[TTC Study] Chapter 81 of the Tao Teh Ching

[XieJia]

We could also use Lienshan's favorite remarks.

 

Objectivity and Subjectivity

[lienshan]

Objectivity and Subjectivity

He used three words 'reliable' 'wise' 'good' together meaning 'holy'

 

These three words are contrasted by three non-synonymous words but not antagonists:

 

'pleasing' 'boasting' 'overstating' together maybe meaning .... 'man'

[Marblehead]

He used three words 'reliable' 'wise' 'good' together meaning 'holy'

 

These three words are contrasted by three non-synonymous words but not antagonists:

 

'pleasing' 'boasting' 'overstating' together maybe meaning .... 'man'

 

I like that!

[ChiDragon]

He used three words 'reliable' 'wise' 'good' together meaning 'holy'

 

These three words are contrasted by three non-synonymous words but not antagonists:

 

'pleasing' 'boasting' 'overstating' together maybe meaning .... 'man'

 

LoaTze says: Holy my foot....man.

[ChiDragon]

1. The character 博 means according to the ancient Shuo Wen dictionary: 'ten sellers of silk loudly spamming their wares at a marketplace'. I choose to translate it 'to boast' but there is probably a better pick in english?

 

2. The Received version's 辯 meaning 'to discuss, a dispute between two scholars'

 

1. The character 博 means according to the old pea brain of CD:

博: adj, means broad as in broad knowledge.

 

2. 辯 meaning "to rebut". The TTC used to have the meaning as "quarrel".

[Informer]

Thank you...

 

 

 

 

It depends on the context. It may not be applied to all.

 

Try to find one translation for a set of characters, that will fit in all the contexts.

 

Is that possible?

[Informer]

So when the same characters are seen together in the same order throughout, they are pointing at the same thing, if it fits it is right, if it doesn't then need different words, imo.

[lienshan]

1. The character 博 means according to the old pea brain of CD:

博: adj, means broad as in broad knowledge.

The Shuo Wen definition : 博 : 大通也 从十, 从尃, 尃布也

 

'broad' makes no sense in the context while a 'loud announcment' word like 'boasting' does,

because the very last term of the whole chapter is 'not argued' indicating not spoken.

[ChiDragon]

The Shuo Wen definition : 博 : 大通也 从十, 从尃, 尃布也

 

'broad' makes no sense in the context while a 'loud announcment' word like 'boasting' does,

because the very last term of the whole chapter is 'not argued' indicating not spoken.

 

Very poor thinking...........my friend...

[Marblehead]

Very poor thinking...........my friend...

 

I do that sometimes. Hehehe.

[XieJia]

He used three words 'reliable' 'wise' 'good' together meaning 'holy'

 

These three words are contrasted by three non-synonymous words but not antagonists:

 

'pleasing' 'boasting' 'overstating' together maybe meaning .... 'man'

 

Well presented, Lienshan.

Clearly received.

 

 

 

Try to find one translation for a set of characters, that will fit in all the contexts.

 

Is that possible?

 

Informer,

I revisit the Way of Man; 人之道. The context is a little different than we have discussed.

But there's a logic that can be apply for the through out the TTC.

 

 

 

[lienshan]

Try to find one translation for a set of characters, that will fit in all the contexts.

 

Is that possible?

Laozi's writing style is in my opinion by purpose 'muddled'. Other pre-Qin texts are much easier to read and translate, because 'philosophical' authors usual try their best to write as clear as possible, so their readers can understand, what they explain. But that was obviously not Laozi's intention and that's why I don't read and translate his texts as recipes in a cookbook.

 

Every one of his chapters has its context and it's here to me expressed in the last line:

The Tao of Man is acted and unspoken.

What still isn't clear to me is, why he wrote 為 'acted' and not 無為 (wu wei)

And how it influence the interpretation of the Received version's:

The Tao of the Holy Man is acted and unspoken.

[ChiDragon]

So when the same characters are seen together in the same order throughout, they are pointing at the same thing, if it fits it is right, if it doesn't then need different words, imo.

