The Twos and the Principle of the Triad
AUTHOR’S NOTE: In yesterday’s post I used a quote from Plato’s Timaeus that has a bearing on how I interpret the tarot Twos. In any reading involving two parties, there are generally three factions that must be accommodated: the two individuals or collective entities and the relationship between them, which will sometimes take on a life of its own.
According to Plato, “It is impossible that two things only should be joined together without a third. There must be some bond in between both to bring them together.” C.S. Lewis called this premise the “Principle of the Triad.” I typically see any Two in a tarot reading as speaking of a reciprocal or compensatory situation that encompasses two extremes and a middle ground that must be navigated to approach and ideally achieve equanimity. I’ve likened this to a swinging pendulum that alternately departs bottom-dead-center (the “equilibrium position”) in one direction and then the other, first engaging one party and then its polar opposite, with its periodic return to neutrality marking a short-lived convergence of interests, potentially sparking conflict, encouraging cooperation or brokering a truce of the “agree to disagree” kind before once again going about its business.
I originally took my inspiration from the Pythagorean concept of the Line, which represents the initial displacement of the Point from its inherent state of rest, a dynamic that imparts mobility and trajectory but not yet depth or mass. Although this projection doesn’t become “triangulated” in the form of the two-dimensional Plane until the Three is introduced, it implies the idea of two terminals between which energy can circulate. In other words, the channel remains open; it doesn’t show a “one-way-trip” but rather an opportunity to either advance or retreat as dictated by circumstances. Thus there is an implied third element that might be construed as the response to stimulus and the conclusion toward which it proceeds (that is, whether it favors one destination over the other). In the past I’ve created spreads that explore this eventuality. (See my “Feeding the Elephant” dysfunctional relationship post.)
Of the two popular types of tarot deck that embody anecdotal insights, I believe the Thoth with its overt Golden Dawn antecedents is best suited to this analysis; the Waite-Smith I find to be (for the most part) too prosaic for philosophical treatment, with its “canned narrative vignettes” that conceal those same roots. As a general guideline, Aleister Crowley observed in The Book of Thoth that the suit of Wands signifies “work, business, etc;” the suit of Cups “love, marriage or pleasure;” the suit of Swords “trouble, loss, scandals, quarreling, etc;” and the suit of Disks (Pentacles) “money, goods, and such material matters.” This overview aligns with the Renaissance viewpoint that Batons referred to matters of commerce and trade (suggested in the RWS 2 and 3 of Wands); Cups to spiritual — and, by extrapolation, emotional — affairs exemplified by the clergy; Swords to the military; and Coins to agriculture.
Below is a series of thumbnails that illustrate my thinking:
The Thoth 2 of Wands conveys the idea of confrontation, with one party seeking to dominate the other; there is a good deal of opportunistic posturing and energetic jockeying for position at the point of convergence. The “third party” is represented by the aggressive flames that erupt from the juncture of the two “Tibetan dorjes;” although the binary Two is said to portray harmony, there is no reluctance to engage here. The RWS gives the impression of a nobleman who is “master of all he surveys;” he is more contemplative than confrontational. The “third party” to the occasion appears to be the globe in his right hand that commands his attention; the whole scene seems to be steeped in dignified ambition.
The Thoth 2 of Cups, with its intertwined streams of water, suggests balanced reciprocation of feelings, supporting the assumption that the relationship will be great while it lasts. The RWS 2 of Cups makes this impression even more explicit with its dual offering of chalices. In the Thoth deck the “third party” is represented by the lotus of purity, renewal and the transcendence of Spirit, while in the RWS it could be seen as the caduceus of communication and compromise, with the winged lion indicating desire and pride in the background.
In the Thoth 2 of Swords, the idea of “Peace” is not particularly convincing given the brooding color scheme and the rather nervous abstract “white rays” emanating from the center; Crowley mentions “latent antagonism” within the apparent composure of the crossed swords. For me it suggests a touchy situation that could go either way. The RWS 2 of Swords always reminds me of “analysis paralysis;” the woman is in a quandary over which way to turn so she is reluctant to do anything at all. In the Thoth image the “third party” is the blue rose that, according to Crowley, represents “the influence of the Mother” (which I think in this context refers to the “Dark Mother” of Binah) that intensifies the sense of discord. She could be a “meddling mother-in-law;” the notion of “peace” is foreign to her unless it is the none-too-conciliatory quietude of matriarchal sovereignty (an inhospitable Mother Nature that provokes adversarial sentiments). The blindfold as “third party” in the RWS scene implies an inability or unwillingness to see the truth of the matter. Both images intimate being “armed to the teeth and ready to pick a fight.”
The Thoth 2 of Disks entails pragmatic mediation, producing a negotiated bargain that “throws a bone” to both parties and allows the relationship to advance to a more productive stage by adjusting compensation. The “third party” would be the “yin/yang” symbolism at the center that captures Crowley’s formula “Change=Stability; Stability=Change;” immobility invites stagnation, which this card won’t tolerate. In the RWS 2 of Pentacles, the juggling-and-dancing man is an exemplar of instability; if he stops gyrating he is likely to fall over like a wobbly top at the end of its spin, “losing his marbles” in the process. The “third party” would seem to be the phallic red cap extolling the unruly passions that have upset his balance. Although he doesn’t seem to be up to the task, he must take his metaphorical “manhood” in both hands if he is to stay upright and soldier on.
Originally published at http://parsifalswheeldivination.wordpress.com on November 29, 2024.
