rene

Since LZ was an intellectual, my guess is he'd probably beat them at their own game, or just watch and laugh, or whatever else he felt like doing. Sorry you're having troubles, taoiseasy; I've no advice to give you. I do know that not all intellectuals are hardasses; and most hardasses aren't very intellectual. warm regards

YW, rainbowvein. (-: I looked at that link; it's pretty good, but incomplete. The content of the book is much richer, (and explains about the grain-avoidance thing) and was worth the price for me, even though I wasn't interested in (nor can comment on) the rest of the "Taoist" ideas contained in the book. Immediately, and by that I mean within 8 hours of doing this, all intestinal discomfort - gone. Heartburn, gas - gone. Just like that. I was just starting to develop what was probably acid reflux (gird), and tried this as last resort before starting on Prilosec. (you readin this, Michael TheLearner?) Now, I rarely even burp. Still fart though. I dont worry about macrobiotics or yin-cool yang-hot balance or any of that kind of stuff... Other than sticking to unprocessed foods as much as possible, my short list is: 1) dont eat eggs/meat with bread/potatoes; 2) only dairy is hard cheese & butter; 3) eat fruit/juice all by itself and never within 2hrs after a meal. Easy peasy. (-: warm regards

rainbowvein, hi You might find the ideas in the food section of the "Tao of health sex and longevity" by Daniel Reid to be a good transitional diet. Taomeow recommend it (the eating concepts, not the book) to me about 5 years ago. All the difference in the world. It's the starting steps to follow what TM just posted above. Maybe someone here has the book (mine wandered off) and can post the info. I still follow the principals; only a few and they're pretty easy. I like easy. (-: warm regards

Sam, hi What a wonderful reply! I've not read any of the philosophies (or much else) so what you bring is a virtual buffet of ideas. Thank you for that. You may be right in all that you say; here's my take. It seems I'm not only 'Laoist', I'm a purist. LOL If it's not in the Laozi, it's not in the Laozi. Simple as that. Since you like stories, here's one for ya. (-: *** "Tao" is an apple. The Laozi paints a picture of the apple, does an astonishinly good job at it, including saying it's not the apple itself! (The apple that can be eaten is not a painted apple... heheh) Then, someone (ZZ, Taoists, Confucianists & others) comes along and takes LZ's apple and grinds it all up into applesauce, adding spices like ch'i and yin yang (and varying ideas of Te).. and later - other ingredients and even other fruits (translator bias) are added until LZ's original apple is only a small part of the gruel and its natural taste relatively hidden. *** Some of the confusion you speak of in post-LZ texts are undoubtedly sourced as you've conveyed. Some might also be from authors attempts to reconstruct the ideas into something more 'apple-shaped'. I don't know. I do feel that all the chopping and adding the other ingredients (post LZ) is fine! Not everyone has the same tastes and this way there's something for everyone. (-: But it's no longer LZ's simple apple. Regarding: "I apologise that my reading of the Lao-tzu is crude, it is a text I am still very unsure of and certainly it is far richer than the single paragraph treatment I'm about it give it..." ~ It's understandable that one would be unsure of the Laozi, imo. Most of the translations I've read all try to change the flavour of the LZ's apple itself to support the addition of later ingredients or perhaps their own preferences... so when you say the LZ is "far richer", yes, and it very much depends on who the "cook" was. So.. I will enjoy watching you and others try to link (or show no link) between various aspects of the dishes served; and thanks for your recommendation of Watson's translation of the Chuang-tzu! If I ever get tired of plain old apples, I may give it a try. (-: warm regards edit to put the story in color (-:

dawei, very nice. And thanks for bring us back on topic. (-: *** 11. This is called [uniting] the Formless [to its] Form; [uniting] the Wu-realm [to its] appearance. Well, whadda know. There's that 'Both' thingy again. (-: warm regards

