[TTC Study] Chapter 49 of the Tao Teh Ching

[ChiDragon]

It's the 以 character, that omits the 之 character according to classical chinese grammar.

Not true.

[doc benway]

Ah, yes.

 

Should I mention that I have a problem with these two lines as well? Not your translation but the concept being presented.

 

I just casn't believe that the Sage does not have thought of his/her own. We all have standards by which we live. To have these standards we must have had thoughts.

Here is another translation that's illuminating - that of Ni Hua-Ching:

One with wholeness of virtue (the Sage) has an unconditioned mind

He regards the mind of all being as his own mind

 

It seems to be saying that the Sage must subjugate the "standards by which we live" to the standards of nature or Dao.

The standards that we adopt as humans are a product of cultural and social conditioning, judgement, individual bias, conventions that tend to be based on things like approval. The unconditioned mind is crystal clear and tranquil and is sensitive enough and empty enough to be filled by and live in accordance with Dao. Like much of the Dao De Jing, it may not be readily attainable by the average person, but it's something worth aspiring to.

[Marblehead]

Here is another translation that's illuminating - that of Ni Hua-Ching:

One with wholeness of virtue (the Sage) has an unconditioned mind

He regards the mind of all being as his own mind

 

It seems to be saying that the Sage must subjugate the "standards by which we live" to the standards of nature or Dao.

The standards that we adopt as humans are a product of cultural and social conditioning, judgement, individual bias, conventions that tend to be based on things like approval. The unconditioned mind is crystal clear and tranquil and is sensitive enough and empty enough to be filled by and live in accordance with Dao. Like much of the Dao De Jing, it may not be readily attainable by the average person, but it's something worth aspiring to.

 

Okay. That is more acceptable. Yes, an unconditioned mind is a state worthy of attaining. And I agree that only the rare person will be able to attain this state because we all have been so conditioned by others all during our youth that it is almost impossible to tear away all the prejudices and biases we have accepted into our mind.

[doc benway]

Okay. That is more acceptable. Yes, an unconditioned mind is a state worthy of attaining. And I agree that only the rare person will be able to attain this state because we all have been so conditioned by others all during our youth that it is almost impossible to tear away all the prejudices and biases we have accepted into our mind.

The cool thing is that in any given moment, we can drop the conditioning.

It's not too difficult to achieve in the moment, but it's pretty tough to maintain over time.

Kind of like the discussion about continuity, the thoughts interrupt and that's where the conditioning resides.

But if we keep coming back to the moment, they add up one by one and gradually come into our daily lives.

[Marblehead]

The cool thing is that in any given moment, we can drop the conditioning.

 

That was easy for you to say, wasn't it? Hehehe. Heck, you have already been there. Folks who have never had the experience have no idea that they are conditioned let alone have any idea as to how or why they should attempt to unclutter their mind.

 

Other than that, okay, I will agree with you.

[lienshan]

2. (亓) 以 百 姓 (之) 心 為 (之) 心

 

He takes the mind of the common people as his mind. (Henricks translation of the Received version)

 

(亓) meaning "He" is omitted

(之) meaning "their" and "his" are omitted

 

2. (亓) 以 百 姓 之 心 為 (之) 心 (The Mawangdui version with a 之 not omitted)

 

An exposured object is placed in front and is repeated by a 之 character,

which was placed behind the verb in warring states time.

The phrase "the mind of the common people" has no verb,

so the 之 is placed where a "pronoun" 之 is omitted by rule.

 

Sorry, that I am so detailed, but I think that the meaning is important:

 

It describes a mutual relationship between the common people and the sage.

The position of a sage is behind in the sentence, as described in chapter 66

It's correct, that "He takes the mind of the common people as his mind."

But the exposured omitted (亓) "they" tells that the primary is:

They take his mind as the mind of the common people.

Hard to translate as a one-liner, but a "too" might work?

 

The sage has no independent thoughts.

He takes the mind of the common people as his mind too.

Edited July 13, 2011 by lienshan

[Marblehead]

 

The sage has no independent thoughts.

He takes the mind of the common people as his mind too.

 

Now if you could somehow squeeze one more word out of that I would feel a lot better.

 

With that one word the first line would read:

 

The sage ruler has no independent thoughts;

 

My problem is still deep rooted. I consider Chuang Tzu to have been a Sage. He was very opinionated - he had many thoughts of his own.

