The Dao De Jhing is a shamanistic treatise

[GrandmasterP]

Your faith does you credit bro.

Best we leave it there I suspect.

Travel lightly.

[Jeff]

 

While I would prefer to return to the topic...

 

GrandmasterP, if you don't mind, a question...

 

In you work as a medium, have you ever tried to delve deep into "consciousness" and connect with a "divine presence"? Or, do you just "open" for those "near"?

 

[GrandmasterP]

Good Q Geoff best left to a PM rather than here maybe.

[flowing hands]

Your faith does you credit bro.

Best we leave it there I suspect.

Travel lightly.

What is to come of the world in the near future is not a light thing!

[GrandmasterP]

You got that right. Nasty times ahead. December 28th looks to be the kick off date according to the planetary alignments. We continue to do what we can and it'll be a busier time for Shamen no doubt. Usually plenty to do during crises.

All success to your work and service FH

[raimonio]

Wish to share my experience with DDJ and shamanism. When I was a Buddhist I interpreted DDJ as philosophical talk or talk about enlightenment, as such I considered it a poor description compared to other available material. There was a "naturalistic" vibe to it which was nice, but still a poor description of enlightenment imho. After I became a Daoist and started practicing Stillness-Movement I took a new look and was really surprised to find out that DDJ was actually describing to me in great detail what I had already experienced during my meditation, the Dao.

 

I have come to the conclusion that although DDJ is philosophical and even political, it is also in some parts (the ones where Dao is described) a literal take on the experience of Daoist practice and experiencing Dao.

 

I can definitely agree with the shamanistic aspect of it, but I think its just that Daoism and Daoist practices are very shamanistic. Anyways there are certainly chapters where the actual experience is described and there is nothing philosophical or political about it.

Edited November 13, 2012 by raimonio

[deci belle]

Please...!!! Is this thread necessary...???

Didn't we have the translation done in the Tao Te Ching Section...???

 

Ready? ooh noooooo!! ahhahahhahahhahahhahhaaa!!!❤❤❤

 

mr Marblesez sez:

I disagree with your stating that the TTC is not a philosophic writing. However, I will agree that there are some Shamanistic over- and under-tones within the Chapters of the TTC.

 

Actually Vous has it backwards, mon ami… it has a sugar-coated philosophical layer that was imbedded deliberately. This allowed the Classic to survive the socio-political purges.

 

The two sections discuss the Power and the Virtue. We can have our affair with Power; though it is inconceivable, it can be imitated. By recognizing the Way and following it, it is possible to align with it. In harmonizing with the Celestial design, Power naturally coalesces. This is how we enter the endless mysteries. It is not a matter of doing. The Way does nothing, the sage does nothing. Heard that before, hmmmmmm?

 

What is knowable are the sciences attributed to the Virtue of the Way. The Virtue of the Receptive is the highest function of immediate acquiescence practiced by enlightening beings (such things cannot be mentioned in the presence of innocent dabblers of saccharine philosophy and social science— or conventionally educated culturally-myopic Chinese).

 

Shamanic traditions out of the Celestial Court's mystical homeland in the Kunlun Range (gateway to the ancient steppe cultures) is only a single aspect of the living mysteries the empty vessel called taoism that literalists, rationalists, methodologists and recreational philosophers cannot accept.

 

It is ssooo old.

 

 

 

 

ed note: add the last three paragraphs

Edited November 16, 2012 by deci belle

[deci belle]

I meant to be sassy, but not necessaarily disrespectful…❤

 

Though literalism is a point of departure, if one does not develop its application in terms of emphasis, sterile dead words are the result, non? Words on there own terms may qualify as definitions, but meaning is created by the user— and what is communicable is the image. If one must live by definition dependent on the word; how could that be true? I don't see it.

 

Anyone inconsiderate of the life of Antonin Artaud, the French surrealist writer and playwright, would do well to find out how it is to rely completely on the word to the extreme of madness. This is the very definition of paucity in terms of the Real. Literal dependancies are discussed in various volumes of the taoist canon with similar results— which is why I brought it up.

 

When I see the TTC, the words of alchemic processes and fundamental wizardry leap out at me. It's not because I seek romance or mystical variance in the text, but because the teachings themselves are a talisman of my or anyone's understanding of the mysteries of life in terms of profound investments, challenges and achievements throwing back the viels of convention and the tyranny of our very own personal "wizards" of Oz.

