Tarot Set for Advanced

[Trivette]

Actually Waite does follow the GD Court order in the selection of a significator.

[Nungali]

Maybe the Waite deck should not be evaluated by comparison with the Golden Dawn Tarot. Even the Trumps deviate from the GD pattern.

 

No, as it is not a 'type of' GD deck. On the other hand, are not we giving a deck a value, by comparing it to the other decks out there ? 

 

 

The Pips apparently do follow the GD decan titles, but there is no way that they can incorporate the fullness of meaning of the decans. I use the images merely as memory aids to evoke the titles. 

 

What titles ... where do you get 'titles'  from?  The GD deck ?  If you think the RW deck should not be evaluated by comparison to the GD deck, why use the GD titles superimposed over the RW images ? 

 

Or do the RW minors have titles attributed to them by Waite ? 

 

 

The Waite is not really a Golden Dawn deck.

 

Certainly not ! 

 

While it may have had an inordinate amount of influence on the design of  modern Tarot trash decks, that is not a valid reason to diss it.

 

No, but there other valid reasons.  Valid, to the one that deeply studies Tarot, but not your average card  'fortune teller' - heck, you can use a playing card deck for 'fortune telling' . 

 

As for being prudish, tastes vary according to their cultural environment. The Golden Dawn Tarot may be considered prudish in comparison with the Thoth and Thoth clones, but so what? There is full frontal nudity in the Waite Devil and Lovers cards, although rather rudimentary in graphic execution.

 

I think prudish may refer to Waite's outlook ... pompous and self-inflated, might be a better term ?  Or 'over - wordy' ... needlessly complicated  ....   obscure verbiage  with reference to certain underlying mysteries that Waite knows....  that he keeps hinting at and won't cough up in clear plain language ( or even obscure language -  I mean I can get a LOT of the hermetic metaphysical obscure symbolic writings, so it isnt that , and when he does,  further research shows it to be a product of his romantic imagination formed from 'penny dreadfulls' of the time ( earlier age when he had little money ) and certain anglo 'wishful mythology',  all rolled up into a ball with his own , often unsubstantiated  take on it all ... (just refer it to a mystery that you are not worthy of ... or ready for    )  

 

Although this article gives a more glowing overview than I would give him, it has some good background info on Waite and his ....   proclivities  ( plus I am a bit of a fan of Bro. Gilbert's writings ) . 

 

http://www.mastermason.com/luxocculta/waite.htm

[Nungali]

On another forum, I once talked with a Tarot reading lady who pulled all the cards showing nudity out of the Waite deck before her boy (an elementary school kid) was going too look at it. We all told her not to be so prudish and to stick them back in.

 

Encouragement to stick it back in is a good way to get over prudishism   

 

 

Nice gloomy deck. Thanks for sharing.

 

 

Love the box !

Edited June 6, 2015 by Nungali

[Nungali]

No, the telephone is not broken; however, arguably it has a rotary dial. Gotta know how to use it, dude.

 

No ... it is broken ... its in the courts .  

 

Well, its either broken as a mistaken GD copy, or it was Waite's own trip ( see my post above about he he did stuff like that) and if it was, why  he syphoned off the GD symbolism and warped it ... with no explanation ( ahh! he didnt have to as he thought the GD deck would never be published )  and copy the symbols but swap the people around  - re Kings and Princes ? 

 

He based his deck's 'construction' on what he syphoned off the GDs system, but then warped it, which warps that system. If he was more capable he would have hitched his tarot to his own star, and not made such a mess of things and created his own comprehensive system without the flaws that come about by hacking someone else's, especially when you dont  fully understand it, or use it to tack your own philosophically  disparate system on to  .

[Nungali]

 

Actually Waite does follow the GD Court order in the selection of a significator.

 

Is that following a court order or is an attribution of cards to people?

 

Even so he says the young man is the King and the old man the Knight       ? 

 

and as usual, he does not say why .... just declares it is so.

 

I contest that most people would make the face and question mark I do       ^      about that.

[Michael Sternbach]

Is that following a court order or is an attribution of cards to people?

 

Even so he says the young man is the King and the old man the Knight       ? 

 

and as usual, he does not say why .... just declares it is so.

 

I contest that most people would make the face and question mark I do       ^      about that.

