...life can be translucent

Menu

6.3 ? any ideas ?

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
I have much difficulty applying 6.3 to virtually any situation. I've read the commentaries of Brad, Lise and Hilary...seems to me this has something to do with needing more than idealism to get by ? You may be sticking to principles or some kind of deep value system and yet you cannot be faithful to it without suffering...so if you do not want to suffer you must maybe still hold your values in your heart but in your actions come to earth a bit more, be prepared to get your hands dirty so to speak...and of course expect no recognition for your deeper values ?

Does that sound right ? Why does it never seem to fit then ?

if i really can't grasp a line meaning...well not the meaning but how the meaning ever applies, i look to a time i received it for some really practical matter because then, seeing it in its most mundane form it can serve as a kind of illustration..like a parable for some deeper meaning.

last time i recall getting 6.3 for a practical matter was when i asked for a pretty direct prediction 'what will the dr do on thursday'...i was just wondering if he'd send me home, give me pills etc etc. He sent me to hospital that day for some tests...So how did 6.3 describe what he did :confused: its okay if i don't know i can't expect anyone else to but you might see something I can't. (Thinking on it i would say hes a man who takes care with his patients. Previously he has unearthed problems others have not seen..in other words I'd say he was quite scrupulous..maybe that fits, he isn't one who is simply going through the motions, i think he believes in his work more than others, maybe 6.3 just described him...or could be the opposite, 6.3 signified going through the usual medical procedures/motions ?)

... maybe you can give me some thoughts or your experiences of 6.3 ? :) How has it applied for you ?

For some reason i always muddle 2.3 with 6.3 they seem quite similar...what are the main differences ? Both seem to be advising one to do the work and forget the credit. I guess theres the whole conflict angle in 6.3 which there isn't in 2.3...obviously lol
 
Last edited:
M

meng

Guest
Thinking on it i would say hes a man who takes care with his patients. Previously he has unearthed problems others have not seen..in other words I'd say he was quite scrupulous..maybe that fits, he isn't one who is simply going through the motions, i think he believes in his work more than others, maybe 6.3 just described him.

I think that fits well with Wilhelm's

"To nourish oneself on ancient virtue induces perseverance.
Danger. In the end, good fortune comes.
If by chance you're in the service of a king (a learned doctor/authority),
Seek not works." (or to try to solve it on your own while in an unknowing or confused state)

For me, 6.3 reminds me to seek expertise to settle something which I'm divided about. Sometimes I might even be my own expert, but I have to seek him out, rather than relying on my mixed emotions and impressions.
 

pocossin

visitor
Joined
Feb 7, 1970
Messages
4,521
Reaction score
181
Parable of the Healer-King

. . . if i really can't grasp a line meaning...well not the meaning but how the meaning ever applies, i look to a time i received it for some really practical matter because then, seeing it in its most mundane form it can serve as a kind of illustration..like a parable for some deeper meaning.

last time i recall getting 6.3 for a practical matter was when i asked for a pretty direct prediction 'what will the dr do on thursday'...i was just wondering if he'd send me home, give me pills etc etc. He sent me to hospital that day for some tests...So how did 6.3 describe what he did?


Code:
▄▄▄▄▄▄ 
▄▄▄▄▄▄ 
▄▄▄▄▄▄ 
▄▄  ▄▄ <
▄▄▄▄▄▄ 
▄▄  ▄▄

Wilhelm:
Six in the third place means:
To nourish oneself on ancient virtue induces perseverance.
Danger. In the end, good fortune comes.
If by chance you are in the service of a king,
Seek not works.

Legge:
3. The third SIX, divided, shows its subject keeping in the old place assigned for his support, and firmly correct. Perilous as the position is, there will be good fortune in the end. Should he perchance engage in the king's business, he will not (claim the merit of) achievement.


The person of the line text is an official. The contention of an official is a power struggle at court. Your 'contention' is a health issue. Your doctor stands in the position of the king. You were under the supervision of the doctor as a court official is under the supervision of a king. As the king did not deal directly with the official, so the doctor sent you to the hospital for further tests.
 

heylise

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 15, 1970
Messages
3,128
Reaction score
202
I got 6.3 for something very practical. I had to make DVD's but some brands did not give good results. It was important, so I asked Yi if Intenso was a good one. Not just good in general, but especially for my computer, I got the impression that it handles some brands better than others. Or some worse: not playable anywhere.

