Asking impersonal questions

[pakua]

I don't understand how one can use IC to ask questions which don't relate to oneself, for example, currently the thread about eating meat or not, which should apply to the species.

Conceivably every person could ask the same questions and get different conflicting answers, so how does one interpret that? How can such answers apply in a universal sense?

 

[demitramn]

Pakua,
Let me help. Conceivably every person could ask the same questions but the answers don't by necessity have to conflict greatly. The hexagrams that come up may be different but the underlying responses can contain quite similar messages.

On the other hand, any major differences that might arise in the responses would lie in the *reason* for asking the question in the first place.

As I pointed out, I am writing a book, and in it I am covering this particular subject. My reason for asking has to do with the fact that I have been quite occupied with this study for some time and would like to hear Yi's voice on what I have been considering lately.

The hope was that the responses I received would address my thoughts and to point out what I am on the right track about and to emphasize what I may perhaps have overlooked.

You can ask the same questions but your reason will most definitely be different and Yi, I suspect, will address those reasons in its response to you.

Demitra

 

[dobro p]

Pakua, Demitramn gave two reasons why the same question about a universal issue would produce a variety of responses from the Yi. And I can think of a third - let's say the three of us in this thread ask the Yi the same question about a universal question - let's say we wanted to know something about Christianity, for example. So all three of us ask: "What do I need to know about the utility of the original Christian message for living in today's world?" Well, the Yi would give us three different answers to that same question, cuz we're three different people, with three different capacities for understanding. The answers would be tailored to the understanding of each questioner. And, as always, the answer might answer the question directly, or it might lead the questioner along more useful lines of enquiry.

The reason I think that asking questions that don't relate to yourself is often a waste of time is that I think although the Yi answers every question you put to it, your understanding of the response will depend on your need to know and your level of development. I think this because of my experience of dealing with students as a language teacher. I often get questions from students at lower levels where the answer to their question is beyond their comprehension. I'm not being arrogant or manipulative here, I know what I'm talking about. A student will often be at 'Level 20', say, and will need to go through another 30 levels before they can understand the stuff at 'Level 50', but they'll be asking me questions about Level 50 while they're still at Level 20. So I can either answer their question (I do this sometimes, depending on the situation and the personality of the questioner, in which case they don't understand the answer, but they have the satisfaction of having their question answered), or I tell them 'you're not ready for that yet - concentrate on the stuff at this level first, and work your way up to where your question lives'. I do it this way if I think they'll accept that, cuz I think this is good teaching - it's no use, for example, teaching a first year medical student the stuff that a fifth year medical student covers - it's important to cover steps and stages of growth in a useful order.

So, although I can understand why the Yi would respond to the same question asked by different people in a lot of different ways, it seems to me that some questions are really a waste of time - that's what I meant in that other thread when I talked about not being 'qualified' to ask some kind of questions. (Actually, to be more precise, it's a matter of not being qualified to understand the Yi's response to certain questions.) It's two different issues for me.

 

[Grandma]

I beleive you can use the IC to ask universal questions. Didn't Wilhelm or someone in their introduction ask about some war and got satisfactory answers.
Demitramn, I am also a vegetarian (I don't think I look anemic either) and I found your question very interesting. I haven't been able to look up the answers in the IC yet to see what it told you but have been following the thread with great interest.

 

[demitramn]

Dobro,
When a child asks about sex, shouldn't parents try to explain in a way that they will understand? Any parent who says "do not ask these questions, you are too young to understand" are teaching their young to limit themselves. Yi, in my opinion, is an excellent teacher. Yi responds in ways that allow each questioner to grasp it's message. Only when the questioner wishes that matters were a certain way, as opposed to how they really are, does Yi's message confuse them.

My only preference on the subject is that I myself remain a vegetarian because it seems to work for me very well. I do not have some vested interest in converting others. It is my desire to impart the best information on this subject as I can muster. Therefore, the fact that I am inquiring about a matter that is impersonal has already caused me to step back and away, and be more objective about the answers I am getting. So for me, these types of questions are anything but a waste of time.

