Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
>>The devil ,has to be 44 what else could fit.
Devil for 44 is not my choice. In the scheme 44 hex corresponds 7 of Pentacles and for Devil hex 29. If you remember how “The Devil” card looks like, you will see its correlation with 29.6 “Bound with cords and ropes”.She's not THAT powerful.
Sorry, but I disagree.For 44 try the 8 of swords.
Sorry, but I disagree.
1. I don’t understand how blindfolded woman on the card (even with 2 swords) can be strong woman, having the power.
While we are talking about beliefs we are free in their choosing. If we want to base them we should to use thinking. I described a few steps argumentation why the correspondences between I Ching and Tarot do exists. Perhaps, you would not be offended if I say that from your belief and my argumentation I prefer argumentation.I do not believe a direct corollary exists between the Yi and Tarot, only vague similarities. Two entirely different symbolic systems.
You are absolutely right. I am not sure about Pan in this case (still thinking) but suppose that Tartar corresponds to “Devil” rather exactly.I also think it's a mistake to interpret the Devil card for evil
As before, it would be interesting if you base your assumption and find something which would fit to “Devil” and hex. 46.So, for a loose similarity, I'd liken it to 46.
Is that all that you can say about h44 or 8 of swords? Not much. Excuse me but I know your type of people very well. Perhaps you know something but it took so much effort from you that you are mistakenly sure that only you knows “the truth”. However, when you are asked to explain you can’t say anything more than empty words or offences. Actually, I think that origin of such a behavior is a lack of thinking skills. For example, in exact sciences such things are extremely rare because you need to train your mind before you can discuss complicated things. And nobody believes your statements if they can’t be checked.This is because you haven't taken the time to understand either the Tarot or the Yijing.
While we are talking about beliefs we are free in their choosing. If we want to base them we should to use thinking. I described a few steps argumentation why the correspondences between I Ching and Tarot do exists. Perhaps, you would not be offended if I say that from your belief and my argumentation I prefer argumentation.
You are absolutely right. I am not sure about Pan in this case (still thinking) but suppose that Tartar corresponds to “Devil” rather exactly.
As before, it would be interesting if you base your assumption and find something which would fit to “Devil” and hex. 46.
I can't understand the need to have these precise correspondences....I mean why do they have to fit ? Why does one divination system have to fit another ? Can't they just be themselves ?
Perhaps, you will share with us the way how you get obtained the conclusion that ”direct corollary between the Yi and Tarot” doesn’t exists. Then we compare your argumentation with mine where I “prove” that the correspondences between I Ching Tarot do exist.Silly, I didn't mean belief as in religious or philosophical beliefs, I meant my conviction of understanding, i.e. my thought process.
“Loose” enough to associate anything with anything? I am sorry but your vague associations is not very interesting for me.Neither have I made assumptions, only loose association between the Devil card and hex 46;
No one said that these systems have historical connection. I “proved” (in some sense) that the archetypical correspondences between I Ching and Tarot exist and you can test you thinking skills disproving it.I've explained in my books that there is no connection, especially not historical.
PS. As far as I understand you have the system of I Ching Tarot correspondences. You described it, bit explanation was too short. Perhaps, you have some web page with your system?
Perhaps, you will share with us the way how you get obtained the conclusion that ”direct corollary between the Yi and Tarot” doesn’t exists. Then we compare your argumentation with mine where I “prove” that the correspondences between I Ching Tarot do exist.
Do you want me to read 600 pages just to find 64 correspondences? “That’s not fair, Mr. Zappa!” Yes, you pointed some pages, but I don’t like to read a book by parts. I think that I understand your system if you answer a few simple questions.I'll repeat. My books are free to download from
http://www.hermetica.info
There are 28 hexs whicn contain Li OR Zhen trigram. If you suppose that they must be on the bottom (or on the top) then it will be 16 hexs. However, in tarot deck there are only 14 cards. And 14=10pip cards + 4 court cards while there 8 hex with Li (or Zhen) on the bottom. Please, explain how do you deal with these problems?Kun and Gen are obviously earth, Kan anf Dui water, Qian and Xun air and Li and Zhen fire. So where you have swords in my system you'll find either Qian or Xun. The numbers are in the lower primary or Zhen Gua position.
