[TTC Study] Chapter 7 of the Tao Teh Ching

[sree]

Yes, it was self understood. A Sage is still human. However, in general, the emphasis was placed on the notion of "his unselfishness".

 

What do you mean by "a Sage is still human"?

Consider 常有欲.

Would this be a sagely state?

 

 

Your transalation below for easy reference.

 

Chapter 7 - The Unselfishness

1. 天長地久。

2. 天地所以能長且久者，

3. 以其不自生，

4. 故能長生。

5. 是以聖人後其身而身先，

6. 外其身而身存。

7. 非以其無私邪！

8. 故能成其私。

 

Translation in terse English...

1. Heaven and Earth are eternal.

2. The reason they are eternal,

3. Because they do not strive for themselves.

4. Therefore, they are eternal.

5. A gentleman always place himself behind but ended up in front.

6. One keeping oneself in a neutral position will survive.

7. Is not because of his unselfishness!

8. Which gained his personal accomplishment.

Edited December 26, 2012 by sree

[ChiDragon]

1. What do you mean by "a Sage is still human"?

 

2. Consider 常有欲.

Would this be a sagely state?

1. What do you mean by "a Sage is still human"?

 

7. Is not because of his unselfishness!

8. Which gained his personal accomplishment.

 

What it meant was that a sage wants to accomplish something with a little selfishness on his part.

 

 

2. Consider 常有欲.

Would this be a sagely state?

 

Sorry, wrong punctuation, it should read...

常有，欲........

Edited December 26, 2012 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

Chidragon: You translate (based on what sree quoted) Sheng Ren as 'gentleman'. Is that truly a Lao Zi association in your opinion?

 

The reason I ask is that I was recently engaged in discussion over such phrases and I am more and more convinced that Sheng Ren is a higher association than Jun Zi or Zhen Ren.

 

Daoist used: Zhen Ren; Sheng Ren (often translated as true man; sage)

Confucians used: Jun Ren (often translated as gentleman)

 

Confucius himself denied he was a Sheng Ren and contrasted it with what he was (Jun Zi).

 

Lao zi does not appear to dis-associate himself with this idea... and it seems to me that Sheng Ren is one step away from Xian Ren (仙).

 

If we look at those given deity titles (whether we believe or not.... just scholarly exchange), do we find a Jun Zi elevated to Xian Ren?

 

I guess my ultimate question is: Is gentleman a little lower than what Sheng Ren may require for a translation?

[ChiDragon]

The TTC definition for a "sage" is the highly cultivated person who follows the principle of Wu Wei which is the way of Tao. Thus a sage can be a gentleman or a good ruler. Most lightly, Lao Tze was always referred the ruler as a sage.

 

BTW Lao Tze's definition of a sage is different from the Sheng Ren in the Confucian philosophy. The scholars were referred Confucius as a Sheng Ren. Confucius was advocating all scholars to be gentlemen by following the moral conducts as a good person. A Jun Zi is a gentleman but he is not a Sheng Ren.

 

In order to keep the purest thoughts within the TTC, I certainly would keep any Confucian ideas out of here to avoid confusion.

Edited December 26, 2012 by ChiDragon

[sree]

1. What do you mean by "a Sage is still human"?

 

7. Is not because of his unselfishness!

8. Which gained his personal accomplishment.

 

What it meant was that a sage wants to accomplish something with a little selfishness on his part.

 

But Mr Chi, a little selfishness is still a blemish.

In the west, forgiveness is a value; morality is a personal matter and upside down is as acceptable as right side up.

Not so in Chinese philosophical thought. Corruption, no matter how minor is unacceptable.

[ChiDragon]

The little selfishness what I meant was not in a negative way but for the good to accomplish something for the benefit of the people. Selfish is not always negative. Selfishness may be applied in a positive way too.

Edited December 26, 2012 by ChiDragon

[sree]

The TTC definition for a "sage" is the highly cultivated person who follows the principle of Wu Wei which is the way of Tao. Thus a sage can be a gentleman or a good ruler. Most lightly, Lao Tze was always referred the ruler as a sage.

 

 

聖人 shèngrén saint; sage, ruler. This fits the the concept of 天人合一.

 

BTW Lao Tze's definition of a sage is different from the Sheng Ren in the Confucian philosophy. The scholars were referred Confucius as a Sheng Ren.

