Decoding the "I Ching"

So you don't want to discuss any of the implications or potential origins of such information? Okay. For the record, however, sometimes answers can be arrived at by simply examining it from every available angle. You mentioned Gilgamesh might be the creator of the I Ching (correct?), so I thought the discussion of ancient history was allowed.

I'd mention other things like, how in the samhill did he gain access to paradise? According to the information he was questioned at the "gate" and because of his DNA (2/3rds god, a nephilim), was allowed to pass threw the gate. You've read the epic of gilgamesh, correct? Hrm, now I'm afraid to talk. See ya later.

Erm. No. Don't know where you got that one.



FYI - Fu Hsi created the I Ching.

I suggested that Fi Hsi and Gilgamesh might be considered mythological "peers," representing distinctly different cultures, who shared similarities and had clear differences.

.

You said:

I am itemizing the similarities between Gilgamesh of Sumeria and Fu Hsi, the 'emperor' credited with creating the I Ching trigrams and hexagrams.

Yes. To paraphrase:

I am itemizing the similarities between Gilgamesh and Fu Hsi; Gilgamesh being a pre-historic king of Sumeria, and Fu Hsi being the pre-historic Chinese 'emperor' credited with creating the I Ching trigrams and hexagrams.

While the phrasing in that one sentence may have been ambiguous to certain minds - in context, it should not have been.

Again - the main topic and goals of this thread were clearly stated, and reiterated. The contrast/comparison between East and West was incidental, and not meant to drive or define this thread.

You have a thread running on your stargate thesis - there is no reason to try and take over this thread, derail it, and redirect it to your own purposes.

I recognize that we all can become obsessive about our own work - bin there dun that - but at the same time, we all need to recognize that others have different directions, goals and priorities.

And we need to respect other peoples' work too, not just our own focus. One way we can do that is to stay on topic.


.

I don't see any Paranormal connection here.
Moving to Skunk Works, home of alternative theories.

What cateogry was it in before?
I should think the best way to solve your dilemma would be to take the schematic to a machinist and ask him/her how hard and/or expensive it would be to create a mechanical model of your diagram. The other solution would be to create it in a 3-D program. Some 3-D artists could do that for you. In that event try:

www.gfxartist.com...

they have several really good 3-d and 2-d artists.

[edit on 14-10-2006 by undo]

Thanks for the link undo. ...I was sorting out diagram details with 2 animator/graphic artists here on the thread and by u2u. Then the thread was derailed - looks like I lost them.

Eek. Well I didn't think I was derailing it at the time. I thought it was relevant to the info, till you told me it was a derail. You had asked me to read it over and offer my opinions, so I did. I suppose I should've just U2U'ed them. Ain't a mind reader.

My expertise is not in erm, the approach you were taking to the subject. Really, I don't have an expertise. I would approach a question such as the one you put forward initially, by viewing it from several angles and trying to wrap my head around how they thought back then, the extent of their knowledge, how much was guesswork and how much was legitimately futuristic. that kinda thing. But you've already decided it's a real, working, gadget. Truthfully, I'd look at it suspciously if I thought for even a moment, that it was a functioning, futuristic device and would probably want to determine how it was used rather than how to use it, if you follow my meaning.

Here's a thought. I was looking at a 4 wheel gyroscope and your diagrams remind of that, for some reason. There were three internal wheels, surrounded by one outer wheel. The outer wheel was oval rather than round, but the internal wheels were round. Of course, there may be variations on that theme.

In the Canon of Yu, Book of Shu (or was that Canon of Shu, Book of Yu? lol) it mentions a few odd gadgets, such as the "Transverse Jade Tube." Have you read that?

Nah. Pas de problemo. It was an important perspective and discussion - just not meant to be the main thrust.

I'm mainly just cranky because this thread was thrown out of "Ancient and Lost Civilizations" and dumped in 'paranormal' on the grounds that it's just a "fortune-telling" book - even tho the I Ching is arguably the oldest book in the world. !!!!!!





At the first level - ie., without being made from specific materials with particular properties - it appears to be a relatively simple "wheels-within-wheels" clock-calendar that describes the interrelationships of various celestial bodies/events, including the earth.






You've got the concept.





No. But sounds like I should.

Thanks for your response. ...I'm on my way out the door, so need to be quick, but I do appreciate your efforts.


sofi

Hmmm. Do you mean the Book of History (or Documents), called the Shu Ching? ...and the Canon of Yao/The Canon of Shun?

If so, yes. FYI - the history was collected well after the great book burning, and largely rewritten. Only hints remain of the original stuff - the rest is cultural overlay. (Much like the situation with Western records.)

The approach here with the weheels-within-wheels clock-calendar is about going back to the simple basics. The premise is that the basics are largely uncorrupted.


.

interesting. I'm reading it now (I ching).

The piece I was talking about is part of the Canon of Yao. It's the second book in the series. Here: www.sacred-texts.com...


I'd just like to state for the record, that had Fu been interested in sharing his knowledge of I Ching and the knowledge had originally been a device, you would not be trying to guess what the thing is. It would be diagrammed out in his writings, not just its application but the entire thing.

