Celtic Cross: A Macrocosmic Approach

Being perhaps the most popular Tarot spread of this century, I thought I would write a piece about it!

The Celtic Cross' mass popularity comes from Arthur Edward Waite's popularity (1857-1942), which began to blossom when he published The Pictorial Key to the Tarot in collaboration with the artistic talents of Pamela Coleman Smith, their resulting deck of course being perhaps the

most influential deck of our time (look at any American tarot deck, and there is a 97% chance it is based on Waite and Smith's designs). The spread was originally developed by the Golden Dawn, which Waite was a member of, and was seen as a kind of abridged version of some of their other techniques (namely the lengthy Opening of the Key spread). This being said, the spread is notably concise, easy to dissect, and useful for just about any kind of question; this clearly accounts for its popularity.

The spread is incredibly malleable, and each position can be custom-fitted to any reader's preferences. The same principle applies to the order in which the cards are placed. Keep this in mind as you work with this spread: it truly is whatever you make it to be. (Honestly, this applies to any spread. It's best not to be dogmatic with spreads.) My only personal complaint with the spread is that it is a positional spread, meaning that the meaning given to each card is affected by the card's position in the spread. This is great for beginning readers, but my

personal belief is that this does not adequately reflect how the universe tends to function; any system is far too complex to partition into isolated boxes, the universe is certainly no exception. Therefore, this post is meant to give you some general tips on how to read Celtic Cross in a more holistic way that treats the cards as intertwined as opposed to isolated countries. After all, as the "venerable" Aleister Crowley writes in The Book of Thoth, "Each card is, in a sense, a living being; and its relations with its neighbours are what one might call diplomatic." (47-48)

To demonstrate each technique, I'm going to use an example reading for an imaginary querent. (This is a good technique for general practice. When reading for yourself no longer becomes helpful or even entertaining, you can always "program" the reading to be for someone who doesn't even exist!) I'll give you a brief

description of my positions (which are pretty traditional) as well as the order in which I place them.

1.) The overall situation.

2.) Primary obstacles or second detail regarding the situation.

3.) Root of the problem. Source of conflict.

4.) Past. What is leaving the querent.

5.) Crown. What the querent is aware of on an intuitive level about the situation.

6.) Upcoming event. Immediate future.

7.) How the querent views themselves in the situation.

8.) Environmental factors. How others see the querent.

9.) Hopes and fears. What the querent expects the outcome to be.

10.) Overall conclusion. Final result that can be known at this point in time.

Ok, so here we go!

Elements: This is a big one for me. I LOVE looking at the relationships created elementally, and honestly, this is the main basis of how I read. Patterns are everything when it comes to reading intuitively, and elements are a simple way to begin noticing patterns. In this example, we can see that the spread is dominated by a strong axis of air cards in the middle as well as an axis of earth that opposes it on the right. This tells us that the air cards are all connected in some way (this can be very subtle sometimes, and may take some gentle prying into the psyche of the querent in order to bring this connection to light), and that this similarly applies to the earth cards. There is one lone water card in the past and one singular fire card showing how the querent feels about themselves. I tend to look at singular elements like these as little signals showing that these are important to the situation, as they represent contrast within the situation. They demonstrate the events that are not well integrated into the situation for the querent, and can show where there is difficulty. Knowing this helps later when you're pressed to give advice.

Here is some general information about elements:

Fire is generally about the querent's energy source. Where are they digging deep, so to speak? Where are they directing their passion? In what form does this manifest?

Water deals with the emotions and the subconscious, dreams and desires. How does the querent feel about a situation? Are they feeling anything at all, or are they too preoccupied? Is the querent being deluded by their emotions and desires?

Air is the element of division, as it involves the intellect and communication (human intellect of course is mainly about categorization of things into separate entities - "thereby commeth hurt"). Therefore, the element tends to have a nasty "problem child" kind of feel to it. It is the element of conflict, anxiety, and entrapment, but is also the element of victory, focus, and inspiration. Where is the querent focused or not? Where are they feeling psychologically burdened? How are they partitioning their reality?

