[TTC Study] Chapter 2 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Aaron]

I was thinking posting the next chapter two days after the previous one, might be a good way to go. It will allow the discussion of the previous chapter to continue, but also allow us to explore the next chapter with the previous still in context. We don't have to do it that way, but I thought it might be nice. I am not going to remove myself from the forum, but I would much rather read the various inputs of other people regarding these chapters. I will refrain from giving commentary on my own views of the chapter's meaning, unless I feel the necessity.

 

Chapter Two (Translated by John C. H. Wu)

 

When all the world recognises beauty as beauty,

this in itself is ugliness.

When all the world recognises good as good, this in

itself is evil.

 

Indeed, the hidden and the manifest give birth

to each other.

Difficult and easy complement each other.

Long and short exhibit each other.

High and low set measure to each other.

Voice and sound harmonize each other.

Back and front follow each other.

 

Therefore, the Sage manages his affairs without ado,

And spreads his teaching without talking.

He denies nothing to the teeming things.

He rears them, but lays no claim to them.

He does his work, but sets no store by it.

He accomplishes his task, but does not dwell upon it.

 

And yet it is just because he does not dwell on it

That nobody can ever take it away from him.

 

-------------

 

Chapter Two (Translated by Gia-fu Feng and Jane English)

 

Under heaven all can see beauty as beauty only because there is ugliness.

All can know good as good only because there is evil.

Therefore having and not having arise together.

Difficult and easy complement each other.

Long and short contrast each other:

High and low rest upon each other;

Voice and sound harmonize each other;

Front and back follow one another.

 

Therefore the sage goes about doing nothing, teaching no-talking.

The ten thousand things rise and fall without cease,

Creating, yet not.

Working, yet not taking credit.

Work is done, then forgotten.

Therefore it lasts forever.

 

----------------

 

 

I look forward to hearing people's input.

 

Aaron

Edited November 29, 2010 by Twinner

[Everything]

My interpretation:

 

It is said that even the worst of all, the most evil men, have good intentions. Thus wise men stay open to all perspectives at all times and can only be stable enough once his experience has grown his perspective/believes to make it more advantageous and prosperous. You can never get the one best truth unless you find the moment of time itself. So giving that up, you must live in order to find the best truth by living in the present only. Not dwelling on the past or future without a present mindedness and awareness of doing so.

 

When you dwell, you loose everything, because you loose your very essence. Like all the great kings who dwell have been thrown from their thrown only to be replaced by a common soldier who speaks less. He who wins the crowd with his deeds, wins the heart of the people. He can be respected enough to spread his teachings upon the entire kingdom, which is a spirit-like thing on it self. No body can ever take it away from him.

Edited November 29, 2010 by Everything

[Trunk]

Can't say I know what it all means,

but it's strikingly beautiful...

which translation are you using?

[Everything]

Can't say I know what it all means,

but it's strikingly beautiful...

which translation are you using?

I based that interpretation on the translation by John C. H. Wu as posted by Twinner. Should have quoted.

I thought we were only discussing the translation posted by Twinner.

[Marblehead]

Hi Aaron,

 

Now, this chapter, I like John Wu's translation very much.

 

I especially like his word selection of this line: And spreads his teaching without talking.

 

Teaching by example. What better way? Especially regarding the concept of living virtuously?

 

Yes, dualities. They exist in the mind of man. Just the simple act of defining beauty we have created (in our mind) ugly. Same with all dualities.

 

But our mind works according to the concept of dualities. Even something as simple as 'hot & cold', 'wet and dry'.

 

It is difficult, if not impossible, to interact with our environment and others without the concept of dualities. In my garden there is a difference between a weed and a flower.

 

Note also that the chapter does not say that the Sage ignores the dualities of life. He just doesn't linger on the differences.

 

 

You did good, I think, by starting a new chapter. Thanks. Yes, we can continue discussion Chapter 1 (or any of the previous chapters) if there is anything that anyone still wishes to speak to while discussing the current chapter.

[Alfred E]

I was thinking posting the next chapter two days after the previous one, might be a good way to go. It will allow the discussion of the previous chapter to continue, but also allow us to explore the next chapter with the previous still in context. We don't have to do it that way, but I thought it might be nice. I am not going to remove myself from the forum, but I would much rather read the various inputs of other people regarding these chapters. I will refrain from giving commentary on my own views of the chapter's meaning, unless I feel the necessity.