 

Sorry, Informer, it was not in classic text. Chinese classic is very esoteric, it was not as easy as it seems like any other modern languages.

 

PS...

Let me tell you a Chinese joke.

 

These characters were posted on a wall:

請不得在此久留隨意小便。

Please do not stay here too long or urinate anytime.

 

Same phrase with a comma:

請不得在此久留, 隨意小便。

Please do not stay here too long, you may urinate anytime....

Edited October 18, 2011 by ChiDragon

[dawei]

Laozi's writing style is in my opinion by purpose 'muddled'. Other pre-Qin texts are much easier to read and translate, because 'philosophical' authors usual try their best to write as clear as possible, so their readers can understand, what they explain. But that was obviously not Laozi's intention and that's why I don't read and translate his texts as recipes in a cookbook.

 

Every one of his chapters has its context and it's here to me expressed in the last line:

The Tao of Man is acted and unspoken.

What still isn't clear to me is, why he wrote 為 'acted' and not 無為 (wu wei)

And how it influence the interpretation of the Received version's:

The Tao of the Holy Man is acted and unspoken.

I don't have a problem with the structure of the line in the MWD. That "Sheng" gets added later which is understandable since Sheng Ren is mentioned earlier; but what may be an interesting issue is that so is "Ren" as to 'other people' (contrasted to the Sage). So one could equate the last 'Ren' back to Sheng Ren or to the general [other] people (Ren).

 

I think there is reason to not have used Wu Wei because it is not trying to describe Wu Wei from the [often poorly mentioned] non-action side, but from the actual action side. Chapter 8 uses a physical example of water for the same phrase 而不爭. Water flows but not to strive or contend as an original intention or outcome.

 

Also interesting is that the last character here is supposedly a hand pulling a bow... another interesting line to pursue in terms of tying it back to the opening line of Chapter 77.

 

[lienshan]

I don't have a problem with the structure of the line in the MWD.

 

Chapter 8 uses a physical example of water for the same phrase 而不爭.

Water flows but not to strive or contend as an original intention or outcome.

水善利萬物而不爭 (the Received chapter 8) 'doesn't strive'

水善利萬物而有爭 (the Mawangdui chapter 8) 'is opposed'

 

聖人之道為而不爭 (the Received chapter 81) 'doesn't strive'

人之道為而弗爭 (the Mawangdui chapter 81) 'not opposed'

 

'to strive' is the subjective meaning of 爭 indicated by the negative 不 'not'

'to oppose' is the objective meaning of 爭 indicated by the negative 弗 'not' and the verb 有 'to be, to have'

 

The coverb 為 is usual translated 'to act' or 'to be'.

According to prof. Pulleyblank does 為 as a full verb mean 'support, be on the side of'.

That seems to function with the last line of both the Received and the Mawangdui version:

 

The Tao of the sage supports and doesn't strive.

The Tao of man is on the side of and not opposed.

Edited October 19, 2011 by lienshan

[Aaron]

Hello Marblehead,

 

If you want to think of them as generalized that's fine, it doesn't bother me either way. One thing to consider though is that this chapter isn't the easiest for the layman to understand or appreciate. It can often be misinterpreted as a suggestion, when in fact it's not. As you said, this may be generalizations, but it also pretty much says if you're argumentative, you're not a good man, if you think that truthfulness is more important than compassion, then you're wrong, and that wisdom isn't gained through knowledge, but rather how one applies themselves.

 

I think there are many erudite people on this forum and most other forums, me included, that could use a good dose of wisdom.

 

Aaron

Edited October 19, 2011 by Twinner

[Marblehead]

Hello Marblehead,

 

If you want to think of them as generalized that's fine, it doesn't bother me either way. One thing to consider though is that this chapter isn't the easiest for the layman to understand or appreciate. It can often be misinterpreted as a suggestion, when in fact it's not. As you said, this may be generalizations, but it also pretty much says if you're argumentative, you're not a good man, if you think that truthfulness is more important than compassion, then you're wrong, and that wisdom isn't gained through knowledge, but rather how one applies themselves.

