I am new to I Ching so it may be completely of the path.

The way I interperet 24 from the 5 element perspective. The trigrams of this hexagram are Earth above and Thunder below. This is mainly a Yin powered hexagram as Yang is still very weak at the bottom. As you say, it is one of the 12 tidal gua, signifying one of the Winter months. Winter is the time to be less active, time to use the reserve. It is also a reflection period. Reflection on the events and the self. Is also a time for patience and perseverance. If one can survive winter, Spring will come and rebirth and regeneration will take place

Thunder is a characteristic of Spring, it is sudden,noisy,powerful,active. It is movement. In humans it reminds me the shouting, assertive voice, very much like the general of an army giving orders to his soldiers to motivate and to give them the courage they need to move forward and attack the enemy. Thunder is also change in weather,as the wind picks up its strength and starts drifting the clouds it is then once can hear the thunders and normally they are followed by the rain.Once everything is finished the sky becomes clear and the sun is still there.

Earth is center. it represents the late summer, which is normally harvesting time. Earth is the mother of many myriad things just like its Yang partner Heaven. Earth is like a mother to the childern, sympathy, understanding,nourishment,pensiveness. It also transforms and transport things. The seed that is planted under the soil, has a bluprint to become a tree. Earth nourishes the seed, protects it from the cold of the Winter. It is when the Spring comes the seed starts pushing upwards with the yang energy that this season brings. It is the birth of the seed . In a way saying to the Earth, so much of pensiveness is not good for me anymore, I need to change and become what I am supposed to be.

So the Yang line at the initial line is this Yang energy. Its is favorable to change things, to make a new beginning. It is appropriate to use the reflections and the nourishment of self to initiate changes. It invites, the action and the movement, yet this is just the initial move,things need time to settle so caution is also recommended as thunder is a warning sign as well.

I think in Tao Teh Ching Chapter 16 ( translated by C.H.WU) is an appropriate to summarize this.
“Attain to utmost Emptiness.
Cling single-heartedly to interior peace.
While all things are stirring together,
I only contemplate the Return.”

So to summarize, my interpretation of “favorable to go somewhere” for this gua is initiate the change which you have been considering, yet be carfeull in taking the steps

Hope it helps
Togan

I don’t consider myself part of any crowd, but thank you. I am no expert whatsoever in this field of study, nor will I ever be, but I try to surround myself with the best possible sources I can afford. I also do not hesitate to ask true experts for information or opinions, if I think they can help me in my quest. But mainly it all comes to this: the progress you make, and the things you find, are almost solely decided by the sources you have at hand. I have dictionaries for oracle bone inscriptions and bronze inscriptions and I know how to use them. Since these are sources which are not often used in the study of characters found in the Yi (most researchers use more or less modern dictionaries) they are a major resource of new information to me. Most people do not have access to these or similar resources, and that is reflected in their findings.

But this could be my motto: “I’m not an expert. I look things up in dictionaries”.

Harmen.

About ‘harvest’ etc - no, not a polished ‘translation’, but not gibberish, either. Your average English speaker, I find, can understand the ‘harvest’ metaphor perfectly well (it helps that we use the same image), and it has more concrete specificity than ‘advantageous’.

I’m happy to study the Yi in its Confucian contexts as well as all the others - not happy to limit it to the Confucian tradition, however, just because it’s Chinese.

The 50 year rule of thumb sounds good, and interesting - thank you for the information. Is it really universally applicable to all cultures, though?

Surely, Hilary, you aren’t suggesting “harvest to have a place to go” is in any sense an adequate translation? Even in ancient times the graph li4 had several common meanings other than “harvest.” It is usual to translate good Chinese into good English. My old English teacher, Miss Birdwhistle, would not be very happy with “harvest to have a place to go,” I’m afraid. In what sense is such gibberish a translation? When you pin down the meaning of li4 here, you can only conclude the graph refers to something being vitally advantageous and beneficial, perhaps as rewarding as taking in a harvest.

