What is Tao

[dawei]

I am not seeing the mystery in dao. I personally think that a part of what Lao Zi is suggesting by that opening famous line is that one doesn't talk about it to make it known; one experiences it. That means, one has to get rid of words (ie: put the book down); you don't experience it by reading about it. Ergo, don't limit yourself to just what he or anyone says since it much more universal than anyone can try to explain.

 

10th or 11 dimension? I feel it is simply a part of some universal concept and representation. If by dimensions we are talking physical (or measurable, given some crazy ability to measure) manifestations, then I don't think so. I think it is a part of non-existence, so there is nothing to look at.

[zerostao]

I am not seeing the mystery in dao. I personally think that a part of what Lao Zi is suggesting by that opening famous line is that one doesn't talk about it to make it known; one experiences it. That means, one has to get rid of words (ie: put the book down); you don't experience it by reading about it. Ergo, don't limit yourself to just what he or anyone says since it much more universal than anyone can try to explain.

 

10th or 11 dimension? I feel it is simply a part of some universal concept and representation. If by dimensions we are talking physical (or measurable, given some crazy ability to measure) manifestations, then I don't think so. I think it is a part of non-existence, so there is nothing to look at.

so, if i answer the question. what is tao? as "the way" which is expressed thru virtue especially in the natural and non-action.

this is a plausible answer?

[Marblehead]

Guys, I'm really confused. You're all talking about the universe, the nature of reality, etc.

 

Isn't the Tao simply not possible to speak of? Is it not something that we cannot comprehend let alone communicate. Is it not simply something that can never be comprehended by the human mind, given our limitations as human beings. Is it simply not something that is beyond this reality, beyond the fabrics of spacetime, beyond every single idea we have ever had and will ever have. Is it not beyond every possible creation that has ever manifested in this entire universe, the universes beyond and the possible creations that still has to manifest in the future? Is it not beyond the concepts of everything and nothing? Is it not an idea of deep mystery that enters the mind almost directly externally.

 

Is it not something that can never be experienced and if it is, will not be true. Is it not something that touches our deepest sense of mystery in mind? Is it not the reason that we ask why, is it not more then the answers we have for these questions? Is it not simply an emotion rather then an idea?

 

Hi Everything,

 

Great questions and I will attempt to address some of them.

 

Yes, it is said that Tao (everything) (No, not you! The totality of the universe and what might be beyond.) cannot be known. I very much agree with this. Example: We cannot know what caused the Big Bang. We cannot go beyond the beginning. Nor can we go beyond the end. Therefore it is said that there is no beginning and no end. (Which is probably true.)

 

However, there are processes in the universe. These processes apply to the grandest of things in the universe as equally as they apply to the minutest things in the universe. These processes of things we observe are all aspects of the observable (Manifest) universe. I haven't checked lately but it is said by science that the observable universe is only four percent of the totality of 'what is'.

 

If we understand these processes and we assume that they are 'universal' processes we can say that these processes apply to the other ninty-six percent of the universe as well.

 

So we look at the Manifest (observable universe) and we see processes like birth-growth-death. All living things operate within this concept. Time periods vary, sure, but all living things die eventually. Even the hardest of rocks eventually erode away.

 

But, upon the death of one thing there is the potential for new life from the remains of what has died. (Yes, this can be taken to the spiritual aspect as well but we all know that I don't go there. Hehehe.)

 

So if we are bold enough to think that we understand this 4% of the universe that is observable we can say that these same processes are working in the other 96% of the universe as well. So we can even go on from there and suggest that we understand all of Tao.

 

But wait! We cannot see beyond the beginning nor beyond the end. Therefore our understanding and our 'knowing' apply only to the present moment. We don't "know" what has happened with "what was" nor do we know "what might be".

 

Equally true is the understanding that we can never "know" "First Cause". This is because we cannot see beyond the beginning to find the "First Cause" if there even is one. This is why I find it rediculous to think that we can "know" God or its purpose, if there is a purpose.

 

But then I have no problem with this because of my understanding that "Everything that is, is, always has been, and always will be." This requires no "First Cause", no "God".

 

So yes, aspects of Tao can be known. Aspects of Tao that cannot be known can be assumed. But we can never get it all. This is where imagination starts and we all have our own ideas.

[Everything]

Hi Everything,

 

Great questions and I will attempt to address some of them.

