Alejandro Jodorowsky presents a variation on the Three Card Spread that I’ve found very powerful. I call it “Jodorowsky’s Three Card Theosophic Sum Spread” because you begin with three cards that expand into seven (Major Arcana only). Jodorowky calls it, “Reading three cards according to their number value.” A “theosophic sum” results from adding a set of numbers and then reducing them, usually to a single digit or “root” number but, in the case of tarot, to a number that is 22 or below. By adding all the variations of the numbers in the three card spread you end up with four additional cards (see instructions below).
Jodorowsky was the writer/director of the late ’60s controversial cult films, El Topo and The Holy Mountain, re-released in 2007. The Holy Mountain contains Tarot content, a bit of which can be seen in this video tarot lecture by him (with English subtitles). I encourage you to look at his The Way of Tarot: The Spiritual Teacher in the Cards (co-written with Marianne Costa and formerly available only in French and Spanish). It will be available in English this December—get your pre-order in now. I highly recommend this book (which I’ve been slowly making my way through in Spanish) as an excellent way of understanding Marseille-style decks and especially for in-depth methods of reading the Major Arcana (he also discusses the Minors).
The Layout
• Ask a question (to my mind this is optional—see below*), shuffle and lay out the three cards left to right (A B C). I find it visually helpful to lay out the rest of the cards differently from Jodorowsky’s layout—(I’ve used my layout but mention his below). Interpret these cards in relation to your question or life situation.
• Add the numbers of these three cards as indicated to get four more cards for this spread. Reduce any sum over 23. 22=the Fool. For instance: 6 + 17 +10 = 33 = 3 + 3 = 6—The Lovers (this card is read in both positions in which it appears); or 2 + 15 + 4 = 21—The World (don’t reduce further). Regarding 8 & 11, I follow the system of whatever deck I’m using.
- A + B + C = Underlying aspects of the question. Place the resulting card under B.
- A + C = Exterior aspects of the question. Place this card at the top leaving space below for the next two cards.
- A + B = Receptive or maternal influences (what you are receptive to). Place this card directly above A/B.
- B + C = Active or paternal influences (likely actions). Place this card directly above B/C.
The layout should look like a Christmas tree or arrow (see sample spread illustration). One or more cards may appear twice.
*Personally, I find that the three cards (A B C) reframe the situation from the tarot’s point of view. If you haven’t asked a specific question, they reveal the issue. I like to understand these three first before moving on to the sums.
Visually, Jodorowsky lays the first three cards out from left to right (A B C) and then a column of four cards (descending) to the right of them. In the two examples in his book, Jodorowsky doesn’t read the initial three cards at all but only the four cards that result from their sums.
Optional: Sometimes I add one more card that results from adding all seven cards: A+B+C+1+2+3+4 (count any card twice that appears twice). This final, eighth card is only to be read, if desired, after all the other cards are thoroughly understood. I see it as a long term result or psychologically deeper understanding of all that’s come before.
Example Spread

This is a brief summary of a spread for my friend Joan. She had no specific question. Joan recognized the first three cards immediately: “For several years I have been running a balancing act (Justice) between my Emperor, business manager self, and the Bateleur, my creative self.” [Note: Jodorowsky advocates paying attention to the direction each figure is facing: the Emperor is looking away into the past while the Bateleur seems particularly concerned with what Justice thinks.]
The overall issue involved legal situations and financial considerations that Joan had to coordinate to the detriment of her creative work involving various forms of media.
When the Death card appeared underlying the situation she said, “Maybe both modes of being are outdated or in need of an overhaul. It could mean the end of both roles.” This is appropriate, although frightening, as Joan’s former way of life had just gone through massive changes at every level including the near death of someone close to her. The reading allowed her to talk about everything that was happening and the impact it was having on her.
She saw the Hanged Man, representing the “receptive (or inner/feminine) influences,” as mirroring a kind of disoriented, helpless state of suffering (that few people see). The Hermit as the “active (outer/animus) influences” shows her looking for a way to turn this whole situation around. She currently has the opportunity to be away from the turmoil at home and is doing a lot of soul-searching. Joan can’t help feeling that the breakdown in her former life, while currently disorienting, is headed somewhere useful. It’s the Emperor side of her life that is currently most handicapped (Hanged Man), so that the Bateleur side can undertake the search for new meaning (Hermit).
