...life can be translucent

Menu

Imagery in the structure

svenrus

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
36
In this video (No.02) I think Zeng Shiqiang explains the pictorial view of the eight trigams excelently. Note: activate english subtitles
Source:
 
Last edited:

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
In ... this video ... I think Zeng Shiqiang explains the pictorial view of the eight trigams excelently. Note: activate english subtitles ....
Very interesting and thanks for sharing. I'll have to ponder what he says, though I have to say, some of it comes across like, 'I'm saying this, so it must be true ...' or 'how can this ancient wisdow not be otherwise ...' or that's how it sometimes feels to me.

D.
 

svenrus

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
36
Well, I think that's what professors in the Western world do too, when to explaining the laws of physics for example...… We do not draw their teachings in doubt maybe because what they says is in accord with what we take for granted ?
 

svenrus

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
36
I've to think about that (lovely) comment and basic English grammarlesson
 

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
And perhaps what you're saying is that we don't as often call into question those whom we agree with, or who seem to support and prop up our own world view (regardless of what culture they come from)? To which I'd answer, most definitely, thats true! But sometimes I do entertain these 'other' ideas, though I can still and should still question them, right?

D.
 

svenrus

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
36
I wouldn't start a discussion with a christian priest as whether Jesus the Christ walked on water or not and I wouldn't start a discussion with a professor in physics whether the surface tension of water could support the weight of a man or not. I think we should be critical in whatever teaching we are tought just as the astronomer Niclavs Copernicus did when asking to the view of the world represented by Clavdius Ptolemy (Sorry if my grammar are wrong)

[Out of context: ]
 
Last edited:

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
I wouldn't start a discussion with a christian priest as whether Jesus the Christ walked on water or not ...
Funny, once I did start a conversation with a Christian monk by asking if he thought that believing in god was necessary to being spiritual? His response: since god is infinite, and since we can't really know something that's infinite, then what we know (or think we know) about god is incomplete, and that therefore it really doesn't matter if you believe in god or not - since what you believe is not really god anyway (or something to that effect).

It was not an answer I would have ever expected. D.
 

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
I was pondering another turtle possibility and thought:

solid line - head
broken line - two front feet
solid line - body
solide line - body
broken line - back feet
solid line - tail or butt ....​

Which - like the do-re-me song - brings us back to 30, Li!

And since this image could describe anything with a head, front and back legs (and perhaps even fins or feathers?), and a tail and/or rump, is the 'message' here that Li, light, and clarity comes to us from a whole host of creatures, even those - like angels and devas - whom we might not see?

So here we have the Di Wu Gui (many creatures turtle) - made up of the myriad beings between heaven and earth.
 
Last edited:

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
20,435
Reaction score
469
Watching a film recently there were scenes filmed in the same room but 30 years apart. I thought of the room as 2, the space and the people and events that moved through as hexagram 1, time.

Hexagram 2 is space and hexagram 1 is time. To allow anything to unfold as a manifestation we need space and time for it to unfold, for it to happen in. I went to school over 40 years ago and I'm here now sitting at the computer and I will be in my car soon but I cannot be or have existence anywhere without the space and time to exist in.

Space and time are there as constructs to help us get a grip on where we are but they can both fold down into nothing at all. The space where I sit exists through time, it hasn't changed since earth began, I mean the actual space where I sit, not the things in it right now. Time seeming to us as a linear process of events occurring within that space has no place to happen other than that space.


I'm sure someone else said it far better but that is my thought for the day
 

radiofreewill

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
453
Reaction score
29
And, to riff on Trojina's comment, if I might, to show that Hexagram 1 and Hexagram 2 ~ although mutual opposites ~ are also united in Oneness:

Space is the Substance of Time,​
and Time is the Activity of Space.​

So, where there is Time; there, also, is Space,
and vice-versa, as well.

With Time and Space as the frame ~ representing three dimensions in a dynamic flux called *Change* ~ then there can be Existence as a construct within it.

Just something to stir into your coffee this morning...
 

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
martyjones said:
Hexagram 1: It takes time to climb the ladder of space. Hexagram 2: It takes times for what ever has to fall through the tube of space.

.... Hexagram 1 and Hexagram 2 look like they represent the Heaven and the Earth.
I have heard people talk about Hex. 1 looking like a ladder, but I've not heard of Hex. 2 looking like a tube. Seems reasonable however.