 

Yes, it is said that Tao (everything) (No, not you! The totality of the universe and what might be beyond.) cannot be known. I very much agree with this. Example: We cannot know what caused the Big Bang. We cannot go beyond the beginning. Nor can we go beyond the end. Therefore it is said that there is no beginning and no end. (Which is probably true.)

 

However, there are processes in the universe. These processes apply to the grandest of things in the universe as equally as they apply to the minutest things in the universe. These processes of things we observe are all aspects of the observable (Manifest) universe. I haven't checked lately but it is said by science that the observable universe is only four percent of the totality of 'what is'.

 

If we understand these processes and we assume that they are 'universal' processes we can say that these processes apply to the other ninty-six percent of the universe as well.

 

So we look at the Manifest (observable universe) and we see processes like birth-growth-death. All living things operate within this concept. Time periods vary, sure, but all living things die eventually. Even the hardest of rocks eventually erode away.

 

But, upon the death of one thing there is the potential for new life from the remains of what has died. (Yes, this can be taken to the spiritual aspect as well but we all know that I don't go there. Hehehe.)

 

So if we are bold enough to think that we understand this 4% of the universe that is observable we can say that these same processes are working in the other 96% of the universe as well. So we can even go on from there and suggest that we understand all of Tao.

 

But wait! We cannot see beyond the beginning nor beyond the end. Therefore our understanding and our 'knowing' apply only to the present moment. We don't "know" what has happened with "what was" nor do we know "what might be".

 

Equally true is the understanding that we can never "know" "First Cause". This is because we cannot see beyond the beginning to find the "First Cause" if there even is one. This is why I find it rediculous to think that we can "know" God or its purpose, if there is a purpose.

 

But then I have no problem with this because of my understanding that "Everything that is, is, always has been, and always will be." This requires no "First Cause", no "God".

 

So yes, aspects of Tao can be known. Aspects of Tao that cannot be known can be assumed. But we can never get it all. This is where imagination starts and we all have our own ideas.

Hahaha... Look now we're talking about the nature of universes and laws of physics, perhaps quantum laws of physics or whatever realities there may be that we can communicate. Perhaps a universe where mass is not stable and it is made out of lightning organisms or something bla bla. Perhaps a universe where monkeys orbit banana's and upon these monkeys live flees that dominate the monkey. It is all possible according to our limited understanding of the science of nature. But this has nothing to do with the Tao. The Tao is simply something that cannot be put into words or spoken of. If you speak of a world that is beyond this world then you have already spoken about it and it is no longer true.

 

That is why I think it is an emotion, because the emotion is the only thing that cannot be communicated, only the false emotion can be communicated trough art. Because TTC says it is unknowable, which is a word on itself, I believe that this Tao speaks about the emotion of Mystery itself. Our own curiosity as human beings that has brought us so far as to almost making us immortal as human species. We just have to make the last transition towards the infinite extracting of solar power. From this point there is nothing known in this universe that can kill us. Even the end of the universe would mean that we can simply travel towards another universe trough the use of this infinite power that is available all over the universe. We can create new planets, new homes, new realities. But the emotion of mystery and the Tao itself will never end. Tao will never be known, thats the purpose of Tao.

Edited March 21, 2011 by Everything

[Everything]

I am not seeing the mystery in dao. I personally think that a part of what Lao Zi is suggesting by that opening famous line is that one doesn't talk about it to make it known; one experiences it. That means, one has to get rid of words (ie: put the book down); you don't experience it by reading about it. Ergo, don't limit yourself to just what he or anyone says since it much more universal than anyone can try to explain.

Well isn't the emotion universal to every human individual, or group? Isn't the emotion something that can only be experienced and not talked about? Maybe you're not seeing the mystery in Tao, because the Tao is the mystery itself, and this mystery is so solid, so true that it has no mystery. Tao is the emotion of mystery, the reason for our curiosity.

[Everything]

Hello Zerostao and Everything,

 

I think the question is this, are we dependent on what was believed two thousand years ago or can we move past that? My belief is that just because something was believed to be true at one time, doesn't mean it's true now. I am very respectful of Taoist and Buddhist teachings, even if I don't necessarily believe them word for word, because despite all the semantics and ideological stuff attached, the general message, for me at least, is relevant. However, with that said, I think we owe it to ourselves to explore these issues, not simply accept them at face value. Again, I think many people see this as a cardinal sin, sort of like questioning the word of Jesus, but in philosophical Taoism, there is no punishment for questioning Lao Tzu (in religious Taoism there actually is, though I'm not sure what that punishment is, I believe its a period of time in hell or hell as Taoists see it.)

