...life can be translucent

Menu

27 - Retrospective on my Personal Lesson in 2021

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
Around the same time in 2020, possibly a Christmas morning - I meditated and reflected on my personal lesson moving into ‘21. What would get in the way of achieving better outcomes? What would be at the heart of of my personal realisations? Using yarn sticks, I inquired and got 27 - Jaws / Nourishment. I thought - well, it simply means that if I am able to nurture my dreams steadily, with the right deeds and thoughts - I will be on my way to good fortune.
As the year unfolded, I found myself presented with the same hexagram, but the true insight behind it eluded me. I had put a lot of effort into certain activities, I was exhausted, already oppressed by springtime. In my relationships, I reflected on this hexagram as it came back often.

I’d love to share, one year ahead - what I thought this Message was truly about. this December my counsellor - who includes mysticism and spirituality in her practice - told me about 27 being the hexagram of the scapegoat.

In spring, I was scapegoated for being and acting different by my work colleagues. I was trying hard to leave the job, had dozens of interviews, dealt with rejection week after week. In certain instances I introjected all of the feedback from my colleagues and interviewers. I felt inadequate, not articulate enough, not experienced enough. I felt something was wrong with me. That feeling lends itself as an attractor to scapegoating. I worked towards breaking the pattern and was relieved to find a better job.

All was well until Autumn when I started to see the scapegoating dynamic creep in again. During summer and into September my personal power was diminished by a series of unfortunate romantic attachments. I spent a couple more months reflecting on how I had lost my independence, my faith in handling events, my ability to bounce back. And finally, I recovered once more.

In conclusion, 27 for me speaks of:
• the journey through losing and regaining my power
• putting a lot of energy into something over an excruciating period of time
• understanding scapegoating and rising above it
• consistency in thoughts
• emotional groundedness and independence

Hope this addition to the collective wisdom inspired by the hexagram 27 helps someone reflect and make better personal choices in their own life.
 
Last edited:

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
I definitely see the "putting a lot of [chewing and gnawing] energy into something" point! There's a lot of dried meat in 21 that yes, could take forever to chew through. Am very happy that it worked out for you with a new job.

Scapegoating - people unfairly blaming you for things, is that what you mean? - isn't a theme I've seen connected with 21 before, though. Has your counsellor explained why she sees it that way?
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
I’d love to share, one year ahead - what I thought this Message was truly about. this December my counsellor - who includes mysticism and spirituality in her practice - told me about 21 being the hexagram of the scapegoat.
21 is 'Biting Through', finding truth through using sharp discernment of mind or external means, the forces of justice.

If you were being scapegoated 21 would be to do with biting through to the truth, addressing the wrong doing to yourself. However that doesn't really make 21 'the hexagram of the scapegoat' so I'm not sure where she gets that from. Presumably she thought you were being scapegoated and needed to fight for yourself but then why would she say the entire hexagram is to do with scapegoating? The experience of being scapegoated would be a very 36 one, the understanding of it and challenging of it might be 21.

This is what the Oracle for hexagram 21 is


'Biting through, creating success.
Harvest in making use of legal proceedings.'

You can see a scapegoat might need to bite through and use 'legal proceedings' to combat their oppressors. That does not mean hexagram 21 is the 'hexagram of the scapegoat' though, that word is not there.
 
Last edited:

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
I definitely see the "putting a lot of [chewing and gnawing] energy into something" point! There's a lot of dried meat in 21 that yes, could take forever to chew through. Am very happy that it worked out for you with a new job.

Scapegoating - people unfairly blaming you for things, is that what you mean? - isn't a theme I've seen connected with 21 before, though. Has your counsellor explained why she sees it that way?
I mistakenly used 21 but meant 27 - Jaws/Nourishment. Apologies! I corrected the thread.

