Lairg Posted Sunday at 08:22 PM 13 hours ago, Lairg said: My own view is that Existence is generated, always penetrated and finally terminated by the Unmanifest. I once had a dream that demonstrated relationships and intelligences present in that process. On waking I re-entered the dream space and did experiments to test the reality of what I was shown 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted Sunday at 08:58 PM 35 minutes ago, Lairg said: I once had a dream that demonstrated relationships and intelligences present in that process. On waking I re-entered the dream space and did experiments to test the reality of what I was shown What are you trying to say here pertaining to the OP? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted Sunday at 10:36 PM (edited) 3 hours ago, ChiDragon said: … the traditional system of tetrasyllables and quatrains … The traditional system of tetrasyllables and quatrains, predates the fourth- to third-century BC additions creating longer lines. (The Book of Chuang Tzu, trans. Martin Palmer) Edited Sunday at 10:49 PM by Cobie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted Sunday at 11:07 PM 29 minutes ago, Cobie said: The traditional system of tetrasyllables and quatrains, predates the fourth- to third-century BC additions creating longer lines. (The Book of Chuang Tzu, trans. Martin Palmer) It was after Laotze's time. It is immaterial here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted Sunday at 11:17 PM (edited) 14 hours ago, Cobie said: The traditional system of tetrasyllables and quatrains, predates the fourth- to third-century BC additions … “predates”. The quatrains go way back, long before even the time of Laozi. (The Book of Chuang Tzu, trans. Martin Palmer) Edited yesterday at 01:09 PM by Cobie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted Sunday at 11:26 PM (edited) On 12/28/2025 at 3:17 PM, Cobie said: The quatrains go way back, long before the time of Laozi. Give me proofs. Otherwise, shall we go back to the discussion of there OP if you have more to say. Please try not to delete any more of you posts. It will lose the connection of thoughts. Don't just bring something out of nowhere and irrelevant for your rebuttal. It is a waste of time for me to explain this over and over. There were a lot of things we had discussed in the good OD already. Peace! Edited 1 hour ago by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lairg Posted Sunday at 11:51 PM 2 hours ago, ChiDragon said: What are you trying to say here pertaining to the OP? In my experience The Source of All (the Dao) has a manifesting impulse and a non-manifesting impulse - hence the dream I had demonstrating both. Many humans (and other soul-bearing species) can access both "soul-bearing" is used in a non-technical sense 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted yesterday at 12:40 AM On 12/25/2025 at 12:15 PM, Cobie said: The DDJ did not have any punctuation. Inserting a comma and a full stop is misleading. FYI Please keep in mind, reading classic, punctuation was done mentally. It doesn't mean it doesn't have it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted yesterday at 05:12 AM (edited) @Cobie can you help me to find my time table for the history of the TTC here? Thanks! Edited yesterday at 05:13 AM by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted yesterday at 01:05 PM (edited) 12 hours ago, ChiDragon said: ... punctuation was done mentally. ... Be as "mental" as you like, but no one is allowed to make changes to the orignal set of characters. Edited yesterday at 01:05 PM by Cobie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted yesterday at 01:07 PM (edited) CD's time table for the history of the TTC On 31-1-2013 at 5:54 PM, ChiDragon said: LaoTze was born around 571 BCE and wrote the DDJ in his seventy's. 孔子(Confucius): 551 - 479 BCE. Tao Te Ching Time table 老子 LaoTze Born: Around 571 BCE. 道德經 Wrote DDJ: 500 - 491 BCE. 