The Lovers as feelings toward someone??

novenovembre

''The other woman'' in an affair. I've often had the Empress pop up to suggest this, and evidently illicit sex is a big part of the allure. Of course other cards in context would come into play.
As far as ''being in love'' goes, I equate that more with the Two of Cups than the Lovers. If we're talking about the FEELING of being in love, that is. If we're talking about actual actual L-O-V-E, abstraction made of racing heartbeats, sweaty palms and other assorted pheromones, and a deeply compatible sexual chemistry that stands the test of time, then yes, I can see the Lovers representing that sort of bond between two people.

I agree totally about the 2 of cups and lovers, and I think I said that in my first response to thirteen. Being in love to me is more the 2 of cups.
The Emperess as "the other woman in an affair" is new to me....never saw it like that.....
 

novenovembre

Nobody is over-intellectualizing, just pondering the meaning of "love," with its many facets, and it isn't over-intellectualizing to consider the totality of significance a card has. Not to mention, there is no use insisting that you have your opinion, I already assume you do, but it helps if people come to discussions with an open mind. Looking at a card's attributions needn't be cold and logical, it certainly isn't for me, but it does help see different sides of a card that may not be apparent simply from the image, as well as make connections between different cards that would otherwise seem unlikely (hence, make connections between facets of life itself).

I look at the Tree of Life and it fills me with sensations (perhaps what one might call, wrongly, "intuitive feelings") even though I may speak in pseudo-intellectual terms. And I can't apologize, as the mindset of "this card means [insert trite, two word, empowering cliche here] is an over-simplification, as we aren't just talking about pictures, we're talking about concepts of life, and death, and love and lust and heaven knows what else. Maybe others' interpretations of Adam and Eve will instruct you, illuminate you or at the very least, allow you to develop you own ideas further, if you don't insist that that is what it means for you.

Death as sex? Makes sense; I've heard the moment of orgasm described as a "little death," a moment when one feels at union with everything, and for a brief moment one is alone in the universe, yet is also everything. There are, of course, many types of love. One can fall in platonic love in the sense of the first months of a new friendship. As to sex, well, there is the assexual community, healthy adults looking for love without sex.

No interpretation is completely wrong, but my point is expanding your ideas about any card can only develop your view of the card as well as develop yourself, and the Lovers is too "big" to be cramped in with the single idea.

I agree totally, of course, otherwise I would't be here.....I've already had this conversation with LRichard, by the way.....like I said to him, I have huge respect for those who have great knowledge of the Cabbalah, and Tree of life, symbolism of tarot imagery, and I' a bit envious, as well... but I also like being instinctive and down-to-earth about things, and maybe it frustrates me a bit to be unable to understand how somebody can see the Lovers and take out the sexual element from it.....

PS I knew someone was going to pick on what I said about "healthy adults"... .I just like being provocative every now and then.
 

Chiriku

But wouldn't you agree that sexual attraction is a huge part of falling in love ?

No, I would (and do) not agree with that. Not if you are suggesting that sexual attraction is *necessarily* a huge part of falling in love.

If you switched the tacit "necessarily" to "often" or "for many people," then we'd be closer to agreeing.

Can you fall in love with someone (a human, not a cat) you are not attracted to sexually ?

But of course. It happens quite a lot and has throughout recorded history. There are many instances of people experiencing sweeping, emotionally intense attachment to another person (often towards people to whom they are not even sexually oriented! ), feeling as if they never want to be parted from them, feeling bliss at being in their presence...and yet, to put it bluntly, not wanting to #$%@ them.

Granted, this phenomenon-- experiencing the euphoric feelings of "falling in love" only minus an accompanying organic sexual impetus--has only recently been explored from a critical, analytic and scientific standpoint. I suspect this is because the phenomenon appears to be especially common among young women and that this group is not the historical standard for scientific research (that has been young to middle-aged men). But it has always been there; it's a part of humanity.

and maybe it frustrates me a bit to be unable to understand how somebody can see the Lovers and take out the sexual element from it.....

when the reality is that, the idea of attraction and falling in love is largely physical.....(not entirely, of course)

See my answer, above.

