"Spirit" in the DDJ

[Daniel]

It has been proposed that Laotze was a naturalist and and an atheist.  This thread is to discuss occurences of "spirit" in english translations of the DDJ.  Is this a spirit like a ghost?  A disembodied soul?  Is it something else?

 

At the time of composition of the DDJ, lacking modern scientific knowledge of natural forces governing:

 

• birth,
• growth,
• sickness,
• death,
• germination,
• blossoming,
• producing fruit/seed
• moving constellations
• phases of the moon
• seasons
• weather
• etc

 

Does it make sense for Laotze to completely avoid any "spiritual" beliefs in the manner of a naturalist atheist by today's standards?

 

 

[ChiDragon]

Yes, the only spirit in the TTC would be Tao. Tao was well defined in Chapter one. Tao is sometimes visible(有) and at other times is invisible(無).

Edited September 18, 2023 by ChiDragon

[Nungali]

Spirit can also mean something else in English ;   '  in the spirit of '     or   his or her  'essential spirit'  ... the 'essence of a thing '  . The essential spirit as a 'distillation ' . 

 

In  a few systems one's 'spirit' , essential nature , 'individual essence ' , 'mode of being ' is connected to one's dharma , Great Work , the 'mission' this incarnation sets out to accomplish  - your spirit and your way .

 

Perhaps 'spirit' /  Dao is the way of ' Nature ' , how it sets about to fulfil 'it's' purpose .  So by following that way we are in harmony with the way .

 

If one understand the way , of say, farming  ( seasons, weather , Moon phases, etc ) and is successful, it may make little difference if one sees the 'animating' or 'originating' forces behind those things as hierarchies of personified or abstract beings or  just 'the way spirit moves' .

 

 

[Michael Sternbach]

9 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

Yes, the only spirit in the TTC would be Tao. Tao was well defined in Chapter one. Tao is sometimes visible(有) and at other times is invisible(無).

 

Dao is equivalent to the World Spirit in Western natural philosophy. 

[ChiDragon]

Thank you. I believe, in the OP, we are dealing with the definition of spirit within the scope of the DDJ.

[ChiDragon]

6 hours ago, Michael Sternbach said:

 

Dao is equivalent to the World Spirit in Western natural philosophy. 

I am not familiar with the World Spirit. Would you please give a little explanation about it. Thank you.

[Daniel]

17 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

Yes, the only spirit in the TTC would be Tao. Tao was well defined in Chapter one. Tao is sometimes visible(有) and at other times is invisible(無).

 

Ahhhh.  That makes perfect sense. Thank you very kindly!

[Daniel]

17 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

Yes, the only spirit in the TTC would be Tao. Tao was well defined in Chapter one. Tao is sometimes visible(有) and at other times is invisible(無).

 

In my mind, right or wrong, I consider 有 and 無 as verbs, maybe not technically, like walking, sitting, jumping... but as "energetic".  I've mentioned it in another thread, 有 is composing, for lack of better word.  Compostional, almost like authoring a book.  But more than that, more basic and primoridal?  Not writing the words, but forming the thoughts and ideas from an unformed pool of possibility. 

 

Forgive me, do you know what I mean when I say primordial?  Pre-existent?  Original?  Foundational?  um... fundamental?  Primordial.

 

Also 無 not as an object, but as the action of decomposing.  Not in an ugly way, like a corpse, although that sort of qualifies as what I am imagining.  But it is a primordial energetic principle of "being un-made", dissassembled.  

 

And both are non-substance, which is why I really appreciate understanding them as spirit, but certainly not spirit in a western sense of disembodied soul.

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Daniel

[ChiDragon]

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

 

In my mind, right or wrong, I consider 有 and 無 as verbs, maybe not technically, like walking, sitting, jumping... but as "energtic".  I've mentioned in in another thread, 有 is composing, for lack of better word.  Compostional, almost like authoring a book.  But more than that, more basic and primoridal?  Forgive me, do you know what I mean when I say primordial?  Pre-existent?  Original?  Foundational?  um... fundemental?  Primordial.

 

Also 無 not as an object, but as the action of decomposing.  Not in an ugly way, like a corpse, although that sort of qualifies as what I am imagining.  But it is an primordial energetic principle of being un-made, dissassembled.  

 

And both are non-substance, which is why I really appreciate understanding them as spirit, but certainly not spirit in a western sense of disembodied soul.

It maybe a little strange to a non-native speaker. As I had indicated before, Chinese characters, sometimes, can be a noun or verb based on the context. Laotze had used both "you" and "wu" many times as verbs and nouns. I believe that the first thing he did was in Chapter One. A bit of advice, it is not wise to interpret the classic DDJ with English thoughts, grammar or rules. Peace!

