u/Green-Albatross951

Every book says keep a magical diary. Almost nobody I've talked to keeps one past a month, and I include myself before this year.

I started recording properly — every working, which method, how long I sat with it, and months later the honest outcome — and the useful part wasn't any

individual result. It was seeing the shape of my own practice: nearly everything I cast was about money, I almost never sat longer than eight minutes despite believing twenty was the target, and the category I said mattered most had two entries in it.

None of that is mystical. It's just that memory is a liar about your own habits, and a record isn't.

For those who do keep one: how long before it told you something you didn't already know? And does anyone track *method* against outcome — wheel versus square versus freehand — or is the sample size hopeless by nature?

I’ve been vibe coding with AI and made a simple tool that makes it easy - myGLYPH.app

A question for the people here who work with the seals rather than collect them.

I've been tracing the 72 Goetic seals from scans of the 1904 Mathers/Crowley plates rather than redrawing them by eye, and the difference is bigger than I expected. The engraver's line has wobbles, thicknesses and asymmetries that every clean modern redraw quietly removes — and once you have both in front of you, the tidy version looks *wrong*, like a font of a signature.

The same question comes up sharper with the planetary seals. Those can be *derived* rather than copied: walk Agrippa's kamea from the cell holding 1 to the cell holding 2 and on to the last number, and the path you trace is the seal. That's reproducible from the square itself, so it isn't a copy of anyone's drawing — but it also comes out subtly different from the engravings in the Magical Calendar.

Where do you land on this? Is a seal a *shape* (so a clean redraw is fine, or even better), or is it a specific historical *mark* whose accidents are part

of it? And for the derived ones, does something built from the square carry what a copied engraving carries?

I’ve been mucking around with it and made a library of them, and a function to draw your own sigils - myGLYPH.app

The step everyone repeats is the one nobody can verify: you cast, then you forget. Except nobody forgets. You remember perfectly well what you wrote, and then you spend three weeks not-thinking about it, which is thinking about it.

I got interested enough in this to build the forgetting into a tool rather than leave it to willpower: it hides the sentence for three months, shows you only the glyph, and at the end gives the words back and asks a single question — did it work, was it inconclusive, or did it not. No score, no streak, just the one answer. I’m still working on it but it’s functional - www.myGLYPH.app

What I did not expect is how much the sigil changes when you genuinely can't read it back. Weeks in it stops being "the money one" and becomes just a shape you sit with, which is presumably what the old instruction was reaching for.

So: has anyone here run this deliberately? Sealed the wording somewhere you genuinely couldn't get at it, and compared results against the ones you kept in mind? I'm curious whether the effect survives contact with anyone else's practice or whether I've built an elaborate placebo delivery system.

O I Ching agora em português. L’I Ching ora in italiano. El I Ching ahora en español.

☯️ Até 11 traduções lado a lado / Fino a 11

☯️ Até 11 traduções lado a lado / Fino a 11 traduzioni affiancate / Hasta 11 traducciones lado a lado

📜 Texto clássico chinês (周易 + 周易本義) / Testo classico cinese / Texto clásico en chino

🪙 Três moedas, hastes de milefólio, ou manual / Tre monete, achillea, o manuale / Tres monedas, milenrama, o manual

📓 Diário privado no seu navegador / Diario privato nel tuo browser / Diario privado en tu navegador

🔒 Nada sai do seu dispositivo / Nulla lascia il tuo dispositivo / Nada sale de tu dispositivo

🌐 Interface em 9 idiomas / Interfaccia in 9 lingue / Interfaz en 9 idiomas

Grátis. Gratuito. Gratis.

Sem conta. Senza registrazione. Sin registro.

Sem IA nas leituras. Senza IA nelle letture. Sin IA en las lecturas.

Feito por uma pessoa só, para quem quer sentar com a resposta.

Costruito da una sola persona, per chi vuole sedersi con la risposta.

Hecho por una sola persona, para quienes quieren sentarse con la respuesta.

👉 myjing.app

L’I Ching, l’antico Libro dei Mutamenti, è ora disponibile in italiano su myjing.app. Gratuito, senza registrazione, senza pubblicità, senza IA che interpreta le tue letture al posto tuo.

Cosa trovi:

☯️ Fino a 11 traduzioni affiancate — Wilhelm, Legge, Blofeld, Cleary, Ritsema/Karcher e altre, per confrontare come ogni traduttore ha reso lo stesso esagramma.

