Cards, Yarrow Sticks, coins or Dice?

[petrosianii]

I came across an interesting section in a wikipedia article a few weeks ago about probabilistic mathematics and the I ching. A I Ching practitioners/mathematicians have discovered a way to preserve the probabilities of the yarrow-stalk method through the use of cards. (Read about Probabilistic Mathematics or I Ching Geometry for a fuller discussion of this subject)

You take one of one suit (say, diamonds); three of a second suit; five of a third; and 7 of a fourth. The one of one suit corresponds to old yin; the three of of the second suit, old yang; the five of the third suit, young yang; and the seven of the fourth suit, young yin.

I've been using this method, and I find I'm liking it better than the simple coin method. Plus, it's nice because it doesn't take as long to get your hexagram as does the yarrow-stalk method. But it's long enough to induce the meditative frame of mind needed to really penetrate the unconscious.

 

[Sparhawk]

I favor cracking tortoise shells, although, it can get a little bloody...

BTW, the marble method also has the same probabilities as the yarrows. Look for it here as it has been discussed before and Hilary has the method listed somewhere.

 

[charly]

I came across an interesting section in a wikipedia article a few weeks ago about probabilistic mathematics and the I ching. A I Ching practitioners/mathematicians have discovered a way to preserve the probabilities of the yarrow-stalk method through the use of cards. (Read about Probabilistic Mathematics or I Ching Geometry for a fuller discussion of this subject)

You take one of one suit (say, diamonds); three of a second suit; five of a third; and 7 of a fourth. The one of one suit corresponds to old yin; the three of of the second suit, old yang; the five of the third suit, young yang; and the seven of the fourth suit, young yin.

I've been using this method, and I find I'm liking it better than the simple coin method. Plus, it's nice because it doesn't take as long to get your hexagram as does the yarrow-stalk method. But it's long enough to induce the meditative frame of mind needed to really penetrate the unconscious.

Hi, Petro:

I had time ago a projet with I Ching cards, but I was not sure about the accuracy from the probabilistic point of view.

If I undestand well, the method you propose uses french cards. Could you explain it with more detail? May you give us some examples?

I always use coins but I read that probabilities using coins are different that using stalks. I'm not sure if cards can replicate the stak probability. The links you post are not free.

Thanks in advance,


Charly

 

[jeb]

Hi All.

I was reading your thoughts on generating hexagrams. Stephen Karcher author of Total I Ching offers another option using coloured objects (e.g.marbles or stones) 7 of one colour, 5 of another, 3 of another and one of another. Doesn't matter what you use, or what colours. Stick em all in a receptical, shake em up and pick one out six times, simple.One of the 7 is a Yin line one of the five is a Yang line one of the three is a changing Yang and the single colour is a changing Yin . Not into maths myself but apparently returns a similar probability of yarrow stalks without the fiddly stuff and if its two quick for you then maybe chill and make yourself a cup of tea while contemplating your question and, before shaking the bag(my method)!!

Jack

 

[dobro p]

Okeydoke. Splain sumthin to me.

Why are probabilities in whatever method you use to consult the Yi important?

1 If it's completely random, what's the point of consulting? If the Yi's response isn't intelligent, if it's completely mechanical and probabilistic, then what's the point of consulting? What can you gain by talking to a machine? You get to hear the sound of your own voice. What else?

2 If the Yi's response to your question is intelligent, then probabilities in the method don't matter, right? Cuz you will get the intelligent response the Yi wants to give you NO MATTER WHAT THE PROBABILITIES.

 

[petrosianii]

to dobro

thanks, dobro, for your questions. i've often thought about that too; namely, that if the shen are really in control of the outcome of the coins or cards or sticks...or whatever...then what difference does the probability ratio make? Maybe thwe should post a thread on that and see what we get back?

 

[dobro p]

I think we're in that thread already. Nobody seems too interested though.

