...life can be translucent

Menu

As good of a place as any?

B

bruce_g

Guest
I think it’s safe to say that diviners/Yi interpreters are a strong willed lot with strong beliefs and convictions. As such, it’s not uncommon or unnatural for disagreements among us to crop up from time to time regarding protocol for offering interpretations for those who request them. Many of us approach Yi interpretations differently from some others, and I believe there should room for those different approaches to be expressed, without creating havoc among the troops.

This probably opens up the “can o’ worms” which LiSe’s 18 speaks of, but if it isn’t opened up things tend to rot.

Without singling out any individuals, which wouldn’t be helpful to anyone here, what guidelines would you like to see in regard to this matter? Let me list just a few specifics that may come to light:

• Ethics
• Methods
• Sources
• Personal styles
• Disagreements
• Tact vs. directness
• Competitiveness
• Clarity
• Opinions vs. facts
• Etc?
 

Sparhawk

One of those men your mother warned you about...
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 17, 1971
Messages
5,120
Reaction score
107
I'll go with "Etc?" for the new guidelines, thank you... :)

But seriously, individuals are exactly that. In my native country --and I'm sure there is an equivalent for every other place on the planet-- we like to say that whenever there are two Uruguayans in one place there are three opinions on any given subject... :) I don't believe we can "can" opinions or the way they are delivered. On the other hand, people can and should control their civility when giving opinions and/or advise. That's always appreciated. In a subject like this, when we are not talking about scholarly translation opinions, like Brad, Harmen or LiSe do to the benefit of all, the actual interpretation of answers is as varied as there are readers of the Yi... IMHO, I believe there's no ruler or a fixed patron to interpret a Yi answer. There are guidelines, of course, but all opinions should be taken with a grain of salt. Ultimately, it is the querent's duty and responsibility to interpret their own answers, be it guided, or not, by others...
 

autumn

visitor
Joined
Jun 12, 2006
Messages
430
Reaction score
4
Bruce,
I completely understand why you started this thread. I agree with you. I feel uncomfortable even providing input into rules, though, because it's Hilary's website. I post on a very moderated forum in a different subject matter somwhere else, and the owner often PMs people to let them know she wants something changed in your interpretation. So, there's different ways to handle it, with different pros and cons.

But, if Hilary wanted to have ethical guidelines attached to her forum, I would suggest something along the lines of, "First, Do No Harm", and then from that principle, ideas to support empowerment rather thean dependency, clear communication of methods, and respectful speech.
 

toganm

visitor
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
139
Reaction score
2
autumn said:
But, if Hilary wanted to have ethical guidelines attached to her forum, I would suggest something along the lines of, "First, Do No Harm", and then from that principle, ideas to support empowerment rather thean dependency, clear communication of methods, and respectful speech.

Looks like to me, Dao De Jing should be a must for Yi-Jing users :)

"Governing a large nation is like cooking a little fish.
When the world is ruled by Dao, the ghosts are powerless.
It is not that the ghosts are powerless; their spirits do not harm the people. Not only do the spirits not harm the people; sages do not harm the people either.
Because the two do not harm each other, their virtues ultimately combine."

DDJ #60

Togan
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
:confused: Sorry Toganm i have not a clue what you are getting at ?

What are you getting at in your own words ?
 
B

bruce_g

Guest
Hi Autumn,

Yep, I posted this topic, hoping to tread lightly around Hilary’s domain. But, after some five years here, and a friendly relationship with Hilary, I thought that approaching this topic in this manner wouldn’t overstep her authority. My observation - and I don’t mean to assume anything here - is that Hilary has determined to keep this forum self regulated rather than governed or tightly regulated. Out of respect for her, I used the term “guidelines” rather than rules. I don’t think she’d mind this open style of soliciting feedback.
 

rosada

visitor
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
9,890
Reaction score
3,171
I Ching Memorizing thread now at 6. Conflict.
Clarity group experiencing Conflict.
Coincidence? I don't think so...

So let's look at what the I Ching says are the causes of conflict. "A deep cunning within and fixed determination outwardly. A person of this character will certainly be quarrelsome." So perhaps if we want to have guidelines, after, "Do no harm" we could have, "Play it streight."

The I Ching goes on to say that if a man is entangled in conflict, his only salvation lies in being so clear headed and inwardly strong that he is willing to come to terms by meeting the opponent halfway. I see this as meaning that when someone's style offends, it will not do to be offensive back, but rather we can better bring things into balance by being clearheaded, not sarcastic, when we mention what makes us uncomfortable.

