Some advise I find interesting

[Sparhawk]

Hello gang, it's been a long time. I've been dedicating much more time to my photography and haven't followed the discussions here for a while. However, I still check this and other Yi related sites, once in a while. Today I saw this at Steve Marshall's site.

I know is not a popular position but certainly deserves consideration.

Cheers,

Luis

 

[rosada]

LOL - This man sure uses a lot of words to complain about people talking too much!

 

[bruce]

Hi, Luis. Hope all's well with you.

It does get pretty noisy. Especially the elaborate 'this means that' and 'this is how it's done' routine, as though reading an instruction manual. It's never that simple.

But I wonder if Steve is antisocial.

 

[jesed]

Well, is not a coincidence that I (mostly) agree with Steve once again

Of course, i'm "traditionalist", so by definition I'm wrong, isn't?

The one thing I don't agree with that is in despicte that practice (calling for others' opinions). What Steve points is the way a Noble aproach to Yi Jing. But not everyone is Noble (neither everyone MUST be one)

That is what Ta Chuan said: "The benevolent see it and call it benevolence; the wise see it and call it wisdom. The common people, acting daily according to it, yet have no knowledge of it. Thus it is that the Tao as seen by the superior man, is seen by few."

The same applies to Yijing.

Let's everyone follow it's own path.

Best wishes

 

[Sparhawk]

Hi Bruce!! (you'll always be Candid for me...

)

All is well, thank you. Hope the same for you. Happy New Year!! BTW, I'll be photographing the arrival of the Year of the Dog tomorrow night at Philly's Chinatown (did you know Philly has the second biggest Chinatown in the East Coast?)

Steve is Steve, most everybody that's been here for more than a couple of years should know that, but he does seem to stand out in many ways, and he's a Yi scholar. When him, like Brad or Karcher speak, my ears perk up (heck, tomorrow starts the Year of the Dog...

)

But yes, he may seem withdrawn.

Miss you all but could not pay too much attention to the discussions.

Luis

 

[jte]

Hi, Luis, nice to hear from you!

On Marshall's blog entry - well, he's certainly entitled to his opinion. In a way though, it made me feel almost sorry for him - I mean, was it worth the long climb up the mountain only to find it so cold and lonely at the top?

To each his own, I suppose...

- Jeff

 

[bruce]

Luis, a picture is still worth a thousand words. Keep ?em loaded and shootin?, cowboy!

I have a good friend who becomes cynical at the mere mention of the Yi being used for every day matters, believing it to be too sacred for such shallow drivel. Part of me feels the same way. It is a sacred work to me too. But as Jesed pointed out, not everyone has such noble ambitions or interest. Imagine if the healing arts were viewed this way? Only health practitioners would benefit from their knowledge. Seems pretty selfish to me.

I?m always a bit skeptical of someone who considers themselves so much an expert that they never ask others for their insights or help, lest it be seen as weakness, or that their own knowledge is inadequate. This applies not only to this board or the Yi, but in all things. Asking an old book for answers shows no such weakness. Asking others for help shows humanity and humility. And how wise would the elder be if not reachable or teachable by the young fool?

 

[freemanc]

Hi Luis, Candid, & other friends,

A thread about Steve can usually be depended on to get me to poke up my antenna... To be very clear on the point, I think Steve's wonderful. Prickly, imperfect, and sometimes demented, but a truly wonderful character, and a good person. (I think his orientation is "Chaotic Good".)

Uhm... when I followed the link to Steve's site in the first post (.../journal.htm) I got a tiny poem/message and a link to ebay... was there a rant or something that disappeared since the first post, or am I missing something?... Not sure which blog some of the above comments refer to... Help me out here?

In passing, I note that Steve has a book of poems out... haven't found if there's an edition other than the beautiful expensive one...

As some of you know I have a real fondness for cheap paperbacks

fondly,
Freeman Crouch

 

[hilary]

I think he deleted the post - or at least archived it so obscurely I couldn't find it on his site.

Basically he said people shouldn't ask other people what their readings mean. At least, not on a forum. He's never asked anyone what one of his readings means, after all. He says people ask for help immediately instead of sitting with a reading (don't know how he knows this...). And that the result is 'I Ching noise', surface interpretation, not real understanding.

Of course there is a nugget of truth in what he says: it is possible to ask too much, ask for interpretations rather than reflecting, get caught up in asking about what to do and only succeed in turning the hamster wheel faster. And of course the sheer brilliance of Steve's writing gives the article a strong charge. I have a copy I could forward to you - I won't post it here, as it looks like Steve doesn't want it online.

Funny thing is - I almost never ask what my readings mean, either; nor do I usually look at commentaries. And on the rare occasions when I do talk about a reading with someone, it doesn't usually make as much impression on me as the conversations that are just Yi pounding realisation into my thick head, without intermediary. But I'm not sure whether this is a good thing, or whether it just means I'm too wedded to my own ideas.

Hello, Luis!

