Hi all,

Has anyone see this? http://elementalpha.blogspot.com/

It's another method of determining which is the important or relevant line when you have multiple changing lines.

I like the logic of what is being said, and it seems to make more sense than some other methods I've read (for example, one method says with 3 changing lines, choose the middle one... why the middle one?), but I don't really know enough to be able to make any conclusions about the theory.

On a practical level, I think it's made some sense for me. I'm going to keep checking it out.

I'd be interested in others' opinion about it.

There are three forms of interpretations for a dichotomy-determined system.

(a) as an expression of magnitude
(b) as an expression of sequence
(c) as a mix giving an expression of hierarchy

As an expression of sequence you can only have ONE changing line since it would be illogical to have more. Plum Blossom and some other traditional methods work off this. (note no coin toss etc)

As an expression of magnitude you can have as many changing lines as you like since the focus is on emotional forms of expression (where emotion is the best example for expression of magnitudes) - thus consider a hexagram as an emotional being and the line changes as expressions of emotion for that hexagram's general form working as context. The XOR material can help here where the 'changing lines' are interpretable as an expression of emotion, an exaggeration in magnitude. E.g. if 01 has lines 1 and 2 changing then the expression is of the 19-ness of 01 and that gives us 33. What is being expressed in the context of 01 is its 19-ness, approaching the high, where 01 does this by trickary, competitive enticement. (note no coin toss for this - better to use questions a la the Emotional IC.) - there is no 'change' manifest here - just the expression of a 'state' but that could include a change focus (e.g. 19 covers the expression of state of approach, of doing something - but a change in 19 does not cover a change INTO something but more the expression of 19 is distorted - an aspect is being exaggerted in the situation)

From the hierarchic form of interpretation, each changing line relates to 'issues' at that level of the hierarchy that are causing imbalance/de-stabilising. Context then determines if this is positive or negative (and so how to interpet). Here you DO need to read each line comment of the possible six given but take them as dealing with their unique positions. THEN consider the relation of the changing line to the line positions one above and below for refined interpretations as well as to the lines correct/incorrect position status. From analysis of each line in its place (Since hierarchy demands all in the 'correct' place to maintain the hierarchy) one then has to consider the IMPLICATIONS of such to the WHOLE hexagram and whether there is a general system change going on etc.

All THREE modes of interpretation can give you the 'full spectrum' of meaning for a situation. You can use random/miraculous methods if you wish but they will not be consistant in giving you the best-fit hexagram for a situation. (as I have said before on another thread, coin-toss etc is like trying to pick the 'snow in the sahara' possibility all of the time!)

As you know I recommend questions rather than random methods but with the hierarchic form of interpretatiion the random methods dont impinge on the interpretation methodolgy as much as the other two in that each line change is in its own little world where as the other two require (a) one change only (not possible using coin tosses etc) (b) none to all lines change reflecting their relatedness as one (interpretation is not possible given we only have six line comments and we cannot read them as individual lines since they reflect more than that - as such there are 63 possible line change conditions and the traditional material only covers 6)

Note that in the hierarchy form of interpretation, the changing line will affect those positions BELOW it whilst having littl or no influence on those above it other than than immediately above it. Thus if you change the 'minister' (line 4) that can influence all below strongly and may influence the line above (the king's advicer changes and that could influence the behaviour of the king) - but the spiritual aspect, covered in line 6, can be fine regardless of what happens at line 4.

Hope all of this helps ;-)

Chris.

to 'update' possible line associations in the hierarchy mappings:

line 6 Spirituality(god) Heaven
line 5 Identity(soul) Heaven
line 4 Beliefs and Values(heart) Man
line 3 Capabilities(mind) Man
line 2 Behaviour(strength) Earth
line 1 Environment(stimulus) Earth

A change in any line will influence expressions of all below aspects of the hierarchy, but usually only, possibly, influence the immediate line above.

The labels come from Dilts - see my comments in:

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/mbti4.html

Chris.

Thanks very much for the link! I've been collecting subscriptions to I Ching blogs (there are a few of them out there nowadays) and this one is new to me. Original, too, and with a brain. (Though I don't agree with him on the impossibility of drawing clear meaning from two 'contradictory' lines.)

I’ve read Eric’s comments on this before on the Great Vessel site. He projects his own difficulty with multiple lines as being everyone else’s difficulty, and discounts anyone else’s ability to reckon with them with such statements as:

“Various ideas have been proposed to allow for these contradictions to coexist, but the methods used tend to be awkward and improbable. Ultimately, in attempting to make multiple lines compatible an opportunity is missed to explore the Yijing more deeply.”

“However, the confusion that often arises from this style of interpretation is too great to continue following this practice.”

Huh? Too great for whom, Eric?

bruce_g said:

I’ve read Eric’s comments on this before on the Great Vessel site. He projects his own difficulty with multiple lines as being everyone else’s difficulty, and discounts anyone else’s ability to reckon with them

Click to expand...

so tell him he is useless. ;-) I cant, I am persona non grata on that list ;-) - ,my above perspective is valid given the nature of dichotomies and so three forms of interpretation where two allow for multiple line 'changes' but one is about emotional expression and so only leaving the hierarchic one that will 'work' in an acceptable form.

lightofreason said:

so tell him he is useless. ;-) I cant, I am persona non grata on that list ;-) - ,my above perspective is valid given the nature of dichotomies and so three forms of interpretation where two allow for multiple line 'changes' but one is about emotional expression and so only leaving the hierarchic one that will 'work' in an acceptable form.

Click to expand...

lol - Nooo, this doesn't make him or his ideas useless. If it works for him and possibly some others, great! But I do get a little annoyed when one writes something off for everyone just because it doesn't come natural to them.

Well, yes. TALOIA*. But if you were looking for a way to eliminate a chunk of your reading from consideration, wouldn't this be an intuitive way of doing it? At least there are a few simple principles behind the rules.



* TALOIA: a diagnosis used by a childhood GP for whatever bug everyone was showing up with at the time. There's A Lot Of It About.

bruce_g said:

lol - Nooo, this doesn't make him or his ideas useless. If it works for him and possibly some others, great! But I do get a little annoyed when one writes something off for everyone just because it doesn't come natural to them.

Click to expand...

tsk - ok - youve convinced me, I was 'nice' - posted by comments anonymously on this thread to his blog ... maybe he will rethink or delete my comments! ;-)

Chris.

Hilary, the main focus is to understand what you are dealing with in the first place.

Given the work on dichotomisations in general, so we can identify the triadic perspectives and in so doing re-consider approaches to the hexagram interpretations - what is indicated is the only changing line perspective that permits multiples is the hierarchic format - and so each line is representative of a 'department' in a hierarchy. Now just because accounts is playing up does not mean it relates to opposite issues in, say, the CEOs office (or is contradictory).

if you try to read the hexagram in a temporal form with more than one changing line you face contradictions re allow the past to change!

If you read the hexagram as a magnitude then any 'changes' are more so an emotional expression WITHIN the hexagram.

the hierarchic allows for (a) working with only 6 lines and (b) allowing for multiple line changes where each can be 'independent' of the others and the sum of the whole then gives us the 'big picture'.

In any hierarchy 'contradictions' abound - and so seed the overall expression of the hierarchy. If you try to 'fix' the contradictions then you are going against the 'natural' course of events.

Chris

hilary said:

Well, yes. TALOIA*. But if you were looking for a way to eliminate a chunk of your reading from consideration, wouldn't this be an intuitive way of doing it?

Click to expand...

I reeeally don't know. Since I don't struggle with it there's no reason to consider a cure.

Oh well... guess I'm still looking for the magic bullet