...life can be translucent

Menu

Spiritually: no blame > good fortune

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
Over and over I find that when Yi considers things for me from a spiritual perspective, "no blame" is considered a higher and more important and superior outcome to "good fortune." Good fortune implies a specific reward that's obtained, whereas no blame seems to point to the stepping back or away of the ego from the situation... a stepping-back which obviates the need or the relevance of "good fortune."

Just an observation.
 
F

Freedda

Guest
... I find that when Yi considers things for me from a spiritual perspective, "no blame" is considered a higher and more important and superior outcome to "good fortune."
Liquidity:

I'm wondering if you could share some examples of what you mean.

Best, David.
 

moss elk

visitor
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
3,280
Reaction score
1,049
No blame is higher than good fortune,
because it one thing really we have power over. (our actions being free from serious error or fault) If you fail or succeed at something, if you've held honor, virtue or character as the highest, then succeed or fail, you will have done what is right.

But, I think it is important to note that
the two are not mutually exclusive.
Set the No Blame as maxim 1, and success as maxim 1.1

Here is a great movie scene:
[video=youtube_share;FwPCs-kjyIg]https://youtu.be/FwPCs-kjyIg[/video]
 

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
Well, when I cast readings about my spiritual path, especially when things are going well on it, and I ask Yi how it's going... over and over I've gotten "no blame"... it seems to be telling me not to look for the external world, where fortune comes and goes, but to the internal, which is above all those comings and goings of fortune.
 

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
No blame is higher than good fortune,
because it one thing really we have power over. (our actions being free from serious error or fault) If you fail or succeed at something, if you've held honor, virtue or character as the highest, then succeed or fail, you will have done what is right.

But, I think it is important to note that
the two are not mutually exclusive.
Set the No Blame as maxim 1, and success as maxim 1.1

Yes, agreed on all points... and great movie clip :)
 
F

Freedda

Guest
... when I cast readings about my spiritual path, especially ... over and over I've gotten "no blame"...
Liquidity, I'm not sure if you were responding to my post, asking if you'd share some examples, but if you were ... I guess I was wondering if you could share some specific readings - including your question, and the hexagrams and lines - where you got 'no blame' as a response to a query about your spiritual path.

Moss Elk seems to grok your meaning - I'm looking for specifics to help me respond more completely.

All the best, David.
 

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
Liquidity, I'm not sure if you were responding to my post, asking if you'd share some examples, but if you were ... I guess I was wondering if you could share some specific readings - including your question, and the hexagrams and lines - where you got 'no blame' as a response to a query about your spiritual path.

Moss Elk seems to grok your meaning - I'm looking for specifics to help me respond more completely.

All the best, David.

Hi David,

I was looking for a good example. I know there were many in the past, but one occurred today. I'm facing certain real-world difficulties, and was wondering between the spiritual and the material how to respond to these.

Asking what would happen if I hewed absolutely and unconditionally to the spiritual and trusted the divine to take care of the material...this is the latest casting, which I think is appropriate:

45.1.5 Gathering Together > 51 Shock
Shock is the current state of affairs indeed!

.1: “The first line, magnetic, shows its subject with a sincere desire for union, but unable to carry it out, so that disorder is created. If she cries out for help to her proper correlate, all at once her tears will give place to smiles. She need not mind the temporary difficulty; as she goes forward, there will be no error.

Who is the correlate? The divine.

.5: “If in gathering together one has position, this brings no blame. If there are some who are not yet sincerely in the work, sublime and enduring perseverance is needed. Then remorse disappears."

So here's the relevant language (these two lines are from different translations, which is why one says "no error" and the other "no blame"). I can't say, of course, that good fortune never appears in spiritual readings, but at the end "no blame" seems to be more important, higher, deeper, and more core -- as if good fortune is in a way beside the point.
 
H

hmesker

Guest
no error (...) no blame (...) remorse disappears
no error/no blame = 无咎. Jiu 咎 refers to an external cause, something from outside, like a curse from the ancestors, or a another calamity. That is how 无咎 is normally read in old texts: 'no calamities (will occur)'.
remorse disappears = 悔亡. This is an internal attitude or emotion: 'regret'.
 

