[TTC Study] Chapter 71 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Marblehead]

Why there is an agreement of bing 病 definition as illness, disease. It seems that the meaning is fault. Any clarification on that?

 

I agreed because I felt it wasn't worth arguing.

 

Henricks' translation:

 

1.  To know you don't know is best.

2. Not to know you [don't] know is a flaw.

3. Therefore, the Sage's not being flawed

4.  Stems from his recognizing a flaw as a flaw.

5. Therefore, he is flawless.

 

My standard for translation of the TTC has always been Henricks. 

 

So I will agree with you in that the word should be "flaw". (or, if you wish, "fault".)

[wandelaar]

Well - I read the whole thread. The most obvious and straightforward interpretation is this one:

 

On 24-4-2017 at 12:32 AM, Marblehead said:

Henricks' translation:

 

1.  To know you don't know is best.

2. Not to know you [don't] know is a flaw.

3. Therefore, the Sage's not being flawed

4.  Stems from his recognizing a flaw as a flaw.

5. Therefore, he is flawless.

 

This is the recognition of the sage that fundamentally - as fallible human beings - we don't know anything. But I don't think this is the whole story, because anybody (whether a sage or not) can and should reach this stage of fundamental doubt at some point in his life when considering the human condition.

 

Now it is very doubtful that animals have found a rational solution to the above problem of knowledge where humans have failed. Nevertheless we see animals generally (but not always) acting and behaving in a manner that is appropriate to their own well being. The same goes for small children and simple people. So apparently rationally solving the problem of knowledge isn't necessary for living. In my mind there are only two commendable positions on this issue: (1) Stay simple and avoid philosophy as the pest, or (2) Go all the way in philosophising beyond the fundamental doubt of human knowledge (what is: curing the flaw by recognising the flaw as a flaw that is essential to being human). 

 

And now I come to the second, somewhat deeper layer of meaning to this chapter. And that is: wu wei. Because of our partial animal nature we don't always need to know to be able to act. A large part of our behaviour is instinctual. Here is another reason why Lao tzu promoted a return to simple living: the simpler the life you live, the more you can trust on your natural instincts. Wu wei in the case of more complicated affairs only works when we have become deeply familiar with those affairs, and our ways of dealing with them have become second nature. Such practical knowledge isn't condemned in philosophical Taoism. Quite the contrary: see the stories about mastership in the Chuang tzu. As far as those abilities go beyond what can be learned from books (dregs of the ancients), they can be called a form of knowing by not-knowing. 

 

Finally we have the Tao that is beyond words, names or symbols and consequently is beyond rational knowledge. Rational thought has no problem in recognising that there are things one cannot reasonably talk about, except maybe in the form of paradoxes. The Tao as the foundation of everything existing is such a thing. Or rather a non-thing, for if it was a thing it wouldn't be the foundation of all things. Now as we ourselves are among the things of this world, the Tao also acts in or rather through us. So in this sense we have intimate knowledge of the Tao because we are part of it. So here again there is (introspective) knowing and (rational) not-knowing at the same time.

 

(All in my opinion of course... )

Edited August 12, 2018 by wandelaar

[rideforever]

You can't know you don't know,
Not "knowing" is ... a meaningless expression.

 

Say I want to overhaul my car's engine.   
Do I know that I don't know how to do it ?
Maybe I am just too chicken to try.
How can I know if I don't try ?
Maybe i have done an overhaul before so I think I know,

but maybe I would find problems I have never dealt with before.

 

It's certainly not uplifting to know you don't know.   That is just BS.

 

This chapter is written in a particular style where categories are used to divide regions knowledge etc... which is not dynamic enough to represent life as we actually live it.

 

What would be better is :

 

To have a negative attitude to life is a sickness

And there are those who are lost in this sickness

But, 

I have a positive attitude to living because I wish to be
To live is to learn
I develop competence, because competence is love
My competence is never complete
On any project there will be new things, and I embrace them positively
Life is about meeting new things with the fullness of my spirit

I wish to be

 

[Marblehead]

3 hours ago, rideforever said:

You can't know you don't know,
Not "knowing" is ... a meaningless expression.

 

That's a different perspective.  I don't agree with it but that doesn't matter.

