Mahjong & Matiao Related? How and Why?

On Oct 31, 9:06 am, mstanwick <mstanw....TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote:
> On Oct 30, 1:20?am, al <a....TakeThisOut@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 9, 8:25 pm, Alan Kwan <notme@nospam> wrote:
> > I have studied the Mataio symbols very carefully in Lo's paper. They
> > are different from mahjong (very much different). Did you actually
> > have a chance to examine or research on mataio "money" symbols and
> > game-play?
>
I inquired if Mr. Kwan had read Ma diao in Lo's translation of Late
Ming Games, because he replied earlier to my question (if mahjong and
ma diao were related).

BTW I never did get a direct answer whether he had read it or not.

But this was your quick answer.

> For those interested, the issue is not the actual representations of
> cash per se but the fact that the representations are of forms of
> Cash.

Does that not sound like saying [the issue is not the actual charge
per se, but the fact that an alleged crime was reported]? Or it sound
more like :
[The issue is not the actual crime per se, but the fact that a charge
was alleged]?

Either way, it's no-explanation or invalid explanation for the marked
differences between the symbols in mahjong and those in ma diao.

In Lo's translation, the term "Cash" was used throughout. I can't help
but wonder where and how he got that. He never showed what a Zero Cash
looked like. He did say the 1-Cash was a taiji diagram [the yin-yang
symbol], but who knows what a Half-Cash was like? Was a Half-Cash (a
Broken-Cash) broken from a 1-Cash into halves or an octagon or how was
it broken up? He also chose a hundred Cash to a String. Wilkinson said
it was a thousand Cash to a String.

This notion of Cash Money just does not add up. The fact it sticks is
truly puzzling to me. It was even based on false information.

According to Wilkinson in Origin of Chinese Games, "Everyone knows
the sapeck of China, a round coin of brass and copper, with a square
hole in its center. It is as a rule very badly cast, and it is worth
just now about 1/15th of a cent. This coin, then is the unit of the
kun p'ai."

I have never seen a bad cast copper coin. How many people did?

How Wilkinson can justify his claim that "as a rule", they were "badly
cast", I don't know. Could the Cash (chien) be so badly cast that they
did not have the square holes? If so, then they were not copper coins
of cash money and they could have been coins for divination. Look at
the hole-less divination coin at the lower right corner on the web
page.

http://www.taopage.org/iching/iching_symbols.html

Furthermore, who has seen square holes in mahjong Circles? No aquare
holes in mahjong circles. Yet mahjong concentric circles are called
Cash, contrary to factual physical observation. People are hanging on
to it, because some Western scholar had said and written it so.

BTW, Cash = 1/15 of a cent is a mistake. I don't know if that was
Wilkinson's typo or a more serious error.

> As has been cited in past posts, there is much evidence (given
> in Prunners catalogue) of the different ways in which the various cash
> denominations have been represented.
>
As replied in earlier posts, the representation is out of proportion.
I recall reading Wilkinson's own remark about the incongruity of
supposed denominations.

The appearance of various denominations in a cataloge does not
necessarily justify or support their grouping in disproportionate
amounts like those as claimed in the 3 mahjong suits. The meaning of
"evidence" has been evidently stretched.

Besides, is a String a hundred or a thousand Cash? If it did not
matter in difference of amounts, then the whole money notion was
WORTHLESS.
++++++++++
Cheers.....al

On Dec 19 2007, 10:18 pm, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On Nov 16, 4:21 pm, mstanwick <mstanw....RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 16, 5:21�pm, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > >[..]
>
> > According to Lo, the game of ma diao disappeared in the late 19th
> > century. I am not aware of any four suited money packs apart from the
> > Hakka cards.
>
That is interesting. Where is the reference to the disappearance of ma
diao? Was that in The Playing-Card? What happened? Did Lo mention
anything more? Could there be a coincidence of ma diao and mahjong,
the disappearance of one and the appearance of the other?

> > FAQ 11 shows a 3 suited deck.
>
> > > There is yaiji and trigrams in that mtiao set. I think I mentioned
> > > about that.
> > > Even yin and yang symbols showed up in that set. Did you look at them?
>
> > Yes.

