Wrong?

[wandelaar]

Just now, rideforever said:

If you copy what he says, isn't that just fake and manipulation ?
He had a arrived at being absorbed in existence, and described what he saw; but if you copy what he saw and understood you will not enter absorption, it will be "as if".

 

Again - not relevant to this discussion. You may regard me as a fake if you like, but that doesn't bother me. I have more regard for the advise of Lao tzu than for yours.

[rene]

40 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

Lao tzu never had a problem in taking sides and stating his position. ...

 

 

In general, I agree with this part of your post.

Care should still be taken, imo, when deciding which side his position appears to be on.

Differently biased renditions have him firmly on the side they promote.

[wandelaar]

2 hours ago, rene said:

In general, I agree with this part of your post.

Care should still be taken, imo, when deciding which side his position appears to be on.

Differently biased renditions have him firmly on the side they promote.

 

That's one way one could err. The other way to err is in obfuscating the path promoted by Lao tzu beyond recognition in the name of nonduality. Any topic on Laotian Taoism can be destroyed by debating the relevance (in the light of nonduality) of words and distinctions used in posing the topic question. Such inappropriate nondual criticisms will lead nowhere: nobody will be learning anything from the mess and frustration created in the process. (Except using the ignore button.) 

Edited August 8, 2018 by wandelaar

[OldDog]

DDJ 32 is probably one of my favorite passages. The middle lines are etched in my memory as being the quintessential expression of the Dao.

 

The Heaven and Earth join,

And the sweet rain falls,

Beyond the command of men,

Yet evenly upon all. (Lin)

 

One of the things I like about the Daoism ... and this site ... is the opportunity to understand the DDJ from different perspectives. In another post the subject of the Mandate of Heaven came up. I think it connects with this discussion.

 

Wandelaar inquires about the factual basis of statements from the DDJ and while its been difficult to pinpoint passages as examples, Ch 32 when taken as a whole point to what the ancients accepted as a fact of life. That is, circumstances in the world derive directly from whether ruler holds the Mandate of Heaven. The ranges of events resulting from loss of the mandate could be anything natural catastrophies (drought, flood, earthquake, famine) to socio-political events (revolution, regime overthrow, assassination, war). These reults could be visited directly by Heaven ... or, the people could understand that the mandate was on their side and rebel against authority ... or, realize they were being conquered becuase someone else held the mandate.

 

So, in line with Wandelaar's inquiry, even without specific example of a disaster being visited on the people, it is implied. It seems you can't really talk about the benefit of sweet rain falling without recognizing the potential for adverse results if the actions of the ruler (or mankind for thst matter) are not in accord with the Dao. That, I think is what the inital lines and the concluding lines of Ch 32 are getting at.

 

Just a thought. 

 

 

Edited August 8, 2018 by OldDog
Unintentional bad grammar

[Marblehead]

7 minutes ago, OldDog said:

DDJ 32 is probably one of my favorite passages. The middle lines are etched in my memory as being the quintessential expression of the Dao.

 

The Heaven and Earth join,

And the sweet rain falls,

Beyond the command of men,

Yet evenly upon all. (Lin)

Or, this chapter could be viewed to say that nature is going to do its thing regardless of what kind of ruler a society has so why have rulers and governments in the first place.

 

[OldDog]

2 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Or, this chapter could be viewed to say that nature is going to do its thing regardless of what kind of ruler a society has so why have rulers and governments in the first place.

 

Fair enough ... could just as easily be hail falling ... or locusts.

[wandelaar]

Where is the ruler in the Lin-quote?

[rideforever]

21 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Or, this chapter could be viewed to say that nature is going to do its thing regardless of what kind of ruler a society has so why have rulers and governments in the first place.

 

Everything has structure and order.

[Marblehead]

17 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

Where is the ruler in the Lin-quote?

 

Beyond the command of men,

[Marblehead]

9 minutes ago, rideforever said:

 

Everything has structure and order.

Until man gets hold of it.

