Since there?s a lull:

[hilary]

Thank you, LiSe, that's an interesting one. And I know they're not meant to make sense... I think... (maybe I forgot)

Alisa, what Candid said didn't just apply to this story, but to every conceivable use of words. One of the reasons we get misunderstandings here occasionally (*ahem!*) is the lack of clues from the situation - no 'tone of voice', no body language.

So... the meaning of the story isn't something that was there at the time (if it ever happened), for us all to burrow down and find. It's something created between us and the story, in the present moment (where else?) When we find we can't create anything from it, then we've got problems.

Or have we? Is that what koans are for - breaking down this whole 'creating meaning' thing so we fall through the gaps into sensations we can't put labels on?

 

[alisa]

Alisa, what Candid said didn't just apply to this story, but to every conceivable use of words. One of the reasons we get misunderstandings here occasionally (*ahem!*) is the lack of clues from the situation - no 'tone of voice', no body language.

I understand completely, Hilary. And, what I also understand, even body language can be misunderstood. Especially so for non Zen'ers.

What is the sound of one hand clapping? Anyone know?

Zen is a "no mind" event. And, from what I understand, takes years to go away.

 

[dharma]

I do believe the point of Zen is to give your mind a chance to break free from it's *habitual* method of understanding and from rationalizing outer experiences in the *usual* way.

If you are presented with something UNcommon, INcomprehensible, a little bizarre and perhaps absurd to boot, your mind has nothing from the *past* to draw from to interpret the experience and to make sense of it --it remains non-sensical.

To understand and arrive at the sense that it DOES contain means that you must enter into the *stillness* at the center of Mind, where truth resides, to glimpse it.

Opening your mind to koans then, is a practice that teaches you first to *discover* that still, centered place within yourself and to then enter it willfully when you choose and eventually, know how to *remain* there indefinitely.

Dharma

 

[lindsay]

I practiced Zen for awhile, perhaps I can offer a few words about koans.

Koans are really not questions or sermons in the usual sense, calling for clearly articulated responses or thoughts. They are more like mental dogbones you gnaw on continuously until . . . well, I'll get to that. Perhaps it is helpful to know that a certain amount of psychological distress is the intended effect of many koans.

Koans are usually studied in sequences, each in its appropriate time and place. There are a number of classic collections. When I say *study*, I mean meditation. It is really only possible to solve koans through meditation.

The only way to know whether you have understood a koan correctly is certification by a Zen Master. Understanding is non-verbal. A Master knows where you are by the way you hold a teacup, or blink your eyes, or walk into a room. There is talking, of course, but that is just part of a much deeper process.

Because koans can only be meaningfully assigned and certified by a Master, who you confront regularly for face to face examination, it would not be possible to offer an email course in koans. No nonverbal cues.

To get back to that *until ...* above. The purpose of koans is to understand the teachings of the Buddha. Zen is a school of Buddhism. Buddhist ideas and goals are at the heart of all Zen practices like meditation and koans, and these things do not really make much sense outside a religious Buddhist context. You will never understand koans unless you grasp the Buddha. Some people also say you will never grasp the Buddha unless you understand koans.

If you want to know about koans, the best thing (actually, the only thing) is to find a Master.

Still, I think all of you are correct in your thinking -- it's just the difference of being on the outside instead of on the inside. Any harmless device (like koans) that undermines the certainty of our own thinking a bit is probably a good thing.

 

[dharma]

Hello Lindsay,

I appreciated the background you've given on Koans. I like the image you gave --"mental dogbones you gnaw on continuously"-- that's exactly what it feels like to me.

Having never desired nor pursued the life of a Buddhist monk I've not applied the practice of Zen in the traditional way. I enjoy it for what it is --an opportunity to expand and find my center (esp. during meditation.) I have found that when I arrive at an understanding of a particular Koan I have no need to "convince" anyone else --I am content to simply have grasped it's essence.

As you pointed out, the understanding is not something that is expressed verbally, anyhow. The change is reflected in one's manner and body language, which is easily discerned by one who has mastered it themselves.

Lindsay, at the end of your post you said:

"Still, I think all of you are correct in your thinking -- it's just the difference of being on the outside instead of on the inside..."

What exactly did you mean by that?

Dharma

 

[lindsay]

Dear Dharma,

Thank you for your kind remarks. I am never sure throwing more beans in the pot makes a better chili.

I didn?t have anything very deep in mind with the inside/outside comment.

Inside the Zen tradition, koans are tools for understanding the Buddha?s message. One could call them ?steppingstones to enlightenment?, but this is altogether too grand a concept. Even the Buddha had to brush his teeth and wash his clothes. For Masters who use koans (many do not), koans are rather precise instruments. A Master prescribes a koan the same way a doctor prescribes a medicine.

Although this sort of thinking is discouraged, Zen students sometimes view ?passing? koans the same way Boy Scouts view collecting merit badges. Being certified for a few koans doesn?t mean buddhahood is just around the corner.