I thought it meant "do not rely on the good name of this brand, first make a few on different brands and try them in other machines. That is the way to solve this". If I would follow the advice of some people who were certain that Intenso was the best one, the experts or kings, there would be no accomplishment.
 
M

meng

Guest
Interesting example.

I wonder if Darwinian selection could also be an example; or, did evolution ever get it wrong in the process of finding what would work well. But I guess that opens a real can of wormyi.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
A wealth of responses and none i ever would have thought of. Never would have thought of 'seek expertise to settle something' (Meng) ....never would have thought of Lises idea of not going with the 'expert opinion'...which is the opposite view to Mengs isn't it ? Had not even thought of 6.3 in terms of expertise at all...so it was worth posting this question.

Pocossin i get the idea the King, the Dr didn't decide the issue or claim merit but passed me on... although I was thinking the Dr was in the Kings service....hmm but thinking on it a king signifies more worldly affairs doesn't it...so if we forget the Dr example and try to transpose the idea to other situations what there is is worldly recognition and values (symbolised by the KIng) opposing or contending with 'ancient power and virtue' which i take to be truth beyond the worldly and political IOW not the kings business...something higher

I'm reminded of the phrase can't recall where in the bible..Jesus said "Give unto Caeser what is due to Caesar, Give to God what is due to God" at least it was something like that. I see a conflict between perhaps ones own values and the values of the world one lives in. In 6.3 you'll get no praise from the king when you live true to your own values.

So does how you act in 6.3 depend on whether you actually want what the King has to give ? Hilarys take on it seems to suggest you put your 'ancient power and virtue' on a back burner lol

Now added into these, , Meng and Lise also bring in the idea of expertise..and so does Tom

I have much to think on (we have no furrowed brow emoticon) :bows:
 
M

meng

Guest
A wealth of responses and none i ever would have thought of. Never would have thought of 'seek expertise to settle something' (Meng) ....never would have thought of Lises idea of not going with the 'expert opinion'...which is the opposite view to Mengs isn't it ?

It is an interesting contrast, but not a contradiction. It's the discrimination ("the cognitive process whereby two or more stimuli are distinguished of qualifications") which can settle or negotiate the best solution, and this could include LiSe's exception to the general rule of expertise, where there were specifics and specializations to consider. If a doctor was considered the best general practitioner in the country, that doesn't mean he'd be the best choice to treat a neurological disorder, for example. Though if he's really a great GP, he'd know who to refer you to. In such a case, neither doctor is the king they serve. Their king is their Hippocratic Oath, not their own reputation.
 

rosada

visitor
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
9,890
Reaction score
3,171
I think we ought consider the significance of the change line leading to 44., the sea this is all swimming in. Perhaps 44 says this is a situation where there are many unknowns and a lesser man might have tried to claim he knew what to do, but this doctor, confident enough in his skills to be able to recognize a situation that required more investigation, did not over play his hand and diagnose - as the first lines suggest might have been a lesser man's temptation - and instead said in effect, "I'm not going to try to grab credit for myself, I'm going to prescribe more tests."
-rosada
 

rosada

visitor
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
9,890
Reaction score
3,171
6.3 If you have to ask permission, the answer is always no.

I had an experience with 6.3 years ago but I liked Meng's interpretation so much better than my own that I erased it after posting. Now that I see there are so many ways of reading this line I'm going to tell my story after all...

I was working for the city of Berkeley as a play ground activities director. I had done this sort of thing before and thus was confident and capable. Unfortunately the woman who was head of the facility was a rage-aholic who saw me as weak and an easy target for her tirades. Although I had great time tested ideas, if a suggestion came from me she would shoot it down. I didn't care, I simply had others present my ideas. This worked out fine, with the added benefit that the other staff members now had the experience of speaking up and suggesting new programs. However, 6.3 changes to 44, and just as we have seen here at onlineclarity how whenever 44 is brought up for discussion it becomes The Thing That Wouldn't Die, I still - YEARS later - am unable to get over the injustices, even posting them here on the internet "and proclaiming them to the four quarters of heaven"!!