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
no error/no blame = æ—*å’Ž. Jiu å’Ž refers to an external cause, something from outside, like a curse from the ancestors, or a another calamity. That is how æ—*å’Ž is normally read in old texts: 'no calamities (will occur)'.
remorse disappears = 悔亡. This is an internal attitude or emotion: 'regret'.

Interesting! But the way it is used in Wilhelm-Baynes and elsewhere is that "no blame" seems to suggest that the way of acting is not blameworthy... but perhaps that is connected as well to the external?

Whereas "no remorse" I thought seemed to suggest that a mistake had been made but had been corrected, and thus, as you point out, there is ultimately no regret.
 

my_key

visitor
Joined
Mar 22, 1971
Messages
2,892
Reaction score
1,334
no error/no blame = 无咎. Jiu 咎 refers to an external cause, something from outside, like a curse from the ancestors, or a another calamity. That is how 无咎 is normally read in old texts: 'no calamities (will occur)'.
remorse disappears = 悔亡. This is an internal attitude or emotion: 'regret'.

External causes can bring us to our fate. Internal attitudes can help us rise above - get the best we can from a situation.
Perhaps the 'no blame / no error' is a place of trust: Trust what is happening - this is not a calamity it is what is meant to be. There will be positive outcomes in the silver lining.
 
H

hmesker

Guest
Interesting! But the way it is used in Wilhelm-Baynes and elsewhere is that "no blame" seems to suggest that the way of acting is not blameworthy... but perhaps that is connected as well to the external?
Maybe, but there are a two things to be noted here. First, the English word 'blame' does not 100% convey the original German word 'Makel' in Wilhelm's translation. Second, Wilhelm followed the Confucian commentaries that give an interpretation to 无咎 that differs from what it meant around 1000-800BC.
Whereas "no remorse" I thought seemed to suggest that a mistake had been made but had been corrected, and thus, as you point out, there is ultimately no regret.
Nowhere does the text talk about a mistake nor does it say that it has been corrected. The disappearance of remorse can have other reasons, like for instance you thought you had done something wrong and you regret the outcome, but later on you find out that the outcome is actually an improvement.
 
F

Freedda

Guest
Hi David ... I'm facing certain real-world difficulties, and was wondering between the spiritual and the material how to respond to these ... Asking what would happen if I hewed absolutely and unconditionally to the spiritual and trusted the divine to take care of the material...this is the latest casting, which I think is appropriate:

45.1.5 Gathering Together > 51 Shock
Liquidity, I'm wondering if you're mixing up a few things here. First, my translation of 45.1.5 has neither the words blame nor error in them, so I'd suggest that you need to be careful in clinging too much to one particular take on these words. I think however, that Harmen gives some good information here about the meanings.

It makes sense that if you're asking about a spiritual issue, you'll get a spiritual answer, or at least one you can interpret that way. I don't think it's any more complicated than that.

I don't think that particular words in a response - like blame, or error, or regrets pass (or whatever it happens to be) unto themselves carry spiritual meaning, at least not exclusively. You could, for example, get a spiritual response that talks about blame, or one that contains the words error or regret, or any of a thousand other things.

I don't think of the Yi as a purely 'spiritual' book; I'd venture that if you were to ask a 'non-spiritual' question, you could end up with a spiritual answer, or general advice or a suggested attitude - all depending on what you asked and maybe what you need to take away from it.

Also, I'm not sure if in ancient China they had clear-cut distinctions between what was "spiritual" versus what was worldly (or whatever the opposite of spiritual would be), just like there aren't those clear distinctions now.

For example, being 'spiritual' might mean taking some kind of action in the world (or how you take that action - like being honest or compassionate ... ), just like a worldy issue might require a spiritual or internal answer or response. This is clearly expressed, at least in Buddhism, where the teachings of the Eightfold Path include worldly actions: "Right Livelihood," "Right Action," "Right Speech," and "Right Effort." Though it is from a different tradition with different roots, I suspect the Yi reflects this as well.


Best, David.
 

