[TTC Study] Chapter 2 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Taoist Texts]

I will just highlight the parallels and see where it is going

天下皆知美之為美亞已 All know beauty for beauty because ugliness is,

皆知善斯不善矣 Know good by what is not good.

有無之相生也 Existence and absence give birth to each other,

難易之相成也 Difficult and easy complete each other,

長短之相刑也 Long and short determine each other,

高下之相盈也 High and low surpass each other,

音聲之相和也 Voice and sound harmonize each other,

先後之相隨恆也 Front and back follow each other;

是以聖人居無為之事 The wise man goes about doing nothing,

行不言之教 Teaches without talking;

萬物昔而弗始 Life is, with no beginning,

為而弗侍也 Does, without serving,

成功而弗居也 Succeeds, and does not linger;

夫唯弗居是以弗去 A man who does not linger does not leave

 

里仁:

子曰：「富與貴是人之所欲也，不以其道得之，不處也；貧與賤是人之所惡也，不以其道得之，不去也。君子去仁，惡乎成名？君子無終食之間違仁，造次必於是，顛沛必於是。」

Li Ren:

The Master said, "Riches and honors are what men desire. If it cannot be obtained in the proper way, they should not be held. Poverty and meanness are what men dislike. If it cannot be avoided in the proper way, they should not be avoided. If a superior man abandon virtue, how can he fulfill the requirements of that name? The superior man does not, even for the space of a single meal, act contrary to virtue. In moments of haste, he cleaves to it. In seasons of danger, he cleaves to it."

http://ctext.org/analects/li-ren?searchu=%E4%B8%8D%E5%8E%BB&searchmode=showall#n1173

[dust]

去 as 'avoid' or 'abandon'....?

 

成功而弗居也 Succeed and not ___

夫唯弗居是以弗去 Not to ___, not to ___

 

I'm rather muddled now.

[ChiDragon]

去 as 'avoid' or 'abandon'....?

 

成功而弗居也 Succeed and not ___

夫唯弗居是以弗去 Not to ___, not to ___

 

I'm rather muddled now.

 

Succeed but not dwelling in it(being vainglorious).

Therefore, by only not dwelling in it; then, the merits won't be discredited.

 

In other words, one shall maintain one's humbleness by not being vainglorious about one's accomplishment. Do not praise oneself for credit but put oneself behind the scene; then, one will be recognized and praised by the people.

 

 

Remember? A sage always puts himself behind but ended up in the front.

Edited August 31, 2014 by ChiDragon

[Harmonious Emptiness]

-- side note --

 

Yes it is. also an example as how most of what is cryptic in TTC is made clear by Confucius.

 

True, I agree there are many instances of this, though I would say, from a Taoist perspective, the style of Confucianism is too "clever" in finding answers for every little thing, which makes for difficulties in putting those subtleties into practice while "following" Confucianism, a main part of which is adherence to the words of another (ie., arbitrary principles).

[Taoist Texts]

 

t put oneself behind the scene; then, one will be recognized and praised by the people.

 

 

Remember? A sage always puts himself behind but ended up in the front.

There is a long authoritative tradition that supports what Chi Dragon says, so we are conditioned to believe it. But how does it work in practice, if at all? If you put yourself behind how you gonna end up in front being recognised? Something doesnt add.

[Marblehead]

If you put yourself behind how you gonna end up in front being recognised? Something doesnt add.

Exactly. That advice was written 2500 years ago. Things change. Societies change. Values change.

 

I can remember back when I was in the Army when I had to put myself in the front in order to get promoted to the next higher rank, a rank that I was very highly qualified for but could not get the promotion until I put myself in front and started asking questions.

[3bob]

Exactly. That advice was written 2500 years ago. Things change. Societies change. Values change.

 

I can remember back when I was in the Army when I had to put myself in the front in order to get promoted to the next higher rank, a rank that I was very highly qualified for but could not get the promotion until I put myself in front and started asking questions.

 

good point MH.

