Now Again

[treebuffalo]

Chapter 37 contains a strange phrase "fu yi" (characters 37 and 38). which don't seem to fit well into the flow of the chapter. According to J. Star it means "truly/now/what follows is true" and "in turn/again/moreover/also," respectively. I tried to ignore them as utility words, until I switched definitions of "yu" (character 41/ 43) from "desire" to "habit." Both are listed among the definitions for "yu" along with "tendencies." 

 

So now the sentence might read "now again free of habit," which is a paradox. And as we all know, the DDJ is nothing if not paradoxical. I like this translation better than "desire." We all know desire is a bad thing, but habit? It makes sense to me that forcing habit on the world may just be as bad as desire. The desire to have predictability in an unpredictable world. 

 

[awaken]

道常無為而無不為。侯王若能守之，萬物將自化。化而欲作，吾將鎮之以無名之樸。無名之樸，夫亦將無欲。不欲以靜，天下將自定。

 

夫是口語文字，例如這個那個
 

 

The Tao is always inaction and inaction. If the princes and kings can guard it, all things will be transformed by themselves. If I want to make it, I will keep it simple and unnamed. Nameless simplicity, the husband will also have no desires. If you don't want to be quiet, the world will be self-determined.

 

 

'Fu' is a spoken word, such as  that, well, en...

 

亦 also

將 will

 

這段老子講的是『無慾』，跟佛陀講的『滅貪』是一樣的

 

This passage of Lao Tzu is talking about "no desire", which is the same as the "elimination of greed" that the Buddha said.

 

修煉的核心必須是『無慾』，如果帶著慾望追求氣感的強大，是不可能得『道』的

 

 

The core of cultivation must be "no desire". If one pursue the power of Qi with desire, it is impossible to get "Dao".

[Mig]

On 5/31/2022 at 9:18 PM, treebuffalo said:

Chapter 37 contains a strange phrase "fu yi" (characters 37 and 38). which don't seem to fit well into the flow of the chapter. According to J. Star it means "truly/now/what follows is true" and "in turn/again/moreover/also," respectively. I tried to ignore them as utility words, until I switched definitions of "yu" (character 41/ 43) from "desire" to "habit." Both are listed among the definitions for "yu" along with "tendencies." 

 

So now the sentence might read "now again free of habit," which is a paradox. And as we all know, the DDJ is nothing if not paradoxical. I like this translation better than "desire." We all know desire is a bad thing, but habit? It makes sense to me that forcing habit on the world may just be as bad as desire. The desire to have predictability in an unpredictable world. 

 

Are you following the English translation or the original text in Chinese? It seems all translations from the original point to desire but nothing else. Where did you get that the word "yu" is habit?

[Cobie]

 

On 01/06/2022 at 6:18 AM, treebuffalo said:

Chapter 37 …

 

Which transcript are you using? 

 

Quote

… I switched definitions of "yu" … from "desire" to "habit." Both are listed among the definitions for "yu" …

 

Listed where? Kroll does nog list “habit” as a possible meaning.

 

On 01/06/2022 at 6:18 AM, treebuffalo said:

… According to J. Star …

 

Is “J. Star” a Sinologist, a paleographer, specialised in Chinese as used at the time of writing of the DDJ? 

 

On 01/06/2022 at 6:18 AM, treebuffalo said:

… a strange phrase … which don't seem to fit well into the flow of the chapter … until I switched definitions of "yu" … from "desire" to "habit." 

 

 “until I switched definitions”  Yes, that would do the trick … Jeez.

 

“ … just think of the degree of cultural chauvinism necessary for someone to suppose that he or she can translate the Daode jing without knowing Chinese.  (... Chinese people don't try to translate Shakespeare without knowing English.).

 The only way would be if you had convinced yourself that you already know what the text says. ... “ (my bold)  

(Paul Golding)

 

Changing the text instead of enduring the agonies of changing your own conviction. 
(Paul Goldin)

 

On 01/06/2022 at 6:18 AM, treebuffalo said:

… as we all know …

“as we all know”  Please substantiate your claim. 
 

 

Edited January 15, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

.

Edited January 15, 2023 by Cobie

[treebuffalo]

22 hours ago, awaken said:

 

The Tao is always inaction and inaction. If the princes and kings can guard it, all things will be transformed by themselves. If I want to make it, I will keep it simple and unnamed. Nameless simplicity, the husband will also have no desires. If you don't want to be quiet, the world will be self-determined.

 

'Fu' is a spoken word, such as  that, well, en...

 

亦 also

將 will

 

This passage of Lao Tzu is talking about "no desire", which is the same as the "elimination of greed" that the Buddha said.

 

The core of cultivation must be "no desire". If one pursue the power of Qi with desire, it is impossible to get "Dao".

 

Yeah, I know desire is bad and the root of all suffering, AND there is probably overlap into the DDJ. But Lao Tzu's is a master of language. He writes a lot of paradox and double meanings. I'm looking for more applicable interpretations than "desire is bad." That sort of translation I think underestimates Lao Tsu's skill with words. 

