The Dao De Jhing is a shamanistic treatise

[Rainy_Day]

I now believe that Heshanggong's identification of "tian" and "xuan" is deeply significant. This confirms that Dao is the origin, and both being with desire and without desire are part of the same process which flows from the origin. However, one is closer to the origin than the other. (cf. 同出而异名, plus the fact that the origin can be found deep within the human heart.)

 

While flowing out from Dao, vapour can be transmuted into desire, but if one follows desire, which is at the lower end of the tributary, then one will lose oneself and perish. If one remains without desire, e.g. not following the flow, then one can go upstream and approach the origin within the origin.

[ChiDragon]

Rainy_Day...

Have you ever thought of 無 and 有 are the two different apparent states of Tao as defined in Chapter 1 of the DDJ...???

 

「無」與「有」都是道, 只不過是同出而异名.

 

Chapter 1

1. 道可道，非常道。

2. 名可名，非常名。

3. 無,名天地之始。

4. 有,名萬物之母。

5. 故常無,欲以觀其妙。

6. 常有,欲以觀其徼。

7. 此兩者同出而異名，

8. 同謂之玄。玄之又玄，

9. 眾妙之門。

 

1. Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.

2. A name that can be named is not an eternal name.

 

3. Invisible was the name given to Tao at the origin of heaven and earth.

4. Visible was the name given to Tao as the mother of all things.

 

5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok its quale.

6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe its boundary.

 

7. These two come from one origin but differ in name,

8. Both are regarded as fathomless; the most mysterious of the mysterious;

9. The gate of all changes.

Edited January 30, 2012 by ChiDragon

[Rainy_Day]

Rainy_Day...

Have you ever thought of 無 and 有 are the two different apparent states of Tao as defined in Chapter 1 of the DDJ...???

 

「無」與「有」都是道, 只不過是同出而异名.

 

Chapter 1

1. 道可道，非常道。

2. 名可名，非常名。

3. 無,名天地之始。

4. 有,名萬物之母。

5. 故常無,欲以觀其妙。

6. 常有,欲以觀其徼。

7. 此兩者同出而異名，

8. 同謂之玄。玄之又玄，

9. 眾妙之門。

 

1. Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.

2. A name that can be named is not an eternal name.

 

3. Invisible was the name given to Tao at the origin of heaven and earth.

4. Visible was the name given to Tao as the mother of all things.

 

5. Hence, when Tao is always invisible, one would grok its quale.

6. When Tao is always visible, one would observe its boundary.

 

7. These two come from one origin but differ in name,

8. Both are regarded as fathomless; the most mysterious of the mysterious;

9. The gate of all changes.

 

I believe we run into the problem of 断句 here, because 河上公 punctuates the verse one way (e.g. 无名，天地之始；有名，万物之母), whereas 王弼 punctuates the verse another way (e.g. 无，名天地之始；有，名万物之母).

 

You have to consider lineage, too. Here I speak from my background in Confucianism: Pre-Qin texts were not punctuated. They also contain difficult words (e.g. where the meaning is unclear). This is why in the early Han Dynasty, lineage is deeply important for Confucianism - The teacher imparts not only the text, but also the correct way to read and understand it. (In effect, an oral teaching component.)

 

There is a rule: 注不驳经，疏不破注 - The commentary should not argue with the Classic, and the explanation of the commentary should not break the commentary.

 

It seems to me that Wang Bi basically made stuff up. He came to the text for the first time, disregarded all previous commentaries, and then gave his own interpretation. I'm not sure where Heshanggong got his stuff from, but at least he is from early Han and so is closer to the original tradition.

Edited January 30, 2012 by Rainy_Day

[ChiDragon]

I believe we run into the problem of 断句 here, because 河上公 punctuates the verse one way (e.g. 无名，天地之始；有名，万物之母), whereas 王弼 punctuates the verse another way (e.g. 无，名天地之始；有，名万物之母).

Exactly, suppose we interpret it both ways, then we have two interpretations. My question is which one do you think is more close to the idea of 同出而异名....???

[Rainy_Day]

Exactly, suppose we interpret it both ways, then we have two interpretations. My question is which one do you think is more close to the idea of 同出而异名....???

