I Ching Digest

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

I believe what you meant was the opposite of what I mean. You are trying to get an "objective" something or other by partially removing yourself from the inquiry. I assert this is not doable. I also assert it's not doable not as a result of something missing from the I Ching's validity but as a result of something missing from the minds of "objective scientists" conditioned to pretend they aren't there when they question reality: to wit, obligatory subjectivity. It is obligatory because reality is based on relationships. Once you exist, you affect whatever you interact with. The I Ching is affected by you not because she "can't be objective" but because she isn't interested in being dishonest.

 

Since we're exchanging stories, here's one of my favorite Simpsons exchanges (quoting from memory):

 

Bart: Mom, I just saw Sideshow Bob!

Marge: Yes, dear, you saw him in your mind...

Bart: No! I really saw him on the street!

Marge: Of course. You really saw him. On the street in your mind...

 

I believe any and all "objective studies" are the ones conducted on the street in someone's mind...

 

Yep......you've hit the nail on the head.... you assert this is not doable..... I assert it is. Obviously I exist(to some degree, but only on weekdays)so therefore I will have an effect on the answer because I exist, and also because I asked it and it's related to me. My answer is contradictory I know..... but my main point is this..... I wish to remove myself simply because whenever I do a reading myself I get exactly what I expect, so, I wanted some clarification, I know my thoughts affect it, but I(and this is just my opinion and perhaps what we are disagreeing on)think that were I to create some distance I can be sure I am, perhaps, to some degree, reducing my effect on the outcome. I do only say 'perhaps' however. I also felt having someone else do it, a someone who I wouldn't know who at the time, would make the answer clearer for me. Now..... that may just be a separation in my mind that in fact doesn't exist.....I'm with you on that..... BUT, I still want to see.

 

I feel you kind of took my question as a kind of challenge or trick, which I can promise you, it was not. The reason the question isn't posted in full is because it's private...that's all. I promise you. I do believe this is well within the I chings scope, and apepch7 has shown me it is, actually checking my own I ching apepch7s' reading IS exactly what I have received before in view of the same question(same changing line too). In recent times though I have found I have been effecting the answer.... so I wanted to somewhat distance myself from it. I believe also there are multiple facets it could give me furthering my understanding of the issue. I however don't wish to personally be connected to the direct action of handling the coins/sticks..... it does simply reflect what I'm thinking these days. That's my fault, I know.

 

I only asked for an answer Taomeow, not a lecture on methodology. You may not agree with my way of going about it, and that's fine.

 

With respect

[Apech]

 

I feel you kind of took my question as a kind of challenge or trick, which I can promise you, it was not. The reason the question isn't posted in full is because it's private...that's all. I promise you. I do believe this is well within the I chings scope, and apepch7 has shown me it is, actually checking my own I ching apepch7s' reading IS exactly what I have received before in view of the same question(same changing line too). In recent times though I have found I have been effecting the answer.... so I wanted to somewhat distance myself from it. I believe also there are multiple facets it could give me furthering my understanding of the issue. I however don't wish to personally be connected to the direct action of handling the coins/sticks..... it does simply reflect what I'm thinking these days. That's my fault, I know.

 

 

 

Ninpo,

 

I for one understand what you asked and why you asked it - and I think it is entirely valid.

 

I am somewhat stunned by the identical results between your and my readings. What are the odds on that!!!! I would also like to stress that although I used an online resource - the result was full text of I Ching (not sure whose translation but quite a good one) and I used this to make the interpretation I gave you. Also I don't think there is any mystique in the method - I have used coins and yarrow stalks in the past and I don't think it really matters.

 

For what its worth I have always found the I Ching stunningly accurate and relevant (when I have understood the answers) - sometimes it is a little inscrutable but that's ok. But I also have often wondered - because of this - am I just reading in what I want to see or what? My solution to this is to be very careful when reading for myself - to 'respect the text' which is a technique I got from the application of phenomenology to Egyptian texts - in this way you read the text without any preconceptions, theories or structural overview - and let it speak to you directly - to do this you have to consciously suspend judgement. When reading for yourself you have an inevitable interest in the answer which can cloud the interpretation - the worst example being when you repeatedly ask until you get the answer you want (although the I Ching seems to have a way of dealing with this "Youthful Folly").

