The names we give to these three aspects are clearly a point of contention among translations. I understand that the English words are chosen mainly for their apparent relevance to the previous lines, but I think it’s important to note the literal translation of the characters in question, especially since the structure stands each apart from the rest of the text.

yí: non-Han people, esp. to the East of China; barbarians; to wipe out; to exterminate; to tear down; to raze.

xī: to hope; to admire;

wēi: tiny; miniature; slightly; profound; abtruse; to decline; one millionth part of; micro-;

The first two are those whose translation attempts most baffle me. Where do we get ‘dim’, ‘minute’, ‘colourless’ or ‘equable’ from the direct translation above? Where does one get ‘rarified’, ‘faint’, ‘soundless’ or ‘inaudible’ out of ‘to hope; to admire’? There seems to be a liberty taken with these translations, which to me demonstrates a misunderstanding of the idea Lao Tzu was trying to convey with this character. It took me a while to make the connections between these ideas that allowed it all to flow without being forced.

I know we like to go with a simple 1:1 translation, but this doesn’t always work. Qualitative experience is a many-to-one relation. There is more to what is ‘looked for without being seen’ than simply being practically invisible - what is it about ‘invisible things’ that inspire us to call them ‘destructive’? What is it about ‘to listen/obey’ without ‘to hear/news/well-known/reputation’ that leads us to dismiss something as merely ‘hope’?

The confusion with the third aspect came from the common translation of bo as ‘to seize’.

bó: to fight; to combat; to seize; (of heart) to beat;

What does fighting, seizing and the heart beating have in common that fails to grasp, and in doing so render something microscopic, profound or difficult to understand (depending on your perspective)?

This just gives you an idea of my process...

This just gives you an idea of my process... — Possibility

Thanks again for all your help. It is good to see the process of thinking involved.
I don't have time now but will read later...

Except you do think that Lao Tzu wrote the TTC for a specific communicative purpose, and I think you’d agree that the text uses a particular language, and employs a particular style and structure in itself. That a reductionist methodology, right there - a way of rendering an understanding of the Tao in a relational structure of strokes on a page. Like the choices an artist makes to render a 4D experience of light and movement in 2D. — Possibility

When you first started using the language you use to discuss the TTC, I found it....well, I thought it distracted from the discussion. Since then, I've come to enjoy the kinds of things you talk about. Evidence that I take your arguments seriously - 1) I bought and am reading, slowly, Barrett's book 2) As I discussed in an earlier post, I'm trying to include some of the information about how emotions play out when I think about the experience I am trying to understand. All that being said, your way of understanding the Tao is not my way.

Did Lao Tzu write the TTC for a specific purpose? This is from Addis and Lombardo, Verse 63.

Act without acting. Serve without serving. Taste without tasting....
Therefore the Sage Never attempts great things and so accomplishes them.

So, I guess, no... Lao Tzu didn't have a purpose in writing the TTC. I think Lao Tzu meant what he said and said what he meant.

The structure of the English language insists that biology is not chemistry and psychology is not anatomy - that each ‘level of organisation’ must be spoken about in a different way, using different words. — Possibility

It strikes me as ironic that you discuss the TTC using unfamiliar technical language and then find fault with me for using everyday English. As I said, I find you approach interesting, but it's not mine. The same goes for your linguistic discussion. Another thing you and @Amity have convinced me of is that I need to spend some time with the Chinese language. Even so, I am comfortable putting myself in the hands of the many people who have translated the TTC.

Each attempted translation of the TTC proposes an alternative reductionist methodology, a set of hypotheses to be tested by relating to experience, life and objective reality. We’re not testing what is written, therefore, but our own relation to it. — Possibility

I don't understand what you're trying to say. As I said in an earlier post - I take an impressionistic approach to the TTC. I wonder how different that is from what you are talking about.

I don’t expect you to see things the way I do - only to explore its potential from your own perspective, to ask yourself why you don’t see fear in the body as well as the mind, how your perspective might change if you did, and if that’s such a bad thing... — Possibility

I think I've shown that I'm paying attention to what you say and trying to fit it into my way of seeing things. Can you say the same about what I've written?

