|
[note—the individual referred to in this essay as 'kwitter' was a particularly long-winded 'contributor' to alt.tarot back in early 1996—her posts set a standard for turgid pomposity that rivaled even the great A. E. Waite—albeit, without any hint that SHE, unlike Waite, actually understood much of anything she was writing about. She now incarnates from time to time on the tarot mailing list, 'tarot-l', as a creature known as Karen Witter, and thus, to honor the fact that she has found 'greener' pastures to fertilize, I color her and her comments—green—which might stand for something else too.]
Preface
As all of you know, I've been a consistent critic of the postings of kwitt.
I can say this in kwitter's praise, I've been given, in the process of discovering all the myriad reasons her posts are utterly absurd, an opportunity to learn more about tarot and now I can tell YOU about it.
kwitter's Chariot posting is particularly annoying, misleading, and irrelevant to the true meaning of the card and I feel I need to address these problems in detail.
kwitt writes—
>This is from the Rider-Waite deck.
OK, fair enough. Kwitter established some ground rules by this choice.
What does it mean to choose this card (particularly) from this deck?
It means, first and foremost, that if we do not go back to the originator of this motif, we will not have a chance to be on the right track because we will not understand the reasoning that went into the specific iconography in Waite's Chariot. Waite admits that he chose the motif used by Eliphas Levi, a writer who obviously had much influence on Waite (though, unlike Crowley, who thought Levi was his immediate former incarnation, Waite whines about admitting this influence).
In fact, what Waite says in his admission is quite illuminating:
Speaking of the charioteer, he says—
"He has led captivity captive..."
note—This is Waite's elliptical way of saying 'he has won freedom', the 'leading' in this case is a reference to a parade of war captives that made up the victory celebration of ancient Roman generals, known as a 'triumph'; wherein the victorious commander would literally lead the train of new slaves and booty through the streets to the cheers of the appreciative Roman people.
additional note (03/13/97)—subsequently I found that the phrase originates in the Bible (of course), being found in two interesting and rather pertinent verses—
Ps. 68: 17,18,
"The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even
thousands of angels: the LORD is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy
place. Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive:
thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that
the LORD God might dwell among them.".
This is again used in reference to Christ, Eph. 4: 8-10,
"Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led
captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. Now that he ascended, what
is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the
earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above
all heavens that he might fill all things."
—in the New Testament version it is God (in the form of Christ) who conquers by 'giving gifts', not God as the Conqueror who receives tribute from worshipers and 'rebels'. The notion of the descent and ascent of spirit into matter is one that forms the basis of what may fairly be called a 'philosophy of tarot'.
Waite continues his comments on Chariot—
"...he is conquest on all planes—in the mind, in science, in progress, in certain trials of initiation. He has thus replied to the sphinx, and it is on this account that I have accepted the variation of Eliphas Levi; two sphinxes thus draw his chariot. He is above all things triumph in the mind. " [see note above on 'triumph'—and note also that the Roman general would be told, in the midst of his honors and adulation—
'fame is fleeting.'
—keep this in mind as you read the following, the ancient Westerners believed that fate and the gods were always playing cruel jokes on us, even when things seemed to be going well and that, as Ecclesiastes tells us, "all is emptiness, all is vanity".]
The 'real' Chariot, Part I
Oedipus
So, our charioteer is, on the surface, Oedipus.
Let's look at the Oedipus myth—
To say that Oedipus, and his Theban family, were plagued with bad luck is putting it mildly.
His father was Laius, king of Thebes, and his mother Jocasta.
Shortly after the marriage, an oracle foretold to Laius that any son born to him by Jocasta would kill him.
Of course, Jocasta bears him a son.
Laius, not wishing to take ANY chances, pierced the baby's feet with a spike (perhaps to cripple the ghost from walking the earth) and exposed him on a mountain to what would have been certain death—except—the Theban shepherd who was supposed to carry out the act instead delivered the baby over to a Corinthian shepherd who took him to his King, Polybus, a childless man, who adopted the baby boy as his own. He called the boy Oedipus, 'swollen foot'.