And lastly, earth is the element of stability (but remember that change is stability), material things, and works. It is solid, heavy, dense, and lacks all the abstraction found in the swords suit. Practical sometimes to a fault, earth can be stubborn and dull, but also highly motivated, reliable, and supporting. Does the situation leave the querent feeling grounded? How is the situation affecting them economically? Are they thinking too plainly or too practically, or do they need more simplicity and pragmatism in their situation?

With this in mind, we can see that the querent of our example reading is primarily highly focused on something, and is perhaps under a lot of pressure (large quantity of air). This is most likely connected to their financial situation, as we see an almost equal preponderance of

earth cards. There is some kind of opportunity for a relationship with someone in the recent past for the querent (Ace of Cups), but we can see that it does not develop as there are no other water cards present. The fire card in position 7 is honestly synonymous with the rest of the air cards (in fact, the 8 of Wands is Mercury ruling Sagittarius, Mercury being an airy planet), but we can see that it may be a source of conflict for the querent, being the only fire card in the spread. Note that the two "lone" cards, the Ace of Cups and the 8 of Wands, oppose each other elementally. Clearly these are two situations relatively exterior to the querent's line of thinking that oppose each other and thus bear little fruit when in conflict.

Pictorial Relationships: This can be divided into two categories: symbolic pictorial connections, and literal pattern connections. The latter is a very interesting one for Celtic Cross, but every now and then, you see it come into play. You just have to know how to look. In our example, it's quite obviously present in the form of the two elemental axes. We see that the poor Ace of Cups really has no chance, as it is literally standing up to a wall of air cards. I found it interesting that this meaning was even echoed in the 6th position in the form

of the 2 of Swords: impasse. The androgynous-looking woman has her back turned to the ocean and the moon, symbols of the emotions, and instead fully ignores them, even going to the extent of blindfolding herself. The querent is clearly not going to open themselves up to this new relationship opportunity, and is going to focus on something completely different, mainly their economic aspirations, represented by the pillar of pentacles on the right that seem to be reaching up/aspiring to a conclusion. I worry though that they will be lying to themselves in position 6 about how they feel. I think it's fairly obvious that the querent needs to pay more attention to their heart, since that may be part of what's causing the stress indicated by the number of air cards present. This message can be seen in the Star, which represents the overall situation. The querent is faced with opportunities that they do not usually have, and rather than being thankful, the querent seems to be squandering them!

Notice how the Star is holding two "cups" of sorts, similar to the Ace of Cups. Therefore, we can say that the querent is again choosing to focus on the pool of their thoughts and is perhaps foolishly dumping out the relationship opportunity onto the earth behind him. He sees the relationship as something exterior to where he needs to focus, and therefore wants no part of it. However, the 3 of Swords in position two tells us that there is in fact some emotional baggage affecting his decision-making. One gets the sense that he doesn't believe this relationship to have any hope (another meaning connected to the star) because his previous relationships have left him alone and damaged. This then begs the question, however: is he throwing himself into his work so vehemently (Knight of Swords) because he's trying to distract himself from this baggage? (Remember that the 3 of Swords is connected to the Knight elementally) Or do his relationships not work because he's a workaholic? This is something to discuss with the querent.

One more observation: there is a horizontal line of cards that all have bodies of water on them. In the Ace of Cups, we have a lake it seems; in The Star, we have a pool (the end of which we can't see, probably reflecting the meaning of this card as infinite possibility); and in the 2 of Swords, we have the sea, or rather maybe an inlet, as there is land in the background not too far away; in the 2 of Pentacles we see an open sea in a state of agitation. We can therefore see that chronologically speaking, the querent's emotional life will remain hemmed-in, ultimately by their economic aspirations (distant land in the 2 of Swords being related to earth). The 2 of Pentacles being in position 8, we can thus conclude that others see the querent as having once been overwhelmed by their emotional life (again, we see this in the past, as his

back is once again to the water). It seems that perhaps once they allowed themselves more freedom with their heart, and perhaps this caused distressing turbulence for them that they are now still juggling - hence the stance of the man and his pentacles. Knowing this, we can finally say something about the Ace of Swords in position 3, and simultaneously answer our above question for the querent: the querent sees his newfound focus on his aspirations as a kind of recovery process - a victory over his troubled past (even echoed in the Ace of Swords' imagery: a hand emerging from dark clouds over a barren terrain). Thus, our concern is more with the extent to which the querent turns to his work as a coping mechanism. He can't go through the rest of his life blindfolded to his emotions!

