Anzhi

Thanks PLB. Very good. Endless nothings, everythings, like to a lover... Bows to Zhuangzi.

Warm greetings to all. Thank you for accepting my membership here. I have wandered past this site a few times, but it appears timely now to join. Other matters I was involved in formerly were an obstacle. I am an Australian senior man who has had an interest in Chinese culture, philosophy (general and Eastern) and the Yi Jing. for some thirty years. I have had a Christian theological background many years ago but have long moved on from a theistic/Christian viewpoint. I basically am feeling a strong need to share a bit of good time with fellow Daoist lovers and fellow "students". I have had some contact with another, more mixed Buddhist/Taoist Facebook group but which has now moved away from deeper attention to the Daoist way. I am currently studying on and off my latest book purchase, "Dao De Jing - A Philosophical Translation" by Roger T. Ames and David L. Hall, and finding it a very good read. Another fine DDJ reference for me is the version of Red Pine. I am pleased to have in my library also "Zhaungzi - The Essential Writings" translated by Brook Ziporyn The Yi Jing versions by Bradford Hatcher and by Stephen Karcher are both furthering references for me at present, along with others, well known in the main. I do not speak Chinese unfortunately but find the many assistant sites and books of the Chinese writings very helpful. The image-ful nature of Chinese is most furthering for me. I look forward to sharing with others here. I use a Chinese username (a meaningful word from the DDJ) but I am not Chinese. My common name is Rod. Thank you.

Thank you Chang for your welcome. Gradually getting the hang of things. Good wishes to you.

Thank you for that necessary clarifying statement, Yueya. I didn't make it clear enough. It was just one historical period and the Confucian way has a great deal of respect from me, not the least in its contributions to the Yi Jing. I am not fully aquainted with when Daoism became afflicted with the same problem, probably later. Thank you for the link. I will read it with much interest. _/\_

Thank you VonKrankenhaus. I tend to agree that Dao is not like "some mystical, ineffable thing that they must attain through some spiritual process". A Western idea like "Logos" is not appropriate to the Chinese more grounded way of approaching things. The example of the molecular coming together appears a really good one. There it is in front of us happening, but exactly "how" is not as easily pinned own and very difficult to convey in an holistic view, which sort of dissipates once you start dividing and labelling. _/\_

Thank you Michael. It seems the crux is in how many words. I have, like many, looked closely at the great summation of Ch. 1. I am definitely no Chinese scholar but there are many helps by these same scholars now. The describing character there is often translated "constant". Others use words like "eternal", "absolute" but some translators think that injects too much Western ideas into it, and I tend to agree. My poor attempt at expanded paraphrase of first two verses, to convey the nuances I see; A way/path (distinctly outlined, edged) cannot be the constant (everywhere, all the time) Way. A name that can said (completed) cannot be the Name that is constant (never finishes, always being named, indicated) This attempt seems to have a certain logicality to it in that a path/way of doing etc, that is boundless and constant cannot be one that is edged like a normal path or set of instructions. A name that is never finished being uttered (constant) cannot logically be one that is a finished, ended labeling. I can only submit it to far more informed Dao bums than I. Thank you very much for your comment.

Thank you very much for your responses that cause more reflection. There appears to me at present, an underlying assumption sometimes that encountering the Dao, moving with its De and its manifestations involves much more immediate physicality of this "now" (Taijiquan, fornicating, drinking tea etc) than thought (or speech, writing) or exploring these byways. The excessive legality and stultifying social rule-making of Confucians was the provoker of this letting go of forms that had become too rigid and deadly and quite devoid of the immediacy of "flow". Life as against death.This appears as an historic extreme. It has always appeared to me however, partitioning off the verbal and cognitive too harshly as if the Dao will not be found there (impossible) begins to harden divisions again, the other way. I always feel more comfortable with the "blurred" Way and the lived being with its practices. I see dancing of thoughts, words, as if picking fruits and tasting. Zhuangzi and the DDJ both attracted me with this delightful non-insistent blurredness in approaching everything. Being ready to appear as an idiot for the Dao. Yet to declare we must always be "blurry" seems another sort of hard edge. This Dao is never pinnable, is what Ch. 14. seems to be saying (in words or characters). Grounding in the present moment of way-making surely includes the timely picking up of its texts and talking in an unfixed way about them, as much as taijiquan or cooking fish. I am still finding my way around. I am open to direction as to where posts fit better. Thank you again, Marblehead, shanlung, Gerard _/\_

First post. Greetings. Thank you, most helpful _/\_ "...Like Laozi, Zhuangzi does not detail any single practical path that can lead us to achieve so dramatic a change in perspective. But his book is filled with stories of people who seem to have made this shift..." Zhuangzi is a most stimulating companion.