This ties in with the final card of “exterior aspects,” which position Joan also saw as an external manifestation or result of what she’s been going through: “The Pope seems to be pointing to a need for more knowledge, research or wisdom, in my case. Perhaps he is the high priest who orchestrates the journey to self-realization and discovery.” She is not involved in organized religion, but it could represent a higher purpose that both parts of herself could respond to. In fact, she’s been thinking of professionally organizing spiritual/adventure trips to sacred sites.
When I added up all seven cards the result was 7—The Chariot, which seems to affirm that direction. For the time being travel is going to be a way of life for her anyway, and she hopes it will help her master a new direction and mode of being that integrates the Emperor and Magician into one.
An Addendum: While psychologically this could be seen as an “animus-driven” reading for a female, and we might assume that Death could refer to the demise of the inner patriarchy, the final card of the Chariot suggests that true balance (Justice) will come from integrating and utilizing those masculine/yang forces (which suit her) in a more spiritually directed way (Pope).
(The deck is the A. Camoin reproduction of the Tarot de Marseille de 1760. Thanks to Casia at Aeclectic Tarot for bringing this spread to my attention. The Spreads section of the Tarot Forum is a treasure chest full of insightful layouts while the Tarot Spreads Ebook collects some of the best of the best.)
♥
37 comments
Comments feed for this article
September 4, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Connie
Very interesting spread, Mary!
I love numerology and often incorporate it into my readings, but never like this. I am going to try this technique with my new Legacy of the Divine Tarot deck and see how it works. Then I will use this spread with my Tarot Readers Group next week…they always like trying new stuff, and I always learn a ton from them while we are doing it.
Thanks for posting this.
Connie
September 4, 2009 at 12:51 pm
mkg
Connie –
Let us know how the readings go with your Tarot Readers Group. I’m curious, too, if you’ll find the 8th card helpful or even necessary. I just couldn’t help modifying the spread a little but I plan to occasionally go back and use it just as described by Jodorowsky.
September 4, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Rachel
Hi, Mary. I seem to have missed something. How do you get four extra cards by adding the numbers of the first three? That would seem to me to produce one extra card, not four. Sorry to be a bit dense about this.
September 4, 2009 at 7:14 pm
mkg
Rachel –
I’m not sure if I understand your question. If the first three cards are A B C, then you add all their variations:
A+B+C =
A+C =
A+B =
B+C =
Each of these four sums provides a new card.
I edited the text and shortened the lead-in to make this clearer. Thanks.
September 4, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Connie
Mary,
I used this spread and my new Legacy deck this evening to do a reading for a friend of mine who is having some rather serious work issues with her boss and co-workers. And I have to say that we both found this to be a fascinating and insightful way of expanding the reading into something that was really meaningful for her…all the cards connected to provide a very consistent and concise message. We did use the eighth card and it was a perfect conclusion to the reading. I definitely will use this method of reading again in the future and am looking forward to seeing how it works with my group next week.
Thanks again (and my friend thanks you too!),
Connie
September 4, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Celeste Cornelia
Hi Mary…I did this spread using Major Tom’s Tarot of Marseilles. You were right on when you said it was powerful. The longer I look at it the more I see. Very enlightening and for me a little scary. Forced me to answer the hard questions I have been avoiding for a very long time…Celeste
September 5, 2009 at 1:15 am
Lisa Lloyd
Wow! Love LOVE this spread. Thank you so much for sharing, Mary. I tried it and blogged about it here: http://tarothealingbylisa.blogspot.com/2009/09/majors-only-spread-by-jodorowsky-thank.html This is one I will return to many times both for self-development and to help clients gain clarity.
September 5, 2009 at 1:25 am
Emily Carding
Mmm, clever- I like! Might try adapting it for the Transparent…could be interesting.
Em x
September 5, 2009 at 7:45 am
Celeste Cornelia
Hi Mary…Thank you again for posting this most enlightening spread. I do have a question. The Pope showed up twice for me in my reading. I had decided, at around 3am to see what the 8th card might be but when I went to add the numbers I wasn’t too sure if I should add the Pope twice, once for each position, or just once….Celeste
September 5, 2009 at 9:53 am
mkg
I’m so glad you all are finding this spread as helpful as I did. I can hardly wait for Jodorowsky’s book to come out in English so I can read it with more ease.
