[TTC Study] Chapter 71 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Marblehead]

Chapter 71

 

 

John Wu

 

To realize that our knowledge is ignorance,

This is a noble insight.

To regard our ignorance as knowledge,

This is mental sickness.

Only when we are sick of our sickness

Shall we cease to be sick.

The Sage is not sick, being sick of sickness;

This is the secret of health.

 

 

English/Feng

 

Knowing ignorance is strength.

Ignoring knowledge is sickness.

If one is sick of sickness, then one is not sick.

The sage is not sick because he is sick of sickness.

Therefore he is not sick.

 

 

Robert Henricks

 

To know you don't know is best.

Not to know you [don't] know is a flaw.

Therefore, the Sage's not being flawed

Stems from his recognizing a flaw as a flaw.

Therefore, he is flawless.

 

 

Questions? Comments?

[Marblehead]

Well, yeah, I have a comment.

 

While doing a search of Chuang Tzu trying to establish a proposal as to how to conduct the study when it is time Nina Correa's name flashed in my face again so I thought I would post her translation of this chapter.

 

Knowing that you don't know is uplifting.

Not knowing that you don't know is sickness.

Therefore, a wise person is not sick, because they're sick of sickness.

That's how they get rid of sickness.

 

 

I know that Nina has her own forum but if one or more of you guys who are active at her forum would mention that we are talking about her here at TaoBums maybe she will come over and share some of her wisdom with us.

Edited September 19, 2011 by Marblehead

[ChiDragon]

Chapter 71

1. One who knows what he doesn't know.

2. Is the best.

3. One who doesn't know but think he knows.

4. It's a sickness.

5. A wise man has no sickness.

6. He treated a sickness as a sickness.

7. Because he knows his sickness as a sickness.

8. Hence, he has no sickness.

 

第七十一章

1. 知不知,

2. 尚矣；

3. 不知知，

4. 病也。

5. 聖人不病，

6. 以其病病。

7. 夫唯病病，

8. 是以不病。

[lienshan]

The Mawangdui B version of chapter 71

 

知不知尚矣

不知知病矣

是以聖人之不病也以其病病也

是以不病

 

The knowledge of ignorance exalts indeed!

The ignorance of knowledge sickens indeed!

Therefore do sages (never sick) treat it (treat a sickness as a sickness).

Therefore are they not sick.

[Marblehead]

I think I'm getting sick reading about all this sickness.

[ChiDragon]

I think I'm getting sick reading about all this sickness.

 

Let's hope it is not contiguous....

[Marblehead]

Let's hope it is not contiguous....

 

Hehehe. I'm sure it's not. It was just a momentary thing.

[lienshan]

I think I'm getting sick reading about all this sickness.

Do you instead prefer his chapter 44 translation of 病(bing4) as meaning 'harmful'

 

In line 3. 得與亡孰病。

The character 病(bing4) is a negative thought as opposed to "beneficial".

[Marblehead]

Do you instead prefer his chapter 44 translation of 病(bing4) as meaning 'harmful'

 

Naw. I think that "sick" is the best word to use if only one word is to be used. "Harmful" wouldn't replace the word "sick" in all sentences.

 

Of course, Henricks did pretty good with the word "flaw". (Okay, my prejudice toward Henricks is showing again. Hehehe.)

[dawei]

A few thoughts:

1. I agree with using the older text here and the structure Hendricks use of MWD-A (which Nina appears to follow too). But I see it slightly differently.

2. Hendricks mentions how later versions drop the "therefore" at line 3 and I think that is should stay to keep the continuity.

3. The 'sick of sickness' , 'flaw of flaw', 'sickness of sickness' are all missing the point, IMO. This is called a reduplication in chinese (病病) where you double a word; usually it simply stresses emphasis in some way, not that the word must be repeated twice. It could be like solicitous (anxious desire or concern) or even deep distress or affliction; graveness. It is in opposition to 尚, which can be favor, esteem, value, etc.