[ChiDragon]

10 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

It maybe a little strange to a non-native speaker. As I had indicated before, Chinese characters, sometimes, can be a noun or verb based on the context. Laotze had used both "you" and "wu" many times as verbs and nouns. I believe that the first thing he did was in Chapter One. A bit of advice, it is not wise to interpret the classic DDJ with English thoughts, grammar or rules. Peace!

Chapter 1 
1. 道可道，非常道。
2. 名可名，非常名。
3. 無，名天地之始。
4. 有，名萬物之母。
5. 故常無，欲以觀其妙。
6. 常有，欲以觀其徼。
7. 此兩者同出而異名，
8. 同謂之玄。玄之又玄，
9. 眾妙之門。

Revised as of 2/27/12
1. Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.
2. A name that can be named is not an eternal name.

3. Invisible, was a name given to Tao at the origin of sky and earth.
4. Visible, was a name given to Tao as the mother of all things.

5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok its quale.
6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe its boundary.

7. These two come from one origin but differ in name,
8. Both are regarded as unfathomable; the most occult and profound;
9. The gate of all changes.

Please note:
In lines 3 and 4, "you" and "wu" were treated as nouns by context.
In lines 5 and 6, "you" and "wu" were treated as verbs by context.

[Nungali]

2 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

Thank you. I believe, in the OP, we are dealing with the definition of spirit within the scope of the DDJ.

 

Indeed , but the OP asks about the English translation into the English word 'spirit' .  Either there was no better fit , or the translator was considering an 'extended' understanding of the English term 'spirit' . ... or maybe didnt understand the Daoist concept ?

[Cobie]

47 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

It maybe a little strange to a non-native speaker. As I had indicated before, Chinese characters, sometimes, can be a noun or verb based on the context. Laotze had used both "you" and "wu" many times as verbs and nouns. …

 

Yes I agree, this is indubitably so. 
 

47 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

… A bit of advice, it is not wise to interpret the classic DDJ with English thoughts, grammar or rules. Peace!

Yes I agree, it’s quite different.

 

[ChiDragon]

24 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Indeed , but the OP asks about the English translation into the English word 'spirit' .  Either there was no better fit , or the translator was considering an 'extended' understanding of the English term 'spirit' . ... or maybe didnt understand the Daoist concept ?

"Spirit" in the DDJ

To my clear understanding, the OP was asking about the "spirit" in the DDJ other than the translation of the  English word "spirit". My response was to answer what the DDJ was really telling us. Peace!

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, ChiDragon said:

It maybe a little strange to a non-native speaker. As I had indicated before, Chinese characters, sometimes, can be a noun or verb based on the context. Laotze had used both "you" and "wu" many times as verbs and nouns. I believe that the first thing he did was in Chapter One. A bit of advice, it is not wise to interpret the classic DDJ with English thoughts, grammar or rules. Peace!

 

I'm listening to you, and that is my aspiration.

 

But, if I may, this doesn't tell me whether I interpretted the concepts properly.  Unless, your message is the kindest gentlest version of "sorry, that's not it at all".

 

At some point, i will need to attempt an understanding, type it out as best I can, then receive some combination of correction, confirmation, or guidance.  What I described, in my mind, does not actually exist in "english thoughts".  A primordial energetic principle of decomposition?  What is that in western religion, spirituality, esoterics, etc?  Entropy is the closest thing I can think of.

 

If it's premature for me to attempt typing out my understanding, that makes sense.  But our conversations are going to be somewhat ... empty.

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Daniel

[Daniel]

35 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

"Spirit" in the DDJ

To my clear understanding, the OP was asking about the "spirit" in the DDJ other than the translation of the  English word "spirit". My response was to answer what the DDJ was really telling us. Peace!

 

Yes.  Thank you.  Other than the english word spirit.  My intention was to, maybe, use the english translation to "spirit" simply as an opportunity to locate chapters and verses which describe this concept, whatever it is.

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Daniel

[ChiDragon]

13 minutes ago, Daniel said:

If it's premature for me to attempt typing out my understanding, that makes sense.  But our conversations are going to be somewhat ... empty.

I understand where you are coming from. It takes little by little to put the whole picture together. The DDJ is not easy to be comprehended, it took me a few years to get it together. You are learning it chapter by chapter is only part of the picture. I had done the same in the past ten years or so. However, we need to relate the chapters together as a whole. In order to understand the DDJ completely.

[Cobie]

10 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

I understand where you are coming from. It takes little by little to put the whole picture together. The DDJ is not easy to be comprehended, it took me a few years to get it together. You are learning it chapter by chapter is only part of the picture. I had done the same in the past ten years or so. However, we need to relate the chapters together as a whole. In order to understand the DDJ completely.

Yes, indubitably so. The meaning of a character depends on the context. The context is the whole of the DDJ. 