 

As you must know, there is no consensus about how the traditional Court Cards relate to the GD scheme. One way of looking at this in fact considers that:

 

Knight (T) = King (GD)

King (T) = Prince (GD)

 

It's even in the introduction of one of Regardie's GD editions (I will look the exact reference up, if you like).

 

See also Crowley's edition of the Book T, "Knight of Wands":

 

"Note that the Kings are now called Knights, and the Princes are now called Kings. This is

unfortunate, and leads to confusion ... "

Edited June 7, 2015 by Michael Sternbach

[Michael Sternbach]

No ... it is broken ... its in the courts .  

 

Well, its either broken as a mistaken GD copy, or it was Waite's own trip ( see my post above about he he did stuff like that) and if it was, why  he syphoned off the GD symbolism and warped it ... with no explanation ( ahh! he didnt have to as he thought the GD deck would never be published )  and copy the symbols but swap the people around  - re Kings and Princes ? 

 

He based his deck's 'construction' on what he syphoned off the GDs system, but then warped it, which warps that system. If he was more capable he would have hitched his tarot to his own star, and not made such a mess of things and created his own comprehensive system without the flaws that come about by hacking someone else's, especially when you dont  fully understand it, or use it to tack your own philosophically  disparate system on to  .

 

It's not a broken telephone... You can use it for making calls out of the Matrix!

 

And of course Waite did his own thing! So did Crowley and others.

 

But I am not aware that Waite ever claimed his deck to be an exact depiction (or encoding) of the GD Tarot system.

[Zhongyongdaoist]

As you must know, there is no consensus about how the traditional Court Cards relate to the GD scheme. One way of looking at this in fact considers that:

 

Knight (T) = King (GD)

King (T) = Prince (GD)

 

It's even in the introduction of one of Regardie's GD editions (I will look the exact reference up, if you like).

 

See also Crowley's edition of the Book T, "Knight of Wands":

 

"Note that the Kings are now called Knights, and the Princes are now called Kings. This is

unfortunate, and leads to confusion ... "

 

It's even in the introduction of one of Regardie's GD editions: Actually it is were you would think it is in the section on Tarot Divination in Volume Four:

 

Kings -- Generally men

Queens -- Generally women

Princes (Knights) -- Generally young men

Princesses (Knaves) --Generally young women (Regardie, The Golden Dawn, third revised edition, 1970, Book Two, Volume Four p. 179)

 

Now, how this relates to this material:

 

The Knight of Wands is called The Lord of Flame and Lightning.   The King of the Spirits of Fire.

The Queen of Wands is called The Queen of the Thrones of Flames

The King of Wands is The Prince of the Chariot of Fire.

The Knave of Wands is the Princes of the Shining Flame, and the Rose of the Palace of Fire.

Etc. . . . (Regardie, The Golden Dawn, third revised edition, 1970, Book Two, Volume Four p. 138)

 

Is an interesting question and to be honest, the above seem to be in conflict to me, so the mess up may originate in ambiguities in Golden Dawn material itself.

 

As for this discussion it seems to involve terminology disputes at the most superficial level of interpretation and doesn't seem suitable for a thread on supposedly advanced topics, of course this is inevitable when Nungali appears and grasping for any argument he can possibly lay his hand on, without consideration of quality or consistency, uses arguments that if applied to illustrations for the Major Arcana, as he wishes to apply them to the Minors, would reduce them to the most abstract levels of symbolism also, or if we applied the idea that the Waite deck is bad because bad use of it is made by New Agers, then we would have to say that Crowley's teachings are bad because of Anton Levey's Satanism, which everyone knows, grew out of O.T.O. activity in California, and other such tactics, which are simply a waste of time to consider, or reply to.

 

To me the only thing that would make this discussion worth contributing to is to get off of terminology and onto function, what did the Court Cards mean in Golden Dawn system, and what could they mean in Waite based on what we can guess and then the most important thing, what an intelligent and well informed person might make of either, without making dogmatic and basically fundamentalist pronouncements about the wrongness of one way of referring to the cards titles and the absolute correctness of another, such discussions are always based on appearances, not matters of substance and are on no interest to me.

