[TTC Study] Chapter 4 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Marblehead]

Yeah, sounds like you have the understanding you want to have. That's good.

 

I have always associated the Spirit of the Valley with Yin, but that's me.

 

Yes, Chuang Tzu spoke of the sounds of the trees. What makes these sounds? You say Spirit, I say Tzujan.

 

And no, I have no problem with your "bodyless Tao" term. But let's be careful so that we don't reify Tao. (But then, if one is a Religious Taoist it is okay to do that. Hehehe.)

[dynamictao]

 

This is my new interpretation (in TTC: An Ultimate Translation):

 

道沖，而用之又弗盈也。

 

Tao pours down upon us; however,

However, when received and used, it does not brim over.[1]

 

Tao never become full.

[1] The word 冲 means showering with water as in making tea, etc. Tao shows down on us, but will not make us (as vessels of Tao) full. When a vessel is full, it is no longer useful as a vessel.

Tao can be received and used without overflowing.

That is the nature of Tao - we shall never feel fed up and shall never stop seeing its usefulness.

We shall not need to empty our cup, because we never feel full.

[Marblehead]

We shall not need to empty our cup, because we never feel full.

Okay. That one is clarified for me.

[lienshan]

If Tao is applied to the bathwater there will be no overflowing.

The laughing sound of an abyss started the lineage of the ten thousand things.

It moderates its cheerful talk.

It releases its fragrance.

It complements its brightness.

It equalizes its dust.

The laughing sound of the depth started someones existence.

I do not know whose child it is; the ancestor of the physical Di?

 

 

The spirit of the Mawangdui chapter four is hidden in the line 5

 

The line refers to the Ta Yi Sheng Shui term 神明 spirit and light

Light is a litteral translation and the scholars disagree with how to read the term?

Mind is my choice, but it's impossible to say what's complementary with a spirit?

[Marblehead]

The lauhging flower down yonder in the vally taking its sustenance from bath water. Got it!

[dawei]

The line refers to the Ta Yi Sheng Shui term 神明 spirit and light

Light is a litteral translation and the scholars disagree with how to read the term?

Mind is my choice, but it's impossible to say what's complementary with a spirit?

 

I tend to agree with Spirit and Light.

 

See Yong-yun Lee's paper and comments on 神明

http://cccp.uchicago.edu/archive/2010Creel-LucePaleographyWorkshop/Yong-yun%20Lee%20-%20on%20Taiyi%20sheng%20shui%20Cosmology.pdf

[lienshan]

I tend to agree with Spirit and Light.

 

See Yong-yun Lee's paper and comments on 神明

http://cccp.uchicago.edu/archive/2010Creel-LucePaleographyWorkshop/Yong-yun%20Lee%20-%20on%20Taiyi%20sheng%20shui%20Cosmology.pdf

 

Laozi's take on 明 (light) was 光 (brightness) that'll say something that can be seen

 

It moderates its cheerful talk. (something that can be heard) (the echoes of the wind from the valley)

It releases its fragrance. (something tat can be smelled) (like e.g. sulfur springs in the valley)

It complements its brightness. (something that can be seen) (the physical sides of the valley)

It equalizes its dust. (something that can be felt) (the quakes forming the valley)

 

The last one refers to Shuo Gua §5 帝出乎震 Di comes forth in Zhen

Zhen is the trigram today known as Thunder but the character does actually mean Quake

Kan 坎 is today known as Water but the character does actually mean Pit / Hole / "valley"

 

The laughing sound of the depth started someones existence.

I do not know it; whose child is the ancestor of the physical Di?

 

誰之子 means Who is the child?

誰之子也 means Whose child is it?

 

象 means the outward appearance or expression of anything - especially weather, heavenly bodies, etc.

I've have chosen the word physical in my reading of the term 象帝

but I see the connection between the bodyless Tao in line 1 and Di with a heavenly body in the last line!

Edited May 30, 2013 by lienshan

[ChiDragon]

誰之子 means Who is the child?

誰之子也 means Whose child is it?

Correction:

誰之子 means Whose child is it?

誰之子也 means Whose child is it then?

[Marblehead]

Whose child is it?

