Your quote from the text you included in your post:

Inward Training understands Daoist practice as
ultimately connected to consciousness and spirit ( shen 神 ), with particular
emphasis placed on the ability of the heart-mind ( xin 心 ) either to attain
numinous pervasion ( lingtong 靈通 ) or to separate the adept from the Dao
as Source. — Valentinus

Do you have a feel for what this means? Does "numinous pervasion" mean experience of the Tao? What does "separate the adept from the Dao as Source" mean?

While it is true that this map has continuity with Dao De Jing, it can never be a replacement for it. — Valentinus

You use the word "map" a lot. A map is a representation of one thing by another, e.g. the world by a piece of paper. I'm going to go back and see how you've been using it in other posts. What map are you talking about here? Taoist practice?

You have started bringing your meditative practice into our discussions more. I really like that.

I like this description. We like to think of ourselves as complete, whole, known (or at least knowable) in some substantial sense; that there exists some predetermined ‘essence’ of who we are, waiting to be discovered by ourselves and others. We continually lose and try to ‘find ourselves’, not realising that we are newly made by the variability of our ongoing relation to the world. The old masters didn’t assume or try to form an identity for themselves. By holding fast to the way, instead of holding fast to an identity or ‘known quantity’, they come across as unidentifiable, murky, passive and lacking in any apparent personality. It’s like trying to describe an electron. I especially like the phrase “formal, like a guest”. — Possibility

As I said in an earlier post, I shouldn't have skipped this verse. I've never liked it, but your way of seeing it makes a lot of sense.

Do you have a feel for what this means? Does "numinous pervasion" mean experience of the Tao? What does "separate the adept from the Dao as Source" mean? — T Clark

I will try to give an answer that connects with our discussion after some time. It a practice of meditation where the homework is difficult. I can't see very far ahead. It is like learning the form in Tai Chi. I understand more of the language framing it after doing it for a while but I am not able to explain much.

I will try to give an answer that connects with our discussion after some time. It a practice of meditation where the homework is difficult. I can't see very far ahead. It is like learning the form in Tai Chi. I understand more of the language framing it after doing it for a while but I am not able to explain much. — Valentinus

Sure. I know that my experience of my practice is connected very little with my understanding and experience of the Tao. Although I understand they are connected both historically, conceptually, and in practice, I don't feel that. They are two things that I enjoy and they both use funny words.

As I said, I hope you will continue bringing your experience into our discussion when it seems useful.

I mainly wanted to bring up the practice to emphasize how the arguments regarding scholarship complicate the direct reading of the text.

I mainly wanted to bring up the practice to emphasize how the arguments regarding scholarship complicate the direct reading of the text. — Valentinus

Use your judgement about when you think it is useful. One thing it does for me is to make me think more about how I should be thinking about Tai Chi.

I think one role of "trying to describe what can't be really described" is the listener is being invited to look for this follower of the way in their own being. That an activity is underway that involves all of existence means that one is a part of it with varying levels of experience. One can start finding the "old follower" in experience that has already brought about good results. The power of metaphor can observe what precise explanations cannot. The elusive quality of "Falling apart like thawing ice" cuts through any list of qualities that can be expressed in other ways. All of our attempts to characterize it cannot add up to the "observation" we are being invited to participate in. Laozi is including his own efforts in that separation. But it doesn't mean we can avoid trying. — Valentinus

I agree, although I’m not sure what you mean by ‘good results’.

Experience is about quality, not ‘qualities’ - about relational structure and process, not activities or ‘things’. Quality interrelates in a many-to-one structure that is not conducive to separation and isolation into language concepts or ‘lists of qualities’. Metaphor enables the reader to recall the quality in an experience they may have around thawing ice falling apart, relate it to the quality in an experience they may have of the formality surrounding a guest, among others, and begin to render a possible experience out of the qualitative potentiality that results - without trying to consolidate it into a language concept.

This is where I think meditative practices come in handy - and with them the ability to recognise the quality of experience as a more complex structural process than the idea of consolidated ‘concepts’ colliding in mind-space, or the intellect wrestling for control over a primitive, emotional brain.

