About questions...

[Liselle]

(This came from here.)

---

Note: this is a segue. I'm not talking about Lola's reading here. So if it doesn't seem to go with the thread, it's not supposed to.

It is really a misconception that the Yi as a kind of robot only answers the question or a question formulated in a certain way.
The Yi does not answer questions, but gives a representation of a situation and everything related to that situation. The question is not meant for the Yi but only for the person consulting the Yi, so that there is a framework within which the answer can be interpreted.
The Yi's answer is a multi-layered one.
So in this case, the Yi was not just answering the question of how to tell him how she feels, but everything related to that situation.

It's not that I don't see your point at all, but I think it's important to ground the answer in the question. Otherwise we'd be all over the place trying to interpret it, more than we already are a lot. This is unlikely to be helpful.

For instance, if we ask Yi for insight, what's going on, it's important at least to start out assuming that's what Yi gives us. If we ask for insight but then figure what we got is advice, what to do, we might end up doing the wrong thing, all because we asked Yi one thing but then ignored it. We'd be working at cross-purposes, passing like ships in the night.

I think one reason for this is just because Yi can't alter itself as easily as people can in conversation. If you asked a person what's going on, but he really wanted to give you advice instead, he could preface his answer with something like, "You know, you asked what's going on, but never mind that frou-frou, all that matters is what you do. Here's some advice" (followed by the advice).

Yi is much more limited. A given line text might be worded in a way that sounds more like advice, and you have to think about it a lot to see how it's insight in the particular reading, and not advice.

Add to that that different translations might give the same line different tones of voice, depending on how the particular author saw it, his/her experiences, etc.

Yi does stray from the question sometimes. But Hilary makes the point that before you assume that, you should make very sure the reading couldn't possibly have answered what you actually asked. She says in her experience Yi normally respects a person's question and answers it. That's why it's important to try to be as clear as possible what you're asking, and ask in an oracle-friendly way.

 

[Hans_K]

For instance, if we ask Yi for insight, what's going on, it's important at least to start out assuming that's what Yi gives us. If we ask for insight but then figure what we got is advice, what to do, we might end up doing the wrong thing, all because we asked Yi one thing but then ignored it. We'd be working at cross-purposes, passing like ships in the night.

Maybe re-read my reply carefully.

The question is not meant for the Yi but only for the person consulting the Yi, so that there is a framework within which the answer can be interpreted.

The Yi gives a multi-layered answer, much like a diamond with many facets, Most who consult the Yi only look at 1 facet and forget that there are 99 other facets.

Yi is much more limited.

No it isn't. Just because you see it in such a narrow way doesn't mean that it is true.
Almost daily I have clients where often, based on the answer of the Yi, not only an answer to a question is given, but also the whole underlying history of the situation and a solution. This all based on 1 hexagram with one or more moving lines.

But Hilary makes the point that before you assume that, you should make very sure the reading couldn't possibly have answered what you actually asked. She says in her experience Yi normally respects a person's question and answers it. That's why it's important to try to be as clear as possible what you're asking, and ask in an oracle-friendly way.

Although I respect Hilary in her knowledge about and work with the Yi, this is blatant nonsense.
Putting so much emphasis on asking questions and having to articulate them correctly is a Western thing. Even without a question or just a few keywords, you get an excellent answer and often the answer itself is then better understood because the emphasis is then not on the question, but interpreted from the whole situation.

Any oracle, be it the Yi, Tarot or Rune stones, always gives much more information than just an answer to the question asked. It gives insight and not an answer and therein lies a world of difference.

 

[Liselle]

It's not that I don't see what you're saying. I agree Yi can pack a lot into one answer, and we shouldn't have blinders on.

The question is not meant for the Yi but only for the person consulting the Yi, so that there is a framework within which the answer can be interpreted.

I agree with that, too.

But a person does have to construct the framework somehow, and it seems to me the best way to do that is through the question. If someone writes a good question, it means they've taken time to do that, they've thought about it carefully. As Hilary puts it, they know what they want Yi to show them. And they've articulated that clearly.

If someone asks Yi for a picture of what's going on, I really don't think he should jump too fast to assume it's advice just because it might sound like advice because that's how the line text is worded (or how the particular translation is worded). It might actually be the explanation he asked for (!), and not advice. Now - if a person can see how the answer is insight, but then also sees advice, and understands all of this and how the reading is working - excellent job, then. But a lot of us aren't going to be able to do that all the time.

