Mark Saltveit
-
Content count
255 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Mark Saltveit
-
The scholarly consensus is that the Daodejing and Zhuangzi are compilations, that Laozi is a mythical figure and while there's more evidence for a historical Zhuangzi,it's not entirely certain that he authored "his" book either. That said, the DDJ has a striking and very consistent voice, it's short and notably different from the other ancient writings even if you can find a bit here or there that overlaps. Whether one person crafted it, or several like minded people, I don't see the importance particularly. It could of course also be a distillation of a long oral tradition -- how would we know? -- but the consistency and uniqueness of it make that seem less likely.
-
Maybe it's just me, but I think of electricity as very different than fluid, though it has a sort of (choppier) flow. I'd love to see water lightning though, I bet that would be cool.
-
VERY interesting paper, thanks! Apparently, only some of the sections of chapter 5 of the well known text existed in the Han-dynasty fragments found at Dingzhou, and mostly the odd numbered sections: 1,3,5,7,9,11,13, 15 and 20.
-
A metaphor for the phenomenon that it describes, that we can not capture with one name. I consider the difference between a metaphor and a label to be that, a label has no meaning of its own. You could replace it with any character or group of letters, it would make no difference. (In Chinese, this is harder than in English, since characters are similar to, or even composed of, other characters or fragments of characters that have a meaning already.) Qi contains images of energy, flow, and water ("pooling"), for example, which are not present in Western conceptions. It is a fluid metaphor.
-
Do you mean this Wen-tzu? Interesting. Wikipedia says there's no authoritative English translation though. It seems to be controversial whether this represents the words of Lao Tzu or, as you might suspect, those of Wen Tzu.
-
When I say that qi is a metaphor, and also that nerves are a metaphor, I mean that these are fingers pointing to the moon. Don't mistake the finger for the moon. qi is real and nerves are real; humans communicate largely through metaphor. The Western view does not have a monopoly on truth; neither does the Chinese. Every metaphor has its limits and its implications that are often inaccurate or don't capture the entirety of what they depict.
-
Some very good resources on the originalist question, which also interests me a lot: Stephen Bokenkamp is a professor or Religious Studies and Philosophy at Arizona State, who has been one of the leading researchers on this subject for many years. His book "Early Daoist Scriptures" starts with the Celestial Masters and discusses many of the additions and changes to Daoism. His second book "Ancestors and Anxiety" looks specifically at concepts of rebirth in exploring how Daoism and Buddhism (and Chinese folk traditions) intertwined. Scott Barnwell has a tremendously in-depth history of the earliest Daoism, ttiled "Classical Daoism – Is There Really Such a Thing?", in several parts on his blog Bao Pu. He's up to part 4.2 by now; might be best to start with part 1 of course. I can't recommend this highly enough.
-
Depends if she wants you to chase her or not. That's where your careful Daoist observation and intution becomes very important. If she's giggling too, and not really trying to get away....
-
I think you're thinking way too hard about the gender stuff. Don't worry about having "feminine" aspects, the whole meaning of yin/yang is not "girls are this, boys are that" but that each person contains elements of both. Don't judge yourself good or bad for what you're feeling. Just be it. Especially being young, it might be worth trying some role-playing, either together or just on your own. Experiment with acting more macho, in various different ways, or less so. As a standup comedian, I have actually pretended to be, e.g. very macho on stage, because I thought it was funny and absurd, and was surprised to find that some of it was really me. And it helped me in dating. Though if you say something like "Damn it woman, get in here right now cause I'm gonna f*** the hell out of you," it kind of ruins the effect if you start giggling.
-
I don't know what "bio mechanical efficiency measure" means. To me, qi and "nerves" and "energy" are all metaphors that have advantages and disadvantages for describing the actual reality of how the human body works. It's important to avoid cultural biases in both directions. IMHO, the strength of qi as a metaphor is that it captures the essential dynamism of the body; Western medicine tends to be very static. There is this body part. You do things to it that might change it. Take a drug, do surgery. It's like comparing old school board games (say, Risk) to computer simulation games (such as Civilization V, or even Sim City). The latter capture the dynamism much better. Experimental science demonstrates that acupuncture and acupressure work, but I don't think Western medicine has any metaphor that can explain why or how, while qi theory does. At the same time, there are many things that Western metaphors (and techniques) do that TCM can't explain.
-
I agree, completely, though I haven't given up on the US Constitution. My point is, let's not fetishize China as some ideal place. (No risk of anyone around here fetishizing the US, it wears its flaws on its sleeve.) I'm not sure I follow. Which chapter is this in? Absolutely. If Tao can only be found in China, then it's not universal, not true. Just a curious local bit of culture, like curvy roofs. I like to think it's more than that. BTW, I like your signoff, Taoist Idiot, but I think Phi92 misread it as an insult. The wrongness of that, if you had really meant it that way, cracks me up. As if you said "Wu wei does not mean 'not acting', you Taoist idiot!" Taoist pun: "Dude, you're trying wei too hard."
