Woensdag, 21 februari 2007Believe meReacties
Geeft reacties weer als
(Lineair | Samengevoegd)
Very wise words, Harmen. Well said. I agree with the spirit of your post. I also believe the Yi can refuse to answer. I mean, you'll always obtain an answer, obviously, but finding an appropriate meaning in it, that is a gift from the Yi.
Cheers,
Luis
Hi Luis,
I think something only has meaning if you give it meaning. In essence everything is meaningless; you, as an observer or participant, have to give it meaning. That is why Yi interpretations differ so much, and why using the Yi is a personal and subjective matter which cannot be standardized. Meaning is subjective. When you say that finding an appropriate meaning in the answer is a gift from the Yi, then I would say, there is no difference between you and the Yi. If you say that the Yi can refuse to answer, then I think, you can refuse to answer yourself.
Warm wishes,
Harmen.
I agree Harmen. I used to have the belief that every reading was meaningful, even ones I didn't understand. Now I go so far as to reject readings from the Yi that I do not believe are correct, like in the story of Taigong treading on the tortoiseshells of King Wu saying what do dry bones and withered plants know about good or bad fortune, thereby urging King Wu to war after getting a bad oracle for attacking the Shang. Yes, indeed, what does the Yijing know when it tells me something I do not want to believe? This is the attitude! I take from it only what I find personally useful. And if I am wrong and it is right, well I'll find out soon enough. In retrospect, I feel foolish to have placed so much blind trust in an oracle, particularly when it comes to relationships. What on earth does the Yi know about relationships?! It knows whether I should attack boldly or retreat to safety, but to use it like glorified daisypetal-picking saying "she loves me, she loves me not" is just asking for trouble. Yet this is what most people actually use the Yijing for. And what they most ask other people to interpret for them, so confused do they become. Best to kick the book into the corner sometimes.
In spirit of the article, it is a just glorified daisy petal if that's all you know about it, and knowing that might be better than not knowing the Yi at all. Who's knows, maybe Confucius started that way, looking for Mrs Right, until the Yi got her esoteric claws into him, and maybe the other girl did love him and the Yi lied, she wouldn't be the first to not be willing to loose her great love to someone else.
Hi Steve, I am, just like you I presume, amazed by the amount of answers from the Yi posted on forums like Hilary's, and the querent begging for interpretation by someone else. And often a querent makes a habit of it - why take time and energy to interpret the answer if someone else can do it much quicker for you? I cannot judge the validity of the questions, but I do see a tendency to let others tell you how to see the answer of the Yi. What a pity.
Warm wishes,
Harmen.
Hi Harmen,
I can only half agree with what you've said. The Yi itself is a construct, which emulates observable natural phenomenon. Granted, "fire" is only the name we give to fire, and "wind" likewise is only a name for what is observed. But neither fire nor wind are constructs merely of what we read into them as being; they actually are what they are and do what they do.
When we use the Yi to consult, fate (another word for an observed phenomenon) in effect points to one or more of those natural phenomenon. We can't read or interpret that fire is wet nor that water is dry. It is what it is.
What is read into is how fire or water relate to our moment, r.e. our question. Whether there is actually universal direction, council or advise is another subject, but it's safe to say a hexagram differs from a blot of ink.
As for reading or interpreting effectively for another person, one must have or make a connection with that person before specific details of the reading can be given. In this sense, an effective interpretation is as much reading the person as it is reading the Yi. Otherwise, all an interpreter can offer are more metaphors to explain Yi's metaphors.
So, while I agree that reading into Yi's answer is what gives an application, I have to disagree that Yi's answer is purely subjective.
Warm regards, Bruce
Hi Bruce,
When you say, "The Yi itself is a construct, which emulates observable natural phenomenon", then I say, that's a believe or assumption. When you say, "We can't read or interpret that fire is wet nor that water is dry. It is what it is", then I say, you are not talking about meaning but about qualities . Indeed, fire is hot and water is wet, but these qualities can have different meanings, depending on the framework of the person who observes these qualities. Fire can have different meanings for a fireman and for fire eater. A mountain can mean something else for a mountaineer (a challenge, for instance) than for a someone who lives in a valley (a possible threat because of avalanches). These meanings are not universal, and if you find them yourself you will make the oracle a lot more personal and powerful. When someone else interprets your answer of the Yi he or she will often do so from her experiences with and knowledge of the Yi - and these two are part of the personal framework. That is what makes interpreting for someone else so difficult - you have to find the personal framework of the questioner and try to connect to that. It is easy to say to the questioner "this hexagram means that-and-that", and the questioner is often glad to hear such things, after all, isn't it wonderful to have someone else tell you what it is all about? But my short piece about believes is not meant as a critique of general Yijing usage. What I am trying to say is that if you have to use personal believes, then do so to their fullest potential. In using the Yi personal believes are not bad, they are something you can apply and take advantage of.
