THE
ARCANE
ARCHIVE

a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining
to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.


TOP | YRONWODE | ARCANE ARCHIVE.ORG | OCCULTISM | DIVINATION | TAROT

Qabalah and Tarot History

To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.consciousness.mysticism,talk.religion.misc
From: jwrevak@home.com (James W. Revak)
Subject: Re: Qabalah and Tarot History (was Hermetic QBL ...)
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 01:00:37 GMT

On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:34:27 GMT, Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume)
wrote:

>On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 05:34:48 GMT, jwrevak@home.com (James W. Revak)
>wrote:
>
>(Snip)
>
>>>> On the other hand, Waite, like many designers of decks, was certainly
>>>> influenced by a variety of other Tarotists and intended that his deck
>>>> be viewed from an esoteric perspective.  Nothing terribly surprising
>>>> about this.  But was his deck a "copy"?  I don't think so.  If nothing
>>>> else the numeric cards are fully illustrated with scenes.  This was
>>>> very rarely done prior to Waite.... 
>
>(Snip) 
>
>******James:
>
>Excellent information. Thanks. However, I'm still wondering why you
>haven't commented on the curious fact that Waite's major arcana
>numerical order (sequence) is exactly the same as the G.D.'s ---

Obviously Waite, following precedent established by the GD, swapped
the traditional positions of Justice and Strength.  However, this
hardly means that he bought the GD Tarot system lock, stock, and
barrel.

>with
>the obviously contrived mis-insertion  of The Fool (=0) between 20 and
>21 (see Waite's *Pictorial Key to the Tarot*) 

Is it really contrived or a mis-insertion?  And if so, why?  As a
"blind"?  (I'll explain why I think this "blind" argument is
particularly weak below.)

Anyhow . . . the precedent for The Fool as the Trump between Trumps 20
and 21 was set by LÚvi and is adhered to by a lot of non-GD Tarotists,
e.g., Papus to name but one.  Obviously Waite chose to place the Fool
thus in his _Pictorial Key_.  This is may be somewhat confusing,
especially when seen in the light of Waite's comments about the
position of the Fool (see below) but it is not shocking.

>and that  this sequence
>(applying the 22 Trumps to the 22 Paths of the Tree) is in fact the
>main important connection between the Tarot and the qabalah. 
>and that  this sequence
>(applying the 22 Trumps to the 22 Paths of the Tree) is in fact the
>main important connection between the Tarot and the qabalah. 

According to some folks.  But there's no clear evidence that Waite
adopted this system.  Point to one passage in one essay or book where
Waite clearly endorses the bulk of the GD Tarot system.  I haven't
found any such passage.  Have you?

>The
>following background material  may help put this in perspective:
>
> from *Secrets of the Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript * 
>by C. R. Runyon
>
>The Tarot Lecture (3=8) 
>
>Fortunately, Mathers translated this part of the Cypher MS. for his
>own students in his Alpha et Omega Order. Brodie-Innes copied it  in
>1910 and R. A. Gilbert published it in 1983. If anyone harbors the
>notion that either Westcott or Mathers wrote the original Tarot
>Lecture, a comparison of the pseudo-Biblical prose in my literal
>translation to that of Mather's version should lay that suspicion to
>rest. Twice the Cypher MS. scribe uses "thy" instead of "thine": first
>to modify a noun beginning with a consonant, and second, to modify a
>noun beginning with the letter 'H' ; virtually a text-book example of
>how to totally violate the rule. Mathers correctly rendered it "thine"
>in both instances. This is confirmed by Robert A. Gilbert's published
>version and an unpublished copy of the same text  I received from New
>Zealand. 

So?  This doesn't mean Waite adopted the entire GD Tarot system.

>      With the Golden Dawn Tarot scheme we have arrived at what some
>will consider the most significant mystery revealed in the Cypher
>Manuscript: the real source of the Order's Tarot and the rationale for
>its arrangement. 

Some people say this.  So?

>In the foreword to his translation of the Cypher MS.
>Tarot Lecture, Mathers states that: "Eliphas Levi....had in his
>possession those cypher MSS. of The Order...

There is no evidence that this was so.  It is probably a fiction just
as the GD ancient lineage is a fiction.

>But he probably felt he
>was not at liberty to divulge to the outer and uninitiated world the
>secret  and true attribution of the Tarot which was given in the
>(G.D.) Cypher MS. 

Pure baloney, in my opinion.  Do you possess any hard evidence that
LÚvi lied about his Tarot-Hebrew attributions?  I've never seen any--
have you?

Here's another reason why I think the position that LÚvi lied is pure
baloney.  Let's assume the LÚvi created a "blind", i.e., lied, with
regard to his attributions as published in his _Transcendental Magic_.
Still, we know that many leading Tarotists have used or still use his
system.  A partial list includes Papus, Curtiss & Curtiss, Wirth,
Sadhu, Tavaglione, and Balbi.  Therefore we can conclude one of two
things, given the assumption that LÚvi lied.  Either all of these
individuals are part of an orchestrated, international, occultist plot
extending over approximately 150 years to publicly lie about
Tarot-Hebrew correspondences, or all of them are utter idiots who
exhibit an abysmal lack of knowledge about Tarot correspondences.
Personally, I reject both of these possibilities.

For this reason, and because no one has ever to my knowledge presented
hard evidence that LÚvi and his followers are a bunch of liars or
idiots, I conclude that LÚvi presented his attributions in good faith
as understood by him.  He didn't lie in this case.  I also conclude
that his followers in this matter have also presented their
attributions in good faith without resorting to lies.  Rather than
having correspondence system X which is "correct" and system Y which
is "wrong", I think we have two imperfect systems, neither of which is
clearly "wrong" or "right".

So, you may ask, "Why the heck all this talk about 'blinds'?"  I feel
there are at least two major reasons for this phenomenon, especially
with regard to Tarot-Cabala correspondences:

1.  Certain authors and magi desire to legitimize their teachings over
prior ones.  They, therefore claim that a given system of
correspondences is the one "true" or "perfect" system and everyone
else lied--except them of course.  Also note, that these authors and
magi usually only claim that prior systems were lies when the creators
of said systems are conveniently dead and can't object to being called
liars.

