There are times :-} [Archive] - I Ching Community

candid

July 19th, 2003, 01:49 AM

Louise, I had 42 recently and asked myself the same question: Where? Then I thought, maybe Yi was just telling me I was full of it. *cymbal crash* ...but seriously, if there's not much in the way of changes for us at a given time, Ching has to say something, even if Increase meant having a nice dinner, or maybe its payday. (more on this in a bit)

During the drive home this afternoon I was thinking about something similar, like the "oh no, I'm in for it now!" type of reading. Then I pictured a detour sign. A warning to adjust my course or attitude. I think its the same whether we're talking about a very positive type of reading or one that sounds extremely negative. A positive reading has a bad outcome if we fail to heed the signs, just as negative sounding reading has a positive outcome if we do heed the signs. Everything serves to further if we heed the signs.

Take 25 for example. It sounds so positive, yet it includes the easily overlooked comment: "If someone is not as he should be, he has misfortune, and it does not further him to undertake anything."

Or, in 42: "If he has faults, he rids himself of them." The Yi could be saying something like: If you want an increase, rid yourself of faults. It doesn't say: No matter how bad your attitude is, you will be blessed with increase, or that increase is unconditional.

I?ve come to welcome 4 greatly. I tie it to 17. A chance for me to shut up for a change and listen to the Sage. Then, if I?m called to reach or teach, I?ll be ready. Otherwise, I?m on my own, which definitely wouldn?t serve well to follow, and heaven help those I'd lead!

Candid

candid

July 19th, 2003, 02:13 AM

Val, Yes and no are the equivalent of increase and decrease, I agree.

Even when we have no specific question, our heart is asking for something. Knowing what we are wanting is, I believe, what Yi tells us. Once we see what we are wanting, we can edit the data in our mind, and make the adjustments, which will render the results we've chosen.

Have you ever noticed an absolutely *instant* attitude adjustment from contemplating one of Yi's answers? Its like a bop in the head! And everything seems to change just as instantly. Where did all the stressful dilemmas go? What changed? I'd say, my mind changed, and my heart followed.

I don?t know which I prefer, increase or decrease. There?s something about the emptiness of decrease that somehow feels more at home. Its like the womb. Needing nothing but life itself. Of course increase is nice because it makes living intensified. Funny though, I?ve known more couples with lots of money than couples with little who have broken up. Increase brings responsibility for all one is increased with. I think of the proverbial camel through the eye of a needle. The way is narrow, and the opportunities, broad. Its so easy to get lost in the woods without a Forester.

martin

July 19th, 2003, 02:37 AM

42 reminds me of an answer that Ramana Maharshi once gave to U.G. Krisjnamurti.
UG asked: Can you give me enlightenment?
Ramana answered: Yes, I can give it to you. But can you receive it?
http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/howmuch.gif

By the way, there must be something in that number 42, as it was also the answer that the huge computer in "A hitchhikers guide to the galaxy" gave when asked about the meaning of life ...

Martin

val

July 19th, 2003, 06:38 AM

Hi Candid...

And have you asked a question that requires a yes or no answer and gotten 42 to 41? *titters* I get from that it's saying, "Welllll...yes and no." So then I have to ask "How so?"

Actually, the Yi has influenced my attitude tremendously about a situation at work, but not through Hex 42. I mentioned the power tripper in another thread. Well....part of her power tripping is to try to get me fired. It seems her original motivation was to cover her butt (an MO my immediate supervisor and colleagues are all well aware of and have all been victims of in the past), but now it's grown into something else altogether...something bigger...something obsessive.

Having failed to convince the division head of my inefficiency, who could find no evidence of her assertions through several surprise visits to my facility to see for himself, she is now travelling around the country looking for mistakes I might have made. In her eagerness to find (and point out) my mistakes, she's ended up making about three big blunders herself...for everyone in the world to see. Every attempt has backfired on her.

She's definitely on a mission and very determined, and it seems every failure seems to make her even more determined. Her efforts have been rather disruptive and time consuming for everyone else in the company. My immediate supervisor has been very nervous and tense, my colleagues have become angry about their time being wasted. And it is, for the most part, a pretty oppressive situation.

But me? I'm not in the least worried. And why am I not worried? Well the Yi of course! They have confirmed that my "tormentor" does indeed have immense power and that the situation is indeed oppressive, but as long as I remain steadfast, she can do me no harm.

Today I had a conversation with the Yi because of her latest attempt. I haven't been worried. I know that whatever happens will work out for the best for me, but it's starting to wear me down. Instead of being able to just focus on my current workload, deadlines and priorities, I have to keep pulling my documentation and showing her where the mistakes she thought she could blame on me were actually oversights on the part of her own staff.

When I told the Yi of a plan I had to try to get out of this without too much damage to my reputation, they answered 5.4 to 43. I decided then to just keep my cool, keep at my job like always and trust that time will tell the truth.

Shortly after I went back to my tasks with a renewed vigor and Buddhalike calm, the division head, who hadn't made a surprise visit in a couple of weeks, popped in. This visit, however, was different from the previous "inspections". His attitude was different. Ever since Power Tripper started her quest, he'd been rather cold and aloof...suspicious. This time, he was back to warm and friendly.

When he left, I just smiled and said thank you very quietly to the Yi.

Cheerio the noo,

Val

yellowblue

July 19th, 2003, 07:00 AM

Big sigh and http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif...I love this thread!!! I've so enjoyed hearing all of you. Next time I'm on the treadmill of 35 and feeling terribly ignorant with 4, I will remember it and smile a little more.

Thanks!!!

Deb

val

July 19th, 2003, 07:03 AM

Martin...

If you like Douglas Adams, have you tried Tom Robbins? It's kind of the same genre...what I like to call "irreverent relevance."

Cheerio the noo,

Val

candid

July 19th, 2003, 08:05 AM

Val - awesome!

That still calm, and knowing you've been guided, and saying, thank you.

frandoch

July 19th, 2003, 11:02 AM

Louise,

Fear not, dear lady. My ego is in fine fettle, and I did not call myself a tosser - I said, if you would be kind enough to read what I wrote (schoolmasterly tone here, so ruler at the ready) that of the spectrum of opinions about me, there are a few who think I'm a tosser.

And I delight in your command of the language - nearly as good as mine LOLOL.

Far be it from me to deny you the pleasure of slapping me down - heaven forfend - Ahhh, change that to 'forbid' -I sometimes forget that we have members in the US, where the word forfend has a different meaning. Alas, they speak a different language.

As George Bernard Shaw is supposed to have said: (actually it does not appear anywhere in his published writings)

'England and America are two nations separated by a common language.'

As for your question about whether the 'Yi' takes the p*** - She certainly does in my case - especially when I'm in 'ego' mode.

Be gentle (especially with me, LOL)

Michael F.

louise

July 19th, 2003, 03:04 PM

Val, well i did get 42 to 41, but dunno about the 'yes' and 'no' idea - interesting idea though.

Thanks for your thoughts Candid.

Frandoch, I stand corrected. You did not call yourself a 'tosser' on another thread, but said there were those who may well have called you one, or who have actually called you one (?)

Funny, just as eskimos have 22 words for snow and we have one, the English seem to have at least 100 words for 'idiot' or 'foolish person'. I wonder why that is ? Also I wonder what 'forfend' means in the US ?

martin

July 19th, 2003, 03:11 PM

Hi Val,

Yes, I like Douglas Adams very much.
It's a pity that he left the planet so early.
I didn't try Tom Robbins yet, but I will, thanks.

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/clown.gif

Martin

frandoch

July 19th, 2003, 03:12 PM

Louise,

I have been called most things including that one. LOLOL.

Forfend: English - to avoid, to ward off
North America _ to secure, to protect.

Michael F.

val

July 19th, 2003, 03:43 PM

So....

Mr. Michael Frandoch and Louise...when are you two going to meet at the Ritz for tea? I'm watching the most delightful friendship develop here, and that seems the next logical step to me...*grin*

Cheerio the noo,

Val

martin

July 19th, 2003, 04:05 PM

Oh yes Val, tea for two!
But could anyone please define "ego" for me?
I don't know what it is or what is wrong with it.
I guess it is the modern scapegoat http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/new.gif that has replaced the sex of other times.
Right?

Martin

val

July 19th, 2003, 04:37 PM

Candid...

I really am pleasantly surprised with my response to this whole bruhaha. It's a first for me actually. I don't think I've ever been in quite so tense a situation or been this calm in any tense situation in the workplace. And I owe it to the wise counsel of the Yi.

My performance on this job, whether it ends now or later, is integral to my securing another position when the end does come. If I were to internalize this whole dog and pony show, it would greatly hamper my performance, and I would make those mistakes Ms. Power Tripper is so desperately looking for. That would only hasten the end and reflect badly on my resume.

The fact that the present economy is literally killing the parent company and it is struggling to survive is a good deal of added stress. But, because of the Yi, I know this is all really a good thing. There is a great opportunity coming out of or in spite of this...and this too shall pass...*grin*

Cheerio the noo,

Val

frandoch

July 19th, 2003, 04:49 PM

Hi Martin,

I hope this helps.

Michael F.

<FONT COLOR="0000ff">EGO AND THE ?I CHING?

In the interpretations of the hexagrams that follow, there will be frequent references to the ?ego? and ?ego-based? actions. It is important that these words, as they are used in the present work, are defined. To begin with, let?s try to see where the concept of ego comes from. In order to do this, we shall consider the various levels of consciousness as found in the world. We will consider a rock, a plant, an animal and a human.

A rock has a very low level of consciousness. It just sits there. It doesn?t move unless acted upon by an external force. It is wholly governed by the laws of cause and effect. Some would doubt that the Life Force is present in a rock, but the rock does show some measure of organisation. As we have seen, it consists of atoms or molecules held together in a specific arrangement by invisible forces, and these forces are part of the Life Force.

A plant exhibits a higher level of consciousness than a rock. As well as being subject to cause and effect, it responds to external stimuli. The sprouting seed produces two shoots, one of which will form the root and which grows downwards in the direction of gravity, whilst the other shoot grows upwards, against the force of gravity. Its flowers will open in the sunlight and close when the light levels fall. Some flowers will follow the sun, turning as the sun goes from one horizon to the other. There is a primitive intelligence at work here.

