Category Archives: I Ching / Yi Jing

astrology, Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Occultism and Esoterism, Philosophy, Playing Cards, Spirituality and Psychology, Tarot, Vera Sibilla

Do You Need To Believe In It For It To Work?

2 Comments

One of the questions that occupy way too many people in the esoteric community is whether divination or even magic require the person to believe in it in order for it to work. If you’ve ever watched the movie The Skeleton Key, you’ll know that this concept has seeped into the collective consciousness enough for it to find its way into mainstream products (I will not spoil the movie here, since it is actually a fun watch, but it depends heavily on its twist).

If you open most premodern books on magic, you’ll be stunned to discover that their content bears very little resemblance to the post-Golden Dawn landscape. This, by the way, is neither good nor bad. Things change. But we need to be aware of the change to avoid being unconsciously ruled by it. One clear difference is that the magician’s will1 or his imagining/manifesting faculties are barely taken into consideration in older sources, at least outwardly.

This is not to say that there aren’t sources that encourage the practitioner to be of firm mind and clear intent (after all, you’d want your doctor to focus, too, even though their focus is not what make their science work), but even those old sources do not consider, generally speaking, the magician’s mind to be the cause of the change. Broadly speaking, when dealing with sources that date back to before the invention of modern psychoanalysis and psychology, we must be extremely careful when interpreting their concept of mind, soul, psyche, etc.

An example will suffice. In his De Vita, Neoplatonic Renaissance philosopher and magus Marsilio Ficino encourages us, among other things, to “think solar thoughts”, or jovial, or venusian, depending on the aim. Similar remarks are found, in various form, in many old sources. A contemporary practitioner might be tempted to interpret Ficino’s invitation as saying that we must envision solar things in order for them to manifest. But neither the language nor the substance of this interpretation belong to his worldview.

Ficino’s view of the cosmos is essentially the same as Agrippa’s and that of many other premodern magi: we are surrounded by chains of sympathy and antipathy between universal powers (typified by the planets). When we think “solar thoughts” we are doing essentially nothing except stepping inside a current of power that has its own metaphysical reality regardless of our attitude toward it. This is because in Renaissance naturalism, the mind is essentially like the body, i.e., a part of the cosmos, and a movement of the mind is like a movement of the body, and just like the body can create a talisman or a concoction, so can the mind shape images that allow it to shower in certain currents of universal power.

Thus, the invitation to think certain thoughts found in Ficino (and others) is not a precursor to manifestation, attraction and other modern concepts, but a natural consequence of the old view of the mind and the world.

On the other hand, from a postmodern standpoint, reality is for us to create at will. Yes, I am exaggerating, but not too much. Therefore, there is the widespread idea, or at least the widespread implication, that what happens happens because we believe in it.

Let us leave magic alone for now and concentrate on divination. Does divination work because we believe in it? Well, no. Certainly divination doesn’t require the querent to believe in it in order for it to work. In fact, it is my belief that, considering how many frauds there are in this field, a querent should be borderline psychotic to blindly believe in divination without a healthy dose of scepticism.

What about diviners? Do they need to believe in divination in order for it to work? That’s complicated, in my view. On the surface of it I would argue that, again, no, we don’t need to believe in divination for it to work. Divination systems work because they have their own internal consistency. The most obvious is Natal Astrology, which presents us with an objective set of symbols that have nothing to do with the manipulation of counters on the part of the diviner.

On the other hand, we need to allow for the fact that divination is not a mechanic set of behaviors, especially with the overwhelming majority of divination systems that do require manipulation (cartomancy, geomancy, dice, etc.) As I often repeat on this blog, divination is and remains something extraordinary. The honest desire for an answer, or at least for a picture of the future, tends to guarantee a crisp and clear answer. This is because the honest desire for an answer allows us to honestly connect with the symbols in a way that makes them fall in the appropriate order.

The querent doesn’t need to be honest in his or her desire, unless they are also the diviner. But if the diviner does not have at least a degree of confidence in what he or she is doing, then the question they put to the system is not the surface question (e.g., “Does X love Y?”) but “Do you really work?” which is an impossible question for the system to answer (if the answer is no, then the system does work).

Even then, I would be cautious in overexaggerating the importance of the diviner’s attitude. As I believe I have mentioned, one of the ways my teacher trained me was by asking me to discover secrets about her past. Clearly, the exercise was not meant to discover something new that might benefit my querent or me, but rather to build my confidence and skill. Yet it worked, and it worked well. Maybe the diviner doesn’t need to believe in divination (I know I am always skeptical until proven right), but they do need to at least be open to the idea that this is a legitimate way of receiving information, just enough to enter into the system rather than operating it from the outside as a scientist would manipulate a bunch of molecules.

My general belief at this point is that the esoteric arts do not require our consent in order to work, but they are also not the product of the mechanistic application of abstract principles. It is indeed a fine balance.