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
Liquidity, I'm wondering if you're mixing up a few things here. First, my translation of 45.1.5 has neither the words blame nor error in them, so I'd suggest that you need to be careful in clinging too much to one particular take on these words. I think however, that Harmen gives some good information here about the meanings.

Many translations have words like blame and error in them for 45.1.5.

Wilhelm-Baynes .1: " If you are sincere, but not to the end, there will sometimes be confusion, sometimes gathering together. If you call out, then after one grasp of the hand you can laugh again. Regret not. Going is without blame.

Liu .1: "In the beginning sincerity, later change. Disorder and gathering alternate. If you cry out, after grasping someone's hands you will smile again. No fear. Go with no blame.

Blofeld .5: "On account of his high position, he gathers people together -- no error! Yet he cannot secure the confidence of the people; therefore he should exalt his virtue and prolong his persistence so that he need no longer feel regret.

Liu .5: "If one has position, people will gather. No blame. If he does not have the trust of all, he should perpetuate his magnanimity. Remorse will vanish.

It makes sense that if you're asking about a spiritual issue, you'll get a spiritual answer, or at least one you can interpret that way. I don't think it's any more complicated than that.

The point is the distinction between no blame and good fortune and the higher spiritual significance of the former, inner correctness being higher than good fortune.
 
H

hmesker

Guest
The point is the distinction between no blame and good fortune and the higher spiritual significance of the former, inner correctness being higher than good fortune.
I understand that this is your perception but it is mainly your interpretation and not a general rule that goes for everybody. nor do I think it is a foundational rule in the Yijing. And what to make of the Judgment of hexagram 7 where it says 貞丈人吉无咎? We have ji 吉 'good fortune' and wu jiu 无咎 'no blame' in one sentence.

What is also telling is that the Yijing hardly ever says 'you (will) have blame'. The only exception to this that I can find is H43.1 where it says 往不勝為咎: 'to go and not be victorius will lead to blame.' This tells something about how the ancient Chinese saw 咎: winners would not receive it but the other parties probably would.
 

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
I understand that this is your perception but it is mainly your interpretation and not a general rule that goes for everybody. nor do I think it is a foundational rule in the Yijing. And what to make of the Judgment of hexagram 7 where it says 貞丈人吉无咎? We have ji 吉 'good fortune' and wu jiu 无咎 'no blame' in one sentence.

What is also telling is that the Yijing hardly ever says 'you (will) have blame'. The only exception to this that I can find is H43.1 where it says 往不勝為咎: 'to go and not be victorius will lead to blame.' This tells something about how the ancient Chinese saw 咎: winners would not receive it but the other parties probably would.

Well certainly, it is my interpretation. As far as I'm concerned, Yi is very much something that requires interpretation to be understood. There are 'universal rules,' but to understand and what they mean and how they actually play out requires a great deal of personal context and introspection.

Also, I never said that "no blame" and "good fortune" are opposed. One can be inwardly correct AND fortunate; there is no contradiction in that, so the judgment in 7 is perfectly fine. And certainly there are opposite examples of blameless action bringing misfortune, as in 25.5 or 39.2.

Now, it's an interesting question where blame is to be found.

Here are some examples where I find it, whether they use the word 'blame' or not, there is an implication of blame:

1.6 -- "Arrogant dragon will have cause to repent."

4 -- "If he asks the same question for the second and third times, he is disrespectful. Having been judged disrespectful, he will not be instructed again."

In 6.6 the line reads: "Even if by chance a leather belt is bestowed on one, by the end of a morning it will have been snatched away three times."
Confucian commentary says: "He receives a reward through his contention, but still he is not deserving of respect."

16.6: "Deluded enthusiasm. But if after completion one changes, there is no blame." This suggests that if one does not change, there is no blame. But there is no specific character here for misfortune.

28.4: "The ridgepole is upheld -- good fortune! Were it otherwise, there would be cause for blame."

40.3: "If a man carries a burden on his back and nonetheless rides in a carriage, he thereby encourages robbers to draw near. Perseverance leads to humiliation." Suggestion of blame here too.

and so on.
 
