Stosh

Thanks for making me look at Lin's product. Ive seen parts before, but didnt notice the two tier stucture , Which, I think is really good. There are yet broader associations that can be made , but I respect the decision made to limit some of that, and consider it a solid rendering I need to get a better familiarity with.

This is looking like a logic circle, If Lao is dao jia , then he is not legalist as defined by the six schools. So , If lao is not legalist then anything the legalists have to say is a rewrite , including Hanfei, Or , if what he, Lao, had to say, was sourced in the legalist traditions,and one considers it significantly different ..again Hanfei is not the guy to go to, to understand Lao. The other thing is that the six schools thing groups lao as Dao jia, and Chuang too , but Chuang is considered a mystic by some , and therefore should be grouped with the yin yang school or something , being dao jiao. It seems,, The problem is that people on the outside are clustering the thoughts of other people, who actually had the sentiments, as if they are all equivalent , and can comment back and forth on each other with validity. That they think they understand all the philosophies and define Taoism for all of them. But if The texts are obscure , there is no basis to do that. People have been arguing about Lao for 2200 years ! How can someone walk up and proclaim that he should be understood in the Legalist context of Han fei? Or how can someone compare the two if at least one is .. still highly speculative ?

Which would not necessarily mean that it is typically Legalist or Confucian in its content , even if that was true. ( Jesus could be properly labeled as a Jew , but being a reformer , that is .., a fungible statement) And so one should not necessarily conclude that the sentiments expressed should be construed as being identical to Confucian or Legalist opinions , that others may have had. That would be like saying all americans have the same sentiments on gun control being that they can be construed as having common origin. One would still need to look at the texts to discern.

Oooh, Agreed.

Its just some ants. If you still need justification, consider that they kill things in their space too.

People look to pages because they don't think their own experiences have led them to the most favorable state in the first place. Theres no reason to believe that every thing you learn from past experiences is going to lend itself gainfully to present and future events.

If it fairly covers all these ways , then it is a broader concept which means none of the the above list of six manifestations are being on point and Hanfeizi had a skewed opinion.

Well what I am meaning by grace is not just prettiness, but that it has a logical fluidity , the chosen words are apt for describing the relationships in an understandable manner, set a tone. They should lead one to a reasonable perspective which the author believes is genuine. IMO the recipient end of the translation is far more important that than the broad guesswork of the source end, given that the translator himself gets the point. Comparatively , in the west we can look back at 2200 yr old Greek and Roman texts , and they can still be read accurately, they can be crosschecked against other languages. Some of the philosophical questions were encountered and reflected upon , both in east and west, and This gives a view of what the eastern texts were talking about on a philosophical level , so while eastern classical speech is poorly certain, there is still a window for understanding of some issues. Not every nuance of daoist canon is important to relate, since much of it is redundant, but one should leave the original text recognized as original , so that those nuances can be enjoyed by those who can read them. In the history of My people , there were also stories and fairy-tales , and they are recognized as fabrications , and they are enjoyed from a perspective of 'suspended disbelief' , though we are aware that they have, or had ,messages of significance underlying the story. Likewise , the right thing is to leave these tales as told , but understand the message. Mostly we just dumped them though, and began afresh with the 'age of reason'. But more directly , no it doesn't have to be a poem , nor written as slick prose . Those are not actionable perspectives , they wont change your attitudes , or the way you relate to the world. In all likely-hood, even long explanations and reflections ,aren't going to do that.

What is needed is grace in the language that one translates into , like English. More than just the 'fluency' of making substitutions of some words to other rough standard equivalent by rote. Besides that , one needs to actually understand the philosophy, the rationale etc. If one wants to study previous culture, then one should do that , but if the desire is to present the ideas of the Classics in modern context, so as to be actionable, the history is basically trivial , and most of the time there are scholars of equal renown who discount claims made by others. Most don't seem to want to emphasize uncertainty about dates and so forth. To create a rational work , one that relies on real world principles , one cannot keep falling back on historical gods , immortals and fantastical connections as explanatory. Many translators seem to do this , making the excuse that appears to be in the original Chinese text which is a figurative writing. They are caught somewhere between , telling folktales , recounting historical accounts, and crudely spinning a yarn they don't believe, into English. As a reader you are faced with trying to understand the minds of the guys who did the original writing despite the fact they were coming from an entirely different standpoint in understanding. BUT since they were humans on earth in a society one should have some common ground and just plain admit , that you never met any gods, or know what happens when one dies- from personal experience , and neither did they.

