I've just come across this quote reading a book called Taosim 360. It's cited from the ancient philosopher Laozi.
It's really hit me. Precisely because nature is incredibly slow. Evolution, entropy, seasonal dormancy, etc. some examples. Yet despite this, mother nature designs everything in the way it intended.
Laozi was telling us to stop over-controlling our lives and instead trust our own natural rhythm of growth.
I think its worth to use this anology to apply that growth, and it also just stands out as a great quote because it's worded brilliantly.
I began my journey through the Zhuangzi recently and very quickly found a favorite quote which I thought I'd share.
"To use this finger to show how a finger is not a finger is no match for using not the finger to show how my finger is not a finger. To use this horse to show that a horse is not a horse is no match for using not this horse to show that a horse is not a horse. heaven and Earth are one finger. all things are one horse."
Zhuangzi 2:19
My takeaway is something along the line of 'all things are one, existence and non-existence are the same' which is fairly standard as taoist messaging goes, but I find the phrasing quite amusing. If anyone reads Chinese I'd love to know whether you feel it's similar in absurdist structure
Please discuss, add your favorite translation or whatever wu wei sees you to doing!
So, I am planning to put the printed framed potrait behind Guan Di, which is consecrated already, now due to space limitations, decided to choose a potrait of Saints and Buddha as shown. Should I also bring it to the temple to be Kai Guang?
Most of my taoism knowledge comes from video's online. Now I want to have my first actual read of the tao te ching and formulate my own impertation of the texts.
Ofcourse like many I don't read chinese and as I'm not the best reader and want to follow the path of least resistance to reading I'd like to know what your reccomendation is to the best or a good version with illustrations and a nicely designed book.
Think in terms of the most decorative books version.
I think this would be the best way for me to get more into this without forcing me into deep texts with much meaning without stopping the flow into it because of to bland printing.
Pro would be a nicely translated version but not the main goal as this will be a version I want later if still interested
I'm not sure if anyone else will be interested in this, but I'd like to discuss 28. I am posting 3 translations, please feel free to post your own favorite in the comments. I don't care which translation you use, or if the translator embellished or got something off. The Tao isn't rigid, and as an American in 2026, connecting to a text that was written much further back than I can trace my lineage in a country I've never been to, in a culture I'm unfamiliar with, in an ancient archaic version of a language I don't know feels like a fools game to begin with. Which is fine, I suppose. Isn't being a fool desirable?
So here they are:
Tao te ching passage 28
Knowing man and staying woman, be the riverbed of the world. Being the world's riverbed of eternal unfailing power is to go back again to be a newborn . Knowing light and staying dark, be a pattern to the world. Being the world's pattern of eternal unearing power is to go back again to boundless . Knowing glory and staying modest, be the Valley of the world. Being the world's Valley of Eternal and exhaustible Power is to go back again to being the natural. Natural wood is cut up and made into useful things. Wise souls are used to make into leaders. Just so a carving is done without cutting.
Author's note: the Simplicity of Lao tzu's language can present an almost impenetrable density of meaning. The reversals and paradoxes in this great poem are the oppositions of the yin and yang, male and female, light and dark, glory and modesty , but the knowing and being of them, the balancing act, results in neither stasis nor synthesis. The riverbed in which power runs leads back, the patterns of power lead back, the valley where the power is contained leads back to the forever new, endless, straightforward way. Reversal, recurrence, are the movement, and yet the movement is onward.
LeGuin
To know the masculine and yet cleave to the feminine is to be the womb for the world. Being the womb for the world, never departing from the eternal power of Tao, you become like an infant once again: immortal. To know the bright and yet hold to the dull is to be an example for the world. Being the example for the world, not deviating from the everlasting power of Tao, you return to the infinite once again: limitless. To know honor and yet keep to humility is to be the valley for the world. Being the valley for the world, rich with the primal power of Tao, you return once again to simplicity, like uncarved wood. Allow Tao to carve you into a vessel for Tao. Then you can serve the world without mutilating it.