 

I have a number of times here on the forum that "I don't know".  This is because of the question asked.  The question required knowledge of something specific and I had no knowledge of it.  So rather than trying to bullshit my way throught it I simply said that I do not know.

 

True, we can learn new thing and then we wouldn't have to say "I don't know" to that something specific.  But until we learn it we don't know.

 

 

3 hours ago, rideforever said:

What would be better is :

I actually like this interpretation though.  

 

 

And we should keep in mind that for Lao Tzu there are differences between the concepts of "knowledge" and "wisdom".

 

 

[rideforever]

17 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

  The question required knowledge of something specific and I had no knowledge of it. 

 

Well go and find out, otherwise you are not interested.
Saying "I don't know" or "I can't" is victim-mind.

Saying "I am not interested" or "I won't" is truth.
Isn't it ?

If someone asks you the capital of Uzbekistan, ... it's just a petty game for children, like Trivial Pursuit.   Then you can say "I don't know ha ha ha".

 

But I am not talking about petty games.

 

Say someone asks you the capital of Uzbekistan, you don't know then he tells you the answer.
So what.  You forget in 2 minutes, nobody cares.
These kinds of expressions like "I don't know" are for idiot games.
Or from not telling someone that you don't give a sh** the capital of Uzbekistan and I'm busy.

Asking someone whether the "know" or "don't know" is just posturing argumentation, trying to appear important.

 

Life is about learning and exploring, people either are working with you on that .... or you should dump them and their words.

 

[Marblehead]

2 minutes ago, rideforever said:

Well go and find out, otherwise you are not interested.
Saying "I don't know" or "I can't" is victim-mind.

Saying "I am not interested" or "I won't" is truth.
Isn't it ?

No.  It is the truth without any flowery words.

 

If I felt I could be of help to the person asking me the question I would likely gain some knowledge of the subject and then reply with what knowledge I thought I had gained.

 

If my knowing makes no difference to the other person and the subject has never been of any interest to me why would I waste my time trying to gain knowledge of it.

 

No, I don't know the capital of Uzbekistan and I have no interest in knowing.  If I were a teacher teaching geography in school I would damn sure know what it is.

 

[wandelaar]

https://www.google.nl/search?source=hp&ei=EpNwW_mGFtDekgWV87_oDw&q=uzbekistan+capital&oq=Uzbekistan+&gs_l=psy-ab.1.6.0l5j0i10k1j0l4.2785.2785.0.6662.1.1.0.0.0.0.125.125.0j1.1.0....0...1c..64.psy-ab..0.1.121....0.HW5ajSRKR3s

 

As simple as that. One has to know where to stop. That's the Taoist way. One can spend ones whole life gaining knowledge and still know almost nothing as compared to what there is to know. No time will be left for meditation, taking a walk, looking at the stars, smelling a flower, etc. And then one dies, and all the knowledge gained is lost. Lao tzu was wiser than that, he knew when to stop. And that is much more valuable than knowing a lot.

Edited August 12, 2018 by wandelaar

[Marblehead]

Thanks.  Now I know the capital of Uzbekistan.  I will likely have forgotten it within 30 minutes.

 

But yes, I use the "Know when to stop" on occasion.  I think it is very valid.

 

And I agree with what you said.  Spend your life acquiring knowledge and then you die.

 

Spend your life living and then die.

 

I'll opt for living.  And know just enough to get myself in trouble.

 

 

[OldDog]

Some random thoughts ...

 

Instictively, I want to first look at what knowledge is. There is knowledge we have from experience and the conclusions (however tentative) that we draw.from it. As organisms, we trust what our senses tell us ... not always a good thing ... but for the most part gets us by in the world. Then there is book learning. We are kind of used to it but is it.really knowledge? I can read a recipe but do I really know what a cake is? 

 

How about intuition? I think it is a form of knowledge that is under-rated. It is a source that many people draw on before.taking action.

 

Knowing that you don't know is not BS. There is real value in knowing ... and more importantly, acknowledging ... that you don't know. It positions you to be open to experiences and understandings which you have not yet had. Not being able acknowledge you don't know is sick minded ... closed minded ... not open to new experience ... unable to grow and progress.

 

And then, what kind of knowledge is it that allows for ...

