![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dao De Jing, chapter 21
Wednesday, 4 September 2024 07:37Accepting the pervasive Virtue is through the Way only.
The Way’s properties are indeed murky, indeed muddled[21-1].
Muddled, ah!, murky, ah! —within those is its form;
Murky, ah!, muddled, ah! —within those are its properties;
Profound[21-2], ah!, deep, ah! —within those is its essence.
When one’s essence is entirely true, within that there is trust.
From ancient times till now, its repute has been retained
By searching for[21-3] the sundry origins.
How do I know the state of the sundry origins? By this.
[21-1] Other texts have “distant” & “hazy” throughout for “murky” & “muddled”
[21-2] Another text has “hidden”
[21-3] Other texts have “submitting to”
孔德之容，唯道是从。
道之为物，唯恍唯惚。
忽兮恍兮，其中有象；
恍兮忽兮，其中有物；
窈兮冥兮，其中有精。
其精甚真，其中有信。
自古及今，其名不去，
以阅衆甫。
吾何以知衆甫之状哉？以此。
And with this appearance in line 1, it’s time to foreground my struggles with the titular 德 dé, as it’s only going to get worse the more the text talks about it. I’ve been rendering it as “virtue” in the sense of “having power/efficacy” rather than “being virtuous.” A basic concept of the DDJ is that people who live in harmony with and utilize the Way have dé—or more specifically, by virtue of being close to the Way they influence people, this influence being dé. This is the point of l.6, and it underlies every statement so far about the best ruler acts least, because by having dé he doesn’t need to give orders. “Virtue” is a common translation, but based on this and other passages, it’s feeling increasingly inadequate. (This is complicated by Confucian uses, including in the Analects, of dé with the sense of “being virtuous.”) However, comma, “power,” another common translation, also feels misleading because of its connotations. My current thought is that something on the lines of “potency” might be a better rendering, for some value of “better” that I can’t at the moment define. Or maybe “influence.” Or, I dunno, stick a pin in it and move on (again).
The final “this” is, as you might expect, universally assumed to refer to the Way. The author has so far not sustained a complicated thought that returns to where it started the chapter, or I’d suggest it could refer back to first line’s Virtue/Potency—as could all the its until then.
---L.
The Way’s properties are indeed murky, indeed muddled[21-1].
Muddled, ah!, murky, ah! —within those is its form;
Murky, ah!, muddled, ah! —within those are its properties;
Profound[21-2], ah!, deep, ah! —within those is its essence.
When one’s essence is entirely true, within that there is trust.
From ancient times till now, its repute has been retained
By searching for[21-3] the sundry origins.
How do I know the state of the sundry origins? By this.
[21-1] Other texts have “distant” & “hazy” throughout for “murky” & “muddled”
[21-2] Another text has “hidden”
[21-3] Other texts have “submitting to”
孔德之容，唯道是从。
道之为物，唯恍唯惚。
忽兮恍兮，其中有象；
恍兮忽兮，其中有物；
窈兮冥兮，其中有精。
其精甚真，其中有信。
自古及今，其名不去，
以阅衆甫。
吾何以知衆甫之状哉？以此。
And with this appearance in line 1, it’s time to foreground my struggles with the titular 德 dé, as it’s only going to get worse the more the text talks about it. I’ve been rendering it as “virtue” in the sense of “having power/efficacy” rather than “being virtuous.” A basic concept of the DDJ is that people who live in harmony with and utilize the Way have dé—or more specifically, by virtue of being close to the Way they influence people, this influence being dé. This is the point of l.6, and it underlies every statement so far about the best ruler acts least, because by having dé he doesn’t need to give orders. “Virtue” is a common translation, but based on this and other passages, it’s feeling increasingly inadequate. (This is complicated by Confucian uses, including in the Analects, of dé with the sense of “being virtuous.”) However, comma, “power,” another common translation, also feels misleading because of its connotations. My current thought is that something on the lines of “potency” might be a better rendering, for some value of “better” that I can’t at the moment define. Or maybe “influence.” Or, I dunno, stick a pin in it and move on (again).
The final “this” is, as you might expect, universally assumed to refer to the Way. The author has so far not sustained a complicated thought that returns to where it started the chapter, or I’d suggest it could refer back to first line’s Virtue/Potency—as could all the its until then.
---L.