4>9 then 41>9

[loulisnowdrop]

I really wanted to share this with you all maybe for opinions if you like (I'm not sure what to make of it) but more because I thought it was interesting/frustrating/thought provoking... I'm going to have another look at it later.

I've recently had relationship issues and he says he feels more comfortable being single at the mo without anybody else in his life. The details are in another thread so I won't repeat myself here. Anyway, we have remained friends and I've agreed to give him space to see how he feels after time alone.

I was debating how a text from me would make him feel... irritated? happy? trapped? I asked yi ching 'What is the outcome of sending him a text today?' I got the response 4.1.3.5

I saw a thread about dealing with multiple lines a few days back and i thought I'd try it out. Change the first moving line then go to the resulting hexagram for your next changing line etc. So in this situation, I did 4.1>41 then 41.3>26 then 26.5>9 This has the same end result 4>9 but the journey through the lines is different.

I was inconclusive if I was being told sending the text was a good thing or not. I asked the yi 'What is the outcome of NOT sending the text?' I thought I would go with whichever answer gave me a more positive feeling. Yi told me 41.3.5!! Now if we look at my multiple lines method we get 41.3>26 then 26.5>9 I've just sat here trying to interpret these very same lines for the opposite question.

Yi, you made my brain ache, and a text message has now become the troubles of my mind for the day. Maybe Yi is just saying, it doesn't matter what I do, it won't make him feel any different and the outcome will be the same.

 

[arabella]

Hi Snowdrop. With multiple changing lines on such a simple question, I'd just simplify the whole issue and read the middle line: hex 4.3

This says essentially not to give up your decorum to run after some guy. Experience [which you can read about on this website ad infinitum] says that if he's not calling/texting/showing up -- don't you bother with it either. Sounds old-fashioned maybe, but men are the aggressors and women who take on the role, as the Yi and Hex 4.3 say, lose their dignity. Play it cool.

 

[loulisnowdrop]

Thanks for that Arabella,
I don't have the thank you button yet or I'd press it.
As I say, we are still friends and he does contact/visit etc he has just said he doesn't want anybody as a partner at this point in his life. I've said I'll wait but I'm struggling to find the balance between too much contact and giving him so much time and space that he forgets me... hence the question. I am playing it down with him.
I shared this reading more because I thought the response from the yi was interesting in that it was a very similar response each time.
Normally I wouldn't read each moving line, it was more to try out an alternative technique to see how the reading 'felt' .

 

[precision grace]

tell me something, if you broke up with a guy because you felt you didn't want a relationship at this point in your life, how would you feel if he was around all the time, waiting with puppy eyes for you to change your mind? Also, he started a relationship with you to begin with but then didn't feel strongly enough about you to try and work out through his issues while still in relationship with you, so I think that's telling you everything you need to know. It totally sucks and I feel for you, but clearly you are not doing yourself any favours being hung up on this guy. Don't give him space - give Yourself space.

 

[loulisnowdrop]

Thanks for your response precision grace
I do agree with what you are saying but do feel the need to point out I'm not around all the time with puppy dog eyes.
He has asked for space and for my friendship. I have not been chasing him, I'm just very conscious that I don't contact him any more often than he contacts me. He is going through things at the moment and needs a friend more than anything else. I respect his honesty and his decision.

 

[precision grace]

yeah but are you happy to be just his friend? I get that he is going through things and that's tough etc, but we are talking about you. If you are happy with the situation as it is, why all the Yi castings? Isn't it true that you really just want to be back in the relationship with him and would be devastated if he was to suddenly start seeing someone else. And what if you could be having a wonderful relationship with someone else right now instead of sitting on the sidelines waiting for this guy. What if there was a much better guy available? Would you go for him? ..just saying..

 

[loulisnowdrop]

I'm not happy with the situation but I respect and admire him for making the decision he has. Yes I would like us to reunite but not in the frame of mind he is currently in.
What has happened to him can not be changed and will play on his mind. The whole situation is playing on my mind too hence both of my castings. In my frame of mind at the moment, I can't have a wonderful relationship with anybody else so I am just getting on with other aspects of my life and seeing what fate brings. I'm certainly not ready to meet other people, that would be unfair to them.
If he were to start a relationship with somebody else that would mean everything he has said/still does say to me is a lie and I could cope because I wouldn't want to be with anybody who did that to me. As it is, I have no reason to disbelieve him.
The reason I initially posted my i ching cast was because I thought it was interesting, not to raise great debate about the situation I am in.

