| knowledge-database (beta) |
 |
Current group: alt.divination
Chings, Divination Tools, and Mystical Texts
| xiwangmu | | Amethyst aka Harry Andruschak | | Odysseus | | FrankB |
|
|
| | From: | xiwangmu | | Subject: | Chings, Divination Tools, and Mystical Texts | | Date: | Sat, 01 Jan 2005 23:04:15 GMT |
|
|
 | 50050101 viii om
Odysseus :
# FrankB wrote:
#> An example : I cannot understand Mandarine Chinese.
#> How could I ever use the tools given in the Book of Divinations
#> (Tao Te King, often misspelled as "I Ching") ?
'King' and 'Ching' are just different translations of the same
Chinese term (also translated 'Jing'), which means 'Classic'.
the texts 1) "Yijing"/"Yi King"/"I Ching" => Classic of Changes
and 2) "Tao Teh Jing"/"Tao Teh King"/"Tao Teh Ching" => Classic of Tao and Teh
are actually different books, or different references to books which
have changed in configuration through time on account of their editing.
your question probably relates to Yijing, because this text is
usually associated with divination, lines, trigrams, hexagrams, etc.
# The "book of changes", concerning the 64 hexagrams?
that's Yijing/I Ching/I King, what I call the Chou Change Oracle.
it is a composition of materials attributed to culture-heroes and
to Chou dynasty officials (King Wen, Duke Chou, and also Confucius).
# What about the book usually known as _Tao Teh Ching_, attributed
# to Laotse? Do you mean that the two are the same,
they are two different books. they even have numerical parameter
differences, though squares are integral at points:
64) Yijing 8 x 8 trigrams
81) Taotejing 9 x 9 chapters in some editions
# or that together they compose a single work?
sometimes 'The Taoist Canon' apparently includes such texts,
since they are both classics (jings) of the Chinese people.
# Or are you implying that one of them is spurious?
both are spurious in parts, just like most old books. portions
are attributed pseudonymously and edited into varying versions
through time.
mu
|
|
| | From: | Amethyst aka Harry Andruschak | | Subject: | Re: Chings, Divination Tools, and Mystical Texts | | Date: | 06 Jan 2005 18:40:54 GMT |
|
|
| >Subject: Chings, Divination Tools, and Mystical Texts
>From: xiwangmu yronwode.com@nagasiva
>Date: 1/1/2005 3:04 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id:
>
>'King' and 'Ching' are just different translations of the same
>Chinese term (also translated 'Jing'), which means 'Classic'.
Thank you for the information. I myself do not use the I CHING, but instead the
LING CH'I CHING, which I guess can be roughly translated as the Spiritual Chess
Classic. I find this lesser known Oracle to be better fitted to my
requirements.
Reply to HarryAndruschak AT aol DOT com
"I have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night."
by Sarah Williams, in her poem "The Old Astronomer To His Pupil."
|
|
| | From: | Odysseus | | Subject: | Re: Chings, Divination Tools, and Mystical Texts | | Date: | Sun, 02 Jan 2005 00:48:45 GMT |
|
|
| xiwangmu wrote:
>
> 50050101 viii om
>
> Odysseus :
> # FrankB wrote:
> #> An example : I cannot understand Mandarine Chinese.
> #> How could I ever use the tools given in the Book of Divinations
> #> (Tao Te King, often misspelled as "I Ching") ?
>
> 'King' and 'Ching' are just different translations of the same
> Chinese term (also translated 'Jing'), which means 'Classic'.
>
> the texts 1) "Yijing"/"Yi King"/"I Ching" => Classic of Changes
> and 2) "Tao Teh Jing"/"Tao Teh King"/"Tao Teh Ching" => Classic of Tao and Teh
>
> are actually different books, or different references to books which
> have changed in configuration through time on account of their editing.
>
>
> sometimes 'The Taoist Canon' apparently includes such texts,
> since they are both classics (jings) of the Chinese people.
>
> # Or are you implying that one of them is spurious?
>
> both are spurious in parts, just like most old books. portions
> are attributed pseudonymously and edited into varying versions
> through time.
>
That all agrees with my understanding of the situation of these
"Classics". But FrankB seems to be speaking from a different
perspective, which I was asking him to expand upon. Unfortunately I
was unable to glean from his reply exactly why he seems to identify
the two.
--
Odysseus
|
|
| | From: | FrankB | | Subject: | Re: Khings, Divination Tools, and Mystical Texts | | Date: | Sun, 02 Jan 2005 03:19:42 +0100 |
|
|
| On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 00:48:45 +0000, Odysseus suggested the following :
> But FrankB seems to be speaking from a different
> perspective, which I was asking him to expand upon. Unfortunately I
> was unable to glean from his reply exactly why he seems to identify
> the two.
I'll wait to be back home, check the book, post the ISBN number and all
necessary things that would clarify the viewpoint of both the authors and
their claims if all that is needed.
Once again : Chinese cosmology and their divination
methods are not really my domain : the original thread started in
news:alt.magick about "Translation of non native English ceremonial
magickians"..
Chinese folklore scares me really !
(too foooking lazy to give you (pl.) the MsgId of that post.:)
|
|
|
| | |
|
 |