[TTC Study] Chapter 63 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Marblehead]

Chapter 63

 

John Wu

 

Do the Non-Ado.

Strive for the effortless.

Savor the savorless.

Exalt the low.

Multiply the few.

Requite injury with kindness.

Nip troubles in the bud.

Sow the great in the small.

Difficult things of the world

Can only be tackled when they are easy.

Big things of the world

Can only be achieved by attending to their small beginnings.

Thus, the Sage never has to grapple with big things,

Yet he alone is capable of achieving them!

He who promises lightly must be lacking in faith.

He who thinks everything easy will end by finding everything difficult.

Therefore, the Sage, who regards everything as difficult,

Meets with no difficulties in the end.

 

 

English/Feng

 

Practice non-action.

Work without doing.

Taste the tasteless.

Magnify the small, increase the few.

Reward bitterness with care.

See simplicity in the complicated.

Achieve greatness in little things.

In the universe the difficult things are done as if they are easy.

In the universe great acts are made up of small deeds.

The sage does not attempt anything very big,

And thus achieved greatness.

Easy promises make for little trust.

Taking things lightly results in great difficulty.

Because the sage always confronts difficulties,

He never experiences them.

 

 

Robert Henricks

 

Act without acting;

Serve without concern for affairs;

Find flavor in what has no flavor.

Regard the small as large and the few as many,

And repay resentment with kindness.

Plan for the difficult while it is easy;

Act on the large while its minute.

The most difficult things in the world begin as things that are easy;

The largest things in the world arise from the minute.

Therefore the Sage, to the end does not strive to do the great,

And as a result, he is able to accomplish the great;

Those who too lightly agree will necessarily be trusted by few;

And those who regard many things as easy will necessarily [end up] with many difficulties.

Therefore, even the Sage regards things as difficult,

And as a result, in the end he has no difficulty.

 

 

 

Questions? Comments?

[ChiDragon]

Chapter 63 - The Lowest to the Highest Extreme

 

1. With an attitude of Wu Wei,

2. Handle all affairs with no interference,

3. Taste the tasteless as a delicacy.

4. Large becomes small, more becomes less,

5. 報怨以德。(out of context)

6. Handle the hardest start with the easiest;

7. Start big project with the minor details.

8. The most difficulty in the world,

9. Always start with the easiest;

10. The world's biggest affair,

11. Always start with something microscopic.

12. Because a sage was never boasted,

13. Then he can accomplish a big mission.

14. One gives promise lightly; shall break them easily

15. Too easy bound to be very difficult.

16. As a sage assumed it was difficult,

17. Thus, there was no difficulty at the end.

 

Chapter 63

1. 為無為，

2. 事無事，

3. 味無味。

4. 大小多少，

5. 報怨以德。(out of context)

6. 圖難于其易﹔

7. 為大于其細。

8. 天下難事，

9. 必作于易﹔

10.天下大事，

11.必作于細。

12.是以聖人終不為大，

13.故能成其大。

14.夫輕諾必寡信，

15.多易必多難。

16.是以聖人猶難之，

17.故終無難矣。

Edited August 22, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Jeff]

Thanks for this topic. A favorite, maybe a different interpretation , but to me it says...

 

Be in moment (not thinking about it).

Feel the flow (of Tao).

Don't judge things.

Do not respond in anger.

Face things head on and don't spend time worrying about it.

Do your best even in little things.

If the universe can figure it out, why worry about little things.

Everything is Tao. Everything is interconnected.

The Sage does not look for attention and glory,

And thus achieves greatness.

Bragging and exaggerating get you know where.

Not paying attention and being in the moment leads to difficulties.

Because the sage is always in the moment,

there are no difficulties.

 

 

 

Feel the flow...

[stan herman]

Seems to me my interpretation of 63 is pretty close to the mainstream--closer than usual?

 

 

63. Particular factors, special conditions and exceptional situations, affect outcomes. The ability to distinguish is required to glean triumph from failure.

 

When your head is not bent by anxiety opportunities can be perceived more clearly. Complicated problems are best penetrated by plain thinking. Arduous projects are best begun with easy steps. Intense controversies are most readily resolved in lesser details. Great issues turn on small pivots.

 

Therefore, the wise person does not concentrate long on intractable dilemmas, but rather on small and simple choices. Solving small problems prevents their growth to intractable dilemmas.

