sent to talk with Adam and Eve; however, he cannot reveal what will happen to them, what choice they will make and thus take away their ability to make it. Quite a paradox. Seems the divine can understand what the future will lead to, but it does not tell us enough to make us puppets to fate. It allows us still our free will. Take also the term "medium". Medium generally in all its meanings refers to something in the middle, a go between for two extremes. A medium in psychic terms is one who goes between the divine and the individual human. For my own viewpoint, I see the divine as the collective unconscious that is spread out amongst all living things. Tarot is a tool for getting at this collective unconscious. Tarot is one among many divinatory devices used in various cultures, including Nordic Runes, Chinese i-ching, the Native American Medicine Wheel, African tribes' Rolling of Bones. What is interesting about all these divinatory devices is that they rely deeply on a random act: choosing of unseen and mixed cards, choosing runic symbols on stones or sticks, casting coins or sticks, spinning of a wheel, etc. What this does is takes the individual consciousness out of the process. Therefore it directly puts forth the question as to whether the universe is a totally uncontrolled, random environment, or is there a controlling force? If no "message" comes from the random act, then there is no divine control. If a "message" comes forth clearly over and over again, then there must be some controlling force. But as with those who use tarot to solve a problem, it becomes a fortune telling device only in what the message tells you is likely to happen. It cannot give details. Christ can come down and warn that it is likely there will be a Fall, and caution to be wary, but he cannot tell the details and transform us into marionettes. We have the will to interpret, listen, do, not do, as we wish. It is the great gift of the divine. Darn, not sure how much sense I made here.

Ruby7	03 May 2004
Khatruman, that was a great post and it made a lot of sense to me. I suppose I have always been invoking the Divine when I do a reading I just haven't been consciously calling what I connect to the Divine. When I invoke the cards, ask for their guidance, knowledge, help etc. it really is asking an unknown force to reveal something. Tarot cards are what has proven to me that the universe is not an uncontrolled, random environment. Although occassionally when I do a reading and don't feel a connection or get any answers, I feel more cynical and that maybe the universe is indeed a totally uncontrolled, random environment. However since the connection with the cards happens more times than not, I conclude that when I don't receive an answer that makes any sense, I'm simply not meant to, or am out of sync that day etc. So what makes a person psychic? Although I can tune into people, I don't consider myself anymore psychic than anyone else. I get feelings and glimpses of the future, but don't believe I have ever had a definite psychic view of the future. At work I can often predict when a particular client will appear, usually this starts in the morning with the "feeling" that so and so will appear today, and usually they do. But that "feeling" is based on a sort of routine about time, it being just about time that so and so will show up. Synchronicity. Thanks so much for your post Khatruman, Ruby7

Khatruman	03 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Ruby7 So what makes a person psychic? Although I can tune into people, I don't consider myself anymore psychic than anyone else. I think it is simply the ability to listen. Too many people simply talk, or, as others are talking, are deciding what to say next, which is also crowding out the ability to listen. I think that, over a prolonged period of truly listening to others, listening to the environment, listening to any and everything around, one gets that "psychic" ability, because one can now better "hear" the universe.

