Hello,

An odd episode just occurred. I entered a general store which is part of a large, nationwide chain and picked up a pack of composition books (office supplies) which bore no price tag. I had been intending to bring them to one of the cash registers to check on the price but as I browsed around the store I realized that the store was charging higher than usual prices for just about everything. After returning the composition books to the appropriate shelf I prepared to leave the store. An employee approached me and loudly accused me of shoplifting. Dumbfounded, I opened my purse to show him that I was not stealing anything. After realizing his error he did not apologize or express any regret. I left the premises, feeling quite shocked and conspicuous. Later I realized that I should have gotten his name and asked to speak to the manager. Now, because the employee's behavior was so egregious - and because I don't want anyone else to have to experience a similar episode - I am thinking of making a complaint to the corporate headquarters of this company. When I asked the I Ching for guidance I received Hexagram 44.3.5 into Hexagram 64. Lines 3 and 5 seem to be dissuading me from pursuing this matter, especially Line 3 which (in the Brian Browne walker version of the I Ching) states: "The temptation is to argue one's case. This will only serve to beckon misfortune."

Should I just abandon this issue? I welcome any input on this matter. Thanks in advance for your help.

Having escaped from the store without further incident, you should probably just avoid that store in the future . . . The offending employee will not be there forever, and one day he'll be gone.

I think the I Ching might be letting you know that the employee will learn from this incident and be more careful in the future, completely on his own, without you reporting him.

Hexagram 44 can mean an intense encounter, such as the one you describe. It often means an encounter that will transform the participants, in this case the employee.

44.3 might be an explanation for why the employee was so rude to you. He may have confronted you because he was under a lot of stress, and it may have made him more aggressive than he might normally be. Maybe the store has had a lot of real shoplifting incidents, and the employees are all on edge about it. As for why he didn't apologize - he should have, of course, but Hilary uses the word "awkward" in her translation. Maybe he felt so awkward at that moment that he drew a verbal blank. That is not ideal, but if I was under a lot of pressure, and then made a huge mistake like that, I might feel so overwhelmed and appalled at myself that I wouldn't be able to summon a normal, proper response.

44.5 is what I think tells you he'll be more careful in the future. Hilary says in her commentary, "This is the beginning of an incubation period, like a pregnancy, and the final shape of this 'thing of beauty' is still hidden away, growing and transforming - perhaps into a whole new pattern to live by." I think it echoes the meaning of hexagram 44 in general - a transformative encounter - and I believe it's telling you that the employee will spend time thinking about this incident, and learning from it. I think it's assurance that he won't ignore it or brush it off.

How awful for you!

My experience with 44 is that we're dealing with a situation that is difficult to bring to conclusion. The wind just keeps blowing around. This makes me think you should take into consideration what will bring you closer.
If you do nothing will you be able to let it go? Or do you think you'll obsess about it? Although it's 44.3 awkward to speak up, it maybe that if you were to call the store, get the name of the manager and either call and speak with him or write a complaint you might get some sort of 44.5 unexpected insight or benefit.

I would think contacting the store manager rather than corporate headquarters would be the more effective approach but who knows, maybe you should write a letter to both. As it sounds like you don't know who the employee was you are probably just writing to blow off steam but even so, I don't think it would be a bad thing to alert the people in charge that their employees need training in how to handle these situations.

While it's true the offending employee may fade away, still there remains a need for management to give their staff better guidance. They may feel your letter is a real 44.5 gift, especially if your approach is not one of criticism and hysterics but a "hey guys, I like shopping at this store, I want you to be successful so I'm alerting you to an area of concern" sort of approach.

Write something that will leave you feeling you've done your duty as a good citizen to inform them and now you can drop it and walk on.

rosada

Hi Lisa, Ginnie, and Rosada,

Thank you so much for your insightful replies. Sounds a bit silly but the store episode rattled me so much that I decided to lie down for a few hours. Sometimes clear answers come to me in my dreams. Above all else I was wondering what I should learn from the events of the day. After waking up I consulted the I Ching for further guidance on the matter. In response I received Hexagram 6.1.2 changing into 25. Line 2 warns of an adversary stronger than myself and cautions me to avoid conflict which could prove disastrous for my loved ones and myself (!)

