dust

You're not wrong. I just wouldn't want to say that security necessarily leads to happiness. I started reading it and am only half way through, so haven't got to a bit about dinner parties! But yes, I know he wasn't hundreds of miles from civilization. You could build one yourself. And once you've got the experience, come build one for me. I can pay you with raindrops and sunshine. That's why many of us are here, isn't it? Figuring shit out. As far as talking to people, though, make sure your family/friends know what you're going through. I know I have a tendency to bottle it in, in person.

A bit of Chinese pop from the '70s? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VQ6Bal9Psg

I think it depends on the sage. The Laozi and Zhuangzi are all about simplicity. I would have phrased it, "To be of the world, but not in it".. ha! secure > comfortable > happy ? I know that might not be what you're saying, precisely, but it sounds like it, a little. Just to offer something.. Earlier this year, I quit the best-paying job I ever had, and have been scraping by ever since. Little money, no car, no "social life", etc... not the modern "success story". I'm less secure than I was before... but happier. Not the happiest I've been... but enough for the moment. It was either quit or go mad, and I do not regret it. But no, I have not given up everything to go live in the woods a la Thoreau, as much as I have considered it.

Welcome aboard A long intro suggests that you're serious about introducing yourself. That's cool! For TTC reading, as zgoat suggests, terebess is a great resource. There is no single, original version of what we call the Tao Te Ching, much less a single "authentic" translation. Anyone claiming to have "the correct" translation is either a liar or a fool. The best course is to read a few, and see where they take you. Personally, I like Addiss, Feng, and Wu http://terebess.hu/english/tao/addiss.html http://terebess.hu/english/tao/gia.html http://terebess.hu/english/tao/wu.html

I think, though I'm not sure, that one can come to an understanding of each separate existing version of the Laozi by studying them closely, as we have been doing. What I mean is that I don't think there's only one understanding of the TTC, because there's more than one TTC. And if Wenzi wrote a guide to the TTC, which version does it apply to? Perhaps it was a teacher's textbook (for people like this king, because he wasn't good with studies!)

Even up to earlier this year, I placed a fairly high importance on I.Q. Please note that I'm not talking about the theory of multiple intelligences. That's a different issue. My problem is with the standard idea of intelligence in the West, or any particular country, as measured by I.Q. tests. It's drummed into us -- or at least it was in my schools -- from quite an early age that "intelligence" is important, and that measuring one's intelligence quotient is a valid way of measuring his or her quality. Yes, a person's quality. That now seems pretty crazy to me, though I know people who believe it (whether or not they're aware that they do). To be intelligent is extolled all over the place as something to aspire to (even though this is impossible), respect (even though many intelligent people are entirely unrespectable), and generally treasure as mankind's greatest gift (even though, as I think many of us believe, it's not). I'll pontificate a bit more below, but for those who can't be bothered to read more, here are my key questions: If we didn't place so much importance on I.Q., would it actually be of any importance? Can someone not be happy in life unless they are intelligent achievers in modern civilization? Do you place great importance on intelligence? Why? Does your experience with Taoism, Buddhism, etc have a bearing on your view? NB: Please, no mention of individual I.Q. scores. I will not have this devolve into a competition of egos. ________________________________________________ The idea of measuring intelligence is necessarily subjective on many levels. If a society prizes numeracy, numeracy will be a high factor in an intelligence test, and simultaneously a key factor in deciding whether or not someone will be successful in that society. In a society where spatial awareness is more important, a maths whiz will be left well behind if he's not got a good sense of direction or coordination. So, of course, someone who performs well in a test designed by leading "experts" in a particular country will necessarily be more likely to do well in that society. However, does intelligence, in the usual Western sense, necessarily correlate with happiness? I mean, is someone with a "high I.Q." intrinsically happier than someone with a "low I.Q." ? (my bold) With scores ranging from 70-129 (70 meaning someone is probably not very good at maths, verbal reasoning, or whatever else), the higher I.Q. has an advantage on every level: she is more likely to be in a more respected position in a company, making more money, receiving more praise for her intelligence, and generally doing "better" by any standard by which people are judged in the country. On the other side, someone of a lower I.Q. is in a lower position or without a job, making less or no money, potentially being mocked for his stupidity by some, and generally doing less well by any standard by which he is being judged, by others or himself. If someone is at the point that they need help with daily life, clearly something is very wrong. Well, I'm not sure I trust this study, actually. (Admittedly without doing much research to find out) I don't know about the sample, the jobs these people do, how the data was analysed, etc. From personal experience, it's not always the case that intelligence = happiness. I know guys who went to Oxford for study who are miserable later on in life, and people who've never been to university, who did poorly in school, who are very happy at their job and life in general. And I don't know anyone who's so "unintelligent" that it is debilitating. Just some thoughts. ________________________________________________ Of course, Daoist or other philosophical views are most welcome Others have enough and more, I alone am left out I have the mind of a fool, Confused, confused Others are bright and intelligent, I alone and dull, dull Drifting on the ocean, Blown about endlessly

