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 you turn to use the I Ching for an immediate assessment of a situation it is usually due to an inability to assess an emotion-painted situation that has come to the attention of consciousness.
Even if you extend your awareness of the situation by using the approach you outline, there will still be a HUGE amount which is unconscious or unknown to you. That's the nature of reality - most of it is unknown to us. So what do you do about that unknown portion? I'd consult the Yi using the magical method, if I were you.
dobro said:Here's one BIG advantage of your approach: it increases self-knowledge. This is huge.
Here's one BIG disadvantage of your approach: real self-knowledge takes a long time. Which means it's less than useful for issues that you feel require immediate decisions.
dobro said:Here's another BIG disadvantage of your approach: like I said before, no matter how much knowledge you get, there will ALWAYS be a larger portion of reality that is unknown to you.
dobro said:Okay, here's one BIG advantage of using the Yi the traditional way: it goes beyond what is known and gives you a useful analog of what is unknown.
dobro said:And here's one BIG disadvantage of using the Yi the traditional way: it largely bypasses the work of self-enquiry that leads to self-knowledge; it's a shortcut, in other words. Me, I wouldn't use it if it weren't so useful. Like Lise says, it goes to the seeds where things have no name. It goes to the darkness. Your approach operates in the light.
dobro said:Me, I like operating in the light and increasing the domain of the light, and I like balancing that by harmonizing with what's going on beyond the range of the light. I use the Yi for the latter. I use self-enquiry for the former. You seem not to use the Yi for what's it's best designed to do, and instead to be using it for what it wasn't designed to do. Like using an airplane to travel down a motorway.
No - I lift the I Ching into what is it capable of doing and so bring it into the 21st century AD. Traditionalists treat the I Ching as a horse and cart show - I demonstrate that it is in fact a spaceship capable of representing 'all there is', not just 10th century BC China. It is transportable to any context covered by neuron-dependent life forms - at any level of being (and so yin/yang line or 12 line dodecagrams)
Chris.
Very interesting Chris thank you. Any creator of new way of interpreting the IC and thus reality, must be open to answering a few questions about himself, especially with some of the above statements in mind...
Several questions:
How do you see your work on the I Ching in relation to yourself? Do you apply the same rigorous standards to your Self as you do your work? A negative or positive answer has implications for any methodology.
Do you see yourself as separate from this particular interpretation of the IC and therefore largely objective? Or do you see yourself as inextricably PART of this method and therefore identified with it to the detriment of objectivity? In other words, have you created a world that works for you because it perfectly meshes with your type of intellect and the way you and others prefer to see the world?
Is there a danger that we become focused too much on the form or framework of a particular method and forget the "substance" or are we entirely objective in engineering of reality as we see it?
Can you give examples in your own life regarding certain readings you have done for yourself (real life examples please) so that we are better able to adapt it to daily life and apply the principles beyond the confines of the neuro-biological machine and binary sequences, for example.
Topal
Several questions:
How do you see your work on the I Ching in relation to yourself? Do you apply the same rigorous standards to your Self as you do your work? A negative or positive answer has implications for any methodology.
topal said:Do you see yourself as separate from this particular interpretation of the IC and therefore largely objective? Or do you see yourself as inextricably PART of this method and therefore identified with it to the detriment of objectivity? In other words, have you created a world that works for you because it perfectly meshes with your type of intellect and the way you and others prefer to see the world?
topal said:Is there a danger that we become focused too much on the form or framework of a particular method and forget the "substance" or are we entirely objective in engineering of reality as we see it?
topal said:Can you give examples in your own life regarding certain readings you have done for yourself (real life examples please) so that we are better able to adapt it to daily life and apply the principles beyond the confines of the neuro-biological machine and binary sequences, for example.
Topal
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).