Qaballah and Tarot

jmd

I thought I should add a note following some messages I received and explain what I mean by my previous post.

Some Kabbalists view the four worlds spoken of in the tradition as each consisting of a Tree of Life, others consider that the Tree is divided into four 'parts' corresponding to the four worlds, and others still tend to include both images, at times using the one, at times the other (to be complete, let me also mention that according to some, each Sephirah is said to contain a whole Tree - an image I have used in at least one paper I wrote for the SRIA).

With regards to the pips of the minor Arcana, they consis of 4 lots of ten cards. This numerical similarity certainly leads to being able to easily correlate the four Trees of each world with the 'unfoldment' of the ten cards in each element. This is further justified by each of the Worlds being associated to one of the four elements through its association with the tetragrammaton (which simply means the 'four letters' - of the name of God, ie, YHVH).

Personally, I see this numerical equivalence as just that. The six of Cups, for example, shows six cups, and does not, to my mind, lead to its meaning as reflecting Tipharet in Briah. Reflecting on Briahic Tipharet can certainly lead to many insights, which the individual may then apply to his or her understanding in life's myriad spheres, including the Tarot. This does not, however, point to an intrinsic connection between these two wonderful 'tools'.

As mentioned in another post, I too correlate the Tree and Tarot, but again, in a different way.

The Continental tradition does this in yet another way, and connects, in descending order, the first ten cards of the Major Arcana (beginning with I - the Magician and Keter) with the ten Sephirot.
 

Driley

Golden Dawn

Most of us (not all of us, but most of us), use decks that have been directly or indirectly influenced by the Golden Dawn. Certainly the two most popular families of decks are products of the Golden Dawn and its successor organizations (or, should I say successor disorganizations?).

The Waite/Coleman-Smith deck is probably the best known deck and what people think of for the most part when they say "tarot cards." The Thoth deck, and those following that set of influences, probably come in second place.

These decks were specifically designed to conform to the way the Golden Dawn approached Tarot -- and it is therefore at least reasonable to explore the approach of the Golden Dawn to the relationship between Qaballah and Tarot, which was well developed and quite explicit.

I have now in my posession my long-anticipated copy of Robert Wang's book Qaballistic Tarot. And I've got to say that it is truly astonishingly wonderful. Things which made no sense to me in the placement of the cards on the Tree have become much more clear.

If you are a fan of one of the GD-influenced deck, I strongly recommend this book. It is currently back ordered from the publisher (I found mine through a used book site on the web) -- but they claim they'll have it back in stock soon. Amazon.com periodically has it at a reasonable price (around $25-30) and always at insane prices ($125 was the last idiotic price I saw).

I'll be sharing various bits and pieces of this book and my take on it as I work my way through my third reading of it --- that's how good I think it is, I'm reading it cover-to-cover three times in a row.

So, many thanks to those who recommended this book to me!

Blessings,
David
 

Jewel

Re: Golden Dawn

Driley said:
I have now in my posession my long-anticipated copy of Robert Wang's book Qaballistic Tarot. And I've got to say that it is truly astonishingly wonderful. Things which made no sense to me in the placement of the cards on the Tree have become much more clear.

So, many thanks to those who recommended this book to me!

Glad you like the book. And I agree with you that the approaching tarot and Qabalah from a GD view might be the easiest as there is tons of info out there.
 

SlyR

I was wondering if I could just butt in with a quick question:

Traditionally, the Emperor is assigned to Heh. Crowley assigns him to Tzaddi. Why?
 

jmd

I have read very little Crowley, and so I too wait for other replies.

Of the top of my head, however, I would presume that various 'path' allocations will result in differing letter ones. As another example, Gray (Cf his Concepts of Qabalah) allocates Gimel to the Emperor - yet many others allocate Dalet.

(see, SlyR, I don't presume to know all - especially when it comes to non-standard or Crowleyan material!)
 

Laurel

The annecdote I have heard is that Crowley was doing some deep meditation and had an epiphany and shouted "Tzaddi is not the Star!" and then had a synchronistic experience with a fishhook (I don't remember the details) that day which re-affirmed it.

I hate definitatively allocating letters--paths--tarot cards to each other. Some my best insights into all three have come when I have manipulated them around and looked at all the possible relationships, rather than dogmatically insisting on one. The most I do is follow certain attribution sequencing based on the 3-7-12 breakdown of the Hebrew letters, which fits in perfectly with the astrological model and extremely well with alchemical models that utilize 12 stages of transmutation in the Great Work.

Laurel
 

jmd

With regards to alchemy, I certainly agree that here again cross-fertilisations can occur.

The three ways in which alchemical stages are described or explained include a threefoldness (blackening, whitening, reddening), a sevenfold stages of transmutation (connected to the seven planetary bodies), and the 12-fold description of the great work.

The three mother letters, seven doubles and twelve singles can thus all here be co-related with distinctive results - yet remain independent!

Maybe we'll need to begin new Alchemical study threads :)!
 

Laurel

-Very- good point, JMD. :)

Nothing shabby about an Alchemy study thread either. The more I learn about alchemy, the more I discover my own ignorance.

Laurel