Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
Janice:
It seems to me [Janice] that this Hex is focussing on 'feeling' our bodily sensations. Right now we are labeling the different parts of the body to understand the area of focus, but in certain meditations we are meant to experience the feelings and sensations of each part. ...
I believe that your point give the exact balance between the passiveness of STILLING and the activeness of MOVING. GEN might be translated as FEEL, feel your toe, feel your calf... something close to LOOK, look at your toe, look at your calf... but combining OBSERVATION and EMOTION.
This is compatible with the etymology of GEN, the man with the BIG EYE.
And at the end «be tolerant with yourself, nobody's perfect».
Best regards,
Charly
Originally posted by my_key - Would this be the same as increasing our concentration and mindfulness?
One thought on staring eyes. I was watching a TV program last night and it was talking about One of the symptoms of shell shock (post traumatic stress) shown by the soldiers in the first world war was something that I think was called the "thousand mile stare" - just gazing intently into the distance, no focus. Any help here?
I agree with you. Yes, the chicken/egg matter of "trigrams first/hexagrams second," and VV, is still inconclusive. The logical part of my brain also tells me that, as things are built, they start at the bottom, that is, with the simplest components first. In this case, other than the Yin/Yang lines by themselves and the Four Powers (the bigrams), the simplest components are the trigrams. I seriously doubt that someone came up, by chance, with a whole set of 64 hexagrams and then derived the trigrams from them. That one can argue about the history of Trigram Circles and sequences, and how they are relevant to the Yijing we know today, is irrelevant to the issue of the actual invention of the trigrams by themselves. For this reason, I believe that, not only the trigrams were invented before, or concurrently with the hexagrams, but that, for the reason that symbols come first and taxonomy second, that the names and associated attributes were assigned later; perhaps much later at that.
Oh and by the way, I checked my favorite thesaurus site out and it had all these words to describe 'stubborn.
http://www.dictionaryofwords.com/search.php?q=stubborn&rad=YM&x=25&y=6
189 moby thesaurus words for "stubborn":
adamant, adamantine, adherent, adhesive, assiduous, balking, balky,
bigoted, bulldogged, bulldoggish, bulldoggy, bulletheaded,
bullheaded, cantankerous, cartilaginous, case-hardened, chewy,
clingy, cohesive, constant, continuing, contumacious, coriaceous,
determined, diligent, dogged, dogmatic, dour, durable, enduring,
faithful, fanatic, fibrous, firm, fundamentalist, gluey, glutinous,
This presents an interesting look at the difference between Darwinism and Creationism. Do things evolve toward God, or are all things originated by God? The idea of parting out infinity seems pretty impossible to me. The idea of letting nature duke it out, and see what adds up, seems more plausible. But what do I know?
__________________
This presents an interesting look at the difference between Darwinism and Creationism. Do things evolve toward God, or are all things originated by God? The idea of parting out infinity seems pretty impossible to me. The idea of letting nature duke it out, and see what adds up, seems more plausible. But what do I know?
If understand your intention correctly--please tell me if I'm wrong--you are trying to prove that I was incorrect with my statement above about word alternatives and that the English language can have as varied a result as we can have in Chinese. Right?
No I wasn't trying to prove anything actually. If this was misconstrued....sorry. :bows:
In a recent post I talked of 'one-pointedness of mind' where images are no longer labeled but seen multi-faceted....no language, however rich and diversed it is, can do this.
The point he wants to make here, of course, is that a vehicle of understanding can turn into an obstacle if it becomes the principal object of attention.
But I think it was Harmen who once wrote that he suspected that trigrams and hexagrams are completely irrelevant. No images there, no meaning, nothing. I suppose that Harmen tends to identify the Yi with the text. The Yi _is_ the text, there is nothing else.
At the other extreme we have people like Richmond and Lofting. For them the Yi is mainly in the trigrams and hexagrams. But trigrams and hexagrams are not images in their view. They are language, "the language of the lines"!
It's complicated isn't it?