 

Chapter Two (Translated by John C. H. Wu)

 

When all the world recognises beauty as beauty,

this in itself is ugliness.

When all the world recognises good as good, this in

itself is evil.

 

Indeed, the hidden and the manifest give birth

to each other.

Difficult and easy complement each other.

Long and short exhibit each other.

High and low set measure to each other.

Voice and sound harmonize each other.

Back and front follow each other.

 

Therefore, the Sage manages his affairs without ado,

And spreads his teaching without talking.

He denies nothing to the teeming things.

He rears them, but lays no claim to them.

He does his work, but sets no store by it.

He accomplishes his task, but does not dwell upon it.

 

And yet it is just because he does not dwell on it

That nobody can ever take it away from him.

 

-------------

 

Chapter Two (Translated by Gia-fu Feng and Jane English)

 

Under heaven all can see beauty as beauty only because there is ugliness.

All can know good as good only because there is evil.

Therefore having and not having arise together.

Difficult and easy complement each other.

Long and short contrast each other:

High and low rest upon each other;

Voice and sound harmonize each other;

Front and back follow one another.

 

Therefore the sage goes about doing nothing, teaching no-talking.

The ten thousand things rise and fall without cease,

Creating, yet not.

Working, yet not taking credit.

Work is done, then forgotten.

Therefore it lasts forever.

 

Aaron

 

O-O - Rene caught me in a Boo-Boo... I was sleepy <-(excuse- Actually I was test tasting my latest batch of blueberry wine ) and posted the first 3 chapters of TTC... in my book Translated by D.C. Lau (1963) if anyone want's to know how to make wine - e-mail or PM me- My grandfather taught me how to do it when I was about 10 years old.(It can be ready for taste test by Christmas)

 

Well - at least I ain't got to do it again - So- Here's Chapter 2

 

4 The whole world recognizes the beautiful as the beautiful, yet this is only the ugly; the whole world recognizes the good as the good, yet this is only the bad.

 

5.Thus Something and Nothing produce each other;

The difficult and the easy compliment each other;

The long and the short off-set each other;

The high and the low incline toward each other;

Note and sound harmonize with each other;

Before and after follow each other.

 

6.Therefore the sage keeps to the deed that consists in taking no action and practices the teaching that uses no words.

 

7. The myrad creatures rise from it yet it claims no authority;

It gives life yet claims no possesion;

It benefits them yet enacts no gratitude;

It accomplishes its task yet lays claim to no merit.

 

7a. It is because it lays claim to no merit

Thus its merit never deserves it.

[manitou]

This chapter is referred to in another translation as "The Rise of Relative Opposites". How often I've noticed that things in life are exactly opposite of what they first appear. And how often I've noticed that my opinions, as one who values and tries to live the Tao, are often exactly opposite of prevailing conventional wisdom.

Therefore the Sage, knowing that everything is relative to the point of view and the vision of the beholder, manages the affairs without action - an allusion to Wu-Wei. Because nothing is absolute - everything is relative to the beholder - the Sage knows by allowing life to happen around him that things are unfolding as they are; when so motivated, the Sage will bend the light (or tweak a dynamic in its budding phase because he sees how the outcome is going to play out; he sees a higher outcome that can result from the smallest tweak). The shaman stands in this dynamic as well (referring to 4th cycle or new age shamans, as Castaneda or don Juan Mateus would call them).

The beginning words of this chapter allude to a subject we've covered many times on this forum, non-judgment.

Lin Yutang puts it slightly differently, for purposes of triangulation:

 

"When the people of the Earth all know beauty as beauty,

There arises (the recognition of) ugliness.

When the people of the Earth all know the good as good,

There arises (the recognition of) evil."

