...life can be translucent

Menu

The Five Worst Translations of Hexagram Names

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
07, Shi as The Army. This calls to mind what we know as a standing army, which isn't the point the Yi is making at all. A local Militia is a much closer idea, the resilient management of resources (water under ground).

11, Tai as Peace. The idea is more about dynamic interaction. It's way too energetic to be called peace.

12, Pi as Obstruction. To use this term is to misunderstand what is going on completely. The forces here are not opposing each other but moving away from each other in opposite directions.

15, Qian as Humility. The idea is being real, even if that's great, not being anything less than you can be. Humility is better understood in 62. Even the word Modesty is used tongue-in-cheek.

22, Bi as Grace. Not even close. It's about not being able to see past things that are too close or opaque. Being nearsighted is OK as long as you don't pretend to know what's beyond the latest cultural or fashion trend.

Additionally,

61, Zhong Fu as Inner Truth can be misleading as long as the emphasis is on Truth instead of Inner. This is about the difficulties we have in getting beyond our own limited points of view and into a wider Truth.
 

NemeanMagik

visitor
Joined
Mar 20, 2014
Messages
200
Reaction score
3
When I read different people's 'takes' on their readings, they are often quite diverse and can be contradictory. I wonder whether it might be the case that the I Ching's responses can be quite individual, and that no one translation or commentary is appropriate for everyone for this reason. Perhaps a bond is formed between I Ching and the individual querent that is more significant than general interpretations that are applicable in every case?
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
That would be an excellent example of "Inner Truth." But the more people pursue this relativism, the further they get from communicating effectively with each other, and with the authors of the Zhouyi, about what the Yi has to tell them. It's really little wonder that there are so many people here with questions they can't answer.
 

NemeanMagik

visitor
Joined
Mar 20, 2014
Messages
200
Reaction score
3
That would be an excellent example of "Inner Truth." But the more people pursue this relativism, the further they get from communicating effectively with each other, and with the authors of the Zhouyi, about what the Yi has to tell them. It's really little wonder that there are so many people here with questions they can't answer.


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

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
When I read different people's 'takes' on their readings, they are often quite diverse and can be contradictory. I wonder whether it might be the case that the I Ching's responses can be quite individual, and that no one translation or commentary is appropriate for everyone for this reason. Perhaps a bond is formed between I Ching and the individual querent that is more significant than general interpretations that are applicable in every case?


I think you are talking at cross purposes. I mean Brad started by saying how misleading some of the names of hexagram titles are. He has done an actual translation, not many people have. Many write Yi books who have done no translation or rely on others for translation.... So getting from ancient Chinese to todays language is a big divide...so if someone can get nearer the meaning of the original then as far as what is written in the I Ching goes...I mean what is actually written, the better. Hexagram titles are important because they influence our entire perception of the hexagram.

I think what you are speaking of is what people do with the translation once they have it...you are talking about commentaries I think....or else you are talking about people's individual application of the answer to any question. That has to be individual since all questions have a context and all do develop their own way of conversing with Yi. But there has to be some kind of base of the I Ching actually says. That involves going to a translation....not a commentary. a translation. So what is being said here as far as I can see is that the titles for these hexagrams have been badly translated from Chinese.

You and I aren't really in a position to argue since we can't translate Chinese. But in practise, in experience I think these are borne out, for me anyway. When has hexagram 11 ever really indicated 'peace' in your readings....? Likewise people think the title of 15, if it is 'modesty' think that it is about being humble...whereas it is more about integrity. So we start to put completely different connotations onto a hexagram because of the title which has been badly translated, so we get more lost. People still turn up on SR wondering why their hexagram 11 reading isn't giving them much 'peace', because of course the translations they have still use 'peace' as the title for hexagram 11.

I still think you mix up what is a translation and what is a commentary . Recently in a reading you took a tiny piece of commentary on 49.2 as your answer. That commentary you took is only someone's take, not the same as the translation. Translations can also be quite different of course according to how the words are ordered and so on, ie compare Wilhelm and Bradford.
 