Edited July 13, 2011 by Marblehead

[lienshan]

So a Sage sees a criminal and trusts him because he understands the true nature of the criminal, that the acts alone do not define the man, but that it goes deeper than that, it involves his place within the whole, so he can trust the man, because he knows the man for what he is, the man cannot betray him. He is kind to all because he knows that to do otherwise is not beneficial.

 

This is one of my favorite passages, so it will be nice to see other people's opinions.

I am good to people who are good.

I am also good to people who are not good.

Because Virtue is goodness.

I have faith in people who are faithful.

I also have faith in people who are not faithful.

Because Virtue is faithfulness.

 

Here's my opinion: Is benevolence good? Is filial piety faithful?

 

So a sage sees a criminal, Confucius, and trusts Confucius because he understands the true nature of the criminal Confucius, that the acts alone do not define Confucius, but that it goes deeper than that, it involves Confucius's place within the whole, so he can trust Confucius, because he knows Confucius for what he is, Confucius cannot betray him. He is kind to all because he knows that to do otherwise is not beneficial.

 

I read the passage as saying:

A sage is good and faithful.

The confucian similarity:

Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself.

[lienshan]

My problem is still deep rooted. I consider Chuang Tzu to have been a Sage.

He was very opinionated - he had many thoughts of his own.

Chuang Tzu had no thoughts of his own, because he shared them with us.

[Marblehead]

Chuang Tzu had no thoughts of his own, because he shared them with us.

 

That's not fair because you are using faulty logic. Hehehe. But good try.

[doc benway]

Now if you could somehow squeeze one more word out of that I would feel a lot better.

 

With that one word the first line would read:

 

The sage ruler has no independent thoughts;

 

My problem is still deep rooted. I consider Chuang Tzu to have been a Sage. He was very opinionated - he had many thoughts of his own.

Perhaps you are taking too literally the idea of the sage having "no thoughts" and what is implied by "of his own".

The Sage means one who is a manifestation of Dao in the flesh - a conduit of Dao.

So the Sage doesn't cloud the expression of the nature of Dao with extraneous, conditioned, or biased thoughts, preferences, desires, longing for approval and attainment, and so on.

 

The Sage is the closest thing to a human expression of nature but it is in our nature to think, so there will be thoughts.

It's not so much that he has no thoughts of his own, it's that his thoughts are the thoughts of Dao, they are the thoughts that arise in the absence of those unskillful things that cloud our clarity.

 

And what does it mean to be "of his own." Who is he? Is he something apart from Dao? The Sage is a living manifestation of Dao so there is no one apart to have thoughts other than the natural thoughts that arise from Dao.

 

And I wonder about the implications of "the common people" - could another interpretation be "all of humanity" or "the genuine nature of people" or something like that? Or is he saying, let go of lofty philosophical and intellectual ideas and goals and desires and just be concerned with doing a good job at work, finding the next meal, supporting your partners, and yourself? Just living without the distraction of over-thinking things, trying to hoard and succeed and so on.

[doc benway]

After reading all the great stuff on this thread and the one in the general forum, I thought I'd offer my own amateur translation/interpretation:

 

 

The Sage has no mind that can be called his own,

Therefore, his mind reflects the true nature of humanity

 

He returns kindness for kindness,

And offers kindness in return for unkindness.

For he is a living manifestation of the virtue of kindness.

 

He is faithful to those who are faithful,

And he offers faith to those who are unfaithful.

For he is a living manifestation of the virtue of faithfulness.

 

The Sage lives and breathes in our world,

Allowing his mind to remain simple and natural.

As far as you and I can tell,

He is as a child.

[ChiDragon]

2. (亓) 以 百 姓 之 心 為 (之) 心 (The Mawangdui version with a 之 not omitted)

 

An exposured object is placed in front and is repeated by a 之 character,

which was placed behind the verb in warring states time.

The phrase "the mind of the common people" has no verb,

so the 之 is placed where a "pronoun" 之 is omitted by rule.

 

The (之) in "為(之)心" is optional as I said before.

 

為 (之) 心 or 為 心 was understood AS "as (his) heart"

 

FYI There are no rules in classic text. All interpretations have to be determined by the logic within context. A statement may be taken as a good interpretation as long it is logical. However, an interpretation of a phrase may be logical by itself but it may not flow with the rest of the phrases. Then, a different interpretation has to be done with another attempt until everything falls into place. One might call this is a trial and error method.

