Alo and De Five Three #72
(PD) Alo and De Lake on Land.
Copyright ©2018 November 27, 2018
Yan: Someone has made a really big mistake... either I can no longer tell the difference between numbers, or else, millions of outsiders cannot... here, this paper, is how I translated the ancient book's little chapter. What did I do wrong?
Alo: Your translation is worded rationally... everything fits well... it looks fine to me...
Yan: Am I wrong, that five implies five, as in the number '5'? And that three means three? The ancient character, five strokes, meaning five... the other ancient character, three strokes, meaning three... obvious... but did I read more into the words than I should have?
Alo: Explain how you arrived at the translation... study how the sequence of logic led to the choices of words...
Yan: Okay... first, the main author of the ancient books was very good at presenting rational sentences... also, whenever he mentioned a number, he was sincere... he sincerely meant to say the number word. The two sentences follow the mental pattern of the main author's, and so it appears reasonable that the words were very likely his.
Alo: Yes... some of the surrounding chapters... not the main author's... very difficult to read... not similar rhythm... not even close...
Yan: Agreed... but here, he began the first sentence with the number '5'... first word is 'five'... the sentence tells us that he is going to speak about five things... by the fifth word, he added the word 'three', which again tells us that he would speak of three things... five and three... ought to be simple...
Alo: The way that you chose the words, fit that pattern...
Yan: Yes... I merely wrote a direct translation, of one synonym for each ancient word, and then I numbered each topic... and yes, five topics... I also numbered the classifications of the topics... and yes, there were three groups within the five topics... just like what the author said...
Alo: Similar pattern... similar rhythm... similar sincerity... similar results... logic says likely same author... logic says likely close translation...
Yan: But it was not close at all, or, at least, not close to what all other translations have claimed. I have not read your translation yet... I still want to find my own words first, before reading yours... learn how different points of view create different words of translations... but here, I could not accept what the other translations have claimed... if the other translations are so much as even remotely close, then I do not want to waste time reading any other ancient books...
Alo: You chose, a kind word... not the bad word... the difference of words, is that the problem?
Yan: Yes... if I accept the common word to be accurate, then the whole of the ancient books is flawed, wrong... unacceptable... unworthy of being read.
Alo: I have held a similar question for myself, numerous times... but here, you did find the better point of view.
Yan: But I am not confident in myself... if billions of people have said that the word means 'punishment', then how can I defend my choice of 'harm'?
Alo: Point of view... the outsiders, their world is of harshness... violence... they know no other way... they cannot imagine a world where a man speaks of harm to heart, and not speak of punishing people who do not kowtow...
Yan: And that was my concern also... if the ancients had taught a belief that people must obey the belief, else be punished, then I wanted nothing to do with the ancients... no system of culture can be worthy, if the system is forced through violence... also destroys completely the idea of junzi, if violence is attached.
Alo: Agreed... but here, your paper, you did well... five harms, three categories of harms... you separated the rhythms properly... we could give effort to choose better modern words, instead of the dictionary words, but still, the words you chose are very good...
De: Five punishments?
Alo: Yes... Yan did well...
De: 'Acts of'... also had five, and a three...
Alo: Yes, it did, and required a similar approach as Yan's... the main author, wise man, very clear... very sincere...
Yan: Thank you, I appreciate the kind words... and now, I am again thinking of 'Three Powers'... 'heaven under straight, because it teach not bow and finish, it government not stern'... 'teach not bow and then stop talking', as if commandments... again, referencing other chapters and books, helps explain all chapters...
Alo: Agreed, including the chapters about government itself... not talking about a government ruling over other people, but speaking of one's own government, ruling over one's self...
Yan: I had begun recognizing that, but now, more obvious...
Alo: The ancient writer, he often spoke analogies, analogies based upon real life... analogies of an ancient culture that we cannot always interpret closely today... but when he speaks of virtue, think instead of what you interpret as being virtuous... the words, then, fall easily into place.
Yan: Easy... I think of Jun... I know her heart... that, to me, is the definition...
Alo: Similar for me... the 'de' word, that implies virtue... I now ignore the modern definitions of words, and instead, simply think 'De'... the meaning, and translation, then flows easily, and agreeable with what the ancient man wrote...
Yan: The ancient writer... I often wonder of his personality... to me, it seems as though he was a much better man than what we have been told...
Alo: I agree... many men, have claimed a lot of things, but the beliefs all include punishments for not believing... the ancient man, his is the only writing that I have ever seen, that does not include violence...