Who does NOT combine astrology and tarot?

[Padma]

Don't know if you need to hear another no, but no, I never use it. Like everything else people heap on the cards, it just seems more than they can bear. And kind of like gilding the lily.

It's certainly more than I can bear! lol...too much theory makes my head explode ;p

 

[poivre]

Thanks for this thread!

I agree with everyone here. I've studied astrology and was going to try
to fit it in but realize it's too much information.

Now, someone can come a get me out of the nut house
Astrology has driven me crazy and I still don't get it so it's
time to let it go.

Astrology is interesting but it's too much info for me and
Tarot already has enough information on each card.

No I will not add astrology with my Tarot readings.

 

[Richard]

Me!! Because I don't really believe in astrology and its validity.

I don't really believe in astrology or Tarot or runes or I Ching or Christianity or the ouija board, etc. They obviously exist. Whether they have any validity has to do with whether they accomplish whatever it is they are supposed to do. The validity of these things varies according to the subjective evaluation of the individual.

I think that combining two entirely different types of divination is nonsense. Astrology as such plays no role in Tarot divination. It is true that the Golden Dawn found a correlation between Tarot and the signs of the zodiac, the planets, and the elements. These are not used as they are in astrology (which is all about charts and rising signs and such) but merely descriptively. For example, The Magician is Mercury and Strength is Leo, not necessarily for astrological reasons but because the meanings of these cards partake of the traditional characteristics of Mercury and Leo, respectively. The astrological attributions ultimately come from a Qabalistic document, the Sepher Yetzirah, which correlates them with the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. The so-called "science" of astrology (which involves knowing times and places and looking up the planetary positions in an ephemeris and making charts) plays no direct role in the use of Tarot unless someone wishes to do so for some zany reason.

 

[Carla]

I think that combining two entirely different types of divination is nonsense. Astrology as such plays no role in Tarot divination. It is true that the Golden Dawn found a correlation between Tarot and the signs of the zodiac, the planets, and the elements. These are not used as they are in astrology (which is all about charts and rising signs and such) but merely descriptively. For example, The Magician is Mercury and Strength is Leo, not necessarily for astrological reasons but because the meanings of these cards partake of the traditional characteristics of Mercury and Leo, respectively. The astrological attributions ultimately come from a Qabalistic document, the Sepher Yetzirah, which correlates them with the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. The so-called "science" of astrology (which involves knowing times and places and looking up the planetary positions in an ephemeris and making charts) plays no direct role in the use of Tarot unless someone wishes to do so for some zany reason.

It is the Golden Dawn sense of astrological attributions that I am referring to in my original post. I do not know what tarot cards are associated with what planet, and I don't believe I need to know. I do not know the traditional characteristics of Mercury and Leo, I do not want to learn them and then associate them with Magician and Strength. It seems of no real value to me. And that is the only level of astrology that I really meant in my original post. I don't know what planet rules which card and I don't really care. This is exactly the sort of thing that makes me do a face-palm and begin to wonder if I am too pig ignorant to continue with tarot: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=171264 I just wondered if there were other readers who also carry on blissfully without using this information. It's cool that people know this stuff and enjoy talking about it, but for me? Meh. I just can't get into it.

 

[Chiska]

I don't use astrology either. I can't imagine it would add anything substantial to a reading. As AJ pointed out earlier, if the deck isn't on the same "element track," then many of the correspondences wouldn't work. I have seen decks with element assignment all over the place, and with the King of Coins as Taurus wouldn't work in an Etteilla deck where Coins are Fire. That would be a bit awkward.

Sure, a person who uses ONLY the RWS deck (or clones) wouldn't notice anything different, but for somebody who reads across several systems, it could get a bit confusing.

 

[Cassandra022]

for me it depends on the deck. if it's in the deck i'll use it, if it's not i won't force it. there are many/most decks i read with no thought about that aspect of things at all.

when i do, it's only in the way lrichard described, basically, as that is pretty much the limit of my astrological knowledge anyway, lol.

for me it makes sense. i have something of an interest in sun signs and have for years. whenever i meet someone i ask them what their sign is if i can work it into the conversation. sometimes in class i will doodle...sometimes its numbers in arabic, sometimes its abstract designs, and sometimes its astrology symbols for zodiac and planets because they are pretty. so there's that.

it makes perfect sense that in this, as in other aspects of tarot, background would inform reading style. if you have no interest in anything astrology related, makes sense that trying to bring it into reading wouldn't do it for you, and no reason to force it, the way i see things. if its one of those things floating around in your head anyway, i don't see why not connect them sometimes, if the deck is right.

but then, i kind of have a thing of synthesizing tarot with other aspects of my life/interests. thus my use of memory exercises, connecting tarot reading to self-help book exercises, using draw to ponder things i am reading about like ethnic war or whatever, do draws about structure and content of papers i am writing...i like experimental synthesis of that sort.

different strokes for different folks. my 'astrology' is elemental dignities. they do nothing for me/cannot connect/make that concept make sense to me in the least :]

 

[Grizabella]

I don't use astrology and have no I have no desire to. I also don't use elemental dignities. I don't think either one is necessary to reading the cards well. More power to those who do----I certainly respect their right and their desire to incorporate those things if they feel like it's enhancing their reading ability, but I just don't feel like I need either one.

I really think it's up to the individual whether they want to take the time and effort to learn these added things but I just find it confusing and unnecessary. There was a time when I wished my mind wouldn't just slam the door on it all, but now I'm not worried about it. The people I've read for didn't think my readings lacked anything and were happy with them, so what more do I need?

 

[Masa]

I don't use astrology, because I have zero interest in it. It's a bias stemming from when I was a cloud-headed, dirty-kneed little girl, and I found out that my sign supposedly meant I was a serious workaholic. X) Mehhhhhhhhhhhh~

 

[Carla]

for me it makes sense. i have something of an interest in sun signs and have for years. whenever i meet someone i ask them what their sign is if i can work it into the conversation. sometimes in class i will doodle...sometimes its numbers in arabic, sometimes its abstract designs, and sometimes its astrology symbols for zodiac and planets because they are pretty. so there's that.

it makes perfect sense that in this, as in other aspects of tarot, background would inform reading style. if you have no interest in anything astrology related, makes sense that trying to bring it into reading wouldn't do it for you, and no reason to force it, the way i see things. if its one of those things floating around in your head anyway, i don't see why not connect them sometimes, if the deck is right.

but then, i kind of have a thing of synthesizing tarot with other aspects of my life/interests. thus my use of memory exercises, connecting tarot reading to self-help book exercises, using draw to ponder things i am reading about like ethnic war or whatever, do draws about structure and content of papers i am writing...i like experimental synthesis of that sort.

different strokes for different folks. my 'astrology' is elemental dignities. they do nothing for me/cannot connect/make that concept make sense to me in the least :]

Exactly! I have an big interest in movies and movie trivia, so that info becomes entwined in my tarot reading style. Elemental dignities make perfect sense to me so I use those. Astrology never made sense to me and I can never even remember what month is which sign, let alone all this Golden Dawn stuff. Yes! We're on the same page here.

 

[Richard]

Over a century ago, S. L. "MacGregor" Mathers discovered the connection between Tarot and Qabalah (and consequently the so-called astrological attributions). The only other related system in use is that of Eliphas Levi, which differs radically from that of the Golden Dawn and seems not to make as much sense. The GD system is the basis for the design of the RWS and the Thoth, so I find it to be helpful, as I use RWS almost exclusively, but not really for "reading" as such. It is perfectly alright to ignore the historical development of these decks, as long as one does not indulge in reverse snobbery toward those who do otherwise.