Introduction

From Derek Lin’s book comments…If we imagine the Tao, we manifest serenity. But – serenity must be consistent. If serenity is consistent, human nature gravitates. If we as humans waffle in our consistent presentation of serenity, human nature levitates. DL’s Comment 1 seems to conflict with Comment 2. One can draw attention to oneself by manifesting the Tao, but the Tao attracts no attention to itself. Can it be so? Comment 3 summarizes this chapter 35. One perspective might be that of quantity and quality. While sensory stimulation holds anticipation, satiation, and memory for moments in time, the great image fortifies the self for all time and its components: future and present and past.

From Derek Lin’s Terebess comments…DL says nothing about consistency in this early commentary. It could be taken that when we hold the image, we attract the flock, when we let them down we incur their mock.

Wayne Dyer’s “translation” appropriates the work of five of the ten usual suspects listed in his book’s acknowledgements. Wayne’s commentary dotes on the term transcend, spritzing permutations of it into verb, noun, present participle, third person present tense and adjective throughout his commentary. He transfers into this mode by stating in paragraph two that, “your pleasure is in being at one with what (The Tao) allows it (pleasure, desire, addiction…the good stuff) all to transpire”.

Ancient scholar and neo-Taoist Wang Bi emphasizes that this chapter, in fact all Tao Te Ching chapters, address the ruler exclusively. He likes to refer to The Tao as The Great Image and mother. WB implores the ruler to mimic The Great Image: being less invasive and, therefore, more persuasive. Wang Bi goes on to ponder that if the ruler put his preferences in suspension and tolerated the preferences of his charge, what a wonderful world it would be. I personally thought the last several lines of chapter 35 better fit into the beginning of chapter 36 (i.e. consider in chapter 35 the three declarative “it can not be” and the four directive “one must first” in chapter 36. However, neither scholars nor translators even hint at this reassignment in their work. Also, I have similar feelings about the last lines of the prior chapter, 34, interlocking with the first line of 35 (i.e. see “great” in lines 9,10, 11 in C34 and line 1 of C35).

Comparing Derek Lin and Wang Bi translations, the couplets that got my attention were in lines 3 and 4. Wang Bi’s subscription to the idea that Tao Te Ching addresses the ruler (him) versus Derek Lin’s gender-neutral rewriting stood prominent. WB’s adjectives in lines 3b and 4a, (optimal and fragrant) also stood out, and caused me to search for clues as to what and why and where in terms of Chinese character etymology. Maybe the Wang Bi translator (Rudolf Wagner) took the WB character 泰 (peaceful) substituted for DL character 太 (greatest) and arrived at “peace [would be] optimal” instead of DL’s “harmonious peace”.

As far as Wang Bi’s use of “fragrant” in line 4a, I see such alternate definitions as “bait” and “entice” as possible inducements to choose the euphemism fragrant.

I included an etymology section this time. The original Tao Te Ching used many characters which emanated from nature. This magic can get lost in translation. For what it’s worth, I’ve tried to bring some of this ancient metaphoric construction to the forefront with some original ancient script. Some of the Oracle Bone Scripts are amusing, others confusing and certain ones worth perusing. Though technically correct, when a translator drops the hint of nature contained in the original Chinese character (earth, wind, fire, water, etc.), they not only drop the link to the ancient shamanic past but further distance the sacred text from Laozi’s warning about giving whole meaning to words and names and form.

Afterword

What can I say after word?

Derek Lin’s translation implores us to hold on to The Tao and harmonious peace will transit. Sensory pleasures hold transitory value while The Great Image leaves you satiated. Things that can be seen and heard don’t transcend time…but Oh! The Way. DL’s commentary reveals his theory on how to attract friends. He inserts the words “cooking smells attract”[1], not indicated in his translation but synonymous with Wang Bi’s use of the adjective “fragrant”[2].

Mr. Lin’s internet commentary, captured from Terebess website, appears to be an early bread crumb path into his thought process for commentary on TTC 35…somehow it is left to us to get from this early rendition to the commentary printed in his book version.

