When you commit to something, put your heart in it. Avoid empty ritual. Do what is best for all.
See Yogi Bhajan’s quote for the day
Meditation: NM327-990930 Know Your Heart
See previous reading
See Related posts
54 – Fifty-Four. Kuei Mei / A Loveless Marriage
The Thunderstorm inseminates the swelling Lake, then moves on where the Lake cannot follow:
The Superior Person views passing trials in the light of Eternal Truths.
Any action will prove unfortunate.
Nothing furthers.
SITUATION ANALYSIS:
This is at best a Marriage of Convenience.
You have found yourself in desperate straits, a position of weakness, and you are tempted to pay dearly for a remedy.
A drowning man isn’t picky about who throws him a rope.
The rescue offered to you now is undesirable.
It may pull you out of this sticky situation, but it will cause even greater predicaments down the road.
Don’t obligate yourself in this way.
You are selling your future for a quick fix today.
Six at the top means:
The groom draws no blood from the sacrifice.
The bride’s basket remains empty.
A barren marriage.
The woman holds the basket, but there are no fruits in it.
The man stabs the sheep, but no blood flows.
Nothing that acts to further.
At the sacrifice to the ancestors, the woman had to present harvest offerings in a basket, while the man slaughtered the sacrificial animal with his own hand. Here the ritual is only superficially fulfilled; the woman takes an empty basket and the man stabs a sheep slaughtered beforehand – solely to preserve the forms. This impious, irreverent attitude bodes no good for a marriage.
38 – Thirty-Eight. K’uei / Estrangement
Fire distances itself from its nemesis, the Lake:
No matter how large or diverse the group, the Superior Person remains uniquely himself.
Small accomplishments are possible.
SITUATION ANALYSIS:
You are working at cross-purposes with another.
The distance between you is very wide.
The gap can be closed, however, with no compromise of your integrity.
You are not adversaries in this case — just two persons addressing individual needs.
Ask yourself: are these needs mutually exclusive?
Is there common ground here?
Must there be one winner and one loser?
Could you become partners in seeking a solution that would allow for two winners?