Namaste theocritus,
thank you for the post.
they are from the same source text... what you are seeing is, to put it bluntly, a difference in scholarship.
even having said that, though, both of those passages are communicating the same sort of thing, using some different terminology.
as an aside... i would encourage you to be open with regards to the translations that you may read... i have one translation that is written in Chinese that is in a completely different form... it is very poetic in it's formulations and often, seems to gloss over somethings which are confusing and, for somethings which seem straight forward, it spends a considerable amount of time
overall.. what they are trying to communicate cannot be communicated in any verbalization, thus, it is quite possible that one of the translations that you read will just "feel right", which is how it was when i was exploring the various translations.
i have several friends that are quite taken with the Burton Watson translations... but, they seem dry and uninspired to me

many beings with many capacities probably need a great variety of tools to find the one that works best for them.
an aside...
if you have an abiding interest in the Tao, i would strongly recommend another text and a lay practice manual.
the lay practice manual, of which i've excerpted a few bits from, is called the Secret of the Golden Flower and is a lay Ch'an Buddhist/Taoist praxis manual. there are two translations that you can find, one by a German named Wilhelm, which you should not get, and one by Cleary, which you should definiately get.
you could get the Wilhelm one, later, so that you can confirm Clearys conclusions regarding Wilhelm and, subsequently, Jungs' mis-understandings and attempts to practice the Golden Flower technique.
the other text is called Awakening to the Tao by Liu I-ming. there is, in my view, hardly a more direct explanation of the Northern Complete Reality school of Taoist Alchemical praxis in existence.