...life can be translucent

Menu

Jungian parallel's in the I Ching

django

visitor
Joined
Mar 25, 1971
Messages
44
Reaction score
1
Hi all
In re-reading Jung's "answer to Job" I was struck
by the parallel of the 35th and 36th hexagram's and and the passages from the above book,especially by the treatment of Job by Yahweh
Yahweh's deep fear of Job's expanding consciousness.
I see the same archetypes at work in the 35th and 36th hexagrams[ Wilhelm]....The 35th The Hexagram represents the Sun rising over the earth. It is therefore the symbol of rapid, easy progress which at the same time means ever widening expansion and clarity.
This widening of consciousness seems to constellate the the next Hexagram the 36th.
In the judgment of "Ming I".....One must not unresistingly let himself be swept along by unfavourable circumstances, nor permit his steadfastness to be shaken. He can avoid this by maintaining his inner light, while remaining outwardly yielding and tractable.
"In some situations indeed a man must hide his light In "Answer to Job".....Yahwehs eyes"run to and fro through the whole earth, it would be better for Job not to wax too conscious of his slight moral superiority over the the more unconscious God. Better to keep it dark for Yahweh is no friend of critical thought.That is why the creator needs conscious man, even though from sheer unconsciousness he would like to prevent him [Job] from becoming conscious

The Sequence of the 36th Hexagram states.... Expansion will certainly encounter resistance and injury..... Why should expansion experience resistance and injury and by whom... Are we subject to the the whims of a Yahweh type of entity through the medium of the I Ching?
If I could finish with another quote from Jung's Answer to Job....Could a suspicion have grown up in God, that man possesses an infinitely small yet more concentrated light than he.
 

cal val

visitor
Joined
Apr 30, 1971
Messages
1,507
Reaction score
13
Django...

Since you have the book handy, would you mind too terribly transcribing the passages in the Torah (Old Testament) that Jung cited as indications of Yahweh's fear of Job?

My Torah is packed away, and this post is certainly thought provoking. Thank you.

Love,

Val
 

django

visitor
Joined
Mar 25, 1971
Messages
44
Reaction score
1
Hi Val
Thanks for your question, I must admit I find it
strange that there appears to be little or no interest in exploring the darker/deeper side of the I Ching from others on the board.

Leaving ones psychic comfort zone,is, I admit quite frightening, but if one is intent on exploring the strange, strange world of the I Ching to any depth at all then "plumbing" the depths is inevitable.
Of course clinging to meaningless lightweight translations is one way of avoiding The Way

Val, If you can obtain a copy of Jung's Answer To Job I really think you would find it a most enlightening read .I quoted the paragraphs out of context, but the whole book is in that vein, I find it mind blowing, But then, what else would we expect from the genius, that was Jung.
Django.
 

cal val

visitor
Joined
Apr 30, 1971
Messages
1,507
Reaction score
13
Hi Django...

Took your advice and ordered the book. Found a "like new" used copy at amazon.com for five bucks US. Until I read it, of course, I have nothing to offer. I just find the story of Job fascinating and would like to read any learned explorations on it...and discuss it with like minds.

In the meantime, I found these articles on the net you might find interesting...

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/gthursby/fonda/jung04.html

http://eliotchapel.org/sermonDocs/job.htm

Love,

Val
 

django

visitor
Joined
Mar 25, 1971
Messages
44
Reaction score
1
Hi Val
Thank you for those two great sites, very thought provoking!. in the first site it states Job appeals to God to protect him from God. Is it stretching a long bow to point out the same situation in [Wilhelm]the 5th line in the sixth Hexagram [ Conflict] This refers to an arbiter in a conflict who is powerful and just and strong enough to lend weight to the right side and so on. In the same Hexagram 2nd line
In a struggle with an enemy of superior strength, retreat is no disgrace and so on.And how about the 36th Hexagram First he held a position through which he might have been able to enlighten all the people of the realm. Instead, however, he made it his business to injure men.

As Jung quotes... Could a suspicion have grown up in God, that man possesses an infinitely small yet more concentrated light than he, Yahweh possesses??? A jealousy of that kind might explain his behaviour Which to me explains the proximity of the 35th and 36th Hexagram, again I repeat the sequence of the 36th Hexagram Expansion [of consciousness] will certainly encounter resistance and injury What God gives, he tries to wrest away again.
This Archetypal situation is illustrated in many myths and legends Prometheous for instance after stealing fire[consciousness] is chained to a rock and has his liver constantly torn from his body as a punishment from the Gods.