郭店 Guodian 476 – 278 BCE; Unearthed:1993; Published: May 1998 馬王堆-甲本(MWD-A) 206 – 195 BCE; 篆書(Seal style); Unearthed:1973 馬王堆-乙本[MWD-B] 194 – 180 BCE; 隸書(Official Style); Unearthed:1973 河上公(Heshang Gong) 179 – 157 BCE 王弼(Wang Bi) 226 – 249 CE 傅奕(Fu Yi) 555 – 639 CE 漢朝 - 皇帝 Emperors of Han Dynasty 高祖 - 劉邦 Liu2 bang1 206 – 195 BCE 文帝 - 劉盈 Liu2 ying2 194 – 188 BCE 惠帝 – 劉恆 Liu2 heng2 180 – 157 BCE Note: These two characters 恆 and 恒 are the synonyms. Edited yesterday at 01:08 PM by Cobie 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted yesterday at 02:46 PM 1 hour ago, Cobie said: Be as "mental" as you like, but no one is allowed to make changes to the orignal set of characters. Are we talking about punctuation or characters. BTW Do you known how many characters were changed on different codexes of the TTC? And you said no one? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted yesterday at 10:03 PM (edited) On 28/12/2025 at 8:34 PM, ChiDragon said: … When we do a translation, the first thing we do is do an interpretation, then do the translation. … Yes, definitely, one cannot read Classical without having an interpretation in mind. Edited yesterday at 10:06 PM by Cobie 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted 9 hours ago (edited) 19 hours ago, Cobie said: ... one cannot read Classical without having an interpretation in mind. An interpretation is like a working hypothesis, it has to be abandoned when it does not fit all the characters. Edited 5 hours ago by Cobie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted 9 hours ago (edited) I'm curious why so many translators use "spoken" to translate the first line of Chapter 1. Is this implied in the syntax or by one of the characters? Edited 9 hours ago by steve Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted 9 hours ago (edited) 4 hours ago, steve said: I'm curious why so many translators use "spoken" to translate the first line of Chapter 1. Is this implied in the syntax or by one of the characters? The characters here are: On 25-12-2025 at 1:30 AM, ChiDragon said: 1. 道可道1. Tao that can be spoken Twice the translator had to chose a meaning for 道 . The listing for 道 in Kroll: ~~~<>~~~ dao4 ~~~<>~~~ 1. way that leads somewhere, road, route, pathway, passage. 2. the Way; as image suggesting how things actually exist, fundamental reality, a constant Way in which the diverse ways of living and relating are essentially balanced and whole. a. conceptual term used by all schools of thought, with same root metaphor but varying connotations: Confucian ‘Way’ incl. norms of social responsibility and personal conduct exemplified by ideal worthies such as King Wen of the Zhou, the Duke of Zhou, etc.; Dao. ‘Way’ points to absolute and ineffable reality behind flux and modalities of the world, and advisability of taking it as model; Budd. ‘Way’ incl. possibility of release from the round-of-birth-and-death (samsara) and recognition of contingent and impermanent nature of human existence. b. 道士 dao4 shi4 gentleman of the Way, exemplar of the Confucian ‘Way’; also, expert in the ‘Way’, specialist in occult or mantic practices, syn. 方士 fang4 shi4; also (med.), Daoist adept, usu. associated with an organised Dao. community (see 5a below), priest. N.B. Contrast these with (med) 道人 dao4 ren2, man of religion, a Budd. monk (not Dao.). 3. way of doing something, course of action, method, proper procedure, practice; e.g. 所以 求 之 之 道 suo3 yi3 qiu2 zhi1 zhi0 dao4, the means by which one seeks it; 道場 dao4 chang2, place of practice, arena of the Way, altar, Budd. or Dao. chapel. a. guiding road, rule of conduct, principle, guidelines. b. doctrine, tenets, dicta; teachings. c. (Budd.) the Buddha-path, path to enlightenment. 4. skill or art of a particular kind, specialisation. 5. ideas and teachings esp. associated with the texts Zhuangzi and Laozi (or Daodejing); e.g. 道家 dao4 jia1, lineage of the Way, bibliographic category ref. to these and related texts, often defined as ‘philosophical Daoism’ in contrast to next. a. practices esp. associated with movements and texts relating to masters of self-cultivation, pursuit of immortality, and various organised religious communities, esp. those ultimately deriving from the Way of the Celestial Masters (tiashidao 天 師 道 [tian1 shi1 dao4]) founded in mid-2nd-c. CE; e.g. (med.) 