Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1It seems to me that the principles which they lay down might find a suitable application in the modern warfare of our civilised and Christian Europe. The inculcation of such lessons cannot have been + without good effect in China during the long course of its“ history. Sze is a fair specimen of its class. From the other 63 hexagrams lessons are deduced, for the most part equally good and striking. But why, it may be asked, why should they be conveyed to us by such an array of lineal figures, and in such a farrago of emblematic representations? It is not for the foreigner to insist on such a question. The Chinese have not valued them the less because of the antiquated dress in which their lessons are arrayed. Hundreds of their commentators have evolved and developed their meaning with a minuteness of detail and felicity of illustration that leave nothing to be desired. It is for foreign students of Chinese to gird up their loins for the / 26 THE Yi KING. CH. 111, mastery of the book instead of talking about it as mysterious and all but inexplicable. Granting, however, that the subject-matter of the Yi is \ what has been described, very valuable for its practical ¥ wisdom, but not drawn up from an abysmal ‘deep of philosophical speculation, it may still be urged, ‘ But in all this we find nothing to justify the name of the book as Yi King, the “Classic of Changes.” Is there not something more, higher or deeper, in the Appendixes that have been ascribed to Confucius, whose authority is certainly not inferior to that of king W4n, or the duke of Kau?’ To reply fully to this question will require another chapter. CHAPTER III. THE APPENDIXES. 1. Two things have to be considered in this chapter :— the authorship of the Appendixes, and their contents. The Subjectsof | Text is ascribed, without dissentient voice, to the chapter. king Wan, the founder of the Kau dynasty, and his son Tan, in, better known as the duke of K au; and I have, in the preceding chapters, given reasons for accepting that view. As regards the portion ascribed to king Wan, the evidence of the third of the Appendixes and the statement of Sze-m4 X‘/ien are as positive as could be desired; and as regards that ascribed to his son, there is no ground for calling in question the received tradition. The Appendixes have all been ascribed to Confucius, though not with entirely the same unanimity. Perhaps I have rather intimated my own opinion that this view cannot be sustained. I have pointed out that, even if it be true, between six and seven centuries elapsed after the Text of the classic appeared before the Appendixes were written ; and I have said that, considering this fact, I cannot regard its two parts as a homogeneous whole, or as constituting one book in the ordinary acceptation of that name. Before entering on the question of the authorship, a very brief statement of the nature and number of the Appendixes will be advantageous. vw CH. Il. INTRODUCTION. 27
2Before entering on the question of the authorship, a very brief statement of the nature and number of the Appendixes will be advantageous. vw CH. Il. INTRODUCTION. 27 2. They are reckoned to be ten, and called the Shih Yt or ‘Ten Wings.’ They are in reality not so many; but the Number and ext is divided into two sections, called the nature ofthe Upper and Lower, or, as we should say, the Appendixes. first and second, and then the commentary on each section is made to form a separate Appendix. I have found it more convenient in the translation which follows to adopt a somewhat different arrangement. My first Appendix, in two sections, embraces the first and second ‘ wings,’ consisting of remarks on the paragraphs by king W4n in the two parts of the Text. My second Appendix, in two sections, embraces the third and fourth ‘wings,’ consisting of remarks on the symbolism of the duke of Kau in his explanation of the individual lines of the hexagrams. My third Appendix, in two sections, embraces the fifth and sixth ‘wings,’ which bear the name in Chinese of ‘Appended Sentences,’ and constitute what is called by many ‘the Great Treatise.’ Each wing has been divided into twelve chapters of very different length, and I have followed this arrangement in my sections. This is the most important Appendix. It has less of the nature of commentary than the previous four wings. While explaining much of what is found in the Text, it diverges to the origin of the trigrams, the methods pursued in the practice of divination, the rise of many arts in the progress of civilisation, and other subjects. My fourth Appendix, also in two sections, forms the seventh ‘wing.’ It is confined to an amplification of the expositions of the first and second hexagrams by king Wan and his son, purporting to show how they may be interpreted of man’s nature and doings. My fifth Appemdix is the eighth ‘wing,’ called ‘ Discourses on the Trigrams.’ It treats of the different arrangement of these in respect of the seasons of the year and the cardinal points by Fa-hsi and king Wan. It contains also one paragraph, which might seem to justify the view that there is a mythology in the Yi. My sixth Appendix, in two sections, is the ninth ‘wing, — 28 THE yf KING. CH. II. ‘a Treatise on the Sequence of the Hexagrams,’ intended to trace the connexion of meaning between them in the order in which they follow one another in the Text of king W4n. My seventh Appendix is the tenth ‘wing,’ an exhibition of the meaning of the 64 hexagrams, not taken in succession, but promiscuously and at random, as they approximate to or are opposed to one another in meaning. 3. Such are the Appendixes of the Yi King. We have The author. tO enquire next who wrote them, and espe- fue ofthe cially whether it be possible to accept the ppendixes. . :
