Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
Just a thought to ask Yi itself about it's underlying principles...14.1.6>32.I know there are fundamental underlying principles in life and all that will mean, if no one is capable of demonstrating even the vaguest underlying principles connected to the Yi, is that the Yi isnt one of those things that wasnt built on any fundamentals
Just a thought to ask Yi itself about it's underlying principles...14.1.6>32.
But, then, if you haven't found Yi to be a connection to underlying principles after 30 years, I wouldn't expect this to change anything for you either and maybe you're right that it's just not for you.
Best wishes whatever your path,
I'am's
Just a thought to ask Yi itself about it's underlying principles...14.1.6>32.
But, then, if you haven't found Yi to be a connection to underlying principles after 30 years, I wouldn't expect this to change anything for you either and maybe you're right that it's just not for you.
Best wishes whatever your path,
I'am's
Oh it's 40 years allegedly.
Surely this thread is only a platform for more of the same ?
This is your own personal answer according to what your ideas of 'principles' actually are. I don't find the notion of underlying principles interesting which is understandable given we have had about 10 days (?) of jukkodave splattering this entire section with talk of 'underlying principles' and 'rational and coherent' so do we really need another thread of the same ?
As this topic is becoming less about exploring the ins and outs of divination and more about a pursuit of underlying principles, may I suggest sharing further readings and insights about the subject on the blog section of the site. It is open to back and forth dialogue there as well. I've never used the blog section myself other than making comments and realize it would be another learning hurdle (hopefully intuitive enough), but think your passion for the journey might better resonate with other like-minded individuals there.
I didnt say I hadnt found it, only that I didnt understand it completely.
Dave, no one understands it completely.
That's a truism if ever there was one.
People have been working for thousands of years to chip away at understanding.
Sheesh.
It may look as though people have been chipping away for thousands of years, but if that was the case we would have more understanding that we had thousands of years ago and yet we take the opposite view with the Yi and consider that what they knew thousands of years ago is more than we know now.
If we had been succesfull chipping away we would see signs of congruence and agreement, but a look at the history and the present state shows that there is no congruence or agreement on anything that might be considered as understanding of fundamentals.
In my initial post, Dave, I quote you as questioning whether or not Yi is even built on fundamentals, certainly a valid question for someone who takes precautions. Since you further ask that someone demonstrate "even the vaguest underlying principles connected to the Yi," I chose to set an example of how that might be done.
I asked Yi directly what its underlying principles are, not for myself, but for the benefit of all. Personally, I am 100% certain that anyone else's answer, even if different, would simply reinforce the same answer (which I interpret similarly to you), yes, even something like 35.5.6>45. I don't agree that Yi isn't comprehensive enough to have given an "I have no underlying principles" reading as well, but, in my opinion, it did not. However, until you attain enough certainty on your own about the validity of Yi's connection with fundamentals, all the rest is secondary.
That said, you say in your reply "I didnt say I hadnt found it, only that I didnt understand it completely." So, maybe your quote in the first post was not meant to be taken literally, just your way of expressing frustration at not understanding underlying principles well enough to your liking. I can see how frustration could easily be part of the package of such a quest so to speak.
As this topic is becoming less about exploring the ins and outs of divination and more about a pursuit of underlying principles, may I suggest sharing further readings and insights about the subject on the blog section of the site. It is open to back and forth dialogue there as well. I've never used the blog section myself other than making comments and realize it would be another learning hurdle (hopefully intuitive enough), but think your passion for the journey might better resonate with other like-minded individuals there.
I'm not sure that's true. Just because people try to make use of research and discoveries into the origins doesn't mean knowledge hasn't increased since then. An imperfect analogy might be to governments. In the U.S. we have the Constitution and other writings of the Founding Fathers, and people involved in government, e.g. the Supreme Court, constitutional scholars, etc., are constantly trying to read their minds by studying the documents, and apply them to today's issues. But the fact that they wrote a genius Constitution doesn't necessarily mean they were better at running their version of the country than we are at running ours. (Generally speaking. Please let's not parse that too finely. I'm not talking about Jefferson vs. Trump.)
