...life can be translucent

Menu

Needing help

lightofdarkness

(deceased)
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
3
An issue with consciousness is its ability to mix fact and fiction, the real vs the imagined. The drive overall is on interpretation, we cannot stop creating fictions to try and understand something 'immediately' rather than wait for Science etc to come up with a 'rational' answer.

The development of consciousness appears to be as an agent of mediation in dealing with novelty in a context or a novel context overall. The use of imagination allows us to adapt to contexts we have not yet experienced in the flesh - but when/if we do we can 'fit in' really quickly.

So.. central to the use of imagination is 'what if'.

The I Ching as a metaphor for what our brains deal with (objects/relationships) works like a filter in identifying, imagined or real or some hybrid, all that was/is/will be; all that could have been/is not/could be. It can also be used to differentiate facts from values, as well as the user's nature of being proactive (instigating things) or reactive (responding to things).

If used PROACTIVELY it can serve as an indicator of what particular is 'pushing ones buttons' unconsciously.

If used REACTIVELY it can serve to describe ALL aspects of some situation where the use of 'random/miraculous' methods brings out one aspect of that situation where ALL hexagrams apply to varying degrees (the bestfit/worstfit ordering of hexagrams).

As an example of the proactive method (answering GENERAL questions) consider the following about a recent event with my daughter (original post to my ICPlus list):

The particular questions I came up with [in ICPLUS) stem from my analysis of the generic dynamics of the brain dealing with 'novel' situations and where, using the questions, we can extract the GENERAL context of which the question is being asked.

For a recent example, with my mother in the hospice I and my daughter were there every day. During this period, three weeks ago, my daughter's car was written-off due to a severe storm that hit the hospice car park and knocked a tree onto her car. Although insured etc this was an issue in that (a) my daughter had now had no car and (b) she could not drive mine due to insurance issues re those under 25 and still on provisional licences.

So - I was the only source of transport outside of taxis and that ment my daughter spent more time at the hospice as I was the one who went out for supplies, paid bills, etc etc IOW she did not have a 'break' from the hospice room as much as I did where prior to the accident we would take turns on these 'outings'.

I asked by daughter to do the ICPlus questions in the context of how she felt in the current context (a few days after the accident); she got hex 47 where the focus is on being confined (either by willingly or by force) and the associated exhaustion that that can bring (we were at the hospice for 6 weeks, day in, day out, and all emotionally draining.)

My point here is that she did not realise how she felt LOCALLY/PRECISELY, she was generally 'cranky' but could not nail-down what was setting that off
- IOW there was general concern with her grandmother etc but the accident concentrated 'issues' to bring out that focus on contractive bounding - a boundary working to (a) keep someone/thing 'IN' or (b) 'OUT'. (the first answer by her was the context was more into a sense of 'values', qualitative focus rather than quantitative)

The hexagram has a dual meaning in that it covers the positive as well as the negative in that it also covers the 'carer' function of PROTECTING - IOW besides HER IMMEDIATE perspective of being 'fenced in' so there was also here GENERAL perspective of 'closing in' grandmother as a form of aid etc. - the role of carers etc is to 'ease' the pain/suffering, to keep out excesses etc. and so to protect.

The ICPlus material is aimed at describing the GENERAL context that is 'pushing one's buttons' rather than the particulars of an asked question; the focus is on one's FEELINGS and so draws out the unconscious as well as conscious elements of the WHOLE context.

With the XOR material we can then take that hexagram and extract all of the
64 parts to cover how the context 'begins', 'completes' etc etc etc and from there give our consciousness the CHOICE of (a) adapting to context or (b) trying to assert one's own, of (c) moving on. (thus for 47, it has its skeletal form, its infrastructure, its 27-ness, described by analogy to the underplayed qualities of hexagram 10 with ITS focus on a need for conduct etc whilst carefully following a path when under close scrutiny.)

