eye_of_the_storm Posted July 10, 2012 I listened to Alan Watts a few times, does that count? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted July 10, 2012 I listened to Alan Watts a few times, does that count? No.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
julianlaboy Posted July 10, 2012 I love everyone's sense of humor here! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
julianlaboy Posted July 10, 2012 1 .What are the qualities of a Taoist....??? 2. What is the first quality to be expected in a Taoist...??? 3. If you want to be a Taoist, what do you need to do to become one...??? 4. If you think that you are a Taoist now, what makes you think that you are one...??? 5. Since you have thought that you are a Taoist, did you follow all the principles or have you ever violated any of these principles....??? You may respond by answering anyone of the question. Any quality may be called "Taoist". Anyone can argue that they are "true Taoists" because they do "this" or "that". I don't think that absolute definitions are part of a Taoist perspective. Taoism typically holds that circumstances are what define everything in life. And of course, circumstances goes hand in hand with change. Sometimes someone will need (will it be useful?) a consistent and immutable definition, sometimes they won't. It's kind of paradoxical because then "coupling with change" may become part of a consistent definition of Taoism... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted July 10, 2012 Let's not say that the definitions have to be absolute. How about somewhat recognizable or noticeable for discussion sake....??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Benster Posted July 10, 2012 i agree with julianlaboy... as he said, its very paradoxical... that's because of language barriers... we think we are speaking of the same "thing" when thinking about "Taoists" but if we begin to question one another what "it" is, then disagreements may or will arise... and julianlaboy, i read your book From Tao to Psychology! it was really nice! i am experienced in these topics and i was unsure if i wanted it because it is called "an introduction" but i went for it because i wanted to read the part of psychology... i wasn't disappointed and i learned a lot! thank you for that! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
julianlaboy Posted July 10, 2012 i agree with julianlaboy... as he said, its very paradoxical... that's because of language barriers... we think we are speaking of the same "thing" when thinking about "Taoists" but if we begin to question one another what "it" is, then disagreements may or will arise... and julianlaboy, i read your book From Tao to Psychology! it was really nice! i am experienced in these topics and i was unsure if i wanted it because it is called "an introduction" but i went for it because i wanted to read the part of psychology... i wasn't disappointed and i learned a lot! thank you for that! Well, Benster, I am extremely happy that you enjoyed the book. Thanks for all your kind words! I won't say much because I would feel like promoting it (spamming! noooo!), but really, thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stosh Posted July 10, 2012 Well, Benster, I am extremely happy that you enjoyed the book. Thanks for all your kind words! I won't say much because I would feel like promoting it (spamming! noooo!), but really, thanks. For the purposes of discussion I think I agree with Chidragon today in that one can say as you see it .. ..either what Taoism is what it is not You could be vague or precise , whichever you want you could be very inclusive or exclusive etc But there ARE meanings for the word and the practice There are folks who consider themselves Taoist and I for one consider myself to exist and I consider my practice to exist. Disagreements arising ?, sure, that happens. If the your book takes a stance as undefined as your post here... I dont think I will be reading it since it seems you are reluctant to stand up and make your point. Stosh Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted July 10, 2012 (edited) Ok Ok... hehe I would still say that there aren't any specific characteristics. I get really mad sometimes (here in Puerto Rico, people on the road are crazy!!) but I am usually a happy person. I can't really say "Julián is a happy person" as if saying "Julián is always a happy person" because that would not take into consideration the Julián at traffic jams in Puerto Rico, hehe. And sometimes I am happy in traffic jams (go figure...). I still cannot say that, regarding myself as someone who enjoys so-called Taoist texts, because I enjoy Taoism, and because I am happy, then people into Taoism are happy people. Taoism may have the characteristic of "something that couples greatly with change", but "Taoists" (if they exist) are another thing. I gave you that example because you said something about temperament. Chapter 8 Translation in terse English: 1. High virtue is like water. 2. Water is good at benefiting all things without contend. 3. Attends places where people disdain. 4. Hence, water is similar to Tao. 5. Dwell in good selectable places, 6. Good deep in the heart with peace and kind to others, 7. Spoken words with trust, 8. Rule with benevolence, 9. Conduct affairs with best ability, 10.Take action in a timely manner, 11.Therefore, only by not contending, 12.Thus no resentment. Isn't this a suggestion for what to do, emotionally, in a traffic jam. By flowing the principal of Lines 3 and 4 in Chapter 8 of the TAo Te Ching: 3. Water attends places where people disdain. 4. Hence, water is similar to Tao. 6. Good deep in the heart with peace and kind to others(by not getting upset with the traffic jam), 11.Therefore, only by not contending(with your temperament), 12.Thus no resentment. Edited July 10, 2012 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Protector Posted July 11, 2012 All the real Taoists live in the woods 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
