OldDog

Amen!

With possession of the Tao, one can go wherever one likes. Without the Tao, one is lost wherever one goes. (Chuangtse)

While I really don't subscribe to the notion that all of existence is really a construct of mind ... I have no doubt that an individual's perception of existence is his reality.

If I may ... I agree with idea that ulterior motive most frequently indicates inappropriate action ... when something is being done to manipulate the natural progression of things. I occasioanlly see wuwei translated as "non-interference". I take this to mean that things should be left to move along according to their manner of natural change and timing. As for goals, aren't we acting with intent when we set a goal? Makes me wonder what is meant by intent. Can there be good intent, bad intent? What if I set a goal for myself. At what point am I erring in the pursuit of my goals? If I am acting with virtue ... from a well considered position and with understanding of how things naturally evolve ... and let things take their course without trying to force an outcome ... could that be considered a kind of wuwei?

Some of this a bit dark and angry for my taste.

Noch ein bier, bitte ...

Ummm, what about Ch40? Reversion is the action of Tao. ... or from Chuangzi ... Division is the same as creation, and creation is the same as destruction. There is no such thing as creation and destruction, for these conditions are again levelled together into One.

I took a quick look around to see how the word square is used in other works and translations. There seems to be a couple of different usages. Square often seems to be used for Earth and Circle in reference to Heaven, or Square can refer to a tool, as in a compass and square, or Square can mean ccan also mean firm, correct, rectitude. Perhaps some one (not me) able to analyze the chinese character can help distinguish the meaning here. Otherwise, look to the context for some guidance. None of these seems to quite open the paradox for understanding. One passage I found in Lin Yutang's translation of zhuang zi seems intreaguing: Those who rely upon the arc, the line, compasses, and the square to make correct forms injure the natural constitution of things. ... Things in their original nature are curved without the help of arcs, straight without lines, round without compasses, and rectangular without squares... and again later The potter says, 'I am good at managing clay. If 1 want it round, 1 use compasses; if rectangular, a square ... But on what grounds can we think that the nature of clay and wood desires this application of compasses and square, and arc and line? So, combining a couple of these notions, perhaps the idea being conveyed here in DDJ 41 is that the great square (Earth) as an expression of Dao cannot be defined using corners. ... or maybe not. Seems like kind of a stretch ... and then, what about the remaining paradoxical lines in 41. Just fodder for discussion. : )

Stewart, I have to say I was really struck by your post. So, many thoughts ran thru my head as I read it. I felt like I wanted to say something but have struggled with words or even where to start. I am no sage. I don't think anyone here is. But there sure are a lot of knowledgeable folks on this site. Everyone here is on their own journey. Each with his/her own perspective and talents. Having picked up a translation of the DDJ is just s starting point on the journey. The Dao is a broad expanse. It has many aspects and they are not mutually exclusive; they form a unity. You may not find a sage that will tell you all you want to know. In a sense you are your own mentor. It is up to you to find the aspects of Dao thst resonate with you and explore them. And I can tell you that takes time. The more you explore the more you can see. There is advantage to having a forum like this. Folks here are willing to offer their understandings and do so in an open and kind way. I hope you can see that value and decide to stay. If not, then best wishes on you journey.

So, there I was on my morning walk, when this tune popped into my head. Arguably one of the best swing jazz bands of the early 40s.

Sorry. Did not mean to bum you out. I put it out there largely in response to Silent Thunder's Rain meditation. I am very fond of guqin music. My taiji master often times would play guqin music as we practiced our form. I developed a taste for it. I don't find it particularly sad but more like peaceful, reflective. I often use music to help set the mood for what I am doing. Every evening, I read for an hour before turning off the lights. This and other instrumental pieces make good background music for reading.

It ain't bluegrass ... but it ain't bad. Joe Bob sez, Check it out.

I looked at a number of translations but all of them seem to avoid these verses at end of Ch 41. Taking them altogether I come away with this: The Dao is difficult to follow but especially so if you are using a mind that is conditioned by ordinary or common values that most people hold. Such a mind is preoccupied with grasping and attaiment. The Dao is not necessarily found in these common values and approaches to life. The things that are of true value in pursuing the Dao do not appear to be of value according to ordinary values. Hence the long list of paradoxical comparisons. Thus, among those that hear of the Dao; the highest are persistent in the striving for true attainment, the mediocre try but often fall back and the lowest never even consider that there might be something beyond their present understanding.

Any jazz aficionados out there?

This is quite remarkable. I think I had understood the trigrams as originating from about the time, if not by, Fuxi with earliest hexagrams appearing a little later around the time of Shang dynasty. Seems improbable that the more complex hexagrams came before the trigrams. Yet you speak with such conviction that trigrams might not have preceded the hexagrams. So, I am forced to ask: What evidence suggests that the trigrams may not have come first?

Regarding the last two lines of DDJ5, Dan G Reid translates them as ... and makes the following interpretation based on comparison of DDJ5 and other proto-daoist texts. ... yet, another way of looking at it.

I took some time this morning to watch the video on DDJ5. It is a good breakdown and discussion of the first few lines dealing with straw dogs. Harkened me back to my Christian upbringing .... going to church on Sunday and hearing a good sermon. Such discussions are very useful. They tend to make you think ... consider possiblities ... help you arrive at your own perspective.

Yes, it would seem so. I went back to Dan G Reid's The Thread of Dao , a comparative analysis of proto-daoist texts. The backdrop he suggests for DDJ5 comes from analysis of Guan zi, where he notes: Ren, translated as “benevolence,” carried a meaning, especially in ancient times, of diligent consideration for courtesy, manners, and hierarchies, following the culture of those who served in the court. One of the most significant contrasts between Daoists and Confucians was that Daoists had little value for complex and prescribed manners and courtesies which they felt must flow as a natural expression from people’s sense of oneness with all things. Against this backdrop, the last two lines may be saying the way of the sage is to maintain a center of natural (core) simplicity in light of all social and court conventions prevalent at the time, rather than a specific indictment of laws and regulations. This makes more sense to me. My sensitivity over the words Derek Lin chose seems to have had the better of me. Still, I like his translation and, for the most part, his interpretation. This exercise has shed a lotnof light for me on DDJ5. Thanks for the engaging discussion.

OK, I'll take that to mean that the original text holds no special connotation toward bureaucracy/government that you can see. That interpretation, though, was very off-putting for me. In our current political climate, it had the ring of someone that has an axe to grind over some political point of view. Maybe I am just being over-sensitive. Would not be the first time. Passages in the DDJ having to do with governing in general are not uncommon. However, I have come to believe that what the DDJ has to say about governing can be equally applicable to the conduct of ordinary individuals ... and vice versa, for that matter. That the principles of Dao be scalable to all levels of worldly activity is not a hard leap to make.

I like this translation, though it is not precisely what appears in his book or web site. I only found "without bias" on the Terebes site; the other two sources I checked have "impartial". The translation as "without bias" has a different impact on me than "impartial". Can't quite put my finger on it but "impartial" has a ring of decision to it, where "without bias" suggests a bias or even the concept of bias does not exist. Some translators use "ruthless" which suggests to me intent. Many use "not humane" which seems to suggest there might be other contexts other that humanity to consider. "Without bias" seems to be a quality more universal and fitting to Dao. What does bother me about Lin's translation is his rendering of as refering to bureaucracy ant its rules and regulations. This seems right out of left field, totally unexpected. I don't read Chinese, so would have to ask: Is there something in the original text that suggests a governmental context?

One of my personal favorites.

Now that's something you have to appreciate ... sort of a jazzy-norteno-conjunto grupo complete with pachuco style zoot suits. Reminds me of the movie Zoot Suit. Good music.

Woof! ; )