2.  Certain authors and magi desire to reduce what shrinks call
"cognitive dissidence".  They, like most human beings, don't like to
hold contradictory thoughts or beliefs.  Therefore, they conclude that
such-and-such system is "correct" or "perfect" and seek to rationalize
this by denigrating other systems as "blinds" or "lies".

>The attribution he gave in The Dogme et Rituel de la
>Haute Magie. . . is very different than that treasured in The Order. "
>
>        Actually MacGregor was fibbing. It's not "very different",
>it's  really almost identical! (For the Major Trumps, that is. ) 

Well . . . it depends on one's perspective.  It is similar to the
extent that the GD assigned Aleph to the Fool rather than the Magician
as LÚvi had done.  The GD's remaining alphabetic correspondences
typically then displace LÚvi's by one letter.  However, Mathers is
correct when he describes the system as "very different" to the extent
that LÚvis correspondences are nearly all plainly "wrong", assuming
that the GD's system is "correct".  For example, according to the GD,
Aleph is assigned to the Fool and anything else, including LÚvi's
insistence that Shin is assigned to this card, is plain "wrong".

>If we
>compare the two Tarot Tables on pages 32 and 35 in the Cypher MS. with
>Levi's arrangement on pages 339 through 342 in Levi's Transcendental
>Magic, we will see that the sequences, titles and what attributes were
>originally identical ---except for The Fool, which Levi placed below
>The Universe in either "29th" or "0" position at the bottom of The
>Tree. He also placed Justice in the 8th position with Strength in the
>11th. In this one instance it seems obvious, especially from the
>interchanging arrows between these two on page 32, that the Cypher MS.
>author(s) (in this case probably Mackenzie) used to improve on Levi's
>scheme. He elevated the Fool to the First Path, moving Levi's original
>order down one Path for each Trump. This put The Lovers on the Path of
>Zain-Gemini (17) and almost gave a perfect scheme --

"Perfection" is definitely in the eye of the beholder when it comes to
Tarot correspondences.

>except that
>Justice needed to coincide with the scales of Lamed-Libra (22). The
>author rightly decided to make the switch, in the interest of elegant
>symbolism, and the arrangement was complete. 

Or an imperfect attempt at the impossible, i.e., torturing Tarot until
it screams, "I confess.  I confess.  Tarot is Cabala and Cabala is
Tarot and the GD got it right."  Pure baloney, in my opinion.  BTW,
none of this means that the GD correspondences are "stupid" or
"unusable", but it does mean that the system is far from epitome of
elegance or perfection.  For example, anyone that knows anything about
Hebrew numbers knows that Beth = 2.  *However*, unlike LÚvi the GD
insisted that the Magician (Trump 1) corresponds to Beth.  So we now
arrive at the following equation: Magician = Trump 1 = Beth = 2.  This
reduces to: 1 = 2.  Pure nonsense, no matter what justification and
twisting of the facts one indulges in to rationalize this position!

But I suppose that's what happens when you attempt to force Tarot into
a framework which did not form its basis from its beginning.  BTW, I
can also offer similar criticism of LÚvi's system, which is also
neither supremely elegant or perfect.  And this doesn't mean that
Tarot-Cabala correspondences are of absolutely no use, but in my
opinion none of the popular systems are supremely elegant or perfect.

>Perhaps to pay Levi back,
>he renamed Prudence "The Hermit", as Levi had originally titled it. 

Pure speculation.  Prudence was never a popular name for The Hermit.
Waite simply stuck with the traditional nomenclature.

>       Mathers and Westcott may have later rationalized about Levi
>"knowing the true attributions " but he probably did not, nor would he
>have been overly concerned. Eliphas Levi, for all his theoretical
>imagination, romantic speculations and limpid prose, was not a
>practical occultist creating workable systems. 

It is documented that LÚvi earned income as a working magician.  To
say that he was not "practical" is not completely accurate.  In
addition, saying that he was not "practical" does not automatically
mean that his Tarot correspondences are incorrect or purposely
deceptive.  One does not follow the other.

>As a specific example
>of Levi in regard to the Tarot as it applies to magick, the reader
>might consult The Magical Ritual of the Sanctum Regnum (a Levi
>manuscript edited and published by Westcott in 1896). 
>        In his preface to this work, Westcott echoed Mathers when he
>stated: "The twenty-two Tarot Trumps bear a relation to  numbers and
>letters; the true attributions are known, 

This assumes that there is one "true" or "perfect" set of
attributions, which is baloney in my opinion.  Also, that he echoes
Mathers is unsurprising; Westcott was committed to the GD.

>so as is ascertainable, to
>but a few students of the secret Hermetic schools: the attributions
>given by Levi in his  Dogme and Rituel, and by Christian and Papus are
>incorrect, presumably by design. The editor has seen a  manuscript
>page of cypher about 150 years old which has a different attribution,
>and one which has been found by several occult students, well known to
>him, to satisfy all the conditions required by occult science." 

Hardly a convincing argument considering that the anonymous Cypher
MS., which is alluded to in the quote above, was a forgery and nowhere
nearly 150 years old at the time.  In fact, LÚvi's attributions may
well pre-date those of the Cypher MS.

>        In so much as we are now among that privileged number of
>Hermetic students, we must agree --and like Brother Westcott and
>Brother Mathers, we too must acknowledge our debt to Eliphas Levi.  

Damned straight.  As goofy as old man LÚvi sometimes was, he was very
influential.


>He
>was certainly the matchmaker in the marriage of Tarot and Qabalah; for
>which our founders properly gave him credit. Westcott also cited Levi
>in the History Lecture, before Mackenzie and Hockley, as a progenitor
>of the Golden Dawn. 

Damned straight again.


>The Tarot Lecture does not concern itself with the
>minor arcana. The considerable ingenuity and inspiration for that
>symbolism might be credited to MacGregor Mathers, along with his
>clairvoyant and artistic wife, Moina. 
>
>Excerpted from: *Secrets of The Golden Dawn Cypher Manuscript* by
>Carroll "Poke" Runyon, M.A., pages 52-54
>Copyright 1997 by Carroll Runyon

OK, but none of the above quoted material, which has been well known
by occultists for decades, gives clear convincing evidence that Waite
adopted the entire GD Tarot system.  Got any?
>
>In the present discussion I think it is pertinent to note the Arthur
>Edward Waite's version of the Tarot follows the G.D. arrangement
>precisely (except for his out-of-sequence  re-insertion of The Fool )

It depends what you mean by the "G.D. arrangement".  Did he use the
GD's swap of Justice and Strength?  Yes, obviously so.  Did he
systematically assign the Trumps to specific paths on the Cabalistic
Tree of Life in accordance with GD teachings?  I know of no hard
evidence that he did so.  Did he systematically assign the numeric
cards to the Sephiroth in accordance with GD teachings.  I know of no
hard evidence that he did so.  Do you?