MQS

  1. Let’s leave aside the fact that the concept of Will found in modern magic is actually more complex than what it appears to be on the surface ↩︎
astrology, Divination, Divination Master Post, Enneagram, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Occultism and Esoterism, Personal Journal, Philosophy, Spirituality and Psychology, Tarot

The Astro-Killer and the Need for Reason in Occultism

4 Comments

Danielle Johnson‘s posts on social media were like those of most popular astrology influencers: cheap mystical drivel devoid of any serious study and insight, constantly hyping up the next big astrological nothing-burger. I’ve known enough people like her in my life to know that this kind of fraudster is the worst exactly because they tend to buy the crap they peddle. Like many cult leaders, they become pleasantly accustomed to the smell of their own farts.

I am not going to examine her tragedy as a whole. You can look it up yourself if you want. Suffice to say that she ended her boyfriend’s and child’s lives, as well as her own. All because of an eclipse she thought was “the epitome of spiritual warfare” where people needed “to pick a side” in the upcoming apocalypse.

For sure there is enough going wrong in the world at present that new millenarian movements pop up from all religious and political directions. Furthermore, it is not unlikely that Johnson suffered from some kind of mental condition.

But there is more to this type of behavior. No one who seriously studies history can believe there was ever a golden age where nothing went wrong, nor there ever will be. These are the dangers of utopianism as opposed to pragmatism: in the name of something that was or will be, the utopian believer feels justified in trampling over others, either rationally (like the left-wing and right-wing dictators of yore) or psychotically.

But, again, there is more. There is a widespread malaise in the “spiritual” milieu at present, in spite of its ever growing popularity on social media. This malaise is the culmination of a historical process of decoupling of reason and spirituality. I have already touched upon this issue elsewhere.

Since official science embraced meterialism in the late XVIII century, those who believe there is more to life have found themselves without an intellectual foundation for their beliefs, and have therefore become prone to accepting any delusion as fact. This is relatively unprecedented in the history of humanity. Not that knowledge and spirituality have otherwise always enjoyed a frictionless relationship, but there had never been so stark and unanimous a rejection of the spiritual in the scientific community.

How the spiritual community tried to cope with this abandonment is paradigmatic. If you read many XVIII and early XIX century occultists, you will often find desperate attempts at fitting their ideas into the tight dress of the new scientific language. Spiritualism and vitalism, which is how occultism survived until around the 1960s are, in many ways, the evil twins of scientific materialism: they are groundless irrationalism masquerading as legitimate scientific concepts (electromagnetism, mesmerism, ‘energy’, etc.)

Yet, for all their attempts at sounding scientific, these authors have never managed to convince anyone who wasn’t already convinced. Furthermore, their attempts at proving, for instance, that this or that scientific discovery is foreshadowed in this or that spiritual doctrine made them look like asses when said discoveries were later disproved and replaced with better scientific theories–because, and this is something many occultists failed to understand, science in the modern sense ceased dealing with the eternally true in favor of ever-improving approximations of what’s likely to be the case. This is what makes modern science effective, but also what ‘spiritual seekers’ desperate for answers don’t want to hear.

Then along rolled the New Age, and the already washed-out spiritual movement started supplementing its diet with saccarine platitudes and politically correct, ill-digested mish-mashes of doctrines coming from all over the world washed down with copious drafts of unproved psychology. Any attempt at using reason became futile, or even frowned upon as a non-enlightened stance. And this is where we are now.

The medieval and Renaissance magus was as much an occultist and diviner as he was a doctor, a scientist, a philosopher, a political strategist, a war counsellor and many, many more things. In Ancient Greece, many great magi were also great philosophers and scientists (Empedocles and Pythagoras come to mind). Apparently, the contemporary spiritual guru just needs a couple of self-help concepts with a spirituar flair and he is qualitifed to tell people they need to “pick a side in the upcoming apocalypse”.

So, what is the solution? I do not know. I do not believe I have one, especially not at the collective level. All I know is that irrationalism is not the blood that sustains spirituality. it is merely the electric shock that makes its corpse convulse and appear to be alive. I also know that the future of occultism, magic and spirituality lies with few individuals who are capable of using their head rather than with desperate masses of unhinged spiritual seekers (“unhinged” because their life hinges on nothing) who let any “astrology influencer” peddle cheap illusions to them.

MQS

Card Combinations, Card Meanings, Card Reading, Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, I Ching / Yi Jing, Playing Cards, Reading Example

The Lost Coins (Example Reading)

Leave a comment

Readings about lost objects are hard. I am very much less than infallible in finding them. The reason is quite simple: most questions have a limited number of likely answers and an even more limited number of unlikely ones, so it is usually easier to make sense of the cards. “Yes he’ll marry you”, “No, he hates you”, “There doesn’t seem to be much tenderness left in the relationship, but with some effort you can keep it going a while.” There is, of course, some skill for finding nuances involved, and a good reader will add some details, but in general, the possible answers are relatively limited.