Celeste –
To get the 8th card you add every position. If you got the same card twice you add it twice—once for each position it falls in.
One person actually got all three of her original cards repeated – so she only had a total of four different cards in the 7-card spread. It made the reading very emphatic and concentrated. Even the 8th card could be the same as one of the earlier ones. That’s why it’s helpful to read each segment completely before going on to the next—so that you understand a card in each position separately and only then try to understand the pattern involved in the repeats.
September 5, 2009 at 9:59 am
mkg
Emily –
This spread could be very interesting with The Transparent Tarot (love that deck!). I’ll have to try overlaying the first three cards and then the next four – and then all together (if I can see through that many).
Let us know what adaptations you come up with.
September 5, 2009 at 10:10 am
mkg
Lisa – I loved seeing your spread and reading how you interpreted it—good job! I also got a few clarifications about how to describe the spread. Thanks. I love how we can learn so much from each other.
September 5, 2009 at 10:21 am
Lisa Lloyd
Thanks for your feedback, Mary – that made my day! Learning together is the best. I love my cosmic scholar friends!
September 5, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Mary
Í’m not a big fan of Jodorowsky’s though I can read him in Spanish (I’m from Spain) but I must say I liked this spread; it’s insightful and deep-the way I like them.
I’m always amazed of how much I learn from your books and blog, Mary- I’m a professional reader and I teach tarot myself, and I draw great inspiration from your work. I just wanted to say that. Thanks a lot!!
September 6, 2009 at 11:38 am
mkg
Mary – Would love to hear more about what you don’t like in Jodorowsky’s tarot book. Who would you recommend for learning to read the Marseille tarot?
September 6, 2009 at 11:47 am
Mary
I don’t like Jodorowsky’s work in general, I find his views on Tarot, magic and spirituality too risky and full of contradictions. I didn’t read the book you talk about if full, it didn’t catch my interst. I may give it another try.
About Marseille tarot, i’m not an expert because I specialize in Rider-Waite, but I find the works of Daniel Rodes and Encarna Sanchez (a couple who write and work together) very interesting. If you read Spanish, you could take a look.
September 7, 2009 at 3:35 am
Helen
I tried this spread out using the Old English Tarot and I found it to be very revealing. I didn’t ask a question but the cards went straight to an issue of importance to me and I have to say they were right on the mark.
Thanks Mary for bringing this spread to our attention – as always your blog is interesting and informative.
September 7, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Mariola
Ante todo gracias por compartir.
Yo he estudiado con Jodoroswky, su libro La Vía del Tarot me parece un gran trabajo.
También estudié con Daniel Rodes y Encarna Sánchez aquí en Barcelona.
Un saludo
September 8, 2009 at 6:57 am
Yao
Jodorowsky and Costa wrote one of the most interesting books on Tarot, focusing on the Marseilles deck. They use numerology but also colours to enhance the understanding of spreads.
Thanx for this great blog!
September 8, 2009 at 7:08 am
Yao
I did the spread and got:
A= VII .- Le Chariot
B= XX .- Le Jugement
C= 0 .- Le Mat
A+B+C= 27= 9 L’Hermite
So, Le Mat is a bit confusing because its “0” value results in same cards.
A+C= A
B+C= B
A+B= A+B+C in this case.
So, I got two Le Chariot, two L’Hermite and Two Le Jugement. Le Mat tends to reinforce the other two cards.
September 8, 2009 at 10:59 am
mkg
Yao –
A friend just had the same situation. When the Fool is one of the three original cards you only end up with one additional card. Essentially the Fool-as-0 simplifies the situation down to its most basic elements. Only the “underlying aspects” position (A+B+C) and one other sum will be a new number (the same in both cases).
If you want to see what the positions “could be” then you can use 22 as the number of the Fool, instead of 0. After all, Jodorowsky says that the Fool counts as 22 when determining the results of your sums.
My feeling is to try both and see what seems truer. I tend to feel that the simpler is more Fool-like – paying special attention to the new positions the original cards now assume.
September 8, 2009 at 11:00 am
mkg
Mariola –
Muchas gracias. Saludo tambien.