.



undo - As a main point of interest for you:

The I Ching is based on a binary numerical system, which starts with the number zero (0).

The 0 is yin, conceptualized as receptive, female, and is constant, the essential beginning point of every "cycle."

1 comes into being only after 0 is recognized. The 1 is yang, conceptualized as creative, male, and is always changing, the essential end point of every cycle:

As a binary sequence, a "cycle" refers to the number of "places" in the number sequence: one place results in (the "cycle" of) yin-0 to yang-1; two places result in yin-00 to yang-11 (0 to 3); three places result in yin-000 to yang-111 (0 to 7); four places result in yin-0000 to yang-1111 (0 to 15); five places result in yin-00000 to yang-11111 (0 to 31); six places result in yin-000000 to yang-111111 (0 to 63). ...As a side point for example, "8" can only come into being after the 0-7 cycle is complete, and the very act of conceptualizing "8" encompasses the full numerical cycle following, and so on.

IMO - It is quite clear that the numbers' order (sequence) was changed to reflect shifting male-female politics - perhaps the change from matriarchy to patriarchy - when then-contemporary politics could not accept the female principle as the essential beginning point. Many of the I Ching's revisions obviously occurred to "correct" this "misconception" of the yin-female as the beginning element, and to establish the yang-male as "first," not "last," and thus, superior to yin-female.

These revisions resulted in the loss (in some circles) of the basic arithmetic principles contained in the I Ching - not to mention the loss of the concept of zero to the larger culture. In fact, much of the ongoing controversy surrounding the I Ching is based in the continued need to conceptualize the yang-male as superior to the yin-female, and hence, mandates denying the binary basis of the work.

Moreover, the conceptually constipated Western mind - while able to accommodate notions of "magic" - is totally terrified of the implications inherent in acknowledging that an ancient and so-called primitive culture could not only apprehend the concept of 'nothing' as a numerical value, but also, could understand it so well as to actually work with it. But I digress. The psychology (and politics) of denial is a whole nother thread.






Thanks for posting the link. It's a great site.






For the record - any diagrams would be long lost/gone.

...But in any event, a device is NOT required - it simply would help see the (fixed) progressions, cycles and relationships. ...I'm talking about a "visual aid" here, but the representation could be strictly arithmetic

Also, constructing a clock-calendar from the I Ching is not a matter of guesswork - it is just a matter of application. The key to doing so involves going back to the basics, in a literal way, before moving on to symbolic interpretation. For Western I Ching diviners, the main obstacle is conceptual - some are convinced that the I Ching is only symbolic, and that such a literal, physical representation would somehow threaten their preconceptions.

In fact, the I Ching is many things. It is claimed by Taoists as the bible of earth-based philosophy-religion, by Feng Shui practitioners as the sorcerors' bible, and by Confucianists as the government administrators' bible.

In China, the I Ching is recognized as a divination manual, a book of philosophy, a book of history, an ancient dictionary, an encyclopedia, a scientific treatise, and a mathematical model of the universe.





Chinese tradition, and the Chinese mind, are capable of accepting the I Ching as all of these things, and more.

It is only the provincial and culture-bound Western mind, with its need for dogmatic referents, that insists on choosing one approach as the "right" one, and on stipulating that the 'ancient human mind' was primitive, therefor savage, and unable to conceptualize, apprehend or understand complex knowledge.

imo, as I've stated earlier - the I Ching is a multi-purpose archive: a beautifully elegant system designed to survive this planet's and mans' cataclysms, whether geophysical or political.

The key survives - it is the binary system, and the images attached to the tetragrams.



.

You said:

the conceptually constipated Western mind

My response:

I don't think it's conceptually constipated, at all. In fact, at times it seems the opposite. Rather what you are seeing is evidence of what the ancient texts keep describing, repeatedly, cross-culturally. There's a SUPERnatural (divine) council in charge of this planet. It follows the "babylonian system", which marked the beginning of the divine council and the separation of people into individual nations with a hyper-natural hierarchal structure. It's the divine council that decides what goes and what stays, and they apply that decision at the top of the governmental levels. It's then realized in education, media and so on. This whole thing is an intricate dance. The idea that you might personally have some control over your little slice of it, is an illusion only supported by its current expendiency to the divine council.

I think if there's one council, the precedent suggests there's gotta be more. IMO - The interplay of conflicting 'divine' agendas is evident - most frequently described as 'good' and 'evil,' or 'God' and the 'devil.'

...But Taoists and and the I Ching for example, explain such polarity in a different way. Here, the focus is on the balance created by the interplay, and the goal is to seek 'harmony' between the forces. Also, the basic assumption is that the individual does indeed have power to influence their own 'field of action' - and hence, the responsibility to do so with awareness.


.

Would that be dialectic diarrhea? Or dogmatic diarrhea?



It's a funny idea. Diagnosis: conceptual constipation, dialectic diarrhea, dogmatic diarrhea; the dreaded CCDDDD Syndrome. Recommended treatment: brain enema.



...More on the I Ching later.
.