[TTC Study] Chapter 5 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Marblehead]

If we're giving grades for accuracy of interpretating this text, I would have to give everyone involved in this most recent debate a C at best.

And you sir, use an old, outdated translation. You need to catch up with the times and get a translation that is done from the Ma-wang-tui texts.

 

Tzu-Jan: Chapter 25, Wayne Wang translation, Line 12:

Heaven follows Tao.

Tao follows Tzujan.

 

(Hint: Tzujan is not a noun, it is a verb.)

[Aaron]

And you sir, use an old, outdated translation. You need to catch up with the times and get a translation that is done from the Ma-wang-tui texts.

 

Tzu-Jan: Chapter 25, Wayne Wang translation, Line 12:

Heaven follows Tao.

Tao follows Tzujan.

 

(Hint: Tzujan is not a noun, it is a verb.)

 

Umm... Really? Wang? If ever there was an innacurate translation, you've picked one of the grand daddies to take from. And what translation am I taking from perchance? I was just nterpreting the chapter, don't be so quick to judge.

 

 

Also using Mao Zedong as an example of the chinese mind is like using Hitler as an example of the German mind, sensational, but not indicative of the truth.

 

Aaron

[Marblehead]

Hi Sree,

 

I'm going through you post piece by piece and will skip what need no response to.

 

Sree said:

I am sure a westerner with the education can translate Chinese into English better than Chinese intellectuals. But I am not talking about the Chinese language even at the classical level. I am talking about Chinese philosophical thought. Only an incorruptible Chinese can grasp that.

 

Good point. I would suppose that is why Henricks did not include an interpretation in his translation. But I still wouldn't limit that ability to only a Chinese person.

 

Sree said:

Forget about wisdom, even at the literary level, translation injures the poetic grace of classical Chinese; word-for-word metaphrasing yields no meaning; and paraphrasing is interpretation, not translation.

 

The Tao Te Ching is inaccessible to non-Chinese and the corrupt. Take it or leave it.

 

I still disagree with this statement. Are you qualified to make such a statement?

 

But I do agree that likely much is lost during a scholastic translation. That would be where a translation/interpretation would be better.

 

Sree said:

The primary qualification of a Chinese philosopher is incorruptibility. I told you that being smart is not enough although this attribute seems to be the only thing that counts in western cultures. Mao Zedong’s large bed was littered with books and young female sexual companions. To lump this ass together with Confucius is offensive to me.

 

I did not make that association. You did. You offended yourself. Name me one Chinese Philosopher who has written anything in the English language that has anything to do with Taoist Philosophy. I would like to read that person.

 

Sree said:

There is a reason to compare, and I did so to show no two translations are the same. They are like blind men’s testimonies of what the elephant is like.

 

You are giving no credit to those who are highly qualified in their field of study or mastery. Again, what qualifies you to make judgements on those who have spent most of their life in their field of mastery? I will agree that there are no two translations alike and that is because most of them are translations/interpretations. True translations of the same source document should have few, if any, differences.

 

Sree said:

I am telling you no such thing. I stand by my opinion that the Tao Te Ching cannot be translated and any motive to do so is suspect.

 

Very nihilistic indeed!!! Then there would be no reason to read it in its original, if ever found, because no one would understand it anyhow? WoW! And all this time I thought I had learned something by reading it.

 

Sree said:

Ok, whatever you say, my friend.

 

Yea!!! Thanks for the discussion. It is a fact that different people prefer different translations. I have my preference, I don't know if you have a preference. Yes, people can remain friends even though they have disagreements.

[Marblehead]

Umm... Really? Wang? If ever there was an innacurate translation, you've picked one of the grand daddies to take from. And what translation am I taking from perchance? I was just nterpreting the chapter, don't be so quick to judge.

 

 

Also using Mao Zedong as an example of the chinese mind is like using Hitler as an example of the German mind, sensational, but not indicative of the truth.

 

Aaron

You use the John Wu translation. You stated so when you started the TTC Chapter series.

 

So you, a person who previously stated cannot read Chinese, is questioning a person who was born in China, had degrees before migrating to the US and now holds a couple PhD's.

 

Do we want to talk about Tzujan? Are you sure? We did wu wei a while back and it got tiring very quickly.

 

I used Mao of an example in the extreme. I also occasionally use Hitler as an example in the extreme. I have no problem with doing that and will likely continue to do so for the rest of my life.

[dawei]

Hehehe. I claim no pedigree. I am just a hard-headed German proud to have been born in the USofA.

 

Until someone who is qualified claims that Henricks' translation is invalid I will continue to accept it as the most valid translation available.

 

Again, his intention was never to interpret the TTC, only to translate it scholasticly and he has received much acclaim for having done that very well.

