The Lovers or 2 of cups?

Thirteen said:

"Love" (L'Amore") was the earliest known version of this trump, and it depicted a marriage with cupid there to bless it. Later, it was changed to The Lover (L’Amoureux) which, got mistranslated into English as "the Lovers." Most of the images for the "Lover" card featured cupid shooting his arrow at a man who was gazing at a woman. Thus, the implication that THIS love was decreed by some higher power: either the gods or a psychic energy by which the man recognized his one-true-love. The Rider-Waite card goes for an Angel in this position, with Adam and Eve. Eve is literally made from Adam by god, and so to be whole he has to be with her. Thus, Heaven itself has made them for each other.

Click to expand...

I don't always go by pictures or symbols on a card either (since many illustrators have their own perception and meaning of the cards). Plus may times a card that is often seen as "negative" to many people turns out to be very positive in meaning for me (even if the symbols are very negative). I could have sworn the card was always called "The Lovers" and when you translate the meaning from plain English to Spanish it translates to "Los Amantes" (which is what we call a person who is married yet has an affair). I use Tarot to make predictions of the future mainly and in all of my experience with both personal and clients..Lovers doesn't mean a loving union at all, but a choice, or a third party..or just simply someone dating more than one individual.

For example I'd always get "Lovers/Empress" as a common combination as to how I man I was 'obsessed' with felt towards me (I was in a relationship with the father of my children by the way). We never really got together or in a relationship..we would argue most of the time and he wasn't entirely single even though he wasn't in an official relationship he was still in love with his ex, and had some sort of friend with benefits around still. I definitely don't have many positive things to say about the Lovers card when it comes to love.

Laurelle said:

The devil is the lower echo of the lovers card. If you look at them both carefully you'll see the devil card lacks the top half of the lovers card.

Click to expand...

Im not good at english and i cannot understand for sure what you meant with the top half but i like this card because if u look at the picture of the two people tied there it shows their tails as well.. she got a grape(which i take it to be the "forbidden fruit" -"the temptation" and he's got the fire burning(and the fire comes from the devil itself if u look closely).
It is pure passion and proves that our sexual instincts and our urges have a darker source,a fire that burns within us when we fall in love with someone. If we go back to the biblical bigennings of adam and eve,God wanted to make us multiply by "word" and not in a sexual way.. but since Eve has sinned,we are now having the sin under our skin and we can choose to express whatever we feel by "choice" since the Devil card as well as the Lovers is a card of choice.
After many years people still believe that Eve's sin has refference to eating the apple..but the apple was in fact Eve tempting Adam to sleep with her because the devil interfered and made Eve be the fruit of temptation and turned on the fire on Adam and they sinned in concequence.
I know this comment will be deleted because it doesnt belong to the topic title but i wanted to explain why i would like to see this card in my readings.

Oh and one more thing related to the name of the card.
My deck is italian of course and the name of this card is "Gli Amanti".. But whoever speaks italian knows that besides Amore this card has refference also to the mistress word.
Gli amanti in this case could reffer to a coupling outside a marriage,something unofficial,something hidden since the pictures shows only them, a garden(with no one else present) and an angel(Only God knows about our story) sort of.

Puffette said:

do they have a ring on their fingers? Or do they just got married?

Click to expand...

Which Lovers card are you referring to? RWS where we have Adam and Eve, effectively married to each other by god? Or the original L'Amore where we see a wedding occurring? I'm just saying, that in some of the cards, marriage is implied. However, I'm confused as to what your point is about marriage. A year ago, there were gay couples in the U.S. who couldn't legally marry. Were they less in love because of that? I'm not at all sure what the status of these lovers has to with the meaning of the card.

Unless you're looking for a card that means "marriage"? If that's the case, then I'll agree that the Lovers card doesn't contain that meaning. I define the Lovers as: "At least one person here is powerfully attracted to the other, and will have to make a choice to be with that person or not; being with them will be difficult, but they will probably feel it is worth it in the long run."

Yes they see everything about each other as the nakedness suggest but we cannot know how they feel inside exactly for each other.

Click to expand...

We do know how one of them feels (see above meaning). But, as I said in the other post, I grant that individual decks have their own short-hand for their readers. If a deck knows that its reader is going to view the Lovers as frivolous, like you do, then that's what the card will mean in your readings. Because the deck has to communicate frivolous relationships to you somehow, and if that's the card which does it for you, then that's the card it will give you. And if 2/Cups appeals to you as meaning "love" then that's what that card will mean in your readings.