 

However, to toss an interesting point in the midst of this otherwise lackluster discussion, and I don't really know if anyone here or elsewhere, has commented upon this before, I will note that the symbolism of Waite's Sun card has a possible relation to the Golden Dawn Practicus intitiation, when, during the section on the Thirty-first Path the Hierophant, quoting from The Chaldean Oracles, says:

 

Also there is the vision of the Fire-flashing Courser of Light, or a a child borne aloft on the shoulders of the Celestial Steed, fiery or clothed in gold, or naked and shooting with a bow, shafts of light, standing on the shoulders of a horse. (Regardie, The Golden Dawn, third revised edition, 1970, Book One, Volume Two p. 101-2)

 

While the Sun card is related to the Thirtieth Path, it should be noted that in Waite's deck the Sun is in the background and the foreground is a very similar image, thus possibly tying the symbolism of the card in with the initiation ritual and possibly indicating the power of the Sun controlling the energy of the spiritual fire manifesting on the lower level:

So, like it or not, there may be deeper meaning to the Waite deck then many people see, and it may relate to the Golden Dawn more than people think.

 

Here is a link to an interesting article which covers a lot of the basics:

 

The Tarot of the Golden Dawn

 

 

 

 

Edit: The Sun card did not line up correctly with the text once posted, so I corrected that.

 

Edit: Since I basically like Nungali and find other aspects of his posting on Dao Bums interesting and stimulating, I softened my characterization of his basically lame criticisms of Waite and his deck.

 

Edited June 7, 2015 by Zhongyongdaoist

[Michael Sternbach]

It's even in the introduction of one of Regardie's GD editions: Actually it is were you would think it is in the section on Tarot Divination in Volume Four:

I was referring to a summary of the topic that I happened to read today in the chapter "Indexing the Golden Dawn" added to the 6th Llewellyn edition (the "black brick"), p. xxviii.

 

Now, how this relates to this material:

 

 

 

Is an interesting question and to be honest, the above seem to be in conflict to me, so the mess up may originate in ambiguities in Golden Dawn material itself.

The conclusion also of aforesaid summary exactly.

 

To me the only thing that would make this discussion worth contributing to is to get off of terminology and onto function, what did the Court Cards mean in Golden Dawn system, and what could they mean in Waite based on what we can guess and then the most important thing, what an intelligent and well informed person might make of either, without making dogmatic and basically fundamentalist pronouncements about the wrongness of one way of referring to the cards titles and the absolute correctness of another, such discussions are always based on appearances, not matters of substance and are on no interest to me.

Agreed on the discussion as is lacking depth.

 

However, to toss an interesting point in the midst of this otherwise lackluster discussion, and I don't really know if anyone here or elsewhere, has commented upon this before, I will note that the symbolism of Waite's Sun card has a possible relation to the Golden Dawn Practicus intitiation, when, during the section on the Thirty-first Path the Hierophant, quoting from The Chaldean Oracles, says:

 

 

 

While the Sun card is related to the Thirtieth Path, it should be noted that in Waite's deck the Sun is in the background and the foreground is a very similar image, thus possibly tying the symbolism of the card in with the initiation ritual and possibly indicating the power of the Sun controlling the energy of the spiritual fire manifesting on the lower level:

So, like it or not, there may be deeper meaning to the Waite deck then many people see, and it may relate to the Golden Dawn more than people think.

Agreed on the RWS deck containing esoteric information in an encoded way.

[Nungali]

It's not a broken telephone... You can use it for making calls out of the Matrix!

 

And of course Waite did his own thing! So did Crowley and others.

 

But I am not aware that Waite ever claimed his deck to be an exact depiction (or encoding) of the GD Tarot system.

 

neither am I, but some seem to think so, or that it came out of the GD. 

 

Would not that, back then, have been breaking his GD oaths if he did ? 

Edited June 7, 2015 by Nungali

[Nungali]

As for this discussion it seems to involve terminology disputes at the most superficial level of interpretation and doesn't seem suitable for a thread on supposedly advanced topics, of course this is inevitable when Nungali appears and grasping for any argument he can possibly lay his hand on, without consideration of quality or consistency, uses arguments that if applied to illustrations for the Major Arcana, as he wishes to apply them to the Minors, would reduce them to the most abstract levels of symbolism also, or if we applied the idea that the Waite deck is bad because bad use of it is made by New Agers, then we would have to say that Crowley's teachings are bad because of Anton Levey's Satanism, which everyone knows, grew out of O.T.O. activity in California, and other such tactics, which are simply a waste of time to consider, or reply to.

 

ermmmm ... I said a few reasons why I dont prefer Waite ....  but you go on, I know you like riding this particular  hobby horse. 

 

What am I applying to the minors that would reduce the majors ???   I was talking about courts.  ...  Then you  sedgway into Satanism and the OTO      ... more  Steckenpferd . 

 

Look ... I will do it for you.

 

Nungali, you retard. the GD made more of a mess of the Court's titles  than Waite ever did.

 

There ya go  

 

 

To me the only thing that would make this discussion worth contributing to is to get off of terminology and onto function, what did the Court Cards mean in Golden Dawn system, and what could they mean in Waite based on what we can guess and then the most important thing, what an intelligent and well informed person might make of either, without making dogmatic and basically fundamentalist pronouncements about the wrongness of one way of referring to the cards titles and the absolute correctness of another, such discussions are always based on appearances, not matters of substance and are on no interest to me.

 

Re post 54 quote from Waite book ; Knight is 40 or older, a King under that age, Queen a woman over 40 , Page a woman under that age, 

 

But ;  " Kings -- Generally men

Queens -- Generally women

Princes (Knights) -- Generally young men

Princesses (Knaves) --Generally young women (Regardie, The Golden Dawn, third revised edition, 1970, Book Two, Volume Four p. 179)

 

And other decks, but yes, I was assumptive in thinking generally people would see a king as older  a prince is younger.

 

And I still do not see why Waite attributes it this way.   And I believe most would not even need to ask why, if it was attributed the other way.   ( OR maybe I just unfairly dont like him because I satanically worship Aleister Crowley ?

 

 

 

[ Besides, you kept saying you were not going to be around here so much and were going to take a break .... and I thought I could muck up a bit ... and only have to deal with Sternbach            

 

 

 

 

 

 

However, to toss an interesting point in the midst of this otherwise lackluster discussion, and I don't really know if anyone here or elsewhere, has commented upon this before, I will note that the symbolism of Waite's Sun card has a possible relation to the Golden Dawn Practicus intitiation, when, during the section on the Thirty-first Path the Hierophant, quoting from The Chaldean Oracles, says:

 

 

While the Sun card is related to the Thirtieth Path, it should be noted that in Waite's deck the Sun is in the background and the foreground is a very similar image, thus possibly tying the symbolism of the card in with the initiation ritual and possibly indicating the power of the Sun controlling the energy of the spiritual fire manifesting on the lower level:

 

Yes, it does seem related, -  Interesting. 

 

 

So, like it or not, there may be deeper meaning to the Waite deck then many people see, and it may relate to the Golden Dawn more than people think.

 

yes, in some ways it does,  but I still think it isnt a GD  deck as such, it has lots of changes and influences from other decks.

 

Your example does show a reasonable association - and there are others, but he would not have explained that Sun symbolism in relation to the GD ceremony as he was keeping his oaths, I assume. Then he adds stuff from his own and other sources.

 

Its a hogdepodge that is hard to navigate. 

 

Edit: Since I basically like Nungali and find other aspects of his posting on Dao Bums interesting and stimulating, I softened my characterization of his basically lame criticisms of Waite and his deck.

 

 

yeah ... I like you too ... thats why I let you off so lightly        . 

 

 

So does that mean you will give me no more chastisement about being a vegemite eater       

Edited June 7, 2015 by Nungali

[Trivette]

.....What titles ... where do you get 'titles'  from?  The GD deck ?  If you think the RW deck should not be evaluated by comparison to the GD deck, why use the GD titles superimposed over the RW images ? .....

The images on the pips are not incompatible with the decan titles given in Book T, although the GD images are not used. This is merely a fact about the Waite deck. It has nothing to do with its evaluation.

[Michael Sternbach]

neither am I, but some seem to think so, or that it came out of the GD. 

 

Would not that, back then, have been breaking his GD oaths if he did ? 

 

Yes, right. However, bear in mind that the RWS was not only influenced by the GD descriptions of the cards, but that Waite and Colman Smith also drew heavily from the Sola Busca Tarot. It's clearly a hybrid deck.

[Nungali]

Yep, thats why I said " but I still think it isnt a GD  deck as such, it has lots of changes and influences from other decks." in post # 64. 

 

I was talking about the parts that were GD influenced .... of course 

Edited June 9, 2015 by Nungali

[Nungali]

The images on the pips are not incompatible with the decan titles given in Book T, although the GD images are not used. This is merely a fact about the Waite deck. It has nothing to do with its evaluation.

