...life can be translucent

Menu

Hexagram 33 - The Land of the Pig?

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Thanks for posting, Breakmov.

A lot of that is very true for trying to trick cats, too. šŸ˜¹

(Er, not related to slaughtering obviously. But in their minds apparently medicine, teeth cleaning, and going to the vet are right up there with it...)
 

breakmov

visitor
Joined
Sep 13, 2017
Messages
366
Reaction score
259
Hi Liselle , thank you.:)
yes, with the cats, too.
It is as if they (pigs, cats...) were "talking" to us: although our relationship is owner/animal, although there is a hex19 relationship between us, I do not let this relationship interfere with situations that I feel are not good for me and so I,pig,cat..., without you being able to choose, instinctively retreat (hex33)

cheers to everyone,

breakmov
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
I saw that thread. Hilary actually explained some of it and showed how he got it from perfectly normal things like trigrams. That helps imo, because then it seems safe to assume they're all explainable like that, if only we knew what to look at.

I'm actually not sure if calling dui "The Joyous Dancer" or upper dui "Rising Mists" helps. Yes, because it helps bring it alive, or because at least we're nudged to think in images at all? No, because Rising Mists is only one possibility? It might be interesting to follow upper dui through his whole book and see when and how he uses Rising Mists, whether he ever calls upper dui anything else in a different context, etc.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
could't we then just as easily have 33 be about dogs, or elephant, or bears ... and that any of these would also work?
Probably but what difference does it make? If you agree 33 is about some creature retreating from harm, why does it bother you that various authors picked a pig?

Even if the character dun isn't really "pig" (what you linked to about compound characters), there is a connection. In that sense it's not made up. As I said before, dun isn't "otter + web-foot = swim away fast," it's "pig + road-foot = run away / escape." So naturally Karcher et al picked pig to illustrate with, not otter. "Pig" fits the idea of it, and there's a pig sitting right there in the name character...

I agree 33 could just as easily be written without referring to any animal at all. Even in this version of Karcher the lines don't have pigs. Hilary's don't, Wilhelm's don't, etc.
 
Last edited:

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
Where I might already struggle with interpreting the Yi, now on top of that, I have to also struggle with interpreting or intuiting Karcher's interpretation of an interpretation?
That is a very good point! :zen:

Also thanks for the further quotes. I looked in the online version and it's the same, so I'm trying to give "Tiger Spirit" a go...
This strategic retreat gathers and focuses positive qualities, connecting you to Heaven-energy, the Dragon force. It is a retreat that allows you to conquer in the end, leaving the Small People who must adapt to circumstances behind. It specifically refers to a sojourn in the Mountain Shrine, talking to the Tiger Spirit and the Mountain Men, the Sages hidden beyond the borders of the civilized world, a retreat to a more primitive state that evokes animal maskers and hidden transformation rituals.

Maybe this is also about trigrams. Heaven-energy and Dragon force are surely outer qian. "Gathers and focuses positive qualities" - maybe gen attributes, the protective mountain?

If you change 33's entire inner trigram and let outer qian alone, you get hexagram 10 - I wonder if that's where "talking to the Tiger Spirit" comes from?
::|||| ||:|||
33-----10

"Beyond the borders" - mountains are boundaries...
"a more primitive state" - treading a tiger's tail without being eaten seems like it would be a primal experience...
"that evokes animal maskers and hidden transformation rituals" - that sounds like 49 and 50, maybe the 49-50 pair?

It is interesting how symmetrical 33's changes to 49 and 50 are. Lines 1 and 6 change to 49, and lines 2 and 5 change to 50 -
::|||| |:|||:----- ::|||| :|||:|
33-----49----------33-----50

- but I have no idea why that's in the same sentence with what seems to be a 33 to 10 discussion, or why he picked those line changes and not others (unless it's just the symmetry).