Outside the Zen tradition, koans are often viewed as slightly loopy stories or paradoxes that somehow contain a kernel of truth. Trying to figure out what koans mean without reference to Buddhist concepts is a little like discussing the flavor of communion wafers without considering their role in the Mass. Koans belong to a specific religious tradition and have a specific religious purpose. They are not intended to be secular mind-benders.

Having said all that, my personal opinion is that the loopy paradox stereotype, like many stereotypes, is based on a valid perception. Koans are absurd. They cannot be grasped by our rational minds without a whole lot of specious interpretation. They are a fishbone in the throat of our common sense. Yet they are true. How can this be? That question, IMHO, is a wake-up call to reality and the beginning of a worthwhile journey.

Dharma, thanks for handing me the soapbox. Now I am ready to listen. I wonder how the I Ching fits into all this?

 

[dharma]

Q: "I am never sure throwing more beans in the pot makes a better chili... Dharma, thanks for handing me the soapbox. Now I am ready to listen. I wonder how the I Ching fits into all this?"

A: Lindsay, for me, I Ching is both the 'chili' and the 'soap'. It sates the hunger for spiritual dialogue and provides [a] solution for clearing away personal misconceptions that stand in the way of Eternal Truth.

 

[lindsay]

Dear Dharma,

?Provides [a] solution for clearing away personal misconceptions that stand in the way of Eternal Truth?!! Whoa! That?s a tall order! Not a devotee of understatement, are you, Dharma? Maybe we should start with something easier to think about. Here is a simple ?lull? question about the Yi that?s bothered me for some time.

My question is this: How many Oracles are there? One or many?

Let me explain. When we consult the Yi using some uncontrolled method, we usually assume the Yi?s answer relates to our question, or at least to our situation, in a meaningful way. Why would anyone take the trouble to consult the Yi if they thought the answer was entirely random? If one answer is as good as another, then the Yi is not truly answering our question ? it is just answering. So let?s assume we get an answer that fits our individual question or situation, OK?

What happens during the time we toss the coins or sort the sticks? ?Something? receives our question, analyzes our situation, devises a reply, and sends us an appropriate answer encoded in the language of the I Ching. This is a very interesting process, much more complex than I have described, but clearly this ?something? ? let?s call it the Oracle ? is an active intelligence with knowledge of our situation we do not possess and the ability to communicate its knowledge in ancient symbols. I do not see how else we could get a meaningful answer ? unless the Oracle (who knows things we do not know) gives it to us.

People remark that when they consult the Yi, they feel they are talking to something outside themselves, something with an independent viewpoint and agenda. Visualizations of the Oracle often take the form of the archetypal Wise Old Man or Powerful Compassionate Queen.

Saying there must be an Oracle does not answer another intriguing question: is the Oracle inside us or outside us? Is the Oracle something hidden within ourselves? It must be hidden because it knows things about us that we do not consciously know about ourselves. Or is the Oracle external, a kind of spirit that uses the Yi as a channel of communication? Either way, why does the Oracle answer our questions?

But my real question is this: is your Oracle the same entity as my Oracle (and the Oracle who communicates with Hilary and Candid and Willow and Alisa and Supanatural and Chris Lofting)? Are we all getting answers from the same place? Or do we each have his or her own Oracle, personal and individual, who answers our questions?

Who cares?

Well, if we are all getting messages from the same Oracle, then it makes sense to talk about the Yi as a common experience. It makes sense to take note of what the Oracle says to other people in different situations. It makes sense to do readings for other people. And it could lead to some very interesting transpersonal conclusions.

But if we all communicate with our own individual Oracles, entities like our hearts or livers or souls, devoted solely to ourselves, then none of these things can be taken for granted. What does your Oracle have to do with my Oracle? How valid are our readings for other people? And what then of Eternal Truth?

So that?s my question: Is there one Oracle or many?

 

[lindsay]

Wow, I just read Hilary's posting to Arthur. The planets must be in convergence. I wrote my message about the same time, but was forced to sit on it for a few hours before sending.

 

[willow]

How many oracles, one or many? I don't know? Inside or out? The image that comes to mind is stonehenge. How many gods, powers, spiritual and practical forces does stonehenge access? It seems to me that it probably had a great deal of versatility built in, but the stones we now see (the outside) are only half of the construction. The other half (the inside) was the rituals and outlook of the people who used it. Most of that is now lost to most of us.

But then again, I am told that many spiritual-tool constructions are designed in such a way that if you place yourself physically in the right relation to them, they begin to teach you -- ie, if you went to stonehenge and sat at a certain spot every evening for a year, the sun and stars would teach you.

So, as you learned your lessons, as stonehenge became in some way your own spiritual tool, would you be connecting with the same spirit the builders did? I don't know.

How valid are our readings? Again, I don't know. I do know that when you are trying to interpret for someone else that you need to, again and again, check in with humility, to make sure you are not just seeing what you want to see. Sometimes I think this task is the one that generates the meanings.

