Lao Tzu: Tao Te Ching: A Book about the Way and the Power of the Way

Los comentarios de Ursula Le Guinn Son excelentes!

Some of the best printing work, and choice of font, letter and page material I've ever seen. Ursula is one of my favourite writters and compared to other translators I know she definitly has one of the most poetical ears and delivers a great amount of rithimical beauty to the poems. Just like the printing, her play and restraint with the words feels very Tao-like. Also she avoids the constant (male) gendering that other translators propagate, and I'm very thankful for being able to read Lao Tzu without distractions that have nothing to do with the way or with being a follower of the way. But, in some poems, her very idiossincratic choices of translation render some passages really moralistic and even if some confucionism may have slipped in the original itself, we know that the taoist message is not usually so, and this is validated by the fact that some other translations that were made directly from the chinese, don't slip into such overly moralistic interpretations. Overall, it is a good version to have and I'm happy I have it.

I have the Shambala paperback version which is well worn from so many readings. Last year I purchased the Kindle version so I could carry it with me always on my phone. It turns out the Kindle version has nothing to do with Le Guin. It appears as published by Eireann Press, translated by James Legge. I wish it were easy to report this to Amazon so they could fix it. My conclusion, though, is that there is no Kindle version of Le Guin’s translation.

I am now reading, concurrently, chapter by chapter, three versions of the Tao Te Ching: Feng/English's, Stephen Mitchell's, and Ursula Le Guin's, which is my hands down favorite. I've owned the Gia-fu Feng/Jane English version for many years and I still love its clear and concise language, it's simple and direct style. Stephen Mitchell's version, in my side by side comparison, is seen to be a more interpretative rendition based on his own understanding of Lao Tzu's meaning. Rather than stay with Lao Tzu's imagery and metaphor, he packages it all up into a kind of exposition of the meaning he derives from those images. This approach may appeal to those wishing for a more conceptual understanding of this great work, but for me, it diminishes so much of the subtlety and a deeper intuitive conveyance of meaning that is only possibly through poetry. This is where Le Guin's version outshines and makes a quantum leap beyond the other two. She retains all the imagery, nuance and flavor of the poetry while capturing a feeling of playfulness and spontaneity. But beyond even that, I find that her ability to hold the paradox and enigma of Lao Tzu's mystical realization allows for a deeper, more inspired reading than the other two.To illustrate what I mean, please bear with me as I compare one stanza. This is Stanza 30 in the three versions:Mitchell:Whoever relies on the Tao in governing mendoesn't try to force issuesor defeat enemies by force of arms.For every force there is a counterforce.Violence even well intentioned,always rebounds upon oneself.The Master does his joband then stops.He understands that the universeis forever out of control,and that trying to dominate eventsgoes against the current of the Tao.Because he believes in himself,he doesn't try to convince others.Because he is content with himselfHe doesn't need others' approval.Because he accepts himself,the whole world accepts him.Feng/English:Whenever you advise a ruler in the way of Tao,Counsel him not to use force to conquer the universe.For this would only cause resistance.Thorn bushes spring up wherever the army has passed.Lean years follow in the wake of a great war.Just do what needs to be done.Never take advantage of power.Achieve results, but never glory in them.Achieve results, but never boast.Achieve results, but never be proud.Achieve results, because this is the natural way.Achieve results, but not through violence.Force is followed by loss of strength.This is not the way of Tao.That which goes against the Tao comes to an early end.Le Guin:A Taoist wouldn't advise a rulerto use force of arms for conquest;that tactic backfires.Where the army marchedgrow thorns and thistles.After the warcome the bad harvests.Good leaders prosper, that's all,not presuming on victory.They prosper without boasting,or domineering, or arrogance,prosper because they can't help it,prosper without violence.Things flourish then perish.Not the Way.What's not the Waysoon ends.Le Guin adds a note at the end of this stanza. She says, "The last verse is enigmatic: 'Things flourish then perish.'—How can this supremely natural sequence not be the Way?" She then directs the reader to another note under a later stanza where she picks up on Lao Tzu's use of a "baby" metaphor to describe how one following the Way acts in the world. She writes: "What is eternal is forever young, never grows old. But we are not eternal. It is in this sense that I understand how the natural, inevitable cycle of youth, growth, mature vigor, age, and decay can be "not the Way." The Way is more than the cycle of any individual life. We rise, flourish, fail. The Way never fails. We are waves. It is the sea."So, rather than change the actual words to make the meaning more intelligible to our conceptual understanding, as in Feng/English, or simply avoid the whole issue by presenting a loose rendition that doesn't follow the original so closely, as in Mitchell, Le Guin presents the enigma as it is and then ponders and digs deeper to try to grasp what Lao Tzu was truly saying. She goes beyond a facile, generic understanding and comes up with something exquisitely profound. The Way isn't about how we're supposed to act in the world. It isn't about us as individuals at all. The Way is beyond all the flourishings and perishings of the temporal world of form. To live in the Way is to live rooted in the timeless, unchanging essence of our Being which simply is, always. Feng/English's and Mitchell's versions don't come close to penetrating into this realization. This is an example of why I consider Le Guin's version to be superior to the others.One minor quibble: Le Guin tells us that the Chinese word "Te" is usually translated as Virtue. She translates it as Power throughout the book because she feels that the word Virtue in contemporary usage has lost its previous sense of "inherent quality and strength of a thing or person." I myself still prefer Virtue, maybe because I'm old fashioned and still think of Virtue in the old way, like the way Plato used it. Another word choice that I believe would convey the same meaning would be the "All-Good." That has both a feeling of Power and Virtue in it. As I said, it's a minor quibble.

