The Five Worst Translations of Hexagram Names

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

Though I suppose not being received or accepted or even heard may feel very much like being blocked...even though it isn't quite. I recently cast 12uc about a response I may get for something. I got no response. The fact that I got no response, was not received, felt as if blocked but of course was not. No one was doing anything as active as blocking, they weren't there, weren't looking. My subjective experience of that may be to feel blocked, but that's all. So I don't agree that in hex 12 the 'opposition' is there, not at all.

So when you say

The problem is they're here, and - by definition - they're impossible to relate to or work with (11-style).

Yes they are impossible to relate to but it's not because they are blocking it's because they are not receiving.

hilary · Apr 16, 2014

Yes, walking away can be an option in 12, or just going back to bed. What you can't do is find a way to achieve what you originally intended - because that way is blocked. Introducing this one to people, I generally find myself talking about banging your head against a wall. 'Noble one's constancy bears no fruit': being more imaginative, visionary, ethical, loyal... just means banging your head against the same wall in a more imaginative, visionary, loyal and ethical way. The non-people (whoever or whatever they are) are entrenched andactive in preventing great things.

By the way - the non-people occur twice in Yi. Once in 12.0, once in 8.3 - I think you conflated the two. In 8.3 the point is indeed that you just can't relate to them, and it's sensible to walk away. These are people who by definition can't be part of anything harmonious, and presumably you can find other people to join with. In 12 I think it's more important that - again by definition - they're opposed to anything creative/ constructive - but that was exactly what you wanted to do, so you're stuck.

As for 6 and 39...

6: I want the cake, you want the cake. Before we sell our worldly goods to buy weapons for the fight, we'd do well to stop long enough to listen to a wise man who introduces the concept of slices, something we'd never imagined before.

39: I want cake. So to make one, I shall cut down the trees in my garden, dig out all the roots, plough and fertilise the soil, sow the grain, harvest it, grind it to flour by hand in a pestle and mortar... wait, what do you mean, bakery?

12: I want to bake beautiful cakes to bring joy to the world. But the government has made cakes illegal. (Or someone burned my kitchen down and the insurance won't pay, or I am so paralysed by guilt about contributing to the obesity epidemic that I never get started... etc, etc...)

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

and BTW I thought the point of the initial post was to help with the misconceptions that so mislead newbies in particular. I mean those 5 translations of hexagram names are the worse culprits. I can't count the number of times we have had to say in SR that no, hexagram 15 doesn't necessarily mean you must be humble and so on. How many times have these inaccurate translations of hexagram names misled people ? I know I was misled by them for many years. I thought that was the point of Brad's initial post. I used to think 'peace' for 11, meant peacefulness and people still are being misled now.

So my view of this thread so far is the 5 worst translations are being pointed out...and I'd have that as a sticky personally, yet some responses that have come back seem concerned that this is not quite egalitarian enough with the previous less accurate translations

To me that seems to miss the point. I don't think Brad was saying these other translations were 'wrong' just least central, less central to the target, and so actually limiting in meaning, as AQ said already. If we get to the core meaning then at least, like the target imagery, we can go to the peripheries from there. But it doesn't seem a good idea to me, practically, to start with a hexagram title that is taken from the very peripheries of it's core meaning. That is not so helpful to me.

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

Crossed posts.

Yes, walking away can be an option in 12, or just going back to bed. What you can't do is find a way to achieve what you originally intended - because that way is blocked. Introducing this one to people, I generally find myself talking about banging your head against a wall. 'Noble one's constancy bears no fruit': being more imaginative, visionary, ethical, loyal... just means banging your head against the same wall in a more imaginative, visionary, loyal and ethical way. The non-people (whoever or whatever they are) are entrenched andactive in preventing great things.

Yes feeling/being blocked is part of hex 12, but here in this thread we are just discussing hexagram names. Hexagram names have a huge impact don't they ? If I ask about a physical problem, something of a physical nature either bodily or in the world, I think the name 'separating' is more useful than 'blocked' because 'blocked' implies an agent purposely blocking and that is not always the case. It is often the case but not always. Thinking of an engine problem or something. So I don't deny feeling or being blocked in 12 is not the case, just that hexagram name 'blocked' is less use than 'separating' IMO.