 

[bruce]

Hi Hilary,

Um, I think it isn?t whether or not you ask others for interpretations but whether you exchange with others about readings, in general, which makes a difference between you and Steve. You and I, for example, have discussed our readings between us in the past. Neither may have been dramatically influenced by the exchange but at least it gave additional input and provided another point of view - "whereas there's always something ponderous and one-sided about the learning of the self-taught." Also, I do recall you telling me, quite awhile back, that we learn a great deal from the interpretations we offer to others. I still agree.

This is a good example of how someone?s personal view of things opens up to general discussion, which benefits all who are interested in the topic. It happens all the time here. I don?t know how anyone can fault that.

 

[Sparhawk]

LOL!! Is the second time I point to something he writes in his journal and the next thing I know it is gone... First time was a coincidence... The first time I wrote a note in my blog about something else he wrote in the journal, something I really liked. The next day it was gone.

For the record, and he may be reading this, I admire Steve like I admire very few people. He may be more on the "eye of the beholder" than most people but in my case I truly believe, feel, he's on the right track about the Yi. It is not a light, off-handed comment. I do have 30 years of using and studying the Yi behind me, and even though there are many here with similar seniority and opposing opinions, it should count for something.

For all I know, he may be laughing more than he's upset for all the attention. He got the point across and even if it was to a very few people the message is out. I think he also enjoys the ephemeral nature of the Net immensely. Never before has a writer been able to have so much control over his own words as now, giving them a sense of vibration akin to the spoken, unrecorded word. If you are there to "hear them", good for you, and then they are gone. From there on it becomes word-of-mouth (and fingers...) Yet again, my hat is off to Steve.

Luis

 

[matt]

I can understand how Steve feels, because I used to feel the same way.

 

[Sparhawk]

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

Funny thing is - I almost never ask what my readings mean, either; nor do I usually look at commentaries. <!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

Hi Hilary!

As you and Steve, I never ask for second opinions on my own readings (at least I cannot remember ever doing so) I chew on the darn thing until I either get all the flavor out of it or find a bone and break a tooth (which is a metaphor for not hearing the "incoming!!!!" call)

What I find funny is that we have both provided a forum for other people to chat about the Yi and share interpretations...

Mind you, mine is almost deprived of traffic and I think is because not enough Spanish speaking people is interested in chatting about it. In any case, it is there for others to use.

Luis

 

[bruce]

Makes no difference to me whether he laughs or falls asleep, nor whether he's Steve Marshall or Jesus Christ. The view he presented is shared by many if not most Yi enthusiasts, and it's worth consideration, just as comments to the contrary are.

 

[Sparhawk]

Jesus he's not...

Got your point though and I think you are correct.

 

[hilary]

Luis, where is this Spanish-speaking forum of yours? I could send a link to the next person who sends me a request please to translate my free course and/or website into Spanish for them.

 

[hester]

Well TAHNK heavens I saw. it read it god I a, so l;ucky i kee[p asking peole for readings but no one GETYS IT!!!!! I ke[p asking and asking NO ON EVER UNDERSTOOOD BUT NOW I KNOW WHY I FOUND OUT IT IS NOT RANDOM GENERATOR IT IS NOT NOT NOT RANDOM SELECTOR; OF THE YI JING IT IS An invisible GROUP OF PEOPLE I CANT SEE. it makes sense to no one but me, and even I I I I DID NOT GET IT. NOW I DO!!!! AHA!!!! NOW I KNOW STEVE MARSHALL WHY NO ONE GETS IT.

 

[Sparhawk]

Oookay.... Yo!, Hester, is that a misspelling on your name? BTW, is Pedro still around?

Hilary, here is reminder link to my site, Sorocabana. Click on the Cafe logo.

L

 

[heylise]

This thread got me thinking about why I (me too) never ask advice.

Strange thing is, when I 'ask' someone for help with a reading, nothing much happens. Even when good things are said, they usually don't help. Might be because the asking itself means, that I am not open to understand it.
But when someone gives me an unexpected and unasked for comment on a reading, very often it does make sense. "Comes falling from heaven.."

 

[jerryd]

Heylise, and all, I have almost never used the YI for purpose of self evaluation. If I need information it is not for me to do my own reading, only to ask the question of another. Advice is like asking the Pope for a blessing, you never know untill the final meeting if it was worth the effort. And as I have pointed out before, asking a question is often percluded by and answer already preconsieved by the self and all we are needing is supported confirmation of something we have the answer to already.
Quality discussions such as I see posted here help in sorting priorities and some which consume several hundreds of words on the enigmatic persuits of neuroscientific emotionalisms are less than helpful to 99% of us.

 

[lightofdarkness]

The IC is self-referencing and so you can get it to describe itself. NOT knowing the methodology that allows you to do that means you will do what the originators did - seek external references, be it through historic or mythic references or the immediate of asking someone else also working with the text to give their interpretations and so we sum 'small worlds' networks to try and get to the underlying 'truth' of the regular network, the universal that seeds the local and that we need to flesh-out once we know it in general.

Since the structure and dynamics of the IC covers 'all there is' so it is applicable to anything you like - the only 'issues' being in methodologies of enquiry.