NemeanMagik

visitor
Joined
Mar 20, 2014
Messages
200
Reaction score
3
I think you are talking at cross purposes. I mean Brad started by saying how misleading some of the names of hexagram titles are. He has done an actual translation, not many people have. Many write Yi books who have done no translation or rely on others for translation.... So getting from ancient Chinese to todays language is a big divide...so if someone can get nearer the meaning of the original then as far as what is written in the I Ching goes...I mean what is actually written, the better. Hexagram titles are important because they influence our entire perception of the hexagram.

I think what you are speaking of is what people do with the translation once they have it...you are talking about commentaries I think....or else you are talking about people's individual application of the answer to any question. That has to be individual since all questions have a context and all do develop their own way of conversing with Yi. But there has to be some kind of base of the I Ching actually says. That involves going to a translation....not a commentary. a translation. So what is being said here as far as I can see is that the titles for these hexagrams have been badly translated from Chinese.

You and I aren't really in a position to argue since we can't translate Chinese. But in practise, in experience I think these are borne out, for me anyway. When has hexagram 11 ever really indicated 'peace' in your readings....? Likewise people think the title of 15, if it is 'modesty' think that it is about being humble...whereas it is more about integrity. So we start to put completely different connotations onto a hexagram because of the title which has been badly translated, so we get more lost. People still turn up on SR wondering why their hexagram 11 reading isn't giving them much 'peace', because of course the translations they have still use 'peace' as the title for hexagram 11.

I still think you mix up what is a translation and what is a commentary . Recently in a reading you took a tiny piece of commentary on 49.2 as your answer. That commentary you took is only someone's take, not the same as the translation. Translations can also be quite different of course according to how the words are ordered and so on, ie compare Wilhelm and Bradford.

I don't doubt it is all highly valuable to look at original Chinese and I recognize how important that is. I have a number of translations some with commentaries, and yes, some are just commentaries: Huang, Bertschinger, Hua-Ching Ni, Lynn, M.J.Pearson, Legge, Wilhelm, Palmer/Ramsay/Xiaomin, Blofield, Cleary, Ritsema/Karcher (others just commentaries).

Some of the Translations though, for example, Pearson calls Hex 15, Modesty; Bertschinger calls Hex 39, Obstruction; Lynn calls 11 Peace; and 15, Modesty also....

Aren't these any good?
 

moss elk

visitor
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
3,280
Reaction score
1,049
Hey Bradford,
I'm reading your book now. It's good work, Thank you.

I've run across these names here and there,
How do you feel about them?

7: Recruiting Allies
11: Harmony
12: Divorcement
15: Moderation
22: Adornment (Legge, i think)
61: Sincerity/Integrity

And what words would you replace them with?
(Are you considering writing an interpretation now to accompany your translation? If so, i would encourage you to)
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Some of the Translations though, for example, Pearson calls Hex 15, Modesty; Bertschinger calls Hex 39, Obstruction; Lynn calls 11 Peace; and 15, Modesty also....
Aren't these any good?

It seems you didn't even absorb my post before having your knee-jerk reaction. I didn't say Modesty was bad (just tongue in cheek). I said Humility was bad.
And yes, those particular renditions of those particular Gua Ming are no good. They reflect a poor understanding of the core meanings of those particular Gua, even if the translators did a good job elsewhere.
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Hey Bradford,
I'm reading your book now. It's good work, Thank you.

I've run across these names here and there,
How do you feel about them?

7: Recruiting Allies
11: Harmony
12: Divorcement
15: Moderation
22: Adornment (Legge, i think)
61: Sincerity/Integrity

And what words would you replace them with?
(Are you considering writing an interpretation now to accompany your translation? If so, i would encourage you to)

My study of the Gua Ming (Hexagram Names) is here: http://www.hermetica.info/GuaMing.htm
I left out all the all the authors who mindlessly copied Wilhelm. And I put all of the explanatory material in the back to make it easier to use the charts, but that material is key.

The translations you offer are pretty good. I'd emphasize something more like Authenticity than Moderation, and stress Sincerity on 61 but try to imply that it might be misguided or narcissistic.

The commentary in my Volume One is as far as I'm going, except that I'll be revisiting all of the Gua meanings in a book I'm currently doing on the Tarot, but as with the Yi, I have about 150 books to study before the opinions are more fully formed.
 

