Harmonious Emptiness

Chi, I think we may both benefit from our disagreements. I am interested to hear how you see it since surely many (especially native Chinese) will see it the same. Now, I do see how wei can be put as "for" in chapter 3. On looking back, I see that it really isn't a stretch from what I was thinking at first. I still don't think it is the best way to convey the text for English speakers though. It might not be a vast difference, but as they (fear mongering imperialist missionaries) say "the devil is in the details": literally: 14 為無為, wéi wú wéi, for wu wei 15 則無不治。 zé wú bù zhì。 (rules:without:no:government/administration) no rules, no government/administration Taking the preceding lines into context (see post #45 of this thread), I think a clearer way to put this in English would be: 14 為無為, wéi wú wéi, The lack of action in this way effects the desired change 15 則無不治。 zé wú bù zhì。 Then neither rules nor their implementation will have to occur. This is what I mean by "working the sentence." I think maybe when a Chinese person sees the direct-relative English words its easier for them to re-translate it into Chinese and say "okay, so their talking like this and this." My concern, though, is to bridge the latin root of words, and the Chinese associative roots of words, as well as the sort of assumption that Chinese has that the reader sees where he is coming from to mean what he means. This could be an even more difficult task for some non-native English speakers as it requires a fair bit of grammatical flexibility to give particular connotations to an English word. An example would be "for." It can mean "to create" (as in line 14) "to be given to someone" and "the reason," so depending on the context, it could be better to work in it's specific meaning and include the meaning created by the flow of the text. If you have some time, I suggest reading George Orwell: Politics and the English Language for more ideas of how to retain meaning in English writing (not that I have mastered this whatsoever, but it's pointers are very good). Basically, that is what happens when we take the "correct" words every time. Though they are correct, they manage to obscure meaning by being so correct and defined.

Sure, we can stop it or start a new thread about interpretation, but the bolded above is exactly my point. There is no grammar, thus it is less specific than English, so just replace one word for another does not convey very much at all to an English speaker. This is why translations work around the words. Look at how Thomas Cleary or Suzuki and Carus translate if you want to see how it helps to know various ways to convey something in English. Between Chinese and English there is not a direct link of the words and so it helps when the translator takes the time to show the various possibilities of meaning. If you just match word for word, you end up with dry and misleading translations as have been discussed here and elsewhere. If translating French to English it is easier as the words mostly have the same roots and the grammar can be equated. From Chinese to English, the important thing is not the words that are used, but that the meaning conveyed is intelligible and the message is conveyed. In latin languages, translation is much easier and the meaning more directly associated as words share the same latin associations. Chinese words have different associations than latin. This makes it important and useful to avoid word for word translations. It is important to "show" and not just "tell" what is being said. Chinese to English needs some "description" to it, not just matching similar words. In fact many good translations don't even use the similar words as they don't line up to the meaning from an English standpoint of grammar. Further discussion on this will probably derail the topic, so lets make a new thread if we want to explore this.

Dbl. Post

"for wu wei" makes no sense in the above context. The sentence needs to be worked better than that. I think it may be your english that is the issue.

天 is heaven, a picture of a man spreading his arms out, usually meaning big, and a line connoting what is above this man. 地 means earth, 土soil + 也 which means "also; classical final particle of strong affirmation or identity" (apparently a picture of a snake) So you almost get an "also" when they appear together as 天 地, but it doesn't mean "and" or "also".. it just points to the earth, as it does in 他 "he or him; (used for either sex when the sex is unknown or unimportant); (used before somebody's name for emphasis)" Excuse the long answer, just using the opportunity to study... Short answer is: 天地 天地之間, tiān dì zhī jiān, There is Heaven, and there is Earth, and thus there is the shining space in between them (Chapter 5, line 5, Dao De Jing) 間 = space between, pictured: sun between two doors

Well, if we're only talking about wei wu wei as it first appears in the Dao De Jing in chapter three, there doesn't seem to be a necessary reason to make the character mean "for" so long as we are keeping in mind the obvious flow of his thoughts [though sometimes "for" can mean "as a result" / doing it for/as a result of something/caused by. I would be inclined to work the sentence to include more connotations of the symbol]. I think it would help to see wei wu wei, 為無為, by tracing the idea back to line 09 of Chapter 2 before it appears near the end of Chapter 3: My translation: last line is "rules:without:no:government/administration" basically means the same as wu wei, I guess.

bird 鳥 bear 熊 fish 魚 horse 馬 鳥 bird means chirping insects with a mouth in front of it according to nina train choa. initially used this dictionary which said the "Associative Compound" of 為 wei is a hand leading an elephant. Though Elephant is 象 [with the trunk on the top) So, don't know what animal 為 is...