I can see why many people "talk" about enlightenment but they dont walk the talk,and who can blame them? certainly not I.

The "Job experience" is, but one of the many,many Archetypal scenarios that can be projected onto this pair of Hexagrams. As for the 44th hexagram,
well how many years have you got?
Django.
 

cal val

visitor
Joined
Apr 30, 1971
Messages
1,507
Reaction score
13
Django...

For the benefit of your insights into Hex 44...I'll make the time. Please, I'd love to hear your thoughts. As fate would have it, I have been contemplating 44 a lot lately. I want to understand it better.

I have some thoughts of my own about the relationship between Job and God because I've uttered under my breath more than once..."What do I look like to you anyway??? Job???" And I have since discovered that my trials have been for a reason. But I'm going to hold onto my thoughts and keep my mind open until I've read Jung's "Answer to Job."

Consciousness...hmmmm...have you noticed the plethora of ways it's been "defined" on this forum alone?

Love,

Val
 
C

candid

Guest
Val,

I think 44 is meant to be a mystery. Or at least part of it is. Similar quality as in 54; also a mystery.

I think its a time when passionate energy arises and seeks outlets. Its something you can't grasp logically, but you know it when you've got it, but.. you never *quite* grasp it.

Trigrams are Sun under Chien. Its as an eldest daughter contesting her father. There's that mix of power and emotions.

Job is also my favorite. Amazing the life lessons packed into that little book.

C
 
C

candid

Guest
Django,

35 and 36, as you described it from Jung, is an inspiring interpretation.

As to the last point from your original post, my mind can not conceive of a jealous God.

C
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,125
Reaction score
139
The name of 44, gou, is a picture of a woman giving birth to a child.
I think it is a picture of creativity, which is the female power.
It does not mean men are not creative, on the contrary, they have a female inside.
LiSe
 
C

candid

Guest
LiSe - Can it not also be a picture of rebirth resulting from passionate drives?

C
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,125
Reaction score
139
hex44.gif

It is a woamn (in the center) and a newborn baby (at right). Later at left another woman was added.
No idea about the passions.
LiSe
 

django

visitor
Joined
Mar 25, 1971
Messages
44
Reaction score
1
Candid...."You state that you cannot conceive a Jealous God". Does that not put limits on God? ie making him/her incomplete, you know, something missing? Where have you put the dark side of God?
Even Jesus's prayer does not completely absolve this dark side . Hence the words Lead us not into temptation. Have you never experienced the dark side of God in the 36th Hexagram.?But thank you for your kind words.

Val asked about some of the deeper interpretations of the 44th Hexagram. As Steve states in the Mandate of Heaven That Wilhelm was being coy[ paraphrased]regarding the meaning of Coming to meetthat it was actually refering to sexual intercourse, which Wilhelm evaded somewhat merely hinting in that direction.

Actually I have always experienced Animosity when discussing this Hexagram with female students because the main direction would appear to be anti-sexual. Which some women seem to "take on board" all the projections from this Hexagram as a "attack" on them.

Heylise Hits the nail on the head when she stated Man has a inner female, his soul, which has the capacity for very earthy desires and passions, but also higher spiritual aspirations.and this is where the Hexagram is directed. In page 609 [Wilhelm] it states... Marriage is an institution that is meant to endure, But if a girl associates with five men, her nature is not pure and one cannot live with her permanently. Therefore one should not marry her

The parallel in the Bible is where Jesus meets the woman of Samaria at the well[paraphrasing] after she draws him a drink Jesus tells her she has had Five husbands but to go and sin no more
[ or words to that effect]
in my opinion it is too much of a synchonicity
that each women has had five sexual partners
I assume this means the five stimulated senses ie to much directed to earthly delights.
Django.
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
17,055
Reaction score
2,318
Django,

There are new perspectives on this hexagram to be had... I first encountered them in a brilliant article in the Oracle journal by Margaret Pearson. She suggests (on ample good evidence) reading the Judgement as

"The king's bride is great. Do not take such a woman by force."

This creates a rather different picture from the horrors conjured up by Wilhelm.

