Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1If, after all, they shall conclude that in what is said on the hexagrams there is often ‘much ado about nothing,’ it is not the translator who should be deemed accountable for that, but his original. I had intended to append to the volume translations of certain chapters from K( Hst and other writers of the Sung dynasty ; but this purpose could not be carried into effect for want of space. It was found necessary to accompany the version with a running commentary, illustrating the way in which the teachings of king Wan and his son are supposed to be drawn from the figures and their several lines; and my difficulty was to keep the single Yi within the limits of one volume. Those intended translations therefore are reserved for another opportunity ; and indeed, the Sung philosophy did not grow out of the Yi proper, but from the Appendixes to it, and especially from the third ofthem. It is more Téoistic than Confucian. When I first took the Yi in hand, there existed no translation of it in any western language but that of P. Regis and his coadjutors, which I have mentioned above and in various places of the Introduction. The authors were all sinologists of great attainments ; and their view of the Text as relating to the transactions between the founders of the au dynasty and the last sovereign of the Shang or Yin, and capable of being illustrated historically, though too Narrow, was an approximation to the truth. The late M. Mohl, who had edited the work in 1834, said to me once, ‘I like it; for I come to it out of a sea of mist, and find solid ground.’ No sufficient distinction was made in it, however, between the Text and the Appendixes ; and in discussing the third and following Appendixes the translators PREFACE. XVii were haunted by the name and shade of Confucius. To the excessive literalness of the version I have referred above.
2XVii were haunted by the name and shade of Confucius. To the excessive literalness of the version I have referred above. In 1876 the Rev. Canon McClatchie, M.A., published a version at Shanghai with the title,‘ A Translation of the Confucian Yi King, or the “Classic of Changes,” with Notes and Appendix.’ . This embraces both the Text and the Appendixes, the first, second, and fourth of the latter being interspersed along with the Text, as in the ordinary school editions of the classic. So far as I can judge from his language, he does not appear to be aware that the first and second Appendixes were not the work of king Wan and the duke of K4u, but of a subsequent writer—he would say of Confucius—explaining their explanations of the entire hexagrams and their several lines. His own special object was ‘to open the mysteries of the Yi by applying to it the key of Comparative Mythology.’ Such a key was not necessary; and the author, by the application of it, has found sundry things to which I have occasionally referred in my notes. They are not pleasant to look at or dwell upon; and happily it has never entered into the minds of Chinese scholars to conceive of them. I have followed Canon McClatchie’s translation from paragraph to paragraph and from sentence to sentence, but found nothing which I could employ with advantage in my own. Long after my translation had been completed, and that of the Text indeed was printed, I received from Shanghai the third volume of P. Angelo Zottoli’s ‘Cursus Litteraturae Sinicae,’ which had appeared in 1880, About 100 pages of it are occupied with the Yi. The Latin version is a great improvement on that in the work of Regis; but P. Zottoli translates only the Text of the first two hexagrams, with the portions of the first, second, and fourth Appendixes relating to them; and other six hexagrams with the explanations of king Wan’s Thwan and of the Great Symbolism. Of the remaining fifty-six hexagrams only the briefest summary is given; and then follow the Appendixes III, V, VI, and VII at length. The author has done his work well. XVili PREFACE.
3Of the remaining fifty-six hexagrams only the briefest summary is given; and then follow the Appendixes III, V, VI, and VII at length. The author has done his work well. XVili PREFACE. His general view of the Yi is stated in the following sentences:—‘ Ex F0-hsi figuris, Wan regis definitionibus, Kau ducis symbolis, et Confucii commentariis, Liber conficitur, qui a mutationibus, quas duo elementa in hexagrammatum compositione inducunt, Yi (M utator) vel Yi King (Mutationum Liber) appellatur. Quid igitur tandem famosus iste Yi King? Paucis accipe: .ex linearum qualitate continua vel intercisa; earumque situ, imo, medio, vel supremo; mutuaque ipsarum relatione, occursu, dissidio, convenientia; ex ipso scilicet trigrammatum corpore seu forma, tum ex trigrammatum symbolo seu imagine, tum ex trigrammatum proprietate seu virtute, tum etiam aliquando ex unius ad alterum hexagramma varietate, eruitur aliqua imago, deducitur aliqua sententia, quoddam veluti oraculum continens, quod sorte etiam consulere possis ad documentum obtinendum, moderandae vitae solvendove dubio consentaneum. Ita liber juxta Confucii explicationem in scholis tradi solitam. Nil igitur sublime aut mysteriosum, nil foedum aut vile hic quaeras; argutulum potius lusum ibi video ad instructiones morales politicasque eliciendas, ut ad satietatem usque in Sinicis passim classicis, obvias, planas, naturales; tantum, cum liber iste, ut integrum legenti textum facile patebit, ad sortilegii usum deductus fuerit, per ipsum jam summum homo obtinebit vitae beneficium, arcanam cum spiritibus communicationem secretamque futurorum eventuum cognitionem; theurgus igitur visus est iste liber, totus lux, totus spiritus, hominisque vitae accommodatissimus ; indeque laudes a Confucio | ei tributas, prorsus exaggeratas, in hujus libri praesertim appendice videre erit, si vere tamen, ut communis fert opinio, ipse sit hujus appendicis auctor.’ There has been a report for two or three years of a new translation of the Yi, or at least of a part of it, as being in preparation by M. Terrien de Lacouperie, and Professor R. K. Douglas of the British Museum and King’s College, London. I have alluded on pages 8, 9 of the Introduction to some inaccurate statements about native commentaries on the Yi and translations of it by foreigners, made in connexion with this contemplated version. But I did not know PREFACE. xix
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.
