has anyone ONLY used the BOT?

Dävid

I apologize if this specific topic has already been adressed...I ran a search and didn't find anything quite along these lines...so I'm just curious. It seems like most people really advocate Lon Milo Duquette's book first. Personally, I've only ever used the BOT just because I prefer getting the words "straight from the horse's mouth." And while certain passages can be a little dense at points...I just reread those paragraphs slowly, taking a word at a time, and think about it until I completely understand. A lot of the book is fairly straightforward, though...so I'm just wondering if anyone else has used this as their primary text?
 

martyn_uk

Bot

Hi David,

I did use the BOT primarily when I first had a Thoth deck.But I found it really hard going im afraid :)

Im just getting used to the astrological symbols used in the deck..something I have never really used before.

How do you find the book?

Martyn.
 

Dävid

Honestly... It's obviously a dense read, but only at times. I think it helps a LOT that my timeline was: study magic/occult in general...THEN focus on the Tarot. So a lot of the different things that are symbolized in the deck, I'm already very familiar with. I think if I hadn't already studied the kabbalah, astrology, and some Egyption mythology it would probably be quite a bit more difficult than it is.
 

Ross G Caldwell

Hi David,

The Book of Thoth is the only book I ever used to understand the Crowley-Harris Tarot.

But I have to admit, to really understand the BoT itself, you need to study a lot of Crowley's other works, as well as the magical system of the Golden Dawn.

The most important of Crowley's works other works (for understanding BoT!) are -

"The Book of the Law"
various essays in "The Equinox";
"The Book of Lies"
"The Vision and the Voice"
"Liber Aleph"
"777"
"Magick in Theory and Practice"

For the Golden Dawn, you have to have Regardie's edition(s) of "The Golden Dawn (System of Magic)".

All of these books are easily available - all of Crowley's on the internet (although 777 should be had in a printed version. "Magick in Theory and Practice" is also much better bought, since there is a very good new version, in its second edition, printed in the way Crowley probably envisioned it.)
 

Lillie

Yup.

Me too.

Only ever BOT.

But this is going back a long time, and back then (mid 80's) either the other books didn't exist or I didn't know about them. No internet then!

I read widely on the subject of magick.
both Crowley and other authors.
And plenty on ancient religions and philosophys.

I don't know how other peole would see my interpretations of the cards, or if they would agree with my understanding of the deck.

But somehow, over the last 20 odd years me and it came to a working compromise between us.

And it's OK, for me.
To be honest I never had the need to comprehend every single word of the BOT. I mostly get the gist of it, and for me that's good enough.
As the years have gone by I find that my understanding of the book has increased, and in some cases chnged.
Wether I do, or did, or ever will, quite understand it in the way the author intended is open to question.
However, there is a philosophical school of thought that states that it is the reader that creates a book, and that the book is created afresh in each individual understanding from each and every reader.
And that will do fine for me.

Another thing that I always found very interesting was the LWB with the stuff by Harris in it.
To see her (albeit tiny) discriptions of the cards as she saw them is, for me, a very interesting and informative thing.
 

redflash

I have been studying various forms of magic/occult/spirituality for years but have always avoided Crowleys work like the plague. Wish I hadn't wasted all these years when I could have been reading his stuff. What a fascinating man !

I only recently got my thoth, & I ordered the book of thoth & duQuettes book at the same time. My plan was--

Read B.O.T
Read DuQuette
Re-read B.O.T

I got a few pages into the B.O.T then put it down & started on the other book. I really wanted to read B.O.T first but it made my head spin!

*hopes nobody is laughing at this post*
 

Ross G Caldwell

Lillie said:
Another thing that I always found very interesting was the LWB with the stuff by Harris in it.
To see her (albeit tiny) discriptions of the cards as she saw them is, for me, a very interesting and informative thing.

Oh yeah, forgot about that. The old James Wasserman-Freida Harris LWB was *essential* for my using the Thoth - it taught the divinatory meanings better than BoT, taught the 15 card spread, and had other interesting data that put the deck in perspective.

Yes, thanks for reminding me of that Lillie.
 

Lillie

Redflash, you just got to come at it whatever way suits you best.
If another book gets you into the deck, and gets you ready for the BOT, then it's all to the best.

Yeah, I love that LWB. Just about the only things Harris ever wrote about it (apart from here very amusing letters to Mr C!)
And the meanings are very handy.
Especially if you look at them then go to the BOT and see how you get from one to the other!

I never could get on with the 15 card spread, but I know some people swear by it.
 

ravenest

I too am one of those 'oldies' when BoT was about the only one availible (and no internet).

But also I studied magick as well and related subjects. Without that comprerhension would have been a LOT slower.

It IS the Thelemic magicians deck, and if you dont like that idea you probably wont like the cards (except for the art) and give up on the book.
 

Bridget

redflash said:
I got a few pages into the B.O.T then put it down & started on [Duquette]. I really wanted to read B.O.T first but it made my head spin!

*hopes nobody is laughing at this post*
You are not alone. :) I bought the BOT years ago, but never got far with it. Even the card descriptions, which I dipped into from time to time, can be obscure.

But now that I've read Duquette's book, I'm going to try again. I feel like it gave me the general picture, so now I can work through the rough spots in the BOT.