DDJ 40

[Cobie]

~~~<>~~~

萬 and 2nd  有

~~~<>~~~

line 3-4
Wang Bi:     天 下  萬        物    生 於         有，    有 生 於 無 。

MWD B :      天 下  之        物    生 於         有，    有 __  於 无 。

Henricks G: 天 下  之 勿（物）生 於 又（有），    生 於 亡。 

DIO link G:   天 下  之         物     生 於         有，        生 於 亡。 

 

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by Cobie

[ChiDragon]

On 8/29/2023 at 4:28 AM, Taoist Texts said:

all the 3 are not only wrong but nonsensical. what do they even mean?

this line is very simple

 物生 things are born 于 into 有 being，有生 being born they go 于into 无 non-being。

thats all there is to it

This is incorrect. The correct logic should be as follows:

物生 things are born 于 from 有 manifested(Tao)，有生 being born 于 from 无 non-manifested(Tao) 。

Edited August 30, 2023 by ChiDragon

[Taoist Texts]

42 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

 The correct logic should be as follows:

first, you made up words in brackets which are not in the original

second, you make up concepts  of manifested(Tao) and non-manifested(Tao) which are not in the original

third, what you say is unintelligible. what does it even mean?

[ChiDragon]

29 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

first, you made up words in brackets which are not in the original

second, you make up concepts  of manifested(Tao) and non-manifested(Tao) which are not in the original

third, what you say is unintelligible. what does it even mean?

You may be correct about my input. However, It is the logic that I am really concerned with the Chinese sentence structure. All the other factors are immaterial right now. I just don't want people to follow this in the wrong direction. Peace!

With all respect, I must say that you have the logic are completely reversed.

Edited August 30, 2023 by ChiDragon

[Taoist Texts]

49 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

With all respect, I must say that you have the logic are completely reversed.

your 'translation' makes no sense. it is a word salad. can you explain what your 'translation' means? you may want to explain it in plain language with a real life example.  if you can not do that then your 'translation'  is gibberish.

[ChiDragon]

3. 天下萬物生於有，
3. All things in the world came from 有(you).

4. 有生於無。

4. 有(you)came from 無(wu).

[Daniel]

On 8/30/2023 at 3:51 PM, Taoist Texts said:

your 'translation' makes no sense. it is a word salad. can you explain what your 'translation' means? you may want to explain it in plain language with a real life example.  if you can not do that then your 'translation'  is gibberish.

 

Are you asking about manifest non-manifest?

 

'word-salad' is an insult which is not welcome in this thread.

 

[Daniel]

@Taoist Texts,

 

It looks like you are using a different version of DDJ40.  Not that it's wrong, but, I was not aware of this.

 

In the OP all the versions agree that DDJ40 has "於" in the last line.  But you have it as "天下万物生于有，有生于无"

 

I see this is how yellowbridge.com has the verse as well.  They have 于 not 於.  Also, note the last character is different.  I think it would be good to have some detail on where this difference is coming from.  From there, I propose looking at the previous verses and perhaps the following verses to see if there is a thematic flow which will help to discern whether it is a better fit for the verse to be communicating 'conceived from' vs. 'conceived into'.

 

Edited September 1, 2023 by Daniel

[whocoulditbe?]

On 29/08/2023 at 12:28 PM, Taoist Texts said:

all the 3 are not only wrong but nonsensical. what do they even mean?

this line is very simple

 物生 things are born 于 into 有 being，有生 being born they go 于into 无 non-being。

thats all there is to it

Where does "they go" come from? Are the 物 from the first line the implied subject of the second? From the structure, it feels more natural to treat 有 as the subject of the second line, with 生 as the verb. Can 有 ever be a noun?

Edited September 1, 2023 by whocoulditbe?

[Cobie]

~~~<>~~~
Re. 于/於 

~~~<>~~~

 

2 hours ago, Daniel said:

… 于 not 於 …

 

I prefer to use 於 。

 

Kroll pages 566 and 567, “cognate yu2 于/於 

in, at, from, to, on, with regard to, etc.

N.B.
From the Warring states period on 于 yu2 and 於 yu2 are generally interchangeable, …; 

prior to the Warring states period they are not equivalent to each other.”