This verse is a watershed of different views. Are the things being named as awkwardly related to each other as the problem of talking about them? Or is there an order that is consistent to itself as how things come about that we only understand poorly through deficient means?... — Valentinus

Therefore it is called the formless form,
The image (hsiang) of nothing.
Therefore it is said to be illusive and evasive (hu-huang).
Come toward it one does not see its head,

I'm going to take this verse as an endorsement of the approach to the TTC I've been discussing over the past few posts. Again, I see the TTC as an impressionistic collage of ideas from lots of different translators, commentators, and people in this and other discussions. That started out as a little joke, but I really do think that is something like what Lao Tzu is trying to say.

It's vague. It's confusing. It's hard to see, understand. It's small. Don't look directly at it. See it out of your peripheral vision.

What he did see was that, unable to examine these aspects closely as such, we tend to confuse them all as one. This doesn’t help. The blended confusion fails to sparkle at best; at worst, we can’t just ignore it. We can’t stop it or name it, and it appears to be nothing at all - the uncaused cause, unmoved mover, etc. — Possibility

I think your map differs from Lao Tzu's in that you are locating the "ineffable" as an ingredient in the experience of living amongst the ten thousand things where Lao Tzu is pointing outside to something we will never experience. The statement is made that the same agency is active on both sides. The "darkness" of the "xuán" in Verse 1 is asking how one can observe an equality like this. The "unmoved mover" is said to be on the job 24/7 on our side of the Heavenly Gate.

I don’t have much to argue over with this translation at all, nor with Chen’s detailed comments. I can see why you use this version - its descriptions of the Tao itself seem quite clear to me. It reminds me of qualitative descriptions in quantum field theory. — Possibility

I have no objection to this comparison, as long as it is clear that whatever connection there is between Taoism and QM is completely metaphorical. Some people - Fritjof Capra, I'm talking to you - get that mixed up.

This is where I sign off... — TheMadFool

I think you have contributed in a very useful way to this discussion. Sorry you're leaving.

If I am one of the 'some', then you can and will do whatever you like. It's your thread.
Re: the thread. You disagreed with me re its disjointed nature. Again, only quoting part of my post. Did you not appreciate my thoughts about a meandering path ? — Amity

Your comments about the thread being disjointed were among those I was considering when I wrote that. I have thought about that more. I do believe that my approach is a reasonable one. It reflects my understanding that our primary relationship with the TTC is the experience not understanding.

Did you not appreciate my thoughts about a meandering path ? — Amity

It definitely is a meandering path. The TTC itself is a meandering path. I think that is reflected in the way the discussion is running. That is my intent.

However, sometimes off-shoots, like this, just get in the way...
They need to be cut back, reduced, so that the tree can grow to its full potential. — Amity

I don't agree.

That is exactly what I was going to do. Leave. — Amity

Does this have to do with the fact that we have been barking at each other the last couple of pages? I would be sorry to see you leave. Your thoughts have contributed to our movement down the path we are on. I understand you are uncomfortable with the way the thread is organized, but this really is the discussion I had envisioned from the beginning.

...

Verse 16

Addis and Lombardo

Attain complete emptiness, Hold fast to stillness.
The ten thousand things stir about; I only watch for their going back. Things grow and grow, But each goes back to its root.
Going back to the root is stillness. This means returning to what is. Returning to what is Means going back to the ordinary.
Understanding the ordinary: Enlightenment. Not understanding the ordinary: Blindness creates evil. Understanding the ordinary: Mind opens. Mind opening leads to compassion, Compassion to nobility, Nobility to heavenliness, Heavenliness to Tao.
Tao endures. Your body dies. There is no danger.

Derek Lin

Attain the ultimate emptiness
Hold on to the truest tranquility
The myriad things are all active
I therefore watch their return
Everything flourishes; each returns to its root
Returning to the root is called tranquility
Tranquility is called returning to one's nature
Returning to one's nature is called constancy
Knowing constancy is called clarity
Not knowing constancy, one recklessly causes trouble
Knowing constancy is acceptance
Acceptance is impartiality
Impartiality is sovereign
Sovereign is heaven
Heaven is Tao
Tao is eternal
The self is no more, without danger

Heshang Gong Commentary

致虛極，得道之人，捐情去欲，五內清靜，至於虛極。
“Arrive at supreme emptiness”
Become a man of Dao. Give up strong emotions and discard desires. Then the five internal organs will be clear and tranquil, arriving at supreme emptiness.

守靜篤，守清靜，行篤厚。
“Embrace deep silence”
Hold onto clarity and tranquility until it is deep and substantial.

