[TTC Study] Chapter 46 of the Tao Teh Ching

[dawei]

You guys go ahead on it you want. I just don't say anything if I have nothing to say. (Well, most of the time. Hehehe. I have been accused of talking a lot but yet not saying anything.)

I say next chapter...

[Marblehead]

I say next chapter...

 

Okay. Tomorrow morning.

[Procurator]

I say next chapter...

the foremost problem with this chapter is that the translators incl. Chidragon (hehe) completely miss on a dichotomy between steer steeds (used for individual chivalric combat) and rongma (chariot horses used in mass armies).

[Marblehead]

the foremost problem with this chapter is that the translators incl. Chidragon (hehe) completely miss on a dichotomy between steer steeds (used for individual chivalric combat) and rongma (chariot horses used in mass armies).

 

Reminded me of Chuang Tzu's story of the famous horse trainer.

[ChiDragon]

the foremost problem with this chapter is that the translators incl. Chidragon (hehe) completely miss on a dichotomy between steer steeds (used for individual chivalric combat) and rongma (chariot horses used in mass armies).

I always tried not the contribute more than what it had been offered....

[dawei]

the foremost problem with this chapter is that the translators incl. Chidragon (hehe) completely miss on a dichotomy between steer steeds (used for individual chivalric combat) and rongma (chariot horses used in mass armies).

I read the Hanfei commentary on this chapter and he has a curious section saying:

 

If the production of domestic animals lessens, then there will be a lack of war-horses; if troops are used up, the army will be in a precarious state. If war-horses are lacking, then even the generals' horses will have to go on the battlefield. If the army is in a precarïous state, then even officials close to the ruler will be pressed into service.

 

The horse is something of great use for the military; 'surroundings' are the officials close to the ruler. Since these days the troops' equipage must have recourse to the generals' horses and intimate officials, the text says: "When the way is not practiced in the world, then war-horses must be brought forth fiom the stalls of the high ministers."

 

So there is a very early story relating that general's horses are synonymous with war-horses(?). Also there is a comment that 郊 is proximity to the ruler, not a bordering state; ergo, those close to the ruler(?).

 

Thus, he seems to imply something along the lines of:

"When the way is not practiced in the world,

then war-horses must be brought forth from the stalls of the high ministers."

 

I wonder if you see anything along this line? Or how do you take the chapter meaning?

Edited July 6, 2011 by dawei

[Procurator]

I read the Hanfei commentary on this chapter and he has a curious section saying:

...

 

So there is a very early story relating that general's horses are synonymous with war-horses(?).

 

i would disagree with this statement. in every cavalry there is a dichotomy between a prized steed and a mass warfare horse.

 

the opening lines are "accepted wisdom" something like a aphorism with centuries of experience behind it.

 

"When there is Dao under Heaven even the prized steeds are left idle (or used for manure). When there is no Dao under Heaven then even suburbian lands (normally reserved for agriculture to support the city) are used to mass produce mass warfare horses"

 

the analogy is that of vegetable gardens established in view of war necessities in White House and Buckinghem Palace in WW2.

 

also the dichotomy is between a small peacefull state where prized mounted steeds were used for chivalric duels or pomp and a totalitarian mass armies of huge chariot formations along the lines of Qin.

 

http://www.ancientmilitary.com/ancient-chinese-military.htm

http://donlehmanjr.com/China/china%20chapters/china%20book2/china39.htm

http://faculty.baruch.cuny.edu/hsarkissian/Jie%20Lao%20Sample%20Translation%20-%20Hagop%20Sarkissian.pdf

 

the rest of the paragraph is authors interpretation of this accepted wisdom.

[ChiDragon]

A little over kill for a small chapter in the TTC, don't you think...???

[dawei]

i would disagree with this statement. in every cavalry there is a dichotomy between a prized steed and a mass warfare horse.

Maybe I did not really word this idea correctly but I follow your point.

 

"When there is Dao under Heaven even the prized steeds are left idle (or used for manure). When there is no Dao under Heaven then even suburbian lands (normally reserved for agriculture to support the city) are used to mass produce mass warfare horses"

I still cannot escape the use of 卻; how are you using it here? I feel like it is suggesting that the horses are often being used for war but 'return' when things are good. The gestation period for a horse is 11 months; so "mass producing" of horses is a very long-term idea, but the Warring State Period is a few hundred years.

 

I think other than "mass produced", I would agree with this explanation.

 

also the dichotomy is between a small peacefull state where prized mounted steeds were used for chivalric duels or pomp and a totalitarian mass armies of huge chariot formations along the lines of Qin.

