Anybody in?

[heylise]

Yesterday I found something interesting in an old journal. More than 10 years old. They had done a research how people healed after an operation. Some people believed, that the doctor would make them well, some that their own inherent power to heal would do that, and still others thought it was a matter of chance. God was nowhere, but I think they put that under ‘chance’: everything you cannot name or explain. And I also think, that the scientist left God out on purpose, afraid that his research would be used by religion or so to prove their point.

The group who attributed it to doctor or self, did a lot less in survival rates than the group who thought it was chance/coincidence.

It made me think of throwing coins, ‘believing’ coincidence, and giving a value to ‘random’. I myself ‘know’ it works, but I never try to really figure out what happens. You’d think that would be very interesting, but I just have a vague idea, and leave it at that. Always nice to be confirmed by reality.

So if I try to find out who answers, it would be like giving a name to the healer. If the healer sits in that book, or if it is a spirit or so, it becomes doctor Yi. If my own subconscious does it, I am the healer. Both don’t give a very big result of actually finding a cure. Accepting it as is and just listening to the answer without giving it any thought, seems to be the best one.

“As is” is called God by some, universe by others. Or chance. Or it gets no name at all. And if God is out there or in here makes no difference at all. As long as you don’t try too much to figure that out. Then again, you’d be making either a doctor or a self.

LiSe

 

[RindaR]

Perhaps God, or universe, is in both places, in here and out there - or perhaps God is the connection between them... (consciousness itself?) Fun to wonder about how it all works but I look for no assurance of ever figuring it out. Might not be much fun anymore then...

Rinda

 

[stevev]

Perhaps the group who thought it was chance/coincidence, might better be classified as 'open minded' or realistic about the chance and therefore less stressed. Anyway you know they've done 10 studies since then and come to 10 different conclusions !

 

[kenresting]

God is everything, infinite. Chance and coincidence is how we communicate with the next level above us. The level above tends to us as we would a garden. They cultivate the soul. There are levels below us with a consciousness we can not understand. We cultivate those below us the best way we can. We cultivate that which has an effect on us, keeping the balance. There are levels above and below the next (in either direction) that we cannot even perceive, and so on. God is all of it. Randomness is our lack of understanding.

 

[mollies]

Such questions are really stimulating. I love to think about it. Finding words.

I like what you say, LiSe, about "I just have a vague idea, and leave it at that. Always nice to be confirmed by reality"

Wish I could be like that more often.

Human beings seem to have a great need to think about all that is possible to think about. Given the possibility to think at all. But it does not make things easier. At least, I feel that way. Maybe that is the reason why it is so soothing, to have an animal in your neighbourhood.

To discuss religion, or believing coincidence or science may have the function that the discussion wakes up something inside you, but mostly one disappears into an immovable state of being. Which gives a very unhappy kind of awareness.

Somehow I and you and we like to be right. And ARE we not right, in a small way, because we are unique? And is it not always a pity when someone does not see it the way I, you, we do from our point of view. At first anyway. The next moment things may change. This possibility, of the changing: (arousing fear, or insecurity, or excitement, or curiousity, etc.) is, for me, really what life is about. Or what time is about.

And the child, talking to the new teacher, is right, saying:"You don't sing that song right. It should be like this: . . lalalala-LA-lalala.

Sometimes I feel it is all about us, being seperated from eachother. Since we were born.

Carin

 

[bruce_g]

Such questions are really stimulating. I love to think about it. Finding words.

I like what you say, LiSe, about "I just have a vague idea, and leave it at that. Always nice to be confirmed by reality"

Wish I could be like that more often.

Human beings seem to have a great need to think about all that is possible to think about. Given the possibility to think at all. But it does not make things easier. At least, I feel that way. Maybe that is the reason why it is so soothing, to have an animal in your neighbourhood.

To discuss religion, or believing coincidence or science may have the function that the discussion wakes up something inside you, but mostly one disappears into an immovable state of being. Which gives a very unhappy kind of awareness.

Somehow I and you and we like to be right. And ARE we not right, in a small way, because we are unique? And is it not always a pity when someone does not see it the way I, you, we do from our point of view. At first anyway. The next moment things may change. This possibility, of the changing: (arousing fear, or insecurity, or excitement, or curiousity, etc.) is, for me, really what life is about. Or what time is about.