 

[arabella]

Thanks for that Arabella,
I don't have the thank you button yet or I'd press it.
As I say, we are still friends and he does contact/visit etc he has just said he doesn't want anybody as a partner at this point in his life. I've said I'll wait but I'm struggling to find the balance between too much contact and giving him so much time and space that he forgets me... hence the question. I am playing it down with him.I shared this reading more because I thought the response from the yi was interesting in that it was a very similar response each time.
Normally I wouldn't read each moving line, it was more to try out an alternative technique to see how the reading 'felt' .

I know you don't want elaborate advice but I'd only give this brief opinion: if and when he is truly interested you won't be able to keep him away. And if he drops the thread of your relationship because you don't keep up contact, he's going to do that anyhow sooner or later. I think that's the same indication your casting is giving in hexagram 4.3
arabella

 

[loulisnowdrop]

Thanks
I still have no button to say so... maybe I should ask the yi where my button is? Only joking!
I think my trouble is my impatience, it's the limbo and not knowing. I have found so many ways to further myself though in an attempt to forget the situation exists. I'm a busy little bee

These shared readings are so helpful I've found. Learning about using I-ching is one thing but to read other interpretations and takes on the lines helps with the learning curve.

 

[arabella]

Thanks
I still have no button to say so... maybe I should ask the yi where my button is? Only joking!
I think my trouble is my impatience, it's the limbo and not knowing. I have found so many ways to further myself though in an attempt to forget the situation exists. I'm a busy little bee

These shared readings are so helpful I've found. Learning about using I-ching is one thing but to read other interpretations and takes on the lines helps with the learning curve.

You're very welcome. It was noted on here the other day that the Thanks button appears when you've posted eleven times. One of those age-old mysteries.:bows:

 

[loulisnowdrop]

Yi has supplied my thank you button I can now use my manners

 

[sooo]

I was debating how a text from me would make him feel... irritated? happy? trapped? I asked yi ching 'What is the outcome of sending him a text today?' I got the response 4.1.3.5

I saw a thread about dealing with multiple lines a few days back and i thought I'd try it out.

I would not choose one of three lines, nor use some convoluted method of trying to simplify an answer, anymore than I'd interpret a triangle as a straight line. There are three lines, and each makes a valid point, or it wouldn't be there for your consideration.

First, I'd consider that he would draw no firm conclusions from the action, that it's new input. Secondly, from h9 I'd surmise that he'd feel as though you were communicating casually about small matters. From line 1, I'd think he'd think some preliminary ground rules and expectations are being revealed by you, i.e. getting to know you. From line 3, I think he'd feel a bit flattered, have his ego stroked by the attention you give him. From line 5, I think he would take it as an innocent and open gesture. Bringing 9 back into focus, I don't think either of you should make a big deal about it. If you wish to speak to someone you don't know well, then do so. It seems all quite natural to me. Just try to keep the drama and/or pressure out of it. Then see what happens, as that's part of the fun of 4.

 

[arabella]

I would not choose one of three lines, nor use some convoluted method of trying to simplify an answer, anymore than I'd interpret a triangle as a straight line. There are three lines, and each makes a valid point, or it wouldn't be there for your consideration.

First, I'd consider that he would draw no firm conclusions from the action, that it's new input. Secondly, from h9 I'd surmise that he'd feel as though you were communicating casually about small matters. From line 1, I'd think he'd think some preliminary ground rules and expectations are being revealed by you, i.e. getting to know you. From line 3, I think he'd feel a bit flattered, have his ego stroked by the attention you give him. From line 5, I think he would take it as an innocent and open gesture. Bringing 9 back into focus, I don't think either of you should make a big deal about it. If you wish to speak to someone you don't know well, then do so. It seems all quite natural to me. Just try to keep the drama and/or pressure out of it. Then see what happens, as that's part of the fun of 4.

The suggestion of reading the middle line and reducing complexity is a technique of Alfred Huang you may or may not like and I'll try to explain better why I'd use it here. I generally steer clear of the "how does he feel about" questions for the reasons discussed here many times. But if I could find no other way to enquire then I'd minimise how much I dissected the answer. I'd do my best to be brief and to the point where I feel that I'm already on creaky ice.