OK. And I understand the water analogy as it applies in the Laozi (e.g. ch.8, 15), but.. How can something be both? Both unmixed, clear, level, and allowed to flow (so it doesn't become stagnant). How can something flow and not mix? Still and unchanging? Surely ZZ is all about change? And if we're not dammed or hemmed in, we're allowed to flow, we're constantly in a state of change, no? To get linguistic for a moment.... I've changed the translation a little above (grey). Apart from "limpid and inactive" sounding horrible, I think 惔 means simple, and I don't think wuwei should mean "inactive" per se.

Well..I'm glad to think that I wasn't entirely misreading/misunderstanding things. I don't know if others will agree though... Don't overtax the body, don't overtax the spirit -- OK But what's all this water stuff about? Could someone explain, please?

So, tell me a bit about the Wenzi? I mean, what you believe it to be, etc. (I hate 蚊子, but might be ok with 文子.)

Nothing! This chapter has just been a bit confusing for me, I'm afraid. Though I'm all for non-interference, spontaneity, and generally being easy and doing nothing if I don't need to, parts of this chapter seem to be hinting at something else. Whether it's ZZ or a disciple, either way... it doesn't all sound like ZZ philosophy.

Yes.. I should've made it clear that I'm aware that he's not supposed to have written the Outer Chapters. I meant more, "Whose philosophy is this?" -- because ZZ, from the Inner Chapters, doesn't seem like the kind of guy who actually sat around doing nothing his whole life. Agreed on most if not all points. But the paragraph there remains -- This doesn't sound natural, though. This sounds like forced nothing.

I think it's more than that, here. It all seems odd to me. I wonder who wrote it? Not ZZ, I think. In the first paragraph, he's not condemning people, but.. he's not impressed by the people he's describing. Doing nothing -- wu wei. But not as a good thing, here. He's also well aware of, and not entirely impressed by, the practices of early qigong. Certainly seems to be a shot taken at those who self-cultivate with breathing exercises. Not that they (we!) are wrong, but that doing that isn't as good as what he suggests next. If Wei is taken as it is in other areas, it might be said that people are forcing life by practicing these things? So.. if we aren't even supposed to even retire to the marshes and live like a hermit doing some breathing exercises, if that's not good enough... what are we supposed to do? Nothing. Literally nothing, is what we're supposed to do. No caring, no moving, no talking, no thinking. Is this meditation? Is this the ZZ of the Inner Chapters? (P.S. note that in the quotes here I've edited some of Legge's words to simplify/fit better with how I read it)

