Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
At the risk of starting the insurrection, I suggest there are multiple ways to consult the I Ching.
I actually do agree with you, really I do. That's why I went on to sayIf the answer had been 17.1 it would have been 17.1. That is a very peculiar thought you are expressing....a really bizarre thought, that Yi didn't want to give 45 but meant 17.1 ...I mean come on
I was just theorizing (probably foolishly), once I realized it's not entirely different from an unchanging hexagram meaning things like "it'll be this whole story"? (What I said about 50uc.)It seems too twisty, to me
Trojina said:There's all that but there is not more than one actual true answer from Yi. I mean there can be many interpretations from various angles but it does boil down to one answer. This forum is mainly text based interpretation so people coming in with all those rule based approaches are asked to say what system they use. It does not make sense at all to say 'this is the answer using text and this is the answer using a rule based method like wengwanggua etc . There aren't 2 entirely different answers from the I Ching.
I think if something really catches your eye, here for Svrenus line 1, then I think that's a valid kind of approach. He just happened to be using a particular translation which referred to a damaged building and this held his attention. Synchronicity ? That is IMO, using intuition, still using divinatory skills. For example sometimes people take just one word from a hexagram and it answers everything for them, I've had that, that is part of genuine divination, noticing and following where your awareness goes. Ah I used the word 'following'. To me Svrenus seems quite intent on his quest, quite focused. maybe the Notre Dame means something personally to him and so he follows his hunches where they lead him.
I like that idea, too.Trojina said:I think I'd probably agree this answer of 17uc was most likely a 'just go along with what transpires about it/rest'.
But, I can see how "it was an accident" is part of an explanation but not a complete one, and we do sometimes look to Yi for more than we can get from the news. Maybe Yi's saying it can't explain it to us in a way we'd ever understand?After all surely there are actual investigations now ? I don't know as I don't follow it on the news. Oh yes I see Svrenus saw it was an accident on the news.
Playing around with the sequence a little bit...
15 - "structural integrity," a need to make repairs
16 - something 16-ish (in a bad way) happening as a result (and 16 involves another thunder trigram)
17 - one thing following another; the fire took some time to get going enough to be noticed down below?
If investigations are still going on, I think CNN would just say that.Yes ! Can You imagine: The reason for the fire was an accident ? (Or: are CNN not allowed to inform futher details because in reality the investigations for the cause goes on...)
Were they using linseed oil up in the spire, though? Didn't the fire start in the spire, not down in the cathedral itself?- and to make a shortcut over the endless repetitions i'll stick on to the cause for the fire being careless handling with linseed oil
Could Thunder below Lake symbolize a live electrical cord in water?
... I Ching translation by Kerson and Rosemary Huang...
They call 16 'weariness'. They call 45 'illness'...
Even those names are justifiable to a degree.
No, wrong element.
Thunder is not fire, it is shocking sound and movement. Li is Fire/electricity.
Do tell, how so?
(I'm preparing popcorn to watch an incredible stretch of logic)
Moss Elk
I know for a fact that electricity is light and fire. and that thunder is sound and percussive force that happens after lightning.
Do you know some fact I do not?
svenrus, these names given by Kerson/ Huang are
terriblyoff the mark.mein
Please invite me over to a book burning party! (I'll rob a skinhead and steal his copy of kampfto add to the pyre)recommend
Please clarify, does Kerson/Huang looking at the first line, or did your eyes just wander there?
(I'm still confused)
Trojina and Liselle,
please read the image of 21.
There you will see that Li is referred to as lightning, and Zhen as thunder.
Hilary made a mistake if she called lightning Zhen.
Yes in a grand sense Li and Zhen are all part of one ten thousand things, yet they are distinct in attributes.
I am leaving an apology bucket outside my cave for you to fill. (no bodily fluids please)
For everyone who wants to get needlessly "creative" in interpretation,
remember to get the basics right before riffing.
Thunder and lightning are part of the same phenomenon, but I agree they're not the same thing. Electricity is in the lightning, not in the thunder.
But, when someone is talking about a live electrical wire that may have caused sparks to start a fire, I think I can see a thunder-like quality in that. Hilary writes things like "Thunder is shock, upheaval and the spark of the new; it’s how heaven sets things in motion."
Is it possible to have thunder without lightning?
No, it is not possible to have thunder without lightning. Thunder is a direct result of lightning. However, it IS possible that you might see lightning and not hear the thunder because it was too far away.
Thank you, I wholly accept your gracious half apology.Hm. I hadn't ever noticed that. I'll give you half an apology.
I think we'll need the bucket to jam over your head to stop it growing any bigger.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).