Aeon418
I found it by chance by while trawling through Amazon.
New Thoth Tarot book.
sworm09
I like this book.
Despite its super casual tone, or perhaps because of it, this book really says a lot of things in a very simple way. The writer has a "cut the BS" tone that's really refreshing for someone writing on the occult who often try to come off as super mysterious and abstract. The author explains deeply esoteric concepts in a very simple, straightforward, and direct way. At numerous points I found myself saying "Oh, THAT'S what it meant"
His explanation of the Emperor/Tzaddi/Heh thing is probably the most simple I have ever seen while his explanation of all of the trumps ring with an element of practicality. The best thing about this book is that it sets you up to read other stuff. Once you understand what's being said in this book, the Book of Thoth becomes considerably easier to understand.
My one issue with this book is how the writer tends to go on long rants that come out of no where, some of which (like in the commentary for the Knight of Disks) almost have nothing to do with the card being described. That's my only issue with the book.
Beyond that though, I would gladly say forget Duquette. If you're just starting with the Thoth and you want a more down to earth look at the cards, pick this book up instead and then go to the Book of Thoth. I wish I would have read this book first.
Despite its super casual tone, or perhaps because of it, this book really says a lot of things in a very simple way. The writer has a "cut the BS" tone that's really refreshing for someone writing on the occult who often try to come off as super mysterious and abstract. The author explains deeply esoteric concepts in a very simple, straightforward, and direct way. At numerous points I found myself saying "Oh, THAT'S what it meant"
His explanation of the Emperor/Tzaddi/Heh thing is probably the most simple I have ever seen while his explanation of all of the trumps ring with an element of practicality. The best thing about this book is that it sets you up to read other stuff. Once you understand what's being said in this book, the Book of Thoth becomes considerably easier to understand.
My one issue with this book is how the writer tends to go on long rants that come out of no where, some of which (like in the commentary for the Knight of Disks) almost have nothing to do with the card being described. That's my only issue with the book.
Beyond that though, I would gladly say forget Duquette. If you're just starting with the Thoth and you want a more down to earth look at the cards, pick this book up instead and then go to the Book of Thoth. I wish I would have read this book first.
Richard
I like the 'cut the BS' tone of the book. However, I was annoyed by the 'god' stuff in the introduction. Not that there is anything wrong with the word 'god'. It is merely a semantic issue. Going into detail to justify one's use of a particular word hardly seems worth all the fuss. Just say what you mean and be done with it.
Aeon418
My copy arrived this morning. I've only dipped and skimmed so far, but already I've seen a few questionable things.
For instance page 113:
Hmmmmm.....
Perhaps Mr Ho would do well to consider that in order to gain Power the King (Adept) must cross the Paths of Lamed and Mem. Adjustment and the Hanged Man - Balance and Surrender/Submission.
What is the difference between a King and a Slave? The King serves willingly, the Slave does not. The essence of Kingship is service. This is intrinsic to the Path of Initiation. Without this it is all too easy to fall into simplistic interpretations based on polarized Old Aeon social models of master-kings ruling over dominated slaves.
That the King is the most willing servant is a mystery of Atu XII The Hanged Man card. To conventional thinking it appears absurd and even upside down. And so it should be.
Internalise the active Ra-Hoor-Khuit. Externalise the passive Harpocrates.
For instance page 113:
Henry Ho said:
Hmmmmm.....
Perhaps Mr Ho would do well to consider that in order to gain Power the King (Adept) must cross the Paths of Lamed and Mem. Adjustment and the Hanged Man - Balance and Surrender/Submission.
What is the difference between a King and a Slave? The King serves willingly, the Slave does not. The essence of Kingship is service. This is intrinsic to the Path of Initiation. Without this it is all too easy to fall into simplistic interpretations based on polarized Old Aeon social models of master-kings ruling over dominated slaves.
That the King is the most willing servant is a mystery of Atu XII The Hanged Man card. To conventional thinking it appears absurd and even upside down. And so it should be.
Internalise the active Ra-Hoor-Khuit. Externalise the passive Harpocrates.
Aeon418
Tripe!
It's curious how his definition for the Aeon of Horus is actually classic Aeon Osiris. His whole ego based, power mad, violence craving, p.o.v. seems to snowball from this misconception.
Lovers of the macabre, the sinister, and the disturbing may appreciate this book. But I'm not so sure about people intersted in the Thoth deck or Thelema. I frequently found myself having to 'switch off' when Mr Henry 'gung' Ho went off on an angry adolescent foot-stamping rant.
I didn't really notice it. I think I was too preoccupied with the psychotic tone. I've met a few freaky 'BoL third chapter literalists' in my time, but I think Mr Henry Ho is right up there with the best of 'em. Wow!
It's curious how his definition for the Aeon of Horus is actually classic Aeon Osiris. His whole ego based, power mad, violence craving, p.o.v. seems to snowball from this misconception.
Lovers of the macabre, the sinister, and the disturbing may appreciate this book. But I'm not so sure about people intersted in the Thoth deck or Thelema. I frequently found myself having to 'switch off' when Mr Henry 'gung' Ho went off on an angry adolescent foot-stamping rant.
Richard
I was just referring to the OP and the part that I read on the Amazon site. Glad I didn't actually buy the thing.I didn't really notice it. I think I was too preoccupied with the psychotic tone. I've met a few freaky 'BoL third chapter literalists' in my time, but I think Mr Henry Ho is right up there with the best of 'em. Wow!
ravenest
Yeah ... same here - Thanks Aeon
(I can make that sort of stuff up my self thanks - don't need to buy a book for it
)
(I can make that sort of stuff up my self thanks - don't need to buy a book for it
)Terrapin
I got the Kindle version of this book a couple of weeks ago and I'm enjoying the read. I do object to some of the adolescent editorializing and the subjective views that the author spews, but I'm also liking some of the insights he offers on the Major Arcana. Specifically, he talks about how an individual card relates the two Sephira at either end of its path which I haven't seen addressed at any length in any other book. This has really peaked my interest in learning why for instance, the Chariot is placed on the Tree where it is in the Thoth system. I think I understand better why, for example, Death is where it is on the Tree.
I was wondering if anyone here also sees some value and accuracy in his discussion of symbols and the various relationships/structures/astrologies amongst the Majors. He seems quite knowledgable and mature in discussing these. Or are his insights on the images just as hit or miss as his politics and personal philosophies?
I was wondering if anyone here also sees some value and accuracy in his discussion of symbols and the various relationships/structures/astrologies amongst the Majors. He seems quite knowledgable and mature in discussing these. Or are his insights on the images just as hit or miss as his politics and personal philosophies?
Aeon418
Some of his views on the symbolism are ok, even to the point of being quite insightful. But at other times he just pulls things out of thin air.
There's a frustrating inconstistency in his writing style too which doesn't help matters much. In multiple places he points how the symbolism indicates a necessary balance between the masculine and feminine, only to go into a one sided macho rant latter on.
At times I found myself having to pick apart the threads of his discussion because his p.o.v. (based on his definition of the Aeon of Horus, p.98) leads him off on a tangent.Is the book completely without merit? No. But it's not the sort of book I would recommend to someone new to the Thoth. And that's a shame really, because in places their are signs in could have been a really good book.
Terrapin
Thank you Aeon418.
It IS very inconsistent in tone. Nonetheless, he's given me food for thought; a good thing! I don't regret buying the book.
It IS very inconsistent in tone. Nonetheless, he's given me food for thought; a good thing! I don't regret buying the book.