 

[wishcraft]

I came across an interesting section in a wikipedia article a few weeks ago about probabilistic mathematics and the I ching. A I Ching practitioners/mathematicians have discovered a way to preserve the probabilities of the yarrow-stalk method through the use of cards. (Read about Probabilistic Mathematics or I Ching Geometry for a fuller discussion of this subject)

You take one of one suit (say, diamonds); three of a second suit; five of a third; and 7 of a fourth. The one of one suit corresponds to old yin; the three of of the second suit, old yang; the five of the third suit, young yang; and the seven of the fourth suit, young yin.

I've been using this method, and I find I'm liking it better than the simple coin method. Plus, it's nice because it doesn't take as long to get your hexagram as does the yarrow-stalk method. But it's long enough to induce the meditative frame of mind needed to really penetrate the unconscious.

You could try my software layer for the i-ching.

​

 

[hilary]

Description from CNET:
"This application explores this fascinating 5000 year old fractal that can be applied to just about any vector in science. ANT stands for Alpha Numeric to Trigram, it is displaying the basic trigram not my yantra extended one that was developed as an object in 2004-2005. I have not further developed this application from 2005 as I decided I would eventually rewrite it in .NET when time is sufficient. This also include the code for Fractal Encryption Set which kinda turns a byte on the side. As the i-ching is recognized as a fractal by Texus Professor Kayta Walters who authored a book called the Tao of Chaos which lead me to develop this application for a better understand of the literature."

Um. What does the software do?

 

[urim]

Re: 'card method' mentioned above by Petrosianii... this method sounds to me like
it would have the same probabilities as the so called '16 method' using marbles
endorsed by Katya Walters because the probabilities simulate the yarrow sticks.

I've been using the 16 marble method for some time now and it seems to work
great.

Urim

 

[urim]

How the I Ching 'works'...?

I think we're in that thread already. Nobody seems too interested though.

This is something I've always been interested in since my discovering the I Ching.
Seems eventually most people get around to wondering about the mechanics of it
all.
I don't think anyone really understands how the I Ching works... i.e. throwing
coins, yarrow stalks etc. and the randomness of it all (the mechanics).

After studying Chaos Theory and a little Quantum Physics, I'm currently
going with a slightly altered- Katya Walter's Chaos/fractal idea- which goes
something like this----The universe is a huge constantly changing fractal organism,
an interconnected random PATTERN of events, past and future-- which we can't see
because of our limited perception etc. Directions for events (as near as I can
understand) are triggered by 'strange attactors' etc.
Because we are a part of the big PATTERN we can initiate a very small random
PATTERN which is a reflection of the big PATTERN by throwing coins etc. which
generates a hexagram.
Then you spice up the foregoing concoction with a little of Jung's sychronicity
ideas and some bastardization of Bohm's Holographic universe theories.

If anyone's interested in more detail in foregoing I can suggest some books on
the subject... not sure if this helps...

cheers
Urim:

 

[dobro p]

I see two main ways of viewing the Yi coin toss: it's random, or it ain't.

If it's random, then you'd do as well when asking a question to open the book at random and read whatever your eye fell on. The idea behind the 'random' interpretation, I think, is that the Yi text is a useful trigger/stimulator/mirror for the intuitive parts of your mind which merely need a cunning foil like the Yi to come up with useful ideas and feelings. In other words, I ask a question like 'what's the best way to survive this ordeal?' and ANY hexagram, ANY line or combination of lines is useful to me - ANY of them would supply the jog my intuition needs to come up with the stuff my mind already has the capacity to produce, stuff which is useful to me.