H

hmesker

Guest
Also, I never said that "no blame" and "good fortune" are opposed. One can be inwardly correct AND fortunate; there is no contradiction in that, so the judgment in 7 is perfectly fine.
Of course it is, but in your initial post you said:

Over and over I find that when Yi considers things for me from a spiritual perspective, "no blame" is considered a higher and more important and superior outcome to "good fortune."
How are you going to make that distinction when both are mentioned in the same line? The Yi apparently does not do that. It is you who is doing that: you find 'no blame' more important than 'good fortune' . Which is fine of course but I don't think the Yi is telling you that.

And certainly there are opposite examples of blameless action bringing misfortune, as in 25.5 or 39.2.
There is no 'blameless action' in 25.5 nor misfortune (无妄之疾。勿藥有喜。) so I don't see any 'blameless action bringing misfortune' there. There is also no blame, repent or misfortune mentioned in 39.2 (王臣蹇蹇。匪躬之故。).

Here are some examples where I find it, whether they use the word 'blame' or not, there is an implication of blame: 1.6 -- "Arrogant dragon will have cause to repent."
Hui 悔, 'repent' should not be equaled with jiu 咎, 'blame'. As I tried to describe earlier, they are two different concepts that do not necessarily have to be related. 'Blame' comes from outside, 'repent' from inside.

The problem that I have with most of your other examples is that they speak of 'if' where there is not any 'if' in the text. In your translation maybe, but not in the Chinese original. In 40.3 you read a 'suggestion of blame' but what Wilhelm translates as 'humiliation' is the word lin 吝 which means 'difficulties, difficult progress' (see here). 'Humiliation' is a much later meaning of that character.

So it is all in the eye of the beholder. And apparently it also matters how the text is translated and who the reader is following.
 
F

Freedda

Guest
The point is the distinction between no blame and good fortune and the higher spiritual significance of the former, inner correctness being higher than good fortune.
I think I understand what you are saying (I think, maybe :duh:).

My point is that any phrase, word, line, hexagram, trigram, image, judgement, interpretation, etc. can have spiritual significance, and none is more 'spiritual' than any other. And none is higher or lower, nor more spiritually correct than any other.

So, on the face of it, a casting or hexagram or trigram with the words (or associated with the words) 'blame' or 'error' is no more or less 'spiritual' - nor better or worse or has more 'inner correctness' - than the phrase 'good fortune.' Just like a dragon is not any better or worse than a pig, and a well is not better or worse than a melon wrapped in leaves, or nightfall better or worse than the sky, etc.

They all have their place, which is why they are where they are. You of course may see it differently.


Best, David.
 

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
Of course it is, but in your initial post you said:


How are you going to make that distinction when both are mentioned in the same line? The Yi apparently does not do that. It is you who is doing that: you find 'no blame' more important than 'good fortune' . Which is fine of course but I don't think the Yi is telling you that.

It would be like me saying "Susan thinks that being a good person is more important than being rich." And you responded: "But Susan said Jason is both a good person and rich. So that disproves that." It doesn't, of course.

What I'm saying is that based on my life experience with Yi in the context of spiritual castings, this is what has been valued.

There is no 'blameless action' in 25.5 nor misfortune (无妄之疾。勿藥有喜。) so I don't see any 'blameless action bringing misfortune' there. There is also no blame, repent or misfortune mentioned in 39.2 (王臣蹇蹇。匪躬之故。).

Legge's translation of 25.5 is "The fifth line, dynamic, shows one who is free from insincerity, and yet has fallen ill. Let him not use medicine, and he will have occasion for joy in his recovery."

Wilhelm: "Use no medicine in an illness incurred through no fault of your own. It will pass of itself."

Wilhelm 39.2: "The king's servant is beset by obstruction upon obstruction, but it is not his own fault."

Liu 39.2: "The king's officer meets many obstructions. It is not his fault."

Hui 悔, 'repent' should not be equaled with jiu 咎, 'blame'. As I tried to describe earlier, they are two different concepts that do not necessarily have to be related. 'Blame' comes from outside, 'repent' from inside.

So it is all in the eye of the beholder. And apparently it also matters how the text is translated and who the reader is following.
Well that may well be true. So who is your translator of choice?
 

liquidity

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
424
Reaction score
125
I think I understand what you are saying (I think, maybe :duh:).