The hexagram is a long, long way from being anti-woman. But it describes the arrival of a strong woman, which has come to represent the arrival of a disruptive force that cannot be handled in the usual ways. How commentators react to this prospect says more about them than about the hexagram, I think.
 
C

candid

Guest
Django,

Its an interesting question you raise. No, I've never experienced the dark side of God. I have only experienced my own darkness when I'm too caught up in my self. Darkness is anti-light, and therefore anti-God. Jealousy is not of light, but darkness. Hence I can not conceive of a jealous God. Besides, how can God be jealous of his own self. God is one.

C
 

django

visitor
Joined
Mar 25, 1971
Messages
44
Reaction score
1
Hilary... Oh my, you do have a problem with Wilhelm dont you?. bringing up other statements by other translators does nothing to diminish my findings. I did not refer to the hexagram as being anti woman but forgive me if I am wrong, was that what you were refering to?.

I feel that the Hexagram is pointing to one of the possible "psychic conditions" of a male querant
dont you find the fact, that a woman with \i {five} sexual partners in both the Bible and the I Ching is to say the least a trifle strange!

But as I said it is not in the least taking anything from my original statement.
Hilary..I think you will just have to accept that there are some people who find the Wilhelm edition a far more meaningful medium for exploring "the Way" than some of the obtuse statements you have offered .

Candid... if you have not experienced the dark side of God via the 36th Hexagram then I am pleased for you [or am I sorry]
Django.
 
C

candid

Guest
Django,

Can you be a little less specific?

Don't be pleased or sorry for me. I've not said that I haven't experienced 36. I've had to hide my light, just as we all have. But I don't project my ignorance as being God. Its just my ignorance of God.

You brought up Job. Job said, "that which I've feared most has come upon me." It wasn't God that brought destruction upon Job's family. It was Job's own fear, his own darkness.

That which is not, is not God. Why is that so difficult?

C
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
17,055
Reaction score
2,318
Problem with Wilhelm? Not overall. Problem with Wilhelm's view of a strong woman in #44, absolutely. (Likewise with his gloss on/ version of 4,2 or, pricelessly, 37,2, for instance.) But Wilhelm, like the Neo-Confucian tradition he represented, was a product of his time. What else can any of us be?

Of course I accept the value of his translation: I'd be spectacularly daft not to. This doesn't mean that I have to confuse him with the Yi itself. For instance, the idea that 44 is about a woman with 5 sexual partners comes from one particular take on the tradition of line analysis - part of the tradition, but not the whole picture. Wilhelm knew his Bible; I imagine that in putting this interpretation forward, he would have been deliberately bringing out the parallel with the Samarian woman.

Wilhelm doesn't seem to have imagined the existence of a female querent: something of a self-fulfilling prophecy, as his version has persuaded many women that this was an oracle for men only. But here we are... and this raises interesting questions. Do you think that hexagrams such as 44, or 31, should be read substantially differently for male and female enquirers?
 
C

candid

Guest
Django,

To answer your earlier question: Does that not put limits on God? Yes, it says that God can only be what is true and real. God can not be what is false and unreal. That's the figurative job of Satan in the Book of Job, who represents our own illusions, fears, suspicions and jealousies, and Jung's Shadow. Satan is called, The Father of Lies, and this is certainly true. There is no truth found in him. How then can this be an attribute of God? Is God a liar too?

Wilhelm is still mostly what I use to divine. But I no longer see his extremes as literal, just as I don't view women or Yin as an evil. If Wilhelm is to be taken literally, all our heads would be locked in stocks. Women would be kept safely in dungeons and used solely to procreate. After all, there is no "Superior Woman."

Gimme a break. This is interpreted language from Wilhelm's own Judeo-Christian-Confucian bias. Or else the ancient Sages were all afraid of women. God, that's a scary thought!

C
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,125
Reaction score
139
Sorry it is so long, but I happened to read this this morning. It is from Amit Goswami 'The Self-aware Universe', how science and religion can be in harmony with each other. And especially that there is no dualism.