I’ve concluded that the good news (of Wayne Dyer using pieces of TTC chapters broken off of the original translations of legitimate authors) is that we can evaluate the perspective and quality of several translators in a single swirling pool of divergent and sometimes pseudo credentialed scholarship. I myself would never have known of some of these fellows, let alone thought to look at the text as their eyes have. Wayne’s commentary, much like a quarry, is long and deep and cool and still. You can’t see into it, so you have to take his word for it. Sometimes someone interpreting for us feels good. And feeling good enough.

Wang Bi’s commentary in some cases uses different Chinese characters than Derek Lin. Their translations read similar. WB’s commentary does make note of a future chapter (45) in the Te.

The comparison sections stood unremarkable to me.

The added Etymology section, however, does allow for an expansion on the idea of nature being present in metaphor, metaphor’s inclusion in Chinese character but then, when myriad things of nature vanish from these characters, the result is that all words necessitate definition. When the sage imagined the ideal metaphor for reverence of ancestors to be:

an old man with long hair, bent-over 耂(lǎo) a child 子(zǐ) this ideal represented itself in a character 孝(xiào).

When the sage ruminated on his thought process, the ideal metaphor for “to think” became:

the brain 囟(xìn) and the heart 心(xīn) heart yielding 思(sī). Even back then the sage realized that peoples’ thoughts were an  inseparably emotion/mind confection. The Oracle Bone Scripts for some of the base characters:

[1] Cooking smells: DL book comment #2.

[2] WB translation line 4a.

Introduction

Chapter 34 needs a title. Section I, lines 1 & 2, invokes the simile of Tao as great water as in a flood. The first two lines approximate The Tao with the nature and physics of water. In Section II, Laozi further personifies water and The Tao, noting that all living thing depend on it and the work never exhausts, the shelter never ceases and the success of life in nature satisfies this humble, flowing non-entity named Tao. Section III names Tao simultaneously both insignificant and great because of its magnanimity and humility. scrutiny should be applied for this paradoxical interpretation. Section IV appears to be a summary of Chapter 34, seemingly defining greatness as a lack of recognition on the part of Tao and a lack of knowledge of it on the part of the myriad things.

Derek Lin’s comments invites interpretation. First, we might embrace our obstacles in order to achieve contentment or even elevate mutual adaptation. Giving takes a great many forms with us humans and as a consequence, giving hardly resembles it definition. Using water…nature…Tao as a model of a giving entity delivers a stark contrast to the “giving” that has evolved among men. In a single paragraph (3), DL balances the terms insignificant, imperceptible, hidden and easy against greatness, fundamental force, reality and exist(ence)…lots of food for lots of thoughts. Though Laozi seems to personify both Tao and water in this chapter, Lin insists we are talking about the transcendental, emotionless and guileless. He goes on to suggest we emulate that which has no form or substance.

Wayne Dyer’s take on Laozi’s Chapter 34 seeks to examine the concept of greatness rather than the metaphor of water. Wayne sees the Tao as a kind of reluctant leader who provides and protects and persuades but allows individuals to take the ill path of large resistance. When you and I take the position that “life is NOT all about me”, we can acknowledge the quality of others and the generosity of nature. WD touches on some other Taoist themes, such as “don’t waste anything, anyone” (TTC 27): the importance of everyone – possibly antagonists or obstacles – embracing obstacles and taking lessons or maturation from toleration and acceptance.

Wang Bi (226–249), was a Chinese neo-Daoist philosopher who died of sickness at the age of 23. Wang Bi’s most important works were commentaries on Laozi’s Tao Te Ching and the I Ching. Wang’s commentary speaks of Tao as The Way. The Way exists all-encompassing and, most important, is not known to the myriad things. Since The Way is not known, it may be “named” small by man, but it is in reality, great. By not being known and referred to as small, The Way acts without opposition on big things. Difficult things. The Way exhibits an example for each of us…if we only knew.

First there was reality. Then metaphor. Then pictures. Eventually words and distortion. Laozi wrote poetry which exalted nature with characters constructed from pictographs which originally drew from nature’s progeny. Derek Lin compared our embracing of obstacles as akin to water’s natural embrace of its habitation. Wayne Dyer felt that greatness can be reimagined but as in nature not in humanity. Wang Bi says we are best left in the dark as to what guides us, protects us, punishes us. Did you come up with your own title for Chapter 34?