 

I think there are many erudite people on this forum and most other forums, me included, that could use a good dose of wisdom.

 

Aaron

 

Hehehe. No, I am not going to contend with you regarding this.

 

Ah!, compassion. Is it better to be compassionate and not tell someone the truth? Or even lie to them for fear of hurting their feelings?

 

I sometimes argue therefore I am not a good man. You logic based on the words from the chapter. I have seen you argue. Are you too not a good man?

 

Wisdom is another story I will not address here.

 

Well, I'll say this: An indication of wisdom is knowing when to keep our mouth shut. We both failed, I think.

 

Hehehe.

[XieJia]

 

Well, I'll say this: An indication of wisdom is knowing when to keep our mouth shut. We both failed, I think.

 

Hehehe.

 

 

 

 

failed too miserably.

[Marblehead]

 

failed too miserably.

 

Yeah. I know the rule - it's just hard to follow sometimes.

 

I do that with speed limit rules too when driving.

[XieJia]

Yeah. I know the rule - it's just hard to follow sometimes.

 

I do that with speed limit rules too when driving.

 

am also guilty as charged.

 

Edited October 19, 2011 by XieJia

[Aaron]

Hehehe. No, I am not going to contend with you regarding this.

 

Ah!, compassion. Is it better to be compassionate and not tell someone the truth? Or even lie to them for fear of hurting their feelings?

 

I sometimes argue therefore I am not a good man. You logic based on the words from the chapter. I have seen you argue. Are you too not a good man?

 

Wisdom is another story I will not address here.

 

Well, I'll say this: An indication of wisdom is knowing when to keep our mouth shut. We both failed, I think.

 

Hehehe.

 

I'm not sure if we've failed. Remember that the other thing we need to remember is that most of this is tied to one or the other. If all the world succeeded in keeping their mouth shut, that would be bad thing. What I think the editors of the Tao Teh Ching tried to do, was end on a high note and minimize division and arguments among their own members, more than anything else. With that said, it is still a good thing to remember.

 

If you can't saying anything nice, don't say anything at all.

Nobody likes a smarty pants.

Think before you say something.

 

I guess Lao Tzu wasn't the only one who thought of these things.

 

Aaron

Edited October 19, 2011 by Twinner

[Jeff]

 

I would not be too hard on yourselves with the arguing point. I think a "Good Man" in this context, means Sage or enlightened.

 

 

Also, reading the recent posts in this thread, does it seem that maybe Marble cloned himself... Not naming names, but...

 

[Marblehead]

Thought to self - Shhhh!

[XieJia]

What!

[lienshan]

My question is whether the guy copying the text for the MWD forgot 聖 (sageness)

towards the end of chapter 81. Or the text is initially like that.

The Mawangdui B version

 

The trustworthy word isn't pleasingly and the pleasing word isn't trustworthily.

The intelligent one isn't excessively and the excessive one isn't intelligently.

The good one isn't additionally and the additional one isn't good.

"holy man" isn't a collection, when considered the man himself.

An answer in the affirmative is, when praising the man!

Oneself answering in the affirmative is additionally.

Therefore:

Tao of Heaven benefits to and doesn't harm.

Tao of Man is on the side of and not opposed.

 

 

The subject of the Mawangdui B version is the term "holy man".

"man" is the trustworthy word, the intelligent one, the good one.

"holy" is the pleasing word, the excessive one, the additional one.

 

Your question is in fact a matter of double-wording or not?

Zhuangzi deals with the subject in a passage of his chapter 6:

 

夫卜梁倚有聖人之才而無聖人之道

我有聖人之道而無聖人之才

 

There was Bu-liang Yi who had the talent of a holy man, but not the Tao of a holy man,

while I had the Tao of a holy man, but not the talent of a holy man.

 

 

The pointe is, that 'a man having Tao' is per definition 'a holy man'!

'A holy man having Tao' is double-wording that'll say 'holy' praises 'a man having Tao'.

Edited October 20, 2011 by lienshan