 

The scholars would not be wrong. Based on the quality of the classics, I would rank Confucius as a 聖人

 

Confucius was advocating all scholars to be gentlemen by following the moral conducts as a good person. A Jun Zi is a gentleman but he is not a Sheng Ren.

 

I agree. 君子 jūnzǐ nobleman; person of noble character.

 

 

In order to keep the purest thoughts within the TTC, I certainly would keep any Confucian ideas out of here to avoid confusion.

 

Seems to me that you prefer to place the Tao Te Ching in a category different from the Confucian Classics. Why?

 

To clarify further for Dawei, the following pertain to spiritualism:

 

 

仙人 xiānrén Daoist immortal; celestial being (Su Wukong)

 

 

真人 zhenren Daoist spiritual master (Flowing Hands)

[dawei]

Chi and Sree... thanks.

 

Sree's point of ranking Confucius as a Sheng Ren was the issue I was discussing with another... IMO, he is only a Sheng Ren as a lower understanding of the word (as scholars view the meaning) and not in the Daoist spiritual sense (that Chi clarifies as a different philosophy and term usage--which I agree with).

 

I am not looking to specifically debate this issue but wanted to understand people's usage of some related terms.

[ChiDragon]

Seems to me that you prefer to place the Tao Te Ching in a category different from the Confucian Classics. Why?

 

Yes, at first when I've heard the term Tao Te Ching, 道德經, I thought it was all about morality(道德) as advocated by Confucius. That was what 道德 was all about because most Chinese people are only familiar with the Confucian philosophy and knew nothing about Lao Tze's Tao Te Ching. How little do I know....

 

As I'd picked up and read a few native books and found out that Tao Te(道德) in the TTC has nothing to do with the morality(道德) in the Confucian philosophy. Then that got me all excited to find out what Tao Te(道德) meant by Lao Tze. There are some native scholars are as confused as some western scholars. Luckily, I had picked a very good book written by 陳鼓應, the most knowledgeable scholar about the Tao Te Ching. Then, I have realized what Tao Te(道德) means exactly in the TTC.

 

I had said the difference many times in the forum, but nobody had paid any attention to it. I hope this is my last time to say it for someone to catch it.

 

The Tao Te(道德) in Confucian philosophy is about the morality in good human behavior and conduct for someone to become a gentleman. It is mainly associated with people. Those who are having good gentle conduct toward human relationships were considered to have the virtue of morality (道德).

 

The Tao Te(道德) in the Tao Te Ching is about a person who is highly cultivated by following the principles of Tao, the concept of Wu Wei(無為). Those who are capable in dealing with naturalism by relating everything to Nature were considered to have the Virtue of Tao(道德).

 

If we can keep the distinction between these two definitions in mind, then it would make it a lot easier in our future communications.

Edited December 26, 2012 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

I had said the difference many times in the forum, but nobody had paid any attention to it. I hope this is my last time to say it for someone to catch it.

That's not true Mr. Dragon. First, I and many others believed as you do regarding Taoist Te. And you have clarified a proper understanding for a number of members on this board.

[ChiDragon]

Mr. Marblehead.....

What a pleasant surprise. My apologies.....

[Marblehead]

Mr. Marblehead.....

What a pleasant surprise. My apologies.....

Apologies accepted.

[sree]

The Tao Te(道德) in Confucian philosophy is about the morality in good human behavior and conduct for someone to become a gentleman. It is mainly associated with people. Those who are having good gentle conduct toward human relationships were considered to have the virtue of morality (道德).

 

But was Confucius talking about morality pertinent to the Chinese culture of his time or did he expound an absolute moral virtue that has universal application across cultures for all time?

 

I feel that Confucius has been under-rated mainly because of a misunderstanding of his teaching.

 

The Tao Te(道德) in the Tao Te Ching is about a person who is highly cultivated by following the principles of Tao, the concept of Wu Wei(無為). Those who are capable in dealing with naturalism by relating everything to Nature were considered to have the Virtue of Tao(道德).

 

Granted, the Tao Te Ching covers more than just right conduct and does delve into the nature of life itself. But there is a connection between the two: the way 道 (tao) we conduct ourselves in accord with our true nature 德 (what we are) which is not an individual person in a particular society but life itself 天人合一 .