 

If one is to be free, one must discover complete freedom, and define one's life on its terms. Otherwise, your freedom is an intellectual concept. The subject of Chuantzu is just this very freedom. There are those on this forum who criticize my "poetic license"— the very vehicle Chuangtzu employs with incontrovertible precision. So it is the withering freedom to use words with commanding alacrity of application that enables one to slice, not the repository of definitions in the brittle ledgers of convention.

 

I no longer contribute to Marblehead's venues because to venture outside of the moribund "philosophical" language-bound approach approbated by a sterile convention arbitrarily attached to these ancient teachings is neither appreciated nor considered tractable by him. Though initially supportive in spirit, an inability to venture beyond the most hackneyed intellectual terms made further communications between us untenable. As far as ChiDragon's tenurial posture on this forum, I rather believe I'm on his "ignore" list— and I don't blame him one bit. heehee!!❤

 

I failed to state the cultural and shamanic influences the vast region to China's traditional northern boundaries not because of their insignificance, but because of time immemorial and beyond being the source of geo-political rivalry, outright domination and as the perennial savage territorial scourge of proto-Chinese agricultural society into well-documented dynastic histories— no ancient regional document could ever condone much less acknowledge as even benign, the relentless influence the North has brought to bear on the Asian river and delta civilizations coming into contact three, four, up to eight thousand years in the past.

 

That's old.❤

 

 

 

ed note: add [my "or" anyones] in the fourth paragraph

Edited November 18, 2012 by deci belle

[Aaron]

I was thinking back to when I first started to read the Tao Te Ching, when I was twenty-one, and how I was so enraptured by it. I told everyone that would listen that I was a "Taoist Shaman" because I thought that was the best description I could come up with at the time. They laughed at me and thought it was really funny, so I stopped. It's funny how you can lose sight of things simply because of what other people think of them. Nowadays I would have to agree that the TTC is based on Shamanistic practices, but I also have to remember that Lao Tzu wasn't a shaman, rather he was an administrator sitting in an office. In that regard I'm with GrandmasterP, it may be partially shamanistic, but overall it's very much a political and moral treatise.

 

Aaron

[GrandmasterP]

To a Shaman TTC's a shamanistic text.

Bit like the Bible for Xtians in a way I suppose.

Only one book more or less but all sorts of Xtians having it say all sorts of different things to suit their own particular standpoint.

Koran too maybe.

One Koran but there's a big difference between Sufis say and Taliban types.

Talmud the Jews have , orhodox Jews interpret that very differently from how the liberal Jews do.

I'm no TTC expert, can't read Chinese for one thing but I have been in Taiwan and Singapore and the Taoists there are very pragmatic and also very different from one another in some ways too. Nobody seemed to be selling TTC. Amulets, charms, merchandise of all fascinating sorts yes but no TTC.

I liked that. Taoism over there was just a natural part of life, very down to earth and practical.

We are very text oriented here in the west.

[ChiDragon]

" As far as ChiDragon's tenurial posture on this forum, I rather believe I'm on his "ignore" list— and I don't blame him one bit. heehee!!❤"

 

deci belle....

I think you are fascinating. Whatever that means, I do appreciate that....

[deci belle]

I wasn't hoping to be on your "ignore" list, mon ami.❤ But, you have been awfully quiet since coming in from the School of Nina, don't you think?

 

As an aside, and as an unrelated matter, I will mention that…

 

"knowledge of beginninglessness is seeing nonbeing; selfless nonbeing has no partiality; impersonal awareness has no equal; the unsurpassed is celestial nature": because impartial selfless awareness is the highest order of consciousness in terms of the intent of human being, which is not a person, therefore Lao Tzu refers to this as "king".

[ChiDragon]

Well, I'm still struggling....

 

BTW The School of Nina is going to be closed down at the end of the year.

[Isimsiz Biri]

In fact there is Xia Mian (Shaman) Daoism which forms the oldest Daoist Schools. Masters of Xia Mian Daoism still exists. Shape-shifting to animal forms are done by these masters. Daoism comes from these Xia Mian roots.