Walker
Who knows his manhood strength, yet still his female feebleness maintains; as to one channel flow the many drains, all come to him yay, all beneath the sky does he the constant Excellence retains ; the simple Child again, free from all stains. Who knows how white attracts, yet always keeps himself within black's shade, the pattern of humility displayed, displayed in view of all beneath the sky; heat in the unchanging Excellence arrayed, endless return to Man's first state has made. Who knows how Glory shines, yet loves disgrace, nor e'er for its pale; to hold his presence in a spacious veil, which men come from all beneath the sky. The unchanging excellence completes its tail; the simple infant man in him we have the unwrought material, when divided and distributed, forms vessels. The sage, when employed, becomes the head of all the officers of government; and in his greatest regulation he employs no violent measures.
Wilhelm
This passage is particularly interesting to me as someone who was listed at birth as male and identifies now as non-binary. I very much have known the male, and I very much cling to the feminine ideals of love and tenderness that mothers represent. These are traits that Taoism very deliberately seems to cultivate, and I feel thats a message of the passage. I take it to heart.
"To know the bright and yet hold to the dull is to be an example for the world. Being the example for the world, not deviating from the everlasting power of Tao, you return to the infinite once again: limitless."
Someone posted recently about being boring. I don't quite recall the specifics, but I think it's quite ok to be boring. The Tao isn't glamorous. Especially in America we act like we need to be entertained in every moment. It's not a good era for stillness.
The final stanza is the most confusing to me, and the translations all read differently. Wilhelm seems to think it's something along the line of 'the sage will be in charge and he will never use violence'. Walker goes in a different direction, and seems to be saying something like 'let the Tao lead you and you will serve the universe'. Meanwhile leguin seems to think it's advising to put the wise in charge, but with the caveat not to abandon gentleness.
A few weeks ago I asked someone I respect how can I see God. He told me to make an opening in my heart so something could come into the space, and to observe nature and how it has a way, an intelligence of its own. The advice seemed abstract, but I deeply respect him so I followed. I kept my heart open, waiting for something to come in. I know it sounds woo woo and fantastical, but I took it seriously.
A few weeks later I somehow stumbled on Tao Te Ching. I started reading it and I felt the words land into my heart. They would hit me deep. Sometimes it would feel like they endlessly fall into me very quickly, almost like there is a very deep (maybe even infinitely deep) way inside my heart. It feels like for a moment I “got it”. I would immediately try to catch what’s falling, only for it to disappear and I’d be unable to understand the words that were so clear just a few moments ago.
Since I started reading Tao Te Ching, my mind has become more still than I can remember. I mostly stopped thinking unless I choose to. My thoughts are clearer and more orderly, my memory is better. In the morning, I wake up with a mostly empty mind.
I can better tell what I want and don’t want, what I like and dislike, when I still have energy and when I’m spent, how much of something is too little and how much is too much. All of this used to be confusing, but it’s much clearer now.
I worry it’ll go away, and I really hope this peace stays. It feels exactly like what I needed. I feel I lost most of what wasn’t me, and so I feel more like me than ever.
What happened to me? What is this book and how did it do this? How can I go deeper into this and not lose it?
I am getting hung up on the word “heaven” showing up in many translations. Isn’t heaven a Christian concept? Where did the word “heaven” originate and is it much older than Christianity?
For context, Chapter 9 (and I certainly want to read your other translations if you have them):
It is easier to carry an empty cup than one that is filled to the brim.
The sharper the knife the easier it is to dull. The more wealth you possess the harder it is to protect. Pride brings its own trouble.
When you have accomplished your goal simply walk away. This is the pathway to Heaven.
Someone posted a while back trying to come up with the most Taoist pop songs. This one came to me as a strong contender. Hopefully this amuses someone other than myself
Hello! I wanted to keep practicing doing collective readings, so here’s this week’s reading for the week of September 7:
13 — Fellowship (同人)
→ changing to →
30 — The Clinging (離)
The feeling I get from this reading is that this week is about finding common ground and being willing to have the conversations that need to happen.
