Blog post: Leaping in the abyss

[Trojina]

True. But should I - is this a real thing? Yi speaks and means things in readings. Each time it responds with 1.2, it means something subtly different. All those meanings have some commonality, and so I can write blog posts about that, but how much real existence do those ideas have?

Well obviously line 2 will mean something subtly different in each reading, we have both known that for a lifetime already surely !

Re the rest of your paragraph one could make exactly the same argument about language itself and that's a whole separate area of academic study isn't it. I forget what it's called, there are probably many branches, it's all to do with theory of language.

It's the old argument of does language exist in itself or does it exist only in use, relatively etc etc I'm thinking way back to degree days....all that stuff, the area where language and philosophy overlap...there's words for it I can't remember


As to whether you should only ever write things things about Yi in connection with someone's love life, cat or eating disorder I bloody well hope not that would be the death of the blog !

Here it is - Part I, chapter 10:

"Yi has no thought, no action. It is inert and motionless, but when activated it penetrates every cause under heaven."

Yes but where are you going with this ? Do you want to stop writing about Yi's words and structure as of and in themselves altogether and just write about what line 2 means in regards to a person's answer on how they should go about finding work and so on ? If so then you may as well just stop writing a Blog at all and start answering the multitude in SR instead. If you are saying there is no meaning in Yi except in someone's answer then there's no point in a blog only in responding to people.



And of course it is a ridiculous suggestion that there is no meaning in Yi except through answers, you know that. You have uncovered patterns in the structure that add to the meaning people receive in answers, as has Karcher and others. If you had not allowed your mind to think about Yi in and of itself that exploration would not have happened. Likewise if you had not allowed your mind free range to make connections in the text itself, you know things like how there are exactly 10 pairs between 41/42 and 61, then we would have far less meaning to use in our readings.


Whoever devalues you doing that or suggests it has no reality is simply jealous of your brilliance.


I've lost count of the things, the connections we have discovered through your blogs, there's so much we almost take these gems for granted. Oh another week and Hilary has found a connection between this line and that line both in the text and the structure. Ah so Hilary discovered the text and the structure are inextricably linked ! Well she never would have found that out if she had only let herself think about reading X or Y's reading !

 

[Trojina]

I also think you don't believe in this at all, that there is no meaning in Yi apart from through readings...I think you are playing devil's advocate and hence triggering me to argue against someone else's case !

Naughty Hilary ! You are playing !

 

[Liselle]

But Trojina, as I said above, it's an oracular text. It was written and constructed to be that, that's why Hilary can find all these things in it. So I figure (without actually knowing, of course!) that the idea of readings, at least, is in the back of her mind when she writes articles like this, even if she never mentions a specific example.

People can and do read the I Ching without ever casting a reading, but that's their deal, and doesn't change the fact that it's meant to be an oracle.

 

[rosada]

I think you can compare the I Ching to a map. A map by itself shows the whole territory but you consult it for specific guidance when you're lost.

 

[Liselle]

@rosada , please add that one to WikiWing!

Second that! But also, Hilary, segue, sorry, the "@rosada" in your post (no. 59) is not a blue link. I noticed that also in Moss Elk's post no. 44 where he @-ed you.

Trying it myself just now - @hilary - when I start typing that, it recognizes what I'm trying to do and gives me a popup with your name, but then doesn't do anything with it.

Well when I posted, it is a blue link. But the previous @s still aren't.

 

[hilary]

It's the old argument of does language exist in itself or does it exist only in use, relatively etc etc I'm thinking way back to degree days....all that stuff, the area where language and philosophy overlap...there's words for it I can't remember

Ditto - degrees, (post-)structuralism, words I can't remember, time I'll never get back. But imagine how much fun that brigade would have if they ever came across the Yi.

Yes but where are you going with this ?

?

Naughty Hilary ! You are playing !

But Trojina, as I said above, it's an oracular text. It was written and constructed to be that, that's why Hilary can find all these things in it. So I figure (without actually knowing, of course!) that the idea of readings, at least, is in the back of her mind when she writes articles like this, even if she never mentions a specific example.

