ChiDragon

This is a special horse stance only, and only, in Wing Chun. The pigeon toed standing posture gives the practitioner a higher traction on the ground to counteract a pulling force. Also, it will naturalize the pushing force of the practitioner when pushing his opponent. Literally speaking, it locks the feet on the ground, to keep the balance of the body.

FYI

There are no most highest, advanced system. All Chi Kung involves breathing and slow movements. It is a matter of how eager do you want to learn and practice. You just learn the basic breathing method with some body movements, it will have the same health effect as with any other methods. Please don't be deceived by those fancy names and claims. It was the practice, practice and practice that will get you to the ultimate.

There are some people who study the Tao Te Ching for spiritual reasons; and some want to learn the true Taoist philosophy and the true sayings of the TTC. IMO People who study for spiritual reasons may interpret the Tao Te Ching any way they want to for their personal needs. However, for those who has a purpose of learning the true meaning of the classic text, how would you go about learning the TTC...??? What is your approach...???

The problem is, IMO: If you only look at the DDJ to understand the DDJ, you will not really get to understanding all of it's meaning since Dao (and Daoism) is much bigger than the DDJ or Laozi. We have to get beyond translating a word for a word and get to the meaning. I have slowly learned this lesson myself over the years and still fall back into it but I am convinced of this myself.

As I said before, the Tao Te Ching is a piece of stand alone document but you don't have to agree with me. All the definitions are well defined and self supported in different chapters within the TTC. It just a matter of finding and use them. If one tries to use other definitions from different philosophers other than the Tao Te Ching, then one was just confusing the issue and ran away the basic definition of the TTC farther and farther.

PS...

Sorry, this is only my approach and may not be suitable for others.

The passage is about "all things", not just man. So do trees, rocks, birds, etc need to gain or need to develop to their full potential also? I personally don't think so.

 

So I think the passage is more general to all things rather than trying to find a meaning which fits only for man.

In general, I am totally agree.

Good point. But, I still think it is only man (humans) that has this problem due to the 'learning' we undergo mostly during our youth. I think that most of us are molded into something other than what we truely are and therefore we do not live 'naturally'.

 

Nearly all other manifestations have no choice but to be what they truely are.

In the case about 'learning', I agreed partially. However, when all things are able to be fully developed to their physical being, then I'm totally agree.

I have a question. The Tao Te Ching always mentioned all things, heaven, earth, human, and Tao separately. Do you think he treated each of these as a separated entity....???

榖

 

 

1. hmm, no that makes no sense. there is no spirit in the valley.

2. those are contrived rationalisations by native speakers who lost ties to traditional teachings.

1. In the same token. There was no such thing as Tao. LaoTze made Tao and used different names to describe Tao.

2. This remark seems too open-minded for me.

Both characters 榖(gu3) and 谷(gu3) pronounced the same. It was traditional to borrow the sound of a character in the Chinese language, especially, when there were only just enough characters to be used at the time.

heh)) they both make zero sense, spirit of the valley is as nonsensical as spirit of the bath. they both are erroneous, it was a diff character initially.

What was a diff character initially...???

The reason that LaoTze use 谷神, spirit of the valley, is because "valley" has the characteristics of Tao as abyssal, vacuous, and serene.

You can think of it as a correction if you want. And you can discuss it further at the chapter 6 post if you want.

Dawei...

It is not a matter of just what I want. If we are studying this document which is more than two thousand years old. The characters are evolved with many changes as the time goes by. We can't just taken it for granted. We must consider them very closely. There must be a justification for our reasoning.

浴（谷）神不死

Let's look at the character 浴. In modern Chinese, it means "bath". However, it could have had the meaning as "valley" two thousand years ago. Here is my reasoning. It has a "water" radical at the left and the "valley" radical at the right. In the ancient time, the characters were written in pictographs. Hence 浴 could be interpreted as water is flowing in a river or valley implicating that was a river or a valley. The modern character with the "water" radical dropped becomes 谷 as "valley"

In both documents MWD-A and MWD-B has the same pictograph with an indication which is more incline to have the meaning as "valley".

1. 浴神不死

2. 谷神不死

Let's look at the translations:

1. The spirit of the bath will not die.

2. The spirit of the valley will not die.

Which one makes more sense and logical to you, line 1 or 2.....???

While your interests are focused on the translations, mine were captured by the meanings. I found this particularly interesting:

 

"Men hate to be "orphaned," "widowed," or "worthless,"

But this is how kings and lords describe themselves.

For one gains by losing

And loses by gaining."

 

I would assume there is another more traditional interpretation than the way I look at these lines. To me, in the "Tao Now" (contemporary) perspective, it says that kings and lords assume a mantle of humility to enhance their image--(not that their behaviors necessarily conform to that image).

Stan, I don't mean to condemn or criticize other translations. I just happened to be understand the language with a cultural background to do the translation. Of cause, with the help of a reliable native source which is the consensus among the knowledgeable native scholars.

"Men hate to be "orphaned," "widowed," or "worthless,"

But this is how kings and lords describe themselves.