 

Well, I'm nowhere near fully comprehending Daodejing - This was why I was reluctant at first to give a translation.

 

I'll offer an addition argument in favour of Heshanggong: Daodejing is a collection of rhymes and verses. This is because it is the written version of a previously oral tradition.

 

Heshanggong's punctuation sounds natural to me. For instance, in 无名，天地之始, the two parts are two syllables and four syllables, which flows in Chinese. In the Wang Bi translation, the two parts are one syllable and five syllables, which sounds awkward in Chinese.

 

I must add that everything I've said up to now are tentative arguments - e.g. the Devil's advocate. I'm not sufficiently familiar with Classical Daoism to decide one way or another, although I'm personally sympathetic toward the idea that Classical Daoism and later religious Daoism form an unbroken tradition, and that Heshanggong's commentary form a key link between the two.

Edited January 30, 2012 by Rainy_Day

[ChiDragon]

Heshanggong's punctuation sounds natural to me. For instance, in 无名，天地之始, the two parts are two syllables and four syllables, which flows in Chinese. In the Wang Bi translation, the two parts are one syllable and five syllables, which sounds awkward in Chinese.

 

Anyway, I am more concern with the actual meaning rather than the poetic rhymes. Besides, the Tao Te Ching was not written in a poetic way at the time.

[Rainy_Day]

Anyway, I am more concern with the actual meaning rather than the poetic rhymes. Besides, the Tao Te Ching was not written in a poetic way at the time.

 

Yes, but there are rhymes everywhere in Daodejing, which means that poetic conventions are a good heuristic for figuring the original intent.

[Rainy_Day]

I just thought of something. I believe Heshanggong's central claim to be reasonable, because it draws upon a common theme in the Confucian Classics:

 

(1) A person must first rule himself before he can rule others.

(2) The central symbolism of Confucianism is the Sage, who is seen to be the center of society and the universe. (This symbolism can be found everywhere in 礼记.)

 

Therefore, the process of cultivation is no different from ruling a country. The only difference is the scale. This metaphor can also be seen everywhere in Chinese medicine.

 

If we look at chapter 3 of Daodejing:

 

不尚賢，使民不爭；不貴難得之貨，使民不為盜；不見可欲，使心不亂。是以聖人之治，虛其心，實其腹，弱其志，強其骨。常使民無知無欲。使夫知者不敢為也。為無為，則無不治。

 

At first, we may think that this refers solely to politics. This would result in a shallow understanding of the text. In fact, the text refers to both politics and self-cultivation, because the principles of both are the same.

 

Note: In fact, I have heard my martial arts teacher quote 虚其心，实其腹 with reference to 站桩.

 

Heshanggong's commentary accords with this:

 

是以圣人之治，

 

说圣人治国与治身同也。

 

虚其心，

 

除嗜欲，去乱烦。

 

实其腹，

 

怀道抱一守，五神也。

 

弱其志，

 

和柔谦让，不处权也。

 

强其骨。

 

爱精重施，髓满骨坚。

 

If Heshanggong is correct, whenever Daodejing refers to politics, that can be taken as a reference to cultivation. Where Heshanggong refers to politics, that can also be taken as a reference to cultivation.

[Marblehead]

I now believe that Heshanggong's identification of "tian" and "xuan" is deeply significant. This confirms that Dao is the origin, and both being with desire and without desire are part of the same process which flows from the origin. However, one is closer to the origin than the other. (cf. 同出而异名, plus the fact that the origin can be found deep within the human heart.)

 

While flowing out from Dao, vapour can be transmuted into desire, but if one follows desire, which is at the lower end of the tributary, then one will lose oneself and perish. If one remains without desire, e.g. not following the flow, then one can go upstream and approach the origin within the origin.

 

I just want to say that I like this post and it very closely reflects my understandings.

[ChiDragon]

Yes, but there are rhymes everywhere in Daodejing, which means that poetic conventions are a good heuristic for figuring the original intent.

Yes, but there are lots of places without rhymes too. We have to consider both ways before come to such a conclusion.

