...life can be translucent

Menu

Yi, fixed or fluid map ? or does it depend ??

D

dharma

Guest
I have been reading tarot cards for many long years. I guess I consider myself a professional by now in this regard. What I have learned after all this time is that a reader will always connect with some people but never with others. Ability and knowledge of the craft is important but not what determines whether or not you can make the necessary connection to turn someone into a client.

At the beginning, when I didn't connect with some people, I believed that it was because I just wasn't 'good enough' yet. However, as the years passed, my ability and knowledge grew and as a result I became much more confident yet I still found that the same principle of 'connection' stood. I connected with some, but not with others.

As I began to make use of individual clients' astrological charts in my practice and as part of my counsel, I began to notice that I could determine ahead of time which new clients would be likely to 'click' and 'stick' with me. A definite pattern began to emerge. Clearly, those whose charts blended well with my own always seemed to connect easily with my interpretations and returned for future sessions with me. While those whose charts differed in important ways from my own very rarely returned despite the powerful readings I gave them.

Bottomline, they could not relate to my world view because it was not familiar. My interpretations were not what THEY would have come up with had they been in a position to interpret for themselves. Therefore my interpretations, however correct they may be for me and anyone else who resonates to the same frequency of perception as myself, are simply 'incorrect' for others.

Now... during a discussion of destiny vs free will, well over a year ago here at Clarity, I pointed out that we are each given a map to make our way through life. I was refering to our astrological natal charts and Hilary thoughtfully added that I Ching too was just such a map. Yes, I agreed. That made perfect sense. However, since then I have noticed that interpretations of Yi is subject to similar differences of opinion over the 'real' meaning and significance of the images and guiding markers that come up, as in tarot.

In light of the discussion taking place this past week on another page, I decided to cast the coins for the following two questions:

Q: Yi, as a fixed in meaning, one-size-fits-all, type map...
A: Hx 44.6 /28

Q: Yi, as a fluid in meaning, conforming-to-specific-orientation, type map...
A: Hx 22.1&2 /18

Based on my personal experiences, as I've described above, Yi's responses seem to sum up my personal "expectations" and "beliefs" through the hexagrams and changing lines that turned up. I would really be interested in hearing other people's points of view and any comments they would like to share that may shed more light, or different shades of it, on this topic for me.

Thank you,
Dharma
 

chrislofting

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

you wrote:
>
> Now... during a discussion of destiny vs free will, well
> over a year ago here at Clarity, I pointed out that we are
> each given a map to make our way through life. I was
> refering to our astrological natal charts and Hilary
> thoughtfully added that I Ching too was just such a map.
> Yes, I agreed. That made perfect sense. However, since then
> I have noticed that interpretations of Yi is subject to
> similar differences of opinion over the 'real' meaning and
> significance of the images and guiding markers that come up,
> as in tarot.
>
> In light of the discussion taking place this past week on
> another page, I decided to cast the coins for the following
> two questions:
>
> Q: Yi, as a fixed in meaning, one-size-fits-all, type map...
> A: Hx 44.6 /28
>
> Q: Yi, as a fluid in meaning,
> conforming-to-specific-orientation, type map...
> A: Hx 22.1&2 /18
>

The I Ching can be called "the book of ings" - a book of verbal nouns - gerunds - and so a book reflecting universal 'superpositions' where CONTEXT collapses meaning into a 'noun' or a 'verb'.

The species-level components of the I Ching are in the form of a generic set of qualities we as a species share with other neuron-dependent lifeforms - all have a sense of 'whole' and 'part' etc etc but the differentiations, the granularity, means richer perspectives, the most refined by far being in us as a species.

This link of neuron-dependent lifeforms reflects a 'single language' at the level of the neurocognitive systems - the language is universal but too corse in granularity - there are no tarot spreads or astrology charted etc., there are basic universals of 'wholes' and 'parts' as well as qualifiers in the form of sensory harmonics (colours, chords etc).

The development of consciousness and serial communications, where we use stringing parts together rather than communicating through an immediate whole (as in instinct/habit), saw the beginning of 'maps' that led to the I Ching, Tarot, Astrology and on into Logic, Mathematics, Science etc.