"THE Spring and Autumn Annals" - "Chunqiu" in Chinese - is the official chronicle of the State of Lu during the period 722-481 BC. It is widely believed that this book, the earliest Chinese historical text written as annals, was authored by the great thinker Confucius (551-479 BC). Accordingly, it is listed as one of the "Five Classics of Chinese Literature," the principle texts for Confucian studies. The others are: "Shi" ("Book of Songs"), "Shu" ("Book of History"), "Li" ("Book of Rites") and "Yi" ("Book of Change"), all thought to be written and edited by Confucius. ?

Yes, sort of. You want confirmation that you are doing the "right" thing", but there is no absolute right thing. There is nothing that one can properly assert is Always right, or the consequences will all pan out as you would have it. You have to believe In yourself and live with the consequences. Then too, you have to accept those consequences. Daoism suggests some basic things which trend towards a life at peace with yourself, but doesnt guarantee a rose garden. If you want smoke blown up your ass, theres other faiths.

When I was a kid , my dad had this saying , which was peppered in any conversation, "Ya follow me?" And what he was asking was reassurance that the other person understood his point , not necessarily that they agreed, ( It was probably assumed , that if they understood they also agreed ) This agreement , would be a sort of , a common rationale , a common sequence of considerations , rather than obedience , since obedience kind of means that you don't agree but are forced to go along with the plan , wouldn't it? And so when I hear this thing about heaven following , and tao following and man following , and societies and families and all the rest Follow ,,,,, it is that they share a common rationale , a common set of considerations , and one can draw analogies about one from the other. So when the quail ,and the cicada ,and the ,li Peng, and the royalty , and everything ! else from Chuang understanding the mind of fishes ... it is that they all follow the way , despite differences in scale etc... So yes, Dao could be said to follow you similarly .. except that as a human being you have imagination and forethought and desires and can make errors etc so we would be a crappy template to learn from , about the workings of the real universe.

You get to live a life in accord with your nature, whether its 100 yrs or 50. No, its not offering magic, but it is something, and it should have meaning. Whether you mow lawns or preside in the supreme court, is up to you and the tide of circumstance. When the time comes and you look back at it all, as some say you get to do, You can be one of those who said "I did it my way" that was me , that was the best I could work out, It was good. That was my part in it all. You are not prevented from being evil , but the consequences are yours. It is presumed that your human nature , in prevailing, fits the definition of human goodness. And in recognizing the ebb and flow of tao , you will do much the same things as any culture would deem good. The sun shining on both the wicked and the just , makes some things possible for both... BUT , dark doings are befitted by obscurity , while noble acts are presentable for all to see. So the impartial sun, still has its influence.

Yes, precisely none of it tells you what to pick, do, or think. But no one needs to tell you to get out of the rain. You are therefore encouraged to consider for yourself what you value , what has meaning,. Yes the difference in the creatures can be seen as being within and relative to you..but youd have to loosen up a bit on your certainties before youd get that point. ex Consider how a person regards their pit bull , and that it lives harmoniously with them. Now consider it as a threat like others may. The dog does what it will as a dog , but whether its a threat or cuddle puppy depends on circumstance. It always has unmanifest and manifest potentials, the mental constructs about the dog are figments of imagination , but the material aspects are whatever they turn out to be because both the dog and circumstances continually vary. Thrrefore the dog is not a constant, what you consider the dog to be should not be fixed, if you are to be accurate about it. Its not that one should not make rational decisions to provide for their safety..and not that the thing can be wished away.. it IS that you need to consider the circumstances and the potentials and deal with it materially with regards to your own aims. Like retaining a face.

