8.3 - non-people as animals

[knotxx]

How could you possibly miss that?

Reading too quickly? I was a little taken aback by your tone.

There is an interesting fundamental issue here. Are the Yi's statements literal predictions? Or are they substitutes for having encountered omens? Or are they priming you for holding a specific attitude with which to greet the near future?

Dunno about priming you for holding a specific attitude, but (I think obviously) the images are most often metaphorical. Thus 8.3 would rarely refer to a literal sociopath, apparently we agree there. I get that you extend the metaphor to refer to those who "don't give a damn about other people." I am musing about extending it a little farther, to encompass those whose thinking is profoundly alien/other/barbaric to the inquirer--whether in general or in a given instance (for example, I have gotten this line in reference to friends who are perfectly lovely people, but with whom I was having a serious difference). People like that are scary and might look like barbarians, or sociopaths, or cats, but they aren't necessarily (although they may be). Of course, in situations where you have so little common ground it is certainly wise to be cautious. But that line has no auspice, which is interesting.

 

[knotxx]

slipped by trojan -- yes, that we've all been Fei Ren sometimes is one thing I was trying to get at. I also like this other/alien/strange idea, too, but we'll see whether it takes me anywhere useful.

and you are probably right about cat reform school

 

[bradford]

You know sometimes we've probably all been Fei Ren unless you believe some people are intrinsically worse than others..which I don't.

You may, if you wish, claim to be no better, intrinsically, than Hitler or Dahmer.
You seem to need to be exactly equal to everyone else. I, however, will more boldly
go right ahead and claim to be a better man than them. And so, if I must in the process,
and by extension, claim to be a better man than you, then so be it.

 

[charly]

Luis:

Seriously speaking ...

... You hold together with the wrong people.
We are often among people who do not belong to our own sphere... we must beware of being drawn into false intimacy through force of habit... Maintaining sociability without intimacy is the only right attitude toward people... otherwise we should not be free to enter into relationship with people of our own kind later on.
W/B

比 bi3: metaphor / comparison / compared // close / near // **** / [YOU HOLD] TOGETHER
之 zhi1: 's / him / her / it / WITH
匪 fei3: bandit / rebels / [THE] WRONG
人 ren2: man / person / people / PEOPLE

W/B says that 8.3 is about intimacy and relationship. In the translation the word 之 zhi1 makes some noise to me, why translate it as «WITH»? Mainly, if not ending the phrase, it means «BELONGING»

May be a literal tanslation could be:

COMPARISONS' WRONG PEOPLE
Doing comparisons is always wrong.​

or ...

BASKET'S WRONG PEOPLE (1)
The wrong people that bears baskets
... say, women

​

Do youthink that 之 zhi1 might be translated otherwise?

Perhaps some sort of hidden propaganda:

JOIN THE REBELS
Approach the dissident people

JOIN THE BAD BOYS
Be with the rough people

Images from: http://www.hawaiiandays.com/KLC/003.htm
​

Maybe always the same obssesion?

Un abrazo,

Charly

________________________
(1) The obscenity filter doesn't allow me the exact english word, you know. No girls of Vassar of course.

 

[Sparhawk]

We believe that it had a decent ending. It was in East St. Louis.
The men were apprehended by the police. But it never went
to trial. Her father was very rich. As far as we could tell they
were "killed while trying to escape custody".

Ah, justice in the raw... Well done, IMO.

 

[rodaki]

for what is worth, i did get that line when i kept on chatting with some girls instead of paying attention to a certain someone

 

[Trojina]

You may, if you wish, claim to be no better, intrinsically, than Hitler or Dahmer.
You seem to need to be exactly equal to everyone else. I, however, will more boldly
go right ahead and claim to be a better man than them. And so, if I must in the process,
and by extension, claim to be a better man than you, then so be it.

Your confidence in the fact that you are better really eludes me. I can't honestly say if placed in certain situations how brave or noble I might be. I don't need to be equal to everyone else, I'm not denying differences between people, but I do know people can be warped by circumstances and I am aware I've escaped displaying the worst of my capabilities simply through the fact of having a relatively supportive environment. Who is to say a better man can't become a worse man all of a sudden ? What makes you think having progressed to the state of being better you sort of made the grade and can never again return to being the kind of man you think you're better than.