As species-members we are all 'the same' but as PARTS of the species we each have 'biases' that serve to group us. The groupings favour different styles of communications, different types of maps as in their EXPRESSION but the underlying species-level set of meanings still dominates. Out of that also comes individual consciousness where we feel as if we are 'independent' beings.

The I Ching as a WHOLE operates at our species-nature level - EVERY moment is an I Ching moment IN TOTO - IOW EVERY trigram, hexagram, dodecagram etc is applied.

Our consciousness-nature is one step 'down' from reality, it is at the parts level and so favours EITHER/OR perspectives rather than BOTH/AND perspectives. Not understanding these differences means we experience paradox very easily - see my page on paradox processing as a root source of mind development - http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/paradox.html

The shift from a species-nature perspective that is holistic, and so BOTH/AND to one that is partial, and so EITHER/OR, means the species-nature encodes both static and dynamic meanings into the ONE space and context acts to 'collapse' things into a state our consciousness can deal with - EITHER/OR. Locally this is useful but it becomes a problem when we try to think globally.

Our species-nature functions through the learning of habits/instincts that allow the context to push the individual and so 'integrate' with the environment. Our base set of instincts serve as a set of gross universals that in our lives we 'customise' to make context-sensitive and so make finer and finer levels of granularity.

Our consciousness goes way beyond this in that it allows us to IMAGINE events that set off instincts/habits such that we can learn things by imagination and so be context-sensitive without even having any 'real' experience of that context. VERY efficient stuff.

The main point to 'get' here is (a) the A AND B nature, the holistic, symmetric, nature of instincts and speciesness and (b) the A XOR B nature, the PARTS, asymmetric, nature of consciousness, its focus on EXAGGERATIONS, as it tries to 'refine' parts to 'fit' different contexts.

Our brains continuously oscillate across the A AND B / A XOR B elements of our brains and in doing so derives -- qualities that are reflected in the I Ching symbolisms.

The BASIC map, the set of universal qualities used to derive meaning, is at the species-nature level. The qualities are shared across all neuron-dependent lifeforms to varying degrees but nowhere near as rich as in us. The GENERAL qualities reflect determinism with a focus on integration, on evolution of the species in a context. Our consciousness-nature is the source of 'variations on a theme' and as such the source of 'free will', revolution, in that we can re-label these basic universal anything we wish as we use the set of universals within unique contexts. This association of universals to unique context leads to the creation of words unique to that association and so enabling precise communications about the properties and methods of that unique context - iow we get increasingly context-sensitive, building-up an arsenal of maps to fit any context.

At the level of our mindless species-nature there is a complement to the 'integration' focus, the need to 'fit in' to a context. That complement is in the ability to REPLACE the context either (a) by escaping that context to another, or (b) by asserting one's own perspective to 'take over' the context. This replacement focus is rooted in the revolutionary, the ability to 'start again', be 'born again' and overall to wipeout the past other than your basic instincts and a species member. It is this 'transcendence function' that is a fundamental of our neurology, as is the 'transformation function' that focuses more on evolution and so integration with a context.

There is a dialectic here in that once the revolution has occured so it has to evolve and so becomes more evolutionary - and so yang into yin into yang etc etc aka static into dynamic into static .....

Thus the FIXED meanings of the I Ching are at the species-nature level - rooted in genetics. Those fixed qualities are those given in the "Species I Ching" page.

Chris.
 
D

dharma

Guest
Chris,

Are you saying that at the genetic level I Ching is definitely a fixed factor but because our mind development tends to break the WHOLE into PARTS and restricts us from seeing the WHOLE, we experience things as EITHER/OR instead of BOTH/AND?

And that we create fluid maps by continually refining things further and further into more and more PARTS, in order to get things to 'fit in' somewhere more neatly, and as a result we get further and further away from the WHOLEness point of view and that the better alternative is to REPLACE context rather than try to make things 'fit in'??? If so, HOW so?

(Ayychihuahua!!)

For goodness sake, tell me I came close cause although I may have a few more neurons working than some others here
wink.gif
who have an interest in your work, I have to admit that what few neurons I DO have, were all cross-eyed and reaching for a drink by the time I managed to put together the above paragraph.