But a lost object can be anywhere, and we can either be very right or very wrong, with little space for “yes, but…” and “no, although…” Especially if we’ve never seen the place where the object was lost, it becomes hard to read the symbolism of the cards without reading our own fantasy into them. As far as I am concerned, much depends on how clear the cards decide to be with me. Since I have nothing to prove, I have no problem throwing my hands up and saying “Dunno” if that is my honest answer.

As we are moving all our stuff from the old house into the new one, plenty of things have gone momentarily missing, in the sense that I don’t know which of the dozens of boxes we’ve brought along they are in, and frankly I’m not too eager to start searching.

Except that I started itching to do some I Ching readings, and I couldn’t find my I Ching coins anymore. I did remember putting them somewhere where “I know I will find them”. The problem is that I have done the same with so many of my things in the last couple of months that the trick doesn’t work anymore. So I asked the cards for a pointer:

K♣ – 2♥ – 5♣

In general, what makes this reading relatively easy, compared to other lost item readings, is that it does not describe the place where the coins are, but rather their relationship to me. The King of Clubs is my significator. It is followed by a card, the Two of Hearts, which indicates ‘close to home’, but also ‘close’ in general. I know I cannot have left the coins in the neighborhood, which is naturally signified by the Two of Hearts, so I take it to mean ‘close’.

That Five of Clubs is interesting. In general it represents effort, but it is connected also with the body in general, understood as moving, acting ‘machine’, and also the hands. Close at hand, maybe? Or close to my body?

Either reading would have been correct. I found the coins in an internal pocket of my jacket where I usually don’t keep anything and don’t bother looking.

MQS

astrology, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Playing Cards, Spirituality and Psychology, Tarot, Vera Sibilla

The Downgrading of Intuition

2 Comments

Many people of the ‘spiritual but not religious’ milieu tend to believe they invented intuition, or that intuition came into existence when glossy oracle cards with gaudy images and inspirational quotes started being published–the kind that was especially en vogue before Doreen Virtue went from a fundamentalist with a deck of cards in her hands to a fundamentalist without a deck of cards in her hands.

But, believe it or not, intuition is a concept with a legitimate philosophical history. It is present, either implicitly or explicitly, in the epistemology (theory of how knowledge happens) of many great traditional Western and non Western philosophers.

If had to provide a generalization of what the tradition meant by intuition, I would say that it’s the immediate apprehension of universal principles and truths. It had nothing to do with the stream-of-consciousness-like association of ideas that many moderns mistake for psychic ability.

Old philosophers held that true intuition could only happen when someone had developed all their human faculties (including, and especially, reason) to their utmost degree, so that such faculties, having been tamed and trained, fell into place and were ready to receive truths otherwise reserved to the gods. In other words, intuition was the reward of the flourishing human.

Nowadays, “I’m intuitive” is usually synonymous with “I’m incapable of simple deduction but I am also deep up my ass and don’t take well to criticism.” Back in the day, intuition was regarded as the efflorescence of the rightly cultivated mind. Put simply, in the past intuition was considered suprarational. Now it is implicitly considered irrational.

So much so that intuition is today relegated to psychic exercise, whereas in days of yore prophecy through psychic means was regarded as a wholly separate matter: the famous prophetess of the Oracle of Delphi, for instance, entered a state of ‘enthusiasm’, that is, of literal divine possession, whereas intuition was, essentially, a gift of God to the philosopher who had educated himself to the point where his excelling human faculties grazed on the superior sphere of divine knowledge, allowing some of it to filter down to him.

This fact is especially clear when we consider the old conception of the cosmos as an onion-like set of emanated spheres, with humans in the middle, capable of either falling deeper or rising above. But the modern intuitive moves in a world that has no clear up or down and where over a century of psychologizing everything has planted in people’s minds the impression that everything is in their head and that, therefore, if it’s in their head it’s true. We could summarize this by saying that intuition in the older sense required people to get out of their ass and become bigger than they were, whereas by today’s standards it requires them to entangle themselves even further in their delusions.

MQS

astrology, Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Playing Cards, Tarot, Vera Sibilla

On Readings Without Question

Leave a comment

The following is an attempt at reorganizing some old notes I have taken on the subject of divinations without a specific question, adding to them some new insights,

Divination Without Questions Is Possible (With Exceptions)

There is a relatively well-known tarot reader who says that a reading without a question is basically two people talking over a bunch of colored cardboards.

This is not true. It was customary, among old-time fortune-tellers, to have the querent sit in front of them and never have them speak anything that wasn’t their name at the beginning of the consultation. I know for a fact that this is a tradition in the Italian countryside, and I believe it is the case all over the world as soon as one leaves the hipster pseudointellectual tarot community bubble and seeks the real deal.