No need to answer that, I think its a fundamental disagreement

 

[javalava]

I, however, will more boldly
go right ahead and claim to be a better man than them.

I agree that it is right to stand up and be counted, and that muddle and foggy thinking is often a refuge for dishonesty and inhumane behaviour. However, aren't there also a couple of problems with making such an explicit claim?

Firstly, it assumes there is an unambiguous, universal standard for "better", and a person has a point-identity on such a scale. I think trojan was arguing that, given such an assumption, each one of us actually occupies a range and cannot be pinned down further. In your evidently full life you may have been able to transmute all your experiences into wisdom. As such, it would be reasonable for you to also have a good degree of self-knowledge. Although I too have had more varied experience than many in my 54 years, one of the things life has written deeper and deeper in me is that, "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" (Jeremiah 17:9) I doubt that my self-knowledge is good enough to guarantee all that I believe is wrought in my character.

Secondly, it assumes that such pronouncements are wise. (This is one of the issues I have with applying science to any domain involving cognition, which I'd be interested to discuss some other time.) We live in a world where IMO one of the most valuable things we can have is trust. (For instance, I would argue that science is not built on facts as is commonly thought, but on trust, evidenced by the falsifying of evidence being the ultimate crime.) Trust is a delicate flower, slow to grow yet crushed in a moment. In that environment it behoves us to be gentle with one another. Clarity and logic have many virtues, but they can be merciless. Unless we understand the full impact all our words will have (and I doubt anyone can), we cannot know what harm we may perform inadvertently and in the process become Fei Ren ourselves, to someone.

Both these issues were jointly covered by some Palestinian guy who advised us "not to judge lest you be judged". There is no need to assume some Final Judgement here, natural justice like "birds of a feather..." will do fine. So, by way of thanking you for making your position clear :bows: I will be equally explicit . Personally, I would prefer to live in a world where there is doubt, and that people can have the benefit of it, even though the cost is that Fei Ren are sometimes freed to offend again. I appreciate that this might be incompatable with your ideal. Who knows, maybe "ideals" are suspect too?

 

[Trojina]

And having just watched the Diary of Anne Frank isn't it the belief that some people are 'better' and some not quite human the very reason she died. The belief the Jews weren't quite human justified all the atrocities against them...isn't that view the source of mans inhumanity to man

I've always admired resistance workers in the war who took huge risks for others and ask myself if I would have done that or would I have been one of the ones who looked away and pretended it wasn't happening. Truth is I'll never know till i face that situation. In my view those who turned away pretending not to see were as guilty the ones who comitted atrocities. If you think about it what might make Fei Ren could be acts of omission as much as acts of commission (if i have that phrase right)

 

[Trojina]

(Not quite sure how this thread started off about a slightly misbehaved cat and we're now onto Hitler )

 

[Sparhawk]

(Not quite sure how this thread started off about a slightly misbehaved cat and we're now onto Hitler )

I've said it before: Hitler is alive in this forum. The man refuses to die and pops-up periodically in conversations here... Just do a search of the forum and you'll see...

Seriously though, I share Brad's metaphors in describing the Fei Ren. To use a modern term, it describes sociopaths.

 

[knotxx]

what do you make of the fact that there is no auspice?

 

[Trojina]

I've said it before: Hitler is alive in this forum. The man refuses to die and pops-up periodically in conversations here... Just do a search of the forum and you'll see...

.

well I guess we mistakenly attribute the entire holocaust to him...as if one man could do all that, and he becomes the figure of ultimate evil. If you ask me (and you didn't) I'd say those who did nothing or who simply obeyed are every bit as guilty. Theres always people who just side with whoever is in power, and one can see as any human would, how tempting that can be for a quiet life but i think thats our really cowardly ugly side.

 

[Trojina]

Going back to Knots cat and the non people and sociopaths...okay I'm wondering if for Knots cat his prey, mice and birds etc are the non people, you know they mean nothing to him he just wants to eat them ....maybe his having a spot of bother with his prey lately...


seriously though did Knot ever get an answer to his actual question, you know as 12.3 relates to his cat ?