So my take on the Conflict in 6.3:
To nourish oneself on ancient virtue induces
perseverance.
(I had done this work in the past and knew the ideas were good.)
Danger.
(The boss saw me as a young upstart to be squelched.)
In the end good fortune comes.
(The ideas were successfully taken up by others.)
If by chance you are in service to a king,
Seek not works.
(well duh...)

-Rosada
 
Last edited:
M

meng

Guest
Good that you brought up the connection to 44, Rosada. I believe the primary connection is between the indecisiveness of 6 and the need for decisiveness of 44 - "The prince carries out his mandate, proclaiming it to the four regions." So a decision must be made, even though the mind is divided in conflict. Line 3 negotiates to determine the best choice, that which serves the greater good.
 

rosada

visitor
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
9,890
Reaction score
3,171
That's a very healing insight, Bruce. Thank you.
rosada
 

tuckchang

visitor
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
281
Reaction score
18
..........
last time i recall getting 6.3 for a practical matter was when i asked for a pretty direct prediction 'what will the dr do on thursday'...i was just wondering if he'd send me home, give me pills etc etc. He sent me to hospital that day for some tests...So how did 6.3 describe what he did :confused: .........

According to your description, I make up a story as follows:

Your doctor might have had some argument with you and you are very tough, or he might have struggled in offering you some high-level curing measures which he is against, or .........something which he must haven’t agreed upon before.

He gave in on that Thursday; otherwise, he would be in a difficult state if he acted as what he used to be. This event ended up with auspiciousness. He served you as if serving a king; he did all what he could but did not expect any benefit; the benefit might be his income, aid to diagnosis, or your appreciation.....

The above presumption comes from my understanding on the text of 6.3:

食 (shi, to eat) 舊 (jiu, past or old) 德 (de, virtue); 舊德 literally signifies the preceding virtue; the whole sentence is interpreted and understood in most of Chinese writings as to take the former job.
My interpretation of the text: To carry on with the former job; it is stern & cruel to persist (in the current post to have litigation), but eventually it will become auspicious; as if one serves the king but does not seek merit.

The feature of Hex 6 is: except for line 5, all other lines do not stay at their right positions. Litigation means: if two lines correlate with each other but both are not at their right positions, i.e. they do not act righteously, this will cause conflict and lead to litigation.

Line 3 correlates with line 6; both lack righteousness. The masculine line 6 reaches the extremity of litigation; the feminine line 3 (like the one below and tender) conflicts with the masculine line 6 (like the one above and rigid) and stays at the position for marching upward (from the bottom trigram to the upper trigram); it is stern & cruel to persist in remaining at the current post. By exchanging positions with line 2, i.e. to carry on with its former job, it can become righteous and doesn’t engage in litigation any longer, i.e. no correlation with line 6 but line 5 which is righteous as well.
From the perspective of the line’s virtue, position 2 is a place, i.e. the former post of the feminine line 3, wherein the feminine line can act righteously and moderately; righteousness and the principle of moderation (which the middle line of the bottom and the upper trigram are designated to possess) are the said ‘preceding virtue’.
From the perspective of the images of Hex 6, a person has internal peril: the bottom trigram Kan (i.e. tendency to take risks) but still performs perseveringly (the upper trigram Qian); this will lead to litigation. Or, within one there is peril, while the other is rigid and performs perseveringly; there will be litigation. The bottom trigram Kan disappears after lines 3 and 2 exchange positions, so it ends up auspiciously

Position 5 is the place of the king and full of merit. After lines 3 and 2 exchange positions, line 2 becomes the representative line of the inner bottom trigram Xun (entrance, the wind), humbleness and obedience, and correlates with line 5, signifying it submissively serves the king. On the other hand the bottom trigram becomes Gen (keeping still, the mountain) which looks like a hand grabbing downwardly, but the merit stays above it; hence it has no intent to obtain merit.