Edited December 26, 2012 by sree

[ChiDragon]

1. But was Confucius talking about morality pertinent to the Chinese culture of his time or did he expound an absolute moral virtue that has universal application across cultures for all time?

 

2. I feel that Confucius has been under-rated mainly because of a misunderstanding of his teaching.

 

3. Granted, the Tao Te Ching covers more than just right conduct and does delve into the nature of life itself. But there is a connection between the two: the way 道 (tao) we conduct ourselves in accord with our true nature 德 (what we are) which is not an individual person in a particular society but life itself 天人合一 .

 

1. It was both.

 

2. I don't think Confucius has been under-rated mainly because of a misunderstanding of his teaching. Actually, his ideas are too idealistic which was not too practical to be carried out in a political environment at all time. As a matter of fact, he had convinced his ruler to try out his idealism and made him an official. In the first months, he did not know how to deal with other corrupted officials. Hence, he didn't last too long in the ruler's court and quit his post.

 

3. Yes, you are right about the former. However,

"the way 道 (tao) we conduct ourselves in accord with our true nature (what we are) which is not an individual person in a particular society but life itself 天人合一 " is not the same.

 

The way we conduct ourselves in accord with our true nature is not the same as in accord with Nature. Nature is impartial but human nature has desires wish to be fulfilled. During the process of fulfillment, humans will do selfish things.

Edited December 27, 2012 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

Sree,

 

Daoist, Confucians, and Buddhist all used the idea of "the way 道 (tao)... was it universal or specific to their way and explanation?

[sree]

Sree,

 

Daoist, Confucians, and Buddhist all used the idea of "the way 道 (tao)... was it universal or specific to their way and explanation?

 

Dawei,

 

You are a spiritualist and I am a scholar. How can we ever see eye-to-eye?

 

As a spiritualist, you believe in spirits and Tao magic like Mantak Chia. As a scholar in the finest Chinese tradition, I believe in nothing. Even a western scientist believes that the world is round and we are a life form living on Planet Earth. How can a mind that is warped by beliefs ever attain 天人合一 ?

 

Daoists, Confucianists and Buddhists are believers of their respective ideologies derived from ancient texts. They worship at temples and practise rituals steeped in superstitions. Naturally, each would use the idea of "the way 道 (tao) according to his own concept. Chinese intellectuals with western academic credentials and don't go to temples think they are better but they are just fudging their own airy fairy ideas of the way 道 (tao) to suit western tastes.

 

Chinese philosophical thought as expounded in the classical texts of China have nothing to do with fostering beliefs either about this world or the nether world. It is not even comparable to western philosophy which is useful for sorting out nutjobs and their crooked thinking.

 

I am sorry to disappoint you but the Tao Te Ching is neither mysticism nor does it hold any mystery. The way 道 (tao), as the Chinese character denotes simply means the "way", not just any way but the perfect way in action. The tradition of the Chinese scholar was to seek only one thing: perfect way in action as a human being (天人合一). This quest has tremendous implication for humanity which includes the totality of existence.

[ChiDragon]

sree and dawei....

 

Tao(道) has three meanings for Daoist, Confucians, and Buddhist.

 

Taoism: 道(Tao, big T) is omnipresent.

 

Confucian: 道(tao, small t) is morality(道德).

 

Buddhism: 道(tao), true reasoning(道理 or 真理).

 

The word "way" used as an translation for "Tao" is outdated already.

Edited December 27, 2012 by ChiDragon

[sree]

The word "way" used as an translation for "Tao" is outdated already.

 

I know, Mr Chi. Each new generation asserts its own fashionable values paying no heed to teachings of antiquity.

Brats of Generation Y know better than those of Generation X who see Baby Boomers as dinosaurs.

 

This western lack of filial piety 孝 has become the 道(tao) of the Chinese in their worship of western material might.

But some things cannot be modernized, eternal things like principles and integrity.

The scholar treasures these things passed on to him and polish them for handing down unchanged to the next generation.

 

The way 道(tao) can only be outdated by the corrupt.

Edited December 27, 2012 by sree

[dawei]

Sree and Chi; thanks again.

 

This was my point... that a word needs to be understood in the philosophical context.

 

But I am not a spiritualist. I am actually more a scholar with training and practice so that experience can be checked against what I research. I am simply open and I don't try to limit what may be behind the universe or beyond. And I don't limit myself to an understanding of Dao based on only the DDJ. I also don't find any mystery in the DDJ and why I suggested the other day you look at Xuan as original or primordial.