Burton Watson CONSTRAINED IN WILL 1 TO BE CONSTRAINED IN WILL, lofty in action, aloof from the world, apart from its customs, elevated in discourse, sullen and critical, indignation his whole concern - such is the life favored by the scholar in his mountain valley, the man who condemns the world, the worn and haggard one who means to end it all with a plunge into the deep. To discourse on benevolence, righteousness, loyalty, and good faith, to be courteous, temperate, modest, and deferential, moral training his whole concern - such is the life favored by the scholar who seeks to bring the world to order, the man who teaches and instructs, who at home and abroad lives for learning. To talk of great accomplishments, win a great name, define the etiquette of ruler and subject, regulate the position of superior and inferior, the ordering of the state his only concern - such is the life favored by the scholar of court and council, the man who would honor his sovereign and strengthen his country, the bringer of accomplishment, the annexer of territory. To repair to the thickets and ponds, living idly in the wilderness, angling for fish in solitary places, inaction his only concern - such is the life favored by the scholar of the rivers and seas, the man who withdraws from the world, the unhurried idler. To pant, to puff, to hail, to sip, to spit out the old breath and draw in the new, practicing bear-hangings and bird-stretchings, longevity his only concern - such is the life favored by the scholar who practices Induction, the man who nourishes his body, who hopes to live to be as old as P'eng-tsu. But to attain loftiness without constraining the will; to achieve moral training without benevolence and righteousness, good order without accomplishments and fame, leisure without rivers and seas, long life without Induction; to lose everything and yet possess everything, at ease in the illimitable, where all good things come to attend - this is the Way of Heaven and earth, the Virtue of the sage. So it is said, Limpidity, silence, emptiness, inaction - these are the level of Heaven and earth, the substance of the Way and its Virtue. So it is said, The sage rests; with rest comes peaceful ease, with peaceful ease comes limpidity, and where there is ease and limpidity, care and worry cannot get at him, noxious airs cannot assault him. Therefore his Virtue is complete and his spirit unimpaired. 2 So it is said, With the sage, his life is the working of Heaven, his death the transformation of things. In stillness, he and the yin share a single Virtue; in motion, he and the yang share a single flow. He is not the bearer of good fortune, nor the initiator of bad fortune. Roused by something outside himself, only then does he respond; pressed, only then does he move; finding he has no choice, only then does he rise up. He discards knowledge and purpose and follows along with the reasonableness of Heaven. Therefore he incurs no disaster from Heaven, no entanglement from things, no opposition from man, no blame from the spirits. His life is a floating, his death a rest. He does not ponder or scheme, does not plot for the future. A man of light, he does not shine; of good faith, he keeps no promises. He sleeps without dreaming, wakes without worry. His spirit is pure and clean, his soul never wearied. In emptiness, nonbeing, and limpidity, he joins with the Virtue of Heaven. So it is said, Grief and happiness are perversions of Virtue; joy and anger are transgressions of the Way; love and hate are offenses against Virtue. When the mind is without care or joy, this is the height of Virtue. When it is unified and unchanging, this is the height of stillness. When it grates against nothing, this is the height of emptiness. When it has no commerce with things, this is the height of limpidity. When it rebels against nothing, this is the height of purity. So it is said, If the body is made to labor and take no rest, it will wear out; if the spiritual essence is taxed without cessation, it will grow weary, and weariness will bring exhaustion. It is the nature of water that if it is not mixed with other things, it will be clear, and if nothing stirs it, it will be level. But if it is dammed and hemmed in and not allowed to flow, then, too, it will cease to be clear. As such, it is a symbol of Heavenly Virtue. So it is said, To be pure, clean, and mixed with nothing; still, unified, and unchanging; limpid and inactive; moving with the workings of Heaven - this is the way to care for the spirit. 3 The man who owns a sword from Kan or Yueh lays it in a box and stores it away, not daring to use it, for to him it is the greatest of treasures. Pure spirit reaches in the four directions, flows now this way, now that - there is no place it does not extend to. Above, it brushes Heaven; below, it coils on the earth. It transforms and nurses the ten thousand things, but no one can make out its form. Its name is called One-with-Heaven. The way to purity and whiteness is to guard the spirit, this alone; guard it and never lose it, and you will become one with spirit, one with its pure essence, which communicates and mingles with the Heavenly Order.2 The common saying has it, "The ordinary man prizes gain, the man of integrity prizes name, the worthy man honors ambition, the sage values spiritual essence." Whiteness means there is nothing mixed in; purity means the spirit is never impaired. He who can embody purity and whiteness may be called the True Man.

3 夫有干、越之劍者，柙而藏之，不敢用也，寶之至也。精神四達並流，無所不極，上際於天，下蟠於地，化育萬物，不可為象，其名為同帝。純素之道，惟神是守， 守而勿失，與神為一，一之精通，合於天倫。野語有之曰：「眾人重利，廉士重名，賢人尚志，聖人貴精。」故素也者，謂其無所與雜也；純也者，謂其不虧其神 也。能體純素，謂之真人。 Now he who possesses a sword made at Gan-Yue preserves it carefully in a box, and does not dare to use it - it is considered the perfection of valuable swords. But the human spirit goes forth in all directions, flowing on without limit, reaching to heaven above, and wreathing round the earth beneath. It transforms and nourishes all things, and cannot be represented by any form. Its name is "the Divinity (in man)." It is only the path of pure simplicity which guards and preserves the Spirit. When this path is preserved and not lost, it becomes one with the Spirit; and in this ethereal amalgamation, it acts in harmony with the orderly operation of Heaven.' There is the vulgar saying, 'The multitude of men consider gain to be the most important thing; pure scholars, fame; those who are wise and able value their ambition; the sage prizes essential purity.' Therefore simplicity is the denomination of that in which there is no admixture; purity of that in which the spirit is not impaired. It is he who can embody simplicity and purity whom we call the True Man.

