Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
His two programmes got to be too much when he was elected to local government this Winter, and he found another person -- a woman -- to take over the longer of his two programmes.
I asked the Yi what the man of the hour took from this coincidental encounter and having to introduce the two of us? Even though he's quite socially suave and adept, I'd imagine it wasn't entirely comfortable for him, but I don't know.
The Yi replied with Hexagram 2.6 becoming Hexagram 23.
Just realised my parting comment was a question: Where do things stand between us now? And maybe that's the question I should have asked in the first place.
Yi's reply: Hexagram 55.1.3 becoming Hexagram 16.
The next question I asked: "How is he going to treat me now?" Because what I really want to know I suppose is if our relationship has altered and he just didn't tell me.
Yi said: Hexagram 41.3.4.6 becoming Hexagram 34.
41.3 reads: ‘Three people walking, hence decreased by one person.
One person walking, hence gains a friend.’
From that I guess this isn't a "three's a crowd" situation -- or at least he doesn't want it to be perceived that way.
41.4 reads; Decreasing your affliction,
Sending the message swiftly brings rejoicing – not a mistake.’
Which would seem to indicate I will hear something soon to clarify this?
41.6 reads: Not decreasing, increasing it – not a mistake.
Constancy, good fortune.
Fruitful to have a direction to go.
Gaining servants, not a home.’
I've just realised that none of this matters because if he doesn't care enough to clarify this, or consider that I may have wondered what is happening, or had any concern for my feelings, then I've overestimated him, the relationship, and our association in general. In which case -- who needs it? I've broken my own first rule which is -- if you have to ask it's a lost cause anyway. Seems like time to move on.
I that attitude exemplifies 2.6 -> 23
I've just realised that none of this matters because if he doesn't care enough to clarify this, or consider that I may have wondered what is happening, or had any concern for my feelings, then I've overestimated him, the relationship, and our association in general. In which case -- who needs it? I've broken my own first rule which is -- if you have to ask it's a lost cause anyway. Seems like time to move on.
Yup....
but you could have a real straight talk with him prior to moving on to at least get some clarity on what has been happening, to know how hes seen this...all the things you need to know...that we cannot answer, and also of course to see if there actually is anything worth continuing with....
BTW I think I read somewhere here from Hilary 2.6 can be a time where in not making choices, in trying to keep all options open chaos results. Last line of 2 and it doesn't look good. So 2 is the receptive, being open, accepting all possibilities but by line 6 all possiblities is just a bit of a chaotic mess...dragons fighting and the colours clash.
BTW if ever there was a line meaning '3s a crowd' its 41.3 so I couldn't see why you'd say it didn't mean that One has to go....which one I don't know
hi arabella,
sad to hear about this . . I'm inclined to read 2.6 in a different way here, also considering everything else you have posted in the past . . for me the struggle of the line is between something created, made up, almost conjured (like a haunting figure) and factual reality. I think it comes up when the inner world (thoughts, wishes, ideas, fears) and the outer world collide.
In this particular case, I'll go out on a limb and say that what the specific person got was a conflict -even an imaginary one, or a conflict in his head- between some ideal figure of womanhood and the women he can actually encounter in his life. Perhaps what he is really looking for/at is a phantasy of a woman (a phantom of a woman?), an idea that just got stripped . . I honestly have no advice or suggestion to give you here, only thing I can say is that this seems like very unsteady ground any way you look at it . .
p.s.: just read your post, I don't have much to say on your other readings cause I think you could read any of them either way, depending on whether you are on a half-full or half-empty frame of mind . .
BTW 41.6 is a pretty platonic line IMO since its about gathering sustenance from a wide range of sources. Its not time to' gain a home' but it is time to gather friends. I don't see him being up for any settled domestic scene with a woman....I do see him making friends
Of course i say that but i don't know i can't speak for him I'm just looking at the line
Thats why you have to talk to the guy
...and he does owe you some sort of clarity on the matter becasue that frees you up to move on or not.
Maybe theres a part of you doesn't want to know the truth and wants to keep this all fuzzy a while longer. I don't blame you its a tactic we all use , and probably a good one for a while.....but when you do actually want to know the truth there is for sure only one place to find it and its not on this forum
I know this is going to sound ridiculous but he is a master of innuendo I think. When I think of our conversations the one who shows ALL their cards is generally me. And invitations from him are always "friendly" but inspecific. And the thought that he is just Hex 45 gathering friends may be accurate. But then there are the places here and there where he exceeds that definition. In the long run T., if I "cornered" him with my feelings and wanting to know something specific I just have the awful feeling he could pretend ignorance of everything. And I'd be standing there looking a fool. MAYBE I underestimate, maybe he's more sincere than that. But the longer this goes on, the more I think this IS a hex 45, conveniently treated like a Hex 44 on certain days of the week.
My eldest daughter chimed in on the conversation just now and said that her opinion -- minus any Yi consultation -- is that he's so unstable in his emotional position he has nothing to offer on a consistent basis. Erstwhile friendship is all there is unless he gets himself onto his two feet. She knew him before his wife' death and says he has seemed to walk in circles and has lost his personality, that she only sees bits of his "self" -- as she knew him before -- blipping through here and there. She ignores him over the past year, she says, because she finds him endlessly indecisive, even in an average conversation, that she can't follow what he is saying or what he really means, and that he has become monotonous and boring.
I see more to him than that, obviously, and we have spent a lot of time together that makes me appreciate other things about him. But as Dora says -- it's pretty unstable.
It's not worthwhile having a relationship with the Yi Ching instead of the person in question. But I don't know if holding him up to the light just now and demanding an explanation is going to produce anything helpful either.
I've just realised that none of this matters because if he doesn't care enough to clarify this, or consider that I may have wondered what is happening, or had any concern for my feelings, then I've overestimated him, the relationship, and our association in general. In which case -- who needs it? I've broken my own first rule which is -- if you have to ask it's a lost cause anyway. Seems like time to move on.
In view of what has happened now, and for the archives -- I think that my friend was in a bit of a "squeeze play" and not entirely comfortable with the circumstances. And I believe that 2.6 becoming 23 meant that he was feeling there was one too many women in the situation -- or an overabundance of women anyway.
I assume he will try to prevent this situation in the future as I thought he didn't like what happened and now that seems to be corroborated.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).