📜 Testo classico in cinese — il 周易 originale con il commento di Zhu Xi (周易本義), in caratteri tradizionali.

🪙 Tre metodi di consultazione — tre monete, steli di achillea (yarrow), o inserimento manuale se hai già lanciato offline.

📓 Diario privato — ogni lettura viene salvata automaticamente nel tuo browser. Puoi categorizzare le domande (“lavoro”, “relazioni”, come preferisci) e vedere un grafico di ciò che consulti nel tempo.

🔒 Nulla lascia il tuo dispositivo — nessun account, nessun server, nessun cookie sulle tue letture. Ciò che è tuo resta tuo.

🌐 Interfaccia in 9 lingue — ora incluse italiano, portoghese e spagnolo.

Costruito da una sola persona, gratuitamente, per chi vuole sedersi con la risposta invece di scorrere l’ennesima app piena di pubblicità.

👉 myjing.app

O I Ching, o antigo Livro das Mutações, agora está disponível em português no myjing.app. Grátis, sem cadastro, sem anúncios, sem IA interpretando as suas leituras.

O que você encontra:

☯️ Até 11 traduções lado a lado — Wilhelm, Legge, Blofeld, Cleary, Ritsema/Karcher e outras, para comparar como cada tradutor interpretou o mesmo hexagrama.

📜 Texto clássico em chinês — o 周易 original com o comentário de Zhu Xi (周易本義), tipografia tradicional.

🪙 Três métodos de consulta — três moedas, hastes de milefólio (yarrow), ou entrada manual se você já lançou offline.

📓 Diário privado — cada leitura é guardada automaticamente no seu navegador. Você pode categorizar as perguntas (“trabalho”, “relacionamentos”, o que quiser) e ver um gráfico do que tem consultado ao longo do tempo.

🔒 Nada sai do seu dispositivo — sem conta, sem servidor, sem cookies nas suas leituras. O que é seu, fica com você.

🌐 Interface em 9 idiomas — agora incluindo português, italiano e espanhol.

Feito por uma pessoa só, de graça, para quem quer sentar com a resposta em vez de rolar por mais um app cheio de anúncios.

👉 myjing.app

L’I Ching, l’antico Libro dei Mutamenti, è ora disponibile in italiano su myjing.app. Gratuito, senza registrazione, senza pubblicità, senza IA che interpreta le tue letture al posto tuo.

Cosa trovi:

☯️ Fino a 11 traduzioni affiancate — Wilhelm, Legge, Blofeld, Cleary, Ritsema/Karcher e altre, per confrontare come ogni traduttore ha reso lo stesso esagramma.

📜 Testo classico in cinese — il 周易 originale con il commento di Zhu Xi (周易本義), in caratteri tradizionali.

🪙 Tre metodi di consultazione — tre monete, steli di achillea (yarrow), o inserimento manuale se hai già lanciato offline.

📓 Diario privato — ogni lettura viene salvata automaticamente nel tuo browser. Puoi categorizzare le domande (“lavoro”, “relazioni”, come preferisci) e vedere un grafico di ciò che consulti nel tempo.

🔒 Nulla lascia il tuo dispositivo — nessun account, nessun server, nessun cookie sulle tue letture. Ciò che è tuo resta tuo.

🌐 Interfaccia in 9 lingue — ora incluse italiano, portoghese e spagnolo.

Costruito da una sola persona, gratuitamente, per chi vuole sedersi con la risposta invece di scorrere l’ennesima app piena di pubblicità.

👉 myjing.app

El I Ching, el antiguo Libro de las Mutaciones, ya está disponible en español en myjing.app. Gratis, sin registro, sin anuncios, sin IA interpretando tus lecturas.

Lo que vas a encontrar:

☯️ Hasta 11 traducciones lado a lado — Wilhelm, Legge, Blofeld, Cleary, Ritsema/Karcher y otras, para comparar cómo cada traductor interpretó el mismo hexagrama.

📜 Texto clásico en chino — el 周易 original junto con el comentario de Zhu Xi (周易本義), en tipografía tradicional.

🪙 Tres métodos de consulta — tres monedas, tallos de milenrama (yarrow), o entrada manual si ya lanzaste sin conexión.

📓 Diario privado — cada lectura se guarda automáticamente en tu navegador. Podés categorizar las preguntas (“trabajo”, “relaciones”, como quieras) y ver un gráfico de lo que consultás a lo largo del tiempo.

