Some more:

I’ve been wandering through the airport thinking about the supposed Confucian emphasis on the value of community and family – are these really properly, or particularly Confucian values? Three hypotheses for your consideration:
1) The character of the junzi seems pretty important as an individualistic ideal

• the character of the junzi isn’t further specified according to its embodiment in family roles
• the junzi’s character is really an expression of an individualistic ideal, even if it becomes applicable to ends of family and community
• this is not unlike reasonable Western ideals of moral agency—they aren’t meant to have value apart from social ends; moral agency is primarily directed toward reasonability in social interactions

2) The family is a model, emblematic of the sorts of social interactions that are present in community as a whole, but does not have value-primacy of any sort
3) Community, in Confucian conceptions, is not in principle different from broad notions of civil society in the West

Click to expand...

Gentlemen prefer bronze...

We are not the only ones concerned about the "junzi". Cool post and comments here:

I thought I would post this string of comments that ended up under the “100 ways” post, since it is really a different topic–namely, how to translate “junzi” (often translated “gentleman”). It’s a topic that might be useful/interesting for others to join in on (the “ubermensch” references owe to a quip I made about Nietzsche, to which Chris replied, and which set this whole string of comments in motion):

Click to expand...

meng said:

It depends on the individual's true nature. That's why fixed rules don't apply to the general description of junzi. Someone's nature/dao/genius may in fact be selflessness. I think we all have had the good fortune to have met someone like this at least once during our lives. Another's nature/dao/genius may be loud and dynamic. Another's may be both, or neither, depending on the time and circumstance.

I have a problem/issue/whatever, when anyone tries to portray 'the superior person' of any culture or belief as necessarily being this demure, quiet, selfless dude; as though the path to sagehood means taking no risks, never speaking out against popular opinions, never challenging the mores, or never questioning the "facts". No offense to anyone, but that seems like a really dull junzi, and not one I'd care to learn from or go see.

Click to expand...

I agree not part of my experience nor do I think it manifests that way - only via the fake. But genuine trailblazers can and do have that calm and peaceful quality depending on their personality traits as well I suppose. I think they go through such an intense, self-elected stripping process that they come out the other side with something more than just humility.

I've had the luck to meet one of these guys or rather gals. She was the epitome of the spiritual warrior with ultimate poise. She took absolutely no BS whatsoever but she defended against it with the integrity and wisdom borne from getting her feet dirty and leading by example. What's more she was like you and I and had a sense of humour and a powerful sense of justice. A turbo-Junzi I'd say.

Topal

turbo-Junzi, lol!

Hi Luis and Meng,
Seeing Chinese philosophy through Western eyes is like watching a championship regatta through the eyes of a kid in a bathtub with his rubber duckie.

In Western scientific objective academic terms, ethics is defined as that branch of philosophy which is soluble in ethanol...

Confucius added to ethical philosophy by forming ethical precepts in terms of proper conduct in light of the context and timing seeking to make thing objectively ideal for all concerned and phrasing this in terms of the trigram imagery applied to the ideal person or Junzi.

Family and Community are different in Confucian Chinese philosophy since the social and political structures are based in family farmers with clear tradition and lineage going back for millennia. Everybody else in the political hierarchy, for all the time there was an Emperor, was part of the Imperial Civil Service. Before that everyone longed for the peace and local prosperity hoped for when there was only one military ruler to upset folks needing troops or taxes rather than many local warlords fighting forever to hold more territory.

Principles remain the same, as local life also constant (cf. well as center of village community hex 48). Higher philosophy mostly a matter of how one interprets Tao and the Junzi as being attuned to the Tao.

Frank

Hi Frank,

fkegan said:

Seeing Chinese philosophy through Western eyes is like watching a championship regatta through the eyes of a kid in a bathtub with his rubber duckie.

Click to expand...

Would you clarify where exactly I proposed to do such thing? I've only pointed to what other people are discussing, in parallel to Clarity (and, as far as I know, completely unaware of each other's discussions until I provided the links), about the concept of Junzi and Chinese Philosophy in general.

