Is ‘Dao’ more easily translated as ‘God’, or ‘Nature’?

[Phoenix3]

Please give a reason.

 

And if ‘God’ usually is seen as masculine, and ‘Nature’ is usually seen as feminine, then what gender is ‘Dao’?

 

If ‘God’ is usually seen as personal, and ‘Nature’ is usually seen as impersonal, then what is ‘Dao’?

 

Please don’t just repeat the predictable answer of ‘Dao is genderless’ or ‘the Dao that can be named is not the true Dao’, like a mindless drone. Not to say they are wrong, but it’s just a typical answer from someone who doesn’t think. Please provide a thoughtful answer, though I acknowledge thinking isn’t for everyone.

 

Thanks

[rene]

Well, that's about the rudest set up for a thread I've seen in a long time.

 

[Marblehead]

Damn!  He wants me to think.  Okay, I am an Atheist but will speak to the question as if the word "God" had meaning to me.

 

6 minutes ago, Phoenix3 said:

And if ‘God’ usually is seen as masculine, and ‘Nature’ is usually seen as feminine, then what gender is ‘Dao’?

Yes, God is masculine in nearly all religions.  Mother "Nature" surely must be female.  "Dao gave birth … " would indicate that Dao would be feminine.  So Dao is the Mother of all Nature (within the universe).

 

6 minutes ago, Phoenix3 said:

 

If ‘God’ is usually seen as personal, and ‘Nature’ is usually seen as impersonal, then what is ‘Dao’?

In a different discussion I would have to ask you why you state that God is seen as personal.  However,

 

So above I stated that Dao is the Mother of all Nature.  Yes, Nature is impersonal.  Therefore it must be stated that Dao is impersonal.

 

 

6 minutes ago, Phoenix3 said:

 

Please don’t just repeat the predictable answer of ‘Dao is genderless’ or ‘the Dao that can be named is not the true Dao’, like a mindless drone. Not to say they are wrong, but it’s just a typical answer from someone who doesn’t think. Please provide a thoughtful answer, though I acknowledge thinking isn’t for everyone.

 

[Marblehead]

2 minutes ago, rene said:

Well, that's about the rudest set up for a thread I've seen in a long time.

 

Well, I ignored the set-up because other than that I thought it was a valid question.

 

I went through this a long time ago regarding the suggestion that Dao can be reified as God and therefore Philosophical Daoism is really a religion with a supreme God.

 

I argued against this suggestion and while not saying I won I will say that the other side gave up trying to argue with me.

 

 

[Lost in Translation]

According to the Book of Changes, Heaven is the Creative whereas Earth is the Receptive. All begins in Heaven and is realized on Earth. Each - Heaven and Earth - requires the other. Tao is the term we use to describe this relationship.

 

Edited July 31, 2018 by Lost in Translation
Grammar

[lucifeh]

If Tao is the same as Dao, from when I read Tao te king, Tao is the path to illumination.

[Stosh]

3 hours ago, rene said:

Well, that's about the rudest set up for a thread I've seen in a long time.

 

Is it not obvious he is frustrated with regurgitated platitudes, and understandably would prefer serious consideration .? 

Yes its presumtive, but then its also highly likely to come to pass as described. ,  Though I doubt it that input will be influential. Who wants that??

 

Edited July 31, 2018 by Stosh

[vonkrankenhaus]

Dao is just the "Way".

 

Like "The Way to Read".

 

How much does "The Way to Read" weigh? Where is "The Way to Read" located?

 

It doesn't, and isn't.

 

Dao is like "The Way It Goes".

 

So Dao is not a thing. Not a power. Not a force. Not a place or destination. 
 

Dao is not  "producer" or "factory". It is not physical, not a thing, and cannot produce things.

 

Yet every thing happens according to Dao, to "The Way Things Happen".

 

The reason the Dao that you can speak of is not the real Dao is simply that Dao is not a thing, and can thus not really be named as a thing. Whatever "thing" you can know to talk about, that thing isn't Dao.  