Similarly with hexagram 15. Being modest may be part of hex 15, one may need at times to get more...modest. But to call the hexagram 'Modesty' or 'Humility' and so on misleads as it doesn't encompass the central meaning of keeping it real, integrity. As has too often had to be said in SR (when it is 99.9% of times assumed that hex 15 means being humble

) acting with integrity as who you are , no more no less, may at times mean being more forthright, more assertive and so on. For those who answer in SR it would be quite welcome to have a sticky with these 5 worse translations to save repetition.

By the way - the non-people occur twice in Yi. Once in 12.0, once in 8.3 - I think you conflated the two. In 8.3 the point is indeed that you just can't relate to them, and it's sensible to walk away. These are people who by definition can't be part of anything harmonious, and presumably you can find other people to join with. In 12 I think it's more important that - again by definition - they're opposed to anything creative/ constructive - but that was exactly what you wanted to do, so you're stuck.

You are right, I mistakenly conflated 8.3 with 12.3. 12.3 is about shame and doesn't mention non people in the line. But hex 12 does.

As for 6 and 39...

6: I want the cake, you want the cake. Before we sell our worldly goods to buy weapons for the fight, we'd do well to stop long enough to listen to a wise man who introduces the concept of slices, something we'd never imagined before.

39: I want cake. So to make one, I shall cut down the trees in my garden, dig out all the roots, plough and fertilise the soil, sow the grain, harvest it, grind it to flour by hand in a pestle and mortar... wait, what do you mean, bakery?

12: I want to bake beautiful cakes to bring joy to the world. But the government has made cakes illegal. (Or someone burned my kitchen down and the insurance won't pay, or I am so paralysed by guilt about contributing to the obesity epidemic that I never get started... etc, etc...)

39 is funny :rofl:

But as we are talking of hexagram names in this thread, not all the meanings within the hexagram then I don't see your point really. I already understand those meanings you describe...but we are speaking of Names. Your example for 12 is all about human agency blocking. The trigrams are just separating. I think it is better to stay near the trigram meaning here. I have had 12 for many things, physical things, that had nothing to do with anyone blocking me and where 'separating' was a far more useful name.

I think the importance of the name should be that it widens the scope of meaning rather than limit it as AQ said. 'Separating' encompasses far more than 'Blocked'. In other translations, and I don't know them all, but often the hexagram name really limits and narrows a person's perception of the hexagram meaning.

You have to admit 'Peace' for 11 is awful. 'Grace' for 22 is not helpful. 'Modesty' for 15 is unhelpful...and I think 'Blocked' for 12 is limiting. What was the other one.....oh 7, I'm not sure about that, haven't thought about it much yet. I think as long as it's not seen as 'battle' it's okay but I think idea of reserve army/group is nearer.

hilary · Apr 16, 2014

Trojina said:
... I don't think Brad was saying these other translations were 'wrong' just least central, less central to the target...

NemeanMagik said:
So, Bradford, are you saying only you know what is correct and all the other translations are wrong?

bradford said:
In those five cases, absolutely.

Let's not water down what Brad is saying - where would be the fun in that?

I agree about 11 - not, in practice, peaceful. And 15 - not a call to self-abasement. And 22, in that people tend to see 'Grace' and think of the divine sort, when it has nothing whatsoever to do with that. That's not so much a mistranslation, though, as people misapplying the word without the context.

Certainly we should try to get closer to the centre of the target. Only how will we know where to look for it, and how can we tell when we've hit it?

There's a good question. Brad, how did you determine - for instance - that myopia is the 'centre of the target' for 22?

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

Crossed posts again, just answered your last post

Let's not water down what Brad is saying - where would be the fun in that?

Fun ? I just see these objections as obstructive, (quite 12ish actually :mischief:

)because I see the misunderstandings caused by these names everyday in SR !! It's not just an academic argument...but if you want people to go on and on being led down the garden path for the sake of everything being absolutely equal even though some translations are total piffle then

Certainly we should try to get closer to the centre of the target. Only how will we know where to look for it, and how can we tell when we've hit it?

you already know perfectly well don't you

hilary · Apr 16, 2014

I think I know... but I've ended up with quite different ideas from Brad's in some cases. So now what?

bradford · Apr 16, 2014

hilary said:
how did you determine - for instance - that myopia is the 'centre of the target' for 22?

The eye sees and the flame shines no further than the mountain.
So the Junzi might clarify local affairs but not presume to execute justice.
Plus the surfaces of things, as is implied by the meaning of the word bi (adornment),
is the subject matter or theme of all six lines. Any core meaning has to be a key
to understanding all six of the lines.

