Mind altering substances

[Joan Marie]

1) It's always been a bit of a sticky issue - when people reinterpret a reader's reading, however talented the reinterpreter is. Although new insights can be welcome additions. Because the reader normally has established a very unique and special relationship with the Tarot and the cards.

Honest question here about Plato's Cave since I've just sort of jumped in.

I wasn't sure if the discussion that ensued should be one based on the original card draw (in this case your HM, Hermit and Emperor) or, if in order to add to the conversation, a person should do their own draw on the question. Or, is it necessary to even make a rule about that? To be honest, I wanted to do a draw but it was late and I was tired so I decided to just use yours.

In my response, I was not attempting to reinterpret anyone else's reading, which is a sticky thing to do. I was strictly doing my own based on the cards you chose. It was fun. (I'm sticking by my interpretation too btw ) )

[Diana]

No no, it's cool that people reinterpret the readings. Or not. It's nice to be free. I speak for myself of course and the readings I do for Plato's Cave. Maybe other people would prefer not to for their readings which is perfectly reasonable.

I just wanted to say that in spite of all the great stuff done afterwards, that I still stick with my original interpretation.

In fact, all the input even strengthened any doubts I could have had.

So all good.

Your interpretation is also right - lol -. In fact, the three could be merged if done skillfully.

[Diana]

Oh, and Monk's interpretation was really great too. And it's always nice to get the words straight from the horse's mouth. I would assume that he's the only member here who can really talk about all this from the inside due to his experience and practice.

I'm convinced that all three readings could be made into one in a coherent fashion. They are just different perspectives of the same thing. Like when you're on a mountain and all three people are looking in different directions. They all see what is out there, just from a different viewpoint.

[Monk]

I've been giving these new insights into the original reading a lot of thought. And I stick with my original interpretation. And will explain why.

1) It's always been a bit of a sticky issue - when people reinterpret a reader's reading, however talented the reinterpreter is. Although new insights can be welcome additions. Because the reader normally has established a very unique and special relationship with the Tarot and the cards. In my case, it almost seems that there is some kind of "convention" established for some cards. For instance, in all my years with the Tarot, the Star has always without exception or shadow, never shown its negative aspect. It's sort of as if the Tarot and I decided once that the Star means all is well and bright and beautiful. It's surprising, but that is how the Tarot and I work together. Now how could anyone who is re-interpreting a reading for me know this ? It's personal so they can't.

I understand you. And totally agree. For me the tarot only started to make sense after I understood that everybody needs to establish a relation with their deck(s). This was a big learning point for me. I noticed that (as you explained) that the cards would only start to speak clearly that I'd have to attribute the right contents/meanings to them as I saw them. I based this on my idea that in every situation, every soul, every part on a path that there are identifiable, defined, outlined factors at play (sorry for my clumsy description). I noticed that if I wanted the cards to speak to me clearly of these situations that I'd somehow have to categorize and agree on where the overlaps between factors in life and the cards would be.

In this light I 100% understand that having cards reinterpreted is kind of like a burglar rearranging your furniture to his taste How could anyone know how and why you are comfy with your interior? I myself still struggle a lot with the meaning of some cards as the "supposed meaning" does not align with what is logical in 'my mind' and what aspects are still not covered by other cards.

If I had made such a serious error in my interpretation I would have realised it by now. Or felt it (like once in a Plato's Cave reading, when I corrupted the meaning and disrespected the Wheel of Fortune - I will never forget that day.)

2) The Hermit is a downside. He can't be a bridge therefore. A bridge would be something positive - a helping hand - a shepherd guiding his flock. I deliberately chose the position "downside" to make it unambiguous. I didn't want any flip-flopping so I chose words like "benefits" and "downsides" to reflect this. The Hermit is however a gentle downside - which is a further indication that there are benefits to taking mind-altering substances (by the way Monk, you mentioned alcohol - naturally I was not including alcohol in my reading which is not a mind altering substance, but a brain altering substance). The downside for the Hanged Man is that the Hermit will not join the Hanged Man on his rope. The Hermit has a lantern instead - he can take it everywhere he goes and doesn't need to even go and stock up with the local salesman for new paraffin or oil. It's always lit - it's the perpetual flame that guards his inner temple.