Mysticism involves a search for the truth about ultimate reality, but the function of the religion is somewhat different. The followers of a particular mystic (most often after the mystic's death) may recognize that the individual search for truth is not for everyone. Most people, lost in the illusion of their ego-separateness and busy in its pursuits, are not motivated to discover the truth themselves. How, then, can the light of the mystic's realization be shared with these people?
The answer is, by simplifying it. The followers simplify the truth to make it accessible to the average person. Such a person is usually caught up in the demands of daily life. Lacking the time and devotion necessary to understand the subtlety of transcendence, he or she cannot appreciate the importance of direct mystical experience. So, the purveyors of the mystic's truth replace direct experience of unitive consciousness with the idea of God. Unfortunately, God, the transcendent creator of the immanent world, is recast in the ordinary person's mind into the dualistic image of a mighty King in Heaven who rules the Earth below. Unavoidably, the mystic's message is diluted and distorted.
The mystic's well-meaning followers inadvertently play the role of the devil in an old joke: God and the devil were walking together when God picked up a piece of paper. "What does it say?" the devil inquired. "Truth," said God serenely. "Give it to me," said the devil eagerly. "I´ll organize it for you."
Yet, despite the difficulties and fallibilities of organization, the religion does convey the spirit of the mystic's message; this is what gives religion its vitality. After all, the value to mystics of realizing the transcendent nature of Reality is that they become secure in a mode of being in which such virtues as love become simple. How can you not love when there is one consciousness and you know that you and the other are not really separate ?
But how does one motivate an ordinary person who does not realize oneness to love others? The mystic clearly sees that ignorance of the transcendent oneness is the barrier to love. The net effect of the absence of love is suffering. To avoid suffering, counsels the mystic, we must turn inward and commence the journey to self-realization. In the religious context, this teaching is translated into the dictum that if we are to redeem ourselves, we must turn to God as the supreme value in our lives. The method of this redemption is a set of practices, based on the original teachings, that forms the moral code of the particular religion-the ten commandments and the Golden Rule of Christian ethics, the Buddhist precepts, the Koranic or Talmudic law, and so forth.
Of course, not all religions introduce the concept of God. In Buddhism, for example, there is no concept of God. On the other hand, in Hinduism there are many gods. Even in these cases, how- ever, the above considerations of religion are evident. Thus we arrive at three universal aspects of all exoteric religions:

I. All religions start with the premise that there is a wrongness in the way we are. The wrongness is variously called ignorance, original sin, evil, or just suffering.
2. All religions promise an escape from this wrongness, provided the "way" is followed. The escape is variously called salvation, liberation from the wheel of suffering in the world, enlightenment, or an eternal life in the kingdom of God, heaven.
3. The way consists of taking refuge in the religion and the community formed by the followers of the religion and following a prescribed code of ethics and social rules. Aside from how the esoteric teaching of transcendence is compromised, it is in the codes of ethics and social rules that the various religions differ from one another.

Notice the essential dualism in the first premise: wrong and right (or evil and good). In contrast, the mystical journey consists in transcending all dualities, including the one of evil and good. Also notice that the second premise is turned by the clergy into carrots and sticks-heaven and hell. Mysticism, on the other hand, does not dichotomize heaven and hell; both are natural concomitants of how we live.
As you can see, when filtered by the world's religions, the monism of monistic idealism becomes ever more obscure, and dualistic ideas prevail. In the East, thanks to an endless supply of students of mysticism, monistic idealism in its esoteric form has popularly retained at least some passing familiarity and respect. In the West, however, mysticism has had relatively little impact. The dualism of the Judeo-Christian monotheistic religions has dominated the popular psyche, supported by a powerful hierarchy of interpreters. Like mind-body Cartesian dualism, however, the dualism of God and the world does not seem to hold up to scientific scrutiny.
 

cal val

visitor
Joined
Apr 30, 1971
Messages
1,507
Reaction score
13
LiSe...

This article is great. Thank you. I knew that religion was about needing to define...to put ideals neatly in a box and tie it up with a neat little bow...to organize. And about safety in numbers. I never thought about the fact it was designed by followers to try to define a leader's experience that they couldn't understand. But it rings so true.

The author of this article writes about people having mystical experiences while searching for the truth. But not about people who don't believe there's anything beyond mankind and have mystical experiences while searching within the confines of their beliefs. I'm referring to my experience. Chris Lofting can type that my neurons made it happen until his fingers fall off...that we have a need...that I had a need to believe in the spiritual realm. I know otherwise. On every level of my being, I had no need to believe there was anything outside mankind and nature. Au contraire! I needed to believe as Chris does. Maybe even more closed minded than Chris. And I was trusting in and surrendering to the collectiveness of mankind... nothing else... when I was shown something else. The men in drab clothing had to visit me so many mornings in a row because of my need to believe mankind is ALL... and collective synaptical energy is ALL. They had to (patiently) show me the concept of fate and destiny so many mornings in a row because of that need.