Sure, to add more Context, she is working with several methods and practices - e.g. Jungian therapy, the enneagram, the gene keys. An interpretative version of the iChing - The Mystical iChing, written by a Jungian psychoanalyst - dives into various archetypes associated with each hexagram. 27 (not 21) is the hexagram of the scapegoat. Scapegoats are sacrificed and eaten to get rid of ailments. People don’t have to blame someone directly, what can happen is that the person becomes the target for group projections - and punished, outcast or sacrificed. The group would then feel that their issue was solved. It’s just socia dynamics and we see it in cancel culture as well As in office politics.

In my case people would constantly be on my back. They would respond very differently to me compared to how they did to others, though my actions were identical to peers. Then, over time, as comments amounted and interview rejections too! - my perception of self would erode - maybe I am faulty/ awful/ maybe something is wrong with me. Which further perpetuates the vicious cycle.
 

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
21 is 'Biting Through', finding truth through using sharp discernment of mind or external means, the forces of justice.

If you were being scapegoated 21 would be to do with biting through to the truth, addressing the wrong doing to yourself. However that doesn't really make 21 'the hexagram of the scapegoat' so I'm not sure where she gets that from. Presumably she thought you were being scapegoated and needed to fight for yourself but then why would she say the entire hexagram is to do with scapegoating? The experience of being scapegoated would be a very 36 one, the understanding of it and challenging of it might be 21.

This is what the Oracle for hexagram 21 is


'Biting through, creating success.
Harvest in making use of legal proceedings.'

You can see a scapegoat might need to bite through and use 'legal proceedings' to combat their oppressors. That does not mean hexagram 21 is the 'hexagram of the scapegoat' though, that word is not there.
I apologise, I meant 27 not 21, but you can see how I made the confusion! I corrected the thread.

thank you for asking further. The work we did early in spring was around being scapegoated and allowing for it to happen - I thought I was not good enough and having dealt with comments, gossip and rejection, it turned me into an easy target. Later during the year, my attachments turned me once more into an easy target - as I see it line 27.1. Not that I sought validation, but I was very le and kind and so easy to be blamed. We reflected on that theme once more.

The Mystical iching - which offers an archetypal interpretation of the I Ching - sees 27 as the scapegoat. Of course, if transcended - the scapegoat no longer operates from fear of being found at fault, for fear of not being Good enough. Instead it has faith that all is quite ok as it is. So the shadow is the scapegoat, the highlight is unending personal nourishment found within (or in the divine will/ the Tao - for those spiritually inclined)
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Thanks for the correction, but I don't see 27 that way, either. 38.3, maybe? The nose-cutting-off line? But that's not about not being good enough. Will have to think about it, am drawing a blank.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
22.5 worries he's not good enough, but it's not even slightly about being a scapegoat, at least as I think of it.
 
Last edited:

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Yes I thought I could see a possible tenuous link with 21 and scapegoating, the Biting Through as the means to overcome it but 27 as scapegoating?

Are you saying this is 'the' meaning or 'a' meaning?

The Oracle for 27 is

'Nourishment: constancy brings good fortune.
See the jaws,
And the origin of your quest to fill your mouth.'

27 is 'Nourishment'. Needs, necessities, hungers and the way we strive to fill them. As with all the hexagrams meanings are vast but at the same time focused.

The only place in 27 I'd potentially see scapegoating is 27.6 but that would be an extremely negative take on the line which does have the auspice 'good fortune' as well as 'danger' and says one is the source of nourishment.

Later during the year, my attachments turned me once more into an easy target - as I see it line 27.1.
27.1 as being an easy target? The line says

'Giving up the spirit tortoise,
Gazing at me with jaws hanging down.
Pitfall.'

The line does describe someone sort of abandoning their own magic, their power of choice, their intuition and I guess that might in some situations make someone easy prey though I wouldn't say it was the main point of the line.