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

hilary said:
I think I know... but I've ended up with quite different ideas from Brad's in some cases. So now what?

Different ideas for the names of the hexagrams ? Not very much as far as I can see by looking at what you call 11, 15 and 22. In what ways, apart from calling 12 'blocked' does your idea of the hexagram names differ significantly from Brad's ?

hilary · Apr 16, 2014

Or in other words: we agree that good translations are better than misleading translations. We don't agree as to whether 12 is closer to 'separating' or 'blocked' (I could come up with some good examples where there is no 'separating' to the experience but a whole lot of blocking), or whether 22 is 'myopia' or 'images to express the essence'.

You and I both tend to be guided by experience: if it works consistently in readings, it's good; if people are being led up the garden path, it's wrong. Your experience says 12 is about a kind of metaphysical separation, energies moving apart. Mine says it's circumstances/agencies preventing flow. Trigrams support the 'separation' idea, text supports the 'agency' idea. (Though I dare say each could be made to support the other with a bit of ingenuity. You can say the problem with non-people is you can't connect with them, so it's about separation. Or that heaven above earth feels like divine opposition, so it's about being blocked. Qian as outer trigram quite often does feel like the ineluctable, uncompromising power of heaven.)

Anyway... where are we going to find the authority to say which of us is right?

Or shall we just take a translation from the dictionary, where I don't think we'll find either 'separating' or 'blocked'? How about 'No'?

hilary · Apr 16, 2014

bradford said:
The eye sees and the flame shines no further than the mountain.
So the Junzi might clarify local affairs but not presume to execute justice.
Plus the surfaces of things, as is implied by the meaning of the word bi (adornment),
is the subject matter or theme of all six lines. Any core meaning has to be a key
to understanding all six of the lines.

Trojina said:
Different ideas for the names of the hexagrams ? Not very much as far as I can see by looking at what you call 11, 15 and 22. In what ways, apart from calling 12 'blocked' does your idea of the hexagram names differ significantly from Brad's ?

OK, both of these were posted in the time it took me to come up with 'other words'. I think we differ most on 22, so let's get into that one.

It's about the surfaces of things, yes. But these are not just random, not just superficial, they're images we create for a purpose. Marriage, for instance (key to understanding at least 3 of the lines). Instead of just getting together under a mulberry bush, we have a marriage ceremony: gifts (line 5), carriages, bridal procession (lines 1, 4).

22 is paired with 21, follows from it and completes it (any core meaning has to make sense within the pair). You bite through to the essence, and then you bring it out, express it. The sequence is pretty clear for this one: 'Things cannot carelessly unite and be completed, and so Beauty follows.' You need 22 to complete what 21 - with all its determination and powers of maybe-shamanic insight - was aiming for.

We adorn things, make them bright and shining, to communicate something. This is not optional or superficial. It's especially clear in the case of marriage: if there were no wedding, no ceremony, there would be no marriage. If there were no surface, there would be no substance - not the same substance, anyway.

Only of course the suitor is not purely a suitor, that's just what he's doing today. Tomorrow he'll be a minister, or whatever, and then he will need a new appearance to express that new truth. And yes, if we get stuck on just one appearance and believe that to be the absolute truth, we're in trouble. The junzi's noticed that the firelight flickering over the rock face creates constantly-changing pictures. Or maybe he knows something about volcanoes, and has observed that the fire within mountains means that the most solid of rocks can change shape.

But 22 is not just about 'not being able to see past things'. It's about how we make things real, make it possible to relate to them at all, by making them visible. Whether or not you can see past the particular appearance they're given in the moment is just one aspect of that.

22, by the way, is a nice hexagram to be using to have this conversation.

sooo · Apr 16, 2014

If Brad's view of 22 is superficial, then it's his view that is superficial. I don't have an objection that 22 could represent something superficial, or that it could represent nearsightedness, but I think it misses the bulls-eye by a mile, assuming a target could be that large. No name for the hexagram (or any hexagram) is going to nail it dead on in every single instance, that's just wishful thinking on the writer's part, at best. At worst, it's going to mislead some people some of the times regardless what name one gives it. I'm fond of LiSe's Flower Power. Though there's no question there's a bit of tongue-in cheek humor intended, it speaks more to the necessity of the opening of the inner essence to the outside world, as shown by this beautiful example of a cacti called The Queen of the Night.