As for myself, I've have always tried very hard to view each philosophical set within their own idiosyncrasies. I don't allow myself any mental crossbreeding.

fkegan said:

Hi Luis and Meng,
Seeing Chinese philosophy through Western eyes is like watching a championship regatta through the eyes of a kid in a bathtub with his rubber duckie.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily Frank. Chinese philosophy is just different. Wonderful, but just another thread in the overall tapestry, as it were. Western spiritual traditions can be just as rich. It depends which traditions you have studied and I can probably lay a bet you haven't studied them all - despite your age....

Give me a rubber duckie anyday.

Topal

topal said:

Not necessarily Frank. Chinese philosophy is just different. Wonderful, but just another thread in the overall tapestry, as it were. Western spiritual traditions can be just as rich. It depends which traditions you have studied and I can probably lay a bet you haven't studied them all - despite your age....

Give me a rubber duckie anyday.

Topal

Click to expand...

Hi Topal,
Preferring the rubber ducky is a viable choice, certainly in Western philosophy.

There are differences in epistemology or Piaget stage and sophistication in various kinds of philosophy though the reduction of other folks' beliefs to mere caricature is always a problem. Far more in Western academic tradition with the strong bias to see all Truth as revealed in the Latin translation of Hebrew and Greek Scripture as interpreted by various political rulers from Constantine through the Popes and Scholastics.

I am well aware of indigenous or tribal philosophical systems being quite sophisticated, and also sharing a universality with all other such systems that contrasts greatly to the Crusader mentality. So, it isn't as though there is an infinitely diversity of systems to study. There are the geometrical/observational traditions and the Western Church traditions with the variations by individuals based upon their personal perspectives and experience.
So, I would advise not laying the bet... the Vegas odds are not good. I have done work in English, medieval Latin Scholastic stuff, ancient Greek philosophy and symbolism, ancient Indian Buddhism, Taoist Chinese, natural systems, the history of psychology (including the reality of Freud and his personal insights), indigenous peoples, as well as the universal correspondence of geometry, observation, and symbolism, General Systems theory, etc. There are lots of specific texts I have no familiarity with, but I have researched and analyzed the fundamentals most all of them assumed or are based upon. Also I worked with the experts in ancient texts, problems of translation through philology and semantics and semiotics who figured out most of the separate texts are only separate to give everyone the opportunity to publish their own work and claim their piece of publish or perish.

Would you clarify where exactly I proposed to do such thing? I've only pointed to what other people are discussing, in parallel to Clarity (and, as far as I know, completely unaware of each other's discussions until I provided the links), about the concept of Junzi and Chinese Philosophy in general.

As for myself, I've have always tried very hard to view each philosophical set within their own idiosyncrasies. I don't allow myself any mental crossbreeding.

Click to expand...

Luis,
Where did you get the idea of my accusing you of being of the propositions you cite in your quotes and links? The quote you gave went on and on about viewing Confucius through Aristotle--that was all I was reacting too. Especially as Aristotle was a teacher of forensic rhetoric without much interest in what we would call philosophy (or Aquinas' translation of his so-called Aristotle the Philosopher). There may have been very good philosophical analysis of Confucius lost in there with your original quote, but how would one pry the Scholastic mistranslation and misinterpretation of Aristotle from your quote?

I am still wondering what folks think about the Junzi not as a real world personality like our modern celebrities but as a literary device, also like our modern fictional characters or major celebrities. The Junzi is a role model and personage to admire and appreciate--like Britney or Einstein. That is where to apply your purity of cultural lineages within their natural habitats... parallel Hannah Montana and the Junzi for example.

Frank

fkegan said:

Luis,
Where did you get the idea of my accusing you of being of the propositions you cite in your quotes and links?

Click to expand...

