Comments on: The lines that don’t change

By: Hilary

Hilary — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 09:13:54 +0000

Thank you!

By: Lanie

Lanie — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 00:15:39 +0000

Actually, and for what it’s worth, the reason I read this site and feel like I learn from it is because Hilary does NOT write with ANY sort of religious fervor, nor does she have her head in the lofty spiritual clouds. Happily, this site is well grounded in common sense and actual practice without being the least bit simplistic or “cookbook” in nature. (Which is difficult to do, and not often achieved as far as I can tell.)

By: Hilary

Hilary — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 23:35:11 +0000

Students of the Yi deserve to hear all sides of the issue, so that they can decide for themselves based on the merits of a particular idea, free from any pressure to conform.

Agreed. (Of course. Did anyone imagine otherwise?)

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 18:38:53 +0000

Disapproval of an idea or practice is one thing, bringing together the evidence to support a theory is another. By introducing new ideas or challenging assumptions we seek to open up a discussion of an issue, whereas disapproval seeks to close it off.

Let’s be clear on this subject: the reading of multiple lines is one theory and it is really an assumption that has been made by modern interpreters, which doesn’t take into consideration the difficulties many people have encountered in using this approach, nor does it recognize the evidence that points towards a different conclusion.

At times, some proponents of reading multiple lines seem to have found it quite vexing to have their view challenged, almost as though they perceived a threat. This comes rather close to the way in which religious fundamentalists behave when they regard with contempt anyone who disagrees with them. It is a reaction that does nothing to promote greater insight.

Our understanding is still evolving, so instead of creating an atmosphere that squelches diversity we can and should allow competing theories to compete. Students of the Yi deserve to hear all sides of the issue, so that they can decide for themselves based on the merits of a particular idea, free from any pressure to conform.