Chris Lofting's System

pocossin · Jun 4, 2011

http://www.emotionaliching.com/

Casting a Hexagram

There are four possibilities for a line of a hexagram:

1. unchanging yang
2. unchanging yin
3. changing yang
4. changing yin

In Lofting's system, these four possibilites for each of the six lines of a hexagram ( 4 X 6 = 24) are identified by working through a sorting structure based on his idea of the meaning of the lines. A hexagram has this pattern:

self
1.facts/values
2.actual/potential
3. proactive/reactive

surroundings (other)
4. facts/values
5. actual/potential
6. proactive/reactive

That is, the lines of the lower trigram relate to the self, the lines of the upper trigram to the surroundings. And as the meaning of a line may be certain or uncertain, there are four possibilites for each line. For line 1, which concerns facts/values of the self:

1. I am certain that the situation is more about facts: young yang.
2. I am certain that the situation is more about values: young yin.
3. I am now uncertain that the situation is more about facts: old yang.
4. I am now uncertain that the situation is more about values: old yin.

Consider the situation, choose one of these descriptions, and you determined a line. The procedures is the same for the other lines.

Interpreting a Casting

Lofting's use of hexagrams as given in his FAQ is conventional.

http://www.emotionaliching.com/faq.html

The query "Why do I feel so bad?" was asked by a family member who had become dependent on another for transportation. The casting gave 47 unchanging. Hexagram 47 has the meaning "Confining, Enforced Waiting, Set-Down Roots". On receiving the hexagram the querent acknowledged feeling trapped, and this acknowledgement resolved the issue. Lofting gives no details on how the querent worked through the sorting structure to arrive at 47, but we can reconstruct the choices made.

Code:

▄▄  ▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄▄ 
▄▄▄▄▄▄ 
▄▄  ▄▄
▄▄▄▄▄▄ 
▄▄  ▄▄

1. I am feeling that the situation is more about values (issues of 'ought'): young yin.
2. I am feeling that the Situation is, time-wise, about what was/is/will be: young yang.
3. I am feeling that, in some way, I am being Reactive (responding): young yin.
4. The surroundings are more about facts: young yang.
5. The surroundings are about what was/is/will be: young yang.
6. The surroundings are being Reactive (responding): young yin.

Sparhawk · Jun 4, 2011

Thanks Tom.

arabella · Jun 4, 2011

Please permit me a few perhaps inane questions, but I'm trying to visualise this.

So it works well if the question is about one's own feelings because it is possible to answer all of the six questions more fully? Is the assumption here then that all depends on our knowing and feeling? All questions in which we have no definite and feeling nor concept would create the same answer? Isn't our assumption also that Yi fills in these quasi-areas? Does this do away with casting?

pocossin · Jun 4, 2011

Arabella, your questions aren't ever inane. I was trying to make Lofting's system clear. No one seems to have done that, and Chris was incapable of doing it for himself. I do not claim that his system is useful. One example lacking essential details isn't enough to say that it works. Chris's system was recommended to Hilary in the Kitchen, and that led me to attempt a summary in the hope that those who know and recommend it would contribute examples and correct my errors, if any.

sooo · Jun 4, 2011

arabella said:
Please permit me a few perhaps inane questions, but I'm trying to visualise this.

So it works well if the question is about one's own feelings because it is possible to answer all of the six questions more fully? Is the assumption here then that all depends on our knowing and feeling? All questions in which we have no definite and feeling nor concept would create the same answer? Isn't our assumption also that Yi fills in these quasi-areas? Does this do away with casting?

You ask great questions.

As I interpret, Chris' emphasis was not focused on the oracle factor, though it was hard getting him to just come out and say there's nothing going on in that way. Everything important related to what the receiver's brain and neuro-system saw, felt and responded to, with whatever hexagram and line happened to come up. To Chris, again as I interpret his words, we need to get beyond 10th century B.C. thinking, which includes belief in magic and oracles. The ongoing arguments with him revolved around "but what about the best fit?" scenario. I don't think Chris believed in a best fit hexagram, but that they all applied all the time, that key factors are hardwired into us, and our brain searches and seizes the meaning it needs from random generation.

