Talk:I Ching/Archive 2

message: What are "yoni" and "lingam" doing in an article about a cornerstone of Chinese culture? Last time I checked, these were Sanskrit words describing a slightly different (and more sexualized) view of divine polarities. For one thing, they're words for generative organs (or at the very least, associated with specific Hindu deities), rather than non-anthropomorphic concepts. Or is the Yijing more sexy and more Hindu than I thought? -- grant 17:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yoni and Lingam are "elementals" now?

message: For those interested, my primary reference is I Ching, The Classic Chinese Oracle Of Change by Rudolf Ritsema and Stephen Karcher of the Eranos I Ching Project, an astonishingly complete translation with loads of cross-reference material.  Published by Element Books, 1-85230-669-6 is the ISBN code.  -- Bignose
:Another reference could be the famous Wilhelm's translation. See some exerpts of his introduction (more details in French version). gbog 16:18, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference

message: 『』 is actually quotation marks for quoting somebody's saying, “”. Book title marks (what in English rendered as italicization or underlining) are 《》. Incidentally, chapter marks (what in English would be quotation marks) are 〈〉. -- Menchi 04:42 Feb 13, 2003 (UTC)
:Yes but these are used in Chinese text, to help distinguish between text itself and book's names. I'm not convinced that those marks are useful in our context and I propose to remove them.gbog 16:18, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Chinese [[Punctuation]] Marks for Book Title

message: Someone has made a redirect from Yijing (Pinyin) to I-Ching (Wade-Giles). At this stage of Chinese studies, redirects should clearly be going in the opposite direction.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Acmuller (talk • contribs) 07:12, 11 August 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: 210000 for I-Ching v. 11000 on Yijing on google. I-Ching still wins. Also, sign your name with ~~~~. --Jiang 07:24, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pinyin/Wade-Giles 

message: I've been adding tables that look like:
Previous: ||:||| Treading (履 lǚ)	I Ching	Next: :::||| Obstruction (否 pǐ)
to the first few hexagrams, to improve navigation.  What do people think about this?  Should the English names be included since the meanings of the hexagrams are disputed? Kevin Saff 16:34, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navigation Tables? 