I'm interested as well in how we might define 'earth' and in particular 'heaven' - with all of it's religious associations. There are other names or titles for 1 and 2 as well: Hex. 1 is often called Creativity, or The Creative, and Hex. 2 is Accepting or Acceptance. Interesting then to think of how these might fit into our 'Chutes and Ladders' imagery.

I was just reading some other handles/names/titles for 1 and 2 that I'd like to explore further at some point:

Hex. 1 as a banner in the center of an encampment, so a focal point, so it might be 'Focus' or 'To Focus' or 'To Be Focused.' And Hex. 2 as 'Ploughed Earth' which brings to mind not just Earth as Gaia or Mother Earth, but also a place of human habitation, where we make our homes and cultivate the soil, or otherwise interact with our environment.

I like these two latter names/titles, in part because Focus/Ploughed Earth do not seem like 'opposites' to me, at least in the sense that people often use yin/yang. And they don't even seem like a paired complement. And this leads me to explore the idea that they were never meant to represent yin/yang - at least as we know it.

But that's all speculation on our parts I suspect, but still interesting to consider: what exactly is being chuted (or sent) down or laddered (or sent) up here?

Best, d.
 
Last edited:

moss elk

visitor
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
2,387
Reaction score
145
I'm interested as well in how we might define 'earth' and in particular 'heaven' - with all of it's religious associations.
Literally to start.
The ground, and the sky.

Then extrapolate the meanings from there.
(the sky (clouds & constelations) never stops moving, it is untiring in perseverance. the ground supports all things, as a helper, higher and lower things...etc)
 
Last edited:
H

hmesker

Guest
I have heard people talk about Hex. 1 looking like a ladder, but I've not heard of Hex. 2 looking like a tube. Seems reasonable however.
This reminds me of the jade bi 璧 discs and cong 琮 vessels that are found in graves from the Neolithic and later periods.

Later writings speak of the cong as symbolizing the earth, while the bi represents the heavens. The square represents the earth and a circle represents the heavens.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cong_(vessel) ; see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi_(jade) )
A cong, which is actually a tube (see description on Wikipedia page):

琮-Vase_in_Shape_of_Neolithic_Jade_Cong_MET_DP148285a.jpg
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
1,275
Reaction score
108
Literally to start.
The ground, and the sky.

Then extrapolate the meanings from there.
(the sky (clouds & constelations) never stops moving, it is untiring in perseverance. the ground supports all things, as a helper, higher and lower things...etc)
There is also the aspect of inspiration (Hex 1) and realisation (Hex 2) to consider.
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
1,275
Reaction score
108
How would you consider that inspiration and realisation/exhalation would fit into the 4 levels of internal/inner, external/outer ways of describeing varying states of Heaven and Earth.
I've never really considered it as i've not come across this 4 states of heaven and earth concept before. It would be great to hear what you think about how they would fit?
 
Last edited:

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
1,275
Reaction score
108
That's interesting. Thanks.
As for Shendu - wasn't he a villain on a Jackie Chan cartoon?;)
 

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
The title of the thread is 'Imagery in the structure' which is what many of us have been looking at. As to if it's real or not: I never thought that was the intent or goal here - but instead to simply explore imagery and imagination. And if any of us want to explore different symbolism, or find different imagery (such as one person seeing a chute in hex.2), or if any of us find meaning or learn something in doing this, that's just gravy as far as I'm concerned.
 
Last edited:

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
itsfreddie said:
Images that are not real, just imagination. I believe that is what is called an hullucination .... Being just a personal belief, different for each person, in their own imagination, so no image in any structure that is real in any way.
Yep, that's about it - imagery, imagination, humor, exploring, even hullucination ... and the more and more varied, the better .... that is all perfect and perfectly fine by me.
 
H

hmesker

Guest
Wo
Yi as an hallucination - that works for me! Thanks for pointing that out.
Works great for many people who are in need of images:

 

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
Works great for many people who are in need of images:
Thanks Harmen, I'll check out these links.

This brings to mind something I just read in The Nature of the I Ching by Charles Ponce where he talks about sleep deprivation studies where they found if people got enough sleep, but that if it didn't include dreams, they exhibited symptoms of psychosis; in other words, that the imagery of dreams - and perhaps also the imagery in the Yi or even hallucinations - serve a vital function and helps keep us sane.

Which reminds me again of the importance of the Yi's imagery, and the fact that imagery has to be personal: I don't dream another's dream (and if I did, it would do me no good), just like I don't conjure up or imagine another person's imagery.