Gender/Age: This is another way of seeing relationships between the many people represented in the various cards of the Tarot. As much as I dislike social constructs of the gender "binary," it is a useful way to categorize allegorically. Kabbalistically or allegorically, masculine cards tend to represent active forces (striving, energizing, originating), whereas feminine cards can represent passive forces (receiving, nurturing, waiting). In this spread, all the cards can be seen as masculine, as the 2 of Swords frankly looks ambiguous to me. The androgynous nature of the 2 echoes its divinatory meaning, as the querent will be unable to commit fully to his feminine emotional side, even though it will still factor into his thinking. In other words, we see that he will turn his back to his usually receptive emotions and will instead devote himself to the action and focus on work represented by the Knight of Swords.

The King of Pentacles is another obviously masculine card, and being in position number 9, we can see that the querent hopes to become more masterful in his craft, whatever that may be. Right now, he is more connected to the Knight of Swords, but he believes that if he continues to devote the amount of energy he is to his career (8 of wands), he will become more mature and able-bodied in his field. (We get this from the fact that the King is "older" than the Knight, and is related to skill in business).

Number: The numbers of the cards themselves create subtle relationships in the same way that Kabbalistic numerology, Gematria, highlights underlying currents of connectivity between words. In our example, notice how the highest ranking minor card is the 8 of Wands. Everything else is quite low, aces or twos and one three, representing beginnings of things, or, in this case, the querent's immobility. We have the Ace of Cups in the past showing freshness in the querent's emotional life, the Ace of Swords and the Star representing new clarity in the querent's goals and ambitions dominating the present, and only the 2 of Swords in the immediate future. Thus, the querent is not going to let this situation take off in the least. He will perhaps ruminate over it for awhile, but nothing more. On the other hand, the earth cards show more progress. The 2 of Pentacles progresses to the King of Pentacles, and culminates in The World. We are then able to reaffirm the querent's greater interest in work and economics, and can begin to pinpoint The World as having to do with this aspect of the querent's life.

Court Card Relationships: Besides the above-mentioned relationship between the Knight of Swords and the King of Pentacles, there are no other court card relationships in this spread. What I mean by this is a familial affinity. For instance, The Queen of Cups in a reading alongside the Page of Cups can perhaps be seen as nurturing the latter (this of course depends on context). Either way, one can either see them as connected by being aspects of the same person, or by being related through affiliation. Usually their age and gender will help determine this. (Remember that Kabbalistically, the Pages are meant to be female.)

Types: In general, it is wise to look at a spread from its different types of cards. Court cards should represent people in one way or another; minors should represent small microcosmic life events within the control of the querent; and majors should be seen as overarching problems or events that are either too large for the querent to manipulate alone, or which represent the main themes of the reading. Therefore, we can see that The Star is a life lesson the querent needs to address right now. Where are they headed? Where are their hopes? How are they limiting their viewpoint?

The final card, The World, seems to be very positive, however. The labor done by the querent will blossom and will culminate, bringing him some kind of advancement. Perhaps a promotion? A new confidence? However, it also strikes me that the woman dancing in The World is in a posture adverse to the one represented by the 2 of Swords. In this case, I would say that this is a very positive development, that hopefully points to the querent being able to liberate themselves from their self-restricting demons. They probably will miss entirely the opportunity presented by the Ace of Cups, but this does not mean they will close themselves off entirely from their social life. Perhaps the success their material efforts will garner them will also reinvigorate their confidence in their ability, and they will be able to reincorporate more strongly the archetype of The Star as an icon of hope and optimism.

I know that this was long, but I hope these techniques and examples have been helpful for you. There are so many other ways of noticing patterns between cards - these are only my personal methods. By all means, invent your own! Experience is the greatest teacher when it comes to the Tarot, and I encourage you to investigate your personal methods of seeing the cards as well. Doing so will truly liberate your reading style, and will free your obligation to LWB's (little white books) and your dependence upon others' interpretations. Good luck, and enjoy yourselves!