 

I think this goes directly to non-judgment. Don't judge someone to be ugly. Don't judge a situation to be ugly. This is the hardest thing to do in the world....I go into a supermarket (particularly here in Ohio) and I'm surrounded by hoardes of very large people. If one pops around a corner and is suddenly standing in my aisle, my first natural thought is "fat guy". I can't help it. They're really fat here. Period. But I've taken to walking through the store and avoiding eye contact with others for this very purpose. It's not that I don't see them...it's just that I'm using my peripheral vision. If someone wishes to acknowledge me, then great, and I respond....but am I making any sense at all here? I'm not trying to NOT look at fluffy people, I'm trying to get my mind to Stop Labeling Them As Fluffy. This is all so very nuanced it's really difficult to communicate stuff like this.

Or...I am surrounded by Tea Baggers here in these parts. This is just plain effing ugly as far as I'm concerned. On any given day I can get a good head of steam going just by stopping in at Tim Horton's for a cup of coffee; I'm in the midst of a WASP hive. I can choose to walk around like this all day, or I can get a handle on it and realize that Those People Are Me. And I am most comfortable by finding a way to love them. Not like them, but love them. The way I've found to 'love them' is to make sure our table is cleaned off and the chairs pushed in and the napkin holder right in the middle of the table before we leave. It's not much, but it's enough to keep my heart on the gentler side.

So I sway between Sage and Sanctimonious A-hole on any given day. Whatever the powers that be had a fine laugh when we found ourselves living here 4 years ago.

[Marblehead]

Yeah, I agree that this chapter does speak to the concept of non-judgement. We normally judge according to what effects us the most. A person who is physically ugly. We judge the entire person on only the external attributes. We have installed a barrier that will prevent us from ever seeing a wonderful, kind and loving person that resides in side this external shell.

 

This is also valid when we break something down into its component parts. When we are done greaking it down all we have is parts and the original thing no longer exists.

[themaninthesuit]

Hey guys i think you all did a good job with the analysis of chapter 2. And excellent i am glad to see there is a section for this now, thanks twinner. I really dont have anything to add after marblehead and manitous well worded responses. But i think parts of chapter 2 touch on everything is not as superficial as you see it. Or there is a deeper level of connectedness to everything.

[Aaron]

Hello folks,

 

I had some ideas regarding chapter two. I've always thought that this chapter isn't necessarily about non-judgement so much as understanding the nature of absolutes, that when one begins to apply absolutes, they deny the true nature that exists within everything. An example would be that every truth holds within it a small lie, or that, what one person might consider a "flawless" diamond, may still seem flawed to someone else. Nothing is completely good, nor completely bad, rather everything complements each other. On another level I think this also applies to morality as a whole, that we should never just accept something as being good, just because everyone else does, but rather try to view it objectively.

 

The last two lines are the most important to me, because they express the entire meaning of this chapter in just two lines, that if you do not value something, no one can ever take it away from you, because you never really own it in the first place.

 

Aaron

Edited November 29, 2010 by Twinner

[Apech]

Hello folks,

 

I had some ideas regarding chapter two. I've always thought that this chapter isn't necessarily about non-judgement so much as understanding the nature of absolutes, that when one begins to apply absolutes, they deny the true nature that exists within everything. An example would be that every truth holds within it a small lie, or that, what one person might consider a "flawless" diamond, may still seem flawed to someone else. Nothing is completely good, nor completely bad, rather everything complements each other. On another level I think this also applies to morality as a whole, that we should never just accept something as being good, just because everyone else does, but rather try to view it objectively.

 

The last two lines are the most important to me, because they express the entire meaning of this chapter in just two lines, that if you do not value something, no one can ever take it away from you, because you never really own it in the first place.

 

Aaron

 

In the real world the flawless diamond like the perfect circle does not and cannot exist. The Tao is a real Tao not an abstract Tao - while being perfectly Tao it not perfect-Tao which would be an abstraction.

 

Despite this we all know what a perfect circle is. We do geometry based on it ... even though such a thing cannot be ever drawn in the real world.

[Aaron]

In the real world the flawless diamond like the perfect circle does not and cannot exist. The Tao is a real Tao not an abstract Tao - while being perfectly Tao it not perfect-Tao which would be an abstraction.

 

Despite this we all know what a perfect circle is. We do geometry based on it ... even though such a thing cannot be ever drawn in the real world.