The reality is that "falling in love" feelings are controlled by one part of the brain and organic sexual desire by another. What often--but by no means always--happens is that the two circuits become intertwined (there are complex reasons why), resulting in some people feeling both strong emotional impulses and strong sexual desire towards the object of their infatuation.

But we must be careful not to imply--as your quotes above do--that there is a necessary link between the two; the link is not a necessary one. And indeed, there are many people in whom the two circuits don't cross one another--people who can experience 'crushes' or strong emotional attachments to people to whom they do not have sexual urges. Again, we often find case studies within a same-sex context, but by no means always.

Obviously, the Trump card now known as The Lovers came into existence at a time when people did not know much, if anything, about the human brain and neuro-pathways and how they play into human emotion and sexual desire. However, as the Qabalistic and other descriptions above suggest, there are many tarot readers who don't assign a "romantic love and sexual desire" meaning to this card anyway; this doesn't have much to do with scientific rationales, I'd imagine.

I am a long-standing and fairly consistent member of "The Lovers-as-'choice' " camp of interpretation. At one point in my tarot life, I read for rather large numbers of members of the public, and when the Lovers came up, as it often did, I usually interpreted some element of choice, decision-making, Duality (whether as opposition or as integration), etc. Usually, I didn't place a large emphasis on ideas of romantic love (and certainly not sexuality, which in my opinion is both metaphorically/psychologically distinct from Love as well as scientifically).

The Lovers card is just not a card about distilled, straightfoward romantic love to me. "How does he think of me? The Lovers--he loves me." No, that hasn't been my experience. If we're in a Rider Waite Smith framework, I can point out several cards in the Minor Arcana that would more sooner point to that conclusion than The Lovers.

If you go back and read Thirteen's explanation to the OP in this thread, that is largely along the lines of how I see The Lovers for this particular question. She and I tend to agree about The Lovers. There are other tarot readers--like the one that read for you--that might not, and I'm sure many of them are competent readers, as well.
 

Richard

The Lovers (Trump 6, Gemini) is an evolution of the older Lover (singular) or Marriage card, which culturally had little to do with the concept of romantic love (which was popularized by the troubadours). Even ideal troubadourian romantic love was rather chaste, but the groin area of the anatomy would sometimes assert its seemingly irresistible magic (as was the case with Lancelot and Guinevere) and could cause no end of trouble for all concerned. (In this connection, John Boorman's 1981 masterpiece Excalibur is a must-see film, IMHO.)

The "love" card is the Two of Cups (Venus in Cancer), one of my favorite cards. Personally, I'm a sucker for romantic love (and all which that entails) and have been from about as far back as I can remember. I even dream about it. }) My present Hermit status is dictated by circumstances, alas.
 

novenovembre

Well, Chiriku, LRichard, and everybody else....it's a really interesting debate, but for me, that interpretation of the Lovers that I use never failed, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree......
 

Richard

Well, Chiriku, LRichard, and everybody else....I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree......
And I am sticking out my tongue in the general direction of Northern Italy. :)
 

novenovembre

And I am sticking out my tongue in the general direction of Northern Italy. :)

....But you haven't convinced me, if that's what you mean.....
And by the way, that Tarot reader in London was bloody right, whether you like it or not.....
 

novenovembre

....And I also think that we've been trying to split the hair in a thousand parts.....or indulging in "intellectual masturbation", if this expression is allowed on this forum (if not, I apologize to the moderators and to you all)......
The truth is we all know what love is about, and for those who see it as a mixture of spiritual ad physical elements,( who I believe are still the majority, though maybe I'm old-fashioned...) the lovers includes both.....and CANNOT just be about one of them.....if it was like that, we wouldn't be in the physical dimension, we would be angels.....
 

Richard

....But you haven't convinced me, if that's what you mean.....
And by the way, that Tarot reader in London was bloody right, whether you like it or not.....
The English are clueless, they even talk funny. :D