Zi Ping Zhen Quan — On the Ten Stems That Combine and Those That Do Not: Original Text, Translation & Interpretation

The meaning of transformation through combination among the Ten Stems was explained in the preceding chapter. Yet there are cases of combination that do not take effect. Why? The original says that something intervenes between the pair. It is like two people who care for each other, but someone steps between them, so their relationship cannot come about. For example, Jia (甲) and Ji (己) combine, but Geng (庚) intervenes between them. How can Jia pass beyond the intervening Geng that controls it and combine with Ji? Circumstances restrain it in this way: there is an intent to combine, but it dares not do so; its effect is as if the combination were absent.

This passage does not cancel the Jia–Ji pairing; it asks whether the combination can actually take effect. The original illustrates an impediment with Geng controlling Jia while occupying the position between Jia and Ji. Both control and position are involved, hence the phrase “an intent to combine, but not daring to do so.”

Xu Lewu first distinguishes “being paired does not necessarily mean combining, and combining does not necessarily mean transforming.” He adds that an intervening position need not involve control. This is broader than the original’s example of Geng intervening between and controlling Jia. Later, however, Xu also discusses distant pairings that still count as combinations when the chart pattern supports them. The intervening Stem, the controlling relationship, and the particular chart pattern must therefore be assessed separately; an intervening position alone is not the only criterion.

There are also cases where the positions are very far apart, such as Jia in the year Stem and Ji in the hour. Though their intentions accord, their positions are distant, like people at opposite ends of the world, and they cannot combine. This differs somewhat from a combination restrained by an intervening factor: they have an intent to combine but cannot do so fully. It is a half-combination, and its effect on fortune or misfortune amounts to only two or three tenths.

This passage separates distance from the control-based impediment in the preceding one. The former describes a pairing whose effect cannot fully take hold; the latter is restrained and treated as though no combination occurred. “Half-combination” and “two or three tenths” are the original’s general descriptions of reduced effect here; no method of measurement is given, so the year-to-hour combination should not be assigned a fixed numerical ratio.

Xu also says that great distance reduces a combination’s effect, but says favorability depends on whether the original function is retained: sometimes losing strength is favorable, and sometimes retaining it is. He also gives cases where qi (vital breath) connects through the month command and a distant pairing is still treated as a combination. The original’s account of distance and Xu’s conditions involving the chart pattern should be read together; neither “all distant combinations are ineffective” nor “all have the same effect” follows.

There are also combinations that do not harm the pattern. How so? If Jia is born in the Yin (寅) or Mao (卯) month and Xin (辛), the Direct Officer, appears in both the month and hour Stems, Bing (丙) in the year Stem combines with the month Xin. One is combined away and one remains, so the Officer is no longer excessive. If Jia encounters the Yang Blade in the month command (yue-ren, 月刃), and Geng (庚), Seven Killings, and Xin, Direct Officer, both appear, Bing combines with Xin. The Officer is combined away and Seven Killings remains; the Seven Killings and blade pattern is still formed. These combinations do no harm to the pattern.

The passage emphasizes that the effect of a combination depends on what it changes. Combining away one of two like Officers while leaving the other, or combining away the Officer while leaving Seven Killings when both appear, may clarify the role being used. The original specifies, respectively, two Xin Stems appearing in Yin or Mao months, and a month-blade with both Geng and Xin appearing. These conditions must not be omitted; the passage does not say that combining away any Officer is favorable.

Xu summarizes this as removing one and keeping one, and says removal may occur through control or combination; the point is that the desired function remains. He also reports that the Sanming Tonghui calls combination “keeping” and control “removing,” showing that other works use these terms differently. First understand “the Officer is combined away and Seven Killings remains” by the effect described in this original passage, then distinguish the terminology used by other texts.

Why are there also combinations that are not treated as a combination? They are combinations involving the Day Master itself. When one of the five yang Stems meets its corresponding Wealth, or one of the five yin Stems meets its corresponding Officer, the two form a combination. But when the Day Master’s own Stem is one of the pair, its Wealth or Officer is not treated as combined away. For example, Yi (乙) uses Geng as Direct Officer. Yi, the Day Stem, combines with Geng: this is my Officer, and I combine with it. How could it be combined away? But if Geng is in the year and Yi in the month, the month Yi combines with Geng first, leaving the Day Stem unable to combine with it. This is being combined away.

This passage distinguishes who participates in a combination. When the Day Master combines with the Wealth or Officer it uses, the original says that function still belongs to it. When another Stem in a different position participates first, the original explains this as the role being combined away. “Not treated as a combination” here follows “not combined away”; it does not mean that the Day Master and the other Stem have no combining relation.

