...life can be translucent

Menu

40.2

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Hi all
In spite of being a rural boy for ages, I just got my first eye-opening experience with foxes, learning in the process why folks would want to shoot them at 40.2. Their symbolism in 64 is something else.
I have a friend nearby who invested fairly heavily in a nice aviary on his farm, about 1/10 acre netted from the hawks and eagles above and fenced pretty well from predators. But recently something started getting in at night and wantonly killing the animals. And it was really evil, maladaptive, perverse, pathological behavior, too - killing only for the sake of killing. In all it got fifteen pheasants, ten chuckars, rabbits, exotic chickens and ducks over a four night period. The tension of hexagram 40 was palpable. We set live traps at first, skunk sized, not knowing what nocturnal beast we were up against. But these just got sprung and the bait stolen. He finally got a permit from the game warden for leghold traps. It was indeed a fox. My friends are animal lovers, as am I, especially of wildlife, but there was no guilt at all in murdering that animal to death with a gun. There was the relief then and a sense of the celebratory victory depicted in 40.2. The wiliness, though, exhibited in getting into the aviary in the first place and later in springing the live traps, coupled with the fact that the animal is sneaky and nocturnal, make hunting these with bow and arrow more challenging than I ever thought to imagine. Three would indeed be worth carving in stone.
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
Hi Brad
To quote from Thomas Hardy - " 'Tis nature after all and what do please god"
A fox has gotta do what a fox has gotta do.

Was the way the fox acted wrong? ..........or just different?

Mike
 
Last edited:

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Of course I've been trying to figure that one out. We're starting to learn that evolution happens on smaller time scales than we thought not long ago. Still not overnight of course. Several significant genetic differences have cropped up in humans in the last 10,000 years. Species introduced into entirely new and relatively new niches can adapt in a few milennia. Several wild species in co-evolution with humankind, especially generalists that follow us around, like skunks, rats, raccoons, foxes, pigeons, etc. are already going down an evolutionary path that could easily be called unnatural or Bu Dao. Domestic animals of course are a whole nother deal. This is my only explanation. Most purely natural behavioral traits can be explained in terms of some survival value. There is none that I can see in the wanton destruction of an entire population that represents a potential food supply. Until I can find this I'll have a hard time seeing this behavior as natural.
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
Hi Brad

It's a strange thing evolution. Here's a take on Mr Fox. He and his family have been running around in your woods for 1000's of years. Running into an odd pigeon or wild turkey every now and again and doing what is natural and then off with the kill to feed the wife and kids. Now one day he finds a place where there are loads of these little fellas running around.

Up until now the opportunity to go into killing frenzy has not presented itself ( or alternatively noone was around to witness it when he did) but as soon as he is in the location with opportunity and resource then bingo his natural instincts kick in. All of these years he has been getting a minor kick from the act of killing associated with his need to eat. Now he has the chance to indulge his baser instincts - and what a buzz he probably got from the frenzy. Hey who doesn't like to let go of themselves completely once in a while. My and your mindset stops short of indulging in killing, but maybe Mr Fox isn't quite so particular. Just for the record I love running through the woods naked and pigging out on cream cakes !!

Where wild animals and man interface there is only going to be one winner when the sensitivities of man are encroached and his possessions are violated. What was the win /win outcome of this event?
If we are not careful we will enter into some eternal ethical debate here, but I'm feeling a bit sorry for the way Mr Fox's "letting it all hangout" party ended up.

Mike
 
Last edited:
B

bruce_g

Guest
Interesting experience, Brad.

Foxes will kill for the sport of killing, given the opportunity. Perhaps this has had something to do with the origins of fox hunting as a sport, and 40.2, yes.
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Humans of course also do plenty of this wanton killing. My American ancestors went on some serious killing sprees too. It took a couple of centuries for the numbers to pile up, but in the end we had murdered a lot more Native Americans than Hitler killed Jews - maybe ten million The Aborigines in Australia and lots of African tribes, on their own turf, didn't fare that much better against the white man. Unfortunately, for evolution to be a form of learning for the gene pools, there needs to be some accountability before a behavior will be eventually selected into neverland, and the white man has not been held to account yet. This probably won't happen until his broader, wanton waste of resources catches up with him. But meanwhile, we may have improved the breed of foxes just the teensiest bit by pruning a bit of maladaptive behavior.
 