And the child, talking to the new teacher, is right, saying:"You don't sing that song right. It should be like this: . . lalalala-LA-lalala.

Sometimes I feel it is all about us, being seperated from eachother. Since we were born.

Carin

Beautiful.

Welcome, Carin. :bows:

 

[bruce_g]

Words and their meanings reduce the life they attempt to describe. But sometimes words themselves are life, such as the child singing lalalala-LA-lalala!

 

[heylise]

Hi Carin,

Nice to see you here!

Thinking too much making an immovable state of being - I know that! Tried for years to get past that solid wall, on this side I could not find any answers, and trying to think over or through that wall only seemed to make it higher. When I think about it, I don't know how I finally managed to get past , but when I stop thinking, I know .

BTW - Carin is making my Yi a real book, sewn by hand. Beautiful! So some time in the future, it will be available as a printed version.

LiSe

 

[bruce_g]

I always find beauty in things becoming,
but once they have become they lose all their life.
I can not play a song any longer,
but I can still play.

 

[mollies]

So here I am, playing someone else's song
cause I am not now who I was then

 

[lightofreason]

The notions of the 'random' and the 'miraculous' share the same space in that they have no history. From a prediction perspective, it is the current moment that predicts the next - as such there is no history, no 'yesterday', just this moment and the next.

Our neurology does better than that in that with feedback, and so some history, survival is enhanced - and so we have developed memory systems etc that allow us to use the past to guide us in the present/future.

When we review the notion of history we can represent it in the form of a sequence. In the basic, mindless, sequence there is only the present. We can represent this as a sequence of 1s - 0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1....

The '0' represents the beginning, the series of 1s each moment with no reference to history other than 'being' in the form of the distinction of the 1 from the 0.

If we start to focus on memory, and so history, we can consider the previous moment and contributing to dealing with the present. We can represent this by adding the '1' from the previous to that for the current to give us:

0,1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10......

This is the beginning of awareness of order and with it the recognition of the pattern projecting into the future.

If now progress into considering the past TWO moments to determine/aid in the present, using the SAME methodology we have:

0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21

This is a fibonacci sequence and reflects the base dynamic that allows for (a) development and (b) the emergence of structure - and so the spiral of the fibonacci sequence dominates much of basic structure development - from galaxies to sun flower petals. There is no need for a 'god' element here - just basic, mindless, development over billions of years where feedback has benefited survival.

If we keep considering how much memory is needed to maxamise survival we find we have to consider all moments back to the beginning. What sort of sequence does this generate? The binary - each moment relies on all of the past to determine the structure of the present/future:

0,1,1,2,4,8,16,32,64,....

This an extreme precision focus - but it is also energy expending and so costly - the fibonacci sequence reflects energy conservation 'immediately'. With the binary so the 'circular-like' spiral of the fibonacci becomes a square spiral where precision means XOR thinking, A/NOT-A in that the NOT-A can be '1' or 'many' and so 1:1 to 1:many relationships.

What is the benefit of the binary? If you push it you destabilise things, one puts in more information than was there in the first place - this leads to imagination as is does to transcendence - we enter the realm of complexity/chaos where the transcendence can be to something new and useful, as it can be to a neurotic or psychotic state. (in reality, the realm of "AS IS" is the base line of all is integrated. The moment we move into memory systems we introduce the notion of the neurotic in that we move into the realm of "AS INTERPRETED".

This passage from the form of '1,1,1,1' to '1,2,4,8' comes as a ratio ranging from 1 to 2.

the numbers in the sequences,when formed into a ratio of n+1 to n cover this range from 1 to 2. As each number in the sequence reflects distinction, the discrete, a positive feedback focus, so the ratios reflects the movement to a constant (the ratio - for fibonacci the ratio is 1.618.. (calleds phi)) - this is what 'irrational' numbers are about - negative feedback as we get closer to a constant.

ALL of this comes out of feedback issues - no need for a 'god' etc just a few billion years of ad-hoc development (chance stuff that elicits order) and from that has come 'us'.