Please grade me from 0 to 10 -
10 being genius and 0 being retarded.
(crossing fingers behind my back)
clown.gif


Thanks Chris,
Dharma
smile.gif
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,128
Reaction score
202
Not enough neurons, or maybe hardly any ..
But the Yi's answer about itself was beautiful. The fluid one: 22 to 18. If I am right, and 22 is not only about beauty but also about herbs, then it sees itself as a beautiful cure, which gives the opportunity to work on yourself (or others).
The answer to the 'rigid' version seems to me: it is too hard (horns), might even make you drown.

LiSe
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
Hi Dharma,

I have the same experience. With some people it connects and we can easily go deeper together, with others it doesn't connect.

A few years ago I discovered something interesting. I did psychology projects (including some astrology) for pupils (aged 15 to 20) of an experimental school. One day I realized that nearly all the pupils in the more advanced projects, who had stayed with me for a year or longer (because it definitely "connected") had the moon in an earth sign, like me ...

Coincidence? I guess not, but the moon features prominently in my own chart.
Perhaps the moon position is not that important unless you are a lunatic guy like me *grin*.

Martin
 

martin

(deceased)
Joined
Oct 2, 1971
Messages
2,705
Reaction score
60
Fluid and fixed. I like fluid but I also like the precision that goes with fixed.
Can we have both?
The integration of these two polar opposites might very well be the work of a lifetime.
It culminates in the master who intuitively hits the student at precisely the right time.
Fluid and fixed meet in one moment of perfection. More is not needed.
The student jumps .... straight into satori.

Just a thought, grin.

Martin
 

Sparhawk

One of those men your mother warned you about...
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 17, 1971
Messages
5,120
Reaction score
107
Hmmm... There are three paragraphs from Chris that are interesting. Two from his message above and one from his Paradox page (I actually read it and re-read it and now I have a headache...):

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

As species-members we are all 'the same' but as PARTS of the species we each have 'biases' that serve to group us. The groupings favour different styles of communications, different types of maps as in their EXPRESSION but the underlying species-level set of meanings still dominates. Out of that also comes individual consciousness where we feel as if we are 'independent' beings.


The BASIC map, the set of universal qualities used to derive meaning, is at the species-nature level. The qualities are shared across all neuron-dependent lifeforms to varying degrees but nowhere near as rich as in us. The GENERAL qualities reflect determinism with a focus on integration, on evolution of the species in a context. Our consciousness-nature is the source of 'variations on a theme' and as such the source of 'free will', revolution, in that we can re-label these basic universal anything we wish as we use the set of universals within unique contexts. This association of universals to unique context leads to the creation of words unique to that association and so enabling precise communications about the properties and methods of that unique context - iow we get increasingly context-sensitive, building-up an arsenal of maps to fit any context.

(26) The retention of core, and so transformation, reflects genetics where there is no 'new' knowledge, just context-sensitive expressions of existing knowledge, the facade changes. On the other hand, the change of core, and so transcendence, reflects a 'new' species, genetic mutation, intentional 'change' that becomes Bateson's 'difference that makes a difference'. Overall, the transformations maintain core sameness, appear different. The transcendence breaks core sameness without immediate recognition of change in appearance.<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I think he is triying to say is that the realm of A AND B is common to all as species and serves as context. Our individual perception, breaking the context into digestable bit of information, is what creates the maps that would fit into that context while at the same time, a certain commonality of perception with other individuals would create a affinity grouping with them. This is what gives you the impression of being closer to certain people/minds than to others. Furthermore, context cannot be broken into infinite pieces nor context can be replaced without alienating yourself. At some point in the process, the WHOLENESS, the common context, will act as a bungee cord and will pull you back within the borders of the shared commonality of our species where you still be part of a grouping that shares part of your "maps". I would say that if there was not tether either a trascendence/mutation/evolution of your frame of mind and/or physical reality will occur or a complete alienation.

I guess what occurs to whom, if the tether is broken, depends on how evolved one's spirit is. According to Chris, if I understood him correctly, such jumps and replacements of context are more likely to occur to all of us as species rather that at the individual level. The good thing is that the I Ching seems to be a constant in his equation, like a Pi. As such, we can keep creating maps to our hearts' content. We will always find people who will share our equations...
happy.gif



Dixit,
clown.gif
(like I know what I'am talking about...)

