[TTC Study] Chapter 53 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Marblehead]

[deci belle]

[Marblehead]

Is it wrong linguistically in this context, Marblehead? I don't know about translating Chinese at all. If so, I can see your point.

 

Hi Deci Belle,

 

Excellent catch on the words of my comment.

 

I am in basic agreement with what you said after.

 

And I suppose that my comment should be understood as directed to that first line of Henricks translation above.

 

It is still my understanding that, in the most part, there must first be knowledge before there can be wisdom. That is, knowledge is knowing the processes in nature; wisdom is knowing how to apply this knowledge in our every-day life.

 

Yes, some people are more gifted than others in that their intuitive wisdom is strong, others of us have to work hard to gain wisdom and that generally involves making a lot of mistakes in life.

 

I have taken the side-paths many times in my life. Yeah, there was a lot of enjoyment gained there. Now that I am older I don't need all that excitement in my life anymore.

 

Ah!, the processes of the universe.

[ChiDragon]

Chapter 53 - The corrupted government.

1. If I have a little bit of knowledge,

2. Then walking on a big road,

3. I'm afraid that I might be going into a wrong direction.

4. The big road is leveled;

5. But the people, still, would like to take a small trail.

 

6. The government is corrupted,

7. The farmlands are deserted,

8. The barns are empty.

 

9. The officials are wearing luxurious attires,

10. Carrying a sharpened sword by the waist,

11. Enjoying a gourmet dinner,

12. Possessed an excess of exquisite goods.

13. They are considered to be bandits.

14. This is not tao at all.

 

1. 使我介然有知，

2. 行於大道，

3. 唯施是畏。

4. 大道甚夷，

5. 而人好徑。

6. 朝甚除，

7. 田甚蕪，

8. 倉甚虛。

9. 服文綵，

10.帶利劍，

11.厭飲食，

12.財貨有餘。

13.是謂盜夸。

14.非道也哉。

Edited January 1, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

I see you opted for "knowledge" in the first line as well.

 

Almost seems that lines 1-5 are one thought and lines 6-14 are a totally different thought altogether. (Maybe originally two different sections or perhaps a later addition?)

[ChiDragon]

1. If I have a little bit of knowledge,

2. And walking on a big road,

3. I'm afraid that I might be going into a wrong direction.

4. The big road is leveled;

5. But the people, still, would like to take a small trail.

 

Annotation:

Lines 1 to 5 are carrying a metaphorically message.

The "I" in line one 1 was referred as a virtuous ruler. The "big road" was analogous to a "big country". Finally, "take a small trail" is analogous to "taken a shortcut".

 

The metaphor was:

If I knew how to run a big country with a little knowledge, I might not know how to handle it and gone the wrong way about it. The country may be in order, somehow, the officials may take some shortcuts and ruin the country. Lines 6 through 8 were describing the condition of the corrupted government. Lines 9 through 14 are describing the small trail that the official took. As a result, the government was robbing the people like bandits. Indeed, that was not the way it suppose to be.

 

6. The government is corrupted,

7. The farmlands are deserted,

8. The barns are empty.

 

9. The officials are wearing luxurious attires,

10. Carrying a sharpened sword by the waist,

11. Enjoying a gourmet dinner,

12. Possessed an excess of exquisite goods.

13. They are considered to be bandits.

14. This is not tao at all.

Edited July 24, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Hehehe. That was a good trick you just pulled off. You actually made it work.

[Jeff Pepper]

Having some trouble with Line 6.  

 

朝甚除 (Cháo shén chú), "Royal court is very ???".  

 

除 in modern Chinese means remove, divide, eliminate, wipe out, but none of those fit here -- ie, "The  royal court has been wiped out" !  Not likely.  There's supposedly an archaic meaning of being reassigned from one post to another, but that doesn't fit either.  There's an obscure meaning, apart, which could work here, as in, "The royal court has been isolated."  This fits well with the following lines... the kingdom is falling apart while the courtiers dress in fine clothes, etc.