It seems to me that this is just the general notion of the translator with a half understanding of the classic text.

By looking at the characters, I know they are saying this:

8. 唯孤、寡、不穀，

Only Loneliness, Celibacy, Unkind,

9. 而王公以為稱，

Are used by the kings and dukes to address themselves as such.

In the modern movies, the characters acting as kings are still using these terms 孤 and 寡 to address themselves. This term 不穀 was not in use anymore. I only saw it in the Tao Te Ching.

Look at the Mawangdui versions; there is a different character.

Is this what you meant...???

I am referring both versions with the characters corrected in ().

MWD-A

http://findpath.web.fc2.com/laozi/mawangduijia.html

浴（谷）神【不】死

MWD-B

http://findpath.web.fc2.com/laozi/mawangduiyi.html

浴（谷）神不死

Note: Not the case for the two oldest versions, the Mawangdui; only versions after that.

Can you be more specific with clarity....???

Fair translation.

 

The "gave birth to" caught my attention the first time I read it as I saw it as support for the personification of Tao as a female God. (Of course, I think it is incorrect to personify Tao but that's beside the point.)

1. Did you get the idea from Chapter 6 for the personification of Tao as a female God...???

2. Do you think LaoTze believes in god....???

3. Why is incorrect to personify Tao...???

Chapter 6 The mysterious female.

1. 谷神不死

1. The spirit of the valley never dies.

2. 是謂玄牝。

2. Is called the mysterious female.

3. 玄牝之門

3. The door of the mysterious female

4. 是謂天地根。

4. Is called the root of heaven and earth.

5. 綿綿若存，

5. Seems eternally existed

6. 用之不勤。

6. With endless reproduction.

Note: LaoTze referred Tao as the "spirit of the valley".

My translation of Chapter 42 is shown in boldface.

1. 道生一。

1. The Way gave birth to the One.

Tao engenders One.

2. 一生二。

2. The One gave birth to the Two.

One engenders Two.

3. 二生三。

3. The Two gave birth to the Three.

Two engender Three.

4. 三生萬物。

4. And the Three gave birth to the ten thousand things.

Three engender all things.

5. 萬物負陰而抱陽，

5. The ten thousand things carry Yin on their backs and wrap their arms around Yang.

All things carry Yin on the back and embrace Yang in the front.

6. 沖氣以為和。

6. Through the blending of the qi they arrive at a state of harmony.

Blending the Chi becomes harmonized.

7. 人之所惡，

7. The things that are hated by the whole world

The things that people hate.

8. 唯孤、寡、不穀，

8. Are to be orphaned, widowed, and have no grain.

Only Loneliness, Celibacy, Unkind,

9. 而王公以為稱，

9. Yet kings and dukes take these as their names.

Are used by the kings and dukes to address themselves.

10. 故物或損之而益，

10. Thus with all things—some are increased by taking away;

Thus the things may be lessen then gained more.

11. 或益之而損。

11. While some are diminished by adding on.

Or maybe gained more then become less.

12. 人之所教，

12. Therefore, what other men teach,

Those things that people taught me,

13. 我亦教之，

13. will also consider and then teach to others.

I also use those things to teach others.

14. 強梁者，不得其死。

14. Thus, "The strong and violent do not come to a natural end."

Those whom are tyrannic and violent will not be dead of natural cause.

15. 吾將以為教父。

15. I will take this as the father of my studies.

I will take that as the standards of discipline.

Chapter 42

 

 

John Wu

 

1. Tao gave birth to One,

2. One gave birth to Two,

3. Two gave birth to Three,

4. Three gave birth to all the myriad things.

5. All the myriad things carry the Yin on their backs and hold the Yang in their embrace,

6. Deriving their vital harmony from the proper blending of the two vital Breaths.

 

 

7. What is more loathed by men than to be "helpless," "little," and "worthless"?

8. And yet these are the very names the princes and barons call themselves.

9. Truly, one may gain by losing;

10. And one may lose by gaining.

11. What another has taught let me repeat:

12. "A man of violence will come to a violent end."

13. Whoever said this can be my teacher and my father.

 

Questions? Comments?

It was obvious that the context of lines 7 through 13 are out of place. They do not seems to agree with the logic of the first six lines. The native scholars suspected that they were mistakenly copied from Chapter 39.

The lines begun with this line of Chapter 42 seem to be out of place.

人之所惡，唯孤、寡不穀，

Men hate to be "orphaned," "widowed," or "worthless,"

而王公以為稱，

But this is how kings and lords addressed themselves.

The the last part of Chapter 39 begun with line 7:

是以侯王自稱孤、寡、不穀。

a Duke or Prince calls himself My Loneliness, The Isolated Person, The Ungracious Person.

Were you kidding?

This is only my experience in a specific case and sometimes in general.

must be because they were written in chinglish too

Yes, a Chinese writes it in Chinese; and an English writes it in English. However, may be a naturalized citizen writes it in Chinglish if you would like to put it that way. So be it. hehehehe

PS...