Luis

PS: Chris, I have a question for you. Did you came up with parts of those theories as a result of other areas of study and then discovered the I Ching and then complemented them with it or you started studying the I Ching and the theories evolved from it? I've always been curious about that...
 

chrislofting

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

umm... I would give you a 7. More comments below:

you wrote:
>
> Chris,
>
> Are you saying that at the genetic level I Ching is
> definitely a fixed factor but because our mind development
> tends to break the WHOLE into PARTS and restricts us from
> seeing the WHOLE, we experience things as EITHER/OR instead
> of BOTH/AND?
>

Yes. You can actually experience the BOTH/AND states using sensory paradoxes. Thus, in a necker cube paradox, where you 'see' two cubes with different orientations, you initially see a 'complex line drawing' - the WHOLE. Your strongly high detail consciousness will quickly zoom-in on the cube shapes and since it does not accept two objects sharing the same space so the data is seen to oscillate, one moment a cube oriented one way, 'suddenly', the cube oriented the other way. This process reflects high degree differentations, a replace focus where two cannot share the one space.

For examples of this and development into general thinking see the page on paradox - http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/paradox.html

The oscillation etc is not restricted to the visual system - complex sounds can be made to be 'paradoxes' and your audition system will make 'jumps' across the parts of the whole as if each part is a whole. IOW we are looking at a GENERAL function of whole/part interactions, not just something limited to the visual system (but something possibly having its roots in adaptations to vision etc)

The high precision of our consciousness, its single context perspective, means wholes at the level of the species are broken down into what consciousness considers wholes but are parts and that sort of breakdown can cause 'issues' ;-)

See the prose and diagram in the IDM introduction page - http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/idm002.html

For sensory system data processing see the pages on synesthesia - http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/synth.html

> And that we create fluid maps by continually refining things
> further and further into more and more PARTS, in order to
> get things to 'fit in' somewhere more neatly, and as a
> result we get further and further away from the WHOLEness
> point of view

....we get more and more away from the species' wholeness point of view. To our individual consciousness we are being more 'precise'!

Issues such as the paradox in quantum mechanics stem from these perception problems in that our species-nature is less precise and more 'both/and' in thinking, instincts/habits rule. This level of existence is what in QM relates to the 'state vector'. Our experimental design, on the other hand, comes out of our more parts-oriented consciousness, a level one 'down' from species reality, in the realm of either/or. That either/or realm is asymmetric and so local in focus. The 'surprise' for all of those physics-minded was to discover reality as seemingly non-local, symmetric etc. They will get the idea one day that their world is 'partial' ;-) ( for QM issues and whole/parts see:

http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/vision.html
http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/svector.html
http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/light.html
http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/bits.html

)

Overall the above 'says' that the yin state, the integrated state, is the 'natural' state of the species, reflecting millions of years of adaptations reflected in our instincts.

> and that the better alternative is to REPLACE
> context rather than try to make things 'fit in'??? If so,
> HOW so?

Not necessarily so. The neurology is tuned feed into a social dynamic of exploitation/protection. The focus of protection is on learning 'good habits' and so develop good instincts in the long run. All of our habits/instincts get encoded into the input areas of our neurons/neural networks. What this does is conserve energy in that it allows context to PUSH us and so we 'flow' with the context. This means we do not need to waste energy re-identifying what we know, we focus energy on identifying differences, we habituate to sameness.

The path from filtering system (instincts) to expression has synchronisation requirements to make the expression 'whole'. These requirements focus activity on the firing of neurons. That firing can allow for 'clear' perspectives but also 'errors'. The benefit of the 'errors' is that they act to BREAK a habit and so a response to the context can be 'errornous'.

That error will (a) kill the lifeform, (b) make the lifeform make a 'little' mistake, or (c) give the lifeform a whole new perspective as to what is going on allowing for the lifeform to (a) escape the situation or (b) assert its own context to replace the situation. It is in these areas that opportunism flourishes.

Integration with a context means adaptation and so a focus on evolution. Differentiation FROM a context means re-configuration and a focus on revolution.

