dawei

In short, I have a slip vertebra at L4-L5; not a slipped disk as is more common. So the bone pattern is out of whack from an old injury and getting worse over time (slipping more and pushing my spine in two directions to adjust to that and causing knee, neck, etc problems). This guy is able to physically move the vertebra back to their original positions. In both the west and east I have heard it unanimously stated that this is impossible to do... I have the xray pictures to show we may not really understand or trust the body as much as we should. Everyone is saying how dangerous this is to do but tell it to this guy who has been doing it for 40 years... Bones move out.... so he moves them back in.... has a bit of Yin to Yang and Yang to Yin flavor... Only time will tell how it all pans out but IMO he sets our understanding of the spine backwards several hundred years and thousands of surgeries later...

It is nothing short of a miracle by laymans terms. Doctors (east and west) have said it is not possible. The local spinal surgeon here told us we were just trying to trick him with my xrays... but to this toothless, shaggy, graying 'bone healer'... this is Dao at work. We talked quite a bit about such things; the body follows it's natural pattern even to destruction; Call it the body's way. But there is always another way, call it higher or lower; relative positioning really doesn't matter to Dao. The moral of the story is if one can get their body back aligned to the Great Way, then there is a second coming... a second chance. Enough for now. I need to travel to south china for a few weeks but I can walk without pain. I'll follow up with 2 more sessions in Nov.

I am certain it is not final and not the final word. Why would there be some excuse for happiness now? You think there is more happiness to be found in china than in the US? I am here for multiple reasons but I am seeing among other things a specialist who can actually re-set a spine displacement; which every medical doctor in the US and China claims is not possible. I already have the xrays to show them their own claims are like "asking a source for the answer to a chapter". This is not just some sort of cause for happiness; this is just a part of life.

Having the chance to be involved in extremely conservative circles for a while... I would say: - Son of Man = Ying of Yin - Son of God = Yin of Yang The "Son" is bi-polar; Sometimes man and sometimes God. Man is inbetween... ergo, Son is "earth" or at least that which is "Heaven-seeking-below". Ergo, man is that which is "on-Earth seeking above".

Good to see you confess to your game playing and your admission to continue BS with others will go far with establishing your way on this board.

Then stop being such a self-promoting, trolling asshole. Get it yet???????????? Stop your Bullshit and stick to the study.

Exactly my thoughts when I read your comments... completely baseless. Stick to context instead of monkeying around and pulling everyone's chain.

You originally wrote: But the original character was 天 者 instead of 天 下 So does your translation then get changed to: Who would offer their excess to the poor in the angels? Just trying to follow the logic. ---- Here is the shift that occurs. I think even a five year old would come up with a better translation than 'angel' here ( and among all the pre-han text usages we see for 天者, used by Confucians, Legalists, Art of War, Yellow Emperor's Classic of Medicine, The Yi Jing, Lao Zi, etc). MWD A 孰能有餘而有以取奉於天者乎 □□□□ MWD B 孰能又余而□□奉於天之唯 又道者乎 FuYi: 孰能損有餘而奉不足於天下者。 其惟道者乎。 HSG: 孰能有餘以奉天下？ 唯有道者 WB: 孰能有餘以奉天下， 唯有道者。

I try to keep at least two thoughts to guard against wanting to quickly to remove sections: 1. It is a patchwork of an oral tradition, so there are many hands in the cookie jar. 2. To not force perfectionist attitude on the text since to do is often due to our own lack of understanding rather than the text's misplacement. So I agree with the approach to try and understand what the line(s) in question mean and how they might actually fit in. There is just too much imagery, innuendo, and metaphor shifting back and forth between the Way of Man and Heaven. And as you pointed out earlier (was it this chapter?), there are times what appears to be described is bigger then the Way of Man or Heaven which is something I feel also about the concept of Dao; it is itself just a part of some whole. We know from other chapters that not everyone can understand the Way... so we have to accept this as well.

Sorry.... can't buy the 'addition' argument for this section for the following reasons: 1. It's in the oldest MWD text; how does it get added to the oldest text? 2. The character usage is consistent to the MWD and not the next FuYi text. 3. The progress is as follows: a. The Way of Heaven b. The Way of Man c. The way of the Man of the Way d. .... any guess what would logically be next... "Therefore the Sage..." 4. This is NOT about the bow and NOT about giving to the poor; These are simply human examples. If you only take a limited humanistic view, then we can just claim anything is added in any chapter. It's about the Way of Heaven (Dao). And in general the distributional and effectual results. What distribution and effect does the bow have when pulled? It has the similar distribution and effect of the Great Way when it moves. Therefore whan a Sage 'acts', what is the effect? One of not relying. And having achieved? One of not dwelling. And his want/desire? One of not displaying.

