majc

Sup T bag. For one that works with an exec's point of view, try this: Exceptional leadership is mostly unnoticed. The next best leadership is followed and praised. The next best leadership is feared. The worst leadership is hated. With uncertainties involved, there's always doubt. The Master understands this well. He succeeds when people say, "We did it on our own." http://www.openwisdom.org/tao-te-ching/#17

Tweak. All we have left to speak of is how they appear...

Yeah I agree this is pretty key. I changed exactly this for the same reason a couple of weeks ago at some point during another stupid argument with TianShi about governance. If you take a literal, broken-english reading of the first line to be "In doing study of skillful [men] of history..." the rest follows much better from there. And then, un-breaking the English: --------- We study skillful men of old. But their subtlety defies explanation. Their clarity can't be described. All we have left to speak of is how they appear... So aware, as if crossing a frozen river. So enthused, as if enveloped in risk. So attentive, as if a humble guest. So effortless, like ice becoming water. So genuine, like uncarved wood. So open, like a great valley. So complete, everything interwoven. Who can allow their own waters to clear? Who can not force and let action arise by itself? Those who are walking this path aren't trying to attain it. So far as there is no sense of arrival, they keep going. http://www.openwisdom.org/tao-te-ching/#15

Not quite what I had in mind... but good luck with that! I lk 4wd 2 rding it wn ur dn.

Wow Taomeow... That's a cool post. Yeah. I think evoke is the key (English) word here, right? The wording chosen by an author evokes a particular (re)cognition in the reader. Depending on the cultural/historical/geographical/linguistic background of the reader, the same string of symbols will evoke different associations. An author can't account for this huge variety in reader backgrounds. So, in being universal, it's up to him or her to use examples which are unmistakably basic to all readers - regardless of what language they have primarily learned to speak - and to make the context of what they're expressing so simple that it crosses all these same boundaries too. This is what I think (the) Laozi achieved using the tools/language available at the time. The TTC happens to have been expressed in Chinese characters 2,500 years ago. But China, Chinese characters, and 2,500 years ago are all arbitrary factors to that-which-inspires-such-expression. I see no reason why the same inspiration couldn't strike someone in pretty much any domain. Another good point. He probably wouldn't today though if he was born here - by now he probably would've been diagnosed with ADHD, dyselecxtria, and some sort of motivational disorder, and be regularly ingesting some bizarre cocktail of medication instead. I guess my point is that if the starting point is an entirely different cultural and technological background, the same considerations might be more effectively evoked by the use of an entirely different cultural and technological medium of expression... Perhaps an internet!

But I didn't support any side...

Nah, I think we're natural too. And easier.

Never underestimate the power of word jitsu in bringing clarity. Is there?

Thanks. Same to you. So do I. Well you're going a different way with it, yeah. But it's not wrong to say water 'follows' a course... it does. It doesn't take aim at a destination, it doesn't follow the route which it believes is going to require the least effort, it doesn't follow the most nourishing path, it doesn't follow its heart, it doesn't think about what other water that came before it did and decide its route based on that analysis. Water follows no thing. That's what needed to be said. But instead, you wanted to use words which effect the idea that you, TianShi the Authoritative, possess a profound, deep and enigmatic understanding of ziran which I, xHSG and "other commoners" as you put it don't. I don't doubt that you possess some understanding of ziran, but (yet again) the authoritarian airy bullshit which you attach to everything is unnecessary.

What's the difference? edit: I should've read TianShi's post. He makes the same point with more words: edit again: Agreed. Except you make it sound complicated. There's nothing profound here... except to say that 'following' automatically implies some kind of separation between you and that-which-is-followed. And like you said, that is precisely the misperception which the TTC addresses.

Jesus' 2010th birthday party is getting in the way a bit at the moment. I'll be back though. Short version: There's more to life than government. An exclusively government-centric interpretation of every possible aspect of everything isn't wrong. If power and control are the constructs by which you understand yourself and make sense of the world, fantastic. Go for it. TianShi, it sounds like you in particular have given this a lot of thought. I enjoy reading your versions of every chapter, and I maintain that you are constricting the significance of Lao Tzu's words. Happy Christmas everyone.

Ha, well I learned something from this thread. I learned that early friday evening was probably not the best time for good translateyness. Is it not when self is lost that he's fulfilled? edit: oh and Rene, you can take any liberties you want. It's all good.

The infinite skies, and our ancient ground... How are they so longstanding? They don't exist just by themselves. That's how their growth can be sustained. Thus... The Master leaves himself behind, and his person comes forth. Forgets himself, and his nature unfolds. Is it not when self is lost that he's fulfilled?

I know what you mean, I don't like "selflessness" there either. I haven't come up with a better (less potentially misleading) way of expressing it yet but I will.

7. The infinite skies, and our ancient ground... How are they so longstanding? They don't exist just by themselves. That's how their growth can be sustained. Thus... The Master leaves himself behind, and his person comes forth. Forgets himself, and his nature unfolds. Is it not when self is lost that he's fulfilled? http://www.openwisdom.org/tao-te-ching/#7