Does Hexagram 6.1.2 generally come to warn of a dangerous situation or am I overreacting? Thanks once again for any insight. I'm still sort of flummoxed by this whole thing. Initially it seemed so reasonable to report the conduct of the store employee but the two separate I Ching readings appear to indicate that I should consider my actions very carefully.

I think the 6.1.2 > 25 reading is more about sacrificing your peace of mind, and just your plain time, to this issue than about actual danger. The employee has no idea who you are - even if you did report him, it's hard to imagine how it could literally be dangerous to you.

I still think the readings are advising you to drop it. 6>25 could be interpreted as disentanglement, disengagement, or detachment from conflict.

6.1 - I understand you're rattled by this. That is a perfectly reasonable reaction to being falsely accused of a crime. But - I think Yi is pointing out that in reality, this was actually not a big deal ("small words"). That may seem very insensitive of Yi. But think about it - the employee accused you of something, but then as soon as you showed him your purse, he immediately realized he was wrong, and you immediately left the store. He didn't call the manager. He didn't take you to the back room. No one called the police. You were not asked to show ID or fill out paperwork. You were not detained. You were not searched. The encounter lasted - what? - thirty seconds, if that? They don't know who you are, and they didn't try to find out.

6.2 - might mean something as simple as "go home," which you did. You're safe at home. You're safe in the other "three hundred" stores. Shop elsewhere; don't go back there; don't re-traumatize yourself. Hilary says in her commentary, "It’s good to remember that there is a modest, ordinary world outside the bubble of conflict, that offers resources and connections of its own – it takes some of the urgency and panic out of your arguing." Yi might be saying that your ordinary world, your normal life, does not have to be changed by this fleeting (though startling) encounter.

If you did pursue it, you might become more entangled rather than less. I certainly don't know, but if you tried to report the employee to anyone, you might have to identify yourself, even if confidentially. At the very least, you'd have to relive the whole thing in order to explain it.

One other thing - if this employee really is a bad apple, his boss will almost certainly find out without you reporting this. It's surely not easy for an employee with a bad attitude to hide that from people he works for or with, particularly if he's in the habit of bullying customers.

Of course, what I'm saying now is influenced by what I thought the original reading meant - that the employee will be transformed by this, and he'll be careful to prevent it from happening again. But that's my opinion, not something that can be proved.

Hi Lisa,

Thank you very much for your detailed, thoughtful reply. If I reported the employee I would definitely provide my full name and contact information because I wouldn't really expect to be taken seriously if I neglected to do so. The store employee may have been the manager. Something in his officious demeanor made me think that right from the start. At the end of our brief confrontation - when it became apparent that no apology was forthcoming - I blurted out: "You people are crazy." He responded: "Yes, we are." I'm not sure why I uttered those exact words to him. Something about the whole place just seemed downtrodden and creepy even though I had no interaction with any other employee. If I could redo the entire situation I would have calmly asked him to identify himself, gotten the name of his boss, etc. but unfortunately I couldn't see through my own shock and anger at that moment.

I really do hope that you are correct, that this man will reevaluate his own behavior and refrain from harassing other people in the future. For the record, this store was practically empty of customers. They promote themselves as a discount establishment but were charging higher than normal prices for the merchandise on their shelves. I certainly have no reason to return. Maybe the store will vanish altogether or fall under the control of new management.

In truth, I do feel lucky that the situation ended quickly. The employee really did seem hate-filled and crazy.

...Oh. That does seem creepy. I hadn't picked up on that aspect from your previous posts, and so my comments were from the angle that this was an innocent mistake by an employee - rude and unfortunate, but still more or less innocent. Not true, apparently. Apologies, Galatea .

I think my interpretation of the readings might still be the same, though, in the end: drop it and go about your normal life, rather than entangling yourself more. At least, I'm not sure the readings are saying that reporting it would fix anything. Not sure, though.

(I'm even wondering if I know the "downtrodden" "large nationwide chain" (quoting you) you're referring to, because the last time I was in one of their stores I had the same reaction. Maybe not the frightening creepy part, and I had no encounters with employees, but I remember being disconcerted by the appearance of what had always seemed like a perfectly normal discount store. That was quite a few years ago, and I've never gone back.)

