Might the Yi's response be tailored to your resources?

[bradford]

This thread was suggested by something Hilary said on another http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/friends/showthread.php?t=4895&goto=newpost

Might the Yi have a different response to your question according to the interpretive tools that you have at your disposal? My own model of how the Yi works doesn't ascribe any sort of conscious intelligence to the Yi, but I'll put it in these terms to keep things simple:

Does the Yi "know" if you're on a forum where you might have expert help?
Does the Yi "understand" your own private vocabulary of symbols and speak to you in this language?
Does the Yi "know" what books or translations you are using?

One example: While the Wilhelm Baynes version might universally be called "A List", it completely misses the main point of the Chinese original about a fourth of the time, and it misses an important nuance another fourth. If this is the only Yi you are using, will the response be tailored to what you can get out of the W-B, or will the response "be in the original Chinese", leaving you as confused as Wilhelm?

Another example: I have a personal system whereby I can move easily between the vocabularies of Yijing, Tarot, Astrology and Qabalah. Sometimes when I throw the coins, the Tarot correspondence to the Gua I have cast paints a clear and unequivocal answer to my question, yet the Yi text is obscure to me. But there is no way it could do this for someone who doesn't know my system. To what extent is this just my imagination?

Similar to this: None of the regular English translations has the answer to your question, even if it can be teased out of the Chinese text, but somehow Hilary has an obscure little insight that bangs that nail right in. Were you "meant" to post your confusion on line to get that extra help?

 

[dobro p]

Does the Yi "know" if you're on a forum where you might have expert help?
Does the Yi "understand" your own private vocabulary of symbols and speak to you in this language?
Does the Yi "know" what books or translations you are using?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

The Yi knows what it knows about you because it's not other than what you are - it's the 'voice' of the parts of you that you either don't identify as being you or which are drowned out by the noise of the everyday consciousness down here in the ego. So when you access the Yi, you're accessing yourself, a part of yourself which uses the verses in the Yi to communicate to ordinary consciousness.

But another issue (two issues actually) is can this communication be used by intelligences which are not you? Can angels and devils tip the coins so that you read something in the Yi which you would otherwise not have gotten? Part two of that question is: are angels and devils actually separate from what you are? I'd say yes, but gee - look at where I'm talking from. Down here.

 

[maremaria]

1.Does the Yi "know" if you're on a forum where you might have expert help?
2.Does the Yi "understand" your own private vocabulary of symbols and speak to you in this language?
3.Does the Yi "know" what books or translations you are using?

Dare to say...
1.yes
2.yes
3.yes

…. I cheat. I asked Yi “based on what you respond” 57.1.5.6 > 11
you name 57 Adaptation so probably “yes” is the right answer .

“All I have is all I need to understand Yi” ???????

maria

 

[Trojina]

I say yes to point 2 only. I do see the Yi as a intelligence seperate from my own, not part of me nor collective unconscious but an oracular prescence. It has a broader consciousness than mine but still is limited by the words in the book - if i don't understand the meaning of the words I will often still misunderstand, if i use the forum I can still often misunderstand because noone else can know how my personal inner symbology (if that is a word) relates to my answer though they can help and sometimes happily hit the nail on the head. For all I know the Yi might adapt to the translation but I don't think so, I can't tell because I stopped believing in any one translation a long time ago. If i look back I can see how the answers I got were spot on but i didn't understand - theres a limit to how much an answer can adapt I think.

 

[martin]

Does the Yi "know" if you're on a forum where you might have expert help?
Does the Yi "understand" your own private vocabulary of symbols and speak to you in this language?
Does the Yi "know" what books or translations you are using?

Yes to all three. In my model the Yi connects me to a conscious intelligence (that is not me, not part of me, although it's not always so clear, because self/other boundaries are relatively vague in the 'inner world', things are a more fluid there).
But perhaps the answers could also be 'yes' in a model that doesn't assume that there is a conscious, more or less personalised, mind behind the Yi. Because reality - all that happens - has a mind of its own, so to speak, it's not as dead and stupid as our scientists tend to believe.