In fact, there's evidence that, contrary to strict GD philosophy, he
sometimes closely associated Trumps with Sephiroth rather than the
Paths between them.  For example, in _The Pictorial Key_, Waite writes
about the Star Trump, "But she is in reality the Great Mother in the
Kabalistic _Sephira Binah_. . . ."  

Again, for example, he writes about the High Priestess, ". . . her
truest and highest name in symbolism is _Shekinah_--the co-habiting
glory.  According to Kabalism, there is a _Shekinah_ both above and
below.  In the superior world it is called _Binah. . . .  In the lower
world it is _Malkuth_."  Hardly a ringing endorsement of the GD Tarot

system.

Furthermore there's clear evidence that Waite's decks is *not* a GD
deck, despite what lots of popular books might say.  Over and over and
over he and the artist Smith throw GD specifications for a Tarot deck
(well defined in the order's "Book T") out the window.  

For one thing, according to the GD, numeric cards should typically
essentially show pips or suit signs and a few other elements--but not
complete scenes based on divinatory meanings.  However Waite's deck
does indeed shows such scenes on its numeric cards.  

Additionally, Waite rejected the notion that the traditional Page
should be replaced by Princess.

Additionally, important changes to selected Trumps stipulated by the
GD are absent in Waite's design.  For example, the Lovers from Waite's
deck depicts Adam and Eve rather than Andromeda and Perseus.

Additionally, in an enigmatic passage in _The Pictorial Key_, Waite
may imply that he rejects the important GD notion that the Fool, the
"zero card", is the first of the Majors.  In the subject passage he
first rejects LÚvi's notion of placing the "zero card" or "zero
symbol", i.e., the Fool, between Trumps 20 and 21.  He also rejects
what he describes as Etteilla's notion of placing the "zero card"
last.  These were two significant ways of dealing with the Fool in
Waite's day.  The only other significant way of dealing with the "zero
card" in Waite's day, to the best of my knowledge, was to place it
first, which is the teaching of the GD.  But Waite says (and read him
carefully), "I have seen yet another allocation of the zero symbol,
which no doubt obtains in certain cases, but it fails on the highest
plane. . . ."

Given all this and more, why on earth should we conclude that Waite's
deck is a GD deck and Waite wholeheartedly embraced the GD's Tarot
system?  In reality, when one looks at the complete picture, there is
an excellent possibility that Waite rejected major portions of the
GD's Tarot system, which would be unsurprising given how much he
detested magic and the GD as a major proponent thereof.

>--and the most important major aspect of the Tarot in relation to the
>qabalah is the assignment of the Trumps to the Paths of  the Tree of
>Life. 

And note that Waite says a lot of explicit stuff about the Star and
High Priestess Trumps (detailed above) in relation to *Sephiroth*.

>If Waite thought Levi, Mathers and the rest were "charlatans" he
>certainly must have thought that they were  inspired and gifted
>nonetheless---

True.  Waite had a ugly habit of trashing others, only to adopt many
of their ideas.  In the bibliography and text of his _Pictorial Key_
he trashes Etteilla to no end.  However, he turns around and bases
approximately half of his divinatory meanings on those of Etteilla and
Etteilla's followers.  Go figure.

>and he probably enjoyed removing his Fool and placing it
>at the top of the Tree to impress his Christian Rosicrucian friends.

But did he really do so?  We have no hard evidence for this position
in this post or anywhere to my knowledge.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES W. REVAK - San Diego, CA, USA - jwrevak@home.com
Villa Revak / A Tarot Web Site: http://jwrevak.tripod.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: typhoon.sonic.net!feed.news.sonic.net!newsfeed4.cidera.com!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!netnews.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jwrevak@home.com (James W. Revak)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick
Subject: Re: Qabalah and Tarot History (was Hermetic QBL ...)
Message-ID: <3c4ab747.35609219@news>
References: <3c164206.1112263@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3kYR7.12787$DD2.130432@typhoon.sonic.net> <3c195d5c.39967482@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3C193C1A.6286@luckymojo.com> <3c1a3d20.26648493@trialnews.peoplepc.com>  <3c31fd8b.36549594@news>  <3c2322e0.13255236@news> <3c20476c.46616575@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3c263308.22348623@news> <3c2181e2.45999803@trialnews.peoplepc.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/16.451
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 476
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:52:12 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.21.14.129
X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net
X-Trace: news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com 1008910332 24.21.14.129 (Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:52:12 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:52:12 PST
Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:30612 alt.magick:281169

On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 06:15:32 GMT, Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume)
wrote:


>
>******what comments? Waite's actual comments are totally supportive of
>my position. How about this one:"Many symbols of the Instituted
>Mysteries are summarized in this card, which **reverses, under high
>warrants, all the confusions that have preceded it.** "  (Emphasis
>mine) from *The Pictorial Tarot* page 155. ******
>>
So?  This is strictly a comment upon the World Trump.  Furthermore,
this doesn't clearly say a thing about the GD system.  Waite simply
says, if I may translate from the Waitean Dialect of Tarotspeak, "The
World Trump of my deck reflects an improved and correct understanding
of Tarot based on ancient mystical teachings."  However, again, this
says nothing about the GD system specifically.

>>>and that  this sequence
>>>(applying the 22 Trumps to the 22 Paths of the Tree) is in fact the
>>>main important connection between the Tarot and the qabalah. 
>>>and that  this sequence
>>>(applying the 22 Trumps to the 22 Paths of the Tree) is in fact the
>>>main important connection between the Tarot and the qabalah. 
>>
>>According to some folks.  But there's no clear evidence that Waite
>>adopted this system.  Point to one passage in one essay or book where
>>Waite clearly endorses the bulk of the GD Tarot system.  I haven't
>>found any such passage.  Have you?
>
>***** Actually the book is so loaded with veiled inferences to the
>"kabbalah" and the "mysteries" that had Gershom Scholem read it he
>would probably have (IMO) withdrawn his support for Waite as a sincere
>scholar not trying to exploit the Jewish kabbalah. 

