Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
“Most of the elaborate associations of the Yi with the Chinese calendar first appeared in the Yiweishu in the Early Han. Further, the references to the coming of the 8th Moon at Gua Ci 19.0 (Lin is the 12th Moon, the 8th’s Inverse), the reference to the coming of solid ice at Yao Ci 02.1 (Zhi Gua 24) and the association of Gua 24 to the Winter Solstice in Da Xiang 24.X all suggest that a system of assignments was both in place and a part of the Zhou Yi and Wing composers’ thought processes.”
-Bradford Hatcher
THATS YOU!!
Are we not talking about the same concepts, aside from a mis-representation of the chronology of the Tai Ji Tu (which is unknown)?
I see that it really looks as if this is the absolute truth.
Sorry for the confusion, I did not realize how definite my reasoning looked.
Robert, how does your idea of the gnomon fit in with LiSe's discovery of the origin of the hexagrams?
http://www.yijing.nl/i_ching/origins/index.html
FROM GUI TO GUA
Might very well be that the origin of gui as the six lines on a sundial is not right.
Gui: a measuring tablet, at one end round, at the other end straight.
Also: a tablet of jade or ivory, the top round, the bottom square, given by the emperor to the new princes. . .
▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄ ▄▄
▄▄ ▄▄
I got the gong character from Wenlin. In Ricci it is described as a mass with a handle: a pounder for stamping the earth or clay when making pots. See C. Lindqvist "China empire of living symbols" page 261.
I like this
I got the gong character from Wenlin. In Ricci it is described as a mass with a handle: a pounder for stamping the earth or clay when making pots. See C. Lindqvist "China empire of living symbols" page 261.
In English also we have phrases like "on the level" or "the square deal" and the like noting that things that are aligned to the T-square or other right angle are considered better than things that aren't.
Much of that has to do with the detail that the human eye evolved to be particularly aware of straight lines....edges ...
Wilhelm's writings seem to emphasize the four seasons, summer and winter solstice, agriculture, and other themes related to the Chinese reverence of gnomonics.
The text of hexagram 49 says:
'As the seasons bring their revolutions,
So the wise man makes clear their times,
And prepares himself for their demands.'
This text links the sages with the calendar makers.
Gui: a measuring tablet, at one end round, at the other end straight.
Also: a tablet of jade or ivory, the top round, the bottom square, given by the emperor to the new princes as token of their power or to envoys as credential. (Wenlin: used as sceptre by ancient feudal lords)
And: several measures of capacity.
THE NUMBER 49
The number 49 is an auspicious number. It is seven squared. Seven may be the most magical of numbers for the mystic and is linked to the calendar in the following ways:
• There are seven days in a week
• There are 13 weeks in a season, and 13 is the seventh odd number
• There are 91 days in a season, the product of seventh number and the seventh odd number.
• The seventh odd number (13) and the seventh even number (14) are the basis of the 27x27 Magic Square, which features 365 as the center number. This is a special feature of the Luo Shu that did not go unnoticed by the early Chinese.
Your choice of characters that are pronounced as gui is very selective and subjective.
gui 圭 in gua 卦 is most likely only a phonetic component.
The fact that the old form of 工 and the modern form of 占 look somewhat similar doesn't mean anything - a 3000 year old tomato can look like modern horse manure but that doesn't mean there is any link between the two.
Also, brush up your knowledge of ancient Chinese, homonyms (the yi 易 from 'change' is different from H27's yi 頤), and phonetic compounds. You're too easily jumping to conclusions.
It has nothing to do with 'thinking out of the box', it is just that working from facts is far more convincing then imaginative theories. A lot of your sentences have 'I think', 'I feel' and 'I believe' in them. Nothing wrong with that, but let's stick to what we know, instead of making up what we don't know. There is enough value in what we know, there is no need to add assumptions to hypotheses to believes. Yi is not a religion, you know.And this is the problem with academics, excellent theories such as this concept get too easily dismissed because people just can't think out of the box.
But sources are exactly what I miss here. When you say, "Hexagram 27 - Yi - is change and exchange, the mouth, jaws, molars, nourishment," you don't give a source. When you say, "The turtle was also associated with the cardinal directions (north), the seasons (winter), and divination. The tortoise, like the Luo Shu, was a model of the universe to the early Chinese and one of the four Divine creatures", I miss a source (I assume Sarah Allan's much overrated 'The Shape of the Turtle'; people should read Keightley's 'The Ancestral Landscape' more often.)Most of what I post I can reference with other sources
As much as possible, yes.Do you suggest we stick with only what we do know?