An animal exhibits a higher level of consciousness yet. It is subject to cause and effect; it responds to external stimuli; but it also has instinctive drives which are not external. It is aware of food, potential mates and potential enemies. This awareness is internal, but the animal will respond to these internal stimuli.

A human is subject to cause and effect, and responds to both external and internal stimuli. But, in addition, a human will respond to internal stimuli which don?t exist, i.e. imagined stimuli. The human mind is capable of asking the question ?What if.....??. This means that it can produce a model of reality in its mind, from which it can project possible futures, and make decisions accordingly. This model necessarily contains a representation of reality which includes the concept of ?I?. In other words, humans are aware that they exist. They have ?self awareness?. It?s what makes us different from animals.

There may be a blurring of the boundaries of the above four levels of consciousness, but there is no doubt that the four levels exist.

In many ways ?self awareness? is a blessing, but in other ways it is a curse. The internal model of reality represents the world, including the concept of ?I? as a separate being. This separate being feels itself to be separate from everything else in the Universe; it feels threatened; it feels vulnerable; it feels that in order to survive it has to take on the external world and win, or it will be destroyed. This separate being is the ?ego?. But the separation is an illusion. It?s unreal. It?s a construct of the mind. We are all connected. We are totally dependent on things outside of ourselves in order to go on living. The air we breathe, the food we eat, our friends, our lovers, all other people, the weather, the seasons - we are interdependent with all that exists.
The ego has other problems. It cannot live in the present moment. It cannot handle the ?Now?. Its identity is based totally on the past. It is built of past memories and experiences and because of its fear, it must protect its identity by manipulating the future. But unfortunately for the ego, the future doesn?t exist. Not only is the ego unable to deal with the present moment, it actively fears it, because if the ?real you? lives in the present moment, the ego evaporates, and it can?t let that happen. At least, not without a fight. It will do anything in its power to stop the ?real you? from living in the ?Now?. But, there is nothing else but the ?Now?. You can?t experience anything but the present moment. You can?t change the past. You can?t alter the future until it becomes the ?Now?. Remember, the ?I Ching? is your connection with the Collective Unconscious, or Higher Self, which only knows the ?Now?, because it experiences past, present and future as one eternal ?Now?.

Can you not see that the ego is a curse? There exist not only individual egos, but collective egos, such as tribal and national egos. After all, nationalism is only an advanced form of tribalism. It is these collective egos which cause racial hatred, fear of different others, wars, in fact, most of the ills of mankind. Because of both the individual and collective egos, humanity is the most insane and dangerous species that has ever existed on this planet, and unless we find a way to control these negative forces, we will destroy ourselves and possibly the planet. We have to continue to evolve, but do it consciously. We must transcend the ego state; we must rid ourselves of this dangerous illusion. The ?I Ching? tells us how.

So, what are the characteristics of ego-based behaviour?

Guilt, sadness, remorse, bitterness, anger, regret, depression, hostility, resentment, etc. These characteristics are all based on past experiences and all represent our inability to forgive ourselves and others for the past, which we cannot change. We can only learn from it.

Fear, worry, anxiety, nervous tension, apprehension, dread, panic, trepidation, etc. These characteristics are all based on a projected future, about which we can do nothing until it becomes the ?Now?. And most of our fears never materialise anyway.

In every part of the text, the message is the same: ?Curb the ego. Follow the ways of the ?wise?. In doing this we will be contributing to the future of ourselves, others, the environment, the planet and then the Universe. People often ask the question: ?But what can I do? What can any one person do? We are powerless.? We are not powerless. We have immense power, if only we knew it. True, we can?t change other people; we can?t change the world. But we can change ourselves, and in doing so we become a centre of influence, which will spread far and wide. It?s like dropping a pebble into a pond. The waves spread over the whole pond, influencing everything in the pond. Not everyone has to change. We only need a small ?critical mass? of people who follow the Sage in order to change the world.

Don?t doubt the wisdom of acting in accordance with the Sage. From personal experience I can say: ?Try it. It works?.</FONT>

martin

July 19th, 2003, 05:17 PM

Well Michael, that's more or less the story that I've heard many times.
I think it's in most cases our superego that creates problems, not our ego, whatever that is.
And that same superego (whatever _that_ is) tells us that we should cange, curb the ego, follow the Sage, etcetera.
Hmmm, looks like a trap to me ...

Martin

frandoch

July 19th, 2003, 05:48 PM

Hi Martin,

I offer my thoughts about things, based on my studies and my experience. You are free to choose whether those thoughts are relevant to you or not.

I merely place them before you. You can pick them up, try them out, use them or discard them. Each of us is on a separate path.

But, if we are to discuss this topic, then I have defined what I mean by ego, and I would ask you to define your use of the terms ego and superego.

If they are part of triple term 'Ego, Id and Superego', beloved of one school of psychology, then we are talking of different things, especially as these terms have never been defined except in the vaguest manner.

I cannot see a trap in what I wrote, but if there is one, I would like to hear about it, as I may have to change my thinking on this subject.

Your input would be welcome.

Michael F.

martin

July 19th, 2003, 06:18 PM

Why don't you see the trap, Michael? It's obvious ..

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/wink.gif

Martin

frandoch

July 19th, 2003, 06:54 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

I think it's in most cases our superego that creates problems, not our ego, whatever that is.
And that same superego (whatever _that_ is).... <!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

Martin,

The above quote from your post is meaningless.http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/wink.gif

You have put forward an argument based on words that you admit have no meaning for you. That would be a trap, but I have no intention of being seduced into a discussion based on words without defined meanings.

Good try though !! http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/biggrin.gif

martin

July 19th, 2003, 07:28 PM

Ha, another trap! But it is not the "obvious" one that I mentioned in my last post.

Perhaps I should explain.
What I mean by superego is the inner voice (or thought pattern, if you like) that tells us that we are no good, that we should change, become "better", conform to an ideal, etcetera.
That voice, when we listen to it, causes a lot of problems.
A tendency to live in the future instead of in the now is one of them. Feeling guilty when we fail to live the ideal life is another.
And so on, the list is nearly endless.

Okay, how do we solve those problems?
Now that voice comes in again and says, well, you should change, this is no good, you should become better ...

That is the trap, the vicious circle.
If we are trapped we continue to believe that we can solve our problems by "becoming better" and we don't see that that belief is in fact the cause of our problems ..

Did I make myself clear?

Martin

louise

July 19th, 2003, 07:41 PM

You're right Martin, it is obvious. So I'll leave the trap bit alone.

The point I would like to pick up on is this - where Frandoch says guilt, sadness, remorse, bitterness, anger, regret, depression, hostility, resentment etc. These characteristics are all based on past experiences and all represent our inability to forgive ourselves and others for the past

All these things are part of our current human experience. If we were enlightened, self realised, whatever you wish to call it - sure we would not experience these emotions -

though "Jesus wept" even Jesus felt sad.

It would seem you are saying that all feeling, all movement of the heart is based on ego ? God Frandoch, thats a barren picture you paint.

But I digress from the point I am struggling to make, which I've made before, is that somehow your explanation is upside down - that is I believe when we are at one with all, enlightened etc then naturally all these feelings do not catch at us. But we do not reach that blessed place by falsely stamping down every natural emotional reaction we have - the detachment is the EFFECT of realisation NOT the CAUSE.

Yes of course it is desirable to have some restraint on the demands of the ego to get praise, be liked etc etc. We have to do that to manage in the world at all. But we can't brush all those nasty feelings away that you listed above, to attempt to do so can lead to mental ill health and a real 52, line 3 situation. I think part of our job here on planet earth is to work through those dark places, to understand their meaning, they are not valueless, they are part of the story God made up. What you seem to be advocating is merely concealment of the dark bits of the human psyche - but no good can come of that. It is my experience that if theres a hurt bit of us, it just doesn't work to push it aside and go away - it does work to listen to it and understand it and work to transform it.

I think the trap Martin refers to is of course the setting up of guidelines and limits about how we *should* be, this including the monitoring of the ego. But *shoulds* have no place in opening our awareness to God/the allthatis etc etc for that as I understand is purely love - and love is not interested in judging and scolding, in codes of conduct,self denial, self punishment. Also of course as soon as we have a set of *shoulds* our egos will get pretty active - whilst our superegos look on with approval or disapproval.

Is it any use for a doctor to say to a severely depressed patient "hey, this is just your naughty ego, forget your traumas they never happened". Sure if the patient were to attain Buddahood, he would not be depressed, but we have to work with what we've got, here and now, the best we can cos we can't buy our way back to our spirtual home.

BTW
The Id is our base desires - newborn babies being bundles of id - our need for immediate satifaction of physical needs.

Ego develops next to give us a handle on the real world, so we have a sense of self, the baby gets to understand he is not his mum.

Superego is the the imbibed moral values of the parents, which determines our stance to our own conduct, ie strict parents make strict superegos.

I'm not saying I would uphold these as definite psychological constructs, I was just trying to define the terms somewhat. I'm sure others could give much better definitions.

And I never thought it was any good to "follow the ways of the wise". No don't copy others - the main thing I thought is to surrender ones will, ones desire to 'fix' things to the intelligence of God - if you believe in God of course which I think I do. It is highly likley Gods wish is for you to be fully who you are, not to emulate anyone else, to be your own glorious self, on a path to be more fully yourself, hence more at one with him/her.

I agree with you we are immensely powerful, more so than we ever realised - more powerful when release our small selves and let the big self do the steering. Probably Frandoch, I fundamentally agree with your ideas, but get stuck when you seem to advocate the dismissal of feelings such as sadness etc as being somehow wrong because they are part of the ego.

I am exhausted now, can't express my objections to your ego ideas more clearly than I have - falls in heap on floor - I hope someone knows what I'm on about.