 

[Liselle]

This is copied from the duplicate thread deleted

Argh, ugh, thank you.

 

[Hans_K]

No it isn't blatant nonsense, questions certainly matter as without those we do not know what is being answered at all!

I think I said that:

The question is not meant for the Yi but only for the person consulting the Yi, so that there is a framework within which the answer can be interpreted.

The nonsense is about

But Hilary makes the point that before you assume that, you should make very sure the reading couldn't possibly have answered what you actually asked. She says in her experience Yi normally respects a person's question and answers it. That's why it's important to try to be as clear as possible what you're asking, and ask in an oracle-friendly way.

Harmen Mesker has made a funny video to debunk a lot of nonsense that exists in the West about the Yi.

 

[Liselle]

But in the instance you are referring to it's not about Yi answering an entirely different question at all but the answer being bigger than the question, the answer containing more than was specifically asked. Yi does that all the time and that is, to repeat, not the same thing that Hilary was talking about above.

I agree with what you said in your post (the whole thing), but I'm not sure Hilary does always just mean entirely different question.

("Entirely different question" - what I mean there is things like asking about my family, but then thinking the answer's about my job. Is that what you mean?)

What I meant in what you just quoted - well I remember a thread in Reading Circle where a number of us were interpreting a reading (and not thinking Yi changed the subject entirely), and Hilary came along and said what if we figure Yi answered the question as asked, and suggested it might mean x/y/z that way. I was impressed.

 

[Hans_K]

Yet he teaches weng wang gu doesn't he which certainly is 'blatant nonsense' the term you applied to Hilary's ideas. Weng wang gua may not be western, I don't know but it looks to be the biggest piece of fortune cookie nonsense I ever did see.

I use WWG on a daily basis (and no not taught by Harmen Mesker). How can you say it is blatant nonsense if you don't know what it is or does? A beginner's attitude would suit you better.

 

[Liselle]

As Trojina says, I fundamentally disagree that asking a clear question, and starting out assuming Yi's answered it, is nonsense.

You yourself say a framework is needed - what could be more framework-y than a question?

 

[Liselle]

She did as otherwise she'd have been saying 'only ever apply your answer to the exact specific question asked' and I can't imagine she'd commit to something so limiting.


That's an entirely different question yes. In the thread you linked to entirely different questions are not answered I don't think but the perimeters of the answers are wider than the question. IOW it tells you more than what you asked for. That is not the same thing at all as thinking Yi is answering another question.

We might be talking at cross purposes.

asking about my family, but then thinking the answer's about my job

- not what I meant. (Hilary suggests not doing this, either, though - it's just not what I mean in this thread or what I thought Hans was talking about.) (Added - Yi can change the subject, of course. I'm just saying don't think that too fast.)

Asking "why," but interpreting the answer as if it's "what to do" - this is the sort of thing I mean. I'm pretty sure Hilary suggests at least starting out quite literally. Ask what you want to know - advice, prediction, insight, description, etc. - and then start out assuming that is what Yi's given you.

Maybe this is just my unique problem, I don't know. (If so... , , and I should not have started this thread.) I get into trouble sometimes when I ask sloppy questions.

E.g. "What about saying 'abc' to this person?" when what I really meant, but didn't ask, is "What reaction can I expect?"

Sometimes the answer's obvious anyway. But sometimes I end up scouring the "What about...?" answer for a description of a reaction, only to find - eventually - that Yi was giving me helpful advice for how to say it. (A perfect answer to what I actually asked - "What about... ." Yi: "Well, the important thing about saying 'abc' to this person is that you frame it this way..." or whatever.)

Do you see what I mean?

the perimeters of the answers are wider than the question. IOW it tells you more than what you asked for

Agreed. But you might have to distinguish between how Yi might have answered your question, and then what else it might be saying, and keep those straight. Sometimes this will be easy, sometimes it'll be subconscious or intuitive - that's perfectly fine. Sometimes it'll need a little bit more conscious distinction, I think.

 

[hilary]

Although I respect Hilary in her knowledge about and work with the Yi, this is blatant nonsense.

This sentence makes me very happy, just in general.

And yes, I think there is a certain amount of talking at cross-purposes going on.

Yes, questions are for the benefit of the questioner, and yes, Yi's answers regularly go beyond the scope of the question. (It answers the person through the question, is how I'd put it.) That's not quite the same thing as answering a different question.

Maybe we need examples?