By starting with what is known and work from there, instead of inventing the unknown.How do you make progress in understanding the unknown if you limit your self in any way?
That's fine. As a believe. But I wonder why it didn't appear before the Ming Dynasty, if François Louis is correct in his article 'The Genesis of an Icon: The Taiji Diagram's Early History'. It does not seem to be as old as many believe it is.I still believe the Tai Ju Tu symbol is a solar tracing of the sun by use of the gnomon and understanding this will lead to a better understanding of the Yi.
But sources are exactly what I miss here. When you say, "Hexagram 27 - Yi - is change and exchange, the mouth, jaws, molars, nourishment," you don't give a source.
Yes it was from the overated Sarah Allan book.When you say, "The turtle was also associated with the cardinal directions (north), the seasons (winter), and divination. The tortoise, like the Luo Shu, was a model of the universe to the early Chinese and one of the four Divine creatures", I miss a source (I assume Sarah Allan's much overrated 'The Shape of the Turtle'; people should read Keightley's 'The Ancestral Landscape' more often.)
But I wonder why it didn't appear before the Ming Dynasty, if François Louis is correct in his article 'The Genesis of an Icon: The Taiji Diagram's Early History'. It does not seem to be as old as many believe it is.
The problem is with the 'if'. I don't like to work with 'suppose if...', 'let us imagine that...', 'maybe this...', 'possibly that...', and I see you do it all the time. Too easily is imagination turned into fact when nobody questions it.Anything is possible, but it is not a stretch to imagine the Tai Ji Tu as an ancient and useful visual calendar, if in fact it represented a tracing of the solar cycle and could mark clearly the four seasons.
In my opinion you are linking things criss-cross without regard to any time frame or context. I hardly believe that the correlative cosmology that was developed during the Han Dynasty can be (completely) applied to the Shang dynasty which took place more than 1000 years earlier.
Yes, the turtle was important to the Shang, but so were many other animals.
hineininterpretieren
The problem is with the 'if'. I don't like to work with 'suppose if...', 'let us imagine that...', 'maybe this...', 'possibly that...', and I see you do it all the time. Too easily is imagination turned into fact when nobody questions it.
No, what I mean is that elements of Shang cosmology can be found in Han correlative thinking, like the importance of the sifang.When you say “(completely)” does that mean some of the cosmology that was developed during the Han Dynasty can be applied to the Shang Dynasty?
Who says that 'cosmology zig-zagged through dynasties'?And who gets to decide which cosmology has zig-zagged through dynasties?
No. He's a mythological figure.Did not Fu Hsi come along about 2200 BC?
That's my point.And some of the earliest evidence we have of him is funerary art from 140 AD
That's an assumption.In order for a symbol to be incorporated into the TLV bronze mirror, the symbol must have tradition and significance. This takes time.
That's lore. And we do not know if what is called the Luoshu in ancient literature is the same as our current version. See this article http://zhouyi.sdu.edu.cn/english0/yiology/sub3/XiangAndXinsThought.asp.The Luo Shu appeared from Heaven on the back of a tortoise, corresponding Heaven with the tortoise.
There is no special status of the phonetic of gui, as I showed with the long list from Wenlin.Therefore, it seems clear that the Tortoise was one of the four sacred animals and was used in the Han dynasty on TLV Bronze Mirrors as well as being given special status of the phonetics of gui.
? No, I'm not.You are acknowledging the awesome tortoise as well.
Why should you? As far as I know it is a normal German word which does not have an English equivalent.I hope I do not have to report this to our new moderators.
Oh yes, it is your responsibility. You are responsible for what you write. And if you represent fantasy as facts, then that is your responsibility. This is a forum, yes, but not only for imaginative storytelling. I suppose the readers would like to be able to discern facts from vivid imagination; but the way you put forward your ideas that is hardly possible:I am using "if" and "imagine" because this is a forum, its for ideas, and ideas are for the imagination. Get over it, this is not an academic journal discussion. As far as imagination turning into fact, that should not be our concern or responsibility.
Yes, it could. Just as the usage of the Nine Tripods is incorporated in the Luoshu.The Tai Ji Tu could have been a calendrical chart to mark the four seasons, the diagram could have attained symbolic status over many hundred years if not thousands before it was documented, zig-zagging its way through dynasties. And it could be a tracing of the the solar cycle featuring the use of the gnomon.