Having said that, this is a technique I've tested on simple questions until I got a pattern of whether it works for me. This is the sort of test that lends itself well to a journal and watching how accuracy plays out over time. In questions like this one, I feel it works well enough and I wouldn't belabour the answer further than that. But this is down to personal choice.

 

[sooo]

But this is down to personal choice.

As does everything. That's why I began my comment with "I would..."

If there are three true considerations, it makes the middle one no less considerable. That's not an absurd way to interpret, but it is a limiting way. Some methods are downright absurd to me.

There are many rationales for using reductionist methods over the obvious one, because many folks find it too confusing to reckon with multiple lines. Some of these folks are even Yijing authors and/or considered as scholars. Who am I, an ordinary layman, to say otherwise? Well, I am just me, who has no difficulty with multiple lines. What the reading says is what it means - no more, no less.

This isn't to you personally, but to anyone who thinks that some form of convolution is necessary to decipher Yi's lines: Imagine if people did that to everything you said which expressed more than one point to consider, and if each person had their own method of rearranging which points you were really making; such as: you mean what you didn't say rather than what you did say - as is the case with some of these, um, creative methods, which some even have the audacity to call laws. Speaking for myself, it would make trying to communicate more than a little frustrating , whereupon I'd be inclined to :mmf: myself thereafter. Even if they've authored a book, so what? I could also author a book and say anything I wish to in it. That wouldn't authenticate what the Yi plainly says or doesn't say in any given reading.

But, whatever floats someone's boat. \____/

 

[loulisnowdrop]

I don't know if this will help with the discussion of multiple moving lines or not but I figure feedback is always helpful. If people know the outcome then they can have another look at interpretations and decide how accurate or off the mark they have been.

I know I had been advised not to chase him and I promise I haven't. However, aswell as space from the relationship, he also requested my friendship. It is this balance that I have found difficult. Hence the original questions of 'to text or not to text'

I did send him a message, it was just a light hearted friendly one with no suggestions of my feelings.

The outcome? It has not made any difference to the situation. He replied in a friendly manner and has since visited me twice unannounced and without encouragement/contact from me but still just on friendly terms.

If I read back through the thread, I originally decided it would make no difference as both casts threw up the same end result. That was without delving too far into hidden meanings and different methods. I was originally trying to step from hexagram to hexagram but still with the same end result.

Arabella, you came up with the idea that my contact or lack of contact will not influence his decision to be around me or not and sooo, you also suggested that it wouldn't be a big deal for him.

We are all arriving at a similar view point in spite of various methods. My conclusion from that is that the process of interpretation is an intuitive one and there is no right or wrong way to go about it.

 

[sooo]

My conclusion from that is that the process of interpretation is an intuitive one and there is no right or wrong way to go about it.

Thank you for your feedback, Laura, and for your levity on your other (what to wear?) thread. I'm curious, as time and your experience goes by, if and how your perceptions evolve on this matter of whether how one interprets matters or not. :bows:

 

[arabella]

As does everything. That's why I began my comment with "I would..."

If there are three true considerations, it makes the middle one no less considerable. That's not an absurd way to interpret, but it is a limiting way. Some methods are downright absurd to me.

There are many rationales for using reductionist methods over the obvious one, because many folks find it too confusing to reckon with multiple lines. Some of these folks are even Yijing authors and/or considered as scholars. Who am I, an ordinary layman, to say otherwise? Well, I am just me, who has no difficulty with multiple lines. What the reading says is what it means - no more, no less.

This isn't to you personally, but to anyone who thinks that some form of convolution is necessary to decipher Yi's lines: Imagine if people did that to everything you said which expressed more than one point to consider, and if each person had their own method of rearranging which points you were really making; such as: you mean what you didn't say rather than what you did say - as is the case with some of these, um, creative methods, which some even have the audacity to call laws. Speaking for myself, it would make trying to communicate more than a little frustrating , whereupon I'd be inclined to :mmf: myself thereafter. Even if they've authored a book, so what? I could also author a book and say anything I wish to in it. That wouldn't authenticate what the Yi plainly says or doesn't say in any given reading.