This is not a building block construction, it’s more like a painting. When we paint, we paint with quality. We reach for an element with a blue-green quality, and place it alongside an element with red qualities, and this draws attention to the red-green relation. We add sand to the paint, and it adds a textured quality to how we experience the image - it doesn’t add sand. We add water, and it gives a translucent quality.

I talk about my emotions, perceptions, and thoughts; but I also talk about my fingers, toes, and stomach. That doesn't keep me from thinking of my body as all one thing. The self, the body, or whatever you want to call it, is one of the 10,000 things. It can be separated into parts. — T Clark

My question wasn’t to challenge this separation, but to understand the process of switching from fingers and toes to body, and to emotions and thoughts - particularly the qualitative structural differences between what we refer to as fingers, bodies, organisms, emotions and selves.

I went back and looked at several versions of Verse 13 and I'm not sure what you mean by three levels. Do you mean body, self, life? — T Clark

This from my interpretation of verse 13 14 (edit: oops! - my error):

First of all, these are aspects of reality that elude us in some way. Perhaps we can look at them this way:

What draws our sensory attention, but cannot be seen in itself, we call destructive. Energy is like this. So is time, the weather, gravity, erosion, etc.

What attracts our desire to learn, but doesn’t offer a clear set of instructions, we call hope. Potentiality is like this. So is peace, knowledge, success, morality, and the path of a quantum particle.

And what attracts our effort to relate, but cannot be grasped, we call abstruse. Truth is like this. So is objectivity, meaning, the ‘God particle’, etc

For me, these three correspond to four, five and six-dimensional qualitative structures, but this is probably not what Lao Tzu saw. What he did see was that, unable to examine these aspects closely as such, we tend to confuse them all as one. This doesn’t help. The blended confusion fails to sparkle at best; at worst, we can’t just ignore it. We can’t stop it or name it, and it appears to be nothing at all - the uncaused cause, unmoved mover, etc. — Possibility

From outlining the problem, Lao Tzu looks at the old masters, and then puts together the cascade structure in verse 16 that corresponds to these three levels in a process of increasing awareness, connection and collaboration:

I understand this verse as describing a process from attaining stillness in being, to then being able to observe the flow of everything, and notice the stillness to which everything returns again and again, revealing an underlying constancy to the world. When we’re aware of this, we have a clearer understanding of the world as a whole; but without this awareness, our actions lack flow and can be reckless and vicious. Without this awareness, we are apart from the world, and in conflict with it.

From an awareness of this underlying constancy, though, we are part of the flow, and act with fairness and justice for all. When we are fair and just, we have the capacity for great leadership, which then enables a spiritual awareness that brings us to the Tao. — Possibility

Which then led me to this explanation:

When the body is recognised as just one facet of our conduct in living (rather than as its main part), then what draws our attention but cannot be seen is recognised for more than its destructive quality.

When our conduct, morality or lifespan is recognised as just one facet of consciousness, then what attracts our desire to learn but offers no set of instructions is understood as more than merely hopefulness.

And when our knowledge or consciousness is recognised as just one facet of a broader experience, then what attracts our efforts to relate, but cannot be grasped is meaningful for more than this quality of being abstruse. — Possibility

I hope this clarifies what I was saying.

Thanks for the information. I found this excerpt and TED video, here:

Excerpted from the new book 7 1/2 Lessons about the Brain by Lisa Feldman Barrett. Copyright © 2020 by Lisa Feldman Barrett. — Amity

Yes. Her older book ‘How Emotions Are Made’ also explains the body-budgeting system:

