dawei

Neiye - Section 2 - Multi-authors

Recommended Posts

Note:

氣 - Qi

天 - Heaven / Sky

德 - De

安  - calm, peace
意 - intent

智 - wisdom

 

Section 2

 

Linnell:

是 故 民 氣 Thus the Qi of the citizens :
杲 乎 Is it bright?
如 登 於 天 As though ascending to heaven.
杳 乎 Is it dark and quiet?
如 入 於 淵 As though entering into an abyss.
綽 乎 Is it wide and spacious?
如 在 於 海 As though residing in the ocean.
卒 乎 Is it closeA?
如 在 於 己 As though residing in oneself.
是 故 此 氣 也 Thus this Qi –
不 可 止 以 力 Can not be brought to rest by using force,
而 可 安 以 德 But can be calmed by using De.
不 可 呼 以 聲 Can not be summoned by using your voice,
而 可 迎 以 意 But can be made welcome by using your intent.
敬 守 勿 失 When you can respectfully* maintain it, and never lose it,
是 謂 成 德 This is called developed De.
德 成 而 智 出 When De develops, and wisdom* arises,
萬 物 果 得 The bounty of the ten thousand creatures is attained.

 

Eno:

This qi is
So bright! As though climbing to heaven.
So dark! As though entering the abyss.
So broad! As though permeating the sea.
So compact! As though residing within oneself.

 

This qi
Cannot be detained through physical force,
but may be brought to rest by force of virtue.
It may not be summoned by means of sound,
but may be received through one’s thoughts.
To guard it alertly without fail,
this is called perfect virtue.
When virtue is perfected wisdom emerges
and all the things of the world are grasped.

 

Roth:

1. Therefore this vital energy is:
2. Bright! – as if ascending from the heavens;
3. Dark! – as if entering an abyss;
4. Vast! – as if dwelling in an ocean;
5. Lofty! – as if dwelling on a mountain peak.
6. Therefore this vital energy
7. Cannot be halted by force,
8. Yet can be secured by inner power [Te].
9. Cannot be summoned by speech,
10. Yet can be welcomed by awareness.
11. Reverently hold onto it and do not lose it:
12. This is called "developing inner power."
13. When inner power develops and wisdom emerges,
14. The myriad things will, to the last one, be grasped.

 

Shazi Daoren:

Therefore, regarding 'Energy', it is:
Bright! As if ascending the sky;
Dark! As if entering into the abyss;
Disperse! As if existing in the ocean;
Present! As if existing in the self.
Therefore this Energy:
cannot be stopped by force,
yet can be pacified by Virtue,
cannot be spoken by voice,
yet can be embraced by the mind.
Reverently nurture it and do not let it go:
this is called 'developing Virtue'.
When Virtue develops and wisdom emerges,
the myriad things will all be attained.

 

Yueya:

Thus we may describe this qi —
Bright! — as if ascending to the heavens;
Dark! — as if entering an abyss;
Vast! — as if dwelling in an ocean;
Lofty! — as if residing on a mountain peak.
Therefore this qi—
Cannot be controlled by force,
Yet can be stabilized through inner power (de).
Cannot be summoned by speech,
Yet can be welcomed through awareness.
Reverently guard it and do not lose it:
This is called “developing inner power.”
When inner power develops and wisdom emerges,
The bounty of ten thousand things will be realized.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dawei said:

是 故 民 氣 Thus the Qi of the citizens :

what happened to this line in other transls?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

what happened to this line in other transls?

 

disenfranchised?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

disenfranchised?

it looks as if they could not figure it out and dropped it altogether. people? what people? hehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two main ideas here are qi and te ... or is it Qi  and Te. In the west we capitalize words that have specific and distinct meaning. Certainly, there are analyses where there is distinction made between athe generic use of a term and the specific. Which is it here? Can those who read the original source material give guidance?

 

We have certainly heard of qi as being dispersed, scattered. So, it makes sense that it may be thought of as being collected or gathered. If so "it" or is it by its concentration that which enables awareness of "it"? Is it substance or acting?

 

Te is a very interesting subject. Here it is likened to virtue, which in my mind is just as vague. I envision virtue to be a collection of enabling qualities, one of which is intent. Sincerity also comes to mind.

