[TTC Study] Chapter 16 of the Tao Teh Ching

[sree]

One man has this attitude and the one standing next to him doesn't.

 

Blame this on the ideology of individualism, the need to be different.

 

Who should we believe? It's completely our choice.

 

The freedom to choose - isn't that great? Free will empowers the individual.

 

The only question is why we choose the mindsets we do.

 

Why? Upbringing, I guess. One's circumstances in life is a factor. And lastly, the available mindsets to choose from.

[XieJia]

Does anyone ever have a feeling of going somewhere anew and feeling "I have come home"?

Just to realize that you never really have left?

[Marblehead]

I was a wondering boy in my youth and learned very early that wherever I was is where my home was.

[ChiDragon]

Updated with the Received Version of the Tao Te Ching
Chapter 16
1. 致虛極
2. 守靜篤。
3. 萬物並作，
4. 吾以觀復。
5. 夫物芸芸
6. 各復歸其根。
7. 歸根曰靜，
8. 是曰復命；
9. 復命曰常，
10. 知常曰明。
11. 不知常，
12. 妄作凶。
13. 知常容，
14. 容乃公，
15. 公乃全，
16. 全乃天，
17. 天乃道，
18. 道乃久，
19. 沒身不殆。

Chapter 16
1. Reaching vacuousness to its extremity,
2. Maintaining stillness ultimately.
3. All things are being vitalized,
4. I observed that they are reciprocating.
5. Therefore, all things are flourishing,
6. Each returns to its root,
7. Returns to its root means stillness.
8. Stillness means returns to its essential.
9. Returns to essential is called the basic routine.
10. Knowing the routine is called comprehension.
11. Not knowing the basic routine,
12. Will act rashly become chaotic.
13. Knowing the basic routine is encompassing.
14. Encompassing will serve with justice.
15. Justice will be impartial.
16. Impartial will be natural.
17. Natural will be in accord with Tao.
18. Then, Tao will be eternal,
19. And the eternal Tao will be exempted from all danger.

Edited March 1, 2013 by ChiDragon

[dust]

Jumping in without reading any of these 10 pages. Because I'm lazy like that.

 

 

至虛恆也 Reach the empty eternal,

獸中篤也 Maintain in honesty;

萬物方作居以頒復也 Life flourishes all around, living in coming and going;

天道熉熉 The Way of Heaven is balance,

各復亓堇 Everything returns to its root

 

 

Well...not really happy with the first 2 lines -- especially as I'm not sure what's meant in line 2 -- but happy with the rest of it.

[Marblehead]

Henricks' translation has 6 lines:

 

1 Take emptiness to the limit;
2 Cautiously guard the void.

3 The ten thousand things, side by side they arise;
4 Sitting still we await their return.
5 Now, the forms come forth in great numbers,
6 But each returns to its root.

 

 

But back to yours:

 

I don't like "empty" or "emptiness". Sounds so Buddhist.

 

Maintain what in honesty?

 

The last three lines flow well.

[dust]

I have been trying to not look at others' translations before I attempt my own -- hoping not to rely on previously inferred meanings, but what I can figure out purely from the Chinese.

Looking now at the translations by Wu, Feng, Addiss, and Henricks... they all use empty/emptiness too!

So... it does seem that, from the GD to the received, "emptiness" is what was meant.

It's the same character as in chapter 5, with the "empty bellows" (in the GD, 16 follows 5, continuing this apparent theme of emptiness)



But since you don't like it, if it helps at all to perhaps find another word for the concept:

The origin of the character was, apparently (and this sounds a bit odd), a place where wild animals roam and men don't go -- i.e. a place free of people. It later came to mean a place free of any creature, or simply: empty.

I suppose that any of the following synonyms would be "acceptable" replacements:

vacant, unoccupied, uninhabited, untenanted, bare, desolate, deserted, abandoned

Edited November 1, 2014 by dustybeijing

[Marblehead]

I have been trying to not look at others' translations before I attempt my own -- hoping not to rely on previously inferred meanings, but what I can figure out purely from the Chinese.

 

 

My compliments to you for that.