Martin I think the ego looks something like this

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/mischief.gif

frandoch

July 19th, 2003, 07:43 PM

Martin,

Thank you for your reply. I avoided being drawn into a discussion about your 'obvious' trap, until you defined some terms, which you have now done, and very clearly. Now you have defined what you meant by the term 'superego' I agree with everything you said.

But if you read what I wrote in my piece on the ego, nowhere did I suggest that we should be 'better'. Nor have I ever suggested that we should destroy the ego, which others have suggested I said. The ego is essential for inter-relating with other people, other egos, and is a tool, a very useful one. But for many people the ego is their master, not their servant.

When I suggest that we must transcend the ego, I mean that we must realise that it is an illusion, but nevertheless a useful one, provided we are in control of it, and not the other way round.

Did I make myself clear? http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/wink.gif

Michael F.

louise

July 19th, 2003, 07:45 PM

Oops, missed the last couple of posts while I was writing mine, and yes Martin that was really clear, thankyou for saying what I find so hard to articulate.

frandoch

July 19th, 2003, 07:57 PM

Hi there all,

We have a discussion going. Excellent. Unfortunately, in one way, I have to go out now, but I'll be back tomorrow.

Blessings,

Frandoch.

martin

July 19th, 2003, 08:08 PM

It's a pity, but I also have to leave now.
Back on line tomorrow night, I hope.

All the best,

Martin

val

July 19th, 2003, 08:36 PM

Martin and Louise...

Great stuff. Rather than try to transcend the ego...I just accept my'self.' Rather than try to transcend those emotions Mr. Frandoch cited...I just accept them as valid. That done, I have established a relationship of trust with my'self' and we have some great dialogs about those emotions. Consequently I'm learning tons, AND...she lets me borrow her clothes...*grin*

Cheerio the noo,

Val

alexis

July 20th, 2003, 06:14 PM

It seems to me that the I Ching is a very helpful and insightful collection of "ideal" ways of behavior and approaches befitting grand masters (who don't need to cast hexagrams to know the proper way of dealing with a situation anyway) and perhaps a little misleading for everyday folk who still believe that the responses we get from it are a means of manipulating circumstances to create outcomes to our liking.

In this sense, the suggestions for perfect human behavior can lead us imperfect people astray if we don't understand that our evolution and growth is dependent primarily on developing our ego's more fully, more completely, in order that we can bring our inner hidden selves into full conscious awareness for ourselves. Attempting to model the perfect behavior of the I Ching may for many of us be a premature step which keeps us believing that we can get to the other side without actually entering the (wicked) ego's territory. Meaning, as long as we're "good" in other people's eyes then the solution lies in hiding the unattractive parts of ourselves away and all is well. Well, this is just a misleading fantasy, but it's just my opinion.

Again, the I Ching has been tremendously helpful to me over the years, so I am not knocking it. What I am saying is that in some ways it is too biased on the side of "good" and so lacks a certain down-to-earth quality that many people actually need to be, and stay, "real".

Alexis

malka

July 20th, 2003, 06:48 PM

Alexis,

The I Ching is biased on the side of good! There is a statistical equation (perhaps someone here knows it?) that shows the number of coins DOES lean towards offering positive answers more often than not. The reason for this that I've been told by others more experienced than myself, and what also feels right to me, is that the world is divine -- the world is good -- this is why the I Ching reflects such goodness in it's biased answers.

I'm saddened by your view of the I Ching being used as a, "means of manipulating circumstances to create outcomes to our liking." Perhaps some do feel this way. What I feel, and friends I know who consult the oracle also feel is that it's guidance to, "help make sure I'm flowing with, and not against, the natural unfolding of events as they must be." I want to know where I may be creating a blockage due to my own fears, how I could expand my thinking, or relax into my own knowing. This is the kind of help I beleive I receive from the oracle.

I beleive there is no such thing as hiding. We may kid ourselves, but in truth all is always known.

Your note here does help me to not take your response to my other post quite as personally. Thank you!

anita

July 21st, 2003, 09:47 AM

Hmmm the EGO again. When my Sensei told me that my ego has caused me many miseries, I asked what she meant by EGO. I think there are many definitions to the ego and one can get very confused. I was told that it is because of the ego that one feels anger or hurt.

Much has been made clear to me by Sensei's answer. And much is clear to me too because I have finally understood the concept of karma. What you sow you reap. So grit your teeth and bear it when what you face is unpleasant. Which doesn't mean stay in the rot either.

Best for your Quest

Anita

gene

July 21st, 2003, 11:43 PM

Yes, many definitions for ego, and different people use the term differently. Here in the context of what I believe Anita is talking about, I would like to add that ego is what we use to separate ourselves from others. It is our mask, our persona, the image we present to others. The problem, the hurts and pains come when reality bumps up against our image of who we are. In actuality what is happening is the cosmic order is trying to reveal our true self to us, and that can be frightening, because it dashes the unrealistic concept we have of ourselves. We often look down on others who have sinned, who have committed trespasses of one kind or another. We make judgments regarding our goodness versus someone elses. But the cosmic order does not do this. The rain falls on the just and the unjust, as does the sunshine, and all is well. The weeds are as much a part of the plan of the cosmic order as are the flowers. We are no better, and no worse than anyone else. In fact, we are everyone else.

Gene

gene

July 22nd, 2003, 12:12 AM

One more thing here about the ego. There is nothing wrong with having an ego per se. But one has to be aware of the pickles it gets us into. The ego is fear based. It fears because it sees itself as separate and outside of everything around it. Since there is no inherent relationship, then events that happen outside of us are at random, and have no bearing and meaning on our life, if we are lucky we get good things, if we are not so lucky, we experience a bad fate. In those terms, and in that way of thinking, then one cannot help but be fearful, for he/she knows not what tomorrow may bring. Will fate be kind? Will it work against us? It is just like a gambling table. We play hoping today will be our lucky day. Of course we don't have much pity on the others who did not have such a lucky day and lost to us. But we play fate as if it were chance. I chanced to win $50 today in the lottery. I chanced to get run over by a steam roller, it is all chance. But the I Ching tells us different. It tells us there is a cosmic relationship, and it is real. It tells us that by opening up to it, we can bring fate more to our side. It tells us that we don't have to be fearful. Fear necessarily leads to hurt and pain. We think fate is hostile to us. We don't see the long term picture, like the person in hexagram 20 line 2. All we think of is how it affects us here and now.

When we try to go it alone, we become like the hunter in hexagram 3 line 3. We have no guide. We have no guide because we do not realize the relationship between the inner and the outer worlds. Since we are not familiar with the inner, we need a guide. The I Ching itself. By following the advice of the I Ching, by submitting ourselves to its teachings, we allow it to become our guide, and it leads through the forest of the inner world to our game. By realizing the relationship between the inner world and the outer, our fears dissolve, and we can move forward with confidence, finding the deer in the forest. If we do not follow the I Ching's guidance, then in line four, horse and wagon part. The inner and the outer worlds do not relate, and whatever happens to us happens by chance. So once again we strive for union.

Gene

gene

July 22nd, 2003, 12:27 AM

In looking back over the posts again here, I realize we have a very superb discussion going on, seems to be also without egos getting so involved there is a war going on.

A lot of what I see seems to boil down to definitions that are different for one person than another.

I was especially interested in the concept that the I Ching is biased on the side of good. That is partly the nature of the supposed dispute between confucian scholars and Daoists. The Daoists were not so concerned with good as they were with the natural order. The confucianists were more concerned about the proper basis for society, and the rules that make a social order work. The Daoists, in effect, said, just let the people farm their lands, the rest will take care of itself. (In a manner of speaking anyway.) I personally believe there is some relevance to both concepts, and ultimately, they boil down to the advice the sage gives us, not just to be good, but to be in harmony with the requirements of the time. Ocassionally lines are not in their proper place or central, but they are still in harmony with the time so the judgment is auspicious.

Gene

martin

July 22nd, 2003, 01:28 AM

The ego is a thing, said Sartre.
In the language of Advaita (Sartre would use different words): the ego is an object of perception.
How could that object possibly be me?
I am the subject!

Spinoza said: God has no attributes.
The same could be said about the subject. Only an object can have properties.

But, well, that is just philosophy, or "elephant ****" as Fritz Perls used to call it.
I have come to believe that every explanation of this ego issue is ultimately wrong and misleading.
There is a big big gap between "understanding" and understanding.
And forget it, there is no bridge.
Zen knows that. UG also knows it.
"There is no way out."
I like that statement, although it may not be entirely true ...

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/shades.gif

Martin

anita

July 22nd, 2003, 10:51 AM

Martin,

Very confusing. Does the Advaita imply that you're not an object? Is the whole quote from the Advaita or only the first line - the ego is the object of perception ? I don't think you understand what that means entirely. I think the Advaita is referring to the ego being born from the process of perception itself. So perception is Maya - illusion. We perceive that we are wronged. And then rises anger and hurt. But reality is that we ourselves have wronged.

frandoch

July 22nd, 2003, 12:30 PM

On another thread Martin wrote:

Dear Michael F,

"Both parties must avoid acting out ego desires".
I couldn't stop laughing when I read that.
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!

Thanks for the fun!
Yours truly,

Martin

It's nice to know I've made a positive contribution to this board. LOLOL. And as an extra treat, Martin, you can have another chuckle at my expense.

I posted my piece on 'Ego and the I Ching', and from the responses, I realised that I had put forward an argument without defining my words. That was done in previous chapters that you hadn?t seen. I'll put that right in another post, but for now I'd like to talk to Louise.

You said in your post: 'But we do not reach that blessed place by falsely stamping down every natural emotional reaction we have - the detachment is the EFFECT of realisation NOT the CAUSE.'

Absolutely - couldn't agree more.

You also said: 'It would seem you are saying that all feeling, all movement of the heart is based on ego ? God Frandoch, that's a barren picture you paint.'

Oh Louise - you couldn't be more wrong. It's not barren in any way - it's awesome, wondrous, magical. I wish I could wave a magic wand and give it to you, but I can't - but perhaps what I can do is point a finger - plant a seed - so that you know that such a place exists.