julianlaboy Posted July 11, 2012 For the purposes of discussion I think I agree with Chidragon today in that one can say as you see it .. ..either what Taoism is what it is not You could be vague or precise , whichever you want you could be very inclusive or exclusive etc But there ARE meanings for the word and the practice There are folks who consider themselves Taoist and I for one consider myself to exist and I consider my practice to exist. Disagreements arising ?, sure, that happens. If the your book takes a stance as undefined as your post here... I dont think I will be reading it since it seems you are reluctant to stand up and make your point. Stosh That's the wonderful thing about Taoism. The Chuang Tzu, for example, makes very interesting arguments in favor of our uncritical use of language (to go to the point that Benster started using). Before our language-world, we cannot define with a precise and absolute manner anything in what we call world. That's why "there is nothing" is such a famous phrase here. Now, when we begin talking in the world of conventions (thanks to language, among other things), then we can come up with definitions, thanks to some consensus. You and your practice exist, I will not deny you that. You may call yourself "Taoist", good for you. I was just being careful with language here. As I said before, the problem comes with absolute definitions. There are meanings out there. One just has to will a meaning and there it is. I made my point, you- in particular- needed more elaboration. And regarding what you said about the book, that is OK by me. That wasn't for discussion here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
julianlaboy Posted July 11, 2012 Chapter 8 Translation in terse English: 1. High virtue is like water. 2. Water is good at benefiting all things without contend. 3. Attends places where people disdain. 4. Hence, water is similar to Tao. 5. Dwell in good selectable places, 6. Good deep in the heart with peace and kind to others, 7. Spoken words with trust, 8. Rule with benevolence, 9. Conduct affairs with best ability, 10.Take action in a timely manner, 11.Therefore, only by not contending, 12.Thus no resentment. Isn't this a suggestion for what to do, emotionally, in a traffic jam. By flowing the principal of Lines 3 and 4 in Chapter 8 of the TAo Te Ching: 3. Water attends places where people disdain. 4. Hence, water is similar to Tao. 6. Good deep in the heart with peace and kind to others(by not getting upset with the traffic jam), 11.Therefore, only by not contending(with your temperament), 12.Thus no resentment. I understand what you say. However, what about "he who talks, does not know; he who knows, does not talk"? "Talking" refers to what I was saying in my last post. Also, what about not following on the footsteps of someone because he/she is an "authority". The text may say that, but that text was an answer to the times, which there full of wars and corruption. Of course, there is always some kind of war or corruption, but I am talking about degrees here. Sometimes, people who called themselves Taoist went to live on woods (as the wonderful picture, sent by Sinfest, shows) because they felt that they could not be involved in such precarious times. At other times, people who called themselves Taoists went to serve the State. Who is a Taoist here, one who involves himself in State affairs, or one who goes to the woods to enjoy life there? We can read from Taoist texts that both are to be avoided and that both are good options. Which is the highest virtue? I believe it's difficult to answer that because we need more details about circumstances. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) At other times, people who called themselves Taoists went to serve the State. Someone calls oneself a Taoist may not be a true Taoist. BTW Anyone can call oneself a Taoist but has to be judged by one's action. A true Chinese Taoist does not go to serve the State nor get involve with politics. PS... A true Chinese Taoist is someone that believes in the principles of the Tao Te Ching or belongs to a Taoist religion. Edited July 11, 2012 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zerostao Posted July 11, 2012 "A true Chinese Taoist does not go to serve the State nor get involve with politics. " i dont know if this is totally accurate or not, but i really dig how it sounds. "A true Chinese Taoist is someone that believes in the principles of the Tao Te Ching or belongs to a Taoist religion." well those are 2 types of taoists Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