My point is that any phrase, word, line, hexagram, trigram, image, judgement, interpretation, etc. can have spiritual significance, and none is more 'spiritual' than any other. And none is higher or lower, nor more spiritually correct than any other.

So, on the face of it, a casting or hexagram or trigram with the words (or associated with the words) 'blame' or 'error' is no more or less 'spiritual' - nor better or worse or has more 'inner correctness' - than the phrase 'good fortune.' Just like a dragon is not any better or worse than a pig, and a well is not better or worse than a melon wrapped in leaves, or nightfall better or worse than the sky, etc.

They all have their place, which is why they are where they are. You of course may see it differently.

Best, David.

It's not so much that they are more or less spiritual on the face of it, as you put it, but that there is an underlying philosopy to Yi that is revealed as one does many castings over time. I am just giving the summary of my experience with those castings vis-à-vis the spiritual... and thus my interpretation of things.
 
F

Freedda

Guest
... but that there is an underlying philosophy to Yi that is revealed as one does many castings over time. I am just giving the summary of my experience with those castings vis-à-vis the spiritual ...
I haven't had an experience of an underlying philosophy of the Yi. I suppose it may make sense, as the Yi might be representative of a specific time, culture and mindset, but not being a Yi or Chinese history scholar, I'm only guessing about that.

Best, David.
 
H

hmesker

Guest
Legge's translation of 25.5 is "The fifth line, dynamic, shows one who is free from insincerity, and yet has fallen ill. Let him not use medicine, and he will have occasion for joy in his recovery."

Wilhelm: "Use no medicine in an illness incurred through no fault of your own. It will pass of itself."

Wilhelm 39.2: "The king's servant is beset by obstruction upon obstruction, but it is not his own fault."

Liu 39.2: "The king's officer meets many obstructions. It is not his fault."
This shows 1. it is in the eye of the beholder 2. how easy it is to read things in a translation that are not there 3. how important a good translation is. There is no mention of 'fault' in these texts, at least not in the Chinese original. In 39.2 the word that Wilhelm and others translate as 'fault' is gu 故 - 'cause, origin, affair, business'. If the tekst really wanted to say 'fault' it would have used another character.

Well that may well be true. So who is your translator of choice?
Me.
 
F

Freedda

Guest
... There is no mention of 'fault' in these texts, at least not in the Chinese original ... the word that Wilhelm and others translate as 'fault' is gu 故 - 'cause, origin, affair, business'.
And then there is Bradford Hatcher's take on 39.2: 'the sovereign's minister is set back and interrupted, but this is not one person's cause.'

I like the notion of 'cause' or 'origin' here.

PS - Harmen, any thoughts of an English translation by you?


Best, D.
 
Last edited:
H

hmesker

Guest
PS - Harmen, any thoughts of an English translation by you?
If you can accept that it will be a tentative translation I am willing to give it a try.

王臣蹇蹇。匪躬之故。

Wang 王: king
Chen 臣: servant(s)

Jianjian 蹇蹇: jian 蹇 is often used with the meaning of jian 謇 which means 'to speak out boldly', 'to admonish the king'. It is repeated here which implies a continuous non-stopping action. The Shanghai Museum manuscript has jiejie 訐訐, 'reprimand, rebuke' which shows that this idea of 'to speak boldly without reservation' is the meaning intended in this line (and not 'obstruction' or 'limping', 'impasse' etc.) "The king's servant(s) continuously admonish him."

Feigong 匪躬: not for himself, not for personal reasons but out of loyalty to the king.

Zhi 之: possessive marker

Gu 故: cause, reason

"The king's servant continuously admonishes him. He does not do this for himself (but out of loyalty)."
 
F

Freedda

Guest
"The king's servant continuously admonishes him. He does not do this for himself (but out of loyalty)."
Thanks Harmen! And how about:

39.2

Here we have obstruction. The rains have flooded the mountain passes; Mountain's stubbornness has slowed down the storm, making the Abyss even deeper and more impassable. And even though no one has caused this to happen - or, if they did, they had a very good reason for it - we still need to find a way forward, to "overcome what causes (this) obstruction."

