|
|
Post by sree on Aug 11, 2022 11:04:55 GMT -5
I have pointed out before that it is not possible for the western mind to grasp Chinese philosophy. Since I started this topic, I feel compelled to engage you to set things right. Below is my attempt to intuit the meaning in those Chinese characters of the first two lines in Chapter 60 of the Tao Te Ching. 1. If the Tao were to come upon the world (thereby, instilling harmony),
以 道 莅 天下
2. Then ruling a big country would be (as easy) as frying a small fish.
治 大 國, 若 烹 小 魚.
Random thoughts. There is a member here named Reefs who knows about 10million times more about these topics than I. I'd almost bet he could read those Chinese characters, whereas I can not. He likely also knows what 'like cooking a small fish' is pointing to, whereas my interpretation would be slightly off.However, if you wanted to go down that path, buckle the fuck up, as I would say. We've already seen what an encounter with reefer can do to a person.. next thing you know ten years have passed and that scary fucker is still haunting your dreams! But you're not going to do that, so good for you.  OK, what about me. Well, I don't know man, but I'll certainly talk to you if you want. But it seems we might want to start with 'to what do you identify?' I suppose I identify as a man, but to be honest I don't know what that means. At one time in my life I identified as a 'Southerner', since that is the location I was born in. Similarly I once identified as an 'American' for essentially the same reason. I am 'an American' but that's just a data point, I don't identify as one as if that were something special or important. That specific data point has no meaning unless you ascribe some to it. I have not reviewed my translation in years. I retrieved the file to reply your post because I remembered reading Jane English/Gia Fu Feng's version, the one I liked best. Their book had the Chinese text alongside the English translation. I noticed that the first line in Chinese was omitted in the English translation. I felt the first line was critical: "If the Tao were to come upon the world." Why did Jane English omit that? She viewed the Tao as a power that can be wielded through a spiritually-honed person.
I saw it differently. The central teaching is based on the unknowable Way. As such, the first line retained would give the reading a different meaning that reflected the Chinese mindset of subservience to the Way. Jane's western mind wielded the Tao like a sword.
Now, on reviewing my own translation, I find that it is not even satisfactory. This ancient scriptural text was formed in another cultural context. "Cooking a small fish" doesn't match the vision invoked by the Chinese verse which could mean capital punishment of some sort. In ancient times, boiling people alive was an imperial edict. Such was the power of officials exerting the Emperor's authority in controlling the far-flung territories of China.
Chinese philosophical texts are meant for self-reflection to draw from within: that inexhaustible spring of wisdom. Western philosophy is prescriptive, a set piece of advice to act in a specific way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2022 11:40:08 GMT -5
Random thoughts. There is a member here named Reefs who knows about 10million times more about these topics than I. I'd almost bet he could read those Chinese characters, whereas I can not. He likely also knows what 'like cooking a small fish' is pointing to, whereas my interpretation would be slightly off.However, if you wanted to go down that path, buckle the fuck up, as I would say. We've already seen what an encounter with reefer can do to a person.. next thing you know ten years have passed and that scary fucker is still haunting your dreams! But you're not going to do that, so good for you. OK, what about me. Well, I don't know man, but I'll certainly talk to you if you want. But it seems we might want to start with 'to what do you identify?' I suppose I identify as a man, but to be honest I don't know what that means. At one time in my life I identified as a 'Southerner', since that is the location I was born in. Similarly I once identified as an 'American' for essentially the same reason. I am 'an American' but that's just a data point, I don't identify as one as if that were something special or important. That specific data point has no meaning unless you ascribe some to it. I have not reviewed my translation in years. I retrieved the file to reply your post because I remembered reading Jane English/Gia Fu Feng's version, the one I liked best. Their book had the Chinese text alongside the English translation. I noticed that the first line in Chinese was omitted in the English translation. I felt the first line was critical: "If the Tao were to come upon the world." Why did Jane English omit that? She viewed the Tao as a power that can be wielded through a spiritually-honed person.
I saw it differently. The central teaching is based on the unknowable Way. As such, the first line retained would give the reading a different meaning that reflected the Chinese mindset of subservience to the Way. Jane's western mind wielded the Tao like a sword.
Now, on reviewing my own translation, I find that it is not even satisfactory. This ancient scriptural text was formed in another cultural context. "Cooking a small fish" doesn't match the vision invoked by the Chinese verse which could mean capital punishment of some sort. In ancient times, boiling people alive was an imperial edict. Such was the power of officials exerting the Emperor's authority in controlling the far-flung territories of China.