I dont think the criticim is all that indicative of what they do know. There are considerations. To rebel at skewed claims. To have a desire for the reader to not be swayed by cockeyed presentations. To maintain credibility. And so forth are all reasons to confront. The one thing you can securely say is that the perception of the entire subject presentation matters to them. Some might argue that one is with virtue if they do not give a shit. I dont. I think I can present excerpts that discuss the importance of meaning and significance . Or at least support oIt inferentially.. If one wants to show a person lacks a skill or misunderstands certain things, It would be most conclusive to expose and present alternatives to that particular thing. Rather than just imply that they have been critical, therefore they dont know anything.

I suppose liking it , is a type of use . Carry on.

So whats an important make or break question ? regarding tao ? its heavily ironic , massively subjective in its application , obscure in its description , and IMO actually makes for a real nice grouping of civilized regular people. ( as difficult to corral as cats)

So are you interested in just defining Taoism , deciding how you feel toward it, or do you think it offers you some venue for better goings on? I thought once that it would improve my discipline , nope, didn't happen, I had to do that on my own , and then give away the credit to the Dao ! if daoism was going to be involved with it at all.

I'm not entirely clear about your phrasing here. I am indeed speaking as an individual, about the prospects of dealing with life's issues as an individual. I agree the affect one can have on the whole of humanity is trivial. But you have to spell out this next issue ,of social responsibility is connected , or has importance on a personal level with you . You're trying to decide if you should get off welfare or something? Like I indicated , sociology as an impersonal interest , is really beyond my pay grade to resolve . It becomes a diversion , to examine sociology , in the context of a person wanting to resolve or improve aspects of their own life. Its possible you already feel you have done a fine job with the cards you have been dealt , great! but then any questions that you have on the related subject matter is moot. When the rabbit is caught , the snare can be forgotten. Right? There's no point in dwelling on it, there's no thing anyone can say that will be of practical use to you , in that case.

I don't think so , all the things we call problems ,essentially come down to a difference between how we want stuff to be and how we believe it is. You can either change your local situation to suit your attitudes , OR suit your sentiments to the prevailing situation... either one of those resolves the conflict, right?

From wherever you are, there is ,if there's any trend at all, still an uphill and a downhill. The rest of society , is beyond our pay grade. Frankly it doesn't matter what society is doing at the moment , there are always difficulties that crop up , whether battling seasons and bugs , or the drudgery of a repetitive job. IT would be a handy truth , to point out the self-destructive aspects of society , and claim that we are but pawns in the grip of this trend. It absolves responsibility. But Dao doesnt recognize responsibility justifications or excuses. Your-my life works out to be at the same deficit , regardless of what one can blame for it.

Not quite a shining success, to counsel the prince himself, and the riff raff get you booted anyway.

Value is often tied to price, and toleration links with commitment. So one who has learned their ways, is reluctant to dump them. Suffering may cause one to abandon previous paradigms, and wisely so. i dont think its the self image of unworthiness so much as a tipping point between investment and reward. Looked at the other way, you get hazing rituals et al. An excuse for cruelty and power games which suits Mr Smith just fine. He likes spinning the human condition into being an insane perversion relative to the measured presumptions of a digital mind. He ironically wants to believe in the rightness of his hatred ,which is not really a rational position. No justification is required , the sun shines equally on the wicked and the just.

I'm not so sure living Confucius was accepted in any town . But , lets hear a nice juicy analect !

Please don't inundate me with the memes. The idea of forgetting the words is forgetting the formalized phrases , ritual terms and courtesies , which grease the wheels of social interaction. I can be abrupt , in my haste , and that's forgetting to spend the time to express carefully , sentiment. Harsh words can be blurted out , or they can be specifically engineered to suit a moments attack, they aren't really the one's that are forgotten by the recipient. But say I was to try to attain some end with the words , I might feel them justified, and dismiss them as, stuff you were basically 'asking !' to have blasted at you, which might happen when subtle hints are ignored.