Wrong translations can be problematic, I think. The intelligence will probably try to work around such errors but may not always succeed.
What speaks through the Yi also works and speaks in other ways, though. The Yi is only one channel. I believe it can (and sometimes will) use other channels to organize a few 'coincidences' that guide users of the Yi in the direction of better translations.

(added later)
Hmm, thinking more about it, I'm not so sure, why would a wrong translation necessarily be a problem? It's an oracle in its own right and if you use only that translation (not comparing it with others, that could be confusing), what's wrong with it?
Lack of internal consistency? Text and hexagrams don't fit? But is the original Chinese Yi internally consistent, do text and hexagrams fit there?

 

[Tohpol]

Does the Yi "know" if you're on a forum where you might have expert help?
Does the Yi "understand" your own private vocabulary of symbols and speak to you in this language?
Does the Yi "know" what books or translations you are using?

Yup
Yup aaaand...
....Yup.

I have no idea if the Yi is an all seeing all juggling Supra-Oversoul-come-Universal-collective intelligence or just unconscious parts of ourselves bursting to the surface, (I personally think it is Us in the far distant Cosmic future communicating with our primative selves via a sort of Universal conduit but hey I'm a little odd...) but it is quite uncanny how it does become an adaptive system i.e. adapting to the consciousness or awareness of the user.

That said, I think it's absolutely imperative to have several sources of Yi material - the more the better - to cross reference and to gain the average interpretation. I remember using Wilhelm for several years in the beginning and there is just no way that this version - although excellent - can fully do justice to this system. It requires other interpretations.

Topal

 

[Trojina]

(added later)
Hmm, thinking more about it, I'm not so sure, why would a wrong translation necessarily be a problem? It's an oracle in its own right and if you use only that translation (not comparing it with others, that could be confusing), what's wrong with it?
Lack of internal consistency? Text and hexagrams don't fit? But is the original Chinese Yi internally consistent, do text and hexagrams fit there?

I think wrong translations are a problem, or maybe I should say awful commentaries - for a beginner who doesn't realise how partial they are. I think the Yi gives you the appropriate hexagram and line - but if you have a ridiculous commentary you are still lost, worse utterly misled. If you consult the Yi, I think it operates as the Yi but the writer may be spouting their own philosophy etc which hs nothing to do with the Yi, well the Yi can't then take on the cloak of a philosophy that has nothing to do with it, it still gives you the appropriate hex and line, what else can it do.

I have records of very old throws which now make perfect sense but at the time because i relied on some silly book I completely missed the point.

 

[Sparhawk]

I'm inclined to say "yes" to all those questions, however, I'm more inclined to answer "why not?" Trying to answer that, as a refute, would be very interesting.

 

[Sparhawk]

(added later)
Hmm, thinking more about it, I'm not so sure, why would a wrong translation necessarily be a problem? It's an oracle in its own right and if you use only that translation (not comparing it with others, that could be confusing), what's wrong with it?
Lack of internal consistency? Text and hexagrams don't fit? But is the original Chinese Yi internally consistent, do text and hexagrams fit there?

I mostly agree with this. The Yi is much more than text. Most users hang on to their favorite translations more out of some comprehension kinship than rational selection. Still, most seem to interpret meaningful answers from what they obtain using those favorites. This leads me to conclude that the Yi makes a connection with the querent at a higher level that is above and beyond mere textual interpretation.

 

[Trojina]

I mostly agree with this. The Yi is much more than text. Most users hang on to their favorite translations more out of some comprehension kinship than rational selection. Still, most seem to interpret meaningful answers from what they obtain using those favorites. This leads me to conclude that the Yi makes a connection with the querent at a higher level that is above and beyond mere textual interpretation.