Your body-budgeting regions play a vital role in keeping you alive. Each time your brain moves any part of your body, inside or out, it spends some of its energy resources: the stuff it uses to run your organs, your metabolism, and your immune system. You replenish your body’s resources by eating, drinking, and sleeping, and you reduce your body’s spending by relaxing with loved ones, even having sex. To manage all of this spending and replenishing, your brain must constantly predict your body’s energy needs, like a budget for your body. Just as a company has a finance department that tracks deposits and withdrawals and moves money between accounts, so its overall budget stays in balance, your brain has circuitry that is largely responsible for your body budget. That circuitry is within your interoceptive network. Your body-budgeting regions make predictions to estimate the resources to keep you alive and flourishing, using past experience as a guide.
Why is this relevant to emotion? Because every brain region that’s claimed to be a home of emotion in humans is a body-budgeting region within the interoceptive network. These regions, however, don’t react in emotion. they don’t react at all. They predict, intrinsically, to regulate your body budget. They issue predictions for sights, sounds, thoughts, memories, imagination, and, yes, emotions. The idea of an emotional brain region is an illusion caused by the outdated belief in a reactive brain. Neuroscientists understand this today, but the message hasn’t trickled down to many psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, economists, and others who study emotions.
Whenever your brain predicts a movement, whether it’s getting out of bed in the morning or taking a sip of coffee, your body-budgeting regions adjust your budget. When your brain predicts that your body will need a quick burst of energy, these regions instruct the adrenal gland in your kidneys to release the hormone cortisol. People call cortisol a ‘stress hormone’ but this is a mistake. Cortisol is released whenever you need a surge of energy, which happens to include the times when you are stressed. Its main purpose is to flood the bloodstream with glucose to provide immediate energy to cells, allowing, for example, muscle cells to stretch and contract so you can run. Your body-budgeting regions also make you breathe more deeply to get more oxygen into your bloodstream and dilate your arteries to get that oxygen to your muscles more quickly so your body can move. All of this internal motion is accompanied by interoceptive sensations, though you are not wired to experience them precisely. So, your interoceptive network controls your body, budgets your energy resources, and represents your internal sensations, all at the same time. — Lisa Feldman Barrett

But I disagree with this statement as far too simple of a view:

"Moreover, there is no such thing as philosophical Daoism. — Valentinus

Simple, surprising and slightly off-putting with its apparent dogma; anti-philosophy.
It reminds me of attitudes held in both religion and philosophy.
Also, the questions of 'What is philosophy, what's it for, what's it all about Alfie ?'
I have no idea as to how 'philosophy' is being defined in the quote; looks like the narrow view.

This argument that excludes the "philosophical" by default is a construct of its own in so far as it assumes the western tradition has succeeded in separating that activity from the religious. I am tired of all the babies getting thrown out with the bathwater. — Valentinus

Yes.

one finds repeated admonitions to refrain from behavior patterns that dissipate one’s foundational vitality. — Valentinus

I think this ties in with @Possibility

It isn’t about their own intentions, but about the flow of energy - the distribution of attention and effort as far as their awareness of it extends into the world. Perhaps it isn’t that their intentions are hidden, but that they comprise only one facet of this more complex flow of energy. — Possibility

Lisa Feldman Barrett's 'body-budgeting system' is of interest to me.
I have been noting how various posters and their responses or attitudes affect me.
Also, how appreciative I am of both the analysis of the text as well as being wowed by the imagery.
Perhaps both could be considered meditative ?
The former takes up more of my energy and thought process than the latter.
The latter - just looking rather than searching or needing to know.
As in art or music appreciation, both kinds of thinking help bring about a deeper understanding.
Or is it a case of wei wu wei ? Thinking then not-thinking.

'To refrain from behavior patterns that dissipate one’s foundational vitality.'
Knowing our behaviour patterns...
I know I tend to want to find out more. That does involve quite a bit of energy.
Costs and benefits - getting the balance right...

Verse 17

Stephen Mitchell

When the Master governs, the people
are hardly aware that he exists.
Next best is a leader who is loved.
Next, one who is feared.
The worst is one who is despised.

If you don't trust the people,
you make them untrustworthy.

The Master doesn't talk, he acts.
When his work is done,
the people say, "Amazing: we did it, all by ourselves!"

Ellen Marie Chen

The best government, the people know it is just there.
The next best, they love and praise it.
The next, they fear it.
The next, they revile against it.
When you don't trust (hsin) [the people] enough,
Then they are untrustworthy (pu hsin).
Quiet, why value words (yen)?
Work is accomplished, things are done.
People all say that I am natural (tzu-jan).

Here are my thoughts about the verse.

