[TTC Study] Chapter 44 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Marblehead]

[MassTaoism]

Great lesson and a fantastic passage. I've learned a long time ago when to stop in certain situations when I found myself fall into some trouble due to personal greed and the desire of possessions, with that said, we all desire things but I think we need to prioritize and strip ourselves down to the core to define these priorities. I've done that and I've decided that the love of my family and personal health has become the most important thing in my life and material possessions have become a much lower priority over the past several years.

[Marblehead]

Nice post MassTaoism. Thanks for sharing.

[ChiDragon]

Chapter 44 - Knowing Your Limitations

 

Translation in terse English...

1. Fame and life which is more intimate?

2. Life and goods which is more precious?

3. Gain and death which is more harmful?

4. Superfluously in love(with fame) must pay a high price.

5. Excessive storage(of goods) may result in a heavy loss.

6. Therefore, one with content will not be ignominious,

7. Knowing when to quit ended with no risk,

8. Can be long lasting.

 

 

1. 名與身孰親。

2. 身與貨孰多。

3. 得與亡孰病。

4. 甚愛必大費。

5. 多藏必厚亡。

6. 故知足不辱。

7. 知止不殆。

8. 可以長久。

[Marblehead]

Chapter 44 - Knowing Your Limitations

 

Only comment is the use of "and" in the first three lines instead of "or". "or" seems to be more fitting to me.

[ChiDragon]

Only comment is the use of "and" in the first three lines instead of "or". "or" seems to be more fitting to me.

I thought you might say that. Yes, you are right in the English language. But the character 與(and) was used in the classic text. The reason that I was hesitated to make the correction because I do not want to alter the original context. Now, do you see the big difference in both languages that may be causing a confusion to the translators.

 

PS...

I know why dawei was so upset with my translations. It was caused by this kind of nuance in the thoughts and it was very irritating. Especially, it was something that is not very easy to explain to a non-native speaker. In this case, it was very easy to understand. However, in some other more complicated cases, they were much more difficult to bring the point across. Sometimes, when I've encountered in such a situation and tried to express it, I rather bump my head against the wall instead. Do you see what I mean...???

 

Peace.

Edited June 26, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Do you see what I mean...???

 

Peace.

 

Yep. I see what you mean. I'm glad you expected me to make comment. Hehehe. Old Mr. Practical here, you know.

 

And BTW: Henricks' Guodian strips of the first three lines read:

 

1 Fame or your health -- which is more dear?

2 Your health or possessions -- which is worth more?

3 Gain or loss -- in which is there harm?

 

Of course, I don't read the Chinese so I have no way of knowing if he took liberties in the translation of the English word "or". But for me "or" is a better word because the concept is opposing one thought against another.

[dawei]

PS...

I know why dawei was so upset with my translations. It was caused by this kind of nuance in the thoughts and it was very irritating. Especially, it was something that is not very easy to explain to a non-native speaker. In this case, it was very easy to understand. However, in some other more complicated cases, they were much more difficult to bring the point across. Sometimes, when I've encountered in such a situation and tried to express it, I rather bump my head against the wall instead. Do you see what I mean...???

I was not upset with your translation but your attitude and assumptions, like the above. This is the second time you want to call me out directly by name in posting to others. How about keeping your editorializing assumptions in check since you don't really seem to even know your doing this. If you do know, then your trolling for trouble. Let it go. No response needed.

[dawei]

Yep. I see what you mean. I'm glad you expected me to make comment. Hehehe. Old Mr. Practical here, you know.

 

And BTW: Henricks' Guodian strips of the first three lines read:

 

1 Fame or your health -- which is more dear?

2 Your health or possessions -- which is worth more?

3 Gain or loss -- in which is there harm?

 

Of course, I don't read the Chinese so I have no way of knowing if he took liberties in the translation of the English word "or". But for me "or" is a better word because the concept is opposing one thought against another.