Similarly with the I Ching? We spend time trying to understand what the authors were trying to say, and how they put the book together, but that doesn't mean the Zhou understood their answers any better than we do.
(to the tune of "Somewhere," from West Side Story)
"There was once a place
Where no one ex-pected us
To solve three-thousand-year-old my-steries
Im-me-diately
...Somewhere"
Dave, in the words of another, more recent tune, "You Need to Calm Down."
Would you try? Please?
My request for "even the vaguest underlying principles connected to the Yi," has to be in context. Unless one differentiates and declares that differentiation, as to whether the Yi is considered, known, used in terms of underlying principles of nature and ordinances of heaven, or, used just as any form of diviantion might be, ther is no way to determine or evaluate what the person is saying or meaning.
Which still leaves the question open as to whether you trust Yi to be connected with underlying principles. Ultimately, it's a personal quest for certainty which no-one can hand to you because it involves personal decisions about the reliability of sources within and without. Maybe you're not happy with what you're finding within or without and that's valid too, so your search goes on...
To clarify my own stand, the fact that things like goodness, decency, courtesy, excellence, integrity, etc. even exist is good enough knowledge about the existence of underlying principles for me. The world hungers for the application of these foundational elements, though, and as long as Yi continues to resonate with answers that help me and others in that way, I have no hesitation about its use.
Still, it doesn't hurt to have a mechanic around if things break down, so I am all for knowing how things work. That is, as long as the chopping of wood and carrying of water chores still get done as well.
I disagree that humans are born with innate "admirable qualities" such as those mentioned, however I do agree that, yes, we resonate more with the fundamentals when we choose, for example, to draw integrity and goodness into our lives.
Yi works well enough for my purposes while your mandate appears more precision-oriented related to Yi's workings. With your advice from Yi being to keep searching, I'd have to agree there is something yet for you find. Of course, as you've said in many ways, it might include that, for you, it's an old, broken down tool not worth using. Or, the discovery of a Yi 2.0. Or, something in between even, like it works for certain things for you and not others.
(Alfred Huang, grown up in chinese traditions and a chinese himself, must have had his reasons for chosing Moon as meaning for the ideograph ?)
So I dont have a mandate, unless anyone would consider it a amndate to continue asking questions, pointing out the contradictions and inconsistencies, pointing out the lack of logical, rational, and coherent explanations, pointing out that the history, and a bit of logic, point to othere possibilities which make a lot of sense and should surely be worth considering if we are concerned with the truth rather than just believing in something because that is easier to do.
That being said, Harmen, that first page, the humanum.arts one, looks blank to me when it comes up. There's stuff at the top, and stuff in the left sidebar, but the whole center of the page is blank. Then again, I've never been to that site, so I don't know what it's supposed to look like.
Harmen, if you have time, could you say any more about all this? What about Huang's resulting explanation, what he says about how 14 changed from "the inappropriateness of possession" to simply "possess"?
Should any of that change by knowing that you contains rou (meat) and not yue (moon)?
What do you say about what 14 means? (I do realize, as far as I can tell, that you haven't actually gotten to 14 yet.)
Hello Harmen, et al. You mention 16.4 a few times, but don't you mean 14.6? And more generally, that the context of both lines 14.1 and 14.6 is about 'great achievements'?... so everything I say about 14 at this point is preliminary.
The name does occur at H16.4: 由豫。大有得。勿疑。朋盍簪。
...
And if I use that to find the meaning of the name of H14, as a general meaning for the complete hexagram, I would translate it as 'great achievements'.
Hello Harmen, et al. You mention 16.4 a few times, but don't you mean 14.6?
And more generally, that the context of both lines 14.1 and 14.6 is about 'great achievements'?
Yep, I'm gradually working my way through 10 now so everything I say about 14 at this point is preliminary. First, since the name of the hexagram does not occur in the line texts it is difficult to find its meaning in the context of the Zhouyi. I'm not even sure if you should see the name as a general theme for the whole hexagram.
The name does occur at H16.4:
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).