How does Kabbalah fit in with the Tarot....

Greg Stanton said:

So is there some kind of double-standard going on here? Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but there was a lot of upset earlier in this thread because people were under the impression that certain beliefs and POVs were being "dismissed".

So now it's ok, as long as it's from a Thelemite?

Click to expand...

No not at all, in fact I would say its exactly contrary to Thelema to do so. Its to be expected for a variety of reasons that someone with one view point cannot be expected to resolve that within themself with another conflicting viewpoint. That was the what I was really trying to say. Hence, oil and water. That doesn't mean that oil is better, or that water must be wrong, just that they can't mix together in the same person.

I don't know if Yygdrasilian is dismissing the Christian faith, or their interpretation of Jewish scripture, or something else. He's entitled to that opinion, as you are to yours. But should he stop by a Christian church and start shouting from the street that "this is a false religion, you've got it all wrong" then I'd have a big problem with that, because its not true. It might be true for him, but not true for someone else.

To act to move another person away from their own course, is explicitely not Thelemic. The whole point of Thelema is that I have my own course to follow and you have yours. I won't interfere with yours and I expect that you will not interfere with mine. When we come into conflict, its because we are in fact off our course. A collision of two Sun's if you will, is always a bad thing. *kaboom*

Of course you will see Thelemites doing just that, same as you will see Christians being judgemental and unloving, and the occasional Buddhist who is willing to sacrifice their ideals when a spider crawls across their bed Its not reflection on the philosophy, just the individual. We're all "fallen" after all

Gavriela said:

I think Waite had the right of it more than Crowley did when it came to making a kabbalistic deck,

Click to expand...

That is intriquing Gavriela. What did you mean by this?

Gavriela said:

I think Waite had the right of it more than Crowley did when it came to making a kabbalistic deck.

Click to expand...

I don't normally think of RWS as a Qabalistic deck, though Waite certainly made some relatively minor adjustments to the cards:

1) The order Justice and Strength are switched
2) The Pope and The Popess have been renamed to The Hierophant and The High Priestess (more anti-Christian sentiment from the occult crowd), but no real harm done.
3) Some "Hermetic" and Qabalistic imagery has been incorporated into the cards (i.e. the Sphinxes on The Chariot, the re-design of the Wheel of Fortune, etc.). Most of the trumps are variations of the Marseilles tarot, and most the deviations are certainly within an acceptable limit.

All in all, the RWS is a useful deck for practically anyone, no matter what their beliefs. This, and the illustrated pips (little Qabalah there) make this deck ideal for beginners -- and some people won't use anything else.

Greg Stanton said:

2) The Pope and The Popess have been renamed to The Hierophant and The High Priestess (more anti-Christian sentiment from the occult crowd), but no real harm done.

Click to expand...

I don't know that its fair to say this is ant-Christian sentiment. Waite most certainly was not anti-Christian, being one himself, as were most of the Golden Dawn (which is essentially Christian/Gnostic in origin). Waite in fact rejected Theosophy because he found it anti-christian. Most people who are anti-Christian will find the GD work very difficult to appreciate as it is so strongly Christian based. Instead the move to the Heirophant and High Priestess is to make it a more universal symbol, rather than limiting it to the purely Christian context in older decks. Not anti, just not exactly the same.

3) Some "Hermetic" and Qabalistic imagery has been incorporated into the cards

Click to expand...

Also the High Priestess of course is a glyph of the Tree of Life and Golden Dawn conception of Qabalah, the Temperance card also a clear visual depiction of the GD conception of Christian-ised Qabalah including their astrological concordances.

Greg Stanton said:

, and the illustrated pips (little Qabalah there)

Click to expand...

Unlike the Majors and the Courts, there is little explicit Qablah imagery in the minors, though the images selected exactly reflect the GD meanings which are Qabalah based. Which is additionally interesting, given that the meanings Waite published in his book conflict so glaringly with many of the images Smith created. Though Waite gathered meanings from various sources for his book, the GD qabalistic sources seem to me to be clearly dominant in the images.

This is why I find Gavriela's comment so interesting. Does she feel that Waite applied Qabalah better to his deck, or that he published it first so he has first dibs, or is it something else she is referring to. Curious!

similia said:

I don't know that its fair to say this is ant-Christian sentiment. Waite most certainly was not anti-Christian, being one himself, as were most of the Golden Dawn (which is essentially Christian/Gnostic in origin). Waite in fact rejected Theosophy because he found it anti-christian. Most people who are anti-Christian will find the GD work very difficult to appreciate as it is so strongly Christian based. Instead the move to the Heirophant and High Priestess is to make it a more universal symbol, rather than limiting it to the purely Christian context in older decks. Not anti, just not exactly the same.



Also the High Priestess of course is a glyph of the Tree of Life and Golden Dawn conception of Qabalah, the Temperance card also a clear visual depiction of the GD conception of Christian-ised Qabalah including their astrological concordances.