Differentiations focus on 'sticking out' from the integrated whole, as our consciousness-nature 'sticks out' from our species-nature. Differentations as such reflect REPLACEMENT and a focus on issues of transcendence. Integrations reflect adaptations and a focus on what IDM labels transformation where learning good habits/instincts makes one into a 'shape shifter' - the ability to adapt immediately to a changing context but retain the core sense of self.

The 'yang' drive is to replace - either cooperativerly (reproduction, flood the context with images of self) or through competition (erradicate all opposition).

The 'yin' drive is to integrate - to keep EVERYTHING in that what is kept could be useful in some future, as yet unexperienced context. (also present here is reactions to attacks, fear, expressed as freezing, playing dead, or using context to 'dissapear'. This leads into 'security through numbers' and so the integration with the context acts to protect, to blend-in, to 'hide' one from attackers)

We thus see TWO forms of negation. Analytical where we wipe the slate clean and start again (revolution focus) and Dialectical where we keep bits of the old to be integrated with the new (evolution focus) [or find some place for the 'new' to share space with the 'old']

Our consciousness is overly analytical (as current times show ;-)) and with that behavour comes an over-emphasis on the 'new' - capitalism is the perfect example of analytical thinking where the exploitation process 'demands' new models, new inventions, each year, month, day - we get hooked on 'perpetual transcendences' - we no longer just use transcendence to ESCAPE we use it to give us a 'buzz'.

The dynamic of the exploit/protect dichotomy means that the exaggerations of the exploitation are eventually met with balancing agents. IN socio-economic contexts these come in the form of (a) socialism - focus on protecting against excessive exploitation of labour (b) conservationism - focus on protecting against excessive exploitation of natural resources, (c) interventionism - state-controlled tools for economic 'balance' as in control of interest rates etc.

Thus the 'unbridled' form of capitalism (1700s-1800s) was eventually met with balancing agents and this 'struggle' continues today, more due to ignorance as to what is going on - once you 'get it' so things can be not so competitive! A consequence of the singlemindedness of 'yang' is to not see, or not care, about the consequences of one's actions - as we see in capitalism-run-riot. In the IC the heaven trigram deals with absolute trust in oneself. Integration is WITHIN. In the earth trigram the focus is on integration BETWEEN - the person recruits the context to aid in assertion of identity, one 'fits in' and so a cooperative, give and take, dynamic dominates. In heaven one is trying to assert one's point of view as if THE pint of view - not able to recognise it as a PARTial view ;-)

Since we are dealing with the basic dichotomy of differentiate(exploit)/integrate(protect) so we are dealing with ... yin and yang and so the IC.

Chris.
 

chrislofting

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

Good summary!

The common ground is represented in the IDM material (blend, bond, bound, bind etc). This is, being species-nature, too general for refined communications and with our consciousness-nature has come re-labelling in the form of the IC etc where the IC is a specialisation, comes with its unique set of terms etc, of the IDM generalisation. Thats 'why' the IC works so well, it reflects our brains states in a better format than many other specialisations. We note that all of those specialisations have arisen from trial and error, lacking any knowledge about what is going on 'in here'. As such they reflect some as aspects of the whole map very well, others badly. Through neuroscience work we now have a lot of that required knowledge, enough to go back and re-assess our specialisations ;-)

You wrote:
>
> PS: Chris, I have a question for you. Did you came up with
> parts of those theories as a result of other areas of study
> and then discovered the I Ching and then complemented them
> with it or you started studying the I Ching and the theories
> evolved from it? I've always been curious about that...
>

My original focus was on Psychology - persona differences, different maps, values, predictions of etc. That led into Neurosciences, Cognitive Sciences. From there I went 'wide' into Occult, other Sciences, Humanities etc. in that the Sciences of the times appeared too 'isolated', I felt there were things 'missing' in their perspectives as in how people valued 'esoteric' material despite Science's claims it was all 'crap'.

My education was not 'traditional', I had live-in/visited about 18 countries world-wide by the time I was 21 (12 years in Asia - thailand, hong kong, singapore, japan etc - did high school in hong kong and thailand, did some 'time' in an English boarding school 61-63, Nottinghill Gate (London) LCC 1957-58 ['interesting' place], Private English school in Thailand 1959-61. English Grammar-type school in Hong Kong (63-66), American-type High School in Thailand (1967).