The above can be understood: One should avoid contesting with those above in scrambling for power and profit but rather retreat one step backward and carry on with the former job; to persist in conflict is stern & cruel (i.e. dangerous); however, this will end up auspiciously if one can behave in a manner like serving the king but not seeking merit. Should this line change its mandate, the hexagram would become Gou: to meet (44), wherein the masculine encounters a powerful feminine appearing behind, signifying a crisis is emerging.

Regards
Tuck :bows:
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Thanks Tuck, I'll come back on this as I can't be too long on computer at the moment
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
According to your description, I make up a story as follows:

Your doctor might have had some argument with you and you are very tough, or he might have struggled in offering you some high-level curing measures which he is against, or .........something which he must haven’t agreed upon before.

He gave in on that Thursday; otherwise, he would be in a difficult state if he acted as what he used to be. This event ended up with auspiciousness. He served you as if serving a king; he did all what he could but did not expect any benefit; the benefit might be his income, aid to diagnosis, or your appreciation.....

The above presumption comes from my understanding on the text of 6.3:


Regards
Tuck :bows:

The above that you wrote in bold may be seen to fit if i give a rough outline of what happened. I'd seen another Dr earlier in the week who thought I'd be okay but told me to return if my condition got worse. It did get worse so I saw this Dr because he happened to be on duty. He seemed to give it alot of thought, seemed to struggle in knowing what best to do. It turned out he did the right thing since once i got to the hospital I was kept in for 5 days. IOW it was something that needed treatment...but as you say it was something that had previously been passed over. Really I should have gone straight to hospital when i saw the first Dr since it was a potentially dangerous condition...(but not easy to diagnose without medical expertise in hospital) The first Dr had actually misdiagnosed and given much less thought to it than the 2nd one. Not that I'd blame him...but I was grateful to the 2nd Dr, very grateful, so in that sense if i were his king I'd give him recognition and merit ...but not money since our healthcare is free here (sort of) ;)

So you were right this situation followed upon something that had previously been not agreed upon...2nd Drs judgment was not the same as the first.

I think your analysis pretty close :bows:
 

tuckchang

visitor
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
281
Reaction score
18
Imho

Hi Trojan,

I change the story as follows:

Hex 6: Song; the environment is of disputes and conflicts, or this issue starts from different opinions or thoughts, or…. signifying Doctor B didn’t agree on the diagnosis of Doctor A, or the treatment which has offered to you didn’t fit your symptoms, or ….. He gave in (at position 6.3). He resorted to various kinds of tests in order to find out what was the cause of your illness. He (or you) would be in a difficult or dangerous state if he believed in his diagnosis without proof, (or the treatment offered to you was carried on), or ….. i.e. what it used to be. This issue ended up with auspiciousness. He served what you needed as if serving a king according to the king’s wish or want; he did not expect any merit, i.e. he was right and Doctor A was wrong.

Imho, the text is fixed but it must be applied for various and different divinations; we must catch its original spirit and try to paraphrase as well as fit in our question. Very often the fortune teller (of Ba Zi or Zi Wei Dou Shu) will say: ‘what he tries to read is a hung image’. The hung image can be understood as an up-side-down image or a image behind the screen, signifying there is something going to happen; it might happen exactly according to what he predicted or in other forms, for instance, he saw blood and you cancelled your forthcoming trip, but later you underwent a surgical operation.

Theoretically speaking in divining, we have to talk with the I Ching in one language. If the language is the text, it means either we have to understand what the text tells us exactly or the I Ching must know what is our paraphrase of its text. The reading method must be fixed; otherwise the I Ching would be able to give us the advice through our route. Our question must be clear, something like ‘I saw the doctor days ago, the treatment he offered to me seemingly doesn’t work. I will see him again on Thursday. What will he do?’