It's not like the Judeo/Christian religions teach at all. It's not like any religion teaches...or defines...or fits nicely into a box and ties with a neat bow...and it's not like Chris Lofting fits nicely into a box and ties with a neat bow. Further, having had the experience, I'm not left with the need myself to fit it nicely in a box and tie with a neat bow. I saw what I saw. And I know I only saw one infinitesimal part of whatever it is. And from that one miniscule aspect of it all, I know that there was at least at one point in time... in eternity a creator. I have no idea if there still is. And I won't arbitrarily "believe" anything in that regard since I... just... don't... know. I know that there's another plane of existence, another force at work on earth beside mankind and nature. And I know that it does not contradict or negate science...only that some of science tries to contradict and negate it.

And Django...

this is where I address the concept of a jealous God. Jung's "Answer to Job" arrived in the mail yesterday, and I'm going to read it to see his point of view. I suspect, at this point, it has more to do with the interactions of the selves... and with lessons about ourselves from the force outside us about ourselves...about the force outside ourselves. The Torah was complied when the Jews were being dispersed as something for all to carry in common as they travelled to different parts of the globe...far from each other. It was comprised of books written by human authors that told moral truths. There are many scholars who believe they were not meant to be taken literally as the word of God. The story of Job is one such story.

I know that Pedro indeed experienced that force outside us because of what he wrote about it. He was left with the same feelings...same impressions I was. There is no judgment... there are no illusions... there is only pure love. And where there is pure love there is no jealousy. Whether the creator was jealous of Job, I do not...cannot know. That has not been part of my experience. Teachers... sages... from a plane outside my conscious awareness is what I have experienced, and they are all about pure love. Until I read Jung's book, I find it very difficult to imagine that a creator would be jealous of conscious critical thought. Doesn't the creation of destiny require critical thinking?

The thing I discovered that I'm trying explain to people who think the Yi to death.... go within for the answers...go to that place we fear so much... and see what you find. I opened myself up to the collective neuron/synapses... the vast "warehouse in the ether" of the knowledge of mankind... by going within...by going into the shadows that I so feared. That's where I knew my own answers lie and where I knew I connected to the flow of mankind...that is where I, where we all connect to mankind...to each other. That was my intent... my only intent. And, by going inside to connect, I discovered so much more. I discovered something I refused to believe in. I discovered a connection to something else... the presence... the force... that we all try to define, deny, blame...the force that the human authors of the books of the Torah tried to define and blame...in the story of Job... for one.

Btw, it's not important to this thread, I know, but I love Chris Lofting, and I love the other people on this board who have expended a great deal of time and energy futilely trying to convince me... more themselves...*grin* that I didn't have the experience I did and that my own beliefs are invalid. These people are very important to me. Don't ask me why...they just are...only God knows...*grin*

Love,

Val
 

bradford_h

visitor
Joined
Nov 16, 1971
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
33
Hi
on 44.0
I've never seen Yi people get squirmier and slipprier than when trying to adapt this text to their modern preconceptions about the proper order of things. The Chinese text is extremely clear and unambiguous here:
Nu zhuang: The woman (is) powerful
Wu yong qu nu: Not at all useful to court (this) woman
Instead of trying to rewrite the text to what you wish they would have said, I highly recommend trying to see the metaphor here, and maybe look for a little tongue in cheek lightheartedness on the part of the authors.
It's about getting your head turned from your higher purpose, and nothing on earth can do that like a member of the opposite sex.
b
 

cal val

visitor
Joined
Apr 30, 1971
Messages
1,507
Reaction score
13
Brad...

I get it. And I think that's still very bad advice and still very sexist...when, in fact, it may be just that very woman who can help a man achieve his higher purpose.

Just look at the opportunities he's denying himself when he believes such nonsense. If he thinks outside the box in terms of that woman... beyond that crippling, limiting either/or perspective... he just may be able to have his cake and to eat it too. *grin*

Love ya,

Val
 

cal val

visitor
Joined
Apr 30, 1971
Messages
1,507
Reaction score
13
As a matter of fact, a woman with true power wouldn't strip a man of his...and that's what the fear is...isn't it? She has her own. What need has she of his. They can co-exist quite well...she with her power and he with his power, she and he and her power and his power. All one big happy family. No either a or b, but c...ALL of the above.