Perhaps what we need here is Fire's light to provide clarity, it's warmth to dry things out a bit, and it's protective shell (two outer solid lines) to give use some 'shelter from the storm.' We may need to have bit of patience before we find a clear way forward, but once we know what it is, we should act without being to passive or too accepting of anything that might deter us.

... or something like that.

Best, David. :bows:
 
H

hmesker

Guest
Thanks Harmen! And how about:

39.2

Here we have obstruction. The rains have flooded the mountain passes; Mountain's stubbornness has slowed down the storm, making the Abyss even deeper and more impassable. And even though no one has caused this to happen - or, if they did, they had a very good reason for it - we still need to find a way forward, to "overcome what causes (this) obstruction."

Perhaps what we need here is Fire's light to provide clarity, it's warmth to dry things out a bit, and it's protective shell (two outer solid lines) to give use some 'shelter from the storm.' We may need to have bit of patience before we find a clear way forward, but once we know what it is, we should act without being to passive or too accepting of anything that might deter us.

... or something like that.

Best, David. :bows:
Yes, that is a good description of the trigrams and their workings. There is Fire in the hexagram; it is the upper nuclear trigram but it is surrounded by Earth: a passive attitude and a focus on feeding the present situation prevents Fire from manifesting itself. Without a goal and a clear direction the actual cause of the obstruction might remain hidden.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
"The king's servant continuously admonishes him. He does not do this for himself (but out of loyalty)."


So the king's servant could admonish him ? It's just usually a servant cannot admonish a king without being fired. A minister I guess might advise but what is meant by a 'servant' here because in English a servant implies a fairly lowly position or at least not one in which one could presume to admonish a king. In English there is something incongruous about the sentence simply for the fact that servants do not admonish kings, unless you mean 'servant' in a very general sense like being a servant of the state. The 'servant' in this sentence brings to mind someone who is bringing the king's food and washing his clothes, at least that's my sense of it. If it was 'minister' it would make more sense.
 
H

hmesker

Guest
So the king's servant could admonish him ? It's just usually a servant cannot admonish a king without being fired. A minister I guess might advise but what is meant by a 'servant' here because in English a servant implies a fairly lowly position or at least not one in which one could presume to admonish a king. In English there is something incongruous about the sentence simply for the fact that servants do not admonish kings, unless you mean 'servant' in a very general sense like being a servant of the state. The 'servant' in this sentence brings to mind someone who is bringing his food and washing his clothes ?
True. 'Servant' might not be the best translation for chen 臣; I readily accepted the most common meaning of this word that I knew without checking if there were better options. The 漢語大詞典 says that it also refers to government officials that served under a monarchy (君主制時代的官吏) so that might be a better fit here. I believe it also meant 'minister'.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
So copying Bradford's translation from Freedda

And then there is Bradford Hatcher's take on 39.2: 'the sovereign's minister is set back and interrupted, but this is not one person's cause.'

comparing it to yours, Harmen's, tentative translation


"The king's servant continuously admonishes him. He does not do this for himself (but out of loyalty)."



There's quite different sense of what's happening although both seem to imply the minister is rejected though the word for rejected is not there. Well in Bradford's he is 'set back and interrupted' which must be the same as 'limping' - ah but you don't have 'limping at all for this line you have


Jianjian 蹇蹇: jian 蹇 is often used with the meaning of jian 謇 which means 'to speak out boldly', 'to admonish the king'. It is repeated here which implies a continuous non-stopping action. The Shanghai Museum manuscript has jiejie 訐訐, 'reprimand, rebuke' which shows that this idea of 'to speak boldly without reservation' is the meaning intended in this line (and not 'obstruction' or 'limping', 'impasse' etc.) "The king's servant(s) continuously admonish him.



So it is an unusual situation where a minister continually admonishes a king.



I've gone to my journal to look at times I received this line just to get a feel of it's flavour as experienced but nothing stands out to me. I have always just thought it describes a time where in order to serve some objective hardship must be faced because there are cockups all along the way and these cockups are generally king's doings, worldly authorities. However your current translation sounds much more heroic. The minister is challenging, criticizing the king for the sake of those he speaks for ? Or maybe a higher truth, or may be he knows the king is a bit dim. I like the last sentence in Bradford's commentary "The king owns the mountain in theory, the servant owns it in fact."


