Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1For information on these points we must have recourse to the Appendixes; and in reply to the question by whom and in what way the figures were formed, the third, of which we made use in the last chapter, supplies us with three different answers. (i) The 11th paragraph of Section ii says :— ‘Anciently, when the rule of all under heaven was in the hands of P4o-hst, looking up, he contemplated the brilliant forms exhibited in the sky; and looking down, he surveyed the patterns shown on the earth. He marked the ornamental appearances on birds and beasts, and the (different) suitabilities of the soil. Near at hand, in his own person, he found things for consideration, and the same at a distance, in things in general. On this he devised the eight lineal figures of three lines each, to exhibit fully the spirit-like and intelligent operations (in nature), and to classify the qualities of the myriads of things.’ . P4o-hst is another name for Fi-hsi?, the most ancient personage who is mentioned with any definiteness in Chinese history, while much that is fabulous is current about him. His place in chronology begins in B.C..3322, 5203 years ago. He appears in this paragraph as the deviser of the eight kw4 or trigrams. The processes by which he was led to form them, and the purposes which he intended them to serve, are described, but in vague and general terms that do not satisfy ourcuriosity. The eight figures, hgvever, wers ===, =, a =, SS, and = SS; called khien, twi, th, Ban, sin, hn, kn, and khw%n; and representing heaven or the sky; water, especially a collection of water as ina marsh or lake; fire, the sun, lightning ; thunder ; wid and wood; water, especially as in rain, fhe clouds, springs, streams in defiles, and the moon; a hill or mountain ; and the earth. To each of these figures is assigned a certain attribute or quality which should be suggested by the we I2 THE yi KING. CH. I. natural object it symbolises; but on those attributes we need not enter at present. (ii) The 7oth and 71st paragraphs of Section i give another account of the origin of the trigrams :— _ ‘In (the system of) the Yi there is the Great Extreme, which produced the two f (Elementary Forms). These two Forms produced the four Hsiang (Emblematic Symbols); which again produced the ei eight KwéA (or Trigrams). The eight Kw4 served ‘to determine the good and evil (issues of events), and from this ‘determination there ensued the (prosecution of the) great business of life.’ The two elementary Forms, the four emblematic Symbols, and the eight Trigrams can all be exhibited with what may be deemed certainty. A whole line ( ) and a divided (— —) were the two f. These two lines placed over themselves, and each of them over the other, formed the four Hsiang: ==; ——; = =. The same two lines placed successively over these Hsiang, formed the eight K wa, exhibited above.
2A whole line ( ) and a divided (— —) were the two f. These two lines placed over themselves, and each of them over the other, formed the four Hsiang: ==; ——; = =. The same two lines placed successively over these Hsiang, formed the eight K wa, exhibited above. Who will undertake to say what is meant by ‘the Great Extreme’ which produced the two elementary Forms? Nowhere else does the name occur in the old Confucian literature. I have no doubt myself that it found its way into this Appendix in the fifth (?or fourth) century B.C. from a Taoist source. Kd Hst, in his ‘Lessons on the Yi for the Young,’ gives for it the figure of a circle,—thus, C); observing that he does so from the philosopher K4u (A.D. 1017-1073)}, and cautioning his readers against thinking that such a representation came from Fa-hst himself. To me the circular symbol appears very unsuccessful. ‘The Great Extreme,’ it is said, ‘divided and produced two lines,—a whole line and a divided line.’ But I do not understand how this could be. Suppose it possible for the circle to unroll itself ; » Ku-yze, called K4u Tun-f and Kéu MAu-shuh, and, still more commonly, from the rivulet near which was his favourite residence, K4u Lien-kkf. Mayers (Chinese Reader's Manual, p. 23) says :—‘ He held various offices of state, and was for many years at the head of a galaxy of scholars who sought for instruction in matters of philosophy and research :—second only to KQ Hsi in literary repute.’ CH. Il. INTRODUCTION. 13 —vwe shall have one long line, . If this divide itself, we have two whole lines; and another division of one of them is necessary to give us the whole and the divided lines of the lineal figures. The attempt to fashion the Great Extreme as a circle must be pronounced a failure. But when we start from the two lines as bases, the formation of all the diagrams by a repetition of the process indicated above is easy. The addition to each of the trigrams of each of the two fundamental lines produces 16 figures of four lines; dealt with in the same way, these produce 32 figures of five lines; and a_ similar operation with these produces the 64 hexagrams, each of which forms the subject of an essay in the text of the — Yi. The lines increase in an arithmetical progression whose , common difference is 1, and the figures in a geometrical y progression whose common ratio is 2. This is all the ! mystery in the formation of the lineal figures ; this, I believe, y was the process by which they were first formed ; and it is hardly necessary to imagine them to have come from a sage like Fd-hsi. The endowments of an ordinary man were sufficient for such a work. It was possible even to shorten the operation by proceeding at once from the trigrams to the hexagrams, according to what we find in Section i, paragraph 2 :—
