I always bring up poor Rachel Pollack whenever I need to give a paradigmatic example of someone who utterly ruined tarot divination by turning it into a heap of psychobabble, though in reality the list is quite long. At some point, it was decided that 1) divination could not be a serious undertaking in an age of reason, and 2) we still wanted to think our illustrious predecessors who bought into it were not poor saps. The compromise therefore was that there was something deeper to divination, and so divination had to be reassessed and purged in accordance to this new ideology of ‘depth’ or *shudders* ‘wisdom’.

The reality is that in the “I’m too special for religion but wouldn’t it be fun if there was something more to life” community, where most people tend to think exactly alike in spite of how different they think they are, depth is a misunderstood concept.

Something is considered deep if it will allow them to talk themselves or others silly while giving them plenty of safe thrills and predictable a-ha moments by hurling around the latest buzzwords (try finding a tarot reader who doesn’t talk about narcissists, gaslighting or inner truth).

Thankfully, the tarot is not deep, just like playing cards–and tarot cards ARE playing cards–or tea leaves or dice or geomantic figures are not deep, which is what makes them marvellous divination tools. Even astrology is not deep by today’s standards, if by astrology we mean astrology in its traditional forms (Hellenistic, medieval, Chinese, etc.)

But the depth that is found in divination, just like the depth that is found in all other branches of magic, has nothing to do with finding abstract meanings or deep doctrines that move us beyond real life. Although there can be space of deep philosophy, the real depth is found in the shift in our consciousness of existence and of our place in it as we practice it concretely and see its concrete impact on real life.

I will forever be grateful to my GD supervisor, who always insisted that I practice tarot in real life and not as a mere metaphysical plaything (people will be surprised by how concrete the GD tarot system is, in spite of its metaphysical underpinnings). Traditionally, in magical practice, people are advised on how to recognize when they have established contact with an entity other than themselves.

The risk is sometimes that of contacting parasites masquerading as great beings, but the even higher (and more common) risk is that of simply contacting one’s ego. Psychic onanism IS a thing, and a much worse vice than the physical counterpart.

This is what limits, in my view, the potential for tarot as a tool for self-reflection or meditation or scrying. Granted, most symbols can be used as doorways for these aims, and therefore also the tarot. There is some value to it, especially when done under supervision or with the proper frame of mind. There is also some value in allowing symbols to bring certain aspects of oneself to the surface, if one has the necessary detachment.

Wisdom is a great thing, and it is something that can be pursued on the path of magic, including divination. But more often than not, those who are too good for simple divination and want to discover the “deeper layers” of the tool simply end up massaging the shallower parts of their own psyche without realizing it, and often even thinking they are making some kind of psychological or occult progress when in fact they are simply digging themselves a deeper hole in their own ego.

MQS