It's not a question of stamping down, or suppressing negative emotions. There is a place where you don't have to experience them. Think of a soap opera on TV. You sit back and watch pure egos fighting , screaming, shouting, trying to manipulate everything - but you don?t have to get involved - you can chuckle, laugh at their crazy antics, their insanity. You can do that with yourself, as well. The ?real? you can step back and be a silent witness and observe your ego interacting with other egos. The only thing that breaks that silence is helpless laughter. I laugh a lot at the stupid things my ego gets up to, but ?I? don?t have to get involved, ?I? don?t have to suffer.

Think of going to a movie. You know that the people on the screen aren?t really there. You know that it isn?t even a movie, just a rapid series of still photos projected onto a screen. But, you can choose to suspend disbelief, and enjoy the experience, even though you know it?s unreal - that?s it?s an illusion. It?s the same with life.

Every morning when I awake, I feel 'WOW' - pure joy, just at being alive. That doesn't mean that my life situation is always 'good' - it frequently isn't. I get my share of 'problems' - in fact I sometimes think that Spirit uses me for target practice. But it never gets me down. I don't do 'down'. Not any more. For many years I suffered from severe depression, so I know what down is.

I always believed it was possible to live in a state of bliss, but I had a worry. We are told that you can?t have the mountain without the valley - you can?t have the crest of the wave without the trough. But I didn?t want the troughs, and everyone said that if I managed to get rid of the troughs, I would get rid of the crests as well and that life would be flat, dull boring. But it turned out that you can transcend the duality, the opposites, and live in a state of joy, of peace. You can still experience life, the ups and downs, but you don?t have to suffer, because you know that you are choosing to experience it - that you are actually creating it.

So, where is this place? It?s here and now - the present moment. In the present moment, the ego isn?t in control - ?you? are - you can choose to experience the present moment without suffering. Let me explain that. Consider pain. Pain is neither good nor bad - it?s neutral - it may be a signal that something is out of balance. Pain just is. Suffering, as I use the term, is our psychological response to the pain. We try to avoid it, and we start on the ?what if?.?. OK - it?s fine to go and have it checked out, if you?re worried about it. Observe animals when they?re in pain. They usually creep off into a corner, lick themselves, lie down and wait. They don?t appear to be suffering - they seem to just accept it. I believe that we can learn from this.

Suffering is resistance to ?what is? - which is totally pointless. ?What is? is simply ?What is?. Think about a swimmer in a fast-flowing river, swimming against the current. You know he?s not going to get anywhere. He will reach the point of exhaustion, and then the flow will take him anyway. Much better were he to go with the flow, and use his energy to steer round obstacles. Just like life. I?m reminded of a prayer, which goes something like:

?Grant me the courage to change those things I can change; grant me the fortitude to accept those things I cannot change; but above all, grant me the wisdom to know the difference between the two.?

If you can take that on board, and really live it, you?ll have life sussed.

I have a favourite quote: ?What is the point in getting upset about things you can?t change.? People will say ?You can?t help getting upset? - but you can - you can choose not to. You see, I believe that we are all infinite and eternal, and that we cannot come to harm - that all ?suffering? is ego - an illusion. But that doesn?t make me callous, or indifferent to the suffering of others - quite the reverse. It?s the other side of the coin of love - it?s called compassion. You give love, comfort and support - and it?s not false - it?s very real.

And Martin, it is possible to be in a relationship that is not controlled by ego demands. How?
Accept the other person totally. Make no attempt to change them. Have no demands or expectations. Give. Receive their gifts, but don?t take.

It?s rare, but I?ve seen it - I?ve even been there. Why aren?t I still there? Six years ago, after 10 years together, my partner chose someone else. Did it hurt?? Oh yes - it hurt, but the pain was the start of a learning process, that has brought me to where I am now, to what I?ve been talking about here.

Michael F.

cheiron

July 22nd, 2003, 01:03 PM

Wow Michael! (Chuckles)

There?s some real peaches in there?

?Think of a soap opera on TV. You sit back
and watch pure egos fighting , screaming, shouting, trying
to manipulate everything - but you don?t have to get
involved - you can chuckle, laugh at their crazy antics,
their insanity. ?

?But, you can choose to suspend disbelief, and enjoy
the experience, even though you know it?s unreal - that?s
it?s an illusion. It?s the same with life.?

And a few more?

Thanks? Enjoyed those ideas.

Much better than reductive definitions anyway IMHO.

Guess Clarity is a soap too eh? ;)

Warm wishes

--kevin

martin

July 22nd, 2003, 01:36 PM

Hello Anita,

There was no (direct) quote from Advaita in what I wrote.
I merely tried to translate Sartres ideas (that is, my interpretation of his ideas!) in a language that is more or less Advaitic.

As you know, different Advaita teachers approach the issue in different ways.
I don't know if any of them would agree with the statement "the ego is an object of perception".
Perhaps Ramana would.

Hope this clears up the confusion,

All the best,

Martin

frandoch

July 22nd, 2003, 01:40 PM

Hi Kevin,

Glad you enjoyed it. And yes, Clarity is a soap, occasionally - remember the recent fisticuffs - the War Room etc?? I could have sat back and chuckled at their crazy antics, but instead, I chose to suspend my disbelief, experience their 'reality' and try to heal some wounded egos. Just like life really. LOLOL.

Michael F.

martin

July 22nd, 2003, 02:00 PM

Hi Michael,

I started laughing when my mind created pictures of your advice "Both parties should refrain from acting out ego desires" hanging on the wall above the bed of a married couple, in the office of a marriage counselor, in the office of a lawyer who deals with divorces, etcetera.

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/biggrin.gif http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/biggrin.gif http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/biggrin.gif

But, of course I understand what you are trying to say.

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smooch.gif

Martin

gene

July 22nd, 2003, 02:18 PM

Hello Michael F

What you say is very appropriate. And it is the basis for the teaching of the I Ching and most eastern religion.

Gene

frandoch

July 22nd, 2003, 02:20 PM

Hi Martin,

Perhaps I should rephrase my advice to 'ALL parties........' to include the lawyer and the marriage counsellor.

But I like the image of the sign above the bed of the couple.

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smooch.gif returned. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/biggrin.gif

Michael F.

tashiiij

July 22nd, 2003, 03:02 PM

frandoch,

how did you get there? how were you transferred over to this state ,--- to where you can watch the 'ego' antics humorously without the attachment-----? did you begin a process of only concentrating on the now? something lke what heylise talks about in another thread.

the title of this discussion is "there are times" and i really relate to that. what i sometimes wonder , is that i may inadvertantly misunderstand --that i am unable to really understand the iching's advice; that i use it to construct a narrative of and with abstact concepts; that by doing so i merely bark at my shadow, rather than truely hear a new perspective... that i color guidance from the yi with my limited perspective.

for examle, if i were to concentrate on the now, the present, i probably would want to take three coins and a couple translations with me to dialog with that 'now'!!! how to do that now!!!!!! how present is that??!! ha ha ha!!!. i sometimes think "i'm not going to be able to take the i ching with me thru my death...to guide the trasition..." what's up with that!!!

anyway.

alll the best---

tashij

cheiron

July 22nd, 2003, 03:44 PM

Hi Tashiij

While we wait for Frandoch?s reply?

I really relate to ?that by doing so i merely bark at my shadow, rather than truely hear a new perspective... that I color guidance from the yi with my limited perspective? Ughhh? got all the T-shirts on that one http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

You raise an interesting point? I think the idea in many ?Eastern approaches? is that by dropping ones constant thinking of the future one can see the present more clearly. ?Futuring? is a game that the ego/mind loves to play with and it can be a noisy distraction.

Similarly by dropping thoughts of the past we can drop our learned fears and pre-conceptions which again inhibit clear seeing of the situation now.

Martin, if I understood him correctly, raised a very interesting point. If we perceive everything through the Ego then even the ?dropping of the Ego? is an ego game? but there is a loophole http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

I believe we can perceive through our ?heart? or unconscious? that?s a bit crude but I don?t want to get caught up in writing a book here ;)

This deeper self perhaps can perceive a ?truth? when the Ego is quiet enough to let us hear it. It uses the symbolic language that Jung puts forth and which the Yi Jing is so full of.

But there is a catch, perhaps? If we were always to be able to let go thoughts of the past then we would be dumping hard won experience. Also we would not process things and learn.

If we were able always never to think of the future then we would be a little impractical with regard to managing in the concrete world?

As always the middle road seems to be the way? One day, just one day I will stop wondering off it into mires http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

All the best

--Kevin

malka

July 22nd, 2003, 05:36 PM

Allow me to clear up a few things about eastern philosophy, at least Buddhism --

When Buddhist speak of being present, and letting go of the past and the future, this DOES NOT mean to "pretend that the past didn't happen." It also doesn't mean to "never think of the future."

Please, please read any of Pema Chodron's books. I especially reccommend "The Places That Scare You." Also, Jack Kornfields, "The Path of Heart" is wonderful.

Buddhism speaks of "quieting the mind" in other words, to stop the constant chatter of tapes that replay, over and over again, a scene, or conversation that has already happened, or never happened. This is referred to as "grasping" or attachment. Very briefly, Buddhists believe that human suffering is the result of such grasping or attachments. That when we find ourselves unable (or unwilling) to rest quietly in the present moment with complete acceptance (acceptance does NOT need to mean liking what's happening, or approving)then we are free from the suffering that is generated from the disconnect between what is actually happening, and our minds's grasping to something different.

The present moment may be filled joy, with sorrow, happiness, or pain. The Buddhist view is to feel it all, whatever it is. In doing so, we allow ourselves to not get "stuck" (or attached).

Children in Tibet are taught about the natural flow of emotions but learning to change their emotion at the clap of a hand as a kind of game. The learning is that emotions flow. Everything comes, and everything goes. Rise and fall. So to be in the present moment means to flow with the natural unfolding of events in the universe.

I beleive the I Ching helps me to see more clearly into this natural unfolding. To be present. And when I seem to have the most difficult time with her is when I'm not HERE, but over somewhere else in wish-ville.

