A proposed new milfoil method

[Sparhawk]

A proposed re-interpretation of the milfoil (Yarrow) method

I just finished something that I had for long in my task list. I'm sure that, although this ideas have been around, privately, for some 50 or 60 years and in journal publication since the early 70's, for some reason, it hasn't gained in popularity. It is perhaps due to the obscurity and availability of some of the material. Here is my article, published in Google Docs:

A Proposed Alternative Milfoil Divination Method of the Yijing

I'm sure this will cause some stir in the Yi community...

 

[ben_s]

Luis, the word milfoil is new to me. Does that make me too much of a novice to appreciate your article? :bag: Or is it OK to ask... what's a milfoil?

 

[Sparhawk]

Luis, the word milfoil is new to me. Does that make me too much of a novice to appreciate your article? :bag: Or is it OK to ask... what's a milfoil?

Milfoil, AKA Yarrow... Sorry, I just kept the nomenclature of the original article by Shih-Chuan Chen that I'm quoting

 

[sergio]

Hola Luis;
Thanks for posting your excellent article.I found it very concise and informative of a subject not fully available to all.My only comment would be that the tittle might imply there is a new milfoil method when in fact you are talking about a reinterpretation of the same procedure.It is only at the end one divides the remaining stalks in groups of four obtaining the ritual numbers 6-7-8-9.A major issue would be the changing line approach-extremely interesting one I might add.Thanks again and keep them coming-I know you have a lot more to tell us.We'll be waiting.....
Sergio

 

[Sparhawk]

Hola Luis;
Thanks for posting your excellent article.I found it very concise and informative of a subject not fully available to all.My only comment would be that the tittle might imply there is a new milfoil method when in fact you are talking about a reinterpretation of the same procedure.It is only at the end one divides the remaining stalks in groups of four obtaining the ritual numbers 6-7-8-9.A major issue would be the changing line approach-extremely interesting one I might add.Thanks again and keep them coming-I know you have a lot more to tell us.We'll be waiting.....
Sergio

There. I changed the title in the first post (I can't change the title of the thread...) I think you are right and it could be confusing. It isn't new, as I mentioned in the first post. It is just unknown, for the most part, apart from a few yi-geeks...

About this: "It is only at the end one divides the remaining stalks in groups of four obtaining the ritual numbers 6-7-8-9," It should be noted that up to the end, if we think about it, the divisions of the stalks is the same as the received method by Zhu Xi. The article uses the remainder of the stalks, as opposed to the ones held in your hand at the end of the three operations, to calculate the 6-7-8-9's. In fact, this is unnecessary. We know already if we have a 6, 7, 8 or 9 by the stalks in our hands at the end of the three operations. For example, a 5+4+4 is a 9 in both methods; a 9+8+8 is a 6; and so on. The important thing to remember is that, when we have obtained all six lines, we must to add the numeric values of the lines and subtract them from 55.

And thank you for your kind comment.

 

[ben_s]

Thanks for the explanation.

The article seems thoughtful, but it involves more technical numerology than I understand. So I'm not qualified to have an opinion about it.

 

[lindsay]

The yarrow-stalk method Luis describes is a well-known procedure known as the “Nanjing rules”. It was proposed in the 1920’s by a group of Chinese scholars from Nanjing (including Gao Heng) to explain certain peculiarities they observed in existing accounts of ancient Yi divinations recorded in the Zuozhuan.

The Zuozhuan is a commentary on the “Spring and Autumn Annals,” a narrative history covering events in the period 770-476 B.C. Among other interesting things, the Zuozhuan contains 19 stories about actual Yi readings. With a couple of exceptions, these stories are the most ancient accounts we have of how the Yi was used for divination.