AskingQuestions

visitor
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
40
Reaction score
2
I see Bradford beat me to posting his Gua Ming page, but I'd like to say I like Trojina's post. It is more about understanding what the original characters were written down to represent.

For instance, 泰 Tai (11) translated as 'peace' by Wilhelm. He chose that word justifiably out of a list of words in the dictionary under the character 泰 Tai. Technically it is a proper translation yet there are many other words that 泰 Tai translates to in the English language. As much as I value Wilhelm's translation and all of the work he did for the Yijing, he did not show the entire essence of Gua 11 in his translation nor his commentary. In his commentaries on Gua 11 he paints a picture of flowering on earth, with peace and harmony. As a person who has received Gua 11 in varying (including terrible) situations, I have come to find that Gua 11 is more about two opposite energies coming together. This could mean crashing, exploding, mixing, turning, and yes, I guess skipping and holding hands.

When translating from Chinese to English there are a cornucopia of definitions for each character to choose from. This can be beautiful for the sake of interpretation but it can also be where you can steer someone wrong by making a limiting or off the mark choice. The names Bradford pointed out are to help with understanding, not to limit. And with all of the authors that reuse someone else's name translation, it is a good idea to point this out and not get stuck in a narrow way of thinking.
 

NemeanMagik

visitor
Joined
Mar 20, 2014
Messages
200
Reaction score
3
It seems you didn't even absorb my post before having your knee-jerk reaction. I didn't say Modesty was bad (just tongue in cheek). I said Humility was bad.
And yes, those particular renditions of those particular Gua Ming are no good. They reflect a poor understanding of the core meanings of those particular Gua, even if the translators did a good job elsewhere.

Bradford, you're right, I am a total loser.
 
S

sooo

Guest
Scholarship is a good starting point for understanding, and it's true that common language is essential to effectively communicate. It provides a solid foundation.

But, as with a symphony conductor, music theory is the podium, which gives the right to wave the baton, however it is the way the theory is used to lead the entire orchestra, how the conductor interprets the piece he is conducting that makes the black notes on white paper come alive to animate the story of the composer's heart and mind through the soul and skill of the musicians.

I'm wary of absolutes, other than to say a whole note gets four beats in 4/4 time. There's a lot that can happen during those four beats.

I have no problem with most of Brad's definitions, but I'm reluctant to say 11 can never mean peace, or 7 can never be likened to a standing army, or that 22 only refers to nearsightedness. I also value LiSe's translation and interpretation of 22, which seems entirely different from Brad's, unless viewed from a holistic view where one can see multifaceted meaning that may apply equally to 22. I'm prone to favor LiSe's view of that hexagram in particular. And 7 as a standing army, is not our body's immune system a standing army, ready to spring into combat with invading infectious bacteria? That doesn't mean I can't see 7 as a local militia, it just means that any absolutes are limiting and potentially dangerous to understanding, and the absolute rejection of reasonable possibilities is just plain arrogance and conceit, unworthy of a true scholar or conductor.

Sorry, Brad, you know I value your Yijing a great deal, but your absolutes are a real turn off, though still a good foundation. It writes a good score, but does not play the entire symphony, other than the way you personally conduct it. And for that I say, Bravo!
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
It all depends on whether you're happy just aiming at the target or you want to start by aiming for the center. Standards vary. I just like higher standards.


Bullseye.jpg
 
S

sooo

Guest
LOL, have to respect that, striving for higher standards. But it is your target you're shooting at.

:bows:
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Aiming for the center just increases you odds of having all of your arrows on the larger target. It doesn't mean they will all land there. And a word in the bullseye stands a better chance of being useful in more contexts than one that starts near the edge - it's the one closest to all of the options.
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
LOL, have to respect that, striving for higher standards. But it is your target you're shooting at.
:bows:

No, it isn't. It was set up by the original authors of the Zhouyi, who were not just talking nonsense.
 
S

sooo

Guest
Do you really believe anyone would expect you to agree?

At any rate, I'll honor you with my retreat. I think we can probably agree on the meaning of that.
 

