Tree Stump

Fear is just the impulse to escape a situation that may be hazardous. Having a gut feeling of fear is natural, and often useful. Sometimes it's misinformed, true, but then again so are our thoughts - so why throw the baby out with the bathwater? - TS

I definitely agree on the point about the paradoxes... it's easy to say something is right or wrong, but I'm sure Lao Tzu would have something to say about that also. The trick, I guess, is to discern intentional paradox from inconsistency caused by faulty translation or a hidden agenda. And what a fun project that would be. - TS

The question I have, though, is whether these are different translations, or are they interpolations? Is it really possible to look at the original Chinese and discern which translation is more accurate, or do you just look for the most consistent interpretation? For example it seems that some translations have inserted Buddhist concepts where perhaps they weren't intended - at least it appears that way. But by what text can we test these things? - TS

Yeah I agree, that makes more sense. I found another similar interpretation from Legge (1891) "What all men fear is indeed to be feared; but how wide and without end is the range of questions (asking to be discussed)!" As you said, in other words, don't take peoples ideas/fears as gospel.. look deeper. - TS

A happy ending? Only a bad tale, ending, Brings much happiness.

A bit confusing really, we have: "Must I fear what others fear? What abysmal nonsense this is!" "Must I fear what others fear? What nonsense! " -- Straightforward: I shouldn't fear what others fear (perhaps without evaluating it myself first) "The one who is feared by others, Must also because of this fear other men? " -- Entirely different meaning. In other words: The scary one shouldn't also be scared. "What the sages fear, I must not fear." -- Entirely different meaning. In other words: The wise one's fears are baseless. "What the people fear, I cannot be unafraid" -- That's a double negative. In other words I cannot ignore the fears of others. So which is it?!! - TS

Warm sun on tan skin I wait only for the tide My carriage awaits

Corn needs to be popped The movie needs to be watched All things have an end

Liver for breakfast? Um no, I'll stick to toast thanks I'm, er, dieting

Carried everywhere Touching all, I am the wind Seeing all, the hills

Jumping from his horse He falls flat, face on the ground Tumbleweed rolls by

The whole chapter is wonderfully poetic (and not just the Mother metaphor)... I think the message appears quite simple: Stay grounded! Look deeply into the nature in things and do not create superficial distinctions or other abstractions that do not relate to the Tao. Trust and reflect only your source, the Tao. - TS

Happy, where are you? Not in that smile, that's for sure A sad actress, m'am

Change is on its way Spirit of Heraclitus Such a grumpy fart

Wow, that's so beautiful - thank you so much for posting that! What an amazing website also... Have a great weekend too! - TS

It'll come to you When you call it by its name If not, throw a rock

No worries my friend, 'no place to go' is precisely it... sounds like that Friday feeling... - TS

Hi marble! I agree that 'we can become our thoughts', so to speak. And that's a valid position to hold. But personally I don't think that is a good thing, sorry There is existence, the 'Tao' if you will, and then there are abstract ideas. If you become your ideas then you're basically an Idealist (from philosophical idealism, which stems from Platonic thought). These ideas are abstract in that they're not linked to existence, they're not natural. What basis of reality do they have? Do you want to reduce yourself to an idea? IMO the great enemies of the Tao are shortsightedness and abstract ideals. They explain those evils such as hedonism, tyranny, socialism and capitalism and other idolatory. We are indeed free, free to find ourselves or free to destroy ourselves. True freedom, happiness and contentment comes from living deeply - stepping 'into the process' as I've said before, not imagining a new one. That makes us truly free because it opens us up to eternity. Ideas can just close us in, lock us up, and take away our lifeline. - TS

Well, my existence didn't spring out of nowhere. I was born of my parents, grew on the nourishment of food, learned from experiences with others. Every part of my whole existence is one big 'thank you' if I only recognize it that way. In other words, my very being is from others. That is all that I am. That is the awakening that we need. Sure I may think I create who I am, that I choose who I am. But really isn't that just acting? Who am I really? It seems to me that identity is critical to any discussion of immortality. If you identify with something that is eternal, then the 'you' that you care about will surely live on in that. And there is only one truly eternal existence, we are part of it - we are it, if we just recognize that. - TS