 

Btw M. I just started to read Kissinger's On China. He begins with some broad historical-philosophical review of ancient Chinese history. I found it interesting and relevant to the Tao in its time. China viewed itself as more of a civilization than a nation--the epitome of civilizations. It also had a perspective that tends to 'explain' the focus of both Lao Tzu and Confucius. In the long view China saw itself as rising and falling in a cycle that went from the 'chaos' of warring princes to the divine order of the emperor, then dissolution. Repeatedly. My impression is that both Confucius and Lao Tzu wrote to encourage stability--peace and calm and order. Not progress, innovation or excitement.

 

I may be quite mistaken in my interpretation. What do you and the other China-knowers think. The historic context of any philosophical writings would have to influence the philosopher of the time, don't you think?

[Marblehead]

Chapter 63 - The Lowest to the Highest Extreme

 

Hi ChiDragon,

 

The grammer is a litle clunky but still faithful to the original as I understand it.

[Marblehead]

Thanks for this topic. A favorite, maybe a different interpretation , but to me it says...

 

Yeah, you modernized that. Good job, I think. You got the main concepts.

[Marblehead]

Seems to me my interpretation of 63 is pretty close to the mainstream--closer than usual?

 

You done good, I think.

 

Indeed, I think that this chapter is relatively easy to restate in modern English because the wisdon is generalized and timeless.

 

Btw M. I just started to read Kissinger's On China. He begins with some broad historical-philosophical review of ancient Chinese history. I found it interesting and relevant to the Tao in its time. China viewed itself as more of a civilization than a nation--the epitome of civilizations. It also had a perspective that tends to 'explain' the focus of both Lao Tzu and Confucius. In the long view China saw itself as rising and falling in a cycle that went from the 'chaos' of warring princes to the divine order of the emperor, then dissolution. Repeatedly. My impression is that both Confucius and Lao Tzu wrote to encourage stability--peace and calm and order. Not progress, innovation or excitement.

 

I may be quite mistaken in my interpretation. What do you and the other China-knowers think. The historic context of any philosophical writings would have to influence the philosopher of the time, don't you think?

 

My understanding is very similar although it has been a long time since I did my reading of early China history.

 

I really wish we could talk about Confucius but it would be difficult because many of the base concepts are rather contradictory even though, as you mentioned, it appears that both philosophers were pointing at the same problem. They just had different ideas as to how many of the problems could be resolved.

[Jeff]

[Marblehead]

When I read the Taoist parables, I have always found a difference of opinion with Confucius thought. The humor is subtle, but they seem to treat Confucius as the fool who misses the point.

 

Yeah, I think it was common back during Chuang Tzu's time for followers to talk down all other philosophies of the time. Went with the territory and perhaps a desire to form a dominant belief system during the early years of China's consolidation.

[stan herman]

Another piece of interesting information from "On China" that seems to cast a quite different light on the messages of many Tao verses/chapters. The Chinese court of the Middle Kingdom regularly practiced what many would call appeasement in the face of potential enemies--relying on the long run in which the enemy would be absorbed into the superior Chinese culture. So, many of the apparently submissive stances (the greater yielding to the lesser) were probably code talk for subterfuge. See below insert re the Five Baits. What do you think?

[stan herman]

Another piece of interesting information from "On China" that seems to cast a quite different light on the messages of many Tao verses/chapters. The Chinese court of the Middle Kingdom regularly practiced what many would call appeasement in the face of potential enemies--relying on the long run in which the enemy would be absorbed into the superior Chinese culture. So, many of the apparently submissive stances (the greater yielding to the lesser) were probably code talk for subterfuge. See below insert re the Five Baits. What do you think? (Having difficulties attaching this file)

Edited August 24, 2011 by stan herman

[Marblehead]

Another piece of interesting information from "On China" that seems to cast a quite different light on the messages of many Tao verses/chapters. The Chinese court of the Middle Kingdom regularly practiced what many would call appeasement in the face of potential enemies--relying on the long run in which the enemy would be absorbed into the superior Chinese culture. So, many of the apparently submissive stances (the greater yielding to the lesser) were probably code talk for subterfuge. See below insert re the Five Baits. What do you think?

 

I agree. A documentary I watched recently on TV strongly supported this idea.

[dawei]

Another piece of interesting information from "On China" that seems to cast a quite different light on the messages of many Tao verses/chapters. The Chinese court of the Middle Kingdom regularly practiced what many would call appeasement in the face of potential enemies--relying on the long run in which the enemy would be absorbed into the superior Chinese culture. So, many of the apparently submissive stances (the greater yielding to the lesser) were probably code talk for subterfuge. See below insert re the Five Baits. What do you think?

I am not sure what you mean by casting a different light. There is a difference [throughout their history] of how they treated the 'barbarians' vs their own ethic group; this goes back to even the 'legendary period' and how they trace their origins as descends of Yan and Huang [Di], and even as Han. It has always been very important to them to cast a national identity.

 

The first Han emperor, Liu Bang, instituted this form of 'barbarian' appeasement just to keep them from having any ideas of fighting. It was a ploy used over and over again in different forms. What may be ironic is that after slaughtering their own in civil wars they would try to appease the barbarians; IMO, the paramount need to maintain isolationism drove this mentality.

[stan herman]

I am not sure what you mean by casting a different light. There is a difference [throughout their history] of how they treated the 'barbarians' vs their own ethic group; this goes back to even the 'legendary period' and how they trace their origins as descends of Yan and Huang [Di], and even as Han. It has always been very important to them to cast a national identity.

 

The first Han emperor, Liu Bang, instituted this form of 'barbarian' appeasement just to keep them from having any ideas of fighting. It was a ploy used over and over again in different forms. What may be ironic is that after slaughtering their own in civil wars they would try to appease the barbarians; IMO, the paramount need to maintain isolationism drove this mentality.

 

The 'different light' applies to reading a number of the Tao verses. Rather than reading them as an attempt to express the 'truth' about the subject, they are often subtle attempts to retain the Middle Kingdom's superiority even when faced with greater opposing power. For example, when forced to accept British terms after a conflict, they spoke as though out of generosity they were granting a favor to the barbarians.

 

If you're interested in the historic context of Chinese philosophy, I heartily recommend Kissinger's On China.

Edited August 26, 2011 by stan herman

[dawei]

The 'different light' applies to reading a number of the Tao verses. Rather than reading them as an attempt to express the 'truth' about the subject, they are often subtle attempts to retain the Middle Kingdom's superiority even when faced with greater opposing power. For example, when forced to accept British terms after a conflict, they spoke as though out of generosity they were granting a favor to the barbarians.

 

If you're interested in the historic context of Chinese philosophy, I heartily recommend Kissinger's On China.

I am curious who is trying to do this retaining? At the time of the Laozi writings the kingdom was fractured into factions all 'warring' for their own superiority among themselves; and they were at least 200 years prior to unification... Laozi was from Chu who was a super power at the start; and again after the fall of Qin. But Laozi seems to see the warring way is not worth sticking around to see what happens. I am always interested to learn more as I have spent almost 8 years writing my own history of early china.

[stan herman]

I am curious who is trying to do this retaining? At the time of the Laozi writings the kingdom was fractured into factions all 'warring' for their own superiority among themselves; and they were at least 200 years prior to unification... Laozi was from Chu who was a super power at the start; and again after the fall of Qin. But Laozi seems to see the warring way is not worth sticking around to see what happens. I am always interested to learn more as I have spent almost 8 years writing my own history of early china.

 

drawel, that sounds fascinating for a scholar. I'd be very interested in your reaction to Kissinger's observations. The book is On China, and the material about earliest China is pretty short. Why don't you get it from the library or on Amazon and let me know. The thing Kissinger does is identify China as a civilization, not just a nation, then he highlights traits (I can't remember the Chinese expressions, but there was one for '(avoidance of) encirclement, others for various processes to make strength out of weakness, and more.) They persist from earlier times, used repeatedly in dealings with neighboring countries and eventually by Mao with world leaders. The example I used re the British, was meant just as an easier to relate to case, not re the time of warring princes

[dawei]

drawel, that sounds fascinating for a scholar. I'd be very interested in your reaction to Kissinger's observations. The book is On China, and the material about earliest China is pretty short. Why don't you get it from the library or on Amazon and let me know. The thing Kissinger does is identify China as a civilization, not just a nation, then he highlights traits (I can't remember the Chinese expressions, but there was one for '(avoidance of) encirclement, others for various processes to make strength out of weakness, and more.) They persist from earlier times, used repeatedly in dealings with neighboring countries and eventually by Mao with world leaders. The example I used re the British, was meant just as an easier to relate to case, not re the time of warring princes

I fully agree that there are many traits where originate and therefore persist from earliest times.

 

I only question the idea of trying to 'retain the middle kingdom superiority'; IMO, there was never any doubt as to their [attitude of] superiority. What they want to retain is some form of control; if one lives among chinese you can see this very strongly playing out as a necessary [for survival]. So, their civilization (yes, not just the nation) survived due to isolationism and protectionism, which we clearly see up to this day

 

Here is one small example which corresponds to what you suggesting: There is a small city southwest of Beijing called Baoding. (I have been there almost a dozen times; it is very small by today's standards of chinese cities at only about 1.2 million). It's name essentially translates as "protector of the capital". It held some significance during the Ming and Qing dynasty and became the capital of Hebei for a while. It is known for having been the site for the site of the HQ of Japanese forces in WWII. If you visited it today, you would find little to impress you and instead quickly try to find the first train out; they rarely see a western visitor and they are very poor and backwards despite their past; now overshadowed by Shijiazhuang, the now capital.

 

Even Wiki can get all this right... what Wiki does not relate, since few know it, is this: Why did Baoding become the site of Japanese occupation HQ??? One will find Kissinger's basic idea at work. Even as the occupied, the city almost welcomed Japan in and gave them whatever they needed. They played the ultimate gambit; they were never slaughtered like the Nanjing Massacre. But... other chinese cities have a kind of disdain for what Baoding did; of course it is not openly discussed... one has to drink many rounds of alcohol and then stories are more often shared

 

One thing that really grabbed me in terms of ancient origins is when I went to the Nanjing museum of history and saw items 5,000 years old. Although the Jesuits said in 1500s that the chinese were expert in imitation (ie: knock-offs), it was clear that when you walked around the museum they did this starting in ancient times.

 

I'll try to get the book for a read. I would counter recommend this book on chinese foreign policy from ancient times to present:

The Dragon and the Foreign Devils by Harry G. Gelber (as cheap as $2.99 on amazon).

Edited August 27, 2011 by dawei

[stan herman]

I fully agree that there are many traits where originate and therefore persist from earliest times.

 

I only question the idea of trying to 'retain the middle kingdom superiority'; IMO, there was never any doubt as to their [attitude of] superiority. What they want to retain is some form of control; if one lives among chinese you can see this very strongly playing out as a necessary [for survival]. So, their civilization (yes, not just the nation) survived due to isolationism and protectionism, which we clearly see up to this day

 

Here is one small example which corresponds to what you suggesting: There is a small city southwest of Beijing called Baoding. (I have been there almost a dozen times; it is very small by today's standards of chinese cities at only about 1.2 million). It's name essentially translates as "protector of the capital". It held some significance during the Ming and Qing dynasty and became the capital of Hebei for a while. It is known for having been the site for the site of the HQ of Japanese forces in WWII. If you visited it today, you would find little to impress you and instead quickly try to find the first train out; they rarely see a western visitor and they are very poor and backwards despite their past; now overshadowed by Shijiazhuang, the now capital.

 

Even Wiki can get all this right... what Wiki does not relate, since few know it, is this: Why did Baoding become the site of Japanese occupation HQ??? One will find Kissinger's basic idea at work. Even as the occupied, the city almost welcomed Japan in and gave them whatever they needed. They played the ultimate gambit; they were never slaughtered like the Nanjing Massacre. But... other chinese cities have a kind of disdain for what Baoding did; of course it is not openly discussed... one has to drink many rounds of alcohol and then stories are more often shared

 

One thing that really grabbed me in terms of ancient origins is when I went to the Nanjing museum of history and saw items 5,000 years old. Although the Jesuits said in 1500s that the chinese were expert in imitation (ie: knock-offs), it was clear that when you walked around the museum they did this starting in ancient times.

 

I'll try to get the book for a read. I would counter recommend this book on chinese foreign policy from ancient times to present:

The Dragon and the Foreign Devils by Harry G. Gelber (as cheap as $2.99 on amazon).

 

I put it on my list. Thanks for the interesting story. I think the story of China--both past and especially future--is fascinating. For instance, how will these new phenomena like democracy and globalization influence developments and how will the Chinese culture influence them?