Chinese philosophical texts are meant for self-reflection to draw from within: that inexhaustible spring of wisdom. Western philosophy is prescriptive, a set piece of advice to act in a specific way.
I'm sorry but there's almost no way I can join you on this... there was a time in my life when I read what you might call - spiritual books stuff (after 50 years of not being interested in the subject) read it non stop really, bouncing around to whatever sounded right at the time and if we had this conversation back then then these ideas would have been fresh in my head.. and I could have talked about the similar areas I was exploring too.. but then I stopped reading almost all of it, and frankly it bores me now. I'd much rather talk about how your life is going. plus my memory is now shot and I'm losing mental capacity as we speak. |
|
|
|
Post by sree on Aug 11, 2022 12:42:55 GMT -5
I have pointed out before that it is not possible for the western mind to grasp Chinese philosophy. Since I started this topic, I feel compelled to engage you to set things right. Below is my attempt to intuit the meaning in those Chinese characters of the first two lines in Chapter 60 of the Tao Te Ching. 1. If the Tao were to come upon the world (thereby, instilling harmony),
以 道 莅 天下
2. Then ruling a big country would be (as easy) as frying a small fish.
治 大 國, 若 烹 小 魚.
Random thoughts. There is a member here named Reefs who knows about 10million times more about these topics than I. I'd almost bet he could read those Chinese characters, whereas I can not. He likely also knows what 'like cooking a small fish' is pointing to, whereas my interpretation would be slightly off. However, if you wanted to go down that path, buckle the fuck up, as I would say. We've already seen what an encounter with reefer can do to a person.. next thing you know ten years have passed and that scary fucker is still haunting your dreams! But you're not going to do that, so good for you. OK, what about me. Well, I don't know man, but I'll certainly talk to you if you want. But it seems we might want to start with 'to what do you identify?' I suppose I identify as a man, but to be honest I don't know what that means.At one time in my life I identified as a 'Southerner', since that is the location I was born in. Similarly I once identified as an 'American' for essentially the same reason. I am 'an American' but that's just a data point, I don't identify as one as if that were something special or important. That specific data point has no meaning unless you ascribe some to it. Ok, let's start with that. Right living, in my opinion, begins right here: knowing what you are rather than who you are. Who you are is a role of the person. The role has a script defining right conduct in accordance with ethics. Therefore, it is not ethical for Nancy to tell Xi Jinping to practice democracy in China. To do that with the backing of US military power is putting me and you in mortal danger.
As I have said, my identity is that of the self, the minder of the body, just my body, not your body or any other body. Based on this ethic, Nancy ought to be minding the welfare of her body. Additionally, she has to do her chosen public duty: see to the welfare of other human bodies within the 12th District in San Francisco. No politics.
If you identify as a man, you have a problem because that self-identity has been cancelled. Avoid politics and stick with the body. Identify as the body; not a body with a penis, just a gender-free body. Shove any attachment to manhood under the carpet if you can't be free like me.
|
|
|
|
Post by sree on Aug 11, 2022 12:55:31 GMT -5
I have not reviewed my translation in years. I retrieved the file to reply your post because I remembered reading Jane English/Gia Fu Feng's version, the one I liked best. Their book had the Chinese text alongside the English translation. I noticed that the first line in Chinese was omitted in the English translation. I felt the first line was critical: "If the Tao were to come upon the world." Why did Jane English omit that? She viewed the Tao as a power that can be wielded through a spiritually-honed person.
I saw it differently. The central teaching is based on the unknowable Way. As such, the first line retained would give the reading a different meaning that reflected the Chinese mindset of subservience to the Way. Jane's western mind wielded the Tao like a sword.
Now, on reviewing my own translation, I find that it is not even satisfactory. This ancient scriptural text was formed in another cultural context. "Cooking a small fish" doesn't match the vision invoked by the Chinese verse which could mean capital punishment of some sort. In ancient times, boiling people alive was an imperial edict. Such was the power of officials exerting the Emperor's authority in controlling the far-flung territories of China.
Chinese philosophical texts are meant for self-reflection to draw from within: that inexhaustible spring of wisdom. Western philosophy is prescriptive, a set piece of advice to act in a specific way.
there was a time in my life when I read what you might call - spiritual books stuff (after 50 years of not being interested in the subject) read it non stop really, bouncing around to whatever sounded right at the time and if we had this conversation back then then these ideas would have been fresh in my head.. and I could have talked about the similar areas I was exploring too.. but then I stopped reading almost all of it, and frankly it bores me now. I'd much rather talk about how your life is going. plus my memory is now shot and I'm losing mental capacity as we speak. Of course, you can join me. Mine is the kind of spiritual inquiry right up your alley. It requires no memory and no thinking. No scriptures. I discuss scripture with others to debunk them.