萬物並作，作，生也。萬物並生也。
“Myriad creatures arise together”
Arise, here, means they are born. The myriad creatures are born side by side.

吾以觀復。言吾以觀見萬物無不皆歸其本也。人當念重
其本也。
“I thereby observe them returning”
Lao Zi is saying “I watch and observe the myriad creatures, and there is not one which does not return to the root foundation.” People should consider the heaviness of the foundation.

夫物芸芸，芸芸者，華葉盛也。
“So many things blossoming”
Blossoming refers to abundant flowers and leaves.

各復歸其根，言萬物無不枯落，各復反其根而更生也。
“And each returns back to its roots”
There is not one of the myriad things which does not dry out and fall. Each returns back to the root, and then many more are born.

歸根曰靜，靜謂根也。根安靜柔弱，謙卑處下，故不復死也。
“Returning to the roots is called silence”
Silence is another word for the root. The root is peaceful and still, soft and pliant. Modestly and humbly, it remains below. Thus, it does not return to death.

是謂復命。言安靜者是為復還性命，使不死也。
“This means returning to one’s destiny-life-force (ming)”
Lao Zi is saying that peace and stillness are the correct way to return to pure nature (xing) and the destiny-life-force (ming). Then one will not die.

復命曰常。復命使不死，乃道之所常行也。
“Returning to one’s destiny-life-force is called eternality”
By returning (to) the destiny-life-force, one will not die but will follow Dao eternally.

知常曰明；能知道之所常行，則為明。
“Understanding eternality is called enlightenment”
Knowing how to follow Dao at all times is to be enlightened.

不知常，妄作凶。不知道之所常行，妄作巧詐，則失神明，故凶也。
“Oblivious to eternality, one is reckless, and author of their own misfortune”
Not knowing how to follow Dao at all times, people recklessly work on developing deceptive skills. As a result, they lose spiritual intelligence. Disaster then befalls them.

知常容，能知道之所常行，去情忘欲，無所不包容也。
“Know how to embrace eternality”
Know how to follow Dao at all times. Leave strong emotions and forget desires. Then there will be nothing which is not wrapped in this embrace.

容乃公，無所不包容，則公正無私，眾邪莫當。
“This embrace shows the way of impartiality”[55]
When there is nothing which is not wrapped in this embrace, there is impartiality, uprightness, and
unselfishness. No wickedness can obstruct it.

公乃王，公正無私，可以為天下王。治身正則形一，神明千萬，共湊其躬也。
“The way of impartiality shows the way of a king”
Impartial, honourable, and unselfish, one can become king of all under Heaven. By governing and aligning the body, form is unified. Countless spiritual lights then assemble in the body.

王乃天，能王，德合神明，乃與天通。
“The way of a king shows the way of Heaven”
Being a king, here, means that Virtue will gather spiritual lights and take you through the Heavens.

天乃道，德與天通，則與道合同也。
“The way of Heaven shows the way of Dao”
When Virtue takes you through the Heavens, you follow Dao and become united as one with it.

道乃久。與道合同，乃能長久。
“The way of Dao shows the way of longevity”
Following Dao and becoming united with it, one can endure indefinitely.

沒身不殆。能公能王，通天合道，四者純備，道德弘遠，無殃無咎，乃與天地俱沒，不危殆也。
“And for the body to be without peril”
If one can follow the way of impartiality and kings, they can travel through Heaven and unite with Dao. These four things prepare one for Dao and Virtue to expand immensely. One will be without misfortune and without error. Then they can be a companion of Heaven and Earth until both have disappeared, yet they will not be endangered.

My thoughts

The ultimate emptiness is the Tao. The path to the Tao is through tranquility, constancy, clarity, acceptance, impartiality.

Everything, the 10,000 things, returns to its root, to its nature. Returns to the Tao. The 10,000 things are created from the Tao but continuously return to it. This is a theme that comes up time after time in many verses. To me this means that, even though the TTC includes a creation story, the process of creation didn’t happen once when the world began, but happens over and over all the time. The Tao and the 10,000 things are always both there. It’s our job to see that.