[ion]

This capter, like chapter 64, is another statement about the symmetry between action in activity. That all the journey of a 1,000 steps is, in essense, put into the iniation of the activity and the rest of the journey is effortless when the initiative to finish it is taken in the first few steps. The rest just naturally unfolds and bares the imprint of the preparedness taken in the original action.

 

Once you get out of bed and put water on yourface, the day takes care of itself.

[ion]

This capter, like chapter 64, is another statement about the symmetry between action in activity. That all the journey of a 1,000 steps is, in essense, put into the iniation of the activity and the rest of the journey is effortless when the initiative to finish it is taken in the first few steps. The rest just naturally unfolds and bares the imprint of the preparedness taken in the original action.

 

Once you get out of bed and put water on yourface, the day takes care of itself.

I wanted to add to the previous post. I think that what could be said about chapter 64 could be said about 63, and vice versa.

 

Another example of symmetry within action and activity is spontaneous expression in art. I think that it is the general idea with abstract expressionalism and Zen art techniques.

 

And it would also apply to what Jesus says about "from the bottom of a mans heart his mouth speaks". It is alot like certain zen philosophies about spontaneous actions being a representation of the contents of a persons heart/mind.

 

The tao is the heart and core of every thing...

[Marblehead]

I love living spontaneously!

[dust]

Marblehead sir.. you asked for it...

 

I really like this chapter, though it's given a bit of a headache.

 

It's already been interpreted in a number of ways, and I feel like there are even more possibilites, especially with the relatively limited text from the Guodian. Here are my 2 translations (so far), in parallel:

 

 

 

為亡為 Action knows no action, There is no action,

事亡事 Service knows no service, There is no service,

未亡未 The ending knows no ending; There is no ending;

大少之多易必多難 Great or small, the easiest is hardest; Great or small, the easiest is hardest;

是以聖人猷難之 So the wise man, lost in difficulty, If the wise man becomes difficulty,

古冬亡難 Knows no difficulty There is no difficulty

 

 

 

In the first 3 lines, there is not necessarily a directive. Many people translate as "do this/don't do this", but it doesn't read as a suggestion to me -- rather, as a matter of fact. The directive comes at the end (So the sage does...).

 

亡 -- literally death or non-existence

i.e. action there is no action, service there is no service, end there is no end

Or: to an action itself, there is no such thing as "doing action“. For example, to a gun, there is no such thing as firing a gun -- there is only being a gun (that fires/gets fired).

 

So, can we see the traditional idea of 为无为 wei wu wei as "becoming one with action" ? i.e. if all life is energy/action, and if the sage goes with the flow and is in tune with all things, though he may act, he does not know it as "action" -- simply as being one with all things, and the Dao

 

 

未 -- the consensus is 味 flavour, but as in previous chapters, that's not how it's written, and it doesn't necessarily have to be what was originally meant. But "to an ending, there is no ending" and "to a flavour, there is no flavour" make equal sense.

 

 

The rest is fairly self-explanatory..?

 

The ultimate meaning here is the same as Feng's or Henricks's; it's just the expression that's a bit different, I think.

[dust]

Why did Baoding become the site of Japanese occupation HQ??? One will find Kissinger's basic idea at work. Even as the occupied, the city almost welcomed Japan in and gave them whatever they needed. They played the ultimate gambit; they were never slaughtered like the Nanjing Massacre. But... other chinese cities have a kind of disdain for what Baoding did; of course it is not openly discussed... one has to drink many rounds of alcohol and then stories are more often shared

 

A pretty good friend of mine is from Baoding..she never mentioned this. I'm not sure if that's because she doesn't know, or doesn't want to talk about it, or just doesn't think it's important. She doesn't drink booze, so that wouldn't have helped!

 

Interesting to know though..

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Thanks for bringing in the Guodian characters dbj. The last line here is especially different and revealing of origins!

 

my translation:

 

 

為亡為

Action (performed) without action

事亡事

Work obligations (performed) without work obligations

未亡未

Ending (arrives) without termination

 

大少之多易必多難

(Take the) great for small or the many to be easy and 必certainly the many will be difficult

是以聖人猷難之

Therefore, wise people 猷plan for difficulty

古冬亡難

(In this way) the 冬winters of the 古past were not difficult

[Marblehead]

I first want to speak to this:

 

So, can we see the traditional idea of 为无为 wei wu wei as "becoming one with action" ?

Yes, Yes, YES!

 

Enough said.