Right, but I don't think it's a matter of practicality. We have to live holistically. For example. When I act, I am acting in the present. But I should also understand what allows and causes me to act, and the consequence of my action. This, I think, is living deeply. It seems simple but if instead I disregard the consequence, or if I act without understanding the cause, or if I focus on the cause without acting - then these are all misbalanced and then we are clinging onto an incomplete abstraction of reality. This is what causes problems. When we experience anything, we should consider its cause and origin, and be grateful for it. We should cherish it as something of impermanence, something temporal, and entrust its future only to the Tao - and not to any other idea. This kind of contemplation doesn't even have to be that difficult. Like when we utter 'thank you' we're acknowledging that what we have comes from another (the past), we're acknowledging its value as something that we need (the future), and so in that simple 'thank you' we could be contemplating the Tao. Showing respect to others and everything is another example. Children seem to get this naturally. They're in constant wonder of everything, they truly cherish life, they understand their dependency, and yet they trust deeply to be guided. I think this filial love should be a model of the relationship we should have with nature, and the Tao Te Ching itself mentions this (chapter 28). Anyway, my point is that it's that kind of contemplation that truly answers the 'after death' question... When we understand who we are (where we come from), we realize our true identity.. Say thank you, live deeply and live forever! - TS

Hi Cat Pillar, To be conscious is to will, and to will is to cling, no? The question is what we cling to, because when we give up our will we may as well be dead. In my view, experience-alone is short sighted because it focuses purely on the immediate senses without any concern for the origin of those feelings. It can be superficial. We may as well be rocks weathering the elements. Experience coupled with insight into natural law seems to be a richer way of living. Looking deeply into your experiences to see their origin, validate their authenticity - are they consistent with the eternal natural law? Or are they born from abstract ideals that are purely self-serving and have no real existence? The way I see it, the beauty of humanity is that we are almost like the Tao's mirror: we exist to experience all of life, to witness the wonder of existence. Confronted with that we see our origin and our eternal destiny, in some small way we are able to identify with the Tao. And in that lies some comfort of our true immortality. What you call 'being present' can be either, but of course (and I'm sure you would agree) we shouldn't ever exclude the past and future, but rather see everything as one process. - TS

One could argue that after-death (eschatological) concerns are the root of all religions and probably all philosophy. They each try to find something eternal with which we can identify with, and through identifying with it we somehow merge with it and live forever. That's the theory anyway. Be that the Tao, the dharmakaya, the risen Christ, God, our offspring, fame or other legacies... we all try to cling on to something that lasts forever in the knowledge that we ourselves do not. I think that's mostly because it's impossible for us to exist without knowing that our existence will continue. But that also depends on what you consider existence to be in the first place. If you cling on to your own experience only (the 'here and now'), then whether you are actually experiencing or gone, doesn't matter so much does it? A little short sighted perhaps? If you cling on to a certain view of the world - an ideal of some kind - then your participation in creating that ideal would probably be your 'salvation'. I think for many progressives this is the case. If you cling on to a view of the world from insight - e.g. Buddhism - then you must must consider whether that insight is truly representative of full existence, or is it just a shadow of it. Will your after-death existence truly exist the way you do, or are you in fact chasing mortality? If you cling on to the actual world and its underlying processes, such as the Tao or natural law, then you can find peace purely in contemplation and living freely, knowing that the spirit within you will continue on after your individual self has had its turn. This is probably more of a conservative view. Reminding yourself of its eternal existence by observing others and nature will provide you some comfort of immortality, and perhaps the hope you need to live each day. Hope is really all we need. Just some thoughts. - TS

Here is the Bynner translation: 19.1 Rid of formalized wisdom and learning, people would be a hundredfold happier, 19.2 Rid of conventionalized duty and honor, people would find their families dear, 19.3 Rid of legalized profiteering, people would have no thieves to fear. 19.4 These methods of life have failed, all three, 19.5 Here is the way, it seems to me: Set people free, As deep in their hearts they would like to be btw - has anybody come across a web page with the original chinese of the TTC, ideally with links from each Chinese symbol to a translation or etymology? TS

Lorax, on his stump Thumping on a lump, or hump? Slumping Lorax, stumped.

Or perhaps if a term needs that much qualification, it's best to find a different term? You use a term like 'not of the world' - but I don't think there are many people who would readily define 'the world' as 'being caught in trival distractions and binding or limiting habits (namely of mental, emotional or physical forms) that deplete a person'. Didn't the tao create the world, as most of us know it? It would seem that a term of more clarity is needed. In fact, I would hazard to say that such a way of being is in fact death. Being dead is the problem and considering ourselves dead just as much. Disagree?