Sure, to add more Context, she is working with several methods and practices - e.g. Jungian therapy, the enneagram, the gene keys. An interpretative version of the iChing - The Mystical iChing, written by a Jungian psychoanalyst - dives into various archetypes associated with each hexagram. 27 (not 21) is the hexagram of the scapegoat. Scapegoats are sacrificed and eaten to get rid of ailments. People don’t have to blame someone directly, what can happen is that the person becomes the target for group projections - and punished, outcast or sacrificed. The group would then feel that their issue was solved. It’s just socia dynamics and we see it in cancel culture as well As in office politics.
Ah so you are getting this idea of 27 as scapegoat from an author writing from a particular perspective, someone who has gone their own way so to speak, that is far far from the words of the I Ching itself.

It seems to me way too far away from the meaning of 27, so far it's not the I Ching any more but someone's own version of it. No reason someone shouldn't have their own version but in rewriting it to their own theories they make it into something that is no longer I Ching. In the I Ching 27 is 'Nourishment' it is not 'Scapegoating'.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Will have to think about it, am drawing a blank.
Well it's all based/rewritten on a set of beliefs or theories much like for example Carol Anthony's I Ching or the Buddhist I Ching or the Christian I Ching or the Medical I Ching. Here it is a psychoanalyst recreating Yi along the lines of Jung's archetypes.

As soon as a writer goes this direction they make another book that isn't really the I Ching anymore. They take away what the I Ching says and replace it with things that reflect or espouse their own philosophies. That is what Carol Anthony did, made the entire book about egos and shadows and 'inferiors' so that every answer became a sort of moral lesson. If you have a plumbing problem or constipation Anthony is not the I Ching for you because she will says the problem is your ego. I mean it has value as a take on the I Ching but it's not really the I Ching in it's fullness.

I'm saying you're drawing a blank because if this is based on a psychoanalyst's take on Jungian archetypes then it's about that not the I Ching as we know it. So we aren't going to 'get' this unless we read the psychoanalyst's book. I think this is a whole different animal.
 
Last edited:

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
True. Helen, would you mind giving us the name of the book and the author so we can take a look on Amazon? As Trojina said, there's nothing wrong with someone taking a particular angle on it, as long as readers know what they're getting. As another example I think there's a Writer's I Ching which might be a lot of help to writers, but it wouldn't be a good choice for a non-writer.

What I was mostly drawing a blank on is is there a hexagram or line we'd think of as scapegoating? I haven't come up with anything. A few that might have part of the idea, but so far I can't think of any single hexagram/line that I'd label "scapegoat."

54 might also have part of it, in the sense of not having any power, but there's not really anything awful in it like I'd associate with scapegoating. The Marrying Maiden's insignificant and overlookable, not really treated badly that I know of.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Having said all of that (we're really not just trying to argue with your counsellor, Helen, in case it seems that way - it's just as Trojina said, some of her ideas are quite different from how we usually think about 27) -

- but that said, I can see 27 in your year. You were learning how to feed yourself. Getting a better job is quite well analogous. Bouncing back from being poorly fed to having better nourishment, and so forth.

I think the only thing we're questioning is the scapegoat idea.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
(Ohhh... I just subtracted from 65. Should I mention that 27's shadow is 38? Look at all the opposition (38) Helen ran into - job rejections, trouble from co-workers for being "different," etc. Am thinking of Hilary's shadow description, that it's what the situation "obviously" seems to be, but really isn't the intended point.)

(Helen, if you're interested, I'll try to explain that better.)
 

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
Well it's all based/rewritten on a set of beliefs or theories much like for example Carol Anthony's I Ching or the Buddhist I Ching or the Christian I Ching or the Medical I Ching. Here it is a psychoanalyst recreating Yi along the lines of Jung's archetypes.

As soon as a writer goes this direction they make another book that isn't really the I Ching anymore. They take away what the I Ching says and replace it with things that reflect or espouse their own philosophies. That is what Carol Anthony did, made the entire book about egos and shadows and 'inferiors' so that every answer became a sort of moral lesson. If you have a plumbing problem or constipation Anthony is not the I Ching for you because she will says the problem is your ego. I mean it has value as a take on the I Ching but it's not really the I Ching in it's fullness.