Our consciousness comes out of ad-hoc evolution and works as an agent of mediation. As such it is a PART of our being where we also include our unconscious - it is like a sea, an ocean but bounded, determined in general.

To communicate with the unconscious, to 'fish' in the sea, requires projection, we cannot directly 'talk', we have to use feelings, images, symbols to elicit 'resonance', to particularise, to get a 'best fit' symbol for a current situation.

With projection comes issues of transference etc and so interpretions of 'meaning' where there is none - no history (and so the link to the 'random' or 'miraculous').

When we as conscious individuals interact with a representation of 'all there is', e.g. IC or Tarot etc etc so we interact with the WHOLE but in a PARTS manner - our 'coin toss' method does not elicit one hexagram, it elicits all of them in a best-fit/worst-fit order

Since our consciousness is limited in what it can deal with at any time and will focus on the 'best fit' (or what it thinks to be) so we miss a lot and in so doing create our own small worlds.

Chris.

 

[hilary]

 

[lightofreason]

The notions of the 'random' and the 'miraculous' share the same space in that they have no history. From a prediction perspective, it is the current moment that predicts the next - as such there is no history, no 'yesterday', just this moment and the next.

Our neurology does better than that in that with feedback, and so some history, survival is enhanced - and so we have developed memory systems etc that allow us to use the past to guide us in the present/future.

When we access the IC for a 'divination' we are asking a question to elicit something we feel we believe we dont have - some history to link to, to give meaning, explanation to the question.

Chris.

 

[getojack]

 

[heylise]

I like this! In Chris' posts I found several things which I found very interesting. I loved the 'sequences', Fibonaccy and the rest. But I am focussing now on just one thing, god.

"No need for a 'god' element". That assumes we all have the same, or at least a similar, idea of what god is. My own idea about god excludes a remark like "no need for a 'god' element ", because to me it is not an element. It is 'beyond' elements. No idea if I can explain that. Will try..

With projection comes issues of transference etc and so interpretions of 'meaning' where there is none - no history (and so the link to the 'random' or 'miraculous').

There, in my opinion, I am getting closer to god.

The notions of the 'random' and the 'miraculous' share the same space in that they have no history. From a prediction perspective, it is the current moment that predicts the next - as such there is no history, no 'yesterday', just this moment and the next.

More god.

To communicate with the unconscious, to 'fish' in the sea, requires projection, we cannot directly 'talk', we have to use feelings, images, symbols to elicit 'resonance', to particularise, to get a 'best fit' symbol for a current situation.

And more..

When we access the IC for a 'divination' we are asking a question to elicit something we feel we believe we dont have - some history to link to, to give meaning, explanation to the question.

Something to link to, something I don't have as conscious 'possession', something I cannot give a name, something I feel as knowing more than me. 'Me' being my everyday commonsense – wise – silly – stressed – relaxed – and whatever-else person, which makes a human being to a conscious human being. Living in a world with other human beings. But in that world I cannot find that answer. So I go search elsewhere. In the world of the miraculous. I know, it has no history, and it is not 'handy' and not effective for even the smallest tasks, which have to give some result in reality.

The answer I find there, is bigger than the answer I can find in that real, existing, world. A non-existing world, with non-existing answers. For some strange reason, the answers which come from there give me joy, something which normal commonsense answers never seem to give in such big measures. Normal answers can be of great help. But these answers can transform me. They don't tell me literally what to do, but my decisions become different. I do the right thing without having to think about it.

I have no name for it, but God would not be a wrong one...

LiSe

 

[bruce_g]

What a wonderful paradox.

 

[lightofreason]

There, in my opinion, I am getting closer to god.

This implies you are working on getting closer to a constant - and so oscillating across that constant as you get closer - but this is the realm of negative feedback where the constants are ratios without 'end' (as decimal values they do not 'stop' in the mantissa) - that is their irrational nature. Irrational numbers like PI and e and Phi etc cover BONDING and overall a focus on relationships to GUIDE structuring etc.