julianlaboy Posted July 11, 2012 Someone calls oneself a Taoist may not be a true Taoist. BTW Anyone can call oneself a Taoist but has to be judged by one's action. A true Chinese Taoist does not go to serve the State nor get involve with politics. PS... A true Chinese Taoist is someone that believes in the principles of the Tao Te Ching or belongs to a Taoist religion. No problem with those definitions. There are various degrees of being called "Taoist". However, one must be careful with calling oneself a "true" Taoist. That sounds kind of pretentious, and that goes against what one tends to read on Taoist texts. As for what a "true" Taoist may do, I have read the Taoist I-Ching, translated by Thomas Cleary, and it says that it is OK to participate in State affairs. When the times need it, when people need it, I don't see why a Taoist should not participate. And as for your PS, I disagree because that same Tao Te Ching tells that one should not follow a text for the sake of following. By that I mean that one should not see that book as Christians see the Bible. Sometimes one needs it, sometimes one does not. PS, I enjoy talking with you. I love your respect and I value your opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) "A true Chinese Taoist does not go to serve the State nor get involve with politics. " i dont know if this is totally accurate or not, but i really dig how it sounds. "A true Chinese Taoist is someone that believes in the principles of the Tao Te Ching or belongs to a Taoist religion." well those are 2 types of taoists Yes, there are two types of Taoists. One type is the scholars who study the pure principles in the Tao Te Ching. The other was those who interpret the Tao Te Ching as their canon for creating a religion. Edited July 11, 2012 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) No problem with those definitions. There are various degrees of being called "Taoist". However, one must be careful with calling oneself a "true" Taoist. That sounds kind of pretentious, and that goes against what one tends to read on Taoist texts. Like I said in the above post, a Taoist is a Taoist or not must be judged by one's action. As for what a "true" Taoist may do, I have read the Taoist I-Ching, translated by Thomas Cleary, and it says that it is OK to participate in State affairs. When the times need it, when people need it, I don't see why a Taoist should not participate. I-Ching is a piece of stand alone classical document which followed by the Taoist. It was not to be called a "Taoist I-Ching" but "I-Ching". And as for your PS, I disagree because that same Tao Te Ching tells that one should not follow a text for the sake of following. By that I mean that one should not see that book as Christians see the Bible. Sometimes one needs it, sometimes one does not. As a rule of thumb, Taoists will do whatever that is natural and "let Nature take its course". By all means, Taoists will try to cause no harm to Nature. This basic principle was advocated by Lao Tze which is called "Wu Wei". Of course, we do not follow the principles in the Tao Te Ching fanatically. PS, I enjoy talking with you. I love your respect and I value your opinion. Thank you very much. BTW... The principles in the Tao Te Ching were mainly advices for the rulers to rule with benevolence. However, the principles are too idealistic but not practical to be carried out by any politician. The purpose for Taoists in the Taoist religion was for a better health and longevity. They tend to stay close to Nature as naturalists, so to speak. That was why they don't want to get involve with politics. Of course, those Taoist priests with high wisdom were admired by the rulers and was asked to be the ruler's advisers. Indeed, some high priests were reluctant to help the ruler unless the ruler was really serious and sincere. Edited July 11, 2012 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted July 11, 2012 Yes, there are two types of Taoists. One type is the scholars who study the pure principles in the Tao Te Ching. The other was those who interpret the Tao Te Ching as their canon for creating a religion. You missed one but I have no idea how one would go about defining me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) You missed one but I have no idea how one would go about defining me. I am still trying very hard indeed........ Edited July 11, 2012 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stosh Posted July 11, 2012 (edited) The roots of Taoism go back beyond Lao Tzu SO the TTC cant really be said to define it in total. The established "churches" of Laoist taoism either used the texts exclusively ,or in part, but either way they had to interpret documentation to establish a traditional understanding Since you can read the stuff in the original as well You are just as valid as a source of tradition as they were! Im thinking the original actual texts were lost therefore all subsequent writings are interpretations and therefore subject to error and bias So..One would have to look at the spiritual value to determine validity therefore folks such as I or marblehead can also- may be legitimate followers of the original intents better than some dude in a monestary. I personally dont think that it was really aimed at rulers at all. Its figurative speech IMO Simply put, plenty of folks who have gone before me may never have gotten it right at all. You can call yourself to be part of the narrower definition , thats true - fair. But prove you guys got it right? I dont think so, theres plenty of room for dispute. The question anyone should ask themselves is if they are living well or better according to what they have learned from texts or traditions ,, and if the answer is yes You should just include yourself as part of the family regardless of the pedigree. Stosh Edited July 11, 2012 by Stosh Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) The whole theme of the Tao Te Ching was based on the concept of Wu Wei. Here are the steps of the logic: 1. Take no action 2. Take no abusive action 3. Take no abusive action to interfere 4. Take no abusive action to interfere with the course of Nature. oops..... sorry, edited by mistake. It cannot be restored what had been said. Edited July 24, 2012 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Marblehead Posted July 12, 2012 And ... 5. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. (I'm still trying to get a handle on this one.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