Erm..., from the:
I was obviously mistaken...

fkegan said:

I am still wondering what folks think about the Junzi not as a real world personality like our modern celebrities but as a literary device, also like our modern fictional characters or major celebrities. The Junzi is a role model and personage to admire and appreciate--like Britney or Einstein. That is where to apply your purity of cultural lineages within their natural habitats... parallel Hannah Montana and the Junzi for example.

Click to expand...

Well, I understand your disgust at the "misinterpretation of Aristotle" among all those philosophy professors (and some wannabes) but where do you get the foothold to find parallels between pop celebrities and the Junzi? I think it is another case of comparing apples and oranges...

fkegan said:

Hi Topal,
Preferring the rubber ducky is a viable choice, certainly in Western philosophy.

Click to expand...

Why? Did Kant and Goethe have a penchant for rubber duckies?

Actually, I said Western spiritual traditions which encompass much more than Western philosophy. But I'm nit-picking so carry on...

fkegan said:

There are differences in epistemology or Piaget stage and sophistication in various kinds of philosophy though the reduction of other folks' beliefs to mere caricature is always a problem. Far more in Western academic tradition with the strong bias to see all Truth as revealed in the Latin translation of Hebrew and Greek Scripture as interpreted by various political rulers from Constantine through the Popes and Scholastics.

There are lots of specific texts I have no familiarity with, but I have researched and analyzed the fundamentals most all of them assumed or are based upon. Also I worked with the experts in ancient texts, problems of translation through philology and semantics and semiotics who figured out most of the separate texts are only separate to give everyone the opportunity to publish their own work and claim their piece of publish or perish.

Click to expand...

Gosh you have been busy! But careful Frank...There's always more to discover. Don't rest on your laurels...Even the most knowledgable person really knows nothing right?

btw, Are you familiar with Boris Mouravieff's work? I think you'd find that quite interesting if you haven't come across it yet.

Topal

topal said:

Why? Did Kant and Goethe have a penchant for rubber duckies?

Actually, I said Western spiritual traditions which encompass much more than Western philosophy. But I'm nit-picking so carry on...



Gosh you have been busy! But careful Frank...There's always more to discover. Don't rest on your laurels...Even the most knowledgable person really knows nothing right?

btw, Are you familiar with Boris Mouravieff's work? I think you'd find that quite interesting if you haven't come across it yet.

Topal

Click to expand...

Hi Topal,
Do we have to spar? But if we must the Don Quixote in me will spot you the windmill.

Western spiritual traditions? Didn't know they had any except for Plato and his PTSD mentor Socrates and the rest of the medieval Church interpretation of everything from their own blind faith in their mistranslations of middle Eastern exotica--like the Bible. I meet your Kant and Goethe with I.F. Stone and Pythagoras.

I am resting on my laurels until those pesky tortoises come into sight. I know they are wily, but I like the Taoist approach and don't mind losing the competition.
I never claimed to know true nothingness! But I am close on some days. :bows:

I am working on P.J. O'Rouke on the Wealth of Nations, but I will give you my review of Boris Mouravieff in due course.

Frank

fkegan said:

Hi Topal,
Do we have to spar? But if we must the Don Quixote in me will spot you the windmill.

Western spiritual traditions? Didn't know they had any except for Plato and his PTSD mentor Socrates and the rest of the medieval Church interpretation of everything from their own blind faith in their mistranslations of middle Eastern exotica--like the Bible. I meet your Kant and Goethe with I.F. Stone and Pythagoras.

I am resting on my laurels until those pesky tortoises come into sight. I know they are wily, but I like the Taoist approach and don't mind losing the competition.
I never claimed to know true nothingness! But I am close on some days. :bows:

I am working on P.J. O'Rouke on the Wealth of Nations, but I will give you my review of Boris Mouravieff in due course.

Frank

Click to expand...

Oh, I wasn't sparring - just being playful.

Yes, do have a look at Mouraveiff. If you can get used to the Christian terminology (and his belief therein) there's a wealth of information that follows the line of gnostic thought vis a vis the Gospel of St. Thomas and other forgotten traditions. He was also very much part of the Fourth Way schools via Ouspensky and Gurdjieff though he didn't have much time for either it seems.