I guess where I am at the moment might be that I'm delighted to know what stuck out to Karcher and what he makes of it - "sojourn in the Mountain Shrine, talking to the Tiger Spirit" really makes me want to go look at my 33 to 10 readings if that's what that even means - but I also think it'd be nice if he'd just tell us! "The inner trigram change is a sojourn in the Mountain Shrine..." Unless not telling us is his poet's prerogative, again. Or done on purpose to make us think. šŸ˜©


I like what you did with the trigrams. It fits nicely with "inner" and "outer" applied to "Retreat," I think.
I think a better name/handle might be 'Seeking the Proper (Correct) Distance': at times we want to or need to be up close to something (a person, a situation, an idea) in order to gain an understanding of it - so here Mountain is in the forefront, maybe so much so that's all we see (and the bugs and tree roots, and grains of dirt look really really close!)

But sometimes we need to get much more distance from something in order to understand it, or see it clearly, so the mountains become little bumps on the horizon, and the very vast, Great Blue Sky is what we're seeing!


But to answer your question, I think it does make a difference, because I don't agree that 33 is only about a creature retreating from harm.
Yes, I see that now that you've posted your mountain/sky ideas, which - appreciated.
 

breakmov

visitor
Joined
Sep 13, 2017
Messages
366
Reaction score
259
Hi Freedda, thank you .

I don't have Karcher's book so I don't know how he brings out the contents of Hex33.
I don't actively study the characters in Chinese either, but I have some books that address the meaning of the title in Chinese and everyone agrees on the idea of "a little pig with the motivation, stamina and determination to instinctively withdraw from danger.

(I especially like Cyrille Javary's book because it deals with each of the lines in great detail and many details in the choice of translation...for example in line 1 you have the tail where there is a chance of being that of a pig, a tiger or a fox...it leans towards the "pig's tail")



My experience with pigs is very much related to what I described above and therefore for me it is natural to associate that attitude that the pig (or the cat... or felino) has and the idea that hex33 represents as a whole.

You notice that a pig has a kind of preservation instinct that does not compromise with its owner. The owner feeds and cares for him, but at no time does he let this relationship take precedence over his instinct - the same for cats.
The same cannot be said of other animals like dogs, horses or sheep. Each of these has a much more committed and dependent relationship with its owner.
We have the dog that is easily influenced by its owner. We have the horse that creates a relationship so strong that it does not mind going into battle with its owner. And the sheep that accepts death by the hands of its owner innocently and without opposition.

But the question remains: why is there an association of pig and not another animal (for example tiger or fox) in the description of the name of the hex33.
My answer will always be an exercise of imagination of the context in which was written the basic text of yijing: the chou dynasty and the customs that made the day-to-day of that people. A king who wanted to create/synthesize something that was simple and easy and that had practical application in the context of his time.


I imagine King Wen and his son using the normal day-to-day experience of their poople raising and killing a pig, and especially the very own instinct of this animal, and transposing this simple and intuitive knowledge to the human sphere in hex33.

cheers to everyone, :)

breakmov
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
I know we're exploring here, but a part of me wants to say, 'good god woman!

Okay. šŸ˜¶ (*grin*)


I did say
Freedda said:
Where I might already struggle with interpreting the Yi, now on top of that, I have to also struggle with interpreting or intuiting Karcher's interpretation of an interpretation?
Liselle said:
That is a very good point!


In all seriousness, I wonder (and it's truly a wonderment, since the bit of time I spent on Tiger Spirit is the longest I've ever spent on Karcher at all) if maybe his approach is meant to be absorbed leisurely, as background, so it just adds to the store of ideas that simmer in one's head? I mean, I can't imagine opening Karcher when I have an urgent reading in front of me.

But with everything else about Yi that I have trouble with, not to mention everything else in life, where (oh where šŸŽ» ) do I best spend the finite time I have left on earth? "Deciphering Karcher" might not rank too high.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
If you want, look at Post #46 above, for another way that I understand 33 - which does not necessarily include a pig's tail, nor retreat.
I'm really glad you included that. Up to then, I'd thought your quarrel was specifically with pigs and I did not understand. It makes a lot more sense now that you've explained the "nor retreat" part.