Let’s leave aside the fact that, technically speaking, there is always a question. Even if the querent sits with their arms crossed in front of you waiting to be astounded, the implicit question is “What’s going on in my life, now and in the near future?”

Times change, and sensibilities change with the times. Many querents nowadays wish to take a more active part in the reading. Furthermore, readings without a question are obviously more difficult, and the modern diviner who doesn’t have time to waste is certainly happy to get more cooperation. I know I do. But this doesn’t mean that a reading without a question isn’t possible.

There are exceptions to this, of course. Some oracles do require a question. Horary Astrology, for instance, usually needs one, and the more specific and focused it is, the better. True, some old authorities give rules for judging “Universal Questions“, but these universal questions were asked back when many people didn’t know their birth time and often had to travel for days to see the astrologer for probably the one and only time in their life, so instead they asked the astrologer to tell them about their future in general in more than one sector of life.

Confronted with the impossibility of looking at the person’s birth chart, the astrologer erected a horary chart for the time the consultation took place, a moment that was probably significant, since the querent had gone to great trouble to visit him. Today, the astrologer is one Zoom call away, so this hardly justifies vague Horary questions.

The peculiarity that makes Horary more sensitive than other oracles is that there is no manipulation of physical counters involved: you don’t reshuffle the planets whenever the querent’s whim settles on a new fancy. Therefore, the question put to the heavens must be meaningful and at least relatively important to the person asking it. In a way, this limitation of Horary is due to Astrology’s nobility, seeking as it does answers from the heavens themselves.

Cartomancy is not noble. It spreaded like wildfire among the lower classes exactly because you didn’t need to have studied trigonometry in order to deal out a spread. Cartomancy is therefore as sturdy as the beasts of burden that the lower classes used in the fields. Like all beasts of burden, of course, cartomancy too has its limits: you can ask random questions (“Tell me about my life. Now tell me about my sweatheart. Now tell me about my job. Now about my neighbor”) but if you abuse it, it collapses to the ground exhausted.

But the fact remains that cartomancy (and tarot reading is a form of cartomancy) is a trusty, resistant beast.

Vague Questions Don’t Necessarily Yield Vague Answers

Another common myth is that if one asks a general question the reader is entitled to give them a general answer. Even worse, some readers say that, in the absence of a question, they can read “the general energies surrounding your life.” The problem is that there is no such thing as a (meaningful) general answer. “Tell me about myself.” Well, you seem to be a featherless biped with one heart, two lungs, etc.

The thing is that when the cards have been shuffled and dealt, they always tell a specific story. Sometimes this story is not what the querent secretly wishes us to talk about, but that’s not our fault–we are merely reading what’s there. Furthermore, we as readers may sometimes not be able to decipher the story in the cards, but it’s there. We may, as a result of our confusion, try to string together the cards in a looser way than usual (“There seems to be a woman next to you whom you love dearly and is going through a rough patch in life. It could be health-related, but I may be wrong. Can you help me with this?”). The cards, however, are always specific, never vague.

As a matter of fact, our life is never vague. It is always made up of details. These details may be mundane, but they are specific. In our life there is never “the general energy of the moment”. You don’t go the supermarket and find the general energy of the moment on sale. There is no such thing.

There is the coffee I’m brewing, the floor I’m sweeping, the feeling of dread I’ve been struggling with for some months, the mom I just talked to on the phone, etc. And the mom I talked to is my mom, not a general mom floating in the world of Platonic ideas. No energy. No universals. Universals are always embodied in our limited existence. I don’t talk to “momness in itself”. I talk to my mom. Therefore, the fact that our querent asks us a general question cannot embolden us to give a general answer, though it CAN justify us in being more cautious and loose in the interpretation.

Again, if we don’t have a specific question, it may be harder to interpret the cards, especially because certain cards together may appear to be open to more than one interpretation if we don’t have enough context.

And here we come to an important point. Some diviners think they need to be able to awe the querent with incredible details without missing a beat and think they should never ask them for clarification. I say that the querent exists in order to be tortured until every last bit of useful information that I need in order to interpret his damn spread has been wrung out of his writhing body, because at the end of the day it’s him who wants to know about his future, not I.

This authoritarianism is all the more justified in case of a general question. I am not going to talk for ten minutes straight without catching my breath only to be told “no that’s not me.” I’d much rather proceed cautiously and ask the querent for clarification step by step (and, if nothing makes sense, start anew).

BUT, the point remains that when we lay out the cards, the cards are going to talk about specific situations in the querent’s past, present or future. They are not going to give us “the general energy”.

MQS

astrology, Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Occultism and Esoterism, Philosophy, Playing Cards, Spirituality and Psychology, Tarot

Divination vs Fortune-Telling: History of a False Dichotomy

2 Comments

The founder of BOTA, Paul Foster Case, proudly started his short book “Oracle of the Tarot” with the assertion that Tarot divination is not fortune-telling. The reason, he explains, is that fortune-telling is grounded in the belief in luck, chance or fate, while divination understands that everything is about our personality. The same statement is found at the beginning of the advanced BOTA course on tarot divination (Oracle of Tarot, without the ‘the’). Ann Davies clearly had a hand in rewriting it, considering how verbose the course is, but the substance was similar.