"And" , "or" , "rather" ,etc and other words work here. Henrick's is doing as the vast majority do, use "or". Even well known chinese translators like Lin Yutang, Chan, Zhengkun, Ta-Kao, Lau.

 

I like the way "or" reads since it creates more of a contrast and the later lines emphasis contrast as well.

[ChiDragon]

I was not upset with your translation but your attitude and assumptions, like the above. This is the second time you want to call me out directly by name in posting to others. How about keeping your editorializing assumptions in check since you don't really seem to even know your doing this. If you do know, then your trolling for trouble. Let it go. No response needed.

All words have meanings. I can only follow your words fanatically but not blindly. I got your "shut up" MSG. Therefore, I will not respond to any of your posts even though my words were seriously criticized.

[dawei]

I got your "shut up" MSG. Therefore, I will not respond to any of your posts even though my words were seriously criticized.

Not idea what your talking about MSG. I certainly did not send you any message (I don't play those kinds of games by sending private messages like that. If I did, I would hope you don't play the kind of game of publicly talking about private messages). We are allowed to disagree with another's idea; that's why it's a discussion forum. Let's just discuss the chapters.

[Marblehead]

Yes, let us all continue discussing the chapters. Actually, I gain when you two get into your discussions for clarification and it would be nice if you both could continue without getting emotional about it all.

 

As Lin Yutang was mentioned I will add his translation here:

 

Fame or one's own self, which does one love more?

One's own self or material goods, which has more worth?

Loss (of self) or possessiion (of goods), which is the greater evil?

 

Therefore: he who loves most spends most,

He who hoards much loses much.

The contented man meets no disgrace;

Who knows when to stop runs into no danger --

He can long endure.

 

 

Lin Yutang followed this chapter with the stories from Chuang Tzu, "Chuangtse Was In A Park." and "Chuangtse Refused Government office."

[ChiDragon]

Not idea what your talking about MSG. I certainly did not send you any message (I don't play those kinds of games by sending private messages like that. If I did, I would hope you don't play the kind of game of publicly talking about private messages). We are allowed to disagree with another's idea; that's why it's a discussion forum. Let's just discuss the chapters.

"Let it go. No response needed." This was the MSG.

 

This was analogous to to an old saying:

Only the ruler was allowed to set a fire, but the people were not even allowed to light a candle.

 

Sorry. If that wasn't what you meant, please forgive me for my over sensitivity and stupidity.

[dawei]

"Let it go. No response needed." This was the MSG.

 

This was analogous to to an old saying:

Only the ruler was allowed to set a fire, but the people were not even allowed to light a candle.

 

Sorry. If that wasn't what you meant, please forgive me for my over sensitivity and stupidity.

It only meant that there was no need to respond. You could stop the tit-for-tat... but as I have said before, you just want the last word but don't seem able to let it go. Even though you posted you would not respond, you did anyways. So you proved my point even when I tried to say we can stop NOW.

Edited June 26, 2011 by dawei

[Marblehead]

Hehehe. Would you two guys look at the last two lines of this chapter?

 

I really would like for both of you to long endure.

 

Should I post the next chapter so we can start all over again?

[ChiDragon]

Hehehe. Would you two guys look at the last two lines of this chapter?

 

I really would like for both of you to long endure.

 

Should I post the next chapter so we can start all over again?

hehehehe..........

This is only part of the learning process of the Tao Te Ching. All misunderstandings are ironed out only by talking it out. Nobody will have the last word, until all the reasons are being depleted.

[ChiDragon]

Chapter 44 - Knowing Your Limitations - Revised

 

Translation in terse English...

1. Fame or life which is more intimate?

2. Life or goods which is more precious?

3. Gain or death which is more harmful?

4. Superfluously in love(with fame) must pay a high price.

5. Excessive storage(of goods) may result in a heavy loss.

6. Therefore, one with content will not be ignominious,

7. Knowing when to quit ended with no risk,

8. Can be long lasting.

[Marblehead]

Nobody will have the last word, until all the reasons are being depleted.

