Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
The way I read five changing lines is this - all aspects of the hexagram have collapsed, and only one still stands. It's as if you get one changing line, but this time with a different 'result'.
.
In the circle of my female friends and acquaintances, usually there is no male person to be the steadfast partner ... I have seen this again and again. And then there is the little boy syndrome, in which full-grown men are emotionally stunted, many times by the lack of male figures in their own lives when they were growing up. I know many mature women who are living alone without male companionship. It's a really widespread phenomenon.
Trojan, what you meant as "prominent in a different sort of reverse image"?
Sort of Fan Yao or?...
The way I read five changing lines is this - all aspects of the hexagram have collapsed, and only one still stands. It's as if you get one changing line, but this time with a different 'result'.
As for the idea of collapsing lines, it made sense in a way that the changing ones did/are happening so they were activated, now spent in a way, and only one left charged
I think it would usually be connected to its relating hexagram by concluded meaning, this way stresses the advice given within the line as one thing left to do...something like that as I understoodI'm wondering in what way is the one unchanging line different to one changing line. An example was given but I didn't quite understand it.
And I can`t help myself reading the lines chronologically and in that way finding 5th connected to 6th one as they are both advising not to do anything - as if there was something to do; one cannot force people into one`s life in a quality way.
Not that your explanation did not make sense but I read the advice if 25.6 quite differently:
Legge: 6. The topmost NINE, undivided, shows its subject free from insincerity, yet sure to fall into error, if he take action. (His action) will not be advantageous in any way.
Line 6 is at the top of the hexagram, and comes into the field when the action has run its course. He should be still, and not initiate any fresh movement.
‘Without entanglement. Acting brings blunders.
No direction brings harvest.’
Being ‘without entanglement’ has been taken too far: someone is going with the flow with such total innocence that he fails to commit himself and take charge of developments. Eventually, opportunities are missed, and he runs into a dead end. Or he's so disengaged from other people that his actions expose his perfect cluelessness, and then their reactions to him come as a nasty surprise.
Thought of it some last night and the line that is last, must be directing out of the philosophy of hex 25 as the idea that it has gone too far and further more will lead into state of the next hex or it is supposed to maybe...a reality check? change of course? learn from the past or just be more concrete? this makes me want to be more careless, I tell you....Yes that's a disparity I noticed myself. On one hand the time for drifting along without taking care has past and on the other hands many commentaries say take no action.
Exactly.
I tend to take it as "take no action if you are unclear, if you are on automatic pilot without thinking then don't act...." IOW take time to think clearly nand then act.
The trouble with relying on commentaries is they always show the bias of the author.
I was under the impression that Legge was quite unbiased in his translation.
The translation of what Yi says is actually "Without entanglement, Acting brings blunders. No direction bears fruit" thats from Hilary's book. So if you act in this disentangled state its not good you need to act in a more thoughtful considered way.
In wiki Hilary says she received this line on a few occasions where she had things cooking on the stove forgot them and they burned and spoiled. That illustrates to me that acting in a disentangled way there was not adequate...she couldn't act as if those pots and pans were really not her problem....acting that way bought disaster (burned food) she needed to be more mindful that actually she couldn't be disentangled from those pots and that they were her responsibility.
So i think 25.6 doesn't mean 'don't do anything' it rather means 'don't do anything in the almost careless state of mind....start thinking more deliberately" I checked out the link you gave and seems to me Bradford is saying something similar to what I mean
I'm wondering in what way is the one unchanging line different to one changing line. An example was given but I didn't quite understand it.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).