In ancient spiritual geometry the closest you could get to 'god' was considered to be related to the fibonacci sequence or more so its ratio - 1.618... This covered having a RELATIONSHIP with 'god'. (given the sequences, for 'them', 'god' was represented in the 1,1,1 or 1,2,3 sequences)

In modern times we focus on the binary sequence and as such positive feedback in that we deal with exclusive OR, IS/IS-NOT. This realm of positive feedback is related to the emergence of self-regulating systems, autopeiotic networks, and .... BEING 'god'. - genetic engineering, terraforming of other planets (or goal of) etc - note the ratio here is a whole number (2.00000)

differentiating/integrating 'rules' ;-) - all else follows (and that includes self-referencing that allows for mediation dynamics) and that includes the INTERPRETATIONS of 'god' etc where each hexagram serves to describe an aspect of the whole - where the whole is all hexagrams expressed at once and local context sorting them into best-fit/worst-fit order.

BONDING and BINDING cover RELATIONSHIPS, the space 'inbetween' as well as 'within'.
BLENDING and BOUNDING cover OBJECTS - be they as 'wholes' or in relation to a greater whole and so 'parts' (bounding, differentiate X from Y, clear 'cut') - and then come the compound forms where we mix the generic categories to give us forms usable to describe 'all there is' and that includes 'god' as a concept.

In Science, with the work currently going on, there is no need at this time for the 'god' hypothesis - something said to Napoleon by Laplace ;-)

Chris.

 

[lightofreason]

For some strange reason, the answers which come from there give me joy, something which normal commonsense answers never seem to give in such big measures. Normal answers can be of great help. But these answers can transform me. They don't tell me literally what to do, but my decisions become different. I do the right thing without having to think about it.
LiSe

When using the 'random' methods you are eliciting the 64 hexagrams in some order from 'best' to 'worst' fit. There is no guarantee that the order will 'fit' the moment perfectly but one hexagram will and the others fall in behind it. However, our consciousness only registers 7-9 'things' at any moment and so has in mind that many hexagrams of the whole. When one gets a hexagram 'outside' of the range of hexagrams that would be 'best fit' it is unexpected (random) but also found to have meaning. What THAT indicates is that one's conscious experience is limited, there is a LOT MORE going on 'outside' of immediate awareness. Recognition of that fact introduces a whole new perspective of our being in that there is a lot more going on that we need to learn about ;-)

Chris.

 

[stevev]

Three words ...

Yin AND Yang.

 

[luz]

Love this thread and love it that Lise's book will be out in print! :bows:

 

[lightofreason]

Yin AND Yang.

No. Go deeper - Tai Chi for particular, Wu Chi for the general. (chi = "extension", Tai = grand, wu = without, no)

The development is noticing a 'change' in the void ( wu chi) - we can label this as yi chi
(change of extension)

Extracting this into our minds 'creates' an object, T'ai Chi, as encapsulation. Keep that long enough in your head and it will break down into its parts - yin/yang. (this gets into the notion of asexual vs sexual reproduction etc as it does issues of paradox - see below)

the alchemical process is to re-integrate yin/yang back into t'ai chi - as long as you can see yin or yang there is no t'ai chi.

If we map a hierarchy of development we have oscillations:

T'ai Chi / Wu Chi
YinANDYang / T'ai Chi
Yin XOR Yang / Yin AND Yang
Yin IMP Yang / Yin XOR Yang
Yang / Yin

Note the oscillations of categories across levels - what is differentiating at one level is integrating at the next etc.

This THEN gets in to types of dichotomies - asymmetric, symmetric, anti-symmetric

The realm of the 'void' is beyond that sequence of 1,1,1,1. It is a place of integration and no more - no differentiation and so 'nothing'. As we differentiate so we move from 1,1,1, to a particular sequence - high precision gives us the binary realm.

This is the realm of high precision but it also PARTS oriented, yin/yang and so we find metonymy present besides metaphor. We also find 'emergence' (positive feedback dynamics pushed beyond the 2.0 ratio)

With XOR comes mediating consciousness and with THAT comes what consciousness creates due to its parts nature - paradox; in other words the price of high precision is the occasional 'issue' ;-)

See examples in http://members.iimetro.com.au/~lofting/myweb/paradox.html

The XOR work in the I Ching is about 'parts' and their contributions to each 'whole' that is a part ;-)


Chris.