Krishnamurti said, the first step to enlightenment is the last step. How easy is that? A lot easier than cowboy dancing. You are from the South, right?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2022 14:54:41 GMT -5
I'm sorry but there's almost no way I can join you on this...
there was a time in my life when I read what you might call - spiritual books stuff (after 50 years of not being interested in the subject) read it non stop really, bouncing around to whatever sounded right at the time and if we had this conversation back then then these ideas would have been fresh in my head.. and I could have talked about the similar areas I was exploring too.. but then I stopped reading almost all of it, and frankly it bores me now. I'd much rather talk about how your life is going. plus my memory is now shot and I'm losing mental capacity as we speak. Of course, you can join me. Mine is the kind of spiritual inquiry right up your alley. It requires no memory and no thinking. No scriptures. I discuss scripture with others to debunk them. Krishnamurti said, the first step to enlightenment is the last step. How easy is that? A lot easier than cowboy dancing. You are from the South, right?
I live three miles from Jamestown Island, know its history? I do, a little bit, since I live here for one, plus I've always had something of an intellectual curiosity about things. It's a beautiful place but so what lots of places are. But you seem interested in my southern roots, and yes there was a time when I could envision a close relative dying at Bull Run dressed in gray.. but Appomattox is the greater story you know. And fuck Krshma..whateverthefuckhisnameis. He knows nothing! But if that's your jam then roll with it bro. Why the southern interest? Makes our different stories relatable for you? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2022 15:24:27 GMT -5
I'm sorry but there's almost no way I can join you on this...
there was a time in my life when I read what you might call - spiritual books stuff (after 50 years of not being interested in the subject) read it non stop really, bouncing around to whatever sounded right at the time and if we had this conversation back then then these ideas would have been fresh in my head.. and I could have talked about the similar areas I was exploring too.. but then I stopped reading almost all of it, and frankly it bores me now. I'd much rather talk about how your life is going. plus my memory is now shot and I'm losing mental capacity as we speak. Of course, you can join me. Mine is the kind of spiritual inquiry right up your alley. It requires no memory and no thinking. No scriptures. I discuss scripture with others to debunk them. Krishnamurti said, the first step to enlightenment is the last step. How easy is that? A lot easier than cowboy dancing. You are from the South, right?
You want me to tell you how easy it is? Do you know, or are you guessing? |
|
|
|
Post by sree on Aug 11, 2022 15:40:49 GMT -5
Of course, you can join me. Mine is the kind of spiritual inquiry right up your alley. It requires no memory and no thinking. No scriptures. I discuss scripture with others to debunk them. Krishnamurti said, the first step to enlightenment is the last step. How easy is that? A lot easier than cowboy dancing. You are from the South, right?
I live three miles from Jamestown Island, know its history? I do, a little bit, since I live here for one, plus I've always had something of an intellectual curiosity about things. It's a beautiful place but so what lots of places are. But you seem interested in my southern roots, and yes there was a time when I could envision a close relative dying at Bull Run dressed in gray.. but Appomattox is the greater story you know. And fuck Krshma..whateverthefuckhisnameis. He knows nothing! But if that's your jam then roll with it bro. Why the southern interest? Makes our different stories relatable for you? You are getting hyper, buddy. You seemed normal until an outburst this morning and just now in this post. You are still mentally lucid. You think you are going to lose it or what?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2022 15:54:05 GMT -5
I live three miles from Jamestown Island, know its history? I do, a little bit, since I live here for one, plus I've always had something of an intellectual curiosity about things. It's a beautiful place but so what lots of places are. But you seem interested in my southern roots, and yes there was a time when I could envision a close relative dying at Bull Run dressed in gray.. but Appomattox is the greater story you know. And fuck Krshma..whateverthefuckhisnameis. He knows nothing! But if that's your jam then roll with it bro. Why the southern interest? Makes our different stories relatable for you? You are getting hyper, buddy. You seemed normal until an outburst this morning and just now in this post. You are still mentally lucid. You think you are going to lose it or what? Zero chance of me losing it my friend. Amp it up if you want. Other than that you ain't saying much. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2022 17:05:19 GMT -5
You want me to tell you how easy it is? Do you know, or are you guessing? Oh sree, I thought this was an easy one. Thought maybe we could compare old war stories. But I don't think you got a story. Would you like me to be friendly and nice for an indeterminate amount of time.. Or would you like some John McCain straight talk? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2022 15:43:24 GMT -5
