AGAIN: Tao Te Ching

Yes Spider Goat, the translation from Stephen Mitchell is by far the best one, hands down. IMO.
Beutiful.
Taoism definitely broadened my experience of life.
Those were definitely some memorable times of self discovery.

The Tao is the way. The way things are.
How you live your life. How your neighbor lives his.
How all of us live.
The way of things, the way of the universe.
It's what happens.
It's what's happening.
Right now.
Before you.
Through you.
It is you.
And me.
It is all.
It is one.
It is many.
Its everything.
Its not a thought,
it's an experience.

The Tao Te Ching has come to me as meaning" The way of change".
Tao= The way
Te= Virtue
Ching= Change
From the book The "I Ching", Book of Changes.

I would suggest Learning the Way of Reason.
But thats just my opinion.
Enjoy your life.
Be awesome!
 
For one, spell it correctly for crying out loud!!!!!!!!
Yah ,I know it's dumb.
And for another, what the hell are you talking about????!!!!!
In laymens or your own terms please.
O.K., I'll look up teleoolgical......O.K.
What's it's end goal?
There is no end goal.
It's living now, working with nature, observings its laws, simplicity.
Living the path of least resistance.
Letting go of all resistance within and without.
It describes "you" as the way.
It's the experience of being alive.
It is the Eternal Now.

As for super natural, there is none of that either.
It is totaly this world here.
Nothing super about it.
It's as glorious or simple as you perceive it.Or both.
 
Daoism is an alternate spelling.

Dao...Da a a o
Dao light comes and me want to go home.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. Taoism...a way of showing you what is past your own mind, concepts, ideas, illusions, and the reality and manner of being that would emerge from having a mind pure of deceptions.
 
To you tao is everything that isn't you.

To someone else, you are part of the tao.

It is the complement of being. It is all that cannot be known.

(noting that what we have of our experience is sensory... it's an abstract reflection of the thing... but it cannot be the actual thing)

I think that Taoism in a nutshell is being mindful of the tao.
 
noting that what we have of our experience is sensory

those are fighting words in this subforum, brother wes.
perhaps a reminder of one of the basic tenets of e phil would be in order..

Yoga is the art of accepting, understanding, and even appreciating the seven senses, and then transcending them to give us a glimpse of the Beyond.

In our daily life, of course, the seven senses are essential in order to live and function in the world. They are not to be denied or suppressed. But in the process of Pratyahara, they are temporarily put to one side so that we can ‘see’ beyond them.

pratayahara


it is an experience not easily communicable.

it's an abstract reflection of the thing... but it cannot be the actual thing)

direct cognition refers to the lack of a mediator. that is, the gross senses do not come b/w you, the knower, and the known. in essense, you are tao.

alas, i merely parrot the sages as i (like you), have only abstractions. ;)
yet i have had a glimpse [:rolleyes:] of what could be so.....i am curious. have you meditated? if so, details?
 
Hathor said:
noting that what we have of our experience is sensory

those are fighting words in this subforum, brother wes.
perhaps a reminder of one of the basic tenets of e phil would be in order..

Yoga is the art of accepting, understanding, and even appreciating the seven senses, and then transcending them to give us a glimpse of the Beyond.

In our daily life, of course, the seven senses are essential in order to live and function in the world. They are not to be denied or suppressed. But in the process of Pratyahara, they are temporarily put to one side so that we can ‘see’ beyond them.

pratayahara


it is an experience not easily communicable.

it's an abstract reflection of the thing... but it cannot be the actual thing)

direct cognition refers to the lack of a mediator. that is, the gross senses do not come b/w you, the knower, and the known. in essense, you are tao.

alas, i merely parrot the sages as i (like you), have only abstractions.
yet i have had a glimpse [] of what could be so.....i am curious. have you meditated? if so, details?

oh thank you, some of it reminds me of this subject, but that's one step added to what you already brought up

staying on topic...I'm really starting to like the whole idea on Daoism, but I feel a bit awkward when the nitty and gritty of what the Dao is begins with a simple idea and everything else begins to sound pretty thought out and then it comes back to the simple idea. Isn't the essential "truth" of things (for lack of a better term) just plain incommunicable? Help me out on this please, I really must change into a better train of logic. :confused:
 
Last edited:
Essential truth can't be told, but lesser truths can. Its up to you to read between the lines. Daoism uses intuition rather than logic.
 
I'd say it also uses a great deal of external logic - taking logic to its extreme ends. its very extreme ends. beyond where war and hatered matter, beyond where even you and I matter. my opinion, of course.
 
As I understand it, Taoism is really all sorts of things to all sorts of people. Which is OK, because it is all-encompassing. And it is nothing at all.

The Tao Te Jing is both a poetic depiction of a philosophy and a guide to proper ruling. As a philosophy it tends towards self-negation and openness toward the "natural" course of things. As a guide to ruling, it attempts to apply these principles to help keep rulers focussed on the people they are responsible for rather than the power they wield.

The gist of many Taoist texts is the attempt to achieve a state of emotional detachment that I do find a bit disturbing. But I personally believe that the essence of this is to help people free themselves from the roller coaster of unexamined emotional responses rather than to deny them the pleasures (and pains) of experiencing life.

The very first lines of the Tao Te Jing state that the Tao cannot be objectively defined. It is a subjective experience. Freeing oneself from desires opens one up to more experiences, ones that can certainly transcend those described by any sage.
 
I'm not convinced by any emotional detachment argument, more that I think you should follow and direct your emotions, and let them direct you, but dont let them get the upper hand.
 
Taoism predates the Tao Te Ching by many thousands of years. Lao tzu (assuming he existed) was a Tao practitioner who defined his beliefs beautifully, but it is really not necessary to read and/or understand his work to be a Taoist.

Be warned, though. It can be a difficult and lonely path.

Here is a tremendous resource: http://taoism.net

Apostrophes
 
Oh, and emotional detachment should not be confused with apathy. Emotions can and do confuse the individual, clouding judgement and leading to difficulty. A Taoist sage does not allow this to happen, though, through compassion, she does what needs to be done. She will not give food to a hungry man because his suffering causes her to feel upset; she gives food to a hungry man because he is hungry.

Apostrophes
 
A person of tao is not emotionally detached, they are emotionally connected, culturally induced judgements do not cloud their intuition. Compassion as a principle, as well as principles in general, do not arise from the source, but from mere knowledge. This is the meaning of:
When the great Tao is forgotten,
goodness and piety appear.
The person of tao may feed a man or not, charity can sometimes be the wrong thing to do.
 
I don't agree that compassion is not of the source. I really don't. If I disagree with you elsewhere I think it's just a question of words. I am sure you and would get along really well in real life!

Apostrophes
 
Back
Top