 

 

 

I don't know whose child it is.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I found something in the Chuang Tzu which seemed to support my perception of the opening lines of DDJ4:

 

My translation of DDJ4:

 

道沖 而用之: Dao is that in which all is immersed, thereby it is used

有弗盈也: and so is not overfilled

瀟呵: [lol, (free laughter) and/or] spontaneously correcting and teaching

始萬物之宗: the first ancestor of the the 10,000 things

 

 

from Chuang Tzu, book VI, ch. 11 (Legge trans.):

 

Tsze-kung rejoined, 'I venture to ask the method which you pursue;' and Confucius said, 'Fishes breed and grow in the water; man develops in the Tâo. Growing in the water, the fishes cleave the pools, and their nourishment is supplied to them. Developing in the Tâo, men do nothing, and the enjoyment of their life is secured. Hence it is said, "Fishes forget one another in the rivers and lakes; men forget one another in the arts of the Tâo."'

 

 

So, simply by being immersed in the Dao, it is used and the people are nourshed by it. The rest of the chapter (DDJ4) shows the leveling effect of Dao, ie., not being "overfull." This is the way of Wu Wei by which Dao is applied.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Harmonious Emptiness

[Harmonious Emptiness]

As for the Child, I believe the child is DE. 瀟呵 and 湛呵 are descriptive of the mysterious, which I've found to be consistent with Miao as referring to De. Also, De can be described as the "象 manifest form" and "Child" of Dao.

 

More on this connection (selon moi) can be read here.

Edited May 30, 2013 by Harmonious Emptiness

[ChiDragon]

I don't know whose child it is.

 

吾不知 誰之子: I don't know whose child it is.

 

 

[lienshan]

I don't know whose child it is.

 

Oh Dear, you have been listening too much to Chidragon's modern newspaper chinese

 

The interrogative 誰 who / whose did in pre-Qin classical chinese always preceed the verb!

The verb of your sentence is 知 to know yet the order of his characters are 吾不知誰之子

 

The order of the ancient Mawangdui characters are 吾不知其 , 誰之子也象帝之先

 

I don't know him. Whose child is the ancestor of the physical Di?

The interrogative 誰 was only used in connection with human beings so put in my own words:

I don't know the author. Who invented the Shuo Gua nonsense, that "Di comes forth in Zhen"?

[Marblehead]

Well, I have to pay attention to you guys. I do pick up little tidbits I had never considered on occasion. Y'all are in an area where I cannot participate except for making a comment now and then.

 

Yes, I am sure that the placement of characters in the Chinese language play a large part in how the characters are to be read.

 

So anyhow, I know not whose child it is.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Oh Dear, you have been listening too much to Chidragon's modern newspaper chinese

 

The interrogative 誰 who / whose did in pre-Qin classical chinese always preceed the verb!

The verb of your sentence is 知 to know yet the order of his characters are 吾不知誰之子

 

吾不知其 , 誰之子也象帝之先

 

sure it's not "who is the child?"? as in a sort of exclamatory statement, such as with 瀟呵 and 湛呵 [for MH, 呵 basically says "lol" here, lol] "瀟呵so spontaneous!" "湛呵so deep!"

 

so then after describing this power of Dao (which I mentioned would appear to be further description of DE), he asks in further awe "who is this child? (where did it come from?!)" then perhaps responds "the image of the first ruling principle (Divine Lord)." De is the child of Dao, the chapter describes the power of De acting upon the myriad things to "set them right" as the character 德De shows walking with virtue or 彳walking with 直erect/straight 心heart.

 

誰之子也象帝之先

Who is this child? The image of the first ruling principle.

[ChiDragon]

Well, I have to pay attention to you guys. I do pick up little tidbits I had never considered on occasion. Y'all are in an area where I cannot participate except for making a comment now and then.

 

Yes, I am sure that the placement of characters in the Chinese language play a large part in how the characters are to be read.

 

So anyhow, I know not whose child it is.

 

Yes, but you knew more than those who do not, even, read the modern Chinese newspaper......