 

Hello Apech,

 

I think you're missing the point and in a way drawing an absolute. You see the diamond as flawed, when in fact it is flawless. Just as the person who sees the diamond as flawless, doesn't realize it is flawed. Long and short, high and low, you can't have one without the other. This isn't so important really and in my opinion it's not meant to be dwelled on, the important thing is not to value the diamond, that way you wont desire to own it and it can never be stolen from you.

 

Also the world is abstract, we just view reality in it, or perhaps the world is reality and we decide to make it abstract? The question of the chicken and the egg comes to mind. Just kidding.

 

What's important to remember is that we don't have to be right, right happens whether we believe it to be or not. If we can just accept that it's a diamond as its intended to be then there can be no argument.

 

Aaron

 

edit- Changed a statement and tried to make my comments less harsh. I'm not trying to instruct, just express my opinion.

Edited November 30, 2010 by Twinner

[rene]

Hey guys i think you all did a good job with the analysis of chapter 2. And excellent i am glad to see there is a section for this now, thanks twinner. I really dont have anything to add after marblehead and manitous well worded responses. But i think parts of chapter 2 touch on everything is not as superficial as you see it. Or there is a deeper level of connectedness to everything.

 

Mike, hi I think it's in there too. Nice to see you in here.

[rene]

... You can never get the one best truth unless you find the moment of time itself. So giving that up, you must live in order to find the best truth by living in the present only. Not dwelling on the past or future without a present mindedness and awareness of doing so. ...

Everything, that is really nice.

[rene]

 

6.Therefore the sage keeps to the deed that consists in taking no action and practices the teaching that uses no words.

 

7. The myrad creatures rise from it yet it claims no authority;

It gives life yet claims no possesion;

It benefits them yet enacts no gratitude;

It accomplishes its task yet lays claim to no merit.

 

7a. It is because it lays claim to no merit

Thus its merit never deserves it.

 

Alfred - thanks for posting the Lau translation.

 

Hey - look at the difference in the lines:

 

Lau:

6.Therefore the sage keeps to the deed that consists in taking no action and practices the teaching that uses no words.

 

7. The myrad creatures rise from it yet it claims no authority;

It gives life yet claims no possesion;

It benefits them yet enacts no gratitude;

It accomplishes its task yet lays claim to no merit.

 

7a. It is because it lays claim to no merit

Thus its merit never deserves it.

 

What is the "it" here? the Sage's teaching?

 

****

 

Here's the same lines in the Wu translation posted by Twinner:

 

Therefore, the Sage manages his affairs without ado,

And spreads his teaching without talking.

He denies nothing to the teeming things.

He rears them, but lays no claim to them.

He does his work, but sets no store by it.

He accomplishes his task, but does not dwell upon it.

 

Definately the Sage is present in those lines..

 

*****

Here's the Feng/English:

 

Therefore the sage goes about doing nothing, teaching no-talking.

The ten thousand things rise and fall without cease,

Creating, yet not.

Working, yet not taking credit.

Work is done, then forgotten.

Therefore it lasts forever.

 

Hmmm. In the F/E version - the 'ten thousand things' seem to do all the rest of those things without the sage's teaching or involvment.

 

Do you guys see that? Or have I just been into Alfred's wine again?

 

Maybe that's why I like the Feng rendition so much: it dont take humans to manage or teach nature to do what it does.

 

What say you? Anyone?

[Aaron]

Alfred - thanks for posting the Lau translation.

 

Hey - look at the difference in the lines:

 

Lau:

6.Therefore the sage keeps to the deed that consists in taking no action and practices the teaching that uses no words.

 

7. The myrad creatures rise from it yet it claims no authority;

It gives life yet claims no possesion;

It benefits them yet enacts no gratitude;

It accomplishes its task yet lays claim to no merit.

 

7a. It is because it lays claim to no merit

Thus its merit never deserves it.

 

What is the "it" here? the Sage's teaching?

 

****

 

Here's the same lines in the Wu translation posted by Twinner:

 

Therefore, the Sage manages his affairs without ado,

And spreads his teaching without talking.

He denies nothing to the teeming things.

He rears them, but lays no claim to them.

He does his work, but sets no store by it.

He accomplishes his task, but does not dwell upon it.

 

Definately the Sage is present in those lines..