Also -- and this sort of refers over to the other topic of trying to arrange all the hexagrams in a sequential order -- I know that the oracle doesn't *tell* you what path to proceed on, it points out to you the range of choices that will perhaps come easier (be "in accord with the times") and the range of choices that will likely go more hard for you.

 

[dharma]

Lindsay,

Fundamentally, we are all made of the same spiritual stuff. Eternal Truth is the same for everyone. Even individually, we are not as different from each other as you may believe we are. Our concerns and issues are so often, so commonly shared. Getting a meaningful answer from any form of divination is not as complicated as we might imagine. I Ching has only 64 hexagrams. The Tarot has only 78 cards. The Runes have only 25 stones. Etc. The Oracle is sophisticated, yes, but nowhere near as complicated as we have made life for ourselves.

You ask, "Is there one Oracle or many?"

There is only one true Oracle and it is the voice of Eternal Truth. It is not contained within any one thing or device, but is everywhere, everytime, within, and without. The pearls of wisdom that issue from it are forever unchanging and true --yesterday, today and tomorrow.

The clearer our perception of reality, the more able we are to directly consult with and hear the voice of the one Oracle. Actually, it is more rightly to say, that the less afraid we are of the Light, the more easily we can rest within the power of Love and receive this Uninversal-Knowing-Awareness directly. We would then be directly infuse by the wisdom of the Oracle rather than "interpreting" what we receive through our personally, colored version of reality.

If it appears to us that there are many oracles, these are merely the voices of our personal, individual Higher Selves. In a sense, they are "personal" oracles whose purpose is to correct the subjective misconceptions and misperceptions of our splintered ego personalities. Their ultimate objective is to create the conditions whereby we may be able to gaze upon the Light of Truth and bear the Force of Love, directly.

In so far as we are able to be objective, we are capable of reading for ourselves and for another. The one Oracle is ever present, though often obscured and colored by concerns of our personal oracle, but still present. Our personal oracle can be likened to a door between us and Eternal Truth. How much of a barrier it is, depends on our individual growth and progress. Some of us have come to the point where we can easily peer through the keyhole, while others of us continue to strain our ears against a solid door for the faintest sounds.

.....

I meditated on this question and this was the response I received. Having written it up in the clearest way I could, I then consulted with I Ching as to it's accuracy. I received 19/27. I'd like to believe that I got a decent eyeful through that keyhole.

I hope this is useful.

Dharma

 

[lindsay]

Dear Willow and Dharma,

Thank you so much for your wise responses. You are such good people. I cannot answer you yet, I must brood on it for a while. But something Willow wrote sent a chill down my spine, and I remembered a story that keeps coming back to me like a recurring nightmare. In a way this story is my koan, and I have never figured it out.

Willow wrote: "I know that the oracle doesn't *tell* you what path to proceed on, it points out to you the range of choices that will perhaps come easier (be "in accord with the times") and the range of choices that will likely go more hard for you."

This is a true story that happened to real people. In the early 1970?s, a ?liberated? and exciting time, my good friend Carl put together a very sweet life for himself, with a prestigious position at a major Canadian university, a talented and lovely wife, and three healthy young children. The only problem was that Carl had fallen madly in love with another woman in California named Sally. Sally in turn was married to a dynamic clergyman/archaeologist she loved deeply along with their four children. But Sally was in love with Carl.

The I Ching was very popular in North America in the early 1970?s. In fact, it was a bit of a fad. Young people were open to many new things the older generation had never even heard of. With all the intensity of a successful young academic, Carl threw himself into the I Ching as a compass for his life. He became a very serious reader. For example, Carl learned there was a Chinese tradition that coins from three successive dynasties were especially potent for divination, so he combed the antique stores in Chinatown for weeks until he had collected old pennies in the correct sequence. Meanwhile, Carl read the Yi for his friends and for himself.

As you can imagine, the Carl-and-Sally double triangle was a fertile source of questions. You might think the situation would have a moral dimension, considering two good spouses and seven much-loved children were involved, but this was the 70?s when everybody was free and the divorce rate was higher than the marriage rate. Carl told me the I Ching encouraged him, in no uncertain terms, to pursue Sally every step of the way. The I Ching was the beacon for his new life.

Carl is neither a fool nor a liar, and I am compelled to believe in his honesty. I have been with him in so many situations over the years, I believe I know him. I believe his story is true.

Finally, after much agonizing and hundreds of readings, Carl persuaded Sally to run off with him. He quit his post at the university, left his wife and children, and took Sally to a commune in Ontario where he learned how to repair shoes and make leather belts. The I Ching was his guide.

Things began to fall apart. Carl and Sally stayed together through amazing hardships, but Carl never regained his academic (or any other) career. There were a lot of drugs, but the two lovers grew deeply remorseful over the loss of their children and spouses. They spent years trying to repair the damage, but in a real sense their lives were broken beyond repair. Even today they are consumed by guilt about the past, and regret what might have been.