Relevancy is subjective. To me it is not relevant at all. It does not tell me anything about the Yi - it only tells me how you see the Yi.This is all relevant to understanding the Yi and deserves consideration.
Which 'support' would that be? You are showing me several modern characters which look more or less the same, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there is any relationship between them.There is support of the role of the gnomon having special status in the philosophical interpretations of the early Chinese characters and the combination of these characters to form new words.
You are misquoting Nielsen. He says, "Tai Ji Tu. The Diagram of the Great Extreme. This refers to both the circular emblem with a dark and light half intertwined (which is also know as the 'yin-yang fish') and to a cosmogonic diagram that shows how the ten thousand things were produced as a result of a process of differentiation of the unity into yin and yang" (p. 227). As you see he says that the Tai Ji Tu is a name for two things: for the first he gives a picture of the 'yin-yang fish', for the latter he refers to plate 9, which is this picture http://sangle.web.wesleyan.edu/etext/song-qing/Taijitu-1.gif. He does not mention the 'solar cycle'.The Tai Ji Tu is a tracing of the solar cycle that helps to identify the four seasons and describes the generation of the ten thousand things, or wan (Nielsen).
It's a nice hypothesis, but it can not be validated by any source.The references for the Tai Ji Tu connection with the ancient sundial and divination are:
1. Where did the Yin Yang Symbol Come From
As Lise already pointed out, you have to be careful to take her findings at face value.
No, but you are very selective in what you accept or don't accept. You just accept every theory that fits your story, without questioning it or tracking the sources, and what doesn't fit your ideas you just ignore.These ideas were posted years ago, if you have a problem with these concepts take it up with the authors, these ideas did not originate with my vivid imagination or storytelling.
I have no problem with math. I also have no problem with the Luoshu and how it is applied. I'm only addressing your selective and narrow way of researching the subject.The symbol for gong includes the image or concept of a craftsman with a compass and square. The square (right angle) can also represent the gnomon (Sir Joseph Needham, Science and Civilisation in China, Vol. III).
The Chinese reverence for math is discussed at length by Needham, Alfred Schinz (The Magic Square), Lars Berglund (The Secret of the Luo Shu) and many others. It is accepted by many (but not everyone) that the early Chinese incorporated the Luo Shu into city planning over 3,000 years ago demonstrating a reverence for math. If you disagree with this, take it up with Mr. Schinz – he wrote the book and I am only reporting the concepts put forward by him.
Of course not. I just don't agree with her conclusions, because there is hardly a foundation for them.Your disapproval of Sarah Allan’s work does not invalidate her research and writings.
Lise does not show any 'correspondence' between the given characters, she only gives a description of every single character. You see in it what you want to see.GONG AND WU CHARACTERS ARE RELATED
The Chinese character correspondences of the ancient sundial, divination, and the hexagrams can be demonstrated here:
The gong character is closely related to both the wang character for king and the wu character for shaman, both of whom practiced divinination with math instruments such as the compass and square. According to Mark Lewis (Writing and Authority in Early China)
“The character gong (skill, craftsman), which is explained as the image of a person with a compass and carpenter’s square, is also said to have the same meaning as wu.”
And wu means a shaman who practices divining with an image that includes a carpenter’s square and compass.
The words were lifted right out of the text on pages 205 and 206.
Lewis does not say there is a link between 工 and 壬, so please describe the relevancy of 壬 with regard to the topic of this thread.In addition, Lewis notes that ren or shaman (which is the same character as king) represented the ultimate yin and facilitates birth. Lewis links the concept to fertility. Ren also occupies the northern quadrant (as did the tortoise), a reference to the cardinal directions. These are the words of Professor Lewis, this is not made up by myself.
At that page it explicitly is said, "The contemporary Chinese character 巫 for wu combines the graphic radicals gong 工 "work" and ren 人 "person" doubled. " But as shown in the etymology paragraph on the same page, this character is not related to the etymology of the original graph - there is no mention of gong there. Since the original form of gong is different from today's form I don't consider it valid reasoning to use the modern form in a false reasoning that explains the character wu as related to gong. See also Schuessler, 'ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese', p. 516.Furthermore, even Wikipedia defines wu, shaman, as combining the characters for gong and ren (man). If you do not agree that wu (shaman) and gong (craftsman with a compass and square) are this closely related, then you should take it up with the Wiki people.
That's my point. You don't report what you are not agreeing with. You only show what supports your theories, you don't show what contradicts it. And as you see, a lot can be found that contradicts your findings. It all has to do with proper, thorough and objective research.If you have a problem with the storytelling take it up the publisher of the web site, I am just reporting what I like and agree with.
