Hi there,
When I first started consulting the I Ching I made an assumption that the second hex in a reading was the future, 'this happens, then this', which sometimes still holds true. With more experience though I find that its not always the case, and sometimes the 2nd hex forms the background or context to a question, or even an overarching theme to the issue.
So I commented on this thread: http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/friends/showthread.php?t=10100
and then realised I have no idea if I'm right, and would love to know how other people see the second hex? Also, if the 2nd hex is the future, then that implies that an unchanging hex is static, with no development, but I'm not sure that's true either...
What do you think?
E

edge said:

Hi there,
When I first started consulting the I Ching I made an assumption that the second hex in a reading was the future, 'this happens, then this', which sometimes still holds true. With more experience though I find that its not always the case,[ and sometimes the 2nd hex forms the background or context to a question, or even an overarching theme to the issue.
So I commented on this thread: http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/friends/showthread.php?t=10100
and then realised I have no idea if I'm right, and would love to know how other people see the second hex? Also, if the 2nd hex is the future, then that implies that an unchanging hex is static, with no development, but I'm not sure that's true either...
What do you think?
E

Click to expand...

that is how i see it..and it also may kind of encompass the future...as I oft quote think it was Hilary, 'the second hexagram is the sea the primary one swims in'...something like that..i dunno who said it but it hits the nail on the head IMO. its all around the question, surrounds the question, its not a fixed future scenario

I have never known it indicate a linear sequence like first the primary happens and that leads to the secondary. Most of the time that simply makes no sense. as soon as you start seeing the relating hexagram as the backdrop, the context, the reason or situation or your position in relation to the question it all becomes much more useable IMO.

Hilary suggested, in her blog i think, an unchanging hexgram can indicate one has 'no place to stand' in regard to the question., like one doesn't have relation to it, one is right in the midst of it..so I think the second hex can indicate your whole demeanour to the issue, as well as nature of ciircumstances behind the question

BTW theres loads of threads on this topic so it might be worth a search

FWIW, the Karcher and Ritsema book says that the 2nd hex is the future outcome of the situation.

online readings at facade.com show the 2nd hex as the "future" hexagram (i think it's facade.com that does that).

i tend to base my actions on those castings that have a favorable future hexagram. "there will be great success" vs. "it does not benefit one to undertake such things" or whatever.

If the 2nd hex is the context i think i have to go look over my old readings again.

in that case:

so what does an unchanging hex mean?
what do chaning lines mean if they're not the path from the first (present) to the second (future)?

thanks.

How you see the second hexagram is up to you. if you find it works for you as fixing it as 'the future' then use it that way.

einhorn said:

so what does an unchanging hex mean?
what do chaning lines mean if they're not the path from the first (present) to the second (future)?

thanks.

Click to expand...

Nice way putting it Trojan, the second hexagram is the sea where the first one is swimming in.

About a hexagram without changing lines. When you want to relate this to a second hexagram then you can relate it to the opposite hexagram. At least that is what I do. That's the way I read mostly a hexagram without changing lines.

Frank

I see a hexagram without any changing line as telling me there is not much I can do or have to do. It can be negative, that not much is possible. Or it can be very positive: you are one with the situation. My experience with many changing lines is the opposite: a big lot to do, very difficult to get it all right because you are still far from where you should go. I got hex.1 with all lines changing for an awful situation which was impossible to solve.

Hilary was the one who gave the example of the sea. Great one, very clear. In the beginning I also thought the second one was the outcome. But reality was very often not at like that. I got a few times 39 as relating hex at moments when I was really in a 39 situation, and the primary hex told me quite clearly what I could do about it. Since then I stick to the 'sea' idea and I love the way it works for me.

'the second hexagram is the sea the primary one swims in'
I love that too, makes complete sense!
I do find that when I get an unchanging hexagram it feels very much like a statement, 'this is where you are and this is what you need to know right now', not that nothing will ever change, but quite a conclusive analysis, and a simple answer to whatever it is I'm asking.
I appreciate your thoughts!
E

This site also refers to the 2nd hex as the "coming situation."

http://psychicscience.org/ching5.aspx

It's interesting to consider the "swimming" analogy, however.

trojan said:

that is how i see it..and it also may kind of encompass the future...as I oft quote think it was Hilary, 'the second hexagram is the sea the primary one swims in'...something like that..i dunno who said it but it hits the nail on the head IMO. its all around the question, surrounds the question, its not a fixed future scenario

Click to expand...

heylise said:

Hilary was the one who gave the example of the sea. Great one, very clear. In the beginning I also thought the second one was the outcome. But reality was very often not at like that. I got a few times 39 as relating hex at moments when I was really in a 39 situation, and the primary hex told me quite clearly what I could do about it. Since then I stick to the 'sea' idea and I love the way it works for me.

Click to expand...

just came across this thread, see Lises post 2nd post down http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/friends/showthread.php?t=2304....this idea of the secondary being the sea in which the primary swims has been knocking around here a long time...its an almost legendary quote !....Who said it ? Karcher or Hilary...or was it someone else ? I guess it doesn't matter although i feel the author should claim the credit, since its a phrase I've quoted about a million times.

Could the true owner of the quote please step foward.