 

Cheers

 

A.

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

 

For what its worth I have always found the I Ching stunningly accurate and relevant (when I have understood the answers) - sometimes it is a little inscrutable but that's ok. But I also have often wondered - because of this - am I just reading in what I want to see or what? My solution to this is to be very careful when reading for myself - to 'respect the text' which is a technique I got from the application of phenomenology to Egyptian texts - in this way you read the text without any preconceptions, theories or structural overview - and let it speak to you directly - to do this you have to consciously suspend judgement. When reading for yourself you have an inevitable interest in the answer which can cloud the interpretation - the worst example being when you repeatedly ask until you get the answer you want (although the I Ching seems to have a way of dealing with this "Youthful Folly").

 

Cheers

 

A.

 

Ya, exactly I found it just started saying what I wanted it to, so this is kind of a backtrack for me because I am no longer objective. It was a question that has been around for a long time, and each time either with that hexagram or another with changing lines it would more or less say the same thing(I have had that exact hexagram and changing line before)ie. do nothing. I don't like doing nothing, as doing something, anything, seems way better to me. But there you go, the advice is the advice. I was getting opposite readings myself, which tied right in with what I wanted to do, so I kind of realized I was influencing it too much myself.

 

Thanks again

[Taomeow]

Yep......you've hit the nail on the head.... you assert this is not doable..... I assert it is. Obviously I exist(to some degree, but only on weekdays)so therefore I will have an effect on the answer because I exist, and also because I asked it and it's related to me. My answer is contradictory I know..... but my main point is this..... I wish to remove myself simply because whenever I do a reading myself I get exactly what I expect, so, I wanted some clarification, I know my thoughts affect it, but I(and this is just my opinion and perhaps what we are disagreeing on)think that were I to create some distance I can be sure I am, perhaps, to some degree, reducing my effect on the outcome. I do only say 'perhaps' however. I also felt having someone else do it, a someone who I wouldn't know who at the time, would make the answer clearer for me. Now..... that may just be a separation in my mind that in fact doesn't exist.....I'm with you on that..... BUT, I still want to see.

 

I feel you kind of took my question as a kind of challenge or trick, which I can promise you, it was not. The reason the question isn't posted in full is because it's private...that's all. I promise you. I do believe this is well within the I chings scope, and apepch7 has shown me it is, actually checking my own I ching apepch7s' reading IS exactly what I have received before in view of the same question(same changing line too). In recent times though I have found I have been effecting the answer.... so I wanted to somewhat distance myself from it. I believe also there are multiple facets it could give me furthering my understanding of the issue. I however don't wish to personally be connected to the direct action of handling the coins/sticks..... it does simply reflect what I'm thinking these days. That's my fault, I know.

 

I only asked for an answer Taomeow, not a lecture on methodology. You may not agree with my way of going about it, and that's fine.

 

With respect

 

Thanks for the clarifications.

 

Um... this didn't quite go the way I expected it to. I have no clue why you thought I was giving you a lecture on methodology when I was merely juxtaposing my understanding vs. yours, but I assure you I meant no harm.

 

I had very limited success when I did try to present a lecture on methodology a while back in another I Ching discussion. I had a Chinese friend translate that for me, the methodology that is, from the guidelines used by his friend who is the I Ching adviser to the president of Hong Kong. The moment I made a peep about the "proper" way to address the I Ching based on that document, I got shot down by someone or other who "despises ritual" the way the majority in the here-now despise any formal infringements on their freedom to do as they please with things they believe they have under their thumb anyway. "Why bother with ritual and 'the proper way' when there's no daddy standing over my shoulder telling me to?" kind of freedom. A proud feeling, sure. That's the prevalent approach. However, the traditional approach to the I Ching is highly ritualized, I follow it because I choose to follow any genuine tradition I might come in contact with rather than modify it as I please, but I'm fully aware that traditionalists like me are more the exception than the rule these days, so I do believe I don't share "methodology" anymore, for lack of takers. So I was surprised to hear from you that I still do. Really? Maybe I did something inadvertently that wasn't my intent? If so, I apologize, it wasn't my intent.

[EagleShen]

(wandering in and as usual full of thoughts...)