And finally - for today - note what 6.1 says, "If one does not perpetuate the affair, there is a little gossip, but in the end good fortune comes." So,rule three, as soon as you recognize posters are getting ditzy, detach, "Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things."

Of course, none of these rules can be enforced, so perhaps it's best we just go back to working on ourselves.

Incidentally, FWIW, awhile back when folks were venting their frustrations with me, it meant everything to me to have some folks speak up and say I wasn't really as dumb as I look. So while I don't think it's ever gonna do any good or be necessary even to argue with those we disagree with - time will reveal the truth anyway - it does seem necessary to support or speak up for anyone you feel is getting unfairly attacked.
 
Last edited:
B

bruce_g

Guest
To avoid a fire fight:

"Without singling out any individuals, which wouldn’t be helpful to anyone here..."
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
rosada said:
So while I don't think it's ever gonna do any good or be necessary even to argue with those we disagree with - time will reveal the truth anyway - it does seem necessary to support or speak up for anyone you feel is getting unfairly attacked.


Eh ? Rosada I gotta disagree there. What kind of world would we live in if no one had ever argued about anything, you know like 'ok Hitler just come on through and take control'..an extreme example in comparison to our current issues I know, lol, but.....

I see making false predictions as a form of attack on the psyche of another thus the necessity to speak up.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
And if no one else had spoken up at all this wouldn't be a place I'd think it worth staying anyway. (FWIW)
 

rosada

visitor
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
9,890
Reaction score
3,171
Hi Trojan, I was just thinking of the board here. I mean we've seen how a one poster can try to make their point, but if the person they are trying to convince refuses to acknowledge the point, what can you do? Nothing you say is going to disable their computer..
 
Last edited:

rosada

visitor
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
9,890
Reaction score
3,171
Just read your second post, Trojan. Yeah, well and that's probably just why having guidelines other than our own inner guidelines doesn't work. But I sure find the arguing exhausting. So maybe my guideline should be, if people want to argue, let them.:)
 

toganm

visitor
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
139
Reaction score
2
trojan said:
:confused: Sorry Toganm i have not a clue what you are getting at ?

What are you getting at in your own words ?

When someone is trying to help another one with an interpretation or on any other topic one should be like a chef preparing a meal. For instance, consider the actions when one cooks fish. If the chef takes the fish early it will be raw, if s/he takes it later, it will be overdone. But to make it delicious one needs to take it at the right moment. Not only that, one also needs to have the right amount of salt and any other ingredients that are being added, then the fish will be cooked fine else sorry. Therefore, with a well prepared fish, the guest will enjoy the meal and thank the chef. Chef will be happy as s/he has a satisfied and fed guest. Overall win/win situation.

So, if one does things without excess or deficiency then everything is in order.

I hope this makes it easier for you to understand

Togan
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
I agree that ultimately our inner guidelines are what we have to look to.

but.....don't stop us arguing :eek:

This forums always worked really well with a minimum of rules, and, thankfully no moderation. But I think thats happened precisely because if we think something is wrong here we are 'allowed' to shout about it and argue about it until we've sorted it out as much as possible. So to that extent because we are not moderated, we self moderate, and generally that works very well because we are such sane intelligent people ;)

That said the trouble is when feelings are strong theres alot of disruption that possibly might be avoided with a guideline here and there, but I'm not sure how useful that would be to us ?

Bruce you haven't told us what you think yet ?
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Er yes thankyou Toganm, but it doesn't address the issue of the need or not for guidelines ? I mean yes ideally everyone would be like this chef with the fishes, but fact is we're not. We are trying to address not how things should be ideally but how to handle them when they are not - or at least not in our own perception.
 

toganm

visitor
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
139
Reaction score
2
autumn said:
I'm ignorant of a lot of these Taoist texts. I've never read Dao De Jing, but is that saying, through peaceful co-existence, two groups that initially opposed one another merge into a new group? Like entropy? Does that first line mean do as little as possible to govern? Let things fit in their own natural way?

Yes wu-wei (non intervention) is the way of Dao. Two groups do not become one yet they work towards the same goal together with harmony. So they look for common ground. (IMPOV theme of hex 6)

I would highly recommend reading Dao De Jing and Zhuang Zhi (especially the first 7 chapters).

Togan
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Ah I think this stuff about wu wei and non intervention as the way of the dao can be very misinterpreted and a great excuse to do nothing. I think sometimes its misinterpreted as something to try to be, to try to make onself - so one only ends up further contorted but with the appearance at least of fake peacefulness.