Her GENERAL 'vibe' of her being in the current context was (a) context was about values (her feelings but no particulars, just a 'vibe' of being uncomfortable etc), (b) about what was/is/will be (no car), (c) she was reactive (little she could do). This gives a core sense of Water (contractive bounding). For the top trigram and a focus on the text operating in the context, she had (a) a facts bias (death), (b) about what was/is/will-be (inevitability), and (c) reactive (the waiting with little one could do)

My daughter was surprised at the GENERAL precision of the result just based on those generic questions but was able to 'resolve' what was troubling her and so 'adapted' to the current context as best she could (and she did extremely well in dealing with her grandmother as her grandmother died)

My point has been on how our LOCAL expressions, our intense use of words etc often covers-up the core context influence and how it pushes our buttons and how through use of the ICPlus perspective we can extract out what is troubling us/driving us (by understanding things we can, through the use of consciousness, REFINE our responses, understand the contexts etc and so move more 'smoothly' in those contexts)

Chris.
 

luz

visitor
Joined
Jan 31, 1970
Messages
778
Reaction score
8
Hi Bruce,

I am curious.. why is it impertinent or irrelevant to ask about a relationship that is over or even one that hasn't started yet, for that matter? I think people ask those questions all the time. In fact, I rarely see questions in this forum about current relationships. Most of the time the relationship hasn't happened yet or is already over.

As to the misleading answers, I think that all of those theories are good. Maybe sometimes we are just projecting, other times the answer fits a different level of reality, other times this reality is not as it seems.. who knows. But I do hope the Yi does not change the subject on me just because it disapproves of my question! I don't think it does.. disapprove of any question, btw.
happy.gif
 
B

bruce

Guest
Hi Angel,

I believe the Yi will speak to the now, and if the relationship exists on as a fantasy, then the Yi wouldn't speak to the fantasy but to the current reality. Just how I see it.

Chris, great post!
 

luz

visitor
Joined
Jan 31, 1970
Messages
778
Reaction score
8
Lol, I agree with you. Although the Yi has been known to sometimes answer questions about tv shows..
biggrin.gif


But I still don't see who is talking about a fantasy relationship here.. ?
 
B

bruce

Guest
Hi again, Angel,

I was preoccupied when I left my last post, and want to return to it.

Are you really suggesting there?s no such thing as asking Yi an irrelevant question?

First, I?m not at all opposed to fantasy, whether it?s Alice in Wonderland or an online sexual encounter. To each their own; and I perceive Yi as being at least as liberally minded about this sort of thing. Fantasy in a relationship can be life-giving. Fantasy in our personal lives can also be life-giving - to a point.

What I was referring to was the forlorn ex-lover/husband/boyfriend/girlfriend who holds onto wishes of what it could have been and might still be, when in fact it has died. This often isn?t acknowledged, however, as fantasy. It?s posed to Yi as though it is entirely real. How then is the Yi to respond to such a question?

I, on several occasions here, have run to the defense of hex.4 being seen in a positive manner, rather than only as the accusing finger of the teacher to the fool. (That image always bothers me, when assumingly applied to Meng.) That said, I do acknowledge that the negative side of 4 most certainly exists, where and when it is applicable. And I believe in such a case as I?ve illustrated, it is pure foolishness to expect Yi to acknowledge a foolish question in a direct manner.

But an answer will be received, irregardless. Now the question is: how to apply or interpret an answer, which rather than speaking to the irrelevant question, is speaking of the mind or psychology of the person asking the question?
 
B

bruce

Guest
Angel,

"But I still don't see who is talking about a fantasy relationship here.. ?"

You yourself said "I think people ask those questions all the time. In fact, I rarely see questions in this forum about current relationships. Most of the time the relationship hasn't happened yet or is already over."

These aren't "fantasy" questions?
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
No, not necessarily, although it sometimes (often?) is phantasy of course.
But when I talked about what happens on "inner planes" I didn't mean phantasy.
It's real!
happy.gif
 
B

bruce

Guest
Martin,

If the question is about something on "inner planes", I see no reason why the Yi wouldn't answer it directly. The context of the question is real, because it has been acknowledged as being about ones own inner condition. As I've said, Yi will speak to the psychology of the person asking the question.
 

luz

visitor
Joined
Jan 31, 1970
Messages
778
Reaction score
8
I see that you interpret that as fantasy now.. Interesting.. thing is, when somebody is in love with somebody else and they don't have a relationship, well they sure have fantasies but when they ask a question like "what will happen", "does she love me", I don't see that as a fantasy question. I see it as a legitimate desire to know if their love is corresponded and if they will eventually have a relationship. Other times, when the relationship is over, they might still ask "how does he feel about me", "what can I do to win him back".. I still dont' see that as a fantasy, it's just a question about what might be.

Take a question, very popular one: "what does he think of me or how does he feel about me"
Does it make a big difference if it is asked before, during or after a hypothetical relationship? Is it a fantasy question if the other person is not interested? I dont think so. The relationship might be dead but the question is still valid, I think.