Background: our querent's been having an affair with a married man, but he is blowing hot and cold, alternately disappearing on her for months and then reappearing and saying how much he loves her and that he is just about to divorce his wife, as soon as he has sorted a few things out. She has resolved not to contact him until he does.

So she asks about this and receives Hexagram 33 - unchanging, let's say, for the sake of simplicity.

If she asked 'What's going on with him?' this means one thing, and if she asked 'What should I do?' it means something else. In one case she would have asked for a picture of him, and in the other, for a picture of herself (doing something sensible). Different people, different pictures, different meanings. If she doesn't know which question she meant, how is she to know what 33 is a picture of?

~~~

But even if this weren't about 2 different people, the distinction between 'What's happening?' or even 'What am I doing?' and 'What would be best to do?' - description vs advice - is an important one. Someone come up with a better example...

 

[Liselle]

(Responding to Trojina, cross-posted w/Hilary)

In your example how different are they really? I think they add up to the same thing anyway and one can always ask more questions to clarify. I tend to go for 3 questions around an issue as if circling it from all sides (yet leaving a path open in front as in 8.5)

I don't worry much about my questions at all but that might be because I am not very often asking for specific advice as such I'm much more interested in 'circling' the question as above and that escape path is important to give Yi room to speak.

If you are often wanting very specific directions on practical things then you are going to worry much more about the question I guess.

We all ask a mix of questions, I think, probably? Advice, explanation, what to be aware of, what to expect, best approach, ad infinitum.

All I'm saying is, decide what you want to know, ask Yi that, try to understand the answer in those terms, then see what else it's saying.

Not being welded to the question is very different from questions don't matter. I think we agree on that.

 

[Liselle]

Someone come up with a better example...

That's a very good example, and thank you for coming along with it.

 

[moss elk]

How can you say it is blatant nonsense....

Like this:

From observation and experience of the wwg users who have come here over the years, who as a group, often insert 'tangential-meanings-not-actually-in-the reading' as a substitution for text comprehension.

I recall a wwg user once telling someone their partner was cheating on them, when the reading they received had absolutely nothing to do with that.

What an incredibly arrogant attitude.

This is funny because, some of the wwg crowd who have come here over the years fit that description perfectly.

 

[hilary]

Pls to bear in mind forum rules about personal attacks. Attacking someone's ideas and opinions - with vigour - is absolutely fine. Attacking the individual personally is not. (Obviously there are grey areas, but the distinction's a good guide.)

I doubt it would work to start with a reading that was intended to be interpreted as a whole - gua and text - and try to turn it into a WWG reading. No reason why it should, on the whole... like the member we had who would use his own personal text for the hexagrams that bore no relation to the original. Of course they are going to come up with meanings not in the text, that's the whole point of the method...

I would be curious to experience a Wen Wang Gua reading as a whole, starting with that intention... though I would probably have to get someone to give me the answer without mentioning which hexagrams were involved, to avoid getting 'distracted' by the voice of the Yi. Great claims are made for it, after all, and it's been around for... hm, how long, Hans? A millennium or two?

 

[my_key]

In the beginning of relationship with Yi, questions based on a clear intent and sympathetically worded in an unambiguous open way greatly helps in the querent learning their craft. A clear question points to a clear answer and so the fledgling querent builds confidence in their ability to make meaning from a divination practice. The multi-faceted aspects of the response are still there but remain unseen,. Gaining insight at a single, practical level at this stage for many is all they require.

Fast forward through 20 or 30 years of divination practice and firmly embedded within the ritual and relationship are things like intent - which can now be unspoken-, confidence and practical understanding. Things have moved on, and it is perhaps here that elements of emotional or spiritual feedback, or even any number of other aspects of the multi-faceted nature available for the response to embrace, become more noticeable. The conversation now has opportunity to progress to new heights, or depths, endorsed by both parties.

Ultimately divination is a conversation with soul and the level at which that conversation takes place is never fixed. It mostly takes place in the world of imagery and symbols as here in this world beyond words, greater stories can be told. Over the years a successful, open relationship with Yi will allow for the querent to become receptive to many more levels of multi-faceted conversation, should they choose to. The openly enquiring querent may well receive insight into one, two, three or more areas that were in need of insight and balance. All this may even transpire in a flash. Equally there is nothing wrong with asking a specific question when focus on a specific matter is required, that cuts through the multi-faceted aspects. Horses for courses.