Lao Tzu’s solution seems to be to examine our history of relation to the Tao, and the very next verse begins with a description of the old masters. — Possibility

I think there is something worthy in framing the "solution" as a history of relation to the Tao, even if people disagree about what relationships are being brought into view. That element is good way to investigate the intention of the text but also how to see what came from framing reality this way. The "natural" is presented as a result of beings being created through opposites related to other opposites. In speaking of a "watershed" one line of thought that came from this understanding lead to empirical methods that were the foundation of medical research. Another way of proceeding can be found in the interest in divination via the The Book of Changes.

I can see some of the relational matrix you are promulgating in both of those outcomes. But they are very different in the agency one is supposed to assume to enter those systems.

That is why I brought up the question of mysticism earlier in responding to Wayfarer's remarks following the distinction he underlined between "existence" and the "real."

Whatever you might make of the above, something that has long struck me about Verse 15 is that the hidden quality of the old masters is being thrust into view in the context of a new conversation. It is not arguing upon the basis of authority. Nor is the matter a revolution that replaces one order with another by cancelling what has gone before.

Thank you for providing the 2 different translations, the commentary and your thoughts.
This provides access and allows for flexibility in reading the text.
It allows me to compare the two translations I have and note the differences.
I am not so concerned with accuracy of translation from the original Chinese characters, although I find it fascinating.

I have been intrigued by the language and the way it is consciously structured in poetic form.
The play on words and reading them encourages flexibility of thought.
I think that it is one of the purposes of the author.
To help us find the Way or set us on the right course by teaching us not to be rigid with fixed beliefs or opinions.

The text is not just to be read and analysed but to be held in reflection and responded to carefully.
The subtle and not so subtle, the play between reading, thoughts and action - all help increase an awareness of our different and limited perspectives.

I think there is something worthy in framing the "solution" as a history of relation to the Tao, even if people disagree about what relationships are being brought into view. That element is good way to investigate the intention of the text but also how to see what came from framing reality this way. The "natural" is presented as a result of beings being created through opposites related to other opposites — Valentinus

[emphasis added]

I have been considering the question of 'What is natural?'
What is it for humans and their activities to be 'natural' ?
What is our natural way?
To create and destroy. To produce and eat food. To unite in cooperation, to disunite in opposition; to disunite in cooperation, to unite in opposition ?
To engage, to disengage, to re-engage. A cycle of analysis and synthesis.
A whole lot more.

Human beings; our ideas and knowledge have evolved.
We have intentions, desires, fears and hopes.
Across all cultures. Isn't that natural ?

Earlier:

..Hold fast to the Way of old, in order to control what is here today.
The ability to know the ancient beginnings, this is called the thread of the Way.
— Ivanhoe

Notes:
32. Returning to an ideal past state is a common theme in the text.
For other examples see chapters 16, 25, 28, 30 and 52. — Amity

The text seems to encourage a return to the good old days. Is there such a thing as an ideal past state ?
Is it desirable to return to a state of nature, whatever that might be ?

In this respect, I think Chapter 16 is an important one to understand.
Reading it is quite soothing. It provides a sense of comfort.
In the way that religions can do for some followers...
If you do follow the Way, then all will be OK...

Mitchell's translation starts with:
Empty your mind of all thoughts.
Let your heart be at peace...

And ends with:

Immersed in the wonder of the Tao,
you can deal with whatever life brings you,
and when death comes, you are ready.

Verse VII

If the sky and the ground last forever is due to they do not live for themselves.
Following this example, the savant advances when he turns back. When he neglects, he take care of him. As he doesn’t seek his benefit, everything tends to be in his benefit

I don’t know if I have translated accurate. But I like this verse because I guess (just my interpretation) that Tao is developing here the principle of omnipresence. When the poem says “advances when he turns back” I think it is referring to either Principle itself or our knowledge.

Help?

I guess (just my interpretation) that Tao is developing here the principle of omnipresence. When the poem says “advances when he turns back” I think it is referring to either Principle itself or our knowledge. — javi2541997

I don't know but think your suggestion of the principle of omnipresence seems right.
Ivanhoe:
Heaven is long lasting;
Earth endures.
Heaven is able to be long lasting and earth is able to endure, because they do not live for themselves.
And so, they are able to be long lasting and to endure.

Re: 'advances when he turns back'.
Mitchell:
The Master stays behind;
that is why she is ahead.
She is detached from all things;
that is why she is one with them.
Because she has let go of herself,
she is perfectly fulfilled.