 

These are the things thst jump out for me in this passage.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

"According to the earliest comprehensive dictionary of Chinese characters (ca. 100 CE), Xu Shen’s Shuowen jiezi (Explaining Single-component Graphs and Analyzing Compound Characters), yin refers to “a closed door, darkness and the south bank of a river and the north side of a mountain.” Yang refers to “height, brightness and the south side of a mountain.” 

 

I find this interesting given that the first two verses refer to 'bright' and 'dark.' Further associating Heaven with yang and its opposite 'abyss' with yin is also valid IMO. I cannot help but wonder if these are early precursors to the more refined yin/yang notion of later times.  

 

'而 可 迎 以 意 ...can be made welcome by using your intent' can help clarify the question in the first verse about whether vital essence arrives on its own or if intention is used. We can use the inner power we do have to calm the jing (which is now referred to as qi?) that exists in everyone and everything, and then use intention to establish the conditions in which jing will come to 'rest'. These conditions are referred to later, so I won't refer to them here. 

 

When this qi is maintained/held onto/nurtured/guarded and never lost or let go of (I would assume in the chest as specified in the text of the first verse), this leads to developed inner power/de/perfect virtue. The dictionary defines developed as advanced or elaborated to a specified degree, thus this leads to inner power that has been advanced or elaborated to some extent. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Bindi
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

"According to the earliest comprehensive dictionary of Chinese characters (ca. 100 CE), Xu Shen’s Shuowen jiezi (Explaining Single-component Graphs and Analyzing Compound Characters), yin refers to “a closed door, darkness and the south bank of a river and the north side of a mountain.” Yang refers to “height, brightness and the south side of a mountain.” 

 

I find this interesting given that the first two verses refer to 'bright' and 'dark.' Further associating Heaven with yang and its opposite 'abyss' with yin is also valid IMO. I cannot help but wonder if these are early precursors to the more refined yin/yang notion of later times.  

 

I think that may be a good catch as there are lots of archtypes Yin/Yang associations and this text (I believe) never says Yin/Yang.  In any case, it is a good pointer to duality concepts like LZ2.

 

2 hours ago, Bindi said:

'而 可 迎 以 意 ...can be made welcome by using your intent' can help clarify the question in the first verse about whether vital essence arrives on its own or if intention is used. We can use the inner power we do have to calm the jing (which is now referred to as qi?) that exists in everyone and everything, and then use intention to establish the conditions in which jing will come to 'rest'. These conditions are referred to later, so I won't refer to them here. 

 

When this qi is maintained/held onto/nurtured/guarded and never lost or let go of (I would assume in the chest as specified in the text of the first verse), this leads to developed inner power/de/perfect virtue. The dictionary defines developed as advanced or elaborated to a specified degree, thus this leads to inner power that has been advanced or elaborated to some extent. 

 

Intent was also translated as awareness in the above authors... so various interpretations may emerge.  

 

As TT mentioned, only Linnell seems to translate the first line in complete (which I'm losing interest in his translation), but the rest may not be representing things (even Linnell).  I think 'thus' and 'therefore' are not transformation but just pointers.   

 

They have not mentioned Qi in the chest yet.   But seems a text change to talk about Qi.

 

Yi (intent) has many meanings:  idea / meaning / thought / to think / wish / desire / intention / to expect / to anticipate

 

It seems clearly in thought level.

 

One observation, using Linnell with chinese... is after a 4-2-4-2-4-2-4-2-4 pattern, is a set of 5 character patterns:

 

是 故 此 氣 也 Thus this Qi –
不 可 止 以 力 Can not be brought to rest by using force,
而 可 安 以 德 But can be calmed by using De.
不 可 呼 以 聲 Can not be summoned by using your voice,
而 可 迎 以 意 But can be made welcome by using your intent.

 

the "thus.. Qi" is repeated to continue the thought of how Qi is viewed using more dualistic ideas.

 

Force vs De

Voice vs Yi

 

Should we equate a forceful voice vs a De of Yi ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

I think that may be a good catch as there are lots of archtypes Yin/Yang associations and this text (I believe) never says Yin/Yang.  In any case, it is a good pointer to duality concepts like LZ2.

 

 

Intent was also translated as awareness in the above authors... so various interpretations may emerge.  

 

As TT mentioned, only Linnell seems to translate the first line in complete (which I'm losing interest in his translation), but the rest may not be representing things (even Linnell).  I think 'thus' and 'therefore' are not transformation but just pointers.   