Tohpol

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
3,566
Reaction score
134
Humans of course also do plenty of this wanton killing. My American ancestors went on some serious killing sprees too. It took a couple of centuries for the numbers to pile up, but in the end we had murdered a lot more Native Americans than Hitler killed Jews - maybe ten million The Aborigines in Australia and lots of African tribes, on their own turf, didn't fare that much better against the white man. Unfortunately, for evolution to be a form of learning for the gene pools, there needs to be some accountability before a behavior will be eventually selected into neverland, and the white man has not been held to account yet. This probably won't happen until his broader, wanton waste of resources catches up with him. But meanwhile, we may have improved the breed of foxes just the teensiest bit by pruning a bit of maladaptive behavior.

Very interesting. Makes me wonder about that blood lust. We do see it in humans however, replicated very precisely indeed as Psychopathology. The fox is just acting on it's innate behaviour; it's "wired in" primal urges as an animal, as a predator to kill. In psychopaths and other categories of primary pathological behaviour there are similar "urges" to be expressed that have made the world what it is today, though they are relatively few in number. Their psychological footprint is huge however. We can see the foxes doing what they do best in our world and through our lack of awareness regarding the nature of their tactics and deceptions we wake up every morning to more carnage and more death by the light of the moon. lack of knowledge of the machinations of the psychopath is one of the core reasons for the State of our present world strife.

I asked the I Ching about this recently with the question:

Which Hex best sums up Psychopathology?

27 unchanging. Nourishment. :eek: In other words, a powerful need and hunger that must be satisfied. Psychopaths can be characterised by a pathological need, or needs of the predator. It is insatiable and all encompassing. In fact, they are primal need personified.

Interesting for a number of reasons. The idea of the fox as predator is about the sheer desire and need for blood-lust; the thrill and chase; the enacting of the game of predator and prey. Psychologists have been at a loss to understand the actions of psychopaths as to whether it is a mental illness or whether it is simply a "wired in" manifestation of another type of human. Like the fox however, there is a lot of data to suggest that they are just doing what comes naturally - they aren't ill at all. Yet for those of us who are wired differently, are seeking to grow, to be creative and nourish others rather than exclusively ourselves, the behaviour is repellent to us. Of course, there are many that can exhibit psychopathic tendencies and are "False Foxes" i.e. they are very damaged and/or have brain lesions etc. Yet this is an area of psychology that we desperately need to understand, especially as such people gravitate towards positions of power, and have been doing so for some time.

They seem to thrive on cunning, deception, manipulation and the thrill of "putting one over" someone in often intensely elaborate games which result in the emotional, mental and physical suffering,of the prey i.e. normal folk. They exhibit a total lack of conscience which means this "blood-lust" continues until there is nothing left. Psychopaths and primary narcissists are renowned for never giving up and they will always, ALWAYS be a step ahead.

Take this together with the vampire archetypes of those that feed off the energy of others due to our lack of awareness of the predatory nature of some individuals there's a close association with the animalistic predator in nature. It is natural. It exists in animals and it seems, it exists in some types of humans as history and our world now can attest. Developing our understanding of foxes running amok in the global chicken coop is essential to our survival, imo.

Topal
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Which Hex best sums up Psychopathology?

27 unchanging. Nourishment. :eek: In other words, a powerful need and hunger that must be satisfied. Psychopaths can be characterised by a pathological need, or needs of the predator. It is insatiable and all encompassing. In fact, they are primal need personified.

