The difference

[candid]

LOL! I don't know. If someone I trusted, and who actually knew me said, "you idiot, smarten up and get a grip", when it applied, I'd thank him for his candor. That's the difference between us, Pakua. My superior man isn't your superior man. You don?t follow mine and I don?t follow yours.

Wonderful! An I Ching question/topic!

To me,

50.5 is about functionality. There's nothing superfluous or ornamental. It is real and it is pure.

50.6 adds to this an appearance which is pleasing and inviting to the eyes of men. This makes it also pleasing to the gods.

Both are acceptable offerings in the eyes of the gods. And remember, what is admired by one is uncomely to another. Some people prefer function over form.

For me, 5 is for people. 6 is reserved for deity.

 

[candid]

Think of it this way. The church grounds-keeper works to have the church ready for Sunday worship. The priest conducts the mass in his impressive robes. Which of the two serves their God and parish more?

 

[dij]

You guys aren't trying to make thin man and fat man wear the same robe, are you?

(figuratively speaking, I hasten to add)

 

[candid]

Some believe in Superman, Dij.

 

[martin]

This begins to sound like a conversation between somebody who believes in hierarchy (Pakua: the superior man, the Master and the rest of us) and somebody who does not believe in it or less so (Candid: "which of the two serves their God and parish more?").

 

[martin]

Yeah Candid.

 

[candid]

Superior Man. What a loaded word. I'm not an authenticator of ancient Chinese anything, but I'm certain that word isn't intended at it's often interpreted today. High and low, yes. High and low are measurable on about any level of thought. ?This serves me better than that.? Yes. Some things are more helpful to living happily.

But to be fair, if it is someone's nature during a particular part of their life to strive for perfection, it is helpful to hold to a hierarchy. It provides a measuring stick to record their progress.

I personally believe that at some point the stick is no longer useful, because the manner of growth is not linearly divided. To even try and measure defeats the entire premise of liberation.

 

[bradford_h]

I don't know how many times this has to be said,
but nobody seems to be capable of hearing it:

The term Superior Man does not occur in the Yijing.
This is just a really Stupid translation of Junzi.
Jun means Noble. Zi means Young Person or Child,
and an endearment like the Japanese suffix -San.
Eventually, but centuries later in Kongzi's time, it meant Sir.
The word for Superior is Shang. Common is Xiao.
Inferior is Fei. Man is Ren.

 

[candid]

Thanks, Brad. It just sounds better coming from you.

 

[bradford_h]

Maybe a whole chorus will get through.

And I'm not at all opposed to the concept of superior people. We desperately need humans evolving much further, into something vastly superior to us.
And as a philosphy major, my favorite of all was Nietzsche, so I devoured everything he wrote on the Ubermensch at least twice.
But if the authors of the Yi had meant to say Superior Man, they would have written Shang Ren, not Junzi.
In the Da Xiang especially, where the term is most often used, the words are directed to the impressionable "Young Nobles" consulting the Yi for its ethical insruction (didn't say moral).
The Junzi was someone with great potential to do good in the world, given the capability to heed good advice.

 

[candid]

Nietzsche, now there was a polite, congenial and accommodating fellow.

 

[martin]

Ah yes, Junzi - noble child, young noble. That sounds much better.

 

[bradford_h]

And best of all it gives the young feller lots of room to grow.

 

[heylise]

There are two terms in the Yi, on is the Junzi, the noble one. Brad is right about zi meaning young, but I remember a TV series, 'Are you being served', in a warehouse called The Grace Brothers. Now and then young mister Grace came in, looking like a tiny brittle ages old fossil, but he was 'young mister Grace', until the end of his days.
I think the zi has a similar meaning. The chief or emperor, or the father of the family, or the leader of the army, has a son who continues his leadership, a heir. This son has the responsibility to continue in the spirit of the father, as good, and possibly even better. He has to keep the inheritance intact or expand it, and to look after all involved. He cannot follow his own pleasures, he has a higher duty. So zi has most of all its meaning of seed, son, offspring.
zi n. son; child; offspring, (hist.) master (title of respect), person, seed, egg, viscount, copper coin; copper, first of the 12 Earthly Branches, cartridge, female dragonfly, adj. young; tender; small, m. (for bundle/hank/etc.) pr. (wr.) you

Then there is the Da Ren, the big man. Superior, great, many different translations, but da is simply big. So he can just as well be your 6 foot neighbor, and the Yi advises you to see him, when the other neighbor threatens to beat you up. He is the one who is good at something, but that can be very different things. Wise, strong, clever, dexterous. Big does not necessarily mean big size, when you lost your key and you need someone who can climb in through the toilet window, then your 'daren' might be your small agile child. And in order to solve a problem, or summon your courage, or conquer your selfishness, your DaRen has his seat in your own head, certainly when there is nobody around who can help you.

ShiJing 189, verse 7
The chief diviner will divine them.
The bears and grisly bears,
Are the auspicious intimations of sons.
The cobras and [other] serpents,
Are the auspicious intimations of daughters.

Here DaRen is translated as 'chief diviner'.