I don't know if this helps at all ?!
Glad you returned to Verse VII. I missed that !

Thank you Amity for your response.

.

Re: 'advances when he turns back'.
Mitchell:
The Master stays behind;
that is why she is ahead.
She is detached from all things;
that is why she is one with them.
Because she has let go of herself,
she is perfectly fulfilled. — Amity

Yes! Helps a lot. I like the verse your shared. I guess it is better than mine. I wanted to translate it with my own vocabulary or brief use of dictionary because Google translate doesn’t translate it properly I think...

I don't know but think your suggestion of the principle of omnipresence seems right. — Amity

Thank you really. I thought this because some notes I read in a Spanish page of interpretation and he was speaking all the time of “be” and “not be” at the same time or “not act” but at the same time “receive everything” as it says: She is detached from all things;
that is why she is one with them.
So, I thought, this sound like omnipresence.

I guess it is better than mine. I wanted to translate it with my own vocabulary or brief use of dictionary because Google translate doesn’t translate it properly I think... — javi2541997

What can I say ? If I had to translate from English to Spanish, the result would be :scream:

It is admirable what you are doing to share your translation and your interpretation.
It is a difficult text in any language. But worthwhile to engage with, I think.

Would you consider yourself a Taoist ?

It is admirable what you are doing to share your translation and your interpretation.
It is a difficult text in any language. But worthwhile to engage with, I think. — Amity

Thank you so much. If I do so is because a sad context: the community of philosophy here in Spain is mediocre... (Probably because is still a traditional/catholic country, hmm).
I had a good teacher in school. He taught us philosophy through texts from different authors until I enter university. Since then, I never met someone who loves philosophy like him (or me hehe). So, I thought I had to try something so I started to find English speakers/thinkers that ended up bringing me here, in this forum. Hopefully, I finally found a good website like this after years of searching.

Would you consider yourself a Taoist ? — Amity

I think not at all because Taoism tend to be ideal. I respect and like the poems but somehow I only believe if I live it. I guess this is why I always like empiricism.

I had a good teacher in school — javi2541997

A good and inspirational teacher makes all the difference in the world :sparkle:

Hopefully, I finally found a good website like this after years of searching. — javi2541997

I enjoyed 2 other philo forums before coming here. It has its ups and downs. As do I.
I keep returning. What makes me stay are threads like this one, even as it throws up its own challenges.

I think not at all because Taoism tend to be ideal. I respect and like the poems but somehow I only believe if I live it. I guess this is why I always like empiricism. — javi2541997

Yes. I am pretty much the same.
Interested in not just the meaning of the texts but how the words and ideas translate into everyday action and behaviour. At every level of our world.

A good and inspirational teacher makes all the difference in the world — Amity

Yes it is so important having good teachers and a quality education system. This is the base for a good society. I remember back in that day (2014/2015) the minister of education wanted to remove philosophy from “selective exam” (it is a special exam where we have to pass if we want go to university). We were debating about it during hours and ended up about the conclusion that without philosophy a society can be in decay.
After 6 or 7 years I see it now. We are in decay...

the conclusion that without philosophy a society can be in decay.
After 6 or 7 years I see it now. We are in decay... — javi2541997

I agree with the importance of education and critical thinking for all.
People are perhaps more engaged than ever in exchanging ideas. For better or worse.
It is the way we agree or disagree that is important.

Whether or not 'we are in decay' is another debate...
If we are, then is it a natural state of affairs that we can do nothing about ?
What would a Taoist say ?

Anyway, will leave it there...
Good to hear your story :smile:

Did Lao Tzu write the TTC for a specific purpose? This is from Addis and Lombardo, Verse 63.

Act without acting. Serve without serving. Taste without tasting....
Therefore the Sage Never attempts great things and so accomplishes them.

So, I guess, no... Lao Tzu didn't have a purpose in writing the TTC. I think Lao Tzu meant what he said and said what he meant. — T Clark

Well, you know that our views differ on this notion of ‘act without acting’. But I don’t think the TTC was meant, originally. I think it is an expression of reaching towards the idea of the Tao in a way that provides some scaffolding for complex ideas beyond understanding. I think we attribute an author to the text in order to distance ourselves from what we cannot yet grasp, but I think the TTC is so ambiguous because there IS no ‘what Lao Tzu says’ and no ‘what Lao Tzu means’ in the text at all. All we can do is relate to the Tao from where we are, making use of scaffolding provided by the TTC to reach closer...

