Tarot Decans in GD Tradition

Question: do you read the astrological aspect of the 2 of Wands as:

(1) influence of Mars in Aries (as if you are staring at this configuration on an astrological chart), or ...

(2) the first decan of Aries, where Mars would have a smidgeon of extra dignity by face if it were there

I learned to read tarot the (1) way, and books like the Book of Thoth seem to imply it is correct. However, a few cards have difficult attributions, considering their accepted meanings. 9 of Pentacles comes to mind, where I've even seen people say "venus is in its fall in virgo, but that doesn't seem to affect the card much." That kind of language never sits well with me.

So now, I'm branching out and learning some traditional astrology, and am starting to think that interpretation (2) is more clean. Maybe the 9 of Pentacles is simply the second decan of Virgo, slightly more friendly to a Venus influence than the 8 or 10 due to dignity by face.

I guess I'm wondering if there is a clear GD party line on this distinction?

Hi,

I was hoping someone with more decan and astrological expertise would answer you first. Like you, I'm familiar with the convention of astrological attributions used the by GD. Book T doesn't have a lot to say about this card's derived meaning from Venus in Virgo. "Yesod in Heh" suggests the possibility of "inheritance" in the text.

Have you seen Paul Huson's "Mystical Origins of the Tarot?" He looks at how the Picatrix affected GD card meanings, and perhaps this would shed light. If you like, I can look this particular card up later and see what Huson says about it.

rif said:

Book T doesn't have a lot to say about this card's derived meaning from Venus in Virgo.

Click to expand...

Exactly! Book of Thoth same deal... it seems like when the attributions are inconvenient they look the other way. I'm not so hung up on the 9 of Pentacles in particular, but it makes a nice example of the issue. Changing perspective and seeing the attribution as a simple descriptor for the decan, though, seems clear and clean in all cases, though. So, I started to wonder if it were somehow more "correct."

rif said:

Have you seen Paul Huson's "Mystical Origins of the Tarot?" He looks at how the Picatrix affected GD card meanings, and perhaps this would shed light. If you like, I can look this particular card up later and see what Huson says about it.

Click to expand...

I would love to see that, and I've just ordered the book from amazon. It looks interesting, thanks! I do have Scion's PDF guide to the decans for the Liber-T deck, which is another reason I started thinking along these lines.

Just so the discussion doesn't get bogged down in my 9/Pentacles example, I'll throw out a couple more cards that I think strain credibility with their planetary attributions.

3 of Swords (Saturn in Libra)... Saturn is supposedly exalted in Libra. In the little traditional astrology I have read so far, I see that malefics with essential dignity are able to express themselves in positive ways. Maybe not fun, but positive. For instance Barclay says a dignified Saturn could bring qualities like austerity, patience, and slow-and-steady accomplishment to the table. Does anyone see these as inherent to the 3 of Swords? They don't exactly call this card "the lord of growth through austere reflection upon sorrow", you know?

Instead, I'm wondering if maybe it's simply the face of Libra ruled by Saturn. No more, and no less. So the 3 of Swords is a sucky spot to be in, and a Saturnian influence would be especially well-dignified here (to bring about the patient reflection that heals mental wounds).


Another example off the top of my head: 4 of Wands (Venus in Aries) Venus in her detriment. Again, in the little traditional astrology I know, a planet in detriment is taken to be fairly ineffectual at accomplishing its goals. As if it is sick, is the analogy Frawley gives. Does anyone see the 4 of Wands as somehow (accidentally?) overcoming an inability to accomplish something? Even in part?


I don't know... the tarot books seem pretty clear on their intent that the planetary influences are in their minor cards. But, I wonder if the intent didn't get fumbled somewhere along the way, since the planetary attributions match the decan rulers around the zodiac. Just my conjecture, not based on any evidence except some difficult cards.

Any thoughts?

RichardT said:

3 of Swords (Saturn in Libra)... Saturn is supposedly exalted in Libra. In the little traditional astrology I have read so far, I see that malefics with essential dignity are able to express themselves in positive ways. Maybe not fun, but positive. For instance Barclay says a dignified Saturn could bring qualities like austerity, patience, and slow-and-steady accomplishment to the table. Does anyone see these as inherent to the 3 of Swords? They don't exactly call this card "the lord of growth through austere reflection upon sorrow", you know?

Click to expand...

It does seem like there is an extra criteria in working out the attributions. 3 of Swords being a 3, and hence the Sphere of Binah (Saturn) should be pretty strongly Saturn, and I've read people say this makes it too much Saturn and hence the very negative interpretation, despite the benefit of placement in Libra. That makes sense I guess, but what I'm not sure on is how anyone would judge exactly when too much becomes too much.

