Most accurate Golden Flower translation?

[silent thunder]

merits its own thread in the new Abrahamic section

[snowymountains]

Just now, silent thunder said:

merits its own thread in the new Abrahamic section

 

It does, I may open this during weekdays next week

[Mark Foote]

8 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

Constantine saw Christianity’s belief in one god as a way to unify the empire that had been so badly divided for two decades. But he discovered that Christianity itself was not unified. So, he called the Council of Nicea in 325 to bring together the 1,800 bishops from around the empire to work out official doctrine and provide the basis for a unified Church. Constantine paid for the entire council and even paid for travel, giving bishops the right of free transportation on the imperial postal system.

 

The council laid the foundation of orthodox theology (Catholic theology) and declared several differing theologies heresies. Constantine’s support initially gave Orthodoxy the ability to require Christians to adopt their doctrinal formulation. While during the next few decades, the church’s fortunes waxed and waned, within a century, Christianity had been declared the official religion of the Roman Empire and non-Christian religions were in steep decline.

 

On July 16, 1054, Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Cerularius was excommunicated from the Christian church based in Rome, Italy. Cerularius’s excommunication was a breaking point in long-rising tensions between the Roman church based in Rome and the Byzantine church based in Constantinople (now called Istanbul). The resulting split divided the European Christian church into two major branches: the Western Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. This split is known as the Great Schism, or sometimes the “East-West Schism” or the “Schism of 1054.”

The Great Schism came about due to a complex mix of religious disagreements and political conflicts. One of the many religious disagreements between the western (Roman) and eastern (Byzantine) branches of the church had to do with whether or not it was acceptable to use unleavened bread for the sacrament of communion. (The west supported the practice, while the east did not.) Other objects of religious dispute include the exact wording of the Nicene Creed and the Western belief that clerics should remain celibate.

These religious disagreements were made worse by a variety of political conflicts, particularly regarding the power of Rome. Rome believed that the pope—the religious leader of the western church—should have authority over the patriarch—the religious authority of the eastern church. Constantinople disagreed. Each church recognized their own leaders, and when the western church eventually excommunicated Michael Cerularius and the entire eastern church. The eastern church retaliated by excommunicating the Roman pope Leo III and the Roman church with him.

While the two churches have never reunited, over a thousand years after their split, the western and eastern branches of Christianity came to more peaceable terms. In 1965, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras I lifted the longstanding mutual excommunication decrees made by their respective churches.

(https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/great-schism/)

 

 

[snowymountains]

1 minute ago, Mark Foote said:

On July 16, 1054, Patriarch of Constantinople Michael Cerularius was excommunicated from the Christian church based in Rome, Italy. Cerularius’s excommunication was a breaking point in long-rising tensions between the Roman church based in Rome and the Byzantine church based in Constantinople (now called Istanbul). The resulting split divided the European Christian church into two major branches: the Western Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church. This split is known as the Great Schism, or sometimes the “East-West Schism” or the “Schism of 1054.”

The Great Schism came about due to a complex mix of religious disagreements and political conflicts. One of the many religious disagreements between the western (Roman) and eastern (Byzantine) branches of the church had to do with whether or not it was acceptable to use unleavened bread for the sacrament of communion. (The west supported the practice, while the east did not.) Other objects of religious dispute include the exact wording of the Nicene Creed and the Western belief that clerics should remain celibate.

These religious disagreements were made worse by a variety of political conflicts, particularly regarding the power of Rome. Rome believed that the pope—the religious leader of the western church—should have authority over the patriarch—the religious authority of the eastern church. Constantinople disagreed. Each church recognized their own leaders, and when the western church eventually excommunicated Michael Cerularius and the entire eastern church. The eastern church retaliated by excommunicating the Roman pope Leo III and the Roman church with him.

While the two churches have never reunited, over a thousand years after their split, the western and eastern branches of Christianity came to more peaceable terms. In 1965, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras I lifted the longstanding mutual excommunication decrees made by their respective churches.

(https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/great-schism/)

 

 

 

Thanks Mark, very interesting, the Schism happened a long time after Constantine though, different era.

[Mark Foote]

30 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

Thanks Mark, very interesting, the Schism happened a long time after Constantine though, different era.
 

Yes, I just thought that was an interesting follow-on from the article you linked.  I wonder what differences there are in the practice of Christianity, between the two churches.

Nothing to do with the best translation of "The Golden Flower", of course.  



 

[snowymountains]

11 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:

Yes, I just thought that was an interesting follow-on from the article you linked.  I wonder what differences there are in the practice of Christianity, between the two churches.

Nothing to do with the best translation of "The Golden Flower", of course.  



 

 

Agreed it's very interesting.

 

One I'm aware of is Papal infallibility ( on doctrinal matters , infallibility is not presumed to be general), the Orthodox church doesn't accept Papal infallibility, nor does it presume infallibility of its patriarchs.

