Taoism and Hedonism

[Rara]

This has been on my mind a lot. Away from any dogmas or schools of thought in Taoism, I'd like to focus solely on Lao Tzu's words and ask - what are the main differences between these philosophies?

 

My main understanding is that Hedonism could lead to over indulgence, and that maximizing pleasure is a nice idea, but surely impossible as we all have to experience a degree of displeasure.

 

Also, by one maximizing pleasure for themselves, does this tip the scales so that others inevitably will be affected negatively by your own pursuits?

 

How does the Taoist live differently? More frugal yet still achieving a same result? Does the Taoist "transcend" pleasure more by enjoying a stripped-down life, as opposed to seeking ways to enhance it?

 

Have I answered all my own questions?

[moment]

Balance in the course of our progression.  Balance as an ongoing process. Without those occasional joyful excesses, what would be the point of living?  What would there be to balance?

Everything has its' time.  Can we slow down aging by being vital?  On those days when there are too many choices is when we should empty ourselves.  Then the subtleties become more apparent.

As we become more with the Tao do we become more intuitive and less self-judgmental? Does this help us relax more?

Does becoming more relaxed bring us closer to Tao?  At that point does asking what is right or wrong become too slow to actively participate at that level?

[Pavel Karavaev]

I think that hedonism overly relaxes a person in the sense of spiritual aspirations. The pursuit of pleasure can make a person lazy and incapable of solving difficult problems. And it is very important for self-improvement to have the ability to evolve in spite of any circumstances. 

 

In traditional teachings, it is often said about the importance of hard work and overcoming all sorts of hardships. And pleasures are also important, but i think there should not be exorbitance of it. All in all, life itself in its many manifestations can be considered a pleasure.

[vonkrankenhaus]

On 12/16/2017 at 7:20 AM, Rara said:

Does the Taoist "transcend" pleasure more by enjoying a stripped-down life, as opposed to seeking ways to enhance it?

 

No. Taoism is YinYang understanding. Which means sorrow is changing into happy, up is going down, and right is turning wrong.

 

So we accept the One and see how things interact and change.

 

Effort spent on Good are also building Bad at the same pace.

 

Taoism sees Good and Bad are only just a Polarity of One thing - seeing unity via discerning dualism.

 

Like a tossed coin - a Taoist catches the whole coin, and doesn't bother trying to catch only one "Good" or "Bad" side of the coin - which is impossible even as so many try.

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

[Rara]

1 hour ago, vonkrankenhaus said:

 

No. Taoism is YinYang understanding. Which means sorrow is changing into happy, up is going down, and right is turning wrong.

 

So we accept the One and see how things interact and change.

 

Effort spent on Good are also building Bad at the same pace.

 

Taoism sees Good and Bad are only just a Polarity of One thing - seeing unity via discerning dualism.

 

Like a tossed coin - a Taoist catches the whole coin, and doesn't bother trying to catch only one "Good" or "Bad" side of the coin - which is impossible even as so many try.

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

 

Thank you. I do see, if hedonism is for pleasure, then the goal is more orientated toward avoiding "bad". Would you agree?

Edited March 8, 2018 by Rara
Daily typo. You know me :p

[Rara]

@moment Thanks. I did see your reply a while ago but it's taken some time to digest

[Rocky Lionmouth]

Pleasure seems to need inspection. Parttaking of subjective pleasure could just as well mean deriving pleasure from keeping oneself strictly balanced or denying oneself indulgences. 

Dominating gives sense of pleasure in the moment, wether self or others or somethings.

 

I think a dedicated hedonist would have to work very hard to maximize pleasure, no matter what that hedonist finds in fact pleasurable right?

 

A dedicated Taoist might be called a true hedonist even, if their pleasure and satisfaction are maximized by employing their skills and understanding for the increased alignment of everything towards the Tao.

 

I’m not arguing semantics i think, i’m just mulling over what pleasure means to me and what connotations the word and concept has, the first thing flashing through my mind was Hedonism-bot from Futurama, lots of icecream and naked people engaged in all sorts of excesses for the sake of excess. But thats a popularized image, external and i’m not even sure it’s accurate, i have spent too little time studying Hedonism to be confident, but it always seemed to hide a deep meaning under the hyperbolic surface.

A little like ”Do what thou willt shall be the whole of the law.” seems VERY practical and lassiez-faire egotistic entitlement at first glance but when observed it starts to expand to cover a lot of responsibility and awarness of ones relation to everything... at least to me*

But on a more personal level and on a more distanced level pleasure strikes me as an umbrella that covers emotion and sensation and thought, broad as it is.

 

A stern and selfpunitive ascetic could be a hedonist, as much as a decadent indulger of debauchery. Or am i missing the point?

 

 

 

 

*any attempts to dress me in perennialism based on this will be vehemently ignored

[Rocky Lionmouth]

Double post. As apology i offer this:

 

 

Edited March 10, 2018 by Rocky Lionmouth

[Rara]

4 hours ago, Rocky Lionmouth said:

 

A stern and selfpunitive ascetic could be a hedonist, as much as a decadent indulger of debauchery. Or am i missing the point?

 

Not at all...on fact, this didn't cross my mind!

[doc benway]

On 12/16/2017 at 7:20 AM, Rara said:

This has been on my mind a lot. Away from any dogmas or schools of thought in Taoism, I'd like to focus solely on Lao Tzu's words and ask - what are the main differences between these philosophies?

 

My main understanding is that Hedonism could lead to over indulgence, and that maximizing pleasure is a nice idea, but surely impossible as we all have to experience a degree of displeasure.

 

Also, by one maximizing pleasure for themselves, does this tip the scales so that others inevitably will be affected negatively by your own pursuits?

 

How does the Taoist live differently? More frugal yet still achieving a same result? Does the Taoist "transcend" pleasure more by enjoying a stripped-down life, as opposed to seeking ways to enhance it?

 

Have I answered all my own questions?

 

I think focusing solely on Lao Tzu's words is an example of being dogmatic and adhering to a school of thought.

Lao Tzu does not define Daoism for me.

 

For me, being a Daoist is related to engaging in Daoist practices more than it is adhering to Lao Tzu's words, or any words for that matter. That said, the results of engaging in the practices brings us to a place where Lao Tzu's words, and those of the other masters, make sense and are expressed in our lives. When we come to these words through practice based realization it is far more meaningful than through words.

 

One way to look at it is that indulging pleasure, and avoiding displeasure, are not supportive of dedicated practice. This is why serious practitioners would routinely isolate themselves. Eventually it is important to integrate the results of such practice with worldy life but in the beginning we do not have the skill or stability. Furthermore indulging oneself, whether positive or negative, reinforces the sense of self that is dismantled by meditative practices and replaced by a far greater and more fundamental sense of self. 

 

A lot of self proclaimed Daoists tend to be self-indulgent. I think this is mostly related to the fact that they are scholars rather than practitioners - two very different types of Daoist. Sorry if anyone is offended by these comments. 

[moment]

22 hours ago, Rara said:

@moment Thanks. I did see your reply a while ago but it's taken some time to digest

Digestion is good!

[Bud Jetsun]

The ultimate Hedonistic pleasure is mindfully choosing to appreciate this moment which embraces the whole of the real. 

 

Appreciation of the real is the same core objective of Yoga, Zen,  Buddhist, Gnostic and all re-linking (religion) systems.  

 

Unlimited Love, 

-Bud

[七星門]

I think there's an overlap with epicurianism which is technically hedonistic as it declares that pursuit of pleasure & avoidance of pain is the ultimate objective in life. The definition of pleasure, however, is quite different than what is generally imagined when hedonism is used.

 

The highest pleasure is freedom from anxieties & fear, the elimination of excessive desires particularly artificial desires, liberation from the fear of death & the Gods. Physical pleasure is rather simple, fulfillment of bodily needs while avoiding excess as moderation prevents the pain resulting from over/under indulgence. Passionate love is generally to be avoided, sex less so but shouldn't be frequently indulged. 

 

Needn't be Dionysian to be hedonistic. 

[Stosh]

Un-bullied by your own passions , there's a sense of quietude. And I think this is the point they were making. Its not that you cant elevate now and then with some fun , or recognize that things ain't all a bed of roses. But one who can appreciate this middle ground sense of stability , clarity , ease, has it to return to.

It is a place from which one can sally forth , or not, but one must unlearn the attitudes and habits which yank you from it. 

I think the hedonist conversely relies on sustained input or output. 

Edited March 9, 2018 by Stosh

[七星門]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

It is a place from which one can sally forth , or not, but one must unlearn the attitudes and habits which yank you from it. 

 

I can only hope that one day I'll be dumb & placid! 

[Rocky Lionmouth]

2 hours ago, 七星門 said:

 

The highest pleasure is freedom from anxieties & fear, the elimination of excessive desires particularly artificial desires, liberation from the fear of death & the Gods. Physical pleasure is rather simple, fulfillment of bodily needs while avoiding excess as moderation prevents the pain resulting from over/under indulgence. Passionate love is generally to be avoided, sex less so but shouldn't be frequently indulged. 

 

Needn't be Dionysian to be hedonistic. 

 

Ah, me like. Balancing and adjustment and liberation in the practical sense! I had totally forgot about epicureans!

[Wu Ming Jen]

Self indulgence  is that mastery of oneself?  Indulgence alone means excess. hedonism leaves the center, the middle way leading one on a journey of the extremes of up down, in out, left right, pleasure pain and so on they are all connected and related.

 

The tao  fuses them all together from one's center. If one wishes to go to an extreme its opposite partner will introduce itself  into our lives.

 

 

To know when one has enough. Imagine being satisfied and complete  without desire.

 

The material life is not true gold. the material life has  needs to attend to and is important but temporary. All forms shift and change, there and not there.

 

The spiritual life is true gold, it is a treasure, the perspective exposes  the true value of things. If a person is all ready spiritually wealthy they do not need to go to extremes to have wealth.

 

Hedonism and pleasure seeking is the spirit searching the endless search, just got to tie that thing up.

 

Just sit in the center and have it all just come to you with no need to chase after anything, What we desire is already full with nothing to seek. Possessing internal satisfaction, satisfaction is no longer needed.

 

The upside is that things will attract to us and the way will open up, unobstructed and free. We know just what to do.

 

Edited March 10, 2018 by Wu Ming Jen

[七星門]

19 hours ago, Rocky Lionmouth said:

A stern and selfpunitive ascetic could be a hedonist, as much as a decadent indulger of debauchery. Or am i missing the point?

 

I think this is very apt, of interest this is from the Liezi's Yangzhu chapter aka the "Hedonist Chapter" (tr. A.C. Graham):

 

Quote

Yang Chu said: 

'It is not that Po Yi had no desires, his was the worst sort of pride in one's own purity, and because of it he starved to death. It is not that Chan Ch'in had no passions, his was the worst sort of pride in one's own correctness, and because of it he weakened his clan. They went to extremes in treating mistaken "purity" and "correctness" as virtues.'

 

Edited March 10, 2018 by 七星門

[Rara]

13 hours ago, steve said:

 

I think focusing solely on Lao Tzu's words is an example of being dogmatic and adhering to a school of thought.

Lao Tzu does not define Daoism for me.

 

For me, being a Daoist is related to engaging in Daoist practices more than it is adhering to Lao Tzu's words, or any words for that matter. That said, the results of engaging in the practices brings us to a place where Lao Tzu's words, and those of the other masters, make sense and are expressed in our lives. When we come to these words through practice based realization it is far more meaningful than through words.

 

One way to look at it is that indulging pleasure, and avoiding displeasure, are not supportive of dedicated practice. This is why serious practitioners would routinely isolate themselves. Eventually it is important to integrate the results of such practice with worldy life but in the beginning we do not have the skill or stability. Furthermore indulging oneself, whether positive or negative, reinforces the sense of self that is dismantled by meditative practices and replaced by a far greater and more fundamental sense of self. 

 

A lot of self proclaimed Daoists tend to be self-indulgent. I think this is mostly related to the fact that they are scholars rather than practitioners - two very different types of Daoist. Sorry if anyone is offended by these comments. 

 

I can't argue with this

 

The only thing I wish to say is that I didn't quite mean to imply that I was treating the words of Lao Tzu as gospel - but I do see how I wrote that does actually imply that.

 

What I mean to say is to understand how traditional Taoist philosophy approaches life in comparison to Hedonism. I just wanted to avoid any extras such as immortals, magic etc. as I deem all that irrelevant to my question. Merely focus on the "core philosophy"

[Rara]

12 hours ago, Stosh said:

Un-bullied by your own passions , there's a sense of quietude. And I think this is the point they were making. Its not that you cant elevate now and then with some fun , or recognize that things ain't all a bed of roses. But one who can appreciate this middle ground sense of stability , clarity , ease, has it to return to.

It is a place from which one can sally forth , or not, but one must unlearn the attitudes and habits which yank you from it. 

I think the hedonist conversely relies on sustained input or output. 

 

I like this. Application is key and I always use my work peers to aid my practice.

 

I work in a competitive field and we all do get a bit excited over results. But when I'm done for the day, if I've become overly proud of our successes, I do tell myself to cool it and restore myself. After all, you can't win them all, and part of my problems whenever I've had them, have stemmed from being a bad loser or being upset because I couldn't get my own way.

 

I'm not sure that the others around me quite do the same. They're pretty amped up a lot of the time. They also have big guts, chain smoke and have regular lavish holidays.

[Boundlesscostfairy]

What my opinion about craving and hedonism is to not interupt the natural flow of said activities and then they turn to tantra.. wheter its martial arts, eating, sleeping, or having sex..

[Starjumper]

The OP mentions the Tao Te Ching, so this is off topic, but I have come to realize that the only people who like my chi kung are hedonistic chi junkies.  Enjoyment is the only, or main, reason that people will continue with a deep practice.

[wandelaar]

On happiness and ancient Chinese philosophy (including Taoism) see:

 

https://personal.eur.nl/veenhoven/Pub2000s/2008e-full.pdf

 

[Michael Sternbach]

The way I look at it, Laotzu's principles of following the way of least resistance and acting in accordance with one's very nature (wu wei) are conceptually close to positions taken by Hedonism.

[gnome]

I agree that Daoism in the pursuit of pleasure draws closer to Epicurianism than it does to Hedonism. Even in Plato's books is repeatedly implied the pleasure drawn from a virtuous, spiritual oriented life (there pleasing the gods meant being in harmony with the Kosmos, not blind worship or fanaticism). Hedonism is just the pursuit of pleasure in material things, i.e., indulgence. This was all abhorred by Plato and his followers. In a way, he defined true Gnosis as we know it now, even before the gnostics and the term appeared. Gnothi Seauton, Know Thyself, the body (soma) is the grave (sema) of the spirit of which we partake with Zeus, for if He is the Artisan (Demiourgos) of the world, we are the artisans of our own life.