lienshan

I agree ... and read the actual Guodian chapter 2 line this way: 有亡之相生也 Existence and nonexistence are together a birth. This point of view is too expressed in the Guodian chapter 40: 返也者道動也 弱也者道之用也 天下之物生於有生於亡 The traditionalist reconstructs Tao. The newcomer is going to use Tao. The matter of the world is born in existence, is born from nonexistence.

So I'm just wondering if anyone here who practices the philosophical ideas could help me understand how it relates to the mystical side of the folk religion. Doesn't all that thinking and analyzing cloud the whole concept?

The lines of the Guodian chapter look like a humanization of "the Great One gives birth to Water": The great perfection is like a defect, it uses not giving presents. The great fullness is like a depletion, it uses not dehydrating. The great skill is like a hump. The great posture is like a stoop. The great straight one is like a crooked one. Activity overcomes the cold. Passivity overcomes the heat. Can clarity be considered the healing of the world? It's IMO a mistake to read/translate the chapter literal as Laozi expressing his own point of view.

To increase one's body temperature by activity and to decrease it by passivity is an ability. An ability is ziran and cannot be graduated by the adjective great. To read and translate classical chinese is a skill. A skill isn't ziran and can be graduated by the adjective great. This interpretation is ofcourse impossible to accept if one believe in the Great Tao

The great challenge of reading/translating the Guodian chapter is to use five terms which cannot be graduated by the adjective great. I've chosen: perfection, fullness, ability, erect posture, straight one perfection doesn't give presents = perfection has no surplus fullness doesn't dehydrate = fullness has no shortage What can be graduated is one's feeling of cold/heat by activity/passivity. It's not the cold or the heat that's being graduated. That's Laozi's commentary to the graduation of 大一 The Great One (the great straight one) The last line is in the Guodian chapter formulated as a sarchastic question. The doubled character can be read as either clarity or clear clearness?

The great perfection is like a defect, it uses not giving presents. The great fullness is like a depletion, it uses not dehydrating. The great ability is like a hump. The great erect posture is like a stoop. The great straight one is like a crooked one. Activity overcomes the cold. Passivity overcomes the heat. Can clear clearness be considered the healing of the world? I read the lines in bold as connected, describing the defect and a possible cure? The first of these four lines is quoted in Zhuangzi chapter 10: If the hook and line were destroyed, the compass and square thrown away, and the fingers of men (like) the artful Khui smashed, all men would begin to possess and employ their (natural) skill - as it is said, 'The greatest art is like stupidity.' If conduct such as that of Zeng (Shen) and Shi (Qiu) were discarded, the mouths of Yang (Zhu) and Mo (Di) gagged, and benevolence and righteousness seized and thrown aside, the virtue of all men would begin to display its mysterious excellence. (James Legge translation) Destroy- and cut to pieces the curve and plumb line, throw away the compass and square, shackle the fingers of Artisan Ch'ui, and for the first time the people of the world will possess real skill. Thus it is said, "Great skill is like clumsiness." Put a stop to the ways of Tseng and Shih, gag the mouths of Yang and Mo, wipe out and reject benevolence and righteousness, and for the first time the Virtue of the world will reach the state of Mysterious Leveling. (Burton Watson translation) Crumble to smithereens the curve and plumb line and throw away the compass and T-square, smack the back of Chui's fingers with a ruler, and the people of the world would appreciate their own artistry. There's an old saying: "Great talent seems clumsy." Wipe out all traces left by Zeng and Shi, gag the mouths of Yang and Mo, push away and discard benevolence and righteousness, and the virtues of the world would mysteriously mesh. (Nina Correa translation)

Is it Laozi's text that has a defect or is it Henrick's translation that has a defect? Is it the world that that has a defect or is it the Great One theory that has a defect? The defect occurs in line 1 and Laozi suggests a cure in line 10