Demitra

 

[demitramn]

Susan,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I'm glad to know that there are others reading here who can appreciate the level of questions I am daring to ask, and who are daring to participate in reading the responses with me.

Demitra

 

[dobro p]

Demitramn -

"When a child asks about sex, shouldn't parents try to explain in a way that they will understand?"

I think they should, yes.

"Any parent who says "do not ask these questions, you are too young to understand" are teaching their young to limit themselves."

I agree.

"Yi, in my opinion, is an excellent teacher."

In my opinion, it's an excellent teacher if you're an excellent learner. It teaches nothing, however, to people who aren't capable of learning.

"Yi responds in ways that allow each questioner to grasp it's message."

That's true if the questioner is able to understand, but it's not true otherwise. The fact that we have so many people asking for help on this page is a pretty strong indication that questioners are often not able to understand what the Yi is saying.

"Only when the questioner wishes that matters were a certain way, as opposed to how they really are, does Yi's message confuse them."

Sometimes. But sometimes, the questioner doesn't understand how the symbology that the Yi uses applies to their question and situation. And sometimes, even when the questioner *does* understand the symbology, they still don't make the connection to their own experience. And finally, like I said above, sometimes the Yi doesn't answer the questioner's query directly; sometimes the Yi tries to divert the questioner's attention along a more fruitful path. Which is what I believe the Yi was doing with that series of questions you asked about vegetarianism. I don't care if you decide I'm wrong in your case; but I would like to be understood before being rejected.

 

[demitramn]

Dobro,
What is the best way for one person is not necessarily always the best way for another. In this I agree with you. So I am not rejecting your point-of-view, as a point-of-view that sits comfortably with you - just not me, at this time, for this situation.

The assumption I reject is the interpretation of hx36 as definitively meaning in this instance, that:

--->> I am not capable of understanding, and so therefore, I should not waste time asking. This kind of response from Yi leaves me feeling "dumb" and "rejected".

It would be more "palatable" to me (excuse the pun, considering the subject

) if your interpretation of hx36 talked more along the lines of:

--->> the best part of the response is still, unfortunately, somewhat hidden from you at this time and will require more investigation on your part than what Yi can reveal at present.. mainly because of the limited paramaters of the questions that you have presented Yi with..

This makes more sense to me because it invites me into deeper communication with Yi, as opposed to Yi rejecting my attempts at pursuing further communication, which your interpretation most certainly does.

Again, I am not rejecting your point-of-view Dobro. There is a great deal of truth to what you say. BUT.. however much truth there is to it, there are exceptions to the rule. Meaning: not everyone gets lost when consulting Yi ALL the time.

IMO, there is no such thing as a waste of time in these matters -unless you yourself deem them to be- and then for you, they are. Why make a point of focusing on what might be wrong with asking (as the underlying interpretation of hx36) and not focus on what could positively be right with it?

Anyway, we can do this back and forth, over and over again, but it will never change the fact that we both wish to see this from a different angle than the other. So lets agree to disagree.

Demitra

 

[pakua]

Demitramn,

"the answers don't by necessity have to conflict greatly. The hexagrams that come up may be different but the underlying responses can contain quite similar messages"

That sounds a bit like manipulating the content to fit the desired outcome. Either the hex means this or it doesn't.

"any major differences that might arise in the responses would lie in the *reason* for asking the question "

I'm assuming the basic reason is the same for all participants, and still we might get 1000 different responses. Of course, the reasons wouldn't be *exactly* identical, which might make all the difference, but let's say the basic reason is a sincere desire to know.

"who are daring to participate "

I don't particularly see it as daring... just trying to order things in my mind, and figure out what's valid and what's not

Dobro,

"The answers would be tailored to the understanding of each questioner. "

So for example, a while ago someone asked about anger and I think they got 19 something, although others pitched in and helped to clarify the meaning, it really had meaning only for the original questioner? Anyone else asking about anger and getting a different hex, that would only be relevant to them?

And yet, the way everyone was discussing the meaning, one would think they were universal concepts, which brings me back to my original question.

If every line combination of every hex tells me the meaning of anger, ok I can see how that would have meaning for me personally, but how can it be a universal? (Other than the fact I'm a human and share some attributes with everyone)

That seems stretching somehow...

