[TTC Study] Chapter 1 of the Tao Te Ching

[stan herman]

Hi

 

I feel that what we have here is simply stated, accessible to most ordinary people and gives a clear and simple explanation of what is a very difficult concept to understand. There is no concept about God, but quite clearly stated that any life can become divine and the mystery is there in front of our very own eyes. All we are required is to abide by the very simple rules that the way has led us to through evolution. We cannot put a name to the Dao "I call it Dao for lack of a better word" but we know that it exists as it has created all that we can see and feel. So I feel that chapter one is simply stating that parallels between universal life force and the creation of matter. One can be seen the other can be 'felt'.

 

Nicely said. This is what I think Verse 1 is about (in contemporary context):

 

1. You can choose how you think and what you act upon. You may center your attention on what is real and valid, according to your own observations and experiences, or you can become a contributor to the latest and most fashionable tower of babel.

 

If you choose to be a tower builder, you put on the uniform of a particular profession or trade or political movement or social or economic group. You go along and get along. You pledge allegiance to your group's slogans and interpret events according to its generalizations.

 

If you choose to be a reality hunter you place your self somewhat apart from the popular view and concentrate on discovering what is going on beneath the slogans.

 

Both courses have their advantages and disadvantages. If you choose to help build the tower, sooner or later, you will be disappointed because what is supposed to happen (according to the slogans) doesn't happen, and you are thrown on your own devices. If you choose to be a reality hunter you find the hunt is not an easy one, and it can get lonesome.

 

Some choose one course and some the other to travel their lives. A few recognize their equal validity. To respect popular generalizations but not to depend upon them is healthy. To increase your capacity to cope with their crucial exceptions is skill. When you depart from your usual pattern, whether by necessity or choice, the crucial moves of your life are made.

[lienshan]

What has not been discussed yet is the difference of the Received chapter One and the exavacated Mawangdui chapter One:

 

wu ming wan wu zhi shi ye

you ming wan wu zhi mu ye

 

The grammatical ye characters do here mark subject noun clauses:

 

wu ming (wan wu zhi shi)

you ming (wan wu zhi mu)

 

Rethorical questions were marked by reverting the subject and the predicate:

 

(wan wu zhi shi) wu ming?

(wan wu zhi mu) you ming?

 

The four primary negatives bu, fu, wu, fei, were used to define the following character:

 

bu ming = not entitling = ming is defined as a "subjective" verb or adjective

fu ming = not named = ming is defined as an "objective" verb or adjective

wu ming = not a title = ming is defined as a "subjective" noun

fei ming = not a name = ming is defined as an "objective" noun

 

Leading to this translation of the two Mawangdui version lines:

 

The first of everything has not a title?

The mother of everything has a title?

 

The contradiction that Laozi point at in the Mawangdui version is in this "Da Yi Sheng Shui" line:

 

Expentant and then someone First causes the self-made Mother of everything.

 

That'll say, that "the First of everything" and "the Mother of everything" are two??

[Marblehead]

That'll say, that "the First of everything" and "the Mother of everything" are two??

 

I would agree with this.

 

From a science point of view, the "Mother" was the big bang. What caused Singularity to bang? It cannot be defined because it happened before there was anything. All we can do is guess. Many assume a god. Others assume whatever. These are only assumptions with no proof to back up the assumption.

[lienshan]

I would agree with this.

Here is most of the chapter related to three Da Yi Sheng Shui lines:

 

Dao is also its character; Early Dawn is its name.

 

It's a walk maybe walking; It isn't a regular way.

It's a title maybe entitling; It isn't a regular name.

 

Pregnant and then someone First causes the self-made Mother of everything.

 

Does the First of everything not have a title?

Does the Mother of everything have a title?

 

Why Dao follows what's duty surely rely on its name.

 

Therefore observe their obedience,

whereby looking at their kowtow regular having the desired,

that regular is to have no desire.

 

 

The reason why "heaven and earth" in line 3 doesn't work are these two lines:

 

The return of water assists the Great One by completing heaven

and the heavenly return assists the Great by completing earth.

What's heaven and earth is the birth of the Great One.

 

because One has the title Great not matching the rethorical questions!

 

From a science point of view, the "Mother" was the big bang. What caused Singularity to bang?

I think that Great One sounds more like Big Bang than the Mother of everything?

[Marblehead]

I think that Great One sounds more like Big Bang than the Mother of everything?

 

Yes, this could be discussed endlessly but we really don't know, do we?

 

We accept whatever makes us feel good. (And I do enjoy feeling good.)

[on the path]

I would agree with this.

 

From a science point of view, the "Mother" was the big bang. What caused Singularity to bang? It cannot be defined because it happened before there was anything. All we can do is guess. Many assume a god. Others assume whatever. These are only assumptions with no proof to back up the assumption.