Unlike the Majors and the Courts, there is little explicit Qablah imagery in the minors, though the images selected exactly reflect the GD meanings which are Qabalah based. Which is additionally interesting, given that the meanings Waite published in his book conflict so glaringly with many of the images Smith created. Though Waite gathered meanings from various sources for his book, the GD qabalistic sources seem to me to be clearly dominant in the images.

This is why I find Gavriela's comment so interesting. Does she feel that Waite applied Qabalah better to his deck, or that he published it first so he has first dibs, or is it something else she is referring to. Curious!

Click to expand...

I think Waite did apply the Qabalah to his deck. That & the illustrated pips cause it to remain popular in the 21st century. Toss in its MANY easter eggs and it's a deck for beginners & experts.

Mac22

mac22 said:

I think Waite did apply the Qabalah to his deck. That & the illustrated pips cause it to remain popular in the 21st century. Toss in its MANY easter eggs and it's a deck for beginners & experts.

Click to expand...

Yes I think so also. Its very clearly a qabalistic deck IMO, but it doesn't require any knowledge of that to work with. No wonder it is so broadly appealing and easily translated to reflect different ideologies.

There has been a thread recently where we are discussing the different ways men and women use the cards. The theory is men are more usually attracted to the structures and systems, women to the images and utilization. Which is why more women read cards, but more men write books. Perhaps the RWS is so popular, not just because of lucky timing and the introduction of illustrated minors in a commercially published deck, but also because it can work so easily with either the more "male" or "female" approaches?

similia said:

Yes I think so also. Its very clearly a qabalistic deck IMO, but it doesn't require any knowledge of that to work with. No wonder it is so broadly appealing and easily translated to reflect different ideologies.

There has been a thread recently where we are discussing the different ways men and women use the cards. The theory is men are more usually attracted to the structures and systems, women to the images and utilization. Which is why more women read cards, but more men write books. Perhaps the RWS is so popular, not just because of lucky timing and the introduction of illustrated minors in a commercially published deck, but also because it can work so easily with either the more "male" or "female" approaches?

Click to expand...

Now THAT IS intriguing... I had never thought of that.... Not bad for what both Waite & Pixie thought a minor project.

Mac22

The Golden Braid Swallows its Own Tail

similia said:

I don't know if Yygdrasilian is dismissing the Christian faith, or their interpretation of Jewish scripture, or something else. He's entitled to that opinion, as you are to yours. But should he stop by a Christian church and start shouting from the street that "this is a false religion, you've got it all wrong" then I'd have a big problem with that, because its not true. It might be true for him, but not true for someone else.

Click to expand...

Wouldn’t it be fun if all great religions looked beyond their differences and found their common thread? We could braid them together and put an end to our petty bickering and bloodshed. There is plenty of magick in this Universe. Whose spell are you under?

I have no need of any religion for my PRAXIS. I am free.

mac22 said:

I think Waite did apply the Qabalah to his deck. That & the illustrated pips cause it to remain popular in the 21st century. Toss in its MANY easter eggs and it's a deck for beginners & experts.
Mac22

Click to expand...

Mac's got the right of it. The Easter Eggs are most certainly there - but you have to look

For the record, I'm an astrologer first. And I read Lenormand. But the kabbalistic aspects of Waite's deck utterly fascinate me. Other than that, I tend to read funky Italian Marseille-style stuff (think Vacchetta, Soprafino).

Written a few books, too. HOPEFULLY not as ponderous as Waite's

And yes, I'm a girl.

Gavriela said:

Mac's got the right of it. The Easter Eggs are most certainly there - but you have to look

For the record, I'm an astrologer first. And I read Lenormand. But the kabbalistic aspects of Waite's deck utterly fascinate me. Other than that, I tend to read funky Italian Marseille-style stuff (think Vacchetta, Soprafino).

Written a few books, too. HOPEFULLY not as ponderous as Waite's

And yes, I'm a girl.

Click to expand...

Thanks.

As for books you'd have to a LONG WAY to be as ponderous as
Waite.

Mac22

similia said:

Unlike the Majors and the Courts, there is little explicit Qablah imagery in the minors, though the images selected exactly reflect the GD meanings which are Qabalah based. Which is additionally interesting, given that the meanings Waite published in his book conflict so glaringly with many of the images Smith created. Though Waite gathered meanings from various sources for his book, the GD qabalistic sources seem to me to be clearly dominant in the images.

Click to expand...

Actually, I don't find this to be the case. The GD meanings of the pips are at odds with most authors, including Waite and Mathers' independent work on the tarot. The GD took the meanings for the pips 2-9 of each suit from the Decan descriptions in Picatrix -- highly idiosyncratic and unorthodox, to say the least. It's fair to say that in some instances Waite attempted to reconcile the GD meanings and Etteila, the imagery itself does not seem to specifically reflect the GD (Picatrix) meanings. Also, the GD tarot has the court cards all switched around and re-sexed, as they are in the Thoth, but this rather drastic change is not in the RWS deck.