 

Warring states period 475 - 221BC 
The Guodian is dated approximately 300 BC

 

Imo the picture on the bamboo looks more like 於 

http://www.daoisopen.com/A18toA20Chapters44409.html  

 

 

~~~<>~~~
Re. 无/無

~~~<>~~~
 

2 hours ago, Daniel said:

… the last character is different.  … where this difference is coming from. …

 

They’re not different: 

 

On 30/08/2023 at 8:42 PM, Cobie said:

… Kroll (page 480):

无 wu2 “… graphically interchangeable with …無 wu2 。…

 

The picture on the bamboo is 亡  wang2

http://www.daoisopen.com/A18toA20Chapters44409.html  

 

 

~~~<>~~~
Re. 有

~~~<>~~~

 

2 hours ago, whocoulditbe? said:

… Can 有 ever be a noun?

Yes.

 

Kroll page 565, 有

3. what there is, what exists; actuality; something.

 

Edited September 1, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

 

3 hours ago, Daniel said:

… I propose looking at the previous verses and perhaps the following verses to see if there is a thematic flow …

 

Note:

 

On 29/08/2023 at 12:04 AM, Cobie said:

Ch. 40 is in the Hendricks MWD, it comes after Ch. 41 …

 

[Taoist Texts]

3 hours ago, whocoulditbe? said:

Where does "they go" come from?

from  于    
于    于    yú    to go; to take; sentence-final interrogative particle; variant of 於|于[yu2]
于    於    yú    (of time or place) in; at; on; (indicating any indirect relation) to; toward; vis-à-vis; with regard to; for; (indicating a source) from; out of; (used in comparison) than; (used in the passive voice) by
 

3 hours ago, whocoulditbe? said:

 

Are the 物 from the first line the implied subject of the second?

yes

3 hours ago, whocoulditbe? said:

From the strucutre, it feels more natural to treat 有 as the subject of the second line, with 生 as the verb.

it is. when the  物things are born into being 有 , they become 有

3 hours ago, whocoulditbe? said:

 

Can 有 ever be a noun?

22) 佛教语。相对於“空”、“无”而言。因各个宗派思想体系不同，解释各异，又有“假有”、“实有”、“妙有”等之分。

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, Taoist Texts said:

things are born into being 有

 

Does this make sense?

 

A thing being born into 有 if the next line has 有 being born into 无?

 

If it is 'into', then isn't this describing "unbecoming" a process of being deconstructed and re-assimilated into non-being?

 

If so, does "born" describe it?  Is "into"a good fit here?

 

1 hour ago, Taoist Texts said:

from  于    
于    于    yú    to go; to take; sentence-final interrogative particle; variant of 於|于[yu2]
于    於    yú    (of time or place) in; at; on; (indicating any indirect relation) to; toward; vis-à-vis; with regard to; for; (indicating a source) from; out of; (used in comparison) than; (used in the passive voice) by

 

I see 'from' listed above.  Doesn't translating it as "from" fit better with "born"?  Then the verses consistently describe "becoming".  Choosing "into" instead of "from" makes the verb "born" awkward to me.

 

Not that I cannot accept the idea of birthing being part of a process of unbirth / unbecoming / deconstructing...

 

Edited September 1, 2023 by Daniel

[ChiDragon]

2 hours ago, Cobie said:

Re. 于/於 

FYI These two characters, basically, have the same meaning and are interchangeable.
The people in different regions are used each character as their standard.
The simplified Chinese uses the former only but not the latter.  All other regions use both, regardless of the standard requirement.

[Nintendao]

I like John C.H. Wu translation:

Quote

The movement of the Tao consists in Returning.
The use of the Tao consists in softness.

 

All things under heaven are born of the corporeal:
The corporeal is born of the Incorporeal.

 

 

Contemporary nerd interpretation:

 

Matter made of atoms is corporeal; can be interacted with five senses.

Atoms are made of quantum field fluctuations; completely imperceptible (without the use of high tech machines, or subjectively via sixth sense)

 

Returning nature of movement is illustrated by the arrow of entropy. High energy particles produced in large hadron collisions have been observed to "blink out of existence," as their energy is dissipated back into the vacuum, or transferred to surrounding particles.

 

The use of the Tao consists in softness...

 

In order for my own awareness to interact directly with the subspace communication network, both mind and body must first be conducted in a very subtle manner.

 

That is why todays quantum computers have to be cooled to near absolute zero. The slightest of "noise" can influence the quark-spins we are attempting to measure and manipulate.

[Daniel]

19 hours ago, Cobie said:

Ch. 40 is in the Hendricks MWD, it comes after Ch. 41 …

 

Thank you,

 

Per Hendricks in the MWD:  "what to us is chapter 40 comes between chapters 41 and 42".