 

 

Nope, none of your alternatives work in my mind either. Hehehe.

 

To your translation above:

 

Line 5: Everything returns to its root

 

So we are talking about a return to their natural, root essence.

 

I would think that Line 1 should speak to this, as in:

 

Line 1: Reach the root (or essence) of the eternal.

 

Line 2 then would be able to say: Maintain (or Guard) it in honesty.

 

 

Of course, this is just my gut feeling and I have no idea if it is possible and still remain true to the original Chinese characters.

[Taoist Texts]

Legge

 

道德經:

致虛極，守靜篤。萬物並作，吾以觀復。夫物芸芸，各復歸其根。歸根曰靜，是謂復命。復命曰常，知常曰明。不知常，妄作凶。知常容，容乃公，公乃王，王乃天，天乃道，道乃久，沒身不殆。 Dao De Jing:

(Returning to the root)
The (state of) vacancy should be brought to the utmost degree, and that of stillness guarded with unwearying vigour. All things alike go through their processes of activity, and (then) we see them return (to their original state). When things (in the vegetable world) have displayed their luxuriant growth, we see each of them return to its root. This returning to their root is what we call the state of stillness; and that stillness may be called a reporting that they have fulfilled their appointed end. The report of that fulfilment is the regular, unchanging rule. To know that unchanging rule is to be intelligent; not to know it leads to wild movements and evil issues. The knowledge of that unchanging rule produces a (grand) capacity and forbearance, and that capacity and forbearance lead to a community (of feeling with all things). From this community of feeling comes a kingliness of character; and he who is king-like goes on to be heaven-like. In that likeness to heaven he possesses the Dao. Possessed of the Dao, he endures long; and to the end of his bodily life, is exempt from all danger of decay.

[dust]

Line 5: Everything returns to its root

 

So we are talking about a return to their natural, root essence.

 

I would think that Line 1 should speak to this, as in:

 

Line 1: Reach the root (or essence) of the eternal.

 

Line 2 then would be able to say: Maintain (or Guard) it in honesty.

 

 

Of course, this is just my gut feeling and I have no idea if it is possible and still remain true to the original Chinese characters.

 

I get what you mean, absolutely. But...I don't think it is (possible). Unless we completely redefine 虚, it seems to me that it must mean emptiness, absence, vacancy...

 

 

As far as the Legge version, TT.. well, let's just say I really am not a fan of his translations of anything.

 

But again, "vacancy" -- is there a translation which doesn't translate 虚 like this?

[dust]

Perhaps looking at the chapters as they're ordered on the slips might be useful. From the end of ch.25 to ch.5:

 

 

... ...

人灋地 Man is of the Earth,

地灋天 The Earth is of the Heavens,

天灋道 The Heavens are of the Way,

道灋自然 The Way is of itself

 

天地之間亓猷囤籥與 The space between Heaven and Earth is like a bellows,

虛而不屈動而愈出 Empty but never exhausted, increasing as it goes

 

至虛恆也 Reach emptiness,

獸中篤也 Maintain ????;

萬物方作居以頒復也 Life flourishes all around, living in coming and going;

天道熉熉 The Way of Heaven is balance,

各復亓堇 Everything returns to its root

 

(me)

 

 

.
Humanity takes as its model the earth;
The earth takes as its model heaven;
Heaven takes as its model the Way;
And the Way takes as its model that which is so on its own.

 

The space between heaven and earth -
Is it not like a bellows?
Though it is empty it does not collapse;
When put into motion it sends forth all the more.

 

Take emptiness to the limit;
Cautiously guard the void.
The ten thousand things, side by side they arise;
Sitting still we await their return.
Now, the forms come forth in great numbers,
But each returns to its root.

 

(Henricks)

 

 

 

 

My compliments to you for that.

 

Note that I used the word "trying" -- sometimes it's hard not to look!

[dawei]

I think the key to the first two lines is a proper handling of what is Zhong (中).

 

At least in the MWD and BeiDa versions, Zhong is at the end of 5 and also in 25...

 

So is Emptiness just Emptiness itself or is something to be empty?

