...life can be translucent

Menu

Steps of Yu (new material from Stephen Karcher)

anon99

visitor
Joined
Jun 28, 1972
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
In your post of 11:05pm you said "...without taking what was just said into consideration.."

I think I agree with your post, except I don't know to what you refer to that was 'just said' ?

I think I am agreeing with you in that of late it seems a trend to always be searching for more and more complex inter-relations between hexagram patterns, and strange phantasmic stories woven seemingly from nowhere, that the inventor believes to originate in the Yi Jing.

I realised of late these add nothing to my own understanding. Perhaps I thought, I am just stupid ? But actually I know I am not.

I just think alot of the stuff is coming soley out of the creative minds of those who don't want to settle sometimes for the honesty, lucidity and dare I say it simplicity of the Yi - not of course to mention its beautiful succinctness -

The beauty of saying a million different things in just a few lines.

Map it and Kill it I say.
 

chrislofting

(deceased)
Joined
Nov 19, 1971
Messages
394
Reaction score
3
Hi Sun,

>
> By Sunpuerh (Sunpuerh) on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 01:58 am:
>
> Then map out clarvoyance, intuition, morality, and
> kindness...

under way. (intuition has been covered before. Morality reflects the activity of security seeking (right/wrong as compared to logics true/false)) - stems from issues in a distrust in others.

The state of empathy allows us to resonate as species members and so share the 'same space' with someone, we bypass the Pauli Exclusion Principle! ;-) BUT to do that well requires 'likemindedness' and the IC can help in developing that. IDM identifies the core generics and IC the specialist terms that our consciousness demands! ;-)

Kindness? -- well I am kind other than to religious fundamentalists - they seem to be doing an excellent job at the moment in 'upsetting' the development of the species - but then exaggerations, ideals, can do that.

By understanding your species nature first so your species comes before your faith, your 'god' etc. IOW all faiths are specialisations of species-level sensations. Thus the protective nature that we associate with our sense of the spiritual is the core upon which we can exaggerate specialisations. Unfortunately the idealist notions can act to FRAGMENT the species nature rather than integrate; differentiation is put first and so a sense of 'it all starts with my awareness' - which is rubbish when we analyse the neurocognitive processes at work.

High level differentiations are reflected in any faith that is monadic in form in that the 'leaders/orginators' are made into universals etc. I have no time for Christianity or Islam or Judaism or even formal Taoism, Buddhism etc etc in that the faith is put ahead of the species and THAT is a real problem - as we witness everyday.

The elements of the spiritual these faiths contain are more so elements of our species nature that have been exaggerated to 'fit' these specialisations. Removing the specialisations does not remove the spiritual, just calms it down a bit and leaves us with the 'good bits'. ;-)

> study good manners, control the ego and the mind,
> emulate humility.
>

emulate?! why not just BE humble - when the context favours it. The nature is built-in and as such is context-sensitive, context will push your buttons to elicit it. To what degree depends on your developed persona but it is still there and fleshing out the IC aids in refining it. To idealise it means to expend energy, the species focus is on conserving energy over the long term, exaggerations over the short term.

As for good manners - I have no time for political correctness which is an exaggeration, a false perspective that is more often 'bull' and so lacking in honesty. I call a spade a spade, not a 'shovelling device' etc etc. As for this particular thread, I told Stephen in no uncertain terms that some of his claims showed he was out of his depth re the 'total I Ching'. Simple. Honest. He was willing enough to 'engage' and in doing so left with a 'new' perspective - and there is a lot more he needs to know IMHO but thats fine - time will develop things ;-)

Get into your species nature and from THERE develop consciousness. We cannot avoid our instincts, our animal nature. We CAN, using consciousness, refine them but to do that requires facing, immersion in, the 'dark' side, the nitty gritty of species nature. From that we can 'explode' in short bursts, forgive and forget, etc etc. The IC material helps with that, and I dont mean the confucius 'overlay', I mean the core qualities.

The IC is about change, cling to the traditional perspectives and you go against the principles the IC expounds!

The simplicity is in the species-nature levels, the GENERAL. The complexity comes out in the specialisations, the PARTICULAR.

simple. ;-)

Focus on the general and the particulars are taken for what they are, metaphors. Otherwise they are taken literally, as are the Bible, Koran etc etc and so out pop the fundamentalists.

Sitting back and focusing on the traditional IC does NOTHING in aiding the species development. It is specialist perspective and so as 'bad' as other fundamentalist material. The focus is on the self, on how 'I' interact, on 'my' problems etc etc - we need to go beyond this, put species first and individual later and a lot of things can be cleared up PRIOR to then developing personal consciousness (and the activity will in fact refine personal skills as well ;-))


Chris.
 
C

cheiron

Guest
As I have just put out diagrams under ?Maps of Change? and as some folk here are roundly condemning ?maps? I thought to write a few words.

The maps I have drawn up are predominantly indexes of the methods most of us use anyway! Drawn up to allow myself and others to enjoy some of the beauty of the patterns as well as a tool to look at resulting hexagrams and Fanyao.

They do not re-interpret they do not re-structure blah blah blah.

Let us not forget the Shao Yong square and Marshall?s helpful diagram of the hexagrams from Shu Yigui from 1274 - Both maps, and there are very many more.

So unless folk really mean to throw these out as well (in which case they might want to tear out that last page of WB into the bargain) then perhaps they might differentiate between this simple tool I called a ?map? and complex methodology when making their points many with which I have some sympathy.

I would suggest that there is a difference between a method which is built on using ?active? liminal language and those which completely re-structure the conceptual body.

Indeed one of which confuses complementary Ying Yang pairing and styles them as opposites ? a departure from the fundamental principal of the Yijing.