Paul Case was tapping into the spirit of the times when he made that statement. Since Tarot had the (mis)fortune of attracting the attention of XVIII and XIX century occultists, it hasn’t enjoyed a moment of peace: everyone wants to believe it to be not an obvious masterpiece of Renaissance art and Medieval philosophy, but an occult device made to transmit mystical knowledge unknown to most people (even though most people prior to the Enlightenment and the French revolution would have been able to tell you what the Tarot was about).

The same has happened to Astrology. Once a practical art for foretelling the ups and downs of actual life, it became the victim of the occult intelligentsia of the last couple of centuries and was turned into a hodgepodge of pseudomysticism, ill-digested psychoanalytic concepts and “it’s true if you believe it” New Thought crap.1

But this is not the whole story. If one takes the time to study, say, the Golden Dawn system, one quickly finds out that their traditional way of reading the Tarot is grounded in fortune-telling (just read MacGregor Mathers’ example of the Opening of the Key spread). Even the BOTA system, which derives from it, preserves very concrete meanings to be strung together into sentences, despite Ann Davies’ attempt to turn divination into a form of Kabbalistic meditation.

In other words, the occultist attempt at reappropriating the Tarot and Astrology (which in part continues to this day with some bogus theories about the so-called Tarot of Marseille, but more on this in another post) is only partly responsible for the divination/fortune-telling dichotomy. Much of contemporary occultism is grounded in the psychoanalyzation of magic and spirituality, which, in turn, is a defense mechanism against the death of the classical spiritual worldview. Yet, for all its shortcomings, it at least preserves some core tenets of the magical worldview.

But the problem with this is that while it does preseve in some ways the roots of the worldview in which divination can flourish, it has lost the intellectual basis for defending it. Intellectually speaking, even today occultism is largely stuck in the pre-WWII era, with its myths of scientific positivism, of constant historical progress and of magic as misunderstood technology (while I would argue the opposite, namely that technology is misunderstood magic).

Essentially, what has gone lost is the philosophical framework that allows us to keep together divination as spiritual practice and divination as uttering of concrete, verifiable truths.2 That’s largely because spirituality, in the post-XVIII-century Western world, was only allowed to survive as private indulgence in irrational behavior, a weakness to be tolerated.

Thus the split was born: 1) on one hand divination: a ‘serious’, and therefore unverifiable endeavor, a tool for vague self-reflection, cheap catharsis and shallow instagrammable aha moments. In other words, something that the small judgmental scientist constantly perched on most people’s shoulder could smile upon as at least benign, if not really true; 2) on the other hand fortune-telling: a crass or quaint superstition that is just a scam when it gets things wrong and just a coincidence when it gets them right. The little scientist can be free to frown on it. In other words, the distinction was born out of the guilty conscience of “spiritual” people, i.e., out of their subconscious scientism, as a way of telling themselves and society “I indulge in this silliness, but I am just quirky, not stupid.”

The occultists of yore were at least intelligent men and women who actually had something to say. They may have worked in an intellectually hostile environment, but they at least gave it their best shot, and for this they deserve leniency. What happened next is worse: that the already battered art of divination fell into the hands of stoned hippies and people with degrees in the most useless branches of socially acceptable knowledge. Then along came the Liz Greene’s and the Rachel Pollack’s (to make just two examples) who destroyed Astrology and Tarot even further. From then on it could only go in one direction: past life readings, divine feminine, empty motivationalism and strategizing, healing of generational traumas and all the attendant nonsense.3

Interestingly, the more contemporary divination’s fake husk rots, the more one needs to be intellectually dead to practice it, the more it becomes reintegrated in the higher spheres of society. I believe I already talked about a friend of mine who works for Google and has to endure meaningless meetings with tarot readers and astrologers because her boss is the manifestation-obsessed boss babe type. Nor are tarot readers a rarity in corporate America. This probably says something about how brain-damaged this kind of environments is. The nicest thing we can say about this part of society and this strand of divination is that they deserve each other.

MQS

  1. This is not to say that Astrology or divination were unanimously accepted, but the debate was much more complex. ↩︎
  2. This, by the way, is not a call to “go back” to some long lost good old times. I am no reactionary. Nor am I a progressive. I am a realist. ↩︎
  3. By which, of course, I do not mean that there is not a feminine side of the divine, nor that trauma cannot be a real thing. I only mean that these words correspond to nothing but the most vapid pseudointellectual nonsense when coming out of most people’s mouths nowadays. ↩︎
astrology, Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Occultism and Esoterism, Tarot, Uncategorized, Vera Sibilla

The Spiritual Aim of Divination

Leave a comment

I had a short but interesting conversation with a visitor of this site. He quite liked many of my articles but was somewhat perplexed by my iconoclastic attitude toward the spiritual side of divination. I think this is a good time to clarify my views further, since the reason I am so scathing is not that I hate spiritual work, but that I take it seriously.