But it means notyjing?
> > [..]
>
> > > You may not have the correct understanding of my argument. I simple
> > > say that the mahjong game design is based on I-Ching concepts. I have
> > > not fixed any date to it. Age of the game is not in my argument. Is
> > > that how you see it?
>
> > I have no idea what this means.
>
Simply put, it means I wanted to show "WHAT", not "WHEN". In other
words, my presentation now is only a part of the whole argument.
Put it in another way, it is like when you were saying that your Cash-
Base does not concern itself with the suit of word-cards (ESWN and
zhong-Fa-Bai, as yet.

> What that means is the circles in mahjong are [or could be] "coins" for divination
> in I-Ching. Now I can show them.
I do not know when Mahjong was created, although it was there for some
time before Westerners found it.

http://www.taopage.org/iching/iching_symbols.hyml
>
But if...

> As the coins are for divination, strings of Cash and Myriads of Cash
> then be no more.
> [..] That
> makes MJ I-Ching based. When did mahjong come into being and what
> changes took place have yet to be determined or estimated yet. That
> was what I meant, besides the 2-3-3-3-3 pattern.
> +++++++++++
You probably have read the meaning of "suo3": a rope or more obscured,
like, to "search,ask,demand,exact". The infinitive is a stronger link
to I-Ching divination than coins. In fact I found the concentric
circles totally "un-cashed". They are symbols of TIME and cyclical
CHANGES.
>
Cheers....al
> +++++++++
> Cheers......al

On Jan 31, 10:18 am, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On Dec 19 2007, 10:18 pm, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:> On Nov 16, 4:21 pm, mstanwick <mstanw....RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 16, 5:21�pm, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
Ma-Daio and Mah-Jong related? That was the question.

I find it hard to see how Ma Daio and Mah-Jong are related.

Ma-Diao is a trick-taking game and a trick consists of 4 cards (page
117 The Playing-Card, Volume XXIX, Number 3).
Mah-Jong is NOT a trick-taking game. Mah-Jong is pattern-forming game.
Its objective pattern is 2.3.3.3.3 where 3’s are sub-sets of 3 cards
in a sequence or all clones.
The two games have basic difference in design concept and rules of
play.

In Ma-Diao each of 40 cards is ranked within and across suits.
In Mah-Jong, cards are ordered within each suit but 136 cards NOT
ranked.

Ma Daio and Mah-Jong sound similar.
But don’t be fooled. The relation is not in the name and it is not
that one is more correct than the other. as I come to understand, they
both are incorrect

Ma in Ma Daio means horse. It was claimed.
Mah in Mah-Jong means hemp. So they say.

Take your pick: “horse hanging a leg” for ma daio or a “hempen bird”
for mah-jong.
Neither name correlate with game-play.

THEN HOW do THE TWO GAME STILL RELATE?

Western historians claim there is a common money-base.
If you can see a common money-base, then that is as far as the
relation goes.

I don’t agree with the perception and interpretation of a money-base
in Mah-Jong, but I see a connection among other symbols such as taiji
(yin-yang) diagram and a suit of line-graphs commonly referred to as
“strings”.
The commonality I see between Ma Daio and Mah-Jong is I-Ching in their
original designs whose “purpose and application” gotten lost “when
drinking cards” came along even before the Late Ming period. (Refer to
articles in The Playing-Card).

> > > >[..]
>
> [..]
>
> > What that means is the circles in mahjong are [or could be] "coins" for divination
> > in I-Ching.[..]
> I do not know when Mahjong was created, although it was there for some
> time before Westerners found it.
>
> http://www.taopage.org/iching/iching_symbols.hyml
>
> But if...
>
> > As the coins are for divination, ]strings of Cash and Myriads of Cash
> > then become meaningless].
> > [..] That
> > makes [Mah-Jong] I-Ching based. [..]
Since Ma Daio has Taiji diagram, then yin-yang concept is the common
link with Mah-Jong's bamboo strips [Captain Mauger, 1915] for
divination.
> > +++++++++++
>
> You probably have read the meaning of "suo3": a r[..] more obscured,
> like, to "search,ask,demand,exact" [answers]. The infinitive [to seek] is a stronger link
> to I-Ching divination than coins. In fact I found the concentric
> circles as [..] symbols of TIME and cyclical
> CHANGES.
>
Cheers....al
> > +++++++++