I think Rosada nailed it when she said

While it's true the offending employee may fade away, still there remains a need for management to give their staff better guidance. They may feel your letter is a real 44.5 gift, especially if your approach is not one of criticism and hysterics but a "hey guys, I like shopping at this store, I want you to be successful so I'm alerting you to an area of concern" sort of approach.

Write something that will leave you feeling you've done your duty as a good citizen to inform them and now you can drop it and walk on.

Click to expand...

This isn't just about you. You have a duty to alert the store in some way because this person will go on and on and if he did this to someone fragile it could upset them even more than it did you.

Where is the harm in simply writing or calling the store ?

You are freaking yourself out with the 6.1.2>25 answer. You don't need to be intensely personally involved simply to make a complaint. You can do it then let it go (6.1) In 6.2 aren't the townspeople warned in some way ....? Not sure but townspeople are mentioned. I think that line I underlined of Rosada's encapsulates the cast of 6.1.2>25 well.

I think you are over thinking. You can inform the store manager...or whoever you want. You can even do it anonymously.

44.3 speaks of labour that is demanding. It may be hard for you to bring this to someone's attention but you are called to do so. It says in 44.3 that Yu the Great's thighs wore thin with the labour of his work. That was no reason not to do it.



Whenever any kind of crime is committed against you it is your duty to prevent it from happening to others. Okay this was not exactly a crime but it wasn't a good thing to happen. I think once you have done your duty in regard to this it will stop playing on your mind.


OTOH if you feel happier to let it drop then do that. Consider also though that it may have happened to you because you are the one who can prevent it in future. I'm thinking of Yu the Great in 44.3. He had a mission, something he had to do. You got that answer so this is something you have to do even if troublesome.

If he goes on and on getting away with treating people that way then he will go on and on doing it. Maybe it's your mission to act so that he cannot do this so easily again. Also you had 44.5 and I wonder if they will give you recompense for your trouble.

No one should be treated this way in their store so they may well repay you in some way.

Thank you so much, Ginnie, Lisa, Rosada, and Trojina. No need to apologize for anything, Lisa. In my initial post I did not do a very good job of describing the hateful and adversarial aspect of the employee's behavior. I really appreciate everyone's opinions more than I can say. Overnight I gave the matter a lot of consideration and then asked the I Ching what would result from my alerting the company's corporate headquarters about my experience in the store. I received 27.2.4 into 38 in return. Line 4 seems quite poignant, perhaps alluding to the notion (mentioned by Rosada and Trojina) that I should try to help others by reporting this episode.

I have sent both an e-mail and a snail mail letter to the corporate headquarters of this company. Within the past few weeks this chain of stores was purchased by another large retail chain so I went ahead and e-mailed their company headquarters too. I do feel relieved. For the record, this store is located in an area with a very large number of non English-speaking immigrants. A false shoplifting accusation could be truly terrifying to someone newly arrived in this country. Trojina's suggestion "that it may have happened to you because you are the one who can prevent it in future" really did resound with me. Thanks again to all of you for your help!

Wonderful! I had been thinking a lot about your situation (I was even going to write the letter and post it here for you to copy!). It seems to me we have all been so brainwashed reading the horrible things that go on in world politics that we feel terrorized in our own towns. I realize I hesitate to sign petitions for causes I believe in that come through on my email cause I think, "Ooooh, what if they come after me?" Geeze, we gotta take a stand.

Thank you for going forward! Let us know if you get a response!

Hi Rosada,

I received a response from the corporate headquarters although it did seem a bit formulaic. On a positive note, the sender (identified as "Your Customer Care Team") indicated that the issue was being escalated to a management team and also provided a case # which I can use for further reference. This came in response to my e-mail. My snail mail letter may reach a different set of eyeballs.

When I review the initial basis for this thread (Hexagram 44 to 64) I think the I Ching was cautioning me to draft my correspondence with great care. In the heat of my anger I was harboring the urge to write a letter which would vilify the store employee as much as possible, paint him in the worst possible light. I'm so glad that I did not attempt to do that. After reading everyone's opinions here (which were invaluable) I instead composed a letter which contained a simple, coherent statement of the facts.

