Interesting Combinations using a three card system for courts

Bernice

MariaPeea: The question: How do I ease any fears x may have about his feelings/getting into a relationship?

Eight of Swords --- King of Wands --- Knight of Pentacles

SO! Eight of swords is something he and I share? So the advice is concerning the block between I and the King of Wands? And this block has something to do with the Knight of Pentacles, who could be someone we know, or the possibility of some other man? So,he is afraid of competition? The possibility of some Knight of Pentacles dependably riding in? Because, I also had the feeling to pull another card and got the Five of Wands, which I see as competition.

Did I get that right???
Maria, is this your query....

'x' seems unwiling to enter into a relationship with you.

Question: How do I get 'x' to change his attitude, and re-consider a relationship with me?

Querent: You

(You offstage) - 8 Swords - King Batons - Jack/Knight Coins

Yes, the 8 Swords lies between you (King Batons = 'x' (?)), this is something that is shared by both of you.

The Jack/Knight Coins is someone/something that belongs to 'x', and it has a bearing on the 'shared' connection (8 Swords). Yes.

However, if you want to do this according to the P.P. method, you must take into account which way the courts are facing.
If the King Batons faces away from you - towards the right, then it apparently means that his attention is elsewhere. A long-term relationship is unlikely. (it says this in the book).

If he faces toward you - facing toward the left - then a relationship is possible. So your question may be worth pursueing.
Therefore you, by your actions or attitude, must deal with the 8 Swords (depending on the meaning you've given it). This is what needs to be addressed, eased/diminished. So, think of it's opposite qualities, then implement them.

Bee :)
 

MariaPeea

Interesting....in my deck, the King/Wands is facing forward. Neither left nor right. The Knight of Pentacles is facing the left. And he's holding the pentacle up, like an offering. Ooo...I never noticed that before.

What does the book say about forward facing cards?
 

Bernice

Maria,

In an ordinary playing card deck (English Standard pattern) the Courts can clearly be seen facing left or right. 'Fancy' decks may differ - as will the Tarot courts.

There's a post somewhere in which someone created a meaning for cards that look forward, 'at' you. Forget what was decided about it.... sorry.

It could mean much the same as 'facing towards' you. Or that the person the court represents, is wrapped up in his/her own thoughts/world. Perhaps not wanting to take part in anything, or be involved with anyone - at this time of doing the spread. If in doubt, you could create your own 'rule' and test it out.

Bee :)

P.S. This P.P. method was created for Playing cards. not tarot.
 

Shebelle

Bee,

I do see what you mean. Maybe this is a different discussion. I guess I am philosophically "funny" about reading for people who aren't in the room for me and haven't asked for the reading. Maybe it's a karma thing. I think we all do it, but I want to be responsible...plus, I feel like the cards are always delivering a message TO THE QUERENT. Which, to me, is the person asking the question (whether the question is directly about them or, in the case of so-called "other" readings, a question about third parties who are not actively participating in the reading).

I have often questioned the validity of "other" readings because I think that the cards pick up MY energy. If I'm drawing cards on behalf of someone not in the room, but who is still asking me the question (i.e. the querent is emailing me a question, etc.), then I feel that I am drawing on their energy...even if the only energy I am really accessing is what I get from reading the words they choose in their emails or listening to their voices.

Also, I suspect that in cases where you cannot really KNOW for sure the other person's feelings or actions -- because the "others" are not participating in the reading and may not even be in steady communication with you, a la, "What does my EX feel about me today?" -- it is best to interpret the querent's question as "What does the querent need to know about her ex's feelings for her today." In this case, as I see it, it is the querent's feelings -- what the querent needs to know -- that is being addressed and, as such, the querent posing the question is the person who the message is for...and the querent is an active participant in the reading...

But I am also parochial and wish there was one way to do this. :) It is the Catholic in me, I guess. I can't help it. I am also slightly perfectionist.

Anyhow, this is agreat discussion and if you'd like to trade readings, I would be happy to...maybe we can "practice" this type of thing online and I can do an "other" reading for you and read it both ways -- the way you like to read it and the way I like to -- and give feedback on how it resonates? Does tha tmake sense?

Seriously, where is Little Baron? :)
 

Shebelle

I am rereading my rambling note. Perhaps another way of stating this is:

1) You treat the SUBJECT of the reading AS THE QUERENT when the question involves one or more "other" parties.

2) When the subject involves one or more "other paties", I tend to treat the SUBJECT of the reading SEPARATE from the person asking the question. Ex: "What do I need to know about my relationship with Bill?" Or "What do I need to know about Bill's relationship with X?" To me, in both instances the querent = the person asking, even if the subject Bill's relationship with the other lady, because the querent is the active participant and is requesting the reading and the message is for her. Now, if the cards want the querent to know that she really DOESN"T NEED TO KNOW anything about Bill's relationship with X, then either NO Courts will appear OR male Courts would appear (I'd be pretty gender-fixed on this subject.) However, if there is something the cards think the querent should know about Bill and X, a female Court will appear that to rep X.

To me, this seems more ethical :) I mean, i'm still spying, but at least the cards are very clearly either going to say to me, "OK: here's what you need to know!" Or the cards are going to very clearly say: "Nuh uh. I am not telling. It's none of your beeswax."