In 1974/75 my last band broke up so I did some maths/science high school courses in 1974-75 (my 'o' levels in English system were all arts subjects, as were my uncompleted 'a' levels) Got into a B.Sc. course at the University of New South Wales in 1976, 1979-80 - eventually dropped-out half way through second year, got bored! ('absent fails' etc) and did a 6 month intense course in Programming (Control Data Institute 1977 - and so the 'break' in uni years 77 through 78). Took to programming like a duck takes to water. Been in IT ever since.

In the occult areas I was attracted more to the IC than anything else and so focused on it, as I did on persona typology systems in Psychology (Jung, MBTI, HBDI, etc), and issues as to what was BEHIND Mathematics, Logic etc.

Even in my rock musician days (1965 - 1975 : hong kong, thailand, singapore, australia) I was always reading something!

The template model developed into something distinct in the late 70s. Marriage, family, profession (got into IT in 1978) etc put things on the backburner but I still read a lot! Did an initial IC+ program on an Amiga system back in late 80s and into the 90s (and so overlying blend...bound, concepts with IC and MBTI etc in the one program) out of which came some public lectures (low numbers but positive feedback) on a theme of "A Piece of Fabric" (sample diagram for that lecture -

http://pages.prodigy.net/lofting/DIAG1.gif - circa 1993)

I also gave that lecture as a 'guest lecturer' for a "Science in Context" course at the Australian National University in 1995. Ported some of the amiga stuff on to a DOS system in 1995 (no snazzy graphics though)- original version available in the file section of my ichingplus list. (http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/ichingplus )

I have not done much since, other than develop what you see on the web, first site was the ozemail site opened in 1995 and I was on hex-8 list to start with (got thrown off - see hex-8 archives ;-)) - although I did give the "Piece of Fabric" lecture as part of my participation at a Humanist Psychology Conference at the University of West Georgia, USA, in May 2000. Small audience but highly positive (if a bit shell-shocked) at the end.

I am aware that my MBTI work has attracted the attention of some 'typology' academics but my being 'unqualified' makes me a 'speculative' reference ;-)

Since a lot of my personal interactions have been with academics (my ex is a Professor of Medicine so even at home the talk is 'academic' ;-)) that seems to 'leak in' to the prose - but then often they dont get things first off! ;-)

perseverence furthers...

Chris.
 
D

dharma

Guest
Thanks LiSe, Martin, Luis and Chris for all your input..


LiSe,
I think there are different types of neurons for different purposes. Since you have the ability to see something of what I saw in the hexagrams then I think we both have enough of the 'other' kind that allows us to communicate with ease.
happy.gif
I like your association of herbs to hexagram 22, it explains more fully my intuitive feel for it being curative and healing as compared to the forcefulness and rigidity, esp. the changing line, of hexagram 44.


Martin,
since emotions play a big part in most people's lives, I think that the moon is a major determining factor of whether or not connections are made, I agree. You said your moon is prominent in your chart, curious, is it by chance at midheaven? I seem to be running into many people with this moon position lately... Hmmm... I'm beginning to wonder why. In any case, you've got the earth-moon thing going and I've got the fire-moon thing going - lunacy is expressed in oh! sooo many wonderful ways!
wink.gif


I liked your little "fluid and fixed" piece. It was almost like a haiku. Here's MY pathetic rendition:

Fluidly precise
Integrating opposites
Culminating in a perfect moment....
Straight into satori. TahDaaah!


Luis,
you are a genuis pretending to be an idiot. Such unfair! (as my 5 year old nephew is wont to say) You wanted me to believe that I was playing with silly putty but you're really the nerd with the keys to the akashic records! A master of disguise, you are a sly sorceror afterall!
biggrin.gif



Chris,
a 7! you gave me a whole lot more than I expected to get, and then some.
proud.gif
Numerologically, 7 is both my destiny and name numbers so it's all good. Unbelieveably, a lot of what you're saying is actually beginning to sink in and creating new pathways in my brain. This, I understand, is the REAL cause of the brain-strain when studying your material. The pain of new neurons, GRRROWING! For now, I've only skimmed quickly over the rest of what you sent, and Luis' summation as well, and I'll be studying it all more closely soon. Also, your background is impressively varied (I've stuck my nose, and other body parts,
wink.gif
into a great number of divergent areas myself.) Yes, perseverence does indeed further...