 

*****

Here's the Feng/English:

 

Therefore the sage goes about doing nothing, teaching no-talking.

The ten thousand things rise and fall without cease,

Creating, yet not.

Working, yet not taking credit.

Work is done, then forgotten.

Therefore it lasts forever.

 

Hmmm. In the F/E version - the 'ten thousand things' seem to do all the rest of those things without the sage's teaching or involvment.

 

Do you guys see that? Or have I just been into Alfred's wine again?

 

Maybe that's why I like the Feng rendition so much: it dont take humans to manage or teach nature to do what it does.

 

What say you? Anyone?

 

 

Hello Rene,

 

I see it... very interesting. I might have to take a closer look at other translations and see what they came up with. Very different ideas going on here. I kind of like Feng's translation more than Wu's in this instance, since it seems more in line with what I think is being espoused in the Tao Teh Ching.

 

Aaron

[Aaron]

Hello Rene,

 

For quick contrast, I went through and found some other translations for those lines, here they are.

 

 

(Tr. Sanderson Beck)

 

Therefore the wise manage affairs without interfering

and teach beyond the words.

 

All things rise, and they do not turn away from them.

They give them life, but do not take possession of them.

They act, but do not rely on their own ability.

They accomplish, but claim no credit.

 

 

(Tr. C. Gansen)

 

The truly wise accept this,

and they work diligently

without allegiance to words.

They teach by doing, not by saying;

are genuinely helpful, not discriminating;

are positive, not possessive.

They do not proclaim their accomplishments...

 

(tr. Robert Henricks)

 

10. Therefore the Sage dwells in nonactive affairs and practices the wordless teaching.

11. The ten thousand things arise, but he doesn't begin them;

12. He acts on their behalf, but he doesn't make them dependent;

13. He accomplishes his tasks, but he doesn't dwell on them;

 

(tr. Lin Yutang)

 

Therefore the Sage:

Manages affairs without action;

Preaches the doctrine without words;

All things take their rise, but he does not turn away from them;

He gives them life, but does not take possession of them;

He acts, but does not appropriate;

Accomplishes, but claims no credit.

[Aaron]

I know I said I liked Feng better, but I think Wu might have been more in line with what most people translated these lines as. I kind of get the feeling that the Sage in this instance is being referred to as a farmer and it's talking about raising a crop... just the general vibe I get.

 

Aaron

[Marblehead]

Hi Rene,

 

Do you guys see that? Or have I just been into Alfred's wine again?

 

Henricks' translation supports Wu's translation whereas Wang's translation supports the E/F translation.

 

I do like this thought of yours though: it dont take humans to manage or teach nature to do what it does.

 

I do agree that human standards are artificial whereas the standards of nature stand without defining or limiting.

 

But it is nice to know that the Sasge understnads this.

Edited November 30, 2010 by Marblehead

[dawei]

Maybe that's why I like the Feng rendition so much: it dont take humans to manage or teach nature to do what it does.

 

What say you? Anyone?

Well, Rene beat me to the punch I wanted to take at this chapter

 

While there are some minor textual differences to the older versions which might change a word here or there, there are two places where a few characters appear to be added. Twinner, realize by quoting Henricks you are showing his translation of the older manuscript. Note he is missing a block of text which most translate as the 'claiming credit' line. This goes between his lines 12 and 13.

 

What is also missing by only quoting Hendricks' translation is that he explains in his commentary notes that while he feels the subject of line 10 (the sage) shifts to the ten thousands in line 11 but then shifts back to the sage. He acknowledges that strictly speaking, it should remain on the ten thousand things, in which case he offers an alternate ending in his notes:

 

[Tr. Hendricks]

12. He acts on their behalf, but he doesn't make them dependent;

13. He accomplishes his tasks, but he doesn't dwell on them;

14. It is because he does not dwell on them, that they therefore do not leave him. (you did not post this ending)

 

[Tr. Hendricks in notes]

12. They act but he doesn't make them dependent;

13. They accomplish their tasks, but he doesn't dwell on them;

 

In this way, he keeps the focus on the ten thousand but still let's the sage be reflected as to his role.