Do you have ideas about the lines in a post-#46 framework? (You can draft the first chapter of your book right here. šŸ˜ˆ )
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
As to Karcher, I think I've already said quite a bit, at least about 33. I have no issue, per se, with using myth or history. But he confuses me much more than he adds to my understanding - at least with a lot of his myth-laden commentary and interpretation.
One point for me is that this Pig/Hex 33 connection is tentative at best (and could very well be made up) ... and if so, could't we then just as easily have 33 be about dogs, or elephant, or bears ... and that any of these would also work?
Okay, I know we're exploring here, but a part of me wants to say, 'good god woman! how far do we have to go to try to make sense of Karcher?' It really seems like a whole lot of bending and streching and reaching to try to give 'tiger spirt' and his 'myths' about 33 some inkling of legitimacy.


Legitimacy ? I'm no special fan of Karcher though he has introduced some really interesting ideas about patterns in the sequence that Hilary has expanded upon to make usable, for example the shadow, but I don't really get your great pig opposition given you are a trigram interpretation person, among other approaches.


All through your objections to the pig I've been wondering how the pig is not okay with you, infact you say it could be about 'dogs elephants or bears' and yet very free wheeling associating to trigrams with anything that comes to mind is okay in your view :???:

Interpreting via trigram associations could be said not to be 'legitimate', you take a trigram from the relating hexagram for example, throw a number of diverse free associations at it and see that as legitimate so why would you see the pig as so objectionable because it may not be there ? In the method you use your associations may not 'legitimately' be there. I mean you have argued against this pig quite extensively and against Karcher's myths and poetics but frankly I don't see that as any more of a problem than trigram interpretation which when used by itself can constitute just making an answer up in your imagination.

My point is not to specifically question trigram association as a method, which isn't what this thread is about, but to simply question what I feel is your inconsistency on this idea of 'legitimacy' in interpretation.

Where do we draw the line at what is a 'legitimate' response/understanding of an answer and what is not ? It is very much down to the individual. You seem annoyed with Karcher but he has just offered what he had to offer and I can't see that it's any more 'way out' than free associating with trigrams which is hardly a precise art IMO and can match Karcher's mythologizing any day.


Of course the person to answer the original question is Kevin who actually worked with Karcher and knew his work well, possibly better than anyone here. I've not seen him for a long while will see if I can at him @kevin
 
Last edited:

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
If nothing else, we need to keep this in mind when trying to understand his mythic-poetic translation. And for me, it also means that to find meaning here we may simply need to wipe or strip away these poetic or mythic layers - that were never a part of the Yi in the first place!


It's his book, his ideas to use or not and there's no more reason to 'strip way these poetic or mythic layers' than there is to strip away the free association to a trigram of your choice in interpretation. How is going, for example, straight to the lower trigram of the relating hexagram and making the answer all about that, so much more 'legitimate' than Karcher's joyous dancers etc ? I can't see the difference. He elaborates according to his connection with and understanding of Yi and works to make his offering known and so do those coming at it from trigram perspective. I get we can all evaluate these different books/writers and so on but I just can't see how you can say Karcher's writing is not 'legitimate' whilst the very loose and flowery method of expanding all one's impressions from a trigram to make an answer is 'legitimate'.

Karcher's work is as legitimate as any IMO. I can't use much of it, I don't get all that repetition and mythology usually bores me but that doesn't mean his work is not legitimate. I mean he is a scholar, he's not just writing some dumb commentary. Also placing his work in context, it came out at a time when actually there wasn't a whole lot to get at bookshops on Yi except Wilhelm. I remember first time I got one of his books and I was delighted to have another angle.

Another inconsistency where you say his work is not legitimate is that I have heard you praise Nigel Richmond's book ? How can you see that as legitimate and not Karcher. Richmond's interpretations are totally idiosyncratic, it's his very individual offering, worthy in it's own right yet completely useless to me. I would say his book is legitimate in the sense of he has paid attention, it's a genuine take on Yi but it bears very little connection to the actual words of Yi and largely doesn't mean anything to me. But I still regard it as 'legitimate'.


That's okay isn't it ? To write a Yi book that's very much your Yi book ? I think Karcher has offered a great deal and doesn't need to have anything stripped away to be 'legitimate', no more than Richmond does.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Do we have to stick to what is 'legitimate' anyway ? The other day in interpretation you spoke of trigram Xun as wind and so movement. Lise came along and said no it wasn't it was a tablet, a seal and 'wind' was just one of Xun's attributes. Well I thought she was wrong in that context and you were right. For me Xun is wind and I would interpret it as such and in that reading, it would scarcely have made sense as a tablet/seal indeed I don't even know if I think that meaning is valid in the same way I'm not sure about the pig and I'm not convinced of any grey rat in 15 either. As you said sometimes there's one of these 'radicals' added to a character that indicates actual sound of the word and then a translator decides to take it further and make it mean that. You explain it well here



My understanding of the Chinese language (and it's historic use) is very, very limited, but what I have gathered is that over three quarters of the characters are compound, which means they contain 'semantic' characters that are related to (an original or 'root') meaning, but they also include a 'phonetic' part, which tells us not only how the word is to be pronounced, but also what new meaning it has.

So, looking at Hex. 33, it is called/titled Dun, which means to hide, to escape, to leave ... and it has been given various names related to this meaning, such as Retreat(ing), Distancing, Withdrawal.

The word Dun, is a compound character: it includes the semantic character for road or foot (maybe: road-foot), AND the phonetic character for pig, which means - as I understand it - "we take the root word/meaning road-foot, and we pronounce it like we would the word 'pig' and in pronouncing it this way we give it a new (but related) meaning: 'to hide, escape, leave' (which are all ways that feet might act when escaping on a road)".

What Karcher seems to have done is given an entirely different function or meaning to the 'pig' part of Dun, so now it has taken on mythic-poetic weight, and he goes so far as to add 'pig' into his translation, when it was never there in the first place!

ā€¦ā€¦ā€¦.yes, but also a person's free associations to trigrams in a situation were never there in the first place, Richmond says things that were never there in the first place, how far can one go in insisting a Yi book must absolutely only be based on what was there in the first place. No translation or commentary can be that pure, only saying what was thought to have been said in the first place, without losing meaning altogether. We bring our meanings in to Yi interpretation in different ways and someone who writes a book offering their take with as much attention as possible to the 'pure' doesn't need stripping back because the whole 'stripping back' idea is flawed anyway. It's a bit like imagining one can have a pure unbiased view of history, it's not there to be had.
 

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
I can see how you are thinking. As cultures develop there is certainly a trend towards obscuring their barbaric roots of man's inhumanity to man. The softening / obscuring eventually ...
... Kings do gain the priviledge of cutting off heads much like victors write the history, so I think I am attempting to stand up for the little men who may be losing their heads through being fed one particular narrative down their throats before the axe bears down on the chopping block...
... The idea of a sacrifice these days is more in the line of giving up something, especially something of value, in exchange for other considerations either for yourself or for others. Not so much of the blood, guts and killing things appear in the sacrifice these days.
Hi Michael:

I believe that human nature had not changed too much during millennia.

Political discourse had focused more in obscuring the perception on actual violence more than obscured that of the ancient times. Current violence gets naturalized, people is encouraged to acustomize themselves to it.

Maybe would be of interest that study by Linh Dam Vu:

The anti-imperial uprisings, the warlord power struggle, the War of Resistance, and the Chinese Civil War took twenty to thirty million lives. Half of the casualties were civilian. Republican China, not unlike the Union government during the American Civil War and the European states during the First World War, began to manage the war dead ...

... In twentieth-century China, conflicts were viewed as rational political choices, inevitable in the modern age, and inseparable from human experience, laying the rhetorical ground for further violence. Examining the changes in compensation and commemoration law from the 1910s to 1940s, I demonstrate that two processes ā€“ the bureaucratization of death (the construction of deaths with numbers and formulaic arratives) and the civilianization of war (increased presence of civilians in war as victims, supporters and penetrators) ā€“ contributed to the routinization of violence in postwar China.

Political struggles from the 1950s to the present testify to how wars of earlier decades have normalized death in the cultural, social, and economic realms. Furthermore, I propose that the dead have sovereignty as their oft-perceived formidable power in the afterlife necessitates that political, social, and cultural institutions develop the means to control the way by which they are remembered. The sheer number of the dead, the eerie specter of their wronged souls, and the multiplicity of their memorialized identities upset the core of human existence...