You can order them here: http://www.praxisinstitute.net/BOOKSHOP/bookshop.htm

or here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gnosis-Exoteric-Cycle-v-Vol/dp/1872292100

Topal

Luis, thanks for your great links! Very interesting, gave me some new viewpoints. And fun to see how people who specialize in something have a certain 'color'. Guess when they read here they'd also have fun about our color.

LiSe

heylise said:

Luis, thanks for your great links! Very interesting, gave me some new viewpoints. And fun to see how people who specialize in something have a certain 'color'. Guess when they read here they'd also have fun about our color.

Click to expand...

Hi Lise, you are welcome. I thought it would be good for everybody to see what other "brains" make of the Junzi, outside of the context of the Yi.

sparhawk said:

Well, I understand your disgust at the "misinterpretation of Aristotle" among all those philosophy professors (and some wannabes) but where do you get the foothold to find parallels between pop celebrities and the Junzi? I think it is another case of comparing apples and oranges...

Click to expand...

Hi Luis,
They are both good, nutritious fruit. The foothold for parallels of pop celebrities and Junzi is that they are both imaginative images, as I stated several times. Junzi don't exist in the flesh, they are lovely imagery based upon trigram lines used as examples of ideal conduct--they are Bronze Age comic book pop stars and heroes.

Speaking of Gentlemen Prefer Bronze, I notice no one noticed that the Junzi are 'noble' or 'Superior' because they are attuned to the Tao. That is the major distinction of Chinese moral philosophy and all the Western allusions and connotations to all these translations of terms. In Europe the higher ranks of society were filled with the descendants of invading conquerers who justified their occupation claiming they were nobles made by God of finer clay than the locals who were militarily defeated. That is the origin of all the lousy associations to gentleman, noble one or Superman that they were quibbling about.

The various Chinese connections of the Junzi being attuned to the Tao rather than any particular status by birth or protocol is what makes Western allusions strike me as petty and unenlightened. There isn't much of a Tao notion in the West--it requires an interest in noticing the background or Context while the West is too busy arguing over who gets to call their personal theories 'Truth revealed by God' that all should bow to and let the human author bask in glory. That is the rubber Ducky mentality I referred to --the infant terrible of magical thinking believing whatever he has at hand must be the same as whatever he hears about.

Hi Topal,
I am glad the Saturn station is over, it seems to have made all sorts of conflict.

Yes, do have a look at Mouraveiff. If you can get used to the Christian terminology (and his belief therein) there's a wealth of information that follows the line of gnostic thought vis a vis the Gospel of St. Thomas and other forgotten traditions.

Click to expand...

bold added

Information? Practices require practice, information won't get anyone anywhere. When I saw this fellow's name I thought of Gurdjieff and sure enough there were M,G, and O in the commentary by their followers all arguing and calling each other names. They seem to not have forgotten that tradition.

Frank

fkegan said:

Information? Practices require practice, information won't get anyone anywhere. When I saw this fellow's name I thought of Gurdjieff and sure enough there were M,G, and O in the commentary by their followers all arguing and calling each other names. They seem to not have forgotten that tradition.
Frank

Click to expand...

Ok, ok. Wrong phrase. A throw away phrase. I'm big on applied Knowledge in fact. At least I try to be... Information is nothing of course. "The highest that a man can attain is to be able to do." as Gurdjieff once said. And this from Mouravieff:

Esoteric science goes beyond knowing and understanding, Objectives common to all the sciences. From this viewpoint attainment of these objectives has value only to the degree it gives access to savoir-faire.[doing] Seen from this point of view, esoteric science has a nature similar to that of applied science. The great difference is always that the scientist and in general the technician seek to master the elements of the external world by external means, while the inner man arrives at analogous or even greater results by his efforts to master the elements of his inner world. In both cases, the same principle is applied: pure theory must lead to practice, and in both cases it is only the result which counts. --Boris Mouravieff, Gnosis, Vol.I, 1961/1989 Praxis Press.