-
Re eating meat: I was in Guangzhou one summer with some friends and went to the famous "Wild Animals Restaurant," (probably The First Village of Wild Food) where various exotic things are brought to your table. For example, bile ducts cut straight out of a live snake at your table for maximum potency/freshness. I ordered dog, because hell I was 25 and you only live once and where am I going to get another chance to eat dog in a restaurant. The waiter starts giggling, then turns and speaks in Cantonese to the entire (large) crowd, telling them that this idiot American just ordered dog, and they all start laughing. And he turns back to me and says, "You can't eat dog!! It's the summer! It's too hot!" And I said, "I don't care, bring me cold cuts or something." And he's just about to pee he's laughing so hard at this point, but he gathers himself and says, "NO, you stupid American. Inside hot! It's summer, This is very YANG! Have you ever heard of Yin and Yang? How can they be so ignorant!" And so I had bitter melon (kugua or something like that) soup, which is awful and kind of numbs your mouth, but very yin apparently.
-
Then again, ch. 47 of the DDJ (Mair translation): "Without going outdoors, one may know all under heaven. ... The farther one goes, the less one knows. ... The sage knows without journeying." Distance can be cultural and temporal, too. I think many Westerners exoticize China and its trappings and cultural products, both ancient and modern. It is easier to find Dao in what you know. Zhuangzi did not portray seekers who traveled to Tibet to retrieve Laozi's teachings; it was Butcher Ding in the basement, and the wheelwright, who found Dao in the "practice" of their work. China is a very confused country, a rapidly industrializing and increasingly rich third world country with incredibly bad pollution, severe corruption and nepotism, and rampant materialism. I hope you don't expect to find the idyllic scenes in the pictures above and wise Daoist sages all around. They are part of China today the same way that cowboy gunslingers and Indian peace pipes are part of America today.
-
Phi92, the reason that ziran (also spelled tzu jan) keeps coming up, is this -- I interpret ziran as the way things organically unfold by their own nature. Each person, animal, plant, thing and all of them together. It's a radically dynamic viewpoint, compared to false static view of most scientific thinking. Like everyone dances in their own way, and all are dancing together. Wu wei is to act without getting in the way of ziran -- not just because you want to be nice to nature, but because that is the natural way of the world, and you will be much more powerful and effective if you play along, instead of fighting it. In the U.S. we have a saying, "you can't fight the tide." Actually you can, but you will work very hard and probably not succeed anyway.
-
You have not hurt my feelings here, and we are all visitors. Perhaps I have misunderstood your intent, in calling yourself "an American Taoist" and portraying American Taoists as rooted in greed and love of money, then later indicating that you are actually Chinese and feel that only the Chinese can understand Taoism. I am not the first to describe you as intending to ridicule Americans, through your play-acting. If I have misconstrued your arguments or intent, I apologize, and would love to hear a more accurate explanation of what has happened.
-
I'll preach for you: Marblehead is God, and I am his prophet! Tremble before the noggin of finest rock! Or we could continue the conversation without Takaaki, which might be more useful. I'm glad to see your presence, Shanlung, and want to hear more of your thoughts in any case. I could play Takaaki's role?
-
Phi92: Maybe this will help. Livia Kohn, an eminent American scholar of Daoism, identifies 3 main approaches to Daoism: 1) the literati approach (some might say philosophical, intellectual) 2) the communal (ie involvment in organized sects, such as the Zhengyi or Quanzhen, which might be hard to find in Croatia); and 3) self-cultivation, pursuing inner alchemy of various sorts, which seems to be most popular here at Tao Bums. Qigong, Taijiquan, Neidan, neigong, the NeiYe, etc. are all part of that third branch but are not universally accepted. Prof. Kohn also makes the important point that nearly every Daoist practices some mix of these three, emphasizing different aspects, but rarely a pure strain of just one. The one thing common to all traditions are the two foundational books, the Daodejing (Tao Te Ching) and Zhuangzi (Chuang Tzu). Meditation is also pretty universal. So these are good places to start. Then see what resonates for you. On the philosophical approach, I would argue that Daoism can be seen as a compelling argument for epistemological humility. In the first line, the DDJ tells us that we can't pin down the precise Dao (the right Way to be, or Way the universe works, or if you prefer ultimate reality) in words and concepts. Everything else follows inevitably from that truth (assertion). You can avoid religious practices and later add-ons such as semen conservation, thankfully, but from the first sentence you should know that logic will not be sufficient. If you can't accept that, then Daoism is not for you.
-
Scholastic Study of the Received Version of the Tao Te Ching.