 

[demitramn]

Pakua,
<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

That sounds a bit like manipulating the content to fit the desired outcome. Either the hex means this or it doesn't.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> Sometimes common themes do run through the results of the hexagrams, particularly along the same line of questioning. I've noticed this myself during my own castings. To see the greys between the black and the white doesn't mean I am manipulating the content to fit a desired outcome. The patterns that are present in any given situation can often only be spied if one is open to seeing the greys between the starkness of either THIS or THAT.

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

I'm assuming the basic reason is the same for all participants, and still we might get 1000 different responses. Of course, the reasons wouldn't be *exactly* identical, which might make all the difference, but let's say the basic reason is a sincere desire to know.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> Though the sincerity to know be the same, your reason for asking will differ from mine. That's precisely where the differing outcomes will issue from.

Demitra

 

[dobro p]

Pakua -

The concepts are universal, but individual people have different understandings of things, and different capacities to understand, and different needs at their particular stage of understanding. So the Yi gives them what they need at that moment.

So you and I can ask exactly the same question, and get different answers. We can both ask: "What do I need to know to love better?" You'd get 19 something and I'd get 15 something, cuz we have different personalities and different needs. Not only that, but if we asked the same question the following day, we'd probably get different results, because moods and thoughts and mental states are in constant flux, and the Yi would adjust its response to the new set of psychological circumstances in the questioner.

Learning to love is a universal concept, and more importantly it's a universal issue, but you and I will take different paths up that mountain, one step, and one hexagram, at a time. Even if we both agree what the concept is. Even if we both experience love. It'll be different hexagrams for you and me.

 

[luz]

"What do I need to know to love better?"
If you knew the answer and you tried to translate it into a hexagram (with moving lines and relating hex), do you think that you could find the combination that would express your answer thoroughly? It depends on who's asking, but for the average person. I don't think we can fit the answer into one set of two hexes and a few moving lines.
So, maybe, if we ask that question, what the Yi does is give you something along the lines of "Readings about love". They all apply, some more than others, some are more urgent for your particular case, but there's not just one to sum it all up. That's why you get a different answer yourself if you ask the same question twice.
So... extrapolating... that might apply to just about any other question. All situations are more complex than they seem.
As an aside, I don't really buy the idea that it's 'bad' to ask the same question twice. I see that 'rule' as a religious dogma of sorts. It's a rule that keeps you from getting confused, because - usually - when you ask the same question twice you'll get a different response. And here, I've been wondering if there is an absolute response for each question and, in my rambling, I think I've found the answer (my own answer, of course) and it's no. My way of asking questions is to ask a lot, I see it as a conversation and then, sometimes I find a pattern (the same answer to pretty much the same question) and then I know I have to pay special attention.
I'm sure this is bound to sound way off to some people, but it is MHO and I'm entitled to it (or am I?).

 

[dobro p]

"What do I need to know to love better?"
"If you knew the answer and you tried to translate it into a hexagram (with moving lines and relating hex), do you think that you could find the combination that would express your answer thoroughly?"

Well, if know the answer to something, I don't ask the Yi. But if I don't know something and I desperately want to know, then I ask, and the Yi gives me a nudge in a direction that will help me. Help means either I see things more clearly, or I do things more skillfully.

"It depends on who's asking, but for the average person. I don't think we can fit the answer into one set of two hexes and a few moving lines."

Right. You don't get answers. You get nudges that help you move into a new space where the answer's easier to see.

"So, maybe, if we ask that question, what the Yi does is give you something along the lines of "Readings about love"."

I don't see it that way. I think it's way more wide open and flexible. For instance, if I'm angry and ask a question about how to find love, I might get Hex 41 or 52 or something - something that'll slow me down. But if I'm ripe for it, if I'm really ready to give up my own agenda and surrender to love, and ask the same question, I could easily get Hex 15. Or if I'm having some self-esteem problems and ask that question, and it's the right time for me to ask it, I might get Hex 46. But if it's the wrong time for me to ask that question, cuz I'm just gonna get bruised by opening my heart, I might get Hex 36. See, I think it all depends, not just on who's asking, but what state they're in at the time they ask.

