Why Taoism?

[silas]

I noticed that you keep referring to "classical Taosism" when you are actually talking about "Philosophical Daoism".

 

Wang Keping and D. C. Lau belong to what Drifting Cloud referred to as "Barnes & Noble" Daoists.

 

I know that labelling is not politically-correct but we need to know what we are referring to, especially over the internet where words are all we have to use in discussion.

 

Philosophical Daoism is the western version derived from popular English translations published in the west (typically by the likes of Barnes & Noble). So, in this forum there are Barnes & Noble Daoists, mainly westerners and western-educated Asians like me, who study and expound Philosophical Daoism.

 

Classical Taoism is based on classical Chinese texts on the Tao Te Ching, as well as, other classical literature of Chinese anitquity, and practised, mainly, by the Chinese according to the Pakua explained in this thread by Mo Tzu. So, in this forum there are Classical Taoist practitioners like Taomeow.

 

Flowing Hands is an anomaly in this forum, a hybrid. He is a westerner who is a Taoist practitioner who based his Daoism on a direct transmission in English from Lao Tzu.

 

Now that we have everything squared away, it would be helpful in avoiding confusion if you use the correct term of reference.

 

Wang Keping and D.C. Lau are professors; their translations are known to be accurate, modern translations, and I quote them (and several others) whose translations do not violate the basic tenets of classical Taoism.

 

What I call classical Taoism religion is based on the books of philosophical Taoism, a category that was created by China's own scholars and originally contained the books Tao Te Ching and Chuang Tzu. According to scholars, the Lieh Tzu contains some of the lost chapters of the Chuang Tzu.

 

The Tao Te Ching and the Chuang Tzu and Lieh Tzu lessons belong together because they teach the same philosophy. Other ancient texts like the Yellow Emperor classics, the Huainzi, the Wenzi have some teachings that agree with the classical texts, but also have many teachings that do not completely agree or outright disagree.

 

In the past, the classical texts alone were said not to describe a full religion, but I say that they do and interpret the texts to uncover the religion. In the past, for example, people said that philosophical Taoism was not about morality and you had to study elsewhere for an understanding of morality. However, classical Taoism includes moral understanding, if you look for it.

 

Most discussion in these forums is about qigong and energy development, but these subjects are mostly ignored in the classical texts. Concepts from the texts like following one's inborn nature and destiny are mostly ignored in these forums, but they are the main means of self cultivation in the classical texts. I read what I can (I am dyslexic and the posts in these forums tend to be very wordy) about qigong here, but am more interested in the practice of classical Taoism.

Edited March 12, 2013 by silas

[chenping]

A woman can only act as a wet-nurse if she is lactating. It was once believed that a wet-nurse must have recently undergone childbirth. This is not necessarily true, as regular breast suckling can elicit lactation via a neural reflex of prolactin production and secretion. Some adoptive mothers have been able to establish lactation using a breast pump so that they could feed an adopted infant.

Dr Gabrielle Palmer states:

"There is no medical reason why women should not lactate indefinitely or feed more than one child simultaneously (known as 'tandem feeding')... some women could theoretically be able to feed up to five babies."

 

I have no problem with Dr Gabrielle Palmer's statement. A wet nurse could suckle babies all her life after nature had kick-started the process after her first child was born. To continue feeding other babies indefinitely would be an unnatural abusive thing to do and she would pay a heavy toll on the part of her body.

 

Kick-starting the milk production on a virgin girl sounds bizarre. Who would even think of this? But then, we humans are a compassionate lot who believe in equal rights. We would even fund research into kick-starting lactation in gay men now that we have accepted Elton John and his husband's rights to have babies.

[chenping]

Most discussion in these forums is about qigong and energy development, but these subjects are mostly ignored in the classical texts. Concepts from the texts like following one's inborn nature and destiny are mostly ignored in these forums, but they are the main means of self cultivation in the classical texts. I read what I can (I am dyslexic and the posts in these forums tend to be very wordy) about qigong here, but am more interested in the practice of classical Taoism.

 

Before we talk further over this, may I ask if you can read the Tao Te Ching (either the Received Version or Wang Bi version) in Chinese?

 

If you can, then we can explore our viewpoints further objectively to prevent our discussion from needlessly turning into an emotional argument.

[silas]

Before we talk further over this, may I ask if you can read the Tao Te Ching (either the Received Version or Wang Bi version) in Chinese?

 

If you can, then we can explore our viewpoints further objectively to prevent our discussion from needlessly turning into an emotional argument.

 

Both translators Lau and Wang ARE chinese, native Chinese, speak Chinese fluently and study in Taoism in Chinese.