As time went by, as things tend to go with these stories, the young man eventually hears rumors that he is a bastard and not the true son of Polybus. Upset by this news he goes to the oracle at Delphi for help. The oracle tells him he will kill his father and marry his mother. Still believing that he is the son of the Corinthian king, Oedipus escapes from Corinth, vowing to never return and thus he hopes to escape the awful fate of the oracle.
Of course, you know where he 'escapes' to.
The really bad luck starts here, with Oedipus making his way along a narrow road one day, and guess who he meets at a crossroads? Yep, King Laius is being driven along in a carriage and tells Oedipus to get of the way so the king can pass. Oedipus, being a rather typical Greek hero, tells him no. So the driver runs over his foot and slashes at him with his staff as they pass by.
I know how we would handle such an effrontery in Texas and they do the same thing in ancient Greece. Oedipus kills everyone (except apparently a servant who runs off) in the carriage.
Now Oedipus finally arrives back in Thebes, where people are NOT happy. King Laius, who was on an important mission to consult an oracle, has apparently been killed by bandits. The mission had been prompted by an emergency caused by the dreaded Sphinx, a monster that was causing all kinds of problems by asking a really annoying riddle of Thebans, which, if they could not answer it (and no one could), meant the Sphinx would gobble them up. The population, apparently a literal-minded lot, was dropping fast.
This is the riddle—
What creature walks on four legs in the morning, two at noon, and three in the evening? Clue: he is weakest when he is walking on the most legs?
Give up?
Anyway, Creon, the regent of Thebes and the sister of Jocasta, offered the throne to any man who could answer the Sphinx (which answer conveniently kills the monster). Of course brave Oedipus steps up to the plate, confronts the Sphinx, and answers—
"Man."
The poor Sphinx dies. Oedipus takes the throne and gets one extra little prize—he gets to marry the queen, Jocasta. So now the oracle is complete and this is of course the origin of 'Oedipal' complex, one who loves his mom (a little too much).
Jocasta, when she learns the truth eventually, hangs herself (so it was OK for Greeks to let their sons be tutored by pedaphiles but heaven forbid a mother should sleep with her grown son, even by accident). Oedipus is so crazed with shame and grief, realizing that he has also killed his own father, that he tears out his eyes.
The story kind of gets a little grim after this, but you get the idea.
So, we might sit and analyze what the Greeks made of this story and it would make for an interesting speculation but more important to our discussion of the tarot card, 'Chariot', is what Eliphas Levi thought this story represented.
However, till then, please note that ALL kwitter says about the
sphinxes on the card is—
" The two sphinx represent the emotional bodies of desire and fear."
and
"the sphinx, themselves, are specifically depicted as being at rest."
As we will see, there is much more going on in this symbolism, and in the rest of this card, than can be rendered by such sophistic insights as these two 'kwitter specials'.
For all of you who think I'm being mean, rude, or abusive when I criticize people, including kwitt, for posting ignorant BS about tarot, I do this because, especially in kwitt's case, the postings reveal, while styled in such a way as to suggest the person actually knows something, an almost pathological aversion to the truth; that is, with dealing with what the symbolism means and what the people who made the cards thought it meant and why.
THAT is what tarot is about, at least initially, learning what things mean and why. Then one can begin to use that knowledge as he sees fit.
The 'real' Chariot/Part II
Levi and the Sphinx
OK, so yesterday we left off with Oedipus tearing out his eyes and we were going to start talking about what all this meant to Eliphas Levi.
Sphinx is actually one of the fundamental symbols Levi discusses in 'Transcendental Magic', wherein he introduces the specific occult motif of Chariot used by Waite.
On page 17 of the introduction Levi writes—
"The mysterious origin of Oedipus, found hanging on the tree of Cithaeron like a bleeding fruit, recalls the symbols of Moses and the narratives of Genesis. He makes war upon his father, whom he slays without knowing—tremendous prophecy of the blind emancipation of reason apart from science. Thereafter he meets with the sphinx, that symbol of symbols, the eternal enigma of the vulgar, the granite pedestal of the science of sages, the voracious and silent monster whose unchanging form expresses the one dogma of the Great Universal Mystery."