Yes, if we have sequences like 1,2,3 …98, 99 it’s very easy to write out formulae which correctly reproduce first 99 terms but it’s 100th element could be anything you like, not necessary 100. However, if we get experimental data of this kind we are almost sure that the next number will be 100. If we assume that there are the orders in the outer world then in this case we prefer simple formula a=n (basing on 99 measurements), though it can’t be proven exactly.Finding symmetry or order in a finite group of numbers is quite common, even when the numbers are selected at random. It has been proven that an order can be found (that is an algorithm) to generate any finite sequence of randomly selected numbers. Evolution has caused us to be very good at recognizing and finding patterns and orders. Many times these 'orders' are nothing more than the result of trying hundreds of variations until one hits upon an 'order'.
The example is interesting however, the conclusion is wrong in general case. If the number or things is much more, like 64, then I doubt that any order can be found if the thing are placed randomly. You can take first 50 numbers for expression for any transcendental number, like Pi, and work out any order for these numbers. I bet you would fail in this attempt. But if you take only 5 numbers it would be relatively simple.When I taught philosophy of science, I would illustrate this to my class by putting on my desk five or six objects that I had gathered from my pocket and my desk in my office: such things as a ruler, a paperclip, a pen, a penny, Scotch tape, a pocket calculator, etc. I pretended to arrange these items carefully in a row on the desk in front of the class. I really arranged them at random! I told them that I had arranged these objects in a certain order (this was a lie) and I wanted them to find this order. I mentioned that the order might have something to do with the material that made up these objects, the size of the objects, or the use of these objects, or the name of these objects, or some combination of these. I also mentioned that the order could be alphabetical by the first letter of the name or use of the object or by its second letter, or every second letter, etc. I allowed the class to talk among themselves.
The result was that the class always found an order!And sometimes more than one! I then congratulate them and tell them that I had arranged the objects at random. What I wanted them to learn was that finding an order in a sequence does not mean that this order was used to generate the sequence. Given enough patience and intelligence one can always find an order in just about anything.
I suggested a way to compare different orders. Any cultural work became well-know if it is manifest archetype clear because only in this case it resonates with collective unconsciousness soundly. So, the correspondences can be checked by presenting such works which fits both elements of two systems. (Actually, there is a way to compare archetypes themselves but it takes rather refined symbolical perception which is hardly achieved by most without training.)There's a humbling message there for those that feel "special" about finding a corresponding order in just about anything. "Your" order may not be the "one" order that puts all other orders to sleep...
The example is interesting however, the conclusion is wrong in general case. If the number or things is much more, like 64, then I doubt that any order can be found if the thing are placed randomly. You can take first 50 numbers for expression for any transcendental number, like Pi, and work out any order for these numbers. I bet you would fail in this attempt. But if you take only 5 numbers it would be relatively simple.
Please, stop talking nonsense. I gave you chance to describe your system to compare it with discussed here. The idea of identification two trigrams with on suit is the first what comes in mind. However, it produces rather ugly system of correspondences for combinatorical reasons.No more stew in your cauldron until you dump the thing out and clean it. It's gross.
You are completely wrong. If a statement correct when parameter equals 5 there is no way that the same statement is correct when parameter is 6. Your example is (perhaps) correct when the number of things is 5 but there are absolutely no reasons why it will be correct when the number of things is 64.The point of that example, which should need no further explanation nor justifying examples examples of any kind, is that most found "orders" are as "subjective" as anything.
Please, stop talking nonsense. I gave you chance to describe your system to compare it with discussed here. The idea of identification two trigrams with on suit is the first what comes in mind. However, it produces rather ugly system of correspondences for combinatorical reasons.
That’s not true. I am citing you: “So where you have swords in my system you'll find either Qian or Xun. ” However, there are 28 hexs with Qian or Xun but only 14 cards with the swords.I answered all of your questions early on in this thread, and in post 17 especially. You chose to ignore this.
Not true again. I am citing you: “Yijing, Vol 1, Part One, pp 54-55I answered your latest question about a website just above, with reference to about 8 pages of text.
These are too presumptuous words for a person who even can’t add natural numbers correctly.I have no doubt now that you are going to remain a fool for the rest of your studies here.
It’s not there anymore…..does anyone know of an alternative chart that can be found or where that one originated? I’ve used it for many years and am struggling to find another like it. Any suggestions would be gratefully received. CarolynHello.
http://hermenes.com/Homepage/ichintaro_en.htm
Here you can find a system of correspondences between the I Ching and Tarot. These systems have absolutely different origins but you can see yourselves how they correspond each other. Keeping in mind the correspondences you can enrich your understanding of hexagrams and cards.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).