[TTC Study] Chapter 60 of the Tao Teh Ching

[Taoist Texts]

What does it say, exactly, then?

 

TTC is a governing manual. Governing is always religious since there is no such thing as an atheist nation, a vociferous sliver of over-privileged libertines notwithstanding. Throughout the history any state was a theocracy: be it Aztek or Roman empires where the emperor was the head priest or a living god, or modern day UK sovereign appointing the head of the state church. Ancient China was a polytheistic theocracy, with many local and familial gods (manes) backed by powerful local clans vying to become state-level gods. Concurrently, in those axial times http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_Age the humans were curiously terrified by an onslaught of foreign spirits which threatened to overran the human world, hence i.g.

 

Psalm 81:9 You shall have no foreign god ... - Bible Hub

You must never have a foreign god; you must not bow down before a false god. ... "Let there be no strange god among you; Nor shall you worship any foreign ...

 

Or

 

Thou shalt have no other gods before me - Wikipedia, the ...

“Do not follow other gods, the gods of the peoples around you

 

Or

 

《論衡 - Lunheng》

 

《解除》

貴人之出也，萬民並觀，填街滿巷，爭進在前。士卒驅之，則走而卻；士卒還去，即復其處；士卒立守，終日不離，僅能禁止。何則？欲在於觀，不為壹驅還也。使鬼神與生人同，有欲於宅中，猶萬民有欲於觀也，士卒驅逐，不久立守，則觀者不卻也。然則驅逐鬼者，不極一歲，鬼神不去。今驅逐之，終食之間，則舍之矣；舍之，鬼復還來，何以禁之？暴穀於庭，雞雀啄之，主人驅彈則走，縱之則來，不終日立守，雞雀不禁。使鬼神乎？不為驅逐去止。使鬼不神乎？與雞雀等，不常驅逐，不能禁也。

 

When a royalty exits into a city, the crowd of commoners rush to gawk at them, filling the alleys and the street. When the royal guards are quick to chase them away – they retreat; and when the guards return to the royal train – the crowds come back; but if the guards would only protect the perimeter in place then the crowds would never leave and they can only be made to stop at the perimeter but can not be made to go away. Why is that? Because the crowd’s desire is to gawk, not a desire to go back and forth.

Likewise, would the ghosts and spirits be on the same plane with the living people, would they have a desire to dwell among us, then the commoners would like to see them, and if the guard chases them away, and then stops to guard the perimeter then the gawkers would not retreat on their own.

So if the chasing out of ghosts would ever stop, then in less than a year the ghosts and spirits would crowd us and would never leave. Even if we chase them away and then stop for as short as a time for a meal – the spirits and ghosts would come back, so how to banish them?

Here is another example: if there is a patch of wheat in the yard, and birds flocked to peck it, then the owner rushes out and chases them away; when he leaves – they fly back in. And unless you guard your yard all day long – there is no banishing the birds.

Now lets take those ghosts that are gods. Those should not be chased away or stopped from coming. But those ghosts that are not gods should be treated like the pest birds. If we constantly do not chase them away there would be no banishing them.

 

 

Such was the historical backdrop against which the chapter 60 recommends to use the local ancestral sacrifices as a regulatory instrument based on following reasoning:

 

Governing of the state must be based on local sacrifices with each family sacrificing to its ancestors only and not elevating a ghost of an individual family to the state of a god. Why not? Because such a god would be a partisan of his clan, giving preference to it and hurting other people. Also the familial gods would fight among themselves (hurting each other), which in turn will imbalance the government of the sages causing it to inadvertently hurt people as well. All that is needed to prevent this havoc is to use the local sacrifices properly, resulting in profusion of beneficial De.

 

 

So, that’s what chpt 60 says in a simple and elegant pronouncement (as opposed to mind –boggling gibberish produced by the expert translators.) Small fish fry for everyone!

[Marblehead]

Fair argument.

[dust]

Well..

 

You've done well in finding the link to 'worship' or 'spirits' in this chapter -- something I had certainly missed when I made the post in the other thread -- but I'm still not convinced that Laozi is in any way recommending religion, or saying that these spirits are real. I believe, as with most other chapters, that there isn't just one message in the words.

 

And even if this one chapter does promote religious action, is that enough to say that the entire TTC is a religious manual?

 

For argument's sake I'll assume you are correct that any given state in history was a theocracy.

 

Take the Romans and the Greeks (so often intertwined in philosophy and religion):

 

Lucretius:

"Too often in time past, religion has brought forth criminal and shameful actions. ...How many evils has religion caused!"
"The nature of the universe has by no means been made through divine power, seeing how great are the faults that mar it."
"All religions are equally sublime to the ignorant, useful to the politician, and ridiculous to the philosopher."

 

Protagoras:

"Man is the measure of all things, of things that are that they are, of things that are not that they are not."

 

And, my favourite...

Diogenes:

"When I look upon seamen, men of science, and philosophers, man is the wisest of all things. When I look upon priests, prophets, and interpreters of dreams, nothing is so contemptible as a man."

"I do not know whether there are gods, but there ought to be."