 

[pooka47401]

Forgive me, I am but an Egg and new to this Community...I have been taught by I-Ching for many years and i thank the I-Ching for that. i have reconciled my view of what the interconnectedness of the Universe is, as a big Rubics Cube...as each thing moves, so does everything else. The Question becomes part of the Dance, and therefore the umbilical cord to the Answer. The Answer is always out there...it is the Right Question that is difficult to find.

 

[nicky_p]

I always find beauty in things becoming,
but once they have become they lose all their life.
I can not play a song any longer,
but I can still play.

It may be the state of mind I'm in at the moment but something in me finds this quite sad - sort of wistful (for me not necessarily you ).

It leaves me asking, or maybe wishing: "What about their beauty in being?"

 

[toganm]

A bird does not sing because it has an answer.
It sings because it has a song.


Chinese Proverb


Togan

 

[bruce_g]

(from an old song)

Night is night and the day is bright,
in-between may seem to last forever.
Well then forever it may be,
though to me it’s almost morning,
and morning comes only once a day.

Imagine if there was no morning, or if morning was forever. How dull life would be.

 

[bruce_g]

A bird does not sing because it has an answer.
It sings because it has a song.


Chinese Proverb


Togan

Actually, this saying is incorrect. A bird doesn’t sing because it has a song. Birds sing for many reasons, all life-becoming: to greet each other, to define their territories, to let their parents know they're hungry, to attract a mate, to warn each other of approaching danger and to tell each other about good feeding spots.

 

[kenresting]

The XOR work in the I Ching is about 'parts' and their contributions to each 'whole' that is a part ;-)

Parts, the whole, people, earth and variables?

 

[denis_m]

LiSe's questions remind me of the mystery of life-giving influences.

When an omen speaks to us, we suddenly arrive back in the field of life-bringing connections. Those enlivening feelers have touched us again, they have reminded us of the enfolding, divine life that was our native state. There is no avoiding the hardening-over of local areas, but even those areas can be used to create something new. A boulder rolls to a stop along a stream, and it makes part of a composition for one who appreciates the landscape. There is a great drama of coming to rest and opening new areas. Like Kenresting said, gardens are being tended on many levels.

The trials come when tending impulses get jumbled, or resentment interferes.

The special hexagram which I receive draws meaning from other hexagrams that don't appear. As we move back and forth among the hexagrams, over years, we see how their meaning depends on each other. And the words in the lines, too, draw their meaning from words in other lines.

There was an intelligence at work that did not trifle with single narrow purposes when it strung the symbols together. (This is also true of the dreamers of mythology). It is like the intelligence that integrates the DNA bases, or tweaks the ratios of basic forces within the atom. The purpose or motive behind the components of life is not an engineering design (at least not the kind of engineering we now practice).

The intelligence that strung the I CHING symbols together, letting them give each other meaning, was re-enacting that divine, life-bringing field. All the components that were bits and shards of metaphor in themselves suddenly coiled and extended and transmitted reinforcing impulses. And all the bits and wisps of thought floating in one's own psyche, or clotted into emotional formations bearing on your life dramas, can be be part of that life-bringing, meaning-bearing field.

The divine intelligence that strung the components together is no different than one's own intelligence that cooperates in extending a new feeler of the life-bringing field. We are continually helping the field expand, working with it at the edges where it touches our lives.

Living things grow best in each other's presence, because the divine intelligence is activated that way. In the case of the I CHING, the intelligence was enshrined and placed in a vessel, in a special form whereby we engage with it. There is no need to find our way back to those who invested their love in making it. The vessel is such as we could make ourselves, and we are still making it collaboratively

 

[bruce_g]

Hi Denis,

Love what you say, each part talking to each other. I have a question here: “The trials come when impulses of tending get jumbled, or resentment interferes.” Would you expand on that? I only have a vague idea of what you mean.

 

[stevev]

No, I aint going down ...

No. Go deeper - Tai Chi for particular, Wu Chi for the general. (chi = "extension", Tai = grand, wu = without, no)

Only delusion lurks in the deep.