If you want to look at the bickering - yes you can do that. But I would advise looking at the message not the messengers. I recommend In Search of the Miraculous, Meetings with Remarkable Men and the Gnosis Series. They were onto something - not the whole pie - but they certainly had some gold before it inevitably went belly-up. Sure, they were falliable, but I think Gurdjieff was much maligned simply because so many were incapable of grasping what he was talking about. Very much ahead of his time and a little too much for the post Edwardian and First World War man.

Ouspensky fell out with him because he was far too intellectually centered. You can see this many times and how he simply cannot process emotionally what G. was saying. Mouravieff was the absolute opposite in terms of personality as well as being overtly Christian, "devotional" etc. and not a little prudish. He couldn't abide Gurdjieff's very direct and martial ways. Maurice Nichol had a wonderful ability to teach but he, like so many others were fairly hopeless in applying what Gurdjieff was trying to say. In fact, Nichol was a bit of a tyrant as a father from what I can gather. (My aunt was taught by him when she was a young girl).

I think the 4th Way schools are pretty much dead in the water in my view though they still present some interesting theory as a starting point. In their meetings there is still a propensity for contemplating a particularly middle-class and somewhat elitist navel. And they are generally not open to expanding and building on the knowledge there. But it is precisely due to the name calling you mention that they have fallen prey to the "inner-considering" and ego-led initiatives - often very subtle. Gurdjieff was well aware of this and knew it was a constant danger. In the end he dissolved it all for that reason. Or you could say they have been "ponerized" or pathologized which happens to anything that has the slightest merit when it first appears.

Gurdjieff tried every possible way to introduce new ways to break the hold of the mechanical nature of man. He represents what you might call shock treatment or fast track system. Not for everyone. If you read all of his stuff there is a consistent pattern of understanding that is matched in the old Sufi, alchemical (Fulcanelli) traditions and updated for the early 20th man. It didn't work of course. It rarely does. In his last book before he died he admitted that he had failed.

So, I believe he was a flawed character but extremely genuine. And the body of work is extremely valuable as a starting point.

Topal

Hi Topal,
All those twists and turns to get maybe to a starting point? How about just use the Yi Oracle and develop one's own personal practice through the divination?

Frank

fkegan said:

Hi Topal,
All those twists and turns to get maybe to a starting point? How about just use the Yi Oracle and develop one's own personal practice through the divination?
Frank

Click to expand...

Well, it depends if you're talking about esoteric practice in terms of the Tradition/The Way or personal, somewhat isolated self-development which always falls into the danger of being far too subjective and overly self-reflective. That's quite a different thing. Certainly, the Yi fufllls a step along that road (and it's more than enough for me at the moment!) But I think at some point another step requires much more.

I do believe that it is the "starting point" or "path of access" that most of us are still trying to find...That's why networking is so important I think.

Topal

topal said:

Well, it depends if you're talking about esoteric practice in terms of the Tradition/The Way or personal, somewhat isolated self-development which always falls into the danger of being far too subjective and overly self-reflective. That's quite a different thing. Certainly, the Yi fufllls a step along that road (and it's more than enough for me at the moment!) But I think at some point another step requires much more.

I do believe that it is the "starting point" or "path of access" that most of us are still trying to find...That's why networking is so important I think.

Topal

Click to expand...

Bold added

Hi Topal,
Huh?! Meditation is always a useful thing to do and there are certainly a vast range of meditation techniques. But... what can be too subjective? or overly self-reflective? That is an objective judgment which is totally incompatible with any viable subjectivity. So you go too into the self-reflective and subjective--eventually you open your eyes or those around you come to check you are still alive and well and life goes on--or more to the point you get hungry, tired, in need of a pit stop or just bored in the inner labyrinth and come on out.