 

I've actually learned a great deal from this thread and I look forward to hearing what others have to say.

 

Aaron

One thing you should know about me, is that I don't care about the truth. All I care about is what a person believes. I see alot of truth and good things in all religions, but the reason why I hold on to TTC is because the believes that lie within these texts seem to be most beneficial to us and most constructive. When you understand the nature of your consciousness, you know that you are a new person every single moment, you are a new consciousness every single moment. Putting an identity on yourself or things outside yourself trough words, trough ideas or thoughts is limitting towards yourself and others. If you don't believe or want to believe in the Tao, there is no problem with that. But there is a problem when you shed your light and do harm towards yourself. When you try to diminish the Tao to words and try to speak of it. I believe this brings nothing but destructive events upon you and others. I simply hold on to the idea of Tao being unknowable, because thats the believe I choose to believe. And I have believed islam, christianity, science aswell. They were also beneficial in my life, ofcourse. But the Tao gives me wisdom, and little knowledge. Thats what I love about it. Something I can go out and live my life with.

 

So it is your choice if you want to be suspicious about Tao or simply forget the Tao alltogether. I suggest you do the last, since you can then move on. Don't you think so?

[lazy cloud]

One thing you should know about me, is that I don't care about the truth. All I care about is what a person believes. I see alot of truth and good things in all religions, but the reason why I hold on to TTC is because the believes that lie within these texts seem to be most beneficial to us and most constructive. When you understand the nature of your consciousness, you know that you are a new person every single moment, you are a new consciousness every single moment. Putting an identity on yourself or things outside yourself trough words, trough ideas or thoughts is limitting towards yourself and others. If you don't believe or want to believe in the Tao, there is no problem with that. But there is a problem when you shed your light and do harm towards yourself. When you try to diminish the Tao to words and try to speak of it. I believe this brings nothing but destructive events upon you and others. I simply hold on to the idea of Tao being unknowable, because thats the believe I choose to believe. And I have believed islam, christianity, science aswell. They were also beneficial in my life, ofcourse. But the Tao gives me wisdom, and little knowledge. Thats what I love about it. Something I can go out and live my life with.

 

So it is your choice if you want to be suspicious about Tao or simply forget the Tao alltogether. I suggest you do the last, since you can then move on. Don't you think so?

I like this. Wisdom and knowledge are 2 different things. I also like your stance about truth. Truth is always so elusive. As elusive as trying to define Tao.

[Marblehead]

The Tao is simply something that cannot be put into words or spoken of.

 

Hi Everything,

 

I think you might be making Tao more mysterious than it really is.

 

You might also be making Tao more mystical than it really is.

 

But those are my opinions.

[Aaron]

One thing you should know about me, is that I don't care about the truth. All I care about is what a person believes. I see alot of truth and good things in all religions, but the reason why I hold on to TTC is because the believes that lie within these texts seem to be most beneficial to us and most constructive. When you understand the nature of your consciousness, you know that you are a new person every single moment, you are a new consciousness every single moment. Putting an identity on yourself or things outside yourself trough words, trough ideas or thoughts is limitting towards yourself and others. If you don't believe or want to believe in the Tao, there is no problem with that. But there is a problem when you shed your light and do harm towards yourself. When you try to diminish the Tao to words and try to speak of it. I believe this brings nothing but destructive events upon you and others. I simply hold on to the idea of Tao being unknowable, because thats the believe I choose to believe. And I have believed islam, christianity, science aswell. They were also beneficial in my life, ofcourse. But the Tao gives me wisdom, and little knowledge. Thats what I love about it. Something I can go out and live my life with.

 

So it is your choice if you want to be suspicious about Tao or simply forget the Tao alltogether. I suggest you do the last, since you can then move on. Don't you think so?

 

Hello Everything,

 

Well I guess my question is why did you even examine Taoism if Christianity and Islam were beneficial? My point, you see, is that there's nothing wrong with questioning what someone else has said. The Tao Teh Ching was written by a man or as most believe, a group of men. Men are fallible. I understand that you have faith, but I also see a great deal of superstition. Let me first point out that the Tao does not punish anyone, great calamities do not befall those who might try to uncover the mystery or mysteries. Wisdom is not understanding that your consciousness is new every second that we exist, but rather that there is a new potential in every second that we exist. I am as connected to the Tao today as I was the day I was born, the difference is that in experiencing the Tao, I can once more understand the nature of existence.