 

I don't use the I-Ching (or any method commonly associated with divination) for divination, i use it to understand the situation i'm in and to deepen or shift my perspective on said situation. Trying to discern the future has never appealed to me, especially not when done by me, it takes a very highly cultivated consciousness to be able to discern between your own desires and whatever mind dimension you may tap into to elicit an answer - and getting a real prediction has rarely ever helped me, i've always wished i hadn't been told.

 

IMO the I-Ching doesn't operate any differently than the rest of the universe, in that you primarily get what you expect and what you believe. The real magic comes in when you are willing to lay down your expectations and actually shift to a new paradigm - this would be part of the magic in a long reading with yarrow, you get into the process and ideally forget your expectations.

 

I mostly find the I-Ching useful for understanding and dis-entangling the knotted threads of my own mind, it helps me understand me and my own motives better, and hence it usually gives me what i expect, but also exactly what i need to hear, just like any other teacher. But occasionally, when i'm really willing or have exhausted the loops within my own mind, it gives me a doorway into another way of understanding.

 

Oh, and Nipon, i'm up for the experiment, i just got Sun over K'un, Observing - observing, one has washed the hands but not made the offering; there is sincerity, which is reverent, above is wind, below is earth, proceeding in accordance with proper timing. (Taoist I-Ching), i shall leave and fuller interpretation up to you as i'm a little short on time. Is this within your expectations?

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

Thanks for the clarifications.

 

Um... this didn't quite go the way I expected it to. I have no clue why you thought I was giving you a lecture on methodology when I was merely juxtaposing my understanding vs. yours, but I assure you I meant no harm.

 

I had very limited success when I did try to present a lecture on methodology a while back in another I Ching discussion. I had a Chinese friend translate that for me, the methodology that is, from the guidelines used by his friend who is the I Ching adviser to the president of Hong Kong. The moment I made a peep about the "proper" way to address the I Ching based on that document, I got shot down by someone or other who "despises ritual" the way the majority in the here-now despise any formal infringements on their freedom to do as they please with things they believe they have under their thumb anyway. "Why bother with ritual and 'the proper way' when there's no daddy standing over my shoulder telling me to?" kind of freedom. A proud feeling, sure. That's the prevalent approach. However, the traditional approach to the I Ching is highly ritualized, I follow it because I choose to follow any genuine tradition I might come in contact with rather than modify it as I please, but I'm fully aware that traditionalists like me are more the exception than the rule these days, so I do believe I don't share "methodology" anymore, for lack of takers. So I was surprised to hear from you that I still do. Really? Maybe I did something inadvertently that wasn't my intent? If so, I apologize, it wasn't my intent.

 

Ya, it's not a problem. Forget about it. You know I understand what your saying exactly, it's kind of the systematic approach Vs. the artistic approach. I believe tradition teaches the structure and creates a useful framework in order to grow and experience and understand the system, but after some years the practitioner goes into the area of art, at that time the rules kind of fall away....I'm not saying that is what should be taught to someone just starting out though, and not everyone even chooses that way either.

 

There's kind of an east/west thing going on too. In western art in the beginning students are actually taught minimal drawing/painting techniques, and are more or less told to sit down and get on with drawing/painting a picture, it's at much later stages they learn a wide variety of techniques. The Chinese way of teaching art is more systematic, the techniques are taught and the exact way to draw a particular thing is also shown/replicated. If you were to compare the drawings of 30 high school Chinese students of a mouse you would be shocked to see, almost certainly, each picture is exactly the same, it's a rare student that would deviate from what they were taught in China. Only when an artist can exactly replicate a painting of one of the previous Chinese master painters is he considered/respected as an artist, only then can they move on to true individual expression and be respected for it. This is completely opposite to the western method, it would drive most westerners crazy with boredom.....and yes, they would feel their freedom was being restricted, so I see what your saying exactly. I wouldn't have posed the question in the way I did had I been using the I ching for a short time, it's simply my own interpretation of the possibility within it.

 

 

(wandering in and as usual full of thoughts...)

 

I don't use the I-Ching (or any method commonly associated with divination) for divination, i use it to understand the situation i'm in and to deepen or shift my perspective on said situation. Trying to discern the future has never appealed to me, especially not when done by me, it takes a very highly cultivated consciousness to be able to discern between your own desires and whatever mind dimension you may tap into to elicit an answer - and getting a real prediction has rarely ever helped me, i've always wished i hadn't been told.

