Chapter 14 (original) (raw)
Translation
Of watched for, yet not seen is called smooth.
Of listened to, yet not heard is called rarefied.
Of handled yet not held is called minute.
These three are unfathomable, so they blend and serve as One.
Its upper part is not bright, its lowest part is not hazy,
Unending, it cannot be named, and returns again to nothing.
This is called the of without shape form, the of without substance shape,
This is called the suddenly trance-like.
Moving toward it, you will not see its head,
Following behind, you will not see its back.
Hold of the ancient way in order to manage today.
The ability to know the ancient beginning, this is called the way’s discipline.
look at (regard; inspect; watch) of no (not) see (not meet) name (fame; reputation; well-known) say (call; name) smooth (safe; exterminate). 视之不见名曰夷。_(shì zhī bù jiàn míng yuē yí.)_
listen (hear; obey / allow) of no (not) hear (news; story; smell) name (fame; reputation; well-known) say (call; name) hope (rare; scarce; uncommon). 听之不闻名曰希。_(tīng zhī bù wén míng yuē xī.)_
roll round with hand of no (not) get (obtain, gain) name (fame; reputation; well-known) say (call; name) minute (tiny). 抟之不得名曰微。_(tuán zhī bù dé míng yuē wēi.)_
this three (者) cannot (must not) send (extend; deliver; result in) closely question (interrogate), reason (cause; hence) mix (confuse; pass for) <conj.> and (yet, but) do (act; serve as; become; be; mean) one. 此三者不可致诘，故混而为一。_(cĭ sān zhĕ bù kĕ zhì jié, gù hún ér wéi yī.)_
his (its; they; that; such) upper (up; upward; higher; superior) no (not) white (bright, clear), his (its; they; that; such) below (down; under; underneath; lower; inferior) no (not) have hazy notions about (be ignorant of; hide; conceal), (neglect), 其上不皦，其下不昧，_(qí shàng bù ji_ ăo shōu qí xià bù mèi)
rope (restrict; unending) cannot (must not) name (fame; reputation; well-known), duplicate (turn over; answer; again) go back to (return) in (at, to, from, by, than, out of) nothing (nil; not have, without) thing (matter; the outside world). 绳绳不可名，复归于无物。_(shéng shéng bù kĕ míng, fù guī yú wú wù.)_
is (yes this; that) say (call; name; meaning; sense) nothing (nil; not have) form (shape; state; condition) of form (shape; state; condition), nothing (nil; not have, without) thing (matter; the outside world) of elephant (appearance; shape; image; be like; resemble), 是谓无状之状，无物之象，_(shì wèi wú zhuàng zhī zhuàng, wú wù zhī xiàng,)_
is (yes this; that) say (call; name; meaning; sense) suddenly (seem; as if) dim (in a trance; seemingly). 是谓惚恍。_(shì wèi hū huăng.)_
greet (welcome; receive; move towards) of no (not) see (not meet) his (its; they; that; such) head (first; leader; chief), 迎之不见其首，_(shŏu zhī bù jiàn qí shŏu,)_
to follow (to comply with / to allow) of no (not) see (not meet) his (its; they; that; such) back (behind; rear; after; afterwards). 随之不见其后。_(suí zhī bù jiàn qí hòu.)_
hold (grasp; manage) ancient (age-old) of road (way, speak; think) of use ( take
according to; because of so as to and) drive a carriage (resist, keep out) present-day (now) of have (there is; exist). 执古之道以御今之有。_(zhí gŭ zhī dào yĭ yù jīn zhī yŏu.)_
ability (skill energy; can) know (realize; notify; knowledge) ancient (age-old) beginning (start), is (yes this; that) say (call; name; meaning; sense) road (way, speak; think) discipline (put down in writing; record). 能知古始，是谓道纪。_(néng zhī gŭ shĭ, shì wèi dào jì.)_
Fourth Pass: Chapter of the Month (pandemic era) 8/3/2024
Zoom on YouTube Recordings:
https://youtu.be/lz6_BcvBy4A is the link to the Zoom video of this month’s Sunday meeting. The shorter first part of the meeting begins with a chapter reading followed by attendees’ commentary, if any. A little later on begins the longer open discussion part of the meeting when those who wish to discuss how the chapter relates to their personal experience.
Corrections?
None this time.