I agree the Yi is more than any text and the connection with the querant operates above and beyond the text but nevertheless I think meaning can be obscured by writers with a very strong message of their own to push, for newcomers especially.

 

[martin]

I think wrong translations are a problem, or maybe I should say awful commentaries - for a beginner who doesn't realise how partial they are. I think the Yi gives you the appropriate hexagram and line - but if you have a ridiculous commentary you are still lost, worse utterly misled.

Oh yes, I agree. I was thinking only about relatively unbiased translations such as the one of Legge. Wilhelm is already too partial for my taste. There is too much 'Wilhelm' in his Yi.

 

[dobro p]

Interesting to me that a lot of people in this thread see the Yi as an intelligence separate from their own. I see two issues arising out of this.

1 Is the Yi really separate from your own intelligence or only separate from your self-image, your idea of what you *think* you are? There's more in heaven and earth, Horatio, etc. You are much more than you think you are. Joni Mitchell said we're stardust. Okay, maybe we're divine and divinely intelligent on some level that we don't identify with.

2 If the Yi is an intelligence separate from your own, then that means, I think, that what you draw can be directed by angels or devils or just stupid, interfering discarnates. There's no way I want any of that. I don't want my emails read by hackers, I don't want my UPS parcels opened and tampered with by strangers, and I don't want my Yi messages messed around with by anything other than my guardian angel. So how do I *know* the messaging system is secure? Only if it's my own, part of me, whether I identify with it or not. So that's why, when I ask a question of the Yi, I'm directing the question to my higher realm, not to an intelligence other than my real self.

 

[Trojina]

Well each to his own but why if you address the question to the Yi should devils and so on answer any more than if i address myself to you or anyone else ? In the final analysis one could say there is no you and me but that is how we experience it now, in the same way that is how I experience the Yi now, which isn't to say its the final truth

 

[mudpie]

My experience was opposite of trojans in that when i started ....using silly books, I got astoundingly helpful answers- albeit thru a silly text - and sometimes i look back and think that if i had had my more *sophisticated* knowledge of certain lines and hex's then, the answers would not have felt as right as they did.

I dont think there is an intelligence *beyond* us...i think there is a pure knowing within us...this is what i feel I access when questioning the Yi.

The ego-me can sabotage my best efforts in life ( like a devil) and the ego-me - for lack of a better word- sometimes wants to bend the current reality to fit my purpose. Sometimes I want desperately to hear what I want to hear from the Yi, but the reason I trust it so much is that I have seen , over and over and over again, that the YI is always impartially truthful, sometimes ruthlessly truthful, and never bends to simply give me the answer i hope to hear. when i do get the answer I was hoping for, i breathe a sigh of relief because I absolutely trust that it is what Yi says it is.
i dont trust quija boards, i dont really trust tarot.........the Yi is to me the purest form of *knowledge*...and I am not quite sure why it is so pure. I have used the quan yin oracle ( sticks) many times and it always gives me nonsense replies.

 

[bradford]

Listener brings up another angle to this -
Suppose I'm working primarily from one of the silly books "Easy I Ching for Feminists," while a fine translation sits on my shelf feeling sad about being a good well that nobody comes to. Now lets say the silly book, which you know really well, has a REALLY BAD interpretation of 48.3, practically the opposite of what the Chinese text and your fine translation says - BUT - it says EXACTLY what you need to hear. Do you think you are more likely to cast 48.3 because some force knows that you will not be going to the more reliable version?

 

[dobro p]

Listener brings up another angle to this -
Suppose I'm working primarily from one of the silly books "Easy I Ching for Feminists," while a fine translation sits on my shelf feeling sad about being a good well that nobody comes to. Now lets say the silly book, which you know really well, has a REALLY BAD interpretation of 48.3, practically the opposite of what the Chinese text and your fine translation says - BUT - it says EXACTLY what you need to hear. Do you think you are more likely to cast 48.3 because some force knows that you will not be going to the more reliable version?