Ah yes, that was the point. I knew I had one somewhere. I have to keep thinking about what lines and hexagrams 'mean' on their own, but I feel it would be good to hold onto those ideas only very lightly. I don't want to end up insisting that any line absolutely and always means x. Then you get timid readers saying things like, 'It seems to be saying this to me, but perhaps that's not what it really means,' and checking with the commentary/ with an 'expert'. Yi does all its 'meaning' in readings, talking to people.

 

[Trojina]

Ah yes, that was the point. I knew I had one somewhere. I have to keep thinking about what lines and hexagrams 'mean' on their own, but I feel it would be good to hold onto those ideas only very lightly. I don't want to end up insisting that any line absolutely and always means x. Then you get timid readers saying things like, 'It seems to be saying this to me, but perhaps that's not what it really means,' and checking with the commentary/ with an 'expert'. Yi does all its 'meaning' in readings, talking to people.

Oh yes I can see you are in grave danger of insisting a line always means x, I've seen you do it time and time again (not). This danger is in the Ladybird Book of Understanding the I Ching and has been referred to ever since the forum started as you know so what a fun game ........it's called pretending not to know things or pretending to have just discovered them. Perphas the word 'disingenuous' is the right one.

You also know as you have already said that yes you do commonly talk about the text and the structure independently of readings, thank God ! It would be terribly limiting not to be able to ever to about a line or image unless in relation to Alice's cast on her hamster. One needs to breathe, the brain needs to breathe. To stand apart and just look at the oracle is not to be underestimated, you don't have to have readings shoved up your nostrils all the time.

Yi does all its 'meaning' in readings, talking to people.

Poppycock and you know it. You can and do talk about meaning without reference to readings as you've said.

But Trojina, as I said above, it's an oracular text. It was written and constructed to be that, that's why Hilary can find all these things in it. So I figure (without actually knowing, of course!) that the idea of readings, at least, is in the back of her mind when she writes articles like this, even if she never mentions a specific example.

People can and do read the I Ching without ever casting a reading, but that's their deal, and doesn't change the fact that it's meant to be an oracle.

Well all these years and I never knew Yi was an oracular text. My my you learn something every day*. This is just a wind up on Hilary's part and you've played into it unwittingly. She's already said she doesn't always write in relation to readings so you made something up like 'oh well she must be thinking about them then' and she's happily picked up that suggestion. It's just playing.

Don't reply to me just have a nice chat you two together, I think I've lost a taste for the game.


* this is sarcasm I'm not actually saying I don't know Yi is an oracle just in case I overestimate my reader

 

[Liselle]

I originally said that way up here, before Hilary addressed it, and I was replying to you.

Part of the point being, it's fundamental that it's an oracular text, and it doesn't have to be stated explicitly all the time. Someone writing about song lyrics doesn't make sure to say, "Bear in mind I'm discussing song lyrics here, which are like poetry, but also different from other poetry because they're written to cooperate with a tune. I'm not going to talk about the tune, only the lyrics, but still." (Might be a bad analogy.)

And yes I know you know that, but--- somehow we're talking past each other, maybe?

If Hilary is playing a game with you/ me/ all of us I'm too dense to get it.

 

[Liselle]

Don't reply to me just have a nice chat you two together, I think I've lost a taste for the game.

Before you point it out, I can see there might be two ways to take that.

1 - You thought we were more-or-less just reinforcing each other and not addressing your points well enough. That's how I took it, like, "Don't reply to me, oh no of course not, just chat between yourselves..."

2 - It was an instruction. "Do not post another reply." Probably how you meant it, in hindsight.

 

[dfreed]

you find Song 239, celebrating the joys of a prosperous country with a good prince. Among its signs of prosperity and harmony: "The hawk flies up to heaven, the fishes leap in the deep."