On Mar 28, 9:54 pm, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 10:18 am, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:> On Dec 19 2007, 10:18 pm, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:> On Nov 16, 4:21 pm, mstanwick <mstanw....RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 16, 5:21�pm, al <a....RemoveThis@ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> Ma-Daio and Mah-Jong related? That was the question.

It still is a question. Now there might be an explanation.
>
> I find it hard to see how Ma Daio and Mah-Jong are related.
>
> Ma-Diao is a trick-taking game and a trick consists of 4 cards (page
> 117 The Playing-Card, Volume XXIX, Number 3).
> Mah-Jong is NOT a trick-taking game. Mah-Jong is pattern-forming game.
> Its objective pattern is 2.3.3.3.3 where 3’s are sub-sets of 3 cards
> in a sequence or all clones.
> The two games have basic difference in design concept and rules of
> play.
They could have been related since way back before Ming.
It just occurred to me. Pan and Feng wrote manuals for the game, but
they didn't say they created the game during their time.
When Pan and Feng had to re-write the instruction manuals for the
game, that means the game Ma Diao had been there before their time;
and no indication how long ago.

Here is an interesting thought. A Late Ming game was actually a PRE-
Ming game.
>
> In Ma-Diao each of 40 cards is ranked within and across suits.
> In Mah-Jong, cards are ordered within each suit but 136 cards NOT
> ranked.
>
The way Ma Diao was played as translated was after the arrival of
cards games for drinking. Then Vice Minister Wang Daokun (1525-1593)
changed the rules to winning money for scores. That is to say Ma Diao
lost its 'purpose and application' like many other games as mentioned
in page 87 Vol 31 Number 2.

So, it is possible, Ma Diao as described during Ming period was not
the original version. Given that, then it would be a likelihood the
two games Ma Diao and Mahjong might have had a link in view of the
taiji diagram and references to Grand Ultimate and Emptiness Supreme
etc.


> [..]
> The commonality I see between Ma Daio and Mah-Jong is I-Ching in their
> original designs whose “purpose and application” gotten lost “when
> drinking cards” came along even before the Late Ming period. (Refer to
> articles in The Playing-Card).
> [..]
> > [..]
>
> > > What that means is the circles in mahjong are [or could be] "coins" for divination
> > > in I-Ching.[..][..]
> > http://www.taopage.org/iching/iching_symbols.hyml
>
> > > As the coins are for divination, ]strings of Cash and Myriads of Cash
> > > then become meaningless].
>
> > > That makes [Mah-Jong] I-Ching based. [..]
>
> Since Ma Daio has Taiji diagram, then yin-yang concept is the common
> link with Mah-Jong's bamboo strips [Captain Mauger, 1915] for
> divination.
>
Ma Diao and Mahjong do seem to relate a long way back in history. As
pointed out, Ma Diao was played in Ming but it is older than Ming
(1368-1644). It is not known how old exactly. Similarly Mahjong was
played in Ching, but we don't know how it is either.
+++++++++++++++++
Cheers....al