 

I know, other like the more poetic translations. No problem. But whenever I need quote something from the TTC I will use the Henricks translation.

I don't think I said anything about his translation being invalid nor not scholarly in attempt. If one has read his two translations they cannot not see copious notes and comments. I have both translations. I appreciate his efforts.

 

Poetic attempts only has the advantage (and disadvantage) of seeing something deeper (or not) and convey some mystery if possible. One irony to me is that Hinton, whom I like very much, is much more a DDJ literalist... yet he is much more well known for his bevy of chinese poetry translations.

 

I don't have a single translation I would live by. I go by an inner sense and nobody has meet that without fail, although I will accept if that is partly my failure. But it is in my nature to be eclectic.

[dawei]

The Tao Te Ching is inaccessible to non-Chinese and the corrupt. Take it or leave it.

You require scientific verification for other's comments; so where is your scientific verification? Of is this some personal feeling?

 

Let's leave bigotry out of this website. There is no need to stir the grass in order to awake the snake (打草惊蛇)

 

Are you saying that chinese philosophers embody 铁面无私 ? And that makes them the keepers of understanding the DDJ?

 

You have some good points to share but some of us are not oblivious to the chinese xenophobic proverb: "We can fool any foreigner".

[Marblehead]

I don't think I said anything about his translation being invalid nor not scholarly in attempt. If one has read his two translations they cannot not see copious notes and comments. I have both translations. I appreciate his efforts.

 

Poetic attempts only has the advantage (and disadvantage) of seeing something deeper (or not) and convey some mystery if possible. One irony to me is that Hinton, whom I like very much, is much more a DDJ literalist... yet he is much more well known for his bevy of chinese poetry translations.

 

I don't have a single translation I would live by. I go by an inner sense and nobody has meet that without fail, although I will accept if that is partly my failure. But it is in my nature to be eclectic.

Hi Dawei,

 

I never meant to suggest that you had said Henricks' translation was invalid. I was just making a generalized statement.

 

I can't recall ever reading anything of Hinton's.

 

And I would agree that there are both advantages and disadvantages with a poetic translation of the TTC.

 

And I agree that to live "religiously" according to the TTC would be impossible for me as well.

 

And all I can say to your last statement is that if you can live according to your true nature without causing undue harm to others then I would say you are a pretty nice fellow.

[dawei]

And all I can say to your last statement is that if you can live according to your true nature without causing undue harm to others then I would say you are a pretty nice fellow.

And if I did harm... was that the sender or receiver's verdict?

 

It seems the conversations have nothing to to with the chapters... I wish someone would just delete all the BS going on here... including mine.

 

But to 'keep the center' is not to judge; no verdict needed. but strike the gavel as needed

[Marblehead]

And if I did harm... was that the sender or receiver's verdict?

 

It seems the conversations have nothing to to with the chapters... I wish someone would just delete all the BS going on here... including mine.

 

But to 'keep the center' is not to judge; no verdict needed. but strike the gavel as needed

Yeah, well, since the primary discussions of the Chapters is finished I suppose a free-for-all is acceptable.

 

To your question (first line), wei wu wei is a funny thing. I like to call it "doing what needs be done". Yeah, harm would result on both sides probably.

 

Indeed, it is so nice when we don't have to make judgement calls. As ET might say, "it be what it be."

[sree]

sree.....

 

This is not the place to argue somebody else's translation. It is only a matter of what one wants to believe what the Tao Te Ching says, personally, with a different approach. If you want to study the TTC, please just read into it the way you think it is. In order to keep it to the purest thought, read it scholastically. If you can read Chinese, use the native sources. However, they are not all the best but there are some that are very reliable. Happy studying......

 

 

Mr Chi, the argument is not about what the Tao Te Ching says but about what people purport what this Chinese Classic says. There is this western rule against plagiarism which is stealing what is not yours to say. In this case, it is reverse plagiarism: forcing the Tao Te Ching to say other people’s nonsense. This is not right. Freedom of speech gives one the right to say what one wants. It doesn’t give one the right to put what one says into other people’s mouth.

 

PS....

Using the native sources, then one does not has to deal with any mistranslation with misunderstanding. So, nothing will get lost in the translation but maybe misinterpretation. At least, you have less errors to deal with. BTW, nowadays, the native sources are pretty unanimous. To the best of my knowledge, at least, Chapters 1 and 5 are unanimous.

 

 

What you say makes obvious sense. A Chinese baby suckling at its Chinese mother’s breast has no digestive issues. A non-Chinese studying the Tao Te Ching is like a kitten insisting on drinking dog milk. It not only suffers indigestion and colic but also end up with dogshit.

Edited December 23, 2012 by sree

[sree]

You require scientific verification for other's comments; so where is your scientific verification? Of is this some personal feeling?