(It's interesting that there are absolutely no entries in our WikiWing for this line at all in an entire decade or thereabouts. Some lines have 5 entries or more this line has nothing)
 
H

hmesker

Guest
There's quite different sense of what's happening although both seem to imply the minister is rejected though the word for rejected is not there.
I don't think that the minister is rejected here - ministers were allowed to critize the king if they substantiated their criticism with actual facts. An interesting book on how they did that is Facing the Monarc - Modes of Advice in the Early Chinese Court by Garret Olberding (ed.).

So it is an unusual situation where a minister continually admonishes a king.
Yes, well, maybe not. The 'continously' does not have to mean 'every day', it could also mean 'once a month' or during regular scheduled meetings. This line might speak of a minister who uses these moments to speak his mind.

However your current translation sounds much more heroic. The minister is challenging, criticizing the king for the sake of those he speaks for ? Or maybe a higher truth, or may be he knows the king is a bit dim.
The classical commentaries would say he does it for the king and his country.

(It's interesting that there are absolutely no entries in our WikiWing for this line at all in an entire decade or thereabouts. Some lines have 5 entries or more this line has nothing)
That is odd. Does this mean this line is not received as an answer very often?
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
I don't think that the minister is rejected here - ministers were allowed to critize the king if they substantiated their criticism with actual facts. An interesting book on how they did that is Facing the Monarc - Modes of Advice in the Early Chinese Court by Garret Olberding (ed.).


Wow at first I thought you were kidding, a whole book on advising the monarch, there must be much to say then. The reason I thought rejection or something near to that might occur is because

1. we are in 39, there is a a difficulty in going forward as planned and so all the lines deal with phases of that.

2. Most translations including yours do say (or imply) this minister or servant is not having an easy time of it. The lines acknowledges this isn't easy whether 'limping' is used or not. You imply it in 'he does not do this for himself'. It is implied in those words he takes on this onerous duty for a purpose beyond his own benefit. If we make a particular point of saying someone is not doing this for their own benefit we assume he is making a sacrifice of some kind. So what could make his task of advising so difficult ? If what he said was easily accepted then it wouldn't be so hard so rejection might be a part of that.



That is odd. Does this mean this line is not received as an answer very often?



No, well we have no way of knowing beyond our own practice how often it has been received. All this means is that no one has shared anything at all about it either in their experience or in thoughts, reflections, revelations, quotes alternative translations etc - nothing. Actually there is one sentence there but it's very little and I'm not sure about it at all. However things are about to change since I will now go and add your tentative translation and a link to this thread :D unless you would prefer I didn't ?

I guess the process of translating is always going to be a tortuous case of marrying accuracy of meaning according to the original Chinese with the necessity of producing a sentence or parts of a sentence that has some meaning for us in our modern languages. The translator has to settle at some point to give us anything we can use as an oracle at all. But all translations will necessarily always be tentative since there is no complete certainty as to how things were meant. I do actually think people's own experience can supplement the sense of a line which is why we have wikiwing I guess. Not that there can ever be a consensus, that would be impossible and undesirable but as we are living the oracle now, in the present we have to use all we have. Hence I think posting your tentative translation in Wikiwing is useful.



Going back to the original query on the thread liquidity simply perceives in her own readings the places where it says 'no blame' tend for her to indicate something bigger than 'good fortune' when she is connecting with Yi regarding her spirituality. I don't find that, I can't see that 'no blame' in those translations we use is 'higher' in any sense. In fact I'd take it more as 'despite the fact there is mess, you made or walked in too far, you haven't done anything wrong - I'm thinking of 28.6 there. But liquidity's conversations with Yi may have taken her a different route whereby for her personally an association is uncovered but maybe she or we don't have the words to express it just as it is felt.


I might start a thread in CC for all the places in wiki where there is nothing because the fact that there is nothing there for one line yet many entries for another must be saying something. Another line where no one ever commented or shared anything at all is 42.2. Maybe no one ever had what that line seems to promise...Oh no there is one entry for that
 

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