If it ain't random, then it ain't random. But it seems to me there are two ways (at least) of viewing this. If the hexagram (and lines) you draw in answer to a question isn't an accident, then it might be because the universe has no choice but to give you the answer you get to your question. It might be completely mechanical, is what I'm saying. Not accidental. Mechanical. That view would say that at the moment you ask the question and toss the coins, you could ONLY get the result you get, in the same way that if you come into a dark room and flip the light switch on, you can ONLY get light (you don't get music or water or fast food). It's mechanical. The idea here is that your particular fall of the coins was as inevitable as the rising of the sun every day. But another way to view this inevitability is what I call the 'angel wing' theory, which is this: something like angel wings fluttering around the coins as they tumble from your hands onto the floor determine which coin combinations you get. In other words, people who are more connected with 'angel energy', more connected with their own higher minds, more connected with the Universe (however you want to view it) will get a reliable 'divine intervention' in answer to their question. So if you believe this, it doesn't matter about the probabilities inherent in using coins or sticks or balls or online consulations, cuz divine intelligence is going to make damn sure you get the result you need to get in answer to your question at this time in your particular frame of mind and with your particular personality, karma and conditions.

And the longer I deal with this question, the less it seems to matter. Cuz in the end, the Yi works for me, and so whether it's accidental in its operation, mechanical, or divinely determined, it's all pretty much the same in the end. And *that* is why I think I'll decline your kind offer of a reading list lol.

 

[petrosianii]

i like it, dobro

i lilke your last comment there...
perhaps that's all the Yi is: a sort of "generator" for the unconscious? It works for me,
I'm not too big on the deterministic theory: that things happen only the way that they could happen. I mean, it's obviously true, but doesn't really tell me anything.

Thanks for your clear thoughts

 

[urim]

Yeah, I basically agree with what your saying, Dobro and thanks for the quick
response & don't get me wrong... the Yi works for me too... I'm just the kind
of guy that likes to figure out exactly how things work.

I haven't really heard of the 'angel wing' theory before-- nice touch, although
a parallel here might be intervention of 'the spirits'-- an idea which Karcher seems to
favor in his books.

I also like what you said about cracking the book open at random and pointing
your finger etc. 'cause you can do the same thing with a good dictionary...
I think they used to call it Webster's Oracle or something like that...

Personally I like to think that the process isn't random, but instead governed
by some laws of physics (chaos theory works for me) that we don't quite understand
yet.

Quantum physics experts have said that if an electron changes it's axis spin,
that other electrons- light years away-- are aware of it, or something to that effect...
...hmm ... I'm thinking there's got to be some relevance here to the I ching
process... can't quite put my finger on it though...

Urim

 

[dobro p]

Well if even sth as small as an electron changes, then the whole universe is different by that one event. But of course electrons and their spin follow very definite laws and therefore a change of electron spin will always be lawful and 'known' to the universe even as the universe is being changed thereby.

By to tell you the truth, I subscribe to all two or three ideas I outlined above, if the user is legitimately respectful of the oracle. I think that the oracle DOES function in a way that jumpstarts my intuition (but I have to do the work of paying attention and engaging with the Yi's imagery); I think it always does this. I think that most times, the oracle functions in a pretty mechanistic way, the same way that the spin of electrons is governed by universal law; I think it functions pretty much the same way that sonar works - the signal goes out, bounces off the ocean floor or whatever else is down there, and is picked up and imaged on the screen of the vessel using it; and I think sometimes, if the user is legitimately respectful of the oracle and if their development will really benefit through serious consideration of the Yi's message, that the 'angel wing' idea holds true, in the same way that the story of the prodigal son states that if you make a real move toward divinity, then divinity comes out to meet you and welcome you.

 

[rosada]

"...story of the prodigal son states that if you make a real move toward divinity, then divinity comes out to meet you and welcome you."
I hadn't realized the "comes out to meet you and welcomes you" idea. Really nice. Thanks, dobro.

 

[jeb]

This question of probability and its importance.

It seems to me, human life can be described and defined in terms of probability simply because through the science of maths, we can. Regrettably time and again it has proven top be as important as we want to make it.Which is essentially whereever there is more than "one" of anything and wherever there is a human to contemplate it. If there were no humans then I'm sure whatever dominated the planet, lets say for argument sake, gorillas, wouldn't give a "monkeys" about a probabalistic calculations in comparing wether one method of anything was better than another.

As far as I ching goes I agree entirely with Dobro view of 6th Dec. But! in deciding what method you use to communicate with I Ching through, our only options are to relate to "what's known" to be part of original methods. If we rely in the first place on spirtual input generated via human actions we either should stick to those methods or others that we can arrive at by whats known of those original methods.All we know of the original methods is by human calculation of the probabilities generated by the various original methods, and in my view that is the only thing we as humans can relate to in choosing and alternative i.e. something that relates closely to the original probabilities. If we could get what we need from reading tea leaves, casting bones, flipping a coin, or direct spiritual contact then I'm sure we would. As regrettable as it may be for some comparing alternative I Ching methods probabilities is the only way, hence its importance.

 

[dobro p]

As far as I ching goes I agree entirely with Dobro view of 6th Dec.

I'm afraid you can't do that, Jeb. What I posted 6 December wasn't a view, it was a question.

 

[jeb]

Sorry Dobro. I thought "Cuz you will get the intelligent response the Yi wants to give you NO MATTER WHAT THE PROBABILITIES" was a view, the rest being questions? I also thought that as the original thread posed the question "Cards, Yarrow Sticks, coins or Dice?" which then led to your opening question on the 6th "Okeydoke. Splain sumthin to me.

Why are probabilities in whatever method you use to consult the Yi important?"

I thought it important that we not lose sight of the original question which was about what method to use and how we decide, before agreeing that the I Ching will give us whatever it gives us, which obviously it cannot do without a method, so which one do we use?

 

[stewlsa]

methods and statistics

Hi
There is an article in the Wiki at click here

cheers
stewlsa

 

[Sparhawk]

I'm afraid you can't do that, Jeb. What I posted 6 December wasn't a view, it was a question.

Geeze, even when they agree with you, you play the contrarian?? LOL!!

 

[miakoda]

Comparing coins and stalks isn't just about the mathematical probabilities of the two methods. There's another aspect that yarrow stalks and marbles have in common that coins don't share--the tactile connection while making a conscious choice. I used the coins for 30 some years, but switched to marbles a few years ago. I've discovered in using the marbles that I'm a more direct participant in the process. My instincts now have a greater role in the reading and the experience is far more meditative and sprirtual. In addition, using marbles also allows for "conversational" readings where many aspects of a situation can be discussed, which has deepened my understanding of the text and my life.

No matter the probabilities of any of the methods, I'm sure the Yi finds a way to get the information across. Even using just four marbles would work because the Yi adapts (think of all of those people who are always confused about the traditional coin method and still find the answer anyway). But there's something about sifting the objects through your hands that eases the reading and can make the connection to the Yi Jing even stronger.

Best,

Miakoda

 

[martin]

I wouldn't worry about those probabilities. As long as the distribution is not too skewed you are okay. It means that you have a device that is sensitive enough to hear the heavenly music and dance with the angels.

Of course calculating exact probabilities can be fun but it's like trying to weigh the angels. It's all illusion, angels are weightless!

 

[dobro p]

Geeze, even when they agree with you, you play the contrarian?? LOL!!

Not contrary. Helpful.

In that post he/she was responding to, I was outlining two different possible ways of looking at the Yi, I wasn't describing my own position. It was as if I had said: "Light can be thought of as a wave or as a particle. Which is it?" and then somebody replied with: "Well, I agree with you, dobro."

Alternately:

Sparhawk: You're being contrary, dobro.

dobro: No, I'm not.

haha

 

[hilary]

Hehe.

On the one hand, if God/ Cosmos/ insert-shorthand-for-unknowable-here wants to communicate with you, then it's unlikely you can prevent this by choosing the 'wrong' probabilities.

On the other hand, years back I tried some I Ching software that had equal probabilities of moving or unmoving lines. The results were teeming with changing lines, of course, and I found it unusable. So it seems we can make it harder or easier for the message to get through, and probabilities are just part of a well-designed 'interface'.