 

Aaron

 

edit- I also hold this idea of examination to all religious texts. We owe it to ourselves to examine what others have said and not to allow faith to blind us.

Edited March 21, 2011 by Twinner

[Everything]

Hello Everything,

 

Well I guess my question is why did you even examine Taoism if Christianity and Islam were beneficial? My point, you see, is that there's nothing wrong with questioning what someone else has said. The Tao Teh Ching was written by a man or as most believe, a group of men. Men are fallible. I understand that you have faith, but I also see a great deal of superstition. Let me first point out that the Tao does not punish anyone, great calamities do not befall those who might try to uncover the mystery or mysteries. Wisdom is not understanding that your consciousness is new every second that we exist, but rather that there is a new potential in every second that we exist. I am as connected to the Tao today as I was the day I was born, the difference is that in experiencing the Tao, I can once more understand the nature of existence.

 

Aaron

 

edit- I also hold this idea of examination to all religious texts. We owe it to ourselves to examine what others have said and not to allow faith to blind us.

You're correct, but this doesn't mean that you can uncover the Tao. Because the Tao is the mystery itself. You cannot uncover the reason for uncovering. It is simply nonsense and useless. It will have been a lie. You might uncover one of the greatest powers on earth, but it will no longer be the Tao once it is uncovered, it will simply be one mystery solved among the infinite other mystery's that are yet to be solved. The Tao will always remain unknown. Thats the point of Tao, thats why they call it the Tao. We move towards it for a better life, but the promise is that our wonderful journey never ends.

[lazy cloud]

Hello Everything,

 

Well I guess my question is why did you even examine Taoism if Christianity and Islam were beneficial? My point, you see, is that there's nothing wrong with questioning what someone else has said. The Tao Teh Ching was written by a man or as most believe, a group of men. Men are fallible. I understand that you have faith, but I also see a great deal of superstition. Let me first point out that the Tao does not punish anyone, great calamities do not befall those who might try to uncover the mystery or mysteries. Wisdom is not understanding that your consciousness is new every second that we exist, but rather that there is a new potential in every second that we exist. I am as connected to the Tao today as I was the day I was born, the difference is that in experiencing the Tao, I can once more understand the nature of existence.

 

Aaron

 

edit- I also hold this idea of examination to all religious texts. We owe it to ourselves to examine what others have said and not to allow faith to blind us.

So, you are a Religious Taoist? Do you view Religion and Spiritual as 2 different things?

Of course we should question all things. IMO the Ancient Sages were far superior to modern man. If they did not define Tao, it will be remarkable if we do. I think we need to further examine what the Ancient Sages said and look for the clues there.

If someone did benefit from Christianity or Islam or any other religion,science, or philosophy why would they limit themself to that and not also seek out the wisdom from TTC. I am starting to agree with Everything in that you are putting limits on your view.

Just because we have advanced in a linear timeline 2000 some odd years does not neccessarily make us smarter,more observant,wiser,...

Just because "most believe" something does not make it the truth either.

[Everything]

Hi Everything,

 

I think you might be making Tao more mysterious than it really is.

 

You might also be making Tao more mystical than it really is.

 

But those are my opinions.

Thanks, I do try hard.

[Marblehead]

Thanks, I do try hard.

 

Hehehe. Keep up the good work!

[Otis]

Hey Aaron,

 

Do you know of Peter Russell, or his work? He's a philosopher of consciousness, and comes to very similar conclusions to you.

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7799171063626430789&hl=undefined#

 

This video lecture is pretty long (over an hour), but it's beautifully elegant and wonderfully mind-blowing. The first half is especially convincing, leading up to the idea that consciousness is in everything, that there is some degree of consciousness in all matter.

 

The second half involves a bigger stretch, but it still makes a very elegant argument to get to your conclusion: that consciousness is all there is. It's a very refreshing talk, and quite worth the time investment, so I highly recommend it.

[Otis]

As for my own opinion on "what is Tao", I think that Aaron has put forth a very beautiful metaphor, that seems to resonate well with my experience and what I have read in Taoist and Buddhist texts.

 

That said, I have to agree with Everything's caution about using "is" or trying to define the mystery. It is not a question of heresy; as Aaron has said: that doesn't exist.