Awareness is an acquired skill requiring diligent practice. Blockages to greater awareness have to be allowed to decay, so that the channels of communication are free and open. The insights that stick are the things / topics/ queries/ worries/fears that were most dominant in the energetic field between the querent and Yi at the time of the enquiry. Most pressing of a reply at the conscious or unconscious levels.

One experienced diviner may still have a need for the structure and associated limitations that a formal question sets; whilst another who has become more adept at riding the waves of awareness in the unconscious landscape of divination may prefer to engage with Yi in a conversation beyond spoken word.

Neither is right or wrong - things just play out how they need to play out. The insights obtained are the ones that the querent is open to receiving and for that matter are the ones that are most pressing for them to gain.
The conversation can be viewed as being held at a level where both sides are able to speak in the same language and this is limited to, and by, the lowest level of consciousness that is brought into the field of consultation. Doors need to be held wide open otherwise, through a shut door, the message coming from a farther distance is no more that a muffled, unintelligible blur.

For what it's worth, my perspective is that this applies whether the divination practice is based in WWG or any other approach that may be the basis to engaging with Yi.

 

[dobro p]

It is really a misconception that the Yi as a kind of robot only answers the question or a question formulated in a certain way.
The Yi does not answer questions, but gives a representation of a situation and everything related to that situation. The question is not meant for the Yi but only for the person consulting the Yi, so that there is a framework within which the answer can be interpreted.
The Yi's answer is a multi-layered one.
So in this case, the Yi was not just answering the question of how to tell him how she feels, but everything related to that situation.

It's not that I don't see your point at all, but I think it's important to ground the answer in the question. Otherwise we'd be all over the place trying to interpret it, more than we already are a lot. This is unlikely to be helpful.

If, as Hans says, 'the question is not meant for the Yi but only for the person consulting the Yi', then the answer is completely grounded in the question, exactly where it needs to be grounded - in the mind of the questioner.

FWIW, this is pretty much exactly how I see it as well.

 

[Liselle]

Alright, but "grounded" (and "framework") are important words there. Let's not brush over them.

If a person doesn't form a question as a perfectly grammatical sentence, doesn't she still have to have pretty much the same thing in her head? What Hilary said -

the distinction between 'What's happening?' or even 'What am I doing?' and 'What would be best to do?' - description vs advice - is an important one.

I hope we're not debating about details like whether our 6th grade teachers would give us good marks for how we write it down. That would be silly.

 

[Liselle]

Unless of course someone's asking for help here, in which case it is important to post exactly what was in your head, because people here will have no idea.

(Hans and I agree on that part, though; it came up quite a while ago.)

 

[hilary]

Another example, probably pertinent to what MyKey was saying...

X and Y are in dispute. X feels Y has taken the easy way out and let her down badly; Y feels exactly the same about X.

X consults the oracle, and since she's an experienced user she finds no need to give much time or thought to her question. She just jots down 'argument with Y' and casts. She receives 32.3 -

'Not lasting in your character,
Maybe accepting a shameful gift.
Constancy: shame'

...and she is experienced enough to know that the 'your' is just an artefact of translation; she can perfectly well read it as 'not lasting in his character.'

What will she make of this? That doesn't depend on her depth of understanding of the oracle; it depends on how honest she can be with herself. If she had thought to direct the question, to ask either 'How am I doing in this argument with Y?' or 'What should I make of Y's position?' she'd know where she was - however uncomfortable.

In other words... to be sure you don't need to pay attention to what you're asking, you need not only great experience with the Yi, but also extraordinary clarity of mind and freedom from bias. Enough, I should think, that you'd rarely need to consult in the first place.

Another way to put this: an ordinary human consulting the oracle needs to be able to be surprised by it from time to time. Sometimes it will say things we don't like and/or couldn't have imagined. The more leeway we leave ourselves to decide how to apply the answer - 'plainly that line is about Y, that's just what I always said about him' - the less possibility there is for us to be surprised.

 

[Hans_K]

The discussion seems to be taking a different turn (which is fine in itself) from what I was initially responding to.
Rosada's reply in this post was

The I Ching was only answering the question should you tell him how you feel about him sometime in the near future?

My reaction was

The question is not meant for the Yi but only for the person consulting the Yi, so that there is a framework within which the answer can be interpreted.
The Yi's answer is a multi-layered one.
So in this case, the Yi was not just answering the question of how to tell him how she feels, but everything related to that situation.

So I am not saying that a question is unimportant, it is in fact the framework within which an answer can be interpreted.
