The Dao as a deistic, rather than pantheistic concept?

[silas]

>>

Dao gives birth to One.

One gives birth to Two. (Yin/Yang)

Two gives birth to Three (Yin/Yan/Qi)

Three gives birth to the Ten Thousand Things (everything else).

>>

 

To give birth does not require intelligence. Giving birth could be a function of Tao that happens without any intention. Just as when women give birth naturally, they do not intend to give birth - it happens when it happens.

 

These verses from the TTC ch. 42 actually describe spontaneous creation - which also does not require intelligence. The One and the Two spontaneously spit by themselves. After the formation of the Three, they interact spontaneously (without Tao) to create everything.

Edited March 4, 2013 by silas

[taijistudent]

>>

Dao gives birth to One.

One gives birth to Two. (Yin/Yang)

Two gives birth to Three (Yin/Yan/Qi)

Three gives birth to the Ten Thousand Things (everything else).

>>

 

To give birth does not require intelligence. Giving birth could be a function of Tao that happens without any intention. Just as when women give birth naturally, they do not intend to give birth - it happens when it happens.

 

These verses from the TTC ch. 42 actually describe spontaneous creation - which also does not require intelligence. The One and the Two spontaneously spit by themselves. After the formation of the Three, they interact spontaneously (without Tao) to create everything.

There is the quiet nothingness that we slip into during the duration between dreams. Then there is the sense of awareness, creativity and the desire to share that is within us when we are awake. And then there is the dream state which is somewhere in betwee. All of this I believe provides clues as to the nature of the origin. I do not believe that the Dao is elusive (we are part of it) nor must we follow it (we are part of it), nor must we seek to return to it (we are part of it). We are all aware of it (ourselves) but it is indeed difficult to understand. In Hindu it is called the Maya-Lila (Hidden Play).

Edited March 4, 2013 by taijistudent

[silas]

>>I do not believe that the Dao is elusive (we are part of it) nor must we follow it (we are part of it), nor must we seek to return to it (we are part of it). We are all aware of it (ourselves) but it is indeed difficult to understand. In Hindu it is called the Maya-Lila (Hidden Play)

>>

 

In classical Taoism, we are part of the matrix of creation - the One Two Three of the TTC 42 - because we are all formed of the condensed energy from that matrix. At death, one's Te (soul - not the energy essences called hun and po) could return to the matrix (Great Yin/Great Yang) or return to actual origin - the deep, profoundly empty, elusive Tao. Because there are 2 routes to return (both Great Yin/Great Yang and Tao itself are called Tao in the scriptures), if one seeks primary origin, one must attain Tao-nature by stilling the self.

 

In classical Taoism, we can be aware of the movement of Tao and of Tao currents within the matrix of creation. In classical Taoism, microcosm follows macrocosm (TTC ch. 25) - not necessarily with precision, but to follow macrocosm is to achieve harmony.

Edited March 4, 2013 by silas

[drifting cloud]

Panendeism denotes a "watchmaker" aristotelian principle making God who is the whole universe, but also transcends it. He doesn't interfere with the world as a theistic God would (Christianity, Islam, Judaism).\

 

The word is in no way incoherent and it denotes concepts such as the native American Great Spirit (Wakan Tanka).

 

And how the word looks or sounds like is completely unimportant.

 

Ontological principle denotes something like the heraclitean logos - a cosmic law which pervades everything.

 

A "watchmaker" is covered by the term "Deism". The concept of an all pervasive watchmaker is just kind of silly, don't you think?

 

Wakan Tanka is definitely not Deist or panendeist. That is a Western distortion.

 

Rather than trying to understand dao in terms of Western concepts, why not take it as it is presented in the DDJ?

 

Better yet, practice and find out directly what it is.

[ChiDragon]

 

Rather than trying to understand dao in terms of Western concepts, why not take it as it is presented in the DDJ?

 

Better yet, practice and find out directly what it is.

 

Yes, good idea. I think the OP is indicating that the author is not familiar with the DDJ yet.

[dawei]

Rather than trying to understand dao in terms of Western concepts, why not take it as it is presented in the DDJ?

 

Or even the earlier traditions and texts, like Nei Ye and Shen Dao, which Lao Zi takes from...

 

and later is the Wenzi and Huainanzi

 

I don't think you'll get the complete picture if you read one book of anything.

 

That might be like suggesting to go to one book of the bible to find out about God... although one has to start somewhere.

[Marblehead]

More often than not it is best to start at the beginning.

 

And then, oftentimes after a very long and trying journey we realize that we have returned to the beginning.

[ChiDragon]

More often than not it is best to start at the beginning.

 

And then, oftentimes after a very long and trying journey we realize that we have returned to the beginning.

 

It sounds like something was said in Chapters 16 and 25.

[Marblehead]

 

It sounds like something was said in Chapters 16 and 25.

Hehehe. Pretty much. Not trying to take credit for something I didn't originate though. I do hold to the concepts of cycles and reversion.

 

A straight line is nothing less than a circle that has lost its way. (That's mine. Hehehe.)

[PLB]

Maybe we don't have access to the answer of the question of whether the Tao is like this or like that.

The classic texts make fun of people trying to make it fit inside tents, people, or paragraphs.

There is much emphasis upon the limits of language.

 

But there is also the clearly expressed desire to change the way we talk about things.

[taijistudent]

Maybe we don't have access to the answer of the question of whether the Tao is like this or like that.

The classic texts make fun of people trying to make it fit inside tents, people, or paragraphs.

There is much emphasis upon the limits of language.

 

But there is also the clearly expressed desire to change the way we talk about things.

There are many ways to interpret the Dao De Jing symbols, especially in light of the changes in symbol meaning over the centuries. All translators and translations bring their own interpretations, biases, perspectives, and sometimes an element of "marketing". We each are drawn to the Dao in our own way.

[PLB]

taijistudent,

Your statement is a well balanced response to my assertion. People all have their own interpretations, including myself, and that is a good thing. It means the idea is alive, personal and communal at the same time.

But I think there is value in listening to the voices in the tradition who challenged the distinctions we like to make a priori. Asking us to look how we separate things and how do we go about verifying what has been thought.

 

I love reading Zhuangzi because he has so little patience for anything that doesn't have a person doing all they can to make their life better. He says flat out that certain kinds of arguments will never help you. I don't completely agree with him but he has put the burden of proof on me if I disagree.

 

Zhuangzi wants to see some skin in the game if some one wants to know the difference between this and that.

And, er, yes; that is a personal interpretation.

Edited March 20, 2013 by PLB

[3bob]

Hmm, was the teaching quoted below brought up or forgotten...? (among all the other things brought up)

 

"Yuan-shih T'ien-tsun -- The First Principal

Although Yu-huang is the High God, there are other abstract deities above him. He rules; they simply exist and instruct. First and foremost is Yuan-shih T'ien-tsun - the First Principal. He has no beginning and no end. He existed "before the void and the silence, before primordial chaos." He is self-existing, changeless, limitless, invisible, contains all virtues, is present in all places and is the source of all truth."

Edited March 20, 2013 by 3bob

[Marblehead]

I simply ignore that stuff.

[zerostao]

" A straight line is nothing less than a circle that has lost its way."

i know i am gonna use that one a few times, hehehe

and not only at baguazhang get togethers