The Guodian chapter 45 大成若缺，其用不幣。 大盈若盅，其用不窮。 大巧若拙， 大呈若詘， 大直若屈。 燥勝凔， 清勝熱， 清清可以为天下定。 The great perfection is like a defect, it uses not giving presents. The great fullness is like a depletion, it uses not dehydrating. The great ability is like a hump. The great posture is like a stoop. The great straight one is like a crooked one. Activity overcomes the cold. Passivity overcomes the heat. Clarity may be considered the healing of the world? 大一 The Great One is the subject of this chapter. Most clearly in the fifth line: The number one character 一 is a straight line and is in the I Ching a steady (passive) line. The number six character V is a crooked line and is in the I Ching a changing (active) line. 大一生水 The Great One gives birth to Water is the passive becoming the active. It's the turning point in all "oneness" theories; the shift from singleness to the multitude?

Yeah, I governed the World five minutes ago

Exclamatory sentences were in pre-Qin classical chinese expressed by inversion of the subject and the predicate. That'll say the characters of the two sentences must be read in this order: 3. 天地之始無名。 4. 萬物之母有名。 But I agree that 恆 heng is the subject of chapter one. Inspired by dawei is my take on it infiniteness/infinite and not eternity/eternal.

The character 而 meant if in pre-Qin chinese when its position behind the subject of sentence. I read 長 as the subject of the sentence, a noun, meaning an adult human being. That'll say if an adult human being is synonymous with the term in manhood Governance is the act of governing. It consists of either a separate process or part of decision-making or leadership processes. To distinguish the term governance from government: "governance" is what a "governing body" does. That'll say without governance is synonymous with the wellknown term wu wei Raise it but not controlling it, isn't wu wei

長而弗宰 In manhood without governance. (lienshan) Raise it but not controlling it, (ChiDragon) To be a leader, not a butcher, (John Wu) Guiding without interfering, (English/Feng) It matures them but doesn't rule them. (Robert Henricks) Guiding them but not controlling them. (Beck) It leads them but does not master them. (Chan) It fosters growth without ruling. (Cleary) Acts as elder and does not rule. (Hansen) Presides but doesn't rule. (LaFargue) Growing yet without directing. (Lindauer) Is superior, and does not control them. (Lin Yutan) Guides, but does not control. (Mabry) Shaping without forcing, (Merel) Leads without forcing. (Mitchell) Cultivates without controlling. (Red Pine) Leading without dominating. (Walker) It lets them grow, without tyrannizing them. (Wieger) Assists them without taking credit. (World)

Professor Edwin G. Pulleyblank writes on page 105 in his Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar: The history of bu 不 and fu 弗 is complicated by the fact that the character fu 弗 was tabooed for a time during the Han dynasty because it was part of the personal name of Liu Fuling 劉弗陵 who reigned as the Emperor Zhao 昭 from -86 to -74. We know from manuscript evidence that this resulted in the replacement of 弗 by 不 in the transmitted text of the Dao de Jing 道德經 My advice: Please spread your misinformations somewhere else; did you read it in a chinese newspaper?

The character 弗 was tabooed, when the Received version was written, and was replaced by 不 生而不有，為而不恃，長而不宰 and Laozi's original version 生而弗有，為而弗恃，長而弗宰 The negative particle 弗 no preceeded nouns. The negative particle 不 not preceeded verbs and adjectives. The term 長而 in manhood occurs in the James Legge translation of the confucian analects: 子曰：幼而不孫弟，長而無述焉，老而不死 The Master said : "In youth not humble as befits a junior; in manhood, doing nothing worthy of being handed down; and living on to old age ..." The grammatical explanation: when 而 meant if then was its position behind the subject of sentence. I do know that the above is darkness to you but now you know the reason why some of the translations you read are flipsy-flopsy nonsense based on the lottery of picking the most pleasing word from a modern chinese dictionary

The second line is a Laozi addition and I read the four lines in this way: In childhood without possessions. In youth without reliance. In manhood without governance. This is called the Te of the darkness. The first line tells why benevolence is unnatural. The first line tells why fillial piety is unnatural. The first line tells why righteousness is unnatural. The darkness is natural while the mystery isn't in my reading of the character 玄 The darkness is too opposite to the Ta Yi Sheng Shui term 神明 spirit and light