Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
cssslw said:"What must I know or do now and in the near future to reunite with my (politely) estranged ex girfriend Stacey?" We have not communicated much in the last six months, I would like for us to be together again. I love her very much.
The I Ching responded with: #24, changing lines 1,2. and the secondary hexagram was #7.
cssslw said:Dear Dobro:
Thank you for your kind response. # 24 seemes positive, but I couldn't figure out how # 7 fit in regard to my situation. It seems the I Ching is advising me to act quickly and with a positive attitude. Now, to figure out just how to do it in the best manner...
cssslw said:Last night I asked the I ching how Stacey would respond if I contacted her this week, and my reply was Hexagram #2, no changing lines, no other hexagram.
dobro said:Hex 42 talks about putting more into this situation.
Okay, I'd say things look like this: Hex 24 talked about getting back together, and said it's a process that's going to take some time. Hex 7 said to act powerfully. Hex 42 says to put more into it. I'd say it's time to ACT. Stop consulting oracles and start making phone calls or start hang-gliding past her window or whatever it is your style sees as forceful. But do something. Start now.
cssslw said:Does the IChing simply get it wrong or mislead people on purpose?
cssslw
dobro said:I don't think so. But I've had this experience: somebody I know consults the Yi in my presence - they toss the coins, and I interpret - and neither of us can make head or tail of the result. In other words, it seems to me that sometimes the Yi doesn't accept a person who consults. It doesn't get it wrong, it denies help. It doesn't mislead, it denies help.
cssslw said:Last night I asked the I ching how Stacey would respond if I contacted her this week
lightofreason said:use of miraculous/random methods guarantees inconsistancy.
dobro said:I know that's your opinion, but I think it's time you stopped telling me all the time, because I've been to your web pages where you describe your IDM and XOR ideas, and there is no possibility at all of my ever verifying what you say there because you don't speak a language I can understand. Since I can't understand it, I can neither verify it nor prove it wrong. Since there's no chance of my ever being able to know if it's right or wrong, there's no point in me wondering whether what you say is valid or otherwise, and no point in you continuing to go on at me about it.
lightofreason said:You dont make sense here
lightofreason said:This PARTICULAR perspective is covered in the Emotional I Ching material - so tell me where you find issue with THAT, dont worry about the IDM etc being too hard for you - we can keep it simple. WHAT in the Emotional I Ching do you have issues with?
dobro said:It's the categories that you use. They elicit no spark of recognition in me.
cssslw said:Now, I Ching apologists seem to be saying that because the reality of what has transpired seems to be the opposite of what the I Ching advised me, that it is still me who is mistaken. However, I get the feeling that if things had gone smashingly well with Stacey, those same people would have said "See. the I Ching's always correct." Isn't it Ok to admit that, for whatever reason, the oracle is simply wrong or purposely misleading a certain percentage of the time? What do folks think about this idea? Thank you.
cssslw
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).