1If, after all, they shall conclude that in what is said on the hexagrams there is often ‘much ado about nothing,’ it is not the translator who should be deemed accountable for that, but his original. I had intended to append to the volume translations of certain chapters from K( Hst and other writers of the Sung dynasty ; but this purpose could not be carried into effect for want of space. It was found necessary to accompany the version with a running commentary, illustrating the way in which the teachings of king Wan and his son are supposed to be drawn from the figures and their several lines; and my difficulty was to keep the single Yi within the limits of one volume. Those intended translations therefore are reserved for another opportunity ; and indeed, the Sung philosophy did not grow out of the Yi proper, but from the Appendixes to it, and especially from the third ofthem. It is more Téoistic than Confucian. When I first took the Yi in hand, there existed no translation of it in any western language but that of P. Regis and his coadjutors, which I have mentioned above and in various places of the Introduction. The authors were all sinologists of great attainments ; and their view of the Text as relating to the transactions between the founders of the au dynasty and the last sovereign of the Shang or Yin, and capable of being illustrated historically, though too Narrow, was an approximation to the truth. The late M. Mohl, who had edited the work in 1834, said to me once, ‘I like it; for I come to it out of a sea of mist, and find solid ground.’ No sufficient distinction was made in it, however, between the Text and the Appendixes ; and in discussing the third and following Appendixes the translators PREFACE. XVii were haunted by the name and shade of Confucius. To the excessive literalness of the version I have referred above.
2XVii were haunted by the name and shade of Confucius. To the excessive literalness of the version I have referred above. In 1876 the Rev. Canon McClatchie, M.A., published a version at Shanghai with the title,‘ A Translation of the Confucian Yi King, or the “Classic of Changes,” with Notes and Appendix.’ . This embraces both the Text and the Appendixes, the first, second, and fourth of the latter being interspersed along with the Text, as in the ordinary school editions of the classic. So far as I can judge from his language, he does not appear to be aware that the first and second Appendixes were not the work of king Wan and the duke of K4u, but of a subsequent writer—he would say of Confucius—explaining their explanations of the entire hexagrams and their several lines. His own special object was ‘to open the mysteries of the Yi by applying to it the key of Comparative Mythology.’ Such a key was not necessary; and the author, by the application of it, has found sundry things to which I have occasionally referred in my notes. They are not pleasant to look at or dwell upon; and happily it has never entered into the minds of Chinese scholars to conceive of them. I have followed Canon McClatchie’s translation from paragraph to paragraph and from sentence to sentence, but found nothing which I could employ with advantage in my own. Long after my translation had been completed, and that of the Text indeed was printed, I received from Shanghai the third volume of P. Angelo Zottoli’s ‘Cursus Litteraturae Sinicae,’ which had appeared in 1880, About 100 pages of it are occupied with the Yi. The Latin version is a great improvement on that in the work of Regis; but P. Zottoli translates only the Text of the first two hexagrams, with the portions of the first, second, and fourth Appendixes relating to them; and other six hexagrams with the explanations of king Wan’s Thwan and of the Great Symbolism. Of the remaining fifty-six hexagrams only the briefest summary is given; and then follow the Appendixes III, V, VI, and VII at length. The author has done his work well. XVili PREFACE.
3Of the remaining fifty-six hexagrams only the briefest summary is given; and then follow the Appendixes III, V, VI, and VII at length. The author has done his work well. XVili PREFACE. His general view of the Yi is stated in the following sentences:—‘ Ex F0-hsi figuris, Wan regis definitionibus, Kau ducis symbolis, et Confucii commentariis, Liber conficitur, qui a mutationibus, quas duo elementa in hexagrammatum compositione inducunt, Yi (M utator) vel Yi King (Mutationum Liber) appellatur. Quid igitur tandem famosus iste Yi King? Paucis accipe: .ex linearum qualitate continua vel intercisa; earumque situ, imo, medio, vel supremo; mutuaque ipsarum relatione, occursu, dissidio, convenientia; ex ipso scilicet trigrammatum corpore seu forma, tum ex trigrammatum symbolo seu imagine, tum ex trigrammatum proprietate seu virtute, tum etiam aliquando ex unius ad alterum hexagramma varietate, eruitur aliqua imago, deducitur aliqua sententia, quoddam veluti oraculum continens, quod sorte etiam consulere possis ad documentum obtinendum, moderandae vitae solvendove dubio consentaneum. Ita liber juxta Confucii explicationem in scholis tradi solitam. Nil igitur sublime aut mysteriosum, nil foedum aut vile hic quaeras; argutulum potius lusum ibi video ad instructiones morales politicasque eliciendas, ut ad satietatem usque in Sinicis passim classicis, obvias, planas, naturales; tantum, cum liber iste, ut integrum legenti textum facile patebit, ad sortilegii usum deductus fuerit, per ipsum jam summum homo obtinebit vitae beneficium, arcanam cum spiritibus communicationem secretamque futurorum eventuum cognitionem; theurgus igitur visus est iste liber, totus lux, totus spiritus, hominisque vitae accommodatissimus ; indeque laudes a Confucio | ei tributas, prorsus exaggeratas, in hujus libri praesertim appendice videre erit, si vere tamen, ut communis fert opinio, ipse sit hujus appendicis auctor.’ There has been a report for two or three years of a new translation of the Yi, or at least of a part of it, as being in preparation by M. Terrien de Lacouperie, and Professor R. K. Douglas of the British Museum and King’s College, London. I have alluded on pages 8, 9 of the Introduction to some inaccurate statements about native commentaries on the Yi and translations of it by foreigners, made in connexion with this contemplated version. But I did not know PREFACE. xix
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.