Now, please note how this is beginning to sound a bit like that fluffery that kwitter posts, with this exception—he now explains to us what the hell he means by "Great Universal Mystery"—
"How is the tetrad changed into the duad and explained by the triad? In more common but more emblematic terms, what is that animal which in the morning has four feet, two at noon, and three in the evening? Philosophically speaking, how does the doctrine of elementary forces produce the dualism of Zoroaster, while it is summarised by the triad of Pythagoras and Plato? What is the ultimate reason of allegories and numbers, the final message of all symbolisms? Oedipus replies with a simple and terrible word which destroys the sphinx and makes the diviner King of Thebes: the answer to the enigma is MAN!"
This much of course we knew from reading the myth but now Levi tells us exactly why merely destroying the Sphinx by answering with the one truth was a fatal error.
"Unfortunate! He has seen too much, and yet through a clouded glass. A little while and he will expiate his ominous and imperfect clairvoyance by a voluntary blindness, and then vanish in the midst of a storm, like all civilizations which—each in its own day—shall divine an answer to the riddle of the sphinx without grasping its whole import and mystery. Everything is symbolical and transcendental in this titantic epic of human destinies."
And, revealing the nature of the mistake—
"...the crime of the King of Thebes was that he destroyed the scourge of Thebes without being pure enough to complete the expiation in the name of his people. The plague, in consequence, avenged speedily the death of the monster, and the King of Thebes, forced to abdicate, sacrificed himself to the terrible manes of the sphinx, more alive and voracious than ever when it had passed from the domain of form into idea. Oedipus divined what was man and he put out his own eyes because he did not see what was God. He divulged half of the Great Arcanum, and, to save his people, it was necessary for him to bear the remaining half of this terrible secret into exile and the grave."
Finally, in Levi's description of the card, Chariot, he describes the sphinxes thusly—
"A double sphinx or two sphinxes, joined at the haunches, are harnessed to the chariot: they are pulling in opposite directions but are looking the same way. They are respectively black and white."
Keeping all the above in mind, now examine the formerly somewhat cryptic lines of Waite in discussing his Chariot card (I think it will NOW make much more sense to you)—
"He is above all things triumph in the mind."
"It is to be understood for this reason—
a. that the question of the sphinx is concerned with a Mystery of Nature and not of the World of Grace, to which the charioteer could offer no answer;
b. that the planes of his conquest are manifest or external and not within himself;
c. that the liberation which he effects may leave himself in the bondage of the logical understanding;
d. that the tests of initiation through which he has passed in triumph are to be understood physically or rationally;
e. that if he (i.e., the charioteer) came to the pillars of that Temple between which the High Priestess is seated, he could not open the scroll called 'Tora', nor if she questioned him could he answer. He is not hereditary royalty and he is not priesthood."
There is an interesting clue in this last bit, a reference to the relationship of HP to Chariot and finally to Wheel of Fortune, but we will look at that later on when we see how the Thoth interpretations and revisions of this card work.
However, this should begin the process for you of unlocking a lot of the symbolic language Waite uses.
I don't claim, by the way, that Levi's or Waite's view of the Oedipal myth is the only valid or possible interpretation (I'm not even sure it is the right one but I think it's interesting), BUT, it is the one they used to create the sphinx symbolism of tarot.
The 'real' Chariot/Part III
symbolic elements
So, let's look at some of the symbolic elements in the Waite Chariot Card—
OK, what about that canopy thing with the stars?
Kwitter writes—
"And the canopy represents the Akashic or Brahmin consciousness that is spoken of as enlightenment or the Kingdom of God."
Of course, as with everything kwitter writes, there is nothing included in the post to explain why this would be.
Now, what's actually being represented by this canopy is what the Freemasons called the 'Covering of the Lodge', otherwise known as the 'clouded' or (according to some sources) 'celestial' canopy.
The 'Covering of the Lodge' is a Masonic tradition that says that ancient brothers of Masonry met under a 'clouded canopy or starry-decked heaven', that is, in the open air. Also, the whole world is understood to be a Mason's lodge with heaven its canopy.
This symbolism also comes into consideration in the first degree initiation ceremony of Freemasonry—some authorities suggest this means that the mason has the 'universe' as his highest aspiration but others say that the symbol merely refers to the area of Masonic utility—that is, that a Mason's responsibilities extend to everything under the universal sky.
Levi describes this as the 'starry drapery'. Waite says nothing at all. Crowley, restating the idea says—"the canopy of the Chariot is the night-blue sky of Binah."