33. Such are the Appendixes of the Yi King. We have The author. tO enquire next who wrote them, and espe- fue ofthe cially whether it be possible to accept the ppendixes. . : dictum that they were all written by Confucius. If they have come down to us, bearing unmistakeably the stamp of the mind and pencil of the great sage, we cannot but receive them with deference, not to say with reverence. If, on the contrary, it shall appear that with great part of them he had nothing to do, and that it is not certain that any part of them is from him, we shall feel entirely at liberty to exercise our own judgment on their contents, and weigh them in the balances of our reason. None of the Appendixes, it is to be observed, bear the There isno superscription of Confucius. There is not a Superscription single sentence in any one of them ascribing onany ofthe it to him. I gave in the first chapter, on Appendixes. 9, the earliest testimony that these treatises were produced by him. It is that of Sze-ma4 Kien, whose ‘ Historical Records’ must have appeared about the year 100 before our era. He ascribes all the Appendixes, except the last two of them, which he does not mention at all, expressly to Confucius ; and this, no doubt, was the common belief in the fourth century after the sage’s death. But when we look for ourselves into the third and fourth Appendixes—the fifth, sixth, and seventh ‘wings ’—both Thethira Of which are specified by Kien, we find and fourth it impossible to receive his statement about isan them. What is remarkable in both parts Cot from of the third is, the frequent occurrence of the formula, ‘The Master said,’ familiar to all readers of the Confucian Analects. Of course, the CH. Itt. INTRODUCTION. 29 sentence following that formula, or the paragraph covered by it, was, in the judgment of the writer, in the language of Confucius ; but what shall we say of the portions preceding and following? If he were the author of them, he would not thus be distinguishing himself from himself. The formula occurs in the third Appendix at least twenty-three times. Where we first meet with it, Xd Hsi has a note to the effect that ‘the Appendixes having been all made by Confucius, he ought not to be himself introducing the formula, “The Master said;” and that it may be presumed, wherever it occurs, that it is a subsequent addition to the Master’s text.’ One instance will show the futility of this attempt to solve the difficulty. The tenth chapter of Section i commences with the 59th paragraph :— ‘In the Yi there are four things characteristic of the way of the. sages. We should set the highest value on its explanations, to. guide us in speaking ; on its changes, for the initiation of our move- ' ments; on its emblematic figures, for definite action, as in the ‘ construction of implements; and on its prognostications, for our \ practice of divination.’
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1It seems to me that the principles which they lay down might find a suitable application in the modern warfare of our civilised and Christian Europe. The inculcation of such lessons cannot have been + without good effect in China during the long course of its“ history. Sze is a fair specimen of its class. From the other 63 hexagrams lessons are deduced, for the most part equally good and striking. But why, it may be asked, why should they be conveyed to us by such an array of lineal figures, and in such a farrago of emblematic representations? It is not for the foreigner to insist on such a question. The Chinese have not valued them the less because of the antiquated dress in which their lessons are arrayed. Hundreds of their commentators have evolved and developed their meaning with a minuteness of detail and felicity of illustration that leave nothing to be desired. It is for foreign students of Chinese to gird up their loins for the / 26 THE Yi KING. CH. 111, mastery of the book instead of talking about it as mysterious and all but inexplicable. Granting, however, that the subject-matter of the Yi is \ what has been described, very valuable for its practical ¥ wisdom, but not drawn up from an abysmal ‘deep of philosophical speculation, it may still be urged, ‘ But in all this we find nothing to justify the name of the book as Yi King, the “Classic of Changes.” Is there not something more, higher or deeper, in the Appendixes that have been ascribed to Confucius, whose authority is certainly not inferior to that of king W4n, or the duke of Kau?’ To reply fully to this question will require another chapter. CHAPTER III. THE APPENDIXES. 1. Two things have to be considered in this chapter :— the authorship of the Appendixes, and their contents. The Subjectsof | Text is ascribed, without dissentient voice, to the chapter. king Wan, the founder of the Kau dynasty, and his son Tan, in, better known as the duke of K au; and I have, in the preceding chapters, given reasons for accepting that view. As regards the portion ascribed to king Wan, the evidence of the third of the Appendixes and the statement of Sze-m4 X‘/ien are as positive as could be desired; and as regards that ascribed to his son, there is no ground for calling in question the received tradition. The Appendixes have all been ascribed to Confucius, though not with entirely the same unanimity. Perhaps I have rather intimated my own opinion that this view cannot be sustained. I have pointed out that, even if it be true, between six and seven centuries elapsed after the Text of the classic appeared before the Appendixes were written ; and I have said that, considering this fact, I cannot regard its two parts as a homogeneous whole, or as constituting one book in the ordinary acceptation of that name. Before entering on the question of the authorship, a very brief statement of the nature and number of the Appendixes will be advantageous. vw CH. Il. INTRODUCTION. 27