[ChiDragon]

That's not fair because you are using faulty logic. Hehehe. But good try.

Yes, our friend was good at that all the time. We have to keep our eyes on him....!!!

[Marblehead]

Perhaps you are taking too literally the idea of the sage having "no thoughts" and what is implied by "of his own".

The Sage means one who is a manifestation of Dao in the flesh - a conduit of Dao.

So the Sage doesn't cloud the expression of the nature of Dao with extraneous, conditioned, or biased thoughts, preferences, desires, longing for approval and attainment, and so on.

 

The Sage is the closest thing to a human expression of nature but it is in our nature to think, so there will be thoughts.

It's not so much that he has no thoughts of his own, it's that his thoughts are the thoughts of Dao, they are the thoughts that arise in the absence of those unskillful things that cloud our clarity.

 

And what does it mean to be "of his own." Who is he? Is he something apart from Dao? The Sage is a living manifestation of Dao so there is no one apart to have thoughts other than the natural thoughts that arise from Dao.

 

And I wonder about the implications of "the common people" - could another interpretation be "all of humanity" or "the genuine nature of people" or something like that? Or is he saying, let go of lofty philosophical and intellectual ideas and goals and desires and just be concerned with doing a good job at work, finding the next meal, supporting your partners, and yourself? Just living without the distraction of over-thinking things, trying to hoard and succeed and so on.

 

Thanks Steve. Those are thoughts I have been pointing to with my statements of doubts. I really get tired of hearing myself state my understanding all the time. I like it very much when I can state my doubts and allow others to suggest clarifications.

 

You did good.

[Marblehead]

After reading all the great stuff on this thread and the one in the general forum, I thought I'd offer my own amateur translation/interpretation:

 

Nice.

[lienshan]

Chuang Tzu had no thoughts of his own, because he shared them with us.

That's not fair because you are using faulty logic. Hehehe. But good try.

The Sage has no mind that can be called his own,

Therefore, his mind reflects the true nature of humanity

I think that my answer is in accordance with Steve's translation!

 

A sage reflects the true nature of humanity and share with us in his way.

Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu reflect the true nature of humanity differently,

but they do both share ... that's to me sagely!

 

Steve's translation inspired me to remember this Eckhart Tolle quote:

 

"I cannot tell you anything, that you do not already know,

but I can tell you something, that you might have forgotten"

[Marblehead]

Steve's translation inspired me to remember this Eckhart Tolle quote:

 

"I cannot tell you anything, that you do not already know,

but I can tell you something, that you might have forgotten"

 

Ah!, yes. It is truely amazing how much I have actually forgotten.

 

This may be good or not-good. I make no value judgements.

[Aaron]

Hello guys,

 

I used to translate the Tao Teh Ching, but I gave it up. This however is probably one of the most important chapters (imo) found in the Tao Teh Ching, so I thought I might give a loose translation, based on what I think is trying to be expressed. Take it or leave it.

 

The Sage is not interested in his own well being,

But takes the well being of others as his own.

He is kind to those who are kind,

He is kind to those who are not kind,

for Virtue (Te) is kind.

He trusts those who are trustworthy,

He trusts those who are not trustworthy,

for Virtue (Te) is trustworthy.

To the world he is shy and humble.

For the sake of the world he remains undecided.

All the people listen and watch him,

because he comes to them like a small child.

 

 

Anyways... when I have the time I'll look at the original texts and try to come up with a better translation...

 

What I think it's actually saying, isn't that the sage has "no-mind", I think that's our own inclination to add Buddhist mysticism to the mix, but rather that he is moved by compassion. This compassion allows him to be kind to those who are unkind, and trust those who are not trustworthy, because he practices High Compassion, or Te, and, as it's been said in other threads, High Compassion is not just about being nice because it's the right thing to do, but being nice because one sees the inherent wisdom in the act, in other words he is moved to compassion because of his felt connection to the world.

 

I think the Sage is undecided, in that he is always empty, he allows each action that occurs to influence his own actions, rather than going with preconceived ideas of what will happen. The people listen to him because he is trustworthy, because he is kind, because he has the mind and heart of a child, so when he speaks they hear that unwavering belief in the virtues of kindness, humility, and compassion, if not said, then in his actions.

 

Anyways, work tomorrow, so bed now. Take care.

 

Aaron

[lienshan]

Anyways... when I have the time I'll look at the original texts and try to come up with a better translation...