Of course. The Yi knows exactly how your ordinary consciousness and personality work because the Yi is greater, higher, and deeper. It is the context that your conscious personality operates in. Your higher mind constantly works for and serves your best interests.

 

[mudpie]

Your higher mind constantly works for and serves your best interests.

Yeah, I agree with this.

Back when I used that silly little first text I had found in the days when I didnt know squat about I ching except for this one text, I had a project that all my closest and trusted friends were telling me to demolish. The little book didnt even give line interpretations, just mini paragraphs about the hexagrams.

I asked about the project which I wanted to save and was being told to give up. I never forgot what the silly text told me. It said: "The interference of other people prevents satisfaction from manifesting in your life... your most devoted supporter cannot be trusted to fulfill your needs at this time ."

For me, it was a crucial message: stand alone and dont pay heed to all the advice; i.e. save the project. which i did, thank goodness, it was right for me.

The hexagram being described by that paragraph was 23...probably wouldve given up on the project if I'd known then what i know about 23 now!

and i think the same principle holds true even if, say, I had a silly text near me and didnt feel like going into the other room to look up another. Then again, I hardly ever even use texts anymore unless I feel puzzled about a response and then I take out every text.

Still all this said, when I read the way Hilary can artfully explore a reading in depth on her blog, I think that I may be missing a whole lot if I just flippantly accept the *cotton candy* version which may come to mind first. I suppose the higher mind adores it when we become more sophisticated and diverse in our exploration because then it has richer vein(s) to reach us through. The higher mind operates on multi-levels too, wouldnt you say? a dream can have many levels also.

Is the higher mind a trickster? I dont think so. it will speak to us on a level we are capable of grasping.

this line from some poem has always given me encouragement:
"Or, if Virtue too feeble were
Heaven itself would stoop to her."

 

[dobro p]

Still all this said, when I read the way Hilary can artfully explore a reading in depth on her blog, I think that I may be missing a whole lot if I just flippantly accept the *cotton candy* version which may come to mind first. I suppose the higher mind adores it when we become more sophisticated and diverse in our exploration because then it has richer vein(s) to reach us through.

Three things: first, I enjoyed what you said in the part of your post I haven't quoted here.

Second, I think the higher mind does enjoy what lower mind experiences. (I wish lower mind would learn how to get consciousness up to higher mind in a way that was more stable and enduring though.)

Third (and digressing) I love Hilary's readings too. One of the best things about getting familiar with the Yi is being able to appreciate how other people read it. I have three main reactions to readings done here by various people: surprise at how wrong they can be sometimes, reassurance when they read it like I do, and surprise and delight when somebody reads in way that has depth, finesse and lightness of touch.

 

[Trojina]

Listener brings up another angle to this -
Suppose I'm working primarily from one of the silly books "Easy I Ching for Feminists," while a fine translation sits on my shelf feeling sad about being a good well that nobody comes to. Now lets say the silly book, which you know really well, has a REALLY BAD interpretation of 48.3, practically the opposite of what the Chinese text and your fine translation says - BUT - it says EXACTLY what you need to hear. Do you think you are more likely to cast 48.3 because some force knows that you will not be going to the more reliable version?

No. I don't think 'the force' or however we think of it compromises itself that much. 'Silly books' (this phrase seems to have got picked up) often say things that have no connection with anything the that is in the Yi at all . Having said that I certainly have 'silly books' which I'll look at when I'm stumped just for some other angle, but I take it with a pinch of salt if its that silly.


I think no because that hasn't been my experience as I said before. If i think back to very old throws I got the right answer from the Yi but the wrong answer through the book i used. Others obviously have different experience so think differently, but for myself the idea that the Yi figures what book you are going to use and moulds itself into the philosophy of whatever some writer decides - hmm no I think not, that way the Yi would lose its Yi ness

But maybe this all comes down to how we see the Yi. I don't see it as my higher self but another being same as other people are other beings. I think it has its own energy and character, as such it its own integrity. If you pick up a book where someones pushing their philosophy of life though it I think you can get the wrong message, or maybe by happy chance the right one, but i wouldn't bank on it.

