4
The Tao is like a well: used but never used up. It is like the eternal void: filled with infinite possibilities.
It is hidden but always present. I don't know who gave birth to it. It is older than God.
My favorite, although my favorite depends on the season
9 Fill your bowl to the brim and it will spill. Keep sharpening your knife and it will blunt. Chase after money and security and your heart will never unclench. Care about people's approval and you will be their prisoner.
Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity.
You're confusing communism with dictatorship. Communism is about communal ownership, and likely some version of worker-ownership ("own the means of production"). If the system, or its leaders, are starving the farmers, and the farmers and their customers can't actively negotiate against that practice, you don't have communism at all.
80? That is about government!
What about 19??
Give up ingenuity, renounce profit, And bandits and thieves will disappear.
29?
Do you think you can take over the universe and improve it? I do not believe it can be done.
66?
Because he does not compete, He does not meet competition.
4:
The Tao is so empty
those who use it
never become full again
and so deep
as if were the ancestor of us all
it dulls our edges
unties our tangles
softens our light
and merges our dust
it's so clear
as if it were present
I wonder whose child it is
it seems it was here before Ti
Instead of pouring in more
better stop while you can
making it sharper
won't help it last longer
rooms full of treasure
can never be safe
the vanity of success
invites its own failure
when your work is done retire
this is the Way of Heaven
I strongly recommend Red Pine!
To give a bit more detail of the first one, 4:
Mitchell 4a: The Tao is like a well: used but never used up. It is like the eternal void: filled with infinite possibilities.
1. The original text does not mention a well.
2. those who use it are not full, not the Tao not used up.
3. there is no mention of eternal voids just a lack of fullness for users.
4. there is no mention of infinite impossibilities, but it is possible "as it were the ancestor of us all" is mistranslated by Mitchell where "all" wan wu (literally 10,000 things) is translated as infinite, and the ancestor part is dropped.
It appears Mitchell skips the middle part of the section, which discusses dulled edges, tangles, light, and dust.
1. The first half is clear / as if it were present, not hidden.
The rest is reasonable.
The wisdom of Solomon was so great, the Queen of Bathsheeba made a year-long journey just to hear him.
The time of Solomon, and his accomplishments, are not taken from older traditions but from the man himself.
Perhaps read some for yourself. The Bible doesn't indoctrinate people do that. The Bible has so much wisdom and knowledge packed within its pages I'm not sure why people are so reticent to peruse or even read through it.
The Bible doesn't bite, but it certainly does cut to the quick.
Solomon the Biblical personage probably never existed. No archaeological evidence, as far as I’m aware, has been found.
[0] https://academic.oup.com/litthe/article-abstract/34/4/486/60...
The work is brief. There is room for multiple translations and interpretations.
Not really. Most of his other "translations" from ancient languages were made the same way as with the Tao te ching: he simply rewrote existing translations. As far as I can tell, the Book of Job translation is the only one made from the source text. I don’t think you understand how notorious Mitchell has been within the field of literary translation for decades now.
> is a trained Zen monk.
Zen and Taoism are different philosophical systems. As the linked paper underlines, choosing someone with a background in Zen to translate that foundational work of Taoism, was peculiar, but it is understandable within the context of a Western publishing market that wants to cash in on wisdom lit and doesn’t really care about the details of Asian religions.
> There is room for multiple translations and interpretations.
Attention is finite and marketing is dishonest. There are myriads of people out there for whom the Mitchell Tao te ching is the only one they will be exposed to, and they won’t even be aware that it isn’t a real translation and they will need to consult other translations in order to make up for that.
My understanding (and some points in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chan_Buddhism echo it) is that Chan/Zen Buddhism is a descendant of Mahāyāna Buddhism and Taoism. In that way, it is itself a Taoist religion.
> Most of his other "translations" from ancient languages were made the same way as with the Tao te ching
This is incorrect for any Ancient Hebrew or Greek works. Genesis is listed as "translated". On the Psalms he says:
I have translated fairly closely where that has been possible; but I have also paraphrased, expanded, contracted, deleted, shuffled the order of verses, and freely improvised on the themes of the originals.
From Googling "does stephen mitchell know ancient greek"
Some of his translations aren't, strictly speaking, translations, but adaptations. He knows Greek, Latin, Hebrew, French, German, Italian and Danish, but he's also rewritten works in languages he doesn't know—Chinese, Sanskrit and Babylonian.It is still problematic, for the same reason that a translation of Christian work by a Muslim or a Mormon with no background in Christianity, in a language they're not familiar with, would raise eyebrows.
I would also counter that a Muslim or Mormon's view of the Bible would probably be very useful, if for no other reason that they would have a alternative but still reverent lens on it; vs an intellectual's which contains little or no reverence. I found a Jew's (Stephen Mitchel's) translation of Jesus's writings to be very enlightening indeed!
象 has the appearance of/seems to
帝 the Di, the highest or supreme deity/Zeus like king-of-the-gods
之先 A (the Dao) comes (typically chronologically or in terms of precedence) prior to B (The Di)
I think there may be an analogy to neo Platonic emanations (including as imagined by Christian thinkers ) in Western thought where the One or ground of Being comes logically prior to the gods/angels/spiritual powers etc.