I get this as looking back on history; but Qin was not a major player throughout the Warring States Period; in fact, despite is size it spills into Tibet and was disorganzied. The Wei State (where the Zhou tribe resided) was much smaller but was much more powerful for a while. Zhao replaced war chariots with cavalry archers and was very successful for a while. Qin was good at a slow build up and deception. But it was around the time of Hanfei that Qin became more powerful and finally prevailed.

 

http://www.ancientmilitary.com/ancient-chinese-military.htm

http://donlehmanjr.com/China/china%20chapters/china%20book2/china39.htm

http://faculty.baruch.cuny.edu/hsarkissian/Jie%20Lao%20Sample%20Translation%20-%20Hagop%20Sarkissian.pdf

thanks for the links.

[dawei]

A little over kill for a small chapter in the TTC, don't you think...???

Do you have something useful to add? Otherwise, don't be such an ass here. I see you often want to cut off the discussion. This is a 'study'. Stop trying to control others. Despite all your claim for 'wu wei', you interfere quite a bit. You are much better than this.

[Procurator]

[ChiDragon]

 

I still cannot escape the use of 卻; how are you using it here? I feel like it is suggesting that the horses are often being used for war but 'return' when things are good.

I am thinking the same that the horses were returned to the farms after the war.

 

Ｔhe commentary of my source:

陳鼓應：卻：　屏去，退回(returned)。

吳澄說:「卻，退也(it's return」

 

Ref: http://www.doc88.com/p-99425151684.html

Point the mouse to the bottom of the screen to download first.

Go to page 二四四(page 244). For those who read Chinese, scroll to Chapter 46 or other chapters for future references. It makes very interesting in studying the Tao Te Ching.

Edited July 6, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Aaron]

My translation of chapter 46... I remember my choice of the word guilty caused a bit of discussion... here goes. I'm not sure why it ended up so different from other translations... perhaps something got lost... hahahaha... well I thought it was funny.

 

 

There are too many guilty,

their desires offend others, they are at fault and blame others, but feel no sorrow.

When one desires what others have, one obtains nothing,

but instead brings a great calamity upon themselves.

 

Be content with what you have,

know when it is enough.

 

To be content with what you have

is to always have enough,

this will bring lasting satisfaction.

Edited July 21, 2011 by Twinner

[Marblehead]

Hehehe. Yeah, more work needs be done with that first section. The rest is good, I think.

[Aaron]

Hello Marble,

 

Again this is one of those chapters where I couldn't see it as other people did. Perhaps I'm missing something. When I translated these chapters I didn't look at anyone else's translation, because I wanted to get my own honest interpretation. This, however, has a few problems. First I miss some of the social and cultural context and second I tend to drift away from the common consensus, which isn't always a good thing.

 

Aaron

Edited July 21, 2011 by Twinner

[Marblehead]

Hello Marble,

 

Again this is one of those chapters where I couldn't see it as other people did. Perhaps I'm missing something. When I translated these chapters I didn't look at anyone else's translation, because I wanted to get my own honest interpretation. This, however, has a few problems. First I miss some of the social and cultural context and second I tend to drift away from the common consensus, which isn't always a good thing.

 

Aaron

 

Yeah, knowing how the words were used 2500 years ago would help a lot, I am sure. It is great that you take the time to do that in order to gain your own personal understandings.

[dust]

GD3

 

罪莫厚於甚欲 There is no greater crime than great desire;

咎莫僉於欲得 None are more guilty than those who fulfill their desire;

化莫大於不知足 There is no greater turmoil than not knowing one has enough;

知足之為足 Knowing one has enough being enough

此恆足矣 Is truly enough

[Marblehead]

Well, I actually like your translation better than Henricks' but that's not saying too much so don't put the feather in the hat yet.

 

(Line 2 is the problem for me. If one has few desires and all are satisfied then one will have contentment.)

[dust]

Well, I actually like your translation better than Henricks' but that's not saying too much so don't put the feather in the hat yet.

 

(Line 2 is the problem for me. If one has few desires and all are satisfied then one will have contentment.)

Line 2 was the main problem for me too

Firstly, on the original bamboo, it's not written as in the first line, 欲 desire, but as 谷 valley

Secondly, looking again, I'm not quite right am I?

 

Perhaps I should go with the crowd: "There is no greater fault than desire for success"

[Marblehead]

Yeah, on a very rare occasion I wish I could read Chinese but that wish has not arisen often enough for me to act on it.