 

[rideforever]

Just now, Marblehead said:

Until man gets hold of it.

 

Mankind is on on the cusp of individuality, and oscillates between different modes on the spectrum of collective <> individuality.   When collective he is more at the mercy of cosmic forces like the alignments of the planets, when more individual then will becomes more expressed but because he is a beginner he makes many mistakes.
All this seems to be a phase of required learning.
There are many casualties and this place is not comfortable.
How to master this terrain, how to take this journey of awakening in the best way ?
- Quickly -
- Very Quickly -

[Marblehead]

1 minute ago, rideforever said:

- Quickly -
- Very Quickly -

Why the hurry?  You've got the rest of your life to get there.  And once you are there you die.  Walk slowly and live long.

 

[rideforever]

Just now, Marblehead said:

Why the hurry?  You've got the rest of your life to get there.  And once you are there you die.  Walk slowly and live long.

 

You are already dead, the only question is whether you will every live.
Move quickly and bring this intermediary space to an end.
Then you will be wuwei.
Everything else is just the imagination of those who don't sense danger.

[wandelaar]

Here is Lin Yutang's translation of the whole chapter: 

 

Quote

Tao Te Ching Chapter 32

Lin Yutang

 

Tao is absolute and has no name.
Though the uncarved wood is small,
It cannot be employed (used as vessel) by anyone.
If kings and barons can keep (this unspoiled nature),
The whole world shall yield them lordship of their own accord.

 

The Heaven and Earth join,
And the sweet rain falls,
Beyond the command of men,
Yet evenly upon all.

 

Then human civilization arose and there were names.
Since there were names,
It were well one knew where to stop.
He who knows where to stop
May be exempt from danger.
Tao in the world
May be compared to rivers that run into the sea.

 

Source: http://tao-in-you.com/lao-tzu-tao-te-ching-chapter-32/

 

Indeed rain falls beyond the command of men, but whether it will fall depends on the way the kings and barons behave.

[Marblehead]

2 minutes ago, rideforever said:

 

You are already dead, the only question is whether you will every live.
Move quickly and bring this intermediary space to an end.
Then you will be wuwei.
Everything else is just the imagination of those who don't sense danger.

Good try but I don't buy it.

 

Yes, "I" have already died.  But yes indeed, "I" did live, and I lived well all things considered.

 

No need to move quickly as I am in my immortal stage of being.  

 

I've been wu wei-ing all day today.

 

I don't use other people's imagination.  I have enough of my own.

 

[Marblehead]

5 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

Indeed rain falls beyond the command of men, but whether it will fall depends on the way the kings and barons behave.

I can't respond to this because of my biases.  (My Materialist aspect.)

 

[wandelaar]

Just now, Marblehead said:

I can't respond to this because of my biases.  (My Materialist aspect.)

 

That's no problem because this topic is about the ways Lao tzu might have been factually wrong. I think it is important to see on what points his approach for instance concerning ruling a state breaks down.

[Marblehead]

11 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

That's no problem because this topic is about the ways Lao tzu might have been factually wrong. I think it is important to see on what points his approach for instance concerning ruling a state breaks down.

I will suggest that he had no problem with government in and of itself.  His problem was with bad government.  Taking from the poor to give to the wealthy.

 

Of course, in chapter 80 he presents an ideal such that government is not needed but that is built on the assumption that all men will do good if given the opportunity.

 

Edited August 9, 2018 by Marblehead

[Wu Ming Jen]

IF.... kings and barons could be like the tao all things would be in order. The kings and Barons are employed in this case not having the mandate of heaven, the Tao can not be employed it can not be used against something else.  kings and barons is a funny translation so is un carved wood, out of context but whatever.

 

The  tao te ching points to how Tao can be applied to all facets of life, of government.just like cooking small fish do not mess with it tooooo much Tao everyone has to use it but it seems like it is not there.

 

 

 

 

 

[OldDog]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

Where is the ruler in the Lin-quote?