I had the good fortune to witness this example of 22 while staying at a friend's desert home. When he explained that his particular one was witnessed to bloom one night each year, I was amazed, not only by its beauty but most of all by the manner of its function of proliferation.

[video=youtube;DCFGm9_yIPw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DCFGm9_yIPw#t=0[/video]

Also called Tan Hua Yi Xian 谭华黟县

AskingQuestions · Apr 16, 2014

Bruce - I have a question. What is it about the flower, that gives it it's power? How does a flower work?
(this is a trick question! so answer thoughtfully

)

hilary · Apr 16, 2014

Serendipity: immediately after posting the above I looked at my inbox. First subject line: 'Is your business invisible?' promoting a series on branding.

sooo · Apr 16, 2014

AskingQuestions said:
Bruce - I have a question. What is it about the flower, that gives it it's power? How does a flower work?
(this is a trick question! so answer thoughtfully )

Trick or not, I can't answer that, Courtney, other than to ask, what makes life work? Biologically it would be within the root of the plant, which btw, in the Queen of the Night cacti can grow as large as 5 to 40+ lbs.

As far as life having a meaning, I'll defer to Joseph Campbell, when asked, what is the meaning of life? He answered: Life has no meaning! What is the meaning of a flower!

But if you're getting at the outer beauty which draws the bees and moths to pollinate, I'd agree with that completely. A woman wears lipstick for the same primal reason, using the analogy from The Naked Ape.

In another example, the same idea is expressed in, why does a warrior wear war paint? It is the outward display of the inner warrior, which is to put fear into the heart of their enemy.

What is your answer to your question?

sooo · Apr 16, 2014

hilary said:
Serendipity: immediately after posting the above I looked at my inbox. First subject line: 'Is your business invisible?' promoting a series on branding.

There it is!

AskingQuestions · Apr 16, 2014

I personally feel that 22 is about the surface of things and also how that attracts and drives us. I used 'adornment' as the translation of 賁 but wanted to say something more like 'aesthetically pleasing and confusing decorations'.

Gua 22 is the Bling of the Yijing.

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

Or in other words: we agree that good translations are better than misleading translations. We don't agree as to whether 12 is closer to 'separating' or 'blocked' (I could come up with some good examples where there is no 'separating' to the experience but a whole lot of blocking), or whether 22 is 'myopia' or 'images to express the essence'.

We are talking about the topic of hexagram titles, not all that the hexagram may contain. The ideal I imagine is to reach the core for the name. Where we go after that is another matter. The trigrams do not show a block

You and I both tend to be guided by experience: if it works consistently in readings, it's good; if people are being led up the garden path, it's wrong. Your experience says 12 is about a kind of metaphysical separation, energies moving apart. Mine says it's circumstances/agencies preventing flow. Trigrams support the 'separation' idea, text supports the 'agency' idea. (Though I dare say each could be made to support the other with a bit of ingenuity. You can say the problem with non-people is you can't connect with them, so it's about separation. Or that heaven above earth feels like divine opposition, so it's about being blocked. Qian as outer trigram quite often does feel like the ineluctable, uncompromising power of heaven.)

I think for hexagram titles it is good to find the centre of the target via the trigrams. I wasn't especially going by my experience, as in my experience 12 can sure feel like being blocked. But I have also seen 12 in plenty of purely physical situations and it doesn't look like a blockage, just like the trigrams really look nothing like a blockage. I mean look at them, they just don't look like a 'blockage' do they ?

Anyway... where are we going to find the authority to say which of us is right?

Me. It's me who is right of course !

and the trigrams.

Or shall we just take a translation from the dictionary, where I don't think we'll find either 'separating' or 'blocked'? How about 'No'?

'no' ? I don't know about 'no' for 12 . I don't know if the title of 12 is 'no'. I can't see 'no' as much use as a title for 12 though.

sooo · Apr 16, 2014

AskingQuestions said:
I personally feel that 22 is about the surface of things and also how that attracts and drives us. I used 'adornment' as the translation of 賁 but wanted to say something more like 'aesthetically pleasing and confusing decorations'.

Gua 22 is the Bling of the Yijing.

I imagine you and Brad are pretty much on the same page with that. I do see that as exactly what he describes: nearsightedness. A nearsighted view of 22.