On Jul 19, 3:08�pm, al <a... RemoveThis @ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On May 21, 8:48 am, al <a... RemoveThis @ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:> On Mar 28, 9:54 pm, al <a... RemoveThis @ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 31, 10:18 am, al <a... RemoveThis @ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:> On Dec 19 2007, 10:18 pm, al <a... RemoveThis @ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:> On Nov 16, 4:21 pm, mstanwick <mstanw... RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Nov 16, 5:21 pm, al <a... RemoveThis @ntl.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > > Ma-Daio and Mah-Jong related? That was the question.
>
> > It still is a question. Now there might be an explanation.
>
> There may be an explanation yet.
+++++++++
But Himly, Wilkinson, or other historians did not write it.
>
> I wrote this back on October 11, 2007.
> +++++++++++
> "So, [..], you are saying nobody in our group knows where the mahjong
> �'game-play mechanism' comes from. I suppose I can infer from what you
> �indicated that mahjong is a one-of-a-kind game. In that case, with
> all
> �the mind-power and logical thinking among the group, why do we have
> to
> �accept a �hypothetical notion that mahjong comes from matiao? Tthey
> �are so different!
> �Are there other compelling reason for the claim?"
+++++++++++++++++++++
Again. There was no reply.
> +++++++++++++++++
> I don't recall what reply I got. It was not satisfactory, because the
> question is not yet resolved.
> [..]
> > > I find it hard to see how Ma Daio and Mah-Jong are related.
>
> > > Ma-Diao is a trick-taking game and a trick consists of 4 cards (page
> > > 117 The Playing-Card, Volume XXIX, Number 3).
+++++++
Mahjong is NOT a trick-taking game.
>
> Ma Daio got changed. Along with many other games, after wine drinking
> card games introduced, ma Daio "purpose and application" were
> drastically altered. [Late Ming game article in The Playind-Card]
>
> > > [..]
> > > The two games have basic difference in design concept and rules of
> > > play.
+++++++++++++
Reconsideration: different in game-play, but maybe not in design
concept.
> [..]
> > They [the two games] could have been related since way back before Ming..
> > [..]. Pan and Feng wrote manuals for the game, [..]
++++++++++
People had been playing Ma Daio for a period we do not know how long.
Calling Ma Daio a Late Ming game is a misnomer.
+++++++++++++++
> > When Pan and Feng had to re-write the instruction manuals for the
> > game, that means the game Ma Diao had been there before their time;
> > and no indication how long ago.
>
> A game played in Ming (1368-1644) could have been a game from Liang
> (502-557). [Who knows?]
>
> > Here is an interesting thought. A Late Ming game was actually a PRE-
> > Ming game. [That it likely was!]
>
> Very likely...since the original or initial paper has disappeared or
> disintegrated.
> [..]
> > So, it is possible, Ma Diao as described during Ming period was not
> > the original version. Given that, then it would be a likelihood the
> > two games Ma Diao and Mahjong might have had a link in view of the
> > taiji diagram and references to Grand Ultimate and Emptiness Supreme
> > etc.
The common reference is Daoism. Taiji diagram has the pair of eyes in
mahjong. Trigrams look like "strings". a trigram is a graph of 3
lines!
>
> http://www.taopage.org/iching/iching_symbols.html
++++++++++++++++++
> > [..]
> > > The commonality I see between Ma Daio and Mah-Jong is I-Ching in their
> > > original designs [..] (Refer to articles in The Playing-Card).[..]
> > > Since Ma Daio has Taiji diagram, then yin-yang concept is the common
> > > link [see below] with Mah-Jong's bamboo strips [Captain Mauger, 1915] for
> > > divination.
http://i-tjingcentrum.nl/serendipity/uploads/slips.serendipityThumb.jpg

Similar strips of bamboo were used by fortune tellers on the streets
of Hong Kong, as I can remember when I was there many years ago.
> [..]
> http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:AcoxLUo9zEG3mM:http://depts.washi

> > Ma Diao and Mahjong do seem to relate a long way back in history. As
> > pointed out, Ma Diao was played in Ming but it is older than Ming
> > (1368-1644). It is not known how old exactly. Similarly Mahjong was
> > played in Ching, but we don't know how [old] it is either.

Likewise, diamond was found about 5000 years ago, but that is not the
actual age of the stone.
> > +++++++++++++++++
>
> Anybody has any [other] idea for a link, even the faintest, between Ma Daio
> and Mahjong? Let's hear it.
> +++++++++++++
Cheers....al

P.S. Here is a quote from earlier post. " Cash denominations are
described in all of Lo's articles. Pan describes a cash coin, Lu Rong
describes the denominations of cash as does Pan." There is the
authoritative voice of history spoken.

It's almost like a bible believer saying "those were forbidden fruits
in the Garden of Eden". The good book says so.