I'm not very learned and a little frightened, but I have begun divination about a week ago and yesterday (sat) the trigrams directed me to kua #55. From the story transmitted, I am compelled to needlessly give. Oh, and it's a bit uncharacteristic of me to do so. Does that mean anything to anybody?

Lines 1 and 6 are moving lines - one is 6 and six is 9.

Hex 55.1,6 > 56

It suggests that you need to go out and meet people because if you don't then you can expect to find yourself alone and very isolated. It further suggests that you are too bound up with material things, perhaps you should relax and have some fun.
This leads to hex 56 the traveller, the loner, the person with either no or few friends. It seems to me that you are making your life into a prison, so go out and join society.

What was your question Tony ? Don't know what you mean when you say you are compelled to neeedlessly give ? Why would the Yi compel you to do something needlessly ?

willowfox said:

Hex 55.1,6 > 56

.....This leads to hex 56 the traveller, the loner, the person with either no or few friends..... .

Click to expand...

absolute rubbish.

56 The Wanderer
Restrained Journeying, Loyalty
In a context of self-restraint we utilise setting a direction (an ideology).

"LU : travel, stay in a place other than your home; itinerant troops, temporary residents; visitor, guest, lodger. The ideogram: banner and people around it, loyal to a symbol rather than their temporary residence." ERANOS p596

Even from the generic position we have expansive bounding in a context of contractive bonding - a boundary focus ("ya with us or against us") operating in a context of sharing space with another/others.

lightofreason said:

absolute rubbish.

56 The Wanderer
Restrained Journeying, Loyalty
In a context of self-restraint we utilise setting a direction (an ideology).

"LU : travel, stay in a place other than your home; itinerant troops, temporary residents; visitor, guest, lodger. The ideogram: banner and people around it, loyal to a symbol rather than their temporary residence." ERANOS p596

Even from the generic position we have expansive bounding in a context of contractive bonding - a boundary focus ("ya with us or against us") operating in a context of sharing space with another/others.

Click to expand...

Rubbish is something you know all about, ain't it sport!

Most of your posts are absolute crap but I have always tried to be polite and ignore your drivel, but today you have caught my attention!

You're out of line here, Chris, IMHO.

Shouldn't this thread be over in the Friends' area?

rosada said:

You're out of line here, Chris, IMHO.

Click to expand...

No I am not. I am spot on. My comment was solely focused on willofox's interpretation of what 56 means. The interpretation is crap. Primitive. Childish. Stupid. Ignorant. Is that clear enough for all to understand?! There is NOTHING in my comments about the question posed nore the answers of such - my comments are addressed solely to willofox's rubbish - repeated rubbish.

WF-

Chris addressed your posts, not your person... You have addressed his person. Name calling is childish, and as I have mentioned before, boring.

Please limit your comments/assessments to his arguments rather than to his worth as a human being. They are not even close in equivalence, no matter what you may think of him personally.

I'd also like to add that your worth as a human being also far exceeds any evaluation of your comments, positive or negative.

There's a categorical line here, and if we can avoid crossing it, we can avoid personal attacks and a whole lot of heartache. We may find fault with anyone's ideas, and when some thought is put into that it may be quite interesting - or not. However that falls out, it's a good thing to respect each other's person.

Rinda

"Please limit your comments/assessments to his arguments rather than to his worth as a human being."

Well, it seems to me that he is not putting up an argument but a statement of "fact"?

rinda said:

WF-

Chris addressed your posts, not your person... You have addressed his person. Name calling is childish, and as I have mentioned before, boring.


Rinda

Click to expand...

If someone calls your post 'absolute rubbish' I think it quite human to feel a little miffed about it. And I think in that instance it was hardly merely a comment on the post !

You each seem to feel you have reason to be provoked.

My point is that there is a qualitative difference between two kinds of responses.- Name calling or other attacks against a person's being are IMO useless at best to the community at large and possibly a huge embarrassment later.

On the other hand, directly countering their observations about their work (or play) here might offer new insight to others if done well, and are not immediately inflammatory.

Two different categories. One requires thought, the other seems to me to be simply an emotional outburst.

See my comment to him also.

Rinda

Chris, if you object to the characterisation of 56 as having few friends, your quarrel isn't with Willowfox, but with the authors of the Zagua:
"He who has few friends: this is the Wanderer."
(Wilhelm's translation)

hilary said:

Chris, if you object to the characterisation of 56 as having few friends, your quarrel isn't with Willowfox, but with the authors of the Zagua:
"He who has few friends: this is the Wanderer."
(Wilhelm's translation)

Click to expand...

which is misleading when used in such a simplistic way. The focus is on issues of maintaining loyalty at a distance (the pair 56/62 cover the issue). Any 'few friends' covers LOCAL observations where there are friends in distance place.

There is no 'loner' or 'friendless' or 'wandering without links etc' focus that comes across in Willofox's interpretation. The CORE sense covers loyalty issues in general.

If we ask the I Ching about what 56 covers, the infrastructure is described by analogy to 55 where the focus is on issues of diversity in general and maintaining loyalty in such an environment/

The beginning of 56, what it keeps coming back to, is described by analogy to 30 and ITS focus on issues of acceptance, of guidance, direction-setting, establishing/joining an ideology.