 

最佳答案

 

无名天地之始；有名万物之母。

也这么分：无，名天地之始；有，名万物之母。

 

其实大意差不多，说道生一，一生二，二生三，三生万物。

在道的初期，什么也没有，即无名天地之始。生一之后就是万物，然后就是有了。

跟色即是空，空即是色的意义差不多。就是有无的问题。

 

Do you accept this interpretation...???

Edited January 30, 2012 by ChiDragon

[ChiDragon]

I now believe that Heshanggong's identification of "tian" and "xuan" is deeply significant. This confirms that Dao is the origin, and both being with desire and without desire are part of the same process which flows from the origin. However, one is closer to the origin than the other. (cf. 同出而异名, plus the fact that the origin can be found deep within the human heart.)

 

While flowing out from Dao, vapour can be transmuted into desire, but if one follows desire, which is at the lower end of the tributary, then one will lose oneself and perish. If one remains without desire, e.g. not following the flow, then one can go upstream and approach the origin within the origin.

Again, "tian" and "xuan", 天 and 玄, are never defined as the same in the modern and ancient. Only Heshanggong(河上公) defined as such. Sorry to ask, do we have to hammer it to fit because someone had said so once in the past...??? IMMHO "同出而异名" was really taken out of context.

[steve]

Anyway, I am more concern with the actual meaning rather than the poetic rhymes. Besides, the Tao Te Ching was not written in a poetic way at the time.

To separate the two is to close your mind to possibility.

Can you support your second statement with some evidence?

It is likely that Dao De Jing, or at least elements of it, was an oral transmission before it was written down.

As such, poetic structure would have been an important part of the memorization and transmission. In fact, some of the wording may well have been intentionally poetic and taking that into consideration can help improve understanding.

Similarly, there is no advantage to look at the DDJ as a shamanistic work or as a philosophical work. There is an advantage to looking at it as both. In that way we are open to more understanding, not limiting our understanding based on bias and interpretation.

[ChiDragon]

Can you support your second statement with some evidence?

 

Yes, during Lao Tze's period, poems were not popular at the time. There were not enough characters to write poem at the time anyway. Besides, most of the poems were written with a fixed number of characters. Some are five and some are seven characters in the later days such as the Tang(唐) and Song(宋) dynasty. Anyway, using the rhymes in a document to determine the meaning of its content instead of the punctuations is not a very good argument to substantiate a rebuttal.

 

BTW This is any subject, I do not wish to going into it here. However, I am glad to discuss the actual meaning of the phrases within context. Anything outside of that is not my main interest.

Edited January 30, 2012 by ChiDragon

[steve]

That argument is not valid since most modern scholarship suggests that there was no single author to the document. Some of it is probably older and was passed along by oral tradition, in which case rhyme was likely to have been used. Other material was probably added later.

 

You are welcome to ignore what you choose but others may find additional insight using a more comprehensive, open, and holistic approach. I would encourage people to look beyond just the meaning of the words. After all, that's a fundamental message of DDJ. It is a finger... not the moon.

 

Yes, during Lao Tze's period, poems were not popular at the time. There were not enough characters to write poem at the time anyway. Besides, most of the poems were written with a fixed number of characters. Some are five and some are seven characters in the later days such as the Tang(唐) and Song(宋) dynasty. Anyway, using the rhymes in a document to determine the meaning of its content instead of the punctuations is not a very good argument to substantiate a rebuttal.

 

BTW This is any subject, I do not wish to going into it here. However, I am glad to discuss the actual meaning of the phrases within context. Anything outside of that is not my main interest.

[flowing hands]

There is definitely no poetry in the DDJ. It was written by one man over a period of time. It reflects his thoughts as he established a way to write down what he felt was important. Remember Li Erh Xian Shi came to me many times to write his thoughts down, he then gave explanations to each chapter. The problem here I perceive is that, we have such a vast amount of differing translations, commentaries, each person giving their opinion and view. This is the one reason why Li Erh gave me his words over twenty four years ago. Sure we can all give our own rendition of Tao, I'm sure I could write a book myself, but that's not what Li Erh wrote and in context. I repeat again it was written at a time when shamanism was deeply held in the culture that Li Erh lived in. It is the root or foundation that Li Erh wrote his words to, there is no denying this. There did not exist any other more well established belief system at that time other than shamanism. This deeply held belief and practice maintained itself for may hundreds of years after Li Erh. It was not till the forming of religious Tao that the elements of shamanism were taken into the Tao religion.

