Is Divination Indecisiveness or Intent ? (was Real Psychic Readings...)

Sparhawk · Sep 16, 2010

Real Psychic Readings and Why It’s not so Easy to Find an Authentic Psychic and Tips to Find One

A psychic reading is something that can be a very rewarding as well as a valuable experience. It is something that is not so hard to find; you can find them on networks on the web, you can find ads for them in the back of magazines, or promoted on television commercials. They are not hard to find–or are they?

With the immediate availability of psychic readers all over the world, it should be a very simple process to find one. One of the most common ways to find a psychic is to do a search on the internet. You type in real psychic readings or “authentic psychic readings.” After all, with the very prevalent perception of all psychics being fake or tricksters, you definitely want to be careful in your search because you want to make sure that you are going to get a real one. Most of us know that intuition exists and there is quite a bit of documentation out there supporting the credibility of gifted persons who are able access energy and see information connected to you clairvoyantly, empathically and in other ways. Some use their natural gifts without any tools while others use their gifts using divination tools such as tarot cards, numerology, runes, I Ching, and list goes on. In short, people with special “spiritual gifts” have the ability to tune into people voluntarily and sometimes involuntarily, giving them access to hidden truths and eventualities about others.

arabella · Sep 16, 2010

Idle curiosity

Sparhawk, considering your serious facility with the IChing, I'm just curious to know how you use your study of these subjects yourself -- if you don't mind sharing your own view of divination as a tool, I'd be interested to hear.

The article is interesting and more open-minded than some who have formed an opinion that psychic ability does or doesn't exist -- those who tend to hype or slam rather than just discuss. I know that the ability does occur because psychics have spoken to me at various times - unsolicited by me. These weren't people wanting to charge me for anything, they just couldn't seem to help telling me some things.

One I met, in particular, physically changed when he explained his predictions and I don't think one can do that on demand -- it just occurred along with his "seeing" elsewhere that I couldn't see. It's there alright. I just don't know for sure how useful it is, unless you can use it to avoid being literally or figuratively hit by a bus.

Sparhawk · Sep 16, 2010

Chuckles!! By the end of this you'll be sorry you asked...

arabella said:
Sparhawk, considering your serious facility with the IChing, I'm just curious to know how you use your study of these subjects yourself -- if you don't mind sharing your own view of divination as a tool, I'd be interested to hear.

Sparingly...

Are you a member of the Reading Circle here? There's a thread I started, two years ago, called "Haphazardness and Consequences" that deals my own approach to the oracle. It is buried there for a purpose, as stated in the opening paragraph, but I'll post my opening to the thread here, anyway:

I'd like to follow the conversation from the "I Ching Wiki" here. At least I know that if somebody wants to argue with me they'll pay someone for the privilege...

Originally Posted by trojan
I find that a really fascinating viewpoint hitherto not really very much present on this forum at all I don't think. I'm still not sure how these "botched fixes by inexpert mechanics" actually manifest ?

Click to expand...

Well, now you appreciate the nature of my dilemma. See, how one deals with the Yijing is not only very personal but, most of the time, is also outside the sphere of casual arguments. One reason I don't bring these views out more often. I don't want to become another overt Chris Lofting or Frank Kegan and give the impression that I "figured out" the nature of the Yijing and then having to defend my position with shield, armor and a two fisted sword. The thing is that I haven't "figured" anything. I have, however, come over a few preliminary conclusions. I have also brought this up before (Bamboo seems to be surprised about it...) and is usually--though not always--together with my sly comments about public interpretation of readings, which I'm against. Of course, both positions, if constantly pushed around, would make me quite unpopular in a forum where the bulk of the messages are dedicated to interpretations and the encouragement of casual readings. No way!! I want to keep the throne of Mr. Popularity...

One of the translations of the character Yi (易), usually translated as "changes," is "easy." Although it is a meaning not often mentioned, it seems people have taken it to their hearts. For me, it is obvious that the immediacy and ease or results in consulting the Yijing has totally obscured the seriousness of the oracle, not only as a tool but as an entity. To use Bamboo's example, it has been brought down to the pedestrian level of a "ouija board."

How the "botched fixes" manifest? Well, that's a pattern difficult to express. Many times they manifest in the subject with the thought "this isn't what the Yijing told me about" and the blame is on the Yi and not on them...