2 故曰：夫恬惔寂寞，虛無無為，此天地之平而道德之質也。 Hence it is said, 'Placidity, indifference, silence, quietude, absolute vacancy, and non-action: these are the qualities which maintain the level of heaven and earth and are the substance of the Dao and its characteristics.' 故曰：聖人休，休焉則平易矣，平易則恬惔矣。平易恬惔，則憂患不能入，邪氣不能襲，故其德全而神不虧。 In accordance with this it is said, 'The sage is entirely restful, and so (his mind) is evenly balanced and at ease. This even balance and ease appears in his placidity and indifference. In this state of even balance and ease, of placidity and indifference, anxieties and evils do not find access to him, no depraving influence can take him by surprise; his virtue is complete, and his spirit continues unimpaired.' 故曰：聖人之生也天行，其死也物化；靜而與陰同德，動而與陽同波；不為福先，不為禍始；感而後應，迫而後動，不得已而後起。去知與故，循天之理，故無天 災，無物累，無人非，無鬼責。其生若浮，其死若休；不思慮，不豫謀；光矣而不耀，信矣而不期；其寢不夢，其覺無憂；其神純粹，其魂不罷。虛無恬惔，乃合天 德。 Therefore it is (also) said, 'The life of the sage is (like) the action of Heaven; and his death is the transformation common to (all) things. In his stillness his virtue is the same as that of the Yin, and in movement his diffusiveness is like that of the Yang. He does not take the initiative in producing either happiness or calamity. He responds to the influence acting on him, and moves as he feels the pressure. He rises to act only when he is obliged to do so. He discards wisdom and the memories of the past; he follows the lines of his Heaven (-given nature); and therefore he suffers no calamity from Heaven, no involvement from things, no blame from men, and no reproof from the spirits of the dead. His life seems to float along; his death seems to be a resting. He does not indulge any anxious doubts; he does not lay plans beforehand. His light is without display; his good faith is without previous arrangement. His sleep is untroubled by dreams; his waking is followed by no sorrows. His spirit is guileless and pure; his soul is not subject to weariness. Vacant and without self-assertion, placid and indifferent, he agrees with the virtue of Heaven.' 故曰：悲樂者，德之邪；喜怒者，道之過；好惡者，德之失。故心不憂樂，德之至也；一而不變，靜之至也；無所於忤，虛之至也；不與物交，惔之至也；無所於逆，粹之至也。 Therefore it is said (further), 'Sadness and pleasure show a depraving element in the virtue (of those who feel them); joy and anger show some error in their course; love and hatred show a failure of their virtue. Hence for the mind to be free from sorrow and pleasure is the perfection of virtue; to be of one mind that does not change is the perfection of quietude; to be conscious of no opposition is the perfection of vacancy; to have no intercourse with (external) things is the perfection of indifference; and to have no rebellious dissatisfactions is the perfection of purity.' 故曰：形勞而不休則弊，精用而不已則勞，勞則竭。水之性，不雜則清，莫動則平，鬱閉而不流，亦不能清，天德之象也。 Therefore it is said (still further), 'If the body be toiled, and does not rest, it becomes worn out; if the spirit be used without cessation, it becomes toiled; and when toiled, it becomes exhausted. It is the nature of water, when free from admixture, to be clear, and, when not agitated, to be level; while if obstructed and not allowed to flow, it cannot preserve its clearness - being an image of the virtue of Heaven.' 故曰：純粹而不雜，靜一而不變，惔而無為，動而以天行，此養神之道也。 Hence it is said (once again), 'To be guileless and pure, and free from all admixture; to be still and uniform, without undergoing any change; to be indifferent and do nothing; to move and yet to act like Heaven: this is the way to nourish the spirit.

As a fellow Brit, I haven't much idea, but it seems fairly...mathematical. For the Senate, of 33 seats up this year, Republicans gained 7 from Democrats. 4 incumbent Democrats retired, 1 withdrew, and in 4 of these cases Republicans gained the seat. I don't know, but it seems plausible that an existing Republican opposition had a fair following in each case (enough to beat a lesser-known Democrat?). People really seem to like Joni Ernst in Iowa. Possibly because of pig penises. In 3 states (Arkansas, Colorado, North Carolina), incumbent Democrats lost re-election. And.. none of these states are particularly surprising red votes.. are they? In Arkansas, the losing Democrat this year ran unopposed (by a Republican) in 2008 and still only got 80% of the vote. And the Republican winner this year is a young Harvard-educated Protestant Iraq & Afghanistan war vet, so... not entirely a shock that he did well? In all, as SC says, it doesn't seem such a huge "coup" as the news is making it out to be. P.S. John Oliver has also pointed out on his show that 25% of State Legislature seats are unopposed this year. Democracy at work! Just look at 2012: http://ballotpedia.org/Candidates_with_no_general_election_opposition_in_2012_state_legislative_elections

I didn't understand a word but thought I might look intelligent if I "liked" it

Well, I didn't to it in order to throw the logic off! I am very much willing to accept that I've used 而 wrongly, except that I don't know how all the lines would make sense if you look at it like that? 不可㝵而利 can't obtain then profit 亦不可㝵而害 also can't obtain then harm 不可㝵而貴 can't obtain then rich 亦不可㝵而戔 also can't obtain then poverty ?