You mentioned the Knight/Cups, by the way, as signaling romantic love to you as well. I know many here who see that Knight/Cups as untrustworthy when it comes to love, and a card that means the person will, as you accuse the Lovers card, leave you at the drop of a hat. My point being that my intent with all these posts is simply to discuss the historical context and the likely intent of certain deck creators like Waite. Personal meanings are absolutely essential to these discussions, especially as they can open up the cards to new and unconsidered interpretations, but they do tend to blur the card's larger meaning. Like those who see the Knight/Cups only as a frivolous lover (personal meaning and originally only for rx), and ignore his potential to be a chivalrous and devout (historical/intended meaning).

Exactly my point!

Puffette said:

Oh and one more thing related to the name of the card.
My deck is italian of course and the name of this card is "Gli Amanti".. But whoever speaks italian knows that besides Amore this card has refference also to the mistress word.
Gli amanti in this case could reffer to a coupling outside a marriage,something unofficial,something hidden since the pictures shows only them, a garden(with no one else present) and an angel(Only God knows about our story) sort of.

Click to expand...

Which goes quite well with my point about marriage, in those old days, as being arranged and not about love. Therefore, true love had to be on the sly, had to be an affair, and had to be hidden.

And even in a modern view, this seems to support the Lovers as a card about feelings so powerful, that the couple will go to extremes to have it. Seems right on target. I'm still confused, however, as to why you view the card as needing to be about marriage. Even today, there are those who don't marry for love, but for money, power, etc. This clearly is a card about love, not marriage. And not casual dating either, as why would anyone go through all that for a one-night-stand? Thanks for that historical point. It really helps get across what I was saying and I'll add it to my notes.

Puffette said:

Oh and one more thing related to the name of the card.
My deck is italian of course and the name of this card is "Gli Amanti".. But whoever speaks italian knows that besides Amore this card has refference also to the mistress word.
Gli amanti in this case could reffer to a coupling outside a marriage,something unofficial,something hidden since the pictures shows only them, a garden(with no one else present) and an angel(Only God knows about our story) sort of.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's exactly what I meant when "The Lovers" is translated from English to Spanish - it turns into "Los Amantes" (could be a mistress, or another male a married woman has an affair with). Which is why I view "The Lovers" as temptation and not "true love" at all.

Thirteen said:

Which Lovers card are you referring to? RWS where we have Adam and Eve, effectively married to each other by god? Or the original L'Amore where we see a wedding occurring? I'm just saying, that in some of the cards, marriage is implied. However, I'm confused as to what your point is about marriage. A year ago, there were gay couples in the U.S. who couldn't legally marry. Were they less in love because of that? I'm not at all sure what the status of these lovers has to with the meaning of the card.

Unless you're looking for a card that means "marriage"? If that's the case, then I'll agree that the Lovers card doesn't contain that meaning. I define the Lovers as: "At least one person here is powerfully attracted to the other, and will have to make a choice to be with that person or not; being with them will be difficult, but they will probably feel it is worth it in the long run."

We do know how one of them feels (see above meaning). But, as I said in the other post, I grant that individual decks have their own short-hand for their readers. If a deck knows that its reader is going to view the Lovers as frivolous, like you do, then that's what the card will mean in your readings. Because the deck has to communicate frivolous relationships to you somehow, and if that's the card which does it for you, then that's the card it will give you. And if 2/Cups appeals to you as meaning "love" then that's what that card will mean in your readings.

You mentioned the Knight/Cups, by the way, as signaling romantic love to you as well. I know many here who see that Knight/Cups as untrustworthy when it comes to love, and a card that means the person will, as you accuse the Lovers card, leave you at the drop of a hat. My point being that my intent with all these posts is simply to discuss the historical context and the likely intent of certain deck creators like Waite. Personal meanings are absolutely essential to these discussions, especially as they can open up the cards to new and unconsidered interpretations, but they do tend to blur the card's larger meaning. Like those who see the Knight/Cups only as a frivolous lover (personal meaning and originally only for rx), and ignore his potential to be a chivalrous and devout (historical/intended meaning).

Click to expand...

I suppose u reffer to this phrase "I dont interpret the Lovers as representing a solid couple.. do they have a ring on their fingers? Or do they just got married? ".. It was just me wondering how can someone interpret the lovers as being something solid since there are no other elements in the card's picture to prove me that yes indeed it is an union meant to last.I havent seen this card as being a marriage signal whatsoever.
This card has proved to materialise this way for me.. frivoulous meaning,brief coupling,nothing solid or super duper as i was expecting at first. This was not what i was expecting and i insist. Even the little story about the dating website i mentioned. Before that i got the lovers as i said and i was thinking that something great and romantic is going to materialise in my life and i was so impatient and then..blaf..nothing..
To me the marriage partains to Hierophant and the Justice along the 10 of cups. If i get to see those cards for someone i know that something huge is about to happen for their relationship.
The knight of cups tends to be regarded by people as a fleety guy but the knight of wands is juggling more then this guy,so lets say i give more credit to the cups fellow. This is why i tend to see him embodied in the image of the guy in 2 of cups.

