Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1There is also in Awang-3ze a peculiar usage of the name Thien. He applies it to the Beings whom he introduces as 1 The Tao Teh Xing, ch. 25, and Awang-3ze, XIII, par. 1. 2 See ‘Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio,’ vol. i, p.1, note 2. (35) Cc 18 THE TEXTS OF TAOISM. CH. UI. ; Masters of the Tao, generally with mystical Peculiar usage . . . of Thien in appellations in order to set forth his own Kwang-4ze. views. Two instances from Book XI will suffice in illustration of this. In par. 4, Hwang-Ti does reverence to his instructor Kwang KAang-3ze }, saying, ‘In Kwang K/ang-3ze we have an example of what is called Heaven,’ which Mr. Giles renders ‘Kwang Khang 3ze is surely God.’ In par. 5, again, the mystical Yiin-Aiang is made to say to the equally fabulous and mystical Hungmung, ‘O Heaven, have you forgotten me?’ and, farther on, ‘O Heaven, you have conferred on me (the knowledge of) your operation, and revealed to me the mystery of it ;’ in both which passages Mr. Giles renders thien by ‘ your Holiness.’ But Mr. Giles seems to agree with me that the old TAoists had no idea of a personal God, when they wrote of Mr. Giles's own Thienor Heaven. On his sixty-eighth page, idea ofthe near the beginning of Book VI, we meet with meaning of the ‘the following sentence, having every appearthe equivalent of ance of being translated from the Chinese * text :—‘God is a principle which exists by virtue of its own intrinsicality, and operates without selfmanifestation.’ By an inadvertence he has introduced his own definition of ‘God’ as if it were Kwang-jze’s; and though I can find no characters in the text of which I can suppose that he intends it to be the translation, it is valuable as helping us to understand the meaning to be attached to the Great Name in his volume. I have referred above (p. 16) to the only passage in LAo’s treatise, where he uses the name Ti or God in its highest The relation of Sense, saying that ‘the T4o might seem to the TaotoT? have been before Him.’ He might well say so, for in his first chapter he describes the T do, ‘ (conceived of as) having no name, as the Originator of heaven and 1 Kwang Xhang-3ze heads the list of characters in Ko Hung’s ‘ History of Spirit-like Immortals (nif fil 48)? written in our fourth century. ‘He was,’ it is said, ‘an Immortal of old, who lives on the hill of M‘ung-thung in a grotto of rocks,’ CH. III. INTRODUCTION. I9 earth, and (conceived of as) having a name, as the Mother of all things.’ The reader will also find the same predicates of the To at greater length in his fifty-first chapter.
2III. INTRODUCTION. I9 earth, and (conceived of as) having a name, as the Mother of all things.’ The reader will also find the same predicates of the To at greater length in his fifty-first chapter. The character Ti is also of rare occurrence in K wang-jze, excepting as applied to the five ancient Tis. In Bk. III, par. 4, and in one other place, we find it indicating the Supreme Being, but the usage is ascribed to the ancients. In Bk. XV, par. 3, in a description of the human SPIRIT, its name is said to be ‘ Thung Ti, which Mr. Giles renders ‘Of God;’ Mr. Balfour, ‘One with God;’ while my own version is ‘The Divinity in Man. In Bk. XII, par. 6, we have the expression ‘ the place of God;’ in Mr. Giles, ‘the kingdom of God;’ in Mr. Balfour, ‘the home of God.” In this and the former instance, the character seems to be used with the ancient meaning which had entered into the folklore of the people. But in Bk. VI, par. 7, there is a passage which shows clearly the relative position of Tao and T? in the Taoistic system ; and having called attention to it, I will go on to other points. Let the reader mark well the following predicates of the T4o :—‘ Before there were heaven and earth, from of old, there It was, securely existing. From It came the mysterious existence of spirits; from It the mysterious existence of Ti (God). It produced heaven, It produced earth!’ This says more than the utterance of L4o,—that ‘the Tao seemed to be before God ;’—does it not say that Tao was before God, and that He was what He is by virtue of Its operation? 3. Among the various personal names given to the Tao Noidea of Crea. @f€ those of 340 Hwa, ‘Maker and Transtion proper in former,’ and 340 Wa K 6, ‘ Maker of things.’ Taoism. Instances of both these names are found in Bk. VI, parr. 9, 10. ‘Creator’ and ‘God’ have both been employed for them ; but there is no idea of Creation in Taoism. Again and again AKwang-jze entertains the question of 1 For this sentence we find in Mr. Balfour :—‘ Spirits of the dead, receiving It, become divine ; the very gods themselves owe their divinity to its influence ; and by it both Heaven and Earth were produced.’ The version of it by Mr. Giles is too condensed :—‘ Spiritual beings drew their spirituality therefrom, while the universe became what we see it now.’ C2 20 THE TEXTS OF TAOISM. CH. Ill. how it was at the first beginning of things. Different views are stated. In Bk. II, par. 4, he says:—‘ Among the men of old their knowledge reached the extreme point. What was that extreme point? ‘Some held that at first there was not anything. This is the extreme point,—the utmost limit to which nothing can be added. ‘A second class held that there was something, but without any responsive recognition of it (on the part of man).