First off, let us distinguish inspired divination from technical divination. Inspired divination is the downloading of information, as it were, from a spirit, a deity, an inner contact or some such. This depends wholly on either the inborn talent or the level of initiation of the diviner.

Technical divination works for the same reason that stones fall: because that’s how things are. One learns it the same way one learns math: they must be predisposed to it and must put in the work. Of course, one can mix the two types of divination, but they are essentially different.

Either type can be used to obtain concrete information. Either type can be used to fool yourself or others (but especially yourself). The difference is that inspired divination, especially as a consequence of initiation, has the perk that the diviner must have somewhat balanced themselves out of many of the delusions typical of the spiritual community at large. Technical divination may be just as hard for other reasons, but the counters used in the prediction are available to everyone.

From here come the hordes of tarot readers and astrologers that (believe they) are using divination for spiritual aims, or inner work, when in fact they are sinking more and more into Delululand, as most of the time they aren’t really speaking to gods or angels or ancestors but rather to their own ego (have you ever heard any tarot reader or astrologer that uses this approach say something that goes against their convictions? How come their gods or ancestors always have their same values, their same political bias, their same preferences?)

The preconception here is that divination, in order to be spiritual, must be about spiritual topics. This is as a result of two widespread phenomena: 1) most people in our society see spirituality as something separate from concrete life, something that takes place in a bubble of white light 2) most people who become interested in divination are initially interested in concrete answers, but finding that getting these is hard and not immediately rewarding, they reframe divination as ‘not really to know the future but to improve yourself’. This is at the heart of the deadly divination/fortune-telling distinction that plagues our art.

In reality, divination is an inherently spiritual practice: 1) by the mere fact of working it deflates the modern ego 2) by its ability to pinpoint how the future is likely to pan out it puts a stop to the marketable but untrue ‘you are the master of your own destiny’ nonsense 3) by showing how the intricacies of real life can be mirrored in a microcosmic mirror it teaches the diviner to rise above himself and his preconceptions and adopt a more universal standpoint 4) by proving that some things are fated it teaches the practitioner to have compassion for themselves and others and to reevaluate their priorities.

Once again, a geographic analogy could help. A traditional diviner who seeks to understand life is like one using a map of a territory to find his way around. By studying it closely the traveler can eventually form a good understanding of the land he is in. A (pseudo)spiritual approach to divination though is like that same traveler painting the map with a uniform white paint because, at the end of the day, everything is one divine unity. That may very well be, but now the traveler is lost without the map and can only sink deeper in his preconceptions in trying to picture the route.

MQS

astrology, Card Reading, Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Occultism and Esoterism, Philosophy, Playing Cards, Spirituality and Psychology, Tarot, Uncategorized, Vera Sibilla

On Prayer Before Divination

Leave a comment

Some days ago I was talking to a fellow occult student and we were comparing notes on how we go about the process of divination. When I told her that I tend to say a little prayer before divination she was surprised, so I thought it would make for a nice topic.

First off, I do not think that praying before divination is mandatory, nor do I think that it’s the prayer that makes divination work. It doesn’t matter if it’s synchronicity, as Jung said, or if it’s the spirits that live inside the cards, as my first teacher told me, or if it’s the Soul of the World, as the Platonists believe, or if symbols are living beings, as I believe: the point is that the cards always rearrange themselves in a meaningful pattern, the planets always find themselves in the right aspects, the right geomantic figures always emerge, the right I Ching Hexagram always forms.

As such, in a way, divination is a natural activity, so much so that it’s probably one of the earliest activities humans have undertaken. The reading of symbols came much sooner than the reading of characters, because symbols occur naturally to the mind whenever we realize that X means Y. The moment the first men drew any kind or conclusion from any kind of observation, divination was born.

And yet, I believe that divination is also essentially extraordinary. In a way, divining is as normal as cleaning your cat’s litter box, but in another sense it is also very different. In divining we read a part of the whole (the divination system) to derive conclusions on the whole (life itself). Indeed most divination systems are universal languages that mirror the complexity of the Macrocosm.

As such, divination cannot be decoupled from a global understanding of life, and this global plane is where philosophy, spirituality and occultism unfurl their wings.

In my own view, occultism is divided into three branches: devotion, divination and magic. But these three aspects are not discretely separated. For instance, theurgy brings together magic and devotion. Divination and magic are often coupled together, such as in electing the right time to make a talisman or in asking if a magical action is warranted or advisable or effective.

Praying before divination brings together devotion and divination. It is a way of recognizing the extraordinary import of the action I’m about to take, despite this action being, in another sense, perfectly ordinary.