I'm saying you're drawing a blank because if this is based on a psychoanalyst's take on Jungian archetypes then it's about that not the I Ching as we know it. So we aren't going to 'get' this unless we read the psychoanalyst's book. I think this is a whole different animal.
Hi! Sure, no problem 😊
It’s “The Occult I Ching” by Maja d’Aoust.
here’s a paragraph on hex 27

“This is a hexagram of Cain and Abel and is related to our offerings and how we choose to feed ourselves, through growing crops and eating the flesh of animals. Cain used a jawbone to murder his brother Abel for offering the meat of an animal instead of the fruits of his labors. It is the hexagram of the scapegoat and of blaming and punishing others rather than taking responsibility for ourselves.”

I’m very respectful of the I Ching and any interpretation is adding richer symbolism. Just like we experience synchronicities that we keep track of in a resonance journal - this particular interpretation seemed to resonate powerfully, towards the end of the year, as I looked back on all experiences!
 

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
(Ohhh... I just subtracted from 65. Should I mention that 27's shadow is 38? Look at all the opposition (38) Helen ran into - job rejections, trouble from co-workers for being "different," etc. Am thinking of Hilary's shadow description, that it's what the situation "obviously" seems to be, but really isn't the intended point.)

(Helen, if you're interested, I'll try to explain that better.)
Yes! Sure :) I’d love to hear more. I see the opposition as well!
 

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
Having said all of that (we're really not just trying to argue with your counsellor, Helen, in case it seems that way - it's just as Trojina said, some of her ideas are quite different from how we usually think about 27) -

- but that said, I can see 27 in your year. You were learning how to feed yourself. Getting a better job is quite well analogous. Bouncing back from being poorly fed to having better nourishment, and so forth.

I think the only thing we're questioning is the scapegoat idea.
I like that, it’s a Clean interpretation of 27 indeed!
 

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
27.1 as being an easy target? The line says

'Giving up the spirit tortoise,
Gazing at me with jaws hanging down.
Pitfall.'

The line does describe someone sort of abandoning their own magic, their power of choice, their intuition and I guess that might in some situations make someone easy prey though I wouldn't say it was the main point of the line.
That’s very well described. i do become an easy pray, either by looking at another for validation - as a result of infatuation or as a result of me introjecting others’ negative feedback or reaction. When you don’t have a sense of personal power you’re easily carrying and acting out what others project in you - hence it’s easy to become a scapegoat. E.g. Someone who thinks women are always “crazy and emotional” will project that into everyone they meet. When they meet me, they will act as if I could that way or even tell me that I am, and I introject their perception of me - starting to feel like my emotions are wrong. The more I accept that, the more I give them room to treat me this way, becoming their scapegoat.

I know it’s a very archetypal interpretation but I thought it would be an interesting perspective!
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
I’m very respectful of the I Ching and any interpretation is adding richer symbolism.
I disagree. It is not the case that any interpretation is adding richer symbolism if that interpretation is a million miles from the I Ching and not what it is saying at all. That's not respect to the I Ching, it's the opposite, making it mean just about anything.

For example the below is quite a bad twist on 27 in the I Ching


“This is a hexagram of Cain and Abel and is related to our offerings and how we choose to feed ourselves, through growing crops and eating the flesh of animals. Cain used a jawbone to murder his brother Abel for offering the meat of an animal instead of the fruits of his labors. It is the hexagram of the scapegoat and of blaming and punishing others rather than taking responsibility for ourselves.”
Yes it is the hexagram of how we choose to feed ourselves, our needs and necessities. But to go from that to the story of Cain and Abel and from that to scapegoating stretches it way too far with completely misaligned emphasis on 'scapegoating, blaming and punishing'. That's an actual travesty of what 27 is about.


In short 27 really is not the 'hexagram of the scapegoat'.
 