AskingQuestions

visitor
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
40
Reaction score
2
Hi Bruce! It's Courtney (aka answeredquestions). You know I love ya, but I have to speak in Brad's defense. If he were going for 'absolutes', his Vol. II wouldn't be so large. Nor would his Gua Ming page be so extensive. His objective is more to give as much information as possible in regards to the possibilities of defining a character.

After having a larger view of the various possibilities, individual translators must picking a name for each Gua (this is just the struggle as a translator). Picking something central, as the arrows in the yellow circle represent, works well for helping people understand. This is because the more central the arrow, the more it is close to *all* of the other arrows. The center is found by looking at all of the stragglers - in other words, the stragglers help to formulate where the middle is.

Another big thing is that people's first step in their reading is often associating with the Name of the Hexagram, so it is important to look at this relationship (and the reputation a Gua can have), and point out where something is not pinning the center, such as this post is meant to do.
 

NemeanMagik

visitor
Joined
Mar 20, 2014
Messages
200
Reaction score
3
I do not think the point I am making is quite the same thing as 'relativism', but people frequently have their own reading/interpretation histories which give them often considerable confidence in their own 'takes' on their readings. We see this again and again on this website.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Have you actually seen Bradford's work ? I mean it's a bit more than a 'take' !
 

bradford

(deceased)
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,626
Reaction score
410
Have you actually seen Bradford's work ? I mean it's a bit more than a 'take' !

I really don't think that would matter.
Everyone's thoughts are equal to everyone else's in this happy new age.
 

AskingQuestions

visitor
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
40
Reaction score
2
Hi NemeanMagik. Part of the confusion in this thread comes from not properly differentiating between translating and commentary. For instance 'takes' would be more like commentary or formulating an experienced (or in the process of learning) opinion.

The other part of the confusion seems to be that you are taking the noble approach of defending the art of having an opinion (which is an important aspect of life) but there is a difference between doing this and looking up the actual glossary meanings of the Chinese characters and picking something to represent it as a name - hence the title of this thread "The Five Worst Translations of Hexagram Names". Not "The Five Worst Takes of Hexagram Meanings".

I think the thing Brad was trying to help with, is for us to not get stuck in the Wilhelm names, which a lot of translators have not come up with their own take on each hexagram's name. Instead they have simply used Wilhelm's hexagram names like it is some sort of all truthful standard. In Brad's first post it does not exactly tell you a specific name the Gua should be, but it does explain a little about why not to settle for just those typical names. It's just a helping post, not a limiting one.
 
S

sooo

Guest
Hi Bruce! It's Courtney (aka answeredquestions). You know I love ya, but I have to speak in Brad's defense. If he were going for 'absolutes', his Vol. II wouldn't be so large. Nor would his Gua Ming page be so extensive. His objective is more to give as much information as possible in regards to the possibilities of defining a character.

After having a larger view of the various possibilities, individual translators must picking a name for each Gua (this is just the struggle as a translator). Picking something central, as the arrows in the yellow circle represent, works well for helping people understand. This is because the more central the arrow, the more it is close to *all* of the other arrows. The center is found by looking at all of the stragglers - in other words, the stragglers help to formulate where the middle is.

Another big thing is that people's first step in their reading is often associating with the Name of the Hexagram, so it is important to look at this relationship (and the reputation a Gua can have), and point out where something is not pinning the center, such as this post is meant to do.

Hi Courtney! Yes, I know you by this handle (also affectionately!), as it's similar to your first, if I recall correctly.

I like your comment about the center arrow helping to focus on the central meaning, and the outer arrows helping to guide toward the center. Point well received, and I never contested that. However, since the Hexagrams have no actual title text to translate, it still remains the narrative of the author. I agree with most of Brad's narrative titles, though not to the exclusion of some other great ones too, which of course Brad regards as nothing more than meaningless new age gobbledygook.

If you receive the same hexagram three times you have three different answers.

