Takaaki's "American Taoism"

[SEEKER OF TRUTH]

If you think about it, society has changed in two thousand years, people have changed, beliefs have changed, science has changed - everything changes, except maybe the fact that everything changes, that seems to have remained unchanged.

 

I think everything else will evolve, it has too, or it eventually dies out from being, at least in part, obsolete . I don't think religion and philosophy are exempt.

 

What was obscure and mystical two thousand years ago, might be common knowledge today, or in a hundred years from now. It's OK though, there are still some wonderful insights in the TTC and I will be eternally grateful for what it has given me, but I'm sure there is more new stuff to come, that will be more relevant in the present day.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's not like I want to go visit the the next country, from where I hear those roosters crowing right now, I'm pretty content where I'm at, but some day......

[Mark Saltveit]

Dwai wrote:

 

If Goethe was a result of nazi philosophy then you would by association. Or you would not like Goethe...

Goethe preceeded the Nazis, just as Laozi and Zhuangzi preceeded the Celestial Masters and other Daoist sects. But I don't think one has to accept the entire tradition and all its "cultural baggage," as you suggest, to like the original thinkers. (Substitute Nietszche for Goethe, or Kaiser Wilhelm for Hitler if you like - the point is the same.)

Why aren't we free to pick and choose philosophers we like?
Can't a Chinese citizen like Plato without liking Aristotle, or the fascist movement gaining power in Greece today?

For that matter, Laozi wasn't Chinese. He lived in the Kingdom of Chu. What right do these Chinese imperialists have to appropriate him, just because they conquered Chu?

Edited January 29, 2013 by Mark Saltveit

[dwai]

Dwai wrote:

 

 

Goethe preceeded the Nazis, just as Laozi and Zhuangzi preceeded the Celestial Masters and other Daoist sects. But I don't think one has to accept the entire tradition and all its "cultural baggage," as you suggest, to like the original thinkers. (Substitute Nietszche for Goethe, or Kaiser Wilhelm for Hitler if you like - the point is the same.)

 

Why aren't we free to pick and choose philosophers we like?

Can't a Chinese citizen like Plato without liking Aristotle, or the fascist movement gaining power in Greece today?

 

For that matter, Laozi wasn't Chinese. He lived in the Kingdom of Chu. What right do these Chinese imperialists have to appropriate him, just because they conquered Chu?

 

I'm not against liking a philosopher or a tradition sans the cultural details. However creating a hodge-podge philosophy based on an existing system and then calling it a hyphenated-ism is hypocritical.

It is a pathway to appropriation and eventually packaging and marketing to create systems so far removed from the source that it will breed generations of misguided souls.

 

You will get things like Christian yoga, Christian tai chi, etc...

[Mark Saltveit]

Well, I'm no fan of the "Tao of Elvis" or "The Tao of Meow." (I did like the Trappist monk Thomas Merton's version of Zhuangzi, though. In part because he warned against "trying to pull a Christian rabbit from a Taoist hat" in interpreting Zhuang's words.)

 

I have the sense that you are criticizing some particular thing or person, when you talk about "creating a hodge-podge philososphy" and Christian appropriation, but I'm not sure exactly what. that might be.

 

I'm honestly unclear what people mean by appropriation, as opposed to reading, understanding and interpreting a thinker or tradition that they like. Isn't the exchange of ideas across cultures a good thing? Appropriation seems to mean, "the other guy published a book that I wanted to publish." Many Chinese writers are exploring Western ideas (and technologies); is that appropriation too?

[dwai]

Well, I'm no fan of the "Tao of Elvis" or "The Tao of Meow." (I did like the Trappist monk Thomas Merton's version of Zhuangzi, though. In part because he warned against "trying to pull a Christian rabbit from a Taoist hat" in interpreting Zhuang's words.)

 

I have the sense that you are criticizing some particular thing or person, when you talk about "creating a hodge-podge philososphy" and Christian appropriation, but I'm not sure exactly what. that might be.

 

I'm honestly unclear what people mean by appropriation, as opposed to reading, understanding and interpreting a thinker or tradition that they like. Isn't the exchange of ideas across cultures a good thing? Appropriation seems to mean, "the other guy published a book that I wanted to publish." Many Chinese writers are exploring Western ideas (and technologies); is that appropriation too?

 

Appropriation process is like this -

 

1) learn from a traditional source

2) create your own version of the tradition

3) gradually eliminate syntax, concepts that you are not comfortable with from your system

4) package and market your system as being original and unique (often deriding the original source)

5) deny all references to the roots

 

Like the bozos who tried to patent turmeric, yoga Poses etc.

