...life can be translucent

Menu

Need Assistance With Hexagram 3

nhyuyi

visitor
Joined
Jul 17, 1971
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Greetings

Lately, I've been having a problem with sticking to an important project (not work related) that I have going.
Things will go well with it for awhile, and then something comes up that seems to block my progress, and I put my project on the back burner until whatever is annoying me at the time passes, then I go to work on it again.

I asked the I Ching about this vacillation and if I will ever complete my work. I received Hexagram 3 lines 1 and 2 changing to Hexagram 29.

I'm sure this is telling me to just stick to it and ignore the obstacles, but I don't understand how 29 relates to my situation. :confused:

Please Explain?
Blink
 

ewald

Administrator
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
510
Reaction score
0
Hi Blink,

3.1 is telling to stick to it. Line 3.2 is telling that things have come to a dead end, and to continue at a better time.

29.0 is in my view about getting accustomed to a dangerous situation that is mainly dangerous because one doesn't know it. One needs to have confidence in safeguards and one's heart and mind to navigate this situation. Taking action is valuable.

This probably pertains to the blockage you encountered. You'll need to go into a situation that you didn't yet feel ready for.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Apart from not knowing, as Ewald said, I think 29 can also refer to mixed or ambivalent feelings. Love-hate, attraction-repulsion.
Do you indeed have mixed feelings about this project, Blink?
29 can also indicate confusion, chaos, lack of focus, and so on.

"with containment comes control" ?!
Hmm, Chris, perhaps. But I think this is typically one of those cases in which your system narrows the core meaning of a hexagram down to one aspect of it. :)
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
martin said:
"with containment comes control" ?!
Hmm, Chris, perhaps. But I think this is typically one of those cases in which your system narrows the core meaning of a hexagram down to one aspect of it. :)
the generic form is contractive bounding - any form of enclosure focused on protection - to keep in or to keep out (and that be done willingly or by force)

Move to more refined terms and the generic behaviour is on containment. Containment doubled is reflected in the concept of control. Thus 29 'reads' "with/from containment comes control"

We can then interrogate the IC to aid us in our understanding of 29 by using the XOR methodology. Thus the description of 29s infrastructure, its 27-ness is given by analogy to:

010010 (29)
100001 (27)
--------
110011 - 60 : hard exterior, soft interior - yielding, flowing within the boundary.

29 gets its nourishment from:

010010 (29)
011010 (48)
--------
001000 - 15 : leveling out, evening out, keep words close to facts ('contain') - note the association with 29s name (below) on foundation setting, educating, socialising, etc - all actions associated with containment/control.

The 'correct steps' through 29 are described by analogy to:

010010 (29)
101010 (63)
---------
111000 - 11 : mediating, harmonising, balancing (links to a sense of 'flow' - and the ideogram of 11 is of someone standing in water connecting to all)

ideogram of 11 covers:

"T'AI : spread and reach everywhere, permeate, diffuse; communicate; great, extensive, abundant, prosperous; smooth, slippery; extreme, extravagant, prodigal. Mount T'AI in eastern China was a sacred mountain connecting heaven and earth. The emperor made offerings there to establish harmony between humans and the great spirits. The ideogram: person in water, connected to the universal medium."ERANOS p186

Ideogram of 29 covers:

"HSI K'AN -

HSI : Practise, rehearse, train, coach; again and again; familiar with, skilled; repeat a lesson, drive, impulse. The ideogram portrays wings and a cap. It suggests thoughts carried forward by repeated movements...

K'AN : dangerous place; hole, cavity, hollow; pit, snare, trap, grave, precipice; critical time, test; risky. The ideogram: earth and pit" ERANOS p344

The containment focus reflects the 'education' aspects of 07,04 as it does the 'encapsulation' focus of 47,06.

29 shares space with 59 where 59 has a focus on lifting the fog etc but it is conditional, 29 is unconditional in its assertions of 'what is' or 'what should be' ;-)

The 59-ness of 29 is:

010010
010011
--------
000001 23 - dispelling illusions is reflected in 29 through a focus on pruning, on revealing the 'true' faith/belief by clearing away the 'rubbish'. This action reflects the influence on the boundary of 'us' vs 'them' etc. and the socialisation emphasis present in 29.

So -- WITHIN 29 we can map out its harmonics (X-ness) and from OUTSIDE we can also map its relationships.

We can in fact use the 47/22 dynamic to show what 29 looks like in general:

From the outside:

010010 (29)
101001 (22)
--------
111011 - 09, making small gains and standing on them to be 'noticed' but those gains are 'owned' and there is the suggestion of hierarchy (and so a link to social hierarchy)

On the inside:

010010 (29)
010110 (47)
--------
000100 - 16, full of potentials, foresight (again a focus on planning ahead through socialising etc), enthusiasm

and so on...