[ChiDragon]

It's okay, guys.

As long we can understand what we are talking about, then it is fine. It is too difficult to set up a standard, here, in the forum. It just won't work that way. We have all kinds of people here from allover the world and think differently. The terms that I had used might not be suitable for other part of the world. I was having a communication problem with the wonderful folks, here, in the first year when I signed up for this site. Let's stay in harmony with each other. Thank you.....

[ChiDragon]

Before we talk further over this, may I ask if you can read the Tao Te Ching (either the Received Version or Wang Bi version) in Chinese?

 

If you can, then we can explore our viewpoints further objectively to prevent our discussion from needlessly turning into an emotional argument.

 

I am accessible to all the versions. Let's do that. I was hoping that someone comes along to discuss the Tao Te Ching with me objectively...

 

@ Silas...please joint in too.....

Edited March 12, 2013 by ChiDragon

[dynamictao]

I have been just working on the Tao Te Ching as a philosophical text that reflect the principle of Nonduality (Oneness).Because this is the First Principle, so it cane be applied to all philosophical issues, including religion, morality, ethics, etc.

 

Traditionally we have regarded the principle of Tao as unfathomable. But I find that Lao-tzu has presented a definite core principle of Tao philosophy and a logical structure of the Tao Te Ching (in Chapter 1 of the Tao te Ching). Lao-tzu uses "vague and indeterminate" language to describe Tao philosophy, but we can show that these "vague and indeterminate" words of Lao-tzu are necessary in describing the principle of Tao (Nonduality). Nonduality is, of course, in all religions and philosophies. That is also why Lao-tzu discusses many examples in the Tao Te Ching.

 

I hasitate to go into detials here and now, because it is contrary to the prevailing thoughts and it will add to the confusion. I do expect a lot of resistance to treat Lao-tzu to be a rational philosopher as Parmenides and the Buddha. But the evidence is convincing now.

 

Soon I will offer my second book "Tao Te Ching: The Principle of Oneness" at a very low price initially (e.g. $1.99) as a Kindle Book. Then if people want to discuss that view, I shall elaborate on what I have found.

 

I shall make the book free to all ( at least on May 1, 2013). If I can publish the book earlier, I shall do that earlier. I do expect a lot of resistance to treat Lao-tzu to be a rational philosopher as Parmenides and the Buddha. But the evidence is convincing now.

 

You do not need a Kindle to download the book, but you need to download a free software to run Kindle on your PC or iPad, Iphone, etc. The first part of all Kindle books is free as a sample. I

Edited March 12, 2013 by dynamictao

[ChiDragon]

I have been just working on the Tao Te Ching as a philosophical text that reflect the principle of Nonduality (Oneness).Because this is the First Principle, so it cane be applied to all philosophical issues, including religion, morality, ethics, etc.

 

Traditionally we have regarded the principle of Tao as unfathomable. But I find that Lao-tzu has presented a definite core principle of Tao philosophy and a logical structure of the Tao Te Ching (in Chapter 1 of the Tao te Ching). Lao-tzu uses "vague and indeterminate" language to describe Tao philosophy, but we can show that these "vague and indeterminate" words of Lao-tzu are necessary in describing the principle of Tao (Nonduality). Nonduality is, of course, in all religions and philosophies. That is also why Lao-tzu discusses many examples in the Tao Te Ching.

 

Greeting.....

Here is what I have to say about the philosophy of Lao Tze in Tao Te Ching.

 

I think Lao Tze was using dualities to set up all his examples, throughout the Tao Te Ching, to reflect the principle of Tao. Lao Tze was using "Oneness" as another name for Tao. The Oneness comprise of the duality of Yin and Yang. The Tao Te Ching does not emphasize on religion at all. Indeed, the "vague and indeterminate" language was used by Lao Tze are paradoxical but it must be interpreted with reverse logic to invert his thinking, in order, to comprehend his philosophy.

[silas]

 

Greeting.....

Here is what I have to say about the philosophy of Lao Tze in Tao Te Ching.

 

I think Lao Tze was using dualities to set up all his examples, throughout the Tao Te Ching, to reflect the principle of Tao. Lao Tze was using "Oneness" as another name for Tao. The Oneness comprise of the duality of Yin and Yang. The Tao Te Ching does not emphasize on religion at all. Indeed, the "vague and indeterminate" language was used by Lao Tze are paradoxical but it must be interpreted with reverse logic to invert his thinking, in order, to comprehend his philosophy.

