...life can be translucent

Menu

Maps of Change IV

C

cheiron

Guest
Key and a few notes to follow.

I have corrected the full set to this style and standard and am happy to send them complete to anyone who emails me... Don't want to repost them all here - Uses too much of Clarity's Bandwidth.

1980.gif


1981.gif


1982.gif


1983.gif


1984.gif


1985.gif


1986.gif


1987.gif


1988.gif


1989.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
Well here is a rather startling observation.

There are four pairs of hexagrams where every line in each pair leads to a hexagram whose pair is not found in the usual Fan Yao way of crossing over in the original pair but by going to the opposite line in the same hexagram.

Look at pair 27:28 above:

27.1 gives hexagram 23? In a normal Fanyao process one would expect 28.5 to give 24 ? the other resulting hexagram. However in pairs like 27:28 the ?partner' is found in the 'mirror line'? so it is 27.6 that gives 24.

There are only four pairs like this? 1:2 27:28 29:30 and 61:62?. (The ones I mapped in deep red and blue) Where each of the pairs seems to relate to its self completely and not diagonally across the pair as in Fan Yao.

(I am really sorry I can?t explain this better)

Now the startling observation? the normal Fan Yao crossover exists in all hexagrams and for all lines except where a changing line leads to one of these four pairs. In those cases the same ?relating to itself / no crossover? exists... just for those lines and no others.

Put another way? no changing line leads to one of these pairs if it has a crossover or fan yao and all others do.

These are the hexagram pairs I marked as ?Progressive change with some transformative change?

The two types seem to be very separate within the Yijing.

Now the question is - WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?

(Sorry to shout) ;)

--Kevin

PS Doing the 'maps' I found the patterns to be exceptionally perfect throughout... after a while I learned to look at the nuclear hexagram configuration first and the get a 'map' which I had already done knowing that it would be a very near match... so many patterns... beutiful.

Where there are patterns there is maths... was this why Fu Xi was also known as 'That Boolian Guy'?

I dream of the day when our computing math friends come up with the polynomial... sigh
 
C

cheiron

Guest
I am paddling up the Orinoco here and having a wonderful time rediscovering things... trouble is whenever I rest up on the shore there are traces of campfires left by Stephen, LiSe and Brad (and many much older foil cartons from Chinese take away?s!)... Gonna get me an outboard engine! - Chuckles

--K
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,128
Reaction score
202
2009.gif

What you say about the fanyao's of those 4 pairs is not strange. Look at the map on Marshall's page, about the division in two parts of the Yi (mails on Clarity: "an old Yijing mystery solved"). The division is not in two unequal parts, 30 and 32, but in equal parts: because there are 2 27's, and 2 28's, same for 1, 2, 29, 30, 61 and 62. This gives a division in two equal parts of 36 hexagrams. One 27 upright, and another one upside down. It's just that the difference does not show.

So the qianyao of 27.2 is (the other) 27.5 and its fanyao 41.2, which turns also to (the other) 27.2. See the square above.

I saw you paddling by and came running out of the bushes, yelling, but you were too busy hitting crocodiles square on the head, trying to get 2 in one strike . .

LiSe
 
C

cheiron

Guest
Hi LiSe

Lol - Quite clearly I am attempting to paddle too fast.

Thanks for solving that for me
happy.gif


That?s what comes of focussing on western numbers and not the hexagram figures!

Yes, I was thinking about Marshall?s announcement when mapping around the middle.

So yes, these four hexagrams would reflect the line pairs within their own structure. That would also explain the lines which appear in the other hexagrams which Stephen calls 'Progressive change with some Transformative change'.

In what appears to be a passage based on Ch 1. Lao Tse (Willhelm p.263) We are told that the hexagrams are formed into pairs the first of which is light and the Second of which is dark. The principal is perhaps also alluded to in Tuan Chuan 6.

I suspect this is where Stephen found the authority to deternine that the pairs of hexagrams were odd numberred inspirational and even numberred manifestation.

Should one therefore consider 28:28 (for example) as a single pair encompassing the two pricipals?

--Kevin
 
C

cheiron

Guest
LiSe

Thinking a lot about your diagram above - I think I see the implications for the pairs.

I am going to sit and read round a few of these squares for these eight hexagrams and see how they feel.

Thanks

--Kevin
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top