Nungali

But this might be the basis of ALL ancient divination in that ( 1 ) its basically easier , regardless of origin , to get an answer from a 'digital' 'binary question ( a yes or no answer ) than one that desires a complex 'story' answer . Ie. it never worked like ; '' Oracle , how should I invade the western lands ? '' Oracle ; '' Wait until winter , use cavalry initially and cut off their left flank , while a rear action cuts their supply chain and Vulture Pass , then proceed to .... '' Its more like '' Oracle should I invade the western lands this winter ?'' or even ; '' Should I invade the western lands by waiting until winter , use cavalry initially and cut off their left flank , while a rear action cuts their supply chain and Vulture Pass , then proceed to ...'' and of course ( 2 ) will follow on from that ; yes and no answers ARE binary or paired structures (ie questions in sequence ) . and from that would develop ( 3 ) and regarding ( 4 ) ummmmm what ? ALL divination or any type , by definition , IS a '' a closed symbolic code that mediates between human questions and divine decisions. '' . What is needed is a demonstrable IE system that is like and predates China's ( maybe that has been shown somewhwere in above posts and I missed it ? ) I did an AI search on the first IE divination systems , no, they dont seem similar to Chinese , so I asked AI for a summary on the issue ; '' There is no widely accepted evidence that ancient Indo-European divination systems directly influenced the Chinese I Ching. The I Ching (or Zhou Yi in its early form) is an indigenous Chinese text whose core methods and philosophy developed independently within ancient Chinese culture, primarily from the Shang and Zhou dynasties (c. 1200–750 BCE). Origins of the I Ching The I Ching originated as a form of cleromancy (divination by lots), evolving from even older Chinese practices involving oracle bones and tortoise shells. The system is based on: Oracle Bones/Tortoise Shells: The earliest known Chinese written records are divinations inscribed on bones and shells from the late Shang dynasty (c. 1200–1050 BCE). Yarrow Stalks/Coins: The later I Ching text itself was a divination manual that used the manipulation of yarrow stalks (and later, coins) to generate random numbers (6, 7, 8, or 9), which were then converted into one of 64 hexagrams (six-line figures of solid or broken lines). Cosmology: The philosophical underpinnings of the I Ching are deeply rooted in Chinese concepts of yin and yang and the five elements (Wuxing), which developed over centuries and became central to both Confucianism and Taoism. Arguments for and Against Influence Most historical linguists and sinologists maintain that Old Chinese is a language family separate from Indo-European, and the two traditions developed largely in isolation regarding these specific practices However, one hypothesis, proposed by sinologist Victor H. Mair and others, suggests that some of the names of the eight I Ching trigrams and a few key terms might have Indo-European linguistic origins due to ancient cultural exchanges across Eurasia. This linguistic hypothesis is not universally accepted within academia and does not necessarily imply that the entire divination system or the underlying philosophy of the I Ching was an import; the practice of divination itself and the structure of the hexagrams remain distinctly Chinese in origin. In summary, while there may have been minor linguistic contact for some terms, the systems of divination themselves are considered to have independent origins and developed within their own distinct cultural and philosophical frameworks. '' Note ; the thin linguistic comparisons relate only to some Chinese words for the trigrams and a a 'few terms ' ... the evidence is far to thin to postulate an origin in the west .

Oh no ... there is a wave of it just starting about to rise in intensity . Several people around me are talking incomprehensible rubbish , more than usual, the last few days ... and now its spreading to all types of normally 'clear' people . Including my gardener this morning ; explained a VERY simple job three times , with him nodding and making comments that seemed to indicate comprehension and then repeating back to me what he should do ..... that wasnt what I explained * ! Oh ... the cause of this 'wave ' ? https://www.livescience.com/space/the-sun/giant-sunspot-on-par-with-the-one-that-birthed-the-carrington-event-has-appeared-on-the-sun-and-its-pointed-right-at-earth It happens every so often *

? yeah but ... 'we' all know it has a clear origin in Hebrew Scripture . Perhaps a better example is the influence Zoroastrianism had on Judaism before the inception of Judaism ( and I dont mean Abraham ) ... some of us realize that but as well ( and I hope ; to your point ) that the Jewish Bible is 'Jewish ' and not 'Zoroastrianism ' ' Influence ' is not ' origin ' .... is it ? Or even if some thin 'evidence' or 'influence' came into China from the 'western ' Steppes ( 'IE Homeland ' ) 'Yijing ' is essentially Chinese . [ Aside : not many realize but there are other dynamics with this idea of 'deportation ' , in many cases people were bought from other parts of the Empire and put in place where people had been 'deported' from . The Assyrians did this in Israel ( the old 'northern kingdom', that is ) and related area; took Canaanites out of Israel and moved people from other places into Israel ... and in Judah , that happened later .

I and other know .... but apparently you dont ? He cited a date of 53 bc , which is why he was originally asked how that had to do with 9th C BC ? And if you are postulating that a few small settlements relating to Rome's origins ( that is not Rome itself :The first 'Roman Kingdom ' started 753 -509 bc ) got a legion together to do a military campaign into China ...... well ..... all I can say is enjoy your burger

I see ..... but then you woke up and you were actually ....... .

? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zirconium

Control sounds dangerously close to oppression , to me . There is this thing in similarity between dealing with children , dealing with yourself , drives and emotions etc and dealing with a skidding motorcycle Sometimes trying to 'control ' things makes it worse . I'd say subtle persuasion, at the best ...... things may arise , be felt .... but in my view its the 'output' or end result that is important , Once , someone to me ; '' But, why are you not jealous ? '' '' Oh, I am .... but thats for me to deal with .... internally , I dont see what yelling, stamping my feet or being violent would achieve , except making me feel worse about that later . ''

any of what happened ?

I wish I could post the film .... if you were a little mouse and big cat was hassling you .... where to hide ? On the cat ( sometimes the too obvious works ) a friend showed me this on her phone ..... very fluffy cat is 'playing' with a mouse , mouse manages to escape and hide , but where ? Cat looks around, side to side .... no mouse , huh ? Where did he go . Then on the film you hear friend say '' Its on your shoulder ! '' and you can notice a grey lump in the thick hair of fluffy cat . cat turns its head backwards and sees it ... oh man, the look on the cats face ! but that causes mousy to burrow in deeper . The follows an hilarious visual of frantic cat acrobatics , shaking, flipping cartwheels, high jumps, legs and tail going everywhere . '' Get im off getim off !

That whole work of his is not a scientific treatise , its a philosophical one ... he was a philosophy as well as a 'cat supposer ' Was you question ; if consciousness is generated from 'one ' how do different people seem so different in consciousness ? Obviously than, its the instruments using the same thing / energy not that the enrgy is the 'instrument ' consciousness is not the instrument , it is what 'activates' the instrument . OR you could see each 'instrument' as a lens or facet of the one illumination

'During that time' was before the Romans ever existed ! That was already explained to you , dont you even read people's responses to you ? And dont respond to this as I will not interact with you more here , as its clear you want to do in this thread , what you have done in other threads on Daobums .... whatever your motivations are for that !

Those last two paragraphs I find very interesting . Pressed for time now, I hope to add more later .

Noooo ..... you be mixed up with 'tow rope ' ; ;

< sniff sniff > ... I smell something suspect here . I did enjoy reading it but then decided to check one random statement - the claim about what Erwin Schrodinger said ; '' "The total number of minds in the universe is one. In fact, consciousness is a singularity phasing within all beings." - who said this ? AI says Schrodinger . But if you put the question the other way around and ask if Schrodinger actually did say it ? ''No, the exact quote is not from Erwin Schrödinger, although he did write similar ideas in his philosophical essays, particularly Mind and Matter. He wrote, "The total number of minds in the universe is one" and that "consciousness is never experienced in the plural, only in the singular". However, the popular version includes the phrase "In fact, consciousness is a singularity phasing within all beings," which is not a direct quote. '' ... 'cause there aint no such thing as a 'singularity phasing ' or the person who made the quote up used bad punctuation https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/47487/did-erwin-schrödinger-say-there-is-only-one-mind-in-the-universe I found the passage in his writing that relates to this, in a way ... although it does not say this - he also said ''This is religion not science . '' (he was an Advaita Hindu ) - I wont be checking the rest .... a shame the author didnt do more research (it took me 12 seconds to check ) because now his whole article is suspect .