 

Calling Dao "God" can be a mistake, depending on what "God" is supposed to be.

 

If a person or thing of any kind is "God", then Dao is not that, not that kind of "God".

 

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

Edited July 31, 2018 by vonkrankenhaus

[Lost in Translation]

3 hours ago, lucifeh said:

If Tao is the same as Dao, from when I read Tao te king, Tao is the path to illumination.

 

Tao is Dao. These are alternate spellings for the same thing. 

[gj551]

doesnt it mean "way"?

 

[rideforever]

Tao leads and we follow, therefore it is masculine and we are feminine .... the soul reflects the light of the One.

When people talk of nature perhaps they see the joy of the natural world on Earth, the wonderful creation that comes from the balance of masculine and feminine forces, the little birds in the trees, the Sun at dawn and the Moon at night, how beautiful .... in appreciating these things they wish to feel the origin of it all.   In the same way becoming one with the vital force chi is the beginning of returning to the origin.

Underneath it all is not matter but a sort of spirit - intelligence ..... which is how I understand Tao.   It is neither God the actor, nor the creation, but the spirit of it all that precedes it.

[Marblehead]

9 hours ago, lucifeh said:

If Tao is the same as Dao, from when I read Tao te king, Tao is the path to illumination.

Yes, and sometimes Tao (Dao) is translated as Way.  So we could say Tao is the Way of illumination.

.

[Stosh]

For philosophical people trying to execute a better course ,,its the illuminated path, or the path you take ,if you're hip to the jive,  not the path to getting illuminated. You 'get it' and so you act with moderation , and so forth. 

What there is to get , is also the way , or dao , the set of natural consequences to behaviors and situations one expects to encounter based on their optimism, fatalism etc  and so forth. 

So IMO it shouldn't be considered as either a god or nature , The classical daoists had attitudes and opinions regarding how the world runs , the religious crowd sees things a bit differently than this because they are focused on an even older set of folk beliefs , or that guys like lao and chuang were something superior to regular people. Chuang would recoil at this as being a mis-characterization. Lao would consider this label as going a tad too far , ending up on the wrong side of the equator,, (so much an accolade, as to become insult.) 

So looking at this in real world situation, MH being more taoist than I , says a thing which is subtle, challenges no paradigms , is basically true , and he won't get flak or upset anyone.

Comparatively ,  My input being explanatory and 'abstandard', is the opposite , in that it is defining a correct vs incorrect situation, folks will tend to reject it.. but thats just .. me. .. If I want redirection , dao would suggest I not do this , and so it illuminates to me the virtuous path, that I do not take.  it is me being willful self-vexed , not allied with the dao of men.. so I am a crappy daoist , (if not just an atheist).

 

 

 

 

Edited July 31, 2018 by Stosh

[thelerner]

The word, concept and history of God has alot of baggage connected to it.  For Daoism, I prefer Nature or Way.  Perhaps Way is better, cause nature has its own set of baggage and suppositions. 

Edited July 31, 2018 by thelerner

[rene]

1 minute ago, thelerner said:

The word, concept and history of God has alot of baggage connected to it.  For Daoism, I prefer Nature or Way.  Perhaps Way is better, cause nature its own set of baggage and suppositions. 

 

Agree, Way is better, in the limited context of this conversation.

From an unlimited perspective - Dao does not even have a 'Way'...as that suggests there is some 'Way' that isn't Dao's... but that's not what the OP wants to hear about so I'll cease.

[Marblehead]

11 minutes ago, rene said:

Dao does not even have a 'Way'

Yeah, I'm glad someone mentioned this.  It never came to my mind to do so.

 

[dawei]

I've seen suggestions about equating Dao with God and I get where those folks are coming from; the most basic angle is they are both creators.   If you leave it at that, I know even some chinese would agree, but in the west we tend to see the baggage of saying God.

 

In my Livia Kohn interview, she said this:

 

Quote

Early Chinese Mysticism 1991:   a survey from the Laozi to the Tang period.

