Takaaki's "American Taoism"

[thinker]

So it would probably be useful to have a non-culture-specific description of Daoism.

[takaaki]

You can belittle him if you want.. but he is not a Taoist... he categorically stated as such. Others label him.

 

I was not belittling him. I was belittling you, for want of a better, inoffensive word.

 

John Chang didn't know and couldn't explain the things he could do. He came up with his spin based on his cultural background and a mix of Chinese Chi magic. You are impressionable and remind me of a Chi story.

 

After ten years of teaching his disciple at his West Lake temple in Hangzhuo, the Tao Master told his disciple, "It is time for you to leave. Don't return until you have realized the power of the Tao Te Ching."

 

Twenty years passed and one day, while the Tao Master was seated in meditation by the lake, his disciple ran up to him and announced excitedly, "Master, master, I have realized the power of the Tao Te Ching."

 

"And what is this power you have realized?" asked the Tao Master.

 

"Watch this," the disciple replied as he stepped out onto the lake and walked on its watery surface. When he was way out, he turned around, and, standing on the water, beamed at the old man, "What do you think, Master?"

 

"You spent all that time to learn how to do that? Why don't you just use a frigging boat?"

[takaaki]

Words in a book can be interesting but life is where we find Dao... The TTC may be a finger pointing to Dao... for those that need it. There are too many books out there to care about one book... and Dao is still known without books.

 

Forgive me for not pointing my finger directly at the moon. Let me rephrase my question.

 

I am not a Taoist. I can throw the Dao into the rubbish bin.

You say you are not a Taoist, can you throw the Dao into the rubbish bin?

 

And I mean, chucking all that crap attributed to Laozi aka Li Erh.

Edited February 9, 2013 by takaaki

[takaaki]

Have you have spent any time living with chinese or in china? For myself, I see much more going on than a simple case of a diffusion of responsibility.

 

But your welcome to have other conclusions based on any direct experience and discussions with hundreds who have similar experiences too.

 

Which is worse? Not lending a hand to help a little girl lying in the street in China or pushing a man onto the tracks of an oncoming train and watching him die in America?

 

I am not dissing any culture. I am curious to know how you think and form judgments in the tradition of Confucius.

[Marblehead]

The Catholic Church does a lot of good works among the sick, the poor and the uneducated all over the world.

One of the organizations I support is overseen by the Catholic Church.

[Marblehead]

So it would probably be useful to have a non-culture-specific description of Daoism.

Therein lies the biggest problem. To this date we still have not done that adequately.

[thinker]

Therein lies the biggest problem. To this date we still have not done that adequately.

Then perhaps it would be useful to attempt it here and now.

[Mr. T]

hey all,

 

you guys are re-inventing the wheel here. there already is a non-culture-specific description of tao, and a few of you were just talking about throwing it into the rubbish bin! which would be fine, of course...

 

the point i am making is that nowhere in the ttc does it say, "in china, it works like this". it could be argued, and probalby will be, that to understand some of the metaphors, one would need somebody who understands them. this would lead to the inevitable conclusion that this person must be chinese. i think we are to the point now where there have been truly wise english teachers who understand the text and have disseminated the teachings in an accurate fashion.

 

in summary, the ttc talks about tao and virtue, not china. call me naive, call me american, call me whatever, but that is how i see it. anyway, have a great saturday!

[takaaki]

hey all,

 

you guys are re-inventing the wheel here. there already is a non-culture-specific description of tao, and a few of you were just talking about throwing it into the rubbish bin! which would be fine, of course...

 

I didn't mean to be disrespectful. Throwing the Dao into the rubbish bin is another way of saying keeping the mind free from any influence.

 

 

the point i am making is that nowhere in the ttc does it say, "in china, it works like this".

 

You need to specify which version of the Tao Te Ching you are referring to. I suppose you are talking about one of the English versions.

