I have a pet peeve, do you?

[Scion]

Lyric,

I hear you talking. And I do think there's a lot of bizarre cross-cultural syncretism in Tarot which gives me the heebs. But that's totally personal and subjective. I do sometimes think numerological reductions and the like are ways of wringing meaning from a frustrating spread: sometimes but not always warranted.

Nevertheless, I have a question about your peeve: What do you mean by basics? What is Tarot if not a "Stone Soup" of all these annoying "extra" traditions? I won't get into I Ching or chakras (both fierce syncretic peeves of mine), but without the astrological and qabalistic attributions the Book T meanings wouldn't exist; goodbye Waite Smith, Thoth, and BOTA and all their progeny. Ditto the Continental post-Levi systems of Christian, Falconnier, Wirth, Papus etc. Still Levi saw EVERYTHING in the deck. So you have to throw out every occult deck created post-Levi because all of them are reactions to Qabalistic and astrological theorizing. Elemental and numerological attributions derive in large part from these same "extra" studies, so the simplest subdivisions of the minors is affected. So even if (for whatever reason) you don't know the attributions, you are still being affected by esoteric decisions that have been made based upon certain theories. In most of these decks every millimeter, every shade, every shape is designed to guide you through these elaborate symbolic systems, so your intuition will be affected, whether you will it or no.

If we jump back before Levi, the textual pickings get slim and deckwise we're strictly talking Marseilles and its nonscenic cousins. Etteilla had an entire divinatory structure (that factored into Book T as well! See James Revak's excellent essays on this phenomenon here)... But I doubt many folks here have studied Etteilla. Digging further back, Gebelin and De Mellet had some things to say that were more theoretical than divinatory, and I only know of a single English translation of their writings, which is not commonly avaiable.

What are beginners supposed to learn unless you're referring to simply looking at a Marseilles deck and intuiting meanings psychically? Isn't study supposed to be a challenge? And why does making something easy make it preferable?

That probably sounds more confrontational than I intend, and you know I'm asking you (and everyone else in the thread) honestly... Reading a TdM is a wonderful training ground for Tarot, but I don't think that's what you're suggesting. And if you're suggesting using any of the Golden Dawn based decks or COntinental decks, you're squarely in attribution-land, whether you like it or not. Simply ignoring symbolic choices or misidentifying them because they're "hard" seems like teaching a child to read by locking them in a room with a collected Shakespeare and not feeding them until they can perform Othello. For my money, reading intuitively is even MORE difficult that simply regurgitating keywords, and neither is particularly useful or coherent. Study and intuition are (as we discussed in your earlier thread) inextricably linked.

So while I'm thinking more about your excellent question, I want to ask you... What then are beginners to study? What are the "basics" you're describing?

Scion

 

[Kenny]

I feel that Astrology, Qabalah, Elements, Numerology all combine to make the Golden Dawn tarot deck--and those based off it--its own system that combines all of them into one form. It is also from the Tarot that I want to learn and study all those other ideas.

Also the Thoth Tarot all have the elemental and astrological signs painted upon them.

 

[tabi]

I do use the shadow card as an overall theme, since some people completely miss the point of the reading and seem to get attached to one specific card.

The others are suppose to be used to help "refine" the meaning of the tarot card itself. I have the Quest which conbines all of those that you mentioned and the Runes, personally if I want to do a Rune, I Ching, whatever reading I simply use the cards and forget what else is there on it. Right or wrong it tends to be less of a headache and a LOT less to remember at one time!

 

[Nholdamek]

I do use most of these systems, and they are very useful.

The quint card is something I've only begun using, but I've found its applicability when I have used it.

The shadow card I mostly use for my daily cards, but rarely use it otherwise. I never quite see how it fits.

Qabalistic associations, well I use the Thoth so for me it is pretty much built in, and so I learned them along with the cards.

Same goes for the astrological associations. Not to mention, one of the methods I've seen around here recently, that of seeing how the astrological associations of cards form aspects with one another, whether they square, or trine, or oppose; it really gives more insight into the reading for me since I started using that.