Regards
Tuck :bows:
Hex 6 at www.iching123.com
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
In general, I'd call 06.3 the personal unsatisfactoriness of social contracts, the price we pay for getting along or doing things in groups in order to preclude conflict. Problems aren't solved ad hoc anymore, but according to a rule, law, or rule of law, They aren't tailored to the individual anymore so there is seldom a perfect fit. A big part of the problem is that these are built or based on worst-case scenarios and so the rigidity of the prescribed solution often seems like overkill. They often seem old fashioned or way too conservative, like Victorian morality.
 

tuckchang

visitor
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
281
Reaction score
18
Imho

A perfect interpretation! Brad.
Or, we can understand from the perspective of the sequence, Hex 1 (Qian) and 2 (Kun) give birth to Zhun (Hex 3); education is provided at Hex 4 (Meng) in the first place; then to feed it at Hex 5 (Xu) and warn it that peril lies in front; it must wait till it knows how to share food with others, which will tide them together over the peril at 5.6. However according to the course of Nature, it is inevitable that people will fight for food, or scramble for power and profit after they grow up and become stronger. Song (Hex 6), i.e. litigation due to conflict, comes next; 6.6 will lose all what he has won if he carries on litigation to the end. If it still keeps on moving forth, it will arrive at Shi: the army (Hex 7). It goes with saying, it will seek alliance at Hex 6 (Bi) but it feels anxious at Hex 9 (Xiao Chu) like the small one playing games with the big one; finally Hex 10 (Lu): to carry out with propriety (i.e. system and order) and Hex 11 (Tai)……….These are the prospective of Confucianism. Usually we regard a hexagram as a particular era or world, and the lines act in six different time-spaces according to their characters and under the environment of the hexagram.

Regards
Tuck :bows:
www.iching123.com
 

tuckchang

visitor
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
281
Reaction score
18
Imho

By the way, should 6.3 change the mandate (i.e. to retreat one step backward) and to the masculine (i.e. 6.3 still remains at its current post although there is correlation with 6.6), the hexagram would become Gou: to meet (44), wherein the masculine encounters a powerful feminine appearing behind them, signifying a crisis is emerging.

Regards
Tuck: bows:
 

peter2610

visitor
Joined
Oct 20, 2009
Messages
410
Reaction score
42
I once received this line, 6.3, when asking about applying for a new academic post. My conscience told me that I should stay where I was, but the post on offer was very attractive. The following was, roughly, how I interpreted the line:
'To nourish oneself on ancient virtue induces perseverance' - or, more simply, 'virtue induces perseverance'. I took this as a suggestion to curb my ambition and simply persevere where I was.
'Danger. In the end good fortune comes' - the 'danger,' I felt, represented my restlessness and future uncertainty if I stayed put.
'If by chance you are in the service of a king, seek not works.' - my present position was exactly where I was meant to be. From an impersonal, more universal, perspective I was fulfilling my correct role in my present position - I should not seek works.

As with any other line, the interpretations, depending on context, could be endless but I would suggest that its essence points to trusting in a higher process, beyond our immediate perception. In the context of visiting the doctor it could mean simply that - trust in the process (the doctor) and don't seek out (worry about) undue difficulties.

Peter
 
Last edited:

seethis

visitor
Joined
Feb 22, 2010
Messages
85
Reaction score
20
Wilhelm seems to be pretty clear on this: to feed on old virtue gives perserverance. There is danger at the beginning but in the end there is success. The old virtue is that one is supposed not to look for personal success but try to look at the whole conflict in an more unselfish way, meaning being in the duty of a king. Don't look for satisfying the short end of selfish satisfaction and don't worry who gets the praise in the end. This way one will have success in the end, meaning overcome the conflict.

Not so sure why 44 is the complementary hexagram for this but it could mean that on the way of reducing short-term selfish motivation of a want but feed on the old virtue of being less selfish here one might get confronted with temptation on the way. However, there will be good success at the end because one feeds nevertheless on old virtue.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Seethis this is very strange that only this morning I looked up this thread....having forgotten all about it, that you should later post on it and bring it up from the depths

need to re read it...I looked it up cos I threw 6.2.3 >33 last night re to give up or not with something. The 6.2 is a sure 'yup go home' IMO, the 6.3.....alot of the answers given on the thread apply I think