 

[Sparhawk]

what do you make of the fact that there is no auspice?

IMO, as I said above, the metaphor of 'fei,' in "fei ren," is one of the most unambiguous in the Yijing. See, if you take the other metaphors for people in the Yi (Junzi, Xiao Ren, Da Ren) they have interpretive "shades of gray." Fei Ren, in my opinion, does not. A "bandit," a bandit is. As such is an image of wrongness, be it in the Chinese culture or elsewhere. No auspice is thus necessary to figure out the outcome of such an association. Ergo, it is an association that should be avoided.

 

[hilary]

...Thus 8.3 would rarely refer to a literal sociopath, apparently we agree there. I get that you extend the metaphor to refer to those who "don't give a damn about other people." I am musing about extending it a little farther, to encompass those whose thinking is profoundly alien/other/barbaric to the inquirer--whether in general or in a given instance (for example, I have gotten this line in reference to friends who are perfectly lovely people, but with whom I was having a serious difference). People like that are scary and might look like barbarians, or sociopaths, or cats, but they aren't necessarily (although they may be)...

Yes, that's exactly how I would extend it. People who are beyond the pale somehow, so it doesn't make sense to have ordinary expectations of them or try to achieve the kind of relationship that's possible with other people. Alien, other and also negative - not even necessarily actively hostile in intent, but simply a dark influence.

I've lavished many hours on trying to communicate with people who are fei ren for me, or were at the time, and it was stupendously wasted. But on the other hand, I've also been party to creating 12-ish situations by regarding someone as 'being quick-tempered and reactive' rather than as being human with real emotions.

(I'm thinking more of 12.0 than the same phrase at 8.3, where the idea of seeking union with non-people - or bandit-people - probably complicates matters.)

(Not quite sure how this thread started off about a slightly misbehaved cat and we're now onto Hitler )

Some kind of little-known physical law, I think, active in all online discussions.

 

[bamboo]

Just for the record, Trojan (detail policewoman), I wasnt referring to the "common" man in any kind of class distinction, just as in common, everyday people, the average joe, the man on the street, or the woman.

this has become a discussion about whether evil exists , presumably in people "beyond redemption". I guess the chinese believe "yes"....Actually, this thread gave me the willies. I once was attacked on the road,punched, pulled by my ponytail into the woods. Miraculously I was saved by a farsighted driver who swerved his car around in time to shine the light on my perpetrator and me. the perp ran off. But afterwards, I was scared out of my mind. It was made worse by the fact that the detective assigned to my case started calling me late at night to "discuss the case"....For quite awhile, I was terrified and couldnt shake the feeling that evil was lurking everywhere, and that I was helpless to avoid it. One night I had a talk with a wise woman who really helped me. She said "there has always been that bestial element in humankind. BUt you don't need to link wth it". That turned me around. The "wavelength" we tune into affects what sort of elements we come in contact with.

When this thread gave me an old case of the willies, I asked the Yi: "by pronouncing that evil does exist on this thread, am I linking myself with the bestial element? " my answer was 17.2.5

I like that answer. Line 2 says , to me, that if I focus on the small (petty, bestial, unkind, etc), I am not focusing on the higher aspects. and line 5, what you look for, you will find.

It's kind to give everyone the benfit of the doubt. BUt there is also something to be said about protecting your core. Being street-smart on the road of life means knowing when to NOT make eye contact, when to close off and when to be open, how to clothe yourself in a mantle of protection, how to hone your instincts. Sort of like a dog or a wolf: you sniff and say "no thanks". You could be saying "no thanks" to an element within yourself that wants to be active, like fear for instance.

maybe the poor cat was suffering a loss of instinct. I think it was Topal who said that cats are attracted to lower vibrations

 

[meng]

IMO, as I said above, the metaphor of 'fei,' in "fei ren," is one of the most unambiguous in the Yijing. See, if you take the other metaphors for people in the Yi (Junzi, Xiao Ren, Da Ren) they have interpretive "shades of gray." Fei Ren, in my opinion, does not. A "bandit," a bandit is. As such is an image of wrongness, be it in the Chinese culture or elsewhere. No auspice is thus necessary to figure out the outcome of such an association. Ergo, it is an association that should be avoided.

