Translation
Brave certainty rules in killing
Brave hesitation rules in living
These both either benefit or harm
Nature’s ruthlessness, who knows its cause.
Nature’s way never contending, yet adept in victory.
Never speaking, yet adept in answering
Never sent for, yet there from the beginning.
Indulgent, yet adept in planning.
Nature’s net is vast and thin, yet never misses.
1) brave (valiant) in (at, to, from, by, than, out of) bold (dare; be certain) standard (norm; rule > imitate; follow) kill (weaken). 勇于敢则杀。(yŏng yú găn zé shā.)
2) brave (valiant) in (at, to, from, by, than, out of) no (not) bold (dare; be certain) standard (norm; rule > imitate; follow) live (alive; living). 勇于不敢则活。(yŏng yú bù găn zé huó.)
3) this two (both; either; some) (者) perhaps (or; either…or…; > someone) sharp (favorable; advantage; profit) perhaps (or; either…or…; > someone) evil (injurious; do harm to; impair; kill). 此两者或利或害。(cĭ liăng zhĕ huò lì huò hài.)
4) sky (heaven; day; season; nature; God) of place (indicate passive construction, agent of action) loathe (dislike; hate_fierce; ferocious) who (which, what) know (realize; inform; knowledge) his (her; its; that; such) reason (cause; on purpose; hence). 天之所恶孰知其故。(tiān zhī suŏ ĕ shú zhī qí gù.)
5) sky (heaven; day; season; nature; God) of road (way, principle; speak; think) no (not) contend (vie; strive; argue) <conj.> and (yet, but) good (satisfactory; be adept in) victory (success; surpass; be superior to). 天之道不争而善胜。(tiān zhī dào bù zhēng ér shàn shèng.)
6) no (not) speech (word; say; talk) <conj.> and (yet, but) good (satisfactory; be adept in) answer (respond; agree (to do something); should). 不言而善应。(bù yán ér shàn yīng.)
7) no (not) call together (convene; summon) <conj.> and (yet, but) from the beginning (in the first place; originally). 不召而自来。(bù shào ér zì lái.)
8) indulgent (generous) right (correct; so; like that) <conj.> and (yet, but, however) good (satisfactory; be adept in) stratagem (plan; scheme; plot). 繟然而善谋。(chăn rán ér shàn móu.)
9) sky (heaven; day; season; nature; God) net (network; catch with a net) extensive (vast) dredge (thin; sparse; distant) <conj.> and (yet, but) no (not) lose (miss; let slip; fail). 天网恢恢疏而不失。(tiān wăng huī huī shū ér bù shī.)
Third Pass: Chapter of the Month
Corrections?
Not a correction to be found. Oh shucks…
Reflections:
The line, Indulgent, yet adept in planning, brought it home for me today. Balance is the message I saw. Nature is nothing if not the active process of balancing. I see nature as an active process because it never reaches the ultimate, ‘perfect’ balance. That is, ‘perfect’ as beheld in the eyes of the human-centric ideal anyway. Yep, nature just doesn’t sit still long enough to suit our sensibilities. It is always changing. 😉 I suppose the yin-yang circle is as good a model as any of that natural flow. Dropping my human-centric ideal of balance for a moment allows me to feel a sort of meta-balance. (Correlations are really the best way I’ve found to delve into this ‘outside the box’ view.)
The problem I have with every translation I’ve seen is that they always succumb to human-centric ideals at some point. That is certainly not surprising; indeed, it is perfectly natural. Biology compels us to project our preferences onto reality. The beauty of the original Chinese lies in how deftly it avoids that. It’s brevity must play a large role in this, although that succinct and simple portrayal makes it difficult to understand. Why? That portrayal offers few detours for the mind to ‘have it both ways’. The solution: interpret it — more words — to say what we want to hear.
The first four lines are good examples. Compare these with D.C. Lau’s translation… one of the best I might add.
Word for Word
Brave certainty rules in killing
Brave hesitation rules in living
These both either benefit or harm
Nature’s ruthlessness, who knows its cause.
D.C. Lau
He who is fearless in being bold will meet with his death;
He who is fearless in being timid will stay alive.
Of the two, one leads to good, the other to harm.
