This conflict-resolution spread links tarot prophecy back to its Italian game-playing origins. The card-selection method provided right here utilizes two decks to figure out which card of a set is to be read in each of 5 “conflict engagement” locations. It is based upon the straightforward “trick-taking” video game “Battle,” in which one card bests an additional in a series of head-to-head “reveals.” Because game, connected pairs are taken into a heap that mosts likely to the individual that takes the following method; the winner is the gamer that has one of the most cards at the end of play. I hopped on this track while considering instructing my five-year-old granddaughter to play War with her Stephen Farmer pet oracle deck (“Hmm, the Bear eats the Deer, you win!”)
Below there is no utmost “champ,” just separate situations based upon various types of engagement that might or might not mesh into a bigger photo. Ties of the same ranking or number require context-specific judgment to decide a victor, or both cards can obtain equivalent prestige in the matter as established by the querent and the viewers. The cards in the “Victor” column are after that read to define the end result and a feasible resolution. The range of this spread ranges from inner, mental struggles to prevalent external discord, with numerous sorts of adversarial group communication in between the extremes. Not all areas will use in every circumstances, but they are all populated “just in case.” For example, if I were to experience serious psychological stress over something occurring on the world stage, I would certainly look initially at the cards in Areas # 1 and # 5, and then analyze the interfering areas for evidence of various other factors that can be “including gas to the fire.” Although we may not have the ability to do anything regarding outside events, this analysis can aid us clarify our understanding and alignment.
A little even more detail concerning the “highest possible in red, least expensive in black” provision of the spread is in order. There is an old rule in trick-taking card games that at a loss fits, Hearts and Diamonds, a high “pip” card will certainly beat a lower one, while in the black matches, Clubs and Spades, a low-numbered pip will beat a greater one. In the world of tarot (although there is some difference) the consensus has been that Sticks (also known as Batons) connect to Clubs due the physical similarity of the representative executes, and are for that reason dealt with as “black” in this example; Swords are connected with Spades, the French word for which– épée — means a form of sword, and are also “black; Mugs have actually always been Hearts and consequently “red;” and Pentacles (also known as Coins or Disks), as the last staying suit, must be corresponded with Diamonds and are also “red.”
Thus, for example, the 2 of Wands will beat the 3 of Wands, while the 3 of Cups will certainly defeat the 2 of Mugs. If the matches are mismatched– state, Wands and Cups, Wands and Swords or Wands and Pentacles– the normal low-to-high number development will prevail. If there is a rank-or-number connection, the property that there is no “champion” for that problem area doesn’t work with this spread; the solution is to either make a judgment telephone call concerning which one best fits the nature of the inquiry or offer both cards a say in the outcome. (Personally, I favor the second option given that it would include some complexity to the one-card responses.) Although it isn’t an official part of the spread, an additional card or 2 can be contributed to the “tale” in any kind of area where the winning card is ambiguous; it would be best to attract these from a 3rd “neutral” deck.
Initially released at http://parsifalswheeldivination.wordpress.com on October 6, 2022