An Introduction To Taoist Philosophy

[Marblehead]

Edited August 20, 2009 by Marblehead

[DalTheJigsaw123]

Thank you so much!

[Marblehead]

Thank you so much!

 

Much more to come during the following days.

 

Be well!

[Stigweard]

Edited August 19, 2009 by Stigweard

[Marblehead]

Hi Stigweard,

 

I acknowledge and accept what you have said. Please don't understand me to be trying to 'separate' the philosophy from the religion. My knowledge does not extend into the religious aspects of Taoism therefore I cannot speak to it.

 

What I am presenting are words by a few translators. Their words sounded true to me. Doesn't mean that they will sound true to anyone else.

 

My only goal is to present one view of the probably hundreds that exist. And when any discussions of what I present come up I will be able to speak only from my understanding and opinions.

 

Yes, religious Taoism is a very important aspect of Taoism but I would be a fool to try to present that information without any knowledge of my own.

 

Plese bear with me. The journey will be exciting. I promise.

 

Be well!

[Marblehead]

Edited August 20, 2009 by Marblehead

[nac]

Do you mind if I ask a few beginner's questions on early Taoist philosophy? Eg. Did Taoist philosophers really consider all forms of property to be theft, or were they just being polemic?

[Marblehead]

Do you mind if I ask a few beginner's questions on early Taoist philosophy? Eg. Did Taoist philosophers really consider all forms of property to be theft, or were they just being polemic?

 

It is my understanding that they saw nothing wrong with property ownership. What they suggested is that when we become attached to our property, as if it was something that was a part of us is where the problems begin. So the teaching was to unattachment. Be we are still the gaurdian of that whatever as long as we are allowed to use it. It is suggested that we really don't own anything - we are just allowed to share it for a while.

 

No, I don't mind at all addressing questions along the way. I wil try to post a new section every day until the introduction is complete. In fact, ongoing questions are probably good as it helps to clarify points early thereby allowing for a better understanding with the progression.

 

Be well!

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

Yes, here is a great link that should be required reading on this topic:

 

 

 

http://www.drtoast.com/departments/ask-dr-toast

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Zhuo Ming-Dao]

Marblehead, when you say that their are 33 chapters of the Chuang Tsu, be careful not to fall into the trap of thinking that all of the text was written by one person or one group of people. When approaching it you will want to focus first on the inner chapters, then work with the later chapters allowing for variation in the ideas and philosophy. If you try to force the ideas of inner chapters to line up with some of the later chapters, you will lose all of it in the contradictions.

 

Do you mind if I ask a few beginner's questions on early Taoist philosophy? Eg. Did Taoist philosophers really consider all forms of property to be theft, or were they just being polemic?

 

One group of philosophers, known by later scholars as the Naturalists, did believe this and wanted to deconstruct much of what we call civilization. The Naturalists have several chapters in the Chuang Tzu and you can also see some of their themes (contributions?) in the Tao Te Ching. The Naturalists were lumped together with the Taoists because of some of the commonalities when Taoism began to coalesce into a single school of philosophy/religion in the Han Dynasty. Interestingly, the philosophy of Yang Tzu, a hedonist friend of Chuang Chou, was also lumped into Taoism, despite the fact that it contradicts many of the Naturalist beliefs.

[Wayfarer64]

Please let us not forget the Yi Jing. It is still the greatest link to sublime wisdom I have yet to find...It is inter-active, supportive and a bonifide kick to the third eye for anyone!-

 

love to all- Pat

[Fruitzilla]

Interesting!

 

I think I'll hunt down an introduction to chinese philosophy to get all of this into perspective.

 

Any reccomendations?

[Marblehead]

Hi All,

 

Thanks for being active in the discussion.

 

 

Marblehead, when you say that their are 33 chapters of the Chuang Tsu, be careful not to fall into the trap of thinking that all of the text was written by one person or one group of people. When approaching it you will want to focus first on the inner chapters, then work with the later chapters allowing for variation in the ideas and philosophy. If you try to force the ideas of inner chapters to line up with some of the later chapters, you will lose all of it in the contradictions.

 

I agree with what you have said. However, as this is intended to be an introduction for beginners I feel it would be distracting to include all the various thouths of scholars of the subject. If after becoming introduced to the philosophy one wishes to investigate further and deeper they will be subjected to all the various views.

 

 

One group of philosophers, known by later scholars as the Naturalists, did believe this and wanted to deconstruct much of what we call civilization. The Naturalists have several chapters in the Chuang Tzu and you can also see some of their themes (contributions?) in the Tao Te Ching. The Naturalists were lumped together with the Taoists because of some of the commonalities when Taoism began to coalesce into a single school of philosophy/religion in the Han Dynasty. Interestingly, the philosophy of Yang Tzu, a hedonist friend of Chuang Chou, was also lumped into Taoism, despite the fact that it contradicts many of the Naturalist beliefs.

 

Again, this speaks to one of the variations from the common view and while it is valid I don't feel it is proper to do a deep and thorough analysis in an introductory phase of discussion.

 

 

 

Hi Fruitzilla,

 

As far as recommendations I will always suggest going to this site:http://terebess.hu/english/lexikon/c.html

 

This site contains only the translation. If you want the translator's introduction, interpretation & notes you would have to buy the book (if it is still in print). Find something that you are comforable with reading and go from there. There are many good translations (and some bad ones) of both the Tao Te Ching and the Chuang Tzu.

 

Be well!

[nac]

Thanks, Marblehead. No, I think it's better to give full explainations, especially when asked.