Why Searching for God is Important

Lately, I have been confronted by several people who have grown skeptical of God and the act of searching for It. They've asked me things like, "but what is spirituality?" and, "what is religion?" or said things such as, "I've already spent a great deal of time looking for Him and I couldn't find Him, so it seems pretty pointless." This all distresses me intensely as I look at these people and wonder, how can you not believe in God? I'm not talking about the demiurgic god of the Old Testament or Greek mythology - the kind that will interfere with your life for seemingly little reason; rather, I'm talking simply about God the Universe, the "pantacle of the whole," so to speak.

Firstly, look around you. For once, don't take it for granted; I want you to truly recognize what you're looking at It doesn't matter what it is because that's the secret - it is. As God is the great "I am," so is existence.

Things exist.

From absolutely nothing there has been made, for whatever reason, by whatever methods, something. How does that not truly stagger your mind? And even if it was not fashioned by God's ideal hands, is it not useful to consider oneself blessed to be a part of this creation? You exist. You are here at this moment with the ability to contemplate and comprehend these words, and for once, I'm asking you to really question the import of that, for that is truly miraculous. Existence alone is a deity deserving of praise since we are lucky enough to be a part of existence's vast body. So why is it then foolish to aimlessly search for that which is the source of it all? Should we not be in awe of that which was the first speck? The first thought? The first will? Do you love your home? Your family? Your own self? Do you love anything at all?

These all must have come from somewhere, and all these things have existed in some form (albeit perhaps not fused in their current form) since the creation of the universe. Form is transitory, but existence is endless. Therefore, should we not recognize the rapture of that one moment when everything we know and will ever love was suddenly exploded into existence? Should we not stand speechless over that? Are we jaded enough by our "isolation" from God that we cannot appreciate all that it, at least as an allegorical being has done?

Let us go further. All this stuff we call existence must be considered one thing. It must be seen as one constantly changing system of simply nothing and things, as all things are made of the same components: combinations of atoms in various forms and negative space. Any chemical system must function as a whole, for instance, if I have a swimming pool and I drop 3 drops of food coloring in, the molecules of those three infinitesimal drops will eventually be dispersed relatively evenly throughout the pool, provided the pool is at equilibrium and there is nothing living in the pool that can consume the food coloring. We all know that when you stir a mixture, it tends to blend together much faster than if you were to simply let it sit placidly.

The same principle applies to the ever-churning Universe. Nothing in the Universe can continue to exist without changing - this is why things die. Death is necessary to continue creation - chemists and physicists will confirm this principle. So therefore, if we are constantly releasing "drops of food coloring" in the form of energy expended through every thought and action both conscious and unconscious (energy, which can never be contained within a system, it too simply transforms), can we not see that those thoughts and actions will have ramifications throughout the entire universe, even if they are infinitesimal in regards to the entire universe? Even if they take eons to reach the corners of the universe? Believe me, the universe has the time.

As much as the universe loves chaos, it also loves equilibrium - that swimming pool is always going to strive for equilibrium, and if we pretend that swimming pool is a perfectly enclosed system, then the amount of "stuff" and energy within the pool will never change but

will simply transform/transfer no matter how much chaos is present within the pool system. Therefore, that entire system must simultaneously accommodate the workings of each individual atom within itself, and here we can understand Crowley's lovely statement "the dropping of a pin excites a reaction within every star." (This includes us, as "Every man and woman is a star.") The point of this enormous explanation and diatribe on basic laws of science is this: this oneness of life is wonderfully intricate, well-ordered, self-sufficient, and (dare I say) aware. It knows how to function. Electrons know when they're being observed and change their properties to suit this observation. Can we not say that electrons demonstrate a kind of wacky omniscience? They actually change their properties from either wave or particle based on observation. Guess what: we're made of electrons. So therefore, anything physical that we see as "constant" is a lie, as it is technically changing its makeup perpetually. The ancient Hindu concept of reality being false and enlightenment bestowing true vision upon the adept is actually true. Guess what again: electrons can never be located within a given time within an atom; their location can only be guessed based on laws of probability. In fact, physicists have suggested that the electron moves in and out of this dimension at random. Say what? Yup. So essentially, you're technically here sometimes and sometimes partially not, and actually, what you think you are is entirely not what you are. What you are is part of God, which is everything, which is eternal. Therefore, how can you not have a piece of you that is also eternal, as in a soul (or whatever term best suits you)? Since the idea of you had to be created at the beginning of things, then can that idea not be eternal? It can't exactly dissipate, can it?