Now, if the person imagines herself to be in a relationship that doesn't exist.. and ask a question, like "will he ask me to marry him".. well I think they have more problems than just a bad question for the Yi..

And I do think that there is no such thing as an irrelevant question. We are humans. Any question that preoccupies us enough to make us toss coins repeatedly while chanting it, trusting in an unseen presence is important to us. Surely, if we humans can have enough empathy for each other to understand why we want to know something, this thing that is the Yi, clearly superior to us, should also have that empathy and I think it does and it speaks to us in the best way it can. And sometimes it tells us "4" because we push too far, but only sometimes. But that is just what i think..
 
B

bruce

Guest
Angel,

When interpreting, I try not to judge which of whose questions has legitimate context and which do not, for just the reasons you've mentioned. Fact is, I don't know. But when looking at the amount of confusion some of these questions raise, it gives a pretty good hint.
biggrin.gif
 

luz

visitor
Joined
Jan 31, 1970
Messages
778
Reaction score
8
I was rereading the thread a bit, Bruce, and I think now maybe I know better what you mean.

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

and if the relationship exists on as a fantasy, then the Yi wouldn't speak to the fantasy but to the current reality<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

You mean that if a person has a fantasy in their head about a relationship and they ask a question, the Yi answers that question based on reality.

But in that case, there would be no misleading issues, the Yi would say.. "well, he thinks of you very seldom and when he does, very briefly..", instead of saying "he really feels connected to you".

Now, what Martin suggests is that perhaps such a connection exists, in an inner plane and the Yi refers to that connection with the 'misleading' answer.

What you say is that the Yi responds by saying "you wish"! Lol

I don't know, my point is that nobody knows for sure what the Yi means by such inaccurate answers. After all, the forlorn lover will find very little consolation in knowing a strong inner connection exists but will never 'come down' to reality.. sob! But, OTOH, I should hope the Yi is not teasing me!

Maybe you're right, maybe we shouldn't ask this kinds of questions.
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
Perhaps, Bruce, there is some confusion about what I mean by "inner" planes or worlds. I do not mean your or mine private inner world, but rather the collective inner reality.
In this shared reality things are happening and people are communicating, although they may not be aware of it in their everyday waking consciousness.
And inner communication can happen even if there is outwardly no relationship, no contact, at that moment.

You wrote "If the question is about something on "inner planes", I see no reason why the Yi wouldn't answer it directly"
Well, the questions that I had in mind are not specifically about inner planes but about a relationship. And then the Yi may give an answer that seems incorrect to us because we are focused on outer reality while it is in fact correct, because the answer refers to inner events.

Does this make it more clear?
 
B

bruce

Guest
Poor Sissy, asked a simple question and we've turned it onto a Socratic discussion.

Martin, yes, it does! Thank you. I completely agree with that. I believe, in fact, we're saying much the same thing, IE: "And inner communication can happen even if there is outwardly no relationship, no contact, at that moment." That indeed speaks to the psychology of the person asking the question. Not saying it isn't real on that level.

Angel, pardon if I sound like I'm contradicting myself here, but 'should' and 'shouldn't' aren't in my vocabulary nearly as much as they used to be. I've all but eliminated those or similar words from my dialogue with the Yi. I'm interested in what benefits and furthers, and knowing what potentially impedes progress, to make improvements upon my understanding of how things work. It's been my experience that this is the way Yi answers most of my questions. Sometimes there is a "STOP, you idiot!" or a "What are you waiting for?!" answer. Most of the time it's more like "Consider and weigh what this is REALLY about." So now I try to form my questions more along those lines.

I truly believe the Yi can and does answer even silly or playful questions, whether about a TV show or a stimulating thought. But those questions exist within an honest and hopefully awakened contextual field. I believe that?s all that is required of us to receive an honest and awakened answer.
 
B

bruce

Guest
Martin, um, I think my arrow fell short of your target. lol

You are speaking of actual telepathic contact with a person with whom there exists no physical or verbal communication? Or did I read it right the first time?
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
Yes, right, that's what I'm speaking of!
Why didn't you pick that up telepathically?
biggrin.gif
 
B

bruce

Guest
I had the music up too loud, probably.
paperbag.gif


Interesting point, now that I finally understand it!
happy.gif
I see no reason why that's not possible. It is the condition of many long distance relationships, especially with the advent of the internet. My only observation on it would be that, those who have relationships on that subtle, subconscious plane often spend time together also in the present, in-person, on phone, in letters or over the internet. That makes it relevant to the present. Just where actual synchronicity ends and imagination begins, is hard to tell, except by way of confirmation with one another, which will also take place in the present.