Yes, Luis, but a bandit in contemporary lingo can mean a rascal. The literal interpretation doesn't necessarily capture the intended meaning of that time. Someone could call an opportunist "a thief", or a doctor a crook for charging so much. They don't give a rat's ass about you.

But - I have looked in the eyes of the kind of Fei Ren, that Brad and bamboo refer to: the rapers, muggers and murderers. I know that that kind of extreme corruption is very real. And, like Brad, I don't think I am wrong to say I am a better man than they are, for choices I make and the effort I give, to not be a Fei Ren.

 

[Sparhawk]

Yes, Luis, but a bandit in contemporary lingo can mean a rascal.

Mind you, I don't disagree with anything you've said in the post about the "self" (as in "you") and the "fei ren" as separate and very distinguishable entities from an ethical point of view. That was my point too. There are "fei ren" and there are "non-fei ren." The dichotomy is immediate and the moral chasm insurmountable.

The only observation I want to make is that, when I use the literal term "bandit" to translate "fei," I'm not thinking about "rascals" nor am I thinking of any other contemporary, grayish kind or meanings. I'm thinking of it from the etymological meaning, and the POV, of ancient China. This is key. The kind of person with whom mere association, real or construed, could send the subject--perhaps innocent of said association--to the gallows or worse. Judgement in ancient China, rightly or wrongly, and justice, was swift and merciless. So the warning, writ large in the term "fei," stands firm and bright as a beacon to avoid falling in with the wrong crowd.

 

[knotxx]

I have to say that doesn't seem consistent with the rest of the yi, to me. I mean there are many lines when quite obviously bad things happen -- the flesh is stripped from the bone, the roof beam collapses, someone is following behind and may kill him -- where it is then underlined: "and that is VERY BAD." Are there other lines where the badness is so obvious that there's no auspice? (I am really asking.)

 

[Sparhawk]

Hi Knot,

I have to say that doesn't seem consistent with the rest of the yi, to me. I mean there are many lines when quite obviously bad things happen -- the flesh is stripped from the bone, the roof beam collapses, someone is following behind and may kill him -- where it is then underlined: "and that is VERY BAD." Are there other lines where the badness is so obvious that there's no auspice? (I am really asking.)

Well, we're not talking about your cat anymore...

My thought about that is that there are occasions
when words of advise would muddle a decision and is better for the subject to act according to his natural inclinations... The compilers of the Yijing were aware of that simple fact.

Now, it your cat an outside cat or an inside one?

 

[jilt]

a slightly misbehaving outside cat

so, yesterday one of our young cats (pre-adolesence) misbehaved badly. He attacked a lame chinese duck in our courtyard, he could not resist the temptation. Today, after some rebuking by Elizabeth, he has house-arrest. So outside cat is inside. And don't think it doesn't affect them, they are very sensitive for withholding love and affection, easily hurt in their pride. But I'm afraid he's a real rascal, a fanatic hunter, so 21-1 can easily develop in 21-6, an incurable criminal, if we don't stop that now. He must know the law in our small couryard.
Of course everything depends on the perspective though..... In the wild his mother would have praised his hunting skills and his courage, we like it (as vegetarians) that he hunts rats and mice, but don't like it when he hunts little birds and chickens and ducks.

 

[Sparhawk]

But I'm afraid he's a real rascal, a fanatic hunter, so 21-1 can easily develop in 21-6, an incurable criminal, if we don't stop that now. He must know the law in our small couryard.
Of course everything depends on the perspective though..... In the wild his mother would have praised his hunting skills and his courage, we like it (as vegetarians) that he hunts rats and mice, but don't like it when he hunts little birds and chickens and ducks.

LOL! Regardless of what you guys like, a cat, large or small, has its own nature. They are predators (apart from cuddly fur-balls). IMO, a reading of 10 is in order. More so than 21. Besides, cats rule us, not the other way around...

 

[heylise]

The fei-ren for cats..

 

[Sparhawk]

The fei-ren for cats..

LOL!! But I think this one falls under the "rascals" category...