Edited January 29, 2013 by dwai

[Mark Saltveit]

Well, 1 and 2 are fine, right? 3 is a fine line between "eliminate syntax" and "translate." Frankly, I find it kind of pretentious when people insist on using foreign terms, e.g. sanskrit and the like, unless there is no good equivalent in the language. In my view, it's also a form of appropriation when people use foreign phrases inaptly, brandishing them like a sword of authenticity.

 

90% of the time, when a Western writer mentions "wu-wei," they have not made their meaning clear. (Hint: it's also difficult in the original Classical Chinese.) It comes off as if they don't really grasp the complexity of the term, and just throw up their hands like, "You know, wu wei dude!"

 

4 and 5, I don't know who you're referring to. Even the most inept pop packagings of Daoism in the United States "brand" their work as Daoist. it's all "The Tao of Steve" and "The Tao of Wu" [Tang Clan], to a fault. Even the most ardent advocates of the superiority of philosophical Daoism, if that's who you're referring to, do not dismiss the Daodejing or Zhuangzi. The only person I've ever seen put down the DDJ is Russell Kirkland, that most impassioned critique of Western appropriation of Daoism.

[Stigweard]

Meh ... genetic mutations are a natural part of evolution

 

NO FOUL !!! PLAY ON !!!

 

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

if the janitor don't mind cleaning it up then...

[Marblehead]

Once the concepts have been grasped the words may be forgotten, whether they were English, Chinese, or Arabic.

[dwai]

Well, 1 and 2 are fine, right? 3 is a fine line between "eliminate syntax" and "translate." Frankly, I find it kind of pretentious when people insist on using foreign terms, e.g. sanskrit and the like, unless there is no good equivalent in the language. In my view, it's also a form of appropriation when people use foreign phrases inaptly, brandishing them like a sword of authenticity.

 

90% of the time, when a Western writer mentions "wu-wei," they have not made their meaning clear. (Hint: it's also difficult in the original Classical Chinese.) It comes off as if they don't really grasp the complexity of the term, and just throw up their hands like, "You know, wu wei dude!"

 

4 and 5, I don't know who you're referring to. Even the most inept pop packagings of Daoism in the United States "brand" their work as Daoist. it's all "The Tao of Steve" and "The Tao of Wu" [Tang Clan], to a fault. Even the most ardent advocates of the superiority of philosophical Daoism, if that's who you're referring to, do not dismiss the Daodejing or Zhuangzi. The only person I've ever seen put down the DDJ is Russell Kirkland, that most impassioned critique of Western appropriation of Daoism.

 

Daoism is relatively insulated now but it might go the path of yoga and Vedanta.

 

It is only a matter of time.

 

As far as foreign terms are concerned -- well they aren't that foreign in the original tradition that you are raiding. Moreover, what's your equivalent for words like prana, Qi, prajna, dharma, Wu wei etc?

 

There are many such words that are really untranslatable. there is no single word in english to describe it. The words that are being used today are inadequate and actually quiet wrong. Those who understand the native languages know what that means...there are cultural contexts that define certain terms (which one cannot possibly grok from the outside).

 

@stig --

 

Genetic mutations might be natural but they must not turn away from the root or they run the risk of becoming grotesque

Edited January 29, 2013 by dwai

[ShenLung]

I do not believe that there is a brush so wide that it could paint such a thing as an 'American Taoist'. Coming up with a narrow set of definitions may well be the result of failing to understand America itself, which is fairly common, even in America! For starters, there are over 300 million people in the United States, Most of whom are either immigrants from any number of nations around the world, or descended from such immigrants. Each group brings along with them elements of their own cultures, which become assimilated into the whole gradually. I have a Southwestern Pioneer breakfast, a Greek lunch, and Chinese dinner ... although it can easily change from day to day to Italian, Polish, or Mexican .. it all depends on the mood - the entire world is represented here in some way or another.

 

Compassion is not a communist virtue. In reality, there are very few communists anywhere in the world ... The Soveit Union, China, North Korea, these are not, in fact, communist nations, although they are called such; They are socialist nations that became thus by exploitation of the communist ideal to decieve their populations into transferring power to a limited set of elites who decide how to 'redistribute' the nation's wealth. There is nothing compassionate about that. When people strive for self reliance, they obtain the ability to be free from desperate individual needs, and are therefore free to excercise compassion for those who do not enjoy such freedom, if they so choose. In American politics, there are perhaps 15-20% who are devoted to the National Socialist Right, another 15-20% devoted to the Democratic Socialist Left, and around 15-20% who will be unhappy with our government regardless of which side manages to get 'elected'. The remainder don't care, so long as everything still works, mostly.

 

Frugality was a quality highly prized by the founders of the United States, and it is not an expression of fear, but a preparation to experience abundance; For when one does not waste what one has, one has more, and having more, is in a better position to be of use to others. For a time, Americans departed from frugality, and large portions of the population still live in excess, but the tide is turning; People are rediscovering the meaning of "Waste not, want not", and "Look after the pennies, and the pounds will look after themselves" either by desire or neccessity.