3The endowments of an ordinary man were sufficient for such a work. It was possible even to shorten the operation by proceeding at once from the trigrams to the hexagrams, according to what we find in Section i, paragraph 2 :— ‘A strong and a weak line were manipulated together (till there were the 8 trigrams), and those 8 trigrams were added each to itself and to all the others (till the 64 hexagrams were formed).’ It is a moot question who first multiplied the figures Who first from the trigrams. universally ascribed to multiplied ~~ FQ-hsi to the 64 hexagrams of the Yi. The to 64? more common view is that it was king Wan; but (0 Hsi, when he was questioned on the subject, rather inclined to hold that Fd-hst had multiplied them himself, but declined to say whether he thought that their names were as old as the figures themselves, or only dated from the twelfth century B.c.’ I will not venture to controvert ' KQ-jze Khwan sha, or Digest of Works of KQ-3ze, chap. 26 (the first chapter on the Y}), art. 16. i 14 THE Yi KING. CH, II. his opinion about the multiplication of the figures, but I must think that the names, as we have them now, were from king Wan. No Chinese writer has tried to explain why the framers stopped with the 64 hexagrams, instead of going on to Why the 128 figures of 7 lines, 256 of 8, 512 of 9, and jfigares were, so on indefinitely. No reason can be given after64. for it, but the cumbrousness of the result, and the impossibility of dealing, after the manner of king W4&n, with such a mass of figures. (iii) The 73rd paragraph of Section i, with but one paragraph between it and the two others which we have been considering, gives what may be considered a third account of the origin of the lineal figures :— ‘Heaven produced the spirit-like things (the tortoise and the divining plant), and the sages took advantage of them. (The operations of) heaven and earth are marked by so many changes and transformations, and the sages imitated them (by means of the Yi). Heaven hangs out its (brilliant) figures, from which are seen good fortune and bad, and the sages made their emblematic interpretations accordingly. The Ho gave forth the scheme or map, and the Lo gave forth the writing, of (both of) which the sages took advantage.’
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.
1For information on these points we must have recourse to the Appendixes; and in reply to the question by whom and in what way the figures were formed, the third, of which we made use in the last chapter, supplies us with three different answers. (i) The 11th paragraph of Section ii says :— ‘Anciently, when the rule of all under heaven was in the hands of P4o-hst, looking up, he contemplated the brilliant forms exhibited in the sky; and looking down, he surveyed the patterns shown on the earth. He marked the ornamental appearances on birds and beasts, and the (different) suitabilities of the soil. Near at hand, in his own person, he found things for consideration, and the same at a distance, in things in general. On this he devised the eight lineal figures of three lines each, to exhibit fully the spirit-like and intelligent operations (in nature), and to classify the qualities of the myriads of things.’ . P4o-hst is another name for Fi-hsi?, the most ancient personage who is mentioned with any definiteness in Chinese history, while much that is fabulous is current about him. His place in chronology begins in B.C..3322, 5203 years ago. He appears in this paragraph as the deviser of the eight kw4 or trigrams. The processes by which he was led to form them, and the purposes which he intended them to serve, are described, but in vague and general terms that do not satisfy ourcuriosity. The eight figures, hgvever, wers ===, =, a =, SS, and = SS; called khien, twi, th, Ban, sin, hn, kn, and khw%n; and representing heaven or the sky; water, especially a collection of water as ina marsh or lake; fire, the sun, lightning ; thunder ; wid and wood; water, especially as in rain, fhe clouds, springs, streams in defiles, and the moon; a hill or mountain ; and the earth. To each of these figures is assigned a certain attribute or quality which should be suggested by the we I2 THE yi KING. CH. I. natural object it symbolises; but on those attributes we need not enter at present. (ii) The 7oth and 71st paragraphs of Section i give another account of the origin of the trigrams :— _ ‘In (the system of) the Yi there is the Great Extreme, which produced the two f (Elementary Forms). These two Forms produced the four Hsiang (Emblematic Symbols); which again produced the ei eight KwéA (or Trigrams). The eight Kw4 served ‘to determine the good and evil (issues of events), and from this ‘determination there ensued the (prosecution of the) great business of life.’ The two elementary Forms, the four emblematic Symbols, and the eight Trigrams can all be exhibited with what may be deemed certainty. A whole line ( ) and a divided (— —) were the two f. These two lines placed over themselves, and each of them over the other, formed the four Hsiang: ==; ——; = =. The same two lines placed successively over these Hsiang, formed the eight K wa, exhibited above.
