Let's
talk about 阴差阳错 yīnchāyángcuò (literally "yin lacking yang
mistaken," or "surprising results due to confusing
circumstances." In contemporary language the phrase conveys the idea of
"by happenstance" or "by chance," but the connotation is
"through this series of absurd mistakes we have a result that is
completely surprising. Think every episode of Arrested Development, or any
short-story by O. Henry story (but no movie by M. Night Shyamalan).
他们阴差阳错地烧毁那个香蕉店了
The reason
I am interested in this phrase is the presence of yin and yang. Given the
massive significance of these concepts in Chinese philosophy, it is simply too
interesting to not ask questions about how to look at this phrase through a
philosophical lens.
First, are there linguistic considerations in how we approach the
phrase? From what I can find this phrase is not a chengyu 成语 (idiom based on a known story), but possibly a guding cizu (a set combination of
characters that must appear in a fixed order).
Four-character
phrases often (but not always) rely on parallel structure between the first two
characters and second two characters: subject/predicate + subject/predicate. In
this case, this suggest the pair is 1+2 // 3+4. This gives us: "yin is lacking and yang is mistaken," or "a surprising result due to confusing circumstances."
The phrase may appear as either 阴差阳错 or 阴错阳差. I think this helps support
reading the phrase as a pair of parallel subject-predicate compounds. You could
possibly rearrange the characters to create a single subject-predicate
statement in the form (1+3) + (2+4), yinyang chacuo. This would mean "yin and yang (circumstances) are in
disarray." Yin
and yang
can be paried together in their common form, yinyang, and chacuo does mean a mistake, mishap,
or accident.
However, the general pattern involves a parallel pair of
subject-predicate compounds. This is visible in both 阴差阳错 or 阴错阳差. This general pattern and
these examples support parsing the passage as 1+2 // 3+4 (parallel
compounds). In this case, a subject (yin) plus a predicate (cha) run parallel to a second
subject (yang)
and second predicate (cuo).
Since the phrase appears as both 1+2 // 3+4 and 1+4 // 3+2, we can look at
possible interpretations for both formulations.
Version 1:
the nurturing elements of yin are
lacking and the organizational powers of yang
are misapplied to the situation.
Version 2:
the generative powers of yin are
disordered and the organizational powers of yang
are lacking.
What are
the philosophical considerations? Today we associate the idea of yinyang most closely with Daoism, but the term
appears throughout Warring States literature. Perhaps most surprisingly the
compound yinyang does not appear at all
in the the Dao De Jing. Furthermore, the text only contains a single instance
of yin and yang
separately, Chapter 42.
However, yinyang appears several times in Zhuangzi's
Inner Chapters, and throughout the Outer and Miscellaneous Chapters.The phrase
also appears in other texts, many of which were viewed as part of a shared
cultural history in the Zhou Dynasty. In these texts the phrase 阴阳
appear once in the Odes, once in the Book of Documents, and six times in the Yi
Jing (Classic of Change). In Confucian texts the term 阴阳
appears most notably Xunzi and the Classic of Rites. The term also appears in
Mozi (Mohism), Han Feizi (Legalism), and Sunzi's Art of War (Militarism).
At
some later point it would be interesting to trace the development of the terms,
or how thye are used in different texts. However, this is a humble blog post,
and so I should get about the business of descriving why I think the ideas of
yin and yang add interesting context to the phrase, 阴差阳错.
In the
Classic of Changes and Ba Gua, yang is
creative and yin is receptive. In a
general sense yang is heavenly, bright,
clear, active, and masculine. Yin is
earthly, dark, obscure, receptive, and feminine. Yang
is associated with the organizing principles of heaven, which provide the basis
of moral action. Yin is associated with
with the nurturing receptive capacity of earth, which provides the capacity for
growth.
Despite
the fact that these concepts appear to be in opposition, the concepts actually
indicate two mutually entailed forces that create a process of transformation. Yin and yang
are simply the most basic method of describing the process of transformation
and change. Systems such as the Yi Jing and Ba Gua make numerous distinctions
in the process of change, creating a detailed map of transformation.
These
forces are also mutually entailed, meainign the neither exists without the
other, and neither functions without the other. Neither is really separate,
either, and both should be understood as different aspects of the same system
of transformation: every system has elements that be seen as creating forward
momentum, and every system has elements that be be seen as receiving,
resisting, or moving away. One could look at yang
as high states of energy and yin as low
states of energy. The high states of energy create change in the system by
releasing energy into the system, which moves and transforms the environment.
However, in order for the environment to change, it has to have the capacity
for change.
Given
this, I think 阴差阳错 is really interesting. "Yin lacking and yang mistaken" suggests (first) that the
system lacks the basic conditions necessary for effectively completing a
process of transformation, and (and second) that the organizing principles are
mistaken and incapable of effectively coordinating the system into an effective
process of transformation. Imagine the example of an orchestra: in this
version, the musicians are poorly trained but playing the correct instruments,
while the conductor is well-trained but leading the wrong piece of music.
We can use the same approach for 阴错阳差. In this version "yin mistaken and yang lacking" suggests
(first) that the basic conditions are the wrong conditions, and (second) that
the organizing principle is poorly constituted or lacking efficacy. In this
version, imagine the musicians are well-trained but all playing the wrong instruments.
Meanwhile, the conductor is leading the correct score but poorly trained and
incapable of keeping time.
Both
versions lead to suprising and confusing results by way of unexpected or
haphazard circumstances. In addition there is a sense of moral disarray: the
principle agents involved are clearly lacking in either basic ability, or the
capacity to correctly apply their abiliteis to a situation. There is a sense
that the situation is more than just unexpected, but also undesirable (becaues
it could and should be avoided when possible).
