Thursday 25 April 2024

Post No. 2,768 - Card oracles (“decks” of cards) such as Tarot, etc

One of the fairly commonly used divination tools is various decks of cards - probably most commonly the Tarot systems, of which the Rider-Waite-Smith is likely the best known. 

With those and similar decks, the visual imagery is an important part of conveying the message - in part because of the prompts it conveys to us through less than fully conscious parts of our being, I suspect. 

However, many of those are now well known, and have been codified into various books which “explain the meaning” of each card. 

When, in the 1980s, I started working more formally at developing my abilities in this area, one of the exercises was to meditate on symbols - including various card systems (I quite liked Murry Hopes “The Way of Cartouche” [a review is here] in those days [out of print and difficult to get now: one probably short term link, for example, is here] - note that this is NOT an ancient Egyptian divination system: it is a modern system using ancient Egyptian symbols). I have used that meditation exercise for a range of systems of symbols and sigils (see also this label) now, and quite liked the idea in Josephine McCarthy’s “The Exorcist’s Handbook” (which I wrote about here) of creating - as the author suggested - an Oracle card deck based on the concepts she described in that book. (She also has a separate, formally illustrated card system which is on my wish list - see here.)

I have nearly finished doing that, creating very simple, non-visual cards as prompts - including mention of the location in that book if I want to look up the meaning of each card. (Incidentally, I first made cards by hand when, in the 1990s, I attended a workshop run by my friend, Rune Master from the Bush, and he had prepared A4 sheets with card outlines for us to draw personalised versions of runes [see also this and this label] on - to be later cut out and laminated.)

So I dont have the beautiful, detailed imagery (see image of example cards below), but I have access to a written description which works entirely at the conscious level (which has strengths and weaknesses), and a set of cards that can be shuffled and used in a layout (or randomly - I sometimes have people loosen a deck and throw it all up in the air, and read what lands on a target area) so I can gain extra insight into causes/cures of various situations. 

However, I liked the concept of hand made cards to access knowledge so much that I have extended the deck beyond that initial set to also include cards for concepts such as types of units

I may also adapt these crude cards into a very cut-down, crude looking spreadsheet version of an app - which just uses a random number generator and a bit of basic maths to identify a specific card. I open the file, consider the question, and press F9 to shuffle, then look up the card. How this looks is shown below (I originally developed this for working with elements, which is why the pentagram option is shown at the left)

Also shown below is how the cards I am currently working on look before I cut up the sheet, with a few final cards also shown. 

The point of this is to illustrate that there are low cost ways of creating oracle systems - although the formally illustrated ones do have advantages, and of working with concepts you learn about or are of particular significance to you.

Food for thought, perhaps. 



An in-progress sheet (the top three cards are the last from Josephine McCarthy’s book - apologies for the reflection of the light, but it is consistent with the card it is on 😊 [I used digital location for the earlier cards, but switched to page numbers for the later cards]) and several finished cards from the system I am creating are shown below (the Mirror of Hathor included in the backing is from Murry Hope's system)

The runes spreadsheet looks like this (the images are a mixture of the original cards from the workshop I mentioned above [no.'s 25 to 42, and yes, they are around 30 years old - too old to use physically, which was one of the drivers in creating the spreadsheet system], and an updated system I have been - slowly [glacially slowly] - working on)


The active page of the Yi Jing spreadsheet looks like this:

 

As noted, I have not included the moving lines yet, as I have not transcribed them all.

The internal links go to a page with the information on it, part of which looks like this: 

(I work directly off a translation of the original texts these days.)



Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

  • there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking” 
  • I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below, and theres also Instagram

Remember: we generally need to be more human being rather than human doing, to mind our MÓ•gan, and to acknowledge that all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk & accept that all insistence on the use of “trans” as a descriptor comes with commensurate use of “cis” as a descriptor to prevent “othering” (just as binary gendered [men’s and women’s] sporting teams are either both given the gender descriptor, or neither).

Copyright © Kayleen White 2007-2024     NO AI   I do not consent to any machine learning aka Artificial Intelligence (AI), generative AI, large language model, machine learning, chatbot, or other automated analysis, generative process, or replication program to reproduce, mimic, remix, summarise, or otherwise  replicate any part of this post or other posts on this blog via any means. Typos may be inserrted deliberately to demonstrate this is not an AI product.     Otherwise, fair and reasonable use is accepted under Creative Commons 4.0 on an Attribution-ShareAlike basis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/  




 


Post No. 2,767 - How good am I?

