The correct one will be the type that is linked to Chinese culture before Buddhism enter China for sure. Just like in order to understand early Buddhism, someone that understand ancient Indian religions will do it correctly.Spiny Norman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 11:00 amIt seems there are different versions and interpretations of Taoism, like with Buddhism. So making connections between the two is not straightforward.form wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 7:08 amSome people said it is about returning to non duality, but that will always be an opinion.
It is for sure very high level as it contains certain things mentioned by the Buddha considering it was written before Buddhism spread to China. It seems to me that the chapters consist of old and new addition. Also we cannot exactly be sure that Laotze exist as a person like what we are sure that Buddha exist before as a human.
Tao
Re: Tao
Re: Tao
I don't know about a phenomena v. noumena style distinction. That conversation is one held by Western converts to Buddhism trying to reckon Buddhist metaphysics against Western metaphysics. I'm not saying that's a bad thing in-and-of itself however. These kinds of conversations have to happen if Westerners are to understand foreign metaphysics and hermeneutics in general. Once a bridge can be built between two systems, then those used to functioning only on terms of one given system can be in a position to cross over into the foreign metaphysic and start to see the ways in which East doesn't meet West in addition to the ways in which they mutually meet and find accord.Spiny Norman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 5:04 amSo does "surfaces" here refer to the naming of characteristics, eg "blue sky"?Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:19 pmI'd say "yes." It says as much in the opening verses. The unnamed is the origin of everything. The named is the origin of everything. The unnamed is the mystery. The named is merely the surfaces. The surfaces and the mystery are the same as far as their source, yet they differ in name all the same. The equivalence of these two, the unnamed and the named, heaven and earth versus the 10,000 things, is a "secret" that is the door to all mysteries.
And what about the "mystery", or unnamed?
Is this pointing to a phenomena v. noumena style distinction, or a distinction between appearance and essence?
Rather than "phenomena v. noumena," I would say it's "underlying principle versus temporary substantiation." Or even "underlying substance versus temporary hypostasis." Most accurately, it's "essence versus function," a native Chinese metaphysic. I'd say your distinction of "appearance versus essence" isn't way off.
It's a tricky passage where it refers to "surfaces" or "boundaries" vs "the mystery/the secret." I'm going to dump a bunch of translations, some very dated, and at least two newer ones that I like.
James Legge translates it thus:
...it rhymes, unfortunately, which compromises how closely it can follow the Chinese. Here, we see a mystery being "sounded," which isn't in the text at all. More on bad rhyming translations from the 1800s later.Always without desire we must be found,
if its deep mystery we would sound;
But if desire always within us be,
Its outer fringe is all that we shall see.
Dwight Goddard (I think his "translation" is actually a "commentary" from the early "American Zen" movement) translates it thus:
...readers can see that this rendering adds a lot of material designed to be clarificatory that is not in the root text at all.Therefore not to desire the things of sense is to know the freedom of spirituality; and to desire is to learn the limitation of matter.
Martin Palmer's is even worse on terms of adding a bunch of invented material designed to "clarify" the text:
...it's almost completely unrelated to the Chinese text.Follow the nothingness of the Tao, and you can be like it, not needing anything, seeing the wonder and the root of everything.
And even if you cannot grasp this nothingness, you can still see something of the Tao in everything.
This is from John C. H. Wu:
Ursula K. Le Guin made a translation of the Dàodéjīng highly based on Paul Carus's 1898 translation. For all intensive purposes, it can be considered a re-working of Carus's dated translation, eliminating the rhyming and trying to aesthetically update the work. This is from the original 1898 translation:So, as ever hidden, we should look at its inner essence:
As always manifest, we should look at its outer aspects.
It rhymes, which was big back in the 1800s. Here is Le Guin's version (AFAIK, she does not read Chinese herself):"He who desireless is found
The spiritual of the world will sound.
But he who by desire is bound
Sees the mere shell of things around."
She changes "(mere) shell," i.e. "surfaces," to "(only) what it wants," which is not a translation at all, but rather a poetical rendering of Carus's "mere shell of things around."So the unwanting soul sees what’s hidden,
and the ever-wanting soul sees only what it wants.
Moving to a translation that I actually like, we have Roger Ames and David Hall's:
The translator includes a footnote on the word "boundaries" (i.e. "surfaces"):Thus, to be really objectless in one’s desires is how one observes the mysteries of all things,
While really having desires is how one observes their boundaries.
I think his usage of the term "phenomena" is based on Buddhist usage of the term "dharma." As mentioned before, Dàoists incorporate a sort of "dharmavāda" into their religion over time that is more-or-less directly modelled on Buddhism. The whole text corresponding to this translation is available here. I don't yet know how to follow the citations of Zhuangzi and its commentary to see what he is referencing.Phenomena are never either atomistically discrete or complete. See Zhuangzi 5.2.40 and commentary on it in 63.23.58; compare Graham (1981):54 and 104, and Watson (1968):41 and 257.
Lastly, from the aforementioned Paul Lin:
He reads "boundaries/surfaces" in a much more abstract way, as "potentialities," which isn't utterly off-the-wall but is certainly at variance with most translations that I consider to be reliable.Therefore constantly without desire, there is the recognition of subtlety; but constantly with desire, only the realization of potentiality.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Tao
There's a formal Dàoist Canon, but I don't even know what it's called. For instance, the aforementioned scripture "Shengxuan neijiao jing," is called "DZ 318," but I don't know how to even look it up. Dàoist literature has been on my back burner for a while, but I never seem to get to exploring it.