 

Any suggestions?

[Taoist Texts]

32 minutes ago, Jeff Pepper said:

朝甚除 (Cháo shén chú), "Royal court is very ???".  

...well cleaned (e.g 除宮 to clean the palace)

 

as opposed to the fields in the next phrase 田甚芜，， which are overgrown with weeds

[Stosh]

AWOL , instead of being invested in proper governance,  the court is preoccupied with self serving matters rather than the duties of service. 

No one is at the helm.

If the analogy is being made, regarding an individuals conduct, they have lost track of their own best interest or have abandoned their best interests. The person is lost and flailing around spiritially.

If the analogy is of the body, the person could be drunk , high, in a rage ,or passion, or even sleeping. 

Edited February 17, 2018 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

I normally refer to Robert Henricks' translation when I see a conflict.

 

Robert does not state that the government is corrupt but rather that the courts are swept very clean. (while the fields are full of weeds.)

 

If accepted history is true, Lao Tzu worked for the government.  I doubt he would call it corrupt.

 

Chuang Tzu?  Well, sure he would.

 

 

 

[Stosh]

Oh, you want it spun the other way? OK. 

The officials have removed their personal egos from governance, so as merely functioning cogs, the court is empty of willful personalities. The palace is swept, the nobles are prepared to defend, the province is well fed. Everything is hunky-dory so being envious or hoping for things to be otherwise would be irrational . 

Same message either way IMO.

[Marblehead]

Good job Stosh.  I don't accept it though.  Politics are just as screwed up today as they were back then.

 

Self interest still rules.  Little foresight of the future for the people or the nation.

 

 

 

 

 

[Stosh]

6 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Good job Stosh.  I don't accept it though.  Politics are just as screwed up today as they were back then.

 

Self interest still rules.  Little foresight of the future for the people or the nation.

 

 

 

 

 

Dont accept what? The view of heaven is impartial, the spin we put on it is a moral call. 

Brass feel justified about the perks they have. The egalitarian or Socialist  view sees wrongness in that. You had advanTages due to position, and not all think that inappropriate. What gov is so wonderful it avoids all that? None , I think we might agree there. 

Edited February 17, 2018 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

2 hours ago, Stosh said:

Dont accept what? The view of heaven is impartial, the spin we put on it is a moral call. 

Brass feel justified about the perks they have. The egalitarian or Socialist  view sees wrongness in that. You had advanTages due to position, and not all think that inappropriate. What gov is so wonderful it avoids all that? None , I think we might agree there. 

Oh, we likely agree.  All governments are that way.  This thought, of course, is one of the drivers of my becoming an Anarchist.

 

Yes, the brass passes the laws that allow them all the wonderful perks.

 

What I didn't agree with was your wonderful optimism.  It's good to be optimistic, but it should be kept within realistic possibilities.

 

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, Marblehead said:

Oh, we likely agree.  All governments are that way.  This thought, of course, is one of the drivers of my becoming an Anarchist.

 

Yes, the brass passes the laws that allow them all the wonderful perks.

 

What I didn't agree with was your wonderful optimism.  It's good to be optimistic, but it should be kept within realistic possibilities.

 

Well yes its unrealistically idealistic to expect flawed humans to meet such a lofty goal as a group. But since I dont think the only thing being discussused here is large scale social dynamics, I think theres a window for individuals to sqeeze through. 

One person can maintain a super high Polemic standard. . And depending on the subject, I dont Think its all that unusual. Its just not all that likely that several people will all conclude the same behaviors really represent virtue., so the group drags down the best and drags up the worst as people traditionally view virtue. 

So I think Iam supposed to come away reinforced about Not taking a highly polarized moral stance. 

Like... not getting bent out of shape at bad drivers who havent collided with anything. 

I'll probably always reflexively mutter ' idiot ', But dont need to dwell on it. Best I can manage..

Edited February 18, 2018 by Stosh