When the Master governs, the people
are hardly aware that he exists.

For me, this verse is about wu wei, no action. The King doesn’t care about honors, status, power, or acclaim. He doesn’t act out of desire or fear. He governs without governing. This is from Mitchell’s Verse 15:

Do you have the patience to wait
till your mud settles and the water is clear?
Can you remain unmoving
till the right action arises by itself?

For me, this is a perfect description of wu wei - both non-action and action without action.

Next best is a leader who is loved.
Next, one who is feared.
The worst is one who is despised.

This is what I call a ladder and @Possibility calls a cascade. They are used a lot in the TTC, sometimes, like this, to describe what happens when a person loses contact with the Tao. This reminds me Stefan Stenudd’s translation of Verse 18:

When the great Tao is abandoned,
Benevolence and righteousness arise.
When wisdom and knowledge appear,
Great pretense arises.
When family ties are disturbed,
Devoted children arise.
When people are unsettled,
Loyal ministers arise.

This is from Derek Lin’s translation of Verse 38:

Therefore, the Tao is lost, and then virtue
Virtue is lost, and then benevolence
Benevolence is lost, and then righteousness
Righteousness is lost, and then etiquette
Those who have etiquette
Are a thin shell of loyalty and sincerity
And the beginning of chaos

This describes a descent from spontaneity to rigid rules and bureaucracy then to forceful, repressive action and then to corruption and weakness. This highlights a theme that comes up a lot in the TTC – what we call virtuous rule, which would be our highest aspiration in a democracy, is not the highest way to govern. Kindness and open-heartedness, which would be our goal in our personal lives, is not the highest step. To me, the step up to contact with the Tao isn’t really a step up, it’s a step out.

If you don't trust the people,
you make them untrustworthy.

I’ve always thought that trust is not an actuarial judgement. You’re not betting that the person or thing won’t betray you. You understand that what you lose by not trusting is more important than what you lose if you are betrayed. I think these lines have something to do with that.

The Master doesn't talk, he acts.
When his work is done,
the people say, "Amazing: we did it, all by ourselves!"

Other writers translate the last line differently:

• People say, "We did it!"
  
• Everyone says We just acted naturally.
• People all say that I am natural (I think this is referring to the King.)
• The people all say, "We did it naturally"
• Ordinary people say, Oh, we did it.
• The people all say, 'It happened to us naturally.'

It happened spontaneously. It happened without happening.

My question wasn’t to challenge this separation, but to understand the process of switching from fingers and toes to body, and to emotions and thoughts - particularly the qualitative structural differences between what we refer to as fingers, bodies, organisms, emotions and selves. — Possibility

I'll take a shot based on my personal experience. It's all about awareness. When I come to something new, I have a general sort of awareness based on my immediate impression. If I expose myself repeatedly and pay attention, my awareness grows and I start noticing the parts of the phenomenon I am experiencing. They start to call my attention to themselves and I start focusing my attention on them. I actually started a discussion about what it feels like to become aware like this a few years ago. Here's a link if you're interested.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/2412/page/p1

I hope this clarifies what I was saying. — Possibility

Thanks for the explanation.

When the Master governs, the people
are hardly aware that he exists.
Next best is a leader who is loved.
Next, one who is feared.
The worst is one who is despised. — T Clark

I find it curious that so many of these translations read in a subject, such as the Tao, the government or leaders, that doesn’t exist in the original text. One of the basic rules of Chinese grammar is that it is topic-prominent, whereas English tends to be subject-prominent. Many sentences in Chinese don’t have a subject at all, which can be confusing.

The topic of verse 17 is its title - chún fēng - roughly translated as ‘honest, genuine, pure’ ‘matter, style, wind, news’. To me, this clearly refers to the manner of the old masters, described in the previous verse, and verse 17 goes on to describe how this was all but lost to the world over time. With little but observable manner to base any understanding on - this manner appearing passive, murky, and unidentifiable - people were more inclined to trust their own accomplishments, and with this success as evidence, they relied on their own limited certainty.