September 10, 2009 at 9:47 pm
Anna
What a really interesting spread! My question is though to how many times do you reduce the numbers? I drew THE HANGED MAN (12), THE LOVERS (6) & THE WHEEL (10 as central cards. When I am adding A+C up I got 28 which reduces down to 10 which I allready got a C. But I solved it by reducing it once more to THE MAGICIAN instead. Whats your thoughts on this?
September 11, 2009 at 6:08 am
nabializm
Very interesting 🙂
I have a problem with the diagram:
[A]+[B]+[C] => [9] [1] [8]
[A]+[B] = [1] duble arkan(?) how to interpret?
[B]+[C] = [9] again duble
[A]+[C] = [8] -,,-
and
[A]+[B]+[C] = [9]
all together = 45 =>4+5=> [9]
September 11, 2009 at 12:19 pm
mkg
Nabializm – Really good question. The instructions say not to reduce any number under 23 and therefore you would instead have:
A + B + C = 18 – The Moon
A + B = 10 – The Wheel of Fortune
B + C = 9 – The Hermit (doubled; the same as “A”)
A + C = 17 – The Star
all together = 72 = 9 – The Hermit again.
This is a very interesting combination!
September 11, 2009 at 12:27 pm
mkg
Anna –
According to the “rules” you don’t reduce any number that is below 23, so you woud use The Wheel again. I noted in the instructions that you may get one or more doubles. This reading would emphasize change as the underlying factor.
BTW, 28 is the sum of A+B+C, not A+C.
Just as I changed the layout of the cards from how Jodorowsky did it, I think you should feel free to adapt this process to one that works for you. However, I suggest that once you find a system that works, to be consistent.
September 14, 2009 at 1:13 pm
arcano
Mary, you are a fantastic writer and a sparking person on Tarot and I really would like to give you my five cents on the theme about Jodorowsky.
I think Jodorowsky is one of the cleverest and keenest persons who speaks about tarot in media and specially TV. He is not the usual “strange person with strange opinions”. He loves TV and is amazing his ability to attract the audience, almost magically.
What I do not like about his book are the numerology, sometimes he is quite superficial with them.
Reducing numbers is a common point in numerology, but has no much sense when you think on the possible results of the reduction, using Tarot cards.
Usually you think something like “after reduction you can have any number between 1 and 21” but although real, you have to know the fact than a few combinations occur far often than the others.
With Excel you can find, for example, the reduction from four cards into another as conclusion (as in the Josephine Péladan spread).
When you go on this process, you find that 95% of the time you have a number between 5 and 15, and the rest of the cards can occur only the remaining 5%.
The iterative process of reduction can be even more pernicious, with a final conclusion with really scarce possibilities.
September 15, 2009 at 1:04 pm
mkg
arcano –
You are so right about the limited numbers/cards that can result from the theosophic sums of three Major Arcana cards. You can’t get the Magician (unless you further reduce a 19 or 10) nor can you get the High Priestess. Certain numbers will be far more frequent than others.
After working with this spread a lot more I realize that all the possibilities could be fairly easily calculated. They would result in a kind of Tarot I-Ching – a set of fixed responses for which someone could write a series of commentaries that could apply whenever you got that combination.
This fixed set of responses doesn’t make the system invalid, but rather makes possible a kind of “sortes” or “lot” book of the kind that used to be popular, in which you would look up an answer. It would take a lot of work to make an intelligent and well-rounded set of commentaries, but it could be interesting in its own right.
In the meantime, I’ll trust to my insights in the moment as I explore this fascinating possibility-set with its in-built probability constraints.
Mary
September 23, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Alvaro
I have the book, is very good, although, alas Jodorowsky just explains the spreads by the Major Arcana mainly, there are solo two basic spreads with the minor Arcana.
He got a psychological view of Tarot instead of Fortunetelling or Esoteric issues. Unfortunately, people don’t want to hear much about Mum and Dad otherwise, they would visited a Psychiatrist instead of a Tarotist.
The book says that Wands are related to “Sex & Creativity” i have my own doubts.
The Tarot pack has Major and Minor cards, using only one of them is like a woman wearing just the bottom of a Bikini..
October 9, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Tristan
Dear Mary: I have a question on this method.