(Funny since I've been dwelling alot on 6.3 which i often confuse with 2.3) anyway if you thought the idea up it can't be taken off you whoever it was who said it)

I've altered my position quite a few years ago, using 'the canvas on which the original hexagram is painted on' idea, rather than it being a future or a result; even though Brad reminds us that the name means "resulting hexagram". My rationale to that is that, yes, it does result from structural changes of the original, but that does not necessarily mean it results as the meaning of outcome. I still see it, more or less, as describing the context of the reading. But neither do I limit it to that. Not being a methodical type of person, I prefer to allow meaning to arise from the fire, and trust my cognitive skills to sort it out.

The 'true owner of the quote' is Stephen Karcher - it's from the (excellent) introduction to his How to Use the I Ching, which was republished as I Ching Plain and Simple. Here's the original:

Relating Figure
The second figure represents how you are 'related' to the basic figure. It can be a future development. It can also point to a past event that brought you here, a warning, a goal, a particular attitude or a deep desire - whatever is 'relating' you to the basic answer. It is the 'sea' or ground feeling in which the basic figure swims.

Click to expand...

(I wonder if this, in 1997, was the first time someone stuck their neck out and published something saying that the second hexagram needn't be fixedly the future result? It's certainly the first time I encountered the idea in print.)

I like this (you can tell from how often I quote it ), and Meng's canvas, and lately I've been enjoying using zhi in its possessive sense, so 9.2 gives you the particular 37-ing moment and aspect of 9. But in practice the character and way of moving of the hexagrams themselves seems to be the biggest influence.

Even better than just the sea. I didn't remember, even though it sits right here on the shelf. Really loved that book. I guess it did color my ideas about the relating hexagram, and then I forgot the origin. Time to reread it.

Imho

I would like to provide some common annotations of so called ‘the changed hexagram’ in Chinese writings for your reference.

The changed hexagram is very often called Zhi Gua (之卦) or Cuo Gua (錯卦), and to my knowledge, they are regarded as:.

Zhi (之) means: to go to (position B from position A), and Zhi can refer to: A) Line 1 goes to position 4 (or any other position in the forward direction) and exchanges positions with line 4 (or the corresponding line ahead) within this hexagram, or line 4 goes to position 1 (in the backward direction) and exchanges position with line 1 (behind it), or B) Hexagram A goes to hexagram B after the moving line is changed, for instance, Hex 8 is the Zhi Gu of Hex 3.1.

Theoretically speaking, Zhi is just a movement and this movement doesn’t specify ‘forward or backward, i.e. future or past’. Most of Chinese diviners are inclined to refer Zhi Gua to a resulting hexagram because of their reading method and because they intend to seek the advice of the future or the possible result.

Cuo Gua (錯卦): Cuo (錯) signifies to intercross. When all the lines of a hexagram change, the changed hexagram is the Cuo Gua (錯卦) of the original hexagram, for instance, hex 11 and hex 12. From the side view, these two hexagrams have access to reach each other laterally, as all of the masculine and the feminine lines of these two hexagrams can mutually respond at their corresponding positions, suggesting they are the cause and effect of each other mutually.

Therefore, It might be the reason that most of Chinese diviners do not intentionally talk about the cause and effect between the original hexagram and Zhi Gua since in their reading methods only the specified 'moving line' can make a change.

Regards
Tuck :bows:
www.iching123.com

for those of you who believe the second hex is the "canvas on which the first one is painted," then if you want to know about a future situation, do you ask specifically about it?

For example:

(if the 2nd hex is the future)
Q. "What should I do about [x]?"
A. X.a > Y

So if you do the action in X.a, you will have Y result.

But if the second hex is not the future, then is it:
Q. "What should I do about [x]?"
A. X.a > Y

So it's telling you to do X.a within the context of Y.

Then do you have to ask: "What will happen if I do X.a?"

Research with the Emotional I Ching indicates that the derived hexagram reflects changes underway (or completed) from the initital assessment.

IF a context is pushing your emotional buttons then we get an initial assessment. Any changing lines involve a response element to that assessment, internal feedback from memories, imagination etc introduce doubts and so the resulting hexagram that covers the situation at this moment. GIVEN this information we can extract finer details re purpose of the universal and from there local context colourings to give us personal biases.

einhorn said:

for those of you who believe the second hex is the "canvas on which the first one is painted," then if you want to know about a future situation, do you ask specifically about it?

For example:

(if the 2nd hex is the future)
Q. "What should I do about [x]?"
A. X.a > Y

So if you do the action in X.a, you will have Y result.

But if the second hex is not the future, then is it:
Q. "What should I do about [x]?"
A. X.a > Y

So it's telling you to do X.a within the context of Y.

Then do you have to ask: "What will happen if I do X.a?"

Click to expand...

I've never been good at algebra uch: I don't get any of this x y stuff but if i were asking for a prediction then the second hexagram would show me the background, all the surrounding issues which helps me see where i am with things and I would most likley look to the moving lines for the actual prediction. Works for me.


BTW how you see the primary and relatinghexagrams is not a matter of belief at all. If you are observant you will see what works for you...you don't have to believe anything (least of all what facade.com says...)