Being in the moment does mean to pretend past experiences or learnings didn't happen. It also doesn't mean not planning for retirement. How impractical! It does mean to listen very closely to everything. Listen to ourselves, listen to others. To be with what is really happening, right now.

More importantly, Buddhism and other eastern philosophy isn't an intellectual exercise. Therefore, it's difficult to "know" it by reading about it. The knowing comes through experiencing. Vipassana meditation, or mindfulness, is the simplest way to gain this experience. Then, when you experience the quiet mind, you will know. You will see how you are BETTER able to draw upon your past experience and knowledge when it comes from a place of conscious choice. But for me to write about this, or you to read it, doesn't do it justice at all. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/sad.gif

For those of you very heavy into traditional Freudian psychological terms, you might enjoy the book, "Thoughts without a Thinker" which is a close examination of psychodynamics and Buddhist psychology by Mark Espstein.

It is neither a bad thing nor a good thing to "act from ones ego" or to "have desires" as this is all part of the human experience. To lable experiences as good or bad is very limiting, and another tool that takes us away from the present moment. So if you want a piece of chocolate, have a piece of chocolate! But...is it chocolate you really want?

Being in the present moment allows us to discern when it's a simple desire for a piece of chocolate, and when the chocolate has been assigned a role of distracting us from a discomfort or displeasure. Because sugar does "cover up" and layer over our feelings and creates a "good" nice feeling for most of us, is it the chocolate we wanted or is it a desire for that "feeling" which is difference from the actually feeling of discomfort that's really happening right now?

If we are taking the chocolate because an image of our lover leaving us has just ever so briefly arisen in our minds, and together with it a very small and quiet sense pain or anxiety, but because we are not so closely listening to ourselves or watching our minds that we miss it -- and instead of just feeling the little wave of discomfort and allowing it to then pass we grab for the chocolate that happens to be in the bowl nearby, we are not being present and this chocolate is not "clean." The chocolate has become a tool to anestisize (spelling?) us away from the present moment. Yes, Buddhism is about being this aware, to every little second of our lives. This is what it is to be "in the present moment."

Hope this all makes sense!

dharma

July 22nd, 2003, 05:38 PM

Ego and it's dissolution... indeed, how does one get there? That is the most crucial question.

Those who are glimpsing the truth are doing so in increments and for the most part are caught up in ego struggles of their own because if they'd already managed to dissolve ego fully there would be absolutely no need for them to come here and bounce their ideas off of others in a discussion of this sort. Myself included.

In that sense, one man's crazy antics on this board is another man's journey to wholeness despite the other man's judgement of his behaviour. And along the same lines, one man's witty intellectual discourse is another man's bogus ego-posturing despite the political correctness of the approach. Both avenues are attempts towards the healing of the original wounds and divisions within that cause one to perceive the illusion of separation in the first place. That we choose different methods and approaches at different times in our lives, and as compared to others, is because of the individual need for experimentation and direct experience.

We all require different means of getting to the same place precisely because we are different aspects of the One Mind. It is also important to recognize that one's present chosen way is not necessarily the BEST way or the ONLY way to get there. Flinging the word ego about like a dirty word, with the implication that to have one is an offensive and embarrassing thing, only perpetuates the myth that to have an ego is inherently wrong, when in fact it serves the purpose of individuating and that complete individuation is the ULTIMATE door that leads to ego dissolution. Thus building a strong ego-container is the KEY that will open that door. Any other way is a lie upheld by ego-fear and meant to control and paralyze the process... precisely because ego demands to have it's day.

Complete ego dissolution is not likely for most of us to occur in this one lifetime, although I understand that it can, but developing the inner courage and fortitude to build a strong ego-container is a powerful benefit that carries over into other lifetimes.

We will be free of ego when we stop dreading it. As long as we try to eradicate it by judging it unworthy, we will remain in it's hold.

We will judge ego as unworthy if we only allow ourselves to witness its true power in others but never in ourselves. And, often we will resent those that expose our own weak and ineffective egos by comparison.

We will build strong ego-containers when we grasp the long-term value in doing so and we will only achieve success if we resist the fears from the crowds of weaker egos that will try to sway us away from the proper course.

We will stay the whole course only if we accept the demanding conditions and come to understand that the ultimate reward lies in the persistence of daring. The journey is through the ego's territory (as Alexis alluded earlier), NOT away from it.

We will develop more confidence in the overall process when we dare to embark on this journey because trust in the natural order of things to lead us to wholeness IS the main program on the agenda of building ego. Following the spontaneous impulses of the ego causes the natural voice of intuition to come through clearly and its promptings to be followed. Give the ego a voice, a platform to express it's uniqueness, fully and completely, and when it finally feels respected and heard it will quiet down. Otherwise, one will always be caught up in an internal struggle with it as it attempts to assert itself and in the process muffles the guidance of one's intuition.

It is the lack of trust in the inherent goodness of the deeper order of things to lead rightly and an apprehension of the overwhelming judgements that others direct at us that keeps the natural journey of ego-building from following it's instinctive process. Ego has it's place in the order of things; we thwart the process by withdrawing our love and acceptance from precisely where it's needed.

Demitra M. N.
(copyright)

tashiiij

July 22nd, 2003, 06:00 PM

wise words, dharma. saddhu saddhu saddhu.

copy on that, malka, cheiron.

good to read. good to take in.

lenardthefast

July 22nd, 2003, 06:18 PM

Dharma, Malka, Cheiron and Frandoch,

I am enjoying throughly the tapestry you have woven in this thread. Four egos presenting their perceptions of ego. Perhaps there is hope after all. Thanks for your forthrightness and keep it coming. Bravo! My ego even took the time to come out of its sumptious quarters and take a peek.

Namaste,
Leonard

frandoch

July 22nd, 2003, 06:22 PM

Hi Leonard,

Good one - I like it. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smile.gif

I have things to do, and the above excellent stuff to absorb before I reply, but I'll be back later.

Michael F.

lindsay

July 22nd, 2003, 07:24 PM

I couldn?t agree less with many of the opinions on this page. I may have intellectual tendencies (which have cost me a lot of time and hard work to cultivate), but I know derivative, fuzzy-minded, self-indulgent New Age rubbish when I hear it. The problem here is not Ego but Ignorance. How refreshing it would be to listen to someone talk about something they really understood through significant personal struggle and effort. Authenticity seems to be what is missing is this discussion.

Lindsay

sparhawk

July 22nd, 2003, 07:49 PM

And that's when Lindsay sat back in his favorite chair. A long sigh later, he looked out the window and seeing the black clouds approaching the shore, just sat and waited for the rain to start. He knew this one promised to be a good storm. Enjoying the moment, he poured some fine cognac in the old snifter and lit his favorite pipe, waiting...

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/ugh.gif

Sorry, I couldn't resist the temptation...

Luis

lenardthefast

July 22nd, 2003, 08:06 PM

Hi Lindsay,

Couldn't resist the urge to pull out the old Funk and Wagnalls, which defines authenticity as: "the condition of being authentic." Proceeded to the definition of authentic: "real, genuine or valid".

So, based on this definition, I would have to say that I believe that everyone who has posted here obviously feels that their perception fits the criteria set forth and is therefore, 'authentic'.

IMHO, your post also fits this criteria.

Thank you very much for your contribution, Lindsay, it was so....Lindsayish.

Namaste,
Leonardhttp://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smile.gif

hilary

July 22nd, 2003, 08:07 PM

Someone pass the chocolate!

sparhawk

July 22nd, 2003, 08:21 PM

While waiting for the popcorn to be ready, Luis passed the dark chocolate covered almonds to Hilary....

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

L

frandoch

July 22nd, 2003, 08:23 PM

Hi there,

I am still working on my response to some earlier posts, but having read the latest emails, I thought I'd take a break to ask a favour.http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

It's very difficult to respond to generalised comments - such as Lindsay's - or barely concealed barbs from Dharma, which as he used my words, were probably directed at me. I don't mind that. Feel free to pull me up for what I write.

If anyone objects to, or disagrees with, anything I post, then please say so - say why - and we can have a discussion. That's what I'm here for.

There's been some excellent stuff on this thread, with no ego (should that be ignorance LOL) showing until today, so please, let's keep it nice and cool, not too po-faced, but up front.

Michael F.

frandoch

July 22nd, 2003, 08:31 PM

Hilary, enjoy your chocolate, Sparhawk, your popcorn and Lindsay, your cognac and pipe.

Lights, cameras, action. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smile.gif

Michael F.

sparhawk

July 22nd, 2003, 08:36 PM

Just to please Hilary I am also playing Yo Yo Ma's "Soul of the Tango" in the stereo.

Darn it, one must create the right ambiance for a good storm to be enjoyed... http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/ugh.gif

L

gene

July 22nd, 2003, 08:41 PM

Hi Tashiiij

Yes, barking at our own shadow. We see as through a glass darkly. It is only by repeated interaction with the I Ching that the shadows begin to take more and more definite shape. Like the wild goose in 53 that gradually draws near the shore, but the trip is ever so long. Any true path takes an eternity to follow. There is no end to the road. We don't just follow the yellowbrick path. An old preacher I once knew said constantly. "If you think you are there, you are not." And Bart Simpson on the road with his dad, Are we there yet? No, repeated a thousand times.

Malka, I like your post about the meaning of Buddhism.

Gene

martin

July 22nd, 2003, 09:40 PM

Just back from work. What has happened here?
I guess I'm really in trouble now.
No chocolate in the house and the shops are closed ..

Martin http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/crazy.gif

cheiron

July 22nd, 2003, 09:43 PM

You think you have a problem?... I've been chasing my ego round the streets to prevent it savaging folk... its went crazy and then ran off.
heheheheh (mad cackling)
--Kevin

martin

July 22nd, 2003, 09:50 PM

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/howmuch.gif http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/biggrin.gif

Martin

frandoch

July 22nd, 2003, 09:51 PM

Hi there,

Tashij, may I leave my response to your question till later ?

It would appear that the naughty Frandoch has pressed a few buttons. Not for the first time, and certainly won?t be the last - but it?s not intentional. I just post stuff from my experience and my studies, which have also been long and arduous.