I came to the I Ching late in life, and when I first announced my fresh, new discovery with all the enthusiasm of a beginner to Carl, I was shocked by the depth of his resentment. Carl blames the I Ching for many of the mistakes he made. If only he had just thought things out for himself instead of slavishly following the advice of this evil old book! He gave me his three-dynasty coins, and wished me well.

Carl is my friend, but I think he is wrong. I don?t know why, because I can see his situation so clearly as he described it. What did he do wrong? He trusted the Yi, and the Yi let him down. Anyway, this story seems important to me, I think about it a lot, but I?m pretty sure I don't understand it correctly yet. What do you think?

 

[hilary]

Just a first impression, but it sounds as if Carl thought that if he could once get the ritual right, the Yi would tell him what to do. (Trusting Yi isn't a sensible substitute for trusting yourself.)

And that then, not to put too fine a point on it, he got his interpretations wrong. You don't have to be a fool to do that - I hope, or I've been one of the world's best at times. You just have to be human and emotionally involved.

Also, 100s of readings sounds like far too many - half a dozen would surely cover it, or at a pinch just one. I think people often do many readings on one issue when they're having serious difficulty accepting the reality before them, and likewise the first answers they get, which obstinately mirror this reality back. Sooner or later, Hexagram 4 comes into play.

I hope this doesn't sound too much like the unbearably smug wisdom of hindsight. I've got things wrong myself, on smaller scales, but looking back it is always stunningly obvious where I went wrong - the only question is what on earth I was thinking of at the time.

I don't normally go for 'energy signatures' etc. But if I had Carl's three-dynasty coins, I'd put them tidily on a shelf somewhere and grab the nearest three pennies.

 

[lindsay]

Having related this rather unpleasant story about Carl (BTW I am not Carl), I feel I should at least tell you what I think of it.

At the time Carl told me his story, many years ago, I was just getting started with the Yi, and it threw a bit of a pall over my initial enthusiasm. This was before the Internet, and it was rather difficult to find people who admitted to any serious interest in the Yi. What I usually heard were stories from people who once used the Yi and then quit for some reason or other. Many stories emphasized the dangers of relying on divination, but the story-tellers had direct experience and I did not, so who was I to doubt them? Eventually I learned two things: (1) people love to tell scary stories, and (2) serious users of the Yi are often not eager to advertise the fact.

I am a fearful person and all this negativity took its toll. I was really afraid I?d succumb to ?superstition? and become a slave to dark, self-destructive forces, although I had no idea how that could happen. Like most beginners, I had a lot of trouble understanding the Yi, and after a while, my practice slipped away. But fortunately a life-long interest in Chinese philosophy kept the Yi alive for me until I was ready to pick it up later. I say all this because, based on my own experience, I believe some people have negative, fearful feelings about the Yi that proponents should take seriously.

I only visit Carl and Sally once or twice a year these days, but I have been imagining what I would say to them if the subject of the Yi came up in conversation (it won?t!). Here are some points I would make:

(1) I have a lot more confidence in the Yi than I used to have. My experience, and the shared experience of others (like all you Clarity folk), has not revealed any dark or diabolical underside to the Yi that I once feared and Carl insists exists. In fact, I have found the Yi wholesome and healthy in a muscular sort of way, and I count it a benefactor. Of course, any good thing can be abused.
(2) In the 1970?s the only versions of the Yi that were available to Carl were Legge, Wilhelm, and Blofeld. I find all of these books difficult to work with for different reasons, and it would not surprise me to learn that many of Carl?s readings were, well, wrong. In the past ten years I believe there has been a bit of an I Ching renaissance, and today we can study Yi divination with a confidence not possible earlier.
(3) Carl did in fact do hundreds of readings, but I failed to mention (a) that his story unfolded over several years and more important, that (b) Carl was using the Yi to make every major and minor decision in his life. I now believe this was an abuse of the Yi. There is a quaint but very relevant religious problem called ?idolatry.? Idolatry is usually defined as a blind and excessive devotion to something. I?m afraid poor Carl was guilty of idolatry in relation to the Yi, and paid the price.
(4) The most important point is that Carl was laboring under the misconception that the Yi was telling him what to do. Willow and Hillary and others have emphasized the fact that the Yi does not give commands or dictate actions. It advises, suggests, informs, cajoles, jokes, admonishes, and so on ? but it does not command.
(5) Didn?t Carl and Sally end up doing exactly what they wanted to do, regardless of what the Yi told them? Their tragedy was the power of passionate love, not the sayings of an ancient oracle. After all, theirs is rather a sad, but old story.
(6) Nothing in the world I can think of would induce me to use those three-dynasty coins. I have not even looked at them for more than two years. I am content with humbler tools.

 

[alisa]

Hi Lindsay,

Carl must have had a lot of bohemian blood in him to quit university post in exchange for a shoe man post. He must have really loved Sally to do that. And I mean REALLY loved her!

