dawei

DDJ = Dao De Jing (道 德 經). Some may write TTC instead (Tao Te Ching).

I did not mean to convey that you said I was wrong; but as others have pointed out, the thread itself suggests that many are wrong in what they are doing. Let's leave this point behind. I understand your feeling as I sometimes don't care to go further and just rather leave something... but ZZ's book seems an interesting take on Neidan method and this site is ideal for such discussions (or disagreements )

I generally like some of your ideas and translations so would like to engage some more thought. I researched the Zhang Ziyang writing and there are western translations that maybe someone has access to which can be shared as part of the discussion. The person who starts a thread on translating a work does not have to be the one with all the answers. And yes, there will be some disagreement over meaning and translation as the words are really code for other meanings. So maybe if someone has a translation of ZZ's work or has decided to buy one based on the discussion you started, we could follow the pattern of the DDJ translations; use an existing translation and discuss it.

I am not asking for a job interview; just a discussion. Can't you think of anything to say to support the translation you made? If it is really necessary to ask questions to get you to think what to write, I'll indulge you: 1. Why not translate "Valley" (why leave it out in a translation)? 2. What is XuanPin? (code for what?) 3. What is "root of the world" ? (is 'world' code for something else?) 4. How does the Spirit relate to XuanPin and the root of the world? 5. Do you see Neidan principles and ideas to the passage?

The "theory" has been raised by at least three members so far. But I have recommended a book which I think would be good grounds for understanding more. I am not sure why it is so black and white, in terms of having to change anyone's mind; if this is simply a game of one-upmanship in changing people's mind then it is not a discussion going on. I am sorry to disappoint your idealism; that people here are going to one day accept what you've said and learn enough chinese (or classical chinese) to read the original... in the best case, a few might buy the translations but then we're really at the translator's idea. A discussion board is for the purpose of discussing ideas not a feather count of how many we can change. If your not up to discussion on such issues that is fine but then you should realize why there is so much resistance in the topics. You will find people are open to ideas if presented and discussed. If you only want to tell another they are wrong and seek to change their idea then it is less productive. There is a sub-forum to attempt translations and discuss them. It is not for the purpose of hoping to control other people's thinking and change their mind. I hope you would see this forum in a better light of discussion and be a part of growing ideas.

There is some fetish on requiring word by word translations at the expense of understanding what is meant (or pictured). The more I have thought about Chapter 6 the more the 'Valley' (or possibly 'Valley Streams' using the MWD character) is nothing but a setting for the mind to picture; it is nothing but the background picture for the every present 'Spirit'. In which case, leaving out the 'Valley' in a translation is not an issue, which I have seen a few translators do. Here is a translation mentioned in another thread: I would like to ask Lao Zi to comment more on his translation. I agree with not translating "XuanPin" and leaving it as-is. But maybe we could talk more about The relationship of the Spirit, XuanPin and the root.

The "theory" has ground; you maybe have simply never choosen to research or read up on it, or even try to experience it yourself. I suspect you may be like many (including myself) where we study something in a partial vacuum and miss the forest for the trees. Your 100 books may tell you something about a particular method of Neidan but I sense your intuition of energetics and the wide world it includes gets discounted very easily if it does not fit to your idea. You don't really "connect the dots" so well in seeing similar applications you have learned. Since your into reading, I would recommend The Biology of Belief. Then I would very much like to hear what you think. We have come a long way since the 'ancient sages' in understanding the mind/body/DNA connections. Also, you have yet to explain the details of the method you gleaned from the 100 books. Why not start a thread where you discuss it and let people ask some questions so we can understand it more. In the Taoist sub forum, you could even start a translations discussion of Zhang Ziyang's book?

How is the west taught? Why do you think the method has not changed but only the thinking has changed? The thinking by who?

I think this is a very good summary and actually very close to my own way. I might only be a little emphatic on the last point of not believing anything on faith unless you can feel it. The boundaries of practice and faith are very blurry at some point and there can be an inner faith based on an inner feeling of some kind that is not like feeling Qi but more like simply awareness.

1. I would agree that the spirits do not differentiate and don't care about any difference... but then why does Zhang Ziyang change to Buddhism later in life? Because in the manifestation of life, there is variation. 2. I hope your not trying to appeal to the idea of "Heng" and "Chang" as the same meaning as "Constant" here ? IMO, Heng means 'continuous change' or ever-changing; That can be seen as a constant, although never static; That is the Spirit of Dao. 3. Your looking at the wrong side of the coin, the doctor... and the treatment is only the medium (although abilities can vary). The issue is the 'state' of the patient, and that state is not just physical health but also mental, emotional, spiritual, etc. Eastern patients grow up in complete trust of acupuncture and its efficacy; there exists a doctor-patient trust which is beyond explanation; they are a part of the same spirit. Western patients do not approach acupuncture with the same level of trust. I wish I could share the East-West study done which showed this. I taught soccer for many years and so was exposed to playing styles around the world. There is a reason that playing styles differ and why they are linked to the geograophical climate and personal temperament of the people. There is not ONE correct way to learn how to play soccer at the highest level. There may be a singular kind of soccer spirit which exists among all those who get to that level but they get there in different ways. My point is not to discredit your original thread concerns or warnings. I accept that you have a Way to get there. And I would only argue that some eastern techniques work great for easterners; and that westerners sometimes need other (or additional) steps to get to the same end. My Taiji teacher is a chinese acupunturist who grew up in Taiwan where he learned Qigong and Taiji. One day he invited me to go to his chinese class although it was going to be spoken in all chinese he told me to just come anyways... He taught the class much different than he did his western class. Later I spoke to him about it since I had a gut feeling why and he confirmed it... it's the same issue that the acupuncture study found; there is an intangible difference between the participants (east vs west) which shows up (ie: visible) in very mechanical western bodies attempting soft movements. IMO, In our pursuit of the spiritual and energetic, we cannot leave out the physical realm as N/A; All the levels are co-existent and like concentric circles (ripples in a pond appearance). Thus, while the spirit may be singular in some respects, the manifest is varied. What works for one may not work for another so easily or quickly. Dao is diversity and I think some respect for the diversity in methods is reasonable.