Edited May 31, 2013 by ChiDragon

[lienshan]

瀟呵: [lol, (free laughter) and/or] spontaneously correcting and teaching

始萬物之宗: the first ancestor of the the 10,000 Things

 

始 to begin / the first ... the Mawangdui A version

佁 ????? .................... the Mawangdui B version

似 to seem ................. the Received versions

 

Both the Mawangdui A version and the Received versions are scolarly editted versions with a lot of changed characters expressing the editors interpretation/misinterpretation of the original text written in the pre-Qin classical chinese language. The outdated ancient character 佁 is probably the original character. What 佁 meant is indicated by the substitutional character in the chapter 52:

 

殆 to endanger / dangerous ... both in the Mawangdui A version and in the Received versions! ... That'll say:

 

The laughing sound of an abyss endangers the lineage of the Ten Thousand Things.

The laughing sound of the depth endangers someones existence.

 

The above reading of the character supports the connection between this chapter 4 and the trigram Water/Abyss

because the trigram is also named The Dangerous!

[lienshan]

such as with 瀟呵 and 湛呵 [for MH, 呵 basically says "lol" here, lol] "瀟呵so spontaneous!" "湛呵so deep!"

 

http://www2.unipr.it/~deyoung/I_Ching_Wilhelm_Translation.html#51 hexagram 51 Zhen

 

The Judgement:

 

SHOCK brings success.

Shock comes-oh, oh!

Laughing words -ha, ha!

The shock terrifies for a hundred miles,

And he does not let fall the sacrificial spoon and chalice.

 

Nine at the beginning means:

Shock comes-oh, oh!

Then follow laughing words-ha, ha!

Good fortune

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

瀟呵: [lol, (free laughter) and/or] spontaneously correcting and teaching

 

This I found interesting:

 

 

瀟呵 = sound of rain + laughter/scolding

 

 

瀟灑 = sound of rain + sprinkle, spray

瀟灑 [xiao1sa3], adj., (1) free, emancipated, unhampered by conventions; (2) (person, writing) spirited, wayward, forthright; (3) (character) pure, noble

[110576_1494798793]

05 挫其銳,

cuò qí ruì,

Putting the clever back in their place

 

 

06 解其紛,

jiě qí fēn,

Uncomplicating the confused

 

07 和其光,

hé qí guāng,

Bringing harmony to the overzealous

 

 

08 同其塵。

tóng qí chén。

Grounding them and reconnecting them to the earth

 

This is great! It's just how I see this part of chapter 4.

 

I'm having a bit of a muck around with my own 'translation', more of a paraphrase, really. I've come up with -

 

The Dao is like an empty bowl,

Yet it may be drawn from without needing to be filled.

It is as bottomless as an abyss,

The source of all things.

It dulls the sharp,

Separates the knotted,

Shades the bright,

Conforms the dust.

So evident,

Yet so hidden.

Ever present and eternal,

It is the child of none,

The predecessor of all.

 

I've written lines 5 to 8 as if they would apply to people, only not as overtly as Harmonious Emptiness.

 

The sharp are the sharp witted, those that rely on their wits to get their own way.

The knotted are those that are followers who can't think for themselves; the herd-like 'sheeple'.

The bright are those with book-smarts but not necessarily life-smarts.

The dust are like the followers of all the supernatural belief systems, bringing them back to a belief in the natural order.

[dawei]

@Zhe: Nice translation. I like it.

 

The second line makes me think about the recent post by D.B. on perpetual potential; that potential is all there was in the beginning and all there is... it rings of the meaning here: Dao pours forth but never empties; never requires to be filled.

 

And the other issue I often think about is the meaning that Dao is prior to anything we can think of, even deities.

[Marblehead]

And the other issue I often think about is the meaning that Dao is prior to anything we can think of, even deities.

But we weren't here to think them (deities) up before we were here.

[ChiDragon]

But we weren't here to think them (deities) up before we were here.

Don't you believe in retroactive......???

[Marblehead]

Don't you believe in retroactive......???

Hehehe. No. We can't change the past no matter how hard we try.

[ChiDragon]

Hehehe. No. We can't change the past no matter how hard we try.

Of course, history doesn't change but it can tell us about the past.

Edited January 15, 2014 by ChiDragon