Waite obviously loved Cabala and incorporated it well into his
spiritual life and the structure of his Christian mystic order.  And,
indeed, Scholem may have been upset by some of Waite's uses for Cabala
if he had known about them.

>I do agree with you
>that his "kabalistic" (his spelling) speculations did not always match
>the G.D. even though his sequence did--but then he was a Christian
>mystic, not a practical magician. Here is a case in point:  (The Star)
>"But she is in reality the Great Mother in the Kabalistic Sephira
>Binah, which is supernal Understanding, who communicates to the
>Sephiroth that are below in the measure that they can receive her
>influx." *Pictorial Key to the Tarot* page 139. *****

Yes, I quoted this passage in my last post in this thread.  Obviously,
Waite's approach to Cabala-Tarot correspondences does not adhere
strictly to the GD approach.
>
>

>>
>>So?  This doesn't mean Waite adopted the entire GD Tarot system.
>
>****No. Of course not. He adopted the G.D. 's 22 letter sequence of
>the Major Trumps. *****

That he adopted the GD's sequence is obvious.  That he also adopted
the GD's attribution of Hebrew letters to specific Trumps and placed
the Trumps on specific Paths is, I feel, unknown.
>>
>>>      With the Golden Dawn Tarot scheme we have arrived at what some
>>>will consider the most significant mystery revealed in the Cypher
>>>Manuscript: the real source of the Order's Tarot and the rationale for
>>>its arrangement. 
>>
>>Some people say this.  So?
>
>******Some people find the 22 major Trumps equaling the 22 Paths of
>the Tree of Life significant. I'm sorry if you do not. 

Let me explain myself.  Yes, I agree that the 22 Majors corresponding
to the 22 Paths is significant to the extent that they can indeed be
incorporated into one's personal spiritual and magical worldview.

However, I don't think that this is "the most significant mystery"
revealed in the Cypher MS.  The relationship between the Majors and
the Hebrew alphabet, and, by extension, the Paths, had been publicly
asserted by LÚvi prior to the beginnings of the GD--even if LÚvi's
system wasn't exactly like the GD's.

>It opens a
>marvelous range of meditative mystical/magical insights and
>contemplative spiritual speculations. *****

For many individuals this is true.  Personally, I have used the
relationship between the Majors and Paths in my own spiritual and
magical life to benefit.  However, this does not mean that I find a
given system of correspondences perfect or nearly perfect.
>>
>>>In the foreword to his translation of the Cypher MS.
>>>Tarot Lecture, Mathers states that: "Eliphas Levi....had in his
>>>possession those cypher MSS. of The Order...
>>
>>There is no evidence that this was so.  It is probably a fiction just
>>as the GD ancient lineage is a fiction.
>
>****** Oh, but what a lovely "fiction" my pedestrian friend. *****

Irrelevant ad hominem.
>>

>>
>>For this reason, and because no one has ever to my knowledge presented
>>hard evidence that LÚvi and his followers are a bunch of liars or
>>idiots, I conclude that LÚvi presented his attributions in good faith
>>as understood by him.  He didn't lie in this case.  I also conclude
>>that his followers in this matter have also presented their
>>attributions in good faith without resorting to lies.  Rather than
>>having correspondence system X which is "correct" and system Y which
>>is "wrong", I think we have two imperfect systems, neither of which is
>>clearly "wrong" or "right".
>
>****** Oh, come now! The changes the G.D. made in the arrangement
>were, from an occult standpoint, quite well thought-out and even
>elegant. 

So elegant that the GD system says that Trump 1 = Beth and Beth
(according to the well established, traditional Hebrew number system)
= 2; therefore the GD system implies 1 = 2.  Sorry, this is not
elegant in my opinion.  In fact, it's nonsensical.

>If they wanted to fib in Levi's favor (he himself was a great
>fibber) then why not. You need to lighten up and develop more of a
>sense of romance. You'll enjoy Tarot much more and have more fun.*****

Irrelevant; you have no idea what I will enjoy.
>>
>>So, you may ask, "Why the heck all this talk about 'blinds'?"  I feel
>>there are at least two major reasons for this phenomenon, especially
>>with regard to Tarot-Cabala correspondences:
>>
>>1.  Certain authors and magi desire to legitimize their teachings over
>>prior ones.  They, therefore claim that a given system of
>>correspondences is the one "true" or "perfect" system and everyone
>>else lied--except them of course.  Also note, that these authors and
>>magi usually only claim that prior systems were lies when the creators
>>of said systems are conveniently dead and can't object to being called
>>liars.
>
>******* When so much of this is subjective speculation, those who
>demand that these ruminations be carried out via rigorous scientific
>method may be likened to mechanical engineers trying to run an art
>school. *****


Non sequitur--and an irrelevant ad hominem.
>>
>>2.  Certain authors and magi desire to reduce what shrinks call
>>"cognitive dissidence".  They, like most human beings, don't like to
>>hold contradictory thoughts or beliefs.  Therefore, they conclude that
>>such-and-such system is "correct" or "perfect" and seek to rationalize
>>this by denigrating other systems as "blinds" or "lies".
>
>****** And other magi take them with a grain of salt. I have clearly
>stated that (IMO) Eliphas Levi was a fanciful romantic and not even a
>magician. We only differ in levels of appreciation and tolerance.****

Another non sequitur.
>>
>>>The attribution he gave in The Dogme et Rituel de la
>>>Haute Magie. . . is very different than that treasured in The Order. "
>>>
>>>        Actually MacGregor was fibbing. It's not "very different",
>>>it's  really almost identical! (For the Major Trumps, that is. ) 
>>
>>Well . . . it depends on one's perspective.  It is similar to the
>>extent that the GD assigned Aleph to the Fool rather than the Magician
>>as LÚvi had done.  The GD's remaining alphabetic correspondences
>>typically then displace LÚvi's by one letter.  However, Mathers is
>>correct when he describes the system as "very different" to the extent
>>that LÚvis correspondences are nearly all plainly "wrong", assuming
>>that the GD's system is "correct".  For example, according to the GD,
>>Aleph is assigned to the Fool and anything else, including LÚvi's
>>insistence that Shin is assigned to this card, is plain "wrong".
>
>****** I'm not sure I follow that reasoning. I'm not sure you follow
>it either.....*****

