Cobie

Always happy to disagree with you. That’s great, I am very happy for you.

These three are not the same: 古文 (gu3 wen2) Classical Chinese ; 文言文 (wen2 yan2 wen2) Literary Chinese ; 普通话 (pu3 tong1 hua4) Mandarin. Most sinologists use the words Classical and Literary for different periods (pre/post Han).

Yes, Laozi thought so too.

These are all dictionaries for the use of the characters in modern Chinese. You need a dictionary for the meanings as used in transcripts of Classical Chinese. There often is some difference in the meanings. I use: A Student's Dictionary of Classical and Medieval Chinese, Author: Paul W. Kroll

Which dictionary did you use?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Quote \/ doesn’t say “twice in one line”, and I haven’t read the article. Still, I thought you might find it interesting. “A thorough study of polysemy is an important prerequisite for the translation of Tao Te Ching to convey its essence well. Therefore, the article screened the polysemy in Tao Te Ching and found many words and phrases have more than one meaning.” (A Study of Polysemy and Multi-translation in Tao Te Ching, by Yan Wang, https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/iccessh-19/125912010 )

.

Exactly. 無 (wu2) not * 為 (wei2) behave like a civil servant * ~~~ * amongst other meanings, Classical was polysemic

.

.

.

Sound idea. I kind of decided, when I was young, to take 'this-whole-life' off. While no doubt your advice will be sound, I have decided not to read the neidan subforum. Now those are always worth reading.