 

Sorry, should have included the entire Ch 32 from Lin Yutang right off the bat.

 

Tao is absolute and- has no name.
Though the uncarved wood is small,

It cannot be employed (used as vessel) by anyone.
If kings and barons can keep (this unspoiled nature),

The whole world shall yield them lordship of their own accord.

The Heaven and Earth join,

And the sweet rain falls,

Beyond the command of men,

Yet evenly upon all.

 

Then human civilisation arose and there were names. 
Since there were names,

It were well one knew where to stop.
He who knows where to stop

May be exempt from danger.
Tao in the world

May be compared to rivers that run into the sea.

 

Reference to kings and barons is not peculiar to Lin. Others reference rulers, monarchs, lords, princes, marquises, etc.

[flowing hands]

CHAPTER 32
The Dao is eternally indefinable.
If kings and lords could use it to rule over their lands and people, everything would
naturally take its course.
Men would need no laws or bars to restrict their actions and their movements.
Once things are broken up and divided, the whole is lost.
Then the parts are given names.
When things are given names,
their purpose in the whole structure is lost.
Men should avoid giving things too many names, and look more closely at the whole.
For the Ten Thousand Things are part of one on-going, flowing structure.
Men are part of this also.
Here lies the key to balance and harmony.

[Wu Ming Jen]

Men should avoid giving things too many names, and look more closely at the whole.

 

That sums up this chapter if we apply that to government we have endless examples of how government is not in accord with Tao.

 

Lobbyist, self interest groups, corporations so many agendas who can keep track. All  acting for itself  makes it very difficult to be interested in such things.

[wandelaar]

1 hour ago, Marblehead said:

Of course, in chapter he presents an ideal such that government is not needed but that is built on the assumption that all men will do good if given the opportunity.

 

And that assumption is also highly problematic. I think Lao tzu is too optimistic about what even an ideal ruler can accomplish, and about what ordinary people will choose to do when allowed to do whatever they want.

Edited August 8, 2018 by wandelaar

[Lost in Translation]

2 hours ago, OldDog said:

Ch 32 when taken as a whole point to what the ancients accepted as a fact of life. That is, circumstances in the world derive directly from whether ruler holds the Mandate of Heaven. The ranges of events resulting from loss of the mandate could be anything natural catastrophies (drought, flood, earthquake, famine) to socio-political events (revolution, regime overthrow, assassination, war). These reults could be visited directly by Heaven ... or, the people could understand that the mandate was on their side and rebel against authority ... or, realize they were being conquered becuase someone else held the mandate.

 

"Mandate of Heaven" could easily to expressed as "In accordance with Tao". If you read what your wrote and simply make this one substitution then the essence is the same but the context becomes much different!

 

"That is, circumstances in the world derive directly from whether ruler acts in accordance with Tao. The ranges of events resulting from failure to act in accordance with Tao could be anything natural catastrophies (drought, flood, earthquake, famine) to socio-political events (revolution, regime overthrow, assassination, war). These reults could be visited directly by Heaven ... or, the people could understand that they, and not their prince, were acting in accordance with Tao and rebel against authority ... or, realize they were being conquered because someone else, and not them, acted in accordance with Tao."

 

This one change of focus has a big impact. It inverts the cause/effect relationship. Instead of being at the mercy of outside forces it shows that we, by our actions, bring forces to bear either with us or against us.

[rene]

28 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

 

And that assumption is also highly problematic. I think Lao tzu is too optimistic about what even an ideal ruler can accomplish, and about what ordinary people will choose to do when allowed to do whatever they want.

 

Hmmm...I don't know if LZ is being too optimistic; my take is he was pretty aware of the feebleness of human nature (Ref: Ch. 70: My words are easy to understand and easy to perform, Yet no man under heaven knows them or practices them).

 

Optimism is there though; so perhaps it's based on what could be - if his ideas were implemented?

 

But who knows for sure; both your and my opinion on this is conjecture.