Holy Light vs Tabula Mundi Colores Arcus

Nemia said:

Sorry I talked so much. I noticed that I'm still receptive for the Holy Light's charms

And I didn't give it enough of a chance. Well well...

Click to expand...

Please don't be sorry. Your posts often relate your own experiences with a deck or decks in a way that is very helpful and really makes me see what it might be like to interact with a deck .

Aeric explained underlying differences in the choice you're making. I just wanted to emphasize the way Tabula Mundi highlights connections between cards, if you think that would be useful for your studies. Since art for a minor is inspired by the art for the two trumps associated with it, the 6 of Cups, for example, will bring visual elements of Death and the Sun into the reading. (Kickstarter demonstrates that with several minors.) I also like that Tabula Mundi isn't a clone of the Thoth, so you're getting a deck that stands on its own, but also one that makes me look at my Thoth with a new perspective.


(I don't have Holy Light, so can't comment.)

I have both decks. I got the tarot of the Holy Light when it first came out , I suggest that if you really are interested in The Holy Light that you get the book. But If you're unsure I suggest you get the Holy Light app. The app is really comparable and will give you a good idea if you really like or want The Holy Light. I'm currently enjoying using the Holy Light and the Tabla Mundi together. I personally think for the rest of the winter I will be using these two decks together. I feel that this something really profound about using them Together!

TM for me, too. The Holy Light is magnificent but as explained it uses a completely different structure and its author isn't easily digestible. If you do get the Tabula Mundi I recommend getting the book as well. It's first-rate and is a good introduction to esoteric thought and symbolism written in a friendly, personable way.

Although the TM isn't the Thoth it is still based upon it. And the Thoth pretty much covers the roots of all modern decks. So if you choose the TM, it will open up all decks to you, but the Holy Light will pretty much give you only knowledge of that deck.

Zephyros said:

Although the TM isn't the Thoth it is still based upon it. And the Thoth pretty much covers the roots of all modern decks. So if you choose the TM, it will open up all decks to you, but the Holy Light will pretty much give you only knowledge of that deck.

Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the system of correspondences used in the Tarot of Holy Light is not unique to the deck. I thought the TOHL used the same correspondences as Wirth and Papus, so it would be good for those decks, and also for the Major Arcana of El Grand Tarot Esoterico. I could be mistaken. If it is, then even if the author is overstating her case that this is the original, "correct" system it is still the system of a school of tarot and it will be interesting to find out more about it.

The Tabula Mundi is lovely but I am not a thelemite so I find cards like the Aeon and Lust kind of annoying. The Tabula Mundi is a very Thelemic deck, lots of stars of Babalon and other Thelemic symbols and concepts. The Thoth is a great reading deck but I decided against the Tabula Mundi for myself. It does look like an amazing deck though with all the echoes between cards.

It looks like delinfrey has answered their question "which deck?" with the perfectly sensible answer "both!"

Myrrha said:

I was under the impression that the system of correspondences used in the Tarot of Holy Light is not unique to the deck. I thought the TOHL used the same correspondences as Wirth and Papus, so it would be good for those decks, and also for the Major Arcana of El Grand Tarot Esoterico.

Click to expand...

I don't have the deck so am not sure which correspondences she uses; but if it is the Gra pattern for the Hebrew letters then the first attribution to these in connection with Tarot was made by William Westcott (one of the founders of the Golden Dawn) in a lecture to the Theosophical society, and was later used by members of the Theosophical society (the Curtiss's) in two books in the early 20th century - so might be better described as the English speaking Theosophical school than a continental model - these were later used in late 20th century decks such as the El Gran Esoterico (which led them to be described as 'Spanish school'). They do not match up with Levi, Papus or Wirth, and Etteilla as far as I know never made any Hebrew letter correspondences. If it isn't the Gra then it will probably be different to Levi, Papus, Wirth at least in as much that no doubt the fool is probably attributed to the letter Tau than to Shin.

Her Decan planetary rulerships are also different (as both English and Continental schools used those based upon the Chaldean order) - so both together (Hebrew letter attributions and decan planetary rulerships) result in a unique set of attributions that differ to any traditional school.

Kwaw, thank you for the information. I don't have the set yet but decided to order it. It may indeed be a unique set of correspondences and it is only her theory that these are somehow connected to Papus and the rest. I do wish that there was some basic information about the structure of the deck and the reasons for the structure at her site somewhere readily accessible . Some of it makes a kind of sense once I think about it (like the Devil (as Baphomet being attributed to Sagittarius). I am hoping that there will be somenkind of explanation with the deck.