What 'feeds' 56 is described by analogy to the characteristics of 06 and its focus on issues with compromise; the maintaining of a loyalty at a distance demands compromise with local conditions.

What completes/restores balance of 56? 25 - the standing and formal assertion of one's loyalty and so making one's position perfectly clear to all.

etc etc etc The I Ching can describe itself and in so doing does a FAR better job than Wilhelm (and Willowfox!).

In 56 there is no unconditional focus on a loner or being 'friendless' - to assert such to someone asking a question is to assert a fiction whilst presenting it as a fact; naughty willowfox, naughty hilary! ;-) (Naughty Wilhelm!)

"LU : travel, stay in a place other than your home; itinerant troops, temporary residents; visitor, guest, lodger. The ideogram: banner and people around it, loyal to a symbol rather than their temporary residence." ERANOS p596

Not just naughty Hilary, Willowfox and Wilhelm. Also naughty Zagua authors, who thought this a useful mnemonic to capture the gist of the hexagram. Not that this is an unusual position: many translators treat the Zagua as trivial/inadequate. I disagree - I think there's considerable depth behind those snappy little verses.

56, in my experience, describes someone who is not at home where they find themselves. They often do have an objective or a loyalty elsewhere, but their prevailing emotional experience is of being outside the circuit. They can be less individualistic, and fit in; they can dance their own dance regardless, and get slaughtered. But there is no question of settling in, of influencing or being influenced by their environment.

In Hexagram 55, you are the king at the centre. You have gathered all resources and allies around you, the signs are present for you, and your decision makes things happen. Then you move on out, following your own banner... and you find that the wider world is not your garrison. Its values and priorities are wholly different. In the wider scheme of things, you have no place to belong (Xugua) and few friends (Zagua).

Hex 56 the wandering sage, a loner with few or no real friends just acquaintances along his road of life. Another traveller. A tramp is a traveller, another loner who knows only separation from society,a stranger wherever he goes. The hermit.
In India there are thousands of wanderers who spend there entire lives moving around, loners who are on a different path from the rest of the world, all hex 56 people.
How about the gypsies, another type of traveller who shun and are shunned by mainstream society, who know only separation because as Wilhelm says they tend to be "gruff", "overbearing" (and very annoying).
The wanderer/traveller of hex 56 is pretty much a loner, a stranger who either tries to blend in or faces persecution, people tend to be very wary of strangers, as you may well know.
All you are doing with your XORing is to force the IC to give you an answer that you like not what was originally intended by its authors.
How come you never offer anybody the wisdom of your XORing and give them an interpretation perhaps even be bold enough to use your knowledge to make a prediction?
I know that all you can do is hide behind your XORing nonsense, you are like a snail hiding safely in your shell of XORing and coming out when the coast is clear to preach your fanatic views of the I Ching.
What do you really know?

Actually, Chris does offer the occasional interpretation. They tend to be his best and most intelligible moments, even if he does typically follow up by telling people that the hexagram they received is no more relevant than any of the other 63.

Ah well. As my mum-in-law would say, it's a good job we're all different. Now please, just talk about the hexagrams and skip the personalities.

Oh well I’m the type of guy who will never settle down
Where pretty girls are well, you know that I’m around
I kiss ’em and I love’em ’cause to me they’re all the same
I hug ’em and I squeeze ’em they don’t even know my name
They call me the wanderer yeah the wanderer
I roam around around around...

As for the rest, can we go back to doing readings for houseplants?

hilary said:

Actually, Chris does offer the occasional interpretation. They tend to be his best and most intelligible moments, even if he does typically follow up by telling people that the hexagram they received is no more relevant than any of the other 63.

Click to expand...

tsk tsk - such a sweeping out of context statement! If you use magical/random methods to consult the IC there is no guarantee of consistancy in those results. Since all 64 hexagrams of the IC apply to any moment, since in using the IC we are using a filter, not part of one, all of one, the focus is on the sorting of the 64 hexagrams into best-fit/worst-fit order by the local context where the magical/random method can give you a close to best fit that is then interpreted AS IF the best fit (and consciousness will do the rest in 'turning' the hexagram into the best fit regardless)

Questions therefore offer a more consistant result and XOR allows for addition of material consistant with the question.

Chris.

hilary said:

Not just naughty Hilary, Willowfox and Wilhelm. Also naughty Zagua authors, who thought this a useful mnemonic to capture the gist of the hexagram. Not that this is an unusual position: many translators treat the Zagua as trivial/inadequate. I disagree - I think there's considerable depth behind those snappy little verses.

Click to expand...

.... based on your experiences, but if you read the post instigating this thread, the person involved is obviously new and so naive of such 'depth' packed into the verse. Willowfox paid no concern to that with the reply.

hilary said:

56, in my experience, describes someone who is not at home where they find themselves. They often do have an objective or a loyalty elsewhere, but their prevailing emotional experience is of being outside the circuit. They can be less individualistic, and fit in; they can dance their own dance regardless, and get slaughtered. But there is no question of settling in, of influencing or being influenced by their environment.