message: The discussion about XOR-ing and recursion on this page and on all the hexagram pages does not make sense to me.  There's not enough explanation here to understand what you're learning by XOR-ing two hexagrams together to get a third, or why 27 appears to be special in this regard.   Also, I think the word 'recursion' doesn't mean what you think it means.  The word "spectrum" is also thrown around without explaining what it means in this context.
My suspicion about this stuff is that it was added by someone who has their own novel system of thought about this topic, but they haven't succeeded in explaining it and maybe it should be replaced to just a link to Chris Lofting's IChingPlus material (which is in the same odd style as the edits, so I wonder if it's that same writer: similar wide ranging use of the words "recursion", "spectrum", "quantum", "DNA").
I hesitate to take this stuff out myself because it may be that it is talking about something widely believed about I Ching and it just needs better explanation.  Cbogart2 12:45, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  
(0) because something does not make sense to you does not mean it is 'wrong'. The material is based on careful analysis of how the brain creates and communicates meaning through specialisations, where each specialisation creates its own language. (as such, the IC is a language but sourced in images that elicit qualities rather than the precision we use of letters to words to qualities etc) - IOW how can the I Ching still elicit 'meaning' when many Westerner's write it off as something 'mystical' etc and useless?
(1) the hexagrams of the I Ching are derived from applying recursion to a dichotomy (rather than a trichotomy or N-chotomy that are also possible). This is identifiable in the binary sequence of the I Ching where, using  0 - yin and 1 - yang, we have 64 hexagrams ordered from 000000 to 111111.
(2) this process of recursion is reflected in the human brain as it derives meaning or more so qualities usable to communicate meaning (the recursion is of the WHAT/WHERE dichotomy used in the brain).
(3) what we find in analysis of the brain's generation of meaning is that it appears to use the ONE set of qualities many times through the creation of specialisations (such as the I Ching). This elicits isomorphism of specialisations.
(4) what this does is allow for the ease in making analogies across specialisations and so use one specialisation as a source of analogy, or as a metaphor for, some other specialisation. (and so the I Ching can describe, is seeable 'in', any other specialisation since they are all metaphors for what the brain deals with - patterns of differentiating/integrating, XOR/AND etc)
(5) The dynamics involved are in PART/WHOLE processing where the PART is extracted from the WHOLE using dynamics associated with the properties of XOR - A/NOT-A, this, not that, etc. - we can experience this directly in sensory paradox processing .
(6) Taking this general XOR/AND dynamic and applying it to the hexagrams of the I Ching we find that EACH hexagram is describable by analogy to ALL of the others in that each contains all. (this reflects general brain dynamics in processing foreground/background, aspects of a whole  in that our brains have strongly adapted to vision and generalised that adaptation to information processing in general) - Note that this application of XOR/AND perspectives shows us an apparently undocumented property of recursion, not just the I Ching.
(7) The initial example given here of extracting 'parts' expressed through a whole is through deriving the '27-ness' of each hexagram where focusing on a particular hexagram and XOR-ing it with hexagram 27 will give you the qualities of 27 expressed by the hexagram under analysis. Many have 'played' with XOR-ing hexagrams etc but none have asked the right question a la 'what does it mean?'. Now we know where the 'answer' comes from understanding how the brain works in deriving meaning.
(8) The intent in the "Self-Referencing I Ching" is to include the list of all 63 analogies of each hexagram and so show how to use the I Ching to describe itself but as a set of UNIVERSALS (hexagrams, trigrams, dodecagrams, depends on what scale you want).
(9) Prior to modern work in neurosciences the descriptions of the I Ching etc were made by reference to local conditions; with the neuroscience work we can show the 'regular' network from which such 'small world networks' as the many I Ching interpretations/transation have arisen.
(10) Since you seemed to think there was only one example (27-ness) I will put up the summary listings (and so 64 entries per hexagram) for hexagram 01 - each of these entries will then need to be fleshed-out (as I have been doing but it takes time) but it will give you a better idea of what has been discovered. (and so make the point, we are dealing with a fundamental property of the I Ching due to the method of its derivation when we 'see' it in it 'natural' binary sequence. IOW this is all about the I Ching but material not covered before AFAIK)
(11) What has been done here is to consider the last 3000+ years of research of neurosciences, cognitive science, and psychology. When we go back and 'review' the traditional I Ching we find a lot that appears to have been missed or touched on vaguely due to lack of information. We now have the information and so can bring the IC from the 10th century BC into the 21st century AD.
-- 14:55, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