 

 

 

the point i am making is that nowhere in the ttc does it say, "in china, it works like this". it could be argued, and probalby will be, that to understand some of the metaphors, one would need somebody who understands them. this would lead to the inevitable conclusion that this person must be chinese. i think we are to the point now where there have been truly wise english teachers who understand the text and have disseminated the teachings in an accurate fashion.

 

 

The Tao Te Ching, in Chinese, is reflective composition thick in metaphors using characters each of which has multiple meanings. For example, over in the Tao Te Ching forum on the study of Chapter 10, two verses were translated into English as follows:

 

In the opening and shutting of heaven's gates,

Are you able to play the feminine part?

 

ChiDragon, a Chinese, guided by his reading of the Chinese text, said that the above verses meant to ask whether one, in perceiving the outer world through the gates of one's senses, could stay unperturbed.

 

Aaron, a westerner who is an authority on the Tao Te Ching having studied it for twenty years, guided by his cultural background, said that the above verses meant to ask whether one could play the woman's part in sexual intercourse.

 

 

in summary, the ttc talks about tao and virtue, not china. call me naive, call me american, call me whatever, but that is how i see it. anyway, have a great saturday!

 

I reiterate my assumption that you are again referring to the English version of the Tao Te Ching. The Chinese version, which was written in ancient China, is steeped in Chinese culture and uses things, found only in China, as metaphors. "Tao" and "virtue" are as peculiar as chopsticks and dim sum. You would insist that you have western equivalents for eating implements and food snack and proceed to prove it by producing a set of knife and fork and a hamburger.

 

There is nothing wrong with studying the English version of the Tao Te Ching. But why would you insist that the English Tao Te Ching is the Chinese Tao Te Ching? I don't know what to call you but I am sure no American, no matter how naive, would be dumb enough to tell me to my face that the hamburger he stuffs into his mouth is a dim sum.

[thinker]

In order to be useful, a description of Daoism would have to be applicable without the need for significant amounts of non-trivial interpretation. For example, if I were trying to provide a description of Catholicism that could be used to answer the question "Is Joe a Catholic?", I might start out by referring to the Pope's pronouncements on matters of faith, and state that one necessary, but not sufficient, condition to be considered a Catholic is that one must abide by the Pope's statements on such matters. I might then provide a list of said statements, including statements regarding contraception, confession, etc. In order to have a useful description of Daoism that could be used to answer the question "Is this sect Daoist?" I must have a similar list of criteria by which Daoism is defined. In areas where there's no agreement, possibly because the DDJ (assuming that that's your only source) is too cryptic, I might have a collection of acceptable options. If it was impossible to get any agreement on what some part of the DDJ meant, it would have to be left out of the description entirely, at least for the moment.

 

I should note that it's inevitably at this point where discussions on this matter seem to break down. Generally for the same reasons. Some people find that Daoism is too vague to allow for a useful description, and some feel that even if one could generate such a description it would be wrong to do so, because it would allow for the exclusion of people who want to think of themselves as Daoist, but aren't. i.e. one group thinks that Daoism is not definable, the other group thinks that Daoism mandates that any form of exclusion is evil. Oddly, I've seen the same person express a dislike for the idea of a useful description of Daoism, while simultaneously lamenting the presence of charlatans who take people's money in return for fake Daoist training sessions. i have no idea how they expected to deal with the problem of Daoist scams without a useful set of criteria by which to determine if a given "teacher" is Daoist.

 

Perhaps it might be useful to begin with a comparison of specific cases. What are the differences between various schools of Daoism in China? Given some property (1) of Daoism, and a Daoist sect for which said property had the value 'a', and another Daoist sect for which said property had the value 'b', we might decide that one necessary condition for a sect to be considered Daoist was that property 1 had to have a value of either a or b. And so forth. Or we might start by drawing distinctions across religions. For example, I believe that there's a religion called Santeria that allows for religious animal sacrifices. By this I mean animal sacrifices such that the slain animal is not to be used for food, but is killed solely for the sake of the sacrifice. Does Daoism mandate this? Or allow it? If Daoism doesn't allow it, then we might state that one necessary condition for a sect to be considered Daoist is that it doesn't accept sacrificing animals for religious purposes.

