Depth Readings - an old approach

[candid]

I was out most of the morning/early afternoon, and I walked by some VHS racks. I don't watch TV but do enjoy an occasional movie at home. I picked up Robinson Crusoe, with Pierce Brosman, and popped it in over dinner. It's a terrible flick; I don't suggest anyone buy it. Yet the story itself played out well enough to immerse myself on that island, with just one 'savage' for a friend. The scene where Friday was explaining his crocodile god to RC was my favorite. Took a long time for them to accept one another's G/god, and they nearly killed one another over it before. I still think RC should have let Friday eat the heart of his enemy, though.

 

[bradford_h]

Hi Candid-
No oracle like Yi or IFA or bones. The Melanesians were about 4-5000 years isolated from any of the African traditions. They left there long ago in big boats.
He used dreams. Or rather, lucid dreaming, to get information. He had two totem animals and would become one or the other and explore for what he needed in those forms. I had to explain a lot of Aesop's animals to him, along with their medicine traits, so he could get some of the inside stuff. Not many indigenous animals out there. But the white man had brought dogs and these became his totems. A big white one when he was helping someone and a nasty little black one when someone needed to get bit.
Of course he also used various sacred plants and got visions that way too.

 

[calumet]

Of course people living in the 21st century never will discern the "original, true" meaning of the Yi. Or the Bible. Or the Koran. Or what-have-you. We see EVERYTHING through our own filters, and OUR filters are not those of 2000 A.D. (Whoops, did it again.) Not to say that the "original, true" meaning isn't of great interest. As long as we have the tools, why not reconstruct the original as closely as we can? It's just that the "original and true" is not really accessible to us.

The real test of value for a document such as the Yi is something like the test for Art: Has it stood up over time? Does it still have meaning? Does whatever it says remain true? Does it speak to those of us for whom it was not "officially" intended? I don't think that Mozart's flute concerti, for example, were intended for peasants like me. In fact, when Mozart wrote this music people like me wouldn't have been able to hear it. But it happens that I have access to very nice speakers, and hundreds of thousands of recordings, and a very nice sound card; and although I have little to no appreciation for the original context of Mozart's music, and therefore little to no appreciation for its "original and true" meaning, I derive great value from what it says. (Lest you be misled, I am very little of a relativist, culturally or otherwise. It's just that I have an inkling of the ways that culture and time limit human vision.)

By the way, anyone ever notice that it's mainly the male members of this forum who contribute to this "intellectual" type of thread, while we wimmins generally is elsewhere, emoting?

 

[bradford_h]

Hi Calumet-
Sounds like a pretty sensible compromise to me.
As a translator I tried as hard as I could to look for author intent. But now doing the commentary I can cut loose and play a bit.
I got pretty tired of the Relativists though, and especially the Deconstructionists' "It means whatever you want it to mean". I think those people ought to move on to divining with chicken entrails.

 

[candid]

Brad, a white dog, you say? Interesting.

Thanks again for sharing this experience with me/us.

Calumet, nice post.

 

[candid]

Brad, for what it's worth:

white dog/black boar

 

[lindsay]

Too much going on in this string - I want to know more about everything.

Calumet, yes, a nice job. Welcome to the boys' club. I don't know why the boys and the girls sort out in this forum, but it often happens as soon as we leave practical applications. There are many notable exceptions - Val and Dharma immediately come to mind, but actually - now that I think of it - there have been many women in the past who liked talking about ideas.

Of course, most of the men are emotionally challenged. Born that way, can't be helped. Maybe when we gained one extra organ, we lost another, the emotive one. But there have also been some pretty passionate dudes posting here too.

I always figure the reason women don't get caught up in these "intellectual" discussions is they have better things to do with their time. The rest of us need a life.

Brad, concerning this commentary of yours, what about Kevin's point above, that we tend to put too much emphasis on the Yi text, and not enough on the structural symbolism of the trigrams, line positions, derived hexagrams, hex sequences, etc., etc.? Are you going to integrate this kind of technical analysis in your expositions? Where do you come down on this whole issue of text vs. symbol, anyway?

 

[martin]

Talking about author intent, the post of Kevin that started this thread (or string, as Lindsay calls it

) doesn't sound intellectual to me.
"Uninform the mind", yesssss!

 

[candid]

If I become an intellectual someone please shoot me. Kevin?s opening post covered several different topics, not just one big one. Kind of a smorgasbord of tasty treats, appealing to a variety of appetites.

 

[kevin]

Thanks Martin Candid - I was not into ruling out any particular approach...

Was trying to draw images of an approach for casting - I use Dobros' approach too... and study from Brads work ammongst others... Tend to keep study and casting as separate activities as my mind interferes too much when casting...