 

I lean toward those who see this as man is to be empty; thus, Zhong is a reference to the person's inner aspect which seems its use in Chapter 5 too.

[dust]

I think the key to the first two lines is a proper handling of what is Zhong (中).

 

At least in the MWD and BeiDa versions, Zhong is at the end of 5 and also in 25...

 

So is Emptiness just Emptiness itself or is something to be empty?

 

I lean toward those who see this as man is to be empty; thus, Zhong is a reference to the person's inner aspect which seems its use in Chapter 5 too.

 

Yes, as I've been thinking about it, I've come to realize that my supposition of what zhong meant might well be entirely wrong

 

As you point out ch.25, I also see that the ch.25 中 lacks the extra line on top that the ch.5 中 has

 

This follows on from what Riyue has mentioned about the differences in characters like

 

天 上 下 而 夫

 

where one version of 天 has an extra line on top and another doesn't.

 

I thought I'd noticed this variation, but told myself I was imagining things, and never bothered to check. Silly.

 

 

As far as man being empty...yes, I think he's at least implying that man could emulate the bellows of Heaven and Earth. And the order of the chapters here seems to fit very well, in that regard

Edited November 1, 2014 by dustybeijing

[Marblehead]

I get what you mean, absolutely. But...I don't think it is (possible). Unless we completely redefine 虚, it seems to me that it must mean emptiness, absence, vacancy...

 

 

As far as the Legge version, TT.. well, let's just say I really am not a fan of his translations of anything.

 

But again, "vacancy" -- is there a translation which doesn't translate 虚 like this?

Well, we tried.

[Marblehead]

 

I lean toward those who see this as man is to be empty; thus, Zhong is a reference to the person's inner aspect which seems its use in Chapter 5 too.

Yes, and this is supported by Chuang Tzu a number of times as I recall.

[Taoist Texts]

Yes, and this is supported by Chuang Tzu a number of times as I recall.

[Taoist Texts]

Jumping in without reading any of these 10 pages. Because I'm lazy like that.

 

 

至虛恆也 Reach the empty eternal,

獸中篤也 Maintain in honesty;

萬物方作居以頒復也 Life flourishes all around, living in coming and going;

....

 

Well...not really happy with the first 2 lines -- especially as I'm not sure what's meant in line 2

here is an illustration of the first two lines by the contemporaries

 

《淮南子 - Huainanzi》

 

《道應訓》

 

尹需學禦，三年而無得焉。私自苦痛，常寢想之。中夜，夢受秋駕于師。明日往朝，師望之，謂之曰：「吾非愛道於子也，恐子不可予也。今日教子以秋駕。」尹需反走，北面再拜曰：「臣有天幸，今夕固夢受之。」故老子曰：「致虛極，守靜篤，萬物並作，吾以觀其複也。」

 

 

Yǐn-xū have been studying the art of driving a chariot for 3 years but still could not get it. He was pained by that, and keeping it to himself constantly pondered it. One night he saw a dream as if he received a driver of the imperial chariot as a teacher. Morning after he went to the court, teacher saw him and said thusly: “earlier I would not give Dao to you sir, being afraid that you can not take it. Today, I will teach you how to drive the imperial chariot.”

Yin-xu retreated, faced the north and bowed twice saying: “certainly I, the servant received Heavenly blessing in the dream yesterday.”

This is an example of what Lao-zi talks about: ‘with emptiness reaching its limit – let me guard the calm assiduously, if so – the all things will evolve and I will just observe their multitude’.

[dust]

"evolve" is a good word, I think it fits well there

 

Other than that, I get the emptiness bit (I think), but I do still wonder about the second line. Especially in the GD.

