dawei

Should I ban the 'intuitive' side or the 'wanderer' side ?

We can make it so you can't log in anymore to use it.

Post Count Range ------> Number of Members :0----->79 :1-2----->943 :3-5----->832 :6-10----->590 :11-50----->867 :51-100----->255 :101-500----->356 :501-1000----->88 :1001-3000----->84 :3001-5000----->22 :5001-8000----->14 :8000------>3

I was looking at this again too and came across a very similar passage which draws me to (I think) the same conclusions... however this is translated, it is oriented on the 'human' aspect... but in the end, Heaven, Earth, and the Sage are not going to confirm to this as they conform to transcendent aspect; they are 'not REN'.

If your going to view yourself as 'something' apart then you've already lost your sense of Unity. To me, this is closer to the meaning of having lost innocence/paradise; Sin. I have heard other religious folks explain its original meaning as "missing the bulls-eye" and I think my point is similar; not in the center of Unity. The easy way that I resolved this (and I was mixed up in this conservative realm for a long time) is to consider two living things: 1. Babies. Clearly this is as close to unity and naturalness as it gets... are they evil ? NO. So why do we even entertain the idea of evil... due to our later existence, not our beginnings... 2. Animals. Clearly, animals have a loving side and care for their own but they are much more aware of the harsh realities of survival and the need to 'eat or be eaten'. They can kill without hesitation. Why are they considered natural and not considered evil ? Thus, man seems to focus so much on himself and then seek some meaning in life and find a purpose... etc... Not so for babies and animals. They remain centered. I would say man's awareness of his existence (ie: which can border infatuation with self) bolstered by the ability to think, plan, muse, and plot give us a spectrum of peaceful civility to lunacy. And because of this we want to call that evil? We're just one of ten thousand in this playground. Our advantage is that if we become apart or stray from being centered, we have the ability to return/transcend/transform from that place.

One of the more interesting translations I have seen on this infers the animals do not harm their own; which I take to mean one does not harm one's self. The self is thus inwardly, completely at union with itself. The child does not know the union of man and women and yet have a natural appearance of stimulation; The hidden union of their inner self does not need to know of such unions to be stimulated. One of high DE is likened to this... they don't need physical stuff to have physical understanding (inner and outer). Their's is an natural, inner way. An issue which I find unmentioned about this section is the Red Child 赤子, usually translated as newborn-infant... but one should look at the Central Scriptures of Laozi where this refers to the child-dan of alchemy; the inner embryo which says of itself: "I am the child of the Tao".

This is a good, brief explanation on each one and their connections: Shen Nong Website: Twelve Meridians For example, if you look at the Gall Bladder:

I like your idea about this as it reminds me of an easy-out I once made by not translating REN... since any meaning we want to apply to it, in the end: Heaven and Earth are not REN The Sage is not REN

how would you feel about a sub-forum for Wenzi for a room where you can lead a translation?

Unifying to what mystery? ... to heaven and earth but ultimately to Dao Opposites can be seen as opposing each other or complimenting as a whole. Because this is about "unity with Dao", this is complimentary pairs making a whole: One neither obtains.... ... closeness nor distance ... benefit nor harm ... honor nor debasement In this way, everything under heaven is treasured/precious ergo, debasement above

Here is the BeiDa Text: 其安易持也， 其未兆易謀也， 其脆易判也， 其微易散也。 為之其無有也， 治之其未亂也。 合抱之木作於豪（毫）末 九成之臺作於絫土 百仞之高始於足下

That is because Confucius was not the first Confucian The word "Ru" is meant to describe those of this manner of philosophy and it can translate as 'scholars'. http://thetaobums.com/topic/34957-origin-of-ru-or-scholars-confucian/ Confucius did use the 'past' to educate the present: http://www.philtar.ac.uk/encyclopedia/confuc/early.html

Some are commentaries... part of the Ten Wings: http://www.iching123.com/brief_a_text.htm

like this: http://ctext.org/book-of-changes?searchu=%E4%BB%81

All of them come from ctext... You can paste Ren (仁) and even change to 'etymology' to narrow down the return. http://ctext.org/etymology?searchu=%E4%BB%81

Like gravity-effect, it is shared influence of existence. I guess it depends on the mysterious female is... but I'll assume DDJ6. This is the Dao-Spirit... Now... it depends on how far "in" you are hanging "out"... If you are willing to let yourself go from this world [of understanding] to merge back to your origin.... then Yes... every day. It seems we have a similar idea of 'in and out'. Just checking too...