For the record, I agree the Yi is a living document, subject to all the uses and needs of the present and the future. My point is that it also resides within a rich tradition. Harmen rails against “stiff Confucian doctrine,” but that is like condemning the Catholic Church in Europe root and branch. The Church has had its moments of dogmatic rigidity, but it has also inspired masterpieces of stunning artistic and intellectual brilliance. Similarly, to condemn fifteen centuries of Confucian culture so cavalierly is not a mark of much sophistication or learning. Very disappointing.

I am not against historical research, but I am against bad historical research. Let’s consider the problem of anachronism for a moment. Harmen is correct to say all Yi interpretation since the Zhou is (strictly speaking) anachronistic. Historians normally suspect any cultural artifact outside of the living memory of an event as being potentially anachronistic, distorted by memory or interest. Living memory is usually considered a generation (about 30 years) or slightly more, say no more than 50 years. In other words, if you travel in time 50 years before or after an event, you are no longer in the same cultural world as the event itself. This is a common heuristic or rule of thumb among historians.

What this means for the Yi is that one must point to evidence plus or minus 50 years from the compilation of the Yi (whenever that was) to be able to speak with any degree of certainty about the cultural world of the time. Everything else is speculation, increasingly suspect as we move further away from the time of composition. Unfortunately there isn’t much evidence we can confidently assign to within 50 years of the composition of the Yi – and what there is has been scoured over by modern scholars for years. In fact, the lack of contemporary sources is one of the great weaknesses of Steve Marshall’s book as history (there are others). But perhaps Harmen, in his search to explain the Zhouyi, has found sources no one else has considered. It will be very interesting to see if he is capable of analyzing historical evidence with any degree of rigor. So far I have seen no one outside of academia who can do it well, though many have tried. It takes years of training and experience with ancient sources to understand what one is dealing with. This is definitely not the sort of commitment one expects from the internet crowd, but I wish him well.

Dear Anonymous,

Since Zhou times onwards every interpretation is ‘anachronistic’. If interpretations weren’t anachronistic we would still be talking about conquering neighbouring countries and enslaving women. Every interpretation, be it in ancient China, modern China or elsewhere, is a document of its time. That “no one in ancient China was thinking about individuation or integraton” should not prevent us from doing just that. What is the point of using the Yi if we are only allowed to interpretate the book according to the stiff rules of the Confucian doctrine? As you say, “in a sense, any and all interpretations of this sort are equally true”. I have never heard Hilary say otherwise.

Harmen.

I don’t have a problem, personally, with being ‘anachronistic’ in my readings: this is the Classic of Change, and it’s very much alive. Would you require that it stop growing now, and become just a static ‘received tradition’? (It won’t, you know.)

I agree with you that ‘a person can benefit from having a destination or goal in mind’ is an excellent summary of the phrase. (To get clear in my own mind just how goal-oriented it is, I need to take the time to go over every occurrence in the text again…) However, this is not ‘just what it says’. It says ‘harvest to have place to go’. In theory, that might just as well mean being under orders to go somewhere, as having a goal of your own in mind.

Harmen is working his way closer to ‘what it says’ in a purely historical sense - stripping out anachronisms - and as far as I can make out (I do hope I am not misrepresenting him through lack of Dutch), he is not willing to rest content with the relatively vague, ‘destination or goal in mind’. Would you add ‘Thou shalt not indulge in historical research’ to ‘Thou shalt not indulge in original speculation’?

Please feel free to respond - and to give your name.

I think we can all agree that your psychological interpretation is completely anachronistic. No one in ancient China was thinking about individuation or integraton. In fact, the whole notion of psyche is pretty mirky in ancient cultures. Of course, nothing prevents you from inventing interpretations cut out of the whole cloth of ahistorical speculation, but it is very difficult to see the merits of one flight of fancy as opposed to another. In a sense, any and all interpretations of this sort are equally true.