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Well, I don't think that your efforts to contain - or should I say tame? - the Yi dragon will give you much real control over it. :) Or much real understanding of its nature.
And anyway, what is the use of a tamed dragon? When you imprison the beast it loses most of its power.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Back to hexagram 29 - enclosure, narrow spaces, yes.
But it also indicates danger and unfamiliar and unstable conditions.
These are all essential meanings (universal, not local) that are, as far as I see, not covered by your concepts.
And control and protection - often hexagram 29 means just the opposite: conditions that one cannot control (metaphorically turbulent water) and a lack of protection and safety.

Hexagram 29 can perhaps mean "from containment comes control" in some cases but it can also mean something very different and IMO that phrase doesn't adequately represent the universal core meaning of the hexagram.

Agree?
Probably not .. ;)
 

nhyuyi

visitor
Joined
Jul 17, 1971
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Hi Again

I appreciate all of your responses.

But this one made me sit up straight.. Yes there's something to this one alright...

["Apart from not knowing, as Ewald said, I think 29 can also refer to mixed or ambivalent feelings. Love-hate, attraction-repulsion.
Do you indeed have mixed feelings about this project, Blink? (YES) :(
29 can also indicate confusion, chaos, lack of focus, and so on. "]

All of your explanations make the situation much clearer.

Thanks Guy's :bows:

Blink
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
martin said:
Well, I don't think that your efforts to contain - or should I say tame? - the Yi dragon will give you much real control over it. :) Or much real understanding of its nature.
And anyway, what is the use of a tamed dragon? When you imprison the beast it loses most of its power.
your missing the point totally. This particular thread, and threads like it, cover the realm of the SINGULAR. "Contractive Bounding" covers the realm of the GENERAL-PARTICULAR.

The realm of the particular focuses on hexagrams, their 'wholistic' nature with associated aspects, harmonics where that includes emotional colourings, what is danger for you is a 'buzz' for someone else but the generic context is about "Contractive Bounding".

The realm of the singular focuses on hexagrams-with-changing lines, and so will interpret to a level of 4096 possibles derived from 'miraculous/random' methods. If you are not aware of the core context then you can interpret a hexagram-with-changing lines to mean whatever you wish. This is due to the 'free' nature of the singular in that its purpose is to act as a 'random seed' to give some unique perspective but always WITHIN the core context - if you ignore that context then you are creating your own and so your personal, unique, interpretation of the IC without due consideration for the IC itself.

IC+ comes out of our species-nature, the realm of particular-general, of Science, in that it maps out the SAMENESS aspects, the consensus derivable from what our mindless brains deal with - patterns of differentiating/integrating - that serve as the foundations for assertions of DIFFERENCE.

The IC is not a 'thing' independent of you, it IS you where through it we can map your singular perspectives as we can your particular perspectives (that you share with other members of the species) - and that mapping covers collectives and the universe in that the IC is a filter through which we interpret 'all there is'.

The notion of "containment" is the core trigram quality derived from "contractive bounding". It covers ANYTHING that is contained and that can be positive or negative where the positive/negative aspects are highly subjective and of no concern with "containment" - IOW seeing the negative is one aspect, there is also the positive, and that is for ALL hexagrams. The 'issue' of danger here is that it covers a sense of being contained/controlled as it does one containing/controlling.

Thus the usual 'negative' nature of 47 often hides the positive aspect, of being willingly contained to allow for one's roots to sink deep into the context and so become part of, commit to, that context. The negative side is in imprisoning, "containing" without the consent of the one contained. THAT, for a 'freedom loving' individual is 'danger'.

Same patterns for all of the water-based trigrams - and so 07 covers the 'darkness' of the Army as it covers the benefits of uniformity and social hierarchy (with 04 the pair maps socialisation, be it unconditional (07) or conditional (04) - these are all grounded in a sense of "Containment". The ONLY place where control comes into it in the water-based hexagrams is in 29 in that water in TOP focuses more on qualities of containment doubled.

Too see issues of CONTROL at work, go through all of the hexagrams with water in the TOP position. (e.g. 08, 05)

When we map in emotions at the TRIGRAM level so we map-in, for water, the notion of rejection where the focus on the containment is to PROTECT.

These are not 'changing line' perspectives, they are qualities derived from the methodology we use in categorising and so stem from the particular-general. THEN comes the singular where the whole of the IC is applicable to each particular as an aid in developing a unique perspective. The creative element is in what that unique perspective brings to the hexagram as a whole GIVEN A LOCAL CONTEXT.