I agree that the times have made me and a lot of other people reluctant to take a stand on certain issues. Now I am very glad that I contacted the corporate headquarters of this company. Thanks again to everyone here for your well-considered opinions and your help!

I've given this some more thought in the last day or two, and I wonder if this is a situation where it actually would have been productive to try to get inside someone else's head via the I Ching.

I understand we're usually advised not to do that, for perfectly good reasons. We're told it's best to ask about things we have control over, such as our own attitude or how we should respond. But in a case like this, I think what was going on with the employee - what was in his head, what his motivation was, what his usual behavior is - may have been the most important thing for Galatea11 to consider.

If it really was an honest mistake or an unusual, rare reaction by the employee (which was my original thought, although I had more doubt by the end of the thread), then bringing an investigation down on his head may have been unkind and unwarranted.

On the other hand, if he habitually bullies customers, then he deserves what he gets.

Maybe a useful question would have been something like, "Why did the employee treat me like that?" or, more simply, "Tell me something I should know about this employee."

Does that seem reasonable? It's too late now, of course, but it might be something to think about for other, similar readings.

(I'm glad you stuck to the dispassionate facts in your letters, Galatea11. I think it gives you more credibility no matter how this ends up.)

I'm coming into this thread quite late, but it's kind of fun answering something in my head, then seeing it played out before answering in print. I only use one text from each reading. I determine which one using a modified version of an ancient technique (Warring States period).

The 5th line text of 44 is the relevant one here.

Putting that together with my experience with American retail and my job in customer service (I'm a kind of concierge for customers, getting them better service within a large IT company)...I was going to say reach out to corporate but also to the local store manager. They have a problem. It needs to be determined if that is because they are not noticing the problem or they ARE the problem. An overzealous security policy can save them a few hundred bucks...and lose them thousands in customers who shun them, perhaps even millions in a lawsuit if they really get over-dramatic and someone gets hurt.

It helps to be firm and polite, but very insistent. I recommend you not take form letters for an answer. 'The management team has been notified' doesn't cut it. I would expect a call with an apology and some free merchandise from the manager of the store. If not...time to let corporate know about the wonderful world of social media. Yelp, Facebook, there are many, many places where their store could be cast in a less than positive light over this. If you really get no satisfaction on a matter it is time to consult the BBB and state agencies. For every industry you will find consumer protection agencies, health agencies, etc. that are in the business of dealing with shady business practices, etc. Not really relevant in this case, but keep it in mind for the future.

Regards,
Chris Gait

I've given this some more thought in the last day or two, and I wonder if this is a situation where it actually would have been productive to try to get inside someone else's head via the I Ching.

I understand we're usually advised not to do that, for perfectly good reasons. We're told it's best to ask about things we have control over, such as our own attitude or how we should respond. But in a case like this, I think what was going on with the employee - what was in his head, what his motivation was, what his usual behavior is - may have been the most important thing for Galatea11 to consider.

Click to expand...

No, of course it wasn't her place to think about what was going on in his head. That would be the job of his employers.

If it really was an honest mistake or an unusual, rare reaction by the employee (which was my original thought, although I had more doubt by the end of the thread), then bringing an investigation down on his head may have been unkind and unwarranted.

Click to expand...

He won't be executed at dawn. I think the phrase 'bringing an investigation down on his head' is over dramatic. Remember people make complaints about staff all the time. Employers will hear what the employee says. If they didn't they'd lose all their staff.

I think to suggest Galatea was unkind in bringing this to the attention of the store is quite peculiar. Letting him potentially go on with this behaviour wouldn't be 'kind' to anyone, not even him.

On the other hand, if he habitually bullies customers, then he deserves what he gets.

Click to expand...

I imagine they would simply talk to him about the incident. You seem to be imagining the worse.

Maybe a useful question would have been something like, "Why did the employee treat me like that?" or, more simply, "Tell me something I should know about this employee."

Does that seem reasonable? It's too late now, of course, but it might be something to think about for other, similar readings.

Click to expand...

No it doesn't seem remotely reasonable to me to suggest that Galatea take responsibility for what was in his head as well as being subject to his abuse. She was a customer buying things from the store hence his role to her was quite defined. It's not her job to ponder his psychology or ours to spend 40 posts speculating about what the I Ching might say he was thinking. Because even if she asked what was in his head, it would remain speculation. She won't know without asking him. It is a far more constructive action to make a dispassionate complaint which is what she did.

