Again, the Deva deck, though beautiful and obviously derived from the Tarot, is not Tarot... unless one doesn't agree with a key characteristic of Tarot having four suits and twenty-two specific Major Arcana cards.
I would agree that the 22 majors/4 suits (10 pips/4 courts) is indeed a "key" characteristic, but I don't necessarily define "key" as "the essential-as-the-whole." Of course, this can be -- and has been -- a matter of some debate, which will probably never be entirely resolved. Nor should it be -- everyone is entitled to their own opinion on this matter.
From my perspective, the Deva Tarot meets the criteria of a "true" tarot, in that it does "pass" the 22 majors/4 suits-10 pips-4 courts "test." What makes the classification of the Deva more "fuzzy" is not what it lacks, but what it adds -- one major arcana card, and an entire suit. Granted, it is, to the best of my knowledge, the first and only "tarot" to do so in quite this particular fashion. But it is perfectly functional as a "standard" tarot -- simply remove the extra cards, and there you go!
By the same token, I do not claim that anything that has only a remote resemblence to tarot to
be a tarot, simply by virtue of the fact that it contains some tarot-like features. To return to the discussion thread at hand, I would find it much more difficult to classify a three-suit tarot as a "tarot" than the five-suit deck in question. But again, this is strictly IMHO, and I make no claims of any sort of "proof" of my position that brings the point beyond further debate.
However, further exposition on the point here would be to deviate too far from the current thread, so I'll start another, with links to the Deva Tarot for reference. I'll start it under the "Talking Tarot" heading, but leave it to the discretion of jmd and the other forum moderators to move it to another section if they see fit to do so.
-- Jeannette
http://www.tarotgarden.com