I assume you mean more than simple misunderstanding/misapplication of the answer ? I assume you mean tampering with or calling upon the Yi as an entity, when you don't really know what you're doing, may be a danger in itself because you're messing blindly with a being who may give you way more than you bargain for. So do you think then, that having been given more than you bargain for, which you don't understand, you can't simply dismiss/ignore the information given without it having an impact or effect of some kind ?

Click to expand...

There are two parts to my thoughts on this: 1, The so called "butterfly effect" and 2. Interpretation.

It is my belief that when one consults the Yijing, one is not reading from a book but is in fact plucking the strings and guiding a bow across a universe-wide cello (I'm listening to Yo-yo Ma playing Bach while typing this and is something Hilary can relate to... ). The act is not passive. It produces vibrations that will indeed have an effect in the outcome of the consultation. It is a holistic experience, meaning that it isn't just outside or totally inside the subject but all around. The subject is, after all, part of the cosmos that sustains him/her. The self/ego plays these little exclusionary tricks that are nothing but illusions. These vibrations echo for far longer than the present moment of the consultation, spread around in waves and bounce over unseen "surfaces." When I mention that a consultation brings more "information" than the actual symbols and text, I refer to this. The "butterfly effect" is manifested in the consequences of those vibrations over a wider field that extends well beyond the querent and his/her present.

The manifestation of proper "Interpretation" is akin to the difference between non-musician and a Yo-yo Ma playing the cosmological cello. You could either cringe at the cacophony or be delighted by the music. How to "harmonize" the vibrations in a coherent piece is key. Of course, the Yi, as an entity, is much more than the confining metaphor of a musical instrument but it should serve to begin to draw a mental picture.

I think thats what your're saying ? If thats the case then the thousands who trundle through here and myself and all of us who consult quite often are really getting in over our heads in some way ?

Click to expand...

Who am I to judge that? I can barely place myself in the context of Yijing knowledge, and only to realize that I have another life worth of study. I do, however, chime the bell of caution. Haphazardness can work well many time but is not the norm of its nature.

That thread goes on for over 50 postings...

The article is interesting and more open-minded than some who have formed an opinion that psychic ability does or doesn't exist -- those who tend to hype or slam rather than just discuss. I know that the ability does occur because psychics have spoken to me at various times - unsolicited by me. These weren't people wanting to charge me for anything, they just couldn't seem to help telling me some things.

I should repeat a caveat about my postings in the Open Forum: I come across a lot of information regarding the Yijing on a daily basis and post those that I think "others" will find interesting. That doesn't mean, even close, that I agree with what's stated in those links. If the information in the links do "move me," I'll state so and/or add some sort of commentary to them. Still, I believe others may or could find more value than myself on the things I find and so I share them.

I believe all human beings have the potential to develop their psychic abilities, the same way you can master a musical instrument, or a skateboard, for that matter. For me, it is a learned ability. We all come to life, all things being equal health-wise, with the same set of "tools." It is just a matter of where you focus your attention and intent. So, if you believe there are people out there with bona fide "psychic abilities," nothing is stopping you from joining them. Alas, it is a field that's very focused on empiricism. Not a very obvious thing to keep in mind when uttering advise to others and why the trade is full of BS'ers. Reason I trust more the advise of fortune cookies than that of self-styled "fortune tellers"...

One I met, in particular, physically changed when he explained his predictions and I don't think one can do that on demand -- it just occurred along with his "seeing" elsewhere that I couldn't see. It's there alright. I just don't know for sure how useful it is, unless you can use it to avoid being literally or figuratively hit by a bus.

Look into West African religions (to name something I've witnessed)... What you describe is more common --albeit mostly buried under ethnic apathy by the rest of us-- than you'd think.

Modern day "channelers," amassing fortunes with their "pet spirits," are opportunistic Johnny-come-lately's in a field that's unbelievably old and unbelievably common in other cultures. IMHO, the so called "pragmatism" of the Anglo-Saxon-Germanic culture is more of a handicap than a virtue. Only because that same "pragmatism" doesn't preempt them from being wide-eyed and open-mouthed when they come across "spiritual portents"...

If one gives the ability for granted and common, the wonderment wears out and real utility begins.

As for real "usefulness" of the abilities, well, I think all relates to the context surrounding the subject. Would you rather treat the ability as an "anti-collision radar" (your bus example) or as a navigation map? One is reactive; the other one is proactive.