 

[luz]

That too.
But! What if you ask the same question twice in a row and you get Hex 15 and then you get Hex 46 and maybet it's because you need to do or know both. Maybe 15 is more urgent, but - if you insist - 46 is very important too!

Regarding the answer you already know and you wouldn't ask the Yi, it was just a hypothetical excercise in which you would know the answer to a rather complex question and - just for the fun of it - you wanted to translate this answer into a hexagram...

 

[Grandma]

By the way I think it is in Blofield's translation tht he asks the IC about a war.
The IC answers how the sage should behave or we should behave if we are the sage. I don't see what's wrong with the original question.

 

[dobro p]

Susan -

Isn't there a difference between these two questions:

"What do I need to know about this war?"

"What does the whole world need to know about this war?"

(Also: just cuz Blofeld asked the question doesn't mean it was a skillful question.)

I think that anybody can ask any question they like about anything, okay? lol

But I think some questions are much less than useful, either because the answer's beyond one's comprehension (in which case you won't understand the answer), or because it strengthens or exercises the pride of the questioner (which is spiritually counterproductive). But it's okay to ask those questions if you want to. It's not wrong. It's just... unskillful.

 

[hilary]

Couldn't asking a question at the limits of my comprehension have the effect of pushing those limits outward a bit?

Why not try it?

(I've just 'blogged' this thread and the original, as I think it's a very interesting question.)

 

[dobro p]

"Couldn't asking a question at the limits of my comprehension have the effect of pushing those limits outward a bit?"

Yeah, of course, but it's got to be 'at the limits of your comprehension'. If it's *way* beyond the limits of your comprehension, you don't stand a chance. Nor, apparently, does anyone who's trying to convince you that it's way beyond your comprehension lol.

 

[martin]

In a sense there are no limits.

Hmm, I'm afraid I've said something that is way beyond the nonexisting limits of my comprehension.

 

[martin]

In any case, the limits are partly an illusion.
The illusion is caused by the belief that I do not understand the insights that I cannot put into words.
In fact I do understand them, although they are too subtle for words.

The encountered limits are the limits of language and concepts, not necessarily of knowing.
I know much more than what I can say or even think.

I seem to know that that is also true for you.

 

[luz]

You know how they say that if you can imagine something then thas something is possible (maybe not probable, but possible)

I think if you can come up with a question you can get an answer. The answer you can know might not be very thorough or very deep but you can 'know' it at some level. To the child that asks about sex you will give much less detail than to the teenager that asks about sex (if they ever asked, of course), but they are both entitled to ask the question.

The sage shows you 'the way'. But do you thoroughly understand why that is the way? It might sound good, feel good, make sense, but - ultimately - why????

 

[martin]

I wonder if there is a why apart from the Way.
Occasionally I have the feeling that I'm perfectly one with the Way. I'm exactly where I'm supposed to be.
And then there is no why. The Path is the destination.

 

[luz]

"The Path is the destination."

That's probably true but my earthly, petty, meat-eating

little self will still want to ask Why?

 

[martin]

Oh well, same for me. As I said, I only occasionally have that feeling.
And when I think of all those vegetables that I still have to eat and all those chickens and cows that I will never eat .. why, oh why?

 

[luz]

Do you really wish you could eat them? Do you really dislike your vegetables? I thought you looked a little pale in that picture you posted an maybe that's why your eyes look so sad! I thought you looked like a poet but it turns out the photographer was munching on a chicken leg!

 

[martin]

You sound familiar, do I know you from another life, err, thread?

 

[martin]

Oh, wait a moment, I'm perhaps supposed to get mad?

Okay then:

 

[martin]

However:

 

[hilary]

Honestly, you two. Some of us were trying to have a serious discussion here.

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

The illusion is caused by the belief that I do not understand the insights that I cannot put into words.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>
Nice one, Martin!

If we were limited to asking questions where we could be sure of comprehensively understanding the answer, this would be a very small forum.

 

[martin]

"Some of us were trying to have a serious discussion here."