Interesting for a number of reasons.
Topal

Like you suggest, there are also other ways of looking at this response. Big chunks of the psychiatric field suggest that psychopathology, neurosis, other maladaptive behaviors are instead born out of the thwarting of needs and hungers, they are not a natural response to or expression of them, and the more fundamental the need, the more twisted and irrational the pathology can get because it gets down into the deeper and older layers of the brain. I still don't think the Fox's overkill is a natural expression of a natural need - I'm still looking for other stressors in the picture that stem from a human presence. Even out here in the middle of nowhere, where the nearest stoplights and Walmarts are 100 miles away, there remain issues of major territory and such between the wild and ourselves and our critters.
 

Sparhawk

One of those men your mother warned you about...
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 17, 1971
Messages
5,120
Reaction score
107
Very interesting. Makes me wonder about that blood lust. We do see it in humans however, replicated very precisely indeed as Psychopathology. The fox is just acting on it's innate behaviour; it's "wired in" primal urges as an animal, as a predator to kill.

Only difference is that, as opposed to humans, foxes don't go berserk against other foxes...
 

Tohpol

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
3,566
Reaction score
134
Like you suggest, there are also other ways of looking at this response. Big chunks of the psychiatric field suggest that psychopathology, neurosis, other maladaptive behaviors are instead born out of the thwarting of needs and hungers, they are not a natural response to or expression of them, and the more fundamental the need, the more twisted and irrational the pathology can get because it gets down into the deeper and older layers of the brain. I still don't think the Fox's overkill is a natural expression of a natural need - I'm still looking for other stressors in the picture that stem from a human presence. Even out here in the middle of nowhere, where the nearest stoplights and Walmarts are 100 miles away, there remain issues of major territory and such between the wild and ourselves and our critters.

Well, I agree up to a point. But I don't see that 27 implies a qualification of an essential need. These "chunks" of hypotheses you mention and the idea of "thwarting" and neurosis can indeed be attributed to maladaptive behaviours but not to primary or psychopathy. Secondary psychopathy or extreme narcissism can be learned and inculcated. True essential psychopathy is a pathology that is unique yet creates uniform results i.e. intense suffering and misery for his victims in an almost infinite variables and permutations whether in the family or in the geo-political sphere.

Psychiatrists and psychologists alike really don't have a clue when it comes to the reasons for the core behaviour of psychopaths. They know, to some extent the symptoms an the functionality of these individals but they do not know why. The layers of the brain are only half the story. Remember too that brains scans of psychopaths are quite different, even anomalous, but not at all damaged.

This is the key point in all this that notions of "twisted" behaviour and concepts of pathology. Yes, the animal can be driven to a form of extreme behaviour due to the ecological footprint of man and the disruption of the delicate balance of the eco-system. Psychopaths however are a strictly human affair in terms of awareness - admittedly the analogy can only go so far. Animals can adapt and sometimes very well, but there is a limit. The psychopath not only naturally adapts to any image he covets but he infects individuals and social systems rather like a pathogen, where governments, collectives and organisations are gradually "contoured" towards pathological ends. This then gives rise to generational narcissistic and pathological traits the likes of which we are seeing more and more in modern life.

Some recommended reading:

Political Ponerology - A science on the nature of evil adjusted for political purposes by Andrew M. Lobaczewski
In Sheep's Clothing Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People by George K. Simon Jr.
The Sociopath Next Door by Martha Stout
The Mask of Sanity by Hervey Cleckly

I realise this is a bit off topic but I think this is so very important for folks to get a real grasp on how invasive and powerful this psychological footprint of the psychopath really is and we can we forewarned and forearmed. It is one of the most vital keys to understanding why the world seems to repeat the same patterns of suffering.

Topal
 

Tohpol

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
3,566
Reaction score
134
Only difference is that, as opposed to humans, foxes don't go berserk against other foxes...

Yes indeed. That's where we slip into ponerology (originating from the Greek word for evil, poneros) and the nature of the strictly human condition... where animal limbic brain becomes married with higher cortical response but missing any kind of emotional connection, or conscience.

