Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
When one is confronting a single situation and choosing insight, or even selecting between a pair of possible decisions, the approach of posing a question, or pair of questions, to Yi is fairly straightforward. What is the best approach, however, when attempting to determine amongst a broad set of possibilities? Let me give a concrete example that Hilary mentions in her post “I Ching and Business” [https://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/answers/2005/03/17/i-ching-and-business/], that of setting a price point for a product. Now, this can be thought of as essentially a ‘search algorithm’ – more precisely, a well-defined quantitative, single-dimensioned search algorithm, however it might be carried out.
What if you need to select among multiple possibilities in multiple dimensions? For instance, if one is looking for an ideal employment, there are questions of location, type of work, size of firm/institution and so on. It is a kind of broad ‘blue ocean’ query, rather than simply selecting between a pair of possible actions. A search algorithm could be rigorously formalized and optimized or could be more along the lines of the blindfolded children’s game “warmer…cooler”, only the querent is literally ‘blind’ – not having a clear direction as to an optimal outcome – and Yi is shouting/whispering “warmer…cooler”.
I queried Yi regarding this: “Is it acceptable to structure a set of questions addressing a single topic in order to narrow down your reply from a broad set of possibilities?” and received 10.3>1, with the wonderfully on-point humbling/nixing changing line (tr. Hilary):
‘With one eye, can see.
Lame, can still walk.
Treads on the tiger’s tail:
It bites him. Pitfall.
Soldier acting as a great leader.’
Now, this might be taken as Yi’s reply to me in that moment, rather than a general judgment.
What are people’s thoughts on the best way to deal with the kind of broad ‘blue ocean’ query I have described above?
Dear moss elk: I’m afraid your reply is too cryptic for me. Can you elucidate?
Dear Freedda: To reply to your second posting, your offered translation of the changing line in question is a little different (and somewhat more positive) in language than Hilary’s translation, as given in my originating post. The comparison opens to a larger issue – which should really be its own thread – of which translation to look to. In other words, what are the ‘ground rules’ established between the diviner and whatever wisdom-intelligence speaks as Yi to maximize the chances of understanding what is being conveyed. For myself, the ‘ground rule’ I have ‘announced’ to Yi is that I look primarily to Hilary’s translation (both her I Ching: Walking Your Path, Creating Your Future as well as the word translations of the ancient Chinese Zhouyi ‘technical’ vocabulary in Language of Change: A Yijing Glossary), but also glance over to Karcher’s I Ching: Plain & Simple as well as DeKorne’s Gnostic I Ching (which incorporates a number of leading translations). This could obviously be extended, and sometimes is, but it already covers a fair amount of ground. Even in comparing Hilary’s translation to Karcher’s I Ching: Plain & Simple, there are, occasionally, distinct shades of meaning that can make a real difference in interpretation. This is a potential problem that requires steering between a) the Scylla of consulting only a single translation, of whatever quality, and b) the Charybdis of looking at too many translations and getting confused in interpretation when meanings diverge. Usually, of course, meanings diverge – among what are presumed to be capable translators – for a very good reason, namely the impossibility of fixing a single English meaning to a given word from the Zhouyi. Ritsema/Karcher (alternatively, Ritsema/Sabbadini) make this perfectly clear. The kind of double assumption I am working under is a) good translation matters and cleaving to the meaning of the ancient Zhouyi as closely as possible is important (in particular, looking to translations and not ‘repackagings’ in contemporary English), but that also b) Yi is adaptable and able to ‘speak’ with a particular ‘go-to’ translation in mind, as long as this is clearly understood and consistently followed on the part of the diviner. In this latter case, consider the near-even split of opinion, both ancient and modern, with regard to the three-coin method, as to whether two heads = yin line / two tails = yang line or the other way round. A choice has to be made by a given diviner – the only way forward is to make a choice, ‘announce’ it to Yi and then be consistent with it.You say you found Yi's response 'perfectly limpid', but you haven't shared what makes it so, or what you think it means for your reading? Of course it's perfectly fine that you don't agree with my approach, but you did invite us to share our 'thoughts on the best way to deal with the kind of broad ‘blue ocean’ query I have described above' ....
And what I described often works for me, regardless of the particulars of the subject or the 'type' of query. I'm often amazed too with how specific the response is.
Looking a bit more at 10.3 and what the response said, here we have:
The one-eyed are still able to seeThe lame are still able to take stepsTreading upon the tiger’s tailIs the bitten one’s misfortuneThe military man works for a greater noble
I was wondering then, is this referring to three or four different people and their responses/approaches to 'Treading', 'Respectful Conduct', and/or 'Propriety, Courtesy, Respect' (three names for hex. 10); or, is this perhaps one person, who might - at times - have trouble seeing or moving forward, or steps unthinkingly into danger, but that even so, this person can be - or become - a warrior if acting for the greater good? One might even think that it's only by making these mis-steps that they can become a 'warrior'.