But, whatever floats someone's boat. \____/

I have to admit: I don't necessarily read the Yi in a "word for word" or "line for line" way, depending on the intention/depth of the casting. There are many opinions what each word and each line denotes -- as we all know. And I do have the greatest respect for those who speak or read Chinese -- or both -- but I don't. And the Yi isn't the only divinatory method I use, but one of a few, which I also combine with several healing techniques. SO it's really complicated anyway.

I suppose there are as many ways to read as there are people in the world. And we could each author a book if we got around to it, as you say. And that doesn't make it "correct." Whcih I guess is the point of this website as well, that we learn and try to document what we learn and see what others do that we may or may not want to adopt. Alfred Huang works for me in particular circumstances, as explained. I find that LiSe's interpretations are dead-on for me about 75 percent of the time or so; and I use Hilary's as a base to work from. I like their more modern adapted images over Wilhelm's. Legge is yet another speed that adds to the bouquet. Sometimes those are a bit abstract to the casting at hand, and then I have to expand my thinking according to the situation and search for other ideas based in the exact word or historical background. But the MAIN thing I believe is to cast enough and track enough of what you do to become acquainted with your own means of divining answers. You can get help from any number of others but what ultimately matters is what you find that becomes part of your own relationship with the Yi. And that could be any number of "masters" or hobbyist interpreters, or something you just "know" for yourself. Like, I generally "know" when a casting I've done is very solid when I cast it. It's like feeling something land, something quicken, and you know it's for YOU. But how I could explain that so that somebody else would get it, or could use it, i'm not sure. I just know that sense and that a special moment has arrived.

 

[loulisnowdrop]

I'm still on a steep learning curve so my thoughts may change again but my learning journey started with a generic online interpretation. At that point, IC was something I'd heard of but didn't have a clue what the mumbo jumbo was about. I've always been more involved with tarot and never really deviated from that.

After the initial reading, I delved a little deeper to find out how a question can be answered in such a way. It all seemed complicated at first glance but I found out what to do with coins etc and gave it a go.

The first couple of questions, I made the mistake of taking the hexagram title as the definitive answer and decided that it was all hogwash as only 64 answers can't possibly fit ALL lifes questions.

Then I learned about the moving lines and relating hexagrams. With each combination open to a fitting interpretation, the possibilities of answering questions is obviously much less limited.

At present, I'm of the opinion that IC is a tool to aid soul searching and an aid to thinking about issues without blinkers. I don't think it can tell us anything we don't already know but it can give us a refreshing perspective we might not get otherwise.

I still struggle with many interpretations but as I say, I'm new and haven't developed my relationship with IC or become fluent in its language yet. This is only something that only experience can bring. People with more experience are more aware of the language and options/connections of each line.

If I stick with the theme of IC language, the different interpretation methods are like different dialects or accents. What is easy to understand for one person is a strong scouse accent for another. (No offence intended here, I'm a scouser myself) It doesn't mean the interpretation is incorrect, just a different way of getting the information.

Because I feel the IC is about looking for answers within, I think the most accurate interpretations come from yourself. This forum is a big help for all though because a nudge in the right direction can be given from those who have seen similar situations and maybe have a different solution. Two heads are better than one in many circumstances.

I'm not putting the IC down in the slightest but if this was just a problem page where people posted an issue for other people to comment on, do you think we would get similar solutions and suggestions to the current ones but maybe with less depth? For example, if I had posted here without a casting saying my boyfriend has left me and I don't know if I should text him or not, I think that the majority of people would say to leave it alone and don't lose my dignity. If he wants to be with me then he will.

I think this forum and IC is the voice of reason that one struggles to find when too close to a situation.

 

[sooo]

