As I continue to chisel out the companion book for the Michael Motivation Cards™ – Interim title: “On Motivation – Getting Gotten on the Drives that make us Human”.
I’ve come across many instances where a selected sample of cards reveals some interesting facets or layers within them. This is the first in a series of assorted samples I’m offering, as illustrations of how one might scan a reading, deconstruct the elements, and make meanings.
I want you to understand that my assessment is the NOT the only one, let alone the right one. It is only mine! Yet the process is useful in modeling how to pick out subtler aspects present in any of the Cards you choose. The Cards are meant to trigger you, reveal your subconscious impressions, en route to your meanings. Hopefully the exercise below shows you how one might sift through additional layers of data and systematically deepen your evaluation and gain understanding. Note to Michael Students: I am writing this to a diverse audience and not just those already familiar with the structure or constructs of the Michael Teaching (MT). So please forgive me if some of my explanations sound remedial for your level of knowledge. 🙂
Example Card Composition
This combination resulted a client’s question: What is happening with my wife and me? We can’t seem to get on the same page regarding our building project?
Card 56: Personality: & Card 68: Essence Twin
- Look to see the polarity of each card: Illuminated = upright = positive pole and Shadow = reversed = negative pole. Note whether they are the same or different. Here, we have one of each.
- Do any cards represent a specific person or issue?
- Consider the number of cards in the layout – in this case two. It could mean a partnership, opposition, or direct contrast. By its structure, a pair is a counterbalance, an equality, and conveys an ‘either/or’ dichotomy. It places one person/idea up against another and may imply (perhaps erroneously) some potential conflict where one may not exist. If it appears this way, choosing (an) additional card(s) might clarify or at least suggest a context for both.
- Notice what set or group they are in and how they might correlate. In this case, Personality is an Augment Card and Essence Twin is a Covenant Card. More below.
- Look for any common symbols on the Card’s corners. In the case of these two Cards, we see the TAO symbol (Alpha-Omega book) in the same position (upper right). And, the Essence & Personality symbol (man and woman) both on each card, but placed in different corners.
- Use the pocket guide for specific comments.
In the MT, one’s Personality is a combination of many parts, but the primary factor is the Role in Essence while the binary fusion with the Essence Twin Role affects one’s perception internally. But it also presents the idea of two unique beings whose bond is fundamental to both. It is possible that these two cards together could signal powerful implications on several levels. However, the person’s involved do not have to be formally ET’s, just enmeshed in a scenario of similar intensity.
Assess Card Concepts and what information they add:
- Card 56 – Personality is in the upright position +Self. The Essence Twin – Card 68, in the reversed (Shadow) position -Mirror. Assuming the first card to be the questioner, this positive placement might indicate that person was coming from an authentic place of responsibility and a clear intention. Yet, assuming the second card to be his spouse, there is a concern or intention of the spouse’s not being readily seen by him. This in no way connotes that the wife is/was unclear, but that somehow he perceives her as unclear to him. Since the ET card is in the Mirror position, something about the reception by the husband could be the core issue. Or, that the wife’s communication is acting in a way to show him a dynamic in play about their relationship.
- These cards don’t necessitate that spouses be E.T’s either. Yet, the fact that mated pairs is one of the most important ways that people strive for intimacy, (and the ET relationship is intimate at your core), the lesson involved in that interaction hold many of the same important features. Hence, the fact the husband and wife are the subjects here could mean that these cards are suggesting the husband (as questioner) is trying to figure out his communication style and/or errors. It may have little to do with his wife at all.
- In other possible configurations, say the archetypes drawn were Card 55 – Masculine and Card 54 Feminine. Replacing the two above might suggest a variation. Instead of the core issue being spousal in nature, it might have to do with gender conditioning about whose perspective should somehow be more valued. Or, a question of who has more clarity or who might see more possibilities. Suggesting this substitution for contrast, can help distinguish variations that might be highlighted by some cards, more so than others.
Comparisons of other elements:
- With TAO oriented symbols on both cards, it indicates something preceding or underscoring just the disparity of a simple disagreement. It calls out that something from a deeper level, perhaps a spiritual origin is in play. The second common symbol of the lovers Psyche/Cupid (read about the myth for archetypal meaning) would also suggest personal-worldly and essence-spiritual components are activated; especially where commitment is concerned.
- Card 56 is in the Augment Set which by definition pertains to an individual person’s character. While Card 68 is in the Covenant Set and speaks to agreements, obligations, commitments, and exchanges of energy. The Essence Twin energy is a chosen quality that you interact with, AND has profound influence on your character.
- Since the primary focus is the husband, his personality quirks, interacting with someone else; the core, in my opinion, is about his communication, agreements or commitments.
- I stressed at this juncture, that this is where this baseline information assembled from the Cards so far, can be used as a starting point begin a conversation between the two spouses. Primary points of discussion from either person might focus on say – broken agreements between them; and a subsequent loss of trust it caused. After that, the next phase is to check-in deeper, and compare agendas of what you really are trying to accomplish. The house design might only be the vehicle that carries a whole host of other issues or hurts.
- The Cards may also be indicating a message at a mundane level: Each of them has design frame-of-reference or cost criteria that is counter to, or differs from, the other’s? Then, it may be helpful to explore the aesthetic behind each person’s preference. Common ground might be found that way.
In summary, the reading suggests to me that a roadblock between the two has far deeper tenants than just design concerns or individual preferences. What do you think? Make sense?
I would be very interested for anyone, if they are so interested, to post an interpretation of their own below.
More to come later. Thank you.