Random thoughts. There is a member here named Reefs who knows about 10million times more about these topics than I. I'd almost bet he could read those Chinese characters, whereas I can not. He likely also knows what 'like cooking a small fish' is pointing to, whereas my interpretation would be slightly off. However, if you wanted to go down that path, buckle the fuck up, as I would say. We've already seen what an encounter with reefer can do to a person.. next thing you know ten years have passed and that scary fucker is still haunting your dreams! But you're not going to do that, so good for you. OK, what about me. Well, I don't know man, but I'll certainly talk to you if you want. But it seems we might want to start with 'to what do you identify?' I suppose I identify as a man, but to be honest I don't know what that means.At one time in my life I identified as a 'Southerner', since that is the location I was born in. Similarly I once identified as an 'American' for essentially the same reason. I am 'an American' but that's just a data point, I don't identify as one as if that were something special or important. That specific data point has no meaning unless you ascribe some to it. Ok, let's start with that. Right living, in my opinion, begins right here: knowing what you are rather than who you are. Who you are is a role of the person. The role has a script defining right conduct in accordance with ethics. Therefore, it is not ethical for Nancy to tell Xi Jinping to practice democracy in China. To do that with the backing of US military power is putting me and you in mortal danger.
As I have said, my identity is that of the self, the minder of the body, just my body, not your body or any other body. Based on this ethic, Nancy ought to be minding the welfare of her body. Additionally, she has to do her chosen public duty: see to the welfare of other human bodies within the 12th District in San Francisco. No politics.
If you identify as a man, you have a problem because that self-identity has been cancelled. Avoid politics and stick with the body. Identify as the body; not a body with a penis, just a gender-free body. Shove any attachment to manhood under the carpet if you can't be free like me.
Thank you for writing this. Sorry if I sounded distracted. Life is messy. I've been there, everyone has. The key is to watch things happen without forming opinions about them. Or maybe said as.. not to become attached to your thoughts or you will become their prisoner. So you really should decide if you want to pursue a life of silence, or the psychological therapy approach. Your mind is not your friend just yet. Good luck man, but you will always have a friend here. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 12, 2022 21:42:38 GMT -5
Random thoughts. There is a member here named Reefs who knows about 10million times more about these topics than I. I'd almost bet he could read those Chinese characters, whereas I can not. He likely also knows what 'like cooking a small fish' is pointing to, whereas my interpretation would be slightly off.However, if you wanted to go down that path, buckle the fuck up, as I would say. We've already seen what an encounter with reefer can do to a person.. next thing you know ten years have passed and that scary fucker is still haunting your dreams! But you're not going to do that, so good for you. OK, what about me. Well, I don't know man, but I'll certainly talk to you if you want. But it seems we might want to start with 'to what do you identify?' I suppose I identify as a man, but to be honest I don't know what that means. At one time in my life I identified as a 'Southerner', since that is the location I was born in. Similarly I once identified as an 'American' for essentially the same reason. I am 'an American' but that's just a data point, I don't identify as one as if that were something special or important. That specific data point has no meaning unless you ascribe some to it. I have not reviewed my translation in years. I retrieved the file to reply your post because I remembered reading Jane English/Gia Fu Feng's version, the one I liked best. Their book had the Chinese text alongside the English translation. I noticed that the first line in Chinese was omitted in the English translation. I felt the first line was critical: "If the Tao were to come upon the world." Why did Jane English omit that? She viewed the Tao as a power that can be wielded through a spiritually-honed person.
I saw it differently. The central teaching is based on the unknowable Way. As such, the first line retained would give the reading a different meaning that reflected the Chinese mindset of subservience to the Way. Jane's western mind wielded the Tao like a sword.
Now, on reviewing my own translation, I find that it is not even satisfactory. This ancient scriptural text was formed in another cultural context. "Cooking a small fish" doesn't match the vision invoked by the Chinese verse which could mean capital punishment of some sort. In ancient times, boiling people alive was an imperial edict. Such was the power of officials exerting the Emperor's authority in controlling the far-flung territories of China.
Chinese philosophical texts are meant for self-reflection to draw from within: that inexhaustible spring of wisdom. Western philosophy is prescriptive, a set piece of advice to act in a specific way.