Thanks to everyone Ever so much.
smooch.gif
 

Sparhawk

One of those men your mother warned you about...
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 17, 1971
Messages
5,120
Reaction score
107
Chris:
<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

Luis,

Good summary!
<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>
What you don't know is that my one neuron is on life support after that charade of mine... Not sure if it is the result of reading your page or because is oversexed trying to "grow the family" and finally tackle the rest of your site...
biggrin.gif


And thank you for the great summary of your life. Very interesting, to say the least. I certainly remember when you were thrown out of Hex-8. It was shortly after I joined the list and could not fully understand the reason. After a few more years of experience in this media (and I've been online since the time when only 300bauds modems were available and the Internet was only a DOD project...) I can say that people in general used to be more rigid and short fused in their communications. Myself included, of course. But, one matures. I'd like to believe, that is... If you add to that the novel power of creating a mailing list (back then it was quite novel) you thought yourself to be a demigod. IMHO, Ron Hale-Evans was such a demigod in that environment and the reason why Hex-8 has dried up while other lists flourish, such as this.

I still insist that you should keep approaching publishers. Forget about New Age type of publishers and try pointing to University presses. Get a copy of the 2003 edition of Writer's Market (look for it at Amazon). You'll get some good ideas from it plus the address and contact numbers of almost every single publisher in the U.S. and Canada (I know you are in Australia but the world has shrunk in the past few years...)


Dharma,

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

You wanted me to believe that I was playing with silly putty but you're really the nerd with the keys to the akashic records!<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey! Nerds have no fun! Silly putty is OK with me.
clown.gif
Besides, according to Lobsang Rampa (debunked or not, I like the guy...) Tarot readers are the ones that have access to the Akashic records. I'm not one. You must be closer to them. Although I have several decks at home I've never learned to use them. Shame on me!
shame.gif


Cheers,

Luis
 
D

dharma

Guest
luis,
weeell, lobsang rampa may 'say' so, but he should really check his pockets - I think he inadvertantly picked them up the last time he was here and took them with him to tibet... no matter WHERE I look these days, all I find are escaped neuron cells (mine & others) partying it up
mischief.gif
and giggling
shades.gif
between the carpet fibres.
spin.gif


enjoy your visit with Val!
wink.gif
wink.gif
 

Sparhawk

One of those men your mother warned you about...
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 17, 1971
Messages
5,120
Reaction score
107
<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

enjoy your visit with Val!
wink.gif
<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

(Gasp!) Busted!!
blush.gif
happy.gif


Luis
 

davidl

visitor
Joined
Oct 31, 1971
Messages
120
Reaction score
0
Something I was taught as a child by my grandmother who was a interested in all this mystical, was that the tarot required a price to be paid for information. She claimed that if you receive a tarot reading to always either immediately pay the reader or if you were doing a reading for yourself to make a donation to some type of charity or give money to a beggar. She also claimed that not paying left a debt that would be reclaimed at a later date. The information that you received and its importance played a part in the amount of the payment. Of course I believe her and am quite careful to keep my account balance with the tarot in the black.
The I Ching for me is purely a communication tool between myself and either other entities on different levels of consciousness or with my own inner and outer levels of consciousness that can't be easily accessed by simple questioning.
Hence after 25 or so years of utilizing the Yi like this, many lines and hexagrams have a personal meaning that are really only relevant to me.
So an example would be, "tell me Yi", is this the colour blue? (yes) Fine , I agree, from this point on this colour we will call blue.
Now, someone else might come along and say to me, hey thats not blue its green. Well thats fine too, because now I will agree with you its green and from now on when I communicate with you we will recognise this colour as green.
So to me arguing about the true meaning of the lines and hexagrams, attributes etc. is nonsense because so much of the communication process is about defining agreements as to what simple words mean, between the two communicators.
So if the question is, is the Yi purely making blank statements or attempting to communicate I for one say the later. An effective communication process is always fluid and accomodating between the giver and the taker, if not it is not communication it is purely the stating of words with little meaning or effectiveness (and many arguments).
To me the long term study of the Yi or any other form of divination is about creating a 'new' language that exists and has meaning between the two participants, the diviner and the divine, this accomplished there is no longer misunderstanding for the diviner.( although this language may be difficult or have no meaning to a third party).
For the purist who feels that the meanings are inscrutable and static there is no longer communication, there is only analysis and argument.
I hope that this has made enough sense for someone to agree or disagree