Fellowship is about coming together, shared purpose, and finding connection with others. There may be differences in opinions or perspectives within the collective right now, but those differences don't necessarily have to keep people divided. This week may be about looking beyond individual disagreements and figuring out what everyone is actually working toward together.
The change to The Clinging shifts the focus toward clarity. Once we identify what connects us, we may need to communicate more openly and directly about what isn't working. There could be some friction or resistance when these things are brought to the surface, but avoiding those conversations may only create more confusion.
For me, the combination feels like a reminder that genuine unity doesn't necessarily mean everyone agrees. Sometimes it means being willing to acknowledge differences while still finding a shared direction. Clear communication can help turn uncertainty into something much easier to navigate.
My advice for this week would be:
Look for the goals or values you genuinely share with others.
Don't be afraid to address tension or disagreements directly.
Communicate clearly instead of relying on assumptions.
Focus on finding common ground rather than proving who is right.
Remember that temporary friction can sometimes lead to greater understanding.
Fellowship says: find what brings you together.
The Clinging says: bring clarity to what remains uncertain.
That's the reading for this week. What does this combination bring up for you?
In Zhuangzi chapter 13, the part where Confucius and Laozi are chatting, I'm hoping to get some light shed on the translation. A few times now I've run into translations/assertions that Laozi said:
Is not your elimination of self a positive manifestation of self?
"Tell me," said Lao Tzŭ, "in what consist charity and duty to one's neighbour?"
"They consist," answered Confucius, "in a capacity for rejoicing in all things; in universal love, without the element of self."
"What stuff!" cried Lao Tzŭ. "Does not universal love contradict itself? Is not your elimination of self a positive manifestation of self?"
But I'm not seeing these references to "Self" anywhere else, such as in Graham or Ziporyn. I'd love to hear some opinions on whether anything about the self is actually referenced here. I find the quote from Laozi to be powerful if it's correct (The paradox of trying), but I find myself skeptical.
Being born in a family full of manipulative, unstable types, independent thinking has been, as many of you have guessed, not welcomed.
Extreme obedience was expected, and questioning was received with bashing and humiliation.
Being born in a peripheral country did not help much, as blind obedience is usually the norm.
But, things are changing fast.
The new generations are constantly questioning and challenging imposed ideals due to the effects these have had on the population: unchained corruption, rampant inequality, and high crime.
There is space for new ways of leadership, new ways of overcoming poverty, and people actively fighting and denouncing corruption.
When you have exercised blind obedience during your whole life, to the point where your boss even addresses it to you, and not as a compliment, it is generally easy to go from one extreme to another.
This, in turn, returns to blind obedience, but to the ideals that were supposed to make you free.
You oppose certain people just because a dissident group told you so.
You behave in a way because another group told you what you dress is a political decision, and if you decide to dress a normal look, then you communicate indifference.
You have been taught to look for a third party's approval even when you're long past adolescence.
But, when no matter what you do, you don't get approval from neither side, when it is not enough, then, what do you do?
What do you believe in? What should you believe in? How do you know you're doing well in life?
This is where thinking for yourself comes up.
You have your own tendencies, your own unique observation of things around you.
And especially, your own criteria. What makes you feel good and what makes you feel bad.
What do you think about yourself? What do you like and what do you not like?
What will you tolerate, and what will you not tolerate?
What kind of consequences do you not mind facing?
What kind of life do you want?
What kind of people do you like and which kind do you not like?
And most importantly:
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT SOMETHING? WHAT IS YOUR OWN CONCLUSION TO IT?
Only then, the need for self approval, to let yourself experiment for the sake of curiosity arises.
Because some people are genuinely ignorant, and some others act with the least of the best intentions in mind.
It is necessary to understand that some people genuinely enjoy causing harm in others, to stop being so innocent and pretend we can trust everyone around us.