Afterword

What are your first thoughts? With what did you come to this Chapter 34? With what are you leaving? Reflecting back on the pages presented by the sages Laozi, Derek Lin, Wayne Dyer, Wang Bi and Kahlil Gibran, can bring on a flood of thoughts. But reduce that flood to a flow and that flow to a few sparkling droplets. Small jewels. Gems. Words are inadequate to describe what these wrote, but that’s all we have, most of what we know. Laozi saw The Way, experienced the flood, embraced nature. Derek Lin looked up to the sky and Laozi for inspiration and brought down a rain of cleansing clarity for us from this nebulous, laconic verse. Wayne Dyer saw in those droplets the idea that greatness could be more than self-aggrandizement and plotted a path to follow. Wang Bi pulled back from even metaphor and wanted us to know what we can’t know – the dark. That which is behind the curtain. Kahlil Gibran delineated the physical from the ethereal with regard to children for whom parents can care for but cannot think for, or dream for, or hold on to. Don’t try to know it all, just try to know.

Introduction

In Reading Tao Te Ching, Chapter 33, I referenced Derek Lin’s A Note on the Translation from his book and, also, his Approach and Guiding Principals which can be found on the internet. With Wayne Dyer, I cross-referenced his translation with the original translators listed in his Acknowledgements section. For the first time, I include Stephen Hodge’s translation and commentary of the selected reading. My comparison section includes the rather sticky first two lines which seem to interchange the English language words intelligent, knowledge, clever, enlightened, wisdom and insight. Also, I look at Derek Lin’s translation versus that of ancient Taoist scholar Wang Bi’s Commentary, which though not overtly mentioned (by Lin), was surely referenced as a basis for ancient Chinese grounding of the text.  

Derek Lin’s translation of 33 is structured in four sections[PS1] [i].  Section 1 consists of lines 1 through 4 and distinguishes intellect from enlightenment; and strength from power. Section 2 consists of lines 5 and 6. Line 5 equates contentment with wealth. Line 6 identifies vigor as an attribute of willpower. Section 3 is merely line 7 which tells us that in keeping our faith in the Tao, we may live long. Section 4, line 8, tells us that through leaving a legacy, we can live on after physical death in our works preserve and in memories deserved.

Lin’s book translation invokes the Greek maxim Know Thyself. He illustrates this, in part, by reminding us that you are your own worst enemy. Though unstated, practice makes perfect might best describe his summation of physical cultivation. A strong spiritual foundation sustains us in the tests of our will over time. Derek closes by telling us that we can live on in the hearts and minds of others by bringing meaning and joy to all others while we live. Helping them. Cherishing them. Sounding very Confucian.

Derek Lin’s internet commentary of TTC 33, to some extent, gives an opinionated interpretation of each line with a summary accompanying each section. The explanations resemble the types of opinionated translations which he rejects from other translators. This observation (of mine) kind of justifies the extended language used by western translators to balance (their) precision to the (laconic) concision of the original ancient Chinese text.

Wayne Dyer never disappoints. Each of his translations is a strict plagiarizing of the hard work of another scholar. Pick an “Acknowledged” author. Grab a few lines. Omit other lines. Voila! Translation a la Wayne Walter Dyer – Self Help Guru. With no attempt to alter even a particle of translation, it is no wonder our poor departed humorous self-help guru gets sued posthumously. I have to admit, I stumbled on Wayne’s verse-clipping fetish by accident when the incongruity of one of his pasted together confections stunned me then sent me into a laborious investigation. Nevertheless, Mr. Dyer’s works in general have helped vastly more souls than his plagiarism has hurt. Who among us can say as much as to our petty transgressions?

Wayne’s Verse 33 commentary inspired almost no curiosity or criticism in me. The mention of A Course in Miracles caught my eye. In short, his 1000+ word gloss, at length, sat uncharacteristically understated, error free and sorely minimally without quotations.

My inclusion of Stephen Hodge originated with his mention in Dyer’s Acknowledgements.  I acquired Hodge’s book used for $1.80. I didn’t know that it would turn out to be a deep dive into the Mawangdui slips and Guodian strips. With a terrific historical introduction of the subject and a rather awkward presentation of the Tao Te Ching, I fell in love, for a moment, you might say.

