ADEPT LEVEL; 21 Ways . . . Step 14

Jewel

squeakmo9 said:
:D-oh yes-I forgot. Thank you for that reminder!
This deck is still very new to me, Jewel, so I really appreciate your insight here! Makes me feel better:)
The VR is my primary reading deck and I am very comfortable with it, if I can ever be of assistance to you with this deck please PM me. I find it to be so intuitive.

Dave thanks for explaining the diagram more. I really really like it. I am going to print that out and put it in my journal for reference.
 

dadsnook2000

For Jewel

I've sent Mary a PM and asked her to look at it when she has time to see if she has comments on its origin or its structure. It looks doable, but its possible that it goes against the grain of Tarot lore in some way. We'll see. Dave

Edited/added: I'll have to expressly test it with combinations of Court, Major, Minor and Ace cards to see how comfortable it then feels. We ought to be able to draw our own conclusions with all that we have learned, don't you think? Dave
 

Jewel

dadsnook2000 said:
Edited/added: I'll have to expressly test it with combinations of Court, Major, Minor and Ace cards to see how comfortable it then feels. We ought to be able to draw our own conclusions with all that we have learned, don't you think? Dave
You had mentioned that we might do some "special" or "extra" excercises, this formula could actually be one for us all to explore together. With various of us testing it we would have variety in perspectives, decks, experience, etc. We could then summarize our collective conclusions. What do you think?
 

dadsnook2000

Relationships between the suits of cards

Yes, Jewel, we could indeed do that. Perhaps a four-card quandary spread or challenge spread could be developed or proposed. Each position in the square layout would be given a meaning, then the cards drawn -- the difference in drawing cards would be that once a suit was drawn, you couldn't draw that suit again but would have to keep drawing until another suit-card came up.

We'll have to think a bit about this, but that's a great suggestion. Dave
 

Jewel

dadsnook2000 said:
Yes, Jewel, we could indeed do that. Perhaps a four-card quandary spread or challenge spread could be developed or proposed. Each position in the square layout would be given a meaning, then the cards drawn -- the difference in drawing cards would be that once a suit was drawn, you couldn't draw that suit again but would have to keep drawing until another suit-card came up.

Ohhhhh yes, how about a spread which requires us to actually separate the deck in suits and each position meaning would correspond to a suit? I know there are spreads that call for separating decks in various ways, so what do you think about that idea?
 

dadsnook2000

Question on step 14:5

I'm a bit confused about this 5th portion of Level 14. The book indicates that we should start with the three-card spread used in Adept Level Step 12. That spread was 6/cups, King/wands, and 4/pentacles.

In this step we are asked to use our chosen card to examine combinations of elemental dignities. I will be doing this step following this process.

** I will draw a series of pair-cards to use with my chosen card.
** I will then mix them in various combinations to see how the elemental dignities affect the reading.
** I will do as many of these combinations here on the list as space and time permits.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT STEP FOR US TO DO relative to the exercise that Jewel and I have been talking about earlier. So, do have fun with this. Dave
 

Jewel

I guess when I read Step 14:5, I understood it to refer to the 3 card spread we did at the Apprentice level where our chosen card was in the spread, and then making different arrangements to look at the dignity influences ... that is what I did, and just used the Star card as it was the card I used in the Apprentice level.

Did I goof? *LOL*
 

squeakmo9

It was my understanding to use the 3 cards spread from apprentice 12:3 & adept 12:6.
Purpose-Issue-Feeling(mine)
Then I switched the elements around, and did a combo between sub-steps (adept)14:4 and 14:5.
Was I wrong to assume that folks? Do I need to do a redo- please let me know guys.
 

Jewel

~chuckles~ guess we are all confused! *LOL*.
 

dadsnook2000

I don't know . . .

Well, I'm still confused. Those who have another understanding of this step should stick to their guns. It might be only me who is confused. We don't want confusion to become like measles and have it spread to everyone. We should never follow the Fool unless two conditions exist; 1) he is in front of us, and 2) there is only one path. Even then, we have a choice to just sit down and wait or rest. Everyone, do your own thing and don't listen to the Fool. Dave.