Topal
 
B

bruce_g

Guest
There's nothing unnatural about it. Foxes kill what game is available. Overkill is buried or hidden, sometimes for extended periods, and they come back to it when needed. If it's full of maggots, all the more protein. They will go from spot to spot or house to house, repeating the killing, saving the meals for a future time. The excitement of big birds freaking out in an enclosed area will of course stimulate the kill response (fun, sport, instinct). But the fox expected to return to the spot many times to finish its cache, and possibly feed its cubs.
 
B

bruce_g

Guest
It’s important to see that the unnaturalness of this situation was not due to any fault of the fox. Had the large birds been in their natural habitat rather than caged in an aviary, the fox may have been lucky and skillful enough to kill a bird, and maybe a couple of mice. But as we've all heard, foxes are clever opportunists, which is why they'll probably be here long after we humans are dust.
 

mudpie

visitor
Joined
Feb 22, 1971
Messages
687
Reaction score
22
If I didnt know better (and maybe I dont) it almost sounds like the fox was being purposefully foxy, flipping the bird at the humans who couldnt figure out who their enemy was. even springing the traps and getting away with the goods. laughing at the bewilderment he caused.

Zoom out and imagine yourself an alien watching these human creatures ( animal lovers) who curiously erect a little sanctuary in which to keep the wild animals they love in. Then spy a very ornery little clever fox who watches the whole scenario, has a building resentment for the humans who dare to think they can enclose wildlife, and who craftily plans his revenge on these all-powerful human creatures who, in civilized America, can really only pretend to be part of the wild, and who, if you zoom out further -as you did- actually have been so presumptuous as to murder off the human wild life they found on this turf to begin with hundreds of years ago. in the name of civilization and progress.

the little fox becomes the personification of predator, a shapeshifter able to disguise himself just like the traps and bait were disguised to lure the unsuspecting. he outsmarts the outsmarters!

the fury of the wild nature at being enclosed and stifled manifests as addiction in human beings, appetites run wild talking on a ravenous life of their own. the fox was acting like an addicted creature, his appetite unstoppable. Perhaps it was a very beautiful act of pure rage, centuries old and collective.

it sounds like a story or a fairy tale. The Alien watches the humans celebrate as they finally prevail at killing off this clever enraged wild creature. I suppose on a deeper level it is not really reason to celebrate.
our own culture is very often like a Predator!
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,128
Reaction score
202
Very interesting thread. I agree with Bruce, My_key and Topal. The fox is not evil.

It is a natural response to an unnatural situation. Nature did not provide a wired-in answer to a species which cages large numbers of animals, keeping them there for an extended period, for food when they need it. The fox did take many lives, but caging them is just as well taking lives, just in another form. Maybe in the long run nature will find an answer, but for the time being the fox is still the same fox with a brain which seizes an opportunity. For the fox, bloodlust makes killing a prey more effective, it will double his efforts. He has no brake on it yet, because so far there was no need for a brake.

Of course I feel sorry for your friend. And I don't think he does something 'wrong' by caging birds. Just like foxes, humans are also still wired in the way they used to be when times were different. When you could have one pig in a pigsty, and pig appartment buildings were unthinkable. Back then a second pig was an opportunity you seized with both hands, so we did not yet learn to stop somewhere. In my country "live" more pigs than humans...

Killing the fox is also a natural response.

(Posted before I saw listener's post)

LiSe
 
Last edited:

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
It’s important to see that the unnaturalness of this situation was not due to any fault of the fox. Had the large birds been in their natural habitat rather than caged in an aviary, the fox may have been lucky and skillful enough to kill a bird, and maybe a couple of mice. But as we've all heard, foxes are clever opportunists, which is why they'll probably be here long after we humans are dust.
Hi, Bruce:

Fox is just clever and opportunistic, clever because he is a dog's cousin, opportunistic because he is a man's cousin.

If foxes were not animals they could be considered martyrs. For farmers they are delinquents, for aristocrats victims, for plain people tey are tricksters.