[Taoist Texts]

As per the usual, the official translators had no clue that chpt 16 is a conspectus of concepts and vocabulary elaborated on in another contemporary text:

 

The Yizhoushu (simplified Chinese: 逸周书; traditional Chinese: 逸周書; pinyin: Yìzhōushū; Wade–Giles: I Chou shu; literally: "Lost Book of Zhou") is a compendium of Chinese historical documents about the Western Zhou period (1046–771 BCE).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yizhoushu

 

which says

 

民性歸利，王若欲來天下民，先設其利而民自至，譬之若冬日之陽，夏日之陰，不召而民自來，此謂歸德。五德既明，民乃知常。

 

The nature of the people is to come back to the profit, if the king wants to make the people of the Earth come to him, he first establishes profitable conditions, so the people come on their own, it can be likened to changes of seasons that come on their own, so when the people come of their own volition is called ‘ a re-establishment of De’. Once the 5 De are bright, it means that the people know morals 常.

 

So:

 

道德經16

 

致虛極，when the resources of the country are exhausted to the limit,

守靜督。preserve peace,

萬物並作，吾以觀復。Watching the evolution of the things I noticed that they are multi-leveled

天物芸芸，各復歸其根。All the things under Heaven have layers, and each layer is based on the common root

歸根曰靜，是謂復命。Which is peace, if there is peace means that Heaven has renewed your mandate to govern

復命曰常，知常曰明。Renovation of the mandate depends on morals of your people, if they have morals then there is a spiritual protection

不知常，妄作凶。No morals, the spirits will create calamity.

知常容，容乃公，公乃王，王乃天，天乃道，道乃久，立身不殆

So the morals of the commoners, rise to the nobility, the morals of the nobility rise to the king, kings morals rise to Heaven, Heaven’s morals rise to Dao, and if this continues long there will be no danger to king’s person.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Taoist Texts

[dust]

Looking at 5 and 16 together in the new ch.5 discussion I realized that this was never resolved (on my end anyway).

 

 

edit: to be clear for non-Chinesers, I'm talking of the line,

 

天/夫物芸芸，各復歸其根

When things have displayed their luxuriant growth, we see each of them return to its root (Legge)

They grow and flourish and then return to the source (Feng)

 

or in the Guodian,

 

天道熉熉，各復丌堇

Now, the forms come forth in great numbers, but each returns to its root (Henricks)

 

 

The character 芸 in the DDJ, and the one it replaces from the Guodian, 熉, both confused me. The received version appears to talk of "the things of heaven" (tian wu) growing and returning (yun yun); the Guodian speaks of "tian dao" (the Way of Heaven) rather than "the things of heaven".

 

Looking at some entries, the Huainanzi says of the received text character,

 

 

芸草可以死复生

 

(Yun) grass can die and live again

 

 

Looking at the character in the GD, it is comprised of something like 員 (increase) and either 火 or 灭 (fire or destroy)

 

increase and destroy

 

The top part of the character, as it is not exactly 員, but  口一目 on top of each other, can also be linked to 春 spring -- another way of saying 'new growth'. And of course, 秋 autumn contains fire, also.

 

The 2 characters are both related in another way, too: the colour yellow. Not sure what relevance that has.

 

 

In summary: both characters related to growth, death, rebirth / creation and destruction / new growth / yellow grass / the colour yellow. The earlier text speaks of 天道 tiandao rather than 天物 or 夫物

 

Thought that was quite interesting. Certainly I prefer the Guodian's version of things.

Edited March 18, 2017 by dust

[dawei]

one things for sure, this has lots of variation based on the version.  Here is what I came up with:

 

天道雲雲各复其堇（槿）= Goudian

天物雲雲各復歸其根，= Beida

天物雲雲各復歸於其根 = Mawangdui

夫物芸芸各復歸其根 = Heshang Gong & Wang Bi

 

 

The character 芸 in the DDJ, and the one it replaces from the Guodian, 熉, both confused me. 

 

This 芸 only shows up starting with HSG and WB (at least above).  The three oldest seem to agree on 雲/云.  

 

Hendricks seems to agree as his modern equivalent is 云 in his Guodian and MWD.    But I will say that Nina comes up with 員/员 as 'round' which would require them to be read as 圓/圆 (round).  See her take: http://www.daoisopen.com/A11toA13Chapters25516.html

 

I'm only surprised that everyone talks of loans, phonetics, exchanging characters but none want to stick with the original 雲雲/云云 and just point out that it means 'every-thing'.   As part of searching around, I found that one of the oldest cosmology, Heng Xian, which was also on Bamboo dates to around 300 BC, so close in time to the Guodian Laozi and it also uses the double characters.   Every translation of that cosmology also translate to mean 'every-thing'.    

