...life can be translucent

Menu

Maps of Change

C

cheiron

Guest
I am going to post graphical representations of the pairs of hexagrams showing their changing lines.

I am doing this in the style of Syephen Karchers 'Total I Ching'

Some folk may find them useful to have a quick look up of where a changing line in one hexagram leads to.

Others might find the emerging patterns quite interesting... I do!

Finally those wanting to look at Transformative Change as oppose to Progressive Change might find them more intersting.

If folk find it too much, bandwidth wise, I will cease... I have worked at keeping them small
happy.gif


Will do them in batches of four.

Hope some find them handy.

--Kevin

PS - This is where attempting to write about 61:62 leas me! - I will come back to that one day.
 
C

cheiron

Guest
Hx 1:
Hexagram 1 has an inner hexagram which is transformative change - Hx1
Other Hexagrams with 1 as inner Hx. are 1; 28; 43; 44)

Hx.2:
Hexagram 2 has an inner hexagram which is transformative change - Hx2
(Hxs 2; 23;24; 27)

The transformative change hexagrams are:
1:2 The Gates of Change - The Dragon and the Dark Animal Goddess
27:28 The Tigers mouth and the Great Transition
29:30 The Ghost river and the Bright Omens
61:62 The Opened Heart and the Flying Bird - Who carries messages across the threshold of Life and Death.


1833.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
Hx. 3:4

These Hexagrams are completely progressive change.

All their moving lines move to a progressive change hexagram.

Its inner hexagram is progressive change too.

1834.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
Hx. 5:6

These Hexagrams are completely progressive change.

All their moving lines move to a progressive change hexagram.

Its inner hexagram is progressive change too.

1835.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
7:8

In hexagrams exhibiting progressive change there are some lines which constitute secondary sites of transformation These show pivotal points where radical change can be brought about in a situation.

The following hexagrams lead to Transformative change at some points in their progressive change:

At the Threshold where line 3 or 4 changes.
9:10 > 1 & 61
15:16 > 2 & 62
21:22 > 27 & 30
47:48 > 28 & 29

At the centres when line 2 or 5 changes.
7:8 > 2 & 29
13:14 > 1 & 30
31:32 > 28 & 61
41:42 > 27 & 61

At the limits of the time / energy where line 1 or line 6 changes
23:24 > 2 & 27
43:44 > 28 & 1
55:56 > 62 & 30
59:60 > 61 & 29

This transformative change is shown in red in the diagram below.

1836.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
9:10 Are a pair where though the movement from one to the other is by rotation - or progressive change, there are lines which lead to hexagrams with Transformative change.

The following hexagrams lead to Transformative change at some points in their progressive change:

At the Threshold where line 3 or 4 changes.
9:10 > 1 & 61
15:16 > 2 & 62
21:22 > 27 & 30
47:48 > 28 & 29

At the centres when line 2 or 5 changes.
7:8 > 2 & 29
13:14 > 1 & 30
31:32 > 28 & 61
41:42 > 27 & 61

At the limits of the time / energy where line 1 or line 6 changes
23:24 > 2 & 27
43:44 > 28 & 1
55:56 > 62 & 30
59:60 > 61 & 29

1840.gif


Notice how those transforming lines (in red) do not reflect accross the pair in the same way. eg 9.1 (57) > 10.6 (58).


Notice how those lines (in red) do not reflect across the pair in the same way. eg 9.1 (57) > 10.6 (58).

There is a 'disjuncture' in the process of progressive change - a sudden transformation. Stephen Karcher proposes that these lines are better read across rather diagonally as in the Fan Yao or LiSe's Square Games.

Any thoughts?

--Kevin
 
C

cheiron

Guest
Oops.

Repost of 7:8

I made a mistake.

The transforming lines in 7.2.5 & 8.2.5 now show the same disjuncture as that found in 9:10 above.

--Kevin

1841.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
11:12

This hexagram pair meets Stephen Karcher?s basic rule that it is both transformative and progressive change. That is each hexagram becomes the other by every line changing to its opposite and by being rotated through 180 degrees).

However it does not meet any of the other conditions he cites:
1 No hexagrams produced, through lines changing, are Transformative hexagrams.

2 The nuclear hexagrams of each primary hexagram are not transformative hexagrams.

3 There is no disjuncture diagonally across the lines ? For example 11.1 gives a hexagram whose pair can be found in 12.6 etc, this is true throughout the matrix.