No sense crying over spilled milk now. It sounds to me like he would of (ended up) resenting his wife had he chosen to stick his *so-called* miserable marriage out. This is just one example of not living *wholeheartedly* and in the *present*. Had he put 100% of his heart and soul into his present time marriage, things might have turned out differently.

Thanks for sharing the story!

 

[supanatural]

Greetings To All...

I would like to add my 2 cents to this disscussion. My intent is not to offend anyone, but to possibly help some understand another point of view.

In Cultures that have given birth to Oracles, they have always been held on the same level as Morality (4th Sphere of the Tree Of Life).

In these Cultures, High morales were the backbone of the laws that were used to govern one's behavior. One may use any tools to consult the Oracle, but it takes a spirit of high morality to interpret these messages (Tri-Gram..Gram synonomous with Message) properly.

In these cultures this task was left to those that had dedicated their lives to living these high moral principles. It was those who had sacrificed the outside world, for the sake of spiritual/moral development, who was in a better position to understand the Oracles message.

With every reading one gets, he or she should strive to evoke this spirit/mentality, in order to see the true message of the Oracle. Each hexagram is a high moral lesson. I don't know what the readings were in the case of this gentleman above, but I've never read any book, or heard of any moral teaching that would advise anybody to break up with a man or woman, who they are supposedly *In Love With* to go jump in another situation with it's roots in visceral sensations.

The book That I'm currently writing, has each Hexagram coming from a high moral eye view. For instance, a while back, there was a person who asked about her leaving her husbands and kids to get involved with another man, who was also married. She drew the 34th Hexagram I believe. There were several people who interpreted this as an Omen to do so. They said that they didn't see anything negative about it, and that the 34th hexagram would be favorable to leave her husband.

The 34th Hexagram, in my opinion deals with how Moral strength is better than physical power. It was saying that physically she could leave her husband and get with this man, but it was Morally incorrect behavior. This was an example of evoking the correct moral position in this time, so the I ching responded with the 34th Hexagram as an Image of the correct thing to do.

I would implore each and everybody who use this Oracle to try to understand the spirit and Culture that it came from, and to use thae same spirit/mentality to interpret it's messages.

Actually in all fairness, the I ching should be consulted *Before* one gets married, to understand the challenges that one will face in the marriage.

I do no Great things; I only do small things with Great love.

 

[willow]

Hi Supa,

That's very interesting what you say about morality and oracles existing on the same level. I'm struck by the fact that it sounds like Carl became obsessed with an oracle precisely at the moment he was encountering a crucial issue of morality!

I recently read a description of one the Tarot cards (The Heirophant) that sounds very much like the type of traditional interpreter you describe. The explanation said the card, "represents the spiritual guidance dispensed by representatives of the traditional organized religions. His guidance is practical, and follows, without question, all dogma as taught by his predecessors... While he faithfully lays down the codified laws and spiritual principals contained in the book he is holding in his right hand, his unremitting daily study and practice of those traditions still impart to him some of the occult knowledge upon which his religion was originally based."

 

[alisa]

Supranatural,

Why would anyone want to consult an Oracle of High Morality when the answers you'd get from it are likened to that of the Bible? The answers you'd get from such an oracle would be very predictable, no?

 

[alisa]

I'm not saying what Carl and Sally did was right, wrong, moral or immoral. What they did, IMO, they made their beds when they brought children into this world. Their first and last *responsiblity* should have been to their children.

I don't know, is responsibility the same as morals?

 

[hilary]

Hello Supa,

So how is that book coming on, then?

I think you may have isolated a sense in which we might create our own oracles. Anyone who starts out with complete certainty about a given moral rule - such as 'A married couple with children must never separate', or 'You must always follow your heart regardless' - will always hear the I Ching as abiding by their rule. (And yes, I have some simple rules of my own, though not either of those.) Consequently, in those areas, they wouldn't actually need to consult any oracle at all - like Alisa says, it would be entirely predictable. With enough rules in enough detail, you would always 'know' what to do, and you could throw the book away. I know that there are very good reasons for no longer needing an oracle - is this one of them?

I suppose Carl's problem, consulting for every decision, was at the opposite extreme. It sounds as if we might be looking for a grey area, or a Golden Mean...

 

[dharma]

The purpose of any divinational tool is for "divine inspiration". The advice that issues from any oracle is a *suggestion* and a *tip* from a higher level and order than we usually get from say, our best friend, whose advice may often be one-sided. Divinational tools, on the other hand, are not slanted and biased in this way --they are focused on the highest perspective of a situation.

Divinational advice is not about "right" and "wrong", either. It's standards may seem morally old-fashioned to our faddish modern culture, yet the advice it presents is based on Eternal Truth and comes from a higher order than we are accustomed to, that's all. If the advice we are getting seems to make sense, we follow it --but we should then accept responsibilty for having done so. If the advice we are getting doesn't resonate or fit with our plans, we skip them --but we should then accept responsibility for having done so.