 

Then I'm doubly bothered that later versions (after the Guodian) want to also change out the first two characters.  While Hendricks takes some effort to explain why, I don't buy it;  both characters should be read as different characters just because they can't get their head around the grammatical challenges of Chu script on bamboo.  I don't see why it has to completely sync up with a modern understanding of chinese character usage.

 

In the end, no matter what character combinations are used, everyone gets to the same meaning... but I'm with Dust here, I prefer the Guodian version. 

[dust]

This 芸 only shows up starting with HSG and WB (at least above).  The three oldest seem to agree on 雲/云.  

 

Hendricks seems to agree as his modern equivalent is 云 in his Guodian and MWD.    But I will say that Nina comes up with 員/员 as 'round' which would require them to be read as 圓/圆 (round).  See her take: http://www.daoisopen.com/A11toA13Chapters25516.html

 

It'll take more than this to convince me how the GD character is related to the other versions!

 

1. Structurally, there is no similarity between 熉 and 云.

 

2. The character 云 existed long before the time of Guodian, so I have to ask, why isn't it used on the GD slip? Why not 云云? Did 熉熉 mean back then what 云云 meant later? Same meaning, entirely different characters? Why such a drastic change in characters? And 云云 makes sense as "every thing" or something similarly wide and inclusive, but 熉熉 ?

 

3. When the first 2 characters are 天道, what does it mean if the next 2 characters are "every thing" ?

 

In the Guodian particularly, in the context of the chapter, what makes most sense to me is not "the way of heaven is everything" but "the way of heaven is growth and decay" (or similar)

 

 

 

I'm only surprised that everyone talks of loans, phonetics, exchanging characters but none want to stick with the original 雲雲/云云 and just point out that it means 'every-thing'.   As part of searching around, I found that one of the oldest cosmology, Heng Xian, which was also on Bamboo dates to around 300 BC, so close in time to the Guodian Laozi and it also uses the double characters.   Every translation of that cosmology also translate to mean 'every-thing'.   

 

The Hengxian transcriptions use 云云, but I cannot find a picture of the original slips to see for myself what is written there.

 

So, as far as we know it's possible that the characters are the same as in the Guodian, 熉熉, and they have been transcribed as 云云; or it's possible that what is actually written on the slips is 云云. By this point I don't necessarily trust transcriptions, even by Chinese people.

 

Also, in Hengxian the 云云 comes first. The line is 氣信神哉，云云相生 -- each gives birth to each other (?).

 

 

In Outer Chapters of Zhuangzi we find 万物云云, 各复其根 -- yet another version, but I don't know that this means anything to us as it was likely written a while later than the original Laozi.

Edited March 18, 2017 by dust

[dawei]

It'll take more than this to convince me how the GD character is related to the other versions!

 

1. Structurally, there is no similarity between 熉 and 云.

 

Nice stuff and willing to discuss but need to resolve this first.

 

Where is 熉 coming from?   I don't see that in any of my research but willing to look again when given some direction. 

 

I did not find that in any ancient version and I provided five in my post.

[dust]

 

 

I've circled the character in question. One of my Chinese references says,

 

員，原字似“——”型。員員，意指物體紛紜眾多。

 

With the —— being a character that doesn't display outside the PDF. It is written as I said,

 

口

一

目

灭

 

 

And I understand where people are getting 員 from, but firstly, it's not quite the same with a 灭 underneath, and secondly, it's certainly nothing like 云

 

Quite probably I'm just confused or ignorant, and there's a simple explanation, and I should just accept what the scholars have said, but...

[dawei]

And I understand where people are getting 員 from, but firstly, it's not quite the same with a 灭 underneath, and secondly, it's certainly nothing like 云

 

 

Hendricks does give the following in his book,  but still holds that it is more about an ancient character of cloud.   My guess is because of the consistency of other ancient versions to do so.