[TTC Study] Chapter 44 of the Tao Teh Ching

[dawei]

I think that the reversed word has nothing to do with Henrick's 'rhythm',

It is the GUODIAN Rhythm he is talking about... A precise rhythm exists in every line but if you reverse or change any line, that one line is now out of sync... ergo, the original Guodian has internal evidence favoring it's order as correct.

 

 

but that line 5 contains the key to answer the line 2 and 3 questions:

 

A body together with a treasure; which one is the overmuchness?

A gain together with a loss; which one is the illness?

 

The Guodian version:

 

and the store of greatly is surely a loss of overmuchness.

 

One can store greatly as a treasure in a body, so a treasure must be the overmuchness!

 

The Received version:

 

and the store of overmuchness is surely a loss of greatly.

 

One cannot store overmuchness as a treasure in a body, so a body must be the overmuchness!

I really can't read or make sense of your english translations... they are just greek to me without using proper words in grammatical structure. SO I cannot comment further.

Edited September 2, 2011 by dawei

[dawei]

I think that the reversed word has nothing to do with Henrick's 'rhythm',

It is the GUODIAN Rhythm he is talking about... A precise rhythm exists in every line but if you reverse or change any line, that one line is now out of sync... ergo, the original Guodian has internal evidence favoring it's order as correct.

 

but that line 5 contains the key to answer the line 2 and 3 questions:

 

A body together with a treasure; which one is the overmuchness?

A gain together with a loss; which one is the illness?

 

The Guodian version:

 

and the store of greatly is surely a loss of overmuchness.

 

One can store greatly as a treasure in a body, so a treasure must be the overmuchness!

 

The Received version:

 

and the store of overmuchness is surely a loss of greatly.

 

One cannot store overmuchness as a treasure in a body, so a body must be the overmuchness!

I cannot comment further. I am not really sure what your trying to prove...

Edited September 2, 2011 by dawei

[lienshan]

I really can't read or make sense of your english translations...

they are just greek to me without using proper words in grammatical structure.

I'm looking from different angles in order to find the proper english words.

E.g. seems this little Zou Zhuan text including 與 interesting to me:

 

鮮虞曰 (fresh fish - worry - is called)

一與一 (one - along with - first)

誰能懼我 (whom - able to - fear - oneself)

 

That'll say I suspect that 與 preceeds an 'objective meaning' of a character? That'll say:

 

與身 in chapter 44 line 1 mean 'along with a body'

身與 in chapter 44 line 2 mean 'a self along with'

 

A title along with a body; which one does oneself?

A self along with a treasure; which one increases advantageousness?

An advantage along with a loss; which one increases jealousy?

The love of considerably is surely an expense of greatness

and the store of greatly is surely a loss of advantageousness

and therefore is to know sufficient harmless knowledge

and to stop secures the ability to prolong the lineage.

 

I cannot comment further.

OK ... I do too leave this great chapter

Edited September 2, 2011 by lienshan

[Marblehead]

Either, or.

 

Choices.

[lienshan]

Either, or.

 

Choices.

Yes, that's the way of the traditional translation's "dummy questions".

 

I still think that "A title with a body" is synonymous with "the son of Heaven",

that the three questions are intelligent and deep and thus hard to translate.

[Marblehead]

Yes, that's the way of the traditional translation's "dummy questions".

 

I still think that "A title with a body" is synonymous with "the son of Heaven",

that the three questions are intelligent and deep and thus hard to translate.

 

Hehehe. Where's my Zen Master so he can tap you on top of your head with his walking stick?

 

KISS

 

Keep

It

Simple

Sweetie

[lienshan]

Hehehe. Where's my Zen Master so he can tap you on top of your head with his walking stick?

Ask him: "Your health or $500"?

 

I think I know the answer if a visit to his doctor costs $250

[Marblehead]

Ask him: "Your health or $500"?

 

I think I know the answer if a visit to his doctor costs $250

 

Now you are talking with me instead of talking to me. Hehehe.

 

To hell with the money. If I have my health I can always get more money.

[ChiDragon]

"A title with a body" is synonymous with "lienshan"

 

"the son of Heaven" is the ruler.