Irrelevant ad hominem.  More importantly, you may wish to re-read the
passage.  It's a tad confusing due to the subject matter, but, I
think, understandable.
>>

>
>****** You can huff and puff but  there is no "Zero" in Hebrew, so the
>G.D. attribution of Aleph to The Fool on path number Eleven works out
>just fine. ******

The non-existence of zero in Hebrew only points up that any direct
correspondences between a set of Majors, which includes zero on the
Fool, is bound to be imperfect and inelegant in my opinion.  Not
unusable and devoid of merit, but imperfect and inelegant.
Furthermore, historically the Fool typically wasn't considered part of
the sequence of Trumps and received neither a number nor a zero, but I
won't even go there today.
>>
>>But I suppose that's what happens when you attempt to force Tarot into
>>a framework which did not form its basis from its beginning.  
>
>******in that  case why do we have 22 Major Trumps?
> Why not 25 or 20, or even 30--why 22? *****

Why are there 22 blocks between my home and the nearest library?  I'm
not being silly.  Frankly, 22 is a very common number.  That there are
22 Majors hardly means that there *must* be a perfect fit between them
and the Hebrew alphabet, or that the Hebrew alphabet was the
underlying structure of Tarot from its very beginnings.  Additionally,
historically, there are many Tarot decks that do *not* have 22 Majors,
but I won't even go there today.
>

>>
>>Hardly a convincing argument considering that the anonymous Cypher
>>MS., which is alluded to in the quote above, was a forgery and nowhere
>>nearly 150 years old at the time.  In fact, LÚvi's attributions may
>>well pre-date those of the Cypher MS.
>
>**** They probably do! Here again you seem to  think I believe this?
>That, my friend, is the real "baloney" in your presentation.  

I did not mean to imply that.  I apologize if I gave you or others
this impression.  I was merely criticizing Westcott.


>>
>>OK, but none of the above quoted material, which has been well known
>>by occultists for decades, gives clear convincing evidence that Waite
>>adopted the entire GD Tarot system.  Got any?
>
>******Of course not. He adopted the sequence of the Major Arcana. That
>is the Hermetic Qabalistic crux of the system. That's enough.*****

Enough for what?  I'm honestly unsure of your point here.  If you mean
enough to conclude that Waite placed the Trumps on Paths in accodance
with GD doctrine, I disagree.
>>>
>>>In the present discussion I think it is pertinent to note the Arthur
>>>Edward Waite's version of the Tarot follows the G.D. arrangement
>>>precisely (except for his out-of-sequence  re-insertion of The Fool )
>>
>>It depends what you mean by the "G.D. arrangement".  Did he use the
>>GD's swap of Justice and Strength?  Yes, obviously so.  Did he
>>systematically assign the Trumps to specific paths on the Cabalistic
>>Tree of Life in accordance with GD teachings?  I know of no hard
>>evidence that he did so.  Did he systematically assign the numeric
>>cards to the Sephiroth in accordance with GD teachings.  I know of no
>>hard evidence that he did so.  Do you?
>
>****** That is a non-sequitor point of argument. 

Not really.  I am merely asking if you have evidence that he adopted
the GD Tarot system.  Even more specifically now, I am asking if you
have evidence that he assigned the Trumps to the Paths in accordance
with GD teachings.  Either you have it or you don't.  So far, the only
evidence I see you presenting is the reality that Waite followed the
numbering system of the GD for the Trumps of his deck.  Personally, I
consider this evidence very shaky, but apparently you don't.  And
there we may have to agree to disagree.

>He was not publishing
>a book on Magical-Qabalistic Tarot -- 

No problem.  Instead, feel free to point to any other source among his
voluminous writings to indicate that he assigned the Trumps to the
Paths in accordance with GD teachings.

>however, the basic order 
>of his Major Arcana is G.D.  You can disagree but I think the facts
>speak for themselves. 

What facts?  The only genuinely relevant thing you have clearly
established is that Waite's numbering of the Trumps follows the GD
numbering.  That's about it.

>Waite was a G.D. member, and if you will
>carefully read his preface to *The Pictorial Tarot* you will see that
>he has,  given his tortured and ambiguous writing style, admitted that
>he has presented the highest esoteric aspects of the system. *****

So?  What is the "highest esoteric aspects of the system" from Waite's
perspective?  Is it the entire GD system, the assignment of Trumps to
Paths in accordance with GD doctrine, or something that is unique to
Waite?  I don't think we know because Waite said very little about his
system in clear terms here, or to my knowledge, anywhere.
>
>>In fact, there's evidence that, contrary to strict GD philosophy, he
>>sometimes closely associated Trumps with Sephiroth rather than the
>>Paths between them.  For example, in _The Pictorial Key_, Waite writes
>>about the Star Trump, "But she is in reality the Great Mother in the
>>Kabalistic _Sephira Binah_. . . ."  
>
>****This is a good point. I mentioned this above. it is not the G,D.
>attribution (Crowley later switched it with the Emperor, BTW). In this
>case Waite was winging it philosophically but at least he left it
>where it was.******

Was he "winging" it or was he pointing towards his unique approach to
Tarot?  Quite possibly it's the latter.  Denigrating his statement as
"winging" it may be inappropriate.
>>
>>Again, for example, he writes about the High Priestess, ". . . her
>>truest and highest name in symbolism is _Shekinah_--the co-habiting
>>glory.  According to Kabalism, there is a _Shekinah_ both above and
>>below.  In the superior world it is called _Binah. . . .  In the lower
>>world it is _Malkuth_."  Hardly a ringing endorsement of the GD Tarot
>>system.
>
>******Oh, come now! Why is the High Priestess on the Middle Pillar
>then? ****

Non sequitur.  Whether or not Waite placed the High Priestess on the
Middle Pillar is not known with certainty.  However, we do know with
*certainty* that he closely associated her with Sephiroth,
specifically Binah and Malkuth.  And this is not orthodox GD teaching.
>>
>>Furthermore there's clear evidence that Waite's decks is *not* a GD
>>deck, despite what lots of popular books might say.  Over and over and
>>over he and the artist Smith throw GD specifications for a Tarot deck
>>(well defined in the order's "Book T") out the window.  
>>
>>For one thing, according to the GD, numeric cards should typically
>>essentially show pips or suit signs and a few other elements--but not
>>complete scenes based on divinatory meanings.  However Waite's deck
>>does indeed shows such scenes on its numeric cards.  
>>
>>Additionally, Waite rejected the notion that the traditional Page
>>should be replaced by Princess.
>
>**** I'm not concerned with this. 