Isn't this where a question pertaining to a particular deity, spirit guide or ancestor might arise? I mean, how can we know for sure there is a literal connection or a purely imaginary one? Would Yi speak only the imaginary, if there was no literal proof? I think so. But again, in that scenario there is an honest contextual field. Yi can work with that, so long as we lend ourselves to understanding, and not just having our fantasy tickled.
 
B

bruce

Guest
Will come back to Chris' thought here, Martin.

"An issue with consciousness is its ability to mix fact and fiction, the real vs the imagined. The drive overall is on interpretation, we cannot stop creating fictions to try and understand something 'immediately' rather than wait for Science etc to come up with a 'rational' answer.

The development of consciousness appears to be as an agent of mediation in dealing with novelty in a context or a novel context overall. The use of imagination allows us to adapt to contexts we have not yet experienced in the flesh - but when/if we do we can 'fit in' really quickly."

The mind is an amazing thing, and the Yi, no less so; if indeed they are separate.
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
Reality and imagination, fact and fiction ...
It's not always easy to distinguish an "inner" fact (a telepathically received message for example) from imagination. They appear more or less on the same inner screen, so to speak.
But sometimes it's very clear, even without a reality check (phone the telephone compagnie and ask "is it true that deity such and so dialed my number a few minutes ago?"
biggrin.gif
)

An incomplete list of differences:

- Facts are somehow alien (Fremdkorper in German), not like me, I couldn't produce them.
In a musical analogy they would be like sounds from a different instrument, not this instrument that I am.

- Facts usually appear sudden, phantasies build up more gradually. In other words, facts appear as given, as if you perceive them (hence the term "inner senses"), with phantasies it's more like you construct them and build them up in your mind.

- Facts present themselves with greater clarity, phantasies are relatively vague.

- Facts are more subtle. Imagination is relatively gross.

- Other differences? What do you think?
happy.gif
 
S

seeker

Guest
Ive read this discussion with great interest as I am one of those who consistently receives answers on relationships that appear misleading. My theory has always been that Yi gives us answers that get us where we need to be, not necessarily where we want to be. But Im curious as to how you think Yi would answer if you specifically ask it for a straight answer to your question. If your preface your question, by saying can you please answer the question I ask directly, will you then get a direct answer or will Yi ignore your plea and answer as it sees fit?

I actually did that today, so will let you know what happens. Though of course, it would have to be an ongoing study to have merit. But I asked about someone I just met (the fantasy if you will) and got 42.1.3. Thought that was positive but have not heard from him. So, after reading this discussion, I asked another question today, prefacing the question with can you please answer the question I ask, and got 42.1. Interesting that I got a similar response. As I mentioned in my thread, I do not hold out much hope. In the last few months I have been stood up 5 times and had several other one time things, so I have pretty much lost faith. I did also get 49 as part of my original response, so maybe my lost faith is part of that. But it will be interesting to see what happens in light of this discussion. Will let you know.
 
B

bruce

Guest
Seeker, I've found that it is helpful to specify for Yi to answer the question directly (btw, some here believe the Yi always answers the question directly), and it has made the process clearer. But, I haven't found it to guarantee that the picture isn't more complex than the simple answer I was hoping for.
happy.gif
 

pakua

visitor
Joined
Aug 26, 1972
Messages
359
Reaction score
0
Hi Martin,

"And then the Yi may give an answer that seems incorrect to us because we are focused on outer reality while it is in fact correct, because the answer refers to inner events. "

This is what troubles me. When the relationship is "real", Yi answers according to reality, ie either positive or negative answers as the case may be, but when the relationship becomes fantasy, Yi may also give positive or negative answers, with no hint that now it's suddenly only in the inner worlds.

How are we supposed to know Yi shifted gears? The question usually has to do with outer reality, so for it to suddenly change it's focus without telling us is not very fair!
 
M

micheline

Guest
re; fantasy and reality...Pakua's question awhile back seems relevant....doesnt there have to be some kind of vital connection (other than collective reality) to make the response meaningful to here and now?

if my teenage daughter is out with friends and not answering her cell phone, I frequently ask the Yi "how she is doing" and I implicitly trust the responses ...they tell me about her, and do not address my psychological state...personal experience bears this out for me. Her friends think I am psychic. Because there is a viable connection between my daughter and I, I find I can use the Yi to "tune in" on whats happening with her.