Aeric said:

Holy Light is the pre-Golden Dawn Tarot work of Etteilla with all of his correspondences. It's the only modern Etteilla deck in existence.

Click to expand...

From Mary's review of the deck I see the lwb has meanings that largely derive from Etteilla's (so do many other decks, to one degree or another).

The correspondences however, do not correspond to anything to be found in Etteilla, as far as I can see, and to call it an Etteilla deck strikes me as something of a misnomer.

kwaw said:

I don't have the deck so am not sure which correspondences she uses; but if it is the Gra pattern for the Hebrew letters then the first attribution to these in connection with Tarot was made by William Westcott (one of the founders of the Golden Dawn) in a lecture to the Theosophical society, and was later used by members of the Theosophical society (the Curtiss's) in two books in the early 20th century - so might be better described as the English speaking Theosophical school than a continental model - these were later used in late 20th century decks such as the El Gran Esoterico (which led them to be described as 'Spanish school'). They do not match up with Levi, Papus or Wirth, and Etteilla as far as I know never made any Hebrew letter correspondences. If it isn't the Gra then it will probably be different to Levi, Papus, Wirth at least in as much that no doubt the fool is probably attributed to the letter Tau than to Shin.

Her Decan planetary rulerships are also different (as both English and Continental schools used those based upon the Chaldean order) - so both together (Hebrew letter attributions and decan planetary rulerships) result in a unique set of attributions that differ to any traditional school.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what her sources are, but in the book for the deck Christine claims that Etteilla assigns the Fool to the letter Tav and to the Sun, and so these are the correspondences for the Fool in the TotHL. After explaining the variations of other Tarot traditions, she says, "...the only arrangement that remains consistent when carried over onto the Kabbalah Tree into the astro-alchemical medicine formulas and back to the ancient Astrology is the pattern that Etteilla passed along. Therefore, Etteilla's esoteric correspondences guide our choices in Tarot of the Holy Light." But the actual numbering of the cards is the same as with Marseille decks.

As far as the planetary rulerships for decans go, they seem pretty normal. Mind you, I've never been big into Astrology, and consequently I've made very little use of it in Tarot readings. But from checking about on the internet, the rulerships look par for the course, as best I can tell. For example, Capricorn is ruled by Saturn in the first decanate (Ace of Disks), Venus in the second (2 of Disks), and Mercury in the third (3 of disks). But I'm guessing it's how the decans are applied to the cards that's causing so much confusion.

I don't know if this will be helpful to anyone, and I don't want to end up writing a wall of text here, but the basic structure for the decans is like this: Aces, 6's, and 9's, are on the middle pillar of the Kabbalah, and that middle pillar holds the primary decanate for each sign; the 2, 4's, and 7's are on the right pillar, which is considered the second decanate; and 3's, 5, and 8's are on the left pillar, which is the third decanate.

So if you laid the cards out in the order they're meant to be read, astrologically speaking, it looks something like this (using Disks as an example):


3 of Disks | Ace of Disks | 2 of Disks
(Capricorn ruled by Mercury) (Capricorn ruled by Saturn) (Capricorn ruled by Venus)
21-30" 1-10" 11-20"


5 of Discs | 6 of Discs | 4 of Discs
(Taurus ruled by Saturn) (Taurus ruled by Venus) (Taurus ruled by Mercury)
21-30" 1-10" 11-20"


8 of Discs | 9 of Discs | 7 of Discs
(Virgo ruled by Venus) (Virgo ruled by Mercury) (Virgo ruled by Saturn)
21-30" 1-10" 11-20"

EDIT: Umm, that formatting didn't quite work out the way I envisioned. Just imagine each set of three in distinct columns, one lined up beneath the other....

Better yet, here's an image:
http://imgur.com/XtKeD4D (Be sure to click the image to enlarge it.)

Note that all three cards for each sign are in the horizontal rows, and the degrees are the same in the vertical columns.

The decanates will also correlate to a progression through the months and seasons in a predictable order, the end of one month/season in one suit beginning a new one in the next suit, and so on - starting with the Vernal Equinox in Aries and Wands and ending finally with March 20 and the sign of Pisces in Cups. But I've probably already confused people enough, and I'm sure it's only telling some of you what you already knew. My only point is that, whether you agree with her system or not, there is a definite and predictable pattern there and once you start to get the hang of it it will probably be at least a little less confusing.

I have, by now, received the Tabula Mundi Colores Arcus, and exacty like some of you predicted, it has re-triggered my interest in Thoth as well. So there's a lot of studying for this winter...

I am going to order ToHL next month, though. And then I'll have both