Heaven hates what it hates, Who knows the reason why?
Therefore even the sage treats some things as difficult.
First, notice how D.C. Lau adds an extra line about the sage treating some things as difficult. That is good counsel, albeit an unnecessary extra. Perhaps he felt it essential given his translation of line 4: Heaven hates what it hates. By the way, line 4 is a good example of where translating begins to turn into interpreting.
More telling is D.C. Lau’s line 3: Of the two, one leads to good, the other to harm. This portrays our innate humanist ideal that beneficial is better than harmful. Naturally, we all have that biological bias. Another bio-hoodwink, as I call it where impartiality is understandably absent. However, without impartiality, a Taoist view is not viable and nearly rising beyond oneself is out of the question.
The original presents a more accurate picture of reality. Everything swings between benefit and harmful. Indeed, even those qualities are projected from the needs and fears of the observer. For example, a fisherman who succeeds feels benefit, yet the fish he hooks feels harm. Brave certainty rules in killing; Brave hesitation rules in living. Whether the result is beneficial or harmful depends on the observer and the circumstances.
Impartiality is crucial if one wishes to see reality (nature) as it truly is. The literal original maintains that neutrality best. Compare these excerpts from Word for Word and D.C. Lau.
Word for Word
Not knowing the constant, rash actions lead to ominous results.
Knowing the constant allows, allowing therefore impartial,
Impartial therefore whole, whole therefore natural,
Natural therefore the way.
The way therefore long enduring, nearly rising beyond oneself.
D.C. Lau
Woe to him who wilfully innovates, While ignorant of the constant,
But should one act from knowledge of the constant, One’s action will lead to impartiality,
Impartiality to kingliness, Kingliness to heaven,
Heaven to the way,
The way to perpetuity, And to the end of one’s days one will meet with no danger
Note: My point here is not to denigrate D.C. Lau’s translation. After all, I made superb use of it for nearly 50 years, and I still love the way he translates some parts… his artistic license and all. It is just helpful to dig deeper sometimes.
Second Pass: Work in Progress
Issues:
It is always satisfying to find mistakes. It is like looking for weeds or for treasure. If you don’t find any, the search feels meaningless. Fortunately, I can always find mistakes!
I changed a few verbs forms and deleted a few words I added that weren’t in the original to make it read smoother; I now figure these aren’t necessary. That what make poetry, or any other creative work, what it is; there is no precise ‘right way’. It is all in the eye of the beholders.
The juiciest error this week was in line 7. There are two character, zì (self) and lái (come) which I treated separately. However, read as one word, zìlái (自来), means: from the beginning; in the first place; originally. This works out much better: Never sent for, yet there from the beginning.
Commentary:
Brave certainty rules in killing, Brave hesitation rules in living is one of the more counter intuitive (i.e., counter bio-hoodwink) ditties in the Tao Te Ching. Loud and clear, emotions tell me just the opposite. It took life experience to teach me otherwise. Brave hesitation rules in living is merely patience, it turns out. Patience when deliberate and standing against the onrush of desire is what makes it brave. Absent that, it is just procrastination. It takes courage to be patient… Hold the ancient way in order to manage today. Procrastination is otherwise.
Nature’s way never contending, yet adept in victory reminds me of the non-violent approach of Gandhi and Martin Luther King. On earth, among living things, this only works within limits. I somehow doubt this would have worked for Hitler’s regime. Indeed, Neville Chamberlain’s “peace at all cost” Agreement with Germany in 1938 helped to guarantee war. Even so, I find that never contending, yet adept in victory to be surprisingly effective, if also completely counter intuitive in the beginning. We really do get in our own way much of the time. Why? Returning to chapter one: The way possible to think, runs counter to the constant way. The name possible to express runs counter to the constant name. There is no ‘one way’ that always works, so each newborn life must stumble and figure out how to manage its own way best. Coming to terms with that has to be one of the more difficult aspects of parenting.