BUt if I were to ask about some person with whom I have no real viable connection -the Yi will still tune in to collective reality perhaps, but the response is going to be mysterious to me...simply because I have nothing concrete to relate it to. It may address a part of the reality I share with that person on an inner level, but how can I ever verify that? or know specifically what it is saying? It will seem like fantasy.

I think that is why questions themselves need to be focused and specific, if you want truly meaningful responses that you can work with. The Yi doesnt change focus on us, it simply reflects a general focus or a specific one depending on our question and our "relationship" (clear or vague) with the issue or person we are asking about.
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
Hi Pakua,

I think the Yi didn't change focus, it always talks about outer as well as inner events. It talks about the totality. The outer world, our imagination and the (real, not imagined, collective) inner world.
Sometimes nothing or not much is happening outside or even in our imagination. And then it may be difficult for us to understand what the Yi is talking about.
But, as an old oracle book that I once had said in its preface: "not everybody understands, but everybody can try to understand".
And I believe we can learn a lot from this "unfair" (lol) behavior of the Yi. We can learn to become more sensitive to inner or subtle realities. Or at least try to learn.
Is that not what IT is all about?
 
B

bruce

Guest
Well said, Martin.

That indeed is the puzzlement. In times of illumination it's easy to see that connection of inner and outer as being reflections of one another. It is a love affair with ones self. When another, outside of ones self, IE: an external love object, enters the foray, it is like 41.3: "When three people journey together, their number decreases by one. When one man journeys alone, he finds a companion." When the companion is there, externally, that is what the mind and Yi are likely to speak to. If the outer companion isn't there, it is speaking to the inner lover. When all three are there, one will have to ride in the back seat - unless they truly are soul mates, which in that case, each is in each other; and again there are two, which really is one.
 
B

bruce

Guest
Btw, ?love object? could be a career, a car or boat, a stacked blond or a hunk with 6-pack abs.
biggrin.gif
 

lightofdarkness

(deceased)
Joined
Mar 16, 1970
Messages
1,025
Reaction score
3
The realm of Lake is a realm of context replacement by replication. This is not just physically sexual, it is also mental and includes narcissm as a property (the focus on mirror and issues of depth etc etc thus there is self-reflection literally as well as figuratively.)

IOW lake includes vanity of pop stars, famous artists, entertainers etc where they present a facade to the audience who then see themselves in that facade etc and so the image of the pop star is replicated and the star even made immortal such that they live on after their death - and so continue to replicate themselves in mind not just in body.

Thus in such hexagrams as 41 the 'decrease' is initially figurative in that it covers distillation/condensation etc - if that fails then comes the literal decrease.


Chris.
 
B

bruce

Guest
Chris,

So, the two small bowls for the sacrifice contain the distilled remains, or the facade, or myth?
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
I think that narcism and mirroring are indeed aspects of lake, and the resemblance with the astrological venus is striking. The symbol for venus looks like a little mirror! (I dont know if that is coincidence or intended, btw)
But I would call lake (and venus) rather "sensual" than sexual. Sexuality also involves another energy that is similar to thunder (mars).

Of course lake correlates with Freud's pleasure principle and he did see pleasure as basically sexual. It's interesting to notice then that in his horoscope venus and mars are in reception (venus is in a sign ruled by mars and mars is in a sign ruled by venus). This could mean that in Freud's experience pleasure and sexuality were closely linked, hence his tendency to reduce the one to the other.
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
In Freudian terms, hex 41 is the pleasure principle (lake, venus) below the reality principle (mountain, saturn).
The quest for pleasure adapts to reality (the fact that gratification is not or not immediately possible, for example).

Hex 4 represents a similar confrontation with reality but in 4 the adaptation to reality is less smooth. Imagine a child (water trigram, moon) that cries and turns red and blue in the face because it doesn't get what it wants. 4 is like that.
41 is more mature and more accepting. The child has learned how to deal with "reality".
 
B

bruce

Guest
Late Lament

Breathe deep the gathering gloom,
Watch lights fade from every room.
Bedsitter people look back and lament
Another day's useless energy is spent.

Impassioned lovers wrestle as one;
Lonely man cries for love and has none;
New mother picks up and suckles her son;
Senior citizens wish they were young.

Cold-hearted orb that rules the night
Removes the colours from our sight,
Red is grey and yellow white
But we decide which is right
And which is an illusion.

Moody Blues

happy.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