I think the reason we can make sense of the Way is more to do with the logical and qualitative structure of the text in relation to the world than anything to do with differences in time or culture. — Possibility

As we've discussed before, and as I've noted in one of my recent posts, I don't see the Tao Te Ching as logical or qualitative. For me, it is metaphorical. Poetic. Experiential.

For myself, I’m reluctant to attribute such intentionality or desire to the original author. — Possibility

I don't think Lao Tzu, as a good Taoist, wrote TTC with intentionality or desire. Or maybe that's what you're saying.

I get that your approach is to make some definitive distinction between metaphysical and physical understanding, but I don’t subscribe to this duality myself. — Possibility

That distinction is at the heart of my understanding, perception, of reality.

Having said that, I don’t feel like we have to go there in this discussion at all. — Possibility

I don't particularly want to talk about metaphysics in general, but it's open season on the metaphysics of the TTC and Taoism in general.

Yes, as I've noted before. — T Clark

You should ad that it's nonsense. Gods don't need anything to precede them. But maybe heaven is made of it.

Capra is another one who doesn't know his metaphysics from his physics. Reading "Tao of Physics" was the first time I remember recognizing that — T Clark

He even has his physics not right..

Verse 24

Lin Yutang

He who stands on tiptoe does not stand (firm),
He who strains his strides does not walk (well)
He who reveals himself is not luminous,
He who justifies himself is not far-famed,
He who boasts of himself is not given credit.
He who prides himself is not chief among men.
These in the eyes of Tao
Are called ''the dregs and tumors of Virtue,”
Which are things of disgust.
Therefore the man of Tao spurns them.

Stephen Mitchell

He who stands on tiptoe
doesn't stand firm.
He who rushes ahead
doesn't go far.
He who tries to shine
dims his own light.
He who defines himself
can't know who he really is.
He who has power over others
can't empower himself.
He who clings to his work
will create nothing that endures.

If you want to accord with the Tao,
just do your job, then let go.

Ellen Marie Chen

One who tiptoes cannot stand.
One who straddles cannot walk.
One who sees himself is not enlightened (ming).
One who justifies himself is not outstanding.
One who shows off (fa) his deeds is not meritorious.
One who boasts (ching) of himself does not lead (chang).

These to a Taoist are called:
Excess nature (yü te) and superfluous actions (shui hsing),
Avoided (o) even by things.
Therefore the Taoist does not indulge (ch’u) in them.

I think this verse is straightforward, familiar. It something we’ve heard before. Don’t reach for acclaim or success, it will backfire. Do what needs to be done, what your true self tells you to do, without regard for what other people think. If you want to have people’s regard, you can have it. All you have to do is stop wanting it, stop struggling for it.

This from Ellen Marie Chen’s translation of Verse 10:

To give birth, to nurture,
To give birth yet not to claim possession (yu),
To act (wei) yet not to hold on to,
To grow (chang) yet not to lord over (tsai),
This is called the dark virtue (yüan te).

This is from Stephen Mitchell’s translation of Verse 13:

Success is as dangerous as failure.
Hope is as hollow as fear.

What does it mean that success is as dangerous as failure?
Whether you go up the ladder or down it,
you position is shaky.
When you stand with your two feet on the ground,
you will always keep your balance.

What does it mean that hope is as hollow as fear?
Hope and fear are both phantoms
that arise from thinking of the self.
When we don't see the self as self,
what do we have to fear?

Derek Lin’s translation of Verse 34:

The great Tao is like a flood
It can flow to the left or to the right
The myriad things depend on it for life, but it never stops
It achieves its work, but does not take credit
It clothes and feeds myriad things, but does not rule over them
Ever desiring nothing
It can be named insignificant
Myriad things return to it but it does not rule over them
It can be named great
Even in the end, it does not regard itself as great
That is how it can achieve its greatness.

