This has been on my mind for a while now, just got around to posting it. I'm sure there have been conversations on this before.
It seems to me, and some others in the community have expressed the same opinion: that the line texts were composed (and comprehensible) to describe a situation when only a single line changes.
Recently, I've began ignoring the line text altogether when there are multiple change lines, and making a sentence out of the relationship between the Primary and Related hexagrams.
And it has been making sense.
This makes me wonder, and please tolerate the question:
If there is merit in the individual line texts, and they were composed on a one changing line at a time basis, would there be merit in writing a few thousand more lines to describe all possible permutations?
(ug, it would take much work.
Trojina, I nominate you for this task)
It seems to me, and some others in the community have expressed the same opinion: that the line texts were composed (and comprehensible) to describe a situation when only a single line changes.
Recently, I've began ignoring the line text altogether when there are multiple change lines, and making a sentence out of the relationship between the Primary and Related hexagrams.
And it has been making sense.
This makes me wonder, and please tolerate the question:
If there is merit in the individual line texts, and they were composed on a one changing line at a time basis, would there be merit in writing a few thousand more lines to describe all possible permutations?
(ug, it would take much work.
Trojina, I nominate you for this task)