Would you consider yourself a Taoist ?
— Amity

I think not at all because Taoism tend to be ideal. I respect and like the poems but somehow I only believe if I live it. I guess this is why I always like empiricism. — javi2541997

I personally don’t think Taoism is an idealist perspective - I think many interpretations read this into the text, and there is nothing in the text to actively discourage it. I don’t think it’s possible to interpret the TTC from its original form without bringing our own perspective into it - so perhaps the TTC itself is an idealist structure, but that’s not the same thing. I think we struggle to make the connection between Taoist thought and Taoist practices because of this notion of wu wei as an indirect, many-to-one causal relation.

When we try to make sense of English or Spanish translations of the TTC, we have consolidated concepts, verb tenses and sentence structures that we’re expected to relate to from a potential position, so we shift perspective in relation to the text. But the Chinese text doesn’t contain either expectations or instructions about our position as reader. It says that ‘these ideas relate to each other in this way’, and how we relate to that idea structure within the Tao depends on our own subjective position as a structure within the Tao, regardless of the author’s meaning or perspective. If we consider this subjective position to consist only of what ‘appears in the mind’, then it’s easy to mistake Taoism for a form of idealism. This is common to those who merely translate the TTC, as well as those who approach it philosophically or intellectually.

But if we recognise that this subjective position which relates to the Tao is inclusive of our variable position in spacetime (we often overlook this), then ‘experiencing the Tao’ is a much deeper process, and necessarily involves understanding the limitations, capacity and processes of the body in relation to what appears in the mind.

I’m thinking perhaps we see Taoism as either monist or idealist. I tend towards the monist perspective, myself. That may be why my interpretation often seems so out of step here.

I’m thinking perhaps we see Taoism as either monist or idealist. I tend towards the monist perspective, myself. That may be why my interpretation often seems so out of step here. — Possibility

Interesting analysis. We are agree in one important point: translation of TTC depends a lot about the way of understanding it because those authors tried their best to give us a book similar or at least closer to what Lao-Tzu thought back in the day. This is the main reason why sometimes I enter into this thread to ask and share my doubts with you because my version probably is insufficient. My TTC version doesn’t even have commented section. There are just the poems except an interesting beginning about a friendship between Tu-Fu and Lao-Tzu. Nevertheless, I think is beautiful and amazing how we, persons from different countries, are sharing thoughts about a poem thousands of years old.

Going back again with your perspective: I

it - so perhaps the TTC itself is an idealist structure, but that’s not the same thing. — Possibility

This is why I pretended to say previously that TTC is pure idealistic symbolism. The structure of TTC is (just my humble interpretation) the Principle that can be also named as “world” or the the thing that emanates everything, etc... because Lao-Tzu puts some metaphor to at least trying to get these objectives: peace (this is why in some verses talks about a the difference between a good or bad savant can lead to be in wars or not) equilibrium (when talks about the Principle itself and how we interpret it in the most balanced position possible). Again, these are my interpretations probably I am wrong.
You perfectly explained that obviously TTC is idealistic. This is why I guess crashes a lot in my empirical point of view of life. Probably, I should take TTC as a Sui generis principle like unique trying to not mix it in other philosophical views.

This is why I pretended to say — javi2541997

I don't think you meant 'pretend' as in to 'to give a false appearance', did you ?
I see the Spanish 'pretender' can have different meanings: to aim, to claim, to profess'.
A case of a 'false friend' ?

I don't think you meant 'pretend' as in to 'to give a false appearance', did you ?
I see the Spanish 'pretender' can have different meanings: to aim, to claim, to profess'.
A case of a 'false friend' ? — Amity

Yes, pretend in Spanish is a “false friend” word. I didn’t mean “to give a false appearance” but the verb “to claim”
Sometimes we have to be careful about different words meanings :sweat:

Yes, pretend in Spanish is a “false friend” word. I didn’t mean “to give a false appearance” but the verb “to claim”
Sometimes we have to be careful about different words meanings :sweat: — javi2541997

English is a strange language. The origin of the word ‘pretend’ is ‘to claim’. In English, we’ve packaged this up more recently with a judgment of intention and/or accuracy in our meaning - thereby making our own ‘claims’ to knowledge. But I digress...