Xu adds that, except where combination transforms and changes the nature of the Stem, the Day Master’s own combination is otherwise used in the same way as no combination, though the bond is closer. This preserves transformation as an exception: the Day Master’s own combination does not invariably leave the nature and function unchanged.

Xu does not fully agree with the original about the year Geng, month Yi, and day Yi. He says that when the month Yi also combines with Geng, the Officer remains and is not combined away; but if the Officer is being used, its inclination is divided and it is no longer directed exclusively toward the Day Master. The original says it is combined away; Xu says it remains but its intent is divided. Their different judgments must remain distinct.

Again, for a woman, the Officer represents the husband. When a Ding (丁) Day Master encounters Ren (壬), this is her husband and she combines with him, like a married couple close to one another, their bond becoming more intimate. But if Ren is in the month and a Ding in the year combines with him, the Day Stem Ding cannot combine with him. Thus her husband-star is combined away by a “sister,” and although the husband-star appears in the Stems, it is as though it did not.

The original carries forward the distinction between the Day Master’s own combination and another Stem combining first, using the images of husband and sister to describe alignment and opposition. “The husband-star appears, yet does not appear” means that although the Officer is visibly present, the author considers it already combined away by another Stem and no longer treats it as the Day Master’s own husband-star. It does not mean that the Stem has literally disappeared from the Four Pillars.

Xu’s account of an Officer that remains but has divided intent offers another reading: combination does not necessarily mean the Officer is removed, though the intent of the Useful God (yong-shen, 用神) may be divided. He also says that even when the Day Master itself combines with a Useful God, one must distinguish whether the Useful God is not directed toward the Day Master or the Day Master is not directed toward the Useful God. The family analogy describes these functional relationships; it should not be used by itself to infer actual marital behavior.

Why, then, speak of contending and jealous combinations? Examples include two Xin Stems combining with Bing, or two Ding Stems combining with Ren. As one husband does not marry two wives and one woman is not matched with two husbands, these are called contending or jealous combinations. Yet there is still an intent to combine; the feeling is simply not exclusive. If two Stems combine with one but are separated by position, however, there is no contention or jealousy at all. For example, the Four Pillars are 庚午、乙酉、甲子、乙亥: the two Yi Stems combine with Geng, with day Jia between them. The text identifies this as the chart of Gao Taiwei (高太尉); it is still read as Seven Killings combined away and Officer retained, with no reduction in good fortune.

The passage first says that two combining with one may make the intent less exclusive, then gives a separated-position example to show that simply counting two matching Stems and one partner does not establish a contending combination. In the cited Four Pillars, the month Yi and hour Yi are separated by day Jia; this positional condition is important to the author’s claim that there is no contention or jealousy. “No reduction in good fortune” is the author’s judgment about this example, not a general conclusion for every separated combination.

Xu likewise emphasizes examining positions. He discusses both the lack of obstruction when the Stems are separated and contention when one Stem is flanked by two others. He also considers whether the Day Master’s relation to what the chart uses is exclusive. Thus, two-to-one pairings, intervening positions, and adjacency are conditions to identify; the final judgment still depends on their actual effect on what the chart uses.

Transformation through combination can be true or false. The two preceding chart examples illustrate true transformation. There are also cases where the transformed qi is abundant, yet the Day Master still carries roots, Rob Wealth, or Resource; where the Day Master has no root, but the transformed qi is insufficient; and where the combination and transformation are genuine, yet an unrelated Stem comes to damage the transformed qi. All of these are false transformations.

The preceding passages mainly discuss whether a pairing can combine, whether something relied upon loses its function after combination, and whether its effect is directed toward the Day Master. Here the discussion turns to whether, after combination and transformation, the transformed qi is sufficient, whether the Day Master still carries root qi, or whether another influence damages it. These are supplementary conditions for true or false transformation; failure to combine and a false transformation after combination must not be treated as the same thing.

In Xu Lewu’s supplementary discussion of transformation, this passage follows his examples of Ding–Ren transforming into Wood and Jia–Ji transforming into Earth. He further says that both true and false transformations require support from the luck cycle, and that a false transformation may function according to his account if a later cycle removes the impediment. He also limits transformation-pattern analysis to the two combining Stems; the remaining Stems and Branches do not all thereby become transformed qi. Transformation, its true or false conditions, and subsequent support must be considered separately; the name of a pairing alone does not mean the whole chart has transformed.