In the Yi the Junzi is the one who works on himself. He examines himself, he changes like a leopard, he has determination, he walks in the rain. The Da Ren does not change or anything else, he just is Da Ren. You have to find him.

LiSe

 

[heylise]

In hex.36.5: Jizi, prince Ji. When he had to hide his brightness he was already a venerable old gentleman, one of the advisors of the emperor.

LiSe

 

[candid]

LiSe, this is a really interesting view, in that you present a distinction between that which is measurable/comparable (Da Ren) and that which is always changing (Junzi). It seems the Junzi would use the Da Ren as a means to grow, express, protect or actualize, much as a man would use a ladder to change a light bulb, or a weapon to defend.

 

[lindsay]

Yes, this is very helpful. While we have our experts looking in -- Brad and LiSe -- I wonder if they would care to comment on Xiao Ren, "little man". Sometimes it is translated as simply the "common" or "ordinary" person, but other times translators indicate it refers to "petty" or "mean" or generally rude, ignorant, and stupid people. Not to contradict LiSe, of course, but I think there may be a value judgment in the Yi between the Da or "big" man and the Xiao or "small" man. It is not impossible that - from the viewpoint of the Yi's authors - common or ordinary people were slightly contemptible. It is not difficult to find elsewhere in the Yi assumptions based on the hierarchy of class. So while the junzi was doubtless a noble fellow, he got that way by being born to the right parents in the right family. I'm not at all sure the Yi is a proletarian document, comrades! What do you think?

 

[lindsay]

Yes, here it is in Chapter 10 in the lost commentary of Linzi: "One daren is worth twelve xiaoren, but a junzi is way better than a whole flock of darens."

 

[lindsay]

Oh, this too: I have observed that Nietzsche is quite popular with people who - in some small, modest way, of course - see a bit of themselves in the ubermensch. He's not a bestseller among the underdogs.

 

[pakua]

"Which of the two serves their God and parish more? "

It's not really the right question. They both serve according to their own ability.

Who has the capacity to serve a wider group of people? Who will be listened to with more depth and understanding? Who will influence other lives more, for the better?

Assuming a "good" sagely priest, and a "good" sagely groundskeeper, I suspect the former, simply because he's more in tune and can communicate better. (assuming the priest is 50.6 in your example, and the groundskeeper is 50.5)

 

[Sparhawk]

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

"One daren is worth twelve xiaoren, but a junzi is way better than a whole flock of darens."<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very funny, Lindsay.

I like LiSe's interpretation of Junzi. It speaks of learning, legacy and passing the torch to the next worthy disciple.

In any case, IMHO, we are running around in circles here, trying to figure out the intention of the original writers of the Yi text. We are not only trying to translate Chinese to English, we trying to alphabetize imagery. Why are there so many art critics with so many different takes on any given art piece, specially when the artist is long gone to ask about his inspiration?? Sometimes, even if the artist is still alive it is difficult and irritating for him to explain himself something that should be obvious for somebody with a pair of eyes and brain in between. I'm sure LiSe knows a bit about what I'm saying

. The point is, something very important will be lost in the translation... The solution that works for me is to see the Yi as art and keep intuitively abstracting those concepts. Mere reasoning does not work for me. It must feel right within the context of a question posed to the Yi. But, that's me, of course...

Luis

 

[lindsay]

Sorry, Luis, but I'm not asking anyone to fly in the thin air of abstract reason here. God forbid we should use our neocortexes! What I am suggesting is a little historical contextualization. LiSe seems to be very big on this with her etymological speculations, but it might be useful to review the history of Zhou society before getting too fuzzy-wuzzy about the ethical nobility of the junzi.

 

[candid]

Pakua, if this idea of good and bad satisfies your need for superiority, then I'm happy you are satisfied. Just try to appreciate that it's too limited and narrow for me to exist fully in.

 

[RindaR]

Pak, I think the point is that they are interdependent... To try to say which is superior may be a category error.

Rinda

 

[bradford_h]

Hey Lindsay-
Before we get into this, would you mind terribly reposting the start of this topic (12-7, "yes, this s very helpful...) on its own thread? Maybe "The Common Man"
I think it's one of the most important topics that's been opened in a while and it deserves its own thread for future reference. Meanwhile I'll be jotting some abstract reasoning down.

 

[Sparhawk]

Got ya, Lindsay. It certainly helps. Actually, what I had in mind was what you just said in another thread (something that I agree with):

<BLOCKQUOTE><HR SIZE=0><!-Quote-!><FONT SIZE=1>Quote:</FONT>

Finally, in the last few years, Westerners are saying serious and important things about the Yi in plain language. The Yi has become so compelling for us that we can discuss it without always referring to some other frame of reference, without dressing it up in borrowed clothes. Finally it is no longer necessary to justify studying the Yi by deriving every scientific, religious, and philosophic idea and principle from it.<!-/Quote-!><HR SIZE=0></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's more like it...

L

 

[Sparhawk]

I second Brad on that topic! Good observation, Lindsay.

L

 

[candid]

Seconds appreciating Lindsay's idea, and beginning a new thread on the Common Man.

 

[candid]

oops, thirds the idea

 

[Sparhawk]

Computer lag, Candid...