text: How should these points be expressed and referenced in this, the Hexagram (I Ching) and individual hexagram articles?  Some encyclopedic citation should be included.  — RDF talk 03:59, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  add a section to that particular page showing the self-referencing of yin/yang as we build a hexagram bottom to top. A diagram such as 
should do where we replace "A" with 'yang' and "~A" with yin. The core label is that of yang and differentiating, yin and integrating. Traditionally, each line is more 'refined' than the previous, we over from the general to the particular, raw to refined. This reflects the use of 'wave' dynamics in the creation of a sense of, a feeling of, meaning in the I Ching.
This XOR/AND dynamic of our neurology etc it discussed in the IDM material with the above particulars touched on in the page on getting meaning from frequencies, wavelengths, and amplitudes. (With refs)
The images built-up from the self-referencing of yin/yang represent generic qualities of wholeness, partness, static relatedness, dynamic relatedness. These are qualified through such synonyms to differentiate/integrate as 'expand' or 'contract' etc
The qualities associated with trigrams reflect what they represent generically:
heaven - wholeness through differentiation (expansive)
lake - static relatedness through differentiation (issues of sharing space with another/others)
fire - partness (boundary, a cut) through differentiation
thunder - dynamic relatedness through differentiation (issues of sharing time with another/others)
wind - dynamic relatedness through integration
water - partness through integration
mountain - static relatedness through integration
earth - wholeness through integration (contractive)
Cognitive analysis of the many texts on trigrams etc brings out the generic qualities that we all share as neuron-dependent life forms and we can label these with qualities more 'felt' - 
wholeness - blending
partness - bounding
static relationships - bonding
dynamic relationships - binding
The self-referencing allows you to interpret hexagrams:
(a) as 6 lines
(b) as 3 digrams
(c) as 2 trigrams
(d) as a hexagram (whole image irreducible)
Hyperbolic development allows you to 'jump' from 8 trigrams to 64 hexagrams where we use the 8 trigrams as sources of analogy to describe finer details in each (and so 'stay in the yin/yang box'). Thus we jump from 8 to 64 rather than just add a dichotomy per level (reflects moving from 2^N to N^2 - in the long run, very energy conserving). When we add 'changing lines' we are in fact moving to the level of 64^2 = 4096 'meanings'; symbolically it is easier to work with 64 changing line symbols (and so each line position has 4 possible states) than list out 2^12 forms (4096 dodecagrams, 12-line symbols).
Each hexagram as such 'contains' 64 dodecagrams, as each trigram 'contains' 8 hexagrams - these simpler symbols are compressions of the meaning at the level of 4096 dodecagrams. This is of course way too complex to deal with at the level of the 'everyday' so 64 hexagrams are enough (or even just 8 trigrams but that can get a bit 'cumbersome' at times)
Neuroscience refs to the oscillations, WHAT/WHERE, etc etc are easy to come by (see the IDM references) and so a corpus can be set up of supporting material.
Of particular 'interest' is the isomorphism to human emotions in that they can be categorised in the same way through recursion of fight/flight dichotomy. This gives us eight 'vague' descriptions of proto emotions (the descriptions taken from the work of Plutchik) that we find 'map' to the trigrams:
heaven - anger
lake - sex (sexual love)
fire - acceptance
thunder - surprise
wind - anticipation
water - rejection
mountain - grief
earth - fear
Move to the hexagrams and these are 'refined' in expression, heaven gets into issues of self-devotion, self-respect, competitiveness etc etc (we try to take over the context) as earth gets into issues of devotion-to-others, cooperativeness etc (fear is translated into blending into the context, using the context to protect).
Through the blending, bonding, bounding, binding qualities there is isomorphism to the qualities associated with the types of numbers we use in Mathematics:
blending - whole numbers
bounding - rationals (parts)
bonding - irrationals (sum parts, harmonic series, share space with others (pi, e etc))
binding - imaginary (share time, cyclic, morphic change etc)
The isomorphism possible is due to all of the 'specialisations' having the ONE root - the qualities derived from the neurology as it processes differentiating/integrating. It is this one root that allows us to use Mathematics or the I Ching to describe some other specialist perspective ;-)
--CJL 12:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Cool! I say "Add away!" :-)  — RDF talk 16:21, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  good point but the material specifically for the IC is derived from a property of recursion and that is not original - just not noticed before ;-) - IOW the material comes out of an existing, identified methodology (as I have referenced in the wikipedia definition of recursion). 
If I was Einstein and came up with something like:
E = MC^2
are you saying that this would be forbidden on wikipedia due to it being 'original' work? - Einstein could give a LOT of references to the physics of his times supporting his equation, as I can to supporting the derivation of meaning and specialisations from work in neurosciences. That said, I am not promoting IDM here, and the only reference to ICPlus is in an external link that is thus the same form of reference as all of the other links supplied in the main IC page.
If I work on Mathematics and come up with 1 + 1 = 2, is the assertion of that equation 'original work'? I dont think so - if the methodology is known then any derivations from that methodology reflect aspects of that methodology - PRIOR to their discovery the aspects still existed, they were just not identified, labelled, by us.
In the particular XOR dynamics I am identifying, these are dynamics 'built in' to the recursion process but have not been identified as such until now... so you are saying that a fundamental property of the methodology in deriving hexagrams is to be ignored/rejected due to no one else explicitly coming up with it in the past? What we are dealing with is 'Science' as such and so can be checked for validity - we are not dealing with some 'imagined' notion of mine where that CAN be an issue re including it in Wikipedia etc due to its possible ideosyncratic nature - but what we are covering in the XOR material is a property of a general methodology, one used by all 'brains' as such and so outside of my personal perspectives (brain oscillations across WHAT/WHERE etc is well researched - see the IDM references ;-))
--CJL 03:26, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