When we cannot still our ego's incessant desire for MORE we become like the artist who doesn't realize that his masterpiece is complete and that his next step is to take a step back and appreciate his efforts and creation. Instead he keeps adding more and more color to his canvas until his once beautiful and perfect picture is reduced to a mess of regret and the dark colors of self-recrimination of what once was. (How often we fail to count our blessings in our unending search for what we DON'T have.)

Lindsay, your friend would have been better off had he (figuratively, speaking) separated his original life from the second one that he later chose. His disappointment stems from a mixture of the two worlds that he created. The two worlds were painted upon ONE canvas instead of TWO separate ones, thus marring the beauty that each once brought to his life experience. He failed to step back from both of them and appreciate what they each brought to his experience. He may SAY he did, but he didn't.

Had he taken responsibility for the choices that he made initially he would have taken responsibility for his decisions after the fact, too. He was not happy with the course his life took, mainly because he never felt that HE was the one in control of making the decisions that lead to it --his ego was, afterall. He had effectively given his power over to something OTHER than his own divine guiding force that had not as much to do with I Ching as he's determined to believe.

More sadly, he didn't seem to learn the lesson the experience contained for him either, because in the end he felt justified in shifting blame elsewhere rather than humbly forgiving himself for having given away his power in the first place.

Thank you Lindsay for sharing your friend's story with us --I am wiser, as a result. It was indeed a koan of sorts and judging from the response it received, I believe it was for others as well. I will leave you with something from Deepak Chopra's latest book "The Deeper Wound".

"Being the source of everything, spirit takes responsibility for organizing all situations and circumstances. This order runs much deeper than anything the intellect can devise. The cells in your body, for example, perform billions of precisely calibrated operations per second. Outer reality, which includes the events of your day, is organized from the same source. When you enter any situation, your actions can be in line with this deeper orderliness, or you can act from ego, imposing your own assumptions about what should happen. The soul also wants results, but it has wide vision; instead of thinking through a situation one step at a time. By contrast, the thinking mind tries to manipulate results to suit what seems best for "I, me, mine."

with love,
Dharma

 

[alisa]

I question whether Carl had an ego at all. For a man to give up his career . . for love??? What kind of man is this?

A man's career IS his ego, and without it, he's not going to be of much use to her, IMHO

 

[littlebuddha]

(bowing) Miss Alisa..

How Grass & Trees Become Enlightened

During the Kamakura period, Shinkan studied Tendai six years and then studied Zen seven years; then he went to China and contemplated Zen for thirteen years more.

When he returned to Japan many desired to interview him and ask questions. But when Shinkan received visitors, which was infrequently, he seldom answered their questions.

One day a fifty-year-old student of enlightenment said to Shinkan: "I have studied the Tendai school of thought since I was a little boy, but one thing in it I cannot understand. Tendai claims that even the grass and trees will become enlightened. To me this seems very strange."

"Of what use is it to discuss how grass and trees become enlightened?" asked Shinkan. "The question is how you yourself can become so. Did you ever consider that?"

"I never thought of it in that way," marveled the old man.

"Then go home and think it over," finished Shinkan.

(bowing)

 

[supanatural]

Greetings To All...

"Supranatural,

Why would anyone want to consult an Oracle of High Morality when the answers you'd get from it are likened to that of the Bible? The answers you'd get from such an oracle would be very predictable, no?"


Oracles were developed from the highest part of being, so naturally they should give answers from that part of being. The I King is composed of 64 hexagrams. Life has more than 64 different situations that will come at a person. So often times the Oracle will be able to tell you exactly what a person is doing, and often times it won't be able to. So, It will sometimes hold up an image of what the person should be doing. All lot systems have their limitations. That's why it is always said that the highest Oracle is a Sage.

Oracles have been around far longer than the Bible has. In fact, Oracles are mentioned in the Bible. The are called Casting Lots. When Judas was kicked out of the Group of the 12, they didn't ask Barabas and Mattias to submit a resume, they casted lots to see who would replace Judas.

The Torah, and Tarot have such a close semantical root because the Bible was intended to be used as a system that would guide aspirants through smoke and mirrors. That's why every statement in the Bible has it's contradictory statement in it. No different from every Oracle having it's exact opposite situation in it. In the I King we call them Complimentary Hexagrams. The Bible just never was developed to the point where it was used as a divination divice world wide.

Morality as a whole is never perdictable. Oracles are based on relationships not absolutes. Yes there are reasons for a woman to leave her husband, but not because she's attracted to another man. That's not a reason. That's a deficiency, or a behavior dis-order. A Higher standard of living can correct those short comings.

 

[supanatural]

Greetings To All...

"I think you may have isolated a sense in which we might create our own oracles. Anyone who starts out with complete certainty about a given moral rule - such as 'A married couple with children must never separate', or 'You must always follow your heart regardless' - will always hear the I Ching as abiding by their rule. (And yes, I have some simple rules of my own, though not either of those.) Consequently, in those areas, they wouldn't actually need to consult any oracle at all - like Alisa says, it would be entirely predictable."