I do not think it is advocating non intervention as a way of dealing with conflict, it would be nice if it was but lifes not that easy.
 

toganm

visitor
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
139
Reaction score
2
trojan said:
Er yes thankyou Toganm, but it doesn't address the issue of the need or not for guidelines ? I mean yes ideally everyone would be like this chef with the fishes, but fact is we're not. We are trying to address not how things should be ideally but how to handle them when they are not - or at least not in our own perception.

One of the uses of Yi Jing is to cultivate self. It is up to every individual to follow it or not, as Yi Jing has already gave the answer with the judgment of Hex. 4 Meng

Togan
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
toganm said:
One of the uses of Yi Jing is to cultivate self. It is up to every individual to follow it or not, as Yi Jing has already gave the answer with the judgment of Hex. 4 Meng

Togan


Undoubtedly it is true Toganm that one of primary uses of the Yi Jing is to cultivate the self. But one doesn't cultivate the self in isolation. One has to cultivate it in the rough and tumble of everyday interaction unless one lives in an ivory tower.

And what constitutes 'following it' is largely a matter of interpretation as we know. My point was passive non intervention in my view does not always constitute 'following it'.

One could still follow the dao and fight like Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita if that was the way of ones nature. One need not try to force oneself into a passive personality type and think that is the 'right' way to be.
 
Last edited:
B

bruce_g

Guest
I’m going to say what I think and enjoy, rather than to say what ought to be, since what I think ought to be bears no relevance to this or any forum, other than it being my opinion.

I enjoy freedom of speech, but not at the expense of doing deliberate harm to others. Yes, words can hurt. I don’t mind honest arguments, even when it gets emotional. We aren’t robots. I don’t mind sarcasm, when someone’s character isn’t being assaulted; or if it is assaulted it is understood between the two that no personal harm is intended - in that case it is merely a tease. I enjoy open and candid dialogue, even when in direct opposition to other points of view. I relish artistic freedom: that which enables one to speak in the first person; so long as it is understood that it is artistic license and not direct advise or even the teaching from the Yi.

I enjoy differences of opinions, perspectives and backgrounds. One of the things I especially like about this place is the lack of class barriers. One may have a PhD or lack any formal education, and there is no prejudice. Neither is there discrimination based of race, age, ethnicity, sex or sexual preference. I’ve been stunned at so-called spiritual forums where there are blatant violations of all of these, even in Buddhist forums. One would expect better.

I think interpreters have an obligation to be accountable for their answers. Let’s face it, it’s unrealistic to think I can be there for them if my prediction turns out to be the wrong one, and sends them careening off their course. I have a responsibility to do my best to see that that doesn’t happen. The easiest and best way to do that, imo, is to try and present my interpretation in an open manner. Who am I that I can be so sure of what the cosmos is saying to that person? Based on my understanding, it isn’t Yi alone which gives the answer. And it sure as hell had better not be me who gives it, unless I specify that it is my own opinion or perspective and not the infallible word of Yi or God.

My 2 pence worth.
 

toganm

visitor
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
139
Reaction score
2
trojan said:
Undoubtedly it is true Toganm that one of primary uses of the Yi Jing is to cultivate the self. But one doesn't cultivate the self in isolation. One has to cultivate it in the rough and tumble of everyday interaction unless one lives in an ivory tower.
There is the Taoist cultivation using the Yi-Jing :)

And what constitutes 'following it' is largely a matter of interpretation as we know.
True and one needs help in understanding the interpretation hence the need of a teacher/guide

Togan
 

autumn

visitor
Joined
Jun 12, 2006
Messages
430
Reaction score
4
Hi, sorry, I deleted my post because it crossed with toganm' s second post where he answered the question, and I didn't want to cause confusion if my attempt to understand the quote was wrong, but he'd already addressed the question.
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
19,149
Reaction score
3,418
Harking back to the conversation between Bruce and Autumn about discussing this here - yes, please. It's useful not only for forum participants but for anyone divining for anyone, anywhere. (Autumn, did you say that in this other forum the moderator has people change their interpretations to agree with hers? Sounds very odd.)

(I just wrote a huge discursive witter that added nothing to the discussion, and deleted it again. You should be very relieved.)

Maybe the nub of it is something Bruce's last post brings up: where does the message of the divination actually come from? Can someone else read it off the page and deliver it? Does this depend on the nature of the message, and does that depend on the nature of the method?
 

willow

visitor
Joined
Aug 16, 1970
Messages
258
Reaction score
6
As a very infrequent visitor these days, I don't have a sense of what current issues might surround the question, but here are some of my thoughts.