Then you are excluding an enormous amount of data.  Specifically, you
are excluding from your analysis 56 cards from a 78-card deck, i.e.,
about two out of three cards.  This is *not* good.

>Waite was a Christian mystic
>designing a popular Tarot in cooperation with a very fine (IMO)
>artist. They created a charming result--but the basic structure of the
>major Arcana is G.D. If you don't think so, look at Paul Foster Case's
>G.D. derived deck and notice the similarities.****

Because Case says XYZ about the BOTA deck is irrelevant in the context
of this thread.  Why?  Because he is *not* Waite and the BOTA deck,
more often than not, is completely dissimilar to Waite's.  The numeric
cards are *completely* different.  Some of the Majors are *completely*
different.  And the Majors include Hebrew letters.  So, yes, the BOTA
deck is more in line with the GD tradition.  But this does not mean
that Case's approach is identical or very similar to Waite's.
>>
>>Additionally, important changes to selected Trumps stipulated by the
>>GD are absent in Waite's design.  For example, the Lovers from Waite's
>>deck depicts Adam and Eve rather than Andromeda and Perseus.
>>
>>Additionally, in an enigmatic passage in _The Pictorial Key_, Waite
>>may imply that he rejects the important GD notion that the Fool, the
>>"zero card", is the first of the Majors.  In the subject passage he
>>first rejects LÚvi's notion of placing the "zero card" or "zero
>>symbol", i.e., the Fool, between Trumps 20 and 21.  He also rejects
>>what he describes as Etteilla's notion of placing the "zero card"
>>last.  These were two significant ways of dealing with the Fool in
>>Waite's day.  The only other significant way of dealing with the "zero
>>card" in Waite's day, to the best of my knowledge, was to place it
>>first, which is the teaching of the GD.  But Waite says (and read him
>>carefully), "I have seen yet another allocation of the zero symbol,
>>which no doubt obtains in certain cases, but it fails on the highest
>>plane. . . ."
>
>***Placing it between 20 and 21 fails on every plane. ****

Non sequitur.  Read the relevant passage of _Pictorial Key_ in
context.  Those who wish to do so may go to pages 70-71.  Waite in the
quote above is clearly *not* talking about placing the Fool between
Trumps 20 and 21 as failure, because he has just disposed of that
issue a couple sentences prior.  Instead, he's talking about something
else, possibly the GD's assignment of Aleph to the Fool.  
>>
>>Given all this and more, why on earth should we conclude that Waite's
>>deck is a GD deck and Waite wholeheartedly embraced the GD's Tarot
>>system? 
>
>******We don't. You say we do so have you can have an argument. ****


OK, then I am reading too much into your statements and I apologize if
that is the case.  If you feel that it is inappropriate to conclude
that Waite wholeheartedly embraced the GD's entire Tarot system, we
are in obvious agreement.
>
>> In reality, when one looks at the complete picture, there is
>>an excellent possibility that Waite rejected major portions of the
>>GD's Tarot system, which would be unsurprising given how much he
>>detested magic and the GD as a major proponent thereof.
>>
>>>--and the most important major aspect of the Tarot in relation to the
>>>qabalah is the assignment of the Trumps to the Paths of  the Tree of
>>>Life. 
>>
>>And note that Waite says a lot of explicit stuff about the Star and
>>High Priestess Trumps (detailed above) in relation to *Sephiroth*.
>>
>>>If Waite thought Levi, Mathers and the rest were "charlatans" he
>>>certainly must have thought that they were  inspired and gifted
>>>nonetheless---
>>
>>True.  Waite had a ugly habit of trashing others, only to adopt many
>>of their ideas.  In the bibliography and text of his _Pictorial Key_
>>he trashes Etteilla to no end.  However, he turns around and bases
>>approximately half of his divinatory meanings on those of Etteilla and
>>Etteilla's followers.  Go figure.
>>
>>>and he probably enjoyed removing his Fool and placing it
>>>at the top of the Tree to impress his Christian Rosicrucian friends.
>>
>>But did he really do so?  We have no hard evidence for this position
>>in this post or anywhere to my knowledge.
>
>*****James, we have no "hard" evidence of anything here except 22 = 22

Non sequitur.  I don't see why the 22 = 22 concept proves much of
anything about Waite's purported placement of the Trumps on the Paths,
which is the issue at hand.

>and the G.D. Majors' arrangement compared to Waite's Majors'
>arrangement. That's it--and that is enough for me, 

Then we do have a disagreement specifically here.  For me, Waite's
mere following of the GD numbering of the Trumps is inadequate
evidence to conclude with reasonable confidence that he placed the
Trumps on the Paths in accordance with GD teachings or associated the
Trumps with the Hebrew alphabet in accordance with GD teachings.
That's all.  If you feel otherwise, we will have to agree to disagree.

>knowing that he was
>a G.D. member. Beyond that,  to subject  these concepts to a
>rigorously scientific and/or legalistic reductionism  is to insult the
>subject matter, the artists who created it, and the aficionados who
>enjoy it. 

I can't and don't take responsibility for others' feelings in this
context.  That's their business.

>To indulge in a bit of that myself, I will submit that
>Arthur Edward Waite was, IMO, a scavenger who was equally attracted
>and repelled to the subjects that interested him most. 

Well . . . "scavenger" is a tad harsh.  However, he certainly was
simultaneously both attracted and repulsed by some esoteric subjects
and disciplines, including magic.

>As you
>mentioned above, he was most adept at lifting material and ideas from
>others while degrading them in the process---usually in a pompous and
>authoritative manner.  

He certainly was.  However, I don't think this characterizes the
*bulk* of his output.

