Continuation... the right-wrong game

About: CFR commentaries on YiKing hex 53 #6

It is interesting that the Arvada viewpoint of the Yi King appropriate to yesterday (& perhaps our political discussion (Magor<->Vidar) was hex 53 line 6. See 1722 and items in the group politics for amusement. There was no possibility of marriage of the points of view at that time. See the reference for deeper meanings.

Tags

  1. hex 53 line 6
  2. XX

Comments


Mark de LA says
The outlook (from Arvada) however is extremely good given the guidance of hex #12 - the thwan commentary is here.

Mark de LA says
BTW, the right-wrong game is discussed in 1722

Seth says
What would actually be totally kewl for me in particular would be if you would plainly and completely say exactly what you are meaning here in this item about ...
source: in item above
the Arvada viewpoint of the Yi King appropriate to yesterday (& perhaps our political discussion (Magor<->Vidar) was hex 53 line 6. See [item 1722] and items in the [group politics] for amusement. There was no possibility of marriage of the points of view at that time. See the reference for deeper meanings.
... otherwise i would need to study it for several hours which i don't have to devote.  But i totally do understand how it is probably all there expressed already ... one does really just need to figure it out.

C says
seth 2010-09-29 07:20:52 1728
What would actually be totally kewl for me in particular would be if you would plainly and completely say exactly what you are meaning here in this item about ...
source: in item above
the Arvada viewpoint of the Yi King appropriate to yesterday (& perhaps our political discussion (Magor<->Vidar) was hex 53 line 6. See [item 1722] and items in the [group politics] for amusement. There was no possibility of marriage of the points of view at that time. See the reference for deeper meanings.
... otherwise i would need to study it for several hours which i don't have to devote.  But i totally do understand how it is probably all there expressed already ... one does really just need to figure it out.
If you even read the line from BC you would get the point!
Empty basket -bloodless sheep in place! i.e. there was no cheese at the end of the maze. The sheep didn't get sacrificed (all metaphorical- of course).  That is what always happens when 2 or more are gathered in the name of the RWG. Remember I was writing for myself, not to be published, almost 5 years ago. Thats why I don't publish this shit yet. Actually we were going meta on the RWG. Nowadays, I blog all the material first & if something shows up significant in the day I note it. Otherwise not.

Seth says
C 2010-09-29 10:59:02 1728
 Did you "throw" #53 on your own recently? Why the interest?

it was just an arbitrary choice of a hexagram to delve into in more depth.  It caught my attention from your spreadsheet because of the "marrying off your younger sister" term on it from the old Chinese culture.

And, no, i won't be "throwing" hexagrams myself.  That would not be my style.  I'm looking for a more conscious binding of my awareness to what conditions prevail in the now.

Seth says
C 2010-09-29 09:46:24 1728
seth 2010-09-29 07:20:52 1728
What would actually be totally kewl for me in particular would be if you would plainly and completely say exactly what you are meaning here in this item about ...
source: in item above
the Arvada viewpoint of the Yi King appropriate to yesterday (& perhaps our political discussion (Magor<->Vidar) was hex 53 line 6. See [item 1722] and items in the [group politics] for amusement. There was no possibility of marriage of the points of view at that time. See the reference for deeper meanings.
... otherwise i would need to study it for several hours which i don't have to devote.  But i totally do understand how it is probably all there expressed already ... one does really just need to figure it out.
If you even read the line from BC you would get the point!
Empty basket -bloodless sheep in place! i.e. there was no cheese at the end of the maze. The sheep didn't get sacrificed (all metaphorical- of course).  That is what always happens when 2 or more are gathered in the name of the RWG. Remember I was writing for myself, not to be published, almost 5 years ago. Thats why I don't publish this shit yet. Actually we were going meta on the RWG. Nowadays, I blog all the material first & if something shows up significant in the day I note it. Otherwise not.
Ok, your right GW's page does shed a lot of light on an interpertation of KWI MIH.   So i gather then that we had some political discussion on the day preceeding your throwing of that hex, and that you felt it went nowhere because of RWG, which of course is frequently the case ... did i get it right?

So perhaps i should introduce in my ontology something of KWI MIH ... perhaps as the realization that an effort was fruitless because of some habitual behavior. 