Linh Dam Vu : Ā«The Sovereignty of the War Dead - Martyrs, Memorials, and the Makings of Modern China, 1912-1949Ā«
Available in UC Berkeley as downloadable pdf here:

All the best,

Charly
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
I stumbled across this interesting and extensive piece on pigs in ancient China. It lists positive pig qualities, negative pig qualities, pig folk-lore ( particularly one of a farmer's wife killing a pig) and general comments on how pigs were integrated into all aspects of the culture in those far off days.
Enjoy
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
Political discourse had focused more in obscuring the perception on actual violence more than obscured that of the ancient times. Current violence gets naturalized, people is encouraged to acustomize themselves to it.
Normalising of violence and other less savoury forms of behaviour is practiced regularly, and almost religiously, in today's society. Not only in today's society it has been prominent over the centuries in many ways and forms.

One of the results of normalisation can be to just bury the feelings and emotions that naturally need to be faced or expressed. A big piece of normalisation 'propoganda' over generations in the UK has been the British 'stiff upper lip' approach to life and more recently supported by" big boys don't cry" thinking, leaving a whole raft of men emotionally stunted. Fortunately, there are signs in our modern day that men are withdrawing / retreating from the emotional stance that has been persistently instilled in them over the generations. I think society may well be stepping into the realms of 33.3 or 33.4 in respect of this.
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
You notice that a pig has a kind of preservation instinct that does not compromise with its owner. The owner feeds and cares for him, but at no time does he let this relationship take precedence over his instinct - the same for cats.
The same cannot be said of other animals like dogs, horses or sheep. Each of these has a much more committed and dependent relationship with its owner.
We have the dog that is easily influenced by its owner. We have the horse that creates a relationship so strong that it does not mind going into battle with its owner. And the sheep that accepts death by the hands of its owner innocently and without opposition.
I could paraphrase this as:
The pig has a natural instinct to sacrifice his relationship with his owner because he sees that persevering with that relationship will no longer serve him.
Maybe the pig is a good symbol for withdrawal after all. I like it.
Not having lived closely with pigs this is something that I have never experienced
Breakmov, thank you for sharing.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
First, Karcher wrote the book, but I'm the one reading it - and how I might choose to do so is my damn business!

Erm well you shared what you thought in Exploring Divination which is an discussion forum. I think you were debating the value of Karcher's work. Give me credit then for continuing that debate in the spirit of debate. Public debate and discussion does mean expressing differing views.
 
Last edited:

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
I have, however, asked questions, and raised some objections to Karcher's 33, which I think we were invited by My_Key to do.
I'm still valueing everybody's contibutions on this thread, Freedda. Every thesis needs an antithesis otherwise we just keep on trotting out all the same old, same old, same old, same old stuff. The diversity gained from your perspective has brought this thread alive and certainly for me has prompted me to challenge my own ideas and views.

I find Nigel Richmond's translation to be helpful on many occassions. Here's his take on Hex 33 from 'Language of the Lines'. No pigs but his world is inhabited with 'grazing deer' and 'prowling cats'.

1587313425617.png 1587313510014.png
 

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
... Lise came along and said no it wasn't it was a tablet, a seal and 'wind' was just one of Xun's attributes. Well I thought she was wrong in that context and you were right. For me Xun is wind and I would interpret it as such and in that reading, it would scarcely have made sense as a tablet/seal indeed I don't even know if I think that meaning is valid in the same way I'm not sure about the pig and I'm not convinced of any grey rat in 15 either. As you said sometimes there's one of these 'radicals' added to a character that indicates actual sound of the word and then a translator decides to take it further and make it mean that...
Hi Trojina:

巽 xun means obedient, modest, mild and is the name ofthe trigram here known as wind, but wind is not the meaning of xun as joyous is not the meaning of 兌 dui.
å·½ Its shape looks like two seals over a table or two kneeling persons or instead of it two kneeling persons with big heads, if there is a phonetic component it might be the upper, but both little to do with wind.

