Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
Four lines change - go to the transformed hexagram and use the lower of the two Unchanging lines.
One moving line takes priority over the hexagram and the changed hexagram.
Of the six 'rules' he decided on,
only the first is correct. The other five are mistakes.
What he did was try to eliminate multiple line rulings. You can see this is an error if you receive for example:
8.5.6 (23)
Using his system, that would change the received reading result to 8.6 (20).
It is like sweeping uncomprehended things under a rug, pretending they do not exist.
Hi svenrusConcerning the Rules for determinating among multiple Changing lines authored by Chu Hsi, Joseph Adler has a translation [LINK]* where, in the Chapter IV (page 62-82) You can read it in detail.
Chapter III (page 46-61) divination with stalks of Yarrows in general.
* direct Download
---------------------------
(Out of context, I find this passage concerning Unchanged hexagrams interesting. Page 63:
"Any hexagram may have all unchanging lines. In that case we prognosticate on the basis of the original hexagram's T'uan statement, taking the inner hexagram as chen [the question, or present situation] and the outer hexagram as hui [the prognostication] **.
** The Inner Hexagram: Nuclear and the Outer Hexagram: Primary hexagram.
This could be seen as the nuclear hexagram reflecting what I Ching is reacting on - Or ??? )
And whom is the 'noble one'?..... With unchanging hexagrams, in the past, I have found good value in following the advice of the Noble One ....
Hi svenrus
………………………. When you say "This could be seen as the nuclear hexagram reflecting what I Ching is reacting on" I would have one slight reservation here in that I see the primary hexagram in an unchanging situation being more of a considered response to the root cause (the nuclear hexagram) rather than a reaction. The I Ching is 'responding to' rather than 'reacting on'.
It's kind of saying, trust me, I know what's behind all of this. No worries, no rush, things are all in hand (even though they may not seem so to the querent) just do a bit more of this or turn down the volume on that and you'll be working in the right direction.
……………………………………..
Indeed you did.I actually added an Or ?
The connection you made that the nuclear hexagram reflected your situation and from that gaining a deeper understanding is a powerful step to have taken. Awareness of this connection adds value to any reading and deserves attention. Similarly, in future, I will be paying more attention to the words of the Image and how the guidance in that relates / responds to the imbalance held in the nuclear hexagram.Some - or rather many - years ago I accidentally falls upon the phenomena that the nuclear hexagram reflected my situation. The question were about the flat I live in and I haven't looked at the nuclear hexagram at all until I wondered when discover that it were hex. 37: Home, The family etc. That it actually showed to me what my question were about. In later readings I were attentive on this phenomena and I think that it maybe could be so, namely that the nuclear hexagram reflects or - as You put it: respond to my question. And Yes: maybe "react" doesn't express it....
For now I'm delighted with your use of the word nuclear. Who knows,though, what wisdoms I may be tripped up be in the future?I trust in Joseph Adlers translation when I use the word nuclear for the Inner hexagram and primary for the Outer hexagram. Later in the qoutation here he use lower Trigram and upper Trigram (Somewhere I've read that the word Gua are used for trigram as well as hexagram)
And whom is the 'noble one'?
One image for me of junzi, though, is one of an active seeker of power and virtue. Searching for ways to better live life, on a personal and relational basis, through developing more highly refined qualities of character while, most importantly, keeping both feet firmly planted on the ground. A high-calibre journeyman treading the road less travelled: looking to realise their full potential.
I took part in that thread and I have a sense of different people's take and impression about the noble (young) one.A thread started by Hilary explores the qualities that the superior man ( noble one) can choose to embrace. In that thread I liked what Bradford had written and had added a perspective that made sense for me at the time ....
But in looking at this, I'm thinking that perhaps I didn't ask the right question .... You said - 'With unchanging hexagrams, in the past, I have found good value in following the advice of the Noble One.
So, the question I have is, what is the advice from the noble one that you are following? That's what is not clear to me.
Yes, I am referring to the text held in the Image. This is the guidance I look to engage with for readings giving unchanging hexagrams. Similarly I also engage with it in readings where there are changing lines. To listen to this text in unchanging hexagrams, for me, seems a common sense approach - if it's good enough to be offered to the noble one, it's good enough for me! Now seeing a source for these words, even if written centuries after the oracle and line text, as resting in the nuclear hexagram has been a reassuring insight.From your posts, I'm guessing that by 'advice' what you are referring to is each trigram's image text. Or, in other words, for the unmoving/unchangiong hexagrams, you are getting some insight from the text on the images that was added as part of the Ten Wings - the Confusian commentary which was added to the Yi many centuries after the oracle and line text. Do I have that about right?
No, the confusion was mine alone. To summarize my understanding of your way of reading: you look at the Image text and the nuclear hexagrams, along with Wilhelm's commentary - and all of these you find helpful in your interpretation. Is that about it?Looking at my post again I think what I have typed is not exactly what I was wanting to say and that may have contributed to your lack of clarity. I wrote
.... Yes, I am referring to the text held in the Image. This is the guidance I look to engage with for readings giving unchanging hexagrams. Similarly I also engage with it in readings where there are changing lines.
... So in summary ....
Yes, my understanding is that it is only in the first and second hexagrams where we find something written about what it means when all the lines are changing.In the Zhouyi there is text connected to all lines of first and second hexagrams changing. That seems to be the only situation where we can see what happens with multiple changing lines.