I think I've said there are times and applications where I'm fine with that as an answer, but I can't see it as the only application nor as a primary one, as my previous examples have attempted to point out. I believe it goes far deeper than that. Why would a book as heavy (showing my age there) as the IC spend 1/64th of itself on bling? Hex 22 - Bling... it is a pretty catchy though. (note to Hilary) The I Bling?

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

OK, both of these were posted in the time it took me to come up with 'other words'. I think we differ most on 22, so let's get into that one.

You have 'beauty' for 22, Brad has 'adornment'. To me, as beauty is a value, what is beauty to one is not to another, then 'adornment' seems nearer the core of 22, as far as I can tell, not being a translator.

I know 'flower power' doesn't work for me in my readings.

It's about the surfaces of things, yes. But these are not just random, not just superficial, they're images we create for a purpose. Marriage, for instance (key to understanding at least 3 of the lines). Instead of just getting together under a mulberry bush, we have a marriage ceremony: gifts (line 5), carriages, bridal procession (lines 1, 4).

But just because images may be created for a purpose it does not make them more than superficial. And the trouble with the word 'superficial' is it carries pejorative overtones which I don't think is intended, at least I wouldn't intend it that way. Trigrams again. Fire on the mountain. It's a show. A marriage ceremony is a show.

22 is paired with 21, follows from it and completes it (any core meaning has to make sense within the pair). You bite through to the essence, and then you bring it out, express it. The sequence is pretty clear for this one: 'Things cannot carelessly unite and be completed, and so Beauty follows.' You need 22 to complete what 21 - with all its determination and powers of maybe-shamanic insight - was aiming for.

I'm not sure about that as I really don't think with pairs that one follows from the other. I think one is the other side of the other, 2 sides of a coin. So to say 22 follows from 21 is like saying one side of a coin follows the other in sequence. I think that's story making, making things fit a linear story. I didn't believe that in your book either so I'm consistent with that anyway. So you don't bite through to the core in order to bring out the essence, you just see 2 sides, one biting through to truth, the other, 22 making some show of a transient truth for a transient purpose...like mating.

We adorn things, make them bright and shining, to communicate something. This is not optional or superficial. It's especially clear in the case of marriage: if there were no wedding, no ceremony, there would be no marriage. If there were no surface, there would be no substance - not the same substance, anyway.

A ceremony is always just a ceremony. And of course in the deeper sense a true marriage needs no ceremony. Things and people can marry without ceremony. But you are talking of the legal state of marriage, as a contract, a change of state, and this is fundamentally a surface thing. Having all the ceremonies doesn't make the marriage deeper or better. The trouble is with this example it gets a bit muddly if applied to union rather than marriage as just a legal state.

Only of course the suitor is not purely a suitor, that's just what he's doing today. Tomorrow he'll be a minister, or whatever, and then he will need a new appearance to express that new truth. And yes, if we get stuck on just one appearance and believe that to be the absolute truth, we're in trouble. The junzi's noticed that the firelight flickering over the rock face creates constantly-changing pictures. Or maybe he knows something about volcanoes, and has observed that the fire within mountains means that the most solid of rocks can change shape.

.

Yes. there is nothing to disagree with there.

But 22 is not just about 'not being able to see past things'. It's about how we make things real, make it possible to relate to them at all, by making them visible. Whether or not you can see past the particular appearance they're given in the moment is just one aspect of that.

22, by the way, is a nice hexagram to be using to have this conversation.

Yes it's making visible by clothing of all kinds, by adornments, not necessarily beautiful ones either I suppose. I mean a judge dons a wig to show his role, it's not beautiful, but he is adorning himself to show his role to others.

Back to the topic which I think you strayed from, that is hexagram names. I'd say the names Bradford uses are better and that the 5 'worst translations' of hexagram titles are actually the worst translations of hexagram titles, as far as I can see anyway. Seems a pity to get side tracked from what was being said there to go onto defending worse translations...

hmesker · Apr 16, 2014

When you translate the name of a hexagram, what means do you use to come up with the best translation? I see many translators use the images of the trigrams to justify their translation, or they use line positions as well. In my book that is not strictly 'translating', it is more 'interpreting'. Because if a definition does not match their view of the trigrams they easily discard that definition.

Also, why does hardly any translator look at the variant texts, or loan characters, or both? I'm not saying these contain the Holy Grail for translators, but I do believe that they are needed to arrive at a solid translation in which all options are considered. Or is the received text of the Yi beyond doubt?

