Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Chapter of the Week: #51
That’s one gorgeous set of quotes you’ve assembled there.
And the understanding that for me removes all the confusions inferred in, bemoaned of and transcended by each quote, being the confusions we’ve been told to think of as paradoxes, contradictions and reasons to argue the wordings we use to communicate about any of this, is right there in the last quote, from our boy, LaoTzu, which I think was your point also.
A little examination of one of the critical words involved lets me describe my understanding.
“Begets” in the original is “sheng” which Jonathan Star translates as ‘begets, begot, produce(s)(d), gives birth to, gives life to”. Considering that all this ‘new’ identity is being ‘produced’ in non-spatial, non-temporal levels, I don’t think our relativistic images of separation, contrast or even process are accurately or usefully applied ‘there’.
These ‘births’ are to me best considered as energies of a specific nature, or relations between them, organizing within a greater more diverse energy. This in a reality level where our temporal concepts of energy and organization are again inappropriate, of course.
Crudely, we can see this ‘organizing within as birth’ more along the imaging we go through to understand this phrase: ‘a galaxy begets a solar system, which begets a planet, which begets an animal.’
None of these objects have any meaning or existence if they are separated from the containing reality that begot them. Each is a current and active part of the greater form, each is formed within and of its parent.
Begetting here isn’t A1 + A2 => A3, it’s A(B(C(D))) where each parenthesis mean ‘forms within and of itself’.
Sheng’s ‘begetting’ process then becomes more of a ‘developing a new identity that exists within its parent’ than an organic birth of splitting apart.
Our minds’ images, among them our words and lives (not bodies), are born into this world the same way. Our new distinctions form within our minds and hearts, our perception is formed within our experience of the universal flow of the world, to help us sort it out. We add these distinctions, among them our words and forms, for our mind’s inner purposes; they are not added to the shared world but to our private, unique inner perceiving of it. They are formed within us and exist only within us.
So we arrive at the paraphrasing of your last quote that I find useful, reversing its order, and using the appropriately flexible and non-spatial meaning of the word ‘within’ suggested above:
‘all things are within the three, the three is within the two, the two is within the one, and the one is within the Tao.’
The order of these begettings doesn’t much matter to us ‘all things’, who only exist when the other stages of the begetting ‘sequence’ are in place.
The reversed order reflects how the chain of included realities looks to us from its most enclosed level looking towards that which contains all of it.
Walking through the meaning of that paraphrase, with each ‘within’ being, I suspect, as unique and identical in our personal imaging as are the words ‘Tao’, ‘one’, ‘two’, ‘three’ and ‘all things’, I come to satisfying parsings of all the other quotes, including the comments of all the contributors to this discussion.
Knowing that all these exist within and of their parent, and that our temporal awareness can know directly only the ‘all things’ level, explains and generates the observations of the other quotes.
Each quote becomes a different blind man’s view of that same elephant we share in the parts of our lives that have no parts, times or distances.
Each contradiction and complementary-opposite pair educate us when we see their real unity, always found just past the distinctions imposed by the abstractions of our perception.
And the understanding that for me removes all the confusions inferred in, bemoaned of and transcended by each quote, being the confusions we’ve been told to think of as paradoxes, contradictions and reasons to argue the wordings we use to communicate about any of this, is right there in the last quote, from our boy, LaoTzu, which I think was your point also.
A little examination of one of the critical words involved lets me describe my understanding.
“Begets” in the original is “sheng” which Jonathan Star translates as ‘begets, begot, produce(s)(d), gives birth to, gives life to”. Considering that all this ‘new’ identity is being ‘produced’ in non-spatial, non-temporal levels, I don’t think our relativistic images of separation, contrast or even process are accurately or usefully applied ‘there’.
These ‘births’ are to me best considered as energies of a specific nature, or relations between them, organizing within a greater more diverse energy. This in a reality level where our temporal concepts of energy and organization are again inappropriate, of course.
Crudely, we can see this ‘organizing within as birth’ more along the imaging we go through to understand this phrase: ‘a galaxy begets a solar system, which begets a planet, which begets an animal.’
None of these objects have any meaning or existence if they are separated from the containing reality that begot them. Each is a current and active part of the greater form, each is formed within and of its parent.
Begetting here isn’t A1 + A2 => A3, it’s A(B(C(D))) where each parenthesis mean ‘forms within and of itself’.