"Since the words are the means to explain the images, once one gets the images, he forgets the words, and, since the images are the means to allow us to concentrate on the ideas, once one gets the ideas, he forgets the images.
Charly,
I understand what you are doing and I think is creative. However, some boundaries must be placed when it comes to metaphorical meanings associated with Chinese characters. They are not Rorschach inkblots... Those are, to a certain extent, the trigrams and hexagrams.
Un abrazo,
The king used him to march forth and chastise.
Then it is best to kill the leaders
And take captive the followers. No blame.
It is not the purpose of chastisement to impose punishment blindly but to create discipline.
Evil must be cured at its roots. To eradicate evil in political life, it is best to kill the ringleaders and spare the followers.
In educating oneself it is best to root out bad habits and tolerate those that are harmless.
For asceticism that is too strict, like sentences of undue severity, fails in its purpose.
W/B
This is the downbeat, the 1 count, the rhythm emphasis of 52, to my ears. Not that this is in any way a negative thing, but I still hear most of what's discussed in this thread, not as not being 52, but rather it's what lives and moves and thrives upon a mountain: which is life, which is symbolized by fire, which is h-22. I think it's a lovely thread in any case.
And traveling a mountain I passed by a firm way and the following day this way didn't exist anymore. The foot of the mountain had collapsed during the night because of the heavy rains.
The Yi _is_ the text, there is nothing else.
What is the difference between a life-22-adorment and a life-22-pure beauty ?
A solid base ( 52 ) ?
No need for that. We are brainstorming here and the media is terse in import and intent and this is why we, sometimes, must ask for further thoughts.
Now, I've read your opinion above early this morning and thought of adding my own bits to it. I agree with you.
Please allow me the tangent to ask you, and everyone here, to go to the nearest bookstore and buy the Spring 2009 issue of Parabola Magazine. The synchronicity gods put it in front of me yesterday... I placed a blurb in Twitter yesterday and many saw the value of it. It is a challenging a very good read. It deals with "imagination" and story-telling.
"Imagination" comes from the Latin root "imago." My old Cassell's Latin-English dictionary says for "imago":
I will quote from a Parabola's article titled "Imagination and the Void":
- 1. an image, representation, portrait, figure
- 2. a likeness
- 3. the shade or ghost of a dead man; a dream; in Epicurian philosophy, the mental idea or representation of a real object.
- 4. an echo
- 5. in discourse, a metaphor, simile, image
- II. Subjective: 1. the appearance; 2. the image, idea, conception, mental representation of any object or event.
Traditional worlds have been unanimous in their metaphysical and spiritual embrace of imagination. The world of images has been universally conceived as an inspiring and pacifying treasury of wisdom: not only a horizon of dream but a space of knowledge. Pre-modern mankind was quite aware that visual representations provide a more direct access to reality than concepts and discourses. It highly prized the power of imagination as a privilege to relate to the beyond. This is why words referring to seeing and "imaging" often denoted, or connoted, a sense of knowledge. Thus, a "theory" amounts to none other, eymologically, that a "vision" of reality. Rites and symbols bear witness to this benefit of directness and integrality with which the discursive process of reason can never catch up. Myths, parables, icons, visionary dreams, sacred ideograms, all bear witness to the instantaneity of the manifestation of the sacred in and through images. Even the most iconoclastic of traditions, namely Judaism and Islam, have not been able to dispense with the human need for visual imagery, if only through their inspiring cultivation of the illumination and calligraphy of the word of God.Since we are discussing the Yijing here, let me also quote from Richard J. Smith's book, "Fathoming the Cosmos and Ordering the World" (highly recommended) talking about Wang Bi and the Yijing in the "Six Dynasties period through the Tang", pg.92 and onwards:
Consider, for example, his famous statement about the relationship between ideas and images in the Yijing:That's some food for thought...
"Images are the means to express ideas, and words are the means to explan the images. To yield up ideas completely, there is nothing better than the images, and to yield up the meaning of the images, there is nothing better than words. The words are generated by the images, thus one can ponder the words and so observe what the images are. The images are generated by ideas, thus one can ponder the images and so observe what the ideas are. The ideas are yielded up completely by the images, and the images are made explicit by the words."