I think what you're saying here is: when we have all the lines moving with Hex. 1 and 2, we look at this 'seventh' line text, instead of looking at the text for all the six changing lines..... Suggesting, if we have 6 changing lines in Hex 1 and 2 and we use (a) rule to figure out what line that would mean, that will give very different outcome then what the book would intent.
First, a question, is 'crane in the shade' referring to a specific book or to a specific hexagram or line in the Yi, or .... ? (Note: answered by Svenrus, below)Line priority can work ... some of the methods ... give not all bad results (the one in crane in the shade I was using for some years).
Yet at the end, we need to either find a way to be able to read info without having the text with the specific line change or we need to make the system only show one changing line. Both are practiced in China.
Thanks, I am familar with that site, though I didn't remember what it was called.I think Gmulii meant "Calling crane in the shade", the Birocco-site I referred to in post #15
Is the 'nanjing rule' that you used to use the same as what I found here?I have used the socalled NanJing-rule for a long time but now I use my own method.
think what you're saying here is: when we have all the lines moving with Hex. 1 and 2, we look at this 'seventh' line text, instead of looking at the text for all the six changing lines.
I agree, but I don't see it as a 'rule', nor that we should apply this (or any rule) to the other 62 hexagrams. If that were the case, I assume the Yi's authors would have just included 62 more line meanings, one for every time you have all lines changing in the other 62 hexagrams.
I assume instead that the Yi's authors specifically thought it was important to add an extra line in both Hex 1 and Hex 2 to give meaning to the rare instances when all the lines were moving in these two hexagrams - and only for these two hexagrams.
Thanks, I am familar with that site, though I didn't remember what it was called.
Is the 'nanjing rule' that you used to use the same as what I found here?
I too use my own method, though to call it a 'method' implies more structure and consistancy than I usually use. My method might better be described as a collection of methods or an 'approach'.The Nanjing Rules of Interpretation
An alternative set of rules for interpreting the I Ching.www.russellcottrell.com
Best, D.
I can understand that you might see these two lines as examples of what happens when all 6 lines change, but that is only an assumption on your part, and we have no proof that is what the Yi's authors intended. I'd say if that were the case, they could have very easily adding another 62 statements - one for each instance where all six lines are changing. But they didn't, so we can only guess that this was a 'hint' - and we can only guess what it means and how to interpret it.... my point ... the reason for including 2 situations when there is a text with 6 changing line is done, so people have some hint that multiple changing lines will have different meaning .... if they wanted to include all possible combinations of all possible changing lines that would make the book gigantic ....
Again, you are taking 2 line statements out of 4,100 and giving them meaning and pretty much saying 'this is the way it is for all instances when you have two or more changing lines.' However, all you're basing this on is your assumptions about what you think these two lines should mean, but you really have no proof of that. You really don't know if this 'hint' applies to only two line statements, or to 64, or to 384, or to 4,032 (this last number being the number of instances where we have multiple moving lines).Because now we know 6 changing lines have different meaning then any rule can provide. And that very likely means that any combination of changing lines will have different meaning as well.
.... the important fact is the text is different with multiple changing lines. So its not about 6 changing line by itself, its about more then 1 changing line, as that is clear and difficult to argue with, example of that.
Assuming for a moment that these two 'seventh' line statements in Hex. 1 and 2 are in fact 'hints' which mean that we should treat all instances where we have more than one moving line differently, how are we supposed to do that? I don't see any direction or instructions in the Yi, and I'm not sure you've said - with any detail - how we'd do that?About the 2 ways ... My idea was that either we try to find meaning in multiple changing lines outside of the text with the rest of the lines, or we make the hexagram in a way that show only one changing line.
The only other possible solution is to take meaning from another line and add it to that reading. But we already know that is unlikely to work, as in the examples of 6 changing line, no single line has that meaning .... So there aren't that many ways. We read the lines outside of the text. We read the lines with the text. We don't have the lines, that seems to be it. : )
And, again I think there are multiple ways for how to read multiple moving lines: you can just read the line statements; you can try to combine the meanings of these statements so they tell one 'story' (and not multiple ones); you could glean meaning from the trigrams in a whole host of ways.
And again, as I said above, assuming you're right, how do we then interpret the other 4,032 instances where we have multiple moving lines? You say these two statements in hexagrams 1 and 2 show us how to do this, but I don't see where we're given that direction - those instructions - but you say it does show us 'how to read changing lines', so I'm asking you to show me how, to maybe give an example.Even if that was the case we still have how to read changing lines and we can still see the difference from the existing text in the book.
And again, as I said above, assuming you're right, how do we then interpret the other 4,032 instances where we have multiple moving lines? You say these two statements in hexagrams 1 and 2 show us how to do this, but I don't see where we're given that direction - those instructions - but you say it does show us 'how to read changing lines', so I'm asking you to show me how, to maybe give an example.
And maybe, to keep it consistent, as an example you can use 3.1.2.3.4.5.6 - the next hexagram with all moving lines.
D.
And what or who is Liu Yao? This is the first time those two words are being used in this discussion.I would read it with Liu Yao ....
how do we then interpret the other 4,032 instances where we have multiple moving lines?
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).