Since you took the time to translate the meaning of the ending I think it is worth some comment. 1. This conveys origin. Or it can mean result; Act without expectation (or want in return) 2. This is quite good 3. What value? We need a description of the kind of value. Does not want to appear as wise or clever?

Is it really awesome that what occurs should occur? Or is it awesome because we cannot conceive that it would occur? So what is the problem here... what occurs or what we conceive can occur?

And yes, XieJia... the logic is all there and flows to the end. The "bow" says is all.. so I can't see why one has to explain it but your clear comprehension is quite astounding Dare I say, "next chapter" ?

Thanks for the thought... I have been in china for a week now and maybe for 2 months, so just catching on when I have time. Not sure what that Dane's excuse is but I have found more recently to understand his thought... which is a little scary

This is an easy chapter to translate if one gets beyond word-for-word translation to get the meaning. And Water and Grass have the same properties of soft and flexible; an inflexible mind will not see it. XieJia explains it as a comparison of grounding vs rooting; the former is anchored in the ground while the latter is a part of the ground. When we are born, we are anchored or rooted? When we die, we are anchored or rooted? I can sense the Great Carpenter (life) and Great Executioner (death) again...

IMO, this is generally the correct line of thinking for the last two lines and it encompasses the classic LZ opposite-pair juxtaposition: Placing no value on life is essentially placing the highest value on life. Legge shows the opposition but doesn't really get the meaning: Thus it is that to leave the subject of living altogether out of view is better than to set a high value on it. His is a kind of acceptance that "less is best" theory. While this can be argued as a LZ idea, it still misses the point. Ni says: One who is a guardian of people and does nothing for his own life knows how to value all lives well. While this is much closer he is embellishing the translation too far for me (ie: guardian). Here is the early translation by Addiss & Lombardo which many follow: Only those who do not strive after life Truly respect life. It is the essence and simplicity stated here which is clear cut. But, IMO, it is the deeper thought caught by Hinton which is the point: they who act without concern for life: it's a wisdom far beyond treasuring life. I will share that Ta-Kao, whom I often find interesting, says: Because they endevour to seek life; therefore they pay no heed to death. He see a deeper juxtaposition as a 'life and death' comparison and therefore ties back to the previous line about death. I think this has some merit and consideration.

I agree with this. There is a 'natural' course to life and the law of man is not really justice because it acts to replace the laws of nature.

Maybe we're having the comprehension issue going on here: Detested: to feel intense and often violent antipathy toward : loathe Hate: extreme dislike or antipathy : loathing YOU ARE ESSENTIALLY SAYING HATE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ARE YOU NOT ??????????????????????????????????????? IMO, It is the wrong point of view to apply to Heaven... I explained my take; your welcome to the idea that heaven detests both.

But this does not suggest impartiality, does it ???????????

I think the problem is that most translate the line from Heaven's point of view; As if it is Heaven which has some favoritism or detests something. That is not a LZ theme. If we turn the point of view around, it is people who reject the Way of Heaven or who disgrace the principles of Heaven. What principles? The opening two lines has the LZ theme of 'the strong die and the weak endure'. I see it going like this (interpretation): The strong [headed or willed] will find death prematurely through their own devices. The weak will naturally find [a longer] life. Of these two ways one results in harm and one results in benefit. Thus, some forsake the principles of Heaven; who is able to know their reasons?

I now see why our openings vary so much. The first two lines have been altered again and again: MWD-B: Has reduplication of 畏畏 民之不畏畏 則大畏將至矣 FY: Removes 之 and 將; Replaces 畏 with 威 in both lines 民--不畏威， 則大威--至矣 HG: Drops 矣 民不畏威， 則大威至-- WB: Simply follows HG 民不畏威 則大威至 I follow 畏畏 as a classic reduplication (same as I commented in chapter 71); Intrepid to mean "resolute fearlessness". The reduplication puts strong emphasis on the singular use of 畏 (fear). Starting with FuYi, the opening gets changed to 'not fearing power' or 'not fearing what is dreadful"... and the entire chapter changes meaning.

Yes. When one is not afraid of what life will bring, even distress is expected (as part of life's variation).

I don't see all the "bad" happenings. It's not consistent with LZ thought. Instead, I see the opening more like: When the People are completely unafraid this is the standard [for handling] when great distress comes. The problem is that most translators take 則 (Ze) as a conjunction (to contrast with the previous statement); I take it as its other meaning, of a standard.

I think when 'bone marrow' is mentioned, it is practices like Liao's condensing breathing, iron shirt, pack Qi, etc. I think this is what was meant by the teacher's comment; to pack Qi into the bones (marrow). This is a part of Iron Shirt and one can pack it in the ribs for that. But consult a good teacher and use a book to help visualize some of it. When TCM uses "Marrow" (and some texts will capitalize), it means as the OP has stated; it includes body fluids including the synovial fluid.