It helps me more than it helps the divination system itself. Nor does it have to be prayer. I know of some people who wash their hands before divining. In Imperial China official diviners had to cleanse themselves before attempting divination, and this is true all over the world.

No one divines willy-nilly. No one *should* divine willy-nilly. This has nothing to do with respect (unless you are receiving information from a particular spirit), it has nothing to do with asking deep questions (divination should always be practical) and it has nothing to do with not having a sense of humor (you can have a sense of humor, in spite of how bland and vapid many of us are). It does have to do with knowing what place divination has in the scheme of things and reaching that place. I do it through prayer, others may do it by just taking a second to clear their mind, but everyone does it one way or another.

MQS

astrology, Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Philosophy, Tarot, Vera Sibilla

Three Enemies of Good Divination (and One Ally)

Leave a comment

Remember those listicles that were much in demand about ten years ago, before people grew tired of the rage-bait? Yea, they still do them, but they have somewhat fallen out of favor, especially since they are so basic even AI can do them better than the poorly paid saps who wrote them back then. Anyway, here’s a short one, hopefully more interesting than the average listicle, on what generally hinders good divination, plus a bonus entry for what helps.

Mechanic Behavior

Divination eschews mechanic repetition. Asking the same question one or two times is fine because there is still enough emotion behind it to put the system into motion. In fact, it is fine to ask the same question many times as long as the querent is truly invested in it, but the more the querent asks the same question with the same emotional drive as the first time, the more you know the querent is cuckoo and is best avoided. In general, it is best to wait a little between divinations.

This point is one that skeptics seem unable to wrap their heads around, because it seems to run against the principle that experiments can be repeated ad libitum, but it is really quite simple: divination is not an experiment, and the more you mechanically ask the same question, the more the real question changes to whatever it was at the beginning to “does divination really work?” and this question cannot be answered by divination itself.

All in all, a balanced relationship to divination as a means of intelligence gathering, together with the understanding that we are attempting something more exceptional than cleaning the cat’s litterbox, is in order.

Shallow Understanding of the System You Work With

If you asked your doctor how he knows his diagnosis is right and he told you it was just his intuition, you’d feel justified in seeking a second opinion. Yet among ‘spiritual seekers’ anything that reeks of effort and study is frowned upon and people go to extraordinary lengths in order to avoid the simple fact that both knowledge and experience are needed to perform satisfactorily in any sector of life. So they come up with anything from intuitive advice (which essentially means “don’t ask me how I know”) to the great angel HRU to fairies to ‘kickass schools of non-duality.’

The reality is that divination is a method for the acquisition of knowledge. If we don’t make the effort of studying the method we don’t get much knowledge. I believe the current distrust of study comes in part from the distrust of intellectual knowledge (see the bonus entry in this list) and in part from the fact that many people who become interested in divination do it to create a little bubble of mystery and mysticism away from the golden cage that is modernity.

Either way, it is a misguided attitude. Divination requires study. Lots of it. In fact, the study will never end. The good news is that we can start practicing much sooner. As for intuition, it does have a place in divination, and I’ll talk about it in the future, but unbridled intuition is just a badly behaved kid.

Bias and Preconceptions

I’ve already talked at length about this, and I will probably still talk about it in the future. It bears repeating: the more we think we know, the less we’re open to discovery.

Aside from ideological forms of bias, which are always bad regardless of the ideology, there are also other forms. One of the most deadly forms of bias is, for instance, the belief that the querent knows what they are talking about. A querent doesn’t need to be malicious in order to confuse us: they can just be confused themselves, or they can have built a whole scenario inside their heads before sitting in front of us.

On the other hand, talking over our querent and treating them like a special needs child won’t do either. There needs to be a balance between our ability to see the truth of the matter in a dispassionate way (thanks to the divination system we are employing) and open-heartedness toward the querent. As a matter of fact, an open heart can go a long way.

Querents can also be biased against us, but we can do nothing about it. People sometimes ask me what happens when someone asks false questions maliciously. What happens is that if I’m lucky, I’ll understand it from the cards, while if I’m not lucky I’ll make a fool of myself. Either way, the person won’t change their mind about divination or about me, so why bother getting worked up about it? Stuff happens.

Your Brain, Your Best Friend

Ever since Madame Blavatsky disgracefully started peddling poorly understood principles of oriental philosophy, the Western esoteric world has become convinced that the “mind is the enemy”. People generally think so (isn’t it ironic? The mind thinking that the mind is the enemy) because they are incapable of using it but want to sound deep in their incompetence.

In reality, if there is such a thing as overthinking, there is also such a thing as underthinking. The idea that everything must come immediately and instinctively to us in a space of pure knowing and that everything resembling logic is the work of the devil is patently wrong.