In IC+ there is no 'taming of the dragon", more so there is a mapping of the dragon's DNA and so genetics and how we can, from that information, get a rough idea of what the dragon will do IN GENERAL given different contexts as well as given its internal context, its core being PRIOR to local context influences. IOW we get more understanding of its nature than you think possible ;-) Youd be surprised how many 'buttons' we all have and how they can be pushed despite the singular focus imagining it is 'free' ;-)

Chris.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
martin said:
Back to hexagram 29 - enclosure, narrow spaces, yes.
But it also indicates danger and unfamiliar and unstable conditions.
These are all essential meanings (universal, not local) that are, as far as I see, not covered by your concepts.
And control and protection - often hexagram 29 means just the opposite: conditions that one cannot control (metaphorically turbulent water) and a lack of protection and safety.

Hexagram 29 can perhaps mean "from containment comes control" in some cases but it can also mean something very different and IMO that phrase doesn't adequately represent the universal core meaning of the hexagram.

Agree?
Probably not .. ;)
Contractive Bounding. Containment. Control. All else follows and that includes the negative (Danger) as well as the positive (Socialisation). What LOCAL traits you paint onto the universal is up to you, but lack of understanding what that universal is about can allow one to 'wander' a bit - be over-creative in one assigns meanings to a hexagram that fit better another. If you focus too hard you will find yourself dealing with a continuum and that becomes useless in predictions/interpretations etc.

This gets into my distinctions of 'small world networks' where your personal experiences in a particular collective can marginalise or even expunge universals from your mindset. We now know the structure of all of the universals PRIOR to any 'colouring' with emotions. LOCAL context then does the colouring and that includes, for example, seeing 29 as negative.

Here you can use the Emotional IC material to flesh out local conditions - better than, more consistant than, traditional 'divination' methods.

Chris.
 
Last edited:

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Lightofreason said:
IC+ comes out of our species-nature, the realm of particular-general, of Science, ...
Chris, your interpretations don't come out of 'Science'. They come out of an interesting but highly speculative personal (!) theory of yours. You use scientific language and you cite scientific research but that doesn't make your work any more scientific than a painting of Salvator Dali or the philosophy of Schopenhauer.
Your work is clearly personal, I recognize you in every page that you write and in all your interpretations of trigrams and hexagrams. You! :)

But what is wrong with that? Why do you put (presumably 'objective') Science on a pedestal and write it with capital S?
The fact that I recognize you so clearly in your work (including your personal control hangups, but hey, I'm not going to psychoanalyze you! ;)) doesn't make it less interesting and valuable to me. On the contrary.


Lightofreason said:
This gets into my distinctions of 'small world networks' where your personal experiences in a particular collective can marginalise or even expunge universals from your mindset.
Marginalizing universals in the I Ching - you are doing that too. Like everybody else. You are no exception. Certain aspects of the universals are highlighted, others are pushed into the background.
I applaud your or anyone elses effort to capture the universals as a whole, not just a part of it. But we are all selective. I believe this is unavoidable.

Lightofreason said:
Too see issues of CONTROL at work, go through all of the hexagrams with water in the TOP position. (e.g. 08, 05)
And what about hexagram 26 for example? No water on top and yet ...

I think that such concepts as control, containment and contractive bounding can be associated with several trigrams.
All the trigrams that have a yang line above a yin line in them, to be more specific (water, fire, mountain and wood). There is an element of contractive bounding in all of them.

In water on top the control seems to be temporary or partial. It may indicate an effort at control that fails or giving up (or relaxing) efforts at control.
You can see that in hexagram 5 where the 'waiting' is temporary, in hexagram 60 ("if the regulations which it prescribes be severe and difficult they cannot be permanent" according to Legge) and in hexagram 8.
Especially in line 5: the king relaxes efforts to control/contain the game and allows it to escape in one direction.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
martin said:
Chris, your interpretations don't come out of 'Science'. They come out of an interesting but highly speculative personal (!) theory of yours. You use scientific language and you cite scientific research but that doesn't make your work any more scientific than a painting of Salvator Dali or the philosophy of Schopenhauer.
Your work is clearly personal, I recognize you in every page that you write and in all your interpretations of trigrams and hexagrams. You! :)
The referenced material is what identifies all of IDM coming out of current research, WHAT/WHERE is not MY interpretation, it is a well-documented feature/dynamic of the neurology - you really should read the references etc before coming up with such above comments. MY contribution is linking the dots of the research, IOW my SINGULAR nature has given me enough experience to be able to understand what is going on at the forest level whilst the researchers are all focused on the trees. As such, I am the messenger ;-)
...
...
...

martin said:
Marginalizing universals in the I Ching - you are doing that too. Like everybody else. You are no exception. Certain aspects of the universals are highlighted, others are pushed into the background.
I applaud your or anyone elses effort to capture the universals as a whole, not just a part of it. But we are all selective. I believe this is unavoidable.
I see you as needing this to be so. As SINGULARS our selectivity aids in the creative, the 'genetic diversity' element, but as PARTICULARS there is no choice, 1 + 1 = 2. period.

