general numerological and suit principles for reading minor arcana

[Wise_Angel]

Hello. I wouls like to know the general numerological and suit principles you use for reading minor arcana. Also I am interested in knowing the general principles you apply to Court Cards reading and understanding them not as persons but as situations, facts, descriptions etc.

[Rachelcat]

This is a confession of my Marseille heresy: I use Golden Dawn ideas for my number and suit attributions. (everybody boo and hiss now, I can take it!)

For my numbers, I use celestial spheres/planets based on GDish kabbalah: 1 = heaven, 2 = zodiac/stars, 3 = Saturn, 4 = Jupiter, 5 = Mars, 6 = Sun, 7 = Venus, 8 = Mercury, 9 = Moon, 10 = Earth.
Ok, I admit my 2s are more “duality and balance” than Stars, and my 4s are more “enclosed” than Jupiter. But otherwise, I’m trying to stay true to my planetary system!

And I use GD-based elements for the suits.

This makes my system almost align with RWS style cards, with some important exceptions.

After all these years, I’m still kind of winging it when it comes to courts. But generally use GD-based elements for ranks: kings = fire, queens = water, knights = air, pages = earth. So the King of Coins would be Fire of Earth, etc. And maturity and family ideas, pages are young, king and queen are parents, etc. As far as courts as things, not people, I usually end up reading them as an aspect of the questioner: in this situation, you’re acting like (or should act like) the Queen of Cups, etc.

(I’ve also come up with MBTI attributions for the courts, but that’s still people. And a topic for a different post!)

I know that some people use other numerological schemes for minors, including associating major numbers with minors. Meaning, for example, 3s are related to the Empress, etc. But then that only goes up to 10. What about the other majors?

I hope this isn’t too much information. Enjoy your historic deck journey!

[katrinka]

No boos and hisses from this quarter, RC. You're using actual number attributions, not going "Oh, Four of Cups. That's the bored guy sitting under a tree. Apathy, withdrawal..." If a person is going to read RWS, they should use RWS. And using a GD system simplifies things when you're working with GD style decks as well as pip decks. There's less you have to remember.

For a long time, I used Jodorowsky's method - not the Freudian stuff (I certainly wouldn't tell a client they have daddy issues), but the idea of relating the Minors to the Majors. So 5 would be The Pope, and it would also be the Devil. (When you do this, you don't reduce 15 to 6. It's just another expression of the 5.) The cards will fit this way (though it's not the only way.) So if you get the 5 of Coins, for instance, you relate the Pope and the Devil to the Coins suit: money, material things - and come up with a meaning.

While this works, it's cumbersome. I wanted something more cartomantic and incisive. So I switched over to playing card meanings. (The Minors just ARE a deck of playing cards.) You can see the numbers here https://cardseer.wordpress.com/2015/07/ ... -meanings/ and the information on the suits here https://cardseer.wordpress.com/2015/07/ ... eractions/

For a good general overview of the different methods out there, nothing beats this book https://smile.amazon.com/Untold-Tarot-R ... 0764355619