It is different from what happened with the retreat and the piglet:

The Shuowen says

éÆļ¼šé€ƒä¹Ÿć€‚
dun4: tao2 ye3.
TO_RETREAT: TO_ESCAPE (1)
to retreat means to withdraw
[defines a word with a synonym with another phonetic]
[也 ye3 in Classical Chinese is a final particle implying affirmation]

ä»Žč¾µä»Žč±šć€‚
cong2 chuo4 con2 tun2
FROM WALK FROM SUCKLING_PIG
From to walk and suckling pig
[not specifying the phonetic component
it is implicit that both add meaning]​

(to be continued)

All the best,

Charly
___________________________________
(1) for beter understandign of 逃 tao2:
  • č‡Øé™£é€ƒč„« run away when battle begins.
  • ē•ē½Ŗ而逃 flee to escape punishment
  • 逃åŒæ escape and hide oneself;
  • ꜛé¢Ø而逃 to run away at rumor of approach
  • 逃婚 run away from wedding;
  • 逃嫁 (of married woman) elope with another man;
  • ē«„cuan4 = To flee and hide: 逃ē«„ ditto: ęŠ±é ­é¼ ē«„ run away frightened like a rat.
From: Lin Yutang online chinese-english dictionary

Ch.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
I think you misunderstood Charly, I was speaking of a particular reading not the 'right' meaning of Xun which is why I wrote 'in that context'.


Well I thought she was wrong in that context and you were right. For me Xun is wind and I would interpret it as such and in that reading,

Some people see Chinese characters and it means a lot to them, I'm not one of them, I blank out, can't help it

I relate best to the trigrams as aspects of nature so for me Xun is wind.


å·½ Its shape looks like two seals over a table or two kneeling persons or instead of it two kneeling persons with big heads, if there is a phonetic component it might be the upper, but both little to do with wind.

This is where chinese dictionary leaves me cold. You're right in translation,I wouldn't know, I but I don't think every day interpreting, for me, relates, to the shapes of what these things are meant to look like. Does it look like 2 seals (not the animals) over a table ? If they say so I guess but then how come in practise I never hear an interpretation where Xun is a tablet, it's usually wind and it makes more sense as wind. Think of 59 Dispersing, wind over water.


巽 xun means obedient, modest, mild and is the name ofthe trigram here known as wind, but wind is not the meaning of xun as joyous is not the meaning of 兌 dui.

There's 'the meaning' as a stand alone thing and that is quite different to finding meaning in Yi's answers. Sometimes these are very far apart. I do see what you're saying though.
 
Last edited:

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,850
Reaction score
2,388
To start, the part of the conversation you took my comment from was not at all about pigs, nor trigrams. It was about how much stretching Liselle had to do and how much time and energy she had to take to find a place or connection between 33 and the 'tiger spirit.'
That was about trigrams, though (at least I thought so - heaven only knows how wrong I might be :rofl: )

For what it's worth, I agree with Trojina that your (Freedda's) trigram methods seem to have a similar flavor to Karcher. I'm glad she brought that up.

But it's probably also true that just because some of us think they're similar doesn't have to mean you do. They are two separate things, and Harmen and Karcher are separate authors - maybe you think the flavors are quite different. It might be interesting if you could explain why (or maybe that's impossible, or would just perpetuate argument, I don't know).

If you wouldn't mind giving it a shot, since we've already started on Tiger Spirit, how about comparing that to what you (/Harmen) might do with 33.1.2.3 to 10? I'd be interested...

Edit - I don't necessarily mean "compare" - that might be harder than necessary. But you could probably say how you'd see the trigrams based on what you've learned from Harmen.
 
Last edited:

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
I'm still valueing everybody's contibutions on this thread, Freedda. Every thesis needs an antithesis otherwise we just keep on trotting out all the same old, same old, same old, same old stuff. The diversity gained from your perspective has brought this thread alive and certainly for me has prompted me to challenge my own ideas and views.

I find Nigel Richmond's translation to be helpful on many occassions. Here's his take on Hex 33 from 'Language of the Lines'. No pigs but his world is inhabited with 'grazing deer' and 'prowling cats'.