But again, even for personal use, the ability should, IMHO, be used sparingly. The observation itself will affect the subject and the outcome of his concerns and the margin of error could be great when toying with "power tools" and no proper training. I myself don't feel comfortable at all with my own knowledge to be casually playing with the oracle. Alas, that's a hard lesson I learned in my first ten years of study and daily use of the oracle. It took me that long to realize the thing, and its "mechanics," were for real and not just a coincidence machine to play with.

As you can imagine, my POV isn't all that popular here. A little stuffy, with a perceived, and misguided, air of "knowledge," perhaps; popular, no... :rofl:

arabella · Sep 16, 2010

A couple things spring to mind Sparhawk. One, that in your description of the Yi, you give an impression of an instrument that equates nicely with current ideas [from what I know anyway] of quantum physics. That the experimenter, the observer, predicts his own outcome. And this transaction apparently happens at the level of light particles that are moving away from each other, therefore, causing an effect moving twice the speed of light, a phenomenon we have no words to explain. Or the Hindu idea, "What you see coming toward you is actually coming from you."

That makes consultation of the Yi into an awe-inspiring experience. More like a prayer than a question or a casting. Because in effect, aren't you then on some subliminal level telling the Yi what you would like for yourself and asking the Oracle to put that into symbols for you?

Maybe it's unpopular to see the Yi this way, I don't know, and certainly I haven't really thought about this before. But when I do think of it in that light, I can see the real possibility of it. In which case, when I talk to the Yi, I am questioning myself and telling myself through a means I can't see -- from a dimension that speaks to me -- what I need to see. So, to ask the Yi to predict the future is to ask what I intend for myself. Is this making sense? OK, one crazy step further. If I ask the YiChing about the future, I am asking what I intend my future to be.

Hmmm. Where are the butterflies in this?

arabella · Sep 16, 2010

Oh, and something else that came to mind when equating intention with effect. I remember reading about aboriginal people who learned of NASA's plans to undertake a lunar landing and then return astronauts to earth in the space shuttle. In Australia, some aboriginal shamans became concerned and built a huge signal fire to light the way for the astronuats. At the same time, the astronauts as they headed back to earth questioned what seemed to be live sparks of fire and flaming cinders flying past the space shuttle windows.

Trojina · Sep 16, 2010

sparhawk said:
But again, even for personal use, the ability should, IMHO, be used sparingly. The observation itself will affect the subject and the outcome of his concerns and the margin of error could be great when toying with "power tools" and no proper training. I myself don't feel comfortable at all with my own knowledge to be casually playing with the oracle. Alas, that's a hard lesson I learned in my first ten years of study and daily use of the oracle. It took me that long to realize the thing, and its "mechanics," were for real and not just a coincidence machine to play with.

As you can imagine, my POV isn't all that popular here. A little stuffy, with a perceived, and misguided, air of "knowledge," perhaps; popular, no...

I vote you should indeed become another Kegan or Lofting re your views on consulting and that you should bang on about your POV as often as possible and bollocks to popularity because the thing is....currently your POV is entirely absent, so there is an imbalance.

The ethos of the forum seems to be 'ask as much as you like as often as you want about anything at all' . I don't have a fixed opinion about that one way or the other right now but I do notice theres nothing much around to counter or balance that prevailing assumption that consulting as an act in itself does not affect anything.

I vote you hijack every single shredded readings thread with your POV....or include your POV ,at length, in your signature...possibly alongside a very large dragon people have to scroll down for 5 minutes to bypass.

Go on .... :mischief:

arabella · Sep 16, 2010

The more I think of this, the more interesting it is. Spawhawk, now I'm getting really personal -- so when you approach the Yi with a question, how do you pose your question and do you try to keep yourself out of the way? Also, what if your enquiry wasn't really about you, but about something or someone else? Do you set events in motion that engulf them/it as well? In other words, if this sets the butterflies in motion, how much responsibility is a querent of the IChing really taking on here for future events? Also, some ask the IChing just to inform them, with no specific query in mind. What causal effect can that have? Boggles the mind really.

arabella · Sep 16, 2010

Yes, by all means, inject your opinion all over the place. This would raise the mental and spiritual level of participation by miles, and also creates a whole series of important considerations about using the IChing in any legitimate way.

mariah kaze · Sep 17, 2010

arabella said:
A couple things spring to mind Sparhawk. One, that in your description of the Yi, you give an impression of an instrument that equates nicely with current ideas [from what I know anyway] of quantum physics. That the experimenter, the observer, predicts his own outcome. And this transaction apparently happens at the level of light particles that are moving away from each other, therefore, causing an effect moving twice the speed of light, a phenomenon we have no words to explain. Or the Hindu idea, "What you see coming toward you is actually coming from you."