text: The policy of "no original research" still applies.  My "add away" comment assumed this would not be an issue.  As I noted above, just site primary or secondary sources that are noteworthy and verifyable.  It's a simple and reasonable requirement for an encyclopedia, as opposed to a journal on innovative practice and/or "original research."  — RDF talk 03:35, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-Referencing I Ching 

message: I'm surprised that Wikipedia seems to say nothing about the Tài Xuán Jīng (太玄經), sometimes known as "Alternate" I Ching or Elemental Changes, which is a sort of sequel to Yì Jīng itself.  Basically, Tài Xuán Jīng uses a ternary system instead of binary: instead of having just unbroken or broken horizontal lines, there are doubly broken ones; from what I understand, whereas Yì Jīng uses unbroken (⚊) for heaven (yang) and broken (⚋) for earth (yin), Tài Xuán Jīng uses unbroken (⚊) for heaven, once broken (⚋) for human and doubly broken (𝌀) for earth.  This gives rise to 9 digrams and 81 tetragrams.  Of course, the Tài Xuán Jīng is not nearly as famous as Yì Jīng, but Unicode seems to have thought it important enough to include all 81 Tài Xuán Jīng tetragrams in plan 1 (Tetragram Symbols, Tai Xuan Jing). --Gro-Tsen 23:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tai Xuan Jing ("Alternate" I Ching) 

message: I've gone through making minor revisions to emphasize the difference between the traditional story behind the Yi Jing's origins and the views of modern scholars, and I added some of the scholarship regarding the oracle bones and early bronzes. All the changes are based on this summary:
Shaughnessy, Edward L. (1993). “I ching 易經 (Chou I 周易)”, pp.216-228 in Loewe, Michael (ed.). Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, (Early China Special Monograph Series No. 2), Society for the Study of Early China, and the Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, . Dragonbones 08:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, since when did you provided a specific scholarly references for that part. Please do show your sources that how appropriate is it, since you're the one who try to make this contributions, not me. I had been heard alots of attribution dating between Warring States to Western Han for Shiyi, but not the Eastern Han. I'm sorry, but please do not remake history through your own Original research, furthermore if your references are not good enough (notes that its state modern scholars under your edits) I am afraid I will still have to reverse your reverts. 18:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you read the talk section above? "All the changes are based on this summary: Shaughnessy, Edward L. (1993). “I ching 易經 (Chou I 周易)”, pp.216-228 in Loewe, Michael (ed.). Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, (Early China Special Monograph Series No. 2), Society for the Study of Early China, and the Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, . Dragonbones 08:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, as long as you did not gives the scholarly references for how would the attribution dating from the Eastern Han is the most appropriate, I will still have to reverse your reverts. This is what you state under your edits (notes that its state modern scholars under your edits), and this is how your specific evidence had to be shown, if not the logic would be flawed. Cited reference of your own contributions should take precedence over personal opinion or, in this case, your lack of information. I just don't see why can't we changed the edits to Warring States to Western Han by the way 02:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Hi, sorry we seem to have gotten off on the wrong foot! I'm of course happy to provide more specific references so that all the editors can better decide, through consensus, whether or not to keep pieces of information in the article. My source, Shaughnessy, is a well-known western scholar, with specialties including the Yi Jing (which was his Ph.D. dissertation topic) as well as early chronology. In the above-mentioned text, on p. 221, he writes: "Still, there  can be no question that the commentaries [on the I ching] were not produced by Confucius. Although each one remains to be dated independently, in general it would seem that they attained their present form in the mid-third to the early second century B.C., with the probable exception of the Hsü kua which would seem to date from the Later Han period. ".  Note that when speaking of multiple scholars (the ones giving your time frame for the commentaries in general, and the one I cite giving the same time frame plus a slightly later date for, in this case, one of the commentary sections), it seems to be correct English to say that scholars variously..., as this allows for the diversity of scholarly opinion. I have not attempted to claim that multiple scholars think the entire thing was Eastern Han. BTW, in the newest edit I have made the reference in more detail so as to clarify which portion may be Eastern Han; this gives more weight to your position. I hope this is satisfactory to all. Cheers!Dragonbones 06:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but we're talking about Shiyi, not Yijing, I don't see the dating from the Eastern Han is the most appropriate. I had seen alots of modern scholars, such as Ma Huanjun, Guo Yi， Feng Youlan, Li Jingchi, etc, who all dated in between Warring States to Western Han for Shiyi. Even the most modernist scholar like Li Jingchi dated it between Zhaodi and Xuandi. Those are all top figures in philology in the PRC for confucius classics btw. And could interpret classic textual analysis more than the western scholars. So almost all scholars supported my opinion, I have not attempted to claim that multiple scholars think the entire thing was Eastern Han, because there's just none. Note that when speaking of multiple scholars as this allows for the diversity of scholarly opinion, I think we should just changed it to Western Han.  14:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a bit more on modern scholarship 