Finally, line 4 is worth considering. D.C. Lau and others translate this as Heaven hates what it hates,
Who knows the reason why? I never liked this; how can Nature hate or love anything? To me, this is merely a projection of human emotion. You see this a lot in Judeo-Christian-Islam sentiment: God love us, is angry with us, punishes us… etc. Therefore, Nature’s ruthlessness, who knows its cause is the best way I can put it. The actual character (恶) has too meanings. One is è which means: fierce; ferocious; and the other is wù which means: loathe; dislike; hate. I chose the former. Equally viable would be Nature’s fierceness, or Nature’s ferociousness. However, ruthless really describes Nature best, because nature treats everything with the same impartiality:
Nature plays no favorites. That fact puzzles believers in God who imagine ‘he’ (or she) is on their side watching out over them. As Jesus apparently said, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”
Suggested Revision:
Brave certainty rules in killing
Brave hesitation rules in living
These both either benefit or harm
Nature’s ruthlessness, who knows its cause.
Nature’s way never contending, yet (is) adept in victory.
Never speaking, yet adept in answering
Never sent for, yet there from the beginning.
Comes simple, yet adept in planning
Nature’s net is vast and thin, yet (it) never misses
no (not) call together (convene; summon) <conj.>and / but (not) from the beginning (in the first place; originally).
WfW Commentary – 07/16/2011
Nature’s ruthlessness, who know its cause brings to mind the Judeo Christian question, why does God cause innocents (like infants) to suffer? I remember how, in the wake of my ski accident’s torn ligament, I naively thought “Why me?”. Alas, heaven hates what it hates, who knows the reason why? Of course, looking at this more broadly, I see how one thing’s gain must be another thing’s loss (i.e., two sides of the same coin). In the flow of nature, gain and loss, good fortune and disaster follow each other; desiring life to go just one way is so utterly irrational, and yet so common. It is a testament (and a warning) to the power of emotion!
Nature’s approach is often opposite our initial inclinations; that’s not surprisingly for Nature isn’t concerned with survival. Life, on the other hand, is. And so we contend with our sights firmly held on victory. But victory is always short lived, and by contending, we set in motion unintended consequences that defeat accomplishing our private ends. Allowing events to play out requires patience (brave hesitation), and usually works to our long term advantage. On the other end we have, in action it is timeliness that matters which also plays a role. Hitler and WWII come to mind. A stitch in time saves nine million or so (deal with a thing while it is still nothing). The art of living comes down to maintaining a balance of the two.
No words—silence—are often the ‘loudest’ answering with which one can reply. I found this marvelously so in raising my two sons. A few days of shunning, with not a word spoken, brought home my answer to certain behavior (like lying) more effectively than could all the nagging in the world.
Simple certainly under-pins adeptness in victory, yet ironically the simplest approaches are the most difficult. ‘Easy’ approaches with their unforeseen complications are our first choice; haste makes waste is no empty saying. Only brave hesitation gives enough time to reflect until a simple, optimum approach takes shape. A good example of this is the time I wanted to put a bridge across a small pond. The simplest would be a plank, but I needed a gentle arch in the bridge. I easily envisioned various plans, but they all required problematic method of joining wood (e.g., screws, nails with the inevitable shrinkage and rust that would follow). I bravely hesitated building anything until a simple, elegant solution ‘bubbled up’. A year later, voila! I simply bent two 3/4″ pipes into gentle arcs, drilled holes in 3×4 lumber and threaded the lumber onto the pipe.
Decades of gardening also offers an example of comes simple, yet adept in planning. For the first 10 years I overdid everything. ‘Complex, and second-rate in planning’ would be a fair description of my gardening then. Over the years complexity gradually dropped away. Now, 30+ years later, simple, yet adept in planning is a fair description of my gardening. I do just enough to get the results I want, when I want. Nothing is wasted. My gardening comes closest to modeling nature, and it only took a couple of decades of that all essential ‘set it up’ (i.e., If you would have a thing shrink, you must first stretch it). This is another way of saying there are no short-cuts in life! Alas, we all have to learn the hard way. Therefore even the sage treats some things as difficult.(1)
(1) This line is in D.C.Lau’s translation of this chapter, but it’s not in the original Chinese. I run across this from time to time; why does he do that? Often I imagine he uses poetic license to make it more readable. Conversely, I take as little poetic license as possible, which often makes my translation much less readable. This is a win-win actually, as reading both versions can help fill out the big picture.