🔒 Nada sale de tu dispositivo — sin cuenta, sin servidor, sin cookies sobre tus lecturas. Lo tuyo queda tuyo.

🌐 Interfaz en 9 idiomas — ahora con español, portugués e italiano.

Hecho por una sola persona, gratis, para quienes quieren sentarse con la respuesta en vez de scrollear otra app llena de anuncios.

👉 www.myjing.app

Hi creators! Pretty much the above. I’m wandering whether the app stores generate organic traffic to your app, or whether you have to largely depend on your own growth efforts to drive downloads?

Reason I ask is that I’m wandering whether the 10,000 unique users per month rule of thumb everyone quotes as being necessary before launching an app is reasonable, or a little pedantic?

Also, I know that the app stores have their own ad program - is this cheaper than Reddit ads, Google AdWords or FB ads?

Any assistance you can provide is appreciated ..

Launched a free web app a month ago (an I Ching study tool with side-by-side translations, local-storage journal, no account). It’s a PWA, not native, by design: works everywhere, no app store gatekeeping, no install friction. Built it solo, partly because I wanted the tool for my own practice and partly to learn coding with AI.

Numbers at the one-month mark:

∙ \~3,000 unique users / month

∙ Acquisition: organic only. Posting once a week in relevant Reddit subs and FB groups. No paid anything.

∙ Analytics: Goatcounter (no cookies, no policy needed, free tier).

∙ Stack: web/PWA, localStorage for user data, no server-side user storage at all.

I’m at the point where the questions are starting to outnumber the answers. Would love input from anyone further down this road:

On guerilla / pre-launch marketing. What actually worked for you in the first 90 days? Reddit + niche communities is what I’m doing and it’s not nothing, but I’d love to hear what you did that you wish you’d done sooner.

On the freemium threshold. My plan is to keep all the core functionality free forever. Where I might eventually add a tier: unlimited journal entries for ~$1/year. Question is when to introduce it. I’ve seen advice ranging from “as soon as you have 100 paying-curious users” to “wait until you have 10k active users so the friction doesn’t kill growth.” What did you actually do, and what did you learn from getting it wrong if you got it wrong?

On paid acquisition timing. When did you start spending money on ads, and how did you decide it was time? I have a strong instinct to stay organic-only until I’m at maybe 10k monthly users, partly because I want the audience to be genuinely interested rather than ad-funneled, partly because I’m bootstrapping. But I might be leaving compounding growth on the table by waiting.

On analytics. Goatcounter has been great for my “no cookies, no policy” stance and it’s free. Anyone moved off it for something better and not regretted it? I’m specifically interested in alternatives that respect the same constraints (no cookies on user data, no privacy policy gymnastics) but offer more depth on flow/retention.

On organic vs platform-driven traffic. Right now I’m web-only and I notice that most growth comes from places I’ve posted, not from search or discovery. When I eventually wrap as a native app for the stores, do Google Play and the App Store actually drive meaningful organic discovery on their own, or is that a myth and you still need to drive your own traffic? curious whether the stores are a marketing channel or just a distribution channel.

On posting cadence. I’ve been posting once a week per platform to avoid spamming. Too slow? Too fast? What worked for you?

On the “free forever” instinct. Is keeping the core product genuinely free a smart long-term moat against AI-bloated competitors, or is it just leaving money on the table that I’ll regret in two years? Curious what people who’ve been on both sides of this think.

Open to harsh advice. I’d rather hear it now than learn it slow.

Something I’ve been thinking about lately, and I’d like to hear this sub's thoughts.

Most translations of the Yi render the line statements as text. You get the literal language (more or less), plus whatever interpretive framing the translator brought. Wilhelm gives you the German Romantic-philosophical version, Legge gives you the Victorian-scholarly version, Blofeld gives you something more direct, Ritsema/Karcher refuse to commit and hand you the semantic field.

They’re all translating the line literally.

James DeKorne did something different. His line summaries translate the line as function. He’s asking: what is this line doing in the situation? What does it actually advise? What kind of moment does it describe? It’s the difference between a translator saying “the dragon hidden, do not act” and someone saying “this is the phase where the right move is to hold position and develop in private, because the conditions aren’t ripe for visible action yet.” Same line, but one tells you what it says and the other tells you what it’s for.

