Chapter of the Week: #45

Carl

You beat me to the punch, or I guess I beat myself to the punch. I have a few cents to add anyhow...

[cite] Lynn Cornish:[/cite]

We all have a little Hitler and a little Buddha within. Which gets expressed when, and to what degree? The easy answer has always been that it’s a matter of ‘free choice’. That way we can judge people as responsible for what they do and deal with them. Looking deeper it is plain to see that free will is an illusion linked to the illusion of self. So what causes a Buddha to be Buddha or a Hitler to be a Hitler?

Do you think that if one had enough awareness to realize that there is no free will and that there is no self, but just an illusion of a self, that that person could be a Hitler? If Hitler had that awareness and all his personal neuroses became transparent to him, would he still have been driven to do what he did?

It is hard to see how. I imagine that neuroses result from the conflict between what we think and what is so (our ideals versus [chref=25] that which is naturally so[/chref]). That dissipates with the realization of ‘That Thou Art’, as the old Vedic saying puts it (Tat Tvam Asi).

I think we've had this discussion before. In Taoism, is there morality? I can't get it through my thick skull that goodness and kindness don't matter. I understand that being or trying to be good and kind is in my own best interest, but aside from that, doesn't goodness have some intrinsic worth?

Perhaps, if we could put aside our narrow view and see the immensity of it all, we could see Hitler and 6 million Jews as just some more grains of sand.

This is a great example of how the ‘virtues’ we cherish are a reflection of ‘self interest’. We empathize with the murdered Jews and recoil at that slaughter, yet have no problem wiping out millions of mosquitoes, cows, chickens, rats, fish. Heck, even plants count among the living things that 'need' to survive.

How can one draw a moral line without becoming a hypocrite? Moreover, aren't hypocrites are blind to their own hypocrisy? Otherwise how could they maintain their 'self interest' double standards? The deep currents of self interest emotion rule the mind's waves.

Carl

Each week we address one chapter of the Tao Te Ching. The Tao Te Ching can be obscure, especially if you think you're supposed to understand what it's saying! We find it easier and more instructive to simply contemplate how the chapter resonates with your personal experience. Becoming more aware at this fundamental level simplifies life. This approach conforms to the view that true knowing lies within ourselves. Thus, when a passage in the scripture resonates, you've found your inner truth. The same applies for when it evokes a question; questions are the grist for self realization.

Chapter 45
Great perfection seems chipped,
Yet use will not wear it out;
Great fullness seems empty,
Yet use will not drain it;
Great straightness seems bent;
Great skill seems awkward;
Great eloquence seems tongue-tied.

Restlessness overcomes cold; stillness overcomes heat.

Limpid and still,
One can be a leader in the empire.

Read commentary previously posted for this chapter.
Read notes on translations

Carl

[Note: I italicize phrases I borrow from the chapter, and link to phrases I borrow from other chapters to help tie chapters together. While making it more tedious to read, :? the Tao Te Ching is best pondered in the context of the whole.

I notice quite a difference between D.C. Lau’s translation and the semi-literal (and semi literate :? ) one below, i.e., great accomplishment seems vacant and doesn’t harm. Perhaps D.C. Lau’s is easier to understand? I don’t know because I’ve been reading D.C. Lau’s version for so many decades now, and it is music to my ears. When I observe nature ([chref=25]that which is naturally so[/chref]), it is easy to see, and very comforting to accept, that great perfection seems chipped. Indeed, the [chref=67]small[/chref] and [chref=1]named[/chref] perfection pushed by culture suffocates me. Of course, from a symptoms point of view, I’d have to acknowledge that we probably buy into culturally idealize forms of perfection when we wish to be hemmed in. After all, being hemmed in can feel more secure. In short, what to one person is a prison, to another is a fortress.

I also notice another clear difference in the last line. Clear and still are closely associated with honesty and in the middle. If restless lies at one end of the spectrum, and stillness at the other, how is still also in the middle? I think of it this way: while neither restless or stillness are in the middle, stillness points to the middle more than restless. The reason: life is, by virtue of its need to survive, biased on the restless side of the ‘middle’. Thus, in the context of life, stillness is more the companion of the middle than restlessness. Boy, that feels like a convoluted way to say something very simple... or is it?

The semi literal translation:
Great accomplishment seems vacant, its use doesn't harm.
Great fullness seems flushed, its use doesn't end.
Great straightness seems bent.
Great cleverness seems clumsy.
Great debate seems slow in speech.
The still surpasses the impetuous, Cold surpasses heat.
Clear and still serves as the middle of all under heaven.

The literal Chinese to English translation:
big (large, great) accomplish (result) like (as if) lack (vacancy), its
use not fraud (disadvantage, harm).
big (large, great) full like (as if) rinse (flush, rush), its use not
limit (end, poor).
big (large, great)straight like (as if) bend (bow, crook).
big (large, great) clever like (as if) clumsy (awkward, dull).
big (large, great) argue (debate) like (as if) slow speech.
still surpass (be equal to, can bear) rash (impetuous, restless),
cold surpass (be equal to, can bear) heat (hot, warm, ardent).
clear (unmixed, distinct) still (quiet, calm) serves as heaven under upright
(in the middle, main, honest, correct).