Marshall is favouring an intimate relationship of him and his IC over the SOCIAL dynamic of sharing experiences. His book reflects this through its attempt to get to the core meanings of the IC through analysis of local historic/mythic links - IOW he tried to get 'behind' the traditional IC using the traditional context - which is fine from a local, traditional level, but will not give you the deeper, more universal, means that the originators were trying to communicate through external, local, links - IOW there was 'something' seeding their thinking that forced them to seek external references to describe that 'something' since they had no information on 'in here' and so the agent of seeding.

Working from the level of the universals created by our neurology for purposes of categorisations, you have to step out of the 'traditional' box and that can be hard to do especially when the relationship of one with the IC is extremely intimate ... but that sort of pure, fundamentalist, approach means new blood is eventually required as decadence emerges and things start to rot from within.

The archetypal is 'pure', is 'immortal', but also sterile. The surrendering of the archetypal to the typal gives 'new blood' in the form of mixing. The price is the immortality and so the sense of 'mixing' as introducing 'death' -- which it does for the benefit of genetic diversity etc. WITH that sacrifice comes awareness of an even more archetypal realm covering the species.

Chris

 

[rosada]

I have had experiences where I'll consult the I Ching about a situation, not understand the interpretation, and then have a dream where the "true" meaning is revealed. Usually, this "true" meaning would make no sence if I were to try to explain it to another, but even so, after having the dream the situation will resolve on it's own. For example, I've consulted the I Ching to get rid of a cold, gotten an answer that made no sence, then had a profound dream in which the answer made total sence, then woken up the next morning with with the dream now only a vague memory of gibrish, but the cold totally gone.
So yeah, I suppose at the highest it's the quiet state of meditation you're in when you consult the I Ching that does all the good and understanding the lines isn't necessary. But then couldn't that sort of thinking be carried to an extreme? I mean, if understanding isn't necessary, maybe being alive isn't necessary either, but hey, I enjoy my life and I enjoy my friends and I enjoy discussing the I Ching.

 

[peace]

I truly believe - that if I were more willing to trust what I know and listen with my heart, I would pick up alot more cues from the environment and myself - and not need to consult as often.

As Rosada says - she "got it" in her dream.

I've had some friends and my kids do some castings - and what they said before they asked I Ching the question - is exactly what they got when we did the readings.

They trusted what they knew and the I Ching validated it.

I, on the other hand, am not as confident - and need "permission" of I Ching answers to live my truth. (How sad!)And...I'm fine with that. Whatever works!
I also agree with LiSe - you never know until later what you really got...

Rosalie

 

[freemanc]

I think one angle that hasn't been mulled over is the profound difference between forum and private talks.

Clearly we agree that the book is a wonderful surface for two people to look at together and have a conversation.

On the other hand: I think that we have to remember that a forum is a worldwide, google-indexed, instantly-searchable publishing medium, and we have to be careful what we share. (Or alternatively, preserve our anonymity with great care.)

On the other other hand: I for one don't mind seeing I Ching noise: The litany of love, work, health, money, soul miseries. It's sort of the noise of the human condition. Life's messy, and a lot of people have the same problems over and over. So it ain't great literature. It's sometimes sad and boring. Oh well. If a real hurting human being make a connection they couldn't make IRL, sorts out something they couldn't IRL, then who the hell cares if it's unsightly?

Fondly,
Freeman Crouch

 

[bruce]

Freeman, my sentiments exactly.

 

[jte]

Yes, I think that's the point - like Hex 48, no? All can drink from it: some might use the water for sacred rituals, while others are simply doing their laundry. But without prejudice it serves their needs.

And like 48.3, what a shame to see it unused...

- Jeff

 

[micheline]

Reading other people's interpretations and intuitive thoughts on the hexagrams and lines is like adding ingredients to my own cauldron of understanding. They get mixed in with all the ingredients (personal understanding and past study) that have been simmering there a long time, and the result is a richer stew to feed on.

I don't usually, hardly ever, ask anyone for help in understanding my current readings, because I feel my readings are meant to stir my own soup, and my job is to read what rises to the surface. Everybody's soup, in this sense, has a slightly different mix, with varying amounts of personal spice and flavoring.

For a person who wants to add ingredients to their cauldron, this forum, and the voices of those here, provides a great resource. BUt for someone desperate to know "what this means," other people's words may have little value. It is like trying to study philosophy by using crib notes. It can remove the whole aspect of personal intuitive connection, and without that electrical charge, how can a reading ever be truly meaningful? Sometimes. though, another person's simple words ignite that very charge.

All that said, I have had my eyes opened and my readings expanded tremendously, by using methods I have seen suggested on this site. The steps/pathways of change, for instance, and the ways of working with a reading that I might not have considered.

It's all good, here. sometimes my understanding of a line has completely transformed due to the generous offerings of those who have shared their soup with me. Feeding the hungry is a good thing.

 

[rosada]

I too have not felt to post a personal question for the group although I've learned a lot reading the questions and discussions posted by others. I now realize how fortunate we are to have among us those who will bare their souls and allow us to comment, something I hadn't adequately appreciated before.