[i] THE STRUCTURE OF LAOZI 33

Laozi 33 has the formal signals associated with IPS[i]. The two pairs in texts 1 and 2 are parallel with a minor difference, you li 有(yǒu) 力(lì) being two characters but 智(zhì)  only one.

Texts 3 and 4 again are parallel with a similar minor difference. Texts 5 and 6 have the same number of characters and closely related terms at their ends, jiu 久(jiǔ) and shou 壽(shòu), but their grammar greatly differs, particularly in Wang Bi’s reading. The only clear indicator linking the first two texts with the second pair is the term powerful, 强(qiáng) in text 4, which links up with the same term in text 2.

However, neither text nor commentary give a clear indication linking text 1 with text 3. The term qiang is not commented upon in the commentary to text 2 and is defined through the quotation from Laozi 41 in the commentary to text 4 as meaning qin neng 勤(qín) 能(néng), “to the utmost of one’s capacities,” and provided with a supplement, “to practice the Way. There are two possible strategies here, either to read the definition in text 4 as fundamentally different from that suggested in text 2 and abandon the attempts at discovering more than a serial structure, or to transfer the content of qiang from text 4 to text 2.

I opt for the second strategy because of text 5. The commentary to this text directly takes up the terminology of texts 1 and 2 in a parallel manner, indicating that it is a general statement referring to previous chains begun by them. Text 6 also comes in as a general statement. Text 5 refers to the stability of position that a Sage Ruler enjoys, and text 6 to his personal survival.

 [PS1]Lines 1 & 2 are paired (P1) with minor differences, as lines 3 & 4, are also paired. Pair 1 (P1) links to Pair 2 (P1) via the word strong.

Lines 5 &6 are paired (P3) with the same number of characters and closely related terms (Long & ) at the ends, but differing grammar.

Phrases belonging to one chain (e.g., a) explicitly refer to each other by using the same vocabulary. In the closed form, no such explicit reference exists; the link is by implication. Given the possibility of the variant ab ba, this often leads to problems of attribution of individual phrases to one of the two chains.

Afterword

Why do I find it so important to investigate and analyze this and other chapters of the Tao Te Ching?

First, the Tao Te Ching guided me through the rough seas of life for decades past and I pay homage to the wisdom that cloaked me then. To stop and wait. To imagine an improved version of myself. To attempt to speak wisdom to another for whom I care. TTC is not just a book, it can be a sort of bible. It is not just poetry to soothe but just profound enough to make one stop and think. Thinking in times of peril may be good enough.

The excruciating detail (sometimes 😉 involved in each chapter analysis, for me, alludes back to the Bible. The Christian works, old and especially new, underwent revision and selection and insertion of ideas and assertions which Jesus surely never intended.  By examining the evidence (commentaries), literature (other Taoist books, e.g. I Ching, Chuang Tzu, etc.) and history (both Chinese and Shamanism), inaccuracies and even a type of “heresy” might be discovered and avoided.

An example of minor “heresy” might be Derek Lin’s conflicting goals of providing a true translation and resolving the gender issue. Laozi wrote Tao Te Ching, according to Wang Bi and others, for THE RULER. The ruler was always a man. Gender neutral pronouns are not true translations. Additionally, Derek Lin only partially resolved the issue of the translator inserting their parochial understanding directly into the piece. For, by writing a virtual line by line commentary alongside his translation, Derek has de facto committed the same “sin”.

The inclusion of the comparison of Derek Lin’s translation with that of Wang Bi via Rudolf Wagner evidences another emerging pursuit. Wagner’s A Chinese Reading of the Daodejing is only one of three tomes written on the subject. Each of his works include Chinese characters and over-my-head explanations of subject matter. I have to admit that one the things I have learned, so far, is how to copy and paste multiple languages from images of pages photographed in Mr. Wagner’s fine publication.

In summary, this granulating of the rock that is Tao Te Ching may result in a sandcastle that dissolves at high tide, much as our Tuesday together scatters us at eventide. But I hope to make my documents more substantive and still practical in future renditions. My process of comparing and resolving certain specifics in the TTC text yields satisfying knowledge within TTC (for me anyway) and an array of investigative and compositional skills without (for other and future research). A warning: my intensity on the subject will likely wax further before it wanes at all.