 

I understand your disdain for western attempts to look at eastern thought but Dao doesn't limit so why should we judge?

 

I am not opposed to "way" for Dao as the 10,000 all have their own coming and going... but I don't think there is only one perfect way. To me, the constancy of Dao is ever-changing-ness, or transformation. If I had to say if the process is singular or not, then that is fine... but what we observe in the manifest world is varying 'ways'.

[sree]

I understand your disdain for western attempts to look at eastern thought but Dao doesn't limit so why should we judge?

 

It's not disdain. I think it is futile for a non-Chinese utilitarian worldview to assimilate Chinese philosophical concepts. Chinese eat dogs, rats and chicken feet. It is easier to hold Marblehead down and force a live black rat down his throat than to drive 故能长生 into his head. A western translation may be digestible but it is not the Tao Te Ching. He is swallowing Campbell Soup. I am just pointing this fact out. I am not judging the westerner who doesn't know better. I am disdainful of the Chinese intellectuals who think nothing of hawking off fake stuff - from knock-off Crocs to bogus Chinese philosophy - to the rest of the world.

Edited December 27, 2012 by sree

[dawei]

It's not disdain. I think it is futile for a non-Chinese utilitarian worldview to assimilate Chinese philosophical concepts. Chinese eat dogs, rats and chicken feet. It is easier to hold Marblehead down and force a live black rat down his throat than to drive 故能长生 into his head. A western translation may be digestible but it is not the Tao Te Ching. He is swallowing Campbell Soup. I am just pointing this fact out. I am not judging the westerner who doesn't know better. I am disdainful of the Chinese intellectuals who think nothing of hawking off fake stuff - from knock-off Crocs to bogus Chinese philosophy - to the rest of the world.

Your just sharing personal belief and judgement, IMO... Your only doing what you accuse others of doing: Following a belief in something which is not scientifically proven or verifiable. So I don't think we'll get anywhere with this, nor the idea of knock-offs. This goes back about 5,000 years and has simply found some modern ways to exploit it.

[sree]

Your just sharing personal belief and judgement, IMO... Your only doing what you accuse others of doing: Following a belief in something which is not scientifically proven or verifiable. So I don't think we'll get anywhere with this, nor the idea of knock-offs. This goes back about 5,000 years and has simply found some modern ways to exploit it.

 

Like I said, we cannot see eye to eye but I do get your point of view.

 

Your understanding of the Chinese classics allows translation such that the English form equates with your Chinese form. Therefore, you see no reason why you should not consign your product for export to America. There is nothing wrong with free trade between willing sellers and willing buyers.

[Marblehead]

It is easier to hold Marblehead down and force a live black rat down his throat than to drive 故能长生 into his head. A western translation may be digestible but it is not the Tao Te Ching. He is swallowing Campbell Soup.

Hehehe. I am glad I have made an impression in your mind. It may not be true but that doesn't matter.

 

My mind isn't all that hard to sway. All one need do is present reasonably logical, verifiable evidence of what they propose. But to suggest that one is incapable of understanding a philosophical concept just doesn't sound logical to me. And I have seen no proof to support such a statement.

 

Oh, one other thing, I wouldn't recommend trying to hold me down. Many have tried and the same number have failed. Besides, I eat rat for breakfast. And yes, I have eaten dog. Not Vmarco's pit bull but still.

 

As to the TTC, I think that there are many worthy people capable of translating it into a non-Chinese language. And if one has studied the history of Chinese culture one would be fully capable of understanding the TTC and the word "Tao".

 

But in the most part, we all believe whatever it is that allows us to feel comfortable and secure. If you need that security then go ahead on.

[sree]

But to suggest that one is incapable of understanding a philosophical concept just doesn't sound logical to me. And I have seen no proof to support such a statement.

 

Ok, analyse this 天人合一.

 

Oh, one other thing, I wouldn't recommend trying to hold me down. Many have tried and the same number have failed.

 

Ok, I will have to square off with you and a side headlock take down should take the wind out of your sails. Dawei will then stuff the rat in.

[dawei]

I prefer dog... all parts... and in my alcoholic brew which seeps in a jug at home it includes, 狗鞭. I am not buy or selling this... but people are welcome to taste it. This is becoming one with the dog in us... next step is 天人合一