I noticed how useful this is when I started keeping a journal of readings. With the literary translations I’d often understand the line at the moment of casting but lose the thread weeks later when I went back to check. With DeKorne’s functional summaries I can look at the line months later and immediately recognize what the situation was, because the function-language survives the loss of context in a way the poetic-language doesn’t.

This isn’t a knock on the literary translators. Wilhelm and Blofeld and Legge are doing something irreplaceable, and DeKorne would be thinner without them as a base. But I think function-translation deserves to be a recognized category alongside literary translation, and the Yi happens to be a text that invites it more than most because the line statements were operational guidance to begin with.

A few questions for the sub:

1.	For those who cast regularly: do you find that one register (literary vs functional) survives long-term review better than the other, the way I’m describing? Or is that just me?

2.	Are there other translators or commentators who do what DeKorne does that I should know about? I’ve seen hints of this functional approach in some of Hilary Barrett’s work, but I’d love other recommendations.

3.	Do you think the original line statements (the Western Zhou layer, before the Ten Wings and the commentarial tradition got hold of them) were closer to function-language or to literary-language?

Disclosure: I’ve built a Yi study tool (www.myjing.app, absolutely no AI, no signup) that includes DeKorne’s summaries alongside Wilhelm, Blofeld, Legge, Ritsema/Karcher, and others, partly because I wanted his functional layer easily accessible next to the others, partly because I wanted to learn to code with ai (ironically 😂).

There’s a thing that bothers me about how divination gets talked about in a lot of contemporary occult spaces. It gets treated as the lightweight cousin of “real” ritual work: the thing you do casually, the thing the apps are for, the thing you don’t need to prepare for. Meanwhile the actual operation, when you take it seriously, is a ritual in every functional sense. You set a question, you create a liminal moment, you randomize against intention, you read symbols through a tradition, you integrate.

The I Ching has made this unavoidable for me. You can’t really half-ass a yarrow stalk casting. Forty-nine stalks, four operations per line, six lines. The procedure itself is the temenos. By the time you’re done, the question has been thought in a way it wasn’t before you started. Even the three-coin method, done with attention, does this; the coins are a compression of the stalk procedure, not a shortcut around the ritual function (they've been using coins since the 12th century, for quick military decisions on the battlefield!).

What I’ve started to think is that the “answer” the Yi gives is partly produced by what the ritual does to you in the process of asking. The hexagram is real and structural, but the readability of it depends on the state you cast from. Which is why “ask the AI what your reading means” feels so wrong. It skips the part that was doing the work.

I built a site for my own practice (and to learn to code with AI on the side, ironically) that tries to stay out of the way of this: myjing.app. It does yarrow, coins, or manual entry; shows multiple named translations rather than synthesizing one for you; keeps a private journal locally; doesn’t interpret. Disclosure that I built it.

My question for this sub: how do you frame divination in your own practice? Is it ritual proper, preparation for ritual, divination of ritual outcomes, something else? And for those who work the Yi specifically, has the casting method (yarrow vs coins vs other) changed the quality of what you get, or is that overstated?

For about a year I’ve been pulling tarot and casting the Yi on the same question, same sitting, and comparing. I want to know if anyone else does this and what you’ve found, because my results are stranger than I expected.

The systems don’t agree literally. Different symbol sets, different time-grains, different ideas of what an “answer” even is. But they consistently agree on tone and direction. If the Yi gives me a hexagram about waiting and not forcing, the tarot will land on something like the Hanged Man or the Four of Swords. If the Yi shows me change at the top line, the tarot will throw the Tower or Death somewhere prominent. The convergence isn’t 100% but it’s far above chance, and the texture of the convergence is interesting: they tend to converge on the situation more than on the advice.

My working theory is that tarot is doing emotional/archetypal weather and the Yi is doing structural dynamics, and a real question has both layers, so a well-cast pair triangulates the same underlying thing from two angles. The Yi tends to be more specific about what’s actually moving. Tarot tends to be more specific about how it feels.

For the Yi side I’ve been using www.myjing.app because it lets me read several translators against each other on the same line, which matters a lot when you’re trying to compare against tarot. A single translator’s word choice can pull the reading toward or away from the tarot in a way that obscures the actual convergence. Disclosure: I built it, partly for this exact use case, partly to learn to code with AI alongside studying the text.

My question: does anyone else here run paired systems on the same query? Tarot plus Yi, runes plus Yi? What patterns of agreement and disagreement have you noticed, and have you developed a working theory of why two unrelated systems converge as often as they do?