You only show what supports your theories, you don't show what contradicts it.
There is no link with the wu shamans, and today's scholars don't see that link anymore.
工 is not related to a compass. Yes, but as I said in my reply to your mail in which you mentioned this, "Lewis refers to the Shuowen, see footnote 50 on p. 441.
According to Mark Lewis (Writing and Authority in Early China)
“The character gong (skill, craftsman), which is explained as the image of a person with a compass and carpenter’s square, is also said to have the same meaning as wu.”
And wu means a shaman who practices divining with an image that includes a carpenter’s square and compass.
The words were lifted right out of the text on pages 205 and 206.
Since the original form of gong is different from today's form I don't consider it valid reasoning to use the modern form in a false reasoning that explains the character wu as related to gong.
圭 is not a sundial, nor did it ever have that meaning.
That's my point. You only show what supports your theories, you don't show what contradicts it. And as you see, a lot can be found that contradicts your findings.
It all has to do with proper, thorough and objective research.
The only reference to a sundial is found in the Zhouli 周禮, where it says, '以土圭之法, 測土深, 正日景, 以求地中'. But in this context 圭 is most likely a loan character for the homonym gui 晷, meaning 'shadow cast by the sun' (漢語大詞典 .v.5, p. 767).
See 古文字古林, vol. 4, p. 760. The Guwenzi Gulin summarises the findings of several scholars. It is explicitly stated that 巫 is not related to 工 but to 玉."Today's scholars don't see that link anymore" but yesterday's scholars did? And every last one of them converted to your way of thinking?
No, but Lewis is only quoting the Shuowen - a sources which isn't always considered reliable when it comes to the etymology of Chinese characters. See about the reliability of the Shuowen (and Wieger's 'Chinese Characters') the entries by kentsuarez in this thread.FOOTNOTE 50, P. 441: "It is interesting in terms of the mythology of Fu Xi to find the carpenter's square in this complex of characters pertaining to wu and fertility. The gloss on the character wu also insists on the fact that it is synonymous with gong "skill, artisan."
Lewis is not about to say one thing and then hide the correct interpretation in a footnote on p. 441. Lewis clearly mentions a connection over and over that gong is related to shaman, wu, fertility, the carpenter's square, and Fu Xi.
I never said it was YOUR imagination, I only object against the fancy way you feel you can link all the data together.That gong is closely related to Shaman is not my vivid imagination, this theory is supported by many scholars as well as Wikipedia.
No, they don't. They don't because Lewis uses the Shuowen as his source, which is unreliable, and Allan doesn't talk about wu being related to gong.The character wu is 3,000 - 3,600 years old and is derived from gong 工 "work" and ren 人 "person". You may agree or disagree with this statement but it is not a vivid imagination nor storytelling that links gong with shaman; the writings of Lewis and Allan support the statement.
You fail to check your sources. You readily accept the conclusions of an author, without checking the path how he arrived at that conclusion.But I feel I have provided credible sources as well, my views should not be reduced to mere fabrication just because we disagree.
Yes.If, as you claim, gui is not a sundial then the information that I have been quoting from, Lise's website, is incorrect.
Yes. Just because he says so doesn't mean he is correct. After all, he doesn't give his sources, so it is impossible to check what he says.Here is another source that equates gui with sundial, this would be incorrect as well according to you.
I never said I was. I am not studying the Luoshu, I don't maintain a website about it - I'm just playing the devil's advocate. You, however, write about it. If you're not objective in the way you research your topic, how reliable can your findings be?Objective? Thats a joke Harmen, you are not objective.
No, just mentioning that 'sundial' isn't the only logical explanation. Since the Zhouli is the only book that gives gui with a meaning of 'sundial' you have to be careful with reading gui as such. Also because it talks about 土圭, not just 圭. Since we have gui 晷 as a homonym for 圭, with a meaning of 'shadow cast by the sun', or 'sundial' of you like, it is more likely that 圭 is a loan for 晷.Oh, gui was just used once (in reference to sundial) so it doesn't really count and its context was most likely a loan character...... Just using what fits, Harmen?
No, just mentioning that 'sundial' isn't the only logical explanation.
The Guwenzi Gulin summarises the findings of several scholars. It is explicitly stated that 巫 is not related to 工 but to 玉.
No, but Lewis is only quoting the Shuowen - a source which isn't always considered reliable when it comes to the etymology of Chinese characters.
.... and Allan doesn't talk about wu being related to gong.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).