For chinese they were very special people:
Humans and beasts are different species, but foxes are between humans and beasts. The dead and the living walk different roads, but foxes are between the dead and the living. Transcendents and monsters travel different paths, but foxes are between transcendents and monsters. Therefore one could say to meet a fox is strange; one could also say it is ordinary.

Human beings and physical objects belong to two different categories; fox-spirits stand somewhere between the two. The paths of light and darkness never converge: fox-spirits stand somewhere between the two. Immortals and demons go different ways; fox-spirits stand somewhere between the two.

Ji Yun, 1789, in Notebook from the Thatched Cottage of Close Scrutiny
from: http://academia.issendai.com/chinese-fox-quotes.shtml

Foxes returns, some people might not stop until kill all, why would the fox stop?

Yours,

Charly
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Well, I agree up to a point. But I don't see that 27 implies a qualification of an essential need. These "chunks" of hypotheses you mention and the idea of "thwarting" and neurosis can indeed be attributed to maladaptive behaviours but not to primary or psychopathy. Topal

Your question was about psychpathology, not about essential needs. The Yi pointed you to essential needs as the place to begin looking. But psychopathologies are not essential needs - they come about by the twarting of essential needs. Several of the Yao Ci point to such problems of malnourishment. I don't see where the confusion is.
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
For chinese they were very special people:
Charly

Apparently, for some Chinese, like the folks who gave us line 40.2,
they were so special that the act of killing three of them was worth
awarding a bronze arrow and engraving the celebrated feat for posterity.
The reason for that is what I was trying to explore here- what caused the
tension that needed to be released (Hex 40) in the image - what force
drew the bowstring tight three times. What end or aim was so clear and
true that it couldn't miss?
 

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
... the act of killing three of them was worth
awarding a bronze arrow and engraving the celebrated feat for posterity.
The reason for that is what I was trying to explore here- what caused the
tension that needed to be released (Hex 40) in the image - what force
drew the bowstring tight three times. What end or aim was so clear and
true that it couldn't miss?
Brad:

Do you say that for don't missing the arrow there must be a heavy force and a clear goal? Of course, killers ever have his motives (very often money), and, if professional, also have clear goals.

I don't believe that hunting foxes is because they are harmful animals, but because they are animals (1).

Like an animal, the fox has some virtues, Bruce says: 1) cleverness, 2) opportunism and maybe he forget 3) lust.

Chinese folktales speaks about foxes seducing girls. The masters of that girls don't like foxes and put they to death.

Another folktales speak us about girls that are themselves foxes and seduce men, also can have kids and be good mothers. But masters don't like such girls and put them to death, foxes or not.

This little guy is hunted using many trained killer dogs, many trained killer aristocrats mounting tall horses. Do you think that they need bronze arrow prizes?

How great is the strenght of the fox that such means are neded for killing him, ye!

The foxes must be killed because the hunters are in the power (2). Also perhaps because they are harmful for farmers pockets. Why would the Yi go to speak from such obvious things? I believe that the Yi has many layers of meaning, the more obvious, the less important.

One possible reading is something like:

«If you get the three virtues of the fox you will earn a prize. If you get the cleaverness of the fox, the opportunism of the fox and the lust of the fox you will earn a golden arrow (or bronze if you preffer). And you know the sort of things you can make with such an arrow.»

The fox is killed because the hunter wants for himself the powers of the fox!

Another story (look at the Da Xiang) holds that the foxes were not killed, that the hunter only cought them and protected them, getting for himself the golden arrow as a gift from the grateful animals.

Who did go to give you his golden arrow if not an animal?

Maybe I'm wrong, but there are too much stories better than that of the punished delinquent...

Yours,

Charly

--------------------------------
(1) of course with no confucian morality.
(2) all the men as corpses (S.Weil), all the foxes as skins!
 