jmd	04 May 2004
I read Ruby7's opening post acouple of days ago, and was a little unsure as to how to respond, for it has many layers. In some ways, I suspect that part of the demeaning of the term 'Fortune Telling' has been out of legal considerations in various places (including various states in Australia). Partly, also, has been the slow but radical shift in general parlance of the meaning of the term 'Fortune'. I remember not so long ago when the term implied no more than 'vissicitudes of chance events' (I nearly used the term 'fate', but then realised that a similar shift has also altered its meaning quite significantly). Hence, it was as likely for someone to use the term 'fortune' to refer to an unfortunate, as for a fortunate, seemingly random event presenting itself (note the inclusion of that root word in those two!). Lately, it seems to have been more closely associated with material wealth... though even this is not universally the case. Also, one of the 'obvious' meanings of 'Divination' is, as mentioned in the opening quote, that of relying of divine influence or spiritual guidance. Personally, I do not see any problems with either usage of the terms. 'Divination' seeks to speak or guide and understand life events and situations; 'Fortune telling' seeks to guide and understand the vissicitudes in life's situations and events. In each case, Tarot may or may not be used. As we are presumably referring to the usage of Tarot in this Forum, what is the difference between each? Each may indicate forecasts for things to come; each may focus instead on current situations; each may also instead focus on the past. In both 'divination' and 'fortune telling', the explanation given as to how it works (if any is attempted) will undoubtedly reflect the current world-view of the speaker (whether it be a physicalist-psychological model or a spiritual view as underpinning manifestation). In either divination or fortune telling, the speaker may or may not encourage the listener to 'fill in the gaps' which makes the narrative meaningful and obviously applicable. In some ways, it could be said that the difference, if any difference there is, seems to me to be more in terms of local and cultural understanding and prejudices with regards to those terms, and on their possible legal ramifications, than on any deep distinction between these two appelations. A good example of this is also the sense that readings are for 'entertainment purposes only'... if one means by this that the person listening to the reading is to seriously entertain and consider the seriousness of the reading, then fine. If one mans by this that the purpose of the reading was as an amusement, then this to me reflects more, again, the social and, it seems in this specific case, especially legal but fortunately only local conditions.

mingbop	06 May 2004
this is one of those posts that really make you think. I dont like to think--it hurts !! I would either have to write a ten page essay---or else simply say "does it matter?!"--I dont put a fixed label on the tarot--I only READ it,and it tells me what has to be known.--- and I never charge money.

Mojo	09 May 2004
I avoided this thread for a long time because I knew it would get my ire up and I would go on another one of my tirades that would once again have moderators telling me to cool it. But for some reason this morning I couldn't resist it anymore. I've actually been surprised that it's a relatively mumbo-jumbo-free thread! The only thing I take true exception with is the author who is originally quoted. Look how he sets up the two (just two???) different approaches to reading the Tarot: Quote: Originally written by Thom Parrott you start with a vague reference to the image of the card and let the querent fill in the gaps---the practitioner talks as little as possible, letting the subject bring up their own interpretation. Little knowledge is required for this and the results can be anything from enightening to damning. The motive of the reader is generally to produce income. Quote: Originally written by Thom Parrott The true Diviner has invoked Divine and/or Angelic Powers into the cards and into the process of reading them. The work is done for the benefit of the subject as an evolving Child of God. Anyone who practices the first type of reading is full of crap. Anyone who practices the second type of reading is even more full of crap. Then he goes on to hit us with this gem: Quote: Originally written by Thom Parrott While some form of compensation may be exchanged, the primary purpose of the reader is to assist a fellow being in his or her growth, thereby enhancing the reader's own." Is he trying to make himself feel better about making money off the Tarot? This sentence contains so much bulls**t you could fertilize Scotland with it. If money is exchanged, any divine intention is flushed right down the crapper. Let's see how this would play in any other "divine" situation: Quote: "That'll be $9.95 for hearing your confession; just say three 'hail Mary's' and be sure to enter our sweepstakes for a free salvation to be given away at the end of the month...." Yeah, that works.

firemaiden	09 May 2004
Ave, Mojo : what would we do without you? I particularly love the part about fertilizing Scotland. :D :D

Ruby7	09 May 2004
Hey Mojo, I'm really glad that you responded, the reason I posted this quote from Tom Parrott was because I wanted to hear many different opinions about it. To be quite honest I wasn't sure what I thought of it, and wanted to hear what everyone else thought. I'm still not sure what I think, but I do agree that it is limiting to say that there are only two types of readers, and I think I'll go with Mingbop and just stop thinking about it just now :). Ruby7 p.s. and yes scotland would be well fertilized LOL