Some might disagree, but I think for an English speaker it is helpful to know that the character for wei 為 is a seen as a hand leading an elephant. I'm not entirely sure how it makes up an elephant but it is obviously something huge. The hand is actually a claw rather than just a hand which I suppose is to show that it is not merely holding the elephant, but is acting upon it. The outcome is that this character also means to govern, make, act upon, handle. As Chi Dragon mentioned, it can mean "for" like "for wu wei" but this would essentially take the meaning "makes wu wei" as another way to say it in English while maintaining the additional connotations. So, it's not just action, but governing action, forceful action, leading and interfering action. Also, the fact that it is an animal claw also shows the nature of this as animals rarely act on something without the intention to change or control it in some way. I think it is very important to look at this in terms of the first few chapters which deal with not meddling too much, such as (ironic as it will be for me to say so) not always putting a label on things. For example, if your listening to music and someone says "oh it's so such and such" that can take away from actually hearing the profound beauty since you will have diminished it to "such and such." Thus, non action of this type (see Chapter 1, TTC) allows one to experience truth and beauty in life which cannot be controlled and possessed, in spite of man's tendency to literalize. You cannot literalize these moments, they need to be experienced, and to be experienced one must learn not to interfere with them. edit - just wanted to note that this happened to be my 1,696th post

Sorry to let it out like that Chi, but we can't have a discussion if you won't at least try employing "in my opinion/it appears to me that..." and or a reason. 有 is a hand, so "has no overflowing" from 有弗盈 later was written 或不盈, "protected from overflowing" would be the better way to say it in English (imo) since 或 is "then" but is shown by a person speaking while holding a halberd spear.. being the one who makes it "then" I guess. Holding/grasping, vs someone tellin' you...

It's okay Chi. I know that you like things to be one way and feel only one way is the correct way. This is why at least %50 of your posts get derided for their apparent authority only to be "missing the forest for the trees." This is not how I plan to approach this text. here are some other links for the character: notice that the first Classical meaning at the top here is "surplus" http://www.alice-dsl.net/taijiren/4_ying2_m7474.htm All etymologies include "overflowing" for this character. As you have said before, you have to take in the rest of the context to know which words are useable in the many possibilities for each character. This not just reading Chinese, it's reading Taoist scripture which is often characterized by its subtlety. I don't see the point of why you're pushing this one. The meaning works in English while maintaining more of the meaning of the character without loosing the meaning of the idea. Thus, it works for my purposes. Btw, I didn't ask for you teach me Classical Chinese, just said thanks for the help. Again, thanks for the help, but I'm not going to get into this foolish cat and mouse game with you. I've seen how you communicate in the TTC forum and have yet to see many of your bold statements be worth more than reducing statements to dry "correct" yet incomplete understanding.

If you want. Others besides myself have used "overflowing." For an English person, "full" just means full, it does not really carry the connotation of "overflowing" to the same degree that it can for a Chinese reader who sees both "full" and "overflowing" in the same word.

haha Thanks bro!

Either way the meaning is the same. Why wouldn't we want something to be completely full? Because then it can spill/overflow. The character 盈 is a picture of a "shallow container" underneath a symbol for "go" within a symbol meaning "as it turns out/ and then." After all, when reading Chinese, you're basically presented a set of pictures, and you have to figure out what those pictures represented to the person who put them there that way. So context is very helpful, but they are also quite open ended in a way that leaves the reader to see a larger context of it all, since the pictures sort of draw the context, like "a shallow container, going going going, and then!"

