Something you must know about Tao Te Ching

[Mak_Tin_Si]

As requested from the moderator of TaoBum, I have moved to this forum : http://www.daoismworld.com right now.

 

So if you want to talk to me or ask me anything about Taoism, please feel free to go over to this forum and enjoy the new forum. New members for discussion are also welcomed.

 

http://www.daoismworld.com

 

Mak Tin Si

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mak_Tin_Si

[teopakees]

Thanks for this posting.

[Mak_Tin_Si]

As requested from the moderator of TaoBum, I have moved to this forum : http://www.daoismworld.com right now.

 

So if you want to talk to me or ask me anything about Taoism, please feel free to go over to this forum and enjoy the new forum. New members for discussion are also welcomed.

 

http://www.daoismworld.com

 

Mak Tin Si

Edited January 8, 2009 by Mak_Tin_Si

[Anabhogya-Carya]

You mean the mythical history of Lao Tzu. It is highly unlikely that he was an actual person or that the Tao Te Ching was written in entirity at one time.

[Squatting Monkey]

You mean the mythical history of Lao Tzu. It is highly unlikely that he was an actual person or that the Tao Te Ching was written in entirity at one time.

 

Agreed. It was probably the work of several 'authors'.

[Aetherous]

Where is the evidence that it was several authors? As far as I know, it's just a theory. I tend to stick to the traditional tale that's passed down, rather than what scholars "what if".

[Squatting Monkey]

Where is the evidence that it was 'Lao Tzu' ?

[Aetherous]

The evidence is sketchy for both sides, but the tales that were passed down is that it was Lao Tzu. That makes it more likely.

[Squatting Monkey]

I would also like it if one person was responsible for this awesome text.

Guess we'll never know.

[Quan Xie]

never mind

Edited December 29, 2008 by Quan Xie

[Anabhogya-Carya]

The evidence is sketchy for both sides, but the tales that were passed down is that it was Lao Tzu. That makes it more likely.

 

o yes, because a tale is passed down in obscurity it makes it much more likely. I guess the whole corpus of mythology has just become a credible source of history.

[Aetherous]

o yes, because a tale is passed down in obscurity it makes it much more likely.

 

Yes it does, unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise.

[Anabhogya-Carya]

Yes it does, unless there is evidence to suggest otherwise.

 

There is evidence, if not conclusive evidence, to back areas of both arguments. But have found much more evidence to back the historical inaccuarcy of Lao Tzu. D.C. Lau, in his translation of the Tao Te Ching, goes into detail in his introduction about the associated history of Lao Tzu, and the evidence that leads to the conclusion that he was not a single figure, as do many other scholars. Or, if he was a single figure, did not write the TTC as a whole. Coupled with the idea that Lao Tzu was a individual (Lao Tzu being an honourific title of course) are tales (passed down) of a miraculous birth and other supernatural events associated with him, are we to believe this as well?

 

And again, many stories about great individuals and great events were passed down and written down, that does not make them reliable, or grant that they are even interpreted correctly. See, Genesis, Gilgamesh, Bhagavad Gita, King Arthur, etc.

[Aetherous]

I will check out D.C. Lau's translation. Thanks.