How the Book of Changes Works

[dobro p]

I'm becoming a Balkin fanboy - I really admire his renditions and his commentaries for their clarity and how they lend themselves to my own ruminations on the material. However, in Section Three of the Introduction, he says this: "...anyone who uses the oracle over a period of time must recognize that the generation of hexagrams is a purely random event. But this does not undermine the questioner's ability to gain insights from interacting with the book."

It's the first part of that statement I don't agree with - my experience is that what the Yi gives you is anything but 'purely random'. Instead, it's often scarily appropriate to the situation being enquired about. So, maybe Balkin and I don't have the same idea about what 'random' means, or maybe we just disagree. What's your take? Random?

 

[surnevs]

#1, "........ What's your take? Random?"
Hi dobro p, I haven't read this book but the take on causality/randomness concerning this back around eight years ago in the pdf I wrote, still today I think that the viewpoint in this has something worthy...

 

[my_key]

I'm becoming a Balkin fanboy - I really admire his renditions and his commentaries for their clarity and how they lend themselves to my own ruminations on the material. However, in Section Three of the Introduction, he says this: "...anyone who uses the oracle over a period of time must recognize that the generation of hexagrams is a purely random event. But this does not undermine the questioner's ability to gain insights from interacting with the book."

It's the first part of that statement I don't agree with - my experience is that what the Yi gives you is anything but 'purely random'. Instead, it's often scarily appropriate to the situation being enquired about. So, maybe Balkin and I don't have the same idea about what 'random' means, or maybe we just disagree. What's your take? Random?

I'm falling into the Balkin Camp.

It can be useful to break down the consultation into 3 chunks - creating a randomised event, decoding the randomness into an archetypal pattern and interpreting the archetypal pattern.

Stage 1:The generation of the randomised event obeys the laws of this realm being enough of a freewheeling adventure to truly call the outcome random.

Stage two: the random outcome is decoded through reference to a unique Enigma Machine ( Book of Changes).

Stage 3: the most elaborate meaning making machine that ever existed contemplates words, imagery, symbols and so much more to create a personal picture of great beauty with is laced with meaningful connections that lead to an insightful understanding.

Where things can go adrift is in Stage 3 when it is possible to adopt what another persons meaning is as our own. An individuals ability to link 2 to 3 will vary in a meaningful way for them is perhaps the greatest gift Yi can offer.

On Balkin as a whole, I have mixed feelings. Balkin's translation and work is so clear and definitive for him, that I have found it to be limiting. At times, and I have allowed it (probably through laziness) to stunt the trust I hold in my own ability to bring forth my own meaning. With eagle-eyed hindsight taking it a step further would have produced for me an even clearer insightful truth.

 

[dobro p]

#1, "........ What's your take? Random?"
Hi dobro p, I haven't read this book but the take on causality/randomness concerning this back around eight years ago in the pdf I wrote, still today I think that the viewpoint in this has something worthy...

If I understand that first paragraph in your pdf correctly, you view the coin toss as a function of your being - unique. Is that right?

 

[Benthos]

I'm becoming a Balkin fanboy - I really admire his renditions and his commentaries for their clarity and how they lend themselves to my own ruminations on the material. However, in Section Three of the Introduction, he says this: "...anyone who uses the oracle over a period of time must recognize that the generation of hexagrams is a purely random event. But this does not undermine the questioner's ability to gain insights from interacting with the book."

Maybe what he meant is that there is no possibility to predict the next result I Ching will put out. No harm. The idea of having a group of possibilities generated by two sets of equals 64 hexagrams relating to each other with seix line each and a 7th unchanging state is inmense.

But this would bring up a new question. Are several linear readings of questionings related to each other, really connected through the I Ching? You know, when you ask three questions related to each other in a row. I assumed something magical happened and the I Ching somehow knew. Now I am questioning myself.

It's the first part of that statement I don't agree with - my experience is that what the Yi gives you is anything but 'purely random'. Instead, it's often scarily appropriate to the situation being enquired about. So, maybe Balkin and I don't have the same idea about what 'random' means, or maybe we just disagree. What's your take? Random?

When the I Ching speaks to me, I feel the same. It's often scarily appropriate to the situation being enquired about, like you said, many times very literaly too. So if its valid for one question, would it be valid for three questions in a row about the same topic? For xample:

Q1 Is it good for me to do X?
Q2 Is it bad for me to do X?
Q3 Advise me on what to do?

Its valid thinking here, sound questions. I am sure many have done it that way. We think IC will read our mind, it will probably also related the questions to give valid answers (A1,A2,A3).

But will the I Ching relate them? Could Answer2 (A2) has become more criptic of A1? Is A3 complete rubbish afterwards, beyond recognition from A1?

Historical Reminder: Only kings could divine (The Mandate of Heaven, Marshall). To divine again would have been considered a weak mind, three times a complete unexperienced problem maker.

In hexagram 4 the I Ching explicitly advises not to ask three times about the same issue, this should also be considered as meaningful. Here are clear stated rules.

Legge´s translation, an excerpt

I do not (go and) seek the youthful and inexperienced, but he comes and seeks me.

Is I Ching saying? "You are coming to me. You are having a problem. "

When he shows (the sincerity that marks) the first recourse to divination, I instruct him.

If you honestly want to learn and be guide (you will be instructed), so be it, it has value for divination.

If he apply a second and third time, that is troublesome; and I do not instruct the troublesome.