message: Although I can't pose as an authority on the I Ching, I have kept it by my bedside for years and find your article in every way worthy of Wikipedia.
A section of my website presents the “I Ching” for a new audience. For that reason, I am submitting this section for your consideration as a proposed link, www.benandverse.com/writings/index.htm.
My version of the “I Ching” is distinctive in that it  “translates” the “I Ching” into jingles with a light touch. It attempts, thereby, to transmit a small quantity of the wisdom found in the "image" section of each of the 64 chapters.
The subject of divination is not discussed.
I hope this effort will cause no offense to those who rightly revere the insights of the priceless original. (I have attempted a similar “translation” of the wisdom of “Poor Richard’s Almanac” on the same website.)
The work on “I Ching” is from a section I have just added to my website, a literary miscellany, called “Phony Pearls of Fictitious Wisdom”. 
My original website, “Ben and Verse,” is devoted to Ben Franklin. It received the A+ award from the www.englishwebteacher.com (together with a link from the Franklin Institute).
205.188.116.196 14:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I Chingalings 

message: lakitu 09:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  bad [[Shi Yi]] link 

message: I've removed the following addition by Karen Solvig from the section "Chart of trigrams":
In the combination of the odd (Yang) values of Heaven and the odd (Yin) values of Earth given as from 1 to 10, together with the odd and even values of the Ho Tu produce a different sequence of trigrams, and thus hexagrams, to those given above. If the values of 1 and 6 (the 2 numbers given as North in the Ho Tu) are placed into the 'Original Trigrams' of Ch'ien and K'un and are multiplied in accordance with their 3 unbroken and broken lines, then Heaven 1 has a value of 6, and Earth 6 has a value of 36 (1 + 2 + 3 = 6 and 6 + 12 + 18 = 36) that fit together to produce a value for all the other 6 trigrams that their combination of lines produce. Thereby all values in Ho Tu are multiples of x 6 (and 6 is number of the great dark). The sequence obtained through the instructions given in 'The Material' of Wilhelm's Edition in its middle book 2, thus appears as Ch'ien, Sun, Li, Tui, Ken, K'an, Chen, and K'un. In the directions of the Ho Tu this sequence alternates, as 2 to 7 sees K'un leading instead of Ch'ien, in this way each of the directions forms a symmetrically placed set of light and dark opposite values. The production of the hexagrams produces a set of values if the same method of placing the values of Heaven and Earth into them in accordance to their amount of lines, as Heaven 1 or Ch'ien has 6 unbroken lines of 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 = 21, and Earth 6 or K'un is 6 + 12 + 18 + 24 + 30 + 36 = 126, so all the hexagrams have a value of x 7, which fit together in the same directions of the Ho Tu. This simple set of multipllications leads anyone to some very interesting numbers, and not only because all the values are x 6 and x 7 (a movement is accomplished in 6 and 7 stages).
Perhaps other editors could comment on whether this material is appropriate to this article.  To my mind, it does not contribute to the reader's general understanding of the I Ching.  It is actually an interpretation of the Ho Tu.  It is extremely long and technical, inapproprately referenced and seems to be mostly original research.  I have attempted to communicate with the writer, explaining Wikipedia norms about citations and sources, but she has not taken any action to improve her posts to this and the Lo Shu Square article.  Overall, this writing does not meet Wikipedia standards, IMO and the writer, frustratingly, fails to respond to the suggestions of others.  Comments?  Sunray 18:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Material removed from article