Most stores these days have 'customer feedback' questionnaires everywhere anyway. At supermarkets they actually give people points to fill in their feedback questionnaire on all aspects of the store. They want to know. Any reputable store would want to know if a customer left upset and shaken up like this.

And as CJ points out reviews of all kinds of industries are all over their websites and social media. What I'm saying is the act of emailing/writing to the company is not a massive big deal when most companies actually leave space on their website and so on for feedback. It's a customer service issue.

Well, what I said was in the context of asking the I Ching about it at all. Reporting the incident may have been a completely obvious, "no-brainer" thing to do, for all the reasons you mentioned. But Galatea11 did ask Yi about it, twice, because she sincerely wanted guidance before doing anything. (I think that's a good, perfectly valid desire.) The answers she got were not terribly clear, judging by the significantly different interpretations we've come up with in this thread.

Given that, I was trying to figure out what sort of guidance from Yi may have been most helpful, and the idea I had was that an optimal response to the incident from Galatea11 might depend most on why the incident happened in the first place.

I was also thinking about the semi-structured exercise (with template) Hilary proposed in the Enliven course, where you think about your intention in asking a question before you ask it. Hilary recommended thinking about things like, "What do you want to be different after this reading?" ("After this reading I want to…´(decide/ understand/ begin/ end/ plan/ attune…))". I don't think Hilary meant it has to be a big formal thing every time - I imagine a lot of the time it's what's in our head anyway - but sometimes it might help to make it more explicit.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying about this particular case, Trojina. Maybe reporting it could have been an automatic thing to do, no hesitation required (other than to calm down first, as Galatea11 did, so she could write an effective letter). But - I still think there is some room for seeing Yi's answers as advice not to report it at all, and as long as that fuzziness exists, it might be helpful (for learning about the I Ching, if not about this particular situation) to think about why.

Galatea11 never spelled out exactly what her question was, other than to say she'd asked twice "for guidance." She said, "[a]bove all else I was wondering what I should learn from the events of the day." In that context, again, I think there is room for interpreting the answers as something like "let it go...go home..." That is what I initially thought the readings meant (and - I think? - what both Galatea11 and Ginnie initially thought the readings meant, to different degrees and for different reasons). Other people looked at the same readings and concluded that action must be taken. I ended up seeing their side a bit more by the end of the thread, though not completely.

Trojina said:

Because even if she asked what was in his head, it would remain speculation.

Click to expand...

It's speculation anyway. A lot of interpretations are speculation, even if the questions aren't in the "sketchy" category. And I honestly don't agree - in general - that this-or-that sort of question should be categorically off-limits. I'm sure people could find examples of asking what was in someone's head or things of that nature which Yi answered perfectly clearly and helpfully, as well as examples of other sorts of responses from Yi.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying about this particular case, Trojina. Maybe reporting it could have been an automatic thing to do, no hesitation required (other than to calm down first, as Galatea11 did, so she could write an effective letter). But - I still think there is some room for seeing Yi's answers as advice not to report it at all, and as long as that fuzziness exists, it might be helpful (for learning about the I Ching, if not about this particular situation) to think about why.

Click to expand...

Yes I think there might be room for seeing it as not to report it at all...but personally I'd have a hard time in seeing that way. 44.3 describes taking something up as one's duty, etc etc. But yes you are entitled to your view on the cast.

It's speculation anyway. A lot of interpretations are speculation, even if the questions aren't in the "sketchy" category. And I honestly don't agree - in general - that this-or-that sort of question should be categorically off-limits. I'm sure people could find examples of asking what was in someone's head or things of that nature which Yi answered perfectly clearly and helpfully, as well as examples of other sorts of responses from Yi.

Click to expand...

I have never ever said in my life that any question is 'categorically off limits' or even off limits, yet people constantly project those words or that thought even though no such thing was ever said.

Not only I have never ever said that but I don't even believe that ! How can any question be 'categorically off limits'. Anyone can ask anything they like in the world. What people ask is up to them. Whether they will understand the answer when asking from someone else's POV is another matter. I think it would have been pretty ineffective to come at this issue by asking what was in the security guard's head. That does not mean I think such a question would be 'off limits'. Anyway Galatea didn't ask what was in his head ....