jmd	09 May 2004
I must have a different picture of Scotland: I thought it was already a land quite fertile and well-fertilised. Firstly, to address the last of Mojo's criticism, it is (or at least in times past was) expected that tithely income be 'donated' (really an oximoron, as there was, in theory if not practice, no choice in the matter). The Church therefore did 'charge', and that charge enabled it to maintain its priests and buildings and charitable works (and for some within the church, charity began at home, and whatever might be left over used to beautify the house(s) of God with gold). Much more subtle than saying: 'this'll be nine pieces of silver'. Some people - not just Mojo - make repeated claims that 'money exchange' somehow negates or obliterates 'Divine intention'. I cannot see why this would be so... Without arguing for or against the very early form of taxation ('tithes') necessary for the provision of those not directly engaged in the production or distribution of goods, it can be viewed that any activity, including religious, psychological and spiritual, which requires of one the office of spiritual counselling or similarly important tasks, implies that he or she will be supported by the community. Normally, this would have been through a communal system such as tithing... in more modern times, this may be achieved in a variety of ways, including claims to intellectual property ('royalties'), and the direct gifting ('payment') when a service is provided. Payment does not negate Divine or spiritual work. Going on to the two types of reading criticised by Mojo, it may be worth pointing out that the first form is very much the type used when Tarot is being used by those more psychologically oriented. A 'reading' by a psycho-analyst may indeed take the form described, allowing the 'client' to speak and narrate what they need to narrate... perhaps this is a form of reading which may well provide for fertilising substance. Hopefully, however, what this means is that it liberates the client somewhat to become more themself and freed to become positively creative. With the second style of reading, of course anyone who operates from a physicalist framework would view any kind of explanation which understands the world from an essentially spiritual one as, at best, misguided. This does not render the explanation incorrect, however. IF the world is such that it is essentially spiritual, then an effort to awaken oneself to its light is wise - even if the story retold of the experiences is utterly rejected by those remaining chained within the platonic cave looking at mere shadows. Of course, this does not mean that the explanations those who claim to have sensed the Divine Radiance of the Sun, because of the usage of terms such as 'Divine' or 'spiritual', are correct. Rather, it perhaps should be just sufficient leaven to encourage others to look in un-expected directions for possible better understanding of the world, and assist in finer delineation of unusual insights.

mingbop	10 May 2004
i think there is no right or wrong way to read tarot; i think its up to the individual whether to charge or not; i think human nature is apt to make rules & judgements when they sometime dont have to ; and even if there was rules then somebody would break them just for devilment. We are individuals, not bees, sheep, or clones !

TemperanceAngel	10 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by mingbop i think there is no right or wrong way to read tarot; i think its up to the individual whether to charge or not; i think human nature is apt to make rules & judgements when they sometime dont have to ; and even if there was rules then somebody would break them just for devilment. We are individuals, not bees, sheep, or clones ! I agree with you, mingbop :) If I didn't charge for readings I would earn no money, zilch and wouldn't be able to eat or pay my rent or study etc. It's a job, just like waiting tables or teaching or working in a bank or singing etc. I also think that if one believes in whatever their beliefs are, whether it be angels or guides or spirits or Jesus or Buddha or (gosh I could on forever with this...) then it is their belief and everyones' beliefs should be respected, whether you agree with them or think they are "crap".... Great thread, I like! XTAX And to add: Scotland is VERY fertilised :) (As in the green and grassy way, water etc.)

Mojo	11 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by mingbop i think its up to the individual whether to charge or not; i think human nature is apt to make rules & judgements when they sometime dont have to I never said you shouldn't charge for Tarot readings. I'm a big fan of charging. My issue is with those who claim "divine intentions" and then charge. JMD, using "the church" to justify charging for services while maintainin divine intentions is roughly equivalent to using George W. Bush as an example of humanitarianism. Name one major organized religion that doesn't have a long and distinguished history of greed, larceny and corruption.

The Divination vs Fortune telling thread was originally posted on 02 May 2004 in the Using Tarot Cards board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Using Tarot Cards, or read more archived threads.