This is why it is important to trust human mystical and religious experience - because there is truth to it that has been known well before the supposed dawn of science in the 18th century.

The Age of Enlightenment cannot monopolize truth, for truth has always been accessible through the subjective lenses of individuals. Otherwise Zoroaster would not have been able to say thousands of years ago that the universe is similar to the vulture's spiral neck only to be echoed by Einstein who also believed the universe to be spiral-shaped, and energy to work in spirals. Therefore, should we not trust the bulk of human experience which from day one trusted in a unified sense of deity? Can we not simply trust that the existence we all share forms one mass of incredible existence that is divine simply because it exists? What makes something divine anyway? Divine is a simply a word/symbol used to describe something greater than the individual self, and the word bestows great importance, honor, and reverence upon such a thing. We can choose as individuals to see anything as divine since it is all divine. It is all wondrous, and has all always been here, and has always been one thing. Is this not something to consider divine? If it isn't, then I vote to abolish the word "divine" from the English language, as it would no longer have a useful place in it.

Some have argued that we have no divine purpose - that we are just like the animals. This is true to an extent. But talk to anyone you know and I guarantee you they don't believe their life is just about eating and sex. We would see an individual like that as utterly backwards.

Since our beginnings as a species with an absurdly large brain, we have all felt that there's something more to the regular meaning we confer on things. Some will attribute this to the ego and man's selfish need for personal validation. But nothing natural has been created without purpose, and that drive must be relevant to our existence. It is the drives that we have created ourselves which are unnecessary and hindering to hearing God's voice, though, perhaps this is useful too. "Sin is befitting," says God to Julian of Norwich, my most beloved female mystic hailing from the 14th century. Striving makes one appreciate that which one strives for so much

more, as we have seen with existence. Existence will always become regular to us. Even the things we strive for here are destined to jade us. But knowledge and feeling of the unity of life and complete trust in God? That is something to truly appreciate, as it is constant and unyielding. God/Existence will always be - it is the only constant (as I have attempted to explain scientifically). That iPhone you just worked a month to buy will feel really great to play with at first, but in another month, it will simply become another phone, and from there, another object you have to carry around.

And finally, to the people who have tried searching for God and who feel like they have failed: congratulations. You have lived, and you have been human. Humans question the divine and often come up with no definitive answers. Questioning is programmed into us like the will to eat. You have failed in nothing - even most mystics are left questioning for their entire lives, like Julian who became an anchoress just for the sake of meditating on her Showings. And has the search not made you a better person? Has it not made you grapple with your identity? Your demons? With what it is you believe existence to be about? How is that not beneficial to a developing mind? In a scientific experiment, if you fail to prove your hypothesis, does that still mean your experiment failed? Of course not! You have provided data for the ones who will follow you. They will try to learn from your mistakes, and will hopefully grow even further (this should be exciting at this point, since I have hopefully swayed you in the direction of believing in unified existence). I believe that St. Augustine and Julian of Norwich were correct when they said that God needs to be looked for, and God loves it when we look for it. And yet, there is nothing really to look for, is there? It is everywhere.

Proof of God is everything that exists. The mystic Jacob Böehme was correct when he declared that all of existence is constantly praising the name of the Creator, as existence is of the creator. God is of us, God is around us, above

and below, in front and behind. It is indeed difficult to find it within us, burdened as we are with an ego that simply does not shut up. Ever. But I know it is there - I feel it. I haven't been able to empirically prove it to myself yet, but I know it's there. I don't need someone else to tell me or to dissuade me, because nothing can change my mind. And even if I never attain true knowledge of that divine spark that lies within me, I can at least continue to enjoy the search, for by searching for the Holy Grail, one can at least know that they are hoping to be everything they "are" and more - everything, in fact.

