THE |
|
a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining
to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects. |
To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.divination,alt.tarot From: nagasivaSubject: Re: Elegance, Tarot and Qabalah (was Qabalah and Tarot History ...) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 08:56:03 GMT 50020121 VI! om Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume): >>>> People who understand that there [are] 32 Paths of Wisdom represented >>>> on the Tree of Life, including the Sephi[r]oth and the Paths.... mine has 10 (2*5) Number-Spheres and 26 (2*13) Letter-Paths in a Tetraktys, totalling 36 (2*2*3*3) in all. my constructed Tarot will have a nonnumbered Fool plus 25 (5*5) Trumps in a 100+1 (10*10+1) card deck with 5 suits. from what I can see there is no required standardization for any of these features except for the relative role of tradition (communication, education, etc.). more on this below. "Tom" : > If the original Tarot designs were not intended to express qabalistic > correspondences, I wouldn't be surprised to find that there aren't exact > and clear correspondences between paths on the Tree of Life, the Hebrew > alphabet, and the numbering of the Tarot trumps. they were not, as part of a game called Tarocci whose Trumps were of variable depth, symbolism, and sequence. > If what Jess Karlin says about the origins of the Tarot is credible, he seems well-studied in the subject. his latest Tarot FAQ is lovely! > those qabalistic relationships may well have been forged later and a > certain amount of force-fitting would be expected. that's right! thus the criticism of whether it is elegant is relevant (how much force was truly required?). relevant questions also include: how closely must one stick to the original Trump structure of the game in order to remain 'tarot'? do emblematic Small Cards compromise too much the deck's relation to the game such that we ought consider this a signifier of occultism? how many of the Trumps could be changed before we should call the result 'non-Tarotic'? for example, if I contend that my deck has the following cards as Trumps: no number Fool 1-5 Mage, Dakini, Mom, Pop, Wizard, 6-10 Love, Carriage, Power, Virtue, Fortune, 11-15 Balance, Martyr, Change, Alchemy, War 16-20 Foe, Attention, Dance, Rest, Tree, 21-25 Cloud, Moon, Sun, Star, Universe and the following Small Card structure: A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Student, Warrior, Scholar, Sage, Mystic in the suits: DISKS, SWORDS, STICKS, FLAMES and DROPS EARTH, METAL, WOOD, FIRE, and WATER (copyright 2002 nagasiva :>) would you say that it was or was not a "Tarot deck"? what are the parameters of tarotic creation? surely they are not specific and agreed-upon across the board. even modern scholars of tarot capture a range of decks which more or less conform to whatever standards they assert are primary (perhaps with very good reason). if my deck comes with a book or incorporates as part of its pictorial symbol the associations of the nearest star (Sol), nearest satellite (Luna), the 8 known planets (even Pluto! maybe the blank card to show its non-planetness!) in sequence from Sol, the 12 zodiacal signs in sequence from Spring Equinox, and, using the card for the planet Earth as a double for the element Earth, the 4 Artistotlean Elements, thus comprising 26 sequential and inclusive composites which mapped perfectly onto the 26-letter English alphabet, would this be an 'elegant tarot' or an 'elegant new construction based on tarot' or something else entirely? what if I based some of its symbolism on Smith-Waite and/or Crowley-Harris? how close would I have to be in approximations to qualify? I submit that there are no absolutes where tarotification is concerned, though certain sets of parameters are sensible to presuppose. the concepts of suits, number cards, trump cards, and possibly of a fool, appear to be reasonable. if one wishes to transcend strict formal parameters one might settle on usage and popularity qualifiers. whether the originators had occult backgrounds, whether the cards were used for meditation, instruction, communication of esoteric ideas and information, etc., etc. even here there is room for disagreement. blessed beast! nagasiva
The Arcane Archive is copyright by the authors cited.
Send comments to the Arcane Archivist: tyaginator@arcane-archive.org. |
Did you like what you read here? Find it useful?
Then please click on the Paypal Secure Server logo and make a small donation to the site maintainer for the creation and upkeep of this site. |
The ARCANE ARCHIVE is a large domain,
organized into a number of sub-directories, each dealing with a different branch of religion, mysticism, occultism, or esoteric knowledge. Here are the major ARCANE ARCHIVE directories you can visit: |
|
interdisciplinary:
geometry, natural proportion, ratio, archaeoastronomy
mysticism: enlightenment, self-realization, trance, meditation, consciousness occultism: divination, hermeticism, amulets, sigils, magick, witchcraft, spells religion: buddhism, christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, taoism, wicca, voodoo societies and fraternal orders: freemasonry, golden dawn, rosicrucians, etc. |
SEARCH THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
There are thousands of web pages at the ARCANE ARCHIVE. You can use ATOMZ.COM
to search for a single word (like witchcraft, hoodoo, pagan, or magic) or an
exact phrase (like Kwan Yin, golden ratio, or book of shadows):
OTHER ESOTERIC AND OCCULT SITES OF INTEREST
Southern
Spirits: 19th and 20th century accounts of hoodoo,
including slave narratives & interviews
|