 

Other than that the usual stuff, different robe colours, beards vs shaven, different management teams and different profit centres 😁

 

It's ok, 3 translations are more than enough for starters

[EFreethought]

On 2/26/2024 at 11:29 AM, blue eyed snake said:

 

i guess to answer that one you have to be fluent in english, chinese and have a good many years of neidan, so I cannot answer that question.  

 

Wilhelm version I like mostly for nostalgic reasons, my version is an heirloom, i cringe at the way he understands this text in a Jungian framework.

The Cleary version is more to the point  

I like this version  https://thesecretofthegoldenflower.com/esposito.html 

 

reading these 3 versions side by side is an interesting experience  

 

Is anyone on this forum working on a translation of The Golden Flower?

 

I know someone wrote they were working on translating something other than the DDJ. I think it was TGF, but I do not remember.

 

[ChiDragon]

33 minutes ago, EFreethought said:

Is anyone on this forum working on a translation of The Golden Flower?

It very difficult to translate without having a complete understanding of what the author's intend.  Is there any particular segment that you would like to have it translated? I could give it a try for you if you like?

[Cobie]

 

17 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

… what differences there are in the practice of Christianity, between the two churches.

 

The Pope is only for the Western Church; the Eastern Church has Patriarchs. 

Filioque (‘and from the Son’, re Holy Spirit) is the main difference.
 

 

Edited March 3 by Cobie

[snowymountains]

26 minutes ago, Cobie said:

The Pope is only for the Western Church; the Eastern Church has Patriarchs. 

Filioque (‘and from the Son’, re Holy Spirit) is the main difference.
 

 

 

"nor does it presume infallibility of its patriarchs" ^^

[Cobie]

8 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

"nor does it presume infallibility of its patriarchs" ^^

Sure. But papal infallibility started much later, 1870.

 

 

Edited March 3 by Cobie

[snowymountains]

1 minute ago, Cobie said:

Sure. But that started much later, 1870.

 

Sure, but Mark asked for differences of the two Churches, no timeframe attached.

[Cobie]

3 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

Sure, but Mark asked for differences of the two Churches, no timeframe attached.

The ‘papal infallibility’ wasn’t and isn’t reason of the schism. The problem is the ‘Filioque’.

 

 

Edited March 3 by Cobie

[snowymountains]

1 minute ago, Cobie said:

The ‘papal infallibility’ wasn’t and isn’t reason of the schism. The problem is the ‘Filioque’.

 

 

 

The question was on differences, not on the schism.

[Cobie]

16 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

The question was on differences, not on the schism.

There are myriad differences, none of which end talk about reunification; Filioque does.
 

 

Edited March 3 by Cobie

[EFreethought]

18 hours ago, ChiDragon said:

It very difficult to translate without having a complete understanding of what the author's intend.  Is there any particular segment that you would like to have it translated? I could give it a try for you if you like?

 

No need. I was not asking for a translation. I just thought that someone on the forum was translating something, and they were planning on releasing it, either online or for money.

 

Searches for all forms of the word "translate" yields a lot of results on this forum.

 

[manitou]

On 3/1/2024 at 2:26 PM, blue eyed snake said:

 

agree, but sometimes one needs a live human teacher pointing some things out, after that you can go on being taught by everything

 

 

I'll bet, BES, that you'll discard human teachers at some point, probably very soon. When you become aligned with who you really are, the communication between yourself and the creatrix becomes direct, and all is seen from that basis.  Human personality no longer figures into it, in fact too much human personality hampers the self-realization.  The further down the path of clarifying the self and purging useless prior conditionings, the more clarity we have access to, and to ask another for clarification is only to get clarification from his conditioned perspective (unless he's self-realized)

[Mark Foote]

On 3/3/2024 at 9:00 AM, Cobie said:

There are myriad differences, none of which end talk about reunification; Filioque does.

 

Learned a lot today, just from a brief reading of Wikipedia entries under "Filioque" and related topics.  Thanks to you, Cobie, and snowymountains.

Cobie, how come you know so much about the topic?  

The outcomes, with regard to the world's faiths, don't speak well for mechanisms of transmission (so to speak).  

Science has its usefulness, in standardizing methodology and especially in predicting physical outcomes.  Religion as the science of arriving at the deathless, not so much. 

 

 

[silent thunder]

please take the Abrahamic stuff to the correct section... thank you.

[manitou]

7 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

Science has its usefulness, in standardizing methodology and especially in predicting physical outcomes.  Religion as the science of arriving at the deathless, not so much. 

 

 

 

Or it could be said that the deathless isn't attained until the religion is dead.

[Iskote]

On 2/26/2024 at 2:43 PM, thelerner said:

I read somewhere that the GF instructions had an oral component- teacher to student.  I'm inclined to agree.  That there's an ingredient X.. missing in the instructions.  

Course I go back and forth over the years over what is The Light.. metaphor, awareness.. literal.    