So your remarks indicate you are storing up information for when you complete your experience with the Yi and require another, stronger fix? Sounds pretty strange to me...

Frank

Interesting read, post 167. Thanks, Topal.

meng said:

' I can't help but to cock a suspicious eyebrow to the suggestion that moralizing rules can be flexible.

Click to expand...

You are right....but what I was trying to suggest in my earlier post was that the Confucian Virtues, possessed by the Junzi of the DaXiang should not be dismissed as "moralizing rules".

meng said:

I have a problem/issue/whatever, when anyone tries to portray 'the superior person' of any culture or belief as necessarily being this demure, quiet, selfless dude; as though the path to sagehood means taking no risks, never speaking out against popular opinions, never challenging the mores, or never questioning the "facts". No offense to anyone, but that seems like a really dull junzi, and not one I'd care to learn from or go see.

Click to expand...

I did not mean to say that the Junzi is a meek, quiet, selfless dude, but rather that he is a leader that considers his community when he acts. I am basing these ideas on the text of the DaXiang which I have been attempting to translate. here is an example:

53. 象曰:山上有木,漸; 君子以居賢德,善俗。䷴ 漸 Jiàn
xiàng yuē: shān shàng yǒu mù; Jiàn; jūnzǐ yǐ jū xián dé, shàn sú.

The image speaks: over the mountain there is wood;gradual progress; the jūnzǐ follows this pattern: by living virtuously, he perfects the common people by example.


Here is one example of the junzi at work on himself, influencing others. I know that it is only one hexagram out of 64, and there are many examples of him doing other things, however I have perceived a common theme of Junzi-ness in the text which I have tried to articulate in earlier posts, that have to do with this serving of others, and the community, but it is not a simplistic moral code of black and white dos and don'ts, because each situation is unique and the junzi will adapt. Even confucius said in the analects that if you hold fast to certain principles they are not appropriate, it is hard-headed and stupid. (sorry i dont have my copy with me but ill get the reference if you want.....)

Of course the junzi is also an individual as it says in Hexagram 38:

38. 象曰:上火下澤,睽; 君子以同而異。䷥ 睽。Kuí
xiàng yuē: shànghuǒ xià zé, kuí; jūnzǐ yǐ tóng ér yì.

The image speaks: fire above, lake below is kuí; following this pattern, the jūnzǐ is part of a community, and yet is distinct from others.

Junzi is his own person who follows the dao, he is not a sheep...Maybe he is more of a shepherd....I am still trying to figure this out myself. I tend to have more Daoist leanings in my personal life philosophy as well, btw, but as I have studied more Confucius, I have noticed more similarities than differences. I would say the main difference in my mind is that the Daoist ideal person retires from society and goes to the mountain to practice internal alchemy, whilst the confucian junzi stays in society and influences the people....:bows:

(side note: I have not found a translation that i like for "Kui".....any new ideas??)

38.X
The flame rises, the lake descends
Estrangement
The noble young one, accordingly, associates, and yet is unique

fkegan said:

Bold added

Hi Topal,
Huh?! Meditation is always a useful thing to do and there are certainly a vast range of meditation techniques. But... what can be too subjective? or overly self-reflective? That is an objective judgment which is totally incompatible with any viable subjectivity. So you go too into the self-reflective and subjective--eventually you open your eyes or those around you come to check you are still alive and well and life goes on--or more to the point you get hungry, tired, in need of a pit stop or just bored in the inner labyrinth and come on out.

So your remarks indicate you are storing up information for when you complete your experience with the Yi and require another, stronger fix? Sounds pretty strange to me...

Frank

Click to expand...

Hey Frank,

You know, you really have to be careful with making such definitive statements. And you do make so many...It closes pathways.