 

I suppose a mousey person might see American women, and regard them as 'battle axes', and there is no shortage of mousey men here, as well ... In the Southwest, we like to laugh at the city slickers in their tight jeans and makeup -! Yet, if there are strong and independant women, there are a great number of men who are every bit their equal. We generally walk gently, and don't make too much of a fuss, getting only mildly preturbed from time to time; When we are aroused to anger, the world will absolutely remember the qualities of American men.

 

The patterns of speech and dialect from the far North east to the Southwest are very different, and although both are nominally speaking English, a person from Maine and a person from Oklahoma might well be from entirely different countries. From one house to another, ideas change and culture differs ... even the translations of TTC are varied from the literal to the poetic, and if we wind up with different views of Tao, it would be no surprise.

 

In summary, No, there is not such a thing as an 'American Taoist'. There are Taoists who are American, each an individual.

[Mark Saltveit]

Moreover, what's your equivalent for words like prana, Qi, prajna, dharma, Wu wei etc? There are many such words that are really untranslatable. there is no single word in english to describe it.

 

There's no word in Chinese that captures wu wei, either. That's why that Dao can't be Dao'ed, and they had to resort to a mystical paradox like that to signify it. Volumes have been written, both in China and the West, trying to unpack those two characters.

 

As someone -- Bokenkamp? -- wrote, the difficulty in Daoism is not translating the characters. The difficulty is understanding what they mean (in any language).

Edited January 29, 2013 by Mark Saltveit

[manitou]

Once the concepts have been grasped the words may be forgotten, whether they were English, Chinese, or Arabic.

 

Perfectly said, as I see it. I personally have found 'my' greatest wisdom by overlaying every tradition I have studied. I am metaphysical, used to be traditional Chrstian, Castaneda shamanic, Taoistic,Buddhistic, Yogic, and rather Zen-like.

 

It doesn't matter what we call ourselves. The overlay of all the viable traditions will show a commonality of essence which is true of all of them - they lead to the One. I see the One as the center of a wheel, the hub, and I often feel that The Tao Bums sits in the hub of the wheel - because we represent so very many traditions and paths who make it to the same lilypad because of one piece of literature we've discovered: the Tao te Ching. Perhaps this is so because the more we follow the path we're on, the more the extraneous dogma and fairy-tale folklore of the religions is peeled away; the truth remains, and will remain in the center of our quest as long as we're searching.

 

The beauty of the TTC is that of all the tomes that I've ever read, the TTC has the least structure or requirement of a specific mindset...as opposed to the Bible or the Bagavhad Gita, etc. There is no lore whatsoever. It is all wisdom; and like all true wisdom, it seems to run absolutely opposite to what we've been led to believe up to this point.

 

I do like the word Pioneer that someone mentioned earlier in the thread - I feel like a pioneer because I like to put my brain to the stuff I read. I like to find connections between Taoism and Buddhism and new age shamanism and sometimes I set up camp right in the middle. I don't want anybody or any tradition telling my brain what to think; but I am so very grateful that I've been a seeker all my life; just a seeker for the truth, that's all. It even reflected in my physical career: a detective. But that was just on the physical level. The real detecting has always taken place in the upper realms.

 

And I've gleaned from all, each and every one. And the very most I received from the 12 step inner work because I was a pathetic alcoholic many years ago. This just goes to how life takes us exactly where we're supposed to go to find what it is we aren't even aware we're looking for.

 

I say mix it all up. Comparative everything, rather than stiff adherence to any one path. We were given these incredible brains for a purpose, and this right here may be the very purpose we were given it.

[ChiDragon]

 

There are many such words that are really untranslatable. there is no single word in english to describe it. The words that are being used today are inadequate and actually quiet wrong. Those who understand the native languages know what that means...there are cultural contexts that define certain terms (which one cannot possibly grok from the outside).

 

You are a gentleman and a scholar.....

[ChiDragon]

There's no word in Chinese that captures wu wei, either. That's why that Dao can't be Dao'ed, and they had to resort to a mystical paradox like that to signify it. Volumes have been written, both in China and the West, trying to unpack those two characters.

 

無為(Wu Wei): 不妄為(no abusive action)

 

The philosophy behind Wu Wei is to take no abusive action to interfere with Nature. Let Nature take its course.

[dawei]

There's no word in Chinese that captures wu wei, either. That's why that Dao can't be Dao'ed, and they had to resort to a mystical paradox like that to signify it. Volumes have been written, both in China and the West, trying to unpack those two characters.

 

As someone -- Bokenkamp? -- wrote, the difficulty in Daoism is not translating the characters. The difficulty is understanding what they mean (in any language).