Reflections:
Of watched yet not seen, call smooth. Of listened yet not heard, call rarified. Of handled yet not held, call minute. These three are unfathomable, hence blend and serve as One.
Of watched yet not seen, Of listened yet not heard, Of handled yet not held bring to mind the senses that are primed to see, hear, touch and so on, yet whatever they notice, they are always ripe to sense more—the ghosts of the next moment, so to speak. This is the odd quality of ‘now’, which is only noticeable when I slow down enough to observe the light of consciousness more than the objects it illuminates. This feels like the surreal and diffuse edge awareness.
More straightforward are the actual—_seen, heard, held_—things in awareness. These tangibles offer me a clear-cut beginning—a ‘moment in time’—and something to react to and remember. Yet, the intangibles—_Of watched yet, Of listened yet, Of handled yet—_linger on at the edge… an implied unfathomable mystery. This begs the question, “What lies beyond the tangible that the senses perceive so readily?” Calling this perception “the eternal moment” helps describe the unfathomable One aspect of consciousness, of time. I find it useful to think of consciousness as the light—the Of watched yet, Of listened yet, Of handled yet— whereas awareness is a blend of the objects this ‘light of consciousness’ shines upon and differentiates. I don’t know if any of this makes sense. See You are Immortal, where I take another stab at the unfathomable.
Anyway, at the surface, our innate senses offer us a firm sense of reality… it’s obvious, it’s loud, it’s tangible, and so on. But those are all relative to their opposites… obscure, silent, ethereal. The fourth line says These three are unfathomable, hence blend and serve as One. This One certainly seems to parallel our notion of God. Here we use words, like God or One, to allude to our awareness of something beyond our dipolar awareness, i.e., so much of awareness requires contrast, without which the mind can get a bit unhinged from reality. A little sensory deprivation can be relaxing, of course, but extended deprivation can result in extreme anxiety, hallucinations, bizarre thoughts, and depression. In other words, too much ‘pure light’ without palpable awareness is “blinding”.
Words like God and One annoy me somewhat because they can’t help but fail to convey the unfathomable mystery they aim to represent. Yet, that doesn’t stop people from touting their favorite label for the unnamable. Relying on such labels always obscures the unfathomable mystery. Even so, such labels are useful up to the point they become locked in doctrine. They serve a social purpose, and like flags, labels offer people something tangible to rally around… and unfortunately, battle over when believed. See Belief: Are We Just Fooling Ourselves?
Its upper part is not bright, its lowest part is not hazy Unending, it cannot be named, and again returns to no-thing. This is called the without of shape form, the without of matter shape, This is called indistinct suddenly.
To me, Indistinct suddenly describes the surreal quality of ‘now’. Each moment feels sudden within a flow of infinitely connected suddenlies. Of course, “_suddenlies_” is not a proper word because we don’t think of suddenly as a flow of time… a series of inseparable suddenlies. Indeed, “series” implies a string of related though discrete phenomena. If ‘now’ was truly a discrete phenomenon it wouldn’t be so indistinct. Of course, we attempt to slice time into more tangible, discrete chunks but this only works up to a point. In the end, ‘now’ is utterly indistinct suddenly. How is this any different from how we chop up the interconnected universe of things into discrete words? It isn’t, although chopping reality—be it time or matter— into identifiable bits is useful. Our problem is that we hoodwink ourselves into believing these symbolic bits and pieces are Reality. Indeed, the most you can say is that these are reflections of reality—glimmers at most. Realizing that I don’t know is better for it helps avoid being swallowed up by this named virtual reality we’ve created.
Unending, it cannot be named, and again returns to no-thing acknowledges the utter inability of names to capture reality. I find that allowing my discerning mind to returns to no-thing leaves me with the deepest sense of self-honesty. This may be hard to understand, I suppose. This is another way of saying, I know that realizing I don’t know is better, as chapter 71 reminds us.
In some ways, This is called the without of shape form, the without of matter shape, feels similar to an intuitive understanding of matter. That is, in the truest sense, physics-wise, matter is an illusion. Einstein’s formula E=MC2 says it all. In the beginning was Nothing, then came the Big Bang of energy, then as the situation cooled, energy coalesced into matter. I guess you could say matter is a frozen solid form of energy.