 

I will consider the flow both 38-39-40-41-42, and 39-41-40-42-43, and compare.

 

Also I noticed that there were not chapter divisions originally, or at least, they were not established and fixed until later.  So zooming out to look at the surrounding context is justified.

[Daniel]

Also, if the MWD has 38 as the first chapter, this will also be considered.  The author is beginning with these verses.

[Daniel]

52 minutes ago, Nintendao said:

The movement of the Tao consists in Returning.

 

I like it.  It's interesting to me that someone ( translator, editor, publisher, someone... ) chose to capitalize 'R'.  Returning as a proper noun or for emphasis.  The character being translated as "Returning" is 反.  The verse begins with it.  So, maybe, this concept of "Returning" is setting the atmosphere, the tone, for the idea which follows?

 

反 seems to be somewhat rare in the DDJ.  Using the version on ctext.org it occurs only 4 times.  25, 40, 65, 78. 

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by Daniel

[Cobie]

4 hours ago, Daniel said:

… there were not chapter divisions originally … 

And Ch. 40 is much shorter than most of the other chapters; it might originally not have been a separate chapter. 

Ch. 40 (Henricks MWD) does not start with a black dot. See Henricks page xvii, re. black dots.

 

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by Cobie

[Nintendao]

1 hour ago, Daniel said:

capitalize 'R'

 

I wondered about that! I checked in my hardcopy of Wu's version from Shambala Dragon Edition, and it is capitalized there. The other occurrences of 反 are not. Interestingly the capitalized Return is also in chapter 16, except there translated from 復.

 

Archangelis transliterated 反 as "cross-over" and 復 as "renewal"

[Cobie]

 

3 hours ago, Daniel said:

… The character being translated as "Returning" is 反.  The verse begins with it.  So, maybe, this concept of "Returning" is setting the atmosphere, the tone, for the idea which follows? …

 

I think so yes. Awaken (now banned) said that at the time of writing of the DDJ, it was customary to start a piece of text with what’s most important; and typically they would start with the conclusion, only after that came the arguments.

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

4 hours ago, Daniel said:

… 38 as the first chapter …

I prefer to see Ch. 1 as the start of the DDJ. Various arguments (Henricks xvi-xvii), I favour the “result of packaging” idea; also Ch. 1 (MWD A) starts with a black dot; Ch. 38 does not.  
 

 

Edited September 2, 2023 by Cobie

[ChiDragon]

On 9/1/2023 at 10:30 AM, whocoulditbe? said:

 物生 things are born 于 into 有 being，有生 being born they go 于into 无 non-being。

On 9/1/2023 at 10:30 AM, whocoulditbe? said:

..... Are the 物 from the first line the implied subject of the second? From the structure, it feels more natural to treat 有 as the subject of the second line, with 生 as the verb. Can 有 ever be a noun?

Hi, whocoulditbe
FYI There are two separated sentences here. 物 should be 万物. It is the subject of the first sentence. What you said about 有 and 生 are very true. In this case, the sentence structure are the same for both Chinese and English here.

You had raised a very interesting question here. Can 有 ever be a noun? Yes, in the Chinese language, any character can be used as a noun. One can tell if it is a noun by context as you did. As a matter of fact, LaoTze had used the characters 有 and 無 as nouns in many occasions. The first thing he did is in Chapter One. If one doesn't understand the usage of characters as nouns, one will never able to read or interpret the text correctly.

[ChiDragon]

5 hours ago, Nintendao said:

 

I wondered about that! I checked in my hardcopy of Wu's version from Shambala Dragon Edition, and it is capitalized there. The other occurrences of 反 are not. Interestingly the capitalized Return is also in chapter 16, except there translated from 復.

 

Archangelis transliterated 反 as "cross-over" and 復 as "renewal"

Hi Nintendao
The character of 反 was used in the ancient as return(a noun). The modern meaning can be interpreted as rebel; opposite.
The modern character for return is 返. I have not seen this character was used in the Tao Te Ching but the character 反.

PPS
 As for 反 and 復
復 means to repeat; again and also has other meanings. To avoid confusion, it is better to stay with the meaning of interest here.

Used as compound character 反復 : repeatedly

Edited September 2, 2023 by ChiDragon

[Daniel]

Return like a pendulum at the top of an arc which is an inversion?  Different than returning like equal and opposite reaction, or oscillating?

 

反 communicates an inversion? 

復 communicates an equal opposite reaction?