BTW, I think an answer can be mathematically random and still meaningful and intended by the [shorthand], in the same way something can be blue and still triangular. (Calculate the odds of receiving the same hexagram twice in a row. OK. Calculate the odds of receiving the same hexagram when you next ask the same question. Ah. Oops.)

 

[willow]

Funny, I just discovered that I haven't been playing with all my marbles! Noticed after a reading (my annual reading, no less) that there were only 15 marbles in the bowl. I've been missing an unchanging yin for who knows how long. Although that of course changes the odds, the discovery didn't affect my sense of the validity of the reading. For the marbles method, as (miakoda) says, casting is very tactile, and my fingertips don't seem to care what they're choosing from. If the changing yin had been missing (the marble of which there is only one), I might have felt differently. Or I might have just taken that fact as additional information in an ongoing conversation with the universe...

 

[Sparhawk]

Although that of course changes the odds, the discovery didn't affect my sense of the validity of the reading.

Aha!! That's an interesting angle to explore.

 

[petrosianii]

Funny, I just discovered that I haven't been playing with all my marbles! Noticed after a reading (my annual reading, no less) that there were only 15 marbles in the bowl. I've been missing an unchanging yin for who knows how long. Although that of course changes the odds, the discovery didn't affect my sense of the validity of the reading. For the marbles method, as (miakoda) says, casting is very tactile, and my fingertips don't seem to care what they're choosing from. If the changing yin had been missing (the marble of which there is only one), I might have felt differently. Or I might have just taken that fact as additional information in an ongoing conversation with the universe...

Man, u guys and gals are...deep!
This example makes me recall a moral paradox that the French philosopher Sartre expounded upon: You're in London.I don't know you're in London, but I think you're in New York. A killer comes to find you and asks me where you are. I "lie", to protect you, and tell him you're in London. He goes to London, find you and kills you.

Now, the question is, of course: Did I lie or tell the truth? Does lying merely have to do with conformance to external fact, or does it also have something to do with my intentions on some leve? Am I guilty or innocent?

In the same way, I've gotten readings "accidentally" but, like willow, it doesn't seem to affect my sense of validity of the reading ... so long as my heart (i.e. intention) is in the right place.

 

[fyreflye]

If you want to make the playing card method more fun use a tarot deck instead: http://www.accessnewage.com/articles/Tarot/GAULT1.HTM

 

[barneybus]

Left Field

I woke up this morning thinking and exploring the ideas contained in this thread of discussion and checked my email and here is this link to this thread. Quite a synchronous moment for me.

What do I mean by left field? I think its quite possible to get tied up in a mechanistic idea of how things work and avoid the question about why what exists is here in this form in the first place and questions of the origin of it all.

I personally like the ideas Carol Anthony explores in her Cosmic I Ching book where she speaks of the Ego skewing things and endeavouring to exploit the 'divine' for its own gratification etc. Somehow we can place strings onto "what is" and use it for our own gain. Somewhat akin to the idea of the "untamed ego".

My thoughts about using yarrow sticks are in the main centred on the main purpose being to tame or diminish the ego's input through a task that is repetitive, frustrating, and monotonous and requires focus to be able to keep the inquiry in mind.

But I would also say that apart from mechanistic views, or views about egos skewing and exploiting, that a good deal of time and discipline is not engaged in spending time arriving at what the key question or enquiry is in the first place.

So left field for me hinges a few mental steps or contexts back from the actual manipulation of card, stalks, coins, dice or grandma's knitting needles. My view is that all that exists, in its symmetry and order has an origin I understand as Creator who is other than what he or she has created. I can diminish ego and overcome the mechanics with the idea that I "connect" with this One who is "other than" and maybe with such a connection you won't even worry about using any device other than the Spirit within you?

All well to you and my sincere thanks for this discussion and my trust in you all as fellow seekers of what is true because you have helped me this day.