Your last question Hilary, about where the interpretation actually comes from, seems very relevant. Before posting here, I had almost no experience interpreting IC answers. I did have experiencing intuiting, discussing, helping other with issues troubling them. As I started to offer interpretations here, I often had the sense I was "channeling" - the flow of images, intuitions, implications and tentative conclusions would often surprise me. Yet the active application of my intellect and experience was also required. And something else, something else. I've come to think of the something else as two things, two rules, as:

First, Humility. As someone else said, "do no harm." The reading is a gift to the querant, that must be fully released when given. No ego, no stroking ego.

Second, in the words of a song, "without love in the dream it will never come true." Always wish the best for the other; always remember that, though a screen and half a globe may separate, you and the querant are inextricably connected in this dance of life. Dance with love and compassion.
 

autumn

visitor
Joined
Jun 12, 2006
Messages
430
Reaction score
4
hilary said:
(Autumn, did you say that in this other forum the moderator has people change their interpretations to agree with hers? Sounds very odd.)

Not to agree with her, just to meet the rigid requirements of the forum. If she feels the dialouge is too disempowering because it is too much an expert telling another person what an answer means, even if it's subtle, she'll step in, for example. There is also a rule that all discussions have to begin with a concrete life experience with the divination symbol. You can't say, "this means such and such", you have to relate "such and such" to a personal experience.

It's just different- it's limiting, but it's also focused, and it's her perogative. Come to think of it, I know of another forum that's pretty rigid. You can't mention a divination symbol without posting the copyright of the deck you're using.
 
B

bruce_g

Guest
hilary said:
Can someone else read it off the page and deliver it? Does this depend on the nature of the message, and does that depend on the nature of the method?

Been thinking about this while enjoying a J. Campbell DVD, as they do speak to essentially the same questions.

As it pertains to the topic of this thread, as far as I'm concerned, no one can answer those questions Hilary has asked, at least not for everyone. Campbell conveys the belief that there is only one grand myth, one story, one human mystery, but that there are many ways of conveying it, as they all come from one single source.

I think that is the danger in becoming entirely absorbed in one translation of Yi, or in a single method, to the exclusion of all other methods: it forms a dogma. A cardinal rule of dogma is that, no other dogmas are allowed to intrude upon the dogma.

One can specialize in a method, but still be open to another’s method, even if they don’t agree. Just because I have little or no faith in assigning time tables to readings doesn’t mean time tables can’t possibly be applicable. Just because I believe that no change lines should be eliminated based on how many change lines someone receives, doesn’t mean that method of elimination doesn’t work. I know what works for me, and I have absolutely HUGE confidence in it. Someone else may not. Oh well. Same with translations: someone swears 100% by Wilhelm, someone else has little use for it. Someone likes Karcher, another thinks Karcher is too mythical and artistic in his rendition. Oh well.

It’s hard to be open. At least it sometimes is for me. As much as I don’t like admitting it, I’m a creature of habit. I’ve developed my strengths and have only managed my weaknesses. I think that’s all anyone does. If I can recognize (love that word: re-cognize) someone else’s strength as being different from my own, it makes being open much easier.
 

willowfox

Inactive
Joined
Jun 18, 2006
Messages
5,530
Reaction score
261
Well, it seems that *certain* people on this forum have certainly upset your applecarts, haven't they bruce, trojan and autumn? Only trojan, with her bitterness, makes it 100% obvious who that evil person is. How come you guys don't live and let live, you know to each his own, peace and freedom, follow the Tao, etc.
That person who said that it is not the Yi alone that gives the answer was correct, it takes two to tango, doesn't it everybody?
Guidelines? Or do some people here want rules introduced on this forum? Perhaps some of you would like to introduce censorship? Big Brother is watching, 1984?
What happened to the idea of freedom of speech? Perhaps you would like to introduce the thought police?
I say this, let the querant decide. That is a good guideline to follow, don't you think. I said think, because certain people here will disagree with whatever I say or do.
 

willowfox

Inactive
Joined
Jun 18, 2006
Messages
5,530
Reaction score
261
To trojan,

You wrote,
I see making false predictions as a form of attack on the psyche of another thus the necessity to speak up.

False predictions? Which ones are you refering to? Follow your advice and speak up.

Is your life so empty, that you fill your mind with hatred against a person that you have never seen or met?

Don't forget the joke. Laughs
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top