I totally agree that we glimpse the truth in increments, and I hope I haven?t given the impression that I?m ?there?. My comments about watching my own ego?s crazy antics, and about the fact that at times I suspend disbelief and join the game, join the ?reality?, obviously playing through my ego, should dispel that impression. Yes, the path is eternal - and that?s fine by me, because we have eternity, and if the path were short, we?d have to find another game to play.

But I have collected a few increments. My ego is certainly not dissolved, but I have gradually been absorbing into my being those things that I understand intellectually, and I delight in sharing my experience. As for the barely concealed barbs in Dharma?s opening paragraphs, I will leave those. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smile.gif

But allow me to clear up some misconceptions about what I?ve written. I?ve never said the ego was bad per se, nor that it should be destroyed, which as Martin pointed out would be another ego game. I have said that the ego is a necessary tool, so that we can interact with other egos. It is a very useful tool, but the problems arise when the ego is in control, when it?s the master and not the servant.

Regarding the past and future: we cannot experience either of them. We may have memories of the past, and plans for the future, but both of these are electro-chemical changes in the brain, which are happening NOW. By all means remember the past, and learn from it. By all means make plans for the future, but make them and release attachment to the outcome.

The past can be a problem, if we carry the baggage from previous experience into the present moment. Let?s say you were about to meet someone who had been unpleasant at a previous meeting. Could you, or any of us, keep your reactions free from being coloured by the previous experience? Most people would answer: ?Of course not.? And my response would be: ?Then you are not experiencing the present moment.?

The future can be a problem too. How many people do we know whose lives are based on: ?I?ll be happy when??????.?. But you can?t be happy, i.e. have peace of mind, in the future. Happiness is not a destination - not something to be achieved. Happiness is the way. If you can?t be happy now, whatever your life situation, you never can be. You can only experience anything in the present moment.

Both of these problems are ego based, because the ego is structured from past experience and memories, feels itself to be vulnerable and tries to manipulate the future, neither of which exist in the now, which is the only place there is.

I?ll stop there for now, so that others can have the opportunity to tear this to pieces.

Enjoy. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/biggrin.gif

Michael F.

gene

July 22nd, 2003, 10:25 PM

Rip, rip rip,

Okay, I'm done tearing it to pieces. Actually, I liked that post.

Gene

lenardthefast

July 22nd, 2003, 10:31 PM

Hi Frandoch,

Just a quick couple of points/questions.

"Regarding the past and future: we cannot experience either of them." I would be more inclined to believe that the past IS experience.

With regards to 'being happy': Your analogy in a previous post on this thread using the dog which was 'accepting' its pain made no mention of said dog running around, happily catching the frisbee and barking joyously while in the suffering state. I fail to recall ever seeing an 'enlightened individual', having had his/her arm just ripped off, projecting happiness and joy whilst doing a comedy stand-up routine.

Would you care to extrapolate on these situations further to ease my present confusion?

If you notice any concealed barbs in the above they are absolutely a perceptual illusion. Honest!

Namaste,
Leonardhttp://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/hex04.gif

frandoch

July 22nd, 2003, 11:27 PM

Hi there,

Gene - thank you for your comment.

Leonard - I liked your last comment about the perceptual illusion. Good one. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

As for your questions. My reply was necessarily short, as I don't want to write a book on it - well I do, but not on here.

Your use of the word experience was as a noun - mine as a verb, hence the confusion. Yes, the past IS experience, and I have never suggested that it should be jettisoned. The problem arises when we carry baggage from the past and allow it to colour our response to the new situation.

OK - let's use the example I mentioned - you see someone coming towards you who was unpleasant at your last meeting. The ego will scan its files to check how it reacted last time, and that 'old' reaction will be brought into the new experience. It won't be a 'present moment' experience - it will be a conditioned response from the past experience. If we could avoid that, we could have a fresh experience. You see, as you approach each other, you would probably be giving out 'bad vibes', to which he will respond. Now, last time you met, he may have just been having a bad day, and if you could meet him, truly in the present moment, without the baggage, you might become friends. It can be done. It takes awareness of why you respond the way you do, and practice.

As for your second point, I used the word happiness when perhaps I shouldn't have. As Malka explains above, to truly be in the present moment means to experience all of it, but you can achieve a state where whatever is happening in the outside world, within you there is place of total peace, that nothing can touch. Yes, feel what is happening, but you don't have to be 'attached' to it. Let's say you lose someone close to you. I'm not suggesting that you should respond by laughing and joking. Yes, you'll feel sad, you'll experience the loss, but you will also have a centre of peace, where the real you resides - the Silent Witness - who is totally unattached to those feelings. You see, the real you is not your thoughts - not your emotions. But the real you wants to experience it all, through you. You are a part of the One, who wants to see Its Creation through your eyes. The real you can sit back and observe, or through your ego can join the game. The guy whose arm is being ripped off feels the pain, and his ego will do some suffering, but the 'real you' hasn't got an arm to rip off. It's untouchable. Think of a play, where the actors end up killing each other. We can become totally involved in their 'experience' and feel deep emotions, even though we know that when the curtain comes down, they'll get up, unharmed, and go to the pub. Life's like that. We join the game to experience it, but knowing that it is your choice means that you don't have to suffer. Non attachment is the key to avoiding suffering.

Hope this helps,

Michael F.

lenardthefast

July 23rd, 2003, 12:02 AM

Hi Frandoch,

Personally, with the possible exception of Lindsay, I have no preconceived notions regarding anyone, regardless of race, creed, religion or past experience.http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smile.gif (Lindsay, I just couldn't pass up the opportunity, I don't really have any preconceived notions about you, I'm just a sucker for great openings!) http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/biggrin.gif Really!

As regards your second point, Frandoch, your explanation has NOT helped. It has absolutely nothing new in it as regards the actual ACHIEVMENT of the vaunted states. Once again, please understand that I am not denigrating you when I say this. Its just that I have been reading similar descriptions of the STATE of Nirvana or 'finding your peaceful center' for the last 45 years and not once has any of them had any real, useful information on achieving said states. Sure, the 'masters' who make these pronouncements seem to have achieved these states, but why wouldn't they? They are for the most part warm, sheltered, fed and have renounced 'living in the world'. None, to my knowledge, has a maniacal boss/supervisor, unfaithful wife/lover, car payments, house payments, delinquent children, leaky roof, broken plumbing, etc., etc,. ad nauseum. My question is not how 'they' have managed to attain a state of bliss and enlightenment, I perfectly understand how that is possible for 'them', given their lifestyle; it is how may 'I'. And, my friend, I just don't see it happening among my friends, my aquaintances on this site, or anywhere in the 'real' world. Should you be capable of explaining that, I would assuredly lend an eager ear.

Namaste,
Leonardhttp://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/hex04.gif

frandoch

July 23rd, 2003, 12:41 AM

Hi Leonard,

My apologies - I wasn't aware that you were asking for the 'How'.

OK - the usual way is by practising meditation. There are many schools of meditation - many ways of achieving the meditative state, but they all have a common core. There's a lot of misunderstanding about meditation, but it's very simple, which is not the same as easy, and it's a long process, but change begins as soon as you start. There are hightech ways of speeding the process, but they are very expensive.

Firstly we need to understand what we are trying to do when we meditate. I'm afraid it's back to the ego. The aim is to silence the ego - NOT to destroy it or dissolve it, but to put it where it belongs - at our service, rather than the other way round. The ego is responsible for the endless chatter that goes on in our minds - the ceaseless dialogue of thoughts. The aim is to quieten it down.

Let me use an analogy: you go outside on a dark, clear night, and look up. You can see the stars and the starlight. Now, during the day the sun will be shining. The stars are still there, and so's the starlight, but you can't see it because the starlight is faint, and swamped out by the sunlight. Equate the starlight to your 'real' self, and the sunlight to your ego. Imagine if the sun were shining all the time - you'd never be aware of the starlight. This is the condition of most people - they are not aware that a higher self exists.

We use meditation to switch off the ego, and to allow contact with the higher self, or rather to allow the higher self to contact us. It's only when the thinking mind is silent that this contact can be established and grow.

You don't need special robes, or a special posture, or to hold your hands in a certain position, or to have incense burning, or to chant mantra - you can do any of this if it helps - some people need ritual - but it's not meditation.

Meeditation is a way of experiencing the present moment - and when you're in the present moment, the ego is not there - it belongs to the past and the future.

If you know of a technique, then use it. If you don't, email me at frandoch@aol.com and I'll send you some stuff.

Hope this helps,

Michael F.

martin

July 23rd, 2003, 01:01 AM

Hi leonard,

I think "how?" is the wrong question.
Yes, most of us ask "how?" sooner or later.
And once that question is asked the answers start to come. There are countless answers.
Try this, do that, this is the way, that is the path, ...
It's possible to attain all kind of "states" by practicing this or that technique.
But none of these states is real.

Well, that's how I see it.

Martin

lenardthefast

July 23rd, 2003, 01:31 AM

Very funny, Martin. Are you competing for the "Most Ambiguous Post" award? http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smile.gif If so, you certainly have my vote!

Now, a moment of levity. Nah, what fun is that? Anyway, Martin, whats the question I should be asking; besides the obvious?

Namaste,
Leonard

martin

July 23rd, 2003, 01:49 AM

Ha Leonard,

Perhaps my english is not what it could be, hence the ambiguity ..

About the question that you should ask, I guess only you can know what that question is.

No?

Martin

lenardthefast

July 23rd, 2003, 02:06 AM

Hi Martin,

There seems to be a pernicious echo in your cpu. I recommend a virus check immediately. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/bounce.gif

Namaste,
Leonard

martin

July 23rd, 2003, 02:20 AM

Hmmm,

Yes, I see it. It is green and it dances. Martian?
It doesn't look pernicious, though, no, not at all in fact. It looks very friendly.
Ah, it's you?
Nice to meet you!

Martin http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/tiger.gif

lenardthefast

July 23rd, 2003, 02:32 AM

Martin, Its almost 2:00 a.m., time for you to have your cookies and milk, hop in your jammies and go right to bed. Tomorrow will be a very busy day for you. ...and don't forget to say your prayers, you naughty boy!

