It is currently Thu Oct 31, 2024 3:56 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
Offline
 Post subject: Re: The traditional name "Taichi" and the false name "tengen
Post #21 Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2022 7:49 pm 
Dies with sente

Posts: 119
Liked others: 21
Was liked: 22
2. Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon: Plain Questions(黄帝内经.素问) • The Tianyuan(天元) Period Discourses & The Five Movements Discourses

References:
One of the Four Classics of Traditional Chinese Medicine -- Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon
https://www.163.com/dy/article/DFTHPVAF0529I2G3.html

Below for English readers:
Yellow Emperor's Inner Canon was written in the period from the Yellow Emperor(about 4000-4500 years ago) to the Western Han Dynasty(202 B.C. - 8 A.D.).

The Chinese characters/word 天元(Tian yuan) is in this book.
In fact, word 天元(Tian yuan) comes from "太始天元册(Tai shi Tian yuan Book)", which has been lost.

============================================================

......

鬼臾区曰:臣积考《太始天元册》文曰:
太虚寥廓,肇基化元,
万物资始,五运终天,
布气真灵,揔统坤元,
九星悬朗,七曜周旋,
曰阴曰阳,曰柔曰刚,
幽显既位,寒暑弛张,
生生化化,品物咸章。
臣斯十世,此之谓也。

......

帝曰:光乎哉道!明乎哉论!请著之玉版,藏之金匮,署曰《天元纪》。

(摘录自“天元纪大论篇”)

============================================================

......

WeiYuQu(鬼臾区) said: subordinate Deeply study 'Tai shi Tian yuan Book'(太始天元册), it said:"

Taixu(太虚) is vast, the foundation is created and the elements are transformed,

all things are original, the Five Movements run in the cosmoses,

Qi(气) is genuine and flexible, distributed in the universe, governs the elements of earth,

the Nine Stars are bright hanging, the Seven Luminaries are circling,

Yin(阴) versus Yang(阳), supple versus hard,

dark versus light, already in their place, cold versus heat, tension and relaxation,

transforming, borning and growing, all things arising, varied and graceful.

What I said,it has been handed down for ten generations."


......


Yellow Emperor said: Tao(道) is bright! theory is clear! Please write the jade version, collect in the Golden Chamber, and sign as 'Tian yuan(天元) period'.


[from Chapter of The Tian yuan(天元) Period Discourses]

============================================================
......

岐伯曰:昭乎哉问也!臣览《太始天元册》文,
丹天之气经于牛女戊分,
黅(jīn)天之气经于心尾己分,
苍天之气经于危室柳鬼,
素天之气经于亢氐昴毕,
玄天之气经于张翼娄胃。
所谓戊己分者,奎壁角轸,则天地之门户也。
夫候之所始,道之所生,不可不通也。
Attachment:
wyxdl.png
wyxdl.png [ 391.37 KiB | Viewed 7072 times ]

......

(摘录自“五运行大论篇”)
============================================================

......(Translate later)

[from Chapter of The Five Movements(五运) Discourses]



2.1 For the records of "Tai shi(太始)" and "Tian yuan(天元)" in Yellow Emperor’s Inner Canon, see above.
"Tai shi Tian yuan Book"(太始天元册) talks about the evolution of heaven and earth, Yin and Yang.


2.2 The original meaning of "Tian yuan(天元)":
"Yuan(元)": meaning of head, beginning, basic or fundamental ;
Therefore, "Tian yuan(天元)" means "the beginning of heaven (& earth) and the essence of heaven (& earth)";
The term "Taishi Tianyuan(太始天元)" is interpreted by author of this article as "Taishi(太始) Period, the beginning of heaven and earth, and the essence of heaven and earth"; The "Taishi Tianyuan Book" describes the model of the origin of the universe.


3. "Tian Yuan technique(天元术)" and "Four Yuan technique(四元术)" of Ancient Chinese Mathematics

(will continue)

_________________
Zhang-hu 章浒
Committed to the restoration Chinese traditional Weiqi
Research on ancient Weiqi rules & Classic (Dunhuang Classic and the Thirteen Chapters Classic)
From Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China


Last edited by pgwq on Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:24 am, edited 22 times in total.
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: The traditional name "Taichi" and the false name "tengen
Post #22 Posted: Sun Sep 18, 2022 7:56 pm 
Dies with sente

Posts: 119
Liked others: 21
Was liked: 22
References:

Chinese Astroarchaeology Archaeologist:Mr. Fengshi 冯时 先生
Chinese speech:

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV18t4y1377t

阴阳交泰(yin yang intersection and prosperous)

_________________
Zhang-hu 章浒
Committed to the restoration Chinese traditional Weiqi
Research on ancient Weiqi rules & Classic (Dunhuang Classic and the Thirteen Chapters Classic)
From Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: The traditional name "Taichi" and the false name "tengen
Post #23 Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:39 pm 
Lives in gote

Posts: 546
Liked others: 18
Was liked: 81
KGS: FanXiping
OGS: slashpine
pgwq wrote:
The national culture is the world culture. My goal is to restore the traditional Chinese Weiqi culture so as to distinguish it from the go culture transformed in Japan. This is the only way for the revival of Chinese Weiqi culture.