That makes consultation of the Yi into an awe-inspiring experience. More like a prayer than a question or a casting. Because in effect, aren't you then on some subliminal level telling the Yi what you would like for yourself and asking the Oracle to put that into symbols for you?

Maybe it's unpopular to see the Yi this way, I don't know, and certainly I haven't really thought about this before. But when I do think of it in that light, I can see the real possibility of it. In which case, when I talk to the Yi, I am questioning myself and telling myself through a means I can't see -- from a dimension that speaks to me -- what I need to see. So, to ask the Yi to predict the future is to ask what I intend for myself. Is this making sense? OK, one crazy step further. If I ask the YiChing about the future, I am asking what I intend my future to be.

Hmmm. Where are the butterflies in this?

Someone on another forum (which will remain nameless) pointed out this thread to me because sparhawk has eloquently and succinctly delivered the very thoughts I was ineptly trying to introduce here. This view is very popular in true Taoist teachings and is precisely what I found lacking here on the open forum. A reverence and appreciation of the "entity" that communicates with us is to be taken very seriously and not to be toyed with lightly. My original questions pertained to ritual and right intention. No wonder I never was answered!

What you read for yourself, you create for yourself and if you read for others, you are karmically responsible for consequences. Intent must always be to divine the Greater Good, never personal gain. The butterflies occur at the moment of resolution of intent - waves ripple out from our manipulations of the coins or stalks and waves return in answer. Picture a spider web in which both the spider and the fly contribute to the movement of the web. One cannot move without affecting the other, yet each moves to struggle from the instinctive will to survive. Once born, things do not die, they simply change form and continue on. We are therefore conditioned by the teachings to be careful of our intentional release of energy so that it raises the level of all beings.

Signed Mariah The Troll

Sparhawk · Sep 17, 2010

Wow, the thread became popular and even transcended forums when I wasn't looking...

See what you started, Arabella? :mischief:

arabella said:
That makes consultation of the Yi into an awe-inspiring experience. More like a prayer than a question or a casting. Because in effect, aren't you then on some subliminal level telling the Yi what you would like for yourself and asking the Oracle to put that into symbols for you?

It is one way to see it, indeed. Let's throw some tangential scholarship in the midst of this to make a later point.

Almost 40 years ago, Profs. David N. Keightley (UC Berkley), Father Paul L-M Serruys (U of Wa), David S. Nivison (Stanford), and others, turned accepted Chinese scholarship on Oracle Bones Inscriptions (OBI) on its head--and for Chinese I mean Mainland China scholarship---with a crazy notion: That the inscriptions on the OBI were not questions but, basically, statements of intent. Akin, IMHO, to what one would find in magical spells.

The publication "Early China 14, 1989," contains an extensive discussion between most of those scholars and their counterparts in China.

One of those, "An Examination of Whether the Charges in Shang Oracle-bone Inscriptions are Questions," by Qiu Xigui, quotes a summary of Keightley's essay by Father Jean A. Lefeuvre as follow:

As early as June 17, 1972, in his study "Shih cheng," Keightley defended the opinion, then very new, that "the oracle-bone inscriptions of Shang were not questions but predictions" (p.1), "the grammar of the oracle-bone inscriptions contains no indications that they were interrogative sentences" (pp. 28-33, p. 68), and some difficulties of interpretation "are solved if we regard the oracle-bone inscriptions as declarative charges of intent and forecast" (pp. 18-39, p. 68). He shows that the interrogative sense given to zhen 貞 by the Shuo wen is a very late interpretation (pp. 4-8), and that "the operative verb for tortoise-shell divination in Chou texts is always pu 卜, not cheng 貞" (pp. 13-15, p. 68). Finally he links 貞 to 正 and proposes to translate the prefaces: "X (name of diviner) 貞" as "with X regulating" (p. 47)

Further down:

Serruys also advocated that charges were not questions in his 1974 T'uong-pao article "Studies in the Language of the Shang Oracle Inscriptions." He too used the word family of zheng 正 and ding 定 to explain the zhen of divination, suggesting that the meaning of zhen is akin to an experiment or test and that what the charge expresses is the action or policy that needed to be verified or tested.