I came only to leave a couple of quotes, saw this. In January 1974 this translation was assigned for a class. I went to the college bookstore, browsed and bought. I sat in my car and read the whole thing. I'd say it's still in my top five all-time favorite books. The Gia Fu Feng/Jane English translation is still my favorite. I recognized myself in Chapter 20, that's still me, 48 years later. If the Tao Te Ching has meaning for you, you sure don't show it. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 12, 2022 22:30:49 GMT -5
I've been reading Cheri Huber for probably 20 years. She is a Zen teacher, she also has an incredible understanding of human nature. Thought I'd just drop a few quotes.
Some Of The Forms Self-Hate Takes (sdp picked these out).
Blaming Others Self-hating and "other" hating are the same thing. Whether you are hateful toward others or hating yourself directly, it's self-hate. You are always the recipient.
Seeing What is Wrong With Everything Your habit is to find fault, criticize, judge and compare. Remember, what is is all that is. The alternate reality in which everything is as you think it should be exists only in your mind, and it exists primarily to torture you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You can listen to the voices that say there is something wrong with you. It's actually very helpful to be aware of them.
JUST DON'T BELIEVE THEM!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Most of what we have been Taught To Believe we had to be Taught To Believe Because It Isn't True!
This is why children have to be conditioned so heavily. We Would Never Have Reached These Conclusions On Our Own!
If we could but for a moment look at what we have been taught to believe with an unconditioned mind, we would see that not only is it not true,
it's absurd.
"Where did all this self-hate come from?"
Socialization and Subpersonalities
We learn self-hate as children, and we learn it whether we grow up in a loving home or not.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Eventually it dawns on us that we can't stay in the "I'm Wrong" mode forever or we really won't survive. There has to be a duality formed in which "I'm not wrong, they are wrong" operates.
The sadness is that you can live your whole life trying to prove your parents wrong, but nothing will really have changed. All your ideas about being perfect and right and good will just be in reaction to the conditioning you received from your parents. Not only will you pursue those ideas of perfection, but eventually you will have to reject them, and you will have to reject them perfectly, and pretty soon you will have tied yourself up into such a knot that you won't be able to move in any direction, and you will just sit there in self-hate because the bottom line is
you lose.
pgs 20-42 There Is Nothing Wrong With You revised edition Going Beyond Self-Hate a compassionate process for learning to accept yourself exactly as you are by Cheri Huber, 2001, 2020
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 13, 2022 5:03:44 GMT -5
Some more Cheri Huber quotes, same book.
What happened to you, not who you are, makes you angry, fearful, greedy, mean, anxious, etc.
We learned behaviors when we were very young in order to survive. We were taught to hate those behaviors and to see them as signs of our badness. Yet we must keep doing them because they still mean survival to us.
And we hate ourselves for doing them.
The Trap: I believe I must be this way to survive. I hat myself for being this way.
Result: self-hate = survival
survival = self-hate.
Suffering provides our identity.
Identity is maintained in struggle and dissatisfaction, in trying to fix what's wrong.
So we are constantly looking for what's wrong, constantly creating new crises so we can rise to the occasion. To ego, that's survival.
It's very important that something be wrong so we can continue to survive it.
Self-Hate is a process.
Self-hate is a "how" not a "what".
If I am caught in self-hate, self-hating is the "how", the process. The aspects of the "me' that are being hated--body, personality. looks (he list is endless)--are the "what's", the context.
In other words, I am not hating myself, self-hate is hating me. Self-hate in an autonomous process with a life of its own, an endless recorded loop of conditioning, creating and shaping the world in which we live.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you had a person in your life treating you the way you treat yourself, you would have gotten rid of them a long time ago.
Student: You'd think so wouldn't you?
Guide: it seems so clear, but because that voice speaks from inside our own head, we are actually willing to perpetuate the illusion that this person:
--is on our side
--likes us
--has something valuable to say
--has some sor of merit in life.
But it doesn't! It is a pathetic thing. It does not need to be in charge of anybody's life.
And so don't let it run your life. You don't let it sign on your bank account. You don't let it arrange your calendar. You don't even let it cook for you.
Are you with me?
Student: I am with you. Sometimes I don't see that separation. Right now, right here in this room, it seems very clear to me.
Guide: I can give you the simplest of all possible rules of thumb: Anytime a voice is talking to you that is not talking with love and compassion, don' believe it!
Even if it is talking about someone else, don't believe it. Even if it is directed at someone else, it is the voice of self-hate. It is simply hating you through an external object. It can hate you directly by telling you what a lousy, rotten person you are, and it can hate you indirectly by pointing out what's wrong "out there."