In the Model of Consultation that I subscribe to, the entire situation and question is as important as the I King's response. Meaning the Question, the background the elements of the whole situation carries weight in the response that the Oracle gives. 2 people can be in the exact same situation, and the Oracle can give the same response, but it doesn't always mean the same thing. because the people's level of understanding, and development are in different stages. So person A, may be ready to follow the counsel, and person B, will not follow the counsel at all. Those are some of the elements that have to be taken into consideration.

Person A may be up to the task, person B may have physical handicaps that will prevent him or her from fulfilling the mandate. So we say yes to person A, and no to person B.

It's no more predictable than people are predictable.

 

[alisa]

Greetings to you, too, Supa,

Morality as a whole is never perdictable.

You're right. Morality is not predictable. Outside of Oracles of Morality, morality is not predictable. The Bible is an oracle of morality. I condones living together, it condones sex before marriage, and even frowns upon divorce even if you are no longer in love with your spouse. Hence, the reason I don't consult it.

I have never read the "Oracle of High Morality" so I offer no opinion about it... at this time. I can only guess by the title that there are rules about right, wrong, good and bad.

The only oracle I subscribe to is the oracle of love; being true to love. If you live with a woman or a man and you don't love him/her, you live in sin. If you are married to somebody and you don't love that person and you still go on living with that person, making love to that person, it is a sin against love.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

They all say that love is eternal, love is permanent; that real love never dies. Absolutely wrong. The real love dies sooner than the unreal love. Unreal love can live long; it is unreal, how can it die? It is a plastic flower. If you are pretending, you can go on pretending as long as you want."

Osho

 

[alisa]

Littlebuddha,

That little Zen story . . . I give up. Would you care to enlighten?

 

[lindsay]

Hello, everybody!

Before we leave Carl and Sally and the whole topic of divination and morality, I?d really like to say a few more things.

First of all, I regard Carl and Sally as reasonably moral people. I did not know them at the time of their big romance, but in later years I?ve known them to be honest, kind, generous, and compassionate. To my knowledge, neither has ever cheated on the other. They both care a lot about the ?rights? and ?wrongs?, ?shoulds? and ?shouldn?ts?, ?oughts? and ?ought-not-to?s? of everyday life. And, as I have said, they are remorseful about the past.

I think we tend to be a little hard on Carl. He knows he is responsible for a lot of wreckage. I?m not sure he really blames the I Ching for his troubles as much as his enslavement to it. He looks upon the Oracle the same way a reformed alcoholic regards a bottle of cheap wine. Such feelings are not simple or easily described. Sally, on the other hand, truly hates the Yi. She says it is irredeemably ?sexist? and demeaning to women. That?s another topic, but who can blame her for her antipathy?

Alisa, you seem to have a trouble understanding how something like the Carl-and-Sally affair could happen? Me too. But I see them as two good people caught up in a terrible accident. I believe they were ?swept away? by a violent passion that somehow rendered them helpless. Not moral or immoral, but overwhelmed by their own emotions. To some extent, it happened against their wills. Carl said they both struggled to resist each other and return to their sensible lives. I believe this sort of thing can happen to anyone. Are you sure you can resist every temptation in life? Maybe you are proof against love ? but what about money or fame or power or you-name-it?

Dharma wrote: ?Lindsay, your friend would have been better off had he (figuratively, speaking) separated his original life from the second one that he later chose. His disappointment stems from a mixture of the two worlds that he created. The two worlds were painted upon ONE canvas instead of TWO separate ones, thus marring the beauty that each once brought to his life experience. He failed to step back from both of them and appreciate what they each brought to his experience.?

Dharma, your whole analysis struck me as extremely insightful ? but a little distant. Do you think it is possible to watch yourself fall in love and weigh all the consequences? And how realistic is it to ask people to compartmentalize their lives into separate phases or sections or ?paintings?? People used to say it is important to integrate your life, bring everything together, and move forward as a whole person. I see Carl?s problem as similar to that of a murderer ? how can you ever forget something like that? How can you ever escape wishing it had not happened? How can you ever feel enough remorse? Even when you fully accept the responsibility, there are some problems in life that never go away.

Hilary wrote: ?I think people often do many readings on one issue when they're having serious difficulty accepting the reality before them, and likewise the first answers they get, which obstinately mirror this reality back. Sooner or later, Hexagram 4 comes into play.?

Hilary, thank you for this valuable observation. I do think something like this happened to Carl. But I see a dilemma here. Isn?t it at times of crisis, when we are most emotionally engaged in a problem and our judgment most unbalanced and confused, isn?t it at times like these that we feel the greatest need for outside counsel ? that is, the Oracle? And aren?t these the very times when we are most likely to overlook, misinterpret, deny or distort our readings? In a sense Carl is right. What kind of guide deserts you at the moment you are most lost? Worse, there seems to be an inverse relationship between need and results. That is, the more you need the Yi, the less likely you are to get an accurate result.

