Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 Well a single word is clearly not really going to cover the essence of the term zhi. Pegging it to any one term -- mind or will, is probably just going to limit the reader. I agree that sometimes zhi means memory, sometimes ambition, sometimes willpower (the power to carry out something) sometimes it may mean concentration. For example, in one Chinese translation zhi is translated as ¡Æwill¡Ç in one paragraph and in another it is translated as ¡Æthe idea¡Ç. But I am clear I don¡Çt like zhi=mind straight across the board, because it clearly misses many aspects. But before we indulge, let us look at line 21 of the lingshu ch8 there is commentary specifically saying what zhi means- It says very simple zhi = zhi4xiang (»Ö¸þ) and fang1xiang4 (Êý¸þ) - zhixiang = aspiration, ideal, ambition. Fangxiang = direction, orientation. Clearly this Chinese author thinks that zhi refers to something much more than mind or memory, and more closely to what we call will (or willpower) or kendall¡Çs drive. But let us look on¡Ä My understanding is that ¡Æzhi¡Ç is a broad term that encompasses much. I have never seen the translation that kidney stores the will-power, but I see zhi equally will-power in some situations / discussions on ¡Æwill¡Ç, which I think is correct. But we know zhi is something intangible like hun (liver) and po (lungs) when it comes to the usage that the kidney is related to the zhi, as well as relating to something more physical like the blood (liver) and breaths (lungs). So we know that zhi conveys a very physical realm and also more ethereal / spiritual (for lack of a better word) depending on the situation. But let us look more at the ling shu ch.8 and see what was actually said. It is said clearly that the kidneys store essences (shen cang jing) and the essences are housed (or are the dwelling place) of the zhi (jing she zhi) although Wiseman translates ¡Æshe¡Ç as abandon which of course does not fit here.) Also it is said that the kidneys stores the jing-zhi (essences and zhi) In Normal Physiology we see 1. ¡ÈWhen intent [yi] becomes permanent, we speak of will [zhi].¡É Note Wiseman translates yi as reflection. So when reflection is permanent this is zhi. What does that mean to you? Again here zhi = zhixiang = aspiration, ideal, ambition. Fangxiang = direction, orientation. - I do think this seals the deal, but there is more to the story. Also there are the 5 zhi referring to anger, joy, thought etc¡Ä Commentary ch 8 - ¡Èhere zhi (will) has its place in the process that leads the mystery of life to efficacious and control the conduct. The vital tension announces and precedes sudden appearances. Will applies itself to life in the first instance. It is the Will-to-life. It then achieves all that life, through the heart, recognizes as true, acceptable, and favorable. One's orientation, already apparent in intent, is affirmed and becomes directive. But we must guard against intellectualizing the will. Its beginnings are before thought, before reflection, before meditation. However, there is nothing thoughtless about it. It is impulse, the natural and vital impulse in me, the injection of the vital life forces. It comes from the guts and the lower belly but resonates perfectly with the intent and with the heart. ¡É But the best way to see what the zhi is, is to view what happens in pathology: The suwen does link the decline (or inability to enter) of jing-shen (essence-spirit) to the zhi(will) - yi (intent) being unable to be appropriately maintained. 1. When the essences are lost ¡Èwill [zhi] and intent [yi] become confused and disordered.¡É (Mind) Commentary - No more strength or perception of what to do - 2. When the zhi is attacked (by the liver) one cannot remember what one has said. 3. When the zhi is attacked (by the liver) one cannot bend the spine forwards or backwards. (Physical) Commentray says, ¡Èthe will makes one move without stiffness¡É 4. The kidney¡Çs store the essences; the Essences are the dwelling place of the will. When the breaths of the kidneys are empty, there is withdrawal (reversal). 5. From the suwen ch.62 - ¡Èwhen there is an over abundance of Will, the belly is swollen and there is diarrhea of undigested food. When there is an insufficiency, there is a withdrawal (reversal). Some commentary on reversal notes the mental aspect, some notes the physical. To sum up the kidneys which house the will, do control the memory, brain power and will or drive in life, power of the bone structure and posture - which is all dependent of essence of the kidney. It is a broad term which IMO mind just does not nail. Maybe it should be mind in shen-zhi and will in jing she zhi. Side note: To further confuse the issue, different authors use different terms: I.e. Kendall uses ¡Æmind¡Ç for xin (heart) in, ¡Èand that which appoints activities is called the mind. The ability of the mind for recalling and recollecting is called intent (yi).¡É He then uses the term drive for zhi , ¡ÈIntent [yi] exists because of the presence of drive [zhi].¡É Hope this helps things, - <Chinese Medicine> tel: <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> Add me to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a signature like this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 , " " <@c...