Symbolism in the RWS 6 of Cups

Zephyros

Perhaps because everything has proper measure and proportion. If I have a stone, it is because all the material in it is exactly right so that it is a stone and not a feather. If Tarot is to portray any meaningful picture of creation at all, and not be simply a random collection of pictures, the it follows that it must have the same laws of proportion as anything else. While one doesn't have to divine according to one certain order's spiritual view of creation, heaven knows Marseilles decks don't follow the same tradition, I think it helps to at least admit the pictures do have structure and purpose.
 

Richard

.....A thought: Why do we have all this kabbalistic and schematic 'sub-text' as the Tarot's framework?
To make it seem more complicated, so that those who pretend to understand the esoteric stuff can feel smarter than the average bear? (That opinion is actually pretty common, by the way. I have seen numerous posts in which it is implied that those who use hermetic/esoteric terms are intellectual snobs. It stings a bit, especially when it comes from someone you like otherwise.)

Perhaps it is to guide and keep us on track with our 'intuitions' so they don't go off the rails into unrelated imagining and mixing them up with our complexes and imbalances?
:D:D:D
 

Richard

Perhaps because everything has proper measure and proportion. If I have a stone, it is because all the material in it is exactly right so that it is a stone and not a feather. If Tarot is to portray any meaningful picture of creation at all, and not be simply a random collection of pictures, the it follows that it must have the same laws of proportion as anything else. While one doesn't have to divine according to one certain order's spiritual view of creation, heaven knows Marseilles decks don't follow the same tradition, I think it helps to at least admit the pictures do have structure and purpose.
Superficially, the Marseille decks do not follow the same tradition as most of the post-GD decks. However, just as I tried to get a handle on the Albano-Waite by coloring the B.O.T.A., I am experimenting with the Marseille in an attempt to discover how such an unlikely candidate might have inspired the esoteric tarot tradition. Thus far, it does not seem totally insane that the designs of the trumps may have been influenced, at least indirectly, by Gnostic and Kabbalistic sources. We may never know the real history, but as a working hypothesis, this flows pretty well. I certainly don't expect such ideas to be generally accepted by historians, because there is a total absence of documentation. However, there's nothing wrong with Always Wondering.
 

rwcarter

Moderator Note

For some reason, I've always thought it was inappropriate to focus on the Rider-Waite Tarot in the Golden Dawn subforum of the Thoth. Actually, neither Thoth nor Rider-Waite conforms precisely to the Book T specifications of the Golden Dawn Tarot. If I was amiss in referring to Qabalistic and astrological concepts in the Rider-Waite forum, I apologize. Maybe a moderator can straighten out the confusion.

My understanding is that this forum is for the -
"Study of the symbolism and detail of the original Rider-Waite Tarot"
and that matters pertaining to The Golden Dawn Tradition have their own sub-forum within the Thoth Tarot forum.

Clearly, all manner of personal issues have been inadvertantly triggered by aspects of this thread. For my part in this, I apologise.

I agree. In Using Tarot Cards, esoteric symbolism is frowned upon (or at least, judging by the things I tend to post, largely ignored). It is in this forum where all manner of different influences can be discussed and dissected. Although this is not the History Forum, threads where someone posts something "by the book" and is then, frankly, dismissed as telling only one side of the story simply do not contribute much. This is as much a symptom of the RWS as Tarot as a whole. The Thoth Forum is much less prone to this type of, well, lack of discourse.

This is the forum I come to in order to learn about the RWS, not divination. I go to Using for that. Not to draw lines in the sand here, but it seems like the "esoteric types" must constantly adapt to fit the "intuitive types," but the same thing does not happen in reverse.
It's up to the Moderator(s) of the forum to determine what content is appropriate to that forum. As Moderators are different people (and our heads don't rotate 180 degrees as some would have you believe ;) ), different Moderators will adjust what is appropriate content in a given forum during their reign as Moderator for that forum.