In the case of hexagram 22, the Mawangdui text uses fan 蘩 as the name of the hexagram. The pronunciation of this character pushes the sound of the character 賁 in the direction of the sound fen, which, besides bi, is another sound for the character. With that pronunciation 賁 is a loan for fen 奮, 'to express, to make visible'.

忠誠盛於內，賁於外...
When loyalty and sincerity become complete within, they become apparent without...
(Xunzi, tr. John Knoblock)

The context of the line texts show that 賁 is a verb, so this could make sense. Or is using loan characters not done?

I envy those translators who are 100% sure how the Yi should be read and translated. After more than 30 years I still have doubts about the true and original meaning of many hexagrams.

AskingQuestions · Apr 16, 2014

I did a first draft of translating the Gua Ci and Da Xiang and I am currently starting my Yao Ci translating. When I approached each Gau Ming I dissected the heck out of it. I really wanted to explore the various parts that made up the character. So for instance with Gua 21- 噬嗑 - Shì Hé. I name it 'Biting Through' just as most of us do. But I go on to break it down like this:

噬 – a picture of a mouth (at left), two bamboo stalks (up top) and a wizard/witch (at bottom). The left half of this character means to divine with the stems of yarrow.
This character means to bite, chew, gnaw or snap at.

嗑 – a picture of a mouth (at left), a person whom is leaving or stepping away and voicing this (at top) and a container (at bottom). The left half of this character means “what?” or “why not?”.
This character means to crack something between the teeth, the sound of teeth hitting together, through, closed, reproach.

I still arrive at the best name as 'biting through', however it is much richer than that!

Dissecting each character, which I have been doing to every single one, has come up with some very interesting syncronicities and created what I think it be a thicker picture.... confusing but thicker...

bradford · Apr 16, 2014

hmesker said:
I envy those translators who are 100% sure how the Yi should be read and translated. After more than 30 years I still have doubts about the true and original meaning of many hexagrams.

Hi Harmen-
You have to feel yourself getting old, first. It's that panicky feeling that you'll never get the job done before you die that pushes you into print. Then, once it's in print you have to defend it. That's where the certainty comes from. Lucky for you, you still have some time.

hilary · Apr 16, 2014

Trojina said:
You have 'beauty' for 22, Brad has 'adornment'. To me, as beauty is a value, what is beauty to one is not to another, then 'adornment' seems nearer the core of 22, as far as I can tell, not being a translator.

Yes - I wished I could have found a verb for it, but 'beautifying' is just ridiculous and 'image-making' is an interpretation, not a translation.

A ceremony is always just a ceremony. And of course in the deeper sense a true marriage needs no ceremony. Things and people can marry without ceremony. But you are talking of the legal state of marriage, as a contract, a change of state, and this is fundamentally a surface thing. Having all the ceremonies doesn't make the marriage deeper or better. The trouble is with this example it gets a bit muddly if applied to union rather than marriage as just a legal state.

No, a ceremony is not just a ceremony, not when a ceremony makes something happen. The ceremonies don't make the marriage better, they make the marriage.

How many people do you know who are married without having got married?

The ceremony is the happening. Maybe this is a slightly ancient-Chinese view of ritual, but no harm in that. (Whereas in modern English, 'ceremony' is more or less synonymous with 'empty pageantry'.)

Think of performative language - words that make something happen even as they say it:
'I name this ship the "Queen Elizabeth"'
or
'I declare this meeting open'
or
'I now pronounce you man and wife'
come to that. The marriage ceremony is like that - it is the happening. The petals, colour and scent are the flower.

I wouldn't be happy giving the Image priority over the original text. (And you are doing that - not just going with the trigrams, which can be interpreted in other ways.)

By the way, in the rankings of worst-translated hexagram names, what about 'The Taming Power of the Small'?

bradford · Apr 16, 2014

hilary said:
By the way, in the rankings of worst-translated hexagram names, what about 'The Taming Power of the Small'?

For me that's being ruled by lots of little things, like herding cats, Lots of details adding up. Or like the fine grit of sandpaper as a subtle wearing force. Some architect came up with the phrase "God is in the details", most likely in the process of congratulating himself. Someone soon followed with "the devil is in the details", which soon became a more popular quote. Anyway, it's crowded down there in those details. And in the process of micromanaging them you wind up getting ruled by them.