The Zuozhuan readings have several interesting features. All readings are done by professional diviners using yarrow stalks. In each reading, the diviner references only one line text or the hexagram guaci (but not both). Trigram-based interpretation is common, but there is no reference to “moving” lines, and “resulting” hexagrams are never mentioned – these appear to be later refinements. When line texts are used in Zuozhuan divinations, they come from the “primary” hexagram only. The Zuozhuan never explains the actual method for deciding which Yi text to use for divination, but the results cannot be derived from any known traditional method of casting.

So there is a mystery: how did the ancient diviners get their results?

The purpose of the “Nanjing rules” was to solve that mystery. However, few scholars have found the rules convincing since they were proposed. The complex numerological juggling in the rules seems to be arbitrary and based on no good ancient authority or tradition. The method appears to yield probabilities in results not supported by the Zuozhuan readings. Also, the “Nanjing rules” rely on the concept of changing lines, and there is no evidence for the use or existence of changing lines in any ancient account of Yi divination.

Perhaps the most serious problem of all is whether the Zuozhuan is a reliable source of ancient custom and practice. This is still a subject of debate. It is possible the divination stories in the Zuozhuan do not reflect actual practice of the period they describe.

Everything I have written can be found in Richard Rutt’s “Zhouyi”, pp. 170-172.

My own feeling is the “Nanjing rules” are a highly speculative and clever attempt to explain divination results that are themselves doubtful. Just as ancient Greek historians invented the speeches and dialogue they quoted as direct discourse by famous historical figures, so too the divination accounts in the Zuozhuan may have been crafted to make a narrative point. The Zuozhuan does not just report divination results, it tells divination stories.

Let’s put it this way: if “Nanjing Rules” was the name of a race horse, I wouldn’t bet any money on it to win. That’s your hot tip for today.

Lindsay

 

[Sparhawk]

The yarrow-stalk method Luis describes is a well-known procedure known as the “Nanjing rules”.

..........


Let’s put it this way: if “Nanjing Rules” was the name of a race horse, I wouldn’t bet any money on it to win. That’s your hot tip for today.

Lindsay

Spot the Yi-geek!!

LIndsay is correct about the "feel" of the method. It just doesn't have 800 years of history on its back and the longer speculation stays current and disseminated, the more chances it has to become an accepted rule.

OTOH, as I've said before in some of the yarrow related threads, every time Zhu Xi comes up, that perhaps he had access to works that are now lost. The proof is just not there though.

 

[lindsay]

You know, Luis, Zhu Xi has a lot of street cred in China. I don't know why everybody puts him down here.

 

[Sparhawk]

You know, Luis, Zhu Xi has a lot of street cred in China. I don't know why everybody puts him down here.

I certainly don't! Really. I've been using the received method for decades without a glitch. I'm just putting things in perspective as far as some facts are concerned: Zhu Xi himself re-constructed the received milfoil method, from whatever material he had available and from his own deductions. No divine illumination there. Furthermore, it should be made very clear that Zhu Xi is much bigger than his work commenting the Yijing.

As for street cred in China, the Zuozhuan is also way up there.

 

[lienshan]

Among other interesting things, the Zuozhuan contains 19 stories about actual Yi readings.

I can only find 12 actual Yi readings in the Legge translation. The others look like Yi quotations?

All readings are done by professional diviners using yarrow stalks.

The 12 actual Yi readings were done by professional diviners, but those actually using the yarrowstalks to create the hexagrams were mostly not-diviners asking for professional readings.

So there is a mystery: how did the ancient diviners get their results?

I think that the mystery is: how did the not-diviners get their results? The method used must have been far more simple than the “Nanjing rules” shown in this thread.

lienshan

 

[lindsay]

Lienshan -

I got my information about the Zuozhuan from Richard Rutt’s book on the Zhouyi. I think Rutt is basically accurate, but I may have generalized too quickly on a few points from his work. Perhaps I should have spent a week or two researching my post so I could meet Clarity's rigorous standards.

You are right to point out the yarrow stalks were sometimes manipulated by people other than diviners in the Zuozhuan. The question still remains, how did they get their results? No known method can duplicate them. The “Nanjing Rules” tried to answer that question. That was the main point, wasn't it?

