dust

Without having looked very attentively at this chapter, I certainly agree that the translations by Wu, Feng, Henricks and the like are basically nonsense. This is one of the few times I actually like Legge's translation!! The numbers translate as "3 in 10", which would be the most precise way of talking percentages with as few characters as possible, I suppose. However, 徒 means follower or believer, right? How does that fit with the working population theory? 1. 人之生，動之死地 2. 夫何故？以其無死地 -- 死地 occurs twice in the chapter, but you seem to brush past the mention of "death" in the first instance? 無死地 -- "there is no place of death". 無 never means "should", does it?

An awareness of what RSD is up to is probably a good thing, but they're not actually full-fledged rapists. Calling them "rapists" is unfair to both them and women who have actually been raped.

My apologies if you felt that I was referring to you with that post. You'll note that I said anyone claiming to have the correct translation is a liar or a fool. What I mean by that, and I stand by it wholeheartedly, is that there is no "correct" translation of any document. Translation is as much an art as writing or photography, and subject to the same degree of subjectivity. There is no correct art. Now, if the version you have is truly directly from Li Erh as you say, then it would be an original English version, rather than a translation. And thus quite correct, insofar as it being written of his mind. I don't know, though. Should I take your word for it? And why should I stop this process of translation which is both enjoyable and educational? I'm learning about Dao by scrutinizing the text word for word, which I would have less reason to do in English, and I'm learning both ancient and modern Chinese in the process...

Far fewer passionately opinionated people here than elsewhere on the net... more cool-headed agree-to-disagree types, and I've not seen any outraged passionate arguments (yet). A sign of how helpful these philosophies and practices can be, I think...

Yeah the Black Keys are cool too Funk is still alive!

Holy shit man that's a lot

I'm not good with genres... would you consider this funk? (from my hometown)

edit, just to say: I think we're inherently selfish. That can be turned either way.

Are we sure that he wasn't saying, "Heaven and Earth are not almonds" ? Okay CD, you're not "making things up". Sorry, that was harsh. But I do have a problem with "mercy" and its connotations. To "have no mercy" is to be "merciless". This goes beyond a mere lack of interest: Nature can be seen, from a human (subjective!) perspective, to be all these things -- unfeeling, implacable and relentless, certainly -- but it's actually none of them. More objectively, it's just doing what it's doing, and has no thoughts one way or the other. It has no heart to begin with, and so cannot be heartless. It has no pity, and so cannot be pitiless. I would suggest that, as 仁 is usually translated as "benevolent", we should simply be able to translate 不仁 as "not benevolent" and leave it at that. What one decides "benevolence" is in the context of the DDJ should be informed by their understanding of the rest of the text.

Well I'm glad it didn't come off entirely as ramblings from a madman There's a lot of discussion on "wu wei" in the Taoist Textual Studies section, and a lot of disagreement and consensus on what it means...

I will think on all this. Thanks guys.

Still not convinced that babies are free from animal attack. But I assume it's not meant literally, so..OK. I get the point. But why does the person of high virtue not know the union of man and woman? This is slightly disillusioning, as I've always considered the people of Tao to be okay with sex (unlike certain philosophies and religions). Sex is a great expression of the union of yin and yang...

I feel like I'm missing something. Wasps etc don't sting babies? Nonsense... and in the GD, at least, I can make neither heads not tail of the bit that's usually interpreted as being about stiff penises. 未智牝戌之合 They do not know the union of man and woman, 易恕精之至也 ...? Really don't like this passage.

Yes, I found the same thing. I think there's probably something to learn from all the mystical "ancient secret" stuff, but really, in terms of "Tao" itself, all that's needed is those 2 books. Cool. Let me offer one more suggestion, as someone who's got/had a similar intent. The idea for many people practicing meditation is to remove thoughts, and "float" in the present moment -- or perhaps as you say, feel a love for the present and all that it contains. This, for me, comes in a few ways. I first discovered what people meant by this with drawing. I love to draw, and when I really get into it I go into a deep zone where my mind is entirely focused on the page. No thoughts, aside from an intuitive sense of where the pencil will travel next. Relaxing and tiring at the same time. And very satisfying, especially when a good picture comes of it. I can't do this on purpose, though -- it just happens when it happens. When I get attached to a certain portrait or sketch or whatever. So I started looking into traditional meditation practices, to try and help me find this thoughtlessness more easily. I realized that one can find it anywhere, with a bit of patience. One just has to be intent on doing the one thing that they're doing. Sweeping the floor, peeling potatoes, juggling balls, running, eating nice food (and not nice food?), etc... one can be mindful, or "meditative", doing all these things. And each task can be enjoyable. I quite like sweeping, these days. Breathing meditation is helping me. Where one focuses on the breath and the body itself (perhaps using a mala/rosary to count breaths, a mandala of some sort to focus on, or whatever other aids might be suggested by others). Not consciously trying to block out thoughts. Not consciously trying to block out anything, but trying to focus on one or two things, and letting that lead into focus on one, which ultimately leads to a lack of purposeful, active thinking. Maybe. This is quite probably not what others will tell you, but this has helped me. Zen and Taoist theory/practice have been very useful.