Edited November 22, 2012 by Recep Ivedik

[Aaron]

posted a reply in the wrong thread... moved to the right one, but I will keep this one here since, ironically it is still a valid response to the quote by Deci Belle

 

 

I meant to be sassy, but not necessaarily disrespectful…❤

 

Though literalism is a point of departure, if one does not develop its application in terms of emphasis, sterile dead words are the result, non? Words on there own terms may qualify as definitions, but meaning is created by the user— and what is communicable is the image. If one must live by definition dependent on the word; how could that be true? I don't see it.

 

Anyone inconsiderate of the life of Antonin Artaud, the French surrealist writer and playwright, would do well to find out how it is to rely completely on the word to the extreme of madness. This is the very definition of paucity in terms of the Real. Literal dependancies are discussed in various volumes of the taoist canon with similar results— which is why I brought it up.

 

When I see the TTC, the words of alchemic processes and fundamental wizardry leap out at me. It's not because I seek romance or mystical variance in the text, but because the teachings themselves are a talisman of my or anyone's understanding of the mysteries of life in terms of profound investments, challenges and achievements throwing back the viels of convention and the tyranny of our very own personal "wizards" of Oz.

 

If one is to be free, one must discover complete freedom, and define one's life on its terms. Otherwise, your freedom is an intellectual concept. The subject of Chuantzu is just this very freedom. There are those on this forum who criticize my "poetic license"— the very vehicle Chuangtzu employs with incontrovertible precision. So it is the withering freedom to use words with commanding alacrity of application that enables one to slice, not the repository of definitions in the brittle ledgers of convention.

 

I no longer contribute to Marblehead's venues because to venture outside of the moribund "philosophical" language-bound approach approbated by a sterile convention arbitrarily attached to these ancient teachings is neither appreciated nor considered tractable by him. Though initially supportive in spirit, an inability to venture beyond the most hackneyed intellectual terms made further communications between us untenable. As far as ChiDragon's tenurial posture on this forum, I rather believe I'm on his "ignore" list— and I don't blame him one bit. heehee!!❤

 

I failed to state the cultural and shamanic influences the vast region to China's traditional northern boundaries not because of their insignificance, but because of time immemorial and beyond being the source of geo-political rivalry, outright domination and as the perennial savage territorial scourge of proto-Chinese agricultural society into well-documented dynastic histories— no ancient regional document could ever condone much less acknowledge as even benign, the relentless influence the North has brought to bear on the Asian river and delta civilizations coming into contact three, four, up to eight thousand years in the past.

 

That's old.❤

 

 

 

ed note: add [my "or" anyones] in the fourth paragraph

 

I wanted to weigh in on this discussion, because I think the comments made here are misleading as to the actual meaning of this chapter (Note- I am referring to chapter 16 of the Tao Te Ching, but in the context of this quote, it could very much be the entire interpretation of the Tao Te Ching). First, many people like to apply a mystical connotation to this chapter that does not exist. The return that Lao Tzu mentions, for instance, is not a return to some mystical state that preexisted our birth, but rather a return to our natural state at birth, in other words the state of the infant.

 

Now how do I know this, because I don't take one chapter and decide it's meaning without looking at other chapters to compare it to. Lao Tzu says that the Tao cannot be spoken of, nor described, yet we can understand the process of Tao by looking at nature (the Mother as he calls it). By examining those things that come from the mother we can understand the PROCESS of Tao, but not define or explain Tao itself.

 

Why did Lao Tzu do this, rather than explain how everything began? Well it's simple and he actually tells us why, because the beginning is not so important as the present. Lao Tzu emphasized a need to stay in the present and not reflect on the past. The past is done, it's dust and it's over, but the present is here and now, it's the only thing we can effect with our actions, so in Lao Tzu's view reflecting on hypotheticals that could never be proved was useless, it was much more important to reflect on what was here and now and could be proven.

 

The return that Lao Tzu mentions was a return to our original nature, the nature we were born with, the state of the infant. It's simply a recognition of his other teachings, and the simplest way to explain this is by reviewing the Three Treasures, which are Compassion, Frugality, and Never Striving to be First in the World. To simplify this even more it simply means, being kind to others, appreciating what we need, and not competing with others needlessly. Nothing really mystical about it, except that it requires a great deal of introspection to come to grasp these notions again, since much of our life is spent learning the opposite.

