How Does Yi Ching Work?

[leandroscardoso]

I don`t know about divination, but there`s another way of use it, an more rational way. See the way the yin and yang (you know, 柔 rou flexible line or 剛 gang firm line) is used in medicine with success analyzing if the pacient is yang or yin, they do not throw coins of rigs of plants. fire is energy, movement generate attrition, generate light, we don't use divination to know this. The i ching is just much more complicated (about 250 times more than yin and yang), but there's a way to use it rationally, I'm working on this right now.
About Jung, is a possibility, but imagine someone asking if she or he would invest in certain stocks, he needs a answer of their subconscious ( imagining they don't know much about marketing, I doubt there's some answer there), we need someone with knowledge of the world 道 dao, that when a thing becomes too much or too few it turn in the opposite direction, like the lines of the Yi jing, you can see these patterns in the stock market (sell high, buy low). We need that kind of help, someone that understand the market and the functioning of the universe, it's not my area, but i think too much attention is giving our subconscious, look what how much we can do with the conscious part of the brain, I will talk more about that on my blog.

 

[yen hui]

Empty imaginings produce failure.

Who judges which questions are unprofitable and misguided?

Sorry, been a little busy lately, but according to Hex 4, the answer to this question is threefold:

1. The Primal Divine Spirit of the Oracle
2. Our teacher, or instructor.
3. Experience itself.

The Hex 4 Judgment says:

It is not I who seek the young fool;
The young fool seeks me.
At the first oracle I inform him.
If he asks two or three times, it is importunity.
If he importunes, I give him no information.

These words apply to both the Oracle, or the Primal Divine Spirit that we have received as our Guide and Master (Wilhelm, Book 3, Hexagram 25), and to our living teacher (or spiritual director), assuming we are fortunate enough to have one, that is. Wilhelm's Book 1 commentary on this Judgment clearly indicates that the manner in which one's teacher should respond to "youthful folly" should be patterned or modeled after the way of the Oracle:

"A teacher's answer to the question of a pupil ought to be clear and definite like that expected from an oracle; thereupon it ought to be accepted as a key for resolution of doubts and a basis for decision. If mistrustful or unintelligent questioning is kept up, it serves only to annoy the teacher. He does well to ignore it in silence, just as the oracle gives one answer only and refuses to be tempted by questions implying doubt."

It is implied in this commentary, incidentally, that the mark of true receptivity in the inexperienced student (or disciple of the Tao) is the seeking out of an experienced teacher, who possesses the spirit of the Oracle; whereas the lack of receptivity is characterized by the opposite mark, or a stubborn refusal to seek out the experience of a genuinely qualified teacher:

"The youth himself must be conscious of his lack of experience and must seek out the teacher. Without this modesty and this interest there is no guarantee that he has the necessary receptivity, which should express itself in respectful acceptance of the teacher."

It is further implied that this lack of receptivity to an experienced teacher of the Tao, and Way of the Oracle, is in essence a lack of receptivity to the primal divine spirit of the Oracle itself. But how does this lack of receptivity manifest itself, again? The Judgment has one word for it: "Importunity," or repeated asking of the same question.

"At the first oracle I inform him.
If he asks two or three times, it is importunity."

In other words, the first word of the oracle was not received in faith, but rejected in doubt. Hence the repeated asking of the same question, a second and third time. This is disrespectful to both the Oracle Spirit and to the experienced teacher of the Tao; which now brings us back to Line 4:

LINE 4: Entangled folly brings humiliation.

"For youthful folly it is the most hopeless thing to entangle itself in empty imaginings. The more obstinately it clings to such unreal fantasies, the more certainly will humiliation overtake it.

"Often the teacher, when confronted with such entangled folly, has no other course but to leave the fool to himself for a time, not sparing him the humiliation that results. This is frequently the only means of rescue."

If a teacher draws this line, it is advising him / her of the course of action that should be adopted toward one or more of his / her unreceptive students. However, if the one who draws this line isn't a teacher, but consults the Oracle Spirit for personal guidance, then it would seem to be a judgment against some aspect one's habitual imaginings, as being essentially "empty," or unprofitable and misguided. Genuine receptivity to the Spirit of the Oracle would accept this revelation, rather than question it.

So, we may see from this that there are clear instances in which both the Primal Divine Spirit of the Oracle and the experienced teacher are called upon to render a judgment against our imaginings, as being "empty" in nature, which is to say, unprofitable and misguided.

This brings us, now, in the third and final case, to the wisdom of firsthand experience, described in the Line 4 commentary as: "Frequently the only means of rescue." What this indicates is that many inexperienced students of the I Ching must learn the hard way, through the firsthand experience of failure and humiliation.

The point of the lesson, however, is that all imaginings are not equal, and we are all expected to exercise discernment, in this regard; but that requires the wisdom of the Creative, and without true receptivity, we cannot tap into that wisdom and the spirit of discernment.