 

We will go back to stanza 1

 

Without giving away too many secrets, here is a very strong reference to self cultivation, to exercises and practices known to shamans to cultivate their power.

 

Stanza 52

The Ten Thousand Things are born of the Universe,

the Universe is born from the Dao.

From whence the Dao came from, I do not know, but I know it exists.

It is the Mother of Heaven and Earth.

In silence and in the void the Dao formed Heaven and Earth.

The Ten Thousand Things are formed by it.

In silence and peace, one can feel and sense the mystery.

Be forever at one, do only what has to be done and then remain at one.

 

Here is another stanza of thought very near the same meaning as stanza 1

If one wants to become enlightened one really only needs these two chapters, only of course if one really understands deeply what they mean in reality. There is the mystery. I take you back to shamanism! But you can show me philosophy, or poetry if you like!

[ChiDragon]

Fine, Steve.

I have no objection of what you and others want to do. What I'm doing is converging into the DDJ, and the others are diverging. I have no problem with that. The reason I was talking to Rainy_Day because he is a newcomer and I would like to pick his brain and see what is in his mind.

[Taomeow]

I'll tell you what could reconcile the one author/multiple authors and one lifetime/much longer period of creation (hundreds of years or more) controversy. If it was indeed a shamanic text, not that such a thing exists (what IS a shamanic text is not a text -- Hetu and Luoshu are shamanic documents, the trigrams are, the hexagrams minus the commentaries, the bone oracles, even the archaic "radicals" in their original form of inscription, etc. -- shamanism will use symbols to encapsulate some important notions but is the antithesis to writing things down that are merely words, because memory is its main tool and committing things to live human memory, its most vital method. That's because the remembering soul -- and even the DNA -- is sturdier than papyrus, paper, or computer drives. MUCH more reliable.) -- where was I? -- oh, "if it was a shamanic text." As I was saying, the only way TTC could be a shamanic text would be if it somehow followed the shamanic tradition of transmitting the whole spirit of the shaman to his or her chosen disciple upon death. This was the standard practice of, e.g., many varieties of Siberian and Mongolian shamanism. The new shaman, upon receiving the whole of the old one's teachings in the form of the totality of his/her "professional" spirit, became that shaman, one and the same, different body, same body of teachings and practices. So it is possible that "Laozi" stands for that spirit transmitted from one author to the next -- different authors, different humans, same divine "Laozi" inhabiting their minds and guiding their hands to write a continuous narrative of The Way and Its Power. How's that?

[flowing hands]

I'll tell you what could reconcile the one author/multiple authors and one lifetime/much longer period of creation (hundreds of years or more) controversy. If it was indeed a shamanic text, not that such a thing exists (what IS a shamanic text is not a text -- Hetu and Luoshu are shamanic documents, the trigrams are, the hexagrams minus the commentaries, the bone oracles, even the archaic "radicals" in their original form of inscription, etc. -- shamanism will use symbols to encapsulate some important notions but is the antithesis to writing things down that are merely words, because memory is its main tool and committing things to live human memory, its most vital method. That's because the remembering soul -- and even the DNA -- is sturdier than papyrus, paper, or computer drives. MUCH more reliable.) -- where was I? -- oh, "if it was a shamanic text." As I was saying, the only way TTC could be a shamanic text would be if it somehow followed the shamanic tradition of transmitting the whole spirit of the shaman to his or her chosen disciple upon death. This was the standard practice of, e.g., many varieties of Siberian and Mongolian shamanism. The new shaman, upon receiving the whole of the old one's teachings in the form of the totality of his/her "professional" spirit, became that shaman, one and the same, different body, same body of teachings and practices. So it is possible that "Laozi" stands for that spirit transmitted from one author to the next -- different authors, different humans, same divine "Laozi" inhabiting their minds and guiding their hands to write a continuous narrative of The Way and Its Power. How's that?