Last edited:

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
(crossed posts with Trojina)
---

Thank you for the quote from the book. At first glance, I'm still not convinced. I don't really get the connection to the Cain and Abel story other than having "jawbone" in common. The book has the "Look inside" feature in Amazon so will look at more of it when I have chance.

Shadow hexagram... you're familiar with the King Wen Sequence, right, it's just the hexagrams in the usual order, 1, 2, 3 ... 64.

You find a hexagram's Shadow by counting backwards from the end. 1's Shadow is 64, 2's Shadow is 63, etc. Or just subtract your cast hexagram from 65.

Often you can see a theme in common: 1 and 64 are both about "beginning" or "before," 2 and 63 are about "manifesting" or "completing/committing," 4 and 61 are about learning (Not Knowing vs. Inner Truth) and so forth.

The Shadow is an idea of Stephen Karcher's - he wrote a little too briefly about it here:
Scroll about a third of the way down the page and download the pdf.

His idea is that a hexagram's Shadow is a "negative screen" in your situation, the least effective way to think about it, which is "blocking transformative energy."

Hilary delved into it and made a whole mini-course about it a few years ago that's in the Change Circle library. She also wrote really good Shadow commentaries for each hexagram, in WikiWing. One of her observations is that the Shadow is often the most obvious way to see a situation. So it didn't surprise me to look at the description of your year, find a lot of opposition in it, and then notice that 38's the shadow of Yi's actual message to you (27).

Going way out on a limb, I wonder if it's possible d'Aoust got caught up in shadow-thinking when she wrote her hexagram 27 commentary? Hilary even says this about 38 in her book:
‘Opposing’ describes irreducible differences – desires, motivations and especially ways of seeing that diverge from one another.

‘Opposing’ people see differently even when they’re looking at the same scene; they are utterly strange to each other, as if they came from different planets.

‘Opposing’ as an inner state can mean a single person who contains mutually contradictory impulses – like two very different siblings under the same roof
Cain and Abel were certainly two very different siblings...


Actually... "two very different siblings" does have a connection to jawbones, doesn't it? The upper and lower jaws are siblings, and yet they're quite different. One moves; one's fixed in place. So even more evidence that 27 and 38 are tied together.

I still suspect d'Aoust's commentary is misplaced, if I can be so brazen. 27 is more about how the jawbones work together - Hilary often describes 27 as an entire ecosystem for getting fed. 27 is more about the jaws' synergy, not their opposition. It's right up the Shadow's shadowy alley to confuse things like this.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
It’s “The Occult I Ching” by Maja d’Aoust.
I wonder if she has any translation of the actual I Ching in her book at all? Doesn't sound like it? You have to go to the I Ching itself to see what it says. Just free associating from the Cain and Able story to jawbones to scapegoating then saying 27 is actually 'the hexagram of the scapegoat' is not a perspective it's just incorrect and misleading.

I mean if it means something to you as it combines with the therapy and synchronicities and so on then that's valid for you. But that doesn't change the fact that hexagram 27 really is not 'the hexagram of the scapegoat' it just isn't and you can see that if you read the I Ching. The writer has gone off on her own tangent and is not really staying close to what Yi says at all. It's like her own art work, fine but it's not the I Ching.
 
Last edited:

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
I wonder if she has any translation of the actual I Ching in her book at all?
It doesn't look like it, though Amazon's "Look Inside" doesn't show everything.

(Lack of actual text translation isn't great, but not necessarily fatal. Hilary likes Sarah Dening's book which doesn't have translation. It's just you have to (a) be aware you're missing something important, (b) be careful to use it alongside another book which has a translation, (c) be discerning about the commentary - be aware it's one person's take and might be from a unique angle, like I said about the writer's I Ching.)

(I know you know that, T, said it for the record.)

Here are some sample pages from Amazon.

1st page of the Hexagram 27 chapter (click to enlarge):
1640538905332.png
A lot of what she says seems really accurate. Hunger, mouths, etc.

