Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
I use it since several years, though differently from Karcher. No 'manifestation' or 'inspirator', just a way to understand a line and a hexagram better. The lines make a kind of pattern of a square.
Justin Farrell said:I wanted to ask how other people have found this technique - did you find that it added an extra dimension to your readings? Or if you haven't used this technique before how does it sound to you? It took me a long time to get my head round it, but as I persevered, I did get the sense that I was starting to understand the I Ching at a deeper level.
Who is your question for, Brad? Peter or Justin? You mean 41.5<>42.2 as Qian Yao?
I suppose it's for whoever supports Karcher's assertion that this is a useful algorithm. I haven't followed his recent work. I don't know the term Qian Yao, only Qian Gua as Inverse Hexagram pairs, but I spoze that would be how you might say it.
You might also wish to explore Sequential or Transitional hexagrams - if say, you receive Hex 3,2,5 > 19 you would extend your interpretation by modulating to the Zhi Gua, in accordance with the first changing line, from hex 3 to hex 60. You would then consider your next moving line, 5th yang, within the context of Hex 60 (ie. 60,5)
These various methods of adding to the overall picture of a reading all work in the same way, that is, by correlation. They reveal diverse aspects of the one core convergent meaning at the centre of the reading with which they share a unifying, synchronistic interconnectedness.
The only truly striking one I've noticed is 41.5 <> 42.2.
Are these said to be only between odd>even pairs (as in 63>64, which are structurally significant as inverses and opposite), or is a connection also asserted between even>odd pairs (as in 62>63), which are normally not structurally related?
Justin Farrell said:At the moment this doesn't make sense to me, but I realise that sometimes these things can take time to understand. Until this happens I find it best practice to keep an open mind.
The only truly striking one I've noticed is 41.5 <> 42.2.
Are these said to be only between odd>even pairs (as in 63>64, which are structurally significant as inverses and opposite), or is a connection also asserted between even>odd pairs (as in 62>63), which are normally not structurally related?
Apart from the occasional use of the Karcher-Ritsema translation with concordance as a useful reference text, I usually give Karcher a very wide berth.
One of the most clear ones was, for me, this "mirror":...In terms of the observation you made about a lack of striking examples of interconnections, what I have found is that although the texts of two related lines might not correspond overtly, this seems to change once we apply them to the background situation of a reading. Something seems to come out of the mix between the two lines and the situation that makes a lot of sense. Again this is something that I am just starting to explore, but so far the results have been quite encouraging.
Justin
I Ching Readings Journal (Software)
If we consider the Sequential Hexagram, following 3,2 we now have 60,5:
However, if a particular technique simply makes no sense whatsoever then far be it for me to continue to advocate its use.
Justin,
Curious, are you trying to integrate line relationships into a piece of software?
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).