View attachment 2825 View attachment 2826
Hi Michael:

Thanks Michael. If there is someone who still doesn't know, both Nigel's books are available in pdf format in Steve Marshall's page:
I like the DEER and the CAT. I suppose that for Nigel they represented inner PEACEFUL, tranquil upper FIRM. But both subject to the threat of undefined dangers, shadows, to which nothing escapes. Except maybe a cautious RETREAT.

All the best,

Charly
 

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
Probably but what difference does it make? If you agree 33 is about some creature retreating from harm, why does it bother you that various authors picked a pig?

Even if the character dun isn't really "pig" (what you linked to about compound characters), there is a connection. In that sense it's not made up. As I said before, dun isn't "otter + web-foot = swim away fast," it's "pig + road-foot = run away / escape." So naturally Karcher et al picked pig to illustrate with, not otter. "Pig" fits the idea of it, and there's a pig sitting right there in the name character...

I agree 33 could just as easily be written without referring to any animal at all. Even in this version of Karcher the lines don't have pigs. Hilary's don't, Wilhelm's don't, etc.
Hi Liselle:

Love your insight! There is no pig in any line in Chase-Daniel & Karcher version, maybe for the influence of the lady. But he is hidden, concealed in the right part of the character éÆdun4, wich means among other things Ā«hidden, concealedĀ».

And is implicit in the lines if one follows the key given by the autors, the piglet means a baby in the womb!
  • ... Inner self-restraint now gives you the ability to connect action
    with the spirit. Heart Theme: 44 Coupling with a new fate...
  • ... Heaven above Mountain. Father and Youngest Son ...
  • ... ideas have borne fruit and the womb is full. Stay quiet for now ...
  • ... You are coupled with a creative force. (44 Coupling) ...
(Chase-Daniel & Karcher version)​

See that this version of H.44 follows the concept of Margaret J. Pearson: the girl of GOU is a bride coming to meet her destiny. In H.44 this version doesn't say that the woman is strong but that she is strenghtening. It doesn't say don't marry her, it says don't act, take your time and marry her.

The received text allows this version almost literally! ...
(to be continued)
All the best,

Charly
 
Last edited:

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
19,149
Reaction score
3,418
I'm a bit behind the curve here, so apologies if this has already been said. To the best of my knowledge, the pig in 33 is quite real, not a phonetic phantom, and nothing to do with Karcher. It can be found in Field and Rutt, for instance. The adjectives applied to 'retreat' in all the line texts (eg 'fat') actually apply more naturally to the pig.

šŸ–šŸ– šŸ– šŸ– šŸ– šŸ–
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
Love your insight! There is no pig in any line in Chase-Daniel & Karcher version, maybe for the influence of the lady. But he is hidden, concealed in the right part of the character éÆdun4, wich means among other things Ā«hidden, concealedĀ».

And is implicit in the lines if one follows the key given by the autors, the piglet means a baby in the womb!

See that this version of H.44 follows the concept of Margaret J. Pearson: the girl of GOU is a bride coming to meet her destiny. In H.44 this version doesn't say that the woman is strong but that she is strenghtening. It doesn't say don't marry her, it says don't act, take your time and marry her.
I think you are right Charly. This version of Karcher has clearly been influenced by Chase- Daniel to align with more with the 'message' her Mothering Change organisation are looking to give. I like some of the ways the text has been modified to give easier access to advice for less I Ching oriented users.

Hex 44 being the nuclear of Hex 33 certainly has a major impact on how Hex 33 'functions' ( for want of a better word). The idea of a strengthening action underlying the lines of Hex 33 fit's nicely with the 'natural birth' she encourages when we leave her to get on with her stuff. (post #38.) Also dovetails nicely into Hex 34 - Great Invigorating Strength (Karcher) / Power of the Great (Wilhelm).
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
...........and a little word from Socrates which I thought was Hex 33 ish

"The secret of change is to focus all your energy not on fighting the old but on building the new"
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
It looks like the sacrifice has been accomplished and we are left looking down at a rich pig. Thanks to all for contributing as it has left me with a much clearer insight of Hex 33 with and without the crackling. I hope that you have fared likewise. I'm going to add a dollop of wealth and fertility to the meal by including the link to Hex 33 in Memorising Threads


...... and with that make a cheerful retreat.