Forgive me, Chris, if I botched that up, but its my interpretation.

bamboo · Jun 5, 2011

the way you describe Chris' system, Bruce, sounds a lot like what jack balkin says in his book material. always a random hexagram and dependent upon how we resonate/seize meaning with/from the answer. "the real oracle always lies within" jb

I will never really know if I agree or disagree with CL because it still doesnt make sense in spite of Tom's generous attempt here. but if Balkin is to be believed, then if someone asked "what can I expect from the Party I am going to ? " and received 55.5, it should be no more or less inviting than 29.6....although those readings would both affect me in different ways about attending the party, and thus affect my experience. makes me question the validity of ever using an oracle at all!

but i guess in Chris's method, one does not , or need not, cast the coins at all? (Back to arabella's question.) what's the point then? you may as well just select for the answer you want, because setting your mind in that direction will bring about the result you are wanting. whereas consulting the oracle could bring in all kinds of doubt.

i am probably not making sense, but I do know what I mean :blush:

rodaki · Jun 5, 2011

bamboo said:
i am probably not making sense, but I do know what I mean

not alone there bamboo, often feel like that myself :blush:

bamboo said:
I will never really know if I agree or disagree with CL because it still doesnt make sense in spite of Tom's generous attempt here. but if Balkin is to be believed, then if someone asked "what can I expect from the Party I am going to ? " and received 55.5, it should be no more or less inviting than 29.6....although those readings would both affect me in different ways about attending the party, and thus affect my experience. makes me question the validity of ever using an oracle at all!

regarding the highlighted above, saying that there are no negative or positive readings, means to me exactly this, that both 55.5 and 29.6 could be equally inviting (btw, I've had 55.5 as my day reading on the day I had an accident to my back trying to carry a box filled with books -not a very auspicious line for me at that time

)
. . I have often read here that readings are most useful when they open a space for self-reflection instead of giving concrete or factual info (not that that doesn't often happen!) and I like it as an approach . . It's like saying that our readings draw their validity more from the way that affect us rather than their objective reality . . and that's part of what makes them magic in my eyes . .

As far as I have understood Chris' approach to obtaining an answer it doesn't seem to me all that different from any other looking-at-signs system, its main -and big- difference being that where other systems search for external or random signs, Chris was looking for internal, rational ones. So where we aim to unleash our intuition in divination, he was aiming towards untangling internal thoughts and emotions. In that way, I think his approach goes against the grain of divination because it doesn't try to bypass or trick the ego in any way, and runs the risk of never moving beyond it, so I don't know how useful it could be . . . but I think that we unwittingly use a method analogous to his -or at least, I do- in interpreting a 'random' answer everytime the 'magic' doesn't happen or the meaning doesn't jump out of the paper and we go into exploring more self-reflective ways of opening a space for a reading's meaning -sort of like the reconstruction shown to us by Tom at the end of his post, only not that rigidly structured . .

making any sense??

anemos · Jun 5, 2011

bamboo said:
but i guess in Chris's method, one does not , or need not, cast the coins at all? (Back to arabella's question.) what's the point then? you may as well just select for the answer you want, because setting your mind in that direction will bring about the result you are wanting. whereas consulting the oracle could bring in all kinds of doubt.

i am probably not making sense, but I do know what I mean

What you say/ask , makes sense. Arabella's question too.

Chris's method , the way I see it (and i haven't study it thoroughly) requires a little more time to reflect on the question/situation and maybe create a matrix with 6 more "meaningful" dots to drawn the lines.

I use it today for a matter I have and still contemplate a lot about it with the help of different tools ( oracles and no oracles) so maybe I gave the right answers to form my reading which made sense and was a bit affirmative re the situation, yet I have a question mark in my mind if I constructed the right hexs. How much I have biased the reading or not, dunno.

on the other hand , "what about the best fit ?" as Bruce said ?

when It about feelings etc, I'll never be 100% sure that in a reading I read what was meant to be told. But there are those times/reading that Yi's answer is so literal that there is not much space for doubt.

How I can discard the synchronicity/magic /call it anyname when I ask where my camera's cord is and receive "under the bed" ? or when I asked feeling a bit worried for the disappearance of one and they affirmed my Yi reading in the most literal way ? Dunno !