The discussion goes on and on for about a third of the thick volume of EC14, with a close to consensus that the OBI contained no real questions but charges of intent.

In quoting this my point is to show that the earliest extant examples of the kind of divination practices that developed into the Zhouyi, and were later canonized under the Yijing, were not passive consultations but active demonstrations of intent. My educated guess is that these diviners were consciously, and intentionally, strumming the cords I mentioned earlier, to achieve their desired results.

OK, one crazy step further. If I ask the YiChing about the future, I am asking what I intend my future to be.

IMHO, the short answer is "yes."

pocossin · Sep 17, 2010

The above "Real Psychic Readings" link isn't working at the moment, but the original (and signed) essay is here:

http://www.cherrysage.com/real_psychic_reading_and_why.html

Sparhawk · Sep 17, 2010

trojan said:
I vote you hijack every single shredded readings thread with your POV....or include your POV ,at length, in your signature...possibly alongside a very large dragon people have to scroll down for 5 minutes to bypass.

Go on ....

You must be kidding!! :rofl:

I haven't retired yet and barely have time to read a few interesting posts and reply to some others. Now, the idea of finding a dragon that dives down for about ten pages is very attractive...

Sparhawk · Sep 17, 2010

BTW,

trojan said:
The ethos of the forum seems to be 'ask as much as you like as often as you want about anything at all' . I don't have a fixed opinion about that one way or the other right now but I do notice theres nothing much around to counter or balance that prevailing assumption that consulting as an act in itself does not affect anything.

Well, I understand the consequences of my stated beliefs and opinions and why I keep my peace, most of the time. No one wants to have their perceived toys taken away and be sent to a time-out...

Sparhawk · Sep 17, 2010

mariah kaze said:
Someone on another forum (which will remain nameless) pointed out this thread to me because sparhawk has eloquently and succinctly delivered the very thoughts I was ineptly trying to introduce here. This view is very popular in true Taoist teachings and is precisely what I found lacking here on the open forum. A reverence and appreciation of the "entity" that communicates with us is to be taken very seriously and not to be toyed with lightly. My original questions pertained to ritual and right intention. No wonder I never was answered!

Personally, I usually stay as far away from the Shredded Readings section as I would from quicksand.

"Fortune Tellers" don't like me very much... :rofl:

Picture a spider web in which both the spider and the fly contribute to the movement of the web. One cannot move without affecting the other, yet each moves to struggle from the instinctive will to survive. Once born, things do not die, they simply change form and continue on. We are therefore conditioned by the teachings to be careful of our intentional release of energy so that it raises the level of all beings.

I use a similar analogy. Check my very, very personal opinions, in post #16, here...

arabella · Sep 17, 2010

OK. This is great and I'm not the least sorry if I started it Sparhawk. I've never heard of this thought process in addressing the Yi before and it's changing all I thought about casting. Bueno.

So more questions immediately leap to the foreground. In this case, what should my state of mind be when I'm consulting? How do I phrase my "question" if it's really in effect a proposition of intention?

I see in your link Sparhawk the parts of this conversation we have had in the past. I see the basis for this latest link, how it's all quite consistent as a view on consultation as intention. Thanks.

Oooh, isn't this fun?

Sparhawk · Sep 17, 2010

I moved my own thread to a better home

(yes, you can do so without being a moderator; if you started it, you can move it)

Sparhawk · Sep 17, 2010

arabella said:
So more questions immediately leap to the foreground. In this case, what should my state of mind be when I'm consulting? How do I phrase my "question" if it's really in effect a proposition of intention?

Well, you realize that, as with anything, I just may be full of it, right? Caveat emptor... :rofl:

They are some of my own personal conclusions though and I suppose I own my words. As for your questions above, I would play "offense" and apply as much goal oriented "will" to your consultation as possible. This is one reason I sort of cringe at relationship questions: They are full of "misplaced hope," "defenseless wishful thinking" and a "The universe of 'them' against 'me'" attitude ---->> A very passive approach, IMO.

Why use the oracle as an umbrella (certainly possible) when it can be the rain that soaks where you direct it?

arabella · Sep 17, 2010

sparhawk said:
Well, you realize that, as with anything, I just may be full of it, right? Caveat emptor...