Imagination is a function of the Creative, which is why dreams were once, and sometimes still are, thought to be the voice of God(s). Dreams can be a form a divination every bit as life changing as a Yijing reading. They just require skill to interpret symbols, just like the Yijing.

Yes, you are quite correct about that aspect of dreaming, as a doorway or gateway into the spirit world and subconscious mind; but I had something a little different in mind, such as awakened and conscious dreaming, or the visualization of a goal with creative intention.

Secondly, the ability to make what is imaginable a reality is an attribute of h2. Like Courtney said, "being open gives rise to more unexpected options."

I don't deny that the Receptive has a critical role to play in the manifestation process, but we mustn't lose sight of the fact that "the Creative furthermore has power to lend form to these archetypes of ideas," as stated in Hex 1 (of the Wilhelm edition); which means that the primary work of creation belongs to the Creative power.

4 is essential only to admit you don't know, which therefore makes room to receive an answer.

Hex 4 says much more to me than that, especially at Line 4 where a causal link is established between empty imaginings and failure.

 

[meng]

yen hui,

Far be it for me to tell you how to interpret, or in this case how Wilhelm renders Meng. I interpret it that way sometimes, sometimes another author has an illuminating perspective. Since your understanding seems mostly limited to the Word according to Wilhelm *cue angelic choir here*, I hear where you're coming from.

However, it is important to realize that some of what you wrote is entirely a your personal and subjective viewpoint. IE, The Primal Divine Spirit of the Oracle. Ok, that is your view or expression of "who judges which questions are unprofitable and misguided?" I jam a lot too, but rarely take myself very seriously, because I am expressing my thoughts, feelings, my concepts of how all this stuff works. We're all entitled to our own views, correct or incorrect. What we see a lot in forums is 'my view is correct, your view is not correct, or not as correct as mine .' Now, if that isn't immature, I don't know what is.

I have no difficulty with the concepts you've laid out for the meaning of Meng. But there appears to be a bunch of meanings for meng. A pig, a dumb ass, or sometimes nothing at all personal, just information unavailable at this time, walking in the dark. It equally employs the teacher within, not just the dumb ass. For me, me and thou is a poor beginning, and makes no better of an ending. Me in thou and thou in me, is more a warrior's path. Accepting complete responsibility for ones life. The young son becomes capable of making his own way, and his own family.

Primal Divine Spirit of the Oracle - is a concept, your construct of what is happening. I don't think the oracle has a spirit, per se. I'm more of the IC as a conduit school, and a tool to engage and exercise our facilities; kind of like a mental gym; important always, but even more so as we age. Have to stretch the mind and cognition as well as the body. That is more along my personal view of meng. A pool of water - repetitive "caprice of danger" and a large, immovable mountain. What to do? Oh,what to do?" That's more my kind of rendition of h4.

I could easily find and paste quotes from translations and renderings, but it's more fun for a kid to play with ideas and discover these things for him/herself, rather than to adopt an established doctrine, and live according to the letters of that law and limitation, which are really concepts and constructs. We're all ignorant in different ways, and those who think they are not are the grandest of fools.

 

[yen hui]

Further clarifications.

Far be it for me to tell you how to interpret, or in this case how Wilhelm renders Meng. I interpret it that way sometimes, sometimes another author has an illuminating perspective. Since your understanding seems mostly limited to the Word according to Wilhelm *cue angelic choir here*, I hear where you're coming from.

Yes, Wilhelm is my first and main teacher of the I Ching, and his work continues to be the standard or benchmark by which I judge all other contemporary IC translations and interpretations; so it is safe to say that he has exerted a profound influence upon my viewpoint. However, having said that I must also stress that I don't regard either him or his work as flawless, or unsurpassable. They will surely be surpassed some day, and of that I'm certain!

Since there are so many different versions of the IC today, I feel it's an unavoidable necessity to state clearly, in all my posts, which version I'm quoting from, or refering to, for clarity's sake; and while the repetition of that fact comes across as somewhat cumbersome and awkward, it hardly seems avoidable, imho.

However, it is important to realize that some of what you wrote is entirely a your personal and subjective viewpoint. IE, The Primal Divine Spirit of the Oracle. Ok, that is your view or expression of "who judges which questions are unprofitable and misguided?"

Yes, it is certainly true to say it's my own private or personal interpretation of Wilhelm, and therefore subjective in that sense, but I'm reluctant to concede that it's an "entirely subjective" viewpoint. It is more accurate, imo, to think of it as a well-grounded and "balanced" reading of Wilhelm's "traditional" viewpoint, as alluded to by Dr. Jung, in his Foreword:

"According to the old tradition," states Dr. Jung, "it is 'spiritual agencies' acting in a mysterious way, that make the yarrow stalks give a meaningful answer. These powers form, as it were, the living soul of the book. As the latter is thus a sort of animated being, the tradition assumes that one can put questions to the I Ching and expect to receive intelligent answers."