Lin Yutang selection from the Chuang Tzu

'He who boasts of himself is not given credit. The man who claims distinguished service falls and the man who achieves fame will be defamed. Who can abandon distinction for service and reputation and return to the common level of men? Tao pervades everywhere, and yet does not show itself, Teh (Tao manifest) influences everything and yet does not make its name known. Live sincerely and plainly like the others and suffer yourself sometimes to be called a fool. Avoid being conspicuous and keep away from a position of power. Do not live for service and fame. Thus you will not criticize others and others will not criticize you. The perfect man has no (thought of) reputation."

Derek Lin’s commentary:

The one who stands on tiptoes, in order to raise himself or herself above others, cannot stand for long. The one who straddles in an exaggerated gait cannot walk any significant distance for long. The one who shows off himself or herself will, ironically, not be clearly perceived by others. The one who thinks he or she is always right will not be considered respectable or admirable by others. The one who incessantly praises himself or herself is not the person with true merit. The one who is always bragging about his or her achievements is not the person with lasting power. Those who are on the path of Tao speak of such things as if they were leftover food or useless growth, like a tumor. They despise such things and regard them with contempt. This is why those who possess the Tao do not engage in such activities. They do not show off, presume, or boast.

He who stands on tiptoe does not stand (firm),
He who strains his strides does not walk (well)
He who reveals himself is not luminous,
He who justifies himself is not far-famed,
He who boasts of himself is not given credit.
He who prides himself is not chief among men.
These in the eyes of Tao
Are called ''the dregs and tumors of Virtue,”
Which are things of disgust.
Therefore the man of Tao spurns them. — T Clark

Dear mother of god...

A critique

"He who tiptoes can see over the wall and do ballet
She who strains his strides can escape
He who reveals herself shows beauty
She who justifies himself shows resilience
He who boasts herself can win the game and be given a lot of credit
She who prides himself can be powerful"

The "dregs and tumors" turned into gaseous benevolence!

I don't think Lao Tzu, as a good Taoist, wrote TTC with intentionality or desire. — T Clark

That remains to be seen. His advocating of non-desire doesn't mean he's free of it. He surely had the desire to express this.

A critique

"He who tiptoes can see over the wall and do ballet
She who strains his strides can escape
He who reveals herself shows beauty
She who justifies himself shows resilience
He who boasts herself can win the game and be given a lot of credit
She who prides himself can be powerful"

The "dregs and tumors" turned into gaseous benevolence! — Hillary

That remains to be seen. His advocating of non-desire doesn't mean he's free of it. He surely had the desire to express this. — Hillary

I won't object to your comments, but until you're willing to respond seriously, I won't respond to you further.

until you're willing to respond seriously, I won't respond to you. — T Clark

I gave a serious critique. Every verse he wrote can be changed. Let's consider another verse. I'll pick a random one.

"Tao is a whirling emptiness (ch'ung),
Ye (erh) in use (yung) is inexhaustible (ying).
Fathomless (yuan),
It seems to be the ancestor (tsung) of ten thousand beings.
It blunts the sharp,
Unties the entangled,
Harmonizes the bright,
Mixes the dust.
Dark (chan),
It seems perhaps to exist (ts'un)."

Which suggests Zao was ahead of his time. What he meant to say was:

"Tao is the vacuum whirling with virtuality (closed propagators)
Yet in use (external) is inexhaustible (energy/mass)
Fathomless (converging),
It seems to be the underlayer (highers dimensional structure) of ten thousand universes,
It blunts the sharp (HUR),
Unties the entangled (interaction),
Collapses the wavefunction,
Mixes the Hilbert states.
Unobservable,
It's existence (reality) is doubted.

What else I need to say?