What happen when the sum of two of the appointed cards is the number of a card that is already placed into the spread?
What do you use instead of it?
October 9, 2009 at 1:37 pm
mkg
Tristan –
Thanks for asking as this is one of the most confusing aspects of this process. You use the one card in both places – resulting in fewer cards in the spread as a whole.
There are limitations to this approach to reading, but also possible benefits as I discuss in my earlier response to “arcano” in the comments above.
Mary
October 9, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Tristan
For our friends that ask about Jodorowsky’s tarot book:
In my youth, I was a reader of several of his books, watched most of his movies, even one of his theater plays. I can tell you that he is very creative, specially in the adaptation of other people ideas.
Due to the very wide spectrum of sources he uses, and his actual state of creativity, his work has many contradictions, no matter the theme he is elaborating on. He also improvises according to the attending people, as is a master in “cold reading” people, and also a great speaker. So, he will always have a new opinion on almost everything, one that fits that specific situation, sometimes even one that contradicts his previous opinions on the subject been treated. He also says that “it is exactly what an artist must always do, challenging no matter what apparent contradictions arise”, as in his “Panical Movement”.
About his book on Tarot, you may read it most as a work of fiction, specially on the historical origins of tarot, because this is a very important subject for the purpose of the book: the assertion that the “original” tarot is the Camoin Marseille one, and how he, Jodorowsky, helped in his restoration, specially in the “true colors that it should have”. I think you have the idea.
His card descriptions are open minded fictions, ranging from freudian psychoanalysis to tibetan budhism, Gurdjieff, Kabbalah or Marcel Marceau, you name it. Sometimes a number relates to a specific idea, other to one in a very far doctrine. The same happens with the colors for each card.
In conclusion:
You may read this book, but don`t believe most of what it says, just have an amused, and sometimes inspiring, account on the many things that can be said about our beloved cards.
Jodorowsky himself once said that, in some occasion, after one of his presentations, somebody told him “You are a conman”, and he
answered “Yes I am, but a sacred conman”.
Best Wishes.
October 9, 2009 at 4:25 pm
mkg
Tristan –
Loved your description of Jodorowsky and his book. Your comments make a lot of sense and are good suggestions for reading his tarot material. Thank you.
September 5, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Paris
Yes, one could make The Fool count as 22. But a technique used by my grandmother might be another way to deal with the problem. I haven’t seen much about this, by the way. My grandmother was a reader who not only used the same deck as Jodorowsky’s early favorite–the 1930 Grimaud–but also used the same book that was Jodorowsky’s most influential work, Le Tarot de Marseille by Paul Marteau. Each time The Fool would appear, she would immediately place a card on top of it, saying “Qui est Le Mat?” [Who is The Fool?] And she would read the covering card as telling her only the answer to her question. When she did her numerological interpretation, the card covering The Fool was used. In her readings, The Fool never appeared by itself.
As you know from both Jodorowsky’s work and from Marteau’s, numerology was much, much more important in the TdM readings than we currently accord most modern readings. I attribute this to the introduction of the illustrated Minor Arcana.
[She had many other special techniques, one of which I note here for your interest only: In three-card spreads, Grandma Germaine would deal a card and then replace it in the deck, shuffle, and deal again. In this way, the same card could reappear. I have adopted the technique and when it occurs, as rare as it is, it always makes perfect sense in the context of the question.]
January 7, 2011 at 4:02 pm
James Wells
I’m thoroughly enjoying Jodorowsky’s book and layouts. I’ve gone back to incorporating the Marseilles deck that he and Camoin did together too. Isn’t it fascinating that what one finds unattractive, another finds completely compelling — i.e. that Mary (not Greer) writes that she finds Jodorowsky’s work too risky. That is exactly what attracts me to his work. I’m not saying that one of us is correct and the other is wrong, I’m just fascinated by the contrast. Section Five of the book offers many fabulous guidelines for being a clear, clean worker with the tarot.
July 14, 2011 at 11:00 am
l'ermite du vulgum pecus
Mary, the name of one of his films you mentioned (which I love) is “The Holy Mountain”, not “The Magic Mountain”.
July 14, 2011 at 11:38 am
mkg
Ermite-
You are so right about the title. How could it have gotten by everyone for so long? I’ll change it immediately.
Mary