2A whole line ( ) and a divided (— —) were the two f. These two lines placed over themselves, and each of them over the other, formed the four Hsiang: ==; ——; = =. The same two lines placed successively over these Hsiang, formed the eight K wa, exhibited above. Who will undertake to say what is meant by ‘the Great Extreme’ which produced the two elementary Forms? Nowhere else does the name occur in the old Confucian literature. I have no doubt myself that it found its way into this Appendix in the fifth (?or fourth) century B.C. from a Taoist source. Kd Hst, in his ‘Lessons on the Yi for the Young,’ gives for it the figure of a circle,—thus, C); observing that he does so from the philosopher K4u (A.D. 1017-1073)}, and cautioning his readers against thinking that such a representation came from Fa-hst himself. To me the circular symbol appears very unsuccessful. ‘The Great Extreme,’ it is said, ‘divided and produced two lines,—a whole line and a divided line.’ But I do not understand how this could be. Suppose it possible for the circle to unroll itself ; » Ku-yze, called K4u Tun-f and Kéu MAu-shuh, and, still more commonly, from the rivulet near which was his favourite residence, K4u Lien-kkf. Mayers (Chinese Reader's Manual, p. 23) says :—‘ He held various offices of state, and was for many years at the head of a galaxy of scholars who sought for instruction in matters of philosophy and research :—second only to KQ Hsi in literary repute.’ CH. Il. INTRODUCTION. 13 —vwe shall have one long line, . If this divide itself, we have two whole lines; and another division of one of them is necessary to give us the whole and the divided lines of the lineal figures. The attempt to fashion the Great Extreme as a circle must be pronounced a failure. But when we start from the two lines as bases, the formation of all the diagrams by a repetition of the process indicated above is easy. The addition to each of the trigrams of each of the two fundamental lines produces 16 figures of four lines; dealt with in the same way, these produce 32 figures of five lines; and a_ similar operation with these produces the 64 hexagrams, each of which forms the subject of an essay in the text of the — Yi. The lines increase in an arithmetical progression whose , common difference is 1, and the figures in a geometrical y progression whose common ratio is 2. This is all the ! mystery in the formation of the lineal figures ; this, I believe, y was the process by which they were first formed ; and it is hardly necessary to imagine them to have come from a sage like Fd-hsi. The endowments of an ordinary man were sufficient for such a work. It was possible even to shorten the operation by proceeding at once from the trigrams to the hexagrams, according to what we find in Section i, paragraph 2 :—
3The endowments of an ordinary man were sufficient for such a work. It was possible even to shorten the operation by proceeding at once from the trigrams to the hexagrams, according to what we find in Section i, paragraph 2 :— ‘A strong and a weak line were manipulated together (till there were the 8 trigrams), and those 8 trigrams were added each to itself and to all the others (till the 64 hexagrams were formed).’ It is a moot question who first multiplied the figures Who first from the trigrams. universally ascribed to multiplied ~~ FQ-hsi to the 64 hexagrams of the Yi. The to 64? more common view is that it was king Wan; but (0 Hsi, when he was questioned on the subject, rather inclined to hold that Fd-hst had multiplied them himself, but declined to say whether he thought that their names were as old as the figures themselves, or only dated from the twelfth century B.c.’ I will not venture to controvert ' KQ-jze Khwan sha, or Digest of Works of KQ-3ze, chap. 26 (the first chapter on the Y}), art. 16. i 14 THE Yi KING. CH, II. his opinion about the multiplication of the figures, but I must think that the names, as we have them now, were from king Wan. No Chinese writer has tried to explain why the framers stopped with the 64 hexagrams, instead of going on to Why the 128 figures of 7 lines, 256 of 8, 512 of 9, and jfigares were, so on indefinitely. No reason can be given after64. for it, but the cumbrousness of the result, and the impossibility of dealing, after the manner of king W4&n, with such a mass of figures. (iii) The 73rd paragraph of Section i, with but one paragraph between it and the two others which we have been considering, gives what may be considered a third account of the origin of the lineal figures :— ‘Heaven produced the spirit-like things (the tortoise and the divining plant), and the sages took advantage of them. (The operations of) heaven and earth are marked by so many changes and transformations, and the sages imitated them (by means of the Yi). Heaven hangs out its (brilliant) figures, from which are seen good fortune and bad, and the sages made their emblematic interpretations accordingly. The Ho gave forth the scheme or map, and the Lo gave forth the writing, of (both of) which the sages took advantage.’
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.