"Meditation is always a useful thing to do"

Not necessarily. What might be called our body-matrix and psycho-spiritual make-up can be quite different. Therefore, some practices can actually be dangerous for some people. Meditation can often be a simple exercise in relaxing the mind and/or an overstimulation of any one "centre" causing all kinds of problems. There are many other types as you mentioned (Raja Yoga, Hatha Yoga etc.) and they definitely have tangible effects which really amount to a science. These sciences when not understood can and do cause all kinds of problems. Relaxation techniques are one thing - meditation is another. If you do indeed become "bored in the inner labyrinth" then that suggests that this isn't meditation at all.

"what can be too subjective? or overly self-reflective?"

I wasn't focusing on meditation practice per se, it was more of a general statement.
"Self-reflection" in the sense of being trapped in our own subjectivity and taking that for reality. Happens all the time. "The World inside the Devil" from the Cathar philosophy sums that up pretty well. Castaneda's take on self-reflection is also pertinent and is closer to the meaning I wanted to convey. I don't mean contemplation, that's a different thing.

"So your remarks indicate you are storing up information for when you complete your experience with the Yi and require another, stronger fix? Sounds pretty strange to me..."

No, that's not at all what I meant. Why would you assume this has anything to do with a "fix"?

I think the Yi is a tool that can be used in conjunction with another "path of access" or Way to better oneself. I don't think it is an end in itself.

Just my personal opinion.

Topal

Thanks, turtlfur, for your further explanation.

bradford said:

The noble young one(s), accordingly, associates, and yet is unique

Click to expand...

Lol!

turtlfur said:

Even confucius said in the analects that if you hold fast to certain principles they are not appropriate, it is hard-headed and stupid. (sorry i dont have my copy with me but ill get the reference if you want.....)

Click to expand...

:bows: And that is something that's intimately connected with the spirit of the Yijing. Well said, Turtlefur.

topal said:

Hey Frank,

You know, you really have to be careful with making such definitive statements. And you do make so many...It closes pathways.
I have to be careful, It closes pathways? All paths remain forever open, what can ANYONE say but their own opinion? Why is it so hard for you to accept that universal truism? Or more to the point, such delicate conditional statements aren't my Tao--too much like the 17th subjunctive mood required by the English of their slaves--what today we know as the strange language patterns of African-Americans.

"Meditation is always a useful thing to do"
I repeat that definitive statement. It puts one in touch with what is going on inside one's Self, any damage that results is part of Self-discovery, not a problem with meditation. Meditation doesn't cause problems, folks have problems and meditation can let them know about them.


"what can be too subjective? or overly self-reflective?"

I wasn't focusing on meditation practice per se, it was more of a general statement.
... from the Cathar philosophy sums that up pretty well.
A general statement different from a definitive statement?
And do you find other parts of Nazi philosophy good too? [Hitler and his inner circle were Cathars at least to their own beliefs, as I was told in Europe by folks studying them to understand what the Nazis were really up to.] Isn't that path likely to be more dangerous than my definitive statements?

"So your remarks indicate you are storing up information for when you complete your experience with the Yi and require another, stronger fix? Sounds pretty strange to me..." No, that's not at all what I meant. Why would you assume this has anything to do with a "fix"?
I used 'fix' since your remarks seem to express a worry about needing stronger inputs to get the same results--which is the general description of a 'fix' --take it as a question about what it is you are seeking through all your reading.

I think the Yi is a tool that can be used in conjunction with another "path of access" or Way to better oneself. I don't think it is an end in itself. Just my personal opinion.Topal

Click to expand...

{Remarks in bold above are my replies to quoted material.}

OK, you believe the Yi is part of an occult process to self-improvement. That would make finding the right path more important to you than plunging deeper into the Yi as a path itself--including the connection of Junzi and trigram imagery from Confucius, etc.

38.X
The flame rises, the lake descends
Estrangement
The noble young one, accordingly, associates, and yet is unique

Click to expand...

Hi Bradford,

Gia-Fu translated this image as:

Above fire below marsh. Diversion. The master uses unity as well as diversity.

Click to expand...

I like the cloud of nuance available through the English word Diversion which places two very different entities, tending in different directions, together though they still make quite a difference between them that can become more intense over time.
Does this junzi-like character associate without losing his uniqueness or does he masterfully use both inherent diversity and specific connections or relationships to accomplish good things?