I believe there are 22 references to the Zhouyi in all in the Zuozhuan. A few are rhetorical in nature, where the Yi is quoted to illustrate or support some point or other. At least 14 of them refer specifically to divinations. I’m not sure where Rutt came up with his 19 examples – I don’t have his book handy - but he does translate all the relevant passages from the Zuozhuan to support his analysis.

Also, while I’m in mea culpa mode, I think the historicity of the Zuozhuan is currently regarded more favorably than I implied. Recent work I have seen seems to indicate much confirmation for certain historical details in the Zuozhuan’s accounts. No doubt skepticism and negativity are completely unwarranted here as elsewhere in our studies of the Yi.

Kidder Smith did a thorough job analyzing the Zhouyi material in “Zhouyi Interpretation from Accounts in the Zuozhuan,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 49, 2 (December 1989), pp. 421-463. I won’t attempt to summarize his conclusions – I might make some trivial mistake like the ones that bothered you so much above. Read it yourself. It's worth it.

 

[Sparhawk]

Also, while I’m in mea culpa mode, I think the historicity of the Zuozhuan is currently regarded more favorably than I implied. Recent work I have seen seems to indicate much confirmation for certain historical details in the Zuozhuan’s accounts. No doubt skepticism and negativity are completely unwarranted here as elsewhere in our studies of the Yi.

I always wanted to use that smiley...

Now, we must give credit to Lienshan''s imagination... No, as Lindsay points out, the question of "how" the answers were obtained can't be found in any known extant text. Soooo, speculation abounds, from ancient to modern sages (and many amateurs, like yours truly...)

Kidder Smith did a thorough job analyzing the Zhouyi material in “Zhouyi Interpretation from Accounts in the Zuozhuan,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 49, 2 (December 1989), pp. 421-463. I won’t attempt to summarize his conclusions – I might make some trivial mistake like the ones that bothered you so much above. Read it yourself. It's worth it.

That's a great article I recommend to all. Here is a quotation:

THE Zuozhuan contains two dozen references to the Zhouyi or stalkcasting divination (shi) in accounts dated 672 to 485 B.c.' About two-thirds of these describe efforts to interpret the hexagrams and line statements of the Yi. Even at that time, we may be gratified to learn, the Yi was not easy to understand. I take these attempts to grapple with a difficult text as my object of study. First I will examine ten of these cases in detail. Then I will draw some general conclusions regarding the nature of the Zhouyi and the usefulness of the Zuozhuan to its investigation.

These accounts speak to a host of topics-the techniques of Zhouyi divination, of course, but also how people balanced ritual, personal and rational considerations in their decision-making, the relationship of morality to augury, how diviners responded to political pressures imposed by their patrons, and how the Zhouyi changed and thus survived. Particularly revealing are accounts in which interpreters fought over the "correct" meaning of the Yi. These indicate the fault-lines of interpretive practice, where old ideas were breaking down and people argued over what would take their place. By the end of the Spring and Autumn the Yi had assumed a variety of new meanings.
​

 

[lienshan]

The question still remains, how did they get their results? No known method can duplicate them. The “Nanjing Rules” tried to answer that question. That was the main point, wasn't it?

hi lindsay

The “Nanjing Rules” are made by chinese scholars based on an accurate study of Zou Zhuan. The Rules are made to create hexagrams with exactly one transformational line. That is the main point; the conclusion of their accurate study must have been, that the subject of the original Zhouyi divination method was to get one single line out of the 384 lines.

lienshan

 

[lienshan]

I got my information about the Zuozhuan from Richard Rutt’s book on the Zhouyi.
I think Rutt is basically accurate

hi Lindsay ... You are basically right

The online Legge translation of Zouzhuan is according to the Biroco link-site not complete,
while Richard Rutt translates all 19 stories from the Zuozhuan concerning the Yi.

http://www.biroco.com/yijing/links.htm

lienshan