道教 dao4 jiao4, teaching of the Way, from early 5th-c. CE a term assoc. with groups and texts just described, often defined now as ‘religious Daoism’. 6. say, speak; express, communicate orally; cue. 7. circuit, administrative area outside the usu. prefecture/district (junxian 郡縣 [jun4 xian4 prefecture county]) structure; in Han times ref. frontier areas mainly populated by non-Chinese; in Tang times also ref. frontier area but from 706 on more importantly to large units of province size throughput the state, each of which (10 at first) incl. many prefectures and governed by special commissioners (shi 使 [shi3 sent]). 8. (med.) understand, be aware of; think, presume. a. (med.) expect; have a sense that X is likely to happen. ~~~<>~~~ dao3 ~~~<>~~~ 1. (interchangeable) 導 dao3 1. lead, lead the way, show the way; conduct, guide. ~~~ Even after filtering out (e.g. ‘med.’, ‘Budd.’), I will still be left with a plethora of choices. Edited 5 hours ago by Cobie 1 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted 8 hours ago (edited) @steve because of the ploysemic nature of classical: 19 hours ago, Cobie said: one cannot read Classical without having an interpretation in mind. 4 hours ago, Cobie said: An interpretation is like a working hypothesis, it has to be abandoned when it does not fit all the characters. Edited 5 hours ago by Cobie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bradley Posted 7 hours ago On 12/27/2025 at 12:08 AM, ChiDragon said: A moral that can be moraled is not an eternal moral. the verbal version of moral would be moralize, and the participle, moralized. Thus, "a moral that can be moralized is not an eternal moral." Not presenting an opinion, just pointing this out. This is a super interesting conversation, though. Appreciate it. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted 5 hours ago (edited) 1 hour ago, bradley said: the verbal version of moral would be moralize, and the participle, moralized. Thus, "a moral that can be moralized is not an eternal moral." Not presenting an opinion, just pointing this out. This is a super interesting conversation, though. Appreciate it. Thank you for correcting the grammar.Appreciate it. Edited 5 hours ago by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted 4 hours ago 4 hours ago, steve said: I'm curious why so many translators use "spoken" to translate the first line of Chapter 1. Is this implied in the syntax or by one of the characters? It is by one of the characters. 道可道非常道。 Both the first and the last 道 are a noun. 可道 is a verb. It is the character 可 that made 道 become a verb. It can be translated as follow: 1. May talk about it 2. Can be speaking of 3. Can be spoken of 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted 1 hour ago 8 hours ago, Cobie said: 01An interpretation is like a working hypothesis, it has to be abandoned when it does not fit all the characters. It has to fit the meaning of the whole message, other than the characters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted 1 hour ago On 12/28/2025 at 3:31 PM, ChiDragon said: I believe this applies to any language. Can you come up with some better words for chaos? ' That which contains the foundation of order, yet unseen . ' or .... ( since you are allowing 'grok' , then I am allowing ) ' warp storm ' . 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted 1 hour ago On 12/29/2025 at 6:47 AM, ChiDragon said: Haha, are you blind? You cannot see a glass with your eyes? Hmmmm ... 'glass' is one thing . 'A glass' is another thing . Listen here you lot ! Dont do to English what you are doing to TTC ! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted 1 hour ago 1 minute ago, Nungali said: Hmmmm ... 'glass' is one thing . 'A glass' is another thing . Listen here you lot ! Dont do to English what you are doing to TTC ! Isn't a glass made with glass? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted 55 minutes ago On 12/29/2025 at 7:58 AM, ChiDragon said: What are you trying to say here pertaining to the OP? The usual . And its often not related to any OP or previous posts . Just some ' self observations' and flag waving about cosmic stuff and how he feels he has it sorted 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites