thoth opening key spread

Nholdamek

Jesse_mtl said:
thanx man, that sheds even more light on this spread... basically just trying to wrap my head around it, i guess i wont know for sure until i really mess around with it. point being, my experiments with various spreads before this thoth spread have just led me to feel that my attempts at divination using tarot were really superficial. example, using celtic cross... i would just give myself or others really vague reprensentations of what they were going thru, and even they commented, that any cards i pulled and the order they would go in, could have their meanings twisted to conform to their situation, failing to " impress " lol or give any new insights into their situation ? i know theres more to tarot that simply telling people what they already know... so my attempt at learning this spread is more for trying to prove to myself, if i can be more accurate.

does that make any sense ?

Well, in my experience some other spreads aren't so detailed, but I wouldn't say they can be twisted to fit anything. Of course some who disbelieve Tarot tend to say that, so it depends if you're saying that yourself or others for whom you've done readings.

However this spread can be very detailed, and generally is. It's the most intuitive and natural for me.

MikeTheAltarboy

i just liek to see how the thoth spread works.. and how does a method like that come into being ?

Someone who's the head of an extremely baroque magical order makes it up.

The Opening of the Key was invented by Mathers, head of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. Crowley was a member, and learned it from him, although he altered it slightly. I expect Mathers developed it slowly; the card-pairing was already part of his technique earlier on. (Others here are no doubt more knowledgable than me on this!)

I think it's a great technique though. Glad to see someone else developing an interest in it!

rainwolf

Duquettes book on the Thoth explains the spread very well. If you are new to tarot you might want to start on easier spreads as the OOTK is fairly complex in it's successful use.

MikeTheAltarboy

If you are new to tarot you might want to start on easier spreads as the OOTK is fairly complex in it's successful use.

I think I would disagree; it's complex *in a different way* than "easier spreads." For me, a 3 card spread (as described in a lot of books) isn't easy: because you have a *wealth* of associations for each card, and you have to decide which of the sometimes conflicting ones apply! The opening of the key, on the other hand, doesn't presume more about the card than its number, suit, and name: The 3 of Swords will always be "Sorrow." And if you're using a deck like Crowley's or the Cicero's, so much the easier!

thinbuddha

MikeTheAltarboy said:
The 3 of Swords will always be "Sorrow." And if you're using a deck like Crowley's or the Cicero's, so much the easier!

I've been thinking on this one for a day, and I'm not sure I agree.

Are you over estimating the number of meanings that people assign to their cards? Or am I under estimating? It seems to me that most people have a few meanings that they use for a given card and that's about it (unless something in the picture calls out to their intuition and modifies the meaning).

And at the same time- are you really a slave to the word sorrow when interpreting this card within the OOTK? I'm not. Oh sure- the card always means something that is in the same vein as "sorrow"- but sometimes it is more melancholy or morose. Sometimes it is more of a depression- or a heart break... and of course who the sorrow belongs to can be different depending on the lay of the cards- Perhaps the sorrow is how the sitter's nemesis feels, rather than the sitter himself.

I'm trying to make myself clear- but it has been a long day.... I can see it's not quite working. Ultimately, I don't think that the number of meanings that a reader uses will change because he is using this spread. He will still use all the meanings at his disposal.

Perhaps you mean that it is easier to get away with using fewer meanings for each card when you use this spread than it is if you use a positional spread? I might agree with that (I might have to think about that for another day first).

-tb

Nholdamek

thinbuddha said:
I've been thinking on this one for a day, and I'm not sure I agree.

Are you over estimating the number of meanings that people assign to their cards? Or am I under estimating? It seems to me that most people have a few meanings that they use for a given card and that's about it (unless something in the picture calls out to their intuition and modifies the meaning).

And at the same time- are you really a slave to the word sorrow when interpreting this card within the OOTK? I'm not. Oh sure- the card always means something that is in the same vein as "sorrow"- but sometimes it is more melancholy or morose. Sometimes it is more of a depression- or a heart break... and of course who the sorrow belongs to can be different depending on the lay of the cards- Perhaps the sorrow is how the sitter's nemesis feels, rather than the sitter himself.

I'm trying to make myself clear- but it has been a long day.... I can see it's not quite working. Ultimately, I don't think that the number of meanings that a reader uses will change because he is using this spread. He will still use all the meanings at his disposal.

Perhaps you mean that it is easier to get away with using fewer meanings for each card when you use this spread than it is if you use a positional spread? I might agree with that (I might have to think about that for another day first).

-tb

Agreed. The meanings do change for me, depending on what else is going on. When I count the cards, I learned to also take into account the cards to either side of that which I landed on. So it could weaken or strengthen that sorrow, depending on what's on either side, and could describe the source of that sorrow.

MikeTheAltarboy

Ok, months later... hehe.

Yes, I might agree, Thinbuddha. I probably wasn't clear in my own way.

I mean to say, perhaps, that in a position meaning "past" only, I usually find myself at a loss for actually positing a meaning for a given card laying on it. What about my past? How far back? Is this me? Someone else? Argh!!

Whereas, *I* find, in the OOTK, there's more context. I do have cards laying around it, giving it context - but not *having* to be consulted in depth either.

Too me, it seems like, to be clichéd, most positional spreads are more right brained; whereas the OOTK of more left brained. I expect one is using intuition, etc., either way, but for me the structure and flow of it gets past the barriers I throw up more easily.

thinbuddha

I think that we are in agreement to a certain degree.

For me, I am still overwealmed looking at a string of something like 15-25 cards that you get after splitting the deck into 4 stacks and reading your stack. Too many cards- it's hard to get my head around it, so I do find the OOTK too advanced for me.

At the same time, my mind doesn't accept the positional spreads (ie past-present-future) for the reasons you stated. These spreads are too narrow in he way they define the limits of how you can read a card. I don't know if these spreads are "hard", but I don't like the way they work. Obviously most people use these spreads- to me they are something of a crutch that might point me in a direction, but keeps my readings from being good (you can't run with your crutch!). For others, they may be essential to a great reading.

My end result is that I usually grab a handful of cards- something that I find managable (say 11 cards or so) and read them without positional meanings. My results are mixed... all too often, I find myself staring at these cards and wishing I had a starting point (such as a positional meaning) to get me going.

-tb

thoth opening key spread

Nholdamek

MikeTheAltarboy

rainwolf

MikeTheAltarboy

thinbuddha

Nholdamek

MikeTheAltarboy

thinbuddha