 

We see that even in such religious nations with such powerful and vengeful gods there was, among philosophers and other writers, often a deep contempt for religion. But religion was inescapable. Aristotle, Plato, Socrates...the greatest philosophers generally accepted the existence of gods in some way. Does that mean that every text was a religious manual?

 

For me, Diogenes is a notable Westerner at that time closest to living a somewhat Taoist lifestyle. The chapters in the TTC come closer to saying, like Diogenes, "Well, religion exists, but I don't really care to talk about that. Let's just talk about living in harmony with nature."

[Marblehead]

-- but I'm still not convinced that Laozi is in any way recommending religion, or saying that these spirits are real. I believe, as with most other chapters, that there isn't just one message in the words.

I would even go so far as to say that he was not nor did he actually believe in spirits. He was a Physicalist. (I didn't want to use the word Materialist.)

[dust]

治大國若烹小鮮 Trying to govern a country is like making offerings to one's ancestors;

以道蒞天下 If one reaches everything through the Way,

其鬼不神 The ghosts of one's ancestors are not elevated to gods,

非其鬼不神也 The ghosts of other people's ancestors are not elevated to gods;

其神不傷人也 These gods will not harm people,

非其神不傷人也 And other gods will not harm people;

聖人亦弗傷也 And the sage also finds no harm;

夫兩不相傷 As long as two parties do no harm to each other

故德交歸焉 Does De not return?

 

烹 / 享

 

 

In other words, trying to govern a country is silly. Offer something to someone, and someone else wants something bigger. Nobody can be pleased, and everyone ends up doing harm (my ancestors are better than yours > my gods are better than yours > let's all kill each other in the name of our gods). If, on the other hand, one just follows the Way and stops micromanaging, gods go out the window and everyone stops fighting. Virtue returns.

 

Thoughts?

[Marblehead]

Oh, of course I have thoughts. Hehehe.

 

Yes, if viewed this way then we could say that it was a protest against the belief in ghosts and gods.

 

I think this would be more in line with the concepts presented in the TTC.

[Taoist Texts]

If, on the other hand, one just follows the Way and stops micromanaging, gods go out the window and everyone stops fighting. Virtue returns.

 

Thoughts?

Questions

 

who is that 'one'?

what is 'following the Way'?

what is 'the Way'?

 

and last but not least

"everyone stops fighting" . How so?

 

 

these are delicious tidbits;)

[dust]

Tehe, OK..

 

We base most of our translations on the idea that the 聖人 is a sage or wise man, right? And that people reading and studying the text were attempting, often, to become better rulers. (Each would have his own idea of "better”, of course.)

 

Laozi, in many chapters, attempts to suggest to these rulers the.. easiest and most virtuous way to rule?

 

The 'one', in this case, is the person reading the text

 

'The Way' is something that's described in numerous chapters. 'Following the Way' is... difficult. As we see in the Zhuangzi, anyone who understands the way the Way works might have their own understanding of a certain aspect of life based on that. Robber Zhi understands the Way, and it makes him a better thief -- he translates it into “the way of robbing”. A ruler understands the Way and it makes him a better ruler. Whatever that might be.

 

I'm looking to some of these other chapters to try and understand what LZ might've meant:

 

37

 

道恒亡爲也 The Way is effortlessness;

侯王能支之 A ruler can lean on it,

而萬勿將自爲 And life will take care of itself

 

57

 

以正之邦 Build a nation with laws,

以奇用兵 Wage war with the element of surprise,

以亡事取天下 Gain everything by doing nothing

 

32

 

道恆亡名 The Way is unidentifiable;

僕唯妻 It serves all,

天地弗敢臣 Yet Heaven and Earth daren’t tame it;

侯王若能獸之 If rulers could maintain it,

萬物將自賓 Life would submit to them

[Taoist Texts]

Excellent! Well in the spirit of the season lets do the 'valley spirit' next, may be we can glean more from it.

[Marblehead]

Excellent! Well in the spirit of the season lets do the 'valley spirit' next, may be we can glean more from it.

Just be gentle with my Valley Spirit. I rest with her often.

[dawei]

'The Way' is something that's described in numerous chapters. 'Following the Way' is... difficult.

 

'Following the Way' is easy...

 

Except...

 

We are easily distracted by life/concerns/wants/desires, etc.

 

Letting go of such things is difficult... for some...

[dust]

Perhaps. My dog follows the Way, I think. More than me, anyway. She's happy running around and eating stinky meat. And barking at random things. But there are no expectations of her to do anything else. We are all expected to "rise above" such behaviour...

 

 

T.T., I'm quite happy to look at ch.6 next. I've just been looking at it, and... well, let's just say I'm as confused as usual. I'll probably wait for your interpretation. It will be very interesting to see what you come up with

[Taoist Texts]

Just be gentle with my Valley Spirit. I rest with her often.

Absolutely. No worries thats a totaly different spirit in a completely different valley i am talking about.

 

[dawei]

We are all expected to "rise above" such behaviour...

 

As TT said... well... I'm loosely going to apply it to the point:

 

Governing of the state Self must be based on local Self sacrifices with each family Self sacrificing to its ancestors Self only and not elevating a ghost of an individual family Self to the state of a god.

 

Are those expectations internally arising or externally imposed?

 

And where do expectations stop.... of a god?