Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
The rear of a misleaders whetstone never apply the existence of that which depart.Here the chinese text for 33.1:
遯 | dun4 | retreat | to conceal, to escape, pig, piglet
尾 | wei3 | tail | back guard, back, rear, to mate, to breed (1)
厲 | li4 } | dangerous | severe, harsh , hard
勿 | wu4 | must not | do not, not
用 | yong4 | undertake | to use, to apply
有 | you3 | ? | to have, there is, there are
攸 | you1 | ? | distant, far, a place, where?
往 | wang3 | ? | to go in a direction, towards
The rear of a misleaders whetstone never apply the existence of that which depart.
li4 does too mean "a whetstone" and I prefer the image of a misleader's tool,
that doesn't produce a leftover from that which should have been sharpend.
Getojack:
Here the chinese text for 33.1 whit W/B and other options:
遯 | dun4 | retreat | to conceal, to escape, pig, piglet
尾 | wei3 | tail | back guard, back, rear, to mate, to breed (1)
厲 | li4 } | dangerous | severe, harsh , hard
勿 | wu4 | must not | do not, not
用 | yong4 | undertake | to use, to apply
有 | you3 | ? | to have, there is, there are
攸 | you1 | ? | distant, far, a place, where?
往 | wang3 | ? | to go in a direction, towards
As you can see W/B had taken some licenses here:
1) «dangerous» isn't what the text says but what it suggests.
2) the rendering for the prognostication «wu yong you you wang» is an advice: «One must not wish to undertake anything» not a literal translation (2).
The commentary of W/B says:
A military interpretation, it is not healthy to be at back guard, better be quiet.
But if you keep still, how could you to retreat? Maybe W/B is ecouraging troops at the back guard to desert? Desertors also runs heavy risks, they can be executed from the back if officials caught him or can be killed by the foes depending of his humour.
The picture you (Getojack) post is telling us that the true danger is to have an exposed tail, folktales speaks of animals (3) cought for having forgot to conceal his tail. The advice could be «if you show your tail, any hiding place can help you» (4).
Yours,
Charly:bows:
______________________________
(1) the last two given as a possibility for Harmen.
(2) a literal translation could be: «useless to have where to go», looks unlucky instead of which «not wish to undertake anything» looks pretty more optimistic about the possible results.
(3) generally foxes.
(4) in a moralistic way it exhorts you not to show your bad aspects, not to show the raveled thread [«no mostrar la hilacha», «las patas de la sota»].
Hi, Lienshan:...
The main problem with this text is the translation of the two vertical columns of characters.
The first character of each line makes this sentence of 11 characters:
The inferior king of the river king uses superior people of superiors below because inferior.
The last character of each line makes this sentence of 11 characters:
In front Earth of Heaven is the influence of Heaven hating the arguement of Heaven.
My explanation of the three gu3 characters and the two min2 characters:
Shuo Gua (the eightth wing): "to Heaven they assigned the number 3, to Earth the number 2"
So the three gu3 characters mean "Heaven" and the two min2 characters mean "Earth"!
...
Dao De Jing Chapter 66
As a large river flows to the sea, it becomes the ruler over the hundreds of valleys it travels through.
Because of this, the hundreds of valleys have the ability to act as though they were below.
It's just natural this ability would allow the hundred valleys to be ruled.
The influence of a wise person promotes other people to advance, while keeping their own selves in the background.
Their influence places others on a higher level, while their own words remain below.
Their influence places people on a higher level, so the people don't feel like they're in the background.
Their influence promotes other people to advance, so the people won't feel like they're being criticized.
Everywhere in the world happiness abounds, yet won't prevent room for more.
Because there's nothing to argue about, that's why nothing in the world has the ability to argue with each other.
Trad. by Nina Correa
from: http://www.daoisopen.com/Chapter66.html
Hi charlyHi Lienshan:
I don´t see any whetstone in my post that you quoted censored.
Very short: The Guodian Laozi is the proof, that there was no Laozi.Hi, Lienshan:
1st.: You posted a link to Guodian manuscript, being that there is no parsing at all, how do you know where is the first or the last character of each line?
Very short: The Guodian Laozi is the proof, that there was no Laozi.
"altered"? The first Guodian Laozi "chapters" are 19-66-46-30-15-64b-37-63-2 and after a break 32
The "chapters" in bold contain the dao character, but brushed like footprints on a road and not as the usual dao character, as it is brushed on the following slips of the Guodian Laozi. The first "chapters" from 19 to 2 were therefore by logic brushed by a copyist listening to someone, who was reading aloud.
One cannot "alter" while stenographing.
The utmost important character in Dao De Jing is dao.What about someone "copying" a text from another one or an "original" writing from memory?
Luis:Sorry, this is "logical" because_______________ (fill in the blank)...
So, it makes more sense to imagine a scene with a "reading aloud" party and a "bamboo slip brushing stenographer" taking down the words and because of the reading speed he wouldn't have a chance to "alter" the words? What about someone "copying" a text from another one or an "original" writing from memory?
...the Guodian version has major departures in organization and content. The arrangement of the passages differs significantly from the received version, and there are numerous variant and/or archaic characters. In terms of content, it is noteworthy that many of the polemical and anti-Ruist (Confucian) passages are absent. One explanation is that the “Bamboo Laozi” represents an earlier phase of composition. The Guodian slips point towards the fact that the organization and content of the received text was in flux at least as late as the end of the fourth century BCE.
Center for Daoist Studies
at: http://www.daoistcenter.org/daodejing.html
I think that t.ex. the first (chapter 19) is very polemical:Center for Daoist Studies said:it is noteworthy that many of the polemical and anti-Ruist (Confucian) passages are absent.
The utmost important character in Dao De Jing is dao.
By logic: The copyist brushing a wrong dao-character three times was not a daoist.
How could a non-daoist copywriter memorize seven or more chapters from a daoist text
The hypothesis of accidental variation of characters requires that the memorious persons that dictated were iliterate, if they were reading a copy why would they don't verify what the scribe was doing ?
Abrazo,
Charly
"If" ... then there probably are more examples ... t.ex. within the 13 characters starting with san yan"If" the text was being "dictated," which I seriously doubt, the scribe writing it down would not capriciously write different versions of the same character for a same spoken word.
Luis!:Charly,
That doesn't hold water either. Spoken word is not the same as the written word. "If" the text was being "dictated," which I seriously doubt, the scribe writing it down would not capriciously write different versions of the same character for a same spoken word. An "illiterate" scribe (biggest oxymoron of them all...) would rather lack a variety of characters to use, not exhibit more options to put down in writing. Scribes do not make accidental errors.
Abrazo,
Some were probably, but the communist scholars reading the Guodian texts were not diviners!But scribes weren't also diviners?
Here's one of the ways to read Guodian chapter 66 and 46 as one single text:You posted a link to Guodian manuscript, being that there is no parsing at all,
how do you know where is the first or the last character of each line?
One can actually see more indications of the fact, that the Guodian text was dictated. The one copyingEven if your arguments held your logic still sucks.
One empirical or anecdotal instance does not constitute a proof of anything,
except that you are easily convinced.
Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).