Frank

"I have to be careful, It closes pathways? All paths remain forever open, what can ANYONE say but their own opinion? Why is it so hard for you to accept that universal truism? Or more to the point, such delicate conditional statements aren't my Tao--too much like the 17th subjunctive mood required by the English of their slaves--what today we know as the strange language patterns of African-Americans."

All paths remain open. Really? Who sez? There's another of your pronouncements which may or may not be true. How do you quantify a path and a dead-end? Maybe you've spent 100 lives being obsessed by the I Ching and you still in the same place you were when you started! Perhaps that's fine too. All I meant was Frank, that when you say something IS this or something IS that, it obviously closes down any more possibilities for alternatives. We can say much more than our opinions - we can seek to know. But hey, no offence intended and I'm pretty sure you won't take it as such.

"I repeat that definitive statement. It puts one in touch with what is going on inside one's Self, any damage that results is part of Self-discovery, not a problem with meditation. Meditation doesn't cause problems, folks have problems and meditation can let them know about them."

Ok, I see where you're coming from. And I agree up to a point. But still I'd have to qualify that with the type and variety of meditation available where even the person teaching some methods are not aware of the full effects these practices can induce. Then you are into the blind leading the blind. Where does it end? You could transpose that dynamic to many things in the world where ignorance is indeed part of the lesson or learning curve. But I would like to think that applied knowledge is a basic spiritual principle that can and does prevent unnecessary suffering.

"A general statement different from a definitive statement?"
Yup.

"And do you find other parts of Nazi philosophy good too? [Hitler and his inner circle were Cathars at least to their own beliefs, as I was told in Europe by folks studying them to understand what the Nazis were really up to.] Isn't that path likely to be more dangerous than my definitive statements?"

That is assuming that your definitive statements are grounded in fact. (That's quite a jump to the Third Reich Frank but I'll go with it). The Nazis misappropriated a great variety of gnostic philosophy including Tibetan buddhism as well as Catharism. The swastika was inverted and generally speaking, inversion and misappropriation of MISUNDERSTOOD practices is very harmful and leads on directly from folks making definitive statements about things they believe they understand and which in turn crystallizes into a belief. We live in a world where such misunderstanding is the norm and is encouraged. Generally, we can see the results of all this manifesting in the world.

"I used 'fix' since your remarks seem to express a worry about needing stronger inputs to get the same results--which is the general description of a 'fix' --take it as a question about what it is you are seeking through all your reading."

Perhaps I gave that impression, but I'm not seeking stronger inputs nor am I worried. As to what I am seeking through reading and more importantly, experience....Hmm. Well, to be at least a point where I can be less mechanical and more Real. But I guess that'll mean different things to different people.

"OK, you believe the Yi is part of an occult process to self-improvement. That would make finding the right path more important to you than plunging deeper into the Yi as a path itself--including the connection of Junzi and trigram imagery from Confucius, etc."

The I Ching as a divinatory tool clearly isn't as important to me as it is to you. I don't see divination as an end in itself as you seem to.

You can plunge deeper into the Yi as a type of path in itself and the Yi CAN be part of a process (occult or otherwise) But I would place emphasis on it as a tool amongst many. This is more of an interesting question to open up...From what I have discovered so far in my life, I don't think the Yi on it's own - due precisely to the nature of the human to delude himself - can operate soley as a guide for esoteric work of the kind I mentioned previously. Now maybe I am quite wrong on that. But that's my view right now. Maybe it's all preferences? Perhaps the establishment of a soul connection - or even we might say, the "growing of a soul" may eventuate from a life long study of the I Ching. That's an interesting question: Is the Yi a Path to self-improvement. Unequivocally, Yes. Is the Yi a path to soul-connection or Self-actualization? Not sure.

But then this is where word meanings become tricky...

Thanks for your replies Frank,

Topal