 

Knowledge which is not-knowing is favorable [in life].

To not know not-knowing is distressful (or an affliction) [in life].

Therefore the sage is not distressed/anxious [concerning life]

It is because of such graveness, [that for him] there is no such distress/afflication.

 

It does not quite read as well as I would like but that is my first thought on it.

Edited September 20, 2011 by dawei

[deci belle]

I do not know Chinese, I only know mind.

 

To realize that our knowledge is ignorance,

This is a noble insight.

 

The insight is not a matter of self-reflection.

Knowing not-knowing is the noble insight.

This is not a reference to humility

Or a quantifiable lack in terms of conventional wisdom.

It is a fact of selfless realization

That you know it is not you that knows not-knowing.

 

So when one has the knowledge that not-knowing is not within or without the ken of the personality

One knows transcendence of self, ego, the karmic conditioned conscious endowed identity

Which is knowing the sickness of sickness has no cause

So the sage has no sickness because of this.

Because selfless realization is the event of selfless objectivity

Which alone is able to discern the nature of awareness

And what is not.

 

I know that Nina has her own forum but if one or more of you guys who are active at her forum would mention that we are talking about her here at TaoBums maybe she will come over and share some of her wisdom with us.

 

Let's hope not.❤

[zerostao]

The sage is not sick because he is sick of sickness.

Therefore he is not sick.

 

this is exactly how Da Liu expressed it to me and it came in a very timely manner.

i dont know any chinese language either , but Da Liu surely did/does?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Qing_Yuen

[Marblehead]

A few thoughts:

 

I would agree just out of logical thinking.

 

Yes, your translation is good although, like you said, it could be a little cleaner.

 

Problem is though that when you (or anyone) is translating that is what they should do. I don't translate. But I do interpret.

 

To know you don't know is good.

The Sage knows this.

Hang in there Bubba.

[Marblehead]

 

Let's hope not.❤

 

Hehehe. I like Nina. We disagreed a lot but we always did it honorably.

[Marblehead]

The sage is not sick because he is sick of sickness.

Therefore he is not sick.

 

That's fair, I think.

[deci belle]

The sage is not sick because he is sick of sickness.

Therefore he is not sick.

 

this is exactly how Da Liu expressed it to me and it came in a very timely manner.

i dont know any chinese language either , but Da Liu surely did/does?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Qing_Yuen

 

What makes a sage is not-knowing.

Sages realize not-knowing themselves.

It is not expressed by another but is the result of being sick of being sick.

Do you know?

Is is so easy as being told that it is so?

I think it is not so easy.

It is not a matter of agreement.

 

The sage has no sickness because of knowing causelessness.

Sickness is in not knowing ignorance.

Seeing that one is ignorant is only the beginning of self-refinement.

Having a self is the reason for sickness.

Not-knowing is seeing nature.

 

Laotzu doesn't stop at the disease

But makes it the point of departure.

So it's not enough to be satisfied that the sage is not sick.

One's own sage is not sick right now.

Do you know?

[Marblehead]

One really nice thing about not knowing is that you never have to explain yourself.

 

"Having a self is the reason for sickness."

 

Gotta' be careful with that statement. Hehehe. Self equals ego here, not the body. And you know me, I would say "Having an excessive ego."

[lienshan]

I read chapter 71 as Laozi's arguement against the Shen Dao slogan 'abandon knowledge'.

'ignorance' or 'no knowledge' is a sickness as the instance of raving, as when mad or delirious.

Laozi regarded this as a matter of fact underlined by his use of the 矣 (!) perfect particles!

 

The knowledge of ignorance is an exaltation!

The ignorance of knowledge is a sickness!

Therefore do sages (never sick) treat it (treat its sickness as a sickness).

Therefore never sick.

 

知不知尚矣

不知知病矣

是以聖人之不病也以其病病也

是以不病

 

The character 以 did always omit 之 in classical chinese.

