Fundamental

((((Moongold))))

All good points....Moongold....we evolve as do systems....e.g. in quantum physics...just looking at something causes it to change somehow...nothing is really static is it?? And the nature of the universe is very different from the world we see...it's about perspective, isn't it....rather than any "absolute" kind of truth...

tmgrl

I think one can draw a lot of parallels like that. In various religions and/or spirituality, certain ethical or moral "summaries" stand out e.g. the Christian Ten Commandments. Presumably it is by following those, one arrives at this spiritual growth (eradication of sin, ego etc) too? Are they then analogues to the usage of Tarot Archtypes... by those otherwise so disposed? Aside: I guess I have always want to know how (150 or so?) possible symbols in the Marseille majors can be functionally equivalent to hundreds of thousands of words in the average mainstream religious text? But, as an agnostic, I've no personal experience of either in this context. I'm not necessarily doubting, merely wondering...

I think it is also aknowledged that the Bible was "optimised" for a semi-nomadic desert patriachy? Is e.g. the Medieval mindset, to whom the tarot was probably(?) addressed, something that remains ubiquitously relevant today? Clearly many authors argue it is, based on assumptions that the "ancients" were somehow more "in touch" with things? Nevertheless the contrary argument for studying ALL (esp. modern!) decks too, might apply, especially THESE days? FWIW, I have always been quite attracted e.g. by the "comparitive tarot" methods (qv) where the optimal deck exists perhaps only in the mind of the user as a superposition (O.K. just plain average!) of as many decks as it takes.

I think, with almost all spiritual and religious ideas, there is this HUMAN tendancy to pine after the "good old days". We see almost everywhere, from politics to religion, the repeated movements "back to basics". Perhaps these are the Tarot fundamentalists?

Seemingly, this whole process of "modernisation" has to begin all over again...

Macavity

Perhaps my heart of fundamental tarot is visual, then interaction

There is a certain dream-laden aspect of tarot that looks at humanity from a pictorial visualness that doesn't agree with my small experiences of the I-Ching.

The clatter of sticks and coins in delicate patterns that remind the I-Ching reader of reading lines to form patterns and concepts explained with a book of phrases...and the beautiful poetic constructs of a family culture (mother, father, daughter, son) and then someone's behavior in allegorical community and kingdom. Even though it is somewhat feudalistic, it reminds me broadly of a rune set with a book of poems and meanings...and there are elemental parallels with Feng Shui and language pictographs. But it pulls from a different brain area for me, much like writing but not like the softness of drawing and painting and swimming in the waters of my mind.

To me, the pictorial appeal of humanity is so rich in the trumps and courts, that somehow activates an area of my mind that begins to be able to the use of numbers and symbols of the minors as pictorial patterns. The pictures interact with visual concepts in my mind and the use of cards with fingering movements are physically engaging, interactive.

I may be straying too far, just want to describe a fundamental difference in my experience of enjoying tarot...

Mari H.

Bump.

Since the polls have been "bumped" and since Merc has a thread going about "Saturation" and "meaty thread discussions," I thought I would bump up one of the "meatier" ones I have saved in my subscriptions.

This should give us all some pause for reflection...I'm even rereading what I wrote only a month after joining AT and starting my work with the Tarot.

Thought-provoking posts here for all Aeclectians....

terri