There are several places in Wilhelm, imo, which pre-suppose or assume this precise viewpoint; and whether, or not, my reading and understanding of him can be termed as "entirely" subjective would largely depend upon objective evidence, or the lack thereof, I should like to think.

Primal Divine Spirit of the Oracle - is a concept, your construct of what is happening. I don't think the oracle has a spirit, per se.

Wilhelm Trans., Book 3, Hexagram 25, pp. 510-511 states the following:

"The Receptive, in approaching the Creative for the first time, receives the first line of Ch'ien and gives birth to Chen, the eldest son. Applied to man, this means that he receives the primal divine spirit as his guide and master."

Now, in his Introduction, Wilhelm makes the claim that his translation of the IC is firmly based on the "Chou I Chê Chung" edition of the K'ang Hsi period [A.D. 1662-1722]; which edition, he asserts, "presents the text and the wings separately and includes the best commentaries of all periods." Then, at the very end of his Introduction, ...

Wilhelm states the following:

"The translation of the text has been given as brief and concise a form as possible, in order to preserve the archaic impression that previals in the Chinese. This has made it all the more necessary to present not only the text but also digests of the most important Chinese commentaries." It is implied that these are the "traditional" or "canonical" commentaries of the "Chou I Chê Chung" edition of the K'ang Hsi period.

Wilhelm continues by observing that these selected digests (of the standard commentaries) "afford a survey of the outstanding contributions made by Chinese scholarship toward elucidation of the book." He then assures us that he has kept the interjection his own views, and occidental comparisons, to a bare minimum; and clearly identified as such, wherever they appear, so as to avoid confusing his reader(s).

In the final analysis, he says that "the reader may therefore regard the text and the commentary as genuine renditions of Chinese thought (Wilhelm's Intro, p. lxii)." It is important to keep this clearly in mind ...

when reading a statement like the one above, quoted from Book 3, Hex 25, concerning man's receiving "the primal divine spirit as his guide and master (p. 511)." Since such a statement is not clearly identified as an "occidental" viewpoint, then we are justified in understanding that statement as reflecting the "traditional" Chinese viewpoint, as directly extracted from the "Chou I Chê Chung" edition of the IC.

Now, in that statement, Wilhelm clearly identifies this "primal divine spirit" as the Creative power: "The Receptive, in approaching the Creative for the first time, receives the first line of Ch'ien and" "this means that he receives the primal divine spirit as his guide and master."

Surely it's the traditional Chinese understanding that the Creative intelligence or power of the Universe guides and speaks to us through the medium of the Oracle, and this, imo, is clearly the viewpoint presented in Wilhelm's translation. Hence "the Primal Divine Spirit of the Oracle." However, you are quite correct to say that this precise phraseology or expression, word for word, is my own "construct" and not Wilhelm's.

I'm more of the IC as a conduit school ...

I'm not entirely sure of your meaning here. Perhaps you like to elaborate or flesh-out your concept of the "conduit school." In the mean-time, allow me to clarify that when I refer to the "primal divine spirit of the Oracle," I am not speaking of any power that is external to us, but only that primal power or life-giving force which is in every one of us; as the root and ground of our being; and from which we derive our "higher nature," as expressed by Wilhelm in Hex 1.

 

[meng]

Hi yen hui,

Again, I am not denying Wilhelm's special and sometimes powerful approach to the IC. I too was glued to it, swore by it, and was convinced it was the authentic article. However, I eventually found the beauty of his presentation to consist of many of Wilhelm's own thoughts and those of his teacher, and the influence of his Christian missionary parents, and sharing breakthroughs in understanding with peers such as C. Jung, who agreed to write the forward based on his own observations in his case studies and an entire philosophy which surrounded his ideas, which defined morality as he saw it. That's subjective. He knew that. He said each person has to find their own, not only copy his mentor. I've always been high on Jung's approach, however if at least part of the mission or calling (if there is one) is to discover ourselves, we ought not remain tethered to a given thinker. We ought to think for ourselves, whether we look to our gods for the answers, or not, we ought to think for ourselves.

 

[meng]

I got some toast once that had the spitting image of the cosmic background radiation left over from the big bang.

 

[soshin]

I don't know how "it" works. The only answer I had, were: MU.:bows: That said I prefer Jung's theory. Just out of experience (gosh... 25 years already).

 

[soshin]

the Word according to Wilhelm *cue angelic choir here*

...yes yes, I was choir member of Vienna's Boys Choir. May I join in jubilating and rejoicing? Soshin, Wilhelm aficionado and countertenor.