[Marblehead]

Just thought to add:

 

But humility is still important. Ego stroking is really not necessary in order to live a good life.

[Michael Sternbach]

Just thought to add:

 

But humility is still important. Ego stroking is really not necessary in order to live a good life.

 

Agreed. But a sound ego is often necessary in order not to be swayed by detrimental outer and inner influences.

[Michael Sternbach]

Regarding the good/bad thing...

 

Once upon a time in the Wild West, there lived a ranger whose horses all ran away one day. His family and employees were totally out of their mind, complaining about how unfortunate they all were. The rangers only comment was: "Maybe." (He was not a man of many words.) They went looking for the horses and soon found them together with a group of wild horses they had joined. It was not difficult to gather them all, and all of a sudden, the range had twice as many horses! Everybody was excited and praising the good luck they had. The ranger's only comment was: "Maybe." Alas, while breaking in the wild horses, the ranger's son (let's call him Joe) fell from a horseback and fractured a leg. Once again, everybody was lamenting... Not only did they pity the young man, what was worse, they had to take over his share of work on the range! The ranger heard how "unlucky" they all were. His reply was - guess what? "Maybe." (Obviously, he was a daoist.) Soon after, two cavalry officers came to the range: They said that war had started and all the young men up to a certain age were to be recruited, including Joe. But seeing his broken leg, all they could do was to throw up their hands and ride off. Soon, everybody was talking about how fortunate Joe actually was to have broken his leg. The ranger only said: "Maybe."

Edited September 1, 2014 by Michael Sternbach

[Marblehead]

Nice up-to-dating of that very old story.

[Taoist Texts]

Heck let me have a go at it too

 

《老子河上公章句·養身》: Nourishing the body

 

天下皆知美之為美，斯惡已；皆知善之為善，斯不善已。

If everybody under Heaven deem something beautiful then it becomes ugly (to a discerning observer, because beautiful is something different from vulgar tastes); if everybody recognizes something as good then it must be not that good. (so ugly comes from beautiful, not good comes from previously good)

 

故有無相生，難易相成，長短相較，高下相傾，音聲相和，前後相隨。

(Similar to the above) being births non-being, hard and easy are two ends of the same, short and long are relative, high and low are parts of whole, the sounds are parts of harmony, before and after are consecutive

 

(If these extremes give rise to each other in nature, then it is best to govern by non-action which will produce action)

 

是以聖人居無為之事，行不言之教，萬物作而弗治也， 為而不恃，功成而弗居。夫唯弗居，是以不去。

 

So the sage manages by non-action and teaches not by words but by conduct, (in this way) the things are done without governance, there is action but not the maintenance of it, the work is accomplished without dwelling on it. Because the work (of governing) is not dwelled on – it is never out of control.

[ChiDragon]

"A sage always puts himself behind but ended up in the front."

[dawei]

故有無相生，難易相成，長短相較，高下相傾，音聲相和，前後相隨。

(Similar to the above) being births non-being, hard and easy are two ends of the same, short and long are relative, high and low are parts of whole, the sounds are parts of harmony, before and after are consecutive

 

(If these extremes give rise to each other in nature, then it is best to govern by non-action which will produce action)

 

The only issue I have is your 'being births non-being'. You don't really treat it as complimentary but if feels like a linear relationship.

 

And if one were trying to give a precedent, non-being is always prior to being. So instead: being is birthed by non-being. Most all cosmologies show this order and Laozi:

 

CH. 40: - Ni

Returning to itself is how the subtle Way of the universe exercises itself.

Being gentle and yielding is how the subtle Way of the universe employs itself.

All things of the world come from the Manifest.

The Manifest comes from the unmanifest, subtle essence of the universe.

 

But interestingly enough, the Guodian text didn't repeat the word for Manifest... and allows for:

 

All things of the world come from the Manifest.

AND comes from the unmanifest, subtle essence of the universe.

[Taoist Texts]

Yes thats my oversight, of course the original says 有無相生 being and non being birth each other. Good catch.