 

[mudpie]

Three things: first, I enjoyed what you said in the part of your post I haven't quoted here.

thank you

(I wish lower mind would learn how to get consciousness up to higher mind in a way that was more stable and enduring though.).

Clarissa Pinkola Estes tells a great story about this in one of her books. A little dog is sent to overhear some important information and then return to give this info to his master who is waiting for it desperately. Every time the dog starts to journey back with the info, he is distracted by a tasty treat on the pathway, and succumbs to his appetite....only to realize he has forgotten the information and has to go back to get it again; he goes back numerous times until he finally learns not to let the scent of something tasty and seductive deter him. She likens the dog to our lower mind which is capable of finding out what we need to know, but fails to get it up to higher consciousness because it is dstracted by what she says are usuallly our favorite "addictions".

Maybe what Trojan says is right. Maybe behind every Yi response is a truly precious jewel of information that we often fail to fully take home because we are not willing, or too lazy, to go the distance. Maybe silly texts are a kind of distracting addiction.
But I am digressing too.

 

[Trojina]

Maybe what Trojan says is right. Maybe behind every Yi response is a truly precious jewel of information that we often fail to fully take home because we are not willing, or too lazy, to go the distance. Maybe silly texts are a kind of distracting addiction.
But I am digressing too.

Well i can't claim 'to go the distance' seeing as i don't know Chinese or anything :bag: maybe I just have a grudge against one or two of those 'silly' books that stand out to me as being particularly misleading to me when i was young and innocent - some time ago now

 

[heylise]

Beautiful thread.. loved Listener’s post (but all other posts as well).

When I read the question in the beginning, my first reaction was yes – yes – yes, but then I thought back to when I started with the Yi. Ages ago. I had Wilhelm, it was enough to fascinate me a lot, but I could not ‘get’ it. Occasionally yes, but most of the time things stayed as muddy as when I started my question to it. So I think my answer is no – no – no. But for all 3 answers there is an 'unless ...'.

My idea about it:
All depends on your own ability to ‘make’ something of an answer, if that is very well developed, you can work with any version. A good one will make it easier for you, but if you have a loud and clear inner voice, you can also use the flight of birds or the bottom of your coffee cup. So I don’t think the Yi ‘knows’ which version you use, but your intuition is clever with whatever tools it can get. No hammer around? Then get a stone...

When you withdraw to the mountains or woods, far from the hectic world of people, it is easier to hear that voice, but we are all kind of stuck in the noise. So an intermediate is very welcome. Most important feature is, that it can knock you off your every-day feet and make you use your mental wings. Some bad translations/interpretations can do that to a certain degree, others do the opposite, they give you the most common stupid answers which keep you securely inside the box you wanted to get out of. The beautiful miracle is, when your despair is big enough, even a bad Yi can sometimes make you find an answer.

I don’t think, personally, that there is any difference between ‘out there’ or ‘in here’. It depends what works best, usually the idea that you do it all yourself is not of much help. Giving it in the hands of a higher power has a lot more effect. Maybe in here is my smaller me, or my “I”. And out there me as part of all, one with all. No me anymore, but not apart from me either. So I rather call it ‘that’ voice than my inner voice.

LiSe

 

[mollies]

Yes

I don’t think, personally, that there is any difference between ‘out there’ or ‘in here’. It depends what works best, usually the idea that you do it all yourself is not of much help. Giving it in the hands of a higher power has a lot more effect. Maybe in here is my smaller me, or my “I”. And out there me as part of all, one with all. No me anymore, but not apart from me either. So I rather call it ‘that’ voice than my inner voice.

LiSe

This is so beautifully said! What more does one need today?


Carin