I used to call the Chinglish the Sino-English or terse English. Thanks for the new term anyway...!!!

ok ok.

 

People at my school say horse stance is this:

 

feet HAVE to be pointing forward as much as possible, meanwhilst the femur bones (upper legs) are pretty much parallel to the ground.

The goal is to have the upper legs parallel to the ground, but not for a beginner. A novice starts with 15 degrees with the Vertical ground, then increase the angle progressively to 25, 35, 45 degrees and so on until 90 degrees. Do the 15 degree for 15 minutes then increase the time limits as the days go by.

Welcome back. I missed my counter part.....

The word "invisible" is almost always exchanged with the word "Mystery" in my mind. So we have being, the Manifest, and we have non-being, the Mystery.

5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok its quale.

We can know the Manifest - we cannot 'know' the Mystery. (But we can experience the Mystery.)

6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe its boundary.

We experience the Mystery of Tao(Invisible) and the Manifest of Tao(Visible).

Yes, I'll add this part to my mental collection...

I don't have to deal with the thought that something was created from nothing as it is my understanding and belief that everything that is, is, always has been, and always will be.

Ah, the eastern classic text was written with metaphors. The classic text, sometimes, does not say what it means nor meant what it says.

"Everything" simply changes and transmutes from 'no-thing' to 'thing' and back to 'no-thing'.

Yes, westerners do spell things precisely as what was in their thoughts.

I wonder if that last word, "nothingness", is valid. Being is born from non-being, (Mystery, potential) not nothingness.

天下萬物生於有，有生於無

It is matter of semantics, translation and interpretation.

This was all started with the characters of 無(wu2) and 有(you3).

A direct translation for an ordinary Chinese language:

無(wu2): none; nothingness

有(you3): to have; having

Western translation:

無(wu2): non-being; non-exist

有(you3): being; exist

By the ordinary Chinese definition, 無(wu2) doesn't say that something does not exist but only implies that something does not exist.

Same thing goes to 有(you3), in order to have something to be existed, we must to have something that is tangible.

天下萬物生於有，有生於無

Under heaven, all things are engendered from 有(you3), and 有(you3) was engendered from 無(wu2).

In the Tao Te Ching, LaoTze used these two terms in his own peculiar way. Thus by his definition:

無(wu2) is something that exists, but invisible, with a high potential power to create. Since there were no other characters that he can use, therefore he used this character and created his own definition.

有生於無

Being was engendered from nothingness.

That's what it says exactly in the esoteric classic text. The next thing is a matter of understand and interpretation.

The interpretation would be:

The manifested Tao came from his invisible state that has a high potential power to create.

To understand the Tao Te Ching was not as easy as it seems. To interpret the true meaning of the Tao Te Ching is not by semantics of the translation of another language alone.

If people understand and interpreted Chapter 1 properly, then it would make it easier to understand the rest of the chapters.

This is the consensus by the knowledgeable native scholars for the interpretation of Chapter 1 .

1. Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.

2. A name that can be named is not an eternal name.

3. Invisible was the name given to Tao at the origin of heaven and earth.

4. Visible was the name given to Tao as the mother of all things.

5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok its quale.

6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe its boundary.

7. These two come from one origin but differ in name,

8. Both are regarded as fathomless; the most mysterious of the mysterious;

9. The gate of all changes.

PS...

Invisible and visible are the closest English words that I can come across for the characters of 無(wu2) and 有(you3) to transmit the theme of this chapter.

Choice of dyad for 有(you3)/無(wu2): being/non-being

Non-being seems it doesn't have the meaning which implies that something exists but invisible. It seems it carries the thought that nothing was existed at all.

"I agree since you're not following what people are saying. But I am not trying to correct your Chinese; so your point is not really relevant."

I am following what people are saying and also what the Tao Ta Ching, the classic text, was saying otherwise.

Second: I speak for the english language as my first language; you clearly cannot articulate it yet despite your repeated attempts to translates in a few nonsensical phrases.

I speak for the Chinese language as my first language. I can see that we are having a communication problem here already....

PS...

@Stigweard, when are we going to have that chess game that you mentioned sometime age.....???

Aww crap here we go

 

ChiDragon we ALL interpret Laozi according to our own world view ... it's unavoidable. I do it, James Legge did it, Suzuki did it and every fool who tries to render a Chinese character into English will do it.

 

Of course you believe you are correct, thats fine and dandy. I grant you the right to question and challenge my translation and interpretation anyway you wish, and I most certainly reserve the right to question and challenge yours.

 

So please take any criticisms as just the way things are when you post here at TaoBums.

 

Stigweard...

I never did say that I wouldn't take any criticisms or challenges. Of course, they are welcome as long they are legitimate and logical. However, it would be utterly impossible for me to respond if it was too much off basis. I am not claiming that I am right nor have full authority on the subject matter. Anyone can ignore my translation is one's choice. But personal attacks, it is most lightly cannot be tolerated. I am just saying this, it was not pointing at anyone.