For Line 1.4, something else that's interesting for me is that Ode 239 also says, "the hazel and hu trees are numerous, joyous, and pleased"; and "the lord is (also) joyous and pleased"; and we also have a "bright (filled up) libation-ladle of jade ...."

Building upon this Ode: "sometimes it leaps above the tides (Rutt)" and to "dance in the abyss" (Barrett), etc. I might take as advice to 'rise above' whatever situation I find myself in (and have asked the Yi about), which can include keeping a positive attitude; creating space (mental, physical, psychological) between myself and whatever situation I'm facing -- perhaps so I can see it more clearly.

The trigram changes for Line 1.4 are Heaven (with the bottom line) moving to Wind: so perhaps here is the idea of bringing Wind's qualities to bear on the situation at hand: to explore, to be gentle, patient, to communicate; all of which are their own sort of dance.

Look for a role model. Where did that dragon come from appearing in the field as if he fell from the sky?

[The dragons] "Root Breath and Lady She-Voice became the first couple, husband and wife, and Lady She-Voice gave birth to humankind. So you see, we are descended from dragons: we have dragon hearts pumping dragon blood, dragon minds thinking dragon thoughts." - David Hinton, 'I Ching'.

One story/tale/myth I have heard about dragons is that when they fight and play up in the heavens and then their dragon's blood, sweat and tears, fall to Earth as rain, hailstorms, strong winds .... So in this way, Dragons are performing a vital Heavenly function by making a connection between Heaven's creativity and Earth's manifestations: their blood, sweat and tears, etc. are fertilizing Earth's fields, making them ready for whatever creative thought, idea, goal, direction ... Heaven has shared with Earth so she can manifest it - make it real, bring it down-to-earth ....

But in Line 1.2, a Dragon comes down and lands in my field. 'What are you doing here', I ask? 'Why have you landed in my field -- is it by chance or intention?'

Dragon answers, but even though she is my distant ancestor, I don't understand the ancient words of Dragon-Voice, so the Oracle says it is:

'Favorable to see the great person' (A. Huang), and / or it is ...
'Favorable to see the Chief Diviner'. (Mesker)
-- i.e. here I need a translator, an interpreter to understand what Dragon is saying and why she's landed here in my field!

I suppose one might question why an Oracle -- which we turn to for answers and advice -- would, in this instance, have us seek our answers somewhere else? I glean a few things from this:

* the Yi oracle doesn't just give us any old answer, but the best answer possible for our situation

* in this case the wisest course of action is to make a connection with another (or others) -- perhaps someone whom is more knowledgeable or wiser about my situation than I am

* perhaps here the Yi is telling us something about its roll: that it is not a mechanic, nor an acupuncturist, nor a school teacher or mathematician, nor any of a multitude of people or beings whose advice we might need to address our particular situation (that we've queried the Yi about)

* I think that how we 'see the great man' (Wilhelm) or 'see great people' (Barrett) is completely personal: it might be listening to a sage or guru; it could be asking the mechanic what's wrong with my car, or it could be looking to someone else -- a role model -- for how best to be or act ...

... it might also be reading a book, meditating, looking within to seek advice from our 'higher self' -- though I think it was Bradford Hatcher who cautioned against always making this an internal exercise; that in the times when the Yi was first written and used, 'to meet with great men, well betides' (Rutt) did not mean (or only rarely meant) to 'look within yourself' for the answer.

The trigram changes for Line 1.2 are Heaven (with the middle line) moving to Flame: to seek clarity, see clearly, to work with others, as the flame works with -- and co-depends on -- it's fuel; and to seek or provide protection -- all of which I feel corresponds quite nicely with the text of the Yi.

Best, D

 

[hilary]

The trigram changes for Line 1.4 are Heaven (with the bottom line) moving to Wind: so perhaps here is the idea of bringing Wind's qualities to bear on the situation at hand: to explore, to be gentle, patient, to communicate; all of which are their own sort of dance.

Yes indeed. And more simply, it changes to wind just as we take to the air. (Bradford makes use of this.)