 

On 2/26/2024 at 6:10 PM, Cobie said:

@Taoist Texts do you think this is true? 
 

 

On 2/27/2024 at 12:30 AM, Taoist Texts said:

first of all it does not matter. with or without XXX GF is doable only for a select few not an average reader. Secondly, saying that a book is useless without XXX is bafflingly unreasonable. who would write a useless book? who would read a useless book?...idk ppl just keep saying the damnedest things...

 

 

Based on some research, it is thought that the 'The Secret of the Golden Flower' text was created using 'spirit writing', which is along the lines of 'channeling'. Apparently two different groups created the text through spirit writing, with the first group creating part of the text, and the second group taking the text from the first group some years later and adding on to it.

 

From Wikipedia:

"The Secret of the Golden Flower (Chinese: 太乙金華宗旨; pinyin: Tàiyǐ Jīnhuá Zōngzhǐ) is a Chinese Taoist book on neidan (inner alchemy) meditation, which also mixes Buddhist teachings with some Confucian thoughts. It was written by means of the spirit-writing (fuji) technique, through two groups, in 1688 and 1692.

 

Origins

Studies by Monica Esposito and Mori Yuria, provide documentary evidence that the book was produced by the spirit-writing (fuji) groups of two altars devoted to the deified Lü Dongbin: Bailong jingshe ("Pure Assembly of the White Dragon", 白龍精舍), and a branch of Gu hongmei ge ("Old Red Plum Hall", 古紅梅閣) in Piling. Members of both refer to as belonging to the school of Pure Brightness (Jingming dao, 淨明道), associated with the cult of the immortal Xu Xun. Previously, Chung-Yuan Chang had also studied the origin of the text as having been received through the "flying spirit pencil", as he stated in the 1956 Eranos lectures. The Secret of the Golden Flower became one of the best-known Taoist texts in the West as a widespread Chinese religious classic, following Richard Wilhelm's translation with commentary by Carl Gustav Jung, but receives little attention by Eastern scholars. 

 

At the beginning of the Qing dynasty, there were followers of Xu Xun who received texts on contemplative alchemical practices (internal alchemy) and self-cultivation through spirit writing. The Secret of the Golden Flower was initially received incompletely in a first group in 1688; it remained unfinished when seven of its recipients died. In 1692, it was continued by the other group. It is claimed that the teachings of Xu Xun were transmitted by intermediate spirits, such as Lü Dongbin, Qiu Chuji and Chuduan. As Xu Xun's writings had disappeared for generations, the text was considered by Pure Brightness members to require the founding of a new Taoist sect, which was called the "Ritual Lineage of Great Oneness". Pan Yi'an (彭伊安), one of the recipients of the work, describes the initial composition process of its first part:

 

    "As I remember, it was in the wushen year [1668] that our holy patriarch Chunyang [i.e., Lü] began to transmit the 'Instructions.' The seven people who made a commitment to him bowed deeply and obtained [his teachings]. None but these seven received this transmission. The most profound teaching was [expressed in] no more than one or two words. It could not be put into words and letters. Afterwards, the seven questioned the Patriarch in detail. As our holy patriarch spared no mercy in giving clarifications, [his teachings were] compiled for days and months. Eventually they composed a volume."

There are six different remaining editions of the text, and it was fundamental to several lineages of Taoism. It became a central doctrinal scripture of the Longmen school canon through popularization by Min Yide (1758-1836), who attributed to its importance as a "blueprint for healing of the world."

"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_of_the_Golden_Flower

 

 

 

Edited March 5 by Iskote

[thelerner]

On 2/27/2024 at 1:30 AM, Taoist Texts said:

first of all it does not matter. with or without XXX GF is doable only for a select few not an average reader. Secondly, saying that a book is useless without XXX is bafflingly unreasonable. who would write a useless book? who would read a useless book?...idk ppl just keep saying the damnedest things...

TT, aren't you arguing the book is useless for most people.  It's pretty common in older traditions to have oral instructions that aren't written down.  Doesn't make the books useless rather it insures people practice with lineage or high quality instructors to weed out undesirables.   People with proper mindset can still 'get' the system but it makes it harder.  

 

As far as I know the GF hasn't been widespread with lineage schools.  Which is too bad.  It's language is flowery but its practice isn't that complicated.  Seems like many Chinese meditation traditions use pieces of it.  

 

Too bad there's not a formal school that puts it front and center(as far as I know).  If there was I bet it'd be more practiced and evolve into an easier tool.  

[Taoist Texts]

3 hours ago, thelerner said:

its practice isn't that complicated.

how come not a single reader of it achieved anything?

[snowymountains]

29 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

how come not a single reader of it achieved anything?

 

Define achieved

[silent thunder]

And have you interviewed and tested each one who read it TT? You have some whoppers maye but this one is top tier.

 

The Naive Realism is flowing on da bums today...