But Wang steadfastly maintained that images, like words, were only the means to an end, not to be confused with the end itself. A person who remained fixed on the words would not be able to grasp the images, and someone who stayed fixed on the images would not be able to get the ideas. Thus he argued:
"Since the words are the means to explain the images, once one gets the images, he forgets the words, and, since the images are the means to allow us to concentrate on the ideas, once one gets the ideas, he forgets the images. Similarly, "the rabbit snare exists for the sake of the rabbit; once one gets the rabbit, he forgets the snare. And the fish trap exists for the sake of the fish; once he gets the fish, he forgets the trap." If this is so, then the words are snares for the images, and the images are traps for the ideas... Getting the ideas is in fact a matter of forgetting the images, and getting the images is in fact a matter of forgetting the words. Thus, although the images were established in order to yield up ideas completely, as images they may be forgotten. Although the three lines [representing Heaven, Earth, and Man] were doubled in order to yield up all the innate tendencies of things [by means of hexagrams], as strokes they may be forgotten."
The point he wants to make here, of course, is that a vehicle of understanding can turn into an obstacle if it becomes the principal object of attention.
Pre-modern mankind was quite aware that visual representations provide a more direct access to reality than concepts and discourses.
Authenticity (solid base?) is the hallmark of the latter - pure beauty. From there it becomes more and more superficial. But beauty is subjective, in the mind of the beholder, much like humor or music. It doesn't matter, in the pure forms, whether or not it's noticed. The earth's most beautiful scenery may have yet to been seen by humans. Maybe it's right in front of us, even! "The kingdom of heaven is already spread out over the whole earth, and men do not see it." Gospel of Thomas
Carl Jung replied...
"Knowledge does not enrich us, it removes us more and more from the mythic world in which were were once at home by right of birth."
ravenstar
All over the place...barbra said:One thing about communication is that 70% of it is visual. So, where is the visual when we're reading the I Ching?
I worry a bit about that Wang Bi quotation - the notion that once you get the idea, you can discard the image. It seems to me to lead straight to the 'modernised versions' that discard tigers, horses, wells and willow-trees in favour of abstractions. We humans do think, live and change through images and stories. If we try to go straight to the idea ('it's about transformation - forget the stuff about the tiger, that's just an illustration') we may never experience the essence.
We I Ching diviners must be people who like to do things the hard way. We started out by not understanding the I Ching. The most logical thing at that point would have been to drop the darned thing entirely. But, no, we wouldn't give up on it -- maybe because it was so difficult. Who knows? But one thing I do know for sure is that we have more in common than what separates us, because only a certain type of mind would persist in something like this.
I worry a bit about that Wang Bi quotation - the notion that once you get the idea, you can discard the image. It seems to me to lead straight to the 'modernised versions' that discard tigers, horses, wells and willow-trees in favour of abstractions. We humans do think, live and change through images and stories. If we try to go straight to the idea ('it's about transformation - forget the stuff about the tiger, that's just an illustration') we may never experience the essence.
So somehow we have to learn again to stay with the idea as it is, before it is put into words. I say "again" because I think that children can stay with ideas quite easily.
But then comes "education" and language become very important. Too important.
As grownups we don't trust or believe meaning if we can't catch it with words, with the "hands" of the mind.
Language is great but there can be too much of it.
Hmm, hope it is clear what I mean? Can't word it very well right now.
I see line 52.1 > 22 and 52.6> 15 here. Abandoning the 22.1 cart and reach to a 15 state and all this through a 52 proccess.
Its a misty thought, have find the links yet to share them here.
looking on things with a mind hard to move
may I give this a try?
I think that a solid base (mountain) is what equalizes the perceived differences in views of adornment and pure beauty; it puts the 2 aspects of beauty (hex.22) on equal ground (hex.15) and keeps them in proportion . . perhaps looking on things with a mind hard to move, makes it easier to balance the scales between outer/inner, facade/essence
how does that sound?
rodaki
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).