 

 

Hi marblehead, I think you've become a Daoist!!!!!!(hehe)

 

The mystery is there its up to us to find it, so Lao Tzu says. "The nameless, is the Mother of Heaven and Earth" No singular God there, no God at all!! Big Bang, its the only thing we have to equate to it. But it seems to me we have a different view from any other religion in the world here. We don't know exactly was the cause of all things coming into existence, but its certainly not God according to Lao Tzu, but whatever it was has made Gods and Immortals to exist. Not the other way round. Using our senses we can see the manifestations, using our hearts we sense the great mystery of creation. They come from the same source, but one we cannot see using only our senses. Lao Tzu's whole work I feel is about taking ourselves back to the source where we can perceive the "path of all mystery". That means to me letting go of all our prejudices, our desires and the things that we have learn't, until we are empty. We then can relearn without these things, leaving our perceptions clear to see what is there. The most difficult bit for all of us I think is being truly empty!!!

[Marblehead]

Hi marblehead, I think you've become a Daoist!!!!!!(hehe)

 

Well, I hope there is a little similarity. After all, I do claim to be one. Hehehe.

 

Reading your post reminded me of the saying "Man created god in his own image." It is my understanding that all gods are man-made.

 

The most difficult bit for all of us I think is being truly empty!!!

 

Ah!, I just spoke to this recently and I totally agree with you. It is a simple thing to empty our tea cup but it is quite another thing to empty our mind (brain).

 

In doing that we are left with only the unknown, and the fear of the unknown is a horrible thing indeed.

 

TTC, Chapter 42, Henricks translation:

 

The Way gave birth to the One. (One = The Mother of all things.)

 

If we used the word "Dao" instead of "The Way" it would leave open the possibility for personification of Dao. That would be an error, in my opinion.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Marblehead

[on the path]

Well, I hope there is a little similarity. After all, I do claim to be one. Hehehe.

 

Reading your post reminded me of the saying "Man created god in his own image." It is my understanding that all gods are man-made.

 

 

 

Ah!, I just spoke to this recently and I totally agree with you. It is a simple thing to empty our tea cup but it is quite another thing to empty our mind (brain).

 

In doing that we are left with only the unknown, and the fear of the unknown is a horrible thing indeed.

 

TTC, Chapter 42, Henricks translation:

 

The Way gave birth to the One. (One = The Mother of all things.)

 

If we used the word "Dao" instead of "The Way" it would leave open the possibility for personification of Dao. That would be an error, in my opinion.

 

 

Its not if you know what you are looking for!!!

[Marblehead]

Its not if you know what you are looking for!!!

 

Ah!, but that's the hard part. We must first know ourself before we will ever know what we are truely looking for (in need of).

[Elliot]

Living in the mystery!

The "Tao" cannot be defined as a thing of form. Trying to find it will distract you from it. Allowing it to be, as it is in every living thing and thinking no more of it will allow you to be more connected and close to the source.

You can't ask for the Tao, you allow it to come and manifest itself in your life.

Enjoy the world as it is! right now, you are breathing, blood is coursing through your veins, you heart is beating. be grateful for that, also, judge less, stop categorizing, everyone must follow their own path you must let everything be as it is. that is mysterious

[Conwaypk]

[it's been quite a while since I've posted, or even been to the site for that matter But I am back, and very glad to be back]

 

I wanted to comment on something I read here: I don't think Lau Tzu is necessarily saying that God does not exist, or that, even further, God did not cause all things to come into existence. Again, I come from a very unique point of view (justified in saying that by previous conversations in this very thread) in that I am a Christian-Tao, that is, I believe in God, Jesus as his Son, and The Holy Spirit as God's Will aka...the Dao.

 

So, if the big bang happened (I am not against it at all) then Tao (as a single molecule of matter?) may have exploded into all things we have. How? Well like you say it is anyone's guess, however I believe that no matter what actually happened (Big Bang or not), God's Will, the active force, Holy Spirit, caused it to happen and this is the natural way and progression (Dao).

 

As the "Hua Hu Ching" states in lesson 8: "Different expressions are merely the results of different times and places." This is how I justify the name or title Holy Spirit as God's active will...the Tao expressed itself necessarily as how the people of that geography, time, and place would openly accept it as. This can be expressed further in the reasoning behind the many gods we have today in the worlds cultures. How does someoe like me justify the Taoist philosophy while holding onto God? Simply: that the Tao has allowed itself to present a certain path to a cetain people at a certain time (some call God Christ, others Buddha, others have Shintoism, etc.)

 

In summation: all is a manifestation of the Tao, the natural way, God's desire.

 

Hope I didn't get too deep and lose anyone. It wasn't really supposed to be such a complicated post

[Marblehead]

Hope I didn't get too deep and lose anyone. It wasn't really supposed to be such a complicated post

I stayed with you all the way.

 

I didn't see any conflicts with what you said.

 

I see no reason why one cannot hold to religious beliefs yet hold to the Taoist philosophy of life.

 

And I would agree that neither Lao Tzu nor Chuang Tzu ever stated that there was no god.

 

I would think that your religious beliefs are just as valid as any other religious belief.

[ChiDragon]

 

In summation: all is a manifestation of the Tao, the natural way, God's desire.

 

Chapter 4 did mention that Tao was before God.

 

Ref: Tao is before God

[ChiDragon]

And I would agree that neither Lao Tzu nor Chuang Tzu ever stated that there was no god.

 

Zhuang Tze did not mention there was neither god or not.