 

Without stepping outside one's doors,

One can know what is happening in the world,

Without looking out of one's windows,

One can see the Tao of Heaven.
The farther one pursues knowledge,

The less one knows.
Therefore the Sage knows without running about,

Understands without seeing,

Accomplishes without doing.

(Ch. 47)

 

This last may be the most important knowledge of them all.

 

 

Edited August 14, 2018 by OldDog
Fat fingers

[wandelaar]

14 minutes ago, OldDog said:

And then, what kind of knowledge is it that allows for ...

 

Without stepping outside one's doors,

One can know what is happening in the world,

Without looking out of one's windows,

One can see the Tao of Heaven.
The farther one pursues knowledge,

The less one knows.
Therefore the Sage knows without running about,

Understands without seeing,

Accomplishes without doing.

(Ch. 47)

 

This last may be the most important knowledge of them all.

 

Yes - what kind of knowledge is that?

 

[OldDog]

26 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

Yes - what kind of knowledge is that?

 

I'm glad you asked. 

 

Seems to me that this is the deep seated knowledge the sage has of the Dao and how change manifests in the world.

[Stosh]

Cleary at terebess has this most clearly presented IMO
71
To know unconsciously is best. To presume to know what you don't ,is sick.

Only by recognizing the sickness, of sickness ,is it possible to be ,not sick.
The sages' freedom from ills ,was from recognizing the sickness of sickness,

so they didn't suffer from sickness.

 

Which to me , looks like should be rendered yet farther ... since.. the repeated use of the word sick , is an incorrect habit in English , which renders the meaning in a passage poorly. And for the translator to actually finish the translating process , he has to get it as far as he can get it ,into proper English format. 

 

To intuitively be understanding of the facts , is the best situation. 

To be aware of the uncertainty one should have ,

regarding what one intuits,

keeps one grounded in that which they truly know,

so one may explore beyond their own personal intuition, 

without kidding themselves. 

 

In his actions , the sage is continuously aware of his own motivations and goals , 

he is not embroiled in complex machinations , and abides by the Kiss principle.. 

Not interfering in things outside his own purview. 

 

 

Edited August 14, 2018 by Stosh

[rene]

21 minutes ago, OldDog said:

 

I'm glad you asked. 

 

Seems to me that this is the deep seated knowledge the sage has of the Dao and how change manifests in the world.

 

LiEhr calls it -  無 智  wu wisdom, ie., knowledge of the mystery.

[wandelaar]

7 minutes ago, OldDog said:

I'm glad you asked. 

 

Seems to me that this is the deep seated knowledge the sage has of the Dao and how change manifests in the world.

 

That's also what I thought. Because the Tao manifests everywhere  you don't have to visit far away places to experience how the Tao works. But there is a limit to the knowledge about events outside of ones own house that one can have without actually looking what happened. The Tao consists not only of patterns but besides and within those patterns it manifests spontaneous changes, and these put a limit to what one can predict on the basis of Tao's patterns alone.  But perhaps Lao tzu is using hyperbole (as he often does) when he claims that the sage need not even look outside to know what is happening. 

[OldDog]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

But there is a limit to the knowledge about events outside of ones own house that one can have without actually looking what happened.

 

True enough ... but it is equally remarkable how limited ones knowedge can be even after having fully observed the actual events. There are facts (events, places, dates) and there are processes. The facts may change but underlying processes are essentially the same. Understanding these processes allows one to see.

 

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

But perhaps Lao tzu is using hyperbole ...

 

Perhaps ... but I don't think so.

[OldDog]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

.... an incorrect habit in English , which renders the meaning in a passage poorly.

 

I agree that Cleary's rendering conveys the message well.

 

However, object mildly to the judgement of correct English. The purpose is communication ... so, if violating the rules that I learned in Mrs. Myers' 12th grade English class furthers the communication ... so be it. Sort of comes under the heading of creative license. ; )

 

[wandelaar]

@ OldDog

Lets take the weather. A sage may possibly know all the processes that make up the weather, but that doesn't mean that such a sage  could forecast the weather for say a month or a year. Same with political developments in crisis situations. Non-linear processes combined with chance events may cause things to develop in a completely unexpected direction. So I agree that understanding underlying processes allows us (or the sage) to see much, but not all and especially not where it concerns long term predictions. The sage will have to leave his home from time to time to actually see what is happening... 