I'd like to put my 2 cents in here as well: The imagery here is that Tao is infused, like a tea bag between heaven and earth. Basically, it is present, thereby it's function is to be utilized. The middle character in line 02 generally negates whatever comes after it so = not overflow. The first of that line generally = maybe, probably. Seems that this line is more revealing that all is immersed in Tao and It's use is to be used. Much like excess energy in parts of the body can cause illnesses if the energy just sits there.. if it does not move it just "overflows" so it must be used as that is "what it does." revealed through Tao being used, as it's character is simply being abundantly useful, much like sexual energy which can build up and overflow when not utilized for higher spiritual/mental purpose. I find it interesting that Lao Tzu puts some passion in his voice! The character 兮 is an expression like "oh my god!." So it's like "oh my god its DEEP." This is using Tao, no? Letting it run so it doesn't overflow This is the way the Tao changes things so it does not overflow -- its energy goes into these things. In a way it does overflow in that it's abundance manifests in overpowering these things which have fallen out of harmony with it, much like people will do to try bring the wayward back to a place where they can "be on the same page" and communicate . The last two lines makes sense this way to me based on they way they contrast with previous chapters. It may not be exact and literal, but I feel like the many poetic sensibilities allow for this interpretation just as well. After all, everybody says the Chinese writing evokes many things surface and subtle. I think it's fair to put it this way since the usual translation "I don't know who's child it is" is still there. However, I think the usual translation misses the light of previous chapters which continues reflect on/off words following them. There are running themes at play which I believe tie into the imagery of following stanzas.

Gonna take a break for a couple weeks.. I think the sky won't fall if I don't hit respond for a while. Enjoying the open source journey, but I need to detach and reconnect, review and respond.. Peace out for now, and Thanks! Hemptiness The sky and sidewalk Reflection of endlessness Each step my journey

Thanks Marblehead. Also, thanks to all the well wishers from my last hiatus! much appreciated . I might still do a bit of moonlighting in the TTC section though as I've been working on translating.. Pce.

Got to disappear for another couple weeks. Enjoying the new energy that has come into the forum though. Blessings on your paths, don't forget:

Just want to second something that suninmyeyes brought up about LSD which is the vast potential for bad trips which can more or less short circuit the mind and lead to lunacy in some instances. I think the biggest reason people have bad trips, other than those who just plain overdose (you can have a bad trip on any amount), is that they are not going into it with the right mind frame. What is the right mind frame? I'm too sure, but certainly an attitude of "okay, I'm just going to enjoy whatever happens and not make too much of it" is necessary, and sounds like something you are not too accustomed to especially with mind expanding experiences. Really LSD should be done in the company of an experienced guide as well to help the person through these things, but that is not part of the culture surrounding LSD. Given that you are powered up with Kundalini energy, and you won't have a guide for it, I would definitely not do LSD for the first time with your reasons and state of mind you will have for doing it. At least with Iboga you will have a guide. However, you have never even smoked weed before. This could be terrible advice, big fat disclaimer, but you might want to try your first high with ganja instead. LSD is maybe 3 to 5 times more intense than weed, and Iboga seems to be 5 to 10+ times more intense than LSD. The major down side might be that you like weed so much you decide you want to do it again and again which is likely to mess with the lifestyle you live. It might even help to cool you down a bit, as it can do for people tripping too hard on shrooms, though so maybe it won't be bad as a medical application. I really don't know enough about you or it or anything to determine this but it might be worth considering if you're going to delve into entheogens without any previous experience (though weed might be like riding a bike to prepare for flying an airplane...)

I don't know man, I try not to think about it too much

I would try to talk to someone who is highly skilled in both entity removal and energetic medicine as you will likely need some treatment between the two. Ya Mu/Michael Lomax can do both, possibly Jenny Lamb as well. I don't know if this will do everything you want it to or not, but either way I'm sure it will help you a great deal...

I guess it really depends on how deeply you want to get into it. It's interesting that Mind and Heart were seen as the same thing. So a clear and tranquil mind was maybe more about a clear and tranquil heart. There are thoughts in the mind and thoughts in the heart, but I think they begin with the heart. So clear your heart = clear your mind. I think if we view beauty with clear heart then we are seeing it "as it is."

Recently I've been looking at Suchness in terms of, for example, you see a beautiful woman but don't want to desire her so you just see her as a woman rather than a beautiful woman, not attaching any "imaginings" in tow. It's a fairly simple side of Suchness, but very real at the same time, I think. We see things as a means to this, or means to that, symbols of this, maybe this maybe that, and imagine so many things about them good and/or bad but not just seeing them "as such." Of course this goes beyond people, and things to days, money, etc.. I don't know to what degree this needs to be everything all the time in the laymen world, but I think it is still useful as an intro