martin said:
And what about hexagram 26 for example? No water on top and yet ...
Mountain in TOP is about QUALITY control, not generic control. 26 is about QUALITY control, the use of discernment to 'hold firm' through use of traditions (and so their quality). ALL hexagrams with mountain on top will focus on this issue of discernment, quality control. That is NOT the same as 29/water as control in that 29/water encapsulates, protects and does not have a focus on bonding, it focuses on bounding and there are CLEAR, PRECISE, differences here. You need to go a bit deeper in your precision thinking!

martin said:
I think that such concepts as control, containment and contractive bounding can be associated with several trigrams.
All the trigrams that have a yang line above a yin line in them, to be more specific (water, fire, mountain and wood). There is an element of contractive bounding in all of them.
you see, you lack precision in your thinking, DIAGRAMS are NOT trigrams. Different level of analysis. In DIGRAMS we have:

yin/yin or yang/yang = blending
yin/yang or yang/yin = bounding

THAT is why you an detect the bounding, BUT it is generic, vague, not clearly differentiated. When the differentiate by moving from four to eight categories so out pop the bonding/binding. PRIOR to the level of eights, they dont exist other than as potentials.

AT THE SAME TIME you can interpret as:

yin/yin or yang/yang = bonding
yin/yang or yang/yin = binding

This is where you start from the relational perspectives rather than the object perspectives - blend and bound dont exist.

IOW the lack in differentiation prohibits the expression of all four generic qualities at the same time, you have to differentiate another level to get the full set in the one meaning space.

martin said:
In water on top the control seems to be temporary or partial. It may indicate an effort at control that fails or giving up (or relaxing) efforts at control.
You can see that in hexagram 5 where the 'waiting' is temporary, in hexagram 60 ("if the regulations which it prescribes be severe and difficult they cannot be permanent" according to Legge) and in hexagram 8.
Especially in line 5: the king relaxes efforts to control/contain the game and allows it to escape in one direction.
You are cutting off the context in the above. The FULL story of 05 is "with perseverence comes control" and it is the perseverence in waiting for the right moment to come that elicits the control.

In 60 the focus reads "with self-reflection comes control" - the self-reflection of lake is dual in meaning, it LITERALLY means copy of self as it does FIGURATIVELY. Thus the focus on STANDARDISATIONS - there is a common, legal, determination on wheels sizes, door sizes etc etc etc and THAT is a form of control DERIVED FROM self-reflection.

GO through all of them:

08 - control of the court over 'followers' (with/from devotion to another (earth in bottom) comes control)

39 - with/from self-restraint (mountain in bottom) comes control - the standing against the mindless flow as we also cover the temptation to NOT stand up, to restrain from standing against it.

29 - self-explanitory

48 - with/from cultivation (wind in lower) comes control. Set the foundations, let things 'grow' from those foundations and you have control.

03 - with/from enlightenment, the 'sudden' breakthrough etc comes control; get through the difficulties etc and stability develops.

63 - with guidance comes control - you get the 'correct' sequence of things, the steps to follow etc.

60 - covered above

05 - covered above.

Thus the set {08,39,29,48,03,22,60,05} cover control more so than the set {07, 04, 29, 59, 40, 64, 47, 06} that cover more issues of containment. 29 is the 'pivot' of the two sets

Lets do the rest:

Heaven in lower = perseverence focus:
{11, 26, 05, 09, 34, 14, 43, 01}
Heaven in upper = singlemindedness focus (total trust in self):
{12, 33, 06, 44, 25, 13, 10, 10}

Fire in lower = guidance focus:
{36, 22, 63, 37, 55, 20, 49, 13}
Fire in upper = ideology focus (direction setting)
{35, 56, 64, 50, 21, 30, 38, 14}

Mountain in lower = self-restraint focus:
{15, 52, 39, 53, 62, 56, 31, 33}
Mountain in higher = discernment, quality control, focus:
{23, 52, 04, 18, 27, 22, 41, 26}

Lake in lower = self-reflection focus (lit and fig):
{19, 41, 60, 61, 54, 38, 58, 10}
Lake in upper = intensity in expression (mirror etc):
{45, 31, 47, 28, 17, 49, 58, 43}

thunder in lower = enlightenment focus (sudden realisation etc):
{24, 27, 03, 42, 51, 21, 17, 25}
thunder in upper = awareness focus (go beyond the 'moment' into what follows etc):
{16, 62, 40, 32, 51, 55, 54, 34}

Wind in lower = cultivation focus:
{46, 18, 48, 57, 32, 50, 28, 44}
Wind in upper = becoming influencial (cultivation doubled):
{20, 53, 59, 57, 42, 37, 61, 09}

Earth in lower = total devotion to another/others:
{02, 23, 08, 20, 16, 35, 45, 12}
Earth in upper = total trust in another/others, dualmindedness:
{02, 15, 07, 46, 24, 36, 19, 11}

At the really generic level we have:

Blend - earth , heaven
Bound - water, fire
Bond - mountain, lake
Bind - wind, thunder

These are all isomorphic to basic emotions such at the trigrams, in LOWER positions reflect core emotional 'drives':

heaven - anger
earth - fear

lake - sexual love
mountain - grief (loss of love)

fire - acceptance
water - rejection

thunder - surprise
wind - anticipation

Move these to the UPPER postions and they become more refined - e.g. from 'anger' comes self-respect, competitiveness, etc etc.