Also, I often feel that there are underlying issues for most querents -- or me in readings for myself. I find that often the cards do not directly answer the question so much as they tell you what you really need to know. I try to keep an open mind because if the cards seem to be screaming one thing at me, but I am trying to make them answer the question I asked, it turns into a whole big thing. But if I can accept that sometimes the cards just want me to know the bigger picture, I can listen to what they're saying -- even if they aren't saying what I want them to.

Does this make better sense??? This is totally a diff, but valuable, conversation! :)
 

Bernice

Shebelle said:
I am rereading my rambling note. Perhaps another way of stating this is:
........
........
2) I treat the subject of the reading as separate than the querent, who may be asking "What do I need to know about my relationship with Bill?" Or "What do I need to know about Bill's relationship with X?" To me, I read both instances as the querent = the person asking and the subject is either her relaitonship with Bill or Bill's with the other lady, but the querent is still "off stage." If the cards want the querent to know that she really DOESN"T NEED TO KNOW anything about Bill's relationship with X, then either NO Courts will appear OR a female Court will appear that reps X.

Does this make better sense??? This is totally a diff, but valuable, conversation! :)

However, courts have appeared in your spread, but not a female one.
In the way that you read the cards, what does this mean in relation to the question?

Bee :)
 

Shebelle

"What do I need to know about Bill's relationship with X?"

3 of Cups, Knight of Pents, King of Wands.

I, as the querent, am asking this question because I desire to reunite with Bill, who may be wanting the same thing, but moving very slowly. The King of Wands is either a person who is involved and who is encouraging Bill to slowly move towards the 3 Cups we share OR he is telling Bill to not take it so seriously, to play a little hard to get (seems like a very King of Wandsy type thing) or he is part of the slow movement because the King of Wands is also a little impulsive and changeable. He could also be another aspect of Bill, but the part of Bill that is insecure and/or wants ME to chase HIM, etc. as above.

I guess, for a little bit of background, this fella told me he was dating someone about 2 months ago. I want to know if he still is dating her. I guess that since there was no female Court in the reading, I interpreted the cards as saying that "The relationship with X is not relevant to what you REALLY want, which is to hang out with Bill."

Does that make sense?

I totally understand your meaning too. It would absolutely make sense! He is enjoying happy times with the off-stage X. But I am still not sure what the King of Wands indicates except that maybe it is an aspect of him that needs a lot of confidence and encouragement and that he is driving towards 3 of Cups with her because he likes her attention or...heck, it could indicate that he's got a sort of "love 'em and leave 'em" attitude...but that's so ill dignified w/ the Knight of Pents.
 

Bernice

Shebelle: "I treat the subject of the reading as separate than the querent, who may be asking "What do I need to know about my relationship with Bill?" Or "What do I need to know about Bill's relationship with X?" To me, I read both instances as the querent = the person asking and the subject is either her relaitonship with Bill or Bill's with the other lady, but the querent is still "off stage."

This question: "What do I need to know about my relationship with Bill?"

The Querent is person asking the question.
...

This question: "What do I need to know about Bill's relationship with X?"

I'm not sure that this question works properly with the P.P.3-card-court-thing. (That's what we're trying to get to grips with...).
Try again:

(you (querent) off-stage) Pip - King - Jack/Knight

It would seem that you need to know whatever the Pip-card represents.
And further, you also need to know that the Jack is involved.

Any better - or different....?

Bee :)

Ooops I was posting and missed your post - Courts ranks are wrong..
 

Bernice

CLARIFYING:

If your question was, "Is there any possibility of re-uniting with Bill" That's nice and clear-cut, there's a Querent and a Quesited :)

You off-stage: pip - king1 - king2

Seems that Bill is dallying with a male-friend - maybe Painting the Town Red.
But the pip that lies between you is your current connection with him. If it's a good 'un, then that's apparently all you need to know.

Is that better?

Bee :)
 

Shebelle

lol, Bee. That is very good to know...

Another way to phrase my question would have been, "What does Liz need to know about the status of Bill's relationship with the other lady because she is wondering whether she should call Bill?" Or, more succinctly, "Is he still dating her?" lol!

I could def interpret this the way that you do and see the other woman as off stage, sharing the pip with the Knight of Pents. It's still an odd reading because of that other guy. Anyhow, I guess I just have had ingrained in my head that it is most accurate and least unethical way to ask an "other" question is to phrase the question as I did... And you're right: how you phrase is everything since the cards WILL answer, but may address the question you SHOULD HAVE asked!

I am cleaning house because I have guests tonight so I am thinking and dusting :) one thought that came to me while I was tidying up the bedroom was: the status of one "other" relationship to another "other" is not really pertinent to the querent, in reality. The person asking the "other" question should really make sure they examine WHY they are asking about people not present at the reading. Because I'm not sure that the tarot is a tool that wishes to lend itself to spying :)

FYI, I spy all the time :)

Also FYI, I drew these cards while I was studying the spread by Little Baron. I asked a bunch of questions, reviewed some old 3 card spreads I did, etc. And I asked this one, thinking I was being clever by wording it "What do I need to know" so that I understood who the message was for and wasn't just asking my deck for, essentially, a free spying session... :)

Like I said, I desire to spy at most times. I try to temper my urges by being clever. :))