That said, I am perfectly fine with discussion of any aspect of the "Study of the symbolism and detail of the original Rider-Waite Tarot". As the RWS deck is part of the Golden Dawn tradition (regardless of how closely it follows that tradition), discussion of GD influences on/in the card are allowed. Discussion of Tipareth in Briah should occur over in the Kabbalah forum, but discussion of how Tipareth in Briah is applied to/shown in the RWS deck is appropriate for the RWS forum. Similarly, a discussion of Astrology should occur in the Astrology forum, but a discussion of how astrology is applied to/shown in the RWS is fine for this forum.

So as not to derail this thread, if there are other questions about what is appropriate content in this forum, please PM them to me. If there is enough interest, I'm happy to start a thread where what's appropriate to RWS can be discussed.

rwcarter, Moderator of Rider-Waite-Smith
 

Aoife

I’m resurrecting this thread in response to issues raised in http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=229159 thread on the Using Tarot Cards board, and bringing across some direct quotes.


ravenest said:
One might be putting one's own shallow, misunderstood concepts into the symbols and coming up with some strange ideas ... that lead to the opposite of what the card, Waite and Pixie intended ( like the 6 cups - being seen as a pedophile danger ) ....
….

If someone thinks I am inflexible, and have a dogmatic approach, and am dismissive and have a bullying attitude for declaring that the 6 of cups being a demonstration of paedophilia is way out of the ball park ... whatever. Dogmatic ??? Wouldnt the person saying that it represents paedophilia (also against much protests in that thread and others pointing out the flawed view) be the dogmatic one due to their insistence of their opinion and the validity of their 'intuition' , when they were the odd one out ?

I don’t think that anyone said that this card represented paedophilia… and I certainly don’t see where anyone was dogmatic in their insistence of their opinion and the validity of their intuition.

IMO an individual card - like the 6 of cups, can mean a LOT of things on its own (its field of meanings) but it doesnt mean things out of its field ... like death and disaster. That might change IN CONTEXT with a reading (maybe the disaster is in the area of what the 6 of cups represents ?) but I wouldnt give it that meaning on its own.

Yes, of course…. however it can represent memories of past trauma, which might constitute disaster for some. Surely it must be within the reader’s spectrum of possible ‘meanings’?

The thread began way back in the spring of 2003 when the forum and its participants was much smaller and fewer in number. The sense of pleasure at being able to interact and discuss tarot, not to mention with people from different continents, was still quite new and wonderful. And the early posts on the thread are representative [from my recollection] of an exploration… exchange of thoughts and ideas, musings, snippets of text from recognised sources. It was about delving the spectrum of ‘meanings’, not defining a specificity. There were no sides or camps that I could discern, just a range of opinion… and there was certainly no attempt to shut down discussion through an insistence that some were wrong and others right. Just as the RWS 6 of Cups speaks to the past, perhaps there’s value in returning to the less confrontational style?
 

Richard

I seem to recall a thread on the Six of Cups in the RWS forum in which someone said that the big kid was trying to lure the little girl to his lair, where he intended to violate her. This was not in the context of a particular reading. How sad. :(
 

Zephyros

I seem to recall a thread on the Six of Cups in the RWS forum in which someone said that the big kid was trying to lure the little girl to his lair, where he intended to violate her. This was not in the context of a particular reading. How sad. :(

Such a specific opinion about a card is as absurd as saying the number three can only refer to cakes.
 

Aoife

I seem to recall a thread on the Six of Cups in the RWS forum in which someone said that the big kid was trying to lure the little girl to his lair, where he intended to violate her. This was not in the context of a particular reading. How sad. :(
I've done a cursory search and can find nothing like this. Are you able to find the thread?

But yes, it is sad that childhood recollections for some people include such nightmare scenarios.

Here's another wonderful thread about the 6 of Cups - http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18421
 

ravenest

I seem to recall a thread on the Six of Cups in the RWS forum in which someone said that the big kid was trying to lure the little girl to his lair, where he intended to violate her. This was not in the context of a particular reading. How sad. :(

YES! " not in the context of a particular reading" IMO THAT is the key. :thumbsup: