Commentary: The importance of this image cannot be overstated. It has taken me some years to clearly ascertain what is going on with respect to trigrammal field alignment within the Tree of Life. The problem ultimately had to do with thinking within the confines of a single Tree System alone, which the Four Pillars would seem to be opposing. The solution, once found, was as obvious as it is elegant and strong. The Tree itself is a synthesis of 2 prevailing inertias, one heaven-bound and the other earth-bound in their essential natures. While we could extend as far out as four arrangements, it isn't actually necessary since two of the four pillars are really reflective opposites. What this will mean in terms of actual field construction is that we will be building from the bottom-up on the yin side, ascending from the lowest rung to the highest through the paths & sepheroth. On the yang side we will be building from the top-down, descending from the highest rung to the lowest. To understand how this is accomplished will take more graphics work outlining trigrammal field anatomy and essential methodology.

What may be a little confusing to beginners is that the numerations we are employing here are the traditional King Wen numerations. This is so that students can follow along with their various copies of the I Ching to cross-reference information as pertaining to the Tree of Life. It means, for instance, that one could draw an I Ching hexagram in the usual way and then locate it by its number on TwinTree Diagram, being able in that instance to analyze both ascending and descending characteristics on the Tree of Life itself.

What is probably not yet fully clear to most people is the importance of having a well defined chronological logic to adhere to in all of this. It may be helpful to understand that an I Ching reading is fundamentally a biofeedback measurement at its most basic elemental level. All the judgments, explanations and definitions that follow upon this are largely a matter of social convention. They do not tell us anything anatomical in nature, but rather tell us something about the character of these structures as observed by many people over an extended period of time and catalogued for posterity. Consequently these things do have a certain value to impart within the contexts they evolved in. When the matter turns to precise anatomical cross-referencing with the Tree of Life and/or other logical matrixes, we require a more exacting standard to make these kinds of assertions, affording any possible chance of an effective synthesis. Adhering to strict chronological protocols where these can in fact be found to exist, is our surest gauge of accomplishing this in such a way as is likely to hold up over time and be found as rational a procedure 1000 years from now and it might seem to us to be today.

Is it the only possible way to proceed? Certainly not. Is it a logical way to proceed? Indeed, it is, and not just logical from the standpoint of the mind alone, but also making a great deal of physical sense in tantric applications. The ingenuity of the tantric approach is that it is fundamentally aiming at strength itself. We are not always looking to ascertain *absolute truth* so much as we are looking to identify and incorporate the highest practical standards of physical endurance itself. If a thing is strong and can remain strong against all manner of competing force, we then have every good reason to invest in its underscoring doctrines without ever attempting to resolve *absolute truth* whatsoever.

m1thr0s