Going meta, were that i actually do interpert that the same as you which is prolly not the case, is for me very interesting.  Does that have anything to do with KWI MIH?  

Seth says
i actually did accomplish what i had to focus on yesterday but then proceeded to waste the rest of the day because of habitual vises.  Oh well!  Was that KWI MIH kicking in ... not really, the effort was not related to the vise.  

Seth says
source: M above
I think fruitlessness has lots of causes - #53,6 is the transition to whatever comes next not the culmination of it. The 5th line is supposed to be the climax of each hex according to the Tai Shu commentaries.
See that whole thing about the progression of lines ... #XX,y ... is all greek to me now.  I don't suppose you could point directly to something that explains it, could you?

C says
seth 2010-09-29 11:33:56 1728
source: M above
talking about talking is going meta, eh?
I would say that talking is going meta.  Talking about talking is going meta ^2 



C says
The going meta had nothing to do with #53.  We were having a RWG on an item which was about the RWG, i.e. 1722 , like talking about talking is going meta, eh? I think fruitlessness has lots of causes - #53,6 is the transition to whatever comes next not the culmination of it. The 5th line is supposed to be the climax of each hex according to the Tai Shu commentaries. Unfortunately I got that one last week on Tuesday & for some reason didn't log it.  The following line for Wednesday was #27,6 which was very telling:
Complex -simple! human form complete.  I remember having some breakthroughs but what they were have crusted over.

C says
 Did you "throw" #53 on your own recently? Why the interest?


C says
seth 2010-09-29 11:49:58 1728
source: M above
I think fruitlessness has lots of causes - #53,6 is the transition to whatever comes next not the culmination of it. The 5th line is supposed to be the climax of each hex according to the Tai Shu commentaries.
See that whole thing about the progression of lines ... #XX,y ... is all Greek to me now.  I don't suppose you could point directly to something that explains it, could you?
     P.1948 & P.1949 do a good enough job & maybe P.1950 . Essentially you cyclically shift the yin & yangs upwards in the marriage (not XOR) of the two hexes the weekly & the equinox & get a new hex. For example: if the marriage yielded #53 the set would become:
53, 27, 14, 39, 20, & 42 - with the first line of #53 written on Friday, the second line of #27 on Saturday & so on.  The hexagrams supposedly show what forces are in play from noon to noon.  Thursday is a recap of all 6, presumably spread out every 4 hours.
     Since you have no interest in the Yi per se, why are you not inventing your own system totally out of your own being & leaving the ancient behind?


C says
Then too, ignoring the YI reminds me of the some jokes:
A FLEA DREAMING

What are the two most concieted
things in the world?
One is a flea,floating down the river on his
back with a erection,
yelling for the man to raise the draw bridge.
The other is the flea's
brother who,
after sexually attacking a rhinoceros,
whisper's in her ear,
"Did I hurt you,baby?"
~


Seth says
source: C above
Since you have no interest in the Yi per se, why are you not inventing your own system totally out of your own being & leaving the ancient behind?
It is not true that i "have no interest in the Yi per se" ... else why would i be studying it. I just don't have any interest in binding it to the now with the throw of a dice.  In other words I'm not into divination per se, however you want to look at it.  But i do suspect that there is some wisdom in the Yi and in GW's interpretation of same.   And yes i am trying to grock my owon system.  It's hard to distinguish this study from a study of ontology itself ... and in particular of my ontology ... because i believe that everyone has their own ... whether they like it or not.   Ontology is really not something that can be totally standardized from person to person.  Do you think it can ... to what degree can it be standardized ?

My way of binding has to do with just being hyper-aware of what i am doing and what is happening to me and in my life.  For example i want to know whether i am doing something habitually rather than  freely choosing my actions.  I want to know why i feel differently when i take my woods walk every day ... something changed ... what was it ... was it something i ate.  What conditions prevailed yesterday that i succumed to my vises, yet today i seem to be communicating well in the social sphere ... but not really accomplishing my work, except of course taking orders which are automated responses.  My kitchen is getting back in order after yesterday's chicken curry/mushroom risotto splerge  ... i am fasting today ... what should i cook and eat tomorrow ... stuff like that...