They are some of my own personal conclusions though and I suppose I own my words. As for your questions above, I would play "offense" and apply as much goal oriented "will" to your consultation as possible. This is one reason I sort of cringe at relationship questions: They are full of "misplaced hope," "defenseless wishful thinking" and a "The universe of 'them' against 'me'" attitude ---->> A very passive approach, IMO.

Why use the oracle as an umbrella (certainly possible) when it can be the rain that soaks where you direct it?

Yes, of course there is no guarantee, but what you are saying makes perfect sense. So, do you think we could say that this divination tool is more a means of telling you what you have to work with in a given situation? Or, beyond that, something like handing you building tools and a blueprint to build your own? Maybe I'm overboard on the metaphors here, but I'm trying to get a mental picture of how far this goes in your estimation in terms of "will" versus pacificsm. That is, that we are fashioners of our future, not its victims.

arabella · Sep 17, 2010

BTW, when you read the Yi in this light, are the hexes very different. By this I mean, how do traditional meanings change from expressions of potential to expressions of will? Now there's a can of worms. Because in this version of the Yi we're not predicting but pointing out the intended path that may or may not be desirable. Giving the situation and the querent power. Hmm. Feels a lot better than a prediction, doesn't it?

pocossin · Sep 17, 2010

In Defense of Frivolity

Lost keys and money, missing pets and boyfriends and pizza, sports results, car repairs, water leaks, and such are common in Shared Readings. Do such queries demean the Yi? In my opinion they do not. Playfulness and creativity are part of the human condition and give vitality to a forum. Further, a query may be responded to as fortunetelling or as divination depending on whether the information comes from casting and its text or from the character of the querent.

Owl asked:

How many days from my trip should I dedicate to visit town X?
39.1>63
http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/friends/showthread.php?t=11243

Based on text, Ginnie replied:

Owl, your reading seems to suggest you shouldn't go to town X -- and maybe that you shouldn't go on a trip, either. This line is saying there is trouble ahead.

The text suggests it, and since Owl and Partner have a car that needs frequent welding, if they travel in that car, Ginnie's prediction may come true.

Base on character, I replied:

You should dedicate N times X days. That is, the more value the offerings of X have for you compared to other places you will be going, the longer you should spend there. 39 is river and hill. Is X on a hill near a river -- like Rome? 63 suggests a bridge across a river, which could be the clue to the specific answer you seek. You should dedicate as many days to X as there are main bridges across the river in X. (Or bridge-like structures if there is no river )

Owl's fondness for algebraic expression ("town X") and concern for exact numbers suggest an accountant or math teacher. Owl's life reflects Owl's deepest values, and I responded accordingly with a math formula and a way to arrived at a specific number. Some may find the query frivolous and my reading playful, yet it is also serious. It may lead Owl to greater self-awareness. There is no profounder use of the Yi.

arabella · Sep 17, 2010

I appreciate what you're saying Pocossin and I've used the Yi for everything but making toast in the morning, so I'm not any living monument to seriousness. However, what Luis is suggesting is something new I'm trying to understand because I've never thought of it before, which is why I asked. I was trying to imagine somebody like he is, with an academic understanding, casting for something he/they would want to learn. Basically, I'm a voyeuristic fan of the IChing trying to understand how others see this experience.

I don't know that the idea of "will" is more mature than the idea of "playfulness" -- or more accurate to what you may want to know in your heart of hearts. However, it is interesting to ponder what the Yi was intended to do in the first place, although many other ideals of civilisation have developed in thousands of years since. I don't know anything of the original Chinese symbolism and early development of this oracle. I'm trying to step back with guidance from Luis's scholarship and question what the Yi's intent was/is and if somehow in studying from a prediction point of view I've missed a very large boat. What I'm enquiring about from him is not intended as a diminution of anybody else's idea. It's, well, EXPLORING DIVINATION!

pocossin · Sep 18, 2010

Almost 40 years ago, Profs. David N. Keightley (UC Berkley), Father Paul L-M Serruys (U of Wa), David S. Nivison (Stanford), and others, turned accepted Chinese scholarship on Oracle Bones Inscriptions (OBI) on its head--and for Chinese I mean Mainland China scholarship---with a crazy notion: That the inscriptions on the OBI were not questions but, basically, statements of intent. Akin, IMHO, to what one would find in magical spells.

