dust

Interesting responses. Maybe it's a chapter I'll have to come back to.

Utopian communistic society...yes. I'd love to find one... Just looking at a few translations, it seems more sinister than that: In this way he will cause the people to remain without knowledge and without desire, and prevent the knowing ones from any ado If men lack knowledge and desire, then clever people will not try to interfere Leads people Away from knowing and wanting; Deters those who know too much From going too far He constantly causes the people to be without knowledge and without desires. If he can bring it about that those with knowledge simply do not dare to act... We get a fairly clear message: keep the people stupid, and those you can't keep stupid, keep silent. Part of me agrees that this would be an easy way to rule, but the individualistic Westerner in me thinks it sounds less like a communist utopia and more like the kind of totalitarian police state that Mao and his successors have been in charge of for the last 65 years...

不上賢使民不爭 Without glorifying the gifted, the people will not contend; 不貴難得之貨使民不為盜 Without treasuring rare things, the people will not steal; 不見可欲使民不亂 Without desire, the people will not rebel. 是以聖人之治也 Therefore the wise man rules by 虛亓心 Emptying their hearts, 實亓腹 Filling their bellies, 弱亓志 Weakening their ambitions, 強亓骨 And strengthening their bones, 恆使民无知无欲也 Until the people have no knowledge and no desires, 使夫知不敢弗為而已 And those with knowledge dare not act; 則无不治矣 In this way, all will be in order Again, posting my own translation after scanning the thread. It seems that the things I wanted to touch on have been touched on, actually, but it was all 2 or 3 years ago, and I'm trying to learn by doing, so... 不見可欲使民不亂 Without desire, the people will not rebel 欲 -- 谷 + 欠 = "gaping" need > need > desire 亂 -- control > anarchy > confusion "Anarchy" or "rebellion" seemed truer to the original meaning of 亂, so that's how I've got it. I also had it as "Do not show them hope, and the people will not rebel", but thought it rather harsh (besides the fact that 欲 doesn't precisely mean hope)... ...but in one way, it does make sense: If the people have no desires, they will not need to rebel. But how does the ruler make sure they don't desire? By making sure there's nothing to desire -- and without anything to desire, without any knowledge that there might be more to life, what kind of "hope" can one have?

The Guodian (what there is of it) is absolutely beautiful to look at. I can barely read a character, but it's so pretty...

Thanks for the links. As far as I can see Terebess doesn't have the scans of the original, right? I've been enjoying trying to read/decipher the original characters As mentioned in the Terebess description, they were both "copied out in classical official script", and it seems rather peculiar that an apparently "official" version would have typos! but without a better explanation, I'll accept it as such.

Scan of MWD 甲道經 http://www.alice-dsl.net/wulfdieterich/mawangdui/blatt1mwd.jpg So... I was reading this and it struck me that the last line does not contain the first 弗 -- something I hadn't noticed browsing the transcription on ctext. Is the general consensus at a point like this that someone simply wrote it down wrong? Missing a character every now and then?

Sorry, wrong topic.

《尋隱者不遇》 松下問童子 言師採藥去 只在此山中 雲深不知處 Seeking but not Meeting I asked the boy beneath the pines He said the master’s picking herbs Alone here upon the mount Cloud-hidden, I know not where just playing with Lin's translation

And here I thought I was just a stubborn fool

I'd suggest that we're discussing, not arguing. It's not a waste of time if one enjoys it... There are a few versions, many translations, and many differences between them all. If everyone summed up each chapter in the same offhand way rather than taking time to translate...would that be preferable? If you think it's a waste of time, you don't have to be here!

Sure. I didn't know if it was Tao-related enough to be there, but I'm happy if it's considered such

Sure, I see that. But I kinda think it might've made more sense if they'd written something like 音默相腾 -- sound and silence lift each other (i'm sure that's not how it'd have been written, but you see what I mean) It's not important; I just like to complain. Sorry, ignore me

Might we compare this version to 萬物昔而弗始，為而弗侍也 萬物作而弗治也，為而弗志也 I'll come back to it. Been sitting at the computer too long today.

As a character, I prefer 妙! ...but as a part of this chapter, talking about identification (名), 眇 does fit nicely. Have you read the Silmarillion? It's been a few years, but I loved the genesis chapter, where reality is created from song. I recall also the Hindu idea of existence beginning as a vibration (OM)? Translating it as such would sound quite wonderful...

One thing bugs me about this chapter: 音声相和 Everything else is, to me, obvious yang & yin: being & not being, long & short, high & low, front & back. So wouldn't sound and silence be more suitable? Then again, sound is vibration, which is itself a combination of 'being' and 'not being'. I guess. Still, I'd prefer sound and silence.

Huh... so doing 'the right thing' is absolute? Good and Evil? I may have mistaken your meaning..? The way I see it, it's all the same. Morality, good, bad, right, wrong... like "time", "race", "ego", they're abstract concepts invented by us to make life easier. They must be relative; as creatures of which the very existence is relative to everything else, how are any ideas we have to be considered absolute?

Are you saying that your interpretation is the only "true meaning“? As far as I can see, different sources have different punctuation. How do you know that the source/version you've chosen is the "true" version? 《老子甲道經》 from ctext.org 道可道也，非恆道也。名可名也，非恆名也。無名萬物之始也；有名萬物之母也。故恆無欲也，以觀其眇；恆有欲也，以觀其所噭。兩者同出，異名同胃，玄之有玄，眾眇之門 and from daodejing.org 道可道也，非恆道也。名可名也，非恆名也。無名，萬物之始也；有名，萬物之母也。故恆無欲也，以觀其眇；恒有欲也，以觀其所徼。兩者同出，異名同謂。玄之又玄，眾眇之門 And a received version from china.com.cn 道可道，非常道。名可名，非常名。无名天地之始。有名万物之母。故常无欲以观其妙。常有欲以观其徼。此两者同出而异名，同谓之玄。玄之又玄，众妙之门 There are a few punctuational differences between the 3. The daodejing.org text, using the MWD, uses the same punctuation as you, whilst ctext.org does not. The simplified Chinese on china.com.cn uses 妙, as you've suggested, but the punctuation differs from yours entirely.

去 as 'avoid' or 'abandon'....? 成功而弗居也 Succeed and not ___ 夫唯弗居是以弗去 Not to ___, not to ___ I'm rather muddled now.

I wasn't trying to suggest that we shouldn't care about people with ALS, or any other debilitating illness. I like to help people, and if everyone was apathetic, the world would be an awful place. But 100% apathy is not possible. There will always be a roughly equal amount of good and bad, happy and sad, caring and not caring. And, in my opinion, no human cleverness has ever made things "better". When we invent machines do help us do our work, the atmosphere becomes polluted and we risk destroying life as we know it; when we discover and utilise antibiotics to help cure ourselves of some horrible diseases, we become resistant to them and potentially worse diseases take their place; when we cure disease and illness itself, and effectively fight global warming, and figure out how to prevent war and intolerance, everyone will live for 100 years, and there will be even more of us than there are now, and we'll all die anyway from lack of resources. Doesn't Laozi warn against trying too hard? If one wants to be happy, and understands what that really means, then I think that a healthy lifestyle will usually play a fairly logical part...

It's not that there's more diversity, per se, but that there are perhaps a few popular shows here that have had leading black actors (Luther, Hustle) when most shows are really predominantly white. I've been known to be ignorant, but in this case, I stand by my comment. Many things nowadays are more obvious from across an ocean than on the scene itself -- standing apart, one sees a bigger picture. And even if we agreed that relying on popular television shows to illustrate the point is not very scientific, and that it was an ignorant comment, the statistics and news stories -- and the OP video -- speak for themselves, don't they? And good lord, I'm not trying to suggest that all white Americans are racist and everyone else is perfect. Everyone's racist. "Race" is and always has been a huge issue in the US. And because of that, white people do still seem to be more privileged. There is a tendency for racial humour among non-white people. I've certainly noticed that. But could that also be because they are very much more aware of these racial issues, being faced with them on a day-to-day basis? There is still some sort of class divide here. In my opinion it's not about race as much as education*. But access to education is linked to race, so in the end it's the same. White privilege. *19 Prime Ministers were educated at Eton. And, except for 2 who didn't attend a university at all, every elected PM since WW2 has been an Oxford graduate. Yes, Oxford is full of exceptionally gifted people, but it still strikes me as slightly odd.

So...is that an agreement?

Yes, if you mean me, sorry. My question was about TTB rather than society as a whole. A little off-topic. I did watch the first half of the video. None of what he says surprises me. Looking at the USA from here (UK), it's fairly obvious that racism and racial privilege are rampant. Without even knowing statistics about police searches vs actual drug crime or anything else, one just needs to look at popular culture (television, movies, music, etc) to see that the young "white" person has far and away the most opportunity and preferential treatment. I don't just mean the portrayal of different "races"; I mean the kind of roles people of different "colours" get cast in, and the shows with non-"white" leads that actually become popular. Just looking at the first list I come across of most popular TV shows this week: New Girl Pretty Little Liars The Vampire Diaries Grey's Anatomy Outlander America's Next Top Model Suits The titular New Girl is a young white female, albeit with some non-white friends. Pretty Little Liars are all young white women. The Vampire Diaries: the lead is a young white girl. Grey from Grey's Anatomy is white. The Outlander leads are white. The leads of Suits? White men. In fact, in all of these shows (except Next Top Model), there are often non-white characters, but all are cast in supporting roles. All are there to augment the position of the white lead, to show us that white people can get along with non-whites...but in the end, if the leads were "black", or "hispanic", or "asian", people wouldn't watch. (I put words like "white", "black", "hispanic", and "race" in quotation marks because really, the idea of race is a bizarre illusion. An abstract, entirely man-made construct that aids us in our desire to break the world down into manageable bits, but that serves no real purpose. Yes, different people have different colour skin, and we can identify individuals based on individual traits like skin or eye colour, but I challenge anyone to come up with a universally applicable definition of "race".) I don't want to speak to white privilege in my own country, because I don't feel like I can see the situation impartially. I'm not a patriot by any means, but I'd like to believe that my friends and family aren't racist. But I think we all are.

Does that happen here too? I was kind of assuming/hoping that this might be a 'place' free of all that nonsense...

Yeahhh, George Clinton. He's fairly well-known to hip-hop, mainly from collaborations with some rappers in the '90s. Crazy stuff. (Perhaps you know them, but) you might also enjoy Skull Snaps (Trespassing, My Hang Up is You, I'm Your Pimp, Al's Razorblade). They're not rock-y, but pretty funky.

ooo oo o