Was it? Perhaps. And perhaps not everything is the way you've pre-decided it is. To me, tao is a great leveller - but it has nothing to do with political values, east vs. west, or wrong thinking or anything else. Tao pours shit and sugar on us all equally, without preference for one group or another. Everyone lives, everyone dies. Sounds like a pretty square deal to me. warm regards

Okay. It was at least two decades after first reading The Laozi (Feng/English) that I finally broke down and read (most of) Zhuangzi's Inner Chapters (again, Feng/English). Having not read the 'outer chapters' there may well be a difference between the inners and outers regarding connections to The Laozi - or more importantly - that which comes 'through' the words found in The Laozi. I suspect there may well be a difference between the inners and outers, and have a guess as to what that might be, but I really want to check that (soon to arrive) reference before wasting forum's time on a hunch. LOL What I can say now, is the reason I dont care for the ZZ is because it takes the clearly expressed ideas of LZ and warps them into mystical unintelligible barely recognizable tales. Entertaining? You betcha! Do the tales have LZ ideas at the core? Yep. All of them that I've read, anyway. But if one is not already familiar with the elegant simplicity of LZ, will the ideas be recognized in the unnecessarily-complex ZZ? Rarely. And that is my objection to ZZ...especially for seekers of the simple path... including LZ's 'Tao'. warm regards *** edit: I just received email about the book stating: "Your order has been shipped; expect delivery in 1-2 weeks." It might come sooner though.

Nelida, hi Regarding: "about how the seasons don't need an 'action' to do what they do, or a plant or tree doesn't 'act' in this sense, because it is simply the way they naturally change, if the snow melts, the seeds simply sprout and then grow because that's what they do, it's the 'intent' that is inherent in their existence that makes them move and change accordingly..." and "... I think what I wrote above, trees grow because it is inherent in what they do, may have made my own understanding clearer here, they don't 'act' because the intent set for them envelops all the actions and characteristics of their existence...." Well put, imo. To me, the difficulties folks have with the idea of 'wu-wei' being translated as 'no-action' are resolved with instead of the 'act' part of no-action implying motion (i.e. do nothing), the 'act' part of 'no-action' refers to "acting" (like a theater actor assumes a role). [Note: to those of you who may be following the States of Tao thread... that latter version of 'no-action' (above) is the same thing as Wu-action, action of the Wu-state, action that arises through what is natrually inherent, rather than contrived.] Also, regarding: "...so then maybe 'intent' is the dynamic principle that initiates and shapes all changes, the movement and manifestation of qi in its different forms...and if you have 'intent' in what you do, you are in a way tapping in to something universally 'set in intent' and if you move along its lines, it's a natural movement and it is wu-wei.........." I tend to respectfully disagree here, maybe, lol, depending on your definition of 'intent'. If it's refering to what inherently arises, then I agree. But if by 'intent' you are refering to an overarching universal 'intent' (for what one might prefer) and we just tap into that to make our decisions and then (theater)-act on them, then I disagree. I run fast from other peoples 'good intentions'. Maybe somebody (not me, lol) could make a thread on the kinds of 'intent': I intend to eat when hungry. I dont intend to shape anyone into another version of me. BTW, welcome to TaoBums, Nelida. I've been reading your posts, they're quite enjoyable. warm regards

reposted

Please excuse the off-topic post Sam - your posts are a delight to read. I'm going to grab parts of them (like above, which is clearly laoist thought) to take to the other thread for the LZ-ZZ comparisons. There's little I can contribute towards, here in the ChuangTzu section, but will be reading all the new posts of yours, and everyone's, here. Sorry, MH, for the interruption. (-: warm regards

Taoists of the past didn't have a McFeedMe on every corner. My only use of sugar (raw maple) is in morning coffee; and processed foods just aint in this owl's nest. You're right, food chemicals affect greatly; especially when you're not used to them even the smallest amounts can toss ya. At a recent event I went ahead out of respect... but man the next day - if you'd have googled 'bitch-city' my pic would have been at the top. Great posts, folks - good topic, wolf. warm regards