 

Lao Tzu said that the perfect village was one where the villagers in one village could hear the rooster crow in the other without knowing what they were doing. So in a perfect world we would not worry so much how other people practiced, but rather what we were doing ourselves. Of course this isn't a perfect world, so the message I tend to offer people is that the truth is within them, that everything else is extraneous.

 

Aaron

Edited November 22, 2012 by Aaron

[flowing hands]

Let me here place the chapter of all chapters that was given to me to show how much emphasis was placed on shamanistic culture when Li Erh wrote the DDJ and how it is so valid for todays understanding of this ancient work. A direct valuing of such practises that cannot be defined as just 'philosophy'.

 

Stanza 60

In dealing with evil, let Heaven do the biding. For Heaven can see all things,

and everything will find its just reward.

In dealing with evil, seek for the Daoist Shaman.

For he is in touch with Heaven and so is able to deal with evil.

Evil is powerful, so avoid any conflict and leave well alone.

Those who dabble in such things will only harm themselves and others.

Then the Shaman's job is made more difficult and he may lose his life.

The Shaman is a treasure to the people, for he calls

up Saints and Immortals, and when the people are starving,

he opens up Heaven and beautiful rain will follow.

He protects all things within a balance and performs selfless actions.

He is a Sage and is treasured by Heaven.

[takaaki]

Let me here place the chapter of all chapters that was given to me to show how much emphasis was placed on shamanistic culture when Li Erh wrote the DDJ and how it is so valid for todays understanding of this ancient work. A direct valuing of such practises that cannot be defined as just 'philosophy'.

 

 

Your Chapter 60 translation bears a message that is different from that of the Chinese text. Your translation does not contain one of the most distinctive statements associated with the Dao De Jing:

 

"Ruling a big country is like cooking a small meal".

 

Please explain.

Edited January 12, 2013 by takaaki

[flowing hands]

Your Chapter 60 translation bears a message that is different from that of the Chinese text. Your translation does not contain one of the most distinctive statements associated with the Dao De Jing:

 

"Ruling a big country is like cooking a small meal".

 

Please explain.

Well lets look at the translation that most people have of this chapter.

 

'Ruling the country is like cooking a small fish

Approach the universe with Tao

and evil will have no power

not that evil is not powerful

but its power will not be used to harm others

not only will it do no harm to others

but the sage himself will be protected

they do not hurt each other

and the virtue in each one refreshes both.'

 

IMO what aload of nonsense! how does the first sentence add up to the next? 'Taking great care and approaching the universe with Tao.'

Who amongst us approaches the universe and uses the Tao to approach it. The universe is unfathomable, we can't even begin to understand it let alone approach it. What has approaching the universe with Tao got to do with evil? Evil exists in the realm of humans in terms of what we do etc. etc as well as in the spirit world and how we percieve things. the Tao does not see either good nor evil. These are moralistic statements that Li Erh would not make in describing the Tao. Why would the sage be protected above all others? The whole chapters does not make any sense.

[takaaki]

IMO what aload of nonsense! how does the first sentence add up to the next? 'Taking great care and approaching the universe with Tao.'

 

Well, you are dead right. The translation (which looks like Feng's) that you used as example doesn't make sense to me either. Just because no one else questions its admissibility and most people swallow it wholesale doesn't mean you can slip in your translation which makes sense even though it is unconnected to the Chinese text.

 

To be fair, the Chinese text itself, on the whole, doesn't make sense either. It is like a puzzle, a Rubic cube, that scholars have been trying to solve since the Dao De Jing was discovered. This has allowed the Chinese themselves to slip in their own renderings of the ancient text to create Taoism.

 

You have based your position on the premise that the Dao De Jing was produced by a shaman for shamanistic purposes. I am not refuting that. You could be right. No one has successfully debunked the notion that the Gospels were written by spiritualists for the religious purpose of worshipping Jesus. It would help your cause to use a translation that bears some connection to the Chinese text.

 

We are left with two choices:

 

1. Accept the nonsensical Feng translation, or

2. Accept your sensical rendering that has no connection to the Chinese text..

 

And you are proposing that we choose No. 2?

Edited January 13, 2013 by takaaki

[ChiDragon]

Your Chapter 60 translation bears a message that is different from that of the Chinese text. Your translation does not contain one of the most distinctive statements associated with the Dao De Jing:

 

"Ruling a big country is like cooking a small meal".

 

Please explain.

 

It was bothering me too, but I was afraid to ask which might divert to further confusion and out of context.

