Re: Mahjong Origin: Not "conclusive", but "quite good evidence"?
- From: al <alee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:43:08 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 15, 2:11 pm, al <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Mahjong Origin: "good evidence" ?++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The following is a quote from a post by JB, November 4, 2007.
The discussion topic was origin of mahjong.
+++++++++++++++
"Actual good evidence would be a pack of cards in which the suo suit
was clearly illustrated with trigrams. This wouldn't be conclusive,
since the cards might have been made by an I Ching obsessive who
forced everything he knew into the mould of I Ching; but it would be
quite good evidence, and if there were many such, it would be strong."
+++++++++++
I found the possibly "good evidence" in the form of 4-suited deck of
30 cards. although undated, this 4-suited deck is shown as Photo 79,
on page 55, of Illustrated Book of the Mahjong Museum (1999, Japan).
Evaluate for it's worth, but evaluate it.
The first three of the 4 suits are 万, 筒 and 索 as described in the
book. The fourth suit consists of 3 cards only. So actually here is a
4-suited deck of 30 cards. The 3 cards in the 4th suits are, Red
Flower, White Flower and Old Thousand.
What is significant here are the 3-line drawings on the lower portion
of cards from 1 to 9 in BOTH of the suits, 筒 and 索. They are trigrams
placed side by side in each card. Two trigrams form a hexagram and fit
the space neatly below the taiji yin-yang diagrams. Hexagrams are
oracles in the divination book, Book of Changes.
++++++++++++++
The search now is for a date to go with that 4-suited deck in the
Japan Museum Book. My personal satisfaction is in knowing that my
imagination and correlative thinking are on the right track. My
hypothesis has been that mahjong origin relates to the Book of Changes
and divination. See comparable symbols in the link below.
http://www.taopage.org/iching/iching_symbols.html
+++++++++++
Allan Lee
2009-01-15
P.S. any helpful hints will be appreciated.
No helpful hints or leads forthcoming so far.
In fact, what has been seen is attack on the age of the deck of cards
that has the suits comparable to mahjong.
I questioned: What is the definition of a "suit" or "suite"?
From the dictionary, a suite is a matching set, group or collection.
Obviously, 筒 and 索 are suits of 9 cards each. But ESWN and ZFB
constitue a suit as well, although they are only 7 cards. Since a
fixed number is not a requirement or criteria for the definition of a
suit, three cards such as Red Flower, White Flower and Old Thousand
can constitute a suit of 3 cards as they are related.
One senior poster attacked the idea of grouping the 3 cards s a suit.
I explained that the 3 cards are distinctively different from the
other suits of 9, and therefore deserve to be a separate group by
themselves.
I questioned: Where is the official definition for a suit of cards =
9? And why?
There are 4 groups of cards like 4 ethnic groups of people. They are
not defined by number. They are grouped by their common
characteristics.
That same poster accused me for failing to demonstrate how the three
extra cards are "matching" and what are their "common
characteristics".
I had thought that was unnecessary, as I know our readers are well
aware of the fact that mahjong does have more than just three suits,
although the so-called "money-base" never made any attempt at
including the 4th suit in its derivation hypothetical explanation.
So that poster wrote and I quote: "The burden of proof is on the above
poster to provide *rational* reasons for his readers to accept his
proposition. Hence the above poster has failed, at present, to
demonstrate (1) the **criteria** for why the three other groups of
cards are called suits and (2) how these criteria apply to the three
extra cards so that they may be labelled as a suit."
+++++++++++
That is a reasonable statement. But notice how the content was
totally ignored. Only the number of suits was of any concern.
Now I will try to explain briefly the rationale for the grouping of
the 3 cards into one separate suite.
Red Flower and White Flower are symbols representing concepts of life,
growth and reproduction. Both being identified as flowers, Red and
White belong to the same group. In terms of color symbolism, red is
male and white is female, corresponding to red as strong and white is
soft. Red Flower and White Flower are another way of representing Yang
and Yin.
As I see it, needless to say about the "birds and bees", one thing for
sure, they help spread the flowers. The flowers spread in myriads here
and there. They become young and old by the thousands.
So, three simple cards can mean a lot. They symbolize the creation of
the universe and life in nature based on Chinese philosophical
thinking. They are significant and they belong in a separate suit.
For comparison, regardless of what has been said or who had said it,
Zhong corresponds with Red Flower, Bai corresponds with White Flower
and Fa corresponds with Old Thousand; more than any other analogy such
as archery and musket shots, although other interpretations may be
applicable in different context.
Hence the suite of 3 cards hold the core concept of the game. Winds of
Changes added another aspect to life as part of nature in cosmology.
Divination is attempt by men of wisdom to anticipate changes. Kings in
ancient China depended on it for decision making in major affairs.
That should be enough to justify a separate suite for the 3 cards, Red
Flower, White Flower and Old Thousand.
++++++++++++++++
Allan Lee
January, 22, 2009
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Mahjong Origin: Not "conclusive", but "quite good evidence"?
- From: mstanwick
- Re: Mahjong Origin: Not "conclusive", but "quite good evidence"?
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Incorrect use of documentary sources
- Next by Date: Re: Incorrect use of documentary sources
- Previous by thread: Re: Mahjong Origin: Not "conclusive", but "quite good evidence"?
- Next by thread: Re: Mahjong Origin: Not "conclusive", but "quite good evidence"?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|