One idea/notion I have of dragons is that they mainly stay in the heavens,

I don't think they do. I'm no expert, but I believe they lived on earth (especially in bodies of water), and there was a minister in charge of them.

here I need a translator, an interpreter to understand what Dragon is saying and why she's landed here in my field!

Good thought! The dragon comes into view ('see the dragon'), this must be significant, so we had better find someone who can tell us what it means.

This is probably a good moment to mention another nice trigram change: Hexagram 1 has two lines that mention seeing, 2 and 5. Change them both, 'open the eyes' of inner and outer trigrams, and you have Hexagram 30.

 

[moss elk]

Ah. Hm. Do hexagrams and their images mean things independently of readings? Discuss.

Yes and No and Neither?

We can truthfully say There is a General meaning.
(comprehsible images/patterns that can be gleened, ala "I see what is happening when I look at Hexagram X", Noone will argue against 52 unchanging..)
&
Then There is a Specific meaning,
that only applies when activated to the living person question & situation and ONLY when it is Comprehended! (you can lead a horse to water....)

 

[dfreed]

I don't think they do. I'm no expert, but I believe they lived on earth (especially in bodies of water), and there was a minister in charge of them.

You are correct. My dragon-lore is as rusty as my dragon-speak, but I've changed my tale -- above -- a bit to reflect this new information.

another nice trigram change: Hexagram 1 has two lines that mention seeing, 2 and 5. Change them both, 'open the eyes' of inner and outer trigrams, and you have Hexagram 30.

Yes, one interpretation could be that with this change, Creativity, now has -- or can access -- both inner and outer clarity (light).

 

[dfreed]

Ah. Hm. Do hexagrams and their images mean things independently of readings? Discuss.

Put another way, are you asking: do the hexagram/trigram images have meanings which are independent of the words/text of the Yi?

In answer to that question: I think they may be independent -- or different -- but they can work together towards providing the answer/information we need. And in some instances I do see similarities -- or make connections -- between the words and the images. One example I mentioned above: between Line 1.4 and the changes (movement) of the Heaven-to-Wind trigrams.

To think otherwise would be like saying that the Zhouyi (Yi's hexagram and line statements), never work with the the Dz Xiang, the Image statements (from the 3rd and 4th Wings). I often find these dissimilar, but I might still make use of them -- and find them useful -- in working with the Yi.

Best, D

 

[hilary]

Yes and No and Neither?

Yes, that's about the size of it.

Put another way, are you asking: do the hexagram/trigram images have meanings which are independent of the words/text of the Yi?

No, that's not what I was asking. I was asking whether we can ever say what a hexagram or line 'means' when it isn't speaking in divination. What you've got there is a whole other kettle of worms...

 

[charly]

... [The dragons] "Root Breath and Lady She-Voice became the first couple, husband and wife, and Lady She-Voice gave birth to humankind. So you see, we are descended from dragons: we have dragon hearts pumping dragon blood, dragon minds thinking dragon thoughts." - David Hinton, 'I Ching'.
...
Best, D

Hi David:

For those who don't know Hinton's Code, Root-Breath is usually known as FuXi 伏羲 and Lady She-Voice is her Sister-Wife Nü Wa 女媧.

In words of Hinton:.

.
​

One of the best known images of both as a couple with intertwined tails, half dragons:

.
Source: https://mysterious-world.fandom.com/zh/wiki/女媧.
​

All the bewst,

Charly

​

 

[dfreed]

I was asking whether we can ever say what a hexagram or line 'means' when it isn't speaking in divination. What you've got there is a whole other kettle of worms...

Okay, I misunderstood. So as to not misunderstand you again: are you asking, can we know what the Yi is saying if we're not doing a casting, if we're only reading about it, if we are just 'eaves dropping' on the Yi? Or ... is it only - or best - understood only in the context of a reading, a casting, or by doing Divination with the Yi?