Very insightful explanation of the Hermit that puts him in a much clearer perspective for me in your explanation of your reading.
on alcohol: yes, it's apart from psychotropics. Alcohol cuts the legs from the chair, one falls. Psychotropics hand you instructions on how to construct a ladder Does the Hermit provide for that insight and then leave?

3) In my reading, the Emperor meant solidity and stability. Emperors rule over their kingdom and have absolute authority. The Hanged Man needs to climb down from his tree, leave the rope behind and go off with the Hermit to the mountain (his higher consciousness) in order to reach this state. There is a sense of movement and of travel and of a saying good-bye.

I refused to put any of my own wishes and desires into this thread. I started out almost hoping that the Tarot would tell us that there is a way through material means to reach full enlightenment. Would have been nifty. It's always nice when the cooking is done for us and we can just sit at the table and enjoy the delicious food.

But I think the Tarot is clear. We can go so far... even very far.... even very very far as Monk has described with mind altering substances. But the last part of the journey must be made alone. With our lantern which is only a symbolic lantern.

There. That's it.

Yes, the last part of the Journey is always done 'without the teacher' (not 'alone' in my book). The reach of an altered state of consciousness is in a certain way limited. The teacher goes home, we stay behind in class by ourselves (and our classmates as we are not alone). A good teacher though knows he has to leave for a bit. Insights gathered by his pupils in the lessons need to be processed and given a place in the mind/spirit, for the lessons were mind altering. Things need to be re-arranged. We can only do that by ourselves. We get shown the crack between worlds, but we have to walk up to it and peek through. (As we cannot traverse the crack, we can only peer into it) By the end of the day we're still on 'our side', lessons learned, insights gathered. And go to work.

[Monk]

1) It's always been a bit of a sticky issue - when people reinterpret a reader's reading, however talented the reinterpreter is. Although new insights can be welcome additions. Because the reader normally has established a very unique and special relationship with the Tarot and the cards.

Honest question here about Plato's Cave since I've just sort of jumped in.

I wasn't sure if the discussion that ensued should be one based on the original card draw (in this case your HM, Hermit and Emperor) or, if in order to add to the conversation, a person should do their own draw on the question. Or, is it necessary to even make a rule about that? To be honest, I wanted to do a draw but it was late and I was tired so I decided to just use yours.

In my response, I was not attempting to reinterpret anyone else's reading, which is a sticky thing to do. I was strictly doing my own based on the cards you chose. It was fun. (I'm sticking by my interpretation too btw ) )

Dear Joan Marie,

I dont have a straight answer to what you suppose and I am in no position to do so. I do know that at this stage for me it is soóó valuable to place interpretations of readings along side each other and reflect. As a relative novice to the Tarot I'm still working a lot to attribute the right meanings to the cards that work for 'me'. The same basis lies under it as why Diana said she'd 'have' to stick with her initial interpretation. I'm not really that far though and greatly appreciate being able to "literally reflect" interpretations. It helps me see structure, the fabric of the universe that makes up the Tarot. In that perspective Plato's Cave seems to me like a golden place to look through ones eyelashes squeezed so we can reflect not on the literal but rather on the "space between".

[Diana]

Yes, the last part of the Journey is always done 'without the teacher' (not 'alone' in my book). The reach of an altered state of consciousness is in a certain way limited. The teacher goes home, we stay behind in class by ourselves (and our classmates as we are not alone). A good teacher though knows he has to leave for a bit. Insights gathered by his pupils in the lessons need to be processed and given a place in the mind/spirit, for the lessons were mind altering. Things need to be re-arranged. We can only do that by ourselves. We get shown the crack between worlds, but we have to walk up to it and peek through. (As we cannot traverse the crack, we can only peer into it) By the end of the day we're still on 'our side', lessons learned, insights gathered. And go to work.