I admire your efforts to discuss philosophy, and especially a translated text, in a second language among native speakers. I don’t imagine it’s easy, and I have enjoyed reading your contributions here.

The structure of TTC is (just my humble interpretation) the Principle that can be also named as “world” or the the thing that emanates everything, etc... because Lao-Tzu puts some metaphor to at least trying to get these objectives: peace (this is why in some verses talks about a the difference between a good or bad savant can lead to be in wars or not) equilibrium (when talks about the Principle itself and how we interpret it in the most balanced position possible). Again, these are my interpretations probably I am wrong. — javi2541997

Peace and equilibrium seem to me fairly accurate descriptions of objectives, or ways towards the Tao. I think most of us agree more or less with the importance of these concepts, but perhaps not so much with the methods for achieving them. I think many people would advocate ignorance, isolation or exclusion as useful methods towards achieving a practical peace, for instance. But I don’t think this is the kind of peace that the TTC strives for - one that prefers division over interaction. So I would suggest unity as a third main objective - in the sense of acting as if one, not dissolving into a literal, singular totality. I also like that equilibrium has a more dynamic quality than balance.

English is a strange language. — Possibility

It isn’t strange, it is unique! As other languages around the world. But English is important because is the basic language where we can communicate each other.

Peace and equilibrium seem to me fairly accurate descriptions of objectives, or ways towards the Tao. I think most of us agree more or less with the importance of these concepts, but perhaps not so much with the methods for achieving them. I think many people would advocate ignorance, isolation or exclusion as useful methods towards achieving a practical peace, for instance. But I don’t think this is the kind of peace that the TTC strives for - one that prefers division over interaction. So I would suggest unity as a third main objective - in the sense of acting as if one, not dissolving into a literal, singular totality. I also like that equilibrium has a more dynamic quality than balance. — Possibility

Interesting facts. I think we only can put TTC in practice if we are truly convinced about Taoism. We have to keep in mind this is literally another path of see the life and live in. Lao-Tzu gives us a lot of wisdom but it depends on us if we want this principles work. I remember that some poems even was about ruling a territory or community. I think poems like this one only cause effect if you are interested in politics and so on with the rest...
I like word you used: “balance”. Yes, it is definitely better than equilibrium. Because TTC wants somehow to put equality principles to work on. You would not see in TTC something as totalitarian as The Prince, by Machiavello.
Terms of unity is something interesting to point out too. Because you used this term in the path of trying to get all Principles by one. Yes, because this is somehow we could archive all objectives of TTC.

I think your map differs from Lao Tzu's in that you are locating the "ineffable" as an ingredient in the experience of living amongst the ten thousand things where Lao Tzu is pointing outside to something we will never experience. — Valentinus

I've been thinking about this. I have always thought that we can experience the Tao directly, but not with our conscious, verbal, rational minds. Above, you write that we will never experience the Tao. Here are some words from different commentaries on Verse 14:

• Chen quoting Walter Stace - What mystics say is that a genuine mystical experience is nonsensuous. It is formless, shapeless, colorless, odorless, soundless.
  
• Stephan Senudd - ...he focuses on its obscurity as well as its infinity. The latter is the reason for the former. Because Tao has no limit in time or space, it cannot be described, not even perceived.
  
• Dan Reid translation of Heshang Gong commentary - What is without colour and appearance is called Clear. This is to say that Oneness is without accumulated colour and appearance. It cannot be inspected or observed.
  
• Derek Lin - The Tao is not a material object, therefore it cannot be seen or touched. We say it is invisible and colorless because it is without form or substance. Sound also cannot be seen or touched. But unlike sound, the Tao cannot be heard. It cannot be detected by any of our physical senses, because it is metaphysical in nature.

So, what do I mean when I say something can be experienced without being seen, perceived, or observed?

Thank you for providing the 2 different translations, the commentary and your thoughts. This provides access and allows for flexibility in reading the text. — Amity

I have been thinking that I haven't been putting enough thought into the selection of translations and commentaries when I post a verse. Sometimes I'm lazy and just slap something, usually Chen, down. I'm going to try to be more careful.

To help us find the Way or set us on the right course by teaching us not to be rigid with fixed beliefs or opinions. — Amity

"Fixed beliefs or opinions" are hard to justify given the problems of translating from ancient Chinese and Lao Tzu's intentional or unavoidable ambiguity.