What I do say is that the Yi's answer contains more "information" than just an answer to the question. The reason there is more "information" is because the Yi does not need the question but gives an answer that resonates with the whole situation.
Perhaps interesting to try for yourself: Create a hexagram the way you are used to without asking a question. And interpret the answer from the situation in your life you are in at that moment.
I do this myself with some regularity and am always amazed by the answer received.

 

[hilary]

That sounds similar to something I suggest: the question 'What to be aware of?' or 'What to be aware of this week?' It works, I learn a lot, and it also seems to clear the air for the more focussed questions, when I have one.

 

[Liselle]

Crossing posts with Hilary (from whom I learned the weekly reading ).

So I am not saying that a question is unimportant, it is in fact the framework within which an answer can be interpreted.

Good, we agree on that...

What I do say is that the Yi's answer contains more "information" than just an answer to the question. The reason there is more "information" is because the Yi does not need the question but gives an answer that resonates with the whole situation.

...and on that, except I think I'd say something like the question's a mutual understanding between querent and oracle. If I ask from a certain angle - advice for a conversation, say - I trust I can interpret the answer from that angle. (Maybe unless there's something unusual going on, like the conversation will never take place for some reason.)

Perhaps interesting to try for yourself: Create a hexagram the way you are used to without asking a question.

The closest I get to this are weekly readings, where I still ask a question, but an open one like "Guidance for this week?" or "What should I be aware of this week?" They've been really helpful.

And interpret the answer from the situation in your life you are in at that moment.

Do you feel like you're in many situations at once, though? Work situations, home situations, health situations, the-washer-is-making-funny-noises situations (whatnot). Is it easy to recognize what Yi's addressing?

My weekly ones are a mix - some are umbrella-ish, like chapters in a book of life lessons ("concentrate on this one now"), others are about actual events.

 

[Hans_K]

Do you feel like you're in many situations at once, though?

No, what I mean by that is the general state/'vibe' of that moment, how you feel with everything going on at that moment.
Personally, I just don't want to pick out a particular part (like work, relationships, ect.) but more of a snapshot of the whole.
From the Yi's answer, a theme or pattern then often arises for me, that runs through all aspects of my life at that moment in one way or another. In addition, it also gives advice on how best to deal with it, what, if any, adjustments or fine-tuning is needed to make things run more smoothly or in a more balanced way.

 

[my_key]

Another example, probably pertinent to what MyKey was saying...

X and Y are in dispute. X feels Y has taken the easy way out and let her down badly; Y feels exactly the same about X.

X consults the oracle, and since she's an experienced user she finds no need to give much time or thought to her question. She just jots down 'argument with Y' and casts. She receives 32.3 -

'Not lasting in your character,
Maybe accepting a shameful gift.
Constancy: shame'

...and she is experienced enough to know that the 'your' is just an artefact of translation; she can perfectly well read it as 'not lasting in his character.'

What will she make of this? That doesn't depend on her depth of understanding of the oracle; it depends on how honest she can be with herself. If she had thought to direct the question, to ask either 'How am I doing in this argument with Y?' or 'What should I make of Y's position?' she'd know where she was - however uncomfortable.

There is also the option that both are 'not lasting in their character'. It takes two to tango or as in this case argue.

In other words... to be sure you don't need to pay attention to what you're asking, you need not only great experience with the Yi, but also extraordinary clarity of mind and freedom from bias. Enough, I should think, that you'd rarely need to consult in the first place.

Clarity of mind can be greatly assisted by ensuring that there is clarity of intent, set before the divination. Intent acts like a snowplough forging a freeing pathway through deeply fallen snow,

I think that you are right too, Hilary, that over time matters at one level of consciousness that once needed a cast to enable understanding are more clearly understood. This is because of the greater clarity coming from enhanced self awareness that grows with concerted relationship with Yi. Over time everyone progresses towards becoming a more self realised junzi.

Another way to put this: an ordinary human consulting the oracle needs to be able to be surprised by it from time to time. Sometimes it will say things we don't like and/or couldn't have imagined. The more leeway we leave ourselves to decide how to apply the answer - 'plainly that line is about Y, that's just what I always said about him' - the less possibility there is for us to be surprised.

I agree. Without surprise then all that remains is a complacent comfort zone. When there is trouble at t'mill then there is always a need to be open to surprise. Nobody expects surprise!
Surprise, fertile shock and growing awareness are the 2 most valuable weapons that are at Yi's disposal to assist us ordinary humans.

 

[my_key]

Do you feel like you're in many situations at once, though? Work situations, home situations, health situations, the-washer-is-making-funny-noises situations (whatnot). Is it easy to recognize what Yi's addressing?