 

Chip away at the marble block long enough and a statue should begin to emerge.

[ChiDragon]

hey all,

 

you guys are re-inventing the wheel here. there already is a non-culture-specific description of Tao, and a few of you were just talking about throwing it into the rubbish bin! which would be fine, of course...

 

the point i am making is that nowhere in the ttc does it say, "in china, it works like this". it could be argued, and probably will be, that to understand some of the metaphors, one would need somebody who understands them. this would lead to the inevitable conclusion that this person must be Chinese. i think we are to the point now where there have been truly wise English teachers who understand the text and have disseminated the teachings in an accurate fashion.

 

in summary, the TTC talks about Tao and virtue, not china. call me naive, call me American, call me whatever, but that is how i see it. anyway, have a great Saturday!

 

Metaphorically, you are saying:

Hey! Now, the TTC had been translated into English. That is the way it should be and non-culture-specific description of Tao. The English translations(not versions) are correct because "there have been truly wise English teachers who understand the text and have disseminated the teachings in an accurate fashion."

 

The "non-culture-specific description of Tao" was already infused with western influence. Therefore, the English translation has to be the "non-culture-specific description of Tao".

 

To make such metaphor, I must assume that the person already knew what the original text was all about. Unless otherwise, it was only a wise educational guess........

 

 

[ChiDragon]

In order to be useful, a description of Daoism would have to be applicable without the need for significant amounts of non-trivial interpretation.

 

I should note that it's inevitably at this point where discussions on this matter seem to break down. Generally for the same reasons. Some people find that Daoism is too vague to allow for a useful description, and some feel that even if one could generate such a description it would be wrong to do so, because it would allow for the exclusion of people who want to think of themselves as Daoist, but aren't. i.e. one group thinks that Daoism is not definable, the other group thinks that Daoism mandates that any form of exclusion is evil. Oddly, I've seen the same person express a dislike for the idea of a useful description of Daoism, while simultaneously lamenting the presence of charlatans who take people's money in return for fake Daoist training sessions. i have no idea how they expected to deal with the problem of Daoist scams without a useful set of criteria by which to determine if a given "teacher" is Daoist.

 

Perhaps it might be useful to begin with a comparison of specific cases. What are the differences between various schools of Daoism in China? Given some property (1) of Daoism, and a Daoist sect for which said property had the value 'a', and another Daoist sect for which said property had the value 'b', we might decide that one necessary condition for a sect to be considered Daoist was that property 1 had to have a value of either a or b. And so forth. Or we might start by drawing distinctions across religions. For example, I believe that there's a religion called Santeria that allows for religious animal sacrifices. By this I mean animal sacrifices such that the slain animal is not to be used for food, but is killed solely for the sake of the sacrifice. Does Daoism mandate this? Or allow it? If Daoism doesn't allow it, then we might state that one necessary condition for a sect to be considered Daoist is that it doesn't accept sacrificing animals for religious purposes.

 

Chip away at the marble block long enough and a statue should begin to emerge.

 

There are some people who already knew what Taoism is all about. Thus the questions in your post wouldn't be needed to be asked. The problem I see it, here, that people argue because they do not have the desirable knowledge.

Edited February 9, 2013 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

Chip away at the marble block long enough and a statue should begin to emerge.

But don't be trying to chip away on my marble head!

[三江源]

I didn't mean to be disrespectful.

~ takaaki, questioning, debating, challenging is what this discussion forum is for. Disrespecting members is against the rules. You have been reported for belittlling and demeaning the participants of this thread. Please limit yourself to debating the topic at hand rather than the character or intelligence or nature of the posters discussing.~

 

mod team

[JustARandomPanda]

Does one need to read ancient chinese in order to understand TTC? It's my understanding that modern chinese find ancient chinese difficult to read and understand. About like asking average english speakers to read and understand ancient anglo-saxon.