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

No, a ceremony is not just a ceremony, not when a ceremony makes something happen. The ceremonies don't make the marriage better, they make the marriage.

The ceremony doesn't make anything happen unless you mean in a religious sense...which would depend on your religious views I suppose. I mean I see what happens is that legally there is a contract and so the person's legal and social status changes on being married, but that doesn't mean any other change really happens within them...unless you're religious/spiritual beliefs tell you something has happened inwardly of course.

How many people do you know who are married without having got married?

Lots and lots....and lots. People who are committed to each other who live together/or not, are in my view every bit as married as those who had some ceremony. This is where it gets muddly. I think you are talking of marriage just as the contract, I was going into talking of marriage in it's truer deeper sense as real union which is a different thing.

'I now pronounce you man and wife'
come to that. The marriage ceremony is like that - it is the happening. The petals, colour and scent are the flower.

Marriage can and always has happened quite without the need of ceremony. Ceremony is a social marker, a status indicator and so on. Does it get any where near what meaningful union is ? Not that I've ever noticed. However I have the feeling we are talking at cross purposes as I veer off into speaking of union as independent of marriage ceremony. What is the point of ceremony ? It is a marker, an adornment, a ritual. You are saying ritual makes something really happen ? Maybe it gives an outer form to what is meant to be happening...but it really is not the happening.

If I follow your reasoning then you'd be saying for example that a funeral is actually the happening of death ! A funeral is no more death itself than a marriage is union. The funeral marks the occasion, is a ritual, a ceremony but it certainly is not the death itself is it ?

So would you say the funeral is the death ?

Making pronouncements that something is so in a ceremonial manner does not truly make it so although it can give it the appearance of making it so. Someone saying this man and woman are joined does not make them joined in any way other than contractually/ legally. Pronouncing someone dead has no impact on their actual death...(unless they come back to life in the coffin)

By the way, in the rankings of worst-translated hexagram names, what about 'The Taming Power of the Small'?

Yes I have often wondered about that one !

hilary · Apr 16, 2014

We are wildly off topic now, but never mind.

Getting married makes you married. Doesn't make a good relationship or a spiritual union or anything else, just a marriage. The rest is still to do, or not. I'm not trying to talk about the spiritual essence of relationship, just about marriage, which is a social reality: not just that these two decided to live together, but that society recognises them as a unit. Another example would be a christening, or naming ceremony, or transition-to-adulthood ceremony from whatever culture you care to mention.

Anyway... our culture has such a thing as a meaningless ceremony or empty ritual. Ancient China doesn't. Rituals are real events. So when 22 talks about the ceremonial of marriage, it's talking about something real.

Pronouncing people married is performative language; pronouncing someone dead is not, or not without some remarkable powers of black magic.

Trojina · Apr 16, 2014

We were always off topic since the topic was hexagram names

Anyway... our culture has such a thing as a meaningless ceremony or empty ritual. Ancient China doesn't

.

It must have had or where would 54.6 come from ? Wherever there is ritual, whatever time, it can be, has the potential to be, empty ritual. It's an empty ritual when your heart isn't in it and how can one know what was in the hearts of those undertaking ritual in ancient China. I see what you are saying , that the place of ceremony was quite different but I think the status of marriage is an adornment, a mantle.

Anyway yes this seems well off topic

Pronouncing people married is performative language; pronouncing someone dead is not, or not without some remarkable powers of black magic.

Why though, it's the same thing. Performative language does not make real change, it makes a mantle of change. I see no difference between pronouncing someone married and pronouncing someone dead :rofl:

hehe that sounded funny...what I mean is neither make anything organically real happen.
The christening is not the birth and so on.

AskingQuestions · Apr 17, 2014

...... let's not rush into this marriage thing, okay?

sooo · Apr 17, 2014

AskingQuestions said:
...... let's not rush into this marriage thing, okay?

You've dashed my hopes!

The Five Worst Translations of Hexagram Names

Supporter

Administrator

Supporter

Supporter

Administrator

Supporter

Administrator

(deceased)

Supporter

Administrator

Administrator

sooo

Guest

visitor

Administrator

sooo

Guest

sooo

Guest

visitor

Supporter

sooo

Guest

Supporter

hmesker

Guest

visitor

(deceased)

Administrator

(deceased)

Supporter

Administrator

Supporter

visitor

sooo

Guest