The Tarot symbols origin

ravenest

But, you have not really answered my objection. Its not the content of Campbell’s and Harpur’s work I am referring to but the method; consistent lines of logical argument, linking of presented evidence with the theme, the sequential structure of their argument. If you cant do this your ideas wont be presented properly. You should study some debating principles and lines of logical debating to understand this. E.g. you diverted my questions into, instead of answering or addressing my objections to your statements and presented ‘evidence’ you went on to criticise Campbell and in that showed that you actually interpreted what he was saying the wrong way and added more confusing ‘facts’ and still haven’t addressed basic flaws in your argument … and n ow you have piled more of them up on your own argument … for example:
I do not want to jump through cards now in order not to dislocate their right sequence, which is evidenced by all the ancient religions. Except of the Christianity, Islamism and Judaism, those are of semi-dedicated people.
Okay THAT statement needs clarifying, what are semi-dedicated people? All the ancient religions .... except those three? Well that is hardly all the ancient religions if you exclude half the main ones. Why are not those three 'dedicated' religions ... from what I know a LOT of their adherents seem extremely dedicated ... some to the level of fanaticism!
As for Campbell research in comparative mythology, he follows the myths, showing their identical features, but does not understand the essence. For example, in Chapter 2 "Initiation" of his book "The hero with the thousand faces", part 2 “ The Meeting with the Goddess” he’s written:
"The ultimate adventure, when all the barriers and ogres have been overcome, is commonly represented as a mystical marriage of the triumphant hero-soul with the Queen Goddess of the World...”
In fact, Queen Goddess of the World is the anima, the second half of the soul. All forces of unconsciousness are inside her, and the gods too. Uniting with her means to master all the forces of nature, including clairvoyance and spiritual knowledge.
These are subjective statements of 'facts' with no further explanation to back them up. Also I think you misunderstand what Campbell is saying ; Queen Goddess of the World is more akin to the Hermetic concept of Anima Mundi ... Campbell is not describing the internal subjective animus but the external objective concept of the ' World Soul'. That phrase uses those words for a reason; 'of the world' ... not 'of the unconscious'.

The basic difference is that 'modern psychology' is an extension of the literalist, rationalist, Aristotle view and (with the influence of Jung) although accepting the 'religious instinct', centres and focuses these things IN the human unconscious and sees any objective existence of them externally as projections INTO the world.

The Hermetic view is an extension of the metaphorical, symbolic, 'Platonic' view, which nowadays (in the progressive world of modern Hermetics) postulates a third realm (which goes back to an earlier Anima Mundi concept, of an external 'other' objective reality AND the unconscious internal reality AS WELL, creating 3 points of view.

That is why I recommended Patrick Harpur to you as well as Campbelll; “ … In the Western world view there exists [the] so-called objective [or ‘outside’] world and the subjective [or ‘inner’] world. There have been various attempts to show that these two worlds are not all that exist. Patrick Harpur’s ’Daimonic Reality’ is one of the most eloquent expressions of that effort. Harpur defines another reality that he calls ‘daimonic reality’, a world of unseen agency that is always present and cuts across the objective / subjective divide. The ways of studying this world are different than the way we study either of the other two worlds, and Harpur invites us to develop a methodology for exploring this third world.” John Mack M.D. (Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School)
(see http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=199449&page=6 post# 57
Following the same part: "… This is the crisis at the nadir, the zenith, or at the uttermost edge of the earth, at the central point of the cosmos, in the tabernacle of the temple, or within the darkness of the deepest chamber of the heart."

They are similarities, the first five examples are externals and objective, the sixth is used as an analogy by extension, and although is an internal and subjective one doesn’t make the whole meaning subjective, internal nor suggest that they (‘in fact’ or not) originate from the unconscious … they can have a REFLECTION in the unconscious. Queen Goddess of the World, again, ‘reflects’ in the heart of the original, but the Anima Mundi is not the same as the unconscious.
This point is located in the center of the “field”. Only at that point it is possible to unite with the second half of the soul, what also means is to become a "knower of the field." This is also written in Bhagavad Gita, when Krishna explains to Arjuna about the field (Kshetra) and the knower of it (Kshetrajna). Jumping ahead of myself, the meeting of anima-animus is the Devil arcana (5 Arcana).
Interesting concept but basically just a statement of assertion if it doesn’t come with relevant explanation … my ‘The meeting of anima animus is not the Devil Arcana ( 5 ??? ) is just as ir/relevant.
One can read many of similar books that reveal the myths, but leave non-acquired the secret gnosis of the Soul.
That is because reading of myths is only part of the understanding … I never claimed reading myths was all of it.
The only dedicated person has a True Knowledge which all these myths are based on.
Sorry, do you mean ‘Only a dedicated person (to study the spiritual sciences?) can understand the true knowledge that the myths are based on’?