Cool. If a 仞 is 8 feet, literally "(An) eight hundred foot (height/building) starts under the feet" Which is what Henricks has But why 2 height/building examples? 臺 and 高 This is one instance where I prefer the received version to the GD. 千里之行 A journey of a thousand li....

Got it. I think. Nicely explained.

Yes, though in translation I don't want to specify any more than the text does I like!

But as 成 in this sense would it not mean "complete” or "accomplish"?

As usual, I see, I disagree with lienshan's grammatical issues. In the GD, 弗 is used by and large to say "(does) not do (sth)". This is evidenced in the first few lines of this very chapter 蜂蠆蠆它弗螫 Wasps, scorpions, and snakes don’t sting them 攫鳥猛獸弗扣 Birds of prey and vicious beasts don’t claw them 不 is used for verbs (不言), adjectives (不善), and determiners (不足), and can be translated as "without (doing/being sth)" For example, in other chapters, 不言之教 Teaching without talking 敚綉蜀立不亥 Morphing and hazy, singular and limitless (i.e. without limit) 信不足咹又不信 When one is distrustful? He will be mistrusted (又不信 literally "have mistrust") Aside from that, I'm having great trouble with this one.

Well, now you're just making things up...

Assuming you're referring to my post: -- I didn't state that I believe in energy treatment -- I didn't state that TCM is superior to Western -- I didn't state that the acupuncturist "waves his hands around" or "pretends" it's all good if it's not -- I didn't state that, if I or someone I knew was having a heart attack, I would suggest such a hand-waving treatment Now you mention it, though, -- I don't know if I believe in energy as referred to in TCM -- I don't know if I believe that either is "superior" -- I don't know what the acupuncturist did, only that it worked, beyond reasonable doubt -- If I was having a heart attack, I would trust the local doctors not an inch more than my own sister (now an acupuncture student herself), who recently diagnosed my grandmother's heart issue a week before her local doctors would even admit anything was wrong. In my experience, Western doctors and medicine are good for some things. Some. I know people who've benefited greatly from surgery; I take ibuprofen if a headache won't go away. And acupuncturists certainly aren't infallible: studies show that, also beyond reasonable doubt, I believe. So, there.

The explanation certainly works. Obviously the red bit stuck out to me. The Chinese here says "open (qi) dui, assist (qi) affairs, to the end of life no saving" In the GD, the equivalent says " 閉丌兌 賽丌門 ", which many think is an error, and switch it to get " 賽丌兌 閉丌門 " Note that 兌 here is accompanied by the 辶 walking/movement radical and that what's been interpreted as 閉 shut could as easily be 開 open Now, in the Wenzi here, he talks about regulating the joy of the heart with ritual. rui/dui/yue 兑 兌 could mean "sharp", "exchange", or it could mean "happiness" (as the ancient variant of 悦) Could this 開其兌 then not refer to opening the joy of the heart?

Whose presentation of Taoism are you finding discouraging? Who is claiming it to be "revolutionary" ? I shall have words with them There are, as you will see here for example, many different types of "Taoist". One thing they generally agree on is that our understanding of Tao came first through the Laozi and the Zhuangzi. Rather than looking to attach yourself to any particular modern idea of Taoism, or accepting any version as presented in a nice "simple" package, you should read these texts, think about things, talk with people, and accept what you accept. How do you know what to think unless you know what you're not thinking about? As well as Tao stuff, Zen meditation might be useful for practicing this mindfulness of which you speak. Zen is Indian Buddhism mixed with a little Daoism and other Sino-Japanese ideas. I'm still very new to it, but have found it quite fascinating so far. There's a journey ahead of you! P.S. I don't know if you've heard of him, but my favourite teacher of all these ideas thus far is (was) a man called Alan Watts. You can find his lectures on Dao and Zen on YouTube. Very useful, especially at the beginning. He's done all the research for you.

I write and use a fork with the left, but most other things I do righty (chopsticks, throwing, scissors, computer mouse, pool, tennis..) This has lead me to believe that we don't necessarily favour a side like we're told we do, and that many people choose a preference out of deference to authority (teachers, parents) who themselves were brought up believing that we must be one-sided in life.

So if there's no translation, you've been translating it yourself, in an effort to better understand and translate the TTC?