So, I’m starting to read “A Chinese Reading of the Daodejing” by Rudolf G. Wagner, and I come across these passages:

A serious scholarly debate can only be based on translations that are in this sense falsifiable…

Falsifiable translations? I have heard of this but I decided I must be able to understand “falsifiable” as a research tool, restate its definition in my own words and explain it to others. In this endeavor, my first stop, the WhatIs website by TechTarget, who say:

• Falsifiability is the capacity for some proposition, statement, theory or hypothesis to be proven wrong.
• That capacity is an essential component of the scientific method and hypothesis testing.
• In a scientific context, falsifiability is sometimes considered synonymous with testability.

Huh, still not there yet!

Reading further… In hypothesis testing, the null hypothesis usually states the contrary of the experimental or alternative hypothesis… The requirement of falsifiability means that conclusions cannot be drawn from simple observation of a particular phenomenon.

Ok, do I have enough to start to define, in my own words, falsifiability? I need three things:

1. a hypothesis
2. null hypothesis
3. conclusion

Each of which must be filled in with details.

An example of falsifiable theories or hypothesis, can be a statement such as:

Tigers roar louder than Lions. That is a falsifiable statement as we can verify it empirically and determine which animal is louder than the other. The theory hypothesis might be wrong and therefore lions might roar louder than tigers.

On the other hand, a non-falsifiable theory defines a hypothesis that cannot be proven wrong.

For example, to state that God exists. This is non-falsifiable due to the fact that we cannot prove nor disprove that God actually exists. It is not possible to test it empirically[1]

This entry from Wikipedia helps:

Informally, a statement is falsifiable if some observation might show it to be false. For example,

 “All swans are white” is falsifiable because “Here is a black swan” shows it to be false.

The apparent contradictionseen in the case of a true but falsifiable statement disappears once we know the technical definition.

This from the METHODS website:

… falsifiability refers to the notion that a theory or statement can be found to be false; for instance, as the result of an empirical test.

So, without fully covering the subject of falsifiability, my simple understanding now is that:

Falsifiability means that a specified research project is falsifiable if through observation of the research material, any of the research conclusions can be proven false.

To be continued…

[1] Empirically: by means of observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.

Hiding from your eye none of the many things which others withhold, I step straight toward you with my heart exposed.

Walking not just as a person with steps but as one who leads with mindful steps.

The ox at slaughter brings forth more than a sharp knife and drops of blood, with life and death and sustenance in one act, the thing within a thing.

Living’s actions and emotions too often cloud our mind, and we neglect to see the whole of it.

At best this vague life tugs at our being, wishing us to turn to the light of full knowing. If not the shining sun, then to perhaps her earth created spawn – the light of fire.

So encompassing thou art, providing the reality of sustenance, the potential for wisdom and the possibility of riches.

Acknowledging its mystery while recognizing its power leaves one at once breathless and agape.

Full consciousness of the Tao informs one of the responsibility for what She gives, and when one takes from her bounty, there in manifests a debt to be repaid. This gives substance to one’s life.

In the dark, the sightless small young simply follow the blind large elder.  Emergence. No longer so young. Not at all small. The light informs. Naked, one gathers strands of silk. Threatened, the awesome four seasons terror meets with power. Power of the mind.

Like new moon sprouts, one’s hue bears notice because life arrives, summoned from non-life, but one’s birthing color shall fade as the seasons, as leaves, as innocence.

With our two hands, we work and create real things, but our mind’s eye too often mistakes ourselves as real creators. We are but tools of the creator.

What power we have when we open our busy kisser, wag our ambivalent tongue and issue homily which inspires certitude, so leading to actualization.

I know my singular present sits impatiently upon my ample past. So, my unique person consists of that malformed past, this hesitant present, and then unfolding fate.

I am at once private and public. For once my domicile’s privacy fades – though carried in my mind’s sanctuary – I walk unsteady upon the nemesis earth.

Use many and create one. Cherish one and you spawn many. A balanced life neither takes nor destroys but creates. And creates!

Knowledge proceeds slow. From it, knowing shoots quick and true and indelibly so.

In the battle to know, many sharp questions must slice and stab and skewer wisdom’s thick skin.

Stop! Put down your tableware. Rather – savor the moment.