 

LaoTze implied that there was no god. Chapters 1, 4, 25 and 42 contradicted that Tao was the desire of God.

[Marblehead]

Zhuang Tze did not mention there was neither god or not.

 

LaoTze implied that there was no god. Chapters 1, 4, 25 and 42 contradicted that Tao was the desire of God.

 

Okay. But then Y'all know that there is no god in my Taoism.

[dawei]

Chapter 4 did mention that Tao was before God.

Wang Bi called it the 'heavenly emperor' modeled upon the Way... you can call it God if you want

[ChiDragon]

Actually, 帝 means ancestor in heaven way back in history. The people were worshiping their ancestors after they die assuming they were in heaven. According to the explanation in my native source, 帝 was referred as their ancestors at the time. Since 帝 is in heaven, people started to think that is "god" or "gods".

 

Modern definition of the character 帝 is the "king", but not "emperor". It is because the 帝 rules the whole kingdom already which there was no need to seize lands as an emperor would have done so.

Edited January 22, 2012 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

Chapter 1

1. 道可道，非常道。

2. 名可名，非常名。

3. 無，名天地之始。

4. 有，名萬物之母。

5. 故常無，欲以觀其妙。

6. 常有，欲以觀其徼。

7. 此兩者同出而異名，

8. 同謂之玄。玄之又玄，

9. 眾妙之門。

 

Revised as of 2/27/12

1. Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.

2. A name that can be named is not an eternal name.

 

3. Invisible was the name given to Tao at the origin of heaven and earth.

4. Visible was the name given to Tao as the mother of all things.

 

5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok its quale.

6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe its boundary.

 

7. These two come from one origin but differ in name,

8. Both are regarded as unfathomable; the most occult and profound;

9. The gate of all changes.

 

Note: Changes made are shown in bold.

Edited August 16, 2012 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Hehehe. I see you are still playing with adjectives in an attempt to describe Tao. But then, there is no harm in trying to define some of its attributes.

[dynamictao]

Here is my final translation of Chapter 1. I have translated the word Heng 恆 as "True" and Xuen 玄 as "Profound." Heng means Oneness or wholeness, so whatever is qualified with Heng has reality. Xuen is the state without clear separation of Wu and Yu.

1. Tao may be talked about, but it is not the True Tao.
   Names may be described, but they are not the True Names.
2. Wu names the beginning of the myriad things;
   Yu names the mother of the myriad things.
3. However,
   In True Wu, we observe mysterious appearance;
   In True Yu, we observe fading boundaries.
4. Both appear simultaneously, as different manifestations of the same (Tao).
5. Profound upon Profound, they are the gateways to all mysteries.

This is a new platform to have a logical interpretation of the whole Tao Te Ching. The detailed discussion of the analysis can be read in the free preview of [Tao Te Ching: An Ultimate Translation. by Wayne L. Wang] - my new Kindle eBook.

 

For discussion of Heng, see

Wang, (James) Qingjie (2000). Heng Dao and Appropriation of Nature - A Hermeneutical Interpretation of Laozi. Asian Philosophy, 10(2), 149-163. “Heng and Temporality of Dao: Laozi and Heidegger,” in Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy, vol.1, no.1, pp.55-71. Winter 2001.

 

Edited February 11, 2013 by dynamictao

[dynamictao]

I just find that there was a topic on this Chapter [TTC Study] Chapter One of the Tao Te Ching.

But this has not been discussed for a few years. Now, the interpretation of Chapter 1 is new.

Of course, I am convinced that this interpretation is valid, but who knows?

 

I would be happy to discuss this interpretation. Please comment. The eBook is on Amazon.

Edited February 11, 2013 by dynamictao

[Marblehead]

Yes, we did the best we could with all the Chapters.

 

Your first two lines include the words "is not a constant". Therefore it is dynamic. Hehehe.

 

Ever-changing. Indeed. As soon as we try to define it it has become something else. But it is still the same. Therefore we can talk about some of its characteristics that we are able to observe.

 

BTW I think it would be great if you would speak to any of the chapters in the "study" that you have input for.

[dynamictao]

Sure I will comment on them. It is good to be back after all these years.

[Marblehead]

Sure I will comment on them. It is good to be back after all these years.

Glad you feel that way. I am looking forward to many potentially interesting discussions as well as the responses from other members of this board.

[dawei]

I have read the referenced text before, and some of your work... so it is nice to be able to discuss your model and ideas.

 

I think 'true' for Heng works. I tend towards also wanting to use Heng instead of Chang but in either case I see the usage as meaning 'singularity' [of Dao as an eternal state of Wu]. And this contrasts with 'multiplicity' [of Dao as a temporal state of You].

 

For me, the multiplicity is spoken of in the first line as well, as 'ke Dao'.

 

Dao once Dao'ing [in temporal multiplicity], is no longer the true Dao [in eternal singularity].

 

 

I found this blog interesting for the pairing model he employs as well:

http://taichi-sayings.blogspot.com/2010/07/blog-post.html

 

 

 

Added:

As for Xuan, I take that meaning as primal or original... As a kind of gate to singularity.

Edited February 12, 2013 by dawei