 

Ha! I always have the last word when I want it. Hehehe. Thank goodness that desire doesn't happen very often.

[Marblehead]

Chapter 44 - Knowing Your Limitations - Revised

 

3. Gain or death which is more harmful?

 

Just wondering, why did you use "death" instead of "loss" here?

 

(The more we lose the less we have to protect.)

[MassTaoism]

"Fame or life, which is more intimate".....

 

Well, fame of any kind brings a lot of people into your life and if that's okay with someone then maybe that's what they would consider to be their "intimacy", but for me I would much prefer "life" because I can make of it what I chose instead of having other hands in my bowl of M&M's....if you catch my drift.

 

Just food for thought.

 

Also, my copy of Tao Te Ching has it listed as the following....

 

"Which is more important, you honor or your life?

Which is more valuable, your possessions or your person?

Which is more destructive, success of failure?

 

Because of this, great love extracts a great cost and true wealth requires greater loss.

 

Knowing when you have enough avoids dishonor, and knowing when to stop will keep you from danger and bring you a long, happy life."

Edited June 27, 2011 by MassTaoism

[ChiDragon]

Just wondering, why did you use "death" instead of "loss" here?

 

(The more we lose the less we have to protect.)

 

1. 名與身孰親。

2. 身與貨孰多。

3. 得與亡孰病。

4. 甚愛必大費。

5. 多藏必厚亡。

6. 故知足不辱。

7. 知止不殆。

8. 可以長久。

 

Good question, I think you are wondering about this character 亡(wang2) in lines 3 and 5.

Normally, 亡(wang2) means death.

 

1. Fame or life which is more intimate?

2. Life or goods which is more precious?

3. Gain or death which is more harmful?

 

If we look at the lines 1 and 2, they were asking something about fame, goods and life.

In line 3, it was asking about the gain of fame and goods; then the death which was related to life.

 

 

5. 多藏必厚亡。

5. Excessive storage(of goods) may result in a heavy loss.

In line 5, it was talking about the storage of goods which was related to loss instead of death. In the classic text, only, the character 亡(wang2) means loss here. In modern Chinese, 亡(wang2) will not be used in such manner.

 

Edited to add:

I did a further investigation, the character 亡(wang2) does have the meanings of "death" and "loss".

Again, in modern Chinese, 亡(wang2) was seldom used as "loss".

Edited June 29, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Okay. I accept that. Loss of life would be just a valid but that would likely be pushing the translation into an interpretation.

[ChiDragon]

Okay. I accept that. Loss of life would be just a valid but that would likely be pushing the translation into an interpretation.

1. Fame or life which is more intimate?

2. Life or goods which is more precious?

3. Gain or death which is more harmful?

 

The translation was considered within context as I had indicated.

If lines 3 was translated as:

3. Gain or loss which is more harmful? Then, the value of life has been ignored as life mentioned in lines 1 and 2.

 

Suppose a question was asked in this way:

3. Gain, loss or death which is more harmful?

Wouldn't you say that death is more harmful and life is more important to you....???

Edited June 27, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Suppose a question was asked in this way:

3. Gain, loss or death which is more harmful?

Wouldn't you say that death is more harmful and life is more important to you....???

 

Yeah, but that would take the first three lines out of sequence of the "this or that" contrasting.

 

But yes, death is more harmful than is gain or loss of material things.

 

Of course we could say: Possessions or life, which is more beneficial?

 

But that wouldn't be fair to the original text.

 

But you stay with the original Chinese as much as you can. I will do the interpretations. Hehehe.

[Eric23]

Wouldn't you say that death is more harmful and life is more important to you....???

 

After watching my father suffer for over 2 years with severe CBD, seeing him holding on in shear misery, his passing was anything but harmful. In fact, his caretakers and health providers did indeed cause more harm by keeping him alive those last couple of weeks.