This is my favorite translation of the Tao Te Ching. It is clear and readable, and the sparse commentary by Le Guin is helpful without getting in the way. It is not a literal translation, but I think it gets the spirit of the text right. Poetic and lively, with the gentle humor of Lao Tzu shining through, Le Guin has done the world a service with this little book.

It's funny and delightful and radiant and nuturing too. I was in awe of this contemporary text until I heard the audio tape with LeGuin and Barton. That left me speechless. What a gift!

I had read Ursula's science fiction, and loved it. I was walking through "a book store" and her name caught my eye in the Eastern Thought section. The rest is history. The Tao Te Ching is a book that can help you survive in this century, by remembering what to treasure the most. Ursula's version is free of sexism, and other power-tripping sometimes added by Westerners. She does an excellent job of helping us get to the meaning of the Tao Te Ching, without destroying the beautiful poetry.

After looking at dozens of translations, this is the one I kept. It hasn't lost all poetry, and seems true to the spirit of the Tao as I understand it. Still, it's readable by anyone who sits down with it and contemplates.

Le Guin notes, "This [book] is a rendition, not a translation. I do do not know any Chinese." Her interpretation joins the growing pseudo-genre of New Age personal takes on ancient wisdom, and as such, is interesting. However, packaged with the odor of scholarship on the title page, nowhere allowing the scholar mentioned to comment on the effect of his tutelage, it deserves to be set down a bit. Le Guin honestly rebukes her own efforts with "...so many Tao Te Chings have appeared or reappeared that one begins to wonder is Lao Tzu has more translators than he has readers." She says of Feng and English's translation that it is "literarily the most satisfying recent translation I have found." Many people agree with that assessment. She says of Legge's -- tellingly -- that Joseph Needham criticized his use of the term Lathe of Heaven "unreproachfully." Well, of course: No orientalist of Needham's stature would dare criticize Legge's accomplishments in any but the gentlest terms, for fear of bruising his mentor's shoulders. But why do so many comment on a text they cannot read? Chinese is not a lost language. Lao Tzu is not a lost author. And few if any sinologists will be leaping from bridges in despair over the beauties of this painfully dislocated verse