I still get 6.3 very muddled with 2.3 as I get 6.4 very muddled with 12.4

6.3 and 2.3 seem much alike to me
 
Last edited:

mythili

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 21, 2008
Messages
246
Reaction score
4
In general, I'd call 06.3 the personal unsatisfactoriness of social contracts, the price we pay for getting along or doing things in groups in order to preclude conflict. Problems aren't solved ad hoc anymore, but according to a rule, law, or rule of law, They aren't tailored to the individual anymore so there is seldom a perfect fit. A big part of the problem is that these are built or based on worst-case scenarios and so the rigidity of the prescribed solution often seems like overkill. They often seem old fashioned or way too conservative, like Victorian morality.

Does the line suggest that sticking to these rigid principles, although causing trouble initially, IS the right approach, because it will bring the right thing to you in the end? Whats tough to understand is the lack of achievement if one follows the king - he would be the leader in this situation? So perhaps, you stick to the conservative approach, or be scrupulous, and dont listen to what the king says. This causes trouble initially, but will work out OK in the end. Karcher seems to say that this attitude is bad for business dealings/social contracts, but will bring you what you need or want on a personal level - personal satisfaction.

But Wikiwing and your book suggest that some compromise may be necessary, the outdated Victorian morality or over-scrupulousness will not work? Or have I got this wrong.

This has all been said before in this thread but I still trying to understand this for myself - working it out loud. Its a really confusing line to me. Cleary, Blofeld, Karcher imply no outward political/social status can be achieved at this time. Hmm. Only at this time, or ever? And is it going to depend on whether you stick to or compromise a bit on your rigid principles?

Maybe then, there are two different scenarios here - if its a matter that is very important on a personal level, then sticking to your reliance on ancient, outdated virtue, or just virtue, is the right way to go even though its causing you trouble and may not get you what want immediately. If its a matter of business dealings or social situations which are not that personally important, then you may not want to rely on the power of ancient virtue and may want to compromise a bit?
 
Last edited:

yamabushi

visitor
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
304
Reaction score
8
6.3 is negative position, one is in a lower position and somebody else in a higher, the only way that everything finish in a good fortune is that first person do everything what second demand without seeking anything.
In anyway the first one is opening door for the negative influences in his life (44)
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
But Wikiwing and your book suggest that some compromise may be necessary, the outdated Victorian morality or over-scrupulousness will not work? Or have I got this wrong.

I'd say it's certainly not a perfect solution, almost always lesser or inferior, but sometimes it's all we have if we want to stay within the social context or political system.
It could be seen as the difference between morality and ethics - the former being what you're expected to do according to social mores and the latter what you have arrived at by reflection and conscience (ethics being a branch of philosophy).
Outside of the group and the king's service it's a different set of rules. As Dylan put it: "to live outside the law you must be honest." Inside the group it's not really just your project.
 

Lavalamp

visitor
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
1,094
Reaction score
191
Looking at the experiences here, makes sense. I think you can read 6.3's "feeding on ancient virtue" as in the case of the DVD's that do or do not work, relying on a brand name or reputation, in the case of a doctor misdiagnosing, standardized medical practices and just doing what the book says. Doctors are generally not trying to find causes, they are going by the book of what they were taught. It has the upside of working out more often than not, and gets around to what works sooner or later, thus "in the end auspicious." But if that is all you rely on, brand names or pro forma examinations it's easy to miss details, thus "determination, danger." And in any event as you are merely doing what the book tells you, or relying on reputation, than it is "without accomplishment," you are really not curing anything or breaking any new ground, you are just doing what the AMA (the King) has taught you or what the computer magazine recommends...

However I got this line in the context of what does someone want from me. Not sure how to take that, if it means share in my limelight, enhance her standing through association with my reputation, or if it means sit at my feet and learn the mysteries of the spheres and arcane knowledge. To benefit from my depth of character?
Damn, I had been hoping for something else...

- LL
 

Lavalamp

visitor
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
1,094
Reaction score
191
Perhaps "ancient virtue" = social acceptance, fitting in with what your friends think, what society thinks. A person who cares a great deal about what others think might then be described as "feeding on ancient virtue." Mores and social norms indeed, maybe you don't take the path less traveled, what everyone else thinks of you or your new friend is important to someone like that.