 

But I think "the Tao which is spoken is not the true Tao" is a warning to us, not to mistake our experiences of Tao for Tao itself. I can NEVER have the experience of Tao (or any experience whatsoever), without also having the obfuscating influence of ME. There is always me in the way, so I can never truly distinguish when I'm experiencing Tao, or I'm just experiencing myself, experiencing Tao.

 

Even when the experience feels so genuine, so absolute, that I begin to imagine: this is Truth, itself, that's just another experience. How can I ever determine, within myself, the distinction between "more true than I've experienced in my life" and "actually True"? Internally, they are the same, because the experience of truth can never rise above being an experience, nor can my conclusions rise above comparison to what I have previously known.

 

I do believe that the epistemological humility that Lao Tzu was advocating is every bit as important to the following of one's path as meditation or cultivation. It is, I think, equivalent to "Beginner's Mind" or "emptiness" in Zen.

 

So yes, I think it's fun to tinker with metaphors, and thereby explain how we experience Tao. And I think that Aaron has put forth a very beautiful model to think about. But to mistake "my experience of Tao" for "Tao itself" is every bit an error as saying that "my experience of Aaron" is the same as "Aaron himself".

[Birch]

Hey Aaron,

 

Do you know of Peter Russell, or his work? He's a philosopher of consciousness, and comes to very similar conclusions to you.

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7799171063626430789&hl=undefined#

 

This video lecture is pretty long (over an hour), but it's beautifully elegant and wonderfully mind-blowing. The first half is especially convincing, leading up to the idea that consciousness is in everything, that there is some degree of consciousness in all matter.

 

The second half involves a bigger stretch, but it still makes a very elegant argument to get to your conclusion: that consciousness is all there is. It's a very refreshing talk, and quite worth the time investment, so I highly recommend it.

 

Wow! A scientist tells it like I have experienced it (on occasion - not too much as it tends to freak me out :-))

I'm glad there's so much more about it that I don't know.

 

Thanks for this one.

[mYTHmAKER]

Perhaps the title of this thread should be "What is Not Tao"

[Stigweard]

Perhaps the title of this thread should be "What is Not Tao"

 

Tao, name of no name

Tao, the ism that isn't

Tao, the word said not

[lazy cloud]

Twinner may have come up with this metaphor independantly but it has been tried before.

Seeking to intellectualize "What is Tao?" is not rational.

It is not the natural universe as a whole nor is it the way of nature as a whole.

It is not even the underlying law of the universe from which all other principles &

phenomena proceed. If it was any of these things/concepts it would have been explained as such. Since it has not been explained as such after thousands of years of thought then maybe it really is unnamable,unfathomable, and inexhaustable.

 

I do like the conscious/unsconcious collective concept IMO it does exist but it is not the Tao. It is not the 10th or 11th dimension. It is not the String Theory either.

It is not the basic eternal principle of the universe that transcends reality and is the source of being,non being, and change.

 

So, it not being any of these, as they have been rejected as a definition of What is Tao?

 

Forward and backward, abyss on top of abyss, on top of abyss.

In danger like this, pause first and wait.

Otherwise you will fall into a pit in the abyss.

Do not act in this way.

 

Tao is GLIMPSED only through its effects.

 

Over in Oxford there is another question that comes up from time to time......

The classical question "What caused God?"(I am not asking any Buddhist to attempt to answer this here) My point is , there are questions that make their rounds and do cause a certain amount of thought. Question all things as Twinner has said. Do not always expect to find the answer.

 

If you find a warm fuzzy place where you think you know the answer to "What is Tao?"

Great! by all means have a cookie.

t

[Aaron]

Hello Folks,

 

I've read through what everyone has said and I must say I didn't expect the topic to go in this direction. I'm not disappointed mind you, but rather perplexed. I suppose it is understandable, in that my views are different. My experience in fundamentalism has made me skeptical of absolutes or the opposites, things that can have no absolutes. With that said, I'm not saying that there can not be absolutes or no absolutes, but rather that this discussion is very much like water.

 

When water is left to its own devices, in a warm climate it is fluid and runs freely, but when it runs to a colder climate it begins to freeze and become still. In the same way if it becomes too warm it will evaporate and disappear. My wish is that we do maintain a climate of comfort, where our thoughts can run freely, that the cooling influence of orthodoxy and tradition do not influence our continued examination of possibilities, even if in the end the possibility does not exist.

