Michael Sternbach

Well, even using a non-randomized algorithm, the result would still vary depending on the initial state and input, right? I believe that answers can come in different ways, and no matter what I do, I can hardly take myself (my intuitive self) out of the equation. So I doubt that the results of such an experiment would be that conclusive, actually. Though I prefer throwing coins or some similar action that directly involves me when consulting an oracle (e.g., I would not usually let a random generator compute the result for me online), that is not to say that such an approach doesn't work. It's more a matter of personal preference, really, and each reader tends to find a way they feel comfortable with. I happen to be the co-founder of a forum for Tarot and other forms of divination, and as such, I observe people getting good results using a variety of methods.

My sense of what is happening when I am doing a n Yijing consultation is that I connect to that intuitive part of me which has access to the answer and also seems to know exactly when to let the coins go.

Go easy on yourself. Some just can't relax without that kind of environment.

Yes, the descriptions of Dharmakaya surely have a lot in common with the conceptions of God, Dao etc. in other metaphysical systems. I have always maintained that there is something like an objective metaphysical reality which underlies all legitimate systems, although perception/interpretation/emphasis varies according to cultures, religions, schools, individuals. To say otherwise is to state that one particular system is right, whereas another is essentially flawed, which, in my view, is the height of human folly. However, you often need to look deep in order to identify the common denominators between them.

Not to my knowledge. What would matter most is the experimenter's focus on the number. Decorating a room with it would be conducive to that, but it is really the mind of the individual involved which is key, IMO.

That sounds a lot like C.G.Jung's interpretation of what was going on as acausal but meaningful synchronicity.

Posting on TDB?

Hi Tombartifacts, Welcome to TDB! How do you like Lara Croft?

Scientifically speaking: What you are saying here is equivalent to waste matter discharged from the body of an adult male of the species Bos taurus.

The post you are quoting is about three years old, and according to Freeform's profile, they visited TDB the last time about two months ago, so I it may be better you PM them with your question.

Yes, it's hard to be definite about anything without even having looked into the books. That may indeed be what the author means, however, as the occult sciences of the Western tradition all go back to more ancient cultures especially of the Middle East, as does Kabbalah, I find aforesaid distinction rather confusing. Just bear in mind that one of the oldest and most influential Kabbalistic books, the Sepher Yetzirah, already refers to Astrology (i.e., its star signs and planets). There is indeed something like an academic standard to distinguish 'Hermetic Kabbalah' from 'Jewish Kabbalah'. I am not sure what exactly 'Christian Kabbalah' is supposed to mean, although it goes without saying that most Renaissance Hermeticists were operating in and referring to a Christian context. I suppose it's hard for anybody to draw clear lines between Kabbalah and Christianity, even just considering how much Kabbalah is interconnected with the Bible (Old and New Testament). Mutual influences between Kabbalah and Christianity are not a relatively modern European development. So I think the author may be trying to draw artificial lines, and his obvious closeness to Crowley may indeed hint at an anti-Christian agenda.

What I gather from reading the author's summaries on Amazon is that he deeply abhors the 'Christian' interpretation of the Kabbalah, which (according to him) served as the basis of the 'occult Kabbalah'. Huh? I have been reading about the Kabbalah (including its history) for decades, but I have never come across a distinct Christian interpretation as such! Also, it should be remembered that the Kabbalah has always been an occult science, right from its beginnings! It's correct that the Kabbalah was re-interpreted by Christian neo-Platonists/Hermeticists like Pico della Mirandola and Johannes Reuchlin during the Renaissance. The result is most accurately referred to as the Hermetic (not Christian or occult) Kabbalah. And later attempts to superimpose the Tarot on top of the Tree of Life by French and English occultists of the 19th century should be seen as a further development of that. Lest anybody thinks that the aforementioned author's aim was to explore the authentic original Jewish Kabbalah (in the way of Gershom Scholem), it's telling that - having refuted the abomination of the 'Christian' Kabbalah - he comes up with his own version of an 'occult' Kabbalah, including yet another attempt at syncretizing Kabbalah and Tarot (in his second book)! Which makes me wonder, is he even aware of how much Christian symbolism there is in Tarot itself?! Also, he explores the relationship of his 'corrected' Kabbalah to Magick - hey hey, Aleister Crowley says hello! To me, all of this sounds a lot like somebody trying to sell his personal pet theory, trying hard to make it look different and profound and original. This is not to say that those books may not have some interesting ideas in them (how could I know, I haven't read them). But based on what the author shares in his summary, this is nothing more than another version of what has come before and been reiterated a number of times. Possibly, uncle Al would have applauded the author for cleansing the Kabbalah from anything Christian, though...

I am aware of the advice found in some Yijing versions (e.g., Blofeld's) to consider every word of the answer in regards to the exact phrasing of the question. But that strikes me as an awful mental strain, blocking the intuitive approach that is required. IME, the Yijing often enough paints a picture of the overall situation, regardless of the exact question. So I prefer to avoid asking my question in an overly specific way in the first place. Wandelaar, if you are sure that the issue you were inquiring about has been settled for good, even though what the Yijing seemingly addressed was a definite possibility, then maybe the (probable) future has been changed? Perhaps even as a consequence of your changing awareness regarding it, due to the reading?

Sorry, my Dutch is a little rusty... As far as online versions, my favourite one is: http://divination.com/iching/lookup/ And here I don't read anything about a special opportunity presenting itself. The gist of the texts is a warning of obstacles and how to deal with them. Sounds like it might have to do with potential long-term consequences of the decision in question.