Now for me, I never tell the client that I'm using these methods. I just give the cards used and my interpretation. I use those methods behind-the-scenes, because I don't think the client would really care what methods I'm using, as long as it is correct.

Oh, elemental dignities...those are my favorite.

 

[thinbuddha]

If you are going to rant on all that, you had better throw reversals into the mix too.

And numerology.

And pips with illustrated scenes.

And most of those spreads...

Lets face it- the list goes on and on until there is nothing left to read with.

 

[elvenstar]

Well, I see all of these things as extra info, tools that you can use, like symbols or colours for example. We have to read with something after all, or at least I do. I can see how it can be taken too far though. I use some of the ones you mentioned - sometimes.

I don't know much about astrology or qabalistic associations, so I obviously won't use them. But I'll often look at the card at the bottom of the deck, this is something I did spontaneously before finding out it's called a 'shadow card'. I will occasionally add up the numbers to get an 'overall' card, especially if I feel I'm missing something.

Elemental dignities I do use, most of the time, but not exactly in the golden dawn way and perhaps often not even consciously. I think of it more as the 'interaction between the elements', it could be between suits or what actually appears on the cards. It's just something that makes sense and works for me.

I won't usually bother mentioning any of that to the recipient of the reading, unless it's for someone here on AT for example, then I may include it if I remember in case they're interested in the way I arrived at their reading.

 

[lark]

All I need is the picture and the colors..you can even skip the numbers for me...

 

[Grizabella]

I don't understand how in the world I'm managing to read my cards, then, if you have to know numerology, Tarot history and all that other stuff. Seriously---I'm not kidding. I've never picked up a TdM deck in all the time I've been learning Tarot so I know nothing about that other than that there are non-illustrated pips and I don't like them. (Someone will correct me if I'm wrong about the pips, I'm sure.) I know next to nothing about Tarot history. Nor have I ever looked into the Golden Dawn or for that matter, Tarot evolution. I guess maybe what everyone is saying is that I've picked up a lot of it without knowing it as I've learned what I've learned. Is that what you're saying? Like mixing peas into a casserole and a little kid will eat it without knowing it?

For those who like to get into numerology and all that I mentioned, if it works for you, then it works for you. I'm not disagreeing with that or faulting you for it.

What I mean by "basics" is say---a Rider Waite Smith deck. Or CWS if you prefer. It's a deck of cards with its own system, I'm sure, but without astrological, Kabbalistic or I Ching symbols on the cards, and you just learn it and read with it. You don't bring in all the other stuff like adding numbers, reducing them, reading them reversed if they come out in a minus (interesting, though) associating them with the Tree of Life, etc. You just read with it as it stands. That's what I do. And I seem to be a pretty good reader. I haven't a clue about the history of the RWS/CWS deck, I haven't a clue about numerology, not much of a clue about I Ching other than the Tao Oracle that I'm learning, only a vague understanding of "dignities" and their relationship to each other----and so on.

My rant is somewhat tongue-in-cheek and humorous, but I do admit that it rankles a little bit with me when I see someone going on and on about the "other stuff" in posts. I hope they don't do that in front of a sitter. I guess because I don't really understand it and since I can read well without it, I don't know why it's necessary. Soooo, we have two things here----a cranky old woman and someone who really doesn't know how it all needs to be part of Tarot. And my answer is "because other people do understand it and want to, so butt out."

But now that I've gotten some big answers to the question, I'm asking how I'm doing so well without knowing all the "stuff" that I have absolutely no desire to learn in my advanced age. History bores me stupid and numbers just bounce off one of my dumb spots and don't sink in, followed closely by Kabbala.

But I guess if I must, I must, if that's the next step. I'm probably going to peek into that stuff.

 

[Grizabella]

shame on you. this isn't that kind of forum

LOL Your gutter is showing, Papageno.

 

[Nholdamek]

Well, I'd say if intuitive reading is working for you, then there's no need to look into the other things.

I don't know why others use it, but I know I use it because I have no choice since I can't see the images, so I can't read intuitively like that. so those other associations are all I have.