 

Oh, I see ; evaluation in their own right as a tarot deck.

 

I am interested in the bit I bolded in your quote. 

[idiot_stimpy]

Nungali, what do you think of the Hermetic Deck.

 

[Trivette]

Oh, I see ; evaluation in their own right as a tarot deck.

 

I am interested in the bit I bolded in your quote. 

It is simply a matter of pairing the decans with the Waite pips and observing that either the decan title is appropriate for the image, or in some cases the image illustrates the astrological configuration of the decan. This has all been thoroughly discussed elsewhere, as you know.

[Michael Sternbach]

Nungali, what do you think of the Hermetic Deck.

 

 

Well, the question didn't go to me, but since Nungali also habitually answers for other people...

 

The Hermetic Tarot is another "recreation" of Golden Dawn co-founder Mathers' mysterious prototype. It follows the structure and some of the symbolism of the RWS but was clearly influenced by the Thoth also. It has many of the GD attributions on it. A great deck especially for occult study.

[Nungali]

It is simply a matter of pairing the decans with the Waite pips and observing that either the decan title is appropriate for the image, or in some cases the image illustrates the astrological configuration of the decan. This has all been thoroughly discussed elsewhere, as you know.

 

yeah, but I am still interested in it,  like 'astrological configuration of the decan', and any associations ... or any ideas people have on it .....   as you know   

[Nungali]

Nungali, what do you think of the Hermetic Deck.

 

 

 

I am attracted to it , I like the idea , but I dont know much about it. I think I looked into it once and found the cards a bit busy.

 

... Sternie probably knows more about it ?

[Nungali]

Well, the question didn't go to me, but since Nungali also habitually answers for other people...

 

You beat me to it .  

 

( habitually ? ...       ... I will have you know, my good Sir, I do  not answer for other people ... I just butt in and give my own 

 

answer         )    

 

The Hermetic Tarot is another "recreation" of Golden Dawn co-founder Mathers' mysterious prototype. It follows the structure and some of the symbolism of the RWS but was clearly influenced by the Thoth also. It has many of the GD attributions on it. A great deck especially for occult study.

 

 

Mathers'  mysterious prototype ? ? ?      

[Michael Sternbach]

Mathers'  mysterious prototype ? ? ?      

 

You don't think it's mysterious?

[Nungali]

When its defined that way I do .    Which deck do you mean ? 

[Michael Sternbach]

When its defined that way I do .    Which deck do you mean ? 

 

I mean the apparently non-extant deck shown to GD initiates, which was developed by Mathers and Westcott. Its history is somewhat complex, mostly due to the revisions that some of the cards underwent.

Edited June 13, 2015 by Michael Sternbach

[Books&Sage]

I'm going to reiterate what a couple people have already said. The deck is only as good as the reader, and you should use whatever resonates with you the most. I use the Rider Waite a lot now (just because my clients recognize it), but it's not the deck I started out with. Actually, I started out with the deck everyone told me NOT to start with. 

 

I would recommend the Palladini Tarot: http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/new-palladini/

and the Universal Rider Waite: http://www.tarot.com/tarot/decks/universal_waite/box.

 

Those decks have different coloring than the original Waite. The Palladini has darker, richer color, while the Universal Waite is a little bit brighter than the original. No matter what deck you use, I HIGHLY recommend getting a book called Holistic Tarot by Benebell Wen. It's hands down the only book you need (in my opinion) to learn the Tarot. I've had many other books, and none of them even come CLOSE to this one!

 

Remember that the most important part of any Tarot reading is the implementation of your own intuition. For example, I might draw the Five of Wands for someone and get a TOTALLY different message than the prescribed meaning. Over time I've learned that if you try to go by the book and leave out what your intuition is telling you, the reading is largely ineffectual. There have been times in which I drew a card, got a weird message, and decided that it was all in my head and settled for the usual meaning only to have the reader DENY what it says and then TELL ME what I intuitively wanted to say in the first place! Talk about frustrating. That's why it's so important to get a deck that you connect with, rather than trying to adhere to a traditional presentation that only confuses you.

 

So yeah...just go with what calls to you. It's not permanent. You can get another deck if you don't like it.

 

Also, a surprisingly great resource (besides Aeclectic) for viewing decks/readers is Instagram. Seriously, there are TONS of readers/pictures of cards on there (myself included.) You might want to check it out.