I don't discard Chris' method and it makes sense what he says about brains functions and I do believe that in any given situation all the 64 hex could apply one way or another , yet "what about the best fit?"

I wonder if we could create a study group here and help each other to understand his method. I have heard many people here saying "I don't understand it" I found his approach very though provoking and I'm interest on exploring it in more depth.

Tom, since you brought this here, if this proposal doesn't create a conflict or messes what is been done in the Kitchen, could you or Luis create such a study group , if others are interest too ?

sooo · Jun 5, 2011

Though I never was interested enough to delve into Chris' in-depth binary calculus, he did succeed in causing me to look at and question a number of factors.

In his beginning on this forum, he used the word EXAGGERATE (caps intended) a great deal, when referring to hex and line texts. I saw the truth and reason for this after he pointed it out. The images and reactions need to be considerable, in order to find our specific meaning within. But there is also the likeliness of overreacting, possibly over-thinking. To find the "local meaning", one needed big images and consequences.

Brad put it in different terms, such as (paraphrasing somewhat): 1/64th of everything is a pretty big piece of pie.

arabella · Jun 5, 2011

sooo said:
Though I never was interested enough to delve into Chris' in-depth binary calculus, he did succeed in causing me to look at and question a number of factors.

In his beginning on this forum, he used the word EXAGGERATE (caps intended) a great deal, when referring to hex and line texts. I saw the truth and reason for this after he pointed it out. The images and reactions need to be considerable, in order to find our specific meaning within. But there is also the likeliness of overreacting, possibly over-thinking. To find the "local meaning", one needed big images and consequences.

Brad put it in different terms, such as (paraphrasing somewhat): 1/64th of everything is a pretty big piece of pie.

To quote Bill Murray, "That's the fact, Jack."

sooo · Jun 5, 2011

He also increased the degree to which I can objectively see my own emotionalism and attachments in the answers Yi gives. An emphasis on emotion has validity, to get to the heart of the reason for someone's question.

pocossin · Jun 5, 2011

anemos said:
I wonder if we could create a study group here and help each other to understand his method. I have heard many people here saying "I don't understand it" I found his approach very though provoking and I'm interest on exploring it in more depth.

Tom, since you brought this here, if this proposal doesn't create a conflict or messes what is been done in the Kitchen, could you or Luis create such a study group , if others are interest too ?

Maria, I shouldn't lead a study group because, except for the very few webpage I have worked through, I do not understand Chris's more abstruse ideas and would be unable to participate. Then too, further discussion could be posted to this thread.

Sources

his books
his posts to Clarity
the IChingPlus Yahoo group
the Emotional I Ching Forum (no longer accessible)
his students (?)

Are there examples of divination by Chris's method anywhere?

anemos · Jun 5, 2011

sooo said:
In his beginning on this forum, he used the word EXAGGERATE (caps intended) a great deal, when referring to hex and line texts. I saw the truth and reason for this after he pointed it out. The images and reactions need to be considerable, in order to find our specific meaning within. But there is also the likeliness of overreacting, possibly over-thinking. To find the "local meaning", one needed big images and consequences.

Brad put it in different terms, such as (paraphrasing somewhat): 1/64th of everything is a pretty big piece of pie.

thanks for sharing that but i'm not familiar with his earlier posts here and couldn't trace them. Did he meant that the Big Images of hex and lines have their pros and cons so his method in a way eliminates the cons ? Thinking of hex 16 where big images can inspire but also delude us. Did he meant that when we throw a question to Yi and cast the coins we participate in a "passive" way but on the other hand constructing our answer we incorporate ourselves in the mapping of the situation ?

the question we pose is of great importance , if not the most important part of our exchange with the oracle and its good to be aware from where the question comes from or were are we coming from and we become more "receptive" to a given answer yet , while I was using that method , the feeling of blocking the unexpected was very intense.

anemos · Jun 5, 2011

Thanks Tom, I do understand

I saw too that the link to the forum doesn't work.
I'll see what I can get from here http://www.emotionaliching.com/ShortEmotionalIChing.pdf

anemos · Jun 5, 2011

pocossin said:
his students (?)