Am trying to write something to post - hope to have it on the thread later...

Am enjoying folks views

--K

 

[lindsay]

So far, everybody seems to be putting the word "intellectual" in quotes. That usually means something like "so-called intellectual" or "intellectual-wannabe" or "these people don't quite have enough wattage." So. by this standard, it looks like Candid will live another day. On the other hand, I know "intellectual" has a more specialized meaning, especially in the EU, but I usually consider anybody who likes to discuss ideas to be an intellectual of sorts. By that informal definition, Candid, you better start saying your prayers.

 

[candid]

But I always say my prayers, Lindsay.

(<- proves I'm not an "intellectual" ->)

Besides, I think I'd have to learn how to spell first.

 

[kevin]

Taking a deep breath and posting

Hilary

You asked how I do conversational readings?

I have been exploring a lot of interesting things? but knowing so little and wanting to use the Yi as a guide? (I am exploring Shamanic things) I began to be stuck with the limitations inherent in single readings? I needed to dialogue? get guidance, refine my ideas find a course through the process which seemed to have so many choices.

I had used conversational reading before and had a very good offline discussion with someone who briefly visited this board in the Summer? we found that we were using the same technique and were getting similar responses guiding our questioning? eg the Yi was using the same ?vocabulary? for both of us... despite the fact we were asking different questions? I will give an example later.

So I would ask? ?OK it is like this then (thinks of a concept)?? - (Cast an answer)
?Like that then (thinks of a concept)?? - (Cast an answer)
?So should I do this (thinks of an action)?? - (Cast an answer)

and so on?

Without knowing it I seemed to have become more intuitive and was asking less questions to discern affirmative answers?

I found that not contemplating a single reading but getting depth through ?conversation? involved two parts:

First (Method) ? not to spend more than a minute on a reading ? often abandoning multiple lines with a few seconds glancing at them? looking at the hexagram name and The first two wings? the appropriate part would just ?light up? or stand out in some way and the rest of that hexagrams complexity would be discarded. Actually sometimes the lines were important. The resulting hexagram nearly always provides the context (but not always) rather than the resultant position.


Second (Process) It enabled me to stay in a deeper (connected) contemplative state with my mind pretty much out of gear? so the connection seemed to grow stronger as my mind was not drowning it out.

Well that was the beginnings of it all? I found what I was looking for.

I am not proposing this as an ?instead of? any other method? just sharing one of the practices I use? and it would not be possible without a certain familiarity with the Yijing? a familiarity which I try to increase through for formal study.

I feel quite vulnerable writing this out for the thread ? never spoken of it before?
--Kevin

 

[kevin]

I posted the above in response to Hilary in particular - but am keen to hear others responses.

Unless you all think I have left the tracks and lost my caboose!

--Kevin

 

[django]

Hi y'all
I have seen several threads where people bemoan the fact, that we in the twentyfirst century are at a tremendous disadvantage.They say all we have to work with are "fragments" and "shards" of the YI, and it must have been so much easier for the ancient Chinese.
Well, I would like to present the view that the Yi
was always presented in such a difficult way to discourage"Young Fools" who bemoaned the fact that the YI was not neatly parcelled up on a plate. In my opinion all there ever was, was Shards! and the extremely difficult task of going down into the "Well" of ones own being
and finding the corresponding shards within ones self, only in this way does the I Ching become sense and meaningful, instead of NON-sense.

It is much easier to avoid such hard, dangerous work and moan about having insufficient material to work with.At least then the "young fools" are insulated from the danger of taking the YI too seriously,
Django.

 

[kevin]

Thank you Django

I seem to explain myself so badly - try re-reading my first post with that thought

-- Kevin

 

[kevin]

Or the thought that it can behave like a Koan with a theme?

The mind is popped out of gear to allow understanding in... something like...

--Kevin

 

[bradford_h]

This is a really ancient debate that goes by the name of Yili v Xiangshu (Meaning and Principle v Image and Number).
I?ve written dozens of pages on it in my intro, history, xiao xiang and dimensions chapters. I don?t want to spoil it for someone who might one day want to read them
Yili folks include Wang Bi, Han Kangbo, Kong Yingda and Cheng Yi. Richard Lynn?s book is great for this side. Xiangshu folks include most of the Han speculators, Feng Shui practitioners and Shao Yong of the Song.
Unfortunately most people find themselves pretty squarely on one side or the other, so like anyone with half of the truth they have to overinflate their chosen side to fill up the remaining space. I try to use both. And I think the authors used both. And I think that the two sides work together very well to inform each other, given lots of patience anyway.
And as to structural dimensions, I try to prioritize them around the likelihood that they were in use when the Zhouyi was written. So to me the Wing & Han dimensions like Correctness, Holding Together and Ruling Lines have a much lower priority than Inverse, Opposite, Zhi Gua and Fan Yao. I disagree strongly with modern scholars who clain the the Trigrams weren?t in there from the beginning. I think there's plenty of evidence that they were. And I find some later Xiangshu developments really useful to the understanding, like Shao Yong?s Primal Arrangement and Zhou Dunyi?s Taijitu.