Edited August 14, 2018 by wandelaar

[Stosh]

32 minutes ago, OldDog said:

 

I agree that Cleary's rendering conveys the message well.

 

However, object mildly to the judgement of correct English. The purpose is communication ... so, if violating the rules that I learned in Mrs. Myers' 12th grade English class furthers the communication ... so be it. Sort of comes under the heading of creative license. ; )

 

That's a fair stance, yes ,

I get the creativity angle , and I get the 'holding true to the original text' angle. 

So I must admit its largely opinion to say that one shouldn't use the same word repeatedly in the translation...

however,,

since there is ample evidence that such 'creativity' does not render a clearly understandable meaning ,

to which a majority would agree that the text claims,

it is at least arguable, IMO, that this is not good translation ,

it is simply an act of creative writing.. fine as far as that goes.. and not fine when one is looking to inform. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[OldDog]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

Lets take the weather.

 

OK, weather. Even modern days sages (weathermen) do a poor job of forecasting when so constrained ... a month or a year in advance. Still, it is possible to know when the tides will rise ... that it will be warmer some months and colder others ... I would even go so far as to say that a well attuned sage can sense when the energies of heaven and earth change and movement turns toward spring or autumn.

 

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

Same with political developments ...

 

And as for politics ... it is possible for the politically astute to understand when a political change is in the wind ... call it a backlash ... maybe even the much recently discussed shift in the mandate of heaven. But you are right ... sometimes just ain't no accountin for things. 

 

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

... to see much, but not all ...

 

Once again a qualification. No one ... even Laozi ... was saying the such knowledge was always complete and exhaustive ... just possible. And no doubt a sage's knowledge would be improved by first hand observation. Don't think the intended message was to ignore first hand knowledge. Just that a sages intuitive grasp of circumstances and process often appears to grant knowledge thst escapes others. 

 

 

[Stosh]

Like what?

[dawei]

22 hours ago, rene said:

 

LiEhr calls it -  無 智  wu wisdom, ie., knowledge of the mystery.

 

I was never one for using the term mystery.. in my parlance it points to the primordial.  For the person, it means an inner wisdom, beyond just instinct but that part of us that responds to the beacon of light that shines from creation

 

[rene]

1 hour ago, dawei said:

 

I was never one for using the term mystery.. in my parlance it points to the primordial.  For the person, it means an inner wisdom, beyond just instinct but that part of us that responds to the beacon of light that shines from creation

 

We're on the same page. I chose the term 'mystery' for Marblehead - who often refers to wu and you in Ch1 as the mystery and manifest.

[Marblehead]

I like "Mystery".  It sounds so mysterious.

 

[dawei]

9 hours ago, rene said:

We're on the same page. I chose the term 'mystery' for Marblehead - who often refers to wu and you in Ch1 as the mystery and manifest.

 

I hear you...  I had a few choice words but decided to let Marblehead have the last word on it.  

 

I think there is a place to express something in an understandable way, although we may hold a deeper meaning.... but deeper doesn't really mean anything in the end either...

[OldDog]

On 8/14/2018 at 1:35 PM, Stosh said:

... however,,

since there is ample evidence that such 'creativity' does not render a clearly understandable meaning ,

to which a majority would agree that the text claims,

it is at least arguable, IMO, that this is not good translation ,

it is simply an act of creative writing.. fine as far as that goes.. and not fine when one is looking to inform. 

 

 

 

You make reference to ample evidence ... which is not yet on the table for discussion ... antecedent missing ... so it's hard to say just what you are referring to. 

 

I am always suspicious of things that are clearly understandable. If one accepts an assertion ... has one really learned anything, internalized it? I would argue that it is precisely lack of clarity that causes us to turn an idea over in our minds ... explore it's possibilities ... develop a sense of its limits.

 

In fact, I think an argument can be made that there can be no such thing as clairty. What we express as words is no more than that ... words. Words have different meanings to different people ... especially where there are cross cultural influences ... and it is unlikely that the words will be received the same way among a diverse group of people. So, how do we get to a point where ... as you say ... a majority would agree?

 

One way would be through discussion ... if forums like this one ... where ideas, interpretations are shared in a collegial manner... and we can all coalesce around a common understanding. 

 

So, I'm fine with creative writing ... varying interpretations  ... gives me room to come to a workable understanding of my own.