Initially, others were unaware of its existence. Then it was loved and praised, then feared, and then despised.
Without complete confidence in the why or how, there is no confidence at all.
Far removed, oh such noble, precious words!
Having accomplished success, many ancestors said: “I am surely correct”.

There are a number of differences between my own interpretation here and the majority of translations. I’ve tried to interpret the characters as literally as possible, and structured these ideas in relation to the general rules of Chinese grammar, without adding any of my own assumptions. I’m often surprised with how different this turns out from other English translations. The hermeneutics commonly employed in other translations has been clearly exegetical, similar to biblical interpretations, which seems to be the correct approach. The aim is to ascertain communicative intent from cultural, historical and biographical evidence.

But any intentionality is fundamentally unimportant, and so obscured, in followers of the Way, through the practice of wu wei. In the same way, the TTC is deliberately passive, murky and unidentifiable - just like the manner of the old masters. The trick, I think, is to be wary of making the same mistake as described in this verse, and forcing an interpretation to fit the conceptual structure of our own experience and knowledge, but rather to be open to restructuring our experience and knowledge, our conceptual structures, to fit the original Way.

I'll take a shot based on my personal experience. It's all about awareness. When I come to something new, I have a general sort of awareness based on my immediate impression. If I expose myself repeatedly and pay attention, my awareness grows and I start noticing the parts of the phenomenon I am experiencing. They start to call my attention to themselves and I start focusing my attention on them. I actually started a discussion about what it feels like to become aware like this a few years ago. Here's a link if you're interested. — T Clark

Our attention and effort is naturally drawn to sensory details that differ from our predictions. So long as we find it useful to allocate attention to new information, then we generate an immediate overall impression or prediction of this something new, and then with repeated allocations of attention and effort, we acquire further sensory details that distinguish qualitative structure, and the brain employs sampling strategies to maximise detailed information with minimal effort - we categorise and group repeating qualitative patterns as concepts.

I had a quick read of the discussion in the link. I kind of wish I had been a part of it. Your discussion with Praxis was interesting - for me, the initial step in awareness is the unfathomable whole, or what I refer to as ‘this’, the possibility of which must exist prior to il y a or ‘there is’. It’s the reference point necessary for any awareness to occur, even in a potential sense. Yet there is no awareness of it. This points to the contradiction at the heart of all existence.

I find it curious that so many of these translations read in a subject, such as the Tao, the government or leaders, that doesn’t exist in the original text. One of the basic rules of Chinese grammar is that it is topic-prominent, whereas English tends to be subject-prominent. Many sentences in Chinese don’t have a subject at all, which can be confusing. — Possibility

The trick, I think, is to be wary of making the same mistake as described in this verse, and forcing an interpretation to fit the conceptual structure of our own experience and knowledge, but rather to be open to restructuring our experience and knowledge, our conceptual structures, to fit the original Way. — Possibility

This is a major procedural disagreement between you and me. You question the basics of all the translations of the TTC and I accept them, at least as a platform to work from. The TTC has been studied for thousands of years and translated hundreds of times. As I've said before, you've convinced me that, if I want to understand the TTC, I have to pay attention to language, but, when trip comes to fall, I will never be able to second-guess the opinions of a whole lot of people who know a whole lot more than I do.

Our attention and effort is naturally drawn to sensory details that differ from our predictions. So long as we find it useful to allocate attention to new information, then we generate an immediate overall impression or prediction of this something new, and then with repeated allocations of attention and effort, we acquire further sensory details that distinguish qualitative structure, and the brain employs sampling strategies to maximise detailed information with minimal effort - we categorise and group repeating qualitative patterns as concepts. — Possibility

You are explaining the mechanisms by which experience leads to awareness, a la Barrett. I was describing my personal experience, a la, well, me. I'm not questioning the value of what you are doing, but it was not the point of my previous discussion.

for me, the initial step in awareness is the unfathomable whole, or what I refer to as ‘this’, the possibility of which must exist prior to il y a or ‘there is’. It’s the reference point necessary for any awareness to occur, even in a potential sense. Yet there is no awareness of it. This points to the contradiction at the heart of all existence. — Possibility

Is this Kantian? Definitely has a touch of "Je pense donc je suis" in it too. Since we're speaking French. I don't see any particular contradiction. Also, that's not really relevant to what I am talking about, which is the experience of awareness. What it feels like to me.