ALL of these come out of the self-referencing of the fight/flight dichotomy where the generic properties of that dichotomy are isomorphic to the properties of WHAT/WHERE, differentiating/integrating etc etc etc.

The patterns are 'in' the neurology of ALL of us - and so the generic IC is in all of us and with that expressed in the XOR material so we find purpose in all of us.

Become more generic, go back BEFORE emotions and the focus is on dealing with context - to REPLACE it or to COEXIST with it. Emotions act to communicate the intent.

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Lightofreason said:
yin/yang or yang/yin = bounding

THAT is why you an detect the bounding, BUT it is generic, vague, not clearly differentiated.
Hmm, I wouldn't read yin above yang as bounding. It is the opposite, unbounding (if that is a word), opening the gates, let go.
And yang above yin is not only bounding, it is also (already) contractive.
So, IMO, the bigram language is already specific.

But the issue here is perhaps that we read trigrams in a different way. I read them more as a temporal sequence:
Water, 010, as 01 followed by 10. First bound then unbound, first contract then expand, first retreat then advance, first close then open, first become tense then relax, and so on.
Water, when read in this way, also suggests hesitation (as in not knowing if one should retreat or advance) and while you associate it with repulsion (if I remember correctly) I associate it with both repulsion and attraction, hence the ambivalence (mixed feelings) that I mentioned in my response to Blink.

As to your "filling in the dots", that's 90% of the work and you do it in a very personal way! :)
 
Last edited:
L

lightofreason

Guest
martin said:
Hmm, I wouldn't read yin above yang as bounding. It is the opposite, unbounding (if that is a word), opening the gates, let go.
And yang above yin is not only bounding, it is also (already) contractive.
So, IMO, the digram language is already specific.
no. You have zoomed-in too quick grasshopper. Bounding is bounding. THEN comes the qualifiers of expanding or contracting of bound/de-bound etc.

Yin does not expand, it contracts so yin 'above' yang is a process of expanding followed by contracting. The other is yang over yin where we contract first to then expand. BUT in these dynamics we are also moving from the general to the particular, something you seem to avoid considering ;-)

Each 'step' is a step of differentiating, of making finer distinctions and so we move from the set of POTENTIALS as:

contractive whole / expansive whole

to

Cwhole, Cpart / Epart, Ewhole

to

Cwhole, Cstatic, Cpart, Cdynamic / Edynamic, Epart, Estatic, Ewhole;

The qualities are 'vague' and potentials. As your brain works so it maps a specific thread through the potentials to select one as representing 'the moment'.

The IC+ perspective is on the decision making steps that elicit 'meaning', that form a 'category' such that 111 gives us 'contractive blending' aka 'high level differentiation' aka 'high frequency' and so a focus on the discrete etc. The path is "I differentiate IN GENERAL to then differentiate to allow be to differentiate in PARTICULAR".

The action brings out properties of differentiating/positive-feedback etc for 111. Then comes 110, 101, 100 and so on to 000.

martin said:
But the issue here is perhaps that we read trigrams in a different way. I read them more as a temporal sequence:
Water, 010, as 01 followed by 10. First bound then unbound, first contract then expand, first retreat then advance, first close then open, first become tense then relax, and so on.
Water, when read in this way, also suggests hesitation (as in not knowing if one should retreat or advance) and while you associate it with repulsion (if I remember correctly) I associate it with both repulsion and attraction, hence the ambivalence (mixed feelings) that I mentioned in my response to Blink.
Bounding is bounding. A boundary, a 'them from us' focus but in the contractive form it PROTECTS whereas in the expansive form (fire) it EXPLOITS in its expansion.

The IC+ focus is on the STRUCTURAL nature of the hexagrams and so how we can extract a spectrum etc and how there are not 6 lines, there are 64 possible line configurations! (OR 6 waves each 1/n^2 of the previous - either way we get 64 states, not 6)

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
Lol, perhaps _you_ zoom in too late!
But where do you get this notion that yin (in the context of the Yi) stands for contraction?
There is nothing more expanded and open than hexagram 2. And nothing more contracted and closed than hexagram 1.
Yes, yang will expand eventually, the seed will germinate, if it falls on fertile ground, if gets the opportunity, the space. That is yin. No expansion without it. Right?

