Reading pips: the Pips-as-Trumps method

[kwaw]

Originally Posted by Lee

For myself, I don't worry about elements. I ignore them. I still arrive at standard meanings for the suits by looking at the suit objects. For Wands, I picture wooden planks used to build a house. For Cups, food and drink as a means of sharing. For Swords, conflict and strategies. For Coins, value systems. I may be wrong about this but I doubt very much that people in the 15th through 19th centuries thought in terms of elements for the suits. I think that's a modern innovation, when esotericists began to look at the cards.

I agree the suit emblems themselves provide sufficient basis as per your examples -

OT: For anyone who may be interested however, the attribution of the four suits to other 'fours' is older than the speculations of modern esotericists - for example from Piscina Discorso, 1565:

[Carla]

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread and it's one of the best I've read on AT. The explanations are completely lucid--and trust me, if I got it the first time reading it, anyone can. Well done to Lee for such a great presentation of his ideas.

I've sat and copied them out by hand in my tarot notebook -- printing is too lazy. I never go back and read what I print. Copying it out makes me actually think about it!

This thread may change my entire way of reading tarot. I want to conduct an experiment. I want to do the same spread, but read it using three different methods:

1) Numerology + elemental suit (my usual way) (I see now I'm imposing two indirect references onto the cards doing this)

2) Pips-as-Trumps

3) Storytelling/intuitive (which might be Enrique's way, though I haven't read his threads yet)

[le_charior]

Originally Posted by Carla

I want to conduct an experiment. I want to do the same spread, but read it using three different methods:

1) Numerology + elemental suit (my usual way) (I see now I'm imposing two indirect references onto the cards doing this)

2) Pips-as-Trumps

3) Storytelling/intuitive (which might be Enrique's way, though I haven't read his threads yet)

Sounds like a great experiment! There used to be a thread about three card readings in the TdM forum where people gave different readings for the same three cards with different methods which I enjoyed a lot (http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=150872). Would be fascinating to see how you do it - maybe you could post it somewhere?

[Lee]

Originally Posted by Carla

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread and it's one of the best I've read on AT. The explanations are completely lucid--and trust me, if I got it the first time reading it, anyone can. Well done to Lee for such a great presentation of his ideas.

Thanks Carla! I'm sometimes frustrated by being unable to absorb or comprehend some tarot books, so it pleases me to hear that someone finds my own writing to be clear.

[MR GREEN]

?????

[BSwett]

Originally Posted by Carla

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread and it's one of the best I've read on AT. The explanations are completely lucid--and trust me, if I got it the first time reading it, anyone can. Well done to Lee for such a great presentation of his ideas.

I've sat and copied them out by hand in my tarot notebook -- printing is too lazy. I never go back and read what I print. Copying it out makes me actually think about it!

This thread may change my entire way of reading tarot. I want to conduct an experiment. I want to do the same spread, but read it using three different methods:

1) Numerology + elemental suit (my usual way) (I see now I'm imposing two indirect references onto the cards doing this)

2) Pips-as-Trumps

3) Storytelling/intuitive (which might be Enrique's way, though I haven't read his threads yet)

Super interesting thread i'm reviving here! I recently read Lee's book for LoS Universal Marseille, and was really enjoying his light numerology approach, and now I find this….. which throws a curve ball at me…

Regardless, I agree with Carla. Lee is a very gifted teacher! His way of explaining things, and his choice of keywords makes it extremely easy to squeeze the juice out of the things he writes!

This is all going into my Tarot notebook! (Including Teomat's I-XX associations)

Paz y amor

[frelkins]

Originally Posted by kwaw

I agree the suit emblems themselves provide sufficient basis as per your examples -

OT: For anyone who may be interested however, the attribution of the four suits to other 'fours' is older than the speculations of modern esotericists - for example from Piscina Discorso, 1565:

Not to be a boring pedant, but the first to link the classic elements to the suits for divination purposes was in fact Etteilla, in his second book on tarot. You can easily confirm this for yourselves. The Piscina piece doesn't explore the elements for divination, but rather ideas like "contentment," etc. Ficino, to whom Piscina refers, mentions the elements, but not in the context of divination nor for cards specifically. This leaves poor ol' Etteilla to take the blame. As usual.