 

I do think we run some risk once we go down any definition of an 'ism'... but I do think the fact is: Anyone can define their own 'ism' if they want to... it may not be how it started out or where it turns when it hits Europe either... But this is just the 'ism' problem; how to define itself.

 

I see it differently when we get to an understanding of something more universal like Dao or Wu Wei. While there is mystical paradox at play, the meaning is more important than the words. Getting beyond a 'practice of words' is the key, IMO. At that point, there are no cultural-specific issues; it is simply an imbedded realization and understanding without words. In fact, words may be causing the problem as it side-tracks us from experiencing it.

[Marblehead]

 

無為(Wu Wei): 不妄為(no abusive action)

 

Let Nature take its course.

Unless it is a weed growing in one of my flower beds; the sucker has to be gone!

[ChiDragon]

Unless it is a weed growing in one of my flower beds; the sucker has to be gone!

 

Well, killing weeds was not considered to be abusive in LaoTze's philosophy but killing people would be....

[Mark Saltveit]

Depending on the person. There was some case years ago where a guy was terrorizing his town, killing raping and beating people. One day a large crowd assembled, he ended up dead, no witnesses. Someone told a reporter, "Some people just need killing."

[manitou]

As someone -- Bokenkamp? -- wrote, the difficulty in Daoism is not translating the characters. The difficulty is understanding what they mean (in any language).

 

 

This makes imminent sense to me. Only an enlightened one can see another enlightened one. Or as a little kid would say "It takes one to know one, nah nah nah na naaah nah! This is why i believe understanding this wonderful tome is best done by triangulating multiple translators, and then applying your own brain to the mix. Every translator is not at the same level of enlightenment as the next one, if at all.

 

There are several works I read at regular intervals, perhaps yearly (the TTC included). There are just some books that are viewed at different levels every time it is read, because our eyes are at a higher level. Reading these works are like reading them for the first time - each time. because my eyes are different each time.

Edited January 30, 2013 by manitou

[ChiDragon]

Depending on the person. There was some case years ago where a guy was terrorizing his town, killing raping and beating people. One day a large crowd assembled, he ended up dead, no witnesses. Someone told a reporter, "Some people just need killing."

 

The original philosophy was intended for the killer to begin with. If the killer had followed the principles of Tao, then the events wouldn't have been taken place. BTW LaoTze's philosophy about Wu Wei was more concerned about the abusive action against the good other than the bad. There is a profound subtlety in his philosophy.

Edited January 30, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Birch]

I do think we run some risk once we go down any definition of an 'ism'... but I do think the fact is: Anyone can define their own 'ism' if they want to... it may not be how it started out or where it turns when it hits Europe either... But this is just the 'ism' problem; how to define itself.

 

I see it differently when we get to an understanding of something more universal like Dao or Wu Wei. While there is mystical paradox at play, the meaning is more important than the words. Getting beyond a 'practice of words' is the key, IMO. At that point, there are no cultural-specific issues; it is simply an imbedded realization and understanding without words. In fact, words may be causing the problem as it side-tracks us from experiencing it.

 

Words can also be a solution, as they might point a way to a different experience. I was contemplating gods earlier and figured if they did disappear, whole swathes of human experience might also. But maybe not. Umberto Ecco is a great guide in this respect.

[dawei]

Words can also be a solution, as they might point a way to a different experience. I was contemplating gods earlier and figured if they did disappear, whole swathes of human experience might also. But maybe not. Umberto Ecco is a great guide in this respect.

 

You may be on to something about such appearances vs disappearances of gods and men... Not sure if that is an analogy to this topic or another topic to discuss... but something about it resonates

[dwai]

 

I do think we run some risk once we go down any definition of an 'ism'... but I do think the fact is: Anyone can define their own 'ism' if they want to... it may not be how it started out or where it turns when it hits Europe either... But this is just the 'ism' problem; how to define itself.

 

I see it differently when we get to an understanding of something more universal like Dao or Wu Wei. While there is mystical paradox at play, the meaning is more important than the words. Getting beyond a 'practice of words' is the key, IMO. At that point, there are no cultural-specific issues; it is simply an imbedded realization and understanding without words. In fact, words may be causing the problem as it side-tracks us from experiencing it.

 

Dawei,

 

It is true, but is it not also true that you need the syntax in the beginning?

 

How easy would Dao be to understand without the dao de jing? If Lao tzu had not left the teachings behind would the process of being in the way be easier or harder?

 

Would it be acceptable to take DDJ piecemeal and create something else from it, call it the American daoist guide?

 

What we are discussing here is really about the stages that lead up to the dissolution of concepts and percepts...the science behind the art so to speak.

 

 

Edited January 30, 2013 by dwai

[Birch]

I should mention, as I said to Apech, God is just another god that has gone too far for his own boots (not without cooperation from men. I suppose I ought to be 'PC' and say men and women though, but I don't believe it).