message: The following text has been removed from the Structure section pending discussion:
But when the workings of the River Maps are revealed it is found that the Ho Tu (Yellow River) and Lo Shu (Lo River) work together, and so, the workings of the I Ching are far more ancient than the historical figure of King Wen, going back to Fu Hsi who is a mythical figure of an estimated 3500 BC., or to the mythical Yellow Emperors of 2000 BC (as these older mythical characters are said in various texts to have invented the Ho Tu, and in some texts the Lo Shu, or the alternations of the days and nights) (see Wilhelm, 1967: bk2 'The Materials'). The workings of the River Maps are revealed when they are combined with the values of Heaven and Earth that are stated in the I Ching as the 'Original Trigrams' (father and mother) — Heaven has all light or unbroken lines and corresponds to odd numbers 1,3,5,7,9, and Earth has all broken lines and corresponds to even numbers 2,4,6,8,10. The father and mother produce the values of the other six Trigrams which are called "The Children." When the values of Heaven and Earth are placed into "The River Maps" the right sequences of all eight trigrams appears. The values of the trigrams form an 8 x 8 square in each of the directions or elements, so the Ho Tu produces four squares that are symetrical and add together as opposite light and dark Hexagrams. The adding together of the values then produces a fifth inner square. which corresponds with the values of 5 and 10 in the "Ho Tu. The workings of "The River Maps" together with the values of Heaven and Earth gives all the mathematical workings of "The Changes" (see Lo Shu Square).
Once again, I would like other editors to comment on whether this is appropriate to an encyclopedia article on the I Ching. It is my view that it is overly long, tendentious, inappropriately referenced, and not something that a general reader needs to know about the I Ching.  However, perhaps I'm missing something.  What do others think? Sunray 19:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not into playing games either.  I am a long-time editor of Wikipedia and am very familiar with editing policies and guidelines, as I am with the I Ching.  Let's let other editors comment on what I have said above.  If no one else comments, then we will have to sort it out between us.  I would ask you to please show that you have understood what I am saying before you proceed further.  One thing that I did not mention above has to do with article size.  This article is fairly complete and stable.  It is also at the upper limit of article size.  Therefore, lengthy additions should not be occuring.  There are ways of dealing with this, but first, I would like to hear comments from other editors. Please be patient. Sunray 20:40, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Perhaps instead of withdrawing those paragraphs entirely, we could start a new sub-article based on that content — possible title Ho Tu Map.  Sunray 22:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional material removed from article

message: I didn't see this in the article; perhaps the ideas about its original use and intent are so well-known that no comment is needed. Or perhaps it would be all speculation, although given the recent archeologic finds described, of which I was not aware, perhaps it's no longer uncertain. In any event, although it's usually referred to as a book of divination, a tool for fortune-telling, I would think this to be a later development, much like the same usage of the western bible. The bible got its start as sort of a description of a group of people and their place in the world. While the I Ching doesn't seem to have much if any history in it, what seems to fit best in my extremely humble opinion is an encyclopedia - that is, an effort to decribe the physical world of the time. I'd be most interested to hear what others think of this idea, and what other ideas are out there. --Dan 17:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The book has always been a book for divination and study as its main content which has never changed is the hexagrams, the text that goes with the hexagrams has changed with the culture and time, but the true meaning of the hexgrams is objective and derived from the structure of the hexgrams in accord with the principles of Bagua. --Nad 20:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The text of the images (each hexagram as a taken as a whole) were done first which essentially told one what their situation was and where it was heading etc, but could not yield any advice on what course of action should be taken and where those decisions may lead. This was resolved by King Wen and his son who added the text for the meanings of changes in each of the individual lines in each hexagram. --Nad 20:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What was the book for, originally? 

message: I described above jingles based on the I Ching, which I called "Chingalings" (that I have now arranged by subject). Please feel free to quote them at any length for commercial or other purposes. I have similarly released for public use everything else on the website -- www.benandverse.com (via what is called the "Creative Commons" program). 209.244.187.124 20:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Freed from Copyright Restrictions 

message: Substituted at 20:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment