Chuang Tzu - Words, ritual and questions related to "Taoism"

[Marblehead]

 

However, ZZ borrowed the idea from the Tao Te Ching and use the natural law to explain why things are the way they are as reasons.

I would also suggest that Chuang Tzu never read the TTC or even heard of Lao Tzu.

 

(I cannot personally support this arguement but I have read others who have suggested this and they did a fair job at supporting their arguement.)

[ChiDragon]

I would also suggest that Chuang Tzu never read the TTC or even heard of Lao Tzu.

 

(I cannot personally support this arguement but I have read others who have suggested this and they did a fair job at supporting their arguement.)

This is interesting and something new to me. Let me try on my end to see that is true of not....!!!

[Marblehead]

This is interesting and something new to me. Let me try on my end to see that is true of not....!!!

Yes, I will look forward to your input concerning this as you are able to read the original texts whereas I am not. While searching, remember that it is extremely likely that some of the things Chuang Tzu said, although they are said in the TTC, were being said by others before the TTC was written. Therefore Chuang Tzu's usage of the words/concepts does not imply that he actually read the TTC.

[dawei]

So I find this to be my confusion. After spending a lot of time "practicing Taoism" and finding it difficult to practice or WANTING to practice all the things that are perceived to be a daily Taoist ritual (chi breathing meditation for example), what you have identified is that Taoists don't HAVE to do anything at all?

 

The importance being that one knows what they are and lives life as true to that as possible. Some might become monks, others more casual every day folk....while all along just knowing that we just make up a segment of the Tao anyway, so it doesn't really matter...?

 

I may use a word that MB doesn't like... but the only thing that matters is your find/walk your destiny.

 

What we often think is natural is purely seeking, attempting, grasping, practicing, etc.

 

One doesn't seek or practice naturalness... well, some try to.

 

 

I often think of a point made by BaoPuZi:

For Ge Hong, such techniques leading to ascension and long life are purely artificial, allowing humans to become something that they naturally, as earthly creatures, could never otherwise attain.

Humans, Spirits, and Sages in Chinese Late Antiquity : Ge Hong's Master Who Embraces Simplicity (Baopuzi)

http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/puett/files/puett_ge_hong_0.pdf

[Rara]

 

HI, Rara.....

Thank your invitation. You see, one must understand the definition of Tao but not "Taoism". Tao(道) for Lao Zi and Zhuang Zi are different. Lao Zi's Tao have various definitions; and Zhuang Zi's definition for Tao is 宇宙最高的法則, the Supreme Natural Law of the Universe. The definition is also one of the definitions of Lao Zi for Tao. However, ZZ borrowed the idea from the Tao Te Ching and use the natural law to explain why things are the way they are as reasons. The western term "Taoism" is very ambiguous and confusing which was never clearly state what it is all about.

 

Zhuang Zi had observed that Nature was constantly changing which effects the human lives. He had come up with many principles from the observations of Nature and applied to the humans. The principles are actually called Tao(道 or 道理) in Chinese which means reasons. Hence, Zhuang Zi becomes a philosopher of principles in reasoning. In English, he may be a Taoist but one must understand what it means.

 

There is one chapter in the classic Zhuang Zi is called 天道, the Principle of Heaven, which also known as the "Natural Law". The character 道 was used in many places. Anyway, it was immaterial whether the Tao character was used or not. It was the contents in the classic which made him a Taoist.

Cool Thanks for this!

[Rara]

I think the arguement could be made that Chuang Tzu was not a "Laoist" but was none-the-less a Taoist.

Lol! (I say this because I actually did)

[ChiDragon]

Yes, I will look forward to your input concerning this as you are able to read the original texts whereas I am not. While searching, remember that it is extremely likely that some of the things Chuang Tzu said, although they are said in the TTC, were being said by others before the TTC was written. Therefore Chuang Tzu's usage of the words/concepts does not imply that he actually read the TTC.

hmmmm.....

Don't you think you are slamming the door on me too soon.....???

[Rara]

This is interesting and something new to me. Let me try on my end to see that is true of not....!!!

Ditto. Lao Tzu is mentioned in the book many times...in later chapters, granted. So depends who wrote them and who told them about Lao Tzu I guess...

[Rara]

Yes, I will look forward to your input concerning this as you are able to read the original texts whereas I am not. While searching, remember that it is extremely likely that some of the things Chuang Tzu said, although they are said in the TTC, were being said by others before the TTC was written. Therefore Chuang Tzu's usage of the words/concepts does not imply that he actually read the TTC.

Hmmm...that he was perhaps just writing what was already spoken ideas of the Tao, passed on generation to generation.

[Marblehead]

hmmmm.....

Don't you think you are slamming the door on me too soon.....???

Hehehe. No. I just wish for you to be cautious, that's all. With whatever you present, if the logic hold true then even if we lack definative "proof" we would still be able to "assume".

[Rara]

 

 

I may use a word that MB doesn't like... but the only thing that matters is your find/walk your destiny.

 

What we often think is natural is purely seeking, attempting, grasping, practicing, etc.

 

One doesn't seek or practice naturalness... well, some try to.

 

 

I often think of a point made by BaoPuZi:

For Ge Hong, such techniques leading to ascension and long life are purely artificial, allowing humans to become something that they naturally, as earthly creatures, could never otherwise attain.

 

 

Humans, Spirits, and Sages in Chinese Late Antiquity : Ge Hong's Master Who Embraces Simplicity (Baopuzi)

http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/puett/files/puett_ge_hong_0.pdf

This has come into quite a few of my convos in TTB...including Stosh's sneezing threat on General Discussion. Training to be natural...

 

Check his angle on the way we breathe. Very interesting discussion.

[Mark Saltveit]

It's like asking if Jesus was a Christian...

 

All of this is so old that very little can be known for certain. This hopefully encourages a certain humility about pronouncing the truth about what happened -- which seems perfectly in sync with Taoism (the Tao that can be told is not the true Tao, and all that.)

 

Some people (esp. professors of religion) consider "Taoism" to be the technical term for the religious form of Daoism that only arose in the second century C.E. By this definition, Zhuangzi can not have been a Taoist, nor could the author(s) of the Daodejing. But it's almost a circular argument. I use Taoist for anyone who believes in the ideas in the DDJ and LZ, or practices based on them in any form.

 

There are references in both ZZ and the LZ that seem to be references to self-cultivation techniques, such as forms of breathing and meditation (Zhuangzi talks about "the feasting of the mind", which certainly sounds like meditation of some sort.) Whether these were common technqiues among Taoists of that era, or even elements of some long-forgotten ancient religion of the Warring States period, there is no way to know. The former seems likely and the latter unlikely to me, but really we don't have any evidence except the texts themselves.

[3deedit]

I finally finished the book a few days ago. I was thoroughly entertained throughout

 

Now, I've realised something due to things that are repeated several times in the book. Of course, Chuang Tzu wasn't a Taoist as he was a pioneer of bringing the ideas into text. The Taoist came later - us who study the Tao.

 

Ok, let me stop here for a minute. Isn't such study the exact thing that Chuang Tzu was ridiculing all throughout the book? Isn't this what Confucius and many others were doing and just not getting it? The idea of ritual is spoken against yet a lot of us sit in meditation daily as a routine. Many strive for enlightenment, but aren't we just chasing something that isn't there by doing so?

 

A lot of us on the forum get caught up in metaphysics and spiritual ideas/dogma. Is this really being a Taoist? If so, I think that Taoism might be missing the point a little bit. The debates that are had are somewhat pointless in the eyes of Chuang Tzu, right?

 

Do discuss!

the dream discribe this feeling from viewpoint of follower

[3deedit]

the dream discribe this feeling from viewpoint of follower