The two last lines of the Mawangdui B version are thus (including) the omitted 之 characters:

 

是以(之)聖人,之不病也,以(之),其病病也,

是以(之)不病

 

The grammatical 也 characters mark two subordinate clauses: ,X, or (X) as in my translation.

The characters 之不 together meant 'never' in classical pre-Qin chinese.

The not-omitted 之 does not belong to the preceeding 是以聖人 but to the subordinate clause,

because it would have been omitted if it did.

Sorry that I am so detailed, but I think that this version seems to be very close to an original version.

 

The 'sick of sickness' , 'flaw of flaw', 'sickness of sickness' are all missing the point, IMO. This is called a reduplication in chinese (病病) where you double a word; usually it simply stresses emphasis in some way, not that the word must be repeated twice.

please read the 4th last scheme at the bottom of this page

Edited September 20, 2011 by lienshan

[lienshan]

Knowing not-knowing is the noble insight.

And not-knowing knowing is a sickness.

 

Knowing when enough is enough!

That's his message in many chapters.

Not-knowing is to not-know when enough.

 

Knowing not-knowing when enough is the noble insight.

[XieJia]

Really like Wu and Dawei's translation.

 

Like the present tense uses of stuff

 

And also Master Shen's stuff, Lienshan mentioned.

[zerostao]

"Do you know? "

 

i know that when i was given the message it struck an immediate and very penetrating chord with me.

i know that since that very moment i have not been sick (illness) since.

 

Do i know? that i dont know?

you did see the title under my name here?

 

 

edit , i wanted to borrow this from Hundun's recent post

There is Only One Illness

 

An interesting feature of Cosmos Qigong is that the student suffering from depression will practice the exact same set of exercises as the student suffering from hypertension. The “prescription” is the same for each student, no matter what the ailment.

 

How can this be? The explanation is as simple as it is profound: There is only one illness

Edited September 26, 2011 by zerostao

[nestentrie]

71
To believe, and yet be aware of all that we don't accept is the highest attainment; to not believe and yet accept anyway is a disease.
It is simply by being pained at the thought of having this disease that we are preserved from it. The Kind have not this disease. They know the pain that would be inseperable from it, and therefore they do not have it.
--

71
To know and yet be aware of all that we don't agree with is the highest attainment; to not know and yet agree anyway is a disease.
It is simply by being pained at the thought of having this disease that we are preserved from it. The Merciful have not this disease. They know the pain that would be inseperable from it, and therefore they do not have it.
--

71
To agree and yet be aware of all that we don't know is the highest attainment; to not agree and yet claim to know anyway is a disease.
It is simply by being pained at the thought of having this disease that we are preserved from it. The Trusting have not this disease. They know the pain that would be inseperable from it, and therefore they do not have it.
--

71
To accept and yet be aware of all that we don't believe is the highest attainment; to not accept and yet still believe anyway is a disease.
It is simply by being pained at the thought of having this disease that we are preserved from it. The Honest have not this disease. They know the pain that would be inseperable from it, and therefore they do not have it.

Edited August 16, 2014 by nestentrie

[Marblehead]

Okay. I agree.

[Mig]

Why there is an agreement of bing 病 definition as illness, disease. It seems that the meaning is fault. Any clarification on that?

[dust]

Meanings of  病  include illness, sickness, disease, hardship, fault, worry

 

It basically means a problem with the mind or body. But I don't like the word 'sick' here -- in English it carries too much connotation of vomit, fever, etc. It seems pretty obvious that the text is referring to mental 'sickness', not physical. And the English term 'mental sickness' sounds too much like we're talking about a clinical mental illness or condition, like PTSD or psychopathy or something.

 

It's not physical sickness we're talking about, and it's not a mental health issue.. it's more like a faulty belief / problematic way of looking at things.

 

So I quite like Henricks's use of 'flaw'. Or maybe 'weakness', or even 'failing' would be suitable.

Edited April 23, 2017 by dust