Sheng’s ‘begetting’ process then becomes more of a ‘developing a new identity that exists within its parent’ than an organic birth of splitting apart.
Our minds’ images, among them our words and lives (not bodies), are born into this world the same way. Our new distinctions form within our minds and hearts, our perception is formed within our experience of the universal flow of the world, to help us sort it out. We add these distinctions, among them our words and forms, for our mind’s inner purposes; they are not added to the shared world but to our private, unique inner perceiving of it. They are formed within us and exist only within us.
So we arrive at the paraphrasing of your last quote that I find useful, reversing its order, and using the appropriately flexible and non-spatial meaning of the word ‘within’ suggested above:
‘all things are within the three, the three is within the two, the two is within the one, and the one is within the Tao.’
The order of these begettings doesn’t much matter to us ‘all things’, who only exist when the other stages of the begetting ‘sequence’ are in place.
The reversed order reflects how the chain of included realities looks to us from its most enclosed level looking towards that which contains all of it.
Walking through the meaning of that paraphrase, with each ‘within’ being, I suspect, as unique and identical in our personal imaging as are the words ‘Tao’, ‘one’, ‘two’, ‘three’ and ‘all things’, I come to satisfying parsings of all the other quotes, including the comments of all the contributors to this discussion.
Knowing that all these exist within and of their parent, and that our temporal awareness can know directly only the ‘all things’ level, explains and generates the observations of the other quotes.
Each quote becomes a different blind man’s view of that same elephant we share in the parts of our lives that have no parts, times or distances.
Each contradiction and complementary-opposite pair educate us when we see their real unity, always found just past the distinctions imposed by the abstractions of our perception.
Comments
Chapter 51
The way gives them life;
Virtue rears them;
Things give them shape;
Circumstances bring them to maturity.
Therefore the myriad creatures all revere the way and honor virtue. Yet the way
is revered and virtue honored not because this is decreed by an authority but
because it is natural for them to be treated so.
Thus the way gives them life and rears them;
Brings them up and nurses them;
Brings them to fruition and maturity;
Feeds and shelters them.
It gives them life yet claims no possession;
It benefits them yet exacts no gratitude;
It is the steward yet exercises no authority.
Such is called the mysterious virtue.
Read commentary previously posted for this chapter.
Read notes on translations
Now, do it too at Wengu!
This chapter is one wonderful [chref=22]model[/chref] for raising children. I suspect that children who tend to rebel do so because their parents claim possession, and exercise authority. In raising my kids, I found that they respected me naturally and never rebelled. Of course, I waited until I was 45 to have kids so it was much easier to claim no possession than it would have been if I’d had kids in my twenties. They never rebelled because I gave them nothing to rebel against. It never ceased to amaze me what [chref=48]nothing[/chref] could do.
The reason [chref=17]the best of all rulers is but a shadowy presence to his subjects[/chref] (or children) is that he is not projecting his own agenda (his fears and his needs) upon them. As I mature, I do this less, and each year that passes offers renewed opportunities for circumstances to bring me to maturity. Of course, seizing these opportunities is crucial. Thankfully there seems no end to opportunities… well, until I die anyway. Oops, no time to waste!
I must say, D.C. Lau’s translation is a smoother read by far this time. Still, the awkward translation below may hold a surprise or two for you.
The, nearly literal:
The way gives birth, virtue rears, things give shape, power accomplishes.
Accordingly, everything respects the way and values virtue.
Respect of the way and value of virtue happens not by fate, but naturally.
Hence, of the way born, of virtue reared.
Of long duration, of giving birth.
Of well balanced, of malicious.
Of support, of overturning.
It gives birth yet claim not, it acts yet relies not.
It is the elder yet rules not.
This truly means profound virtue.
The, as literal as I can make it:
of way existence (gives birth to), of virtue rears, of things form, of power accomplishes.
correct in order to everything nothing not respect way, and (but, yet) value virtue.
of way respect, of virtue value, of no one man life (fate, destiny), and (but, yet) always natural (free from affectation.
reason of way give birth, of virtue rear.
of long of give birth to (educate).
of well balanced of poison (malicious, fierce).
of support (provide for) of cover (overturn).
grow (existence, give birth to) and (but, yet) not have, do (act, become,
serve as) and (but, yet) not rely on,
elder (chief, long) and (but, yet) not rule.
correctly say profound (dark, mysterious) virtue.