I went to a business seminar yesterday. It was more of a promotion. After I got home, I asked Yiching, “What do I expect if I invest in the business?” I received H25.1.4.5 which led to C23.

To understand the transformative process, I read that there are a couple of ways:

(a) Linear
H25.1.4.5 > H12.4.5 > H20.5 > C23

OR

(b) Stephen Karcher’s
H25.1.4.5 > H12.4.5 > H42.5 > H21.4 > C23


As above, even though the end hexagram is C23 for both processes, which is the right way – (a) or (b)? [For Stephen Karcher’s method, I don’t know whether H21.4 should be before H42.5 or vice versa].

Dilemma

It reminds me of this posting I made a while ago:

http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/frie...6-bring-1-2-3-4-5-6-to-24&p=218503#post218503 (#14)

The posting you made a while ago (as stated in pp 64 to 69 of Mondo Secter's book) is linear. It is the same as (a) above. The method used by Stephen Karcher is different - see (b) above. Check it out and I'm confused which is the best way to go.

There probably isn't a 'best' given these are people's preferred methods. I mean people use what works for them. With a cast like 25.1.4.5>23 do you really need to use the steps of change ? One danger of such techniques for going deeper into a reading is that one can absolutely miss the answer that's being given.

I think such techniques are only useful to cast more light on a reading, they aren't in place of the reading.

Those who formed the socalled NanJing-rule at least tried to reconstruct the ancient way of handling multiple moving lines.... I mean: out of those few readings it appeared that they somehow used a method to handle multiple moving lines. Their reconstructions has been critisized but does that mean that their attempt, to find the ancient way of handling multiple moving lines, is without interest ? Dead-end Street....
Until the exact method has been found, the method used by these ancient diviners, I'm convinced that the view mentioned by LiSe, and here by Trojina, namely that each moving line playes a role, is the way to handle multiple moving lines. Out of the logic I, at least, has reached by now.
It's interesting thou to look at this in the way that each line is a stage of hierarchy, mentioned fully in Bradford Hatchers book (Yijing, word by word, vol. II, p. 25-27) so that: Concerning moving line X is determined by this line's place in the hierarchy of the hexagram and concerning moving line Y is determined by that line's place in the hierarchy of the hexagram.... An example: hex. XX.2.4 Concerning the subordinate/woman in the home etc. etc. (line two) the second moving line should be seen in the light of, and concerning the son/empowerted delegate etc. etc. (line four) the fourth moving line should be seen in the light of. And furthermore it can be seen in the light of that the lower trigram is the coming etc. etc. and the upper trigram the going etc. etc. etc.
Has anyone given this point of view a thought ?