This is a major procedural disagreement between you and me. You question the basics of all the translations of the TTC and I accept them, at least as a platform to work from. The TTC has been studied for thousands of years and translated hundreds of times. As I've said before, you've convinced me that, if I want to understand the TTC, I have to pay attention to language, but, when trip comes to fall, I will never be able to second-guess the opinions of a whole lot of people who know a whole lot more than I do. — T Clark

Why not? You seem convinced that your own experience and understanding of the world has nothing to offer these so-called experts. I’ll admit that I’ve learned to second-guess all opinions, and never take ‘expert’ on face value. This may be a generational thing - plus, my university education in the 90s was steeped in PoMo, and I’ve since done the existential journey into nihilism and emerged out the other side unshackled by my Catholic upbringing, for one.

But surely you would agree that the most accurate platform to work from is still the original text, and that Fenollosa’s essay highlights just some of the errors and assumptions surrounding any interpretation from Chinese to English - especially by experts. I’ve learned from bible hermeneutics that we interpret religious texts as much from our own belief systems as from textual analysis, and that when push comes to shove it is invariably the text that gives way. Each translation brings with it the translator’s historical, cultural and ideological position in relation to the text, to ancient Chinese culture, to Daoism and to the Dao. This is more pronounced with the TTC because its structure invites this subjective relation much more than the bible, for instance.

I could spend my time on a contextual analysis of each translation, which might give an idea of the motivations that pull these experts to assume and even justify that Lao Tzu is talking specifically about governments and leaders, for instance. But I find it more useful to offer my own interpretation into the mix. When it differs markedly from most translations, I offer an explanation of the process by which I arrived at my interpretation, and why I think it’s truer to the original. If you choose to dismiss this based on my apparent lack of expertise, then that’s your methodology. I’m just sharing my journey.

Personally, I think the TTC - particularly these verses we are exploring right now - highlight the value of returning to original expressions of the Dao, armed with a better understanding of wu wei, to look for what is unobserved and unintended. It is these hidden examples of wu wei that are overlooked by experts, particularly those who claim to have the answers because they can demonstrate the success they have achieved.

Why not? — Possibility

Well -

To believe our own thought, to believe that what is true for you in your private heart is true for all men, -- that is genius. Speak your latent conviction, and it shall be the universal sense; for the inmost in due time becomes the outmost,--and our first thought, is rendered back to us by the trumpets of the Last Judgment.

and all that. I'm with Ralph and all, but right now, my "own thought" tells me that the translations provided by others taken together provide the best basis for me to proceed. I'll add your voice as one among the others.

You seem convinced that your own experience and understanding of the world has nothing to offer these so-called experts. — Possibility

I come to the translations, and so, to the translators, for guidance experiencing the Tao. For me, what they are doing is saying over and over again "Hey! look over here. No! here! See this?"

But surely you would agree that the most accurate platform to work from is still the original text, and that essay highlights just some of the errors and assumptions surrounding any interpretation Chinese to English - especially by experts. — Possibility

I haven't read more than the first couple of paragraphs of Fenollosa's essay. It's on my list.

Each translation brings with it the translator’s historical, cultural and ideological position in relation to the text, to ancient Chinese culture, to Daoism and to the Dao. — Possibility

Sure. And that's why the final test - how well does the translation help me attain the experience - is the only important test.

If you choose to dismiss this based on my apparent lack of expertise, then that’s your methodology. I’m just sharing my journey. — Possibility

As I said, I don't dismiss what you have to say, I include it as one of the voices I listen to.

When the great Tao is abandoned,
Benevolence and righteousness arise.
When wisdom and knowledge appear,
Great pretense arises.
When family ties are disturbed,
Devoted children arise.
When people are unsettled,
Loyal ministers arise.