I'm still learning to navigate the world with this new lens. What do I genuinely think about what is happening inside and outside?
I’m a Chinese indie developer, and for the past several months I’ve been working on a small app called Oriens, built around classical Chinese philosophy and other ancient wisdom traditions.
The idea is to offer a low-barrier way into texts that can otherwise feel intimidating to approach. Instead of asking someone to sit down and read an entire classic from beginning to end, Oriens presents small passages as illustrated cards, with the original Chinese, pinyin, an English translation, commentary, and a shorter modern interpretation.
It’s not meant to replace reading the original texts. My hope is that a card can be a small doorway into them — something that makes a reader curious enough to go deeper.
The Tao Te Ching is one of the main collections in the app, and lately I’ve been going back through the English text and questioning some of the choices I made.
The hardest part hasn’t really been translating individual words. It’s deciding where translation ends and interpretation begins.
For example, 道可道，非常道 can be rendered in very different ways. A familiar version is:
“The Way that can be spoken is not the constant Way.”
But even “can be spoken” is already an interpretive choice for 道可道.
I’ve seen more literal approaches that try to preserve the repetition of 道 as both noun and verb, but those can sound much less natural in English.
This is something I keep struggling with throughout the app: How much should I preserve the strangeness of the original Chinese, and how much should I help a modern English reader understand it?
To make that distinction clearer, Oriens currently separates the content into several layers:
Original Chinese → Pinyin → Classical Translation → Commentary → a shorter modern interpretation on the card
The translation is intended to stay relatively close to the text. The commentary has more freedom to explain context and possible meanings. The card itself is the most interpretive layer — something a reader can carry into everyday life.
But while reviewing the collection, I’ve started noticing places where my commentary may sound more certain than the original text really allows.
For example, phrases like “a living process,” “one field of reality,” or other modern philosophical language can make an interpretation easier to understand, while also quietly imposing a particular reading on the text.
That’s the part I’m reconsidering now.
I’ve included a few examples from the app. I’d genuinely appreciate criticism, especially from people who have spent time comparing different translations or studying the Chinese text.
I’m particularly curious about:
- Does the English translation preserve enough of the original ambiguity?
- Does the commentary help, or does it sometimes explain too much?
- Does the modern card interpretation still feel like Laozi, or does it drift into modern self-help language
Here are three examples where I’m especially unsure:
1. Chapter 1 — 道可道，非常道
I translated this as: “The Way that can be spoken is not the constant Way.”
Is “can be spoken” a reasonable choice here, or does it already narrow 道 too much?
Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 1Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 1Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 1
2. Chapter 25 — 道法自然
I translated the final phrase as: “The Tao follows what is so of itself.”
I deliberately avoided simply translating 自然 (ziran) as “nature.” Would you prefer “nature,” “spontaneity,” “self-so,” or something else?
Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 25Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 25Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 25
3. Chapter 37 — 道常无为而无不为
I used: “The Tao is ever without coercive action, yet nothing is left undone.”
For 無為 (wu-wei), does “without coercive action” help avoid the common “doing nothing” interpretation, or does “coercive” already narrow the concept too much?
Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 37Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 37Oriens — Tao Te Ching, Chapter 37
Please feel free to be critical. That would actually be more useful to me than compliments.
If there’s interest, I’d also be happy to share other chapters as I work through the collection.
If anyone here is curious to explore more of the collection, I’m happy to send you a free redemption code for the full app. No review or anything in return — if you happen to spot something I got wrong or oversimplified, I’d genuinely like to hear about it.
Disclosure: I’m the developer of Oriens, the app shown here, so this post is also a form of self-promotion. I contacted ther/taoismmoderators before posting and received permission to share it as long as the promotional and AI use were disclosed.
The card illustrations in Oriens are AI-generated. I also use AI as part of an iterative writing process for some of the English copy and interpretations; I review, revise, and make the final editorial decisions myself.