 

I find that the most potent debater says very little. They ask questions, rather than give answers. I've never been good at debate. I tend to tell it how I view it and at times, perhaps, I am a bit too honest in what I say. I do not intend to change, because for me an honest examination of a subject is the only true way of knowing the subject. And winning an argument doesn't necessarily mean that you've explained what the subject was actually about.

 

If I did not question my faith at one point in my life I might very well be a priest or minister in some small town advocating the will of God, even if deep inside I had doubts about what I was believing. In the same way, if I did not question those parts of Taoism that I had doubts about, I never would've explored other avenues of philosophy.

 

It wasn't until recently that I stumbled upon Vendanta Hinduism and experienced an awakening that seemed to bring all those questions I had about reality and my experience and non-experience in this world to an end. I understand now. I know on a deep experiential level what I am and my place in this world. I do not fear death and I accept life for what it is.

 

It is this understanding that led me to examine Tao, to try to realize exactly what it was and to attempt to share this experience with others. I didn't do this as a guru, but rather as a child who having learned something new runs to his friends and shares what he's learned. Of course as a child you find that many times, what you find interesting, your friends don't. The difference is that now, I'm not so disappointed anymore when others don't find what I say interesting. As a child I wanted others to be interested in the things I was interested in because I thought that interest meant they were interested in me. As an adult I fully understand that no one needs to be interested in me or my ideas, but still there's always that desire to share what I've learned. If for no other reason than to test what I've learned with others.

 

With that said, I will admit that most likely what I am describing as Tao is not what the Ancients described as Tao, if only because the Ancients have defined it in such a way that any definition one comes up with can be refuted or denied. So what I will say is that I am not talking about Tao at all, but rather the force that creates and manages the entirety of existence. If Tao is not this, then this is not Tao.

 

I hope that we can continue this discussion, but I think it's definitely become a discussion about what is not Tao, in the sense that everything we wish to explain as Tao can be said not to be Tao, merely because we have started to define it and by defining it proved it not to be.

 

So I suppose my question is, if we cannot define it or understand it, then why should we worry about it? Perhaps our time is better spent discussing things we can understand? Perhaps if we do define it and understand it we will all cease to be in a flash, punished for our arrogance, or perhaps we will just continue to view it differently and come to an understanding that not agreeing about something is completely normal and beneficial. If all the world saw beauty as beauty, wouldn't that be ugly?

 

Aaron

 

edit- In closing, I do agree with nearly everything Taoism does teach, which is why I respect and follow it's teachings. For me the small points of contention are not worth giving up what is fundamentally a fruitful and beneficial philosophy. As a friend of mine once advised, take what you can use and leave the rest, but always remember what you've left behind in case you might need it at a later time.

Edited March 22, 2011 by Twinner

[Aaron]

Twinner may have come up with this metaphor independantly but it has been tried before.

Seeking to intellectualize "What is Tao?" is not rational.

 

 

Hello LC,

 

Thankfully I've never been very rational.

 

Aaron

[Marblehead]

If you find a warm fuzzy place where you think you know the answer to "What is Tao?"

Great! by all means have a cookie.

 

 

I do eat my cookies.

 

(But sometimes other people come along and crumble them to a state where they are impossible to eat.)

[Marblehead]

So I suppose my question is, if we cannot define it or understand it, then why should we worry about it? Perhaps our time is better spent discussing things we can understand? Perhaps if we do define it and understand it we will all cease to be in a flash, punished for our arrogance, or perhaps we will just continue to view it differently and come to an understanding that not agreeing about something is completely normal and beneficial.

 

Great post Aaron.

 

I wish to speak to the above.

 

I think it is possible to intuitively understand Tao. No, it cannot be put into words. And yes, each individual who does intuitively understand it will have a somewhat different understanding and this is because we all are different manifestations of this Tao we speak of.

 

But I do agree that we will never be able to properly define it.

[mYTHmAKER]

 

Tao, name of no name

Tao, the ism that isn't

Tao, the word said not

 

So what is there to discuss?

[mYTHmAKER]

 

But I think "the Tao which is spoken is not the true Tao" is a warning to us, not to mistake our experiences of Tao for Tao itself. I can NEVER have the experience of Tao (or any experience whatsoever), without also having the obfuscating influence of ME. There is always me in the way, so I can never truly distinguish when I'm experiencing Tao, or I'm just experiencing myself, experiencing Tao.

 

So you are saying you are separate from Tao? I don't think so.

When you are in your mind you are Tao. It is a humans nature to think -intellectualize.

When you are beyond your mind you are Tao - only you are not thinking about it.