Aside from the fact that this is philosophically delusional, most people who think only the mind lies never stop to consider how many times their instincts or their heart actually let them down on a day-to-day basis. The reality is that our mind, our body and our heart are ways for us to acquaint ourselves with the world, and all three can lead us astray depending on the context, just as much as they can guide us to profound insight.

Therefore, if it is not correct to let the other two dry up, it is also not correct to become mindless pseudomystics, sacrificing our understanding on the altar of an ill-digested and rather offensive orientalism (“Counterfeit Asian philosophy 101 says the mind is poo poo, therefore it’s true. See how smart I am? I misquote exotic people!”)

The funny thing is that most Eastern forms of divination are not at all intuitive, and in fact verge on the overly technical (see Da Liu Ren, Qi Men Dun Jia, Wen Wang Gua, Vedic Astrology, Purple Emperor Astrology, etc.) They are also incredibly accurate exactly because of how majestically brainy they are, though they may not have the glamour of the latest useless set of empowering witchy cards. Traditional Western divination systems, of course, can be just as accurate, but people usually have the expectation that they need to unplug their brains on the way in. Let’s not do this. Our mind can sometimes lead us astray. It can also help a great deal.

MQS

astrology, Cartomancy, Divination, Divination Master Post, Fortune-telling, Geomancy, I Ching / Yi Jing, Philosophy, Playing Cards, Tarot, Vera Sibilla

Should Diviners Give Advice? Yes, But…

Leave a comment

I come from a rather traditionalist school of divination. One of the ways I learned was that my teacher often told me to do a spread on an aspect of her past I knew nothing about to see if I managed to discover what happened. Another way was when she told me to do a spread to see what would be the problem of the next person going to her for a reading. Interestingly, I have met other people, who have taught me other techniques, who used the same method.

As can be expected, there was little room for anything other than the literal interpretation of the cards. This has helped me a lot to remain  with my feet on the ground as I forged my path, which is very good, considering how littered with nonsense the esoteric landscape is.

On the other side of the spectrum you have a sizeable chunk of diviners today, though the situation now is slightly more balanced than it was just twenty years ago. These readers simply interpret the cards (or the planets, or whatever) as if they were benevolent tips from the universe about some inner issue that the person needs to work through to progress.

The problem I have with this approach, aside from the fact that it leads to unverifiable predicitions, is that it presupposes a superstitious view of the universe as some kind of benevolent nanny that teaches you how you ought to behave. These people, I should remind you, are the ones who often loathe Christianity as a bundle of silly dogmas and think they are the reasonable ones.

If there is one thing that my study of philosophy as well as my experience as fortune-teller has taught me is that there is no such thing as an ‘ought’. There’s what is and what isn’t, what was and what wasn’t, what will be and what won’t be, as well as what can be, or is more or less likely to be. For instance, there is no way you ‘ought’ to eat. You either eat well or you don’t. Eating well only becomes an ought when your current diet is checked against your desire to minimize health risks. It’s your desires that create oughts, not the universe.

I already discussed how I believe that divination tools are essentially something that gives us a bird-eye view of existence, affording us a glance at a number of considerations about our situation that we might not otherwise have. To use my old analogy, it is like being in a crowded city center and talking to a person on a walkie talkie, this person looking at your position from the top of a skyscraper and therefore seeing things you cannot see.

It goes without saying that I believe divination tools never give advice.* As maps, they simply tell you what is. Advice is contingent on what either someone wants to do or what they believe a superior authority wants them to do. My view of the superior authority is that it is too occupied exploring all its potential through us to pick and choose what’s best for us.

Does it therefore mean that a diviner should not give advice? I actually believe advice is a perfectly fine thing, as long as it is not delusional advice. I think a good divination session should always be of help to the querent in living their own life better. This is done by checking the querent’s wishes (sometimes implied, sometimes stated outright) against the wider situation as portrayed by the oracle, with its potentials, its risks, its possibilities and impossibilities, its certainties and its uncertainties.

In other words, advice must come from the diviner on the backdrop of the oracle, and not be projected onto the oracle, which just pictures reality as it is, not as it should be (because there is no way reality should be, from an objective standpoint). Sure, sometimes I tell my querents “the cards are advising you to do X”, but this is short for “I am advising you to do X based on what the cards are telling me about your situation.”

Sometimes the right bit of advice at the right time can help the querent make a turn for the better in life. These are the readings I love the most. Sometimes it can improve a situation. Sometimes, though, the advice is not enough to change an objectively difficult situation. The more heroic and nietzschean reaction to these slings and arrows that life throws at us is that of amor fati: in knowing what’s coming, one can learn to love it, thus overcoming it, making it part of oneself instead it being an alien destiny. But this is not always possible. Sometimes, all the querent can get from a difficult reading is peace of mind. And peace of mind is a great thing, all too often undervalued until it’s no longer there.

MQS

* In this, divination tools are very different from inspired divinations caused by spirits or deities, since these actually do have their own particular views and preferences.