 

One of my favor translator of chinese texts (various philosophical writings and a lot of poetry) is David Hinton and he clearly mixes the older manuscript words where appropriate and is one of the few to shift from the sage to the ten thousand but end it with a personal note:

 

[Tr. Hinton]

That's why the sage abides in the realm of nothing's own doing

Living out that wordless teaching.

The ten thousand things arise without beginning there;

abide without waiting there;

come to perfection without dwelling there.

Without dwelling there: That's the one way

you'll never lose it.

 

 

This chapter is a linked chapter with parts of the ending also in chapters 10,51, and 77.

Edited November 30, 2010 by dawei

[Aaron]

Hi Dawei,

 

I left out that last line from all the translations... I didn't want to confuse people. Apparently it had the opposite effect. Anyways thanks for your input... so is it about farming or running a farm or is this sage wandering around the wilderness perpetuating nature?

 

Aaron

[manitou]

You can never get the one best truth unless you find the moment of time itself.

 

 

This is a remarkable statement IMO and goes directly to the wu-wei practice of Do Nothing and wait until the situation comes to you.

[manitou]

I've always thought that this chapter isn't necessarily about non-judgement so much as understanding the nature of absolutes, that when one begins to apply absolutes, they deny the true nature that exists within everything. /quote]

 

It's almost a little shamanic, like separate realities. Where's the line between difficult and easy? It's relative to you or me. Where's the dividing point between high and low? Long and short? Seems like we do live in separate realities where my perception will always differ from the perception of another. If we're sitting on a couch 3 feet apart and watching, say, the Kardashian girls - they will look one way to me, but from where you're sitting they would be a little broader or narrower than what I perceive. But you will be convinced that you know what they look like, and so would I. It's almost like our separate realities are like a rubber band that's part of a larger ball of rubber bands. And we have community realities - and national 'realities'. The national separate reality of the U.S. is certainly different than the national separate reality of, say, Haiti. The point is that there's no absolutes at all perceivable to us, at least on this physical level. It all interdepends. Wow. When you really get to thinking about it, Wow.

[Marblehead]

... there's no absolutes at all ...

 

Need you say more?

[Apech]

Hello Apech,

 

I think you're missing the point and in a way drawing an absolute. You see the diamond as flawed, when in fact it is flawless. Just as the person who sees the diamond as flawless, doesn't realize it is flawed. Long and short, high and low, you can't have one without the other. This isn't so important really and in my opinion it's not meant to be dwelled on, the important thing is not to value the diamond, that way you wont desire to own it and it can never be stolen from you.

 

Also the world is abstract, we just view reality in it, or perhaps the world is reality and we decide to make it abstract? The question of the chicken and the egg comes to mind. Just kidding.

 

What's important to remember is that we don't have to be right, right happens whether we believe it to be or not. If we can just accept that it's a diamond as its intended to be then there can be no argument.

 

Aaron

 

edit- Changed a statement and tried to make my comments less harsh. I'm not trying to instruct, just express my opinion.

 

Aaron,

 

You can be as harsh as you like - I won't be offended. Please express yourself freely I enjoy the debate.

 

Maybe I didn't make my point properly. I think these relative judgments are important because this is what we tend to do all the time. In the West for centuries people (poets and philosophers) have been talking about beauty, goodness and truth. This gives rise to the idea that there is perfect beauty, perfect goodness and perfect truth. If one is religious then these qualities are often assigned to God. Keats in his Ode to Grecian Urn said "Beauty is truth, truth beauty," - that is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know." So there is a kind of elegant harmony in form which is 'true' and 'beautiful' - as if there is some essence in the thing that makes it so.

 

Lao Tzu says "Once all under Heaven knew beauty as "beauty"; at that moment "ugliness" was already there" (Richard John Lynn trans.)

 

What I take from this is that the idea of the perfect diamond (or anything) is an abstraction while the Tao is not an abstract. Tao follows its own nature (or some say Tao follows nature) so Tao is natural and the sage follows this by not using judgments ... or "Therefore the Sage [sheng] tends to matters without conscious effort" (same trans.).

 

If you think the world is abstract then you are starting to sound a little Buddhist. I tend to use the Taoist version - to paraphrase : man follows earth, earth follows heaven, heaven follows Tao and Tao follows its own nature [ziran]. Nothing abstract about that.