Yes one can possibly get insight into another's perspective through an I Ching cast, although sometimes it can be very difficult to interpret when in fact the answer comes straight back to you. So often when asking about another's view one has the extra task of understanding if the answer is about you or them.

Anyway in this case I can't see any use in asking about the security guys motives. However if you think it is useful to ask about the security guys motives then that's fine too. I'm just saying I don't agree with you in this case.

I don't agree speculation level is the same in all questions. When asking about what is going on in someone else's head the speculation level zooms up to about 99%...well no more 100%. When you ask from your own POV about a course of action you can at least see what happens as a result. If you ask about what someone else is thinking you will actually never know the truth of it unless you ask them.

However my approach to the oracle differs fundamentally from yours. I see it as a personal guide, a guide for one's own actions, attitudes etc. You sometimes seem to view it as a kind of esoteric Wikipedia. Because of this our views will at times very widely diverge. What people think the oracle is for very much impacts on the kinds of questions they ask. But I have never said anything about any questions being 'off limits'. There is no limit to what might be asked, however there are limits to understanding particularly when you remove your self from the question.

I wrote a blog post on that called 'Yi is not a fork lift truck' by which I meant it is not something that one can 'operate' like a piece of machinery IMO. You can't operate it because you are going to be there in the answer somewhere. Although it is true at times we are given what seem quite factual objective information....but it is still in relation to the questioner

Trojina said:

44.3 describes taking something up as one's duty, etc etc.

Click to expand...

And I can see that; thank you for saying it.

I have never ever said in my life that any question is 'categorically off limits' or even off limits, yet people constantly project those words or that thought even though no such thing was ever said.

Click to expand...

It may be a case of what you have in your head being different from how it comes across. When you say things like:

No, of course it wasn't her place to think about what was going on in his head.

Click to expand...

and

No it doesn't seem remotely reasonable to me to suggest that Galatea take responsibility for what was in his head

Click to expand...

and things of that nature, I think it comes across as blanket disapproval of the entire line of inquiry. Maybe people who know you better understand you don't mean it as categorically as it sounds.

I think it would have been pretty ineffective to come at this issue by asking what was in the security guard's head.

Click to expand...

Well, one reason I thought of explicitly asking about that is because that's what I thought the 44 reading might actually be telling us. I thought 44.3 was an explanation of why the employee was so rude (because he felt Yu-like at that moment, beleagured, under enormous stress, and then when he realized what he'd done he felt so awkward and appalled that he couldn't come up with the appropriate words of apology). I thought 44.5 was saying that he'd learn from behaving so horribly and would be much more careful in the future. I guess I could see myself reacting in exactly those ways in a bad moment .

But I can also see 44.3 as you said, and that 44.5 might mean Galatea11 had a duty to take care of other customers, and even the company itself, as you, Rosada, and Chris said.

A kicker (for me, anyway) is still 6.2, which I still think was advising her to drop it and go home to her normal life. But - that may just be because I'm ignorant of other ways to see 6.2, which would cause me to go, "Ohhhhhh....".

I agree that this is almost certainly not a big deal regardless of what happens. I don't see how Galatea11 would be in any danger whether or not she reported it. And no, I don't think they'll execute the employee at dawn. I had more in mind "black mark on record" for what I thought may have been an isolated incident that he will correct himself. (But as I said, I could be wrong about that in the first place.) I think what Galatea11 ended up doing is fine.

However my approach to the oracle differs fundamentally from yours. I see it as a personal guide, a guide for one's own actions, attitudes etc. You sometimes seem to view it as a kind of esoteric Wikipedia. Because of this our views will at times very widely diverge. What people think the oracle is for very much impacts on the kinds of questions they ask.

Click to expand...

It may just be that different people have different problems to ask about? I don't know what you typically ask the I Ching, but the majority of my problems and confusion in life are practical everyday things, so that's what my questions are about. I come very close to "never" asking about romantic issues, for example, because I just don't have those problems.