 

They have not mentioned Qi in the chest yet.   But seems a text change to talk about Qi.

 

Yi (intent) has many meanings:  idea / meaning / thought / to think / wish / desire / intention / to expect / to anticipate

 

It seems clearly in thought level.

 

One observation, using Linnell with chinese... is after a 4-2-4-2-4-2-4-2-4 pattern, is a set of 5 character patterns:

 

是 故 此 氣 也 Thus this Qi –
不 可 止 以 力 Can not be brought to rest by using force,
而 可 安 以 德 But can be calmed by using De.
不 可 呼 以 聲 Can not be summoned by using your voice,
而 可 迎 以 意 But can be made welcome by using your intent.

 

the "thus.. Qi" is repeated to continue the thought of how Qi is viewed using more dualistic ideas.

 

Force vs De

Voice vs Yi

 

Should we equate a forceful voice vs a De of Yi ?

 

Not outer force but inner force, not outer voice but inner voice?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bindi said:

 

Not outer force but inner force, not outer voice but inner voice?

 

Ok, I think I follow the idea:

 

[Not outer] Force vs [inner] De

Not outer] Voice vs [inner] Yi

 

In this case, the inner De and inner Yi are not senses and thus not 'human qualities', yes ?  but yet are there.    I think that is something to think about as we go forward through the sections.   As inner vs outer is already a part of the dualistic picture but how do they resolve in the text as separate or joined, we'll see.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

"According to the earliest comprehensive dictionary of Chinese characters (ca. 100 CE), Xu Shen’s Shuowen jiezi (Explaining Single-component Graphs and Analyzing Compound Characters), yin refers to “a closed door, darkness and the south bank of a river and the north side of a mountain.” Yang refers to “height, brightness and the south side of a mountain.” 

 

I find this interesting given that the first two verses refer to 'bright' and 'dark.' Further associating Heaven with yang and its opposite 'abyss' with yin is also valid IMO. I cannot help but wonder if these are early precursors to the more refined yin/yang notion of later times.  

 

'而 可 迎 以 意 ...can be made welcome by using your intent' can help clarify the question in the first verse about whether vital essence arrives on its own or if intention is used. We can use the inner power we do have to calm the jing (which is now referred to as qi?) that exists in everyone and everything, and then use intention to establish the conditions in which jing will come to 'rest'. These conditions are referred to later, so I won't refer to them here. 

 

When this qi is maintained/held onto/nurtured/guarded and never lost or let go of (I would assume in the chest as specified in the text of the first verse), this leads to developed inner power/de/perfect virtue. The dictionary defines developed as advanced or elaborated to a specified degree, thus this leads to inner power that has been advanced or elaborated to some extent. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think Yin/yang is older than this text - the Yijing dated to around 1046 BC.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Apech said:

I think Yin/yang is older than this text - the Yijing dated to around 1046 BC.

 

very true... that got me thinking whether Legalist used the concept that much.  I didn't find it in [legalist] Hanfeizi commentary on laozi (first commentary that exists).  But find it in Heshang Gong's commentary...  

 

But searching Guanzi's full text, there is plenty of references, together and apart.   He just doesn't use it in the texts on 'cultivation'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is important that the Neiye's method of 'reverting back to what is natural' is fundamentally based on opposites, perhaps someone with more general understanding of yin and yang in Chinese history would know whether the opposites referred to in the Neiye are reminiscent of the way they are used in either the Yijing or in Daoism. 

 

The Neiye is being classified as 'proto-Daoist' as far as I can understand it because it doesn't align with Daoist thinking? But does it align with Yijing philosophy? 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bindi said:

I think it is important that the Neiye's method of 'reverting back to what is natural' is fundamentally based on opposites, perhaps someone with more general understanding of yin and yang in Chinese history would know whether the opposites referred to in the Neiye are reminiscent of the way they are used in either the Yijing or in Daoism. 

 

The Neiye is being classified as 'proto-Daoist' as far as I can understand it because it doesn't align with Daoist thinking? But does it align with Yijing philosophy? 

 

 

 

 

I think we might have to go further through the text to answer that one.  I would be surprised though if were not influenced by the Yijing since it is the classic of all classics for Chinese literature.