So that's what it all stands for, what does any of this mean, in terms of the card?
The canopy should be viewed in context of the the whole chariot, including, as you can see, a Charioteer who is NOT riding in the Chariot, but is set in the cubic stone of the Chariot. The stone and the 8-pointed star on the Charioteer's head (kwitter says this is "The eight-pointed star that crowns him represents the Soul, or the Higher Self") refer to the same idea—the cube is 2 'cubed' or 8=and that is the number of Cheth, the kabbalistic number of this card but also refers to the Masonic 'ashlar' or the 'perfect ashlar'.
In Speculative Masonry an 'ashlar' is freestone as it comes out of the quarry. So, a 'rough ashlar' is a stone in its 'rude and unpolished' condition—that is—ignorant, uncultivated and vicious man.
But after one is 'smoothed and polished' by education and one learns to restrain (or 'temper') ones passions, he is represented by the 'Perfect Ashlar', the smoothed and squared stone, fitted into its place in the building (the temple). Or in the Chariot.
The 'real' Chariot/Part IV
more symbolism
In part III we left off with the starry canopy and the cubic stone (perfect ashlar).
Let's look at more of the symbolic elements in
Waite's Chariot—
The four posts holding up the canopy (or sky) refer to Tetragrammaton, the 4-lettered Name of God—Yod/He/Vau/He—which we mispronounce Jehova but which was probably pronounced something like 'Yah-weh'.
These letters or energies of God have been applied, for rather obvious convenience, to the Greek elemental system—
Fire, Water, Air, Earth
—although here they are not distinguished as kerubic entities (as they are in Wheel of Fortune and The World) but are seen almost as an extension or outgrowth of the Perfect Ashlar (or the other way around). One should probably then think of these 'supports' not so much as providing the force that holds up the sky (or which keep the sky and earth separate) but as the conduits through which that force is transmitted. The color, of course, may be an aesthetic convenience but see the note below.
(NOTE ON COLOR)
A critic once noted that Pamela Colman Smith did not seem to know why she used the colors she did in her paintings, but, regardless of whether that assessment is fair or accurate, Waite certainly did have specific reasons for the colors chosen in his tarot deck.
Color in Waite cards (while bitched about by some people as 'bland') is an extremely important marker for determining relationships between symbolic elements.
There's a reason why the wheels are the same color as the sky and it's not because Waite or 'Pix' were really into yellow.
The colors are 'simplistic' in Waite because there's more concern in this deck (in the original) with communicating ideas through the symbols and colors (in the majors particularly) than with making a 'pretty' deck. One should study the color schemes inherent in Christian art , Masonry, and of course, Golden Dawn symbolism, to make proper determinations about meaning.
Now, let's look at the emblem displayed on the front of the chariot.
We see a type of badge or small shield (white) upon which is a wheel-spoke-looking thing (red) and this all is surmounted by a blue-winged yellow disc.
What's that all about?
Kwitter says—
'The red lingham represents the vital force of the body which is known as the etheric body. The winged globe represents the astral body (this is a symbol typically used in Egyptian glyphs to represent the departure of the soul from the body at the time of death).'
As usual, there is no attempt in kwitter's post to justify any of these claims. We are left to accept them or not, purely on their face value.
Is there a better explanation? Of course.
Let's look at what the originator of the motif (Levi) has to say—
'On the square which forms the forepart of the Chariot is the Indian lingam surmounted by the flying sphere of the Egyptians.'
So, it appears kwitter has captured the correct words at least.
But so what? WHY is this lingam 'hanging out' on this shield?
One clue is handed to us by Waite, who otherwise ignores this symbolism and spends most of his time castigating the poor charioteer for being unworthy to ask the Priestess out on a date.
He says right in the start of the Chariot article, in describing the stature of the charioteer—'An erect and princely figure...'
OK, what do we know of Princes in the Golden Dawn system?
They are the redeemers and the dying gods, and they are specifically, in this regard, the Phallus, or a solar reference.
If we need some sex education on the symbolism here just let me know, but I will assume, for the time being, that you all 'get it'.
So what's the symbolism of lingam? You recall right?