2Before entering on the question of the authorship, a very brief statement of the nature and number of the Appendixes will be advantageous. vw CH. Il. INTRODUCTION. 27 2. They are reckoned to be ten, and called the Shih Yt or ‘Ten Wings.’ They are in reality not so many; but the Number and ext is divided into two sections, called the nature ofthe Upper and Lower, or, as we should say, the Appendixes. first and second, and then the commentary on each section is made to form a separate Appendix. I have found it more convenient in the translation which follows to adopt a somewhat different arrangement. My first Appendix, in two sections, embraces the first and second ‘ wings,’ consisting of remarks on the paragraphs by king W4n in the two parts of the Text. My second Appendix, in two sections, embraces the third and fourth ‘wings,’ consisting of remarks on the symbolism of the duke of Kau in his explanation of the individual lines of the hexagrams. My third Appendix, in two sections, embraces the fifth and sixth ‘wings,’ which bear the name in Chinese of ‘Appended Sentences,’ and constitute what is called by many ‘the Great Treatise.’ Each wing has been divided into twelve chapters of very different length, and I have followed this arrangement in my sections. This is the most important Appendix. It has less of the nature of commentary than the previous four wings. While explaining much of what is found in the Text, it diverges to the origin of the trigrams, the methods pursued in the practice of divination, the rise of many arts in the progress of civilisation, and other subjects. My fourth Appendix, also in two sections, forms the seventh ‘wing.’ It is confined to an amplification of the expositions of the first and second hexagrams by king Wan and his son, purporting to show how they may be interpreted of man’s nature and doings. My fifth Appemdix is the eighth ‘wing,’ called ‘ Discourses on the Trigrams.’ It treats of the different arrangement of these in respect of the seasons of the year and the cardinal points by Fa-hsi and king Wan. It contains also one paragraph, which might seem to justify the view that there is a mythology in the Yi. My sixth Appendix, in two sections, is the ninth ‘wing, — 28 THE yf KING. CH. II. ‘a Treatise on the Sequence of the Hexagrams,’ intended to trace the connexion of meaning between them in the order in which they follow one another in the Text of king W4n. My seventh Appendix is the tenth ‘wing,’ an exhibition of the meaning of the 64 hexagrams, not taken in succession, but promiscuously and at random, as they approximate to or are opposed to one another in meaning. 3. Such are the Appendixes of the Yi King. We have The author. tO enquire next who wrote them, and espe- fue ofthe cially whether it be possible to accept the ppendixes. . :
33. Such are the Appendixes of the Yi King. We have The author. tO enquire next who wrote them, and espe- fue ofthe cially whether it be possible to accept the ppendixes. . : dictum that they were all written by Confucius. If they have come down to us, bearing unmistakeably the stamp of the mind and pencil of the great sage, we cannot but receive them with deference, not to say with reverence. If, on the contrary, it shall appear that with great part of them he had nothing to do, and that it is not certain that any part of them is from him, we shall feel entirely at liberty to exercise our own judgment on their contents, and weigh them in the balances of our reason. None of the Appendixes, it is to be observed, bear the There isno superscription of Confucius. There is not a Superscription single sentence in any one of them ascribing onany ofthe it to him. I gave in the first chapter, on Appendixes. 9, the earliest testimony that these treatises were produced by him. It is that of Sze-ma4 Kien, whose ‘ Historical Records’ must have appeared about the year 100 before our era. He ascribes all the Appendixes, except the last two of them, which he does not mention at all, expressly to Confucius ; and this, no doubt, was the common belief in the fourth century after the sage’s death. But when we look for ourselves into the third and fourth Appendixes—the fifth, sixth, and seventh ‘wings ’—both Thethira Of which are specified by Kien, we find and fourth it impossible to receive his statement about isan them. What is remarkable in both parts Cot from of the third is, the frequent occurrence of the formula, ‘The Master said,’ familiar to all readers of the Confucian Analects. Of course, the CH. Itt. INTRODUCTION. 29 sentence following that formula, or the paragraph covered by it, was, in the judgment of the writer, in the language of Confucius ; but what shall we say of the portions preceding and following? If he were the author of them, he would not thus be distinguishing himself from himself. The formula occurs in the third Appendix at least twenty-three times. Where we first meet with it, Xd Hsi has a note to the effect that ‘the Appendixes having been all made by Confucius, he ought not to be himself introducing the formula, “The Master said;” and that it may be presumed, wherever it occurs, that it is a subsequent addition to the Master’s text.’ One instance will show the futility of this attempt to solve the difficulty. The tenth chapter of Section i commences with the 59th paragraph :— ‘In the Yi there are four things characteristic of the way of the. sages. We should set the highest value on its explanations, to. guide us in speaking ; on its changes, for the initiation of our move- ' ments; on its emblematic figures, for definite action, as in the ‘ construction of implements; and on its prognostications, for our \ practice of divination.’
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.