Harmen

I have looked up the relevant passage in the Chinese original, starting with 'There are three hundred and sixty schools of wisdom': 祖師道：「『道』字門中有三百六十傍門，傍門皆有正果。不知你學那一門哩？」 悟空道：「憑尊師意思，弟子傾心聽從。」祖師道：「我教你個『術』字門中之 道，如何？」悟空道：「術門之道怎麼說？」祖師道：「術字門中，乃是些請仙 、扶鸞、問卜、揲蓍，能知趨吉避凶之理。」悟空道：「似這般可得長生麼？」 祖師道：「不能，不能。」悟空道：「不學，不學。」 What is translated as 'shuffling the yarrow-stalks' is actually sheshi 揲蓍; 揲 is almost exclusively used in combination with 蓍 'yarrow' and in this combination it simply means 'to consult/sort/divide/take the yarrow'. At least 'shuffling' is a better translation than 'throwing'.

No. Yes, it comes from the throwing of the coins but it seems to be a word that is only used in the West. Chinese texts often talk about yaochu 搖出, which literally means 'shake and go out'. The coin method was looked upon with disdain by the Confucian elite because it was mainly used by Daoist mediums, shamans and fortune tellers who represented everything the Confucians disapproved of, so they favoured the yarrow stalks even though for a long time they did not know how to use them and therefore focused on a more philosophical use of the book. In The Old Days yarrow was used alongside the oracle bone method, and there are known cases where the bone was consulted first and since its answer was not decisive the yeaaor was consulted. For more about this see my article The Yijing as oracle bone’s sidekick – a study of ‘heng’ 亨 https://www.yjcn.nl/wp/the-yijing-as-oracle-bones-sidekick-a-study-of-heng-亨/

If I read this correctly it is not so much about hexagrams but about trigrams. The question that OP started the thread with refers to a 'daoist perspective.' I wonder if a medical perspective (TCM) would not be a better approach. I have a few books on TCM & Yijing. I'll see if I can find something in them that answers OP's question. Might take some time though.

Answer from Ed: Hi Harmen, Yes, I think it must be an error. The only place in the divination where "four or less" is appropriately mentioned is in the sentence: "The left heap is counted through by fours, and the remainder (four or less) is inserted between the ring finger and the middle finger." I believe that if one could count through the left heap by four or less, the probabilities of obtain the four different kinds of lines would vary considerably. I do not remember the source I used. It was a long time ago. I have no idea how that error occurred. I think it is best to trust only the descriptions of the divination given by sinologists, like Wilhelm and Shaughnessy. My description was obviously incorrectly copied. My best regards, Ed

I have sent him an email. If he replies I'll let you know.

Ah yes, I see. This does not correspond to his description in Ch. 10 and yet in Ch. 10 he says that Method B is used in Ch. 9. Especially the first sentence, 'From the right pile take a number of stalks, but no more than four' is ominous - this does not at all correspond with either the traditional method or Method B from Ch. 10. It implies you can also take less than 4 stalks which is not correct. If you want I can ask Ed if this is an error.

In Chapter 10 Hacker gives two versions for the yarrow stalk method. He says, "Yarrow-Stalk Methods. Versions A and B are both based on Chapter 9 of the Great Treatise (Ta Chuan), one of the Ten Wings of the I Ching. These two versions are mathematically equivalent; use of one over the other is a matter of preference alone. 1A. Yarrow-Stalk Method: Version A. This method is described in Greg Whincup's book and in a paper by Koon-Loon Leung. Whincup says that it is a reinterpretation of the traditional method described in other translations ([A] Whincup, p. 227)- Leung says that this method is "the way practised in ancient China" (Leung, p. 244)." Whincup = Rediscovering the I Ching. Leung = "An Algebraic Truth in Divination." Journal of Chinese Philosophy 9:2 (June 1982): 243-58. At version B he says, "This method was also explained in Chapter 9." This is also the method that Wilhelm describes. I don't really see why you call it 'an uncommon variant.' What differences do you see with the traditional method? AN ALGEBRAIC TRUTH IN DIVINATION - Leung.pdf

Does this correspond to the tables that Edward Hacker gives in his I Ching Handbook? If you don't have this book I can scan the pages if you want. I remember Wandelaar referred to these pages somewhere else with a link to Amazon.

I hate my accent and my pronunciation is terrible but that does not keep me from making videos

https://www.yjcn.nl/wp/the-oldest-source-for-the-coin-method/

The Dazhuan might be a good start I think. For know I can't think of another title. Let me get back on that.

These are good suggestions that can work very well in personal readings, so I'd say if you find the idea of changing trigrams interesting you can try to find out what this change means to you - you don't have to assign one principle to it. It can be very valuable to explore your own view of the trigrams and their changes, and I think this is more important than how I use it. The old commentaries speak of 'movement' (dong 動) and that movement leads to 'change' (bian 變). Before the change there is movement. If we apply this to changing trigrams it means that something is affecting the trigram which leads its change. But as said, in the application of this the two trigrams were seen as a unity and not simply as 'one trigram changing into another'. No doubt there are several ways to apply all this, and investigating these can be very rewarding.

