wandelaar

@ Marblehead What advise from the Tao Te Ching do you consider nearly non-applicable in the modern world of today?

The above is the question of this topic. Can we return to that? We talked about the example I gave, but are there any other wrong claims in the Tao Te Ching besides that?

Do we have to come up with a solution that cannot possibly be misused? Don't think that is possible, surely not from a Taoist perspective where good and bad are inextricably mixed up.

The article is not about New Age stuff. That's why I wrote:

Yes - within Taoism the still older doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven was gradually given a more natural interpretation.

Yes - this discussion about "following Tao" comes up time and again, but we already had it solved some time ago. Actually it is quite simple: 1. In a metaphysical sense everything follows Tao, because Tao is the way the world works. 2. In a metaphorical sense "following Tao" means acting in a way that minimises egocentric considerations and makes a maximal use of situations and developments that are already given. It is perfectly possible to not follow Tao in the second sense, and in fact most people do so because they want to shine as the one who got the job done. A Taoist would prefer to stay in the background. Same thing as LiT wrote.

Thank heavens, yes!

Taoists love water.

Something like this? https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.nl/&httpsredir=1&article=2401&context=theses

How does the five-element theory of Chinese philosophy relate to the ways of Lao tse and Chuang tse? Do they have anything to say about it? And if so, is this positive, neutral or negative?

And that assumption is also highly problematic. I think Lao tzu is too optimistic about what even an ideal ruler can accomplish, and about what ordinary people will choose to do when allowed to do whatever they want.

That's no problem because this topic is about the ways Lao tzu might have been factually wrong. I think it is important to see on what points his approach for instance concerning ruling a state breaks down.

Here is Lin Yutang's translation of the whole chapter: Source: http://tao-in-you.com/lao-tzu-tao-te-ching-chapter-32/ Indeed rain falls beyond the command of men, but whether it will fall depends on the way the kings and barons behave.

Where is the ruler in the Lin-quote?

That's one way one could err. The other way to err is in obfuscating the path promoted by Lao tzu beyond recognition in the name of nonduality. Any topic on Laotian Taoism can be destroyed by debating the relevance (in the light of nonduality) of words and distinctions used in posing the topic question. Such inappropriate nondual criticisms will lead nowhere: nobody will be learning anything from the mess and frustration created in the process. (Except using the ignore button.)

Again - not relevant to this discussion. You may regard me as a fake if you like, but that doesn't bother me. I have more regard for the advise of Lao tzu than for yours.

Probably it was this chapter: http://www.wussu.com/laotzu/laotzu32.html I don't know for sure whether there is also a negative version in the Tao Te Ching, where Heaven reacts by sending down a disaster. Lao tzu never had a problem in taking sides and stating his position. That's why his ideas can be called a doctrine, with Chuang tzu that term would be too strong. But I don't think it is interesting to have that discussion again. It isn't relevant to this topic either.

Sorry - I just posted some questions. Feel free to ignore them.

In broad outline, yes. But here the problems start: - What is a positive difference? - What kind of society do you want to live in? - How much room is there for people who fail in the rat race? - How to balance environmental protection and free enterprise? - What to do about crime? - Should drugs be legalized? - Are parents allowed to religiously indoctrinate and/or mutilate their children? So much questions... What do you mean by that?

Don't think one can go any further than commending a middle path. That's the most reasonable position. But where exactly the middle path lies is unknown. So there remains a big subjective factor in ones personal placement of the middle path that cannot further be defended in any objective manner.

Most people only participate in political discussions to defend their own preconceptions, and not to learn anything new or to seriously consider the arguments of their opponents. Hence the predictable result is further polarisation. That's why I mostly avoid those discussions nowadays. As concrete reality is a complex matter one can always look for and find cases that seem to prove ones own position. In this way one will get further and further entrenched in ones own preconceptions and will consequently start seeing the others as complete fools incapable and/or even unwilling to see the obvious truth. All very much against the spirit of the Chuang tzu! As for Lao tzu: he would be against too much rules and regulations, and that could be considered as commending laissez faire. But he also disapproves of extreme inequality, useless innovations and overconsumption! He actually commends a radical return to a simple agrarian form of living. So here again, the case is not that simple.

This topic isn't about my example! So it doesn't even matter whether or not I remembered it well. As I said before:

The Feng/English rendition is OK with me. It's a beautiful and sober translation that doesn't try to force things one way or another.

I don't remember the chapter. Maybe it has a positive formulation in the sense that everything in nature will go well (I remember something about gentle or timely rain) as long as the ruler acts well morally speaking. I only mentioned it as an example of the kind of claims that could be considered suspect. So here I am mainly interested in other examples from the Tao Te Ching. And when we have those other examples the next interesting thing would be investigating how that impacts on philosophical Taoism as a practically feasible doctrine.

What do you people consider the best book on the Guodian Lao tzu?