The only issue I have is your 'being births non-being'. You don't really treat it as complimentary but if feels like a linear relationship.

[dust]

One thing bugs me about this chapter: 音声相和

 

Everything else is, to me, obvious yang & yin: being & not being, long & short, high & low, front & back. So wouldn't sound and silence be more suitable?

 

Then again, sound is vibration, which is itself a combination of 'being' and 'not being'. I guess. Still, I'd prefer sound and silence.

[ChiDragon]

One thing bugs me about this chapter: 音声相和

 

Everything else is, to me, obvious yang & yin: being & not being, long & short, high & low, front & back. So wouldn't sound and silence be more suitable?

 

Then again, sound is vibration, which is itself a combination of 'being' and 'not being'. I guess. Still, I'd prefer sound and silence.

 

音声相和

 

I believe the proper translation would be as follows:

音声相和

Tone and sound are mutually harmonized.

 

音 is signifying the five Chinese tones. The five tones are do re mi so fa.

声 signifies the human voice.

 

Human sings with the musical tones which harmonize with melody.

 

Edited September 1, 2014 by ChiDragon

[dust]

萬物作而弗治也， 為而不恃

 

Might we compare this version to

 

萬物昔而弗始，為而弗侍也

 

萬物作而弗治也，為而弗志也

 

 

I'll come back to it. Been sitting at the computer too long today.

[dust]

音 is signifying the five Chinese tones.

声 signifies the human voice.

 

Sure, I see that. But I kinda think it might've made more sense if they'd written something like 音默相腾 -- sound and silence lift each other (i'm sure that's not how it'd have been written, but you see what I mean)

 

It's not important; I just like to complain. Sorry, ignore me

[Taoist Texts]

 

音声相和

 

I believe the proper translation would be as follows:

音声相和

Tone and sound are mutually harmonized.

 

 

Thats quite likely.

 

 

 

 

One thing bugs me about this chapter: 音声相和

 

Everything else is, to me, obvious yang & yin: being & not being, long & short, high & low, front & back. So wouldn't sound and silence be more suitable?

 

Then again, sound is vibration, which is itself a combination of 'being' and 'not being'. I guess. Still, I'd prefer sound and silence.

If you look in a larger dictionary you will find that 音聲 combo denotes the initial 音 and the final 聲sounds of a chinese syllable.

[ChiDragon]

Sure, I see that. But I kinda think it might've made more sense if they'd written something like 音默相腾 -- sound and silence lift each other (i'm sure that's not how it'd have been written, but you see what I mean)

 

It's not important; I just like to complain. Sorry, ignore me

 

Yes, I'll ignore you is because it was not how it was written to make sense to anyone but to Lao Tze.

 

 

No offense! Please keep in mind that all my responses are aiming at the issue rather than make a personal attack.

[flowing hands]

You chaps argue over the small details of what you think is the original text; IMO a waste of time.

What is chapter two about? Contrast, complimentary differences that make the whole. Yes difficult and easy are different etc. but they are the same, they are part of the whole and seeing this is what Li Erh is saying, part of accepting that this is how the Dao manifests itself in our lives worldly and individually, this is how we should be seeing it, the differences are just part of the whole.

[dust]

You chaps argue over the small details of what you think is the original text; IMO a waste of time.

What is chapter two about? Contrast, complimentary differences that make the whole. Yes difficult and easy are different etc. but they are the same, they are part of the whole and seeing this is what Li Erh is saying, part of accepting that this is how the Dao manifests itself in our lives worldly and individually, this is how we should be seeing it, the differences are just part of the whole.

 

• I'd suggest that we're discussing, not arguing.
• It's not a waste of time if one enjoys it...
• There are a few versions, many translations, and many differences between them all. If everyone summed up each chapter in the same offhand way rather than taking time to translate...would that be preferable?
• If you think it's a waste of time, you don't have to be here!

[Marblehead]

Hehehe. Great Buddhist attitudes going on here.

[Taoist Texts]

the differences are just part of the whole.

wow, its like deep, man.