Btw, there are many other meanings of water (I forgot "first resist then surrender", for example).
And there are other ways of reading trigrams too.
I'm not trying to imprison the Yi-dragon in this or that system, this is just a game. :)
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
martin said:
Lol, perhaps _you_ zoom in too late!
But where do you get this notion that yin (in the context of the Yi) stands for contraction?
There is nothing more expanded and open than hexagram 2. And nothing more contracted and closed than hexagram 1.
Yes, yang will expand eventually, the seed will germinate, if it falls on fertile ground, if gets the opportunity, the space. That is yin. No expansion without it. Right?
The notion of the receptive, of darkness, female, potentials etc covers the sense of contraction, to draw in, to experience wholeness by drawing in, being 'empty' as compared to yang that experiences wholeness by pouring out, being too full. Planting the seed is the planting of a potential and that is covered in 'yin'.

the sense of 'following' is covered in the 'drawing in', as is devotion to another/others and the sense of protection. The focus on absolute darkness also contains (!) the sense of potentials, what is 'in there?' etc.

The core association is with integrating and so to pull together as compared to push apart (differentiating) - so ... there is a lot to associate 'contracting' with yin ;-) When we order things into their 'natural' sequence so 000000 is the point of identification of 'potentials' which is one step removed from no awareness as such. 'Energise' each potential and the line positions become lines and the hexagrams form and so 'expand' from there - there is no expansion until actualisation, until 'yang-ness' is applied.

Emotionally the focus is on context-coexisting, to 'blend in', to 'disappear' into the context, the culture, etc - all markers of issues with fear that is turned to become devotion to another/others etc.

In this condition, identity is implicit, it is asserted through others, it is gained from others, all in the act of devotion, of drawing 'in' to fill the emptyness that is of potentials - as such we introduce light into the darkness (or bring the potentials into the light - 35)

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
I don't know, Chris, it sometimes seems that you follow the principle "if the facts don't confirm my theory then sorry for the facts!"
I don't like to use the handy word "period" but IMO some of your interpretations of trigrams and hexagrams are really way off.
Period! There, I did it! :)
There must be errors in your thinking somewhere if it leads to such results. I think it's time to go back to the drawing table and revise your theories.
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
Martin,

To see the GENERAL, neurologically-determined categories and compare them to the PARTICULAR, culturally-determined categories of the traditional IC I suggest you see my 'attachements' to "Confucius" posts on hexagram entymology. Those posts of Confucius cover attempts by the 'ancients' to describe the categories through analogies/metaphors to local conditions. The universals are the FEELINGS we all have as a species and relabel to describe reality. The difference in the prose (mine is 'short') is where the attempts to describe the analogies/metaphors will always cover a lot of associations, aspects, as one tried to 'hit the nail on the head' ;-)

The issue is that the 'nail' is general, vague, it is a product of our species-nature and so general by default, but we have not understood that until recent times.

I have added ONE XOR aspect to my comments, that of 27-ness, but note we can give 64 associations per hexagram and so a LOT of detail beyond what the 'traditionalists' can give. What they can do is add finer details, unique perspectives, etc and so flesh out the general associations (ie.g. n 05 there is no explicit reference to 'networking' whilst waiting for one's moment - but there IS when we focus on the infrastructure hexagram for 05 - 57 where ITS focus is on cultivating and becoming influencial. THAT influence will come out in any 'reflections' on 05 since the influence is hard-coded in the neurology ;-) )

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
When you use the Yi as an oracle for a long time and receive the same hexagrams repeatedly you get a pretty accurate idea of their general (universal) meaning. And then, when you go back to the text of the Yi and read it again, you often discover that it is all there. Passages that were opaque suddenly become transparent.

It's all there, albeit in metaphorical language that is sometimes hard to understand, but the ancients did a very good job, on the whole.

This is the reality of the Yi, these are the "facts" that are uncovered gradually by reading and practical experience with the Yi as an oracle. I trust that reality, those facts. They are my empirical "ground".

Based on your insights about how it all works in the brain you get results (interpretations) that sometimes come near to this reality and sometimes not. Some of your interpretations contradict the facts. So I say, because I trust those facts, that there is probably something wrong with your insights.
If it is indeed all neurologically determined (I doubt it, btw, but okay, let's assume it is for now) the question is still: how exactly? Perhaps not exactly like you think?
 
L

lightofreason

Guest
martin said:
When you use the Yi as an oracle for a long time and receive the same hexagrams repeatedly you get a pretty accurate idea of their general (universal) meaning. And then, when you go back to the text of the Yi and read it again, you often discover that it is all there. Passages that were opaque suddenly become transparent.
The IDM perspective is that you dont need to work with the IC for such a long time to understand what is going on. The METHODOLOGY in its creation will set down a template of categories, qualities, that, in that 'long time', you will in fact be
'filling in the dots' - there is nothing 'new' in general, only in particular, as in some novel experience of 'contractive blending' etc.