> wrote: > Well a single word is clearly not really going to cover the essence of the > term zhi. Pegging it to any one term -- mind or will, is probably just > going to limit the reader. Jason, thanks for your comments and the extensive examples. I have learned a lot about zhi, although my knowledge of it has not become more finite even though it has become increasingly complete. As I mentioned in my just-now post (typed at the same time as yours, apparently), I have retracted a bit from my stance in light of an abundance of evidence to the contrary. I do think that pegging it to one term is awkward, but not pegging it to any term makes it even more nebulous because the reader can no longer see that the chinese text was using the same word in all these different contexts. If the meaning was crystal clear, of course we would want different words for each circumstance, but it isn't always clear, thus the English needs to maintain a bit of ambiguity just like the Chinese does. Mind I think covers more ground that will, but each is very problematic. The concept itself is problematic. > It is said clearly that the kidneys store essences (shen cang jing) and the > essences are housed (or are the dwelling place) of the zhi (jing she zhi) > although Wiseman translates ¡Æshe¡Ç as abandon which of course does not fit > here.) No, he translates that ªÙ she4 as abode. Same word as in the compound for a dormitory. Thanks for the comments. Your neijing work will be interesting. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 > > > On Behalf Of Eric Brand > Thursday, September 29, 2005 11:49 AM > > Re: Zhi - will or mind??? > > , " " > <@c...> wrote: > > Well a single word is clearly not really going to cover the essence > of the > > term zhi. Pegging it to any one term -- mind or will, is probably just > > going to limit the reader. > > Jason, thanks for your comments and the extensive examples. I have > learned a lot about zhi, although my knowledge of it has not become > more finite even though it has become increasingly complete. As I > mentioned in my just-now post (typed at the same time as yours, > apparently), I have retracted a bit from my stance in light of an > abundance of evidence to the contrary. > > I do think that pegging it to one term is awkward, but not pegging it > to any term makes it even more nebulous because the reader can no > longer see that the chinese text was using the same word in all these > different contexts. If the meaning was crystal clear, of course we > would want different words for each circumstance, but it isn't always > clear, thus the English needs to maintain a bit of ambiguity just like > the Chinese does. Mind I think covers more ground that will, but each > is very problematic. The concept itself is problematic. This is precisely why I am not in favor for 1 to 1 transliterations. Cleary any single term (for zhi) will miss important meanings in certain contexts. I think this is a situation where transparency is more important. The more Chinese I deal with, the more I see these types of situations. This example is from one single book from 1 time period (although it is a compilation), but compound the situation with 10000's of authors, 10000s of books, over 2000 years and we have a real mess. But the question becomes do we sacrifice clarity of what the term is really saying in a specific context, for the term's ability of being pegged to the original Chinese. Clearly in this situation if the reader actually did look in the PD (about 1% chance IMO) to get a definition of what mind (zhi) meant, there is a good chance that it would not do justice to the usage that any number of places in the neijing it occurs. Without Chinese and immense 'zhi' (Drive) a reader will not get the full meaning of zhi. It is up to the translator to supply some depth, and pick a term that fits the context that it being used in. Just my opinion though, to each their own. > > > It is said clearly that the kidneys store essences (shen cang jing) > and the > > essences are housed (or are the dwelling place) of the zhi (jing she > zhi) > > although Wiseman translates ¡Æshe¡Ç as abandon which of course does > not fit > > here.) > > No, he translates that ªÙ she4 as abode. Same word as in the compound > for a dormitory. You are right, he has 2 entries one for each tone. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 > > > Well a single word is clearly not really going to cover the essence > > of the > > > term zhi. Pegging it to any one term -- mind or will, is probably just > > > going to limit the reader. > > > > I do think that pegging it to one term is awkward, but not pegging it > > to any term makes it even more nebulous because the reader can no > > longer see that the chinese text was using the same word in all these > > different contexts. If the meaning was crystal clear, of course we > > would want different words for each circumstance, but it isn't always > > clear, thus the English needs to maintain a bit of ambiguity just like > > the Chinese does. Mind I think covers more ground that will, but each > > is very problematic. The concept itself is problematic. > First, let me say that I am not a Chinese translator, but I was a professional editor before going into TCM. I don't think the two comments above are necessarily at odds. What's wrong with having a standard term with a footnote to explain it's more nuanced meaning in a specific context? Granted, lots of folks don't read footnotes, but more read footnotes than would go to the dictionary. Sarah Rivkin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 29, 2005 Report Share Posted September 29, 2005 , " saydit " <saydit@e...> wrote: > First, let me say that I am not a Chinese translator, but I was a professional editor before > going into TCM. I don't think the two comments above are necessarily at odds. What's > wrong with having a standard term with a footnote to explain it's more nuanced meaning > in a specific context? Granted, lots of folks don't read footnotes, but more read footnotes > than would go to the dictionary. Sarah, the exact suggestion that you have made is the approach endorsed by the COMP (Council of Oriental Medicine Publishers). Blue Poppy & Paradigm follow this standard, and it is clearly endorsed by people like Wiseman, Flaws, Rosenberg, Damone, and many others. Jason is following a similar model as well with his paper. I, myself, am in complete agreement with you. It is telling that a professional editor such as yourself would draw the same conclusion without necessarily having heard about the COMP designations in the past. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.