commentary or not

[snowymountains]

I'm wondering how others view DDJ commentaries, not if this or that commentary is good/bad. The use of DDJ commentaries in principle.

 

I believe a commentary can only detract.

 

The language of DDJ is written in a way to resonate within in a profound way and unless the commentator is equally skilled, any additional text will miss the most important part, the part where the text resonates within us and instead the commentary will replace this resonation with a cognitive process.

 

Personally I won't read a commentary as I don't want the commentator's cognitive processes to be activated next time I read the DDJ.

Edited September 14 by snowymountains

[Ascetic]

Commentary is annoying and not helpful. I got this Dao De Jing Hardcover from Barnes and Noble and I feel more perturbed than I should about a third of the book being someone else’s commentary.

Edited September 14 by Emaciated Ascetic

[silent thunder]

I expect the potential benefit and use depends on the resonance of the commentary from the awareness that shares it, to the one encountering it.  Value and Worth do not seem like concepts that abide in objectivity, for me.  Value and Worth shift even within one awareness' lifetime.

 

And unless one reads the original language of any given writing, every translation in my experience, is a commentary.

 

Any concept or idea synthesized by an individual awareness from one language model to another imbues a filtered resonance of their particular facet of experience into the process. 

 

And then, with concepts and the limits of language as it is regarding experiential sharing as deep and ephemeral as the tao....  even the original (if such still remains intact) is itself a distillation of the experiential process of living tao as experienced by the original sharer/author, into their version of mentation and word symbols to try and convey into mind objects, the sense of the living experience.

 

So for me, the original itself is a commentary. 

The Tao spoken is not the eternal tao...

 

I guess for me, all words are like fingers pointing to the moon.

If they point somewhere beneficial in the moment they're encountered, they're probably valued...

 

Intriguing question.  thanks for sharing it.

Edited September 15 by silent thunder
clarify

[A Flyer of Gy]

I read somewhere that one of the ways humans became separated from nature is people forget that spiritual stories are stories and then turn them into something akin to facts. He is talking about Buddhist sutras, but Thich Nhat Hanh always says that we need to use our own intelligence and not follow blindly what we read. I think what matters is the relationship to the text. What happens when one engages with the text? I think commentaries are useful, especially since I don't read or speak Mandarin, but I also think one can get lost in the weeds. For me either gentleness while engaging any writing, or a return to gentleness and then reengaging the writing are valuable tools.

[Mig]

On 9/14/2024 at 10:22 AM, snowymountains said:

 

I believe a commentary can only detract.

 

The language of DDJ is written in a way to resonate within in a profound way and unless the commentator is equally skilled, any additional text will miss the most important part, the part where the text resonates within us and instead the commentary will replace this resonation with a cognitive process.

 

Personally I won't read a commentary as I don't want the commentator's cognitive processes to be activated next time I read the DDJ.

Which language do you think the DDJ was written? Considering it was a poetic language easy to misinterpret it into another language. How would I understand each line if I don't have a structural understanding of each chapter as it seems it was intended and those chapters have been understood by generations of teachings in the same culture. If you read the translation you are reading words and understanding what you've been taught in your own culture. Talking about benevolence is purely a Christian understanding but not necessarily how the similar concept has been understood by the Chinese culture. 

[doc benway]

I'll offer an alternative perspective. I think there can be great value in commentary, particularly when someone is reading a translation of an ancient work coming from an unfamiliar culture and society. While the core text of the DDJ certainly is approachable and can potentially speak to anyone at any given time, I also think it is deeper than what any one of us can fathom. Some of the depth and breadth of the text can be limited by not having a clear or even rudimentary understanding of the cultural and societal context. 

 

I am currently involved in a group, slow read of a long, classic historical novel reading one chapter a day. There is public discussion and commentary going on for each chapter. While this is a historical novel and not the Dao De Jing, it certainly is pervaded by philosophical and spiritual ideas. In fact, the author was involved in translating the Dao De Jing into his native language and it shows throughout the writing. I find that I am getting a far deeper and broader appreciation and understanding of the story and the author as a result of seeing how others interpret the readings. Many things come up that I would never have considered myself. People from the author's country of origin and those more familiar with the historical context have revealed a different view of actions and characters.

 

So while I think there is great value in studying the ancient classics on our own and interpreting the original, if we speak the language, or our preferred translation, I would not personally disregard commentaries out of hand. I do think it is important not to attach too much importance or authority to a commentary but I also feel it is equally important to not attach too much importance and authority to any writings, even the core classics. Each of us needs different and unique things at different times along our paths. It can be an obstacle to get too hung up on any particular writing, even something as amazing as the DDJ, if it is not speaking clearly to us. At times I find it important to simply. step away and remain open to the possibility that the work will make more sense when I am ready to see the meaning and revisit it in the future. 

 

 

Edited September 23 by doc benway

[Sahaja]

I think both the translation and commentary can introduce a spin. Reading it directly without attention to an informed commentary can also introduce  spin, typically due to a lack of one’s own understanding of the context. This is particularly true when the word choice is limited by the use of rhyme or meter. This can be  a real challenge in understanding  both old Daoist and old Hindu texts. 

 

My own approach is to read both and try to integrate it with my own direct experience and with what I have learned from my teachers.  What I find most rewarding is when I find something in the text that appears related to these direct experiences that aren’t picked up in the commentary.

 

this can also be frustrating. Lately I have enjoyed reading Harold Roth’s writings  on the other Daoist and Daoistic texts written before the common age. I really like the central emphasis he places on inner cultivation as the common thread across these texts. However every time I read him or one of his students use the term “breath meditation” I want to send him a note that when they said qi they likely really meant qi. The breath is only the training wheels. In my direct experience in seated practice once the qi arises the breath becomes invisible, even the Dan tian can keep working without being tied to the breath. Oh well,  the rest of his stuff is great. 

[dawei]

If one is not reading the original characters from 300 BC... its all commentary.  If you find something that helps you understand it, then great. If not, forget it. But there is lots of in-between to just ponder what your reading.