All my love.
 

pedro

visitor
Joined
Jul 10, 1971
Messages
311
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, Ive been on vacations and its impossible to catch so many great threads now. Anyway, here's my fluid-vs-rigid opinion.

The Yi (or whatever symbolic oracle) is definetely fluid. If we search for the rigid part of the symbols, I mean the ultimate purest objective meaning of each hex, then even the ancient chinese text must be discarded, let alone translations and interpretations. Only the hexagram names can have such a primal meaning, the "original" meaning or the rigid part of the symbology.
But then you cannot interpret any of these symbols without resorting to subjectiveness. It is not possible to confer any meaning without associating personal experiences to them. Thats the goal of the symbols, being just hints, deprived of meaning until we associate them with one particular reality.
So we can never observe it as it really is, we can only see how each of us distorts it more or less, and perhaps try to extrapolate by some average, what the actual reality is. Just like when two observers look at the same thing, and see slightly different "realities", none of them free from personal consideration, so none of them really true.
Each individual will relate in different ways to the rigid meaning, and to some extent distort it to fit its personal beliefs. Its only human nature. So there is no way to actually find the rigid objective meaning if there is one.
Its just like reality, if we realise that at a quantum level all matter is basically empty space, and most probably at the deepest level just an uniform mass of infinitely small undiferentiated whatevers that compose the myriad of things, then we realise that it is all the same, wherever and whenever, and it is only our subjective observation that gives it some specific form.
But is there a reality? No, just a whole bunch of personal ilusions, each of us believes are the actual truth.
Taking Dharma's color analogy, how can we know that what we call blue is indeed blue? we were taught as childs that it was the colour blue, we learned that from associating "that colour" with the name "blue", but perhaps we dont all see it the same, even if we can agree that it is the colour blue.

And now I'll let my neurons rest again, after all Im just a male, we werent designed to stress our brain cells that much
 
D

dharma

Guest
Pedro,
I agree on every point you've made except your last sentence, but then again I'm just a very biased female
wink.gif



David,
I can agree with half of your post wholeheartedly but find that your belief regarding tarot tends to fall into the tight squeeze of superstition that I just don't buy into. I've expressed my views on tarot in the past more than a few times here at Clarity and rather than use up time repeating myself, if you are interested in knowing where I stand, you can call up those pages by using the forum search and keying in the word "tarot".

You can begin here ->->->
http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/I_Ching_community/messages/48/221.html?

The following passage on the subject of divination as I wrote it (dated, November 11, 2001) can be found there:

.....

"In my opinion, all forms of divination can be likened to different languages. I, myself, can communicate in three different languages (English, French and Greek) and I am very much aware of how dissimiar each is from the other in form, structure and nuance. Though each are a form of human communication they stem from very specific cultures and traditions that affect the imagery and intention evoked when expressed. I think different methods of divination are similar in this respect.

Some languages (or methods of divination, for that matter) may lend themselves better to certain individuals than others. Each has something unique to offer and allows for different aspects of a person to emerge and be developed. They may, for example, have more words or expressions that define or explain certain things or activities more concisely, mainly because this is more natural or inherent to the culture which the language or divination springs from.

Keeping this in mind, it's fair to say that all languages and forms of divination are perfect in and of themselves. One needn't necessarily learn another language or form of divination to manage or get the job done, for instance. However, learning more than one form of divination widens one's scope of understanding and 'knowing' in the same way that speaking many languages automatically widens and enhances one's communication skills. Beyond that, it stimulates one's personal boundaries and comfort zones to open and stretch to allow for things that one's conventional method or customs had no need of or no place for previously.
 

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