ChiDragon, hi It seems your student is very disrespectful of you and your request. Perhaps you could help him understand how his actions now reflect on you. warm regards

dawei, thanks for your take re Henricks. If the 'Feng' you refer to is Gia-Fu, there's an interesting side-story re the final edit of his DDJ which I'll share another time so as to not distract the topic. Thanks again, most appreciated. (-:

I very much agree with that, Marblehead. *** Sam, thanks for starting this thread, and I agree in general with your ideas above, as described. If you'd be so kind to allow me to wait a bit before contributing in detail... there is an incredible reference book that I'm waiting to receive. I had it a decade ago, but it seems to have "Yu"-ed off somewhere and, in anticipation of this thread, I jumped online a few days ago and ordered its replacement. Should be here relatively soon and then I'll have a whole bunch to say. It might be that Zhuangzi was a Yu-ist indeed! In the style of 'Laoist' and 'Lao-Zhuang'ists - maybe he was just a 'Zhuangist'? Which, as he was Zhuangzi, I not sure how he couldn't be! Playful aside, it might be prudent for us all to recall that this entire body of eastern way - is mostly divided up into little named categories by Western ideas. Chunking things into their own little corners: what is Taoist? Religious? Alchemical? Energetic? Proto-taoist? Philosophical? Laoist? Zhuangist? Yu-ist? might have a similar result as what happened to that poor guy whose neighbors poked holes in him, with good intentions of course, so he could be just like they were... That said, I'm sure No Ideas Will Be Harmed In The Making Of This Thread, and I look forward to sharing a viewpoint I've not yet seen on TaoBums, and especially hearing your take on it. warm regards

dawei, if you dont mind saying, what are your thoughts about the Hendricks translation? tks.

Dawei. You have just concisely and precisely described the essence of the origin of one-half of what I point at with the word "both". I have never seen it in words before this. Thank you. edits 1) typo 2) delete seen gif.

I do not know its name- Call it Tao. For lack of a better word, I call it great. Being great, it flows It flows far away. Having gone far, it returns.

This idea is of particular interest to me. There is an argument to be made in the Chaung-tzu inner chapters that we should not translate tao as "The Way" but merely "a way". In this sense Chuang-tzu may not be a traditional Taoist at all, but rather an advocate of "tao-practice". There are hints in Ch2 that Chuang-tzu is suspicious of any kind of simple "unity" (ie a Tao rather than tao) [...] Chuang-tzu seems to be saying we shouldn't even try and talk of a single Tao; but instead "take no step at all". Or as you so succinctly put it wu tao ! I take issue with this, especially if my ideas are mistaken to support it... but the Chuang-tzu subforum might be a better place to address specific differences between LZ and ZZ - and your scholastic input would be incredibly welcomed, if you're willing. warm regards

deci belle, nice post. This: "If such a way can be described as having an attribute and a location, Ting cleaves potential in its incipience by meeting it on its terms developing spontaneously in perpetuity." - is the essence of what some may call the pathless path, and what I call wu dao 無道. Well met.

I like that, too; it sets Dao as a facilitator of the process. Do you think, then, that Dao would have been present in the {nothing} ? Or did it just mysteriously form (ddj25) to get the ball rolling?

CD, I'm not upset at all! It's much better for me to discover your nature now before more energy was invested in a dialogue with you on this thread. (-: Dont you have a new student (yiming) to see to over in the Chinese forum? Nice that you're helping him translate the DDJ. Hopefully you'll not alter the original over there. Good luck!

@ rainbowvein - Kind words, thanks. (-:

Dont worry too much about your sifu's 'reverence' for the Tao Te Ching. He likes to alter the orignal characters. Best of luck!

I'm surprised that you would change the original DDJ, CD, which you clearly did. Apologize to yourself. IF one agrees or disagrees with something, or IF one has made errors in interpretations, those kinds of things can be discussed and then ignored/corrected/sorted/whatever ... WHEN an original character in the DDJ is intentionally changed, I'm done. Peace out, CD. edit to add CD's posts.