 

Calling something proto-Daoist because it doesn't align seems a little perverse to me.  I would suggest that the definition of Daoism is, or should be, much broader than whatever fits with a certain school.  Its also fair to mention that many Chinese philosophies use the word dao in their own ways.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

I think we might have to go further through the text to answer that one.  I would be surprised though if were not influenced by the Yijing since it is the classic of all classics for Chinese literature.

 

Calling something proto-Daoist because it doesn't align seems a little perverse to me.  I would suggest that the definition of Daoism is, or should be, much broader than whatever fits with a certain school.  Its also fair to mention that many Chinese philosophies use the word dao in their own ways.

 

I've researched a bit about proto-Daoism just now, and found that the “Neiye” 内業 , Daode jing 道德經 , and Zhuangzi 莊子 are all considered to be proto-Daoism/classical Daoism/early Daoism. What I was interested in earlier was in what ways the Neiye is different to the Daode jing in its philosophy and methods, because I was assuming (and might be wildly wrong in this assumption) that Daoists in general look to the DDJ. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

I've researched a bit about proto-Daoism just now, and found that the “Neiye” 内業 , Daode jing 道德經 , and Zhuangzi 莊子 are all considered to be proto-Daoism/classical Daoism/early Daoism. What I was interested in earlier was in what ways the Neiye is different to the Daode jing in its philosophy and methods, because I was assuming (and might be wildly wrong in this assumption) that Daoists in general look to the DDJ. 

 

I would recommend The Creation of Daoism by Paul Fischer

 

https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/phil_rel_fac_pub/14/

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Apech said:

Calling something proto-Daoist because it doesn't align seems a little perverse to me.  I would suggest that the definition of Daoism is, or should be, much broader than whatever fits with a certain school.  

 

I don't mind the term proto-daoist so much. Its just a device to refer to what came before and lead up to what we previously understood to be the origin and standard for daoism, the DDJ. As long as we keep that in mind then we should be OK. After all, aren't the terms daoism and daoist relatively recent designations themselves?

 

But what do these earlier and contemporary other texts represent? I have to believe that there is some sort of continuity running from antiquity through to today ... from the Yijing through "proto-daoist through Laozi, Chuangzi, Leizi all the way up to current dates. So, what we are talking about as proto-daoist are just a phase along an evolutionary procession.

 

A lesson that was driven home for me came from the Cantong qi. Its main lesson was to show that these collections of things are unified in their being part of a greater continuity.

 

So, I am not too concerned over discussions that seem to want to classify things as belonging to this or that,  being exclusive or inclusive of this tradition or that. The real questions involve what we can learn from these things and does it help us as individuals to construct and practical understandings of our realities.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, OldDog said:

But what do these earlier and contemporary other texts represent? I have to believe that there is some sort of continuity running from antiquity through to today ... from the Yijing through "proto-daoist through Laozi, Chuangzi, Leizi all the way up to current dates. So, what we are talking about as proto-daoist are just a phase along an evolutionary procession.

 

IMO, you should be reading a lot more of legalist thought and alignment with Daoism.. but we did that before.

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/38060-legalism-vs-daoism/

 

Not sure that answers your questions but it should broaden the thought. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

I've researched a bit about proto-Daoism just now, and found that the “Neiye” 内業 , Daode jing 道德經 , and Zhuangzi 莊子 are all considered to be proto-Daoism/classical Daoism/early Daoism. What I was interested in earlier was in what ways the Neiye is different to the Daode jing in its philosophy and methods, because I was assuming (and might be wildly wrong in this assumption) that Daoists in general look to the DDJ. 

 

I'm reading Dawei's link.  I think some would see it like that but I know from on here that others see it differently - and I'm a bit suspicious about the idea of a neat historical progression (but that's just me :) ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dawei said:

 

I would recommend The Creation of Daoism by Paul Fischer

 

https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/phil_rel_fac_pub/14/

 

 

Thanks read that now.

 

Luckily we are more interested in praxis than theory and personally I go with the shamanic roots of what eventually became the school/religion of Daoism.  In which case there is no proto version as such - just various expressions emerging over the years depending on the cultural setting.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Apech said:

 

Thanks read that now.

 

Luckily we are more interested in praxis than theory and personally I go with the shamanic roots of what eventually became the school/religion of Daoism.  In which case there is no proto version as such - just various expressions emerging over the years depending on the cultural setting.

 

 

 

Yes and I agree with that thought... but how to get there may still require broadening one's view of daoism till they change course.. or not.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Once again, here's my comment written before reading most of the above....