 

[hilary]

Love it! Especially the cat's very scientific experimental approach.

 

[bradford]

No need to answer that, I think its a fundamental disagreement

Indeed it's about as fundamental a disagreement as it gets. At bottom, your position is Christian. God made us all spirits in his image, equal and endowed with free will. God didn't make no junk. And we have until our dying breath to claim our forgiveness and redemption, which is believed to be as easy as that. My position is Darwinian. Life is an emergent, not a fundamental, property of the universe. and spirit, however real, is an emergent, not a fundamental, property of life. Genetics makes lots of junk, which tends to eventually get selected out according to a life form's ability to fit into its environmental niches. Salvation and redemption are not easy - they involve a lifetime of hard work. It is up to us, as spirits in evolution, to provide fewer niches for evil and unfitness to thrive, if we are to have any hope at all of ridding our world of them - its a responsibility. The Christian view has no responsibility - things are all working out as part of God's plan. To me that's not only cowardly - our failure to embrace selection is a huge part of the trouble we're in.

 

[my_key]

Love it! Especially the cat's very scientific experimental approach.

If at first you don't succeed try try try again.

 

[knotxx]

The Christian view has no responsibility - things are all working out as part of God's plan.

I have not heard anyone here make the argument that terrible things are all working out as part of God's plan.

I am also not trying to deny the existence of Jeffrey Dahmer, which would be an odd thing to do, or to deny that there are people so profoundly broken for whatever reason (genetic, whatever) as to be beyond anyone's power to change them, at least as it stands now, and that these people can be terribly dangerous.

What I'm trying to say about 8.3 (to bring it back to the yi) is that there are people who look Evil to us who are not sociopaths but just working from completely alien worldviews. To take an obvious example, the 9/11 hijackers look like fei ren to the US; to themselves they look like noble martyrs doing god's will against their own fei ren, the US.

Please don't misunderstand me to say "and so it is all a silly misunderstanding"--what I'm pointing out doesn't make al qaeda any less dangerous to the US or the US to al qaeda, and it doesn't make 9/11 less terrible. But it does help ME understand that 8.3--when not addressing these most extreme and dangerous examples--might metaphorically extend to 'clash of alien Weltanschauungs.'

For those who have asked: my cat is an 18-y-o indoor cat who lost her lifetime companion/littermate a few months ago and who now several times a day runs off to a particular spot in the house and gives a series of loud, sharp little cries that sound like anguish or rage to me, although of course I don't speak cat. Sometimes the reason is clear (water bowl not freshened, junior cat in household eating her food, laptop on my lap instead of her), sometimes I have no idea. I just wish I understood how to make her less unhappy. If she is unhappy.

 

[charly]

... there are many lines when quite obviously bad things happen ... and that is VERY BAD." Are there other lines where the badness is so obvious that there's no auspice? (I am really asking.)

Knot:

I believe that there is not bad auspice at all in 8.3, It is an open ended line. Cats can truly be called BRIGANDS or BAD PEOPLE.

suppose that 8.3 said:

JOIN THE BRIGANDS. [NO COMMENTS].
Join the BAD PEOPLE, without comments.​

... say you know the consequences and the benefits of such an action, there are promises and there are risks, you choose.

May be an image of a brigand with a knot in the neck:

from: http://www.cat-city.com/museum/ukiyoe/​

Maybe FEI REN is a way to call people BANDITS, CRIMINALS, ALL THE WORST... mainly applied to people different from us, all sort of troublemakers, rebels and outsiders.

But some people can be PROUD to be called so, some people could even adopt it as a nickname like warriors or delinquents, but not always bad people, like CATS.

So FEI REN (1) could be:

• partisans instead of regular troops
• civilians instead of military
• peasants instead of citizens
• barbars instead of civilizated people
• children instead of adults
• women instead of men
• animals instead of human
• wild animals instead of tamed ones
• disloyals instead of loyals
• cats instead of dogs

... and, given that all change, also vice versa. All we can be called FEI REN for somebody.
8.3 can of course speak about your cat, but also can speak about yourself.

Yours,

Charly

_______________________
(1) FEI REN: 匪 fei3 (bandit / rebel); 人 ren2 (man / person / people)