And here, a 'warrior' might be 'detached and at ease, and she 'acts not for profit, but for the spirit', and they think that despite their mis-steps and despite the troubles of the world, they see it as 'stupendous, awesome, mysterious, and unfathomable' (all from the teachings of Don Juan).
Similarly, if we were to think of this response as being about querying the Yi (and not about a particular person), I can see the Yi responding:
'Go on, ask your question. Don't worry if it's worded incorrectly, or if you don't see clearly how to best act or ask; and that even if you 'step in it' - and fumble and blow it - if you ask sincerely - as a warrior might - you'll get an answer that you can use or one that you need.'
Works for me!
Best, D.
Dear Liselle: Yes, I know the article you referenced well. I fully agree, a kind of general ‘clearing question’ / ‘orienting question’ is a very good idea. To bark up the right tree, first you need to be in the right woods. Yes, checking to make sure that, really, these are the woods you are supposed to be in before proceeding on a tree hunting expedition is a generally good idea. How might this work in practice? Let’s take a leaf out of Hilary’s blog post, mentioned in my originating post, where she was trying to set a price point for a product. She doesn’t go into detail as to how exactly this was done, but let me propose a possible example:Mr. Elk, sir, I don't understand your reply, either. That makes at least three of us. Do you mean something like, "ask a higher-level question"? That would go along nicely with the following...
Peters, here's an article Hilary wrote in her blog, if you haven't already seen it:
Yi and decisions: a cautionary tale
Here is a cautionary tale about involving Yi in decision making, how this can get you tied up in an endless series of unpromising readings, and the tremendously simple way to avoid this. Why is this a cautionary tale? Well, because I've managed to act out the full story twice in the past couple of wwww.onlineclarity.co.uk
It recommends starting out asking for general guidance first, as Freedda also suggested. I think the point is you might recognize something from that which will help guide everything else. (I'm going from memory as unfortunately I don't have time to re-read the whole thing now.)
Also, here's the results page from using Clarity's "Quick search" feature with the search term 'decision': https://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/?s=decision
From the article titles it seems useful (I want to sit and read them too when I have chance).
("Quick search" is in the menu at the top of the page - hover over the magnifying glass on the right. It's really good for finding blog articles.)
One guideline I know of (from a few different people) is to look for a Yi version that keeps the imagery of the Yi, and doesn't do your thinking for you. ...
I find it interesting (thought not entirely in a critical way) that you then mention a half dozen or so versions - some of which are very, very different - and I found myself wondering, where is the clarity, or where are the 'ground rules' in that approach? ...
I don't really understand your idea of 'annoucing' this to the Yi, but it seems to me that consistency is what matters here - that you don't swap out heads for tails mid-reading.
But if for your next reading you wanted to swap the coin's meanings, or use yarrow stalks or willow branches, or use computer-generate random numbers, ...
For me - despite differences in translation/interpretation - I am seeing a similar theme to what you, I, and others are saying here: that a different approach is needed, and perhaps one that (according to some of us) should be more direct and simple .....
Again, thanks, and just a few more thoughts: ...But that's just one take on things, and if that's not true for you, that's fine too - we are just exploring here at your invitation ....
Best, D.
Thanks Moss Elk, et al.
I understand that in the era of oracle bone divination (pre-Yi), they often didn't ask questions, but instead made statements. So, instead of: will next fall's crop be good or fail? Will we have a harsh winter? Or, will the advancing army attack us?
.... you would have statements like:
'next fall's harvest' 'next winter' 'the approaching army'
I rather like that ..... simple, direct, open.
Best, D.
P.S. and thanks to Harmen Mesker, who first presented this idea to me:
Two workshops with Harmen Mesker in March, 2020
Two workshops with Harmen Mesker in March, 2020 – at The Academy of Acupuncture in San Diego, Calif. (USA) This is one workshop, but you can attend either for the first two days (March 26-27) which will be about using the I Ching, or you can attend all four days (March 26-29) which will also...www.onlineclarity.co.uk
The kind of double assumption I am working under is a) good translation matters and cleaving to the meaning of the ancient Zhouyi as closely as possible is important (in particular, looking to translations and not ‘repackagings’ in contemporary English), but that also b) Yi is adaptable and able to ‘speak’ with a particular ‘go-to’ translation in mind, as long as this is clearly understood and consistently followed on the part of the diviner. In this latter case, consider the near-even split of opinion, both ancient and modern, with regard to the three-coin method, as to whether two heads = yin line / two tails = yang line or the other way round. A choice has to be made by a given diviner – the only way forward is to make a choice, ‘announce’ it to Yi and then be consistent with it.
But it seems you politely rejected our suggestions, and instead did at least two more Yi queries about your question …
So it seems to me that despite multiple queries you’ve made and multiple suggestions from others, you do not yet have a response from the Yi which answers your original question: “How to best approach Yi re: broad multidimensional questions?”
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).