 

I said to take it or leave it. Which part of this statement you do not understand?

 

Let's leave bigotry out of this website. There is no need to stir the grass in order to awake the snake (打草惊蛇)

 

I take offense with your accusation. Do you understand what bigotry means? One meaning is intolerance of race or religion. Do you see evidence of this in my debate with anyone in this forum?

 

Are you saying that chinese philosophers embody 铁面无私 ? And that makes them the keepers of understanding the DDJ?

 

Do you see any incorruptible Chinese anywhere? Find me one and I will give him my stamp of approval.

 

You have some good points to share but some of us are not oblivious to the chinese xenophobic proverb: "We can fool any foreigner".

 

I don't know what you are insinuating. When it comes to cheating, the Chinese are right up there with the sneakiest crooks on account of their long history of hardship, misery and suffering. It has to do with survival. It is not unreasonable of me to say that only a Chinese can appreciate Chinese philosophy in a way that Chinese can. There is nothing elitist about this. Can you understand and appreciate Wagner the way Germans can?

[Aaron]

Dawei is right, most of what is being talked about has nothing to do with this chapter. If you want to discuss something different than this chapter, please start a new thread. The rules of this subforum are very specific and it is specific so that the integrity of these chapter studies can be maintained. The only thing that should be discussed in this thread is Chapter 5, any subtopics should be discussed elsewhere.

 

Aaron

[dawei]

I said to take it or leave it. Which part of this statement you do not understand?

typical ploy to prevent discussion... pick one of two extremes.... the lack of discussion in your posts does question why you are here. If you want to only hear from Sir Chi, then get his email. If your willing to talk to one and all, then act like it and discuss openly the chapter topic.

 

I take offense with your accusation. Do you understand what bigotry means? One meaning is intolerance of race or religion. Do you see evidence of this in my debate with anyone in this forum?

ah... I can't be responsible for personal reactions to english words which you interpret.... Your not seeing the deeper point, which is my point overall. If you need someone to teach you english expressions then you'll need to appoint another "Sir".

 

Do you see any incorruptible Chinese anywhere? Find me one and I will give him my stamp of approval.

Again... your nationalism, xenophobia, and bigotry is speaking... why do I need to find a chinese this way? Let's get beyond ethic backgrounds please. Your wear your stripes proudly but let's put down the guns.

 

I don't know what you are insinuating. When it comes to cheating, the Chinese are right up there with the sneakiest crooks on account of their long history of hardship, misery and suffering. It has to do with survival. It is not unreasonable of me to say that only a Chinese can appreciate Chinese philosophy in a way that Chinese can. There is nothing elitist about this. Can you understand and appreciate Wagner the way Germans can?

Your not telling me anything I don't know or have experienced in the US or china... What you say is valid to a degree and I accept your expression. But your stuck in some kind of thinking that nobody can know another way outside of their own upbringing. that is a limitation of your own thinking and way. I know that people like to think in terms of herd and the masses and forget there are outliers and people who see beyond the norm and beyond the physical realm and experience something beyond the senses and can talk about that which is unseen.

 

I know this is not for you to understand but realize there are others who do. The world is not as only you see it. Welcome to 10,000 varies ways of mankind.

 

Do you want to specifically discuss the chapter or harp on divisive issues?

 

You said your are a DDJ addict... but you seem to not share any understanding and only ask questions from one person alone... What do you hope to gain from your questions? I would suggest you try Qigong or other meditative practices to get beyond the mental angst you are projecting here. Your in some kind of pain which is getting spewed out on the website. While I am somewhat curious to see where it goes, I can see the symptoms... but the final outcome is yours alone.

[ChiDragon]

Dawei is right, most of what is being talked about has nothing to do with this chapter. If you want to discuss something different than this chapter, please start a new thread. The rules of this subforum are very specific and it is specific so that the integrity of these chapter studies can be maintained. The only thing that should be discussed in this thread is Chapter 5, any subtopics should be discussed elsewhere.

 

Aaron

 

Let's have the initiator to take the lead in following his own advice.

[dawei]

Let's have the initiator to take the lead in following his own advice.

Aaron is the initiator of the entire subforum... and moderator of the subforum.

 

I am not sure what the point of your challenge to him but most of us would like to simply discuss the chapters.

 

You have a wealth of knowledge that if someone wants to start a 'Sir Chi' thread they are more than welcome to have a two person discussion over many years.

[sree]

Perhaps we should conclude in accordance with the ending of Chapter 5:

 

Between Heaven and Earth

The empty vessel

Makes more sound

 

多言數窮，(more words count less)

不如守中。 (Hold your tongue)

[ChiDragon]

「多言數窮，不如守中」

 

話說多了道理就少了，真理就是那麼一點，說多了都是空話。

If one talks too much, then the amount of reasons become less. The truth is only so little. It'll become empty words if one say too much about it.