 

One group of philosophers, known by later scholars as the Naturalists, did believe this and wanted to deconstruct much of what we call civilization. The Naturalists have several chapters in the Chuang Tzu and you can also see some of their themes (contributions?) in the Tao Te Ching. The Naturalists were lumped together with the Taoists because of some of the commonalities when Taoism began to coalesce into a single school of philosophy/religion in the Han Dynasty. Interestingly, the philosophy of Yang Tzu, a hedonist friend of Chuang Chou, was also lumped into Taoism, despite the fact that it contradicts many of the Naturalist beliefs.

Thanks, it all makes sense now. Which one was Taoism originally closer to, if any?

Edited August 20, 2009 by nac

[Marblehead]

Thanks, Marblehead. No, I think it's better to give full explainations, especially when asked.

Thanks, it all makes sense now. Which one was Taoism originally closer to, if any?

 

As far as the splinter groups of Taoist philosophy goes, I have very little knowledge so I would have to rely on others for that information if anyone can respond to the individual questions.

 

Lao Tzu set the standard for Taoist philosophy. Chuang Tzu popularized it. From that point arose many different thoughts and therefore the various groups with special interests.

 

Taoism is very much a nature-based philosophy - that can never be denied.

 

Be well!

[Zhuo Ming-Dao]

Thanks, Marblehead. No, I think it's better to give full explainations, especially when asked.

Thanks, it all makes sense now. Which one was Taoism originally closer to, if any?

 

Originally is a little too hard of a question, from the academic perspective. According to modern scholarship the Tao Te Ching existed as individual poems by different authors in an oral tradition for a long period of time. These poems were put together in a number of different ways, with some versions having altogether different collections and orders. The scholarship actually places the inner chapters of Chuang Tzu as older than any compiled version of the Tao Te Ching. According to the current theory, when the TTC was put together, people pulled the name Lao Tzu from the teacher of Confucius, since Chuang Tzu had already claimed that Lao Tzu was a master of the Tao and Confucius did not understand the teachings. Since this name (which is not really a name, but just "Old Master") was so popular in the tradition already, it was used to validate the Tao Te Ching as having had an important, historical author.

 

Then, four hundred years later Sima Qian, the Grand Historian, reported his "real name" based on some records that he found (which he admitted were probably inaccurate), and the rest was history.

 

Of course, all of this could be bunk and the original mythology could be right, but there is some very good evidence supporting this interpretation and not much in favor of the classical view.

 

Marblehead: You are probably right, though. This is way more information than a new student really needs. I was just trying to point out that some of the Outer Chapters of the Chuang Tzu can be confusing because they contradict some very basic Taoist tenets (read the final chapter closely, for example - when Chuang Tzu was alive legalism did not exist and Chuang Tzu would have absolutely hated it, not promoted it). I am sorry if I derailed your interesting project a little.

[Zhuo Ming-Dao]

PS. Here is a site to help you with your project:

 

http://www.yellowbridge.com/onlinelit/daodejing.php

 

This way you can go back to the Chinese and compare your interpretations with the original. When you put your mouse over the characters you get different possible translations.

 

Hope this is helps!

[Marblehead]

Hi Zhuo Ming-Dao,

 

All is fine. And the thread is going well also and I see nothing wrong with the interaction and the questioning.

 

If anyone is interested in having a clean, complete version of the introduction I have I am willing to share it.

 

And so, moving right along to the next segment ...

 

Be well!

[Marblehead]

[nac]

Edited August 20, 2009 by nac

[Marblehead]

PS. I still think it's idealistic crap, but I always give credit where it's due. This is a masterpiece, IMO.

 

 

Yes, there is a lot of idealism in Taoist philosophy as well. But I see nothing wrong with reaching for an ideal good.

 

Be well!

[nac]

Yes, there is a lot of idealism in Taoist philosophy as well. But I see nothing wrong with reaching for an ideal good.

 

Be well!

... as long as one doesn't start believing it's already "out there" somehow, sure, why not? Eg. what exactly does it mean to say that the field "cares for all of the flowers without discrimination"? That's obviously untrue, as some plants have way more advantage (space, height, access to sunlight, fertility of soil, etc) than others. Not to mention just as it "creates", it also "takes away" once autumn arrives, but I digress. This is obviously just an analogy, never mind all that ranting.

 

Please try the play sometime and tell me what you think. It's quite short.

 

PS. Hmm, maybe the Project Gutenberg edition will be better, I don't know: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/6521

Edited August 20, 2009 by nac

[Marblehead]

Please try the play sometime and tell me what you think. It's quite short.

 

I did start reading it when on an earlier break. Sounded good to the point I had to stop. To be continued ...

 

There will be answers to the questions you asked regarding the field. Hang in there with me.

 

Be well!

[Zhuo Ming-Dao]

Yes, That is a good resource. However, as I do not read Chinese I must rely on those who do. Robert Henricks has recieved much acclaim for his translation and he does note why he selected certain words for translation where there is question as to the usage. He has also included previously missing text from two additional finds of original Tao Te Ching documents in 1979. Since his book was published there has been one additional find that he has translated and published as a suppliment. (I don't have that one but I am told that it really isn't very significant and doesn't change anything that is now in print.)

 

Be well!

 

I am sorry, I should have been more clear in my explanation of the link I offered. With that website, you just point your cursor over the Chinese character and it tells you all of the possible translations. You can easily create your own personal translation or just verify others translations with a quick look through. Classical Chinese is VERY easy if you have the characters already defined since it has so little grammar. All you really need to know is that it is a basic Subject-Verb-Object language, like English, only more clear and simple. You can just use the site as a resource, even if you do not create your own original translation. It will keep you from accidentally straying too far from the original text.

[Marblehead]

Edited August 21, 2009 by Marblehead