[flowing hands]

Well, you are dead right. The translation (which looks like Feng's) that you used as example doesn't make sense to me either. Just because no one else questions its admissibility and most people swallow it wholesale doesn't mean you can slip in your translation which makes sense even though it is unconnected to the Chinese text.

 

To be fair, the Chinese text itself, on the whole, doesn't make sense either. It is like a puzzle, a Rubic cube, that scholars have been trying to solve since the Dao De Jing was discovered. This has allowed the Chinese themselves to slip in their own renderings of the ancient text to create Taoism.

 

You have based your position on the premise that the Dao De Jing was produced by a shaman for shamanistic purposes. I am not refuting that. You could be right. No one has successfully debunked the notion that the Gospels were written by spiritualists for the religious purpose of worshipping Jesus. It would help your cause to use a translation that bears some connection to the Chinese text.

 

We are left with two choices:

 

1. Accept the nonsensical Feng translation, or

2. Accept your sensical rendering that has no connection to the Chinese text..

 

And you are proposing that we choose No. 2?

 

Li Erh is a real person, alive in the sense that he no longer has a mortal body, but can take on one if he pleases, but is alive in an energy form. Now nearlly 29 years ago, when I was begging for holy water, Li Erh came. I was greatly surprised as he seldom comes to holymen/women and leaves such things to othe Immortals of the sect. He came to me and said I want to teach you my true teachings that I wrote down thousands of years ago for the English speaking world. So every day I begged him to come and every day he told a chapter at a time giving me understanding of each chapter. I was astounded by some chapters as he completely discarded what was said in other translations saying they didn't make any sense at all. As I have said many times on this site, Li Erh was born into a deeply held shamanistic society where people believed in that natural system of spirituality. The chinese people were very fond of transcribing text, especially for imperial exams. The DDJ has gone through multple changes since it was first written, what we have in the original text is not by the hand of Li Erh, it is by the hand of a copyist. These people were renowned for making their own shortened pictograms and personal attributes to the writing. No genuine chinese text exists of Li Erh's original script remains. So we have mine, sense will show you that what I have produced is the original.

[takaaki]

It was bothering me too, but I was afraid to ask which might divert to further confusion and out of context.

 

The context of this discourse pertains to the assertion that the Dao De Jing is a shamanistic "treatise". I am sure your observations would contribute to clarity of the discussion.

[Marblehead]

It was bothering me too, but I was afraid to ask which might divert to further confusion and out of context.

Well, as all is Tao I suppose going a little off topic isn't really all that bad.

 

Can we look at Henricks' translation of this?

 

First, for some reason there is an empty line between Line 1 and Line 2; perhaps indicating that the two (Line 1 and the rest of the chapter) are different ideas.

 

In the following, I will modify his Line 6 based on his notes.

 

1. Ruling a large state is like cooking small fish.

 

2. When you use the Way to govern the world, evil spirits won't have godlike powers.

3. Actually, it's not that evil spirits won't have godlike power,

4. It's that their power will not harm men.

5. But it's not [just] that their power won't harm men,

6. The Sage, also, will not harm these spirits.

7. Since these two do not harm others,

8. Therefore their Virtues intermingle and return to them.

 

Neat trying to always gain a better understanding.

 

Edit to add:

 

And if we replace the label "Sage" with "Shaman" then Flowing Hands view would be further supported.

Edited January 13, 2013 by Marblehead

[ChiDragon]

The context of this discourse pertains to the assertion that the Dao De Jing is a shamanistic "treatise". I am sure your observations would contribute to clarity of the discussion.

 

I had tried to clarified it but people already have their mind made up that the Dao De Jing is a shamanistic "treatise".

 

I'll let you read my translation:

1. Ruling a big nation is like frying a small fish.

2. With the presence of Tao beneath heaven,

3. The ghosts cannot extent their power.

4. It's not only that the ghosts cannot extent their power,

5. But its power cannot harm anyone.

6. It was not even that their power cannot harm anyone,

7. A ruler also does no harm to anyone.

8. Since both do no mutual harm to each other,

9. Then, the virtue of peace was returned to the people.

[Marblehead]

... but people already have their mind made up that the Dao De Jing is a shamanistic "treatise".

I'm not convinced.

 

Can you justifiy the use of the word "ruler" in line 7?