[ChiDragon]

Please do not remove takaaki from the forum. We need to hear some negative comments to balance out the objective point of view. Personally, I do not wish just to hear everybody agrees with everything that everybody says. Any contradictory statement was considered to be disrespectful is not the way to go in a Taoist forum. IMMHO The words used here as long as they are not too disparaging should be tolerated to some extent.

Edited February 9, 2013 by ChiDragon

[thinker]

Does one need to read ancient chinese in order to understand TTC? It's my understanding that modern chinese find ancient chinese difficult to read and understand. About like asking average english speakers to read and understand ancient anglo-saxon.

IMHO Yes. I got far more mileage out of my attempts to translate the DDJ when I started using etymological dictionaries with historical usages of the words.

[ChiDragon]

Does one need to read ancient chinese in order to understand TTC? It's my understanding that modern chinese find ancient chinese difficult to read and understand. About like asking average english speakers to read and understand ancient anglo-saxon.

 

Yes, it does. One need to read ancient chinese in order to understand TTC.

 

"t's my understanding that modern chinese find ancient chinese difficult to read and understand."

You've just answered your own question....

[JustARandomPanda]

 

Yes, it does. One need to read ancient chinese in order to understand TTC.

 

"t's my understanding that modern chinese find ancient chinese difficult to read and understand."

You've just answered your own question....

 

Ok. So the average chinese off the streets of Beijing is not able to read and understand TTC.

[JustARandomPanda]

Another question.

 

Is TTC in ancient chinese discussing something that can be known without needing to read at all?

[ChiDragon]

Ok. So the average chinese off the streets of Beijing is not able to read and understand TTC.

FYI There are lots of Chinese off the streets of Beijing don't even know that the TTC ever existed.

 

Another question.

 

Is TTC in ancient chinese discussing something that can be known without needing to read at all?

Hmmmm,....How can a discussion be initiated, without any knowledge of, to begin with....???

 

 

[dwai]

Metaphorically, you are saying:

Hey! Now, the TTC had been translated into English. That is the way it should be and non-culture-specific description of Tao. The English translations(not versions) are correct because "there have been truly wise English teachers who understand the text and have disseminated the teachings in an accurate fashion."

The "non-culture-specific description of Tao" was already infused with western influence. Therefore, the English translation has to be the "non-culture-specific description of Tao".

To make such metaphor, I must assume that the person already knew what the original text was all about. Unless otherwise, it was only a wise educational guess........

 

I cannot speak with authority about the state of translations of chinese texts into englsh but i can say that most of the translators and commentators on indian texts did not really know the native languages and either worked off the works of the few that did or had native scholars translate the works into english or german and worked off them.

 

As far as DDJ goes, our grandmaster Master Waysun Liao translates and comments on it quite different from translations i have read. For instance he suggests hat the "Te" is not "virtue" in the literal sense but rather refer to an imprint of "tao" within us. It is an energetic condition and has nothing to do with the "moralistic" virtue non-chinese take it to be.

[Marblehead]

 

Yes, it does. One need to read ancient chinese in order to understand TTC.

 

Naw. I just let you and Henricks do the hard work for me.

[ChiDragon]

As far as DDJ goes, our grandmaster Master Waysun Liao translates and comments on it quite different from translations i have read. For instance he suggests hat the "Te" is not "virtue" in the literal sense but rather refer to an imprint of "tao" within us. It is an energetic condition and has nothing to do with the "moralistic" virtue non-chinese take it to be.

 

That is exactly how I understood about Te in the TTC. I am glad some people do understand it that way.

[ChiDragon]

Naw. I just let you and Henricks do the hard work for me.

 

Yes, you're lazy son of a gun........