The categories of the IC are derived from the neurology as it self-references WHAT/WHERE aka differentiating/integrating. These are universals in that they lack local colouring, which is what 'filling in the dots' does. As you 'fill in the dots' what you are doing is becoming aware of finer distinctions - the point is that you start off by flying 'blind' in you need to get into the LOCAL nature in the form of the traditional IC. Given the work in neurosciences etc and so the IDM model, that period of time is no longer necessary, one can 'get it' quickly if but generally.

We then start to see how the IC can reflect 'all there is' as 'all there is' can reflect the IC - we are dealing with a template of meaning applied to ANY specialist perspective where the specialisations are METAPHORS etc for describing reality.

martin said:
It's all there, albeit in metaphorical language that is sometimes hard to understand, but the ancients did a very good job, on the whole.
"on the whole", sure, but they also introduced a lot of 'local interpretations' that are not present other than as 'primitive' attempts to try and describe how it all does what it does. They had no idea of properties and methods of self-referencing and the brain's use such. WITH that knowledge we can now make things a lot clearer in understanding, we move way beyond the traditional material in that we can flesh out a lot more detail and in doing so show a property of self-referencing not restricted to the IC but covering any self-referencing methodology using dichotomies.

martin said:
This is the reality of the Yi, these are the "facts" that are uncovered gradually by reading and practical experience with the Yi as an oracle. I trust that reality, those facts. They are my empirical "ground".
and there is your 'issue' with things, and IDM. You have spent a LOT of time/energy in trying to understand the IC and along comes IDM etc and shows how the basics can be done quicker and not requiring 'local knowledge'. The IDM perspective is inevitable given the research. IT does not diminish the IC, it in fact shows there is a lot there not covered in the traditional material due to ignorance of the findings coming out of scientific research on meaning generation etc.

There is nothing 'wrong' with the traditional perspective other than it being 'primitive' at times. But that just reflects the age when it was 'born' and how, over 3000 years we have learnt a lot about 'in here' and 'out there' - and the IC has ignored that but times change, the IC is in need of 'refurbishment' ;-)

martin said:
Based on your insights about how it all works in the brain you get results (interpretations) that sometimes come near to this reality and sometimes not. Some of your interpretations contradict the facts.
show me. I will show you, using XOR, how we can get the IC to describe itself and in so doing validate my interpretations IN GENERAL. IOW I can show you where the 'traditional facts' are in error or 'misled' where local context has gotten confused ;-) - recall I have said before that local context will marginalise or even expunge universal aspects and then consider than local context as if it is THE context - it isnt.

MY contribution, YOUR contribution, as singulars, as mindful species-members, will show unique local perspectives on the IC but always WITHIN the GENERAL as identified in blending, bonding, bounding, and binding.

Issues can develop if you do not know what you are dealing with at the GENERAL level in that one can step across boundaries that ARE there as if they were not - and THAT leads to 'bad interpretations' but with a touch of charisma etc can be sold as if 'true' and so lead to some 'local context' issues. Understanding what is BEHIND the IC allows one to be more efficent in working with it and so using it.

martin said:
So I say, because I trust those facts, that there is probably something wrong with your insights.
If it is indeed all neurologically determined (I doubt it, btw, but okay, let's assume it is for now) the question is still: how exactly? Perhaps not exactly like you think?
;-) Exactly has how IDM has presented (read the neurology ref abstracts) to date. Nothing has come up that throws a spanner in the works.

The facts you trust are derived from within a 'traditional' perspective and so are 'small world'. The facts I deal with come out of research in neurosciences etc and so cover the global as well as the local. I think it is time for the local to re-appraise their position since it is becoming increasingly 'marginalised' when viewed from the facts we are getting out of neurosciences.

As such, the emotional IC work etc shows us a very exiting tool for interactions with emotions and shows how well the IC categories work when applied to reality without any of the 'miraculous' or 'random' methods. IOW the IDM/IC+ material validates the IC but with some minor 'adjustments' and/or major new insights.

Chris.
 

martin

visitor
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
0
lightofreason said:
show me. I will show you, using XOR, how we can get the IC to describe itself and in so doing validate my interpretations IN GENERAL. IOW I can show you where the 'traditional facts' are in error or 'misled' where local context has gotten confused ;-)
"Show me .."
I didn't make a list - not yet :) - of all IMO major discrepancies between my 'facts' and your interpretations.
But we apparently see the water trigam and some hexagrams with that trigram in it quite differently. We have discussed that here.

I think we also differ about the thunder trigram. You associate it with surprise, enlightenment and so on. IMO these are only secondary effects of the trigram that do not cover its core meaning.
Another issue is the interpretation of hexagrams in terms of trigrams as context-text. Nothing wrong with that as such but I believe that sometimes other interpretations are needed to make sense of a hexagram, especially in divination.