In my unscholarly understanding, depending on the angle of the crack, oracle bones returned one of two possible answers: auspicious or inauspicious. That is, yes or no. The querent proposed something like "Sacrifice sheep to Uncle Ma" and received a yes/no answer.

Now, "Sacrifice sheep to Uncle Ma" is a conditional intention, but it is also a question:

Should I sacrifice a sheep to Uncle Ma?
If I sacrifice a sheep to Uncle Ma, will he receive it?

So in the context of oracle bones there is no distinction between conditional intention and question.

Sparhawk · Sep 18, 2010

pocossin said:
Lost keys and money, missing pets and boyfriends and pizza, sports results, car repairs, water leaks, and such are common in Shared Readings. Do such queries demean the Yi? In my opinion they do not. Playfulness and creativity are part of the human condition and give vitality to a forum. Further, a query may be responded to as fortunetelling or as divination depending on whether the information comes from casting and its text or from the character of the querent.

Well, Tom, it is a good thing that, in these kinds of interventions, I always write disclaimers about the popularity of my views, yes?

There's no need to defend playfulness as I myself find a lot of humor in the Yi. No hard selling on my part. It is never the intention to change anybody's mind about how they use or approach the oracle. I'm just sharing, usually on cue, what my thoughts are about it. To each their own.

Sparhawk · Sep 18, 2010

Scholars teach and publish narrowly focused papers. I just find them and read them. So, if anything, charge me with "reading avidity," not scholarship.

pocossin said:
In my unscholarly understanding, depending on the angle of the crack, oracle bones returned one of two possible answers: auspicious or inauspicious. That is, yes or no. The querent proposed something like "Sacrifice sheep to Uncle Ma" and received a yes/no answer.

Now, "Sacrifice sheep to Uncle Ma" is a conditional intention, but it is also a question:

Should I sacrifice a sheep to Uncle Ma?
If I sacrifice a sheep to Uncle Ma, will he receive it?

So in the context of oracle bones there is no distinction between conditional intention and question.

Tom, IMO, in defending the "playfulness" of others, you are missing the point of this discussion. Indeed, the translation of OBI isn't an exact science and there are arguments pro and against the "Question Question" at a real scholarly level that's way above my level of discourse. I'm just reporting what appears to be, more or less, the consensus of those scholars. If you disagree you are not disagreeing with me and I will not argue on their behalf.

Although, I must say that their position, the way I understand it, makes sense to me and help to explain some the things I intuited before about how the oracle might, just might, work.

Now, the point of this discussion is, from my position, to show that, perhaps, the oracle is not a passive tool handing out answers to idle and "playful" questions. That the ancients strived to will results in their consultations as opposed to passively wonder about the outcome of their affairs. As it is, there is a fine line and a lot of blurring between the two.

Sparhawk · Sep 18, 2010

arabella said:
However, what Luis is suggesting is something new I'm trying to understand because I've never thought of it before, which is why I asked. I was trying to imagine somebody like he is, with an academic understanding, casting for something he/they would want to learn. Basically, I'm a voyeuristic fan of the IChing trying to understand how others see this experience.

Actually, I am casting for understanding. I have taken the accuracy of the oracle as a fact for a long time. I am past, by a couple of decades, the "amazement stage." I am now striving to understand what's behind the accuracy of it, which is also the cause of the historical resilience exhibited by the oracle. It is in that pursuit that, inevitably, one starts drawing some tentative conclusions.

I don't know that the idea of "will" is more mature than the idea of "playfulness" -- or more accurate to what you may want to know in your heart of hearts. However, it is interesting to ponder what the Yi was intended to do in the first place, although many other ideals of civilisation have developed in thousands of years since. I don't know anything of the original Chinese symbolism and early development of this oracle. I'm trying to step back with guidance from Luis's scholarship and question what the Yi's intent was/is and if somehow in studying from a prediction point of view I've missed a very large boat. What I'm enquiring about from him is not intended as a diminution of anybody else's idea. It's, well, EXPLORING DIVINATION!

Flattered you see it as scholarship. Not at all, I'm afraid. Just the sort of the education level and focused attention that Don Quijote had with chivalry and wandering knights novels...