(As to Ponce's book, I am just barely into reading it, so I can't draw any conclusions about it yet.)

Best, D.
 

svenrus

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
36
Thanks Harmen, I'll check out these links.

This brings to mind something I just read in The Nature of the I Ching by Charles Ponce where he talks about sleep deprivation studies where they found if people got enough sleep, but that if it didn't include dreams, they exhibited symptoms of psychosis; in other words, that the imagery of dreams - and perhaps also the imagery in the Yi or even hallucinations - serve a vital function and helps keep us sane.

Which reminds me again of the importance of the Yi's imagery, and the fact that imagery has to be personal: I don't dream another's dream (and if I did, it would do me no good), just like I don't conjure up or imagine another person's imagery.

(As to Ponce's book, I am just barely into reading it, so I can't draw any conclusions about it yet.)

Best, D.

Amazon still got it: LINK
 

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
.... just stumpled over today, who's newest book strikes the theme of this text:
https://www.academia.edu/24579224/_True_eye_of_the_Tiger_?email_work_card=view-paper
Thanks Svenrus, I downloaded the book and looked at it briefly.

Based on my very quick look-see, It seems to be a bit different than what we were talking about here, in that this thread was often being playful and stretching our thinking - but we did not often mean that Hex. X is actuallly a large, vulerable turtle (to use one exaample); whereas, the book pretty much takes his various images and seems to say, 'here is what these hexagrams are about'.

But it does, as you say, strike at some of the same themes of this thread.

Also, there are a few places where the author says things like 'isn't it obvious that this is what it means ... ' which was as a bit of a turn-off for me. But then again, it could have something to do with the translation.

Also, he only lists three books as his references: Wilhelm, Legge, and Kerson and Rosemary Huang. That struck me as odd, but then again I don't know if he's claiming the book to be anything other than his own take on things, and of course he's free to use however many and whatever references he wants to.

But again, thanks. D.
 
Last edited:

hilary

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
14,598
Reaction score
376
Sakis Totlis kindly gave his book to Change Circle many years ago, so it can also be found in the archives there. It's alongside Tom (pocossin's) work doing exactly the same thing: looking at hexagrams and insisting 'this is a picture of X, so this hexagram is about X'. Most of the pictures they see are different. If hexagrams were ever pictures, I think the original idea may have been more like what we see in the Shuogua with trigrams, where gen is doorways but also fingers.
 

svenrus

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
36
"...….. looking at hexagrams and insisting 'this is a picture of X, so this hexagram is about X'. Most of the pictures they see are different……..."

Just as with clouds on the sky: A: "I see a dog" - B: "No, it's rather a....." and so on.
On the extreme: in the remote past some people were sitting around the camp fire having eaten. The bones were spread here and there. Beside wood they have by accident also used plants with hallucinogenic effects and saw in the cracks on the bones all kinds of pictures…. This could have happened but possibly it was not how the signs on the sky and the earth came to Fuxi. Anyway: Fuxi is said to have observed (looked at) contrary to thought about (observing/thinking) these Signs. Somehow the trigrams are founded on images rather than abstract thoughts. And in this way the trigrams and their combinations could be seen in a pictorial way.
 

Freedda

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,070
Reaction score
321
..... Somehow the trigrams are founded on images rather than abstract thoughts.
No disagreement from me, only that I don't at all know where the 'boundaries' are between images and abstract thought. I just can't imagine nor think where those would be - or if they even exist!

Best, D.
 

svenrus

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
1,183
Reaction score
36
I don't know these boundaries either. But there is a difference thou in our thoughts and what we see. What we hear and what we think we can remember. What we see we can't remember in the same way; I have experienced again and again this phenomena that when I search for something in the nature, a certain kind of mushrooms to example, I can walk around for a long time not finding anyone, yet I know in my mind what I'm searching for... Then I see one mushroom and suddenly one more appear and one more and, and plenty. Our sight doesn't have memory in the same way as have our thoughts, or rather: it's more briefly...
This is kind of a difference between what we observe and what we conclude out of the observation.
The conclusion we can remember but what we observe we only remember in the conclusion; not in the sight itself.
The trigrams I think are signs lead out of observations, like our first attempts in writing were pictorial.
Freeda, still: to draw boundaries between observations and conclusions or thoughts concerning these observations I can't either. But I think there is a difference between symbolic drawings like the trigrams and the attributes attached to these…
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top