Good Luck
 

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
I can see how you are thinking. As cultures develop there is certainly a trend towards obscuring their barbaric roots of man's inhumanity to man. The softening / obscuring eventually transforms to the place of focussing on the positive rather than the negative, so focus on feasting and celebration rather than sacrifice over time is only to be expected and welcomed. After all the society is becoming more refined, more cultured, more sophisticated, more civilised.
Kings do gain the priviledge of cutting off heads much like victors write the history, so I think I am attempting to stand up for the little men who may be losing their heads through being fed one particular narrative down their throats before the axe bears down on the chopping block.
...
For those interested in Tony Saroop about the Ā«Joy of cutting off headsĀ». it's availabe in Wayback Machine, here:


Ch.
 

charly

visitor
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
2,315
Reaction score
243
... To the best of my knowledge, the pig in 33 is quite real, not a phonetic phantom...
Hi Hilary:
  • The OLDEST CHARACTER for PIG is 豕 (shi3 : hog / swine / pig) .
    It's a PICTOGRAPH, there are many variants of it in bone script, a little sample:
Pig_Shi_Bone.jpg
Source: Zdic.net www.zdic.net
All depicting a DOLMESTIC PIG of those times: long snout, big ears, slim, long legs. See that the tail is not curly. I believe black. Compare with the pig in this neolithic bowl, of course, not turned clockwise like the characters:

Pig_Neolithic_Bowl.jpg
Source: Museum
  • The character 豚 (tun2 : PIGLET, suckling pig, small pig, young pig) is an ASSOCIATIVE COMPOUND with ꜈(yuĆØ: moon) used for 肉 (rĆ²u: MEAT) at the left and 豕 (shi3 : PIG). In some of the ancient variants of BONE script can be seen a third component at the right side of shi, a HAND. This HAND passed to the SMALL SEAL CHARACTER but it has get lost in modern scripts.
Bone_Piglet_ZDic.net.jpg
Source: Zdic.net www.zdic.net

  • The character éÆ (dun4: deceive, hide, conceal, flee, run away) is a compound whose protograph was 豚 (tun2: PIGLET, at the left of wich in SMALL SEAL was added č¾µ (chuĆ²: foot, walk), in MODERN script reduced to č¾¶.
Source: Zdic.net Seal_Flee_Zdic.net.jpg www.zdic.net
There are not documented variants in BONE or BRONZE scripts. The character appears only in Qin Dynasty SMALL SEAL script retaining the HAND former fourth component of 豚 tun2. Surely the character éÆ dun4 was created long after the first centuries of WESTERN ZHOU period. It's reasonable to think that the former scribes used 豚 tun2 but the Han scribes who transcribed the received text of the Zhou Yi, replaced it by the modern éÆ dun4 in the sense of RETREAT believing that it was the intended meaning of the old scribes.
But if not?

... and nothing to do with Karcher. It can be found in Field and Rutt, for instance.
The list of PIG translators is long. Even some traditionalists who believe that PIG was not the intended meaning of éÆ dun4, think that the 豚 tun2 component adds CONNOTATIONS that worths not to pass unnoticed, like Tuck Chang or the late WU JING NUAN:

Piglet33_WJN1.jpg

Piglet33_WJN3.png Piglet33_WJN4.jpg
Source: Wu Jing Nuan Ā«Yi JingĀ»

The adjectives applied to 'retreat' in all the line texts (eg 'fat') actually apply more naturally to the pig.
šŸ–šŸ– šŸ– šŸ– šŸ– šŸ–
č‚„ fei2: FAT, plump, obese, FERTILE, loose-fitting or large, to fertilize , to become rich by illegal means ...
Maybe a FERTILE PIG fits better. PIGS, like FISHES, were symbols of FERTILITY and, of course WEALTH. They pleased to the ancestors.

If NOT PIGS? Maybe, following Wu Jing Nuan, RICHES TO HIDE. Those COMING HOME WINNERS were loaded with HEAVY SPOILS OF WAR: weapons, money, dresses, shoes, jewelry, furniture, ears, animals, food, drinks, women ... and much more. They come back FATTENED.

All the best,

Charly
 
Last edited:

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top