Thirteen said:

Which goes quite well with my point about marriage, in those old days, as being arranged and not about love. Therefore, true love had to be on the sly, had to be an affair, and had to be hidden.

And even in a modern view, this seems to support the Lovers as a card about feelings so powerful, that the couple will go to extremes to have it. Seems right on target. I'm still confused, however, as to why you view the card as needing to be about marriage. Even today, there are those who don't marry for love, but for money, power, etc. This clearly is a card about love, not marriage. And not casual dating either, as why would anyone go through all that for a one-night-stand? Thanks for that historical point. It really helps get across what I was saying and I'll add it to my notes.

Click to expand...

Yes i agree with the old days and their need to please themselves outside the marriage next to other partners out of necesity and frustration of being tied to someone they dont want to.
But im confused about the marriage topic since i didnt mentioned that it might have any correlation with it and moreover i see this card as being opposing to this idea of strong connection and marriage.Would you show me the exact paragraph?

True Love has often been behind affairs!

AzulParadiso said:

Yes, that's exactly what I meant when "The Lovers" is translated from English to Spanish - it turns into "Los Amantes" (could be a mistress, or another male a married woman has an affair with). Which is why I view "The Lovers" as temptation and not "true love" at all.

Click to expand...

So, marriage is always about true love, and affairs are *always* about temptation, never true love? Lovers Card Story (in my view, at least): John Lennon met his first wife, Cynthia, when he was young and unknown. In spite of light affairs with other girls while on the road, he always returned to her. This romance I'd say was very 6/Cups. She was his "known joy." Liverpool born like him, his girlfriend from way back. A comfort zone. When she got pregnant, he married her, as that's what Liverpool lads did in those days when their girls got pregnant. Had his career in music fizzled, he probably would have lived out his life with her and their son in Liverpool, perfectly happy. But John became a global phenomenon. Now, he had plenty of quick affairs as the Beatles went from city to city. YOU would say that these affairs were the Lovers card, as they involved back staircases and service elevators. I'd argue that these were The Lovers rx only. Why? Because John never thought of leaving his wife. He had affair after affair and was never willing to change his status with Cynthia for any of them.

On meeting Yoko Ono, however, he was willing to do just about anything: divorce his wife, and bring the Beatle's break-up to a head. Yoko wasn't known or comfortable like Cynthia, quite the opposite. She was, however, an inspiration, an equal partner, his other half. She transformed him. He was so attached, that Yoko insisted they have a year off from each other so that they could create individually for a while. He was miserable the whole time. He begged her to come back to him, and gave up everything that he hadn't even considered giving up for Cynthia in order to get her to stay...including other women. That's right. No more affairs, he was faithful to her and only her from then on. This story, to me, is a prime example of "The Lovers" card.

So. I will totally agree that the Lovers can indicate an affair--and that's pretty alarming if you're Cynthia and it comes up in a reading about your husband. But why, exactly, do you think that "affair" can't mean "true love"? Men and women should marry for true love, but often they don't. And if they don't, then when they DO find true love...well, there's your affair. The Lovers, however is NOT about marriage or affairs (I can give you a personal, true Lovers story, my own, that was not an affair and did end in marriage--roughest time of my life, but I made the right choice; I bring this up so that no one thinks the Lovers is always about affairs, as you seem to be implying). The status of the Lovers doesn't matter to the card. All it's about for sure (IMHO) is that there will be true love, and that it won't be easy. Which is why, I think, we can all agree on that the Lovers choice is always a tough one, and we'd rather see the 2/Cups instead.

Thirteen said:

So, marriage is always about true love, and affairs are *always* about temptation, never true love?

Click to expand...

No, that's not what I meant. You can have an affair and be in love with your mistress instead of wife, etc - that's definitely possible - that's not what I meant at all. Like I mentioned previously, I use another card for love and Lovers as temptation. That's why I put "true love" in quotation marks. The Lovers card is all about affairs, choices, and other options when it comes to love readings (for me). I haven't read your entire post yet, but I do know briefly about the John Lennon story.

What I meant was when the Lovers shows up in a reading, it always indicates a "third party" being involved - whether there are real loving feelings involved or not, to me the card mainly signifies temptation. I wouldn't get the Lovers card for a stable committed partnership at all - don't see it that way. When the Lovers shows up it's always more than one person - which to me doesn't define "true love".

For example if I ask how X feels about Y I rather see the 2 of Cups, or the other card I use for love instead of the Lovers. The Lovers is my red flag card for "affairs", etc. Thus, The Lovers means someone is already involved and "in love" with someone else.