I appreciate the side-by-side commentaries and translations. So much to puzzle over in this cryptic poem.
:fire: :hearts: :fire:

I appreciate the side-by-side commentaries and translations. So much to puzzle over in this cryptic poem. — ZzzoneiroCosm

I started out just reading the Stephen Mitchell translation, which is very Americanized, colloquial. Many don't like that. I acknowledge he leaves things out and rounds corners, but sometimes his interpretations are those that reach me the best. They are what attracted me to the TTC first and I still like it a lot. If you just want one translation to read, I would suggest that one.

If you've seen my posts here on the forum, I bring up Lao Tzu a lot. After a while it felt like I was presenting myself as more knowledgeable than I am, so I decided to start digging deeper, looking at more translations, reading commentaries. That's what lead me to this thread. I wanted to put some discipline into my ideas.

So, I'm glad you like it. The extra depth has meant a lot to me.

fter a while it felt like I was presenting myself as more knowledgeable than I am, so I decided to start digging deeper, looking at more translations, reading commentaries. That's what lead me to this thread. — T Clark

The humility is refreshing. I should have lots of time this summer (after finals) to revisit the Tao. Inspiring to have a comrade in arms.

The only thing the good Lao does is giving examples of things he doesn't like and then says these things are not things he does like. Sorry, but I don't like the paternizing. But I won't bother again. "He who keeps critique to herself, will drown in contrariness".

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations. — T Clark

I'm wondering about your take on desire. To my view, desire, broadly defined, is the prime motivator for artistic creation and spiritual aspiration. I get that Taoists and Buddhists (I'm a self-made universalist syncretist of sorts) have a beef with desire, and I understand that unregulated desire, untempered irrational desire, can cause a lot of psychical suffering. But I put desire at the heart of inspiration and inspiration at the heart of a life fully lived.

I'm wondering about your take on desire. To my view, desire, broadly defined, is the prime motivator for artistic creation and spiritual aspiration. I get that Toaists and Buddhists (I'm a self-made universalist syncretist of sorts) have a beef with desire, and I understand that unregulated desire, untempered irrational desire, can cause a lot of psychical suffering. But I put desire at the heart of inspiration and inspiration at the heart of a life fully lived. — ZzzoneiroCosm

As I see it, for Lao Tzu, desire denotes our craving for worldly treasure - acclaim, success, money, power. On the flip side, our fear of pain, death, dishonor, poverty. From Verse 24, one of my favorite lines:

Success is as dangerous as failure.
Hope is as hollow as fear.

The alternative is "wu wei," non-action, acting without acting. Acting without intention or desire. Acting spontaneously from our true selves.

If you're acting to achieve something or avoid something, that's desire. If you're acting from your heart, it's the Tao. Or actually, maybe Te. I get confused by that.

Keeping in mind, please, that this is my understanding. Lao Tzu gets pissed when I put words in his mouth.

This whole Tao nonsense seems like a perfumed soft paper handkerchief to me. You can blow your nose, clean the screen, or wipe your ass with it. In Tao style. Sorry, couldn't resist! Continue!

Toaists — ZzzoneiroCosm

Eek. That's an especially egregious misspelling on my part. Apologies. Typical of a work-post.

Keeping in mind, please, that this is my understanding. Lao Tzu gets pissed when I put words in his mouth. — T Clark

Understood. :smile:

Hope is as hollow as fear. — T Clark

Off-topic but...

Kazantzakis' epitaph: I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free.

Have to play evangelist for this beautiful powerful poem:

My God is not Almighty. He struggles, for he is in peril every moment; he trembles and stumbles in every living thing, and he cries out. He is defeated incessantly, but rises again, full of blood and earth, to throw himself into battle once more.

He is full of wounds, his eyes are filled with fear and stubbornness, his jawbones and temples are splintered. But he does not surrender, he ascends; he ascends with his feet, with his hands, biting his lips, undaunted.

My God is not All-holy. He is full of cruelty and savage justice, and he chooses the best mercilessly. He is without compassion; he does not trouble himself about men or animals; nor does he care for virtues and ideas. He loves all these things for a moment, then smashes them eternally and passes on.

