The Yi is user-specific?

[bruce_g]

Yes, knowledge is a tool for development. But knowledge doesn't lead to wisdom.

Jack, are you practicing shape shifting exercises?

I'm not interested in gaining wisdom, and I'm half skeptical of the word itself; the half which pertains to humans. But I am interested in developing character, which is what 26 speaks to, in human terms.

 

[peacecat]

So, apparently the Yi doesn't always adapt to the translation you are using.

Actually, I have been checking out situations and corresponding readings on this forum (with the hexagram index) to see whether particular translations fitted with what seemed to have happened. I've found lots of times that it didn't with the translation the querant appeared to have been using, and that a different translation of my own did actually fit.

That's interesting. Perhaps the Yi is also aware of just how many translations each of us has. Therefore if we have the resources and we don't do the work, we don't interpret properly and we make mistakes, but perhaps those mistakes are necessary parts of the grander scheme of things. Huang says in his Preface, "According to the I Ching, every country has its destiny and every person has his or her fate, but everyone still has freedom to make their own choices." (xvi) It may be our fate to make certain mistakes but our choice whether or not to correct them.

 

[dobro p]

Huang says in his Preface, "According to the I Ching, every country has its destiny and every person has his or her fate, but everyone still has freedom to make their own choices." (xvi).

Really? I doubt it. Where in the Yi proper does it say that every country has its destiny? I've read the Yi tons of times, and I don't remember it talking about a country's destiny. I remember Confucian scholars and commentators talking about a country's destiny, of course, but that's not the Yi. That's Confucian commentary.

And as for the freedom of choice thing, the Yi *implies* that the individual has freedom of choice (otherwise why would it indicate useful responses to particular situations?), but it doesn't say so in so many words.

 

[peacecat]

What really struck me about the Huang quote was his idea that every person has a fate. I've never really considered it, though now that I do I can see that it could very well be true. Personal experiences lead to patterns of action and these patterns must decide the structure of one's fate. But still patterns can be broken though it takes the effort of will to do it successfully. On the other hand, some patterns (and fates) are desirable and don't need changing.

Does the I Ching espouse the concept of fate? I don't know. It seems to help to direct individuals to follow a way of life that seeks to establish balance in all situations. The Middle Way? So the focus is more on how to be rather than what will be. Though the hints at what might be appear to act as spurs to direct one's course hopefully away from misfortune and towards good fortune.

 

[laureet]

An idea occurred to me. (Uh-oh...)

We talk here about the meaning of a hexagram or the meaning of a line, but I'm wondering to what extent the meaning of a hexagram or a line is user-specific. For instance, for me Hex 21 might mean X, cuz it always refers to situations where X is the issue, whereas for you Hex 21 might mean Y, with quite a different meaning from X, again cuz for you Hex 21 always refers to situations where Y is the issue.

You known, meanings in the Yi (or in any other literate medium) will always be somewhere on the continuum between completely individual/idiosyncratic and common/shared. But for something like the Yi, perhaps those individual meanings will play a larger part, for two reasons: first, the Yi deals in symbols and generalities, and these will ALWAYS translate into a variety of individual differences; second, people's personalities (and souls or essences, I believe) are different, and so the Yi will have a meaning that's as unique for each user as a drug is unique for each user. Alcohol strikes different people in different ways, right? Depending on their personality.

Whatcha think?

It is user specific by nature, it is also situation specific, meaning that your understanding of it and the very results will differ if tyou are in the middle of a situation which relates to your present or you wonder about the future or you fear the consequences of the past. This is because you change depending in which point of time you have your mind, you can see this in the relativity of the sensation of passing time when you are enjoying yourself or suffering each second, your spirit (or mind if you prefer, or substance or whatever your concept of your non physical you) changes its interpretation of the world around you, so it must affect the interpretation and outcome of your tossing and readings:bows:

 

[ariel13]

I have to admit that I did not read this entire thread but got very anxious and wanted to add something (apologies if something similar has been stated already) But, YES in a way I think that the Yi will always be user-specific in that interpretations vary from person to person. However, I also feel that the Yi speaks in archetypes, and of course the definition of an archetype is that it holds a universal meaning for many b/c it arises from the collective unconscious. It's inherent logic relies on synchronicity, which for those who don't know is a term coined by Carl Jung who was also a proponent of divination tools and specifically the I Ching (he wrote the forward for the Wilhelm translation– of course). So much like the archetypes of dreams– there is a certain aspect that is totally individualistic/subjective, however the underlying principles remain the same as the collective image. Anyway, I am reading a book now called "The Tao of Psychology" which touches on things related to this question (and my interpretation of it). I haven't quite finished it, but I'd say it's worth a read if you are interested. It talks about psychology/parapsychology/quantum physics– stringing all of these things together in an interesting way and in reference to the I Ching as another component of the story. The book is written by a Jungian analyst who uses the I Ching with her patients! :+D

 

[meng]

I still think it's a great question.

On one hand, sentiment seems a rarity, while pragmatism and realism rules. What is absent is a broader scope of what is real, and by that I don't mean Yi's intelligence lacking scope of what is real, but the self, which creates the inner drama from the Yi, and winds up animating the individualism within the question as well as the answer.

Also, I think the mere fact that we have translations of the originals prove that the ears of the Ding may be moved, and even removed entirely, and they're interchangeable materials, hopefully without breaking its leg and spilling its content all over the Prince. If that happens, the whole thing is lost.

 

[bradford]

Roughly half of the users think heads count as two when tossing the coins, the other half three.
It's about the same with the Chinese coins. There is no right way, but these give opposite results.
Is it the Yi that adapts or the reader?
A lot of people use pretty bad translations or even just un-insightful commentaries, and yet they
still seem to derive real wisdom. Mucho mysterioso, unless pareidolia explains it all.