I for one have found Stephen?s creativity with symbolic language very emancipating. The Yijing is a set of symbolic images which were written for another culture in another time. His work has helped me become a lot more intuitive about the application of the imagery to a reading and to find that connective resonance. For me using the Yijing is absolutely not about transcribing words from a text and applying them to a situation in simple form.


A cursory glance at Chung Wu; Alfred Huang and Wu-Jing Nuan?s versions (all of whom studied in China apparently under well schooled specialist teachers) immediately demonstrates that there is a lot of disagreement about the lines even before they are translated. Then we have the problem that the language base is so different from English that really the only way to get at the meaning is to read it in ancient Chinese or to work with something like Bradford?s Matrix or the Ritsema Karcher copy.

Staying with Chung Wu who claims to be a traditionalist (presumably of a post Han kind). He insists that Complementary; antiparallel; derived and inverted hexagrams are essential tools to have in ones bag for understanding a reading.

We also have the Plum Blossom method ? another tradition and one which I do not favour much. However the great Shao Yong was the leading proponent in his time.

Steve Marshall?s work illuminates some of the contexts which I find very helpful in understanding the time of some of the hexagrams and the stories and myths some of the ancient Chinese would have been drawing on when reading.

LiSe?s work on the original hexagram glyphs unpack some of the older layers which underpin the meanings of the hexagrams too. Her work also gives us a fine view of some of the older layers which show us just how far the Yijing grew and metamorphosed over the years.

Yes I am sympathetic with the view that we must not loose site of the core and that it is necessary to strive to find clarity and understanding of the text.

Also that there are methods which appear to use the 64 hexagrams which might actually not be the Yijing at all but other models of thought masquerading as the Yijing.

--Kevin
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,128
Reaction score
202
Chris, several posts ago you said something about lying and cheating being hard-cored or so. I hope I am using the right terminology.
Contrary to those who saw it as either a license to go on and cheat as much as they want, or as a license to eugenics, it made me smile. If we see and accept people the way they are, not putting our own morality on them, then we love humanity. Of course one has to take care not to be cheated. But that is something one has to do all the time.

I happen to know someone (more than one, but this one is special, because she does not really want to cheat anyone) who cannot speak the truth. She hardly knows what it is. Very surprised she commented on something "what you said was true . . !", and I seldom heard such surprise. I cannot talk with her, because personally I need more or less to know what we are talking about. But I have to admit that she is a nice person. When she needs something, she cheats and lies to get it, very simply because for her that is the way to get something. She was raised that way.

And now you said: "Morality reflects the activity of security seeking (right/wrong as compared to logics true/false)) - stems from issues in a distrust in others".

I love it. So if I want her to be honest, it is because I don't trust her. And if I trust her, I accept her as she is, and just have to make sure not to do anything against my own interests.

It gives me an entirely new view on trust, it feels rather like trusting myself, and it feels immensely strong.

Thanks,

LiSe
 

chrislofting

(deceased)
Joined
Nov 19, 1971
Messages
394
Reaction score
3
Hi LiSe,

you wrote:
>
> Chris, several posts ago you said something about lying and
> cheating being hard-cored or so. I hope I am using the right
> terminology.
> Contrary to those who saw it as either a license to go on
> and cheat as much as they want, or as a license to eugenics,
> it made me smile. If we see and accept people the way they
> are, not putting our own morality on them, then we love
> humanity. Of course one has to take care not to be cheated.
> But that is something one has to do all the time.
>

thats right. the hard-coding is basic survival skills and with that comes a focus on protection as well as exploitation. Given an opportunity the 'con artist' can take over one's persona! ;-) Our species-nature buttons get pushed all of the time and our consciousness spends time trying to catch up! The IC aids in identifying the 'instincts' of the species and so aids in refining those instincts - the refinement being for protection or for exploitation.

The protect/exploit dichotomy is a fundamental that is a synonym for integrate(yin)/differentiate(yang). Applied to itself (process of recursion) the dichotomy creates a mediation industry - the more 'cultured' a collective the more lawyers, accountants, and psychotherapists abound! ;-)

> I happen to know someone (more than one, but this one is
> special, because she does not really want to cheat anyone)
> who cannot speak the truth. She hardly knows what it is.
> Very surprised she commented on something "what you said was
> true . . !", and I seldom heard such surprise. I cannot talk
> with her, because personally I need more or less to know
> what we are talking about. But I have to admit that she is a
> nice person. When she needs something, she cheats and lies
> to get it, very simply because for her that is the way to
> get something. She was raised that way.
>

.. but that does not stop your relationship with her - you just know that she has 'traits' that one needs to be wary of! ;-)

> And now you said: "Morality reflects the activity of
> security seeking (right/wrong as compared to logics
> true/false)) - stems from issues in a distrust in others".
>
> I love it. So if I want her to be honest, it is because I
> don't trust her. And if I trust her, I accept her as she is,
> and just have to make sure not to do anything against my own
> interests.
>

yup. Our education can be divided into two camps, that for socialisation (protection bias) and that for development (exploitation bias).

Some will go through socialisation but have 'issues' and that can reflect some elements of 'hard coding'. Now, because someone gets expelled etc from 'socialisation school', does not necessarily make them 'bad', just 'difficult' - until you put them in a specialist context where suddenly they 'flower'.

The IC binary sequence range covers absolute trust in others to total distrust (yin based hexagrams) and absolute trust in self to total distrust (yang based hexagrams). IOW besides betraying others we can betray ourselves.

History shows us the 'hard coded' personas, who have ALWAYS been 'X', and those who have adapted to contexts in their life such that 'X' is adopted as the 'best fit' behaviour.


Chris.
 

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