>He certainly was influenced by the G.D. in the
>creation of his Tarot. He also ---and this was how this discussion
>started --a proponent of kabbalistic (more P.C. to say qabalistic)
>Tarot correspondences, as you and I have both revealed in the course
>of this discussion. 

Well, we've certainly accomplished that much!  :)

>I will say again, if Gersholm Scholem had read
>*The Pictorial Tarot* I believe his kindly opinion of Mr. Waite would
>have suffered. ****
>
Agreed, it probably would have.  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES W. REVAK - San Diego, CA, USA - jwrevak@home.com
Villa Revak / A Tarot Web Site: http://jwrevak.tripod.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: typhoon.sonic.net!feed.news.sonic.net!sfo2-feed1.news.digex.net!intermedia!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jwrevak@home.com (James W. Revak)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick
Subject: Re: Qabalah and Tarot History (was Hermetic QBL ...)
Message-ID: <3c25caa4.8701904@news>
References: <3kYR7.12787$DD2.130432@typhoon.sonic.net> <3c195d5c.39967482@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3C193C1A.6286@luckymojo.com> <3c1a3d20.26648493@trialnews.peoplepc.com>  <3c31fd8b.36549594@news>  <3c2322e0.13255236@news> <3c20476c.46616575@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3c263308.22348623@news> <3c2181e2.45999803@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3c4ab747.35609219@news> <3c22ec01.55957681@trialnews.peoplepc.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/16.451
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 61
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 06:41:00 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.21.14.129
X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net
X-Trace: news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com 1009003260 24.21.14.129 (Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:41:00 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 22:41:00 PST
Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:30638 alt.magick:281253

On Fri, 21 Dec 2001 08:46:56 GMT, Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume)
wrote:


>>
>>So elegant that the GD system says that Trump 1 = Beth and Beth
>>(according to the well established, traditional Hebrew number system)
>>= 2; therefore the GD system implies 1 = 2.  Sorry, this is not
>>elegant in my opinion.  In fact, it's nonsensical.
>
>*******  Are you trying to get newbies to think that the numbering of
>the Paths is supposed to be a direct analog to the number value of the
>Hebrew letters? For your information The Fool is on Path 11 and the
>Magus is on Path 12. ******
>
No, I'm just pointing out that when you stick the letter Beth on a
card which is also numbered one, you have a contradiction, which for
me renders the GD and similar Tarot systems imperfect and inelegant.
That's all.




>(Big, big snip)
>
>>No problem.  Instead, feel free to point to any other source among his
>>voluminous writings to indicate that he assigned the Trumps to the
>>Paths in accordance with GD teachings.
>
>***** As a matter of fact, in his autobiography he stated that he was
>the source of the Golden Dawn's deeper knowledge of Tarot. If he had
>shared this opinion with Yeats he might have left the Golden Dawn
>sooner.******

This may be getting boring to most readers.  However, I will request
it only once more and then cease to beat the nearly dead horse.  Feel
free to quote any of Waite's voluminous writings to indicate that he
assigned the Trumps to the Paths in accordance with GD teachings.
Paraphrases or murky, vague passages which can be interpreted multiple
ways are unconvincing.

I have found no such quotes.  However, if you have I am eager to learn
about them.
>
>>>however, the basic order 
>>>of his Major Arcana is G.D.  You can disagree but I think the facts
>>>speak for themselves. 
>>
>>What facts?  The only genuinely relevant thing you have clearly
>>established is that Waite's numbering of the Trumps follows the GD
>>numbering.  That's about it.
>
>****Nope. He also adopted their interchange of Justice with Strength.
>*****
>
Yes, of course.  I include this in the notion of "numbering".  I
thought this was obvious from my other statments in the post.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES W. REVAK - San Diego, CA, USA - jwrevak@home.com
Villa Revak / A Tarot Web Site: http://jwrevak.tripod.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Path: typhoon.sonic.net!feed.news.sonic.net!news-out.nuthinbutnews.com!propagator2-austin!propagator!feed2.newsfeeds.com!newsfeeds.com!news-in-austin.nuthinbutnews.com!telocity-west!TELOCITY!enews.sgi.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jwrevak@home.com (James W. Revak)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick
Subject: Re: Qabalah and Tarot History (was Hermetic QBL ...)
Message-ID: <3c2ce60e.5454387@news>
References: <3C193C1A.6286@luckymojo.com> <3c1a3d20.26648493@trialnews.peoplepc.com>  <3c31fd8b.36549594@news>  <3c2322e0.13255236@news> <3c20476c.46616575@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3c263308.22348623@news> <3c2181e2.45999803@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3c4ab747.35609219@news> <3c22ec01.55957681@trialnews.peoplepc.com> <3c25caa4.8701904@news> <3c24307b.48130592@trialnews.peoplepc.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/16.451
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 105
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 20:05:53 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.21.14.129
X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net
X-Trace: news1.rdc1.sdca.home.com 1009051553 24.21.14.129 (Sat, 22 Dec 2001 12:05:53 PST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 12:05:53 PST
Organization: Excite@Home - The Leader in Broadband http://home.com/faster
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:30662 alt.magick:281281

On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 07:15:52 GMT, Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume)
wrote:

>On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 06:41:00 GMT, jwrevak@home.com (James W. Revak)
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 21 Dec 2001 08:46:56 GMT, Gnomedplume@aol.com (Gnome d Plume)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>So elegant that the GD system says that Trump 1 = Beth and Beth
>>>>(according to the well established, traditional Hebrew number system)
>>>>= 2; therefore the GD system implies 1 = 2.  Sorry, this is not
>>>>elegant in my opinion.  In fact, it's nonsensical.
>>>
>>>*******  Are you trying to get newbies to think that the numbering of
>>>the Paths is supposed to be a direct analog to the number value of the
>>>Hebrew letters? For your information The Fool is on Path 11 and the
>>>Magus is on Path 12. ******
>>>
>>No, I'm just pointing out that when you stick the letter Beth on a
>>card which is also numbered one, you have a contradiction, which for
>>me renders the GD and similar Tarot systems imperfect and inelegant.
>>That's all.
>>
>*******People who understand that there 32 Paths of Wisdom represented
>on the Tree of Life, including the Sephioth and the Paths,  have no
>problem with this assignment. *****

A glittering generality.  Some people, including me, do.
>>
>>>(Big, big snip)
>>>
>>>>No problem.  Instead, feel free to point to any other source among his
>>>>voluminous writings to indicate that he assigned the Trumps to the
>>>>Paths in accordance with GD teachings.
>>>
>>>***** As a matter of fact, in his autobiography he stated that he was
>>>the source of the Golden Dawn's deeper knowledge of Tarot. If he had
>>>shared this opinion with Yeats he might have left the Golden Dawn
>>>sooner.******
>>
>>This may be getting boring to most readers.  However, I will request
>>it only once more and then cease to beat the nearly dead horse.  Feel
>>free to quote any of Waite's voluminous writings to indicate that he
>>assigned the Trumps to the Paths in accordance with GD teachings.
>>Paraphrases or murky, vague passages which can be interpreted multiple
>>ways are unconvincing.
>
>******You are the one who pointed out that Waite lifted others'
>material and then denigrated them. 

