I found it here, I believe. Its pretty good, and keeps "additions" to a minimal level.davidbrainerd wrote:I spent quite a bit of time in Barnes and Noble comparing translations one time. It seemed to me the best translation is John C.H. Wu. But then again, that determination wasn't based on a knowledge of Chinese, so I'd be curious your evaluation of that translation.Coëmgenu wrote:Fun fact about the Dàodéjīng:
It is VERY minimal and sparse. It makes the Chinese āgamaḥ look like Hegel in comparison.
The opening stanza is only 9 words.
The entire opening chapter has only 50 words. Compare this with some of the very verbose translations of it in Engish!
Compare his rendition of the opening to Dwight Goddard's:
A lot of "interpretation" there, its almost a "commentary" on the text rather than a translation. At the very least he could have put his own commentarial additions in footnotes or differentiated from elements found in the source text.The Dao that can be understood cannot be the primal, or cosmic, Dao, just as an idea that can be expressed in words cannot be the infinite idea.
And yet this ineffable Dao was the source of all spirit and matter, and being expressed was the mother of all created things.
Therefore not to desire the things of sense is to know the freedom of spirituality; and to desire is to learn the limitation of matter.
These two things spirit and matter, so different in nature, have the same origin. This unity of origin is the mystery of mysteries, but it is the gateway to spirituality.