Two chinese characters of the first line have been inverted. Litterally translated:

 

sages ever have no mind (The Mawangdui B version)

sages have no ever mind (The Received version)

 

The adverb ever becomes an adjective meaning independent in the Received version.

 

The Mawangdui B word structure is similar to line 5 in chapter 1

if the word mind is replaced by the word desire.

A corresponding Feng-English translation:

 

sages ever mindless

[Marblehead]

Hello guys,

 

I used to translate the Tao Teh Ching, but I gave it up. This however is probably one of the most important chapters (imo) found in the Tao Teh Ching, so I thought I might give a loose translation, based on what I think is trying to be expressed. Take it or leave it.

 

 

Nice Aaron. Thanks for sharing.

[Aaron]

Two chinese characters of the first line have been inverted. Litterally translated:

 

sages ever have no mind (The Mawangdui B version)

sages have no ever mind (The Received version)

 

The adverb ever becomes an adjective meaning independent in the Received version.

 

The Mawangdui B word structure is similar to line 5 in chapter 1

if the word mind is replaced by the word desire.

A corresponding Feng-English translation:

 

sages ever mindless

 

I understand what you're saying, I just tend to side with the majority of authorities who have translated this chapter and view it as not being something you can literally translate.

 

Aaron

[lienshan]

I just tend to side with the majority of authorities who have translated this chapter

and view it as not being something you can literally translate.

Sages, what's their physical being in the world, inhale and exhale.

Thereupon: The creation of the world's spoken communication!

Common people all concentrate their ears and eyes.

Thereupon: All newborn babies are sages!

 

My above reading of the Mawangdui version's last 4 lines is definite not an authoritative reading, but it makes sense to me, that sages use dialogue when communicating their wisdom. That the common people isn't defined as ears and eyes, while sages are defined as mouths, screaming like newborn babies.

 

The last line in details: 聖人 皆孩 之 is equivalent to 皆孩 聖人

 

聖人 (sages) is the exposed object of the sentence placed in front

皆孩 (all newborn babies) is the subject of the sentence

之 is used grammatically repeating the exposed object placed behind the inplicit verb "are"

 

聖人皆孩之 can't be translated in any other way, because:

 

孩 is a noun "children", and 之 meaning "make" would say: sages are all childish

之 being the personal pronoun "their" would have this layout: 聖人之皆孩

之 being the verb "to go to" would say: all newborn babies of sages walk

 

Lao Tzu used this grammar rule to show, that sages placed in front use monoloques.

He used exactly the same grammar rule in the Mawangdui line 2 to put sages behind,

because that's the correct position of a sage according to his chapter 66.

Edited July 14, 2011 by lienshan

[ChiDragon]

Sages, what's their physical being in the world, inhale and exhale.

Thereupon: The creation of the world's spoken communication!

Common people all concentrate their ears and eyes.

Thereupon: All newborn babies are sages!

 

My above reading of the Mawangdui version's last 4 lines is definite not an authoritative reading, but it makes sense to me, that sages use dialogue when communicating their wisdom. That the common people isn't defined as ears and eyes, while sages are defined as mouths, screaming like newborn babies.

 

The last line in details: 聖人 皆孩 之 is equivalent to 皆孩 聖人

 

聖人 (sages) is the exposed object of the sentence placed in front

皆孩 (all newborn babies) is the subject of the sentence

之 is used grammatically repeating the exposed object placed behind the inplicit verb "are"

 

聖人皆孩之 can't be translated in any other way, because:

 

孩 is a noun "children", and 之 meaning "make" would say: sages are all childish

之 being the personal pronoun "their" would have this layout: 聖人之皆孩

之 being the verb "to go to" would say: all newborn babies of sages walk

 

Lao Tzu used this grammar rule to show, that sages placed in front use monoloques.

He used exactly the same grammar rule in the Mawangdui line 2 to put sages behind,

because that's the correct position of a sage according to his chapter 66.

 

The post above was totally incorrect and misleading.

Edited July 14, 2011 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

Clarification:

I had translated the following lines incorrectly in another thread.

 

5. 德善。

Correct:

5. I've gained kindness.

 

Incorrect:

5. It's the virtue of kindness.

If the characters 德善 had been reversed such as 善德, then I would have been correct.

 

8. 德信。

Correct:

8. I've gained trust.

 

Incorrect:

8. It's the virtue of trust.

If the characters 德信 had been reversed such as 信德, then I would have been correct.