My weekly ones are a mix - some are umbrella-ish, like chapters in a book of life lessons ("concentrate on this one now"), others are about actual events.

Hi Liselle
This is an astute observation, and can confound many a divination understanding - especially for the less experienced diviner. We all wear many hats and equally have many different instruments to play in the soundtrack of our life. I have found, on many occasions, when engaging with divination that it can be too easy to allow the big bass kettle drum to drown out, or even play the part, that has been written to be played by the violin. This invariably leads to an unrecognisable cachophony.

By setting clear intent at the start of the divination you are introducing a conductor waving a baton over the proceedings. His job is to ensure that all the instruments in the orchestra play the right notes, in the right order, at the right time and only play the notes that are meant for them to play.

I have found this single practice, over the years is effective in supporting increased trust in the understanding reached of the reading. The conductor opens a clearer pathway towards seeing what Yi is addressing and can severely curtail second guessing, confusion and doubt. Specific intent like 'root the response in health situation' can work to direct understanding to an area and still leave an openness for the response to creep around the edges. This is a freedom that might be limited by asking a specific question or by the way ones mind interprets the reading, in effect shutting down possibilities by saying ' nope, that wasn't what I asked about'.

Even a global intent like 'please bring clarity' or 'for the highest good' can be a sufficient waving of the baton to enable any confusion caused by the mind to be lessened or dispelled. It is important thing to recognise, in divination practice, that it is only the limitations imposed by mind that create difficulty in recognising what Yi is addressing.

 

[hilary]

There is also the option that both are 'not lasting in their character'.

Yup. It would still make for a stronger reading, one with more of an impact, if she knew in advance what she was asking about.

Clarity of mind can be greatly assisted by ensuring that there is clarity of intent, set before the divination. Intent acts like a snowplough forging a freeing pathway through deeply fallen snow,

Also yup. I spend a lot of time encouraging people to find their intent for a reading - some sense of what you would like to change as a result of the reading. It can be anything from calming one's inner state of hope/fear to deciding whether to call a plumber.

I think that you are right too, Hilary, that over time matters at one level of consciousness that once needed a cast to enable understanding are more clearly understood. This is because of the greater clarity coming from enhanced self awareness that grows with concerted relationship with Yi.

And/or it can be a result of pausing to think about the question and the intent behind it. From time to time I have talked to someone for half an hour or so about their situation and question, and they've realised they already knew the answer, or they'd moved on from the question. I've also spent time trying to dissuade people from consulting at all when what they are seeking is the peace of mind that they feel would come from absolute certainty about the future - something that's not on offer from any amount of relationship with Yi.

 

[my_key]

And/or it can be a result of pausing to think about the question and the intent behind it. From time to time I have talked to someone for half an hour or so about their situation and question, and they've realised they already knew the answer, or they'd moved on from the question. I've also spent time trying to dissuade people from consulting at all when what they are seeking is the peace of mind that they feel would come from absolute certainty about the future - something that's not on offer from any amount of relationship with Yi.

Yup. Pre-casting practice is really the crux of the matter with regards to a successful divination understanding. Rubbish in rubbish out!

You make a good point about rushing to divine rather than spending time in quiet contemplation in order to get a handle on what the situation is about. I know, I went through a phase where I was asking Yi about everything, until it dawned on me that I was just disempowering myself. I was giving away my ability to express myself through critical thinking and to be discerning in my own right. I can only speak for myself, but I do think we humans have an inbuilt tendency to give away our power at every opportunity we can.

If we have an inkling of the answer or what might be going on then it is best to formulate an understanding without Yi's support first. This is our best chance of finding a simple. basic answer that is right for us. It can also help in formulating the most appropriate question to ask or the right area to focus on. Then, if needed, seek confirmation of some sort or further clarity. In many cases when life sets us a conundrum less is more.

I can across this quote a little while back and stored it in my 'Little Book of Resonating Quotes'. For the most part he comments on 'Not Knowing' which in a thread about questions, seems to me a good place to give it an airing.

I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong. I have approximate answers and possible beliefs and different degrees of uncertainty about different things, but I am not absolutely sure of anything and there are many things I don't know anything about, such as whether it means anything to ask why we're here. I don't have to know an answer. I don't feel frightened not knowing things, by being lost in a mysterious universe without any purpose, which is the way it really is as far as I can tell. ~Richard P. Feynman