This also corresponds to the illusion of solid form and substance. At the atomic level we see a huge degree of emptiness that bridges the gap between individual atoms. What we see, hear, and touch are not what we think, but rather a handy illusion of solidity to help us navigate the world. Yet, we can’t help but feel solid things are truly real. Emptiness has no tangible property to feel. All we can feel is the lack of a something. Our intuitive sense of the indefinable and unfathomable is only possible because we put such stake on the tangible side of reality, i.e., on the objects illuminated rather than on the light illuminating. I imagine that is due to how thought divides the whole unfathomable into discrete knowable bits and pieces. Our memory and imagination then hold on to these pieces.
In trying to discern a truer reality, the best response is Neti Neti the Sanskrit expression which means “not this, not that”. Neti neti aims to help a person understand the nature of Brahman by negating everything that is not Brahman. This is just another way of stating chapter 1’s The way possible to think, runs counter to the constant way. The name possible to express runs counter to the constant name. Here, Brahman is a synonym for the constant way, name… and God, of course. Naturally, if you really believe in such labels, you get locked into dogma again… the symbol, this or that, rather than the substance-less substance, i.e., Unending, it cannot be named, and again returns to no-thing.
Of moving toward it, you will not see its head, Of following behind it, you will not see its back. Hold the ancient way in order to manage today. The ability to know the ancient beginning; this is called the way’s discipline.
Finally, these last lines connect to something more practical. Of course, the need for that has been set up by the first part of this chapter. I mean, if everything boils down to E=MC2 or something equally indistinct and suddenly how am I to know what the hell is going on here and now?
Actually knowing what is going on here-and-now in any situation across the board is impossible if all we have to go on relates somehow to our current story about what is going on. We go round and round, throwing one false herring after another at the wall to see what sticks for a while. There is a better way… Hold the ancient way in order to manage today**.**
I look to wild animals and to the biology across all life on earth as my most effective way to Hold the ancient way in order to manage today. The underlying processes of life that have persisted from the very beginning billions of years ago is the most stable and reliable context in which to view and interpret the present. The present time, whether that be now in 2024 or any present moment a billion years ago, or a billion years from now, is utterly unstable and fleeting; deriving the deepest sense of meaning and being is beyond reach. Our downfall lies in believing we understand the present within the context of the present and its stories, beliefs, ideals. That is just being a dog chasing its tail.
The deepest-most process that I see applying to all life forms from the very beginning is fear. Most simply put, the perception of fear drives life’s quest to push back on entropy—death. Of course, entropy always wins out in the end, and yet due to evolution and procreation I suppose you could say this is how life triumphs over entropy.
If you take a deep contemplative moment out of your daily life to inspect, you should be able to perceive how every single thing you do in life is driven by fear, fear of discomfort, pain, loss, failure, embarrassment, weakness, loneliness… all the way down to death itself. Fear drives life’s will to survive. Chapter 33 speaks to this battle with entropy that all life endures…
Naturally, I’m referring to a much more profound and subtle version of fear—not the run in terror from the monster that movies depict. In any attempt to distinguish the ‘fear in all actions’ connection, it will help to know that fear is the driving force behind need. Without fear there can be no need. Thus, in any search for fear, closely inspect your needs, desires, and wishes. They are all symptoms of fear.
Now, is the converse true, i.e., without need there can be no fear. In the end I suspect both are simply two sides of the same coin. Still, it helps to regard fear as the primary mover of life, and to classify need as an emotional push to move in a direction away from what is feared. Thus, if you really want to have a deeper understanding of what is going on, strive to see how fear is pulling the strings. See Fear & Need Born in Nothing.
Chapter Archive https://youtu.be/Ta_y-L0vLCE
This is the complete video. It begins with blowing Zen followed by the meeting
Third Pass: Chapter of the Month 9/30/2017
Corrections?
None this time
Reflections:
These three are unfathomable, hence blend and serve as One. I capitalize One because I think it refers to our notions of God, gods, spirit forces, or whatever ‘higher power’ we credit for creating the reality we find unfathomable. Of course, there is no capitalization in Chinese, and so ( 一 yī) is mostly simply 1. Yet, 一 yī also means: single; alone; same; whole; all; throughout; each; per; every time; also; otherwise; concentrated; wholehearted. I interpret this “one” as whole; all; throughout, which to me turns it into an omnipotent and omnipresent One that we credit for the unfathomable.