Warm wishes,
Harmen.
Hi Harmen,
You seem to be disagreeing with my agreement with you. The Yi IS a construct; not because I believe it is but because that’s precisely what it is. It was made up, constructed. Weren’t you saying the same thing? That said, fire and water are the same fire and water to an astronaut as it is to a caveman. These are not relative things. What is relative is the human relevance we attach and extract from the constructed metaphor – which, to me appears as a (metaphorical) onion: meaning within meaning within meaning. I agree with you, that the meaning is not inherent in the observable phenomenon, but the phenomenon itself is predictably repeatable, and it is this constancy which gives the Yi (or astrology, etc) it’s oracle effect: as a compass always points in the same direction, at least for a few million years at a time. Warmly, Bruce
Hi Bruce,
It seems I read your post somewhat different than you intended. Thanks for your posting, much appreciated. Warm wishes, Harmen.
Hi Harmen
I think you have a good point, a very interesting one as well. I still feel somewhat of a beginner on the Yi, but in a broader sense I feel that what you say goes for the whole human experience (at least: MY whole human experience . Meaning is what makes my world go round (while the "real" world goes anyway). Meaning and the framework is what gives value to life. And it's always very personal. Like interpreting a dream (the interpreter in my opinion should stick to facilitating finding ones own personal meaning to dream-symbols; can give suggestions from the "shared framework", but always as hypotheses).
But I have a question: what if Yi wants to show a way outside ones framework? Or is that even possible?
Lovely discussion.
Bye, Femke
Quote:"But I have a question: what if Yi wants to show a way outside ones framework? Or is that even possible?"
I think this creates a nice -very Yijingistic to me- paradox: If you believe that the Yi can refer to something outside of your framework, then this can and will be the case. But since the believe 'referring to something outside your framework' is part of your framework, the Yi still works within your framework.....
Warm wishes,
Harmen.
That's interesting. So then, nothing from outside of ones own framework can enter inside? How, then, do we learn anything? We must believe, according to our framework, that the new thing to learn is out there to be learned? Maybe that goes from belief to trust? If you trust your teacher, you believe you will be taught? huh... interesting idea. But, what of experiences which teach us by surprise, where the totally unexpected happens? That happens in dreams too, and it's always been a mystery to me how it can. If if comes from the dreamer's psyche, how can it be a surprise? If it comes from a collective or from somewhere outside, then it's easy to understand. I lean toward it coming from the collective. So perhaps our framework is vastly larger than we realize.
Quote: "So then, nothing from outside of ones own framework can enter inside? How, then, do we learn anything?"
When using the Yijing I believe, or better: hold as a rule, that the Yi does not refer to anything outside my framework. If I learn something new, something that is not yet incorporated in my framework, I can choose to make it part of my framework or discard it. I am specifically speaking of the use of a known framework with Yijing usage, not of experiences and learning in general.
Hi Harmen, "When using the Yijing I believe, or better: hold as a rule, that the Yi does not refer to anything outside my framework." I generally hold to the same rule, but with one difference; namely that, to quote George Harrison, "life goes on within you and without you". I see Yi's answer as identifying inside with outside. But, often, for me at least, the understanding originates from outside of my personal framework. Every reading interpretation I offer to someone else's question speaks personally to me and my framework. That's what I meant by the vastly larger framework we may be operating from. One other thing: I do not make a distinction between the Yi and life. Thanks for indulging me, old friend. Respectfully, Bruce
|
LanguageCategorieënZoekenAangedreven door |
Believe me - Harmen’s Dagboek A good, thought-provoking post from Harmen. Basically he’s pointing out that Yijing readings work within a framework of personal beliefs. This is true of what methods you know and find significant (nuclear he...
Gevolgd: Feb 24, 17:13