[Marblehead]

"A title with a body" is synonymous with "lienshan"

 

"the son of Heaven" is the ruler.

 

Hehehe. I would rather be a body and throw the title away.

[dawei]

Yes, that's the way of the traditional translation's "dummy questions".

 

I still think that "A title with a body" is synonymous with "the son of Heaven",

that the three questions are intelligent and deep and thus hard to translate.

I really hate to ask this.. I said I was done but I keep seeing this 'synonymous' comment... I must be a Flagellant

 

If we substitute the synonymous part.. it reads:

 

The Son of Heaven, which one does oneself?

 

The Son of Heaven, which one is the intimateness?

 

 

What does that even mean?

[ChiDragon]

Hehehe. I would rather be a body and throw the title away.

 

Yes, me too.

[Marblehead]

Yes, me too.

 

Hehehe. Actually, I would kinda' like to have a younger body, this one has grown old and well-used.

[stan herman]

Yes, but are we taking Confucius sufficiently in to account? The body without title must lead the people back to the original body, before the title was changed. Or did I get that wrong?

 

It's a loose day for me

[Marblehead]

Yes, but are we taking Confucius sufficiently in to account? The body without title must lead the people back to the original body, before the title was changed. Or did I get that wrong?

 

It's a loose day for me

 

Hehehe. That post right there is why I think it would be interesting to compare/contrast Taoism with Confucianism.

 

Yes, if I recall properly 'title' was very important to Confucius.

 

Where's my title?!?!?

[lienshan]

Does the old blind man,

the one more chinese than the chinese,

the one translating TTC like a non-grammatical recipe in a modern chinese cookbook,

does he really have the answer?

Rethorical questions were in pre-Qin classical chinese made by reverting the subject and the predicate:

 

Which one is the intimateness? A title along with a body?

Which one is the overmuchness? A self along with a treasure?

Which one is the illness? A gain along with a loss?

 

To lose through a gain and to gain through a loss is according to other chapters connected like relatives!

No one is able to guard gold and jade according to another chapter so the overmuchness must be a treasure!

 

That'll say:

 

A title together with a body = The son of Heaven = The ruler = ChiDragon's answer = An illness

 

"the son of Heaven" is the ruler.

Edited September 4, 2011 by lienshan

[Marblehead]

... does he really have the answer?

 

Does anyone really have the answers?

[stan herman]

Does anyone really have the answers?

 

Sure, many people have even more answers than there are questions.

[ChiDragon]

That'll say:

 

A title together with a body = The son of Heaven = The ruler = ChiDragon's answer = An illness

Son of Heaven

[Marblehead]

Son of Heaven

 

Where's the Daughter of Heaven?

[ChiDragon]

Where's the Daughter of Heaven?

 

Please don't start this gender thing again....!!!

 

PS...

There is a Father of Heaven,

Mother Earth, and Son of Heaven;

But no Daughter of Heaven.

 

I guess China is one of those male dominant societies.

Edited September 6, 2011 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Please don't start this gender thing again....!!!

 

Hehehe. Belly laughs!

[Marblehead]

 

There is a Father of Heaven,

Mother Earth, and Son of Heaven;

But no Daughter of Heaven.

 

I guess China is one of those male dominant societies.

 

Yeah. Actually, I think they are doing much better now-a-days but they, like we in the US, still have a long way to do.

 

Of course, there is Mary.

 

You know what I heard a while back?

 

It is said that Mary rode Joseph's ass all the way to Bethlehem.

[ion]

I think this passage is pretty straight forward in highliting the benefits of non attatchment and being content with little.

 

However there is some hint at universal law, and self sufficiency being contrary to the Tao.

 

In certain cultures, to gather up more goods then you will need for yourself for a couple days is considered a sign of mental illness. It is a fear based activity, and once it becomes a collective activity then it gives rise to greed.

 

Also lacking in certain areas compared to being self sufficient allows passage for energy to circulate through a group. Humans are designed to fullfill eachother, and with a compatibility to a collective.

 

Even the sage in his hermitude serves a purpose for humanity.

[Marblehead]

I think this passage is pretty straight forward in highliting the benefits of non attatchment and being content with little.

 

Yep. That pretty much wrapped up the entire chapter.