Are there examples of divination by Chris's method anywhere?

that would be great to know , just to form an opinion.

pocossin · Jun 5, 2011

anemos said:
I'll see what I can get from here http://www.emotionaliching.com/ShortEmotionalIChing.pdf

I made a quick scan and found only the "Why do I feel so bad?" example given above.

sooo · Jun 5, 2011

anemos said:
thanks for sharing that but i'm not familiar with his earlier posts here and couldn't trace them. Did he meant that the Big Images of hex and lines have their pros and cons so his method in a way eliminates the cons ? Thinking of hex 16 where big images can inspire but also delude us. Did he meant that when we throw a question to Yi and cast the coins we participate in a "passive" way but on the other hand constructing our answer we incorporate ourselves in the mapping of the situation ?

the question we pose is of great importance , if not the most important part of our exchange with the oracle and its good to be aware from where the question comes from or were are we coming from and we become more "receptive" to a given answer yet , while I was using that method , the feeling of blocking the unexpected was very intense.

Positive and negative, dramatic and large. There are, for example: kings cutting off heads, sagging ridgepoles, spokes popping out of wheels, overbearing dragons, carts full of devils and corpses, calamity and disaster, injured body parts, lawsuits and punishments; all dramatic images. And big poetry too. Big impressions, which create big reactions, which set in motion the process. In regard to the small, the elegant and simple, equal time and space is given... just have to look for it longer because it's subtle and requires self reflection. The, sometimes called, yin, doesn't crow like a rooster, but her silence is just as loud.

russell · Jun 6, 2011

Should I join this discussion?

30:1,5,6 — 31

Even though the footprints run crisscross, here goes . . . .

I hate to put Chris or anyone else down, but there is a dark side to this tao. In this case, I think one must consider the messenger along with the message. As I see it, the EIC method itself is an introspective plum blossom method; one looks within and chooses a hexagram based on the answers to questions about one’s feelings and the situation. Well and good; if it works for you, use it. But Chris accompanied this fairly simple method with a mass of unintelligible obfuscation (case in point: posting a scan of a page from an advanced textbook to “explain” relativity) that says more about him than his method or the I Ching. When it came right down to it, he couldn’t explain his own ideas; he hijacked every thread he could to trumpet them whether they were relevant or not; and, the part that gets me the most, he continually promoted his own method to the exclusion of all others, as if his superior ideas were intended to sweep away everything known about the I Ching for the last 3000 years. These are not the actions of an enlightened person.

Before embarking on a quest to understand the depths of the EIC, I would ask myself if it is likely to be of any real use. Having said that, to each his or her own . . . .

—Russell

pocossin · Jun 6, 2011

Russell, welcome to the discussion. I too was turned off by Lofting's conduct but can now separate the message from of the messenger. I would say he was the victim of an obsessive vision of a beautiful pattern and found it incommunicable. The attractive aspects of his personality did not come to the front in Internet forums. He had a background in music, was an aviation photographer, and more of an artist than a communicator.

http://www.myaviation.net/search/search.php?uid=16327

A person who knew him told me he was the most intelligent man he ever met. So, yes, Chris had a dark side, but it was mostly turned toward us. Behind his Internet persona was a human being. The one example of divination by his system that I have been able to find is most poignant. It is apparently about his wife and daughter visiting him in a hospice. "Two family members are in a hospice looking after another near-death family member. . . ."

sooo · Jun 6, 2011

Never knew he was an aviation photographer. Knew he was a drummer. Having worked with many drummers, I'd best Chris was pretty freakin' amazing, if he played like he thought. I remember one of his admonitions was to "pick up the beat!"

rodaki · Jun 6, 2011

russell said:
These are not the actions of an enlightened person.

—Russell

maybe others here have met these 'enlightened persons' and have a standard I cannot share . . maybe Lofting was not a saint but I believe he was absolutely genuine and original in what he was doing, both in its weaknesses and its 'genius' . . isn't that what the dao is about?

Maybe he wasn't easy to follow but I have been astonished by the warmth and sweetness some of his posts exuded . . I knew at those times that I could see the man behind the persona and that was enough to look at his other posts thru different eyes . . and I agree with what Bruce says, he must have been a great spontaneous musician

bamboo · Jun 6, 2011

pocossin said:
.

I would say he was the victim of an obsessive vision of a beautiful pattern and found it incommunicable.

i think you are correct. :bows:

Sparhawk · Jun 6, 2011

sooo said:
Never knew he was an aviation photographer. Knew he was a drummer. Having worked with many drummers, I'd best Chris was pretty freakin' amazing, if he played like he thought. I remember one of his admonitions was to "pick up the beat!"

Indeed he was, plus he comes from a family of singers and his dad was a renowned World War II RAF pilot, Pat Lofting. I would say his passion for planes comes from his dad. Also, back in 2003, The New Yorker published a very nice profile of his mom, Gery Scott. I just printed a PDF of it to share here.

arabella · Jun 6, 2011

I think I got left at the curb about ten miles back. Is there an overview of this person?

Sparhawk · Jun 6, 2011

arabella said:
I think I got left at the curb about ten miles back. Is there an overview of this person?

Not sure what you mean for an "overview"... As for contributions to Clarity, the man wrote extensively, both attacking traditional views of the Yijing and defending his own. Search for "Chris", "Lofting", "elvis", "lightofdarkness".

pocossin · Jun 6, 2011

arabella said:
I think I got left at the curb about ten miles back. Is there an overview of this person?

"Human nature is a mixture of good and evil." -- Yang Xiong. Russell is right that he was often a disruptive and antagonizing influence. But that's in the past, and his ideas -- insofar as I have been able to decipher them -- have value.

arabella · Jun 6, 2011

sparhawk said:
Not sure what you mean for an "overview"... As for contributions to Clarity, the man wrote extensively, both attacking traditional views of the Yijing and defending his own. Search for "Chris", "Lofting", "elvis", "lightofdarkness".

I thought if he was well-known there may be a description somewhere of his background, a brief biography or summary of his involvement with the iChing. I don't know the name particularly, although I would guess that I've seen loads of his entries here on Clarity. I've just never associated his name with any special brand of interpretation [even if I've undoubtedly seen his comments] since nothing about someone called "Chris" has stood out as different on the whole.

sooo · Jun 6, 2011

I don't think there was anything brief about Chris, nor can he be easily profiled. A very controversial fellow with controversial views. I personally enjoyed, like a kid at a big league baseball game, his debates with Harmen Mesker.

Chris' view was that there was no need whatsoever for Chinese history or language to understand the Yijing, that everything relevant in the Yi could be deciphered through recursion and binary language. Of course, this didn't exactly make him endeared to "old school" Yi scholars, whose concern with Yi's authors and historical roots and development are of great interest and importance. And, yeah, lol, he'd definitely provoke obstinately at times. On some rare occasions, his human side would come out. It was nice to see the human, but it never seemed to last long, before it was mister roboto again. So, it could be frustrating to reckon with him. I got what I got from him only as a fox eating some ripe fruit that fell from the tree. The rest was either over my head, or he was completely mad, and probably both.

Sparhawk · Jun 6, 2011

arabella said:
I thought if he was well-known there may be a description somewhere of his background, a brief biography or summary of his involvement with the iChing. I don't know the name particularly, although I would guess that I've seen loads of his entries here on Clarity. I've just never associated his name with any special brand of interpretation [even if I've undoubtedly seen his comments] since nothing about someone called "Chris" has stood out as different on the whole.

All I can say is that you've missed all the fun then. There's no way to describe Chris Lofting with any justice. The other choice is that he's dismissed forthwith. Believe me, there are many Chris but only one, unmistakable, "Chris". The man knew how to push buttons...

sooo · Jun 6, 2011

sparhawk said:
All I can say is that you've missed all the fun then. There's no way to describe Chris Lofting with any justice. The other choice is that he's dismissed forthwith. Believe me, there are many Chris but only one, unmistakable, "Chris". The man knew how to push buttons...

Yes, grass hopper. grmph

Chris Lofting's System

visitor

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

visitor

sooo

Guest

Supporter

visitor

visitor

sooo

Guest

visitor

sooo

Guest

visitor

visitor

visitor

visitor

visitor

sooo

Guest

visitor

visitor

sooo

Guest

visitor

Supporter

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

One of those men your mother warned you about...

visitor

visitor

sooo

Guest

One of those men your mother warned you about...

sooo

Guest