As a kid and young adult, I used to race sailing dinghies. Initially I was a good crew, then poor skipper - until other more experienced sailors helped me, and then I was reasonably successful.

Based on those decades, and the sailing I did intermittently until the early 2000s (including skippering a boat to 7th out of 28 in the Sydney Gay Games - and our team came 3rdso we got bronze medals for that), my assessment of my sailing ability is: 

  • I could win regional and club dinghy championships (and I did);
  • I would finish around 10% of the way back in state championships; 
  • my ability was around 20% back of the best in national titles (although I never had the back up / set up ashore to realise that); and 
  • globally I would rate myself about 30% back from the best. 

To put that another way, around ⅓ of the dinghy sailors in the world are better than me, and I am better than ⅔ - until the end of last century, at any rate (sailing techniques have changed since then, and I would be much further back in the fleet nowadays)

I also knew what work I would have to do to improve my ability, but I decided to put my energies and times into trying to make the world a better place, and happily let the competitive sailing go. 

Now, one of the word puzzles I do started publishing some statistics recently, and based on that, I suspect it is probably reasonable to suspect that ⅓ of the people who do that puzzle are better than me, and I am better than ⅔ - and, given the amount of writing I have done for work, activism, this blog, and for myself (i.e., - a lot more writing than most people in the world), I would hope to be something like that. 

However, I also know there are people who love words far more than I do, and I am comfortable with the fact that I am nowhere near being best. 

In my former day job, I was acknowledged as being one of the best engineers in my speciality in Australia, and probably as good as most of the best in the world (based on the feedback from my peers in the multinationals I worked in) - and, after nearly half a century of work, I would hope to have good competency. 

But again, others were better. 

In terms of psychic ability, I have been working at developing that since the 1980s, but in fairly specific areas (energy  work, rescue, etc), and that has necessarily been second in my life to family responsibilities over the last quarter century, and behind my day job duties for much of the last half century. 

Other people are more talented and capable psychics generally than I. 

I would like to think I am also in the situation of ⅓ of psychics being better than me and me better than ⅔ of psychics, but I think that would likely be the case only in my areas of specific interest (earth empathy, global divination, clearingrescue, etc) - although, as with my former day job, my interest and application may mean I am better than I am suggesting.

In other areas (e.g., conventional Tarot), I would refer anyone who came to me for help in that area to others. 

Now that I have retired, I can work at my psychic ability more, and look at developing my skills more (and am, in fact, doing so).

Spirituality is a far more ... unclear area. I have probably done more work on spirituality than any of the other areas in my life, and I consider myself competent & capable, but definitely NOT the best in the world in that area either.

One other area I consider myself to be quite capable in is teaching - going all the way back to being a teenager in sailing, when I was given the people who were struggling most to teach. 

So teaching and spirituality are areas where I may be better than the other areas, but I know there are others who are better than I - and I am quite comfortable with that. 

I consider the desperate drive many people have to be “the best” counterproductive - and dangerous. In my day job, whenever asked about my driving skills, for instance, despite the courses I have done and the experience with difficult driving conditions, I NEVER rated myself any better than average (whereas everyone else thought they were best ... ).

People don’t have to be the absolute best to be able to do good, or to be able to help others.

Remember that when assessing your life, and whether you should try to help or not - and also remember that you may find others who are better suited for you than what I present on this blog. 

Also remember that how good you are is not only talent: it is how much and how well you work at developing that talent

 ... and what you do or dont do with it ...


PS - as an illustration of an area I lack talent, there is an online version of Solitaire I play where ¾ of the players are better than me ... and I couldnt care less: I enjoy the game, have no desire to improve against others, and just play it for the relaxation and fun of it.


If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below, and theres also Instagram Remember: we generally need to be more human being rather than human doing, to mind our MÓ•gan, and to acknowledge that all misgendering is an act of active transphobia/transmisia that puts trans+ lives at risk & accept that all insistence on the use of “trans” as a descriptor comes with commensurate use of “cis” as a descriptor to prevent “othering” (just as binary gendered [men’s and women’s] sporting teams are either both given the gender descriptor, or neither).

Copyright © Kayleen White 2007-2024     NO AI   I do not consent to any machine learning aka Artificial Intelligence (AI), generative AI, large language model, machine learning, chatbot, or other automated analysis, generative process, or replication program to reproduce, mimic, remix, summarise, or otherwise  replicate any part of this post or other posts on this blog via any means. Typos may be inserrted deliberately to demonstrate this is not an AI product.     Otherwise, fair and reasonable use is accepted under Creative Commons 4.0 on an Attribution-ShareAlike basis https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/