[treebuffalo]

9 hours ago, Mig said:

Are you following the English translation or the original text in Chinese? It seems all translations from the original point to desire but nothing else. Where did you get that the word "yu" is habit?

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Tao_te_Ching/bK9PEAAAQBAJ?hl=en

 

This book is the only one I know of that breaks down each character definition. 

[treebuffalo]

7 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

“ … just think of the degree of cultural chauvinism necessary for someone to suppose that he or she can translate the Daode jing without knowing Chinese.  (... Chinese people don't try to translate Shakespeare without knowing English.)  The only way would be if you had convinced yourself that you already know what the text says. ... “ (my old)  (Paul Golding)

 

 

 

So there's a billion people in China right? And how many are aware of Shakespeare? Probably some. You don't think any of those people are a little confused about something good ole Bill wrote and looked up the definition in English?! Talk about cultural chauvinism. Yeesh.

[awaken]

老子講的無慾和佛陀講的滅貪，指的都不是表層意識的狀態，而是深度入定的狀態，這個沒練的人應該是聽不懂的

 

如果你聽懂了，那你的修煉內景當中，應該會出現一輪明月，證明你真的懂了

 

Lao Tzu's desirelessness and Buddha's cessation of greed do not refer to the state of superficial consciousness, but to the state of deep meditation, which should be incomprehensible to those who have not practiced.

If you understand it, then a bright moon should appear in your cultivation interior, proving that you really understand

[Cobie]

1 hour ago, treebuffalo said:

So there's a billion people in China right? And how many are aware of Shakespeare? Probably some. You don't think any of those people are a little confused about something good ole Bill wrote and looked up the definition in English?! Talk about cultural chauvinism. Yeesh.

I don’t see the connection.

[Cobie]

1 hour ago, treebuffalo said:

This book is the only one I know of that breaks down each character definition. 

You could try a proper dictionary like the Kroll.

 

 

Edited June 4, 2022 by Cobie

[zerostao]

10 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

“as we all know”  Please substantiate your claim.

 

 

 

11 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

 

Changing the text instead of enduring the agonies of changing your own conviction. (Paul R Goldin)

 

 

 

 

11 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

“ … just think of the degree of cultural chauvinism necessary for someone to suppose that he or she can translate the Daode jing without knowing Chinese.  (... Chinese people don't try to translate Shakespeare without knowing English.)  The only way would be if you had convinced yourself that you already know what the text says. ... “ (my old)  (Paul Golding)

 

 

 

Bordering on trolling.

Are you trying to increase your post count or is it you just couldn’t have responded with one post to make your stance?

[Cobie]

26 minutes ago, zerostao said:

Bordering on trolling.

 

My alpologies. That certainly was not the intention at all. : )
 

26 minutes ago, zerostao said:

Are you trying to increase your post count

 

Lol, no, that doesn’t interest me at all. 
 

26 minutes ago, zerostao said:

or is it you just couldn’t have responded with one post to make your stance?

Possibly. 
 

I always post like this, because I like to make things clear by putting one point only per post. I always posted like this on OD. I would like to keep on posting like this. But if you say it is unacceptable, I will of course stop posting.

Please let me know.

[Cobie]

Moved to my PPD.

Edited June 4, 2022 by Cobie

[zerostao]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

My alpologies. That certainly was not the intention at all. : )
 

 

Lol, no, that doesn’t interest me at all. 
 

Possibly. 
 

I always post like this, because I like to make things clear by putting one point only per post. I always posted like this on OD. I would like to keep on posting like this. But if you say it is unacceptable, I will of course stop posting.

Please let me know.

I am not saying it is unacceptable.

I just wanted to bring it up, thank you for your response, letting me know that this is your style.

I didn’t issue any warning; and prefer using a soft style of modding. I am a mod, and there was a concern expressed by another member. 
TDB has always had/have trolls, some we tolerate, others not so much. If it is not mean spirited type, I usually allow it. However, this is subjective in some part. I have been a major troll myself, playing hard with everyone isn’t going to work. with some it does, iron sharpens iron. And as I allow freedom of style, I also don’t want a member thinking they are being bullied or singled out to be picked on. Does that make sense?

We have a worldwide membership here, folks have different norms for what they consider to be insulting, and what have you.

I know you’re new here, having fun, and I am big on self moderation.
I prefer informal solutions over formal ones. Everyone, almost everyone that is active will ruffle someone’s feathers sometimes, as you get a better feel for the personality of individual members, I trust you will adjust accordingly.

 It’s a continuing process IMO

 

a hint to all; if I notice someone speaking in absolutes, outright saying another member is wrong, playing armchair mod out on the open forum, those things raise my red flags.

we have a report box that does get checked. 
we may not always please everyone, in fact we could never accomplish that, I don’t think.

 

 

 

 

[Cobie]

51 minutes ago, zerostao said:

 

Yes, it makes perfect sense to me what you say. I totally agree with what you said and will take it to heart. I will make sure the problem will not reoccur. Thank you very much for explaining. 

 

 

Edited June 4, 2022 by Cobie