Great topic to discuss This line of thinking of conformity makes me think of ancestor worship, which predates Confucius but he put a patent on it. 恕, 惠, 親, 忍 are considered related meanings. 人，仁也，- Person, Ren also. 仁生物也。- Ren is life form too. And the mere fact of being a person (人) shows that as well in the Book of Change, Yi Jing: 故《易》曰：立人之道，曰仁與義 and the way of men, under the names of benevolence and righteousness. (Legge translation)

Just this point alone should be enough to realize the many character exchanges from the Guodian. In this case, the GD seems to be 夜, and fits with night, or traveling at night... which may mean when crossing a river at night, one is cautious or hesitant (later word used in received text by Wang Bi, 豫). the dating is an interesting issue as is the question of what is going on during this time.... which is highly dependent on the date. The Guodian is about 40% of the received text but most date it no later than 300BC. And if we allow for oral tradition of the work, then it would be earlier. Although I've read an interesting brief that Laozi was born in Qin, the historical account seems to be Quren village in the district of Hu County of the State of Chu (today is Luyi County of Henan province) and he later worked in worked as an archivist in the Imperial Library of the Zhou Dynasty court. There is a Stele of the Sage Mother erected by the then emperor in 153 in Hu County. So The Warring State period/Eastern Zhou (475-221BC) seems reasonable since it must pre-date the unification in 221BC... But one thing which has bothered me and I don't find a lot written on it is: Chu was a large and powerful state and poised at the start to be a favorite to dominate/unify... And given that Zhou fell in ~ 770BC, and it was a disastrously fragmented 'warring state' time, why is Laozi even in eastern Zhou (?)

I know one thing for sure... we're over-thinking it... but while we're at it, I'll share one more thought One character has a female part while another doesn't... As if to say: 'You can know beauty once you see beauty'; Where the former is just a concept of beauty and the latter is a real sense of beauty. We can also recall that the 'rectification of names' was very important and so it seems there are plenty of examples where Laozi is rectifying words or concepts in his way. If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things. -- Confucius , analects

I was at this thought as well... or maybe it is just being playful with similar words... as Ch. 1 said: "As one and the same / But differ in name”

去 - justice (to go or leave; but here it means 'to get rid of' something... the wrong done)

It can mean small.... but is also the name of an ancient Clan. see: http://www.rtega.be/chmn/index.php?start=160&subpage=64 But I think I have uncovered the link between the two characters and they trace back to 'beautiful'. So the variant exchange may be well correct. See: http://ctext.org/dictionary.pl?if=en&id=323123 媺 - note the similarity of this to the second character in question.

灋(fa) was composed of [three parts]: 去, 水, 廌. 去 related to sacrificial rites. 水 meant sacred place. 廌 meant totem.

I did understand... I am not sure if the character being used is really the GD one... and I don't think the variant is replace. I think it is a different character. 微 from 彳+ 𢼸 𢼸：妙也。从人从攴

I think they are two sides of a coin and are not meant to be divided too much in thought BUT... is one is 'practicing' then it cannot be wu wei... I see it like: wu wei occurs because Ziran is in control... If you look at the word origin/graphs then the 'animal' aspect is seen. http://www.chineseetymology.org/CharacterEtymology.aspx?submitButton1=Etymology&characterInput=%E7%81%8B I had tracked this back to an old story. Here are my notes: According to one of the earliest Chinese dictionaries, law (fa-法 or anciently as 灋), means criminal punishment. A legendary judge during Shun and Yu’s time was said to have a horned animal by his side which he would ask to hit a suspect on hearing a case or to point out the guilty party. This animal, called Zhi (廌), is in the right side of the ancient ‘fa’ character. The Book of Rites describes a unicorn like animal: 'Chief among four-footed beasts. It resembles the stag but is larger. It has a single horn, the tip of which is fleshy, indicating that it is not used in battle. There are five colours in the hair of its back - red, yellow, blue, white and black - and the hair of its belly is dark yellow. It does not tread any living grass underfoot nor eat any living creature. It shows itself when perfect rulers appear and when the Tao of the King is accomplished.' That is to say, when the ruler's work is well done and his time has come, the Ch'i-lin arrives to bear his soul to Heaven.’ The three parts of the ancient character for law breaks down as: Equality, Justice and Punishment. The western godess of justice is blindfolded and carrying a scale in one hand and a sword in another. This comes from the Roman godess of justice also blindfolded and sometimes with a scale and sword, and other times with an axe and torch. Although the eastern and western view of law appears similar, the east focuses on punishment while the west focuses on rights and justice. The first greek lawgiver is said to have written his law in with blood, not ink. While law is often justified by the need for social order, the ancient texts also attribute the institution of law as a sign of decline. When a Rong envoy was asked by the Duke of Qin how they [as barbarians] could possibly govern themselves the envoy stated that starting with the Yellow Emperor and his social reforms of music, rites, and law that disorder began; that it was better to live in simplicity without such institutes. A ancient text found amongh the Ma Wang Dui tomb texts included the Jing fa (Canon of Law) and it opens with, “The Dao produces Law”. The Warring State period Huang-Lao philosophy espoused a close-knit relationship between Dao and Law; that Law is the pattern or model of Dao. Almost prophetically, law and punishment in future dynasties were often ruthless and would bring about the fall of a dynasty.