3What was that extreme point? ‘Some held that at first there was not anything. This is the extreme point,—the utmost limit to which nothing can be added. ‘A second class held that there was something, but without any responsive recognition of it (on the part of man). ‘A third class held that there was such recognition, but there had not begun to be any expression of different opinions about it. It was through the definite expression of different opinions about it that there ensued injury to the (doctrine of the) Tao?” The first of these three views was that which Kwang-jze himself preferred. The most condensed expression of it is given in Bk. XII, par. 8:—‘In the Grand Beginning of all things there was nothing in all the vacancy of space; there was nothing that could be named*% It was in this state that there arose the first existence; the first existence, but still without bodily shape. From this things could be produced, (receiving) what we call their several characters. That which had no bodily shape was divided, and then without intermission there was what we call the process of conferring. (The two processes) continued to operate, and things were produced. As they were completed, there appeared the distinguishing lines of each, which we call the bodily shape. That shape was the body preserving in it the spirit, and each had its peculiar manifestation which we call its nature.’ Such was the genesis of things; the formation of heaven 1 Compare also Bk. XXII, parr. 7, 8, and XXIII, par. 10. 2 Mr. Balfour had given for this sentence :—‘In the beginning of all things there was not even nothing. There were no names; these arose afterwards.’ In his critique on Mr. Balfour’s version in 1882, Mr. Giles proposed :—‘ At the beginning of all things there was nothing; but this nothing had no name.’ He now in his own version gives for it, ‘At the beginning of the beginning, even nothing did not exist. Then came the period of the nameless ;’—an improvement, certainly, on the other; but which can hardly be accepted as the correct version of the text. CH. II. INTRODUCTION. 21 and earth and all that in them is, under the guidance of the Tdo. It was an evolution and not a creation. How the T4o itself came,—I do not say into existence, but into operation,—neither Lao nor Kwang ever thought of saying anything about. We have seen that it is nothing material’. It acted spontaneously of itself. Its sudden appearance in the field of non-existence, Producer, Transformer, Beautifier, surpasses my comprehension. To Lado it seemed to be before God. I am compelled to accept the existence of God, as the ultimate Fact, bowing before it with reverence, and not attempting to explain it, the one mystery, the sole mystery of the universe.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1There is also in Awang-3ze a peculiar usage of the name Thien. He applies it to the Beings whom he introduces as 1 The Tao Teh Xing, ch. 25, and Awang-3ze, XIII, par. 1. 2 See ‘Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio,’ vol. i, p.1, note 2. (35) Cc 18 THE TEXTS OF TAOISM. CH. UI. ; Masters of the Tao, generally with mystical Peculiar usage . . . of Thien in appellations in order to set forth his own Kwang-4ze. views. Two instances from Book XI will suffice in illustration of this. In par. 4, Hwang-Ti does reverence to his instructor Kwang KAang-3ze }, saying, ‘In Kwang K/ang-3ze we have an example of what is called Heaven,’ which Mr. Giles renders ‘Kwang Khang 3ze is surely God.’ In par. 5, again, the mystical Yiin-Aiang is made to say to the equally fabulous and mystical Hungmung, ‘O Heaven, have you forgotten me?’ and, farther on, ‘O Heaven, you have conferred on me (the knowledge of) your operation, and revealed to me the mystery of it ;’ in both which passages Mr. Giles renders thien by ‘ your Holiness.’ But Mr. Giles seems to agree with me that the old TAoists had no idea of a personal God, when they wrote of Mr. Giles's own Thienor Heaven. On his sixty-eighth page, idea ofthe near the beginning of Book VI, we meet with meaning of the ‘the following sentence, having every appearthe equivalent of ance of being translated from the Chinese * text :—‘God is a principle which exists by virtue of its own intrinsicality, and operates without selfmanifestation.’ By an inadvertence he has introduced his own definition of ‘God’ as if it were Kwang-jze’s; and though I can find no characters in the text of which I can suppose that he intends it to be the translation, it is valuable as helping us to understand the meaning to be attached to the Great Name in his volume. I have referred above (p. 16) to the only passage in LAo’s treatise, where he uses the name Ti or God in its highest The relation of Sense, saying that ‘the T4o might seem to the TaotoT? have been before Him.’ He might well say so, for in his first chapter he describes the T do, ‘ (conceived of as) having no name, as the Originator of heaven and 1 Kwang Xhang-3ze heads the list of characters in Ko Hung’s ‘ History of Spirit-like Immortals (nif fil 48)? written in our fourth century. ‘He was,’ it is said, ‘an Immortal of old, who lives on the hill of M‘ung-thung in a grotto of rocks,’ CH. III. INTRODUCTION. I9 earth, and (conceived of as) having a name, as the Mother of all things.’ The reader will also find the same predicates of the To at greater length in his fifty-first chapter.