Now I remember why I thought of The Magician in Valentin Tomberg's masterpiece - Meditations on the Tarot : A Journey into Christian Hermeticism (I mentioned somewhere that something reminded me of the first Letter of his book).

The wiki page doesn't do the book justice, but I'll link it anyway : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meditations_on_the_Tarot. The pdf of his astounding book is here : http://tarothermeneutics.com/tarotliter ... -Tarot.pdf. A brief biography of Valentin Tomberg can be found here : http://tarothermeneutics.com/tarotliter ... berg1.html

In it he says : It goes without saying that nobody initiates anyone else, it we understand by "initiation" the Mystery of the Second Birth or the Great Sacrament. This Initiation is operative from above and has the value and the duration of eternity. The Initiator is above, and here below one meets only the fellow pupils; and they recognise each other by the fact that they "love one another" (cf. John xiii. 34-35).

There are no longer any more '"masters" because there is only one sole Master, who is the Initiator above. To be sure, there are always masters who teach their doctrines and also initiates who communicate some of the secrets which they possess to others who thus become in their turn the "initiates"— but all this has nothing to do with the Mystery of the Great Initiation.

Of course, when he speaks of the great Inititiator, he is speaking here of God or the source of all things. Not a fellow homo sapiens sapiens.

[Monk]

Yes, the last part of the Journey is always done 'without the teacher' (not 'alone' in my book). The reach of an altered state of consciousness is in a certain way limited. The teacher goes home, we stay behind in class by ourselves (and our classmates as we are not alone). A good teacher though knows he has to leave for a bit. Insights gathered by his pupils in the lessons need to be processed and given a place in the mind/spirit, for the lessons were mind altering. Things need to be re-arranged. We can only do that by ourselves. We get shown the crack between worlds, but we have to walk up to it and peek through. (As we cannot traverse the crack, we can only peer into it) By the end of the day we're still on 'our side', lessons learned, insights gathered. And go to work.

Now I remember why I thought of The Magician in Valentin Tomberg's masterpiece - Meditations on the Tarot : A Journey into Christian Hermeticism (I mentioned somewhere that something reminded me of the first Letter of his book).

The wiki page doesn't do the book justice, but I'll link it anyway : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meditations_on_the_Tarot. The pdf is of his astounding book is here : http://tarothermeneutics.com/tarotliter ... -Tarot.pdf. A brief biography of Valentin Tomberg can be found here : http://tarothermeneutics.com/tarotliter ... berg1.html

In it he says : It goes without saying that nobody initiates anyone else, it we understand by "initiation" the Mystery of the Second Birth or the Great Sacrament. This Initiation is operative from above and has the value and the duration of eternity. The Initiator is above, and here below one meets only the fellow pupils; and they recognise each other by the fact that they "love one another" (cf. John xiii. 34-35).

There are no longer any more '"masters" because there is only one sole Master, who is the Initiator above. To be sure, there are always masters who teach their doctrines and also initiates who communicate some of the secrets which they possess to others who thus become in their turn the "initiates"— but all this has nothing to do with the Mystery of the Great Initiation.

Of course, when he speaks of the great Inititiator, he is speaking here of God or the source of all things. Not a fellow homo sapiens sapiens.

This stuff is worthy of it's own thread..
TY, this will keep me busy for a while <3

[Diana]

This stuff is worthy of it's own thread..
TY, this will keep me busy for a while <3

Yes... the "quite a while" could get quite long !! It's the most fascinating book on the Tarot that has ever been published. When it was published posthumously (and anonymously) people were amazed and astonished. No-one was expecting that !! It was originally published in French - but apparently the English version is closer to the original as the French edition has something missing. The translation is outstanding.

I hope one day we will find the time and space to discuss it on CoT. But it's a long haul and would require dedication and commitment.