If the voice is not loving, don't listen to it, don't follow it, don't believe it.
No exceptions!
Even if it says "for your own good", it is not. it's for its good, not yours. This is the same as when parents talk to you in a hateful tone of voice "for your own good". It's for their good. It makes them feel better. It does not make you better. And it does not make you behave "better".
Here are some outrageous things I suggest about this. Anytime you hear the voice of self-hate, do somthing for yourself that will make it crazy. ............. be lazy and indulgent....
Constructive criticism: Not Required
Let's say you sense that you have been less than kind to someone. .............
Constructive criticism is a scam run by people who want to beat you up. And they want you to believe that they are doing it for your own good!
pgs 10-54 There Is Nothing Wrong With You, Cheri Huber
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 13, 2022 9:38:43 GMT -5
Random thoughts. There is a member here named Reefs who knows about 10million times more about these topics than I. I'd almost bet he could read those Chinese characters, whereas I can not. He likely also knows what 'like cooking a small fish' is pointing to, whereas my interpretation would be slightly off.However, if you wanted to go down that path, buckle the fuck up, as I would say. We've already seen what an encounter with reefer can do to a person.. next thing you know ten years have passed and that scary fucker is still haunting your dreams! But you're not going to do that, so good for you. OK, what about me. Well, I don't know man, but I'll certainly talk to you if you want. But it seems we might want to start with 'to what do you identify?' I suppose I identify as a man, but to be honest I don't know what that means. At one time in my life I identified as a 'Southerner', since that is the location I was born in. Similarly I once identified as an 'American' for essentially the same reason. I am 'an American' but that's just a data point, I don't identify as one as if that were something special or important. That specific data point has no meaning unless you ascribe some to it. I have not reviewed my translation in years. I retrieved the file to reply your post because I remembered reading Jane English/Gia Fu Feng's version, the one I liked best. Their book had the Chinese text alongside the English translation. I noticed that the first line in Chinese was omitted in the English translation. I felt the first line was critical: "If the Tao were to come upon the world." Why did Jane English omit that? She viewed the Tao as a power that can be wielded through a spiritually-honed person.
I saw it differently. The central teaching is based on the unknowable Way. As such, the first line retained would give the reading a different meaning that reflected the Chinese mindset of subservience to the Way. Jane's western mind wielded the Tao like a sword.
Now, on reviewing my own translation, I find that it is not even satisfactory. This ancient scriptural text was formed in another cultural context. "Cooking a small fish" doesn't match the vision invoked by the Chinese verse which could mean capital punishment of some sort. In ancient times, boiling people alive was an imperial edict. Such was the power of officials exerting the Emperor's authority in controlling the far-flung territories of China.
Chinese philosophical texts are meant for self-reflection to draw from within: that inexhaustible spring of wisdom. Western philosophy is prescriptive, a set piece of advice to act in a specific way.
Put your Tao Te Ching translation on Amazon print on demand (plus as ebook of course), I will buy it. With commentaries even better. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2022 9:44:01 GMT -5
I have not reviewed my translation in years. I retrieved the file to reply your post because I remembered reading Jane English/Gia Fu Feng's version, the one I liked best. Their book had the Chinese text alongside the English translation. I noticed that the first line in Chinese was omitted in the English translation. I felt the first line was critical: "If the Tao were to come upon the world." Why did Jane English omit that? She viewed the Tao as a power that can be wielded through a spiritually-honed person.
I saw it differently. The central teaching is based on the unknowable Way. As such, the first line retained would give the reading a different meaning that reflected the Chinese mindset of subservience to the Way. Jane's western mind wielded the Tao like a sword.
Now, on reviewing my own translation, I find that it is not even satisfactory. This ancient scriptural text was formed in another cultural context. "Cooking a small fish" doesn't match the vision invoked by the Chinese verse which could mean capital punishment of some sort. In ancient times, boiling people alive was an imperial edict. Such was the power of officials exerting the Emperor's authority in controlling the far-flung territories of China.
Chinese philosophical texts are meant for self-reflection to draw from within: that inexhaustible spring of wisdom. Western philosophy is prescriptive, a set piece of advice to act in a specific way.
Put your Tao Te Ching translation on Amazon print on demand (plus as ebook of course), I will buy it. With commentaries even better. Here's the Aleister Crowley one, if you're interested. sacred-texts.com/oto/lib157.htm |
|