I will agree to that and I extend ‘dedication’ to the study of modern, appreciated and applauded (by respected researchers, scholars and critics) researchers like Patrick Harpur. If one does not take this ancient and accepted view that myths have an outside objective reality and incorporate the Anima Mundi ‘reality’ of the ‘otherworld’ and sees it all as projections of the unconscious then one will not understand the’ true knowledge’ the myths are based on.

Or to put it another way; ‘It isn’t all about us.’ ;)
 

Moonstranger

But, you have not really answered my objection. Its not the content of Campbell’s and Harpur’s work I am referring to but the method; consistent lines of logical argument, linking of presented evidence with the theme, the sequential structure of their argument. If you cant do this your ideas wont be presented properly. You should study some debating principles and lines of logical debating to understand this. E.g. you diverted my questions into, instead of answering or addressing my objections to your statements and presented ‘evidence’ you went on to criticise Campbell ....

I’m not criticizing Campbell, would like just to show that he was searching after knowledge, therefore has undertaken such considerable research, but did not succeed to get a True Knowledge however.

Okay THAT statement needs clarifying, what are semi-dedicated people? All the ancient religions .... except those three? Well that is hardly all the ancient religions if you exclude half the main ones. Why are not those three 'dedicated' religions ... from what I know a LOT of their adherents seem extremely dedicated ... some to the level of fanaticism!

Sorry, I had to use "initiated" insted. This issue was raised by Blavatsky a way back. She pointed out that an “initiated” person is the one who has reached the “Holy/Sacred island”
But as everyone imagines oneself as “initiated” this definition finally tailed away over the years. So, what is the background/essence of the issue?
There are 3 plains (sorry for taking some time to repeat): course material world, thin astral world and the initial world of creation. Semi-initiated persons are those who cognized the thing astral world using such “keys” as: alchemical, mathematical, astrological and philosophical ones. The initiated people are those who attained an ultra-thing world – causal plane. Such symbols as Meru Mountain or World Tree, for instance, belong to that causal plane.

Also I think you misunderstand what Campbell is saying ; Queen Goddess of the World is more akin to the Hermetic concept of Anima Mundi ... Campbell is not describing the internal subjective animus but the external objective concept of the ' World Soul'. That phrase uses those words for a reason; 'of the world' ... not 'of the unconscious'.

Yes, of course, Anima mundi is not a unconscious, it is super-conscious. The same as Alaya in Buddhism. Or “consciousness – storehouse”.

That is why I recommended Patrick Harpur to you as well as Campbelll;
I don’t mind to study Campbell or Hurper books, but I base myself on the knowledge of Maitreya who reached the sacred island, and published (2009) the book about the cosmos morphology.

Interesting concept but basically just a statement of assertion if it doesn’t come with relevant explanation … my ‘The meeting of anima animus is not the Devil Arcana ( 5 ??? ) is just as ir/relevant.

Any of statements related to the metaphysical world could be either accepted or rejected. For instance, the explanation below is the one from Matrieya.
“The field is the place of dreams, it is symbolized by a square. The meeting of who halves of a soul (anima-animus) is happening in the center of the field, where the absolute equilibrium of the field is.”
This explanation could be also accepted or rejected. Everyone can say everything, but Plato in his books for instance, clearly distinguished opinions (might be right or wrong ones) and knowledge.

I will agree to that and I extend ‘dedication’ to the study of modern, appreciated and applauded (by respected researchers, scholars and critics) researchers like Patrick Harpur. If one does not take this ancient and accepted view that myths have an outside objective reality and incorporate the Anima Mundi ‘reality’ of the ‘otherworld’ and sees it all as projections of the unconscious then one will not understand the’ true knowledge’ the myths are based on.

Re: "dedication" - pls read "initiation" instead.

Maitreya is not a researcher in this sense. He’s the person who shares the sacred knowledge and shows that this knowledge was fully explained or written in ancient religions. If a person learns something, the obtained knowledge should bring him a benefit. Knowing Arcana Tarot - which is the knowledge about the right way of following the spiritual path – opens the spiritual potential of a man. That means opening the forces of the soul, including clairvoyance. Exactly what Maitreya demonstrates.
 

ravenest

In my view Maitreya or yourself have not demonstrated anything. You still cant seem to follow the process of getting your point across in discussion or properly answering questions or challenges that purport to show holes in your theories .

E.g. this; "Its not the content of Campbell’s and Harpur’s work I am referring to but the method; consistent lines of logical argument, linking of presented evidence with the theme, the sequential structure of their argument. If you cant do this your ideas wont be presented properly. You should study some debating principles and lines of logical debating to understand this. E.g. you diverted my questions into, instead of answering or addressing my objections to your statements and presented ‘evidence’ you went on to criticise Campbell .... "

Here I am clearly saying, again, that I said it is their method you need to adopt ... but what is your response? " I’m not criticizing Campbell, would like just to show that he was searching after knowledge, therefore has undertaken such considerable research, but did not succeed to get a True Knowledge however."

You have totally ignored or glossed over or avoided the pointing out of the problems with your argument TWICE.

Dedicated? Initiated? 'Not initiated' ... many people in those religions you mention have been initiated into the mysteries of those religions ... do you know what a Christian Monk is , have you ever done a baptism or confirmation ceremony, do you know what a Sufi is ... or a circumcision ?

You agree Anima mundi is super-conscious, but that is not what I said - I said it is a separate world and not a projection, un or super of our consciousness... and you ignored the significant part there in what I said that YOU referred it to the anima / animus.

You said you don't mind reading the books I recommended but you 'base myself on the knowledge' of Maitreya ... I recommended those books as an example of writing in a way to get your ideas across validly not to adopt their viewpoint, but you seem to be constantly mis-interpreting what I am saying.


My; "Interesting concept but basically just a statement of assertion if it doesn’t come with relevant explanation … my ‘The meeting of anima animus is not the Devil Arcana ( 5 ??? ) is just as ir/relevant. " is about this again ... this failure to back up a statement with a case for argument .... I could be easily convinced this is relevant by the logical argument ,,, there is a good case for it. MY POINT IS its not the content, it is the way , just asserting an idea as a fact doesn't give it validity, one needs to demonstrate logically why. A point I keep making and you keep twisting into something else.

Blavatsky and Maitreya may write like that ... that's the sort of material that appeals to some, if you want to write in that style, fine ... certain types will accept it at face value but others wont give it any validity because you haven't been able to demonstrate validity.
 

Teheuti

Maitreya is not a researcher in this sense. He’s the person who shares the sacred knowledge and shows that this knowledge was fully explained or written in ancient religions.
You are talking philosophy and beliefs and that's fine, but this is not the place for it. I suggest you switch your discussion to an area that encourages such discussions, not an area that does it's best to adhere to the discipline of research into history. You aren't going to get a good hearing here.
 

Richard

You are talking philosophy and beliefs and that's fine, but this is not the place for it. I suggest you switch your discussion to an area that encourages such discussions, not an area that does it's best to adhere to the discipline of research into history. You aren't going to get a good hearing here.
Solandia has approved the Talking Tarot forum for such discussions.
 

ravenest

Very well ... then it must be okay to post this then :


Getting back to the topic (remember that?) ...

I am putting foreward Hermetics, going back to Plato as a major source of the tarot symbols origin.

[Note; not THE source … I am swayed toward the view that Plato had a great content of ‘Egyptian’ wisdom underlying his philosophy (even the ‘father’ of Greek Philosophy came from ‘Turkey’ and was taught by an Egyptian) , I know this is not as pop esoteric views sometimes think; a source from Ancient Egypt, but the source is Alexandrian Syncretism and that had a large componant of passed on Egyptian gnosis as well as other sources like the ‘Magi’, Zoroastrians and perhaps even the Proto-Indo European culture (as mentioned elsewhere). But Plato is a focus point of accretion that much can be traced back to from today’s Western Mystery Tradition, including Tarot.]

As an interesting point of consideration we can compare Plato’s imagery from one of his dialogues; The Phaedrus - a discussion on types of ‘spirits’. [I won’t quote the whole passage (too long) just some and I will leave the visual examining up to the reader].

Have your RW tarot deck handy for reference. Start with the Fool, pull it out and have a look at it.

The Fool

" There abides the very being with which true knowledge is concerned; the colourless, formless, intangible essence, visible only to mind, the pilot of the soul."

The Lovers

"The soul in her totality has the care of inanimate being everywhere, and traverses the whole heaven in divers forms appearing--when perfect and fully winged she soars upward, and orders the whole world; whereas the imperfect soul, losing her wings and drooping in her flight at last settles on the solid ground-there, finding a home, she receives an earthly frame which appears to be self-moved, but is really moved by her power; and this composition of soul and body is called a living and mortal creature"

The Chariot

“Of the nature of the soul, though her true form be ever a theme of large and more than mortal discourse, let me speak briefly, and in a figure. And let the figure be composite-a pair of winged horses and a charioteer. Now the winged horses and the charioteers of the gods are all of them noble and of noble descent, but those of other races are mixed; the human charioteer drives his in a pair; and one of them is noble and of noble breed, and the other is ignoble and of ignoble breed; and the driving of them of necessity gives a great deal of trouble to him… “

The Devil

“ "The divine is beauty, wisdom, goodness, and the like; and by these the wing of the soul is nourished, and grows apace; but when fed upon evil and foulness and the opposite of good, wastes and falls away"

"The rest of the souls are also longing after the upper world and they all follow, but not being strong enough they are carried round below the surface, plunging, treading on one another, each striving to be first; and there is confusion and perspiration and the extremity of effort; and many of them are lamed or have their wings broken through the ill-driving of the charioteers; and all of them after a fruitless toil, not having attained to the mysteries of true being, go away, and feed upon opinion."

The World

" For the immortals, when they are at the end of their course, go forth and stand upon the outside of heaven, and the revolution of the spheres carries them round, and they behold the things beyond."

Wheel of Fortune (but one might need Crowley’s take on the card {i.e. the Three Gunas} to make fuller comparison)

“Such is the life of the gods; but of other souls, that which follows God best and is likest to him lifts the head of the charioteer into the outer world, and is carried round in the revolution, troubled indeed by the steeds, and with difficulty beholding true being; while another only rises and falls, and sees, and again fails to see by reason of the unruliness of the steeds. The rest of the souls are also longing after the upper world and they all follow, but not being strong enough they are carried round below the surface, plunging, treading on one another, each striving to be first; and there is confusion and perspiration and the extremity of effort; and many of them are lamed or have their wings broken through the ill-driving of the charioteers.”

An interesting exercise is to read the whole passage (and others) with your deck handy.

Here is an interesting passage; “Zeus, the mighty lord, holding the reins of a winged chariot, leads the way in heaven, ordering all and taking care of all; and there follows him the array of gods and demigods, marshalled in eleven bands; Hestia alone abides at home in the house of heaven; of the rest they who are reckoned among the princely twelve march in their appointed order. They see many blessed sights in the inner heaven, and there are many ways to and fro, along which the blessed gods are passing, every one doing his own work; he may follow who will and can ...”
 

Teheuti

Very well ... then it must be okay to post this then :

Getting back to the topic (remember that?) ...

I am putting foreward Hermetics, going back to Plato as a major source of the tarot symbols origin.
I'm assuming that you don't understand that "Talking Tarot" is a different section of the forum that includes philosophical discussions (i.e., Hermeticism, etc.). It can be found here: http://www.tarotforum.net/forumdisplay.php?f=16

"Historical Research" is not an appropriate place to proselytize, which is what you appear to be doing.
 

Debra

There's quite a lot of reference to Plato in the tarot history forum as an influence on the old imagery.

Were the Golden Dawn fans of the Platonic dialogs?
 

Zephyros

There's quite a lot of reference to Plato in the tarot history forum as an influence on the old imagery.

Were the Golden Dawn fans of the Platonic dialogs?

Probably many of them were born at a time when people, mainly the upper classes, still received a classical education, comprising of Latin, Greek, philosophy, etc., so they were at least familiar with them.