RichardT said:

Another example off the top of my head: 4 of Wands (Venus in Aries) Venus in her detriment.

Click to expand...

In this case it could be read more loosely, as Venus and Mars (ruler of Aries). Kind of like a tight aspect between the two planets in a relationship chart, even a negative aspect would be a good sign for the bedroom, these two planets can spark of each other even when conflicting. And again, being a 4, maybe Jupiter (chesed) lends a hand too.

I guess I think of each card as having a set of astrological influences at play, but not necessarily complelety within the rules of traditional astrology as there is no chart to fit everything into. Its just different energies sparking off each other. I guess that means I vote for option 3

similia said:

That makes sense I guess, but what I'm not sure on is how anyone would judge exactly when too much becomes too much.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. I've tried thinking along those lines as well for the 5 of Cups (Mars rules scorpio, but maybe it's just too much mars in Geburah?). But, this kinda leaves me flat. Is the 6 of Cups too much Sun? The 9 of Wands too much Moon? 8 of Wands too much Mercury, etc?

similia said:

I guess I think of each card as having a set of astrological influences at play, but not necessarily complelety within the rules of traditional astrology as there is no chart to fit everything into. Its just different energies sparking off each other. I guess that means I vote for option 3

Click to expand...

I think that's a fine way for a person to go. I'm looking for more of a system, though.

Most authors (which wouldn't bother me except it includes Crowley) have no trouble using the rules in spots (for example pointing out the moon in exaltation in the 6 of Pentacles). To the extent that I understand it, the best I could say is that they play fast and loose with the astrology... use it when it fits the card, look away otherwise.

To my mind, barring misunderstandings on my part, this is a place where tradition could be improved upon.

In the Golden Dawn the decanates were only one of the influencing factors on the card. They are often mitigated by other things. For instance, here is a GD text on the 9 of Pentacles:

Nine of Pentacles: (Yesod of Assiah, Material Gain, Venus in Virgo) 9 = A strong fundamental force. Levanah = Sphere of the Moon which governs the Waters of earth. A force which governs the feminine & negative is usually termed luck. This = gain. Venus the generative power in Virgo the fertile earth = material increase.

Click to expand...

You can see the rest at:
http://marygreer.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/the-golden-dawn-minor-arcana/

Teheuti said:

In the Golden Dawn the decanates were only one of the influencing factors on the card. They are often mitigated by other things.

Click to expand...

They are just one of the influencing factors, absolutely. On inspection, though, I'm finding the astrology to be applied somewhat haphazardly. Surely I'm not the first to notice this, but I can't find an explanation. I've been looking around, expecting to see a website or book reference explaining why it only _seems_ sloppy, but is actually quite elegant. Sadly, the more I learn, the less impressed I am with the GD texts.

For instance, I would love it if the text you provided for 9/P at least made mention of venus' difficulties in the meticulous and analytical realm of Virgo, and for bonus points mentioned how the other factors mitigated it. Instead, we get brushed off with a statement that Virgo is "fertile earth" for venus' generative power. That's totally at odds with established astrological thinking. Even pop astrology websites will tell you that virgo is the antithesis of venus in most respects.

Am I just expecting too much? Hmmm... at least I am learning a lot by thinking about it so hard! And I do appreciate the replies I've gotten so far, so thank all of you!

In "The Qabalistic Tarot" (one of my favorite references), Robert Wang says this in his entry on the 4 of Wands:

robertwang said:

There are, in fact, a number of cards where the meaning of Planets in Signs differs from that commonly accepted, because the card combines Sephirothic and astrological symbolism.

Click to expand...

... which, to me, sounds like a cop-out. If I mix two paint colors, I do indeed get a third color. No question there. But the two colors I started with haven't changed! Adding salt to a french fry does not change the nature of salt, my friends.

But, lets say I go along with this, and agree that fusing astrology and qabalah changes the meaning of the astrology. At that point my question is "where is the text on how _that_ astrological system works?" In all of tarot history, no one has thought to write it down? I could make peace with any coherent system, as long as I can learn it, you know?

I imagine many serious tarot/astrology students have hit this road-block at some point. Those of you that have gotten through it, how did you do it?

Would you consider the fives a good example of the sephiroth taking precedence over the astrology? I can't say what the fives astrologically correspond to off the top of my head, but I have noticed that they seem to be consistent in their meaning across the suits; moreso than the other pips.