I am glad you liked the article. And you have summarized it rather nicely.

As seen from the perspective of the evolving entity, the Self you speak of is in the future. It is that Entelechy, the Telos, the Great Attractor which needs that evolutionary process in order to become what it is. True that outside space-time, all exists simultaneously... Infinite possibilities, that must, however, be actualized. And many never come to blossom. Or maybe they do - in another world. As one cycle ends - in dissolution alright - and another one begins, something is carried over: an information; a seed; a genetic code. Call it a karmic turnover! And once again, the wheel starts turning... Will this ever end? Is it even supposed to? Just some incoherent late night ramblings... Cool topic, anyways.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to write a whole thesis on this right now. However, from several articles on the topic I reviewed for reference, I found the following to speak to some of the issues that the scientific method has in a way I resonate with. https://onthinktanks.org/articles/the-limits-of-the-scientific-method-and-the-need-to-merge-science-and-innovation/

I am quite familiar with those arguments. Overall, I also think that the 'scientific method' is overrated, especially when it comes to phenomena as complex and subtle as the psyche. That said, I follow your experiments with interest; how conclusive the results will really be remains to be seen, though.

From what I have read, besides the physical body, there is the 'energy body' or 'soul body', and the 'spiritual body'. So just three in this system (including the physical).

The concept of Man's subtle bodies goes back to the Hermetic Astrology of the 2nd century BC. It was received in Hermetic, Platonic and Gnostic circles, which came up with different versions specific to their general philosophical outlook. E.g., it is being referred to in the Poimandres, a text that is central to the Hermetic tradition, as well as in the neo-Platonic writings of Plotinus and Porphyry. Later it played an important role in European metaphysics from the Middle Ages to the end of the Renaissance. Thus it already had a history of at least two-thousand years before it became a part of 'modern' Theosophy. In brief, the idea was that before birth, the soul descends from the cross section of the Milky Way and the Zodiac in Cancer through the seven concentric planetary spheres all the way down to Earth. Passing through a sphere, it would envelop itself with the subtle 'matter' that belongs to it, which would endow the pre-natal individual with various qualities. There you have the origin of the term "astral body". (It was probably the neo-Platonist Proclus who first talked in terms of the soul's "astral vehicle".) The Daoist tradition also has a concept of subtle bodies - besides the physical body, an "energy body" and a "spiritual body" are mentioned -, however, they are not considered to be innate to the human being, but must be developed by years of Alchemical practice. Perhaps the seeming contradiction can be resolved by the assumption that, even though everybody is born with subtle bodies, they can be activated and strengthened by methods of spiritual cultivation. Nowadays we are dealing with a plethora of different systems of subtle bodies, which often defy all attempts to unify them. Nevertheless, I (for one) welcome this topic and will be pleased to make further contributions to it as the occasion arises.

While IME the coin throwing method works well enough, I agree that the more orthodox yarrow stalks method may, by the mathematics intrinsic to its design, yield even better results. Although practically speaking, that will depend on other factors as well, especially on the state of the reader. And in regards to that, the more elaborate process of a divination with the yarrow stalks may actually contribute to making the mind of the reader more receptive. Exactly. The observer can never take themselves out of the equation! They are intimately involved in the process, random as the latter may seem. All the more since it's the 'observer' who is throwing the coins or dividing the stalks.

I agree that debates about this are useless. You need to experience psychic phenomena yourself in order to truly know. And once you have experience them on a regular basis, doubting them will make about as much sense as doubting the taste of vanilla ice cream when you are eating it. But I am also just writing this to share my position. Please note that I brought this issue up in the first place as part of a longer reply to OldDog who seems to be interested in discussing the psychic side of Yijing divination.

Talking about Wilhelm's conspicuous mention of mediumistic powers, there is a debate regarding this also in the field of Tarot divination. Some say that there is nothing psychic to consulting the Tarot, others feel there is. As for myself, I try to decide intuitively what card to draw, and also how to shake the coins/when to let them go. And intuition does tie in with psychic perception, IMO and IME. It is true that pretty much anybody can throw the coins and get useful results, though. Notwithstanding Wilhelm's comment, you most definitely don't have to be a full-blown medium for that. Then again, tapping into psychic information is much easier than a lot of people believe - just attend a Silva Mind Control seminar and marvel at the level of ESP skill demonstrated by 'ordinary' people after just a few days of training! True, somebody may be blocking their intuition and psychic perception respectively. I especially feel this with pronounced skeptics. Personally, it just baffles me how anybody could categorically deny the existence of psychic phenomena. I sometimes wonder if it's because in their experience, these things really just don't occur. Or is it that those folks, indoctrinated by the Materialism/Positivism of the modern era, unwittingly filter any hints at them out? Be that as it may, this topic also leads us back to the recent/current discussion in some other threads. How does chance (some call it synchronicity) tie in with psychic action? The respective discussion of C.G.Jung with quantum physicist Wolfgang Pauli may offer some clues, if studied carefully. Bottom line (at my current level of understanding) is that somebody with more advanced psychic perception (due to talent or training) may be able to get somewhat more accurate replies from the Yijing. But it's just a matter of degree, at the most. And then there is another part to a reading that involves intuition and psychic perception respectively. That's when it comes to interpreting the oracle's reply. Similar assessments like the ones I just mentioned apply to that as well, in my view.