 

All I have is my understanding of life and that's not a valid understanding for the majority of people. I do try to apply logic to what I read about the TTC and Daoism in general.

 

If you would please, do another shot at Line 2. And go with your gut this time.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

GD3

 

罪莫厚於甚欲 There is no greater crime than great desire;

咎莫僉於欲得 None are more guilty than those who fulfill their desire;

 

"The greatest transgression is abundance of desire. No greater punishment than the accumulation of desires."

 

There's a lot in there. The English grammar is too finite to encompass all the simultaneous ways meanings that are possible in Classical Chinese words and grammar, but I think this is the meaning being construed.

化莫大於不知足 There is no greater turmoil than not knowing one has enough;

知足之為足 Knowing one has enough being enough

此恆足矣 Is truly enough

 

"No greater turmoil than not knowing one has enough

Creating sufficiency by knowing sufficiency

This (is how to bring about) enduring sufficiency."

 

note that 之 usually turns the sentence around, so that what precedes, is the description of what follows it. So from the English linguistic mind, it would be like "為create/made 足sufficiency of knowing sufficiency."

 

The last line is really interesting to me because of the way "heng 恆" (later replaced by chang, ex. "eternal Dao," ch. 1) seems to be used as a way of saying "this brings endurance to sufficiency."

 

This made me reflect some more on it's use in the second line of chapter one. In the lines "Dao can be spoken, not eternal Dao," heng could also, poetically, be talking about how Dao not only endures forever, but also brings life - existence, endurance, continuity, time, .... Dao not only endures, it brings endurance, is endurance.

[dust]

note that 之 usually turns the sentence around, so that what precedes, is the description of what follows it. So from the English linguistic mind, it would be like "為create/made 足sufficiency of knowing sufficiency."

 

The last line is really interesting to me because of the way "heng 恆" (later replaced by chang, ex. "eternal Dao," ch. 1) seems to be used as a way of saying "this brings endurance to sufficiency."

 

This made me reflect some more on it's use in the second line of chapter one. In the lines "Dao can be spoken, not eternal Dao," heng could also, poetically, be talking about how Dao not only endures forever, but also brings life - existence, endurance, continuity, time, .... Dao not only endures, it brings endurance, is endurance.

 

Ya...don't know why I bothered yesterday! I shall attempt again later with all this in mind. Thanks

[Marblehead]

Ya...don't know why I bothered yesterday! I shall attempt again later with all this in mind. Thanks

Well, I don't want to influence you in any way but I think this:

 

"The greatest transgression is abundance of desire. No greater punishment than the accumulation of desires."

 

speaks to the concept very well indeed.

[dust]

OK.. just looking at characters for a moment:

 

咎 -- a verb -- to blame or fault someone

 

僉 -- this character is written in GD with an extra radical at the bottom, but if the meaning is the same as 僉, we can assume "all (people)" ?

 

欲 -- in the third line not written as in the first line (甚欲) but as 谷 -- which seems like an odd typo to make just a few characters after writing it in the very same chapter...? -- but if we assume they meant 欲...

 

得 -- to get/obtain, but looks like it's written as 㝵 without 彳-- http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E3%9D%B5

 

Which could mean we have something like

 

咎莫僉於欲㝵 blame not all (than) desire obtain/obstruct/offend/complacence

 

...?

[Taoist Texts]

道德經46

 

《道德經》:

禍莫大於不知足；咎莫大於欲得。故知足之足，常足矣。

《老子河上公章句·儉欲》:

罪莫大於可欲。禍莫大於不知足，咎莫大於欲得。故知足之足，常足。

《郭店·老子甲》:

罪莫厚於甚欲，咎莫僉於欲得，禍莫大乎不知足。知足之為足，此恒足矣。

《馬王堆·老子甲德經》:

罪莫大於可欲；禍莫大於不知足。咎莫憯於欲得。□□□□□恆足矣。

《馬王堆·老子乙德經》:

罪莫大可欲禍□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□足矣。

《群書治要·德經》:

罪莫大於可欲，禍莫大於不知足，咎莫大於欲得，故知足之足，常足矣。

 

The idea is that when everything 僉that could have been desired and obtained IS obtained, then there is no other way further but downhill. Therefore:

A. that eventuality is the moment of greatest, inevitable danger.

B. One should stop before that point of no return is reached, that’s how one knows when to stop – before sufficiency is reached.

C. If stopping BEFORE sufficiency (obtaining everything obtainable) is optimal, then it follows that one should be ALWAYS in a stopping mode. (pun: sufficiency=stopping).