ChiDragon

I always let him pass by without a challenge to MH. I'd accepted of just what he said because that is his style. I know that is his way of understand as an American Taoist. I don't think I can get anymore out of my friend here.......

Very nicely said. I agree that there are different Chinese versions of the Tao Te Ching but actually there are merely just copies. The original version written by Lao Tze was never found. However, I wouldn't consider that there was a single English version because any English message about the TTC is just a translation which has no bearing to the authenticity of the Tao Te Ching. The Chinese only have to deal with interpretation of the Tao Te Ching classic. The non Chinese have two problems. They have to deal with the language and the interpretation of Chinese classic. Knowing how to speak the modern language and the meanings of the characters has no merits in doing the interpretations without the cultural heritage, history and the native philosophy. Lots of people including the Chinese cannot keep in mind that the Tao Te Ching is a piece of stand alone document. The most common mistake they had made was interpreting it in their flavor with what they had leaned in the past. They tend to interpret it with a mixture of philosophies such as Confucian, Buddhism, and western influence. Especially, the westerners, each translator tend to interpret it as one pleases. That is why there are thousands of different translations. The Chinese interpretations are sharing a common language and there is a great advantage for improvement of understanding the Tao Te Ching. Scholars always come up with different ideas to get closer and closer the original intended meanings of the Tao Te Ching. In the west, there was no update in their translations and just become stagnate. Besides, there were many copy cats by just revising the wordings of others' translations and called their understanding of the Tao Te Ching.

Yes, that is the reference of Wang As Shi(王安石).

Received Version: The 名 in lines 3 ans 4 was used as a verb in the Received Version. 3. 無，名天地之始。 4. 有，名萬物之母。 5. 故常無，欲以觀其妙。 6. 常有，欲以觀其徼。 According to my native reference in page 三九六(396) . 王安石(Wang An shi), in the Tang Dynasty, was the first scholar who reads 無 and 有, followed by a comma, as shown in Lines 3, 4, 5 and 6. Here is a very good native explanation about 道，無 and 有 for Chapter One:

太武斷了。　Ｉ can be as objective as I can and as I want to. However, I do admit that I'm being subjective, only one time, to be objective. It is analogous to 有為 for being 無為.

The natives scholars do aware that there are many errors made by the ancient scholars from copy-to-copy. In order to make the correction, the native knowledgeable scholars have attempted to put their greatest scholastic effort to come up with a Received Version. In the event, they studied each copy by comparison to see what characters were missing in one copy and replace with what they thought was logical from another copy. In the contrary, there are extra characters were added but removed in the Received Version. Sometimes, some characters are in reverse order based on the improper arrangement made by the ancient scholars and was corrected also. However, the worse errors ever made by the ancient scholars were using illogical homonym characters in some phrases. These errors were causing the phrases to be out of context. As a result, the idea of the whole chapter was out of whack. The worse of it, it looses the continuity of thoughts within the Tao Te Ching. IMMHO It is not wise for someone who just pick up any copy of the Tao Te Ching and starting doing translation without considered all the errors were made by the ancient scholars. The accuracy of the translation is very questionable. Unless otherwise, accuracy was considered not a serious matter. Therefore, further mistakes and errors are multiplied causing the real meaning of the Tao Te Ching to be jeopardized.

This situation is quite frustrating but eventually things will be back into balance. It is just one of those things that Nature has to be taken its course.

By definition of "quarrel": an angry argument or disagreement between people, often about a personal matter. Have we seen anything that says Zhuang Tze was angry in discussing any personal matters. Most of the time he was presenting his philosophy in a parable by given his reasons at his best. Was that considered to be a quarrel....???

Profound......!!!

Okay, is Watson an American Taoist.......???

No, that was Zhuang Tze's whole philosophy to have an enjoyable life without quarrel. Maybe I can dig something up for you......!!!

We are not quarreling; we are just teasing each other with Taoist thoughts from time to time to kill time.

Chuang Tzu does not quarrel. He says: "why should I be wasting my breath arguing something for nothing, I rather enjoy life with silence and have a peace of mind." Chuang Tzu was a Chinese Taoist.......!!!

Yes, you are an American Taoist because you do quarrel, and kill for food as a soldier. To me. Meridian_Man is Taoist because he does not quarrel. Period.