When doing the book on Chen Tuan, he came across to me as a mystic but that word was not applied in such a way at that time of my writing.   Mysticism was considered in the west as arising with Christianity and a transcendent God; In East, Dao was immanent.   So there was a lot of conflict in my usage of mysticism.  IN the end, I had re-defined A new definition of mysticism for religious studies community.  So it was very controversial when the book released but it brought people forward to start discussions on mysticism.    Opened up other books and religious studies on Asian. 

 

 

In essence,  instead of trying to equate Dao with God she re-defined a higher level label that would fit east and west: Mysticism.   

[silent thunder]

ebb and flow

push and pull

all the myriad expression of the 10,000

being and nonbeing

 

to my human perception nature seems to oscillate between apparent opposites

yet have been revealed to be not separate, but varied expressions of one process

 

the way

[Stosh]

There's something in the way she moves
Or looks my way, or calls my name
That seems to leave this troubled world behind
If I'm feeling down and blue
Or troubled by some foolish game
She always seems to make me change my mind

James Taylor

[Wu Ming Jen]

The Tao is not God

The Tao is not God and is not worshiped. Taoism does include many  deities, but although these are worshiped in Taoist temples, they are part of the universe and depend, like everything, on the Tao.

 

The most important thing about the Tao is how it works in the world, and how human beings relate to it. Philosophical speculation about what the Tao actually is, is less important than living in sensitive response to the Tao.

 

The Chinese gods are actual people who lead exemplary lives. The archetype of the gods and immortals is based on humanity, all genders, all race. The gods are administrators of a healthy way of living they all have jobs to keep order and benefit all of humanity.

 

The western man god does not like people and is fond of genocide. The term foreign devils comes from the western introduction of religion to china. After reading the bible they assumed they in the west worshiped some kind of devil. 

 

The Tao is before creation, before heaven and earth

 

The Dao De Jing describes the way of yin, the feminine, as being ‘water’ and that of the complementing yang, masculine, as fire. In Daoist terms there has recently been a shift in the internal energies in both sexes, resulting in women now having too much fire. The water-based nature of women has been forgotten and they can no longer express this innate way of their being. Unfortunately this has a negative impact on mankind as a whole. Without the true influence of the feminine the world is becoming more volatile; like a fire burning out of control. Only women have the power to quench the fire of the masculine. Therefore women must find their way back to the water and to the true seat of their power.

 

 

 

 

[Michael Sternbach]

Dao can be called God in my book, but by the same token, God can be called Dao.

[Phoenix3]

42 minutes ago, Michael Sternbach said:

Dao can be called God in my book, but by the same token, God can be called Dao.

 

Really though? Or is God more like hexagram 1?

[Michael Sternbach]

8 hours ago, Phoenix3 said:

 

Really though? Or is God more like hexagram 1?

 

That may be an adequate comparison if all you take into consideration is God as Creator. However, bear in mind that in Christian metaphysics (and indeed in some other systems as well), God is seen as a Trinity. Thus, "he" includes mediating and receptive aspects as well.

Edited August 1, 2018 by Michael Sternbach

[Lost in Translation]

God has intelligence, purpose and morality. It's hard to square that with Tao. I believe the two concepts can be reconciled, but not with words. Silence is the key. The Christians have something called "speaking in tongues." The idea is basically that God takes over and speaks through you, and you have no idea what he's saying but you trust that it's in your highest good. Some people even pray in tongues! This is analogous to silent prayer or meditation where you clear your mind of all thoughts. Your thoughts are inadequate to express the truth so you let them go.

[Lost in Translation]

11 hours ago, thelerner said:

The word, concept and history of God has alot of baggage connected to it.  For Daoism, I prefer Nature or Way.  Perhaps Way is better, cause nature has its own set of baggage and suppositions. 

 

The irony is you can choose any word you like and people will eventually find a way to deify it. Then you'll need to find a whole new word.