• Title/Summary/Keyword: Designated governance periods in the hidden stems

Search Result 1, Processing Time 0.014 seconds

A Study on the Origin of Human Governance Periods in the Hidden Stems (인원용사(人元用事)의 연원에 관한 연구)

  • Won-Ho Choi;Na-Hyun Kim;Ki-Seung Kim
    • Industry Promotion Research
    • /
    • v.9 no.1
    • /
    • pp.203-212
    • /
    • 2024
  • The purpose of this study is to examine the validity of Hidden Stems (支藏干) in the Four Pillars of Destiny with regard to the use of human governance periods in the hidden stems (人元用事). First, there is a theory of assigning period of governance for designated constituents (司令論) in the Hidden Stems of the Earthly Branch. Second, there is a theory that determines the structure of the Four Pillars by the Exposed Constituent from the Hidden Stems (透出論) in the Month Earthly Branch. Since these two theories conflict with each other and cause confusions, this study examined the theory of Hidden Stems in the Four Pillars Classics and examined the historical development of governance period for constituent hidden stems and their validity. The results of the study are as follows: Firstly, the number of dates assigned to respective constituents does not correspond to the calendarical principle, and the assignment of the governance dates for each constituent does not correspond to the principles proposed in ancient books of Four Pillars. Second, though it is said in the Classics that 72 days are equally assigned to each of the Five Elements, actual distributed days for the five elements was 65 days for Wood, 55 days for Fire, 100 days for Earth, 65 days for Metal, and 65 days for Water. Third, though it is said that 7 days should be designated to Yang Earth Mu for the months of Tiger 寅, Monkey, Snake, and Pig, it is logically more legitimate to assign those days to Yin Earth Ki since the month before Tiger is Ox, and the month before Monkey is Goat. Lastly, rationale behind assigning Ki Earth only to Horse Oh as constituting Hidden Stem while disregarding months of Rat, Rabbit, and Rooster is considered not reasonable. Looking at these results comprehensively, it is concluded that the Exposed Constituent theory is logically more appropriate than Assigned Governance theory.