Yes, I agree. Feng Shui was started as an environmental science where the living quarters were made to be as comfortable as possible. Somehow, people start using the Ba Gua(八卦) and Lo Shu(洛書) to formulate some Feng Shui formulas to foresee the condition of the dwelling based on the birthday of the individual owner. Thus I would say that Feng Shi is not pure superstition nor pure science but also psychology. If something in a dwelling causing a psychological problem and discomfort, then, it was definitely considered to be a Feng Shui problem. "Another Feng Shui recommendation: don't stand too close to the edge of the platform while waiting for your train." This is obviously a hazardous environmental issue.

Meridian_Man..... I do respect and consider you as true Taoist. You've learned the lessons well from the Tao Te Ching. Welcome aboard......!!!

子曰：「巧言令色，鮮矣仁！」 孔子說：“花言巧語，一副討好人的臉色，這樣的人是很少有仁德的。” Confucius said: "Those whom are using blandishments with a gratifying face; this kind of people are seldom have any virtue of kindness."

In both versions, the observation was pointing to Tao other than the world. It is because Chapter One is all about Tao but not the world. Common Version: 5. 故常無欲，以觀其妙。 6. 常有欲，以觀其徼。 5. Always without desire, one would grok its quale. 6. Always with desire, one would observe its boundary. To be more explicit, I can rephrase lines 5 and 6 for clarity. 5. Always without desire, one would grok Tao's quale. 6. Always with desire, one would observe Tao's boundary. The illogical notion here lies on the state of desire. The question is do we need to be in a different state of mind to observe Tao's quale or boundary....??? Can we observe Tao at any time without depending on the state of desire....??? Received Version of Chapter 1 5. 故常無，欲以觀其妙。 6. 常有，欲以觀其徼。 I do the same by rephrasing lines 5 and 6. 5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok Tao's quale. 6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe Tao's boundary. Over here, we observe Tao's quale and boundary under two conditions. 1. When Tao was in an invisible state, we observe Tao's intangible characteristic or quale. 2. When Tao is in a manifested state, we observe Tao's limitation or boundary.

If we have to translate "Tao" as "Way" without reading further down the line in the TTC, we are jumping the gun too soon. Later along in other chapters, "Tao" was fined by LaoTze with multi-definition. "Way" may only fits one of the definitions. You will see that "Way" may not fit all those definitions as you reading along the TTC. Besides, The first "Tao" in Chapter One is a proper noun. Sometimes, for consistency, a proper noun does not need to be translated. In the second character, 'tao' is a verb, thus it may be translated as 'spoken'. PS.... Can "takaaki" be translated.....??? If the answer is no, for the same token, 'Tao' may not be translated neither. The reason we can translate the character 道 because it has linguistic meanings. If it is a pure proper noun with no other meanings, then, people do not have the option to think otherwise.

That is a nice way to put it. I can't argue with that...... Thanks.

There is a big difference, in the meaning on lines 5 and 6, between the two versions. Let's go over it again. Received Version of Chapter 1 5. 故常無，欲以觀其妙。 6. 常有，欲以觀其徼。 5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok its quale. 6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe its boundary. These two lines were referring to the states of manifestation of Tao. ************************************************************************************************************************** Common Version: 5. 故常無欲，以觀其妙。 6. 常有欲，以觀其徼。 5. Always without desire, one would grok its quale. 6. Always with desire, one would observe its boundary. These two lines were referring to the states of desire of a person. Since Chapter One was given an introduction of Tao, it wouldn't make any sense by jumping out of the subject and talk about someone's states of desire. There was no connection there, it was just out of context. Do you see the difference in the outcome, by place the comma in different a position, of the two versions.....???

To be honest with you. Your reasoning are lack of substance. It is monotonous that your presentation only goes back and forth between the first and third party without any of your own ideas. I have given you my legitimate reasons but you were just not able to digest. Anyway, this is only my most humble opinion. No malice was intended.

Yes, "ignore" is a silent way to express oneself that further verbal exchange is no longer needed. Hence, it means either that the last argument was not valid or just due to the lack of further interest in the subject matter.

Did you read or didn't understand their explained details.......????

Why is anything that was leaning toward the yin-side was considered to be a "troll". If there is yin, then, there is yang. Why are we so sensitive about hearing something that is being in the negative view a little bit.....??? If we only want to hear what we want to hear or just one side of the story all the time, then, everything will become stagnate.