I was going to work on better wording, honest guv 智之者弗言 One who knows does not talk, 言之者弗智 One who talks does not know; 閉丌兌賽丌門 Closing doors, blunting edges, 和丌光同丌謹 Softening light, aligning ambitions, 畜丌解丌紛 Balancing shares, untangling knots, 是胃玄同 Is called unifying the mystery; 古不可㝵而新 Without closeness, 亦不可㝵而疋 One can feel no distance; 不可㝵而利 Without benefit, 亦不可㝵而害 One can feel no harm; 不可㝵而貴 Without treasures, 亦不可㝵而戔 One can feel no destitution; 古爲天下貴 And one treasures all things The thing is, unless I'm missing something, the writer makes it no clearer than that. I am quite tired, though. And open to suggestions. 不可㝵而利 not can get benefit/profit, 亦不可㝵而害 also not can get harm; 不可㝵而貴 not can get treasured things, 亦不可㝵而戔 also not can get lowly/no things note: 戔 is taken to be variant of 賤 jian base/lowly (which my girlfriend used to call me often)

Well... that's how it's written.... 㝵 - 得 - obtain Like I said, it's unpolished, and by that I meant that the wording could use some work, but the meaning is... correct. I say that with more certainty than usual. What's more, it's the only version I'm aware of that actually makes some kind of sense, right to the last line. Prove me wrong.

This is why I don't pay attention to Legge translations. Where under heaven did he get "nostrils" from? My (thus far very unpolished) GD: 智之者弗言 One who knows does not talk, 言之者弗智 One who talks does not know; 閉亓兌賽亓門 Closing doors, blunting edges, 和亓光同亓謹 Mollifying light, aligning ambitions, 畜亓𣂼解亓紛 Equalizing shares, untangling knots, 是胃玄同 Is called unifying the mystery; 古不可㝵而新 Not obtaining closeness, 亦不可㝵而疋 One cannot obtain distance, 不可㝵而利 Not obtaining profit, 亦不可㝵而害 One cannot obtain harm, 不可㝵而貴 Not obtaining riches, 亦不可㝵而戔 One cannot obtain poverty; 古爲天下貴 And one treasures all

That's cool.. set as many goals as high as you like, but....don't expect me to! —— Alan Watts For some people, the goal is to have goals. They're not happy unless they have something to "achieve". I feel that many people run around in this great panic trying to set and achieve these goals without ever asking why. I think this is what Mr Zhuang was talking about, perhaps. Now, I suppose that I have a current goal of improving my understanding of Taoism, Chinese, and translation, by translating the Laozi. But it's not a target I set for myself..it just happened one day. I thought it might be fun. Maybe I'd be happier if I'd set some early financial goals, achieved them, and had more money right now. But I don't think so.

My sister had eczema-like skin problems since childhood. For over 20 years, Western doctors couldn't find what was wrong, and continually prescribed things like steroids and other drugs that didn't work. She tried acupuncture, and has been problem-free ever since. I have no idea about the energy involved here, though. I don't know if I believe in these energies as described by TCM -- it sounds like hocus pocus. I only know that this acupuncturist did his thing and it worked.

I don't think that many here on TTB will disagree with the above comments about happiness, contentment, and being happy with being alive. If we all cared deeply about "money and bitches" we wouldn't be on here discussing Laozi and the Upanishads. But I don't think we're representative of society at large. In response to the OP, I'm certain that many people consider success to be determined by a number of factors, and that "contentment" isn't necessarily one. On that other thread, Mike said: I think this is a majority definition of success. And I think that, unlike Mike, many people equate success with happiness. When I was younger, my best friend's goal in life was to own a Mercedes by the time he was 40. By that, he said, he'd know that he'd been successful, and would therefore be happy. This way of thinking is not uncommon. (He's since realized that he was wrong and has quit his high-paying job to travel the world.)

My life thus far has been a series of unmade plans. As Alan Watts mentions, one can make plans spontaneously. I think the idea might be not to lay out large life-plans that cannot possibly come to fruition.