Mark Saltveit replied to ChiDragon's topic in 道家学说
You have not hurt my feelings or offended me in any way. I am just publicly discussing how to evaluate the intent and usefulness of your comments here. And by making my comments online (rather than just holding them in my head), I am inviting comment, reaction, and/or disagreement. The culture that matters here is that of The Tao Bums' online community. It's not "mine;" I'm still trying to get a sense for it myself. But I like the idea of thinking of each online community as another nation or culture, that one must adapt to the same way as we would with a nation or culture we find through traveling or reading. -
Yes. Is that direct and clear?
-
Scholastic Study of the Received Version of the Tao Te Ching.
Mark Saltveit replied to ChiDragon's topic in 道家学说
Is this trolling, simple bigotry, highly spun irony, or all three? One thing it is not, is useful communication. -
Q's...ONLY Teachers may Answer.
Mark Saltveit replied to thelerner's topic in Systems and Teachers of
I taught a humble Access database class today, so 3 simple principles of data cultivation: 1) Honor each datum. Don't repeat or duplicate it, but rather point to it relationally. 2) Separate your front end (the manifestations) from your back end data (the source.) Back each up diligently, but focus especially on the source. 3) Remember that your software and data are not machines. They are the distilled spirits of many people, so treat them as the living essences that they are, and do not cleanse them of personality. -
At least you are now being honest about the point you are trying to make. Jesus did not pretend to be a "Roman Daoist" for the purpose of distorting and ridiculing Roman thought. (BTW, in the U.S., people who compare themselves to Jesus are usually seen as megolamaniacal or insane, or both. Ditto Napoleon, Einstein, etc.) And it has very often considered Daoism to be one of those wasteful superstitions. In 1987, when I was in China, the PRC banned anyone from bringing a Daodejing into China (but had no problem with Christian Bibles.) I don't think I saw that conversation, and it's hard for me to believe that Marblehead would say that. I certainly don't agree. But don't forget, the Daodejing is not a Chinese book. It is from Chu, and was only claimed as Chinese after the Qin imperialists conquered the kingdom of Chu.
-
Scholastic Study of the Received Version of the Tao Te Ching.
Mark Saltveit replied to ChiDragon's topic in 道家学说
Any decent scholar of the Chinese classics reads Classical Chinese fluently. They are not looking up words in a dictionary. With all respect, I think that your argument here betrays a bit of cultural bias. Your point about modern definitions is a very good one, but it is in fact the person who has grown up with modern Chinese who is more likely to do this. They have grown up knowing different meanings for many of the characters in Classical era books, and ingrained these meanings over decades of use. It is no simple matter for them to "forget" these meanings, which did not apply when these old books were written. A Western (or Indian, or South Sea Islander or whatever) who learned Classical Chinese as their first dialect of Chinese language may well have an advantage over someone who grew up speaking modern Chinese, in their understanding of these classics for this reason. Maybe not, it all depends on the person. But it not an obvious advantage for the Chinese scholar, who must also study Classical Chinese diligently to understand it. -
It depends what you mean by "understand." It's not a yes or no question. I'm no expert on the evolution of the Chinese language, but I know that the meaning and interpretation of the language has changed a lot. We're talking about 2,400 years distance. Look how different the English of Shakespeare's time is from now, much less Chaucer's; and that's only one third as much time. The Wikipedia page on the subject goes into considerable detail. There are ,many complications. For one thing, no one knows how Classical Chinese characters were spoken, since there are no phonetics. This is a particular problem with poetry. For other words, the meaning has changed over the centuries. I've read discussions of translations of Taoist works that note that certain meanings only arose centuries after the DDJ and Zhuangzi were written. There is furthermore a common problem with homonyms (like in English, meat and meet) getting confused. This happens even between the three oldest editions of the DDJ, between the Guodian, Mawangdui and Wang Bi editions (all before 250 CE).
-
Scholastic Study of the Received Version of the Tao Te Ching.
Mark Saltveit replied to ChiDragon's topic in 道家学说
ChiDragon, you seem to be saying that Western scholars can't read Chinese, and so don't know about this book, which is obviously not true. (How would they translate?) There are at least one or two new translations each year, most based on the two very old texts of the Daodejing discovered in recent decades, the Mawangdui and Guiodian texts. As far as I know, these are older than any other known texts, and most people presume that this makes them more reliable and "closer to the source." You seem to disagree with this, and feel that there is a more accurate or more reliable version available only in Chinese. Of course, the Mawangdui and Guodian texts are in (classical) Chinese, and some of these translations show actual pictures of the old texts, and/or reproduce the Chinese. Also, this website claims to be showing the actual bamboo strips from Guodian, alongside traditional and simplified Chinese characters, pinyin and Wade Giles versions of the Chinese, and English too. http://www.daoisopen.com/A1toA2Chapters1966.html Can you please explain how the "Received Version" is different?