Yes Another interesting aspect of Wang Bi's book is that in his introduction (or appendix, depending on which format you have), in the 明爻通變 chapter, he does not talk about 'changing lines that change to make a new hexagram'. He only talks about change within a hexagram. It seems as if the concept of H1 --> H2 originated quite late in Yi history.

Yes, this is definitely something I will touch upon in a future video, actually I am considering to make it the subject of the next video. I have developed my own way of dealing with moving lines & trigrams though, a way that does not entirely correspond to 'the old way' but is more an expansion of it. To me moving lines make a trigram unbalanced, it will show itself in a more exaggerated way. Earth that is unbalanced will become passive, submissive, meek; Thunder unbalanced will become aggressive and not consider consequences, etc. To restore the imbalance you need the trigram that it changes into: Thunder with the first line moving needs Earth to regain balance, Mountain with the 2nd and 3rd line moving needs Water etc. Every combination of moving lines in a trigrams results in a different trigram that is needed to regain the balance. I am fully aware that this is not how the early diviners did it but at least it let's the changing and changed trigrams cooperate - just as we see in the Zuozhuan examples. I see nuclear trigrams as a secondary layer that can be used when more information is required. But I always consider them in relation to the baoti 包體, the trigram that 'envelops' the nuclear trigram (of 2, 3 and 4 are the lower nt then 1, 5 and 6 make the baoti). This gives you information what aspect in your situation is blocked. For instance, nt Lake might be blocked by baoti Heaven - this might indicate something like "you have trouble enjoying life because thoughts, ratio and yang in general are blocking your feelings of happiness." I think nuclear trigrams are a much later development but that does not mean I discard them. I find them quite useful in certain contexts. If I have trouble starting something new and I consult the Yi which gives me a hexagram with trigram Thunder ('a new beginning') as a nt then it becomes especially useful to see how it is blocked. When I look at the oldest examples I don't see much references to the resulting hexagram as a whole, I mainly see references to its trigrams. That doesn't mean that the second hexagram was not given meaning, but I don't think this meaning was considered equal important as the initial hexagram. In my own readings I hardly look at the second hexagram. This makes the reading easier because often the two hexagrams give mixed messages and by focusing on the initial hexagram I don't need to be bothered by that.

Yes. I know of two authors who postulated that the hexagrams came first and the trigrams later: Steve Moore in The Trigrams of Han and Cyrille Javary in ... I don't know because I don't read French but this is what I remember from a conversation with someone who had read Javary's books. They both suggested that the trigrams were 'invented' during the Han dynasty. But the archaeological excavations show us that the trigrams were already in use before the Han dynasty. These example also show us that hexagrams were (almost) always divided in trigrams, which shows that they did not really come after the hexagrams. This is the subject of my first video, in case you haven't seen it

Thanks for the clarification. The Yijing is not a book that is part of the foundation of daoism and with respect to that I agree with you that daoism in its earliest form can easily do without it. That goes for humanity as well. We don't need the Yi. Nevertheless there are times when it is a welcome tool. About that thread you mentioned: it seems to me that some users of the book have expectations of what the Yijing should do or tell; expectations that do not correspond with its original usage and content. The Zhouyi itself does not talk about change or any inherent philosophy. It is best to read this core text without any commentary and let the Yi speak for itself. Originally it was a book of divination and nothing else.

Yep, that is how it works.

Laozi + Zhuangzi = daoism? I think the compilers of the various Daozang 道藏 editions would not agree. There is more to daoism than Laozi & Zhuangzi.

Thank you, that is very kind of you. The next video will discuss a few early examples of Yi divination from the Zuozhuan and Guoyu and explains some of the awkward trigram associations from the Shuogua (why all these horses at Qian, why is Dui associated with 'broken' etc.

No. It is just that I am not good at it

Michael received H4 when he asked the same question several times. Is that also how you want to test for patterns? Ask the same question multiple times? I think you want to see if the answers of the Yi (and their quality) can be scientifically tested, and if patterns emerge during its consultations? Patterns that can be objectively measured? I have attached a few articles by Lance Storm who conducted similar studies. I can find more if you are interested. The Yijing has been tested during several parapsychological investigations. I_Ching_Storm_2009.pdf I_Ching_Storm_2008.pdf para-ac07_Storm_2003a.pdf para-ac07_Storm_2003b.pdf Storm_2002.pdf

Can you define what kind of 'patterns' you are referring to?

" Future events..." Is this an attempt to predict the future?

The way you turn the yarrow numbers from each line into trigrams was first described by Zhang Li 張理 in his Yixiang Tushuo Neipian 易象圖說外篇 (1364) and I mention it in my Dutch book De I Tjing stap voor stap. But it never occurred to me that you can combine these trigrams to hexagrams and link them to the sancai 三才. That's just......brilliant.

Ah yes, I see what you mean. His post triggered one of my pet subjects, hence the way I responded.