Click to expand...

For 56 they ALWAYS have a loyalty issue. Your above comments (notably far superior to what Willowfox offered the newbie) reflect a lack of consideration of the full spectrum of the hexagram, especially the last sentence where there IS a focus on fitting in through the focus on the question of how 56 expresses the immature (54) vs how it expressed the mature (53). In the latter the expression is through characteristics of 45 where the willingness to join a congregation of other with different loyalties (and so 'fit in' and at the same time use the celebration to include one's own loyalties). The former covers the immature in the form of expression of characteristics of 26 and the focus on 'holding firm' to that loyalty regardless of circumstances. In other words there is a development path from characteristics of 26 to those of 45 covering movement of 56 from immature to mature form.

hilary said:

In Hexagram 55, you are the king at the centre. You have gathered all resources and allies around you, the signs are present for you, and your decision makes things happen. Then you move on out, following your own banner... and you find that the wider world is not your garrison. Its values and priorities are wholly different. In the wider scheme of things, you have no place to belong (Xugua) and few friends (Zagua).

Click to expand...

I find issues with trying to focus on the structure of a hexagram using the traditional sequence rotations. (in mathematics this is equivalent to a negation!). The pairing with 62 is far more constructive in understanding the loyalty emphasis in that the binary sequence focus is on structure (yin/yang extremes are covered). Thus 56 gets close to 62 with the only difference being in the top line and brings out the unconditional/conditional differences operating in the one theme.

55/56 pairing covers more a singular/group dynamic focus expressed as:

GOING BEYOND:

55 : going beyond - through overflow, abundance, diversity; 55 abundance, diversity comes from a context described by hexagram 56 - loyalty

56 : going beyond - through loyalty, stay focused; 56 loyalty comes from a context described by hexagram 55 - diversity

Note the XOR linkage covering infrastructure.

Chris.

willowfox said:

Hex 56 the wandering sage, a loner with few or no real friends just acquaintances along his road of life. Another traveller. A tramp is a traveller, another loner who knows only separation from society,a stranger wherever he goes. The hermit.
In India there are thousands of wanderers who spend there entire lives moving around, loners who are on a different path from the rest of the world, all hex 56 people.
How about the gypsies, another type of traveller who shun and are shunned by mainstream society, who know only separation because as Wilhelm says they tend to be "gruff", "overbearing" (and very annoying).
The wanderer/traveller of hex 56 is pretty much a loner, a stranger who either tries to blend in or faces persecution, people tend to be very wary of strangers, as you may well know.

Click to expand...

the above is VERY weak understanding of 56 and fails totally to identify the core loyalty issues covered in such (and its pair with 62). You have not gone deep enough into the IC - you work off WIlhelm and his limited understanding of what is going on in the structure.

willowfox said:

All you are doing with your XORing is to force the IC to give you an answer that you like not what was originally intended by its authors.

Click to expand...

The original authors had no idea what they were dealing with in details, they attempted to describe feelings through the making of analogies/metaphors to local context through history/legend/myth. In doing so they did a good job but they LACKED the precision we have access to today through understanding the methodology used by our brains and so we can update the ad-hoc aspects of past interpretations/representations to a depth 'they' did not have descriptive access to.

The self-referencing of the IC allows for the IC to describe itself and that is brought out in the XOR and is FAR FAR superior to any ancient (or even modern) interpretations by individuals since they lack the awareness of the methodology at work - until one gets into XOR that brings out the details (as does EQV in the context of sameness mapping).

What consciousness does is offer LOCAL variations on a theme of the GENERAL qualities of hexagrams. Thus the local interpretations of a hexagram by you or hilary or me or LiSe etc etc add colour to the general -- they are all different, add variation to the general theme although yours are often misleading in their 'rigid', limited, focus on Wilhelm and wandering off theme, IMHO.

willowfox said:

How come you never offer anybody the wisdom of your XORing and give them an interpretation perhaps even be bold enough to use your knowledge to make a prediction?

Click to expand...

I sometimes do give interpretations but I will usually suggest the person uses the questions method to derive a hexagram to interprete. Why? because it is more consistant in generating a hexagram that is the 'best fit' for the situation.

Other times I will give the GENERAL meanings of a hexagram without comment on what it means locally - leave that up to the individual and their belief system. Thus a 'change' to you is one hexagram operating in a context of another to me and the pair covers a whole. The methodology of coin toss etc is delusion in the belief one is in touch with some spiritual element (the use of random/miraclous methods repeatedly bring out the probabilities as prescribed by basic probability theory. The neuroscience work brings out the 'IC is applied as a whole to any moment' and so how any hexagram will elicit meaning to a question given a belief, whereas the fact is more that all hexagrams are sorted into best-fit/worst-fit order and the need therefore is to identify that best fit)

willowfox said:

I know that all you can do is hide behind your XORing nonsense, you are like a snail hiding safely in your shell of XORing and coming out when the coast is clear to preach your fanatic views of the I Ching.
What do you really know?

Click to expand...

through IDM, IC+ and XOR etc - More than you.

Hi Tony, you still there?
Welcome to the family.