As for your choice, it is of course freedom.
I think this is a good goal to pursue. The world should know more about Chinese weiqi history and their contributions to the game. It just so happens that since Japan was the first country to introduce weiqi to Western countries, much of what we know about the game and its history comes from Japanese sources. Thus, for a long time weiqi was considered a Japanese game and no substantial efforts were made (outside of academic circles) to establish a strong link between China and weiqi. Even so, now we can learn more about Chinese historical contributions to weiqi thanks to the work of Ruoshi Sun, who has published several English translations of classical Chinese weiqi books and the academic research of people like Mr. Fairbairn, who has published his own books. (And I happen to have 2 of his works.)

Do you believe we should establish tournaments to resurrect the playing of weiqi under old Chinese rules, like the ones under which Huang Longshi, Fan Xiping, and Shi Xiangxia played?

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: The traditional name "Taichi" and the false name "tengen
Post #24 Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 6:46 am 
Dies with sente

Posts: 119
Liked others: 21
Was liked: 22
tekesta wrote:
I think this is a good goal to pursue. The world should know more about Chinese weiqi history and their contributions to the game. It just so happens that since Japan was the first country to introduce weiqi to Western countries, much of what we know about the game and its history comes from Japanese sources. Thus, for a long time weiqi was considered a Japanese game and no substantial efforts were made (outside of academic circles) to establish a strong link between China and weiqi. Even so, now we can learn more about Chinese historical contributions to weiqi thanks to the work of Ruoshi Sun, who has published several English translations of classical Chinese weiqi books and the academic research of people like Mr. Fairbairn, who has published his own books. (And I happen to have 2 of his works.)

Do you believe we should establish tournaments to resurrect the playing of weiqi under old Chinese rules, like the ones under which Huang Longshi, Fan Xiping, and Shi Xiangxia played?


Thank you for your reply.
Of course,we will restore old Chinese rules.
However, it is still difficult now. The Chinese Weiqi Association does not in fact support it,
there are some spontaneous activities by private enthusiasts who love ancient Chinese Weiqi.

For example: Weiqi Baby( https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/jI9ki7zIi2jOK65KpN9KfA ), a small program for playing on WeChat, already supports ancient Weiqi rules, where folk enthusiasts can play games based on ancient Weiqi rules with their friends.

_________________
Zhang-hu 章浒
Committed to the restoration Chinese traditional Weiqi
Research on ancient Weiqi rules & Classic (Dunhuang Classic and the Thirteen Chapters Classic)
From Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China

Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: The traditional name "Taichi" and the false name "tengen
Post #25 Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 7:33 am 
Oza

Posts: 3698
Liked others: 20
Was liked: 4660
pgwq: there is a big, though very inexact, difference in English between 'ancient' and 'old'. You use both terms in your reply, so it would be useful to know which is intended.

In the case of go, references to go in, say, the Dunhuang Classic would certainly count as ancient, and probably that would be acceptable to many people for anything up to the late Ming Dynasty, too. But from Qing times, including the time of Huang Longshi, I think we would more usually call that simply "old" Chinese go, and even (some) Ming Dynasty go would count as "old."

I think this distinction would apply simply because of the huge timespan involved. However, the fact that Chinese rules changed in (apparently) Ming times fortuitously makes that distinction even more useful.

So, the obvious questions are:

1. What do you mean by "ancient" Chinese rules? If you mean go of the era of Guo Bailing and Huang Longshi onwards (which I would call "old Chinese go"), do you wish to restore a form of go that simply uses group tax, or do you want to include the four starting stones as well?

2. If you really do mean ancient (pre-Ming), do you want to use the pre-Ming method of counting, and do you want to allow variants with differing numbers of starting stones, for example? (It would seem strange to take this choice as we have no reliable documentary evidence, such as game records, that show us how ancient go was played.)

If your answer is (1), why do you want to restore it, and do you know why the Chinese Weiqi Association rejects it? It seems to me that both forms can easily just co-exist, with the ancient version reserved perhaps for small-case private use, as happens with chess players who sometimes play ancient Arabic or Indian versions of the game.