Tohpol

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
3,566
Reaction score
134
Your question was about psychpathology, not about essential needs. The Yi pointed you to essential needs as the place to begin looking. But psychopathologies are not essential needs - they come about by the twarting of essential needs. Several of the Yao Ci point to such problems of malnourishment. I don't see where the confusion is.

My point is that psychopathology IS essential need and one without conscience; and may well be natural for some humans. I had this in mind when I asked the question. Secondly, there is no consensus on primary psychopathy arising from a "thwarting" of essential needs - secondary psychopathy, narcissism, skirtoidal tendencies, characteropathy etc. - yes. But the jury is definitely out on the causes regarding true primary psychopaths. Sure, the psychopath becomes crazy if whatever his focused desires are become thwarted but that may be just a symptom of the core state rather than a progressive deterioration. Psychopaths may be born that way.

This quote from George K. Simon Jr. from his Book In Sheep's Clothing sums up the "confusion" that so often ensues about it all:

…[W]e’ve been pre-programmed to believe that people only exhibit problem behaviors when they’re “troubled” inside or anxious about something. We’ve also been taught that people aggress only when they’re attacked in some way. So, even when our gut tells us that somebody is attacking us and for no good reason, we don’t readily accept the notion. We usually start to wonder what’s bothering the person so badly “underneath it all” that’s making them act in such a disturbing way. We may even wonder what we may have said or done that “threatened” them. We almost never think that they might be fighting simply to get something, have their way, or gain the upper hand. So, instead of seeing them as merely fighting, we view them as primarily hurting in some way.

Not only do we often have trouble recognizing the ways people aggress us, but we also have difficulty discerning the distinctly aggressive character of some personalities. The legacy of Sigmund Freud’s work has a lot to do with this. Freud’s theories (and the theories of others who built upon his work) heavily influenced the psychology of personality for a long time. Elements of the classical theories of personality found their way into many disciplines other than psychology as well as into many of our social institutions and enterprises. The basic tenets of these theories and their hallmark construct, neurosis, have become fairly well etched in the public consciousness.

Psychodynamic theories of personality tend to view everyone, at least to some degree, as neurotic. Neurotic individuals are overly inhibited people who suffer unreasonable fear (anxiety), guilt and shame when it comes to securing their basic wants and needs. The malignant impact of overgeneralizing Freud’s observations about a small group of overly inhibited individuals into a broad set of assumptions about the causes of psychological ill-health in everyone cannot be overstated.[…]


Topal
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
My point is that psychopathology IS essential need and one without conscience; and may well be natural for some humans.
Topal


Uhh-
I think you'd better find a good dictionary and look up pathology and pathological.
The meanings are pretty well established as deviant, abnormal, diseased, etc.
You cannot just claim that normal behavior is pathological - your statement is
simply false by definition.
 

Tohpol

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
3,566
Reaction score
134
Uhh-
I think you'd better find a good dictionary and look up pathology and pathological.
The meanings are pretty well established as deviant, abnormal, diseased, etc.
You cannot just claim that normal behavior is pathological - your statement is
simply false by definition.

I think we have our wires crossed here.

That's my fault - I'm using Lobaczewski's vocabulary here. No, I'm not claiming normal behaviour is pathological, (although to a degree a lot is!) I'm claiming that the causes of "essential" or primary psychopathy have not been defined. And it is primal, extreme NEED at any cost, that characterizes their dynamics. It's the lack of conscience associated with that powerful need that makes it so pathological. It is pathological "hunger" (27) for whatever may be in their sights. And in this sense, it may a pathology that is in essence a "natural" one - a human predator in human form. Evil personified.

And our social systems are very much adapated to pathological constructs whereby most of us begin to mimic and mirror systems which at their heart have become anti-human. To understand just how deep this goes, those aforementioned books are a must.