 

The TaoTeChing is religion because many of its precepts cannot be understood without the metaphysical. The TTC is (among other things) a manual for the ruler or king, and its verses must teach the king to rule harmoniously or the people will revolt. Although some of it can be interpreted in a rational manner, many of the verses are about the transcendental - and this transcendental is REAL, not a metaphor.

 

For example, the mystical concept of wu-wei which is handled by the emperor makes no sense without the metaphysical.

 

In TTC ch. 57 it says:

 

I take no action and the people are transformed of themselves;

I prefer stillness and the people are rectified of themselves;

 

This form of wu-wei could be interpreted as non-interference with the people, as laissez faire government or even anarchy, as following nature or the natural flow. However, government that does absolutely nothing usually fails. If my understanding of chinese history is correct, the chinese government in the 1800s did nothing about the Opium War either, because many religious advisors said to "do nothing" and the problem would resolve itself. What happened is one of china's most traumatic events that set the stage for the Communist takeover in the 20th century. Drug addicts followed their nature into addiction and the government fell into chaos.

 

The mystical form of wu-wei assumes that the Tao is an actual entity, that the king must connect to it and interpret the patterns for harmony and bring Tao to the people to maintain peace. This is religion. See Anarchy And A Classic Tao Of Laws.

Edited March 12, 2013 by silas

[Marblehead]

If the world is moving toward a one-world religion based in Christianity, would there be Christians who actually help to establish syncretic universalist churches like I-Kuan Tao? That seems reasonable, doesn't it?

I know of no reason to suggest that this is not a reasonable thought. At their heart all religions have the wellfare of the people at its roots. I see no reason for all the different religions except that there are those who would have some of the power over the people.

 

I have never had a beef with any religion that teaches loving-kindness. I do have a significant problem with the institutions of religion and all their power-playing.

 

(But no, don't expect me to become a religious person any time soon. Hehehe.)

[Marblehead]

But Chidragon have said that the Tao just doesn't care. So, how do you justify any purpose in the 3 treasures for the human good?

I would like to suggest the the Three Treasures are directed toward self-preservation. (Doesn't really have that much to do with the 'others'.)

[Marblehead]

I do expect a lot of resistance to treat Lao-tzu to be a rational philosopher as Parmenides and the Buddha.

I'm sure you won't be getting any resistance from me. (Duh!)

[Marblehead]

The TaoTeChing is religion because ...

I'm not going to agree with this although I will admit that the TTC did leave the room for religion to be established based on what was said and what was not said.

[silas]

I know of no reason to suggest that this is not a reasonable thought. At their heart all religions have the wellfare of the people at its roots. I see no reason for all the different religions except that there are those who would have some of the power over the people.

 

Well a unified system of belief would mean no more strife among the various faiths and churches over doctrine. That would be nice, although, as you said, there might still be epic internal power struggles inside a mega, mega, mega world church.

 

Is a single religion good for all the people? What about that old adage: different strokes for different folks?

[silas]

I'm not going to agree with this although I will admit that the TTC did leave the room for religion to be established based on what was said and what was not said.

 

The TTC alone gives us Taoist Creation Theory, a sophisticated understanding of the entity Tao, the mechanics of this reality, not to mention statecraft. When combined with the Chuang Tzu and Lieh Tzu for a theory of afterlife, the 3 books comprise a full religion.

[Marblehead]

The TTC alone gives us Taoist Creation Theory, a sophisticated understanding of the entity Tao, the mechanics of this reality, not to mention statecraft. When combined with the Chuang Tzu and Lieh Tzu for a theory of afterlife, the 3 books comprise a full religion.

Hehehe. I still won't argue with you 'cause I don't want to piss off all the Religious Taoists here.

[chenping]

 

I am accessible to all the versions. Let's do that. I was hoping that someone comes along to discuss the Tao Te Ching with me objectively...

 

@ Silas...please joint in too.....

 

Silas can only contribute meaningfully in telling the difference between Philosophical Daoism (derived from English translations) and Classical Taoism based on the Chinese text of the Tao Te Ching if he can read Chinese.

 

You and I can read both the Chinese texts and the English translations. Grasping their respective messages of the Tao Te Ching, to me, is like eating "lap cheong" and bratwurst. Lau and Wang might insist that the western sausage is a good approximation of the lap cheong. No self-respecting Chinese would agree.

 

Both translators Lau and Wang ARE chinese, native Chinese, speak Chinese fluently and study in Taoism in Chinese.

 

Yes, that is true. But that doesn't mean they could convey classical Chinese thought in English. I am quite happy with Philosophical Daoism derived from English translations of the Tao Te Ching. It helps me to get along with people in the west. But when I have to deal with life in a serious way, I look to the Chinese texts.