2III. INTRODUCTION. I9 earth, and (conceived of as) having a name, as the Mother of all things.’ The reader will also find the same predicates of the To at greater length in his fifty-first chapter. The character Ti is also of rare occurrence in K wang-jze, excepting as applied to the five ancient Tis. In Bk. III, par. 4, and in one other place, we find it indicating the Supreme Being, but the usage is ascribed to the ancients. In Bk. XV, par. 3, in a description of the human SPIRIT, its name is said to be ‘ Thung Ti, which Mr. Giles renders ‘Of God;’ Mr. Balfour, ‘One with God;’ while my own version is ‘The Divinity in Man. In Bk. XII, par. 6, we have the expression ‘ the place of God;’ in Mr. Giles, ‘the kingdom of God;’ in Mr. Balfour, ‘the home of God.” In this and the former instance, the character seems to be used with the ancient meaning which had entered into the folklore of the people. But in Bk. VI, par. 7, there is a passage which shows clearly the relative position of Tao and T? in the Taoistic system ; and having called attention to it, I will go on to other points. Let the reader mark well the following predicates of the T4o :—‘ Before there were heaven and earth, from of old, there It was, securely existing. From It came the mysterious existence of spirits; from It the mysterious existence of Ti (God). It produced heaven, It produced earth!’ This says more than the utterance of L4o,—that ‘the Tao seemed to be before God ;’—does it not say that Tao was before God, and that He was what He is by virtue of Its operation? 3. Among the various personal names given to the Tao Noidea of Crea. @f€ those of 340 Hwa, ‘Maker and Transtion proper in former,’ and 340 Wa K 6, ‘ Maker of things.’ Taoism. Instances of both these names are found in Bk. VI, parr. 9, 10. ‘Creator’ and ‘God’ have both been employed for them ; but there is no idea of Creation in Taoism. Again and again AKwang-jze entertains the question of 1 For this sentence we find in Mr. Balfour :—‘ Spirits of the dead, receiving It, become divine ; the very gods themselves owe their divinity to its influence ; and by it both Heaven and Earth were produced.’ The version of it by Mr. Giles is too condensed :—‘ Spiritual beings drew their spirituality therefrom, while the universe became what we see it now.’ C2 20 THE TEXTS OF TAOISM. CH. Ill. how it was at the first beginning of things. Different views are stated. In Bk. II, par. 4, he says:—‘ Among the men of old their knowledge reached the extreme point. What was that extreme point? ‘Some held that at first there was not anything. This is the extreme point,—the utmost limit to which nothing can be added. ‘A second class held that there was something, but without any responsive recognition of it (on the part of man).
3What was that extreme point? ‘Some held that at first there was not anything. This is the extreme point,—the utmost limit to which nothing can be added. ‘A second class held that there was something, but without any responsive recognition of it (on the part of man). ‘A third class held that there was such recognition, but there had not begun to be any expression of different opinions about it. It was through the definite expression of different opinions about it that there ensued injury to the (doctrine of the) Tao?” The first of these three views was that which Kwang-jze himself preferred. The most condensed expression of it is given in Bk. XII, par. 8:—‘In the Grand Beginning of all things there was nothing in all the vacancy of space; there was nothing that could be named*% It was in this state that there arose the first existence; the first existence, but still without bodily shape. From this things could be produced, (receiving) what we call their several characters. That which had no bodily shape was divided, and then without intermission there was what we call the process of conferring. (The two processes) continued to operate, and things were produced. As they were completed, there appeared the distinguishing lines of each, which we call the bodily shape. That shape was the body preserving in it the spirit, and each had its peculiar manifestation which we call its nature.’ Such was the genesis of things; the formation of heaven 1 Compare also Bk. XXII, parr. 7, 8, and XXIII, par. 10. 2 Mr. Balfour had given for this sentence :—‘In the beginning of all things there was not even nothing. There were no names; these arose afterwards.’ In his critique on Mr. Balfour’s version in 1882, Mr. Giles proposed :—‘ At the beginning of all things there was nothing; but this nothing had no name.’ He now in his own version gives for it, ‘At the beginning of the beginning, even nothing did not exist. Then came the period of the nameless ;’—an improvement, certainly, on the other; but which can hardly be accepted as the correct version of the text. CH. II. INTRODUCTION. 21 and earth and all that in them is, under the guidance of the Tdo. It was an evolution and not a creation. How the T4o itself came,—I do not say into existence, but into operation,—neither Lao nor Kwang ever thought of saying anything about. We have seen that it is nothing material’. It acted spontaneously of itself. Its sudden appearance in the field of non-existence, Producer, Transformer, Beautifier, surpasses my comprehension. To Lado it seemed to be before God. I am compelled to accept the existence of God, as the ultimate Fact, bowing before it with reverence, and not attempting to explain it, the one mystery, the sole mystery of the universe.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.