VI Pentacles Interpretation

Ruby Jewel

I have difficulty with the standard definitions of the VI Pentacles as being a situation of generosity, and "coming and going" of money as that interpretation does not fit the picture on the Rider Waite card. It is hardly "generous" to weigh out and balance gifts....nor does the disparity in the giver and the receiver give me a sense of justice or balance. The picture on the card seems just the opposite of the standard interpretation. Does anyone else have a similar problem with this card...?
 

rwcarter

You have a wealthy man who wishes to give to the less fortunate and he uses his balance to make sure that he gives the same amount to each person in the card. What's not generous or balanced about that?

Money comes to the less fortunate and goes from the more fortunate. So where is the issue with "coming and going" of money?

I don't equate the concept of justice with that image though.

You say what you don't see in the card, but haven't said anything about what you do see in it instead.

Rodney
 

Abrac

The imagery could come in part from Book T. It says "Fortunate, successful, just and liberal." The scales show his "justness" in weighing out equal amounts for each person, as Rodney pointed out.
 

Ruby Jewel

You have a wealthy man who wishes to give to the less fortunate and he uses his balance to make sure that he gives the same amount to each person in the card. What's not generous or balanced about that?

Money comes to the less fortunate and goes from the more fortunate. So where is the issue with "coming and going" of money?

I don't equate the concept of justice with that image though.

You say what you don't see in the card, but haven't said anything about what you do see in it instead.

Rodney

What I see in this card is "inequality". According to Waite, the man is "disguised" as a merchant. So, why the disguise? The scales speak of "equality" but everything in the picture says "inequality" and "unbalanced." Yet, the card is Moon in Taurus, which is "exalted." Who is "exalted"......certainly not the poor people on their knees. Are the rich being exalted then? For some reason which I cannot explain, this card brings Temperance to mind....in that it feels like the opposite of Temperance....the balancing of forces. Therefore, I get a negative feeling from this card, which is a contradiction of all the standard interpretations.
 

Ruby Jewel

The imagery could come in part from Book T. It says "Fortunate, successful, just and liberal." The scales show his "justness" in weighing out equal amounts for each person, as Rodney pointed out.

I am not familiar with Book T. Could you enlighten me a bit and I will look it up. Interesting that I did not relate to the scales as being a measurement between the two people on their knees, but rather a measurement between the benefactor and the beggars.
 

firecatpickles

Here is a link to Book T: http://www.tarot.org.il/Library/Mathers/Book-T.html

"Above and below are the symbols Taurus and Moon of the Decan.

"Success and gain in material undertakings. Power, influence, rank, nobility, rule over the people. Fortunate, successful, liberal and just.

"If ill dignified, may be purse-proud, insolent from excess, or prodigal."

So there is a negative connotation to this card, particularly "rule over people".

Your interpretation is close to mine (sometimes), as I see this as a card of "profligacy".

"Being too many things to too many people"; "Spreading oneself too thin"; "Penny-wise and pound-foolish"; the list goes on.

I don't particularly like this card at all.
 

Abrac

Book T is a document used in the Golden Dawn and contains their teachings on the Tarot. It's available online if you search for it, or here's a link to a version I enhanced with card images and additional information. Direct download: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/mju622dstho7t59/Ultimate Book T.pdf?dl=0.

Waite says he's in the "guise" of a merchant. Guise simply means an external appearance or manner of dress, not necessarily deception, though it can. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/guise#English So the question it seems to me is, does it make more sense in the overall context of the card that Waite meant "guise" or "disguise"?
 

Zephyros

The Sixes are in the place of balance, the element is at its best there. If I may be a bit of a socialist, I think that the best balance of the material is when it is spread out, and I think this is what the card is trying to say. Something along the lines of "give, and ye shall receive." The man is giving out money but will always have enough, "enough is as good as a feast," etc. The card is attributed to Moon in Taurus, with the moon being exalted in that sign. Together they make for a good influence, the dreaminess of the Moon is offset by the earthy practicality of Taurus in management of material matters.
 

Ruby Jewel

Book T is a document used in the Golden Dawn and contains their teachings on the Tarot. It's available online if you search for it, or here's a link to a version I enhanced with card images and additional information. Direct download: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/mju622dstho7t59/Ultimate Book T.pdf?dl=0.

Waite says he's in the "guise" of a merchant. Guise simply means an external appearance or manner of dress, not necessarily deception, though it can. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/guise#English So the question it seems to me is, does it make more sense in the overall context of the card that Waite meant "guise" or "disguise"?

I feel there is very little difference in "the guise of" or "disguised as"...... since, in either case, we do not see the real person. So, either way, I would be interested in knowing what he meant by that very odd statement. Thanks for the link to Book T. I'll check it out.
 

Ruby Jewel

Here is a link to Book T: http://www.tarot.org.il/Library/Mathers/Book-T.html

"Above and below are the symbols Taurus and Moon of the Decan.

"Success and gain in material undertakings. Power, influence, rank, nobility, rule over the people. Fortunate, successful, liberal and just.

"If ill dignified, may be purse-proud, insolent from excess, or prodigal."

So there is a negative connotation to this card, particularly "rule over people".

Your interpretation is close to mine (sometimes), as I see this as a card of "profligacy".

"Being too many things to too many people"; "Spreading oneself too thin"; "Penny-wise and pound-foolish"; the list goes on.

I don't particularly like this card at all.

I think the word "profligacy" feels appropriate for me as well. I can see this card in the sense of S.L.M Mathers interprets it in "The Tarot" as simply gifts or presents being given; in which case the scales and the economic disparity seem out of place. Generosity has no need of judgment as implied by the scales. This card feels as though I'm forced into an interpretation that doesn't "fit" numerologically (it is a "6" which is positive) or astrologically (exalted Moon). Maybe this is an indication that I am ready to move beyond illustrated pips into a deck like the TdM...Anyway, thanks for your response.