He is a power that contains all things, that begets all things. He begets them, loves them, and destroys them. And if we say, "Our God is an erotic wind and shatters all bodies that he may drive on," and if we remember that eros always works through blood and tears, destroying every individual without mercy - then we shall approach his dread face a little closer.

My God is not All-knowing. His brain is a tangled skein of light and darkness which he strives to unravel in the labyrinth of the flesh.

He stumbles and fumbles. He gropes to the right and turns back; swings to the left and sniffs the air. He struggles above chaos in anguish. Crawling, straining, groping for unnumbered centuries, he feels the muddy coils of his brain being slowly suffused with light.

On the surface of his heavy, pitch-black head he begins with an indescribable struggle to create eyes by which to see, ears by which to hear.

My God struggles on without certainty. Will he conquer? Will he be conquered? Nothing in the Universe is certain. He flings himself into uncertainty; he gambles all his destiny at every moment.

He clings to warm bodies; he has no other bulwark. He shouts for help; he proclaims mobilization throughout the Universe.

It is our duty, on hearing his Cry, to run under his flag, to fight by his side, to be lost or to be saved with him.

God is imperiled. He is not almighty, that we may cross our hands, waiting for certain victory. He is not all-holy, that we may wait trustingly for him to pity and to save us.

Within the province of our ephemeral flesh all of God is imperiled. He cannot be saved unless we save him with our own struggles; nor can we be saved unless he is saved.

We are one. From the blind worm in the depths of the ocean to the endless arena of the Galaxy, only one person struggles and is imperiled: You. And within your small and earthen breast only one thing struggles and is imperiled: the Universe.

The Saviors of God
Nikos Kazantzakis

Just an excerpt, the whole thing is here:

http://www.angel.net/~nic/askitiki.html

Kazantzakis' epitaph: I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free. — ZzzoneiroCosm

When I first read that I thought - "Yes, he means exactly the same thing that Lao Tzu did." Then I read the poem. It's the anti-Tao. For me, the Tao is about surrender of will. Wu wei is action without intention, without will. Kazantzakis' poem is a paean to Will with a capital "W." He has taken hope and fear and wrestled them till they were bloody carcasses lying on the sand. Then he held up their severed heads for the crowd to see so he could hear their roar. Lao Tzu saw through their illusion and didn't think about them any more.

Interesting take. I'll have to think more about that. Definitely something repulsive in Kazantzakis' fiery description of god. Though I love the poem.

Though I love the poem. — ZzzoneiroCosm

Definitely powerful. "The power of will" is not just a cliche.

I don't think Lao Tzu, as a good Taoist — T Clark

Going by the essence of Taoism (negation/inversion), a good Taoist is a bad Taoist...perhaps not a Taoist at all. :snicker:

"Taoism? Never heard of it! What are you on about?"

"Then you're a taoist, you knucklehead!"

:snicker:

Brother Smith! T Clark is serious!.... :lol:

Brother Smith! — Hillary

:snicker:

Brother Smith! T Clark is serious!.... — Hillary

You're right, I do take this thread seriously. Please stop harassing it.

You're right, I do take this thread seriously. Please stop harassing it. — T Clark

Just expressing my thoughts about it. We are free to criticize, n'est pas? I think it's a bunch of $##%^$.

Have patience. Wait until the mud settles and the water is clear. Remain unmoving until right action arises by itself.

Laozi

:smile:

"Taoism? Never heard of it! What are you on about?"

"Then you're a taoist, you knucklehead!" — Agent Smith

:lol:

Just expressing my thoughts about it. We are free to criticize, n'est pas? I think it's a bunch of $##%^$. — Hillary

You've made your opinion clear. Now all you are doing is sniping with no substantive content. As I said, it's harassment. Please stop.

Have patience. Wait until the mud settles and the water is clear. Remain unmoving until right action arises by itself. — frank

Alas, I am not Lao Tzu.