No instruction available for the those cannot see the meaning of the first one, diving is not valuable and who create trouble (drama, problems, injustice, etc) will get 0 benefit of it.

Things I question myself like probably many here. Thank you

 

[dobro p]

I'm falling into the Balkin Camp.

It's fine with me if it turns out to be that way. But from my present vantage point, it seems about as random as dreams to me. (I'm into depth psychology and view dreams as messages from the unconscious to the conscious ego - tailor-made, appropriate to what you need to know, completely non-random.)

Stage 3: the most elaborate meaning making machine that ever existed contemplates words, imagery, symbols and so much more...

I love - no, adore - the way the Yi attracts wisdom also. I love the way the Image links the meaning of the hexagram to what might be called moral fiber and individual development (the Image always seems to be saying something like 'Okay, you enquired into this situation and you got your Judgement for how best to navigate it, but just before you press on with navigating that situation, spare a thought for the inner dimension, to your personal bearing and development. After all, situations come and situations go, but who are you and how are you shaping yourself is what you really want to know.' I love how it attracts - magnetizes might be a better word - powerful, insightful wise minds to add their commentaries to the ongoing enterprise. That's love.

 

[surnevs]

dobro p (#4), In one end I can take the coins and lay them as I wish, Conscious. On the other end, when tossing them, it's my motoric (supposed to be random) that decides the outcome - and here I ask: by doing so, will a connection to my unconsciousness - where all the evolutional information lay stored from the earliest time - be opened? And here it's a bit tricky, and I'm not the one to answer that, just wonder: has this information been systematized in these 64 patterns ie the hexagrams and has the choice of which of these 64 hexagrams to be pointed out in a consultation been made attainable via the code 6,7,8 and 9?
Tricky, partly because it as well could have been the patterns in the tortoise (?) cracks for example being read in a pictorial way, directly as seen by those diviners in these early days (?) that gave the answer and partly because it likewise could have been a numerical system given far back from an unknown authority (the sages) in the way the stalks of yarrow had to have been manipulated to give the mentioned code; and that's not for me to declare anything on how or when or by whom, but just to point out that this "doorway" to a higher knowledge within us - a higher knowledge that out of a circular repeating evolution - which have the answers to our questions is made attainable?
But I don't think, when thinking about it, I can explain it better now than I did back then.

 

[my_key]

It's fine with me if it turns out to be that way. But from my present vantage point, it seems about as random as dreams to me. (I'm into depth psychology and view dreams as messages from the unconscious to the conscious ego - tailor-made, appropriate to what you need to know, completely non-random.)

Not looking to persuade you one way or another. Our unconscious percolates many a tune or image into the conscious. As with I Ching dreams, that are randomly produced, the dreams of the unconscious still need interpretation.

I love - no, adore - the way the Yi attracts wisdom also. I love the way the Image links the meaning of the hexagram to what might be called moral fiber and individual development (the Image always seems to be saying something like 'Okay, you enquired into this situation and you got your Judgement for how best to navigate it, but just before you press on with navigating that situation, spare a thought for the inner dimension, to your personal bearing and development. After all, situations come and situations go, but who are you and how are you shaping yourself is what you really want to know.' I love how it attracts - magnetizes might be a better word - powerful, insightful wise minds to add their commentaries to the ongoing enterprise. That's love.

Interesting that you see Yi as attracting wisdom. Another way would be to see the wisdom as inherent in the Yi and that it is the openness of the querent that actually does the attracting of the wisdom. Consider, someone who has not studied the Book of Changes. All the joining of dots and connectivity you speak of is still there in the pages as an inherent wisdom and yet it remains unreachable to them. Who is it then that attracts the wisdom? The informed querent or the Book or something else?

 

[dobro p]

I think people can be wise, but a book is just paper and ink until it's read. It think wise people made the I Ching and expressed their wisdom in it. I think the wisdom that wise people put into the Yi exerts a powerful draw on some minds, and it's interesting to me that some of those minds are also wise.

 

[dobro p]

In hexagram 4 the I Ching explicitly advises not to ask three times about the same issue, this should also be considered as meaningful. Here are clear stated rules.

Legge´s translation, an excerpt

I do not (go and) seek the youthful and inexperienced, but he comes and seeks me.

Is I Ching saying? "You are coming to me. You are having a problem. "

When he shows (the sincerity that marks) the first recourse to divination, I instruct him.

If you honestly want to learn and be guide (you will be instructed), so be it, it has value for divination.

If he apply a second and third time, that is troublesome; and I do not instruct the troublesome.

No instruction available for the those cannot see the meaning of the first one, diving is not valuable and who create trouble (drama, problems, injustice, etc) will get 0 benefit of it.

Exactly. But here's the thing. A person who thinks the hexagram you get is random will say 'The reason for that Hexagram 4 stuff is because each toss is random.' Whereas, a person who thinks that when you do a consultation, you're addressing your question to a living intelligence, mediated by the text of the I Ching (that's my take), and they will think the Hexagram 4 stuff amounts to a living intelligence which is to be taken seriously and not treated like you would a Google search.

In other words, both views of how the I Ching works are mutually exclusive, yes, but they're both respectable and have their own internal validity. (And the oracle works equally well for both types of person!)

Basically, I think the I Ching is a sophisticated, nuanced collection of symbols that can reflect the human mind well enough to offer the possibility of communication between the unconscious mind and the conscious ego. As I said above to my_key, I think the I Ching is like a dream (communication from unconscious to conscious), except for the fact that the ego initiates the communication and that you're awake when it happens.