However, there is a problem here. Because what is depicted by Waite (and more clearly by Levi) is NOT just a lingam, but a lingam (or a phallus) growing out of a yoni (or kteis).
Masonic theories about this combined symbol suggested that the shaft (the axle) penetrating the circle (the wheel), when seen head-on, was the origin of the solar symbol of the point within the circle.
So, ultimately, this is a reference again to the function of the Prince, who, in the kabbalistic framework of the Golden Dawn, lives in 6-Tiphareth, the home of the Sun.
To reinforce this symbolism the winged solar disk of Horus surmounts the lingam-yoni.
If you now look at what Crowley has done with this symbolism, converting it to the Holy Grail, you may begin to get some idea about what is going on here.
One thing—Oedipus is the Prince (and the walrus is Paul).
We will look at the symbolism of the 'shield' tomorrow.
The 'real' Chariot, Part V
the Masonic Apron
& the Hidden Obelisk
Some notes before we proceed—
Some Masonic writers have suggested that, in the knightly orders, some of which are considered the Medieval source of the later fraternal orders, the use of the shield foreshadowed the later use, by Masons, of their apron. In other words, the shield, with its heraldic device, ritually and literally protected the knight from external threats AND announced to the world his identity and mission. The Masonic apron fulfills the same function for the Mason.
Interestingly, the Masonic apron is also known as a 'badge'.
When we see the shield or badge displayed on the front of the chariot what we are really looking at is the lambskin apron of the Mason. There are several clues as to why this is so:
1. It is white, the color of the basic apron.
2. It is shaped like the drawings of the apron, with, however, the 'flap', or 'fall' piece (the small descending part of the shield on the bottom whereas it is usually shown on top on aprons), shown inverted here. The inversion may be an attempt to hide the obvious but there is another possibility, discussed below.
3. While Waite depicts this symbol with no border, aprons often were trimmed with red or blue or some other color, depending on the rank of the wearer or the rite for which the apron was dedicated. In Levi's depiction of this card there is a trim around the shield (again, Waite has sought to strip away all but the suggestions of the original idea) AND Levi does not add the point on top of the shield (as Waite and Case do) but depicts it properly, although inverted, as the apron is square or straight on the bottom. The use of the trim is particularly interesting if the card is meant to indicate the Masonic Royal Arch, which used red trim on its ceremonial aprons—the trim appears to have been transferred to the lingam-yoni device in Waite and Case.
4. The most basic meaning of the apron is 'investiture' and this is an interesting indicator, in light of the meanings we have already examined, and is particularly so when we take another look at the 'heraldic' device, the lingam-yoni.
Recall we mentioned that the shield or apron is inverted in the Levi-Waite Chariot. Beyond the obvious possible explanation for this—that they were again trying to conceal things hinted at but not explicitly or completely discussed, there is another possibility—the lingam-yoni is MORE than it appears.
The Dagger 'N'
Again, Waite's (or Smith's) depiction of the original Levi drawing is a poor copy, not showing the detail of the symbol at all. In Levi's drawing there are three parts—
- a sphere or ball on the bottom
- bowl-shaped 'yoni' mounted on the 'ball'
- somewhat bulbous shaft coming out of the 'bowl'
Now, when we flip this image over, in order to correctly view the shield or apron, we see something else as well. This shape becomes a dagger. And more than this it becomes a Masonic hieroglyph, standing for the letter 'N'.
And we see the three parts of the superficial symbol
transformed—
- the 'ball' becomes a pommel
- the 'bowl' becomes a guard
- the shaft becomes or transfers to blade
So, as always, we are faced with that age-old question—so what? What's the dagger and what's the 'N'?
In Masonry, part of the significance of the dagger is involved in the tradition called 'vengeance'. There is no agreement, as far as I can tell, whether this word refers to a symbolic (or even literal) act of violence in retribution for a wrong, or whether, as most Masonic supporters indicate, the word is to be understood rather as 'justice' or the balancing of the will of God against sins.
In reference to what we've already discussed (about Oedipus) this symbol is interesting.
However, it's also useful to recall that 'dagger' has the meaning of 'obelisk' (in printing, and the print dagger looks much like the Masonic 'N') and that concept resonates the symbolism we've been seeing in lots of the roots of this card, particularly in that of the winged disk—obelisk also refers to the towers (with pyramid tops—see the tower in the background of the card) Egyptians built in homage to the sun god. The obelisk also refers to the Christian and Masonic concept of resurrection.