 

IMO the I-Ching doesn't operate any differently than the rest of the universe, in that you primarily get what you expect and what you believe. The real magic comes in when you are willing to lay down your expectations and actually shift to a new paradigm - this would be part of the magic in a long reading with yarrow, you get into the process and ideally forget your expectations.

 

I mostly find the I-Ching useful for understanding and dis-entangling the knotted threads of my own mind, it helps me understand me and my own motives better, and hence it usually gives me what i expect, but also exactly what i need to hear, just like any other teacher. But occasionally, when i'm really willing or have exhausted the loops within my own mind, it gives me a doorway into another way of understanding.

 

Oh, and Nipon, i'm up for the experiment, i just got Sun over K'un, Observing - observing, one has washed the hands but not made the offering; there is sincerity, which is reverent, above is wind, below is earth, proceeding in accordance with proper timing. (Taoist I-Ching), i shall leave and fuller interpretation up to you as i'm a little short on time. Is this within your expectations?

 

lol, that's a bang on interpretation by the I Ching but for reasons other than the question posed. After posting to apepch7 that I had got the same hexagram before, or others with a similar theme, as in 'do nothing' I kind of felt it was pointless to go on with expecting an unbiased interpretation, as anyone asking may have a pre-conceived notion of what the answer may be. So, I wiped the previous symbols intent I had placed within it, you know, a lot of people around here can 'read' stuff, somewhat directly too, and as it was a private question I didn't wanna leave it hanging out there. I removed the intent I placed within in, so 'one has washed the hands but not made the offering' is exactly right, the question was washed/wiped so there is no offering(question). Very impressive I must say, 10 out of 10 to the I ching!!

[EagleShen]

lol, that's a bang on interpretation by the I Ching but for reasons other than the question posed. After posting to apepch7 that I had got the same hexagram before, or others with a similar theme, as in 'do nothing' I kind of felt it was pointless to go on with expecting an unbiased interpretation, as anyone asking may have a pre-conceived notion of what the answer may be. So, I wiped the previous symbols intent I had placed within it, you know, a lot of people around here can 'read' stuff, somewhat directly too, and as it was a private question I didn't wanna leave it hanging out there. I removed the intent I placed within in, so 'one has washed the hands but not made the offering' is exactly right, the question was washed/wiped so there is no offering(question). Very impressive I must say, 10 out of 10 to the I ching!!

 

The I-Ching does some astounding stuff sometimes. My first 'oh my god' type experience with it was when i had it on a palm pilot i used to have many years ago. I was feeling very stuck in work and life and didn't know how to move forward in what i really wanted. So i asked it my question, and it gave me an answer that basically told me what i knew (but was too afraid to act on), so i asked it the same question again, hoping for a new pearl of wisdom that would offer a different way forward. I got the same hexagram. A bit freaked, i went about my day. The next day i had the impertinence to actually ask the same question again, and the reading i got basically told me to stop asking stupid questions and to get on with what i knew had to be done. I still feel humbled by this experience, and it was only a program on a palm pilot. I had a lot more respect after that, and did eventually do what i needed to do and haven't looked back.

 

I'm a bit afraid/curious/excited by what would happen if i used yarrow sticks, i'll have to try it sometime. Oracles are doorways to our own deeper wisdom, and often what we need to hear we do already know.

[Taomeow]

Let me insert a P.S. on top -- I've re-read what I've just written below and hasten to add a disclaimer: wherever I use "you," "yours," etc., I don't mean you personally, Ninpo, it's a generic "you," I just went a-rambling and a-ranting on a catalyst, is all...

 

There's kind of an east/west thing going on too. In western art in the beginning students are actually taught minimal drawing/painting techniques, and are more or less told to sit down and get on with drawing/painting a picture, it's at much later stages they learn a wide variety of techniques. The Chinese way of teaching art is more systematic, the techniques are taught and the exact way to draw a particular thing is also shown/replicated. If you were to compare the drawings of 30 high school Chinese students of a mouse you would be shocked to see, almost certainly, each picture is exactly the same, it's a rare student that would deviate from what they were taught in China. Only when an artist can exactly replicate a painting of one of the previous Chinese master painters is he considered/respected as an artist, only then can they move on to true individual expression and be respected for it. This is completely opposite to the western method, it would drive most westerners crazy with boredom.....and yes, they would feel their freedom was being restricted, so I see what your saying exactly. I wouldn't have posed the question in the way I did had I been using the I ching for a short time, it's simply my own interpretation of the possibility within it.

