Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva) Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.consciousness.mysticism Subject: RCavallaro: English Tao Te Ching (was something similar) Followup-To: alt.philosophy.taoism,alt.magick.tyagi,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.consciousness.mysticism Date: 27 Jul 1996 13:03:35 -0700 Organization: Portal Communications (shell) Lines: 112 Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com Message-ID: <4tdsmn$jsh@jobe.shell.portal.com> References: Reply-To: raffael@tiac.net (Raffael Cavallaro) NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com Xref: shell.portal.com alt.magick.tyagi:9756 talk.religion.misc:231375 talk.religion.newage:55074 alt.consciousness.mysticism:6648 [from alt.philosophy.taoism: raffael@tiac.net (Raffael Cavallaro)] Although one would like a modern english translation of the Tao Te Ching to be 1. easy to read and 2. coherent in style and philosophy the latter assumes that the original was itself coherent in style and philosophy. Such is (for better or worse) not the case. All translations which take as their starting point a particular view of Taoism must distort the original text in order to make it conform to their interpretation. Seen in this light, the best recent translation if probably that of the renowned sinologist, Victor Mair, which is based on the most ancient version of the text known. Mair points out that the individual verses vary widely in style, and their autorship by a single individual is doubtful. Most likely the verses represent an oral tradition of long standing that was committed to writing at various times, by various people. Furthermore, later editors would have had no compunction about making additions and inserting them into the corpus as if they had been written (or said) by some more ancient (and hence venerable) master. The result is a collection of verses, many of which express a common theme, but many of which do not, and a minority of which express something altogether different. Thus, any translation that takes the Tao Te Ching to be the work of a single author, expressing a single theme or philosophy, is bound to do violence to the original. Here are the translations I own (I've read others but they were so bad I didn't want to subsidize the translator and publisher by buying a copy). Feng and Englilsh: Nice photos, but the translation seems to rely too much on modern chinese readings, so the meaning is unecessarily obscure. It should be remembered that many of the characters used to write the Tao Te Ching (and the I Ching) are still in use in modern chinese. Unfortunately, the readings of these characters was often different in ancient times. The result is that when a person with a knowledge of modern chinese (or even of historical chinese usage) reads ancient texts, he or she is likely to get key characters wrong. The most glaring example of this is the many interpretations of the I Ching which are based on medieval readings of a late Bronze Age/early Iron Age text, that is to say, almost all of them. The only translation of the I Ching that gives the *original* meanings of the hexagrams is that by Kerson and Rosemary Huang. Their introduction treats all of these issues rather well. One example will suffice. Hexagram 26 is translated by Wilhelm (the most widely available scholarly translation) as "The Taming Power of the Great." In fact, these characters would have been read as "Big Cattle" in ancient China, meaning that it was auspicious to sacrifice a large steer. Of course by the time medieval Chinese commentators came to gloss the ancient text, animal sacrifice was no longer a central part of court life and religious practice, but it was vital in late Bronze Age/early Iron Age when the I Ching was written. The Huang's translation of the I Ching (highly recommended) is ISBN 0-89480-319-0. Robert G. Henricks: This translation is very good with regard to attention to original meaning, but it suffers from an attempt to impose the translator's interpretation of Taoism on the text. Also based on a very early manuscript. ISBN 0-345-37099-6. Arthur Waley - The Way and its Power: Excellent translation which puts each of the verses in it's politico-historical context. Waley makes it clear that many of the verses in the Tao Te Ching incorporate quotes or aphorisms commonly used by competing philosophical schools (like the Legalists - or Realists, as Waley calls them, the Individualists or Yang Chu school) and then turns these homilies against themselves to make a Taoist point. 0-394-17207-8. Stephen Mitchell: Easily one of the most readable, but suffers the most from a spurious attempt to shoehorn every verse into the translator's philosophical worldview. This translation is really no good for anything other than understanding Stephen Mitchell's philosophy, (which is itself interesting, but it just isn't the original meaning of the Tao Te Ching). For a similar sort of philosophical discourse, I highly recommend "Tao: the Watercourse Way" by Alan Watts and Al Chungliang Huang, ISBN 0-394-73311-8. Watts was also a far more interesting philosopher than Mitchell is. I hope this helps some. BTW, Mair has also done an excellent translation of Chuang Tzu. Both are available in paperback. Tao Te Ching: ISBN 0-553-34935-X Wandering On the Way: Early Taoist Tales and Parables of Chang Tzu: ISBN 0-553-37406-0 warmest regards, Raf In article , Eric Chen wrote: > I'd like recommendations for the best english interpretation of the Tao Te > Ching. > > I went to Barnes and Noble yesterday and found 3 different interpretations > and they were all different. It's all very confusing. > > I've heard a good thing or two about the Paul Carus interpretation. > > Any help would be appreciated. > > > Eric -- CC public replies to email --- see http://www.hollyfeld.org/~tyagi/nagasiva.html check: http://www.paranoia.com/coe/ ---- (emailed replies may be posted) * * * * Asphalta Cementia Metallica Polymera Coyote La Cuckarach Humana * * * *