Amour me fait commencier

I couldn't help myself. Wanted to share with y'all Anne's voice, though I promise it is even more stunning live, as she is truly a performer in every sense of the word. Thibaut de Champagne (1201-1253) was actually crowned king of Navarre in 1234, and is a stunning contributor to the Trouvère repertoire. I tried to find Anne singing his "Aussi comme Unicorne sui," but it wasn't on the Youtube. I HIGHLY recommend you find the track on your own along with the lyrics. Absolutely marvelous poetry, and Anne delivers it flawlessly (as if I would expect anything less). Let me know what you think of it!

St. Augustine (354-430): A Defense

Speak to most liberal academia about St. Augustine and you will undoubtedly hear all about his conservative philosophy, particularly in regards to sexuality. You will hear important facts, such as, "His Confessions were the model in the Middle Ages for all autobiographies," and, "His Civitate Dei was considered a valuable source of political theory." This is all true and highly relevant, however, in my academic travels, I have found that the venerable saint is often bashed too much for his supposed "hatred of the body," and this becomes the the central commentary on his work. I would like to argue here primarily that this is a fallacy, and must be taken in the context of his personal life. For this, we must turn to his Confessions.

In Book VII of the Confessions, Augustine explicitly (and eloquently) writes that all things which have substance must be good, for "if they were to be deprived of all good, they would not exist at all." (124) Furthermore, "the evil into whose origins I was inquiring is not a substance, for if it were a substance, it would be good... Hence I saw and it was made clear to me that you made all things good, and there are absolutely no substances which you did not make." Similarly, Augustine also attributes all forms to the God, the "supreme beauty." (10) Clearly, Augustine philosophically did not despise the body. He was simply afraid of what it is capable of doing to the soul when the soul is unable to make the right moral decisions, for he also believed that the soul was in control of the body and acted as the pathway to God, since God was not of the flesh but rather of the spirit.

Augustine's supposed hatred of the body can be connected to his own dilemma as a sexual addict. There is little maneuverability around this prickly fact, but it is significant here. Augustine rails mainly against the corruptibility of sexuality, not necessarily about physical existence - an important distinction. And what is more, all his huffing and puffing over sex must be attributed to his fear of rekindling his own sexuality, which was a constant problem until his conversion in the garden in Milan. He writes that Carthage proved to be a "cauldron of illicit loves," (35) and later he writes of how he "fell with a groan into [his] old habits." "Give me chastity and continence, Lord, but not yet," is another piquant little quote demonstrating his sexual addiction. Does it not make sense then that he would be petrified of what the tantalizing human body can do to a man/woman and his/her senses?

For me, the Confessions represent Augustine's characteristically fantastic grappling with philosophy and theology in a way that is poetically sweet and rhetorically erudite. From the book's beginning, in which St. Augustine questions how he can address a God that is everywhere, is part of him and all else, and which exceeds the spatial limitations of that which it even created (a mind-boggling conundrum that Augustine admits he cannot hope to wrap his mind around), to the analysis of memory and the nature of evil, one can only remain impressed at the profundity of Augustine's exegesis. His argument that evil has no substance immediately reminds me of the Sephiroth in which God is sephiras 1-10, but Daath is the realm of literal nothing, and is therefore considered relatively "evil" by Qabalists. Likewise, his emphasis on the unity of God's being seems more in line with Eastern religions and Qabalah than with Trinity-obsessed Western Christianity.

I suppose this is why I feel so strongly about defending Augustine. The man was brilliant. Part mystic/philosopher/teacher/academic/writer/and theologian, his works reflect a personage of intense intellect, who has undergone tremendous personal trial and guilt, and who deserves an amount of sympathy and praise, even if you still believe he was too conservative (note: Augustine also disliked ascetic practices because of the bragging rights they allowed individuals. He was monastically egalitarian. Yet another reason why Augustine cannot be considered a raving ascetic, unlike Gregory the so-called Great), because let's face it - we all have our addictions and personal road blocks that prevent us from truly listening to our real selves. Very few of us are beatific enough to not have these dilemmas, and in this context, it seems foolish to me to condemn a man for his own self-fear and indomitable will-power.