 

Lol, a thousand identical mice? But that's the taoist ideal! You don't want mice the size of elephants nor the size of gnats, you don't want glowing mice, skunk-stinking mice, man-eating mice... you want just mice, perfect at being just that. You plant seeds, you want all the sprouts to come out at the same time, grow at the same rate, none too short, none too tall, none bearing fruit too soon, none too late, all the same... and... gasp... this is only possible when all of them are perfectly healthy, normal, natural, and so is their environment and all their circumstances! A horrifying picture from the perspective of a society that is supposedly into "diversity." But we only have what we call diversity (including any and all pathology into the category while we're at it) because we can't possibly have health, normalcy, naturalness for most, let alone all. Let alone perfection. And if we could... diversity would show itself for what it really is -- abnormality, whatever deviates from whatever is perfect. In an extreme scenario, that's what cancer cells exhibit: extreme diversity. They are bent on freedom of expression -- their own. They don't want to follow any rules the body has established for the benefit of the whole -- cell division rate, metabolic rate, which types of cells are produced where and when and so on. Nah. They do it their own way, they believe they are ready to do better than just follow the rules.

 

I have practiced Chinese calligraphy a bit. You do the same four bamboo strokes four million times. You can't possibly do it right even once even if you do it four trillion times though -- unless... ...and that's where the real heart of the matter lies. Unless you realize that your freedom of doing it any which way gets you nowhere because there's no such thing -- there's only one right way to do it, the perfect, normal, healthy, natural way -- and you do it right or you screw it up, and calling the screw-up individual artistic expression sugar-coats the pill and everybody is addicted to sugar... but you have to spend years to learn to hold your forearm horizontally, parallel to the surface of the table, and until you can and it's easy and spontaneous, all you can really express is your limitations. And that's on the gross anatomy level -- and there's more, much more... you start finding out that your head, your neck, your eye, your spleen -- your mind -- your breath -- your life -- have to be aligned a certain way too, and you aren't used to having any of that aligned any which way but "the way I please," and the way he pleases is, in the case of a modern civilized artificially raised human being, wrong. Just plain incompetent at being fully human.

 

Now you master that, being competent at being fully human, and that's when and only then can those four strokes be done the right way (the way tao does it when she paints bamboo on the rice paper of manifestations, no less). By the time you're there you can do anything -- use an acupuncture needle or a sword perfectly, paint perfectly, have a perfectly balanced body, mind, spirit, life, afterlife -- you get to embody tao. That's the idea. Taoist artistic freedom is understood as freedom from error. You do things a certain way till you are so perfect that any which way you do them will be the perfect way. If you are at a stage where your self-expression is spontaneously free from error and perfect, then it's the right time to self-express. Sooner than that is too soon.

 

Few westerners will believe that until they start a practice with a demanding traditional teacher and, to their horror, begin discovering that what they thought of as freedom of expression -- in any which area -- was in reality the outcome of a mere lack of exposure to what freedom really is like. People are used to expressing themselves freely under circumstances that don't require them to venture into areas of their incompetence -- physical, mental, spiritual -- and a good teacher will gently nudge or roughly push one smack into that... I've seen it happen, e.g., when a cocky TKD black belt who "doesn't believe in soft MA" came to check out what my taiji teacher has to show, and was thrown across the room with one finger on every approach. You should have seen the face of the guy the moment he became enlightened.

Edited November 20, 2009 by Taomeow

[rain]

Ya, it's not a problem. Forget about it. You know I understand what your saying exactly, it's kind of the systematic approach Vs. the artistic approach. I believe tradition teaches the structure and creates a useful framework in order to grow and experience and understand the system, but after some years the practitioner goes into the area of art, at that time the rules kind of fall away....I'm not saying that is what should be taught to someone just starting out though, and not everyone even chooses that way either.