This answers a question for which I seldom if ever have heard: Why do people believe in God, gods, or spiritual forces? Clearly, our species needs to have a name for this unfathomable ‘thing’. And I do mean NEED! Once we have a name for it, we hold on to it for dear life. From a Symptoms Point Of View, that tells me we are terrified of the unknown, which causes us to name ‘it’. With this comes the unintended consequence of believing wholeheartedly in what you think.
This is the disease chapter 71 mentions: Realizing I don’t’ know is better; not knowing this knowing is disease. Clearly, chapter 1’s disclaimer view, The name possible to express runs counter to the constant name, is beyond belief, so to speak. Speaking of belief, see Belief: Are We Just Fooling Ourselves? This also ties into Buddha’s 2nd Truth which states, in part, “the illusion of self originates and manifests itself in a cleaving to things”. Belief is just another thing on which to cleave. In doing this we enhance our illusion of self, which leaves us feeling even more disconnected from One — whole; all; throughout.
This is called the without of shape form, the without of matter shape, reminds me of a Zen koan, like that famous, “What is the sound of one hand clapping?” I use something similar. I regard reality as what is behind me… literally. In other words, I regard what I see in front of me as deceptive and misleading. I need to be tuned into what I don’t (can’t) see! Does that make any sense? Our sensory bias to favor what we can see, touch, and hear often gets us into trouble.
This is called indistinct suddenly. This has been a bit of an odd ball for me, but today I linked it to an experience I have constantly. Whenever I actually open my eyes and look, I suddenly see something I have not seen before. That applies to my mind’s eye as well. When I let it observe, it sees something new, without fail. Perhaps like the eyes and mind of an infant. Everything is new if you drop the story that tells you what ‘it’ is. Ironically, the major impediment to seeing the world as it is, is language. Words define, and in defining they blind the eye to the Dark and dark again, the multitude of wondrous entrance as chapter 1 puts it.
At least science employs a rigorous discipline on what we think we know. That is a good beginning to making our way back to impartiality. As chapter 16 says…
Second Pass: Work in Progress 3/06/2013
Issues:
I’ve dropped some superfluous words and suffixes, which is always gratifying! There are a few larger changes too. I enjoy this because it means I’ve found my errors, but I also enjoy not making changes because it means I got it right… as far as I know anyway. I suppose I’ll stop bolding the changes. Who really cares that much? If you do, then you will recognize the changes anyway… right?
Notice that line 6 ends with the words no-thing. This is two characters, wú (无… nothing; nil; not have; without) and wù (物, thing; matter; the outside world as distinct from oneself). It is important to note the subtler connotation that easily gets lost when we say ‘nothing’. Nothing, in the ‘normal’ mind conveys unimportance; nothing in the Taoist mind conveys ‘deep and dark in which exists essence. Its essence is more than real‘.
I corrected the sloppy placement of “of” zhī (之) in line 7, where I had put the cart before the horse. This brings home the value of reading out load in order to proof what you write. Over the years, I’ve heard that was useful to do, but until recently didn’t. This is a clear case of understanding without knowing! (i.e., I understand, but do I know?) Oh well, better late than never.
Next, I swapped out suddenly trance-like for indistinct suddenly, which hits closer—hū (惚, indistinct) and hu ǎng (恍, all of a sudden; suddenly; flurried; indistinct, seem; as if). An alternative would be ‘_indistinct indistinct_‘. The idea here is almost the opposite of ‘enlightenment’—that illusory ideal which many seek. Rather than coming from darkness into clarity, the emphasis here is on the darkness, shadowy, and indistinct. This is what occurs when you peer into infinite mind space. Bits and pieces of enlightenment, if any, simply follow this catalyst—the stepping outside oneself .
Commentary:
Our love of story over truth stems from our need to manage today. It is as though we have come into Act III of a play; we’re in the middle of the story. We don’t truly know what’s going on, so we (cultures) make up plausible stories (myths) that answer what we are anxious to know. The early creation myths are obvious examples, but science’s quest for answers also springs from this need to know. Indeed, this need to know is what makes realizing I don’t know so extremely difficult.
Granted, it is easy for most anyone to admit they don’t know much compared to the expert, or ____(you fill in the blank)____. However, true realization of ‘I don’t know’ pertains to the names and words themselves—the nuts and bolts of knowledge. That is where knowledge begins! For the serious student, correlations are the rigorous way to challenge what you think at the deepest name and word level. See, Using Yin and Yang to Pop Preconceptions, or perhaps, Couplets and the Co-generating Principle.