This is from Derek Lin’s translation of Verse 38:

Therefore, the Tao is lost, and then virtue
Virtue is lost, and then benevolence
Benevolence is lost, and then righteousness
Righteousness is lost, and then etiquette
Those who have etiquette
Are a thin shell of loyalty and sincerity
And the beginning of chaos — T Clark

I liked these two verses compared. It is so interesting what you are sharing in your debate. I am reading it from the shadows :wink:

I liked these two verses compared. It is so interesting what you are sharing in your debate. I am reading it from the shadows — javi2541997

Lao Tzu repeats himself a lot, but each iteration is a bit different. I really like looking at that too.

When the great Tao is abandoned,
Benevolence and righteousness arise.
When wisdom and knowledge appear,
Great pretense arises.
When family ties are disturbed,
Devoted children arise.
When people are unsettled,
Loyal ministers arise.

This is from Derek Lin’s translation of Verse 38:

Therefore, the Tao is lost, and then virtue
Virtue is lost, and then benevolence
Benevolence is lost, and then righteousness
Righteousness is lost, and then etiquette
Those who have etiquette
Are a thin shell of loyalty and sincerity
And the beginning of chaos

This describes a descent from spontaneity to rigid rules and bureaucracy then to forceful, repressive action and then to corruption and weakness. This highlights a theme that comes up a lot in the TTC – what we call virtuous rule, which would be our highest aspiration in a democracy, is not the highest way to govern. Kindness and open-heartedness, which would be our goal in our personal lives, is not the highest step. To me, the step up to contact with the Tao isn’t really a step up, it’s a step out. — T Clark

I refer to this as a ‘cascade’ because I think the multi-dimensional aspect to the structure is an important one: loyalty is one aspect of etiquette/wisdom, politeness is one aspect of righteousness, and benevolent justice one aspect of the Tao. Not just the top step but each step is therefore a step out in all directions, rather than up, broadening our capacity to interact with the world, increasing awareness, connection and collaboration. The ‘descent’ is characterised by ignorance, isolation and exclusion - a closing ourselves off from our capacity to interact with the world, and a satisfaction with a lesser aspect. If we can’t be righteous, at least we can be knowledgeable; if we can’t be polite, at least we can be sincere...

And then suddenly we’re insisting on sincerity and loyalty instead of encouraging wisdom, or enforcing ‘political correctness’ instead of striving for benevolence. And a leader (like Trump) who claims sincerity and loyalty as his greatest strengths (without any interest in intelligence, etiquette, virtue or righteousness) is but a thin shell and the beginning of chaos...

If we’re thinking of these levels as ladder rungs, then I think there’s a tendency to quantify them in isolation. The idea that knowledge and formality/etiquette can result in falseness comes from understanding sincerity as one aspect of this level of awareness - but in a qualitative, not quantitative, sense. In other words, we don’t reach wisdom or etiquette by insisting on brute honesty in all relations. It’s about a qualitative awareness of sincerity. If we cannot differentiate levels of sincerity or loyalty in a qualitative sense, then any ‘knowledge’ we have is just data: it lacks formal structure, the relational qualities of wisdom.

Verse XI

One wheel is composed by thirty sensible radios, but spins thanks to the central emptiness of a not sensible cube.
The crockery are made of sensible clay, but their hole is not sensible for the one who is serving.
The no sensible holes that are the doors and the windows of a house, are the essential
As we see in these examples.
The efficient, the result, comes from the no sensible

Thoughts: I guess TTC wants to show us here the difference between tangible and not tangible things. It is interesting how he explains that no sensible aspects are the ones which put emphasis in the sensible.
Probably, TTC is referring here as the spirit or soul of the things that exist around us as a mechanism of how they actually work.
Despite we need a practical part, he focuses in the importance of the roots or beginning from those things. Thus, no sensible parts.

I liked these two verses compared. It is so interesting what you are sharing in your debate. I am reading it from the shadows :wink: — javi2541997

Lao Tzu repeats himself a lot, but each iteration is a bit different. I really like looking at that too. — T Clark

Yes, I too think it important to recognise the repeated themes throughout the TTC.
This serves as a teaching or learning aid - to ram the message home, if you like.