Namaste,
Leonard

gene

July 23rd, 2003, 02:33 AM

Nice to see the levity here.

Frandoch. I have been using some of those high tech methods you talk about and yes, they are very, very expensive, so much so I may not be able to continue. I do recommend it though if you can afford it. There are a number of them out there on the internet. I use Centerpointe myself. What high tech can accomplish for you is amazing, and yet at the same time, there are shortcuts to pay, but if you can pay that price...

The reason the master don't have wives screaming at them, is because they've alreay had that, and had enough of it. When we properly meditate, and learn to use our mind, the neurons and the synapsis of the brain actually breakdown then reintegrate in a higher form. As that happens, life breaks down for us temporarily, and we may go through some horrifying experiences, but when it is over, we come out the other end, and the new electromagnetic charges in the brain, and the new neuron structure eventually puts the pieces back together in a much better way. It is like the phoenix who rises out of its own ashes.

Gene

martin

July 23rd, 2003, 02:39 AM

Haha Leonard,

You are also not a very serious man, aren't you?
By the way, did you know that tigers like me love to eat dancing green puppets for breakfast?

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm

Martin

val

July 23rd, 2003, 02:39 AM

The libido....

We must transcend our libido...

Men...I'll get back to you with my response.

Women...the "when" of transcending your libido is most of the time, but especially when you have PMS. When even the pizza delivery boy looks good...TRANSCEND!

The "how"...oh never mind. I have no idea "how" whatsoever.

Cheerio the noo,

Val

gene

July 23rd, 2003, 02:54 AM

In hexagram 52 we have the example for meditation. The image says "...does not permit his thoughts to go beyond the current situation." It is impossible to keep the mind totally quiet all the time, and maybe not a good thing either, but whether we meditate, or we are active, total focus is the key. Focusing keeps our mind on the situation. The more we can focus, the less mistakes we make. The purer our work, and the faster. In meditation, it is said, "...he does not feel his body." This is how calm and focused the mind has to be. And in the Tao Te Ching, it states that the mind must be as calm as the water on a lake. When it is totally calm, it reflects everything around it. When it has waves, the reflection is disturbed. Likewise, when our mind has waves, our reflection, and our understanding is disturbed, and incomplete, and so is our environment.

Gene

martin

July 23rd, 2003, 02:55 AM

How to transcend the pizza boy?
Listen to the wise: just eat the pizza!

Oh my god, I am joking again ...

Martin http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/shame.gif

lenardthefast

July 23rd, 2003, 02:55 AM

Hi Martin, (...as he arranges his plethora of tiger tail trophies on the shelf.)

Many tigers have stalked the little bouncing green man.....and left their tails on the shelf. But, far be it for me to dissuade you in your quest. I enjoy the exercise. Here, kitty, kitty!

Namaste
Leonardhttp://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/bounce.gif

gene

July 23rd, 2003, 02:56 AM

Val

Is it the pizza delivery boy? Or the pizza he delivers?

Gene

gene

July 23rd, 2003, 02:59 AM

Has the little green man been treading on the tail of the tiger again?

Gene

lenardthefast

July 23rd, 2003, 03:02 AM

Hi Val,

The PIZZA DELIVERY BOY? ...Gosh, I guess the land of Virgins has finally claimed another victim. You had best pack your bags and head due west immediately. Oh, and take two aspirin before going to bed.

Namaste,
Leonard

val

July 23rd, 2003, 03:03 AM

Gene...

We're talking PMS here...BOTH! But which came first? The urge for the pizza? Or the urge for the pizza delivery boy?

And how do we transcend? Why that's easy! Go out shopping for hollow point bullets and chocolate ice cream instead.

Val

martin

July 23rd, 2003, 03:37 AM

Now what about that pizza girl, Val?

Come on, Leonard, get off my, ahem, tail!

While I'm writing this I get new mail.
It's spam, titled "the secret of sex appeal"!!

Martin

gene

July 23rd, 2003, 04:29 AM

The hollow point bullets are for when you are done with the pizza boy?

Gene

gene

July 23rd, 2003, 04:30 AM

Sort of like the black widow spider. After its over, its really over!!!

Gene

davidl

July 23rd, 2003, 09:22 AM

I personally have found that dealing with the ego is a daily , almost moment to moment job.
One of the best ways I have found to limit its destructiveness is to realise that there is a difference between 'reacting' to life and 'responding' to life. Where the ego is the 'reacter' , our higher mind the 'responder'. The difference is subtle but incredibly powerfull. Its the difference between lashing out at someone for offending you in some way, and alternatively taking a little time, to think, formulate and deliver a response. The outcome is always better from this type of calm response (for both parties).
My view is that by understanding this difference in approach one starts to understand what cliches like 'living in the moment' and 'letting things flow' really mean.
Actually the 'taking a little time' before speaking technique I have found has had an incredible effect on my private and business relationships. People tend to take you a little more seriously because they know that what their getting is a response not a reaction. (and that can be really good for the ego)!

malka

July 23rd, 2003, 09:30 AM

Hello there,

I appreciate much of the sharing here. Thank you. So as not to leave the impression that the methods and goals of meditation that have been discussed here are the only possibilities of meditation, I want to briefly share my own practice and experience of nearly 6 years.

My practice is really two practices: I both study and practice Kabbalistic meditation (from Jewish mystical tradition) and Vipassana meditation (from Buddhism.) The lineage of vipassana I practice is Theravedan, which comes from Tibet.

Both of these practices have the same goal, which is complete openness to what is happening in the moment. There is no effort, attempt, nor desire to change, manipulate, get rid of, make smaller, alter, adjust, or limit. There is only the continuous practice of opennes and presence. Even the most experienced practitioners must remind themselves numerous times a day to "drop" into the present moment. The Buddha himself said there is no enlightenment -- that's the enlightenment! So there isn't an end goal, there isn't a final destination. These traditions do not attempt to control the mind, shrink the ego, or eliminate the libido. Rather, they are about being open to, welcoming, and walking along side whatever is happening. This is presence.

Just like with chocolate, these meditation traditions do not seek to control sexual desire, however in being truly present one does come to know when such desire is just simple sexuality, and when it's an expression of the need to self comfort (just like the food.) Chocolate and sex (both great things!) are also top on the list of ways we deceive ourselves, comfort ourselves, medicate ourselves, and take ourselves away from the present moment. They can be avoidance tactics -- ways to deflect the energy away from what's really happening and what we're really feeling.

I do not write from a place of profound theory, if I did this would be far more eloquant. I write from my own experience of having lived this path, of currently living this path. I have found that reading about it, and living it, to be very different. Thanks for listening.

anita

July 23rd, 2003, 09:47 AM

Frandoch,

I like what you said about the way to test attachment - can you be in the present when you meet someone you've had an unpleasant experience with? Hey! I now can! And that's most amazing to me. And I've learned how to do that from my Sensei- who is married with kids. She became Sensei after being married by the way. None of the senseis marry after they dedicate themselves.
And celibacy is definitely required and adhered to.

In fact, I used to think that sex and sexual thoughts keep one looking young. But there are other ways to do that as I can see with my spiritual teachers! Meditation is certainly one of them and this I do every day. So is being veg, among other things. Ah yes and green tea too.

Malka, liked your post too about Buddhism.

Best for your Quest

Anita

frandoch

July 23rd, 2003, 10:36 AM

Gene - Snap, I too use Centerpointe, with the same problem of financing it.

Malka - Your post above has shown me that I made the wrong emphasis when speaking about quietening the ego. You're right, it is the effect of meditation rather than the cause.

Anita - Good for you. I have learned to do it too. Because of events in the village where I live, I have had ample opportunity to practice this non-attachment. When you actually do it, I've found the other person's response to be very interesting. The first time, they are non-plussed, because it's so unexpected. The next time, you can almost hear them wondering if you're 'taking the mickey'. But later on, in some cases anyway, they actually start to talk to you, and sometimes you can end up chuckling together about the original 'hostility'.

Michael F.

val

July 23rd, 2003, 01:23 PM

Davidl...

You said, "Where the ego is the 'reacter' , our higher mind the 'responder'."

Here's some interesting cognitive behavior at work. When one prefaces anything with a possessive pronoun one is indicating ownership. To say "my/our/your/his/her/its higher self/feelings/inner child/whatever" is claiming ownership. When one prefaces anything with "the" one is not claiming ownership.

When I am owning "my" higher self, but not "the" ego, I am owning the behaviors of "my" higher self and not the behaviors of "the" ego.

One has to own it ALL to be able to communicate with ANY of it. Everything starts with the self. If I can't communicate with myself, how can I communicate with anyone? And "higher self" presents a problem for me. How intimidating is "higher" anyway?!?. How do I approach someone higher than myself?

I don't have an ego. Ego is a word coined by a cocaine-addicted (consequently judgment impaired) mysogonist 78-79 years ago. If it's not yet dead at that age considering all that's been learned about human psychology since, it should be. I have a lot of selves, none of them higher or lower than me, that need to be integrated into one self in order to function as a whole. I've got a 3-year old self that was jealous of baby brother, a 9-year old self that got blamed for everything, an 11-year old self that experienced a life-threatening situation, etc. etc. etc.

And I own them all, they are all me, and I love them all. Love is trust. Trust is the key to communication. When those parts of me trust my adult self and feel safe to communicate with that part of me, the "here and now" me, they become part of my whole and stop doing the 3-year old, 9-year old or 11-year old behaviors and trust my adult self to handle situations with adult behaviors.

And like Dharma said, they never all integrate in most of us. They sure haven't all integrated in me...*childish grin*

Cheerio the noo,

Val

martin

July 23rd, 2003, 02:23 PM

I like the way you see it, Val.
Each or our selves is valuable and has something to offer to the whole.
And there is no "ego", or at least no ego that should go, be transcended or whatever.