- LL
 

moss elk

visitor
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
3,280
Reaction score
1,049
Marijan,

I have moved your post to Shared Readings because you are seeking help with your reading. (That is where those types of posts go.)
 

Wondering

visitor
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
26
Reaction score
3
I am adding to this old thread because I have a clear understanding of this line for my situation. I was dating someone who after a couple of months communicated in an inconsistent manner that concerned me. Apparently his inconsistency wasn’t due to seeing someone else- It may have been that he was consumed with responsibilities with his kids or just didn’t feel like checking in at times. This was a new relationship and I had extended myself quite a bit (as had he in certain ways). Something in my request for more consistency and subtle bristling when it wasn’t there- (which came to a confusing head during the holidays )- may have set him off- whatever it was, he withdraw in an erratic manner without any explanation or warning and shortly thereafter ghosted me altogether. When I sought understanding for his behavior in a text- nothing. Aside from the hurt and confusion of rejection, his behavior really went against my values of human decency which are all about direct honest communication as an important demonstration of respect for the time and intimacy we shared. I was in the throes of my own compulsion for further communication with him and asked the IC- what do I do with this impulse to communicate with him? I received 6.2.3 to 33. I think line 3 in this situation meant- you’re compelled by your own values to have a decent exchange over what happened, a proper ending- but the king here is about foregoing this, letting go of my own idea of how things should be done. My old fashioned values induced me to want clarifying closure. But there’s a greater wisdom in suspending this urge. Very painful experience but grateful for the reading.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2022
Messages
74
Reaction score
22
I am adding to this old thread because I have a clear understanding of this line for my situation. I was dating someone who after a couple of months communicated in an inconsistent manner that concerned me. Apparently his inconsistency wasn’t due to seeing someone else- It may have been that he was consumed with responsibilities with his kids or just didn’t feel like checking in at times. This was a new relationship and I had extended myself quite a bit (as had he in certain ways). Something in my request for more consistency and subtle bristling when it wasn’t there- (which came to a confusing head during the holidays )- may have set him off- whatever it was, he withdraw in an erratic manner without any explanation or warning and shortly thereafter ghosted me altogether. When I sought understanding for his behavior in a text- nothing. Aside from the hurt and confusion of rejection, his behavior really went against my values of human decency which are all about direct honest communication as an important demonstration of respect for the time and intimacy we shared. I was in the throes of my own compulsion for further communication with him and asked the IC- what do I do with this impulse to communicate with him? I received 6.2.3 to 33. I think line 3 in this situation meant- you’re compelled by your own values to have a decent exchange over what happened, a proper ending- but the king here is about foregoing this, letting go of my own idea of how things should be done. My old fashioned values induced me to want clarifying closure. But there’s a greater wisdom in suspending this urge. Very painful experience but grateful for the reading.

Old thread but interested in how you are able to let go of your own values? I understand sometimes letting go of some rigidity in your morals and values can end up giving what you actually want/need. But at the same time it, to me, would create unsafety and uncertainty. It would feel like undermining my needs. Direct communication enhances safety, trust and consistency. But even if someone is direct yet unable to show up consistently, is it wrong for us to be rigid about that? To feel like we are deserving of more? It's okay if someone cannot show up for a while, but especially when building a foundation with someone and they suddenly tap out it's hard to put in trust that they'll return/are a safe person in my opinion. This is where you should be getting to know each other and build that trust so in the future you can let one another go and feel confident that they'll show up once they can, or there should already be an innate trust that someone can/will do this. In that sense would it be helpful to just hope/trust for the best and if it doesn't get better, to walk away? It's so confusing for me when something doesn't align with my values/needs when to protest/communicate/have needs and set boundaries and when to know I'm being rigid and should loosen up.
 

Iris Lake

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2023
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am guessing this means stay in your proper place. You tried the old methods before concerning the worldy affairs, they already proved they didn't work. (I got line asking if I should go to a party, while my only intention is going because I'm hoping a certain guy will be there.)
 

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