 

病從口入，禍從口出，說多了惹事生非，還不如保持適中。

Diseases are entering to the mouth, troubles are existing from the mouth. Saying too much will induce unnecessary arguments. Perhaps the best thing to do is stop at a point where it is adequate.

 

該說則說，可說可不說則不說。

Thus only say the things which need to be said. Anything that could need to be said or couldn't needn't to be said, then just don't say it.

Edited December 24, 2012 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

「多言數窮，不如守中」

 

話說多了道理就少了，真理就是那麼一點，說多了都是空話。

If one talks too much, then the amount of reasons become less. The truth is only so little. It'll become empty words if one say too much about it.

 

病從口入，禍從口出，說多了惹事生非，還不如保持適中。

Diseases are entering to the mouth, troubles are existing from the mouth. Saying too much will induce unnecessary arguments. Perhaps the best thing to do is stop at a point where it is adequate.

 

該說則說，可說可不說則不說。

Thus only say the things which need to be said. Anything that could need to be said or couldn't needn't to be said, then just don't say it.

Is that from Chapter 5? That is the topic you are posting in...

 

I just want to know if your posting something for discussion or you are venting or doing what now. Let's stick to the chapter as Sree appears to want to do. That is the simple agreement of the subforum.

[sree]

Is that from Chapter 5? That is the topic you are posting in...

 

I just want to know if your posting something for discussion or you are venting or doing what now. Let's stick to the chapter as Sree appears to want to do. That is the simple agreement of the subforum.

 

Mr Chi is talking about Chapter 5 and elaborating on the meaning of 多言數窮，不如守中.

 

Why are you trying to provoke him?

 

You said that Aaron is the moderator. What are you?

 

In the imperial court of China, mandarins and officials were constantly pushed around by the harem watch-dog, the spy for the ruler, who framed false charges and was brutal to officials.

[dawei]

Elaborating is one thing... too many words is another thing... I guess you didn't realize what 'holding the center' (tongue) can mean... Is there something to discuss?

[sree]

Elaborating is one thing... too many words is another thing... I guess you didn't realize what 'holding the center' (tongue) can mean... Is there something to discuss?

 

Yes, I would like to discuss holding your tongue by 孫悟空 . The only way to resolve this is with Tao magic.

Do you dare to accept the challenge?

Edited December 24, 2012 by sree

[XieJia]

The Heaven and Earth is not partial, treats ten thousands things as straw dogs.

The Sage is not partial, treats the all people as straw dogs.

In between Heaven and Earth, what cannot be hold within it?

All hollow without any fault, emerges and manifests.

All can be say fated to be exhaust, but not so the guarded center.

 

No matter the interpretation, what I think is important about the DDJ is that

it should promotes self-inquiry and cultivations. If it didn't makes any different to the world

but did improved the person who read it, then I think it is worthwhile. It's the world's treasure.

 

To those who penetrate them, their minds are as vast as Heaven and Earth.

Nor partial to ten-thousands things whether theirs or others.

 

Happy Holiday!

[Marblehead]

I don't do magic.

 

Rain will fall equally on all men (and women too).

[dawei]

Yes, I would like to discuss holding your tongue by 孫悟空 . The only way to resolve this is with Tao magic.

Do you dare to accept the challenge?

I am already talking with 齐天大圣, so no need.

 

Iet's get back to something to discuss on chapter 5.

[dawei]

The Heaven and Earth is not partial, treats ten thousands things as straw dogs.

The Sage is not partial, treats the all people as straw dogs.

In between Heaven and Earth, what cannot be hold within it?

All hollow without any fault, emerges and manifests.

All can be say fated to be exhaust, but not so the guarded center.

 

No matter the interpretation, what I think is important about the DDJ is that

it should promotes self-inquiry and cultivations. If it didn't makes any different to the world

but did improved the person who read it, then I think it is worthwhile. It's the world's treasure.

 

To those who penetrate them, their minds are as vast as Heaven and Earth.

Nor partial to ten-thousands things whether theirs or others.

 

Happy Holiday!

welcome back... Do you see this chapter a symbolic for inner cultivation?

 

To take it one step further, since immortals are being called up, I see the last line as a immortality phrase.

 

 

 

"Heshang Gong states that all things are self-originating within the void which exists

between heaven and earth. There is 'one gentle energy flowing throughout'. If we can

likewise preserve a quiet within, we are one with heaven and earth - and a spiritual light is

born. 'The inner light will command him'. The pure energy moves on unobstructed - like

the opening and closing of a pair of bellows." - Bertschinger Translation and notes