Yes, I see where you are coming from. Sorry if I came across as shooting you down in flames Lisa. My delivery was somewhat over emphatic. There certainly is room for your interpretation though I felt she'd suffered enough at his hands so his psychology wasn't her problem. I know at times people get stressed in their job but a male security guard can be quite a threatening figure so I think the store needed to deal with it and on balance I think she did the right thing. I felt the reading showed that too. But you also had valid points on the reading and I think it was good you bought that angle up also. I'd think your take on it assisted Galatea in making the choice to just give the facts without vilifying the store employee.

the majority of my problems and confusion in life are practical everyday things, so that's what my questions are about

Click to expand...

yes and they are a treasure to have here :bows:



BTW this reminds me of something that happened not long ago where I made no attempt to complain yet was invited to give feedback which I did so factually and received recompense without seeking it.



I went into a chemist/drug store to buy some witch hazel water. I couldn't find it anyway and tried to ask a member of staff. She was talking to someone in a wheelchair. She didn't want to pay me any attention and just said they didn't stock the item. I thanked her but thought she could have given me a little more time. I continued to look and found the item she said they did not stock. I went back to show her I'd found it. She just shrugged. I wasn't that bothered though I didn't feel this was great customer service. I thought maybe the woman in the wheel chair needed help more than me so that's why she wasn't willing to give me any attention. However when I got home there was an email from the company asking for feedback on my shopping experience . Strange coincidence I thought. Anyway since it was on my mind a little and I'd just been to that shop I wrote that I'd been told the store did not stock an item, yet I had found it myself eventually. I also stressed that the staff member was busy with a lady in a wheelchair and so that may have been the reason she neglected me.

I got a telephone call from the manager of the store about 5 minutes later ! I said I didn't want to get the staff member into trouble since she was trying to help the lady in the wheelchair and I presumed that is why she did not attend to me much. The store manager said that staff member spent ages talking to the lady in the wheelchair every day as it was her relative and she was always talking to her relatives in the shop. I think she said other staff members had noticed since they had to do extra work to cover her. She offered me a £15 voucher as recompense.

Pretty strange series of events I thought. Nothing like that has ever happened before. Odd that the questionnaire was in my inbox when I got home and that the manager rang me personally so quickly. In such an instance I wondered if I was just acting unwittingly as the agent that made a shift in the situation that might have needed to happen.

I don't know exactly why but that incident kept coming to my mind during this thread. 44 pushes things into our attention. I didn't do a cast about it but I felt surely there was something being enacted out there that wanted to happen...I was just a catalyst of some kind.

What an interesting story, Trojina; thank you for sharing it. I'm starting to come around to the idea that there's something to this synchronicity stuff...

That's a great point, too, about 44 pushing things into our attention, especially when 64 (the relating hexagram in Galatea's 44 reading) is put into that context. Hilary's questions from her book: "How to prepare for the crossing? How will you know when it's time?"

I hope Galatea continues to update us on what happens, please, Galatea?

Hello,

I did not realize until now that there has been so much new activity on this thread! Thank you all so much for your posts and interesting discussion. Nothing new has developed in this situation except for a friend telling me about his experiences working for a bad manager at a retail store. The manager used to order him to follow customers, confront customers about possible shoplifting, etc. Eventually a customer wrote a letter of complaint and the manager was demoted to an assistant manager position at a much smaller store. My friend's working environment changed dramatically for the better after the problem manager's demotion. His telling of the story gave me a lot of insight because he was still haunted by some of the experiences at the store (stuff he did at the problem manager's behest.) These episodes occurred during my friend's senior year of high school and he is now a middle-aged man with kids in college.

I think that writing a letter to the company headquarters was the right decision. My habit is to keep an I Ching journal and write about current events and issues of concern in my life. On the day of the shoplifting accusation I expressed my inclination to write a letter to the company headquarters and then asked the I Ching for guidance with this matter. Hexagram 44 to 64 initially puzzled me. In retrospect I think I was perhaps being cautioned to stick to the facts of the matter and refrain from slanting any details in order to make the store employee sound as bad as possible. The I Ching has cautioned me over and over to relinquish anger and tendencies toward vengeful thinking. It felt cathartic to write the e-mail (and letter) without any malicious intent.

Thanks again to everyone for helping me make a decision in the matter. Very much appreciated.