LZ: I can appreciate what your trying to say but it comes across as very categorical, regardless if it was sages who said it... and I should clear up one thing that nobody has called you on: Zhang Ziyang as an 'ancient sage'... I don't think so. The Song Dynasty isn't 'ancient' in my view. He was a master of inner Alchemy... And the guy gave himself to Buddhism later in life and continued to write books... He is described in one of the links below as "a Song Dynasty scholar of the Three teachings (Confucianism, Daoism, and Buddhism)." That is probably more accurate. Your error is a very simple but subtle point; your lumping everyone and every possible experience together as part of your point. Just because someone wrote something in the past which showed why meditation may not be the best (or harm-free) technique, it does not mean that everyone in the world was the intended reader of the advice and that everyone should strictly follow it. Why would someone in today's climate have a lifestyle and environment similar to that of a Song Dynasty person? If there are environmental or personal (mental, emotional) differences then you would understand why methods are different too; There are many roads which can successful assist people in their energetic and spiritual pursuits and there are many different goals or lengths one wants to go. THERE IS NOT ONE MANUAL FOR THE WORLD on how to do it. If you can understand this question I ask you, then I think you will understand why your position is faulty: Why do chinese tend to show better results as a patient of acupuncture than westerners? In other words: What makes a chinese patient different than a western patient when it comes to eastern approaches to medicine (or other arts)? For those interested, a few links: Wuzhen Pian The Inner Teachings of Taosim Awakening to Reality

Sorry... I don't buy that they mean the same for LZ. For anyone interested to look a little further: http://www.cnphenomenology.com/modules/article/view.article.php/c7/711

There is a very obvious difference... if the King does not exist then there is no need to replace the character... but we get a replacement based on politics.... so we lose the inherent meaning... don't justify the reason... you've missed the point of the meaning. I'm done here when we use a kings death to justify a change in the meaning of the original character to justify the change. The meaning is lose... with you...

In modern chinese... of course... you have proved my point. thank you.

Maybe your aware that the Mawangdui has 恆 instead of 常... of course for some there is no difference after the ruler is dead. The difference is not in the language or thought... it is beyond all this or that thing...

Did you actually ever see the character yourself or are you saying to just "forget about it" (I forget which movie that is from, but I think Donnie Brascoe). I saw it several times but have nothing to add to it's meaning.

I personally prefer to know what is behind the "doing"... then there are no words needed. There is obviously a different perspective going on here; one of talking and one of doing; and one of silently doing... each choices their path. To each their own.

If lived... then there is nothing to "do"... It is all immaterial as if it does not exist... so words, instructions, advice on the 'way' is "greek" to one... I am often surprised at the amount of talk that conveys "what to DO"... DOING is intrinsic (Zi Ran); There is no need to talk about it... Talking is like internet babble...

That's one of the most absurd things I've ever seen in print... The characterization of Dao as LZ describes is something he borrows from those before him... and he says that throughout the DDJ. If one locks themselves up in a room and only looks out a window and describes the world, we get this kind of explanation of Dao. For those who need some explanation: The "room" is the DDJ and so Don't look for a complete understanding of Dao from the DDJ... It is but a small speck of understanding; as humans are a small speck to the great unfolding.

I agree with the above bolded comment. It is not really trying to force the spirit on just one thing; it is the spirit which moves along as water moves along the valley.

Found it in a few places but always without any comment or info. Note that the various manuscripts have different characters: 晚 - Wang Bi and Heshang Gong 晩 - Fu Yi 免 - Mawangdui B 曼 - Guodian

As to 'written', one is referring to 'characters'. As to 'mandarin', on is referring to pronunciation of characters. http://www.chineseetymology.org/mandarin.aspx http://www.chineseetymology.org/why_study.aspx

It seems most times when Taoism is mentioned its pre-Lao Zi stage is rarely mentioned which was neither philosophy nor religion... if we keep going deeper they will eventually dissolve back to that state of oneness. For anyone interested in the topic, further reading: http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?/topic/19538-difference-between-dao-jiao-and-dao-jia/

The problem with this is that this is actually a Western idea (invention); Eastern thinking tends to not distinguish them so much. This has been an academic debate for at least 40 years. Kirkland has written quite a bit about it but here is one example: http://kirkland.myweb.uga.edu/rk/pdf/pubs/VARIETIES.pdf