Topal
 
Last edited:

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
... it sounds like a story or a fairy tale. The Alien watches the humans celebrate as they finally prevail at killing off this clever enraged wild creature. I suppose on a deeper level it is not really reason to celebrate...
Listener:

Foxes are very frequent in chinese folklore :
The fox, it turns out, was considered by its very nature ambiguous. It was untamable and inedible, yet possessed quasi-human intelligence and itself hunted close to human habitations. Consequently it became a symbol of the marginal and the semi-legal. Its cult was illicit but widely practised. It was believed to be especially appropriate for people with feelings at variance with the official norms. If you loved someone who was already married, for instance, you wouldn't go to the regular deities for assistance, but the fox spirit might prove sympathetic to your plight.

From: In China, the fox cult lives on
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/feat/archives/2006/03/05/2003295907

If a'm not wrong, ZhouYi only speaks of catching the foxes, not about shooting them nor killing them.

Yours,

Charly
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
If a'm not wrong, ZhouYi only speaks of catching the foxes, not about shooting them nor killing them. Yours, Charly

Maybe the arrow was for scratching behind his ears, or handing him chunks of fresh meat.
 

Sparhawk

One of those men your mother warned you about...
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 17, 1971
Messages
5,120
Reaction score
107
Maybe the arrow was for scratching behind his ears, or handing him chunks of fresh meat.

Toothpicks, maybe? All that raw flesh must be bothersome between the teeth... :rofl:
 

Sparhawk

One of those men your mother warned you about...
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 17, 1971
Messages
5,120
Reaction score
107
Brad, BTW, this afternoon I received "The Zhou Book of Change" translated by Fu Huisheng. Here is his translation of this particular line:

Nine at the second line, he catches three foxes in hunting, and found a yellow arrowhead. He will enjoy good fortune if he keeps to the right way.
Image: Adherence to the right way can bring good fortune, because the nine at the second keeps to the just and moderate way.

I will create a post in the review section with the scans of the first two hexagrams.

Cheers,
 

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
Maybe the arrow was for scratching behind his ears, or handing him chunks of fresh meat.
Brad:

You know what the fox would think about the use you could make of the arrow.

But foxes are dirty guys and maybe you'r not the sort of people who goes to the fox shrine, surely you also think that the gong killed the falcon.

I believe that three foxes were a very poor performance for a JunZi looking for skins and that arrows were too cheap for being an important prize.

In my country there is a proverb «do not waste powder whith chimangos» (1)

Yours,


Charly

-------------------------------------------------------------
(1) useless country predator, not good for to eat.
 

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
...translated by Fu Huisheng...
...he catches three foxes in hunting, and found a yellow arrowhead. He will enjoy good fortune if he keeps to the right way.
Luis:
I don't like very much this translation, but I observe that:

1) Fu speaks of «catching» the foxes not of «killig» him.
2) The object found isn't the entire arrow.

Maybe no causal connection between the catching and the finding.
Sinchronicity presented as a portent or lucky omen. Close to the Waley's hipthesis.

The arrow is no apt for hunting because it hasn't body.

What is the right way? To continue seeking for more foxes? for more skins? To come back home? To seek for the rest of the arrow?

How was that the hunter catches the foxes?
Surely one after another and only stops when the arrowhead appears. Maybe for stopping him?
Foxes are lonely guys, catching the three together may be a portent. They were babies?
One thing is clear, not shoting him with the later found arrowhead.

About the arrow:
The arrowhead was not a prize for hunting the foxes, was a finding.
A bronze arrowhead seems something cheap, an archer keep many arrows for using.
The arrow simbolize the right way. Perhaps this arrowhead indicates the right direction?
A gift from high powers to orientate the hunter or to stop him.

About the hunter:
Who was him?
Not a King, he catches very few foxes. Oracle bones speak of much higher quantities in royal hunting. Not a Gong, not a JunZi, where are the comitives?
The hunter is alone. Who is him?

I believe that when the Yi don't say, the person from the Yi is speaking are you.
We are the hunters, the lonely hunters, searching for a sign to know what to do.
The foxes ever return to the scene of the hunting. They are like us.

Un abrazo,

Charly
 

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