Is that sorta, kinda your question? (sorry if I'm being dense here)

 

[dfreed]

Charly, thanks for that additional info. Here's an interview with David Hinton and artist Bill Jensen from the Brooklyn Rail. I'm printing out a hard copy at my local library today and will then finish reading it.

I'm not all that keen on Hinton's 'translation' of the Yi, nor do I always agree with his understanding of it or of it's history, but I do like some of the things he says. I especially like the topic of this interview - which delves some into the intersection of the Yi and art (or that's my first assumptions about what I think it's going to be about!)

Best, D.

 

[hilary]

Okay, I misunderstood. So as to not misunderstand you again: are you asking, can we know what the Yi is saying if we're not doing a casting, if we're only reading about it, if we are just 'eaves dropping' on the Yi? Or ... is it only - or best - understood only in the context of a reading, a casting, or by doing Divination with the Yi?

Is that sorta, kinda your question? (sorry if I'm being dense here)

Sorta kinda, yes. Try... is Yi 'saying' anything when it isn't actually saying something, in a reading? Can we claim 'here is what this line means' in general terms when we're not talking about a reading?

(I think we can, sort of, but mostly because those general meanings are well-rooted in readings.)

 

[dfreed]

Sorta kinda, yes. Try... is Yi 'saying' anything when it isn't actually saying something, in a reading? Can we claim 'here is what this line means' in general terms when we're not talking about a reading?

Sorry, but I'm still not getting it. Are you referring to text versus hexagram/trigram imagery? (I don't think so, but ...?) I don't get 'is it saying anything when it's isn't actually saying something ' ...

... but that's fine - I can let it ride. D.

 

[rosada]

I get value from reading the hexagrams independently from readings. I see them as mini guides outlining every life situation and how to handle them in six easy steps.

For example, if you are wanting to be Creative, maybe thinking of taking up oil painting hexagram 1 tells you how to go about doing it:
1.1 First do no harm.
1.2 Find someone active in your field of interest. Let their example inspire you.
1.3 Learn everything you possibly can about your subject.
1.4 Okay, pick up a brush and try painting. Maybe one step forward, two steps back for a bit. That's okay.
1.5 Join a support group of fellow artists. May The Force be with you!
1.6 Those who channel The Creative must beware not to let the ego claim the credit.

Or maybe you are thinking of taking a trip and are wondering what are the characteristics of a good tourist. Hexagram 56. tells you what to watch out for:
56.1 Mind your own business. You are an outsider so don't be nosy asking questions about things that are none of your concern.
56.2 Don't expect to sponge off locals either. Bring your own supplies and it would good if you came already having some contacts.
56.3 But even if staying with friends remember fish and guests smell after three days. Move on before they kick you out.
56.4 No matter how nice the new place is, be prepared to experience some homesickness. You can help yourself get past this by..
56.5 Looking to see if there isn't something you can do to contribute to the community. You may then even be welcomed into a closer connection. However..
56.6 Even though you may then be treated like a highly honored guest, don't push it - you are first and foremost an unknown wanderer and you could just as easily be found murdered in a ditch.

So you can do this with all the hexagrams letting them give you the guiding principles for every situation.

Now if you want to use the IC as an oracle you can do that too. In fact there is a special word for readings where one opens a book and points to a line at random. It's called "Bibliomancy," but you can also use the oracle as a book like Confucius did and just study the text for the next fifty years, thus becoming free from error.

 

[hilary]

Sorry, but I'm still not getting it. Are you referring to text versus hexagram/trigram imagery? (I don't think so, but ...?) I don't get 'is it saying anything when it's isn't actually saying something ' ...

... but that's fine - I can let it ride. D.

Try a change of verb. Yi is an oracle: something that speaks. When does it speak? In readings. When it isn't speaking, it's silent. If it's silent, how can it mean anything?

But this is getting into literary-theoretical pretentiousness, as Trojina was too kind to point out explicitly a good few posts ago. Rosada has just punctured this nicely by talking about reading the book without doing readings.