Just for information, there are similar problems when talking about older forms of Chinese (or any language, really). The umbrella term is usually "classical Chinese" (and we can likewise easily talk of all of Chinese go prior to, say, the 20th century as "classical Chinese go". But to make finer distinctions, linguists use terms such as Archaic Chinese, and split this into Early Archaic and Late Archaic and so on. It sounds very scientific but doesn't really tell us very much.

If I was forced to try to make a meaningful distinction for Chinese go, I would diffidently say "ancient" for go up to and including the Tang period. Then Tang to Mid-Ming, then Late Ming to Late Qing. How would you divide it up, and what would your criteria be?

In Japan it's easy: Edo go and modern go. In Korea, sunjang go and modern go (though with the reservation that sunjang go may also be Chinese in origin).


This post by John Fairbairn was liked by 2 people: Elom0, Harleqin
Top
 Profile  
 
Offline
 Post subject: Re: The traditional name "Taichi" and the false name "tengen
Post #26 Posted: Sun Nov 27, 2022 6:42 pm 
Dies with sente

Posts: 119
Liked others: 21
Was liked: 22
John Fairbairn wrote:
pgwq: there is a big, though very inexact, difference in English between 'ancient' and 'old'. You use both terms in your reply, so it would be useful to know which is intended.

In the case of go, references to go in, say, the Dunhuang Classic would certainly count as ancient, and probably that would be acceptable to many people for anything up to the late Ming Dynasty, too. But from Qing times, including the time of Huang Longshi, I think we would more usually call that simply "old" Chinese go, and even (some) Ming Dynasty go would count as "old."

I think this distinction would apply simply because of the huge timespan involved. However, the fact that Chinese rules changed in (apparently) Ming times fortuitously makes that distinction even more useful.

So, the obvious questions are:

1. What do you mean by "ancient" Chinese rules? If you mean go of the era of Guo Bailing and Huang Longshi onwards (which I would call "old Chinese go"), do you wish to restore a form of go that simply uses group tax, or do you want to include the four starting stones as well?

2. If you really do mean ancient (pre-Ming), do you want to use the pre-Ming method of counting, and do you want to allow variants with differing numbers of starting stones, for example? (It would seem strange to take this choice as we have no reliable documentary evidence, such as game records, that show us how ancient go was played.)

If your answer is (1), why do you want to restore it, and do you know why the Chinese Weiqi Association rejects it? It seems to me that both forms can easily just co-exist, with the ancient version reserved perhaps for small-case private use, as happens with chess players who sometimes play ancient Arabic or Indian versions of the game.

Just for information, there are similar problems when talking about older forms of Chinese (or any language, really). The umbrella term is usually "classical Chinese" (and we can likewise easily talk of all of Chinese go prior to, say, the 20th century as "classical Chinese go". But to make finer distinctions, linguists use terms such as Archaic Chinese, and split this into Early Archaic and Late Archaic and so on. It sounds very scientific but doesn't really tell us very much.

If I was forced to try to make a meaningful distinction for Chinese go, I would diffidently say "ancient" for go up to and including the Tang period. Then Tang to Mid-Ming, then Late Ming to Late Qing. How would you divide it up, and what would your criteria be?

In Japan it's easy: Edo go and modern go. In Korea, sunjang go and modern go (though with the reservation that sunjang go may also be Chinese in origin).


I think the Tang and Song Weiqi rules are very mature rules.

I don't agree with the paranoid discrimination of a certain Go rules expert against the Japanese counting rule (derived from the Tang and Song rules), but have an unusual preference for the "modern Chinese counting" rule.

I like the Tang and Song rules more than the "Ming and Qing counting" rules. The Tang and Song rules do not have the "last dame" problem, and are more precise than the Ming and Qing rules.

The rules of Weiqi as described in the Dunhuang Classic, the rules of Tang and Song, and the rules of Ming and Qing are in fact one and the same, they all agree that the "basic eye(s) for groups living" can not "be filled".

See my research article on ancient rules.
Research of ancient weiqi rules in two Chinese classic books https://www.lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=17865

The 4 starting stones are necessary, and this is what the majority of Chinese players, including the Chinese Weiqi Association, are against.

The starting stones also includes the ancient way of seating the stones in handicap games.

Rebuttal article(Chinese):
批驳日本的棋史谎言:“取消座子增加了围棋的变化,使围棋得到极大的发展。”
Criticism of Japanese lies about the history of Weiqi: "The elimination of the starting stones has increased the variations of Weiqi and has led to its great development."
https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/344776623

Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

_________________
Zhang-hu 章浒
Committed to the restoration Chinese traditional Weiqi
Research on ancient Weiqi rules & Classic (Dunhuang Classic and the Thirteen Chapters Classic)
From Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group