 

There's kind of an east/west thing going on too. In western art in the beginning students are actually taught minimal drawing/painting techniques, and are more or less told to sit down and get on with drawing/painting a picture, it's at much later stages they learn a wide variety of techniques. The Chinese way of teaching art is more systematic, the techniques are taught and the exact way to draw a particular thing is also shown/replicated. If you were to compare the drawings of 30 high school Chinese students of a mouse you would be shocked to see, almost certainly, each picture is exactly the same, it's a rare student that would deviate from what they were taught in China. Only when an artist can exactly replicate a painting of one of the previous Chinese master painters is he considered/respected as an artist, only then can they move on to true individual expression and be respected for it. This is completely opposite to the western method, it would drive most westerners crazy with boredom.....and yes, they would feel their freedom was being restricted, so I see what your saying exactly. I wouldn't have posed the question in the way I did had I been using the I ching for a short time, it's simply my own interpretation of the possibility within it.

lol, that's a bang on interpretation by the I Ching but for reasons other than the question posed. After posting to apepch7 that I had got the same hexagram before, or others with a similar theme, as in 'do nothing' I kind of felt it was pointless to go on with expecting an unbiased interpretation, as anyone asking may have a pre-conceived notion of what the answer may be. So, I wiped the previous symbols intent I had placed within it, you know, a lot of people around here can 'read' stuff, somewhat directly too, and as it was a private question I didn't wanna leave it hanging out there. I removed the intent I placed within in, so 'one has washed the hands but not made the offering' is exactly right, the question was washed/wiped so there is no offering(question). Very impressive I must say, 10 out of 10 to the I ching!!

 

 

that statement is completely false.

 

in the west we have tradition for objective as well as subjective art. even tradition of portraying can be executed in either fashion.

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

Let me insert a P.S. on top -- I've re-read what I've just written below and hasten to add a disclaimer: wherever I use "you," "yours," etc., I don't mean you personally, Ninpo, it's a generic "you," I just went a-rambling and a-ranting on a catalyst, is all...

 

Lol, a thousand identical mice? But that's the taoist ideal!

 

 

Few westerners will believe that until they start a practice with a demanding traditional teacher and, to their horror, begin discovering that what they thought of as freedom of expression -- in any which area -- was in reality the outcome of a mere lack of exposure to what freedom really is like. People are used to expressing themselves freely under circumstances that don't require them to venture into areas of their incompetence -- physical, mental, spiritual -- and a good teacher will gently nudge or roughly push one smack into that... I've seen it happen, e.g., when a cocky TKD black belt who "doesn't believe in soft MA" came to check out what my taiji teacher has to show, and was thrown across the room with one finger on every approach. You should have seen the face of the guy the moment he became enlightened.

 

A thousand identical mice is a confucian ideal. And so is the majority of structure leads to perfection confician at its roots. Daoism advocates removal of the conditioned structure that society has created within a person thus revealing their true, natural expression and nature. Confucianism says create the external structure ie. laws, rules and morals and then the inner character will mold itself to them, hopefully creating an upstanding person. Conficuian ideals and Daoist ideals are mixed up all the time due to them being side by side within Chinese culture. Although I do agree structure is needed.... but not forever. I have trained with traditional teachers who have stayed within the framework of their arts, and to be frank they were much poorer martial arts wise(if we talking martial arts)than the ones who created part of their own interpretation. There are many weaknesses in many martial arts, but then it does depend what your focus of training is, I think if the main focus is cultivation then absolutely one strict system can suit many for a lifetime or more. Your Tai chi story doesn't surprise me at all, internal martial arts are in a world of their own in my opinion and cannot be judged in the normal physical fashion as they go much deeper than the ones they simply focus on the external side.

 

I think there comes a point Taomeow where we can already tell, we're simply not going to agree on certain points. I do see what your saying, but I just think what you mean is confucian, not Daoist. I would say though, I don't agree that a person should start learning from nothing, or a mish mash of no consequence, I do think structure is important, but only up to a point. You chose your structure.....you chose to follow it. Millions of Chinese don't have that luxury, and I can assure you I don't see that as much of a benefit to them, however, that is a bit broader than the specific subjects we're talking about.