From https://principlesoflearning.wordpress.com/dissertation/chapter-4-results/themes-identified/repetition/
Repetition

This is perhaps the most intuitive principle of learning, traceable to ancient Egyptian and Chinese education, with records dating back to approximately 4,400 and 3,000 B.C., respectively (Aspinwall, 1912, pp. 1, 3). In ancient Greece, Aristotle commented on the role of repetition in learning by saying “it is frequent repetition that produces a natural tendency” (Ross & Aristotle, 1906, p. 113)

There are short declarative phrases which help you remember. Also good if you want a quick-fix inspirational quote, I suppose. :sparkle:
There are intentional contradictions which make you ask 'you what?' :chin:
Our minds are activated in an effort to reconcile the paradoxes, see earlier discussion with @TheMadFool (p14)

I returned to Ch10 - Ivanhoe translation and his notes showing where lines are repeated.

Embracing your soul and holding on to the One, can you keep them from departing ? (note23)
Concentrating your qui ''vital energies'' (24) and attaining the utmost suppleness, can you be a child?
Cleaning and purifying your enigmatic mirror, can you erase every flaw?
Caring for the people and ordering the state, can you eliminate all knowledge?
When the portal of Heaven opens and closes, can you play the part of the feminine?
Comprehending all within the four directions, can you reside in nonaction?
To produce them!
To nurture them!
To produce without possessing; (25)
To act with no expectation of reward; (26)
To lead without lording over;
Such is Enigmatic Virtue! (27)

Notes:
23 For other examples of 'the One' see Ch 22,39 and 42
24 See qi under Important Terms
25 This line also appears in Ch 2 and 51
26 This line also appears in Ch 2, 51, and 77.
27 Chapter 51 concludes with the same 4 lines. For another passage concerning xuande 'Enigmatic Virtue' see chapter 65.

I don't think I gave this verse enough attention.
What strikes me now is the line:
'When the portal of Heaven opens and closes, can you play the part of the feminine ?'
I can't recall any discussion about 'the feminine'...
Is it about the caring aspect of humans, the creative part, the concept of Ying and Yang ?

From https://principlesoflearning.wordpress.com/dissertation/chapter-4-results/themes-identified/repetition/ — Amity

Thanks for sharing it. I will check it out :100:

You're welcome. Thanks for your inspiration :smile:

So, talking about translations...
And I was looking at the repeated patterns, noting Ivanhoe referred to Ch 51, Part 2 of the TTC.
Came across this:

'Tao Talks' by Derek Lin
Useful slides.
Here's the Tao Te Ching 32
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69PbMr3BVu0

You can click on Derek Lin's Youtube lectures of some verses, here:

https://taoism.net/tao/tao-te-ching-lectures/

Chapter 11 as translated and explained by Derek Lin.
Slides showing repeated Chinese characters. Also, the overall idea.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOAU7IlVF-I&t=46s

Amity!

Thanks for keep sharing this information with me. So much appreciated. I going to give a look

Chapter 17
Ivanhoe trans. with notes, from:
https://terebess.hu/english/tao/Daodejing-Ivanhoe.pdf

The greatest of rulers is but a shadowy presence;
Next is the ruler who is loved and praised;
Next is the one who is feared;
Next is the one who is reviled.
Those lacking in trust are not trusted.(36)
But [the greatest rulers] are cautious and honor words.(37)
When their task is done and work complete,(38)
Their people all say, "This is just how we are."( 39)

Notes:
36 This line appears again in Ch 23. I interpret it as an expression of the Daodejing's characteristic view on de, 'Virtue'. For a discussion of 'Virtue'...and how it differs from related Confucian concepts of 'Virtue' or 'moral charisma' see my 'The Concept of de ('Virtue') in the Laozi'...( 1998), pp 239-57. *
For other passages concerning the concept of trust, see Ch 49 and 63.

37 Sages are reluctant and slow to speak, but their words are worthy of complete trust.

38 Cf. Ch 2,9,34 and 77.
39 Literally, "We are this way ziran". See ziran under Important Terms. Other exs: Ch 23,25,51 and 64.


* free download of Ivanhoe's The Concept of de ("Virtue") in the Laozi:
https://terebess.hu/english/tao/ivanhoe.pdf