Ironically, the Tao Te Ching begins with the disclaimer, the name possible to express runs counter to the constant name, before it plunges into describing the way. This is quite novel; at least I’ve never run across such humble self-honesty in anything that purports to tell me the secrets of reality. Buddha, on the other hand, avoids the ‘superiority’ trap with a matter-of-fact observation of basic human nature, and leaving it to me to prove for myself—again humble and self-honest.
Museums also reflect our desperate need to have some tangible evidence of the ancient way in order to manage today. The value we place on our stories—political and religious especially—are symptomatic of the discomfort we feel with what is called the without of shape form, the without of matter shape. I now look back on the stories I grappled with earlier as stepping-stones to what is an increasingly indescribable teaching. No-thing actually answers the mystery I feel. I just make do with my stories when I lack the ability to know the ancient beginning; this is called the way’s discipline.
Suggested Revision:
Of watched yet not seen, call smooth.
Of listened yet not heard, call rarified.
Of handled yet not held, call minute.
These three are unfathomable, hence blend and serve as One.
Its upper part is not taken in, its lowest part is not overlooked.
Unending, it cannot be named, and again returns to no-thing.
This is called the without of shape form, the without of matter shape,
This is called indistinct suddenly.
Of moving toward it, you will not see its head,
Of following behind it, you will not see its back.
Hold the ancient way in order to manage today.
The ability to know the ancient beginning; this is called the way’s discipline.
First Pass: Chapter of the Week 02/10/2009
Perhaps the most remarkable thing about the Tao Te Ching is how it attempts to speaks ‘subjectively’ to consciousness in various ways, e.g., know, watch, listen, seems, hear, discernment, think. As awareness slows down and my mind settles into its consciousness, the more unfathomable consciousness becomes. A profound tradeoff we make in having awareness preoccupied with the thinking side of consciousness is a declining awareness of the mysterious sameness side of consciousness.
I’m having a problem keeping rhythm on fast songs. People have given me advice on what to do, but I find nothing ‘works’. Perhaps the reason the advice never truly works is that we always attempt to name it. What does seem to work is being as conscious as possible of the _smooth, rarified, minute_… the unfathomable. That is to say, I find that I can manage this problem best by holding to the ancient way.
Now, that’s easy to say and easy to do, yet when I ‘try to do it’, it becomes impossible, i.e., whoever lays hold of it will ruin it; whoever lays hold of it will lose it. Not that I can cease ‘trying’ and ‘laying hold’, mind you. Happily though, I’ve found that ‘if you would have a thing weakened, you must first strengthen it‘. Know and giving into this, the way’s discipline, helps me manage today. That this is not widely valued may be because when we lay hold of it we lose it; thanks to biology, we don’t realize that only through loss do we gain. This makes for life’s greatest adventure – the adventure within.
Note: Sometimes there are differences between the two principle original versions of the Tao Te Ching, the standard Wang Bi 226-249 AC version and an earlier Mawangdui version (dating from 168 BC) Personally, I find little difference between them; what ever differences are seen lie in the eye of the translator / interpreter / reader, in my view. In other words, why leave a mole hill a mole hill when you can make a mountain out of it? Below, I’ll past in a short description of these two versions from Wikipedia.
Mawangdui Silk Texts
(From Wikipedia)
Some people believe that the silk texts of the Tao Te Ching are the real book, and that the texts that have come down to us generation by generation are wrong wherever they disagree with these two earlier versions. Other people point out that the silk texts are not particularly good — in the sense that people often would not be able to make sense of them unless they had access to the texts written with the full forms of the characters. They add that Wang Bi, and other very early scholars who edited the texts that are the ancestors of the ones that came down to us by tradition, had access to many early versions of the Tao Te Ching and so were able to correct many mistakes by comparing the several versions available to them.
Most of the time the received versions of the Tao Te Ching are in substantial agreement with each other, and most of the time the text is simple and straightforward. Occasionally, however, two received versions will write homonyms with entirely different meanings at some point in a chapter. In such cases, much help can be received from a silk text that gives a third character that has a different pronunciation but is a synonym for one of the two in the received text.
In recent years several scholars have made new translations of the Tao Te Ching that are based on the silk text and ignore the received texts entirely or almost entirely. These include works by D. C. Lau, and by Robert G. Henricks. Henricks’ translation does compare received versions of the Tao Te Ching with the text found in the tomb.