It seems to me this is a powerful argument against reading for yourself. And, conversely, a major selling point for asking for the help of an independent reader. It would make sense to me that people who come to Clarity are often at their wit?s end, emotionally and rationally unable to do a reading for themselves - regardless of their level of skill with the Yi.

Hilary wrote: ?With enough rules in enough detail, you would always 'know' what to do, and you could throw the book away. I know that there are very good reasons for no longer needing an oracle - is this one of them?

Hilary, don?t throw the Yi away yet! Just because rules exist, even internal ones, doesn?t mean we do not have to constantly remind ourselves of them. People still read the Bible, don?t they? I think most moral questions are so difficult ? nearly every good is inseparably linked to an attendant evil ? that we tend to study morality-in-action, especially specific cases, as much as we can. For example, ?Do not kill? sounds to me like a reasonable and obvious proposition, but I am endlessly interested in seeing every side of this moral principle in the world of human events. Seeing the circumstances and results of killing reinforces my understanding and adherence to the moral law.

Actually, Supanatural?s link between morality and oracles makes sense to me. I think the Yi, especially in its final classic form (with all the wings), is saturated with moral content. And what questions are more vexing than moral ones? If we need an oracle for anything, it is to try to understand the right thing to do. So perhaps a good oracle should require the best from us and point to Higher Ground. Isn?t that what Dharma is always saying?

Sorry to be so long-winded, but this whole discussion has been very stimulating. Thank you all!

Is the lull over yet?

May you all be spared temptation,
Lindsay

 

[dharma]

Lindsay,

When I really pay attention to the intimate details of my own life experience, I can see that EVERY moment contains a temptation for me. The temptation to continually focus on past mistakes and future hopes, is ever present. Often minor, yes, yet they so easily can snowball into major dramas if I don't reorient myself before they get out of hand. Temptation is a fact of life for all of us, though I prefer to call them 'tests' myself. Opportunities to 'test' the depth of my understandings, the wisdom of my beliefs and the allegiance to my decisions.

Also, I understand dependency, enslavement and addiction only too well. I am where I am and who I am today as a result of these huge stumbling blocks that defined my life at one time, and if I sound distant, it's because I am. I would, without doubt, still be in the dark and struggling to make sense of it all, otherwise.

My insight to this situation comes from KNOWING Carl's experience first-hand, and discovering that rising above and beyond a bad situation is not just about time's passage but about the ability to create an *internal* distance to the situation. I am not talking about forgetting but about forgiving what is perceived as perhaps a mistake or wrong-doing. The truth is, on-going remorse for something that occured a long time ago is more about being a martyr than about repenting. If he's still feeling like "a big heel" then he is stuck in Time and unwilling to release himself for some, most likely unconscious, reason because he's attached some mistaken value to UNending guilt and suffering.

Anyway, you see them as two good people who got caught up in a terrible accident, swept away by a violent passion that somehow rendered them helpless. But in hindsight, is there really any such thing as an accident... really? Studying the details of any accident, consistently reveals that thoughtlessness, carelessness and neglect, more often than not, figure in some way. Was their relationship *really* an accident? Doesn't sound that way to me.

And what *is* "passion" but the unyielding DESIRE to HAVE something. (If we're honest with ourselves, we believe we are helpless in order to justify getting what we want --perhaps even what we NEED.) I always say that in order to get to the Higher Ground we have to travel through, and in & out of our self-created pits and ruts, afterall, we cannot become holy without first understanding what it is to NOT be holy. These are the rules, I didn't make them up.

For Carl and Sally, the opportunity to experience falling helplessly in love and out of control presented itself. Could there very well be a spiritual reason that Carl and Sally NEEDED to experience what they did? Could I Ching, in it's infinite wisdom, have directed them to go in this direction for the intense spiritual refinement that it would bring all persons involved? I don't think that any one of us can say for sure and without a shadow of a doubt.

What *is* certain, is the value in appreciating the growth and insight that each relationship brought to them and forgetting about regrets. Regret is nothing but wasted energy --and there's so much more that could be done with it.

Dharma

 

[alisa]

Actually, Supanatural?s link between morality and oracles makes sense to me. I think the Yi, especially in its final classic form (with all the wings), is saturated with moral content. And what questions are more vexing than moral ones?

Supanatural's link between oracles and morality doesn't makes to me. I've throw away most of my books on morality. I have taken their advice into consideration and have come to the conclusion that most of what is said in those books is garbage.

Morality is the way society and religions has set it up to be, and there's not much we can do about it.


Alisa, you seem to have a trouble understanding how something like the Carl-and-Sally affair could happen?

Yes, I do have trouble understanding it. It was a very selfish act, to up and leave your children. I don't care how much passion I had for someone. My children would always come first. No wonder they are remorseful.


Wish I could stay and write...gotta go...time to get ready for work.