 

I am a traditional shaman. To transmit the practices to someone else, they would usually follow the same Immortal and I would leave them in the hands of the Immortal once they had been accepted. But equally I can write down the teachings and observations from my long years of being a shaman and then people can read them. Many a book has been written by other shamans and there are varying ways and traditions that are used to transmit knowledge to an apprentice shaman. I can write them down just as I am talking to you and giving you information and knowledge, there is no difference in the end.I do not call Lao Tzu (Old Teacher) this name, because he has a proper name; Li Erh (long Lobed). The same as he is often called 'Tai Sung Lo Gin', which again is not his name. Li Erh is his name and he was a real person, some people believe that they are descendants of Li Erh, which is quite possible.

[steve]

I'll tell you what could reconcile the one author/multiple authors and one lifetime/much longer period of creation (hundreds of years or more) controversy. ......

 

So it is possible that "Laozi" stands for that spirit transmitted from one author to the next -- different authors, different humans, same divine "Laozi" inhabiting their minds and guiding their hands to write a continuous narrative of The Way and Its Power. How's that?

Well said TM. I often feel that this is how the world works including and not limited to the genesis of Dao De Jing. This explanation is truly the shamanic approach.

[steve]

There is definitely no poetry in the DDJ. It was written by one man over a period of time. It reflects his thoughts as he established a way to write down what he felt was important.

 

Dao De Jing is the purest of poetry.

Poetry is an attempt to convey through words that which cannot be reduced to words.

This was not written by one man over a period of time, it was written by all men and it is timeless.

[steve]

Fine, Steve.

I have no objection of what you and others want to do. What I'm doing is converging into the DDJ, and the others are diverging. I have no problem with that. The reason I was talking to Rainy_Day because he is a newcomer and I would like to pick his brain and see what is in his mind.

I've been very impressed with Rainy_Day's contributions to our community and I'm very confident that there are great things to come. He does not sound like a newcomer to me but a wise, old soul.

[Rainy_Day]

Yes, but there are lots of places without rhymes too. We have to consider both ways before come to such a conclusion.

 

最佳答案

 

无名天地之始；有名万物之母。

也这么分：无，名天地之始；有，名万物之母。

 

其实大意差不多，说道生一，一生二，二生三，三生万物。

在道的初期，什么也没有，即无名天地之始。生一之后就是万物，然后就是有了。

跟色即是空，空即是色的意义差不多。就是有无的问题。

 

Do you accept this interpretation...???

 

"道生一" implies that Dao is the source of everything.

 

If Wang Bi's division is correct, that means Wu and You are the source of everything, making them the same as Dao. But then Laozi just said that "The Name which can be spoken is not the true Name".

 

Whereas with Heshanggong's division, Named and Nameless tie directly into the verse before them. Clearly, Nameless refers to the true Way and the true Name in the first couplet.

[Taomeow]

Thank you, Steve. Don't great minds think alike?

 

And I agree about Rainy_Day -- hey RD, delighted to have you here, you may be a newcomer to TTB but definitely not to cognitive cultivation (and perhaps other kinds too? ) -- do stick around!

[Taomeow]

I am a traditional shaman. To transmit the practices to someone else, they would usually follow the same Immortal and I would leave them in the hands of the Immortal once they had been accepted. But equally I can write down the teachings and observations from my long years of being a shaman and then people can read them. Many a book has been written by other shamans and there are varying ways and traditions that are used to transmit knowledge to an apprentice shaman. I can write them down just as I am talking to you and giving you information and knowledge, there is no difference in the end.I do not call Lao Tzu (Old Teacher) this name, because he has a proper name; Li Erh (long Lobed). The same as he is often called 'Tai Sung Lo Gin', which again is not his name. Li Erh is his name and he was a real person, some people believe that they are descendants of Li Erh, which is quite possible.

 

That's a theory I'm familiar with. To my knowledge, no one has any definitive proof, but it does not seem impossible, sure thing.

 

What do you mean by "traditional shaman" -- in what tradition? I have studied shamanism, been exposed to several traditions and initiated into one, they are pretty different... Yes, a shaman can write a book, 'tis true... I read every book by every shaman who cared to write one I could lay my hands on, but it's like an auto mechanic writing a book about the car transmission -- the book does not transmit the spark... or like a candle maker writing a book about all kinds of flames candles can produce but not giving you the matches... catch my drift?

[Protector]

DDJ understands me and that's what important