"[A] desire for something to fill ourselves" is right out of the Oracle (Hilary translates as "Your own quest for something real to fill your mouth.")

"The things that go in and out of our open mouths during the course of our lives" - Image wing.

She certainly seems familiar with the text, even if she doesn't include it directly.

Still think the Cain and Abel story is misplaced.

14:
1640539281029.png
Maybe here she's latched onto an idea that is in Hilary's book, too, but I've apparently always overlooked it:
The Chinese word for ‘possession’ also means ‘there is’, so this is ‘great being’ as well as ‘great having’: what there is and what you are, as well as what you have.

This might be the last page of the hexagram 8 chapter, covering lines 5, 6, and 8's complement 14:
1640539388158.png
Can't make sense of the line commentaries but am getting tired.

I like that she attempts an opposite/complement commentary. Might be interesting to try them out and compare to Hilary's and LiSe's complement ideas.

When she says "Transforms into Shadow x.x," she means the fan yao, not the Shadow hexagram. (Although I can see generic "shadow" for "line which lurks behind.")
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
(Lack of actual text translation isn't great, but not necessarily fatal. Hilary likes Sarah Dening's book which doesn't have translation. It's just you have to (a) be aware you're missing something important, (b) be careful to use it alongside another book which has a translation, (c) be discerning about the commentary - be aware it's one person's take and might be from a unique angle, like I said about the writer's I Ching.)
All true except it is fatal at times. For example look at this for 14

'If you draw this hexagram you will be on your own'

That just isn't there for 14.


Still think the Cain and Abel story is misplaced.
Utterly.


The Chinese word for ‘possession’ also means ‘there is’, so this is ‘great being’ as well as ‘great having’: what there is and what you are, as well as what you have.
I couldn't see where you picked that from, presumably 14 somewhere.

Thanks for gathering it all up to look at.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
I couldn't see where you picked that from, presumably 14 somewhere.
Directly from Hilary's book, Oracle commentary, a sentence/idea I've managed to utterly overlook all these years but which d'Aoust might be making more of.

Mind you, I don't think d'Aoust will end up too high on my "books to buy" list (which per orders from bank account does not exist anyway), but it might be more evidence that having a variety of books is good. I mean, I never noticed that in Hilary's, till trying to puzzle over d'Aoust.

'If you draw this hexagram you will be on your own'

That just isn't there for 14.
Agreed.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Directly from Hilary's book, Oracle commentary, a sentence/idea I've managed to utterly overlook all these years but which d'Aoust might be making more of.
I thought it sounded familiar. I hadn't overlooked it, great being as well as having. Well being is having in a sense but that does not equate to 'Messiah' as a title for 14. The problem with such books is people might think they are consulting/reading the I Ching when they really aren't.

Being, having being itself is Having.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Yes, I mean, you have to be able to separate out the actual good stuff, from the possibly dubious, from any utter rubbish that may exist.

And as I think you meant about Carol Anthony (?) - sometimes it might not be rubbish, it might just be an angle. I mean, if you want an I Ching from the angle of morality and egoism, maybe Anthony is perfect. (No idea, have never read her.)


For instance - this is way far out on a very thin limb, don't shoot me - if I read what d'Aoust says about 14 while squinting, I think I can detect 51/52, which guess what, is 13/14's shadow pair. Did she write her whole book getting sucked in by Shadows? No idea, would have to look at a lot more hexagrams.

Examples: 52, and 51's more 52-ish parts like not dropping the sacred ladle, compared to some of her phrases for 14:
  • "self-contained"
  • "needs no others"
  • "self-reliance"
  • "We have all we need inside ourselves and do not have to worry about someone else stepping in"
  • "After we have travelled through hexagram 13" (substitute 51), "which is a group of people" (people in the wild; substitute 51, Shock), "we may find ourselves in a position of needing to return to the self and our own..." (substitute 52).
I'm not saying it's valid to put all of that under hexagram 14 as if that's what 14 means, of course - I'm just wondering if this is a pattern (don't know), and if so whether she did it consciously or not...
 