Now, if you, or anybody, is missing anything, is not having contemplated that, just perhaps, the Yijing is as much of a weapon to be wielded as it is a shield. And for that I mean that, besides being an observation device, it is also a manifestation tool. If I'm correct, think about the spectrum of possibilities that open up.

And that is my conundrum, on the one hand I intuit those possibilities and the consequences of mishandling them and on the other, I am as far away from mastering the process as anybody. Chances are that most casual (playful?) querents are shooting their own foot all the time.

That's what I mean about the "haphazardness" I see all around.

arabella · Sep 18, 2010

Well, that is only more amazing to me, to think of the Yi as a conjuring tool. In fact, late as it is, I have to go think on that until tomorrow at least. Thanks Luis for sharing this idea, I find it astounding and completely counter to what I've known before, so I have to consider where that takes me now. Even the idea of approaching the Yi in a humble attitude, as many recommend, takes on a different aspect doesn't it? If you are about to cast a spell on yourself, humble is the least you'd want to be.

sooo · Sep 18, 2010

Is it resilience of the oracle or our own neural elasticity which is the cause of historical resilience exhibited by the oracle? It seems a fairly strong thread of reason, that we are the intended object of change, and our will is to be subjugated and trained to more responsibly assume charge of that which we have charge over, and to yield to that far greater force or field or path, which carries us along as a flea on a dog's back.

Sparhawk · Sep 18, 2010

sooo said:
Is it resilience of the oracle or our own neural elasticity which is the cause of historical resilience exhibited by the oracle? It seems a fairly strong thread of reason, that we are the intended object of change, and our will is to be subjugated and trained to more responsibly assume charge of that which we have charge over, and to yield to that far greater force or field or path, which carries us along as a flea on a dog's back.

Well, of course, the oracle doesn't exist in a vacuum of us and even if it were a monolith found on the moon, it begins its meaningful existence, in our consciousness, the moment we lay our eyes on it. When I speak of historical resilience I refer to how we have carried its presence for millennia and we find it as actual today as it was 3,000 years ago.

But, correct me if I'm wrong, the second part of your paragraph seems to put the carriage before the horse. I mean, are you treating the oracle as a pre-existing "monolith" we are trying to make sense of (or subjugated and trained by it) or is it a "monolith" of our creation? I believe it is our creation but, as we still scratch our heads regarding how ancient civilizations built pyramids and cut and moved giant chunks of rock to great highs, we seem to have lost the mechanics behind its inception. What we have today are later "rationalizations" of those mechanics that don't seem to go back in time further than the Warring States period, when the oracle already had, at least, a multi-centenarian existence. I, we, are just piling our own thoughts upon that exegesis.

Now, I don't believe, for a moment, that it is a hopeless pursuit. I believe that, the same way it is our own creation, we can fit the tool to the task at hand. I am not negating or taking away any of the uses currently applied to it. Why would I when I am part of the same crowd? If anything, I'm adding, or perhaps making others aware of them, some more uses.

sooo · Sep 18, 2010

Luis, all good points, imo, for which I have no rebuttal. But let me see if I can be more clear, as my comments weren't intended to refute but to elaborate, or perhaps have a little fun with.

The monolith is a grand idea to me. Yet it only exists as an idea, for which I have no proof. So much for solid ground, huh?

.... It is faith which I credit for believing in an ultimate truth, which would desire to propagate and strengthen in people. I regard Faith and Folly as close cousins, but ones whom I have a personal and loving relationship with. So here, to me, is where the monolith lives. Here is where God and morality live also. Ultimately, it's still just survival, imo, and subject to the same rules as a fox who eats a rabbit. I liken the flea on the dog to the cow upon the earth.

Am I aware that the above could be entirely subjective? Painfully. lol.. having a final answer could be comforting.

But am I off the subject now? I was following with interest your points of view. What stood out to me is the idea of divining to effectuate will. Then arose the question: whose will?

sooo · Sep 18, 2010

Luis, I'm also kind of in the dark in regard to what mechanics you're referring to?

Is Divination Indecisiveness or Intent ? (was Real Psychic Readings...)

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

visitor

Supporter

visitor

visitor

visitor

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

One of those men your mother warned you about...

One of those men your mother warned you about...

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

One of those men your mother warned you about...

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

visitor

visitor

visitor

visitor

One of those men your mother warned you about...

One of those men your mother warned you about...

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

sooo

Guest

One of those men your mother warned you about...

sooo

Guest

sooo

Guest