4 There is no appearance of Hx. 10 the Tiger of transition!

5 Finally every line changes to a progressive hexagram pair and every inner hexagram of every resultant hexagram is one of a progressive pair.

IMHO ? This is a Progressive hexagram throughout the changes it represents.

Here is the Transformative map (hatched out as a caution!).

This is not always the case as I shall show when I get to the others two pairs of this group ? 17:18 63:64

1842.gif


--Kevin
 
C

cheiron

Guest
13:14

This is another pair exhibiting progressive change with some disjuncture in the moving lines.

In this case at lines 2 & 5.

Hexagrams 1:2 and 29:30 are both major sites of transformative energy.

There is an energy flow through these sort of hexagrams, but I see Stephen has posted so for now just the map.

--Kevin


1846.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
15:16

Here again is a hexagram pair whose nuclear hexagrams, and all of the resulting hexagrams, are progressive in nature... except for the lines exhibiting the disjuncture (in red).

These lines lead to hexagrams who are themselves transformative in nature.

1847.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
17:18

This hexagram pair is one of the three pairs which exhibit the basic feature that each becomes their opposite by either changing every line to its opposite or rotating it through 180 degrees.

As such one might consider the possibility that they could be considered as a Transformative and a Progressive change pair.

Like in 11:12 all features, other than the ?changing every line to its opposite to get the other in the pair' as above, are missing.

I have difficulty in finding any transformative elements in this hexagram pair.

The nulear hexagrams are a progressive pair and as such do not seem to offer the ?transformative engine? sitting a the centre of the matrix? a key feature of a fully transformative pair like 1:2 or 29:30.

Also all of the lines exhibit the 1:6 2:5 3:4 line relationships across the pair as found in progressive change hexagrams. Thus there are no disjunctures accross the pair.


I have not yet fully grasped Stephen?s latest post as I am more intent on finishing charting these sorts of change just now? So tentatively I have hatched this Transformative matrix out as a ?caution?

I shall post them as a 'progressive change' pair - their other form.

--Kevin


1848.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
17:18

1849.gif


Note: Everything in this pair is progressive... including all of the resulting hexagrams - that's why they are white in the transformative map and black in the progressive map - there is a colour code here too - oops.

Stephen's idea is that in Transformative change the Nuclear hexagrams can be seen as forming a Transformative Gateway (like an engine energising the transformation) accross the disjunture... That is why he refers to the Transformative hexagram pairs as being the engines which 'Charge' the changes and drive the movement throug them.

See his articles or Total I Ching.

--Kevin
 

chrislofting

visitor
Joined
Nov 19, 1971
Messages
394
Reaction score
0
Kevin, Hilary, et al,

ANY form of imposing of pairs across the 64 hexagrams reflects a focus of ONE dichotomy and using the full set of hexagrams to cover all aspects of the qualities derived from applying recursion to that dichotomy.

The binary sequence focuses on the qualities in a dichotomy represented by hexagrams 01/02.

The traditional sequences focuses on the qualities in a dichotomy represented by hexagrams 01/64.

The point to be made is that the hexagrams reflect qualities, not lines, such that if you focus on lines only you will miss things.

Thus, using the traditional sequence:

1 is to 2 as 1 is to 64.
3 is to 4 as 1 is to 64.
5 is to 6 as 1 is to 64.
...
...
63 is to 64 as 1 is to 64.

The focus is on different degrees of the basic 1:64 quality of individual-group dynamics; pure-mixed dynamics.

Thus in the context of PURE yang and PURE yin, there is still a sense of 'lack of purity' in 02 *when compared* to 01; the social character of 02, its focus on integrating goes AGAINST the ultimate in purity and that means clearly differentiating, the ONE as compared to what 02 is limited to, a PAIR.

That pattern is all the way through the pairs of the traditional sequence since the POLES of the sequence relect the originating QUALITIES under consideration, where those qualities are represented by 01 and 64.

you can then apply recursion to EACH hexagram to focus on the qualities WITHIN a hexagram. This is achieved for the POLES by simply taking the existing sequence of 64 and rotating every hexagram, thus WITHIN hex 01 is the passage of 01 to 63 etc etc etc

There are a LOT of these sequences to deal with but the overall development path will always be egalitarian (yin) to aristocratic (yang) followed by collapse etc (the cycle is reflected in the 1000 AD diagrams with the binary ordering represented as a square within an ordering in a circle. THAT circular form can be used to represent the cycles of boom and bust)

Thus the dynamic of change is binary, bottom up, different layers at the same time:

24 -> 27
03 -> 42
51 -> 21
17 -> 25

EACH of these pairs link to the next pair in the order but not as strongly as they link to each other.

Thus at a more general level we have:

(24,27) -> (03,42)
(51,21) -> (17,25)

and on to the whole octect that now links to the next octet in the binary sequence:

(24,27,03,42,51,21,17,35) -> (36, 22, 63, 37, 55, 30, 49, 14)

etc
etc
to

43 -> 01 (peak yang) -> 44 -> 28.... to 23 -> 02 and then 02 -> 24....

The 'maps of change' as such are rooted in small world networks and they are reflected in the basic derivation of the binary ordering of the hexagrams from pure yin to pure yang.

FROM THAT we can derive particular change dynamics in umpteen sequences.

IMHO Karcher's perspective is 'limited' by his focus on 10th century BC IC material and so reflects a focus on a SPECIALISATION WITHIN a specialisation, the IC 'as a whole'.

IOW the 'Total I Ching' comes from a 10th century BC perspective and so is LIMITING in understanding what is going on in the IC as a metaphor that spans all ages.

Chris.
 
C

cheiron

Guest
Greetings Chris
happy.gif


Hahaha ? You read my mind ? Was just thinking that this thread had enough graphics on it (bandwidth) and that I would start a new one to continue. Thus I thought it would give folk posting room.

What I am attempting to do here is explore Stephen?s Paradigm ? See what it yields.

Karcher proposes that the pairs are not dichotomies, but actually form nodes.

He proposes that the lines can be seen as activated paths of concepts or ?time / space / change? which form threads running both within the pairs and between them. Inner and outer circulation of energy / concepts.

Thus he sees the nodes as being linked by the movements indicated in the lines in a very dynamic fashion.

He does not focus on lines only ? I am mapping the lines as matrices ?within the hexagrams pairs?? my next project (offline folks so don?t panic
happy.gif
) will be to join these matrices up to try to map the extended pathways and to look for extended flows / links / patterns.

I think I am right in saying that, like yourself, Stephen Karcher sees the hexagrams as having a far more dynamic set of relationships than many would normally accede to in the 21st Century ;)

What I am doing with Stephens concept at this point is to drop all associations and to look at patterns and qualities ? I am astonished you missed that ? or am I spelling qualities differently to yourself ;)

Yes, I will read about your recursion idea again one day ? I have tried twice so far and Chris, I mean this with no aggression at all, I could not understand your writing. You talk away in your own language quite a lot which makes your material extraordinarily difficult to access.

?IOW the 'Total I Ching' comes from a 10th century BC
perspective and so is LIMITING in understanding what is
going on in the IC as a metaphor that spans all ages.?

No ? Karcher makes it very clear that he is trying to drag the I Ching out of the 21st Century and to recover underlying principals which may well have been lost.

Curiously I suspect you have allies in the Song thinkers? They were very modern in their time too (ouch) ;)

My main purpose at the moment is to ?scribe? all of these maps out as per Stephen?s principals? room for discussion later.

Best wishes

--Kevin
 
C

cheiron

Guest
I am re-posting some of the ?Maps? from earlier as they were missing the nuclear hexagrams which I was not going to show at first.

Karcher proposes that there is an energy flow (or conceptual core if that language suites you more) through these back and forth to 1; 2; 63; 64.

All hexagrams will go to one of these four in either one or two steps if one takes their nuclear hexagram and then the nuclear hexagram of the next.

I do hope I am not transgressing on folks good will by posting all of this stuff here.

Those who are thinking of getting Karcher?s American Total I Ching in the fall or who have the current one might find these very useful as he does not map them out in his book which I find makes following it a little harder.

--Kevin

1855.gif


1856.gif


1857.gif


1858.gif
 
C

cheiron

Guest
These are clearer and have a lot more detail.

By putting in the nuclear hexagrams another pattern has emerged.

Also the colour system is simplified.

Red means the nuclear hexagrams reduce to Hx1
Green means the nuclear hexagrams reduce to Hx2
Blue means the nuclear hexagrams reduce to Hx63
Yellow means the nuclear hexagram reduces to Hx64

Puce and Lilac is to draw attention to the 'squares' of nuclear hexagrams that develop at lines 1&6

White denotes points of disjuncture or Transformative change in Progressive hexagrams

It is interesting how 63:64 makes squares across the threshold so often.

--Kevin


1872.gif

1873.gif

1874.gif

1875.gif

1876.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