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
(crossed posts with Trojina)
---

Thank you for the quote from the book. At first glance, I'm still not convinced. I don't really get the connection to the Cain and Abel story other than having "jawbone" in common. The book has the "Look inside" feature in Amazon so will look at more of it when I have chance.

Shadow hexagram... you're familiar with the King Wen Sequence, right, it's just the hexagrams in the usual order, 1, 2, 3 ... 64.

You find a hexagram's Shadow by counting backwards from the end. 1's Shadow is 64, 2's Shadow is 63, etc. Or just subtract your cast hexagram from 65.

Often you can see a theme in common: 1 and 64 are both about "beginning" or "before," 2 and 63 are about "manifesting" or "completing/committing," 4 and 61 are about learning (Not Knowing vs. Inner Truth) and so forth.

The Shadow is an idea of Stephen Karcher's - he wrote a little too briefly about it here:
Scroll about a third of the way down the page and download the pdf.

His idea is that a hexagram's Shadow is a "negative screen" in your situation, the least effective way to think about it, which is "blocking transformative energy."

Hilary delved into it and made a whole mini-course about it a few years ago that's in the Change Circle library. She also wrote really good Shadow commentaries for each hexagram, in WikiWing. One of her observations is that the Shadow is often the most obvious way to see a situation. So it didn't surprise me to look at the description of your year, find a lot of opposition in it, and then notice that 38's the shadow of Yi's actual message to you (27).

Going way out on a limb, I wonder if it's possible d'Aoust got caught up in shadow-thinking when she wrote her hexagram 27 commentary? Hilary even says this about 38 in her book:

Cain and Abel were certainly two very different siblings...


Actually... "two very different siblings" does have a connection to jawbones, doesn't it? The upper and lower jaws are siblings, and yet they're quite different. One moves; one's fixed in place. So even more evidence that 27 and 38 are tied together.

I still suspect d'Aoust's commentary is misplaced, if I can be so brazen. 27 is more about how the jawbones work together - Hilary often describes 27 as an entire ecosystem for getting fed. 27 is more about the jaws' synergy, not their opposition. It's right up the Shadow's shadowy alley to confuse things like this.
This is a very valuable comment, thank you - for all the links too and for the teaching around interpreting a hexagram by looking at its shadow hexagram too! 38 makes a Lot of sense as a description of all forms of opposition I experienced.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Aww, thank you for not being miffed that we (er, I) derailed your thread like this! I find the Shadow interesting because I've found it to be helpful, so it's fascinating to me when I think I find it peeking out of things unexpectedly.

There are many such things - paired hexagrams, change patterns, opposite/complements, nuclear hexagrams, etc. Helpful and interesting, but they can also be overwhelming and confusing - too much information. Hilary always points out this stuff is optional. Getting a good handle on the hexagram you cast (27 for this one) is a lot more important.

You're new to posting here, but of course I don't know how long you may have been behind the scenes reading things - have you found Hilary's blog, and her hexagram essays?
 

HelenBrun

visitor
Joined
Oct 14, 2020
Messages
9
Reaction score
6
Aww, thank you for not being miffed that we (er, I) derailed your thread like this! I find the Shadow interesting because I've found it to be helpful, so it's fascinating to me when I think I find it peeking out of things unexpectedly.

There are many such things - paired hexagrams, change patterns, opposite/complements, nuclear hexagrams, etc. Helpful and interesting, but they can also be overwhelming and confusing - too much information. Hilary always points out this stuff is optional. Getting a good handle on the hexagram you cast (27 for this one) is a lot more important.

You're new to posting here, but of course I don't know how long you may have been behind the scenes reading things - have you found Hilary's blog, and her hexagram essays?
Yes, I have been exploring and there’s lots to learn as well as develop more of an intuition for. I’ve been “lurking” for a year and happy to share my experiences as well as improve my interpreting abilities. Right now I go often to WikiWing.
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top