[dynamictao]

We can view the Tao Te Ching as part of a "coherent systematic whole" of a religion or a philosophy, etc.

Each "belief" may have a completely different framework to represent the same reality (or truth, or Oneness), and

they are equivalent in representing the reality and can be transformed into each other.

 

Of course, we all only have limited time to figure out one "comfortable" framework for ourselves (if we are lucky).

Changing from framwork to another is probably impossible, but some understanding of other frameworks may go a long way.

As an ex-scientist, I expect, and happy to see, my theory overthrown some day when something new appears.

 

Religion or Philosophy, or Big Bang Theory, is built on a set of formidable "paradigms." Enjoy making some paradigm shift.

Even theology is discussed together with science. Many people may believe the Big Bang Theory as a proof for a Creation Theory. We just enjoy what we believe (Laotzu says so in ch.80).

[chenping]

The mystical form of wu-wei assumes that the Tao is an actual entity, that the king must connect to it and interpret the patterns for harmony and bring Tao to the people to maintain peace. This is religion. See Anarchy And A Classic Tao Of Laws.

 

Why do you keep referencing the Tao Currents site? The blogger is a Pooh Bear Taoist with a lively imagination. I have difficulty tracking out his complicated thinking pattern which is harder to understand than classical Chinese.

[三江源]

I am quite happy with Philosophical Daoism derived from English translations of the Tao Te Ching. It helps me to get along with people in the west. But when I have to deal with life in a serious way, I look to the Chinese texts.

Hi chenping...

 

I would be very interested if you were able to give examples of the difference you describe, so that we could understand more what you get when looking at life in a serious way, and what you get when you are looking at getting along with people in the west.

 

A comparison on some specific points.. so that we may have an idea of some kind about that to which you refer.

[chenping]

I would like to suggest the the Three Treasures are directed toward self-preservation. (Doesn't really have that much to do with the 'others'.)

 

There are people who prefer practising martial arts for self-defense even though packing heat is easier. For self-preservation, isn't $20 billion better?

[Marblehead]

There are people who prefer practising martial arts for self-defense even though packing heat is easier. For self-preservation, isn't $20 billion better?

Hehehe. Yeah, then I could hire the Hulk to protect me.

[silas]

Why do you keep referencing the Tao Currents site? The blogger is a Pooh Bear Taoist with a lively imagination. I have difficulty tracking out his complicated thinking pattern which is harder to understand than classical Chinese.

Are you having trouble understanding Anarchy And A Classic Tao Of Laws? We can discuss it if you like.

[silas]

Silas can only contribute meaningfully in telling the difference between Philosophical Daoism (derived from English translations) and Classical Taoism based on the Chinese text of the Tao Te Ching if he can read Chinese.

 

You and I can read both the Chinese texts and the English translations. Grasping their respective messages of the Tao Te Ching, to me, is like eating "lap cheong" and bratwurst. Lau and Wang might insist that the western sausage is a good approximation of the lap cheong. No self-respecting Chinese would agree.

 

 

Yes, that is true. But that doesn't mean they could convey classical Chinese thought in English. I am quite happy with Philosophical Daoism derived from English translations of the Tao Te Ching. It helps me to get along with people in the west. But when I have to deal with life in a serious way, I look to the Chinese texts.

 

Classical Chinese is very complicated, and I am happy to let the experts translate for me. When I quote a specific translation, I double-check it against other academic translations for accuracy and analyze whether the translation is in harmony with classic Taoist philosophy, religion and practice.

[silas]

We can view the Tao Te Ching as part of a "coherent systematic whole" of a religion or a philosophy, etc.

Each "belief" may have a completely different framework to represent the same reality (or truth, or Oneness), and

they are equivalent in representing the reality and can be transformed into each other.

 

Of course, we all only have limited time to figure out one "comfortable" framework for ourselves (if we are lucky).

Changing from framwork to another is probably impossible, but some understanding of other frameworks may go a long way.

As an ex-scientist, I expect, and happy to see, my theory overthrown some day when something new appears.

 

Religion or Philosophy, or Big Bang Theory, is built on a set of formidable "paradigms." Enjoy making some paradigm shift.

Even theology is discussed together with science. Many people may believe the Big Bang Theory as a proof for a Creation Theory. We just enjoy what we believe (Laotzu says so in ch.80).

 

For me, the paradigms must make sense - and that includes corroboration with other academic translations of the classics and scientific knowledge. The TaoTeChing privileges actual experience and observation in the real world, when interpreting the verses (TTC ch. 16: "The ten thousand things, I watch them rise and fall"). Taoist Creation Theory does not conflict with modern models of the universe.