The meanings of the hexagrams are not fixed, they change according to your situation. Hexagram 3 can mean that you are experiencing initial difficulties, but it can also mean that initial difficulties elsewhere have to be addressed. A friend of mine was asked to give a beginners course at the upcoming Yijing Symposium in Ruigoord. He asked the Yijing whether this was a good idea, and he received hexagram 3 (5th line moving). You could see this as a difficult start, leading to a troubled course, and be tempted not to do it. But who were the targets of the course? Indeed, those people who experience difficulties when starting to use the Yijing. Therefore, "if you receive the same hexagram three times you have three different answers". - Harmen Mesker

Could there not then be at least three different narrative titles assigned to a single hexagram?

There is no text in the Yijing.

The words are not important, and although it can be very rewarding to look at the original Chinese text from a historical and philological point of view, you should not be carried away by the endless sea of possibilities that such an undertaking can give. What the Yijing gives you when you use the book are images, an overview, a situation, an idea - not words. Therefore, "there is no text in the Yijing". - Harmen Mesker

If the book speaks through images, how, then, can one be so sure that their translation, given through text, is in the center of the target? With only 64 hexagrams covering near infinite circumstances, how can one be so sure that their narrative text is the only exact and true one?

People have assigned the word translation as being some sort of holy grail of Yijing comprehension, while a translation is still an interpretation, a narrative, hopefully a well informed one. That's why I've likened it to the symphony conductor. He reads the composer's score, which requires an interpretation to be conducted. Each musician then must interpret the conductor's interpretation. It is as much art as it is science or math. Imagine if everything in heaven and on earth had to be limited to just 64 musical compositions! Would not there be either a greater number of interpretations or a greatly more limited number of performances? How boring would that become, and quickly!

I made my respect for Brad's works quite clear enough without needing to kiss his behind or worship his narratives as being the final word. There are other excellent teachers on the subject, with views different from his own on such specifics as hexagram names, of which there is no actual text to translate, only images to interpret through their own understanding, unless someone is channeling the sacred authors, he keeps referring to. Perhaps they too were artists rather than scholars.
 

NemeanMagik

visitor
Joined
Mar 20, 2014
Messages
200
Reaction score
3
yes, I have had one or two dives into it. I am sure it is very useful and scholarly and valuable.
 

NemeanMagik

visitor
Joined
Mar 20, 2014
Messages
200
Reaction score
3
I appreciate the differentiation you are referring to. I am not so out of touch that I don't realise it is not just a free for all. I am merely reacting to an attitude that seems to lambast rather cavalierly other worthy scholars' work which I shall continue to value. I don't doubt there is truth in what B. says and I appreciate very much what he has done (and offers here), but I am not willing to discard the painstaking work of so many other translators just because they have different views.
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
19,149
Reaction score
3,418
12, Pi as Obstruction. To use this term is to misunderstand what is going on completely. The forces here are not opposing each other but moving away from each other in opposite directions.

Mmf. The trigrams are moving apart, the Image says 'heaven and earth do not interact'. True. But I'm not convinced that the trigram dynamics are right at the centre of the target for this one.

The name of the hexagram has to do with negation, 'saying no'. That's nearer to 'obstruction' than 'separating'. Similarly, the 'wrong people'/ 'non people', the bandits/gangsters/outlaws. If they just went away in the opposite direction, we wouldn't have a problem. The problem is they're here, and - by definition - they're impossible to relate to or work with (11-style).

('They' might be identifiable people, they might be a dehumanising culture, or a mental habit of closing off interaction by labelling - self or others - rather than seeking to understand.)

And this, for me, fits with experience. Yes, it can be, 'this is not working because the inspiration is missing,' but it can also be, 'this is not working because circumstances/ culture/ mental habits are in opposition - overwhelming, immovable opposition.'

(Until there's a changing line that shows how things could shift.)
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
With regard to hexagram 12, not being accepted or received is not the same as being blocked. I don't think 'Blocked' is an apt name for hexagram 12 at all. All that you describe sounds part like hex 6 and part like 39. In all my experience of 12.3 re the non people I have been absolutely free to walk away as have they. We aren't blocking each other, we just aren't receiving each other. There is a difference.

. If they just went away in the opposite direction, we wouldn't have a problem.

we would, we would have the problem of not being accepted because we are headed another way. That doesn't generally feel good but it's not the same as being blocked.
 

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