AND, 'N' is a common abbreviation on Egyptian coffin texts for Osiris, as well as of course, the letter of both the sky goddess and for the abyss—Nun—water. So, one possible meaning for this symbolism on the card is that Horus (winged disk) arises out of the spilled blood or semen of Osiris (who is not only dead but inverted). And of course Horus balances the wrong done to Osiris by seeking vengeance against Seth.
All this symbolism relates to what we've already seen and discussed in relation to Oedipus, the Sphinx, and the structure of the temple and it hints at why this card occupies the path between Binah and Gevurah.
The ultimate depiction of the warrior sun-god in Egyptian temple iconography is as the 'victor' or 'conqueror' (of light over darkness)—the same basic meaning of the card, Chariot.
The 'real' Chariot/Part VI
The Triple Tau Jewel
& The Masonic Royal Arch
One of the most revealing and interesting symbols on Waite's Chariot is actually one that is NOT there, at least not completely there. This symbol is drawn in an outline on the chest of the charioteer, the 'white square', which is in every way as enigmatic and dangerous (to those who have been misled by it) as the White Whale.
Again, to start our search for this elusive 'creature' we will look back to the writings of Eliphas Levi, who describes this symbol in the following—
"on his breast are three superposed squares"
—but there is nothing like this depicted on Levi's drawing.
Waite, of course, says nothing of this symbolism, but in Paul Case's book, The Tarot, he tells us part of what is going on here while displaying it, in his version of the card, more openly than either Levi or Waite—
"A square on this cuirass (breastplate) represents order and purity by its shape and color (although it looks light brown it's the same color as the charioteer's crown so presumably this is intended as gold, which is the proper substance of the 'jewel'). On it are three black T's, which stand for the limiting power of Saturn."
Case was still addicted to the notion that earth was evil and so kept the black coloring that Crowley changed to green. Also, as we shall see, Case inverted the actual depiction of the T's, again, apparently, to hide the true symbolism (one has to wonder at this point, from whom—it's not like anyone but people familiar with these ideas are going to get it).
Case then says something interesting which illuminates the 'reasoning' process used by some occultists in their conversion of mundane tarot to occult tarot—
"They also (meaning the three T's), like the .V.T on older versions, refer to the letter Tav (or Tau)."
Prior to this section he discusses the '.V.T'—
"In some older Tarot Keys the shield bears the letters .V.T, written with the periods at the left of the letters, to show that they are to be read, like Hebrew, from right to left. So read, they spell the Hebrew word TV, Tav. This is the name of the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet. To an occultist this conveys the same fundamental idea as the lingam-yoni, because the original character for Tav was a cross, combining the vertical masculine line with the feminine horizontal, like the cross on the breast of the High Priestess."
First, we should talk about the 'evidence' used to establish this 'theory'.
According to Stuart Kaplan, in French tarot decks, which used the Marseilles design popular between c. 1600-1800, it was a common feature of the Chariot cards in these decks to place the initials of the designer or engraver on the shield. So, in one deck you might have 'VT', on another 'MJ', on another something else, and on some nothing at all. It is extremely unlikely that Case's 'Tav' is any evidence at all.
And, since he is the only person I'm aware of who has articulated the historical reasoning for thinking that Tau has some place in Chariot, it's difficult to know if other occultists had better reasons than this. However, there is at least one old deck (late 15th century) in which the front frame of the Chariot IS shaped like a T or Tau. Whether this is intentional or occult in any way is of course unknown, as is whether this particular card is another influence on this line of Tau argument.
However, whether or not we can determine that Case's historicity is one generally or traditionally accepted, we can here, finally, get a firm hold on what is intended by this symbol, for in Case, though the symbol is inverted from its normal appearance, we have the Masonic 'triple Tau', which forms the basic structure for the Royal Arch 'jewel', worn by Masons of the Royal Arch degree.
What is the triple Tau?
It is composed of three t-shaped devices all meeting at their base points, with one T upright and the other two laying on their sides to form an H. The base of the upright T rests at the midpoint of the H crossbeam.