 

You know this is gonna just end up as splitting hairs..... we're never gonna agree. I do have a question though, I'm real curious if you are a Virgo...it's off topic I know.... but my curiosity in that respect has peaked

 

 

that statement is completely false.

 

in the west we have tradition for objective as well as subjective art. even tradition of portraying can be executed in either fashion.

 

I didn't say there wasn't a tradition of subjective and objective art. That would be ridiculous. My point was the 'techniques' are not taught from the beginning(ie young age), whereas in China technique is taught 'first'....at the very beginning. If you disagree then perhaps your level of artistic training from a young age was completely different from what I experienced in my country, and if that's so, I'm actually exceptionally happy about that. Frankly speaking the level of teaching whereby actual techniques are concerned in England is absolutely dire, I've never met anyone who's said different, if I ever do meet anyone who says different then I can only say they must have had a fantastic teacher, and I wish I would have had their teacher.

[Taomeow]

You know this is gonna just end up as splitting hairs..... we're never gonna agree. I do have a question though, I'm real curious if you are a Virgo...it's off topic I know.... but my curiosity in that respect has peaked

no Edited November 21, 2009 by Taomeow

[Apech]

Bumpy bump

 

Just bought on Kindle the Original I Ching by Margaret Pearson and am using that with the Lynn Wang Bi trans , Huang and Kercher to try to really get to grips with the YiJing.

 

Anybody got the Kunst - The Original YIjing or Shaughnessy - composition of the Zhouyi (both quite expensive so not sure whether to buy).

 

Also - we should have a regular I Ching thread or even a sub forum on here if enough people are interested.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Great topic to revisit.

 

Another great version is that by Wu Jing-Nuan. I saw the recommendation in a Micheal Winn news letter. It basically translates the King Wen and Duke of Zhou commentaries and then gives some guidance on how they relate to the subject of the hexagram. Great for looking deeper at the roots of the later commentaries.

[Apech]

Great topic to revisit.

 

Another great version is that by Wu Jing-Nuan. I saw the recommendation in a Micheal Winn news letter. It basically translates the King Wen and Duke of Zhou commentaries and then gives some guidance on how they relate to the subject of the hexagram. Great for looking deeper at the roots of the later commentaries.

 

 

Hi I checked that version on amazon uk and its listed at either 163 or 241 pounds shipped from US! So on my meagre budget I have second thoughts ... unless it is very, very good.

 

Have you seen this one which you can download from this site http://grichter.sites.truman.edu/home/ it seems pretty good and is FREE!!!!

[Daeluin]

I find it interesting that the Taoist notion of change, represented by the character 易 (yì), means to "to pour water from one container to another". The old Bronze character shows this quite clearly:

 

 

Ah, thanks for this.

 

For a while I've seen how many layers the hexagrams operate within.

 

More recently I've been mulling over how when Earth ☷ becomes more self-centered, transforms into Water ☵, transforming Heaven on Earth ䷋ into Fire on Water ䷿. This transformation is explained in-depth in Neidan - Water is K'an, the "abyss", or "the pit" - and describes the process by which what was originally open and receptive becomes self-aware and self-serving.

 

I think this also describes the process of unfolding creation, in contrast to taoist reversal. Perhaps this can be seen in the tendency for a conversation to introduce tangents. In the beginning there is one subject, in discussion - the focus is on this one, and all of the 8 forces operate as the transformation of the discussion progresses. There is an element of openness here, but at some point one participant is likely to be triggered with the desire to transform the conversation into something related, but operating on a new layer. Often conversations will proceed from layer to layer, tangent to tangent, unless the participants take care to stay "on topic".

 

In inner alchemy, much emphasis is placed on dissolving the ego and returning the separated "true yang" (the center line in ☵) back to it's rightful place in Heaven ☰ and bringing the "true yin" (the center line in ☲) back to it's rightful place in Earth ☷.

 

Also no mistake that water rules desire and ambition, from which comes the impetus of creation. Water is associated with the numbers 1 and 6, correlating with the 6 lines of the I ching.

 

Also no mistake - Earth controls Water - Integrity controls Desire. The key to staying "on topic" and ego-less-ness = integrity and sincerity.

 

In these contexts, the concept of change as pouring water from one container to another makes a great deal of sense. Layer within layer, container to container, ad infinitum.

Edited October 19, 2014 by Daeluin