I think there are basically two approaches to the human psyche (and yes, I know I am simplifying).
The first approach says "this should not be there, try to get rid of it, or sublimate it, transcend it".
The second approach is "this may be problematic, but it surely has it's place. It must have value. Accept it, embrace it, try to communicate with it"

I prefer the second approach.

Martin

dharma

July 23rd, 2003, 02:56 PM

Frandoch, with complete honesty there was absolutely no barb intended... none at all. It is simply not even a part of my M.O. I merely took an idea you presented and flipped the coin over to reveal it's other side. Nothing more than that.

I'm afraid the first impression of me has given you, and perhaps some others here, the notion that I am easily riled and will charge at the slightest provocation. Not true, not true.

In Chinese Astrology I am born in the year of the Ox/Yak/Buffalo (take your pick, they're all thick, heavy, slow and exasperatingly stubborn)...

(for those of you intent on calculating the years, this makes me anywhere between 78 and 18, and I promise you I am neither frail nor innocent)

...and just like any one of these normally placid and docile animals it takes a whole lot of agitation over a considerable period of time for me to even bother looking up from my cud-chewing. A heavy, plodding, farm animal is often too overworked to care much when the farmer's abnoxious son Billy Bob comes a tossin' twigs and stones into the pen. It's the hot-brand irons I have a problem with.

Yes, once in a blue moon, I have been known to turn into a raging bull in a china shop, and woe to those who get caught in the cross-fire! But I can hardly be blamed when, having reached the limits of my extraordinary patience and tolerance, I find the pen has been carelessly left wide-open for me and Billy Bob has taken to mooning me in the pasture. In those moments, all I see is a red target where that little pisher's bottom is waving.

If, and when I charge, there won't ever be any doubt about my intention... none whatsoever. You will get no coy or coquettish back-handed slaps or barbs from me. Nor will I shower you with kisses and gushy affection... Apparently, I'm too stodgy to have a clue how this is done. However, I thoroughly enjoy the giddy chatter from all the other farm animals around here, hootin' ana hollerin' as they come and go, including yourself.

Vicariously yours,
a field-plowing, cud-chewing, card-holding member of the funny farm

frandoch

July 23rd, 2003, 03:40 PM

Dharma - thank you for your post. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif. I accept your assurance that no barb was intended. And thank you for your hilarious image of you and Billy Bob. I will do everything in my power to avoid being either the target, or caught in the crossfire.

Michael F.

sparhawk

July 23rd, 2003, 07:58 PM

Aha!! Some Ox meat, eh? Great stews and soups with oxtails.... http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

Before Dharma start dusting and oiling the flame-thrower I must say that I also am an Ox, a Metal-Ox to be precise. Combine that with being a Leo in these parts of the world and the mix is not a pretty one (just ask my wife...) For example, this is a little something I found regarding Metal-Ox:

quote
-----
Metal-Ox: 1901, 1961

Is very focused, determined, stubborn and unyielding.

Is hardworking and extremely resilient.

A trifle dull, has a strong personallity and domineering.

Refrain from arguing with him. He is relentless and because of his stubborn nature, never want to lose.

unquote
-------

[stifle your chuckles here, show some respect!!] Who? Me?? http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/smile.gif

In any case, let's dissect Dharma's age using some logic and observation using hexagram lines as an ascending ladder using one line for each occurrence of the Ox in the past century {Dharma, I'm joking with you...}:

Line 1: 1997 Fire-Ox (hmmm, she can't be a precocious Fire-Ox, if that's the case some episodes of the X-Files must be real and documented facts) Perhaps she is from 1937, I see some similarities with my father who is also a Fire-Ox. But, 1937 Fire-Ox is repeated in Line 6, so read that one... Soooo, this one, as it is the position of the line in the hexagram, is way too young to be Dharma and be taken too seriously...

Line 2: 1985 Wood-Ox. Well, if we go by the sheer amount of all the porno spam I get in my e-mail Inbox every day it appears that innocent 18 years old girls is an extint species. So, being 18, nowadays, is not a good metaphor for innocence. That applies only to Line 1. However, although innocence at the age of 18 may be a scarce commodity, they would absolutely lack the eloquence that Dharma exhibits in her writings. That could perhaps apply to a 1925 Wood-Ox but that line would escape just above the sixth line of this hexagram making her a retired sage not to be bothered with mundane stupidity (just like what you are reading here...)

Line 3: 1973 Water-Ox. Here the speculation on Dharma's age starts to get trickier. Hmmm, Water Ox -> Is calm, hardworking, ambitious and fearless. More flexible than his cousins. Is easy to be pleased. Is never in a hurry but methodical and extremely patient, tough and seldom forgets <- Warmer, but for some reason I see the position as a third line and some immaturity would seep thru that fact alone. She could be 30 but, nope, some immaturity is still exhibited at that age (actually, immaturity, as we know it, is ageless and full of shades so is not really a good metaphor). The eloquence may be there but, whatever you may say about Dharma and her writing, immaturity is not one of those treats. Furthermore, flexibility and ease of pleasing....?? http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

Line 4: 1961 Metal-Ox. I think we are getting warmer here. Nice, central position in the hexagram having crossed the gate to the upper trigram, close to the usual regent of the sign. That's my year and although I didn't actually fell in love with any of the Bee Gees or a skinny Travolta in the late 70's (I guess it was the young hormones, my cup of tea was the blond bombshell from ABBA...) I can identify myself with some of Dharma's personality. Geeze!! I wish English was my first language and write as well as she does, barbs and all. I can emulate that in Spanish but then this audience, or most of it, is out... If I was going to bet a couple of bucks I would say Dharma is from 1961... http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/ugh.gif

Line 5: 1949 Earth-Ox. Well, finally we reached the regent of the hexagram, central and correct, as it would be said... I would cry HOT! but for some reason, something tells me that she is closer to the fourth line. Age wise, position wise and writing wise, she would fit perfectly as a 1949 girl but Earth-Ox wise, hmmmm... -> Is intelligent, honest, hardworking, confident and deligent. Is not a risk taker and a real family man who will protect his family to the ends of the earth. Has endurance and lots of patience. Is also highly ambitious and quite a autocratic person will often be sucessfull financially. Do not cross his path as he can get very tough.<- You judge for yourself...

Line 6: 1937 Fire-Ox, again... From pure innocence in Line 1 to sage maturity in Line 6. A full circle. More on the way out from empty arguments and closer, much closer to retirement and contemplation of one's life than those below. Don't see Dharma up here. I seriously doubt she is a 1937. If you are, what the heck are you doing playing with us immature children?? But, then again, a Fire-Ox have some intriguing characteristics, viz -> Is industrious and a high achiever always aiming for the top. Can be dictatorial and ruthless, hot tempered and stubborn. Wants others to be loyal to him. On the good side, he is generous, protective and resilient.<- Not ready for retirement?? http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/ugh.gif

Cheerfully yours,

Luis

dharma

July 23rd, 2003, 08:47 PM

Wow!! What an absolutely delightful tribute!!

(I even went to the trouble to fetch some proper images as my way of saying thank you cause I needed to find some way of covering up the speechlessness)

Brilliant, I love it! http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/heart.gif
Terrifically creative! http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/bounce.gif

A pleasure, Luis, a pleasure indeed! http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/proud.gif

One incredibly honoured Pisces/Metal-Ox http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/blush.gif

sparhawk

July 24th, 2003, 03:10 AM

Geeze! I wish I had placed that bet! I would be a few bucks richer. http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/clipart/happy.gif

Glad you liked the lighter side of my version of the Yi.

Cheers,

Luis

davidl

July 24th, 2003, 03:25 AM

Hi Martin

Quote .......Accept it, embrace it, try to communicate with it"

Whats an 'it' and who is communicating with it ? How do you separate 'it' from you.

Val,
Picky, picky, picky. Of course its my ego and my higher self and yes I do take responsibility for both of them. One thing I dont do though is try and integrate old aspects of myself that have no value for me today. They can be left behind where they belong. Im sorry but Im not a great advocate for the idea of reliving past horrors to release them or accepting adults that act like 3 year olds. All can be released, dissapated purely through the grace of the creator.

davidl

July 24th, 2003, 03:29 AM

Hi Anita,

Karma or the concept of karma I believe can be a real trap. Just release any ideas that bad things that happen to you are because of bad things you did in the past. I find this is a very controlling idea that probably suited the elite priesthood nicely. In fact I am not aware of the Yi mentioning this concept .
My background is Judaism but wasn't it Jesus who basically said 'all is forgiven' . No benevolent creator I believe would allow suffering of this kind. Karma is a man made idea. If you doubt this then dont doubt that by asking your creator to wipe the slate clean, like, today, that grace would descend. Would you punish your child for an indiscretion that occured 10 years ago. Of course not, then why would your creator.

val

July 24th, 2003, 03:50 AM

Luis...

Are you Basque by any chance? Ox tail soup is a Basque specialty isn't it?

My dad liked Basque food and used to take us to Basque restaurants in the central valley of California where's there's a rather large Basque population. The meal always started with ox tail soup.

Cheerio the noo,

Val

gene

July 24th, 2003, 04:19 AM

David

While the I Ching may not overtly teach Karma, it is "hidden in the balance so to speak." It is true, Karma is not a hard and fast rule, but it does operate, simply by the universes naturally tendency to balance itself.

Again, while karma is not taught outwardly by Jesus, there are allusions to it. The church that became Rome destroyed evidence of these teachings early on. We do still have hidden examples of reincarnation though. Supposedly, John the Baptist was a reincarnation of Elijah. Some say Jesus did not teach Karma due to the disciples questioning, did this man sin or his parents that he was born blind. Jesus answer was neither. It sounds like he is saying karma is not a valid concept. However, when he healed, he commonly said, thy sins be forgiven thee, though the person being healed had the infirmity since birth. There is a lot behind the scenes. And in the Torah, you have hidden references to karma in the words, "the sins of the father shall be visited upon the children to the second and third generation" Sins of the previous incarnation visited on the next incarnation. By the nature of the universe's tendency to balance itself, there has to be a balancing on the human level too. This does not mean there can be no redemption or escape from karma, but the escape comes from learning the lesson before it is forced upon you.

Gene