However, we are hijacking this thread more or less (as least we might be accused again of that crime :eek:) so it is perhaps a good idea to move this discussion to the Confucius thread where it seems more appropriate.
I see that you are contributing to that thread now and I will comment over there when I spot a glaring discrepancy. ;)
 

TygerChild

visitor
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
149
Reaction score
5
The IDM perspective is that you dont need to work with the IC for such a long time to understand what is going on. The METHODOLOGY in its creation will set down a template of categories, qualities, that, in that 'long time', you will in fact be
'filling in the dots' - there is nothing 'new' in general, only in particular, as in some novel experience of 'contractive blending' etc.

The categories of the IC are derived from the neurology as it self-references WHAT/WHERE aka differentiating/integrating. These are universals in that they lack local colouring, which is what 'filling in the dots' does. As you 'fill in the dots' what you are doing is becoming aware of finer distinctions - the point is that you start off by flying 'blind' in you need to get into the LOCAL nature in the form of the traditional IC. Given the work in neurosciences etc and so the IDM model, that period of time is no longer necessary, one can 'get it' quickly if but generally.

We then start to see how the IC can reflect 'all there is' as 'all there is' can reflect the IC - we are dealing with a template of meaning applied to ANY specialist perspective where the specialisations are METAPHORS etc for describing reality.



"on the whole", sure, but they also introduced a lot of 'local interpretations' that are not present other than as 'primitive' attempts to try and describe how it all does what it does. They had no idea of properties and methods of self-referencing and the brain's use such. WITH that knowledge we can now make things a lot clearer in understanding, we move way beyond the traditional material in that we can flesh out a lot more detail and in doing so show a property of self-referencing not restricted to the IC but covering any self-referencing methodology using dichotomies.



and there is your 'issue' with things, and IDM. You have spent a LOT of time/energy in trying to understand the IC and along comes IDM etc and shows how the basics can be done quicker and not requiring 'local knowledge'. The IDM perspective is inevitable given the research. IT does not diminish the IC, it in fact shows there is a lot there not covered in the traditional material due to ignorance of the findings coming out of scientific research on meaning generation etc.

There is nothing 'wrong' with the traditional perspective other than it being 'primitive' at times. But that just reflects the age when it was 'born' and how, over 3000 years we have learnt a lot about 'in here' and 'out there' - and the IC has ignored that but times change, the IC is in need of 'refurbishment' ;-)



show me. I will show you, using XOR, how we can get the IC to describe itself and in so doing validate my interpretations IN GENERAL. IOW I can show you where the 'traditional facts' are in error or 'misled' where local context has gotten confused ;-) - recall I have said before that local context will marginalise or even expunge universal aspects and then consider than local context as if it is THE context - it isnt.

MY contribution, YOUR contribution, as singulars, as mindful species-members, will show unique local perspectives on the IC but always WITHIN the GENERAL as identified in blending, bonding, bounding, and binding.

Issues can develop if you do not know what you are dealing with at the GENERAL level in that one can step across boundaries that ARE there as if they were not - and THAT leads to 'bad interpretations' but with a touch of charisma etc can be sold as if 'true' and so lead to some 'local context' issues. Understanding what is BEHIND the IC allows one to be more efficent in working with it and so using it.



;-) Exactly has how IDM has presented (read the neurology ref abstracts) to date. Nothing has come up that throws a spanner in the works.

The facts you trust are derived from within a 'traditional' perspective and so are 'small world'. The facts I deal with come out of research in neurosciences etc and so cover the global as well as the local. I think it is time for the local to re-appraise their position since it is becoming increasingly 'marginalised' when viewed from the facts we are getting out of neurosciences.

As such, the emotional IC work etc shows us a very exiting tool for interactions with emotions and shows how well the IC categories work when applied to reality without any of the 'miraculous' or 'random' methods. IOW the IDM/IC+ material validates the IC but with some minor 'adjustments' and/or major new insights.

Chris.

gosh:eek:uch:
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
19,923
Reaction score
208

Both Lightofreason (Chris) and Martin have been dead for some time.....so he isn't going to answer you or see your comment...unless he haunts which he might


I still have Martin on my friends list lol

And Good grief the whole computer went and did a few flashes on and off as I wrote that...hehe

Hi Martin :D
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
19,923
Reaction score
208
At one time Chris and Martin spent ages arguing/discussing, take your pick. It always amuses me to think of their conversation continuing in heaven.

Martin was right of course because I don't think Chris would have believed in spirits or life after death and Martin did, so if they are chatting now Chris is going to feel a right plonker isn't he.

Personally I think they both get someone who doesn't know them to resurrect their old posts now and then so they can say 'hi'. Martin definitely says 'hi' here about twice a year here IMO. Is it his birthday or something ?
 

anemos

visitor
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
2,316
Reaction score
1
Personally I think they both get someone who doesn't know them to resurrect their old posts now and then so they can say 'hi'. Martin definitely says 'hi' here about twice a year here IMO. Is it his birthday or something ?
:)
 

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