 

[hilary]

Thanks, Kevin! Looking forward to that example...

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

So I would ask? ?OK it is like this then (thinks of a concept)?? - (Cast an answer)<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>Would the answer say something like 'you're almost there but need to revise your ideas about x'? Or something more like 'it's like this'? Ie would you expect it to be describing you and how close you were to 'getting it', or to be talking about 'it' directly?

 

[martin]

Yes Kevin, you have left the tracks and lost the caboose ...
Congratulations!

 

[martin]

If I'd observed all the rules, I'd never have got anywhere.

Marilyn Monroe

 

[kevin]

 

[tashij]

Is it something like this Kevin?:

Example: have had a long running conversation with the Yi about something. Recently reached a settling point. But then a legitamate unresolved aspect popped in my mind, so I went to the Yi about it. "But I thought blah blah blha blha blah blah" type of thing. Yi said 64 2.4. to 23 ... which i read as "Strip it! Youre dragging your heels on this! (line 2)You have work to do!"(line 4).

Did I really get an answer? I think so. And I have an answer which clarifies my direction, but, really, everything is still completely in the soup, since Im dealing with concepts, (as opposed to should I rent or buy, practical kinds of things) so nothing, in a way, is REALLY resolved.

Is that kind of what you are talking about Kevin?

 

[candid]

You mean we actually have to engage our brain to decipher a reading, AND understand the original symbolism too? No offense, but isn?t that what everyone does? Or tries to do?

I do not understand how anyone can not see the relevance of trigrams, nor how hexagrams could have possibly evolved without them.

 

[kevin]

Tashiij - Yes exactly

Bo - in my speed reading results most often means something like, "Ok - take that idea and strip it down to find the core... then from that try to move forward with the idea." eg the core is good / true but too much flesh has been built upon it."

64.2.4 > 23

Might mean something like... "Context - one of stripping things down - 64 not yet got there - pause and think - then move forward - Strip things down - you will get there."

When I use this method I use breadth to serve instead of depth... many questions instead of one deeply understood.

Sometimes during a series there is a response which stops me in my tracks... Just like any conversation in Vivo - that might be a time to stop talking and to ponder that response in depth.

It is actually the connection which is central. Just like in conversations - they are easier when both folk are focusing and can hear clearly, catching the nuances.

?

--Kevin

 

[tashij]

Well I think I am understanding you better, depth and breadth give meaningful distinctions, and I DO like hearing you think through this. Very interesting. Thank you.

(and funnily enough i did have thoughts along the ones you expressed here about the 64-23)

But just now I am going to go back a reread this thread.

Love reading Django's words about fragments. That gave me incredible inspiration.

 

[tashij]

few more thoughts here...I certainly know those moments of being stopped in my tracks by a response. That's what Dobro is talking about. Love those. I imagine many of the diviners in this forum carry on in depth conversations about non tangible things with the Yi.

What irks me about it, is not the translations, or the difference between the bronze and the plastic age, it is the fact, that with the Yi, that even if I get a connection, it is still a finger pointing at the moon. And, really, what I want, is the moon. Not the finger. Or the image. I want the moon.

And I think it is ok to want that. Yi IS a guide, isnt it?

 

[martin]

I wonder Kevin - because you say that the connection is central - do you have the feeling that you are talking to somebody when you consult the Yi?
I use the Yi rarely nowadays but when I do I know that there is somebody on the other end of the line. And that is different from the way I used the Yi in the past when I saw it more as a natural phenomenon, in the spirit of what Jung called synchronicity.
One difference is that the messages seem to be much clearer now. I often get 'it' immediately and effortlessly, although I don't understand the language of the Yi much better than - say - ten years ago.
The communication seems to be mostly - for want of a better word - telepathic.

You wrote "the appropriate part would just ?light up? or stand out in some way". I usually don't experience it that way (because I often don't look at the text) but it sounds familiar. As if you describe the same kind of 'direct' contact with .. somebody?
I don't necessarily mean the "Sage" who is often mentioned in this forum.
Or my absolutely amazing friend Marilyn for that matter.

 

[martin]

I guess the problem with these fingers, Tashi, is that they - apart from being too short - don't really point at the moon.
The moon does not exist in the space of the mind. Therefore no thought - however deep or true - can point at her.

 

[martin]

But you are not seeking the moon, the moon is seeking you.
And she will find you.