 

 

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

Please note:
In lines 3 and 4, "you" and "wu" were treated as nouns by context.
In lines 5 and 6, "you" and "wu" were treated as verbs by context.

 

When 有 and 無 are translated into visible and invisible ( noun or verb ), that, in my mind, is communicating vision, like physical sight.  But is that what is intended here?  Or is it maybe more than lacking physical visibility?  When something is invisible, maybe it stlll exists?  Or maybe not.  Maybe I can even grasp it?  Perhaps I wouldn't know I was grasping it. Or it would be grasped by not grasping it.  There's many options of what it could be, if I release myself from the cage, for lack of a better word, of the literal english meaning of "invisible".

 

At risk of making a mistake which you just recently cautioned against,  there is a concept "the unseen".  It's a category of "things" which simply can not be grasped intellectually in a standard straight forward way.  I'm not comparing the two concepts, 無 and "the unseen".  not intentionally.

 

I'm bringing the idea "the unseen", the category, as an example of a concept which is named "invisible" but is not actually communicating no-sight.  It is not *limited* to things which are not physically visible.  Is that at all comparable to 無?  Is 無 in this context limited to lacking-physical-sight?

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Daniel

[ChiDragon]

2 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

3. Invisible, was a name given to Tao at the origin of sky and earth.
4. Visible, was a name given to Tao as the mother of all things.

5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok its quale.
6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe its boundary.

In line 3, Laotze called Tao "無", Invisible(noun), indicating that Tao is in the invisible state.  One can feel Tao's existence by intuition.
In line 4, Laotze called Tao "有" Visible(noun), indicating that Tao is in the visible state. One can feel Tao's existence by vision.

Do you see that Laotze is shooting two birds with one stone? He was using "無" and "有" as nouns pun intended. At the same time, they are giving a hint to the meaning of the verbs. It was to show the present state condition of Tao. Indeed, that is the tricky part of the Chinese language.

Edited September 18, 2023 by ChiDragon

[Cobie]

10 minutes ago, ChiDragon said:

… shooting two birds with one stone … using [characters] as nouns. At the same time, they are giving a hint to the meaning of the verbs. … Indeed, that is the tricky part of the Chinese language.

Yes, that I see a lot in the DDJ. It makes the verses so rich in meaning. 

 

 

[Cobie]

A native speaker would associate all the possible uses when seeing a character. To translate a character with one English word, will never capture this richness in meaning. But to use more words is imo not an option, because then I’d lose the beauty of the terseness of the DDJ language. The DDJ is so beautifully crafted, all thought through to the extreme.
 

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Cobie

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, ChiDragon said:

In line 3, Laotze called Tao "無", Invisible(noun), indicating that Tao is in the invisible state.  One can feel Tao's existence by intuition.
In line 4, Laotze called Tao "有" Visible(noun), indicating that Tao is in the visible state. One can feel Tao's existence by vision.

Do you see that Laotze is shooting two birds with one stone? He was using "無" and "有" as nouns pun intended. At the same time, they are giving a hint to the meaning of the verbs. It was to show the present state condition of Tao. Indeed, that is the tricky part of the Chinese language.

 

No. I don't see it.  I love it, but I don't see it.  And if at all possible can you elaborate on the pun?  I don't get it.  But I am honestly tickled with the mystery of it.  It literally is... tickling my insides.  Hee.  I like it.  So perhaps it's better left as a mystery.  I don't know.  All I know is, I came back from some frustrating work, physical labor, outside the house.  Sat down and read this post, and now I am happy-happy.

 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Daniel

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, Cobie said:

A native speaker would associate all the possible uses when seeing a character. To translate a character with one English word, will never capture this richness in meaning. But to use more words is imo not an option, because then I’d lose the beauty of the terseness of the DDJ language. The DDJ is so beautifully crafted, all thought through to the extreme

 

And this, imo, is what makes language "magical".  At some point when learning language, the character ( written word ), the vocalization, the various meanings, and the context will all unite and resolve in the moment of comprehension.  Not only for the individual reader, but for all other readers who are sharing the moment.  All of them are united in the moment of shared comprehension. 

 

And little children do this every single day all across the globe when they are learning to speak, read, and write.

 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Daniel

[Cobie]

 

2 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

… invisible … One can feel Tao's existence by intuition. …

 

Yes, I agree with this as a statement. * Thanks for posting that. 

~~~
* please note this is not referring to it being or not being a correct translation of Ch.1, that topic is closed. 
 

 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Cobie

[Cobie]

 

5 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

… Tao … invisible, one would grok its quale.

Yes, I agree with this as a statement. * And it follows from 

 

2 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

… invisible … One can feel Tao's existence by intuition. …

 

~~~
* please note this is not referring to it being or not being a correct translation of Ch.1, that topic is closed.

 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Cobie