Love,

Val
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
17,055
Reaction score
2,318
Hm. I do think the woman of 44 can be a genuine threat. The question's more what she is a threat to. A woman with multiple sexual partners, for instance, is a fearsome threat on both a genetic and a social level. How can he be sure that the child he spends most of his adult life providing for is his own? How can we guarantee the line of descent, if she is beyond our control?

I wish Margaret Pearson's article were online - it really is worth reading, and in no way a dogmatic or evangelical 'rewriting'. She very simply runs through the etymological and textual evidence, without so much as a breath of ideological comment.

Basically there are three points in the article. Firstly that a hexagram so cram full of fertility imagery doesn't fit well with the traditional idea of a warning against marriage. Then she looks again at just two characters.

The title of the hexagram can mean specifically the queen and bride of the ruler, she who was to become the mother of the next heir. On her arrival in her new state, she was received by high officials with much ceremony to demonstrate and consolidate her importance.

The other character that Pearson revisits is 'qu', 'courts', or more literally 'take hold of'. (Not 'marry', apparently.) This she says has been shown by Liu Xinglong to be 'based on the graph for seizing a slain enemy by the ear, a forcible taking of vanquished by victor.' And the same 'taking' character is used on oracle bones to mean seizing cattle or horses, and 'taking a woman in the woods', which does not befit the queen.

So it would seem that the original slippery rewriting into what people wished it said took place long, long ago, when the queen was 'rewritten' as a whore.
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,125
Reaction score
139
I got hex.44 many many times, maybe 30 or more, when I was asking about a cooperation with a man. I was making my Yijing book, and I had no computer yet, no books either, so I needed other images and ideas to make it to a living book.

Every time when I asked if it was a good idea, I got 44. It was difficult to decide for me, because he is very overwhelming, to say the least, and I had no idea if I would stay in charge, or lose all control. And it had nothing at all to do with sex.

Yijing was telling me all the time, that there was great creative potential in the cooperation. In the end, the computer, the website, my being here in this list, and the huge change from an insecure know-nothing to the happy and very at-ease-with-myself-and-the-world person I am now (well - on the average, not always of course), all these things are results of this cooperation.

You can imagine that I appreciate this hexagram a lot.

LiSe
YiJing, Book of Sun and Moon
http://www.anton-heyboer.org
 

bradford_h

visitor
Joined
Nov 16, 1971
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
33
Hi
Anyone who has read my Speculative History knows that I think that women were well represented among the Wu Xian (congress of shamans) who authored the Yi. I think that they had a sense of humor too.
Again, this hexagram is Not about the sexes. This is just a metaphor they used. It's about the good fight, against entropy or dissipation, that describes both life and intelligence.
The woman to whom a man gives his power is also the man to whom a woman gives her choices. It is not about sexes, it is not about all women or all men. It's about keeping one's center. The encounter in the title is a chance or random encounter. Nothing about one's choice in a mate for life. This Zhuang (power) is the same power as the title of Hex 34. We are taught here that the power is in the axle, not in the Samsara out on the rim.
b
 

cal val

visitor
Joined
Apr 30, 1971
Messages
1,507
Reaction score
13
Brad...

Great food for thought. Thank you.

I love your perspective.

The woman to whom a man gives his power is an entirely different woman than the woman who takes a man's power. And the man to whom a woman gives her choices is an entirely different man than the man who takes a woman's choices.

You stated the secret to knowing and living the difference well: It's about keeping one's center. When one keeps one's center one can easily increase others without decreasing oneself.

Love ya,

Val
 

bradford_h

visitor
Joined
Nov 16, 1971
Messages
1,115
Reaction score
33
Val-
Exactimundo!
Was beginning to fear I couldn't communicate it.
Nice segue to your Sun (41) insight too.
b
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
17,055
Reaction score
2,318
So Brad... the chance encounter, with the 'dissipating' force - is it a Bad Thing in your view? What do you think you are meant to do with the queen/whore (whichever) when you encounter her?
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
17,055
Reaction score
2,318
(Speaking metaphorically, you understand
wink.gif
.)
 

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