 

Following from the previous verse, the qi being referred to here is likewise the shen of later Daoism, as in the conceptual model: Jing Qi Shen (精氣神). At the highest level, to my mind, this shen can be likened to Buddha Mind, or to the Christian notion of Holy Spirit. Hence we have this description of the first five lines from  A C Graham: “This may well be the earliest Chinese interpretation of the experience of mystical oneness.”

 

(Roth bases his version of line five on what he considers from his extensive research to be the wording of the original line. I followed Roth in my version but if I were redoing it I’d go with something like Eno’s: "So compact! As though residing within oneself." Or go free form and add Eno’s as a new line after Roth’s line five.)

 

The second part of the verse brings in the important notions of de and also awareness / intent. In my comment on the first chapter I wrote: “Whereas for the sage of the Neiye the same vital essence burns continually with a steady glow. They have somehow transmuted vital essence into something stable and manageable.” Here we learn this stabilisation requires personal de. Moreover, the vital essence (shen) itself helps develop de. They must be allowed to work together for wisdom to develop. 

 

(For those who aren't familiar with the Chinese notion of de there's extensive discussion on it in the archives of DaoBums and on the web in general.)  
 

 

Edited by Yueya
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/17/2019 at 6:06 AM, Yueya said:

Jing Qi Shen

 

Hi Yueya,

 

精氣神 is ONE as linked to A C Graham's ~ “This may well be the earliest Chinese interpretation of the experience of mystical oneness.”?

 

Are they a trinity ~ one cannot do/be without the other two?

 

th?id=OIP.ztnBBoomgDsmair7wjBTGAAAAA&pid=15.1&P=0&w=292&h=157

 

 

Jing Qi Shen ~ is ONE as in The Dao?

 

th?id=OIP.xqN3Fv0Y7gA38SCFHjbpGwHaFj&pid=15.1&P=0&w=242&h=182

 

 

From your Booklet ~ verse 4...

The Dao is what infuses the body,

Yet the people are unable to fix it in place.

 

image.png.008f1f33cec7c1077ec12519b5d127f7.png

Related image

 

Can mystical oneness be my personal being, philosophy, sense (feel)... of ONE?

 

 

A Blessed Vesak.

 

- Anand

 

 

Edited by Limahong
Enhance ...
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without access to Roth's critical text, it's impossible to critique his translation. For example, Roth considers 民 (citizen) to be copyist error. (See his note 29 below.) I have no problems accepting this emendation because ‘citizen’ does not make sense when following from the preceding verse about the vital essence of the sage, or leading into the second part of this verse. Linnell’s translation using 'citizen' is clumsy. Dan Reid makes a valiant effort with: “As a result (of essence), the energy-breath of common people (becomes).”  He includes this note: 

 

Quote

The word min, 民 “the people,” is usually suppressed in translations of this line as it appears to read “the qi of the common people is: bright!..” By reading 是故 with its literal meaning of “as a result” rather than simply “therefore,” the following lines appear to describe a transformation of the people’s qi. The conclusion of this passage, “When virtue has ripened, wisdom comes forth, and the myriad things attain fruition,” appears to support such a reading. Further statements such as “when the people attain it, they become fruitful” also suggest an interest in a transformation of “the common people.”

 

All in all, I think accepting 'citizen' as an error is far simpler than making these translation contortions. On the other hand, I think the received text version of line 5 is better than what Roth considers to be the original line. (See Roth's note 31 below.) 

 

Scan_20190523 (1).jpg

 

 

Scan_20190523 (2).jpg

Edited by Yueya
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to interpreting these text, I am out of my element because I do not read or speak Chinese. Still, two things occur to me as I read the above.

 

16 hours ago, Yueya said:

Further statements such as “when the people attain it, they become fruitful” also suggest an interest in a transformation of “the common people.”

 

Here, I would understand the "common people" to mean ...  any person from the set of "common people" as a representative of that group. That is, attainment is potentially available to all.

 

Roth's note:

 

 ...  vital essence is secured through developing the "inner power" that comes from the mental concentration attained through breathing meditation.

 

I take "inner power" to mean de, which I have always understood be more than just concentration. That is, encompassing other qualities as well such as intent, sincerity, etc. ... a broader definition rather than focused on mental concentration.

 

This is how these readings make sense to me.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

Edited by OldDog
spelling, grammar and clarification
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites