Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
I'm falling into the Balkin Camp.I'm becoming a Balkin fanboy - I really admire his renditions and his commentaries for their clarity and how they lend themselves to my own ruminations on the material. However, in Section Three of the Introduction, he says this: "...anyone who uses the oracle over a period of time must recognize that the generation of hexagrams is a purely random event. But this does not undermine the questioner's ability to gain insights from interacting with the book."
It's the first part of that statement I don't agree with - my experience is that what the Yi gives you is anything but 'purely random'. Instead, it's often scarily appropriate to the situation being enquired about. So, maybe Balkin and I don't have the same idea about what 'random' means, or maybe we just disagree. What's your take? Random?
If I understand that first paragraph in your pdf correctly, you view the coin toss as a function of your being - unique. Is that right?#1, "........ What's your take? Random?"
Hi dobro p, I haven't read this book but the take on causality/randomness concerning this back around eight years ago in the pdf I wrote, still today I think that the viewpoint in this has something worthy...
Maybe what he meant is that there is no possibility to predict the next result I Ching will put out. No harm. The idea of having a group of possibilities generated by two sets of equals 64 hexagrams relating to each other with seix line each and a 7th unchanging state is inmense.I'm becoming a Balkin fanboy - I really admire his renditions and his commentaries for their clarity and how they lend themselves to my own ruminations on the material. However, in Section Three of the Introduction, he says this: "...anyone who uses the oracle over a period of time must recognize that the generation of hexagrams is a purely random event. But this does not undermine the questioner's ability to gain insights from interacting with the book."
When the I Ching speaks to me, I feel the same. It's often scarily appropriate to the situation being enquired about, like you said, many times very literaly too. So if its valid for one question, would it be valid for three questions in a row about the same topic? For xample:It's the first part of that statement I don't agree with - my experience is that what the Yi gives you is anything but 'purely random'. Instead, it's often scarily appropriate to the situation being enquired about. So, maybe Balkin and I don't have the same idea about what 'random' means, or maybe we just disagree. What's your take? Random?
I'm falling into the Balkin Camp.
Stage 3: the most elaborate meaning making machine that ever existed contemplates words, imagery, symbols and so much more...
Not looking to persuade you one way or another. Our unconscious percolates many a tune or image into the conscious. As with I Ching dreams, that are randomly produced, the dreams of the unconscious still need interpretation.It's fine with me if it turns out to be that way. But from my present vantage point, it seems about as random as dreams to me. (I'm into depth psychology and view dreams as messages from the unconscious to the conscious ego - tailor-made, appropriate to what you need to know, completely non-random.)
Interesting that you see Yi as attracting wisdom. Another way would be to see the wisdom as inherent in the Yi and that it is the openness of the querent that actually does the attracting of the wisdom. Consider, someone who has not studied the Book of Changes. All the joining of dots and connectivity you speak of is still there in the pages as an inherent wisdom and yet it remains unreachable to them. Who is it then that attracts the wisdom? The informed querent or the Book or something else?I love - no, adore - the way the Yi attracts wisdom also. I love the way the Image links the meaning of the hexagram to what might be called moral fiber and individual development (the Image always seems to be saying something like 'Okay, you enquired into this situation and you got your Judgement for how best to navigate it, but just before you press on with navigating that situation, spare a thought for the inner dimension, to your personal bearing and development. After all, situations come and situations go, but who are you and how are you shaping yourself is what you really want to know.' I love how it attracts - magnetizes might be a better word - powerful, insightful wise minds to add their commentaries to the ongoing enterprise. That's love.
In hexagram 4 the I Ching explicitly advises not to ask three times about the same issue, this should also be considered as meaningful. Here are clear stated rules.
Legge´s translation, an excerpt
I do not (go and) seek the youthful and inexperienced, but he comes and seeks me.
Is I Ching saying? "You are coming to me. You are having a problem. "
When he shows (the sincerity that marks) the first recourse to divination, I instruct him.
If you honestly want to learn and be guide (you will be instructed), so be it, it has value for divination.
If he apply a second and third time, that is troublesome; and I do not instruct the troublesome.
No instruction available for the those cannot see the meaning of the first one, diving is not valuable and who create trouble (drama, problems, injustice, etc) will get 0 benefit of it.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).