And of course we should immediately recognize in this triple-tau the shape of the Chariot, with the top tau forming the 'canopy' and charioteer, and the reclining taus forming the base and wheels.
The tau itself is full of potential symbolism, some of which, such as a 'resurrection' symbol, and the sign of the cross, should remind us of things we've already seen here (Osiris, Horus, and the Solar-phallic symbolism, and the sacrifice of Oedipus and the Sphinx).
The triple tau also has a lot of potential symbolic meanings. However, for our purposes, it is enough to know that the 'jewel' in the Royal Arch designated members as those select who knew the secret name of God and were thus separated from the ignorant who did not. Keep this idea of the secret or hidden name in mind as we go through this and recall our previous discussions of the fatal error of Oedipus.
The triple tau is the base symbol which makes up the 'jewel' (a small golden pendant) of the Masonic Royal Arch degree, and is typically worn about the neck of the member (as it is by the charioteer). Again, in Waite's card this symbolism is only hinted at but we get some further clues looking at both Levi's and Waite's depictions of the charioteer, who, we find, is actually a figure combining elements of the 'high priest' and 'king' of the Royal Arch rites. The high priest of the Royal Arch simulated the high priest of the Jewish temple and wore both the Urim and Thummim (the lunar divinatory devices on the shoulders of the charioteer) as well as the breastplate and helmet. The crown and sceptor are the devices typically worn by the Royal Arch 'king' and here is it is instructive to look at the crowns worn by the Levi and Waite 'kings'.
Before this though, it's interesting to recall that Waite remarks about the charioteer—
"he is not hereditary royalty and he is not priesthood"
(nope, he's both)
—someone once told me, and it only now becomes very apparent to me why this is so, that Waite was quite easy to decipher, since whenever he makes a definite statement, all you have to do is reverse the meaning and you've got the truth.
In the Waite card, recall that what we see is an odd-looking crown with an 8-pointed star in the middle. We've already discussed the potential symbolism of this star (8 is the number both of Cheth, the letter of this card, as well as 2 cubed, a reference to the Perfect Ashlar).
But this is NOT the helmet or crown depicted in the Levi or Case Chariot cards. In those we see instead three 5-pointed stars.
Now the 5-pointed star in Masonry is also called the 'blazing star' and is one of the most important symbols in Masonry, although its exact meaning seems arguable for some of the degrees in which it is used. However, the general notion is that it applies to a mnemonic for God, or the presence of God (although it has been also Christianized into a reference for the redeemer). In the center of this blazing star we find the letter 'G', which is the Masonic letter for God, and which is also the Hebrew 'gimel', the letter of the Priestess, whose lunar characteristics 'rule' Chariot (that is, Cancer).
The number of 'gimel' is of course 3.
Now, that we find three of these symbols is interesting here because, with 3 x 5=15 (and of course 3+5=8), the number 15 sends us back to an idea we thought we had dispensed with. We are told that 15 was a code replacement for the holy name for God,'Yah', that is, for Yod-He (whose letters equal 15), and that this replacement used two other letters also equaling 15 whose numbers were 6 and 9.
The Hebrew letters whose numbers are 6 and 9 are Vau-Teth—VT.
See. That's a key, a real one, as opposed to all the numerous fake keys lying about on this and other cards.
Go back up there and read Case's words about VT armed with this new data and see what you make of all this.
Well, there's a lot more stuff to say about this card, and a good amount of synthesis that can be done on what's already been presented but I've got other projects to concentrate on now so I will end this series here (if you have any specific questions, please ask and I will endeavor to answer them).
I think you can, however, see, from the things we've discussed, that simplistic newage approaches to evaluating the symbolism of the occult tarot simply will not do justice to the complexity and richness of the ideas being represented.
YOU MUST STUDY!! to have any chance to know what the hell is really going on with this stuff. That does not mean, nor has it ever meant, that you have to know all this stuff to use tarot cards for things like divination. If you can read cards (which requires an inherent talent to do it well) then you can do that with a deck and a set of basic meanings and no prior knowledge of symbolism.
However, there is much more than fortune-telling to tarot, and the more one knows about the complexity of the symbolism and the more one knows the truth about the symbolism, the better chance he will have to make accurate applications of the symbolism, in whatever usage he may make of the cards.
(jk)
|