I think we're talking about two very different things. One being renditions, translations, interpretations of hexagrams and lines. The other being methods of divination. Regarding the first, I've found extremely different 'takes' on a given Gua or line, and this among even some highly respected translators. So, I'm in total agreement that it takes a fair amount of searching and cognitive reasoning to find the best fit for a given question and answer. But in regard to the second matter, I'm at a loss to understand why one would not accept the hexagrams and lines as they have been plainly given - other than having difficulty dealing with a more complex answer. If that's the case, then minimizing: literally throwing away lines, or in some cases all the lines, is indeed a way to simplify things. It doesn't mean someone can not receive something of value, or in some cases even a clearer answer to them by having to reckon with each and every feature of the black & white answer they've received. It depends on how deep someone wants or needs to deal with the entire answer they've received as it is. Sometimes one just needs a flash, a picture, an image for their cognitive mind to assemble the answer they are seeking to find. I have no problem with that, I do it too. However, I have a fair degree of familiarity with every line in the book on an experiential level. If I didn't, I'd be too curious to simply discard lines for any reason. And I've always found the practice of changing the lines received into lines that haven't been received, in order to have a simpler answer to reason with, a crazy practice. And when impressive names, either of antiquity or of contemporary origin are given as substantial reasoning to use such methods, it makes the method no more credible to me. It's not hard to count from 1 to 6. If there is one change line or six lines, there they are in black and white. It's beyond me why and how it's necessary to eliminate part of that answer, other than to simplify it, which gives one less feature to consider. If someone is happy throwing away part of their answer, or using some method to change the answer that was given, it's no loss to me that they limit the full spectrum of Yi's answer to a single line. Maybe they don't want or feel they need for the whole answer. If that's the case, fine, then call it what it is, not try to authenticate it because someone said that's the law in that case.

It's like using a road map to get from point A to point B. You may not need to know all the crossroads along the way, but you do need to know where to get off one highway onto another, or you may find it useful to know where the rest stops are along the way, or where you can refuel. If you don't need to know those things, and all you want to know is how long it should take to drive across a single road or highway, then you can rightly throw out all that other information. But it doesn't mean that discarded information isn't there or has no possible relevancy to your trip, especially if you have to refill your gas tank or take a pee.

 

[arabella]

I think we're talking about two very different things. One being renditions, translations, interpretations of hexagrams and lines. The other being methods of divination. Regarding the first, I've found extremely different 'takes' on a given Gua or line, and this among even some highly respected translators. So, I'm in total agreement that it takes a fair amount of searching and cognitive reasoning to find the best fit for a given question and answer. But in regard to the second matter, I'm at a loss to understand why one would not accept the hexagrams and lines as they have been plainly given - other than having difficulty dealing with a more complex answer. If that's the case, then minimizing: literally throwing away lines, or in some cases all the lines, is indeed a way to simplify things. It doesn't mean someone can not receive something of value, or in some cases even a clearer answer to them by having to reckon with each and every feature of the black & white answer they've received. It depends on how deep someone wants or needs to deal with the entire answer they've received as it is. Sometimes one just needs a flash, a picture, an image for their cognitive mind to assemble the answer they are seeking to find. I have no problem with that, I do it too. However, I have a fair degree of familiarity with every line in the book on an experiential level. If I didn't, I'd be too curious to simply discard lines for any reason. And I've always found the practice of changing the lines received into lines that haven't been received, in order to have a simpler answer to reason with, a crazy practice. And when impressive names, either of antiquity or of contemporary origin are given as substantial reasoning to use such methods, it makes the method no more credible to me. It's not hard to count from 1 to 6. If there is one change line or six lines, there they are in black and white. It's beyond me why and how it's necessary to eliminate part of that answer, other than to simplify it, which gives one less feature to consider. If someone is happy throwing away part of their answer, or using some method to change the answer that was given, it's no loss to me that they limit the full spectrum of Yi's answer to a single line. Maybe they don't want or feel they need for the whole answer. If that's the case, fine, then call it what it is, not try to authenticate it because someone said that's the law in that case.It's like using a road map to get from point A to point B. You may not need to know all the crossroads along the way, but you do need to know where to get off one highway onto another, or you may find it useful to know where the rest stops are along the way, or where you can refuel. If you don't need to know those things, and all you want to know is how long it should take to drive across a single road or highway, then you can rightly throw out all that other information. But it doesn't mean that discarded information isn't there or has no possible relevancy to your trip, especially if you have to refill your gas tank or take a pee.

Yes, this is it precisely. And it's also part of the "flash" you refer to earlier on that validates this line over the others that merely seem to confuse the issue. It's something I've felt for a long while was perfectly suitable for me in certain cases -- and this was bolstered by reading what Alfred Huang does as well. I don't think it's a "rule" and I surely don't treat it as such -- but sometimes it is a choice that works for me, as I've tried to explain here. But each person has to test for themselves. If you keep track of whether it works for you or not, when it does or doesn't, you'll find out whether it fits in your repertoire of skills -- and all that you stand to "lose" is that you may need to read in both ways for a while [middle line of the three versus all lines] and see if results suit you or not.