Non sequitur.  That Waite sometimes lifted others' material hardly
comprises clear evidence that he adopted the GD assignment of Trumps
to specific Paths.  One does not follow the other.  

>The above is very much in line with
>that----and maybe the discussion  wouldn't be so boring if you'd deal
>with questions such as:

I don't think it would make it *that* exciting.
>
>>*****What comments? Waite's actual comments are totally supportive of
>>>my position. How about this one:"Many symbols of the Instituted
>>>Mysteries are summarized in this card, which **reverses, under high
>>>warrants, all the confusions that have preceded it.** "  (Emphasis
>>>mine) from *The Pictorial Tarot* page 155. ******
>
>>So?  This is strictly a comment upon the World Trump.  Furthermore,
>>this doesn't clearly say a thing about the GD system.  Waite simply
>>says, if I may translate from the Waitean Dialect of Tarotspeak, "The
>>World Trump of my deck reflects an improved and correct understanding
>>of Tarot based on ancient mystical teachings."  However, again, this
>>says nothing about the GD system specifically.
>
>******* I think you will find that page 155 in *The Pictorial Key to
>the Tarot*, and the passage I quoted, refer only to The Fool. The
>commentary on The World begins on page 156. There is nothing in the
>commentary on The World resembling what you have misinterpreted
>above.*****

OK, I made an error.  It's neither the first nor last.

The quote really talks about the Fool.  So, again, translating from
Waite's murky prose, we get, "The Fool of my deck reflects an improved
and correct understanding of Tarot based on ancient mystical
teachings."

The quote still doesn't comprise clear evidence that Waite assigned
the Majors to the Paths in accordance with GD teaching.
>
>******How about owning up on that one instead of just snipping it
>out?*****
>
Done.

>Good Magick!
>
>(Good Tarot too).


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES W. REVAK - San Diego, CA, USA - jwrevak@home.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Arcane Archive is copyright by the authors cited.
Send comments to the Arcane Archivist: tyaginator@arcane-archive.org.

Did you like what you read here? Find it useful?
Then please click on the Paypal Secure Server logo and make a small
donation to the site maintainer for the creation and upkeep of this site.

The ARCANE ARCHIVE is a large domain,
organized into a number of sub-directories,
each dealing with a different branch of
religion, mysticism, occultism, or esoteric knowledge.
Here are the major ARCANE ARCHIVE directories you can visit:
interdisciplinary: geometry, natural proportion, ratio, archaeoastronomy
mysticism: enlightenment, self-realization, trance, meditation, consciousness
occultism: divination, hermeticism, amulets, sigils, magick, witchcraft, spells
religion: buddhism, christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, taoism, wicca, voodoo
societies and fraternal orders: freemasonry, golden dawn, rosicrucians, etc.

SEARCH THE ARCANE ARCHIVE

There are thousands of web pages at the ARCANE ARCHIVE. You can use ATOMZ.COM
to search for a single word (like witchcraft, hoodoo, pagan, or magic) or an
exact phrase (like Kwan Yin, golden ratio, or book of shadows):

Search For:
Match:  Any word All words Exact phrase

OTHER ESOTERIC AND OCCULT SITES OF INTEREST

Southern Spirits: 19th and 20th century accounts of hoodoo, including slave narratives & interviews
Hoodoo in Theory and Practice by cat yronwode: an introduction to African-American rootwork
Lucky W Amulet Archive by cat yronwode: an online museum of worldwide talismans and charms
Sacred Sex: essays and articles on tantra yoga, neo-tantra, karezza, sex magic, and sex worship
Sacred Landscape: essays and articles on archaeoastronomy, sacred architecture, and sacred geometry
Lucky Mojo Forum: practitioners answer queries on conjure; sponsored by the Lucky Mojo Curio Co.
Herb Magic: illustrated descriptions of magic herbs with free spells, recipes, and an ordering option
Association of Independent Readers and Rootworkers: ethical diviners and hoodoo spell-casters
Freemasonry for Women by cat yronwode: a history of mixed-gender Freemasonic lodges
Missionary Independent Spiritual Church: spirit-led, inter-faith, the Smallest Church in the World
Satan Service Org: an archive presenting the theory, practice, and history of Satanism and Satanists
Gospel of Satan: the story of Jesus and the angels, from the perspective of the God of this World
Lucky Mojo Usenet FAQ Archive: FAQs and REFs for occult and magical usenet newsgroups
Candles and Curios: essays and articles on traditional African American conjure and folk magic
Aleister Crowley Text Archive: a multitude of texts by an early 20th century ceremonial occultist
Spiritual Spells: lessons in folk magic and spell casting from an eclectic Wiccan perspective
The Mystic Tea Room: divination by reading tea-leaves, with a museum of antique fortune telling cups
Yronwode Institution for the Preservation and Popularization of Indigenous Ethnomagicology
Yronwode Home: personal pages of catherine yronwode and nagasiva yronwode, magical archivists
Lucky Mojo Magic Spells Archives: love spells, money spells, luck spells, protection spells, etc.
      Free Love Spell Archive: love spells, attraction spells, sex magick, romance spells, and lust spells
      Free Money Spell Archive: money spells, prosperity spells, and wealth spells for job and business
      Free Protection Spell Archive: protection spells against witchcraft, jinxes, hexes, and the evil eye
      Free Gambling Luck Spell Archive: lucky gambling spells for the lottery, casinos, and races