(A maybe-more-interesting practical question along related lines: what does the name of Hexagram 36 mean? Scholars may tell you that its original meaning, the one the authors would have had in mind, is 'Bright Pheasant'. But it has spent a millennium or two saying 'Brightness Hiding' to perhaps a few million diviners. Now what does it mean?)

 

[dfreed]

Yi is an oracle: something that speaks. When does it speak? In readings. When it isn't speaking, it's silent. If it's silent, how can it mean anything?

Ah, I think I kinda, sorta get it! There is another thread in Open Space, 'Regarding the "intentional" selection of hexagrams... ' and some of that discussion brings this same issue to mind. There I said:

Author and Merry Prankster Ken Kesey once wrote, "You get good advice from the Ching even when you're eavesdropping".

But I'd say for me, the Yi speaks most clearly when in the context of a reading or query, even one that's open ended. I'm not sure why: it may be because that is its intended use, or maybe that a query/question provides context and / or something solid that the Yi can 'bounce off of' or resonate with ....

When I studied Urban Planning one of my teachers often talked about the idea of a 'sense of place' and he gave us examples -- including the city where our university was located -- where there was 'no there there' -- that the city had no core, no center, no sense of history .... And this reminds me of how the Yi might also need a 'sense of place' provided by a query or a question put to it.

Best, D

 

[hilary]

But I'd say for me, the Yi speaks most clearly when in the context of a reading or query, even one that's open ended. I'm not sure why: it may be because that is its intended use, or maybe that a query/question provides context and / or something solid that the Yi can 'bounce off of' or resonate with ....

Yes, or both. 11 years ago, when I started writing the commentary for my book, I thought I had a good understanding of what the lines 'meant'. I found out quite fast that being able to describe what it's saying in a reading is one thing, and writing a commentary that's supposed to work for all possible readings is quite another. (And impossible, of course, which is why I've now spent longer trying to persuade people to ignore the commentary than I ever did writing it...)

 

[IrfanK]

Sorta kinda, yes. Try... is Yi 'saying' anything when it isn't actually saying something, in a reading? Can we claim 'here is what this line means' in general terms when we're not talking about a reading?

(I think we can, sort of, but mostly because those general meanings are well-rooted in readings.)

I remember Harmen taking on two cases studies during his trigrams course, about a week apart from each other, but both exactly the same hexagram, with the same moving line (2.4, from memory). Of course, the nature of the question was quite different in each case: one was a relationship issue, a sort of character analysis question, and the other was about a cardio-related health problem. It was fascinating to watch his little video clips one after the other. Completely different stories! What he got out of the same hexagram each time was worlds apart!

Although of course I think you can look at a line or hexagram without reference to a question. In fact, when I had a difficult reading with Wayne during the RFO class, when I was the querent and he was diviner, I was a bit bewildered by a reading I'd received. So he said, well, just forget your question for a moment. Just look at the line and see what you think it might be saying in general terms. After I'd explored that idea, he then said, okay, how do you think that could apply to your question now? I thought it was a good trick. I put that one in my box to use again when the time seems right.

 

[dfreed]

Further ruminations on 1.4:

Wilhelm translates 1.4 as: Wavering flight over the depths. No blame.
Rutt says: Sometimes it leaps above the tides. No misfortune.

So maybe ... with line 1.4 one of the myriad beings is somewhere in transition between being Line 1.3's Prince, Superior Man or Woman, and being Line 1.5's Dragon in the heavens. It's as if the 'it' of 1.4 is saying:

"Here I am - without blame and with no misfortune - in a transition place/time between human and dragon. And while I know I'm above the depths and above the tides, I'm not quite sure of my destination. (And looking at the upper trigram changes ...) It's as if I'm between being Wind/Root and being the Creative .... but, maybe it's not such a bad place to be right now?"

And the being who inhabits Line 1.4 is named/titled 'Wavering-Leaping Dragon-Wind'. And this be the place / being where Dragon meets the Great Woman - the Chief Diviner!


Best, D