There's probably some comparable version of CBETA, SAT Daizōkyō, or SuttaCentral available to navigate the Dàoist Canon, which I can guarantee is mostly to almost entirely untranslated, but I don't have access to it as of yet to share it here.
There's probably some comparable version of CBETA, SAT Daizōkyō, or SuttaCentral available to navigate the Dàoist Canon, which I can guarantee is mostly to almost entirely untranslated, but I don't have access to it as of yet to share it here.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Tao
Some links I happened by:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daozang#T ... %B4%9E_400
https://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/ ... aozang.htm
I can't yet find an encyclopedic account of the Canon, but these are general overviews.
Edit: There are better resources in the Wikipedia article's citations.
https://pages.ucsd.edu/~dkjordan/chin/CanonDaw.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20120306001 ... oe_idx.htm
This paper contextualizes the above "DZ" citation slightly: http://www.goldenelixirpress.com/files/ ... alogue.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daozang#T ... %B4%9E_400
https://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/ ... aozang.htm
I can't yet find an encyclopedic account of the Canon, but these are general overviews.
Edit: There are better resources in the Wikipedia article's citations.
https://pages.ucsd.edu/~dkjordan/chin/CanonDaw.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20120306001 ... oe_idx.htm
This paper contextualizes the above "DZ" citation slightly: http://www.goldenelixirpress.com/files/ ... alogue.pdf
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Tao
From the third link above:
So earlier when I said that "there is a formal canon" I should have said "I think there's a formal canon," because in truth it seems there as many canons as there are schools.Throughout history the "Daoist Canon," or Dàozàng 道藏 "Vault of the Way," has suffered from:
1. lack of official status
2. lack of agreement about the contents across different Daoist sects
3. the tendency to include ever more works
4. much overlap among the works making it up, which often duplicated parts of other works
5. little coherence in content from one work to another
6. the inclusion of liturgical and meditational texts that make little sense without orally transmitted exegesis, rarely stable and often lost
7. lack of adequate indexing
8. a tradition that regarded the details of Daoist practice as secret, so that different families transmitted different collections of Daoist books, often differently interpreted, and none wanted to have their versions published
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Tao
The fourth link, https://web.archive.org/web/20120306001 ... oe_idx.htm, has some translated scriptures, but unfortunately has no dates associated with them. Given the previous posted material, it seems that a lot of these scriptures might be extremely apocryphal. Here is the first translated scripture from there, entitled "The Supreme Jade Emperor's Heart Imprint Scripture," translated by Frederic Henry Balfour:
This references "the Elixir," which is to-do with Chinese alchemy. These two, alchemy and exorcism, are topics fundamental to Dàoism that are rarely heard of in the West.There are three degrees of Supreme Elixir: the Spirit, the Breath, and the Essential Vigour.
Obscure and recondite! Confused and dim!
Maintain vacuity, and you will preserve the actual, accomplishing it in an instant of time.
Make the wind return and mix it up, after a hundred days, the work will be achieved; then you may silently adore the Supreme Ruler, and in twelve years' time may wing your flight above.
The wise understand this easily, but the dull find it difficult to perform.
[Those who have attained it] tread in the Light of Heaven; by inhaling and exhaling, they nourish the Pure Breath; they emerge from the Azure (Heaven) and enter the Female (Earth);
now, as it were, annihilated, and now, as it were, existing,
they never cease to all eternity; their supports are strong, their roots deep.
Men are all possessed of Essential Vigour; this corresponds with the Spirit, the Spirit with the Breath, and the Breath with the essential nature of the body. Those who have not obtained their original or essential nature, all usurp their reputation.
The Spirit is able to enter stone; the Spirit is able to fly through solid bodies. If it enters water, it is not drowned; or fire, it is not burned.
The Spirit depends, for its birth, upon the body; the Essential Vigour depends, for attaining its full proportions, upon the Breath. They never lose their vitality or force, but are evergreen, like the pine and cedar trees.
The three are all one Principle. Their mystery and beauty cannot be heard. The combination of them produces existence; their dispersion, extinction.
If the seven apertures are all open, each aperture will be bright and luminous, [for] the Holy Sun and Holy Moon will pour their effulgence upon the Golden Hall.
Once obtained, they are obtained for ever; then the body will become naturally buoyant, the Universal Harmony will be replete, and the bones will dissolve into the cold chrysoprasus-flower.
If the Elixir be obtained, supernatural intelligence will result; if it be not obtained, there will be defeat and ruin. The Elixir, being in the centre of the body, is neither white nor black.
If this treatise be conned-over and observed ten thousand times, its beautiful and mysterious doctrine will become clear of itself.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Tao
This is talking about the unconscious. And the way to deal with unconscious.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 1:53 pmI don't know about a phenomena v. noumena style distinction. That conversation is one held by Western converts to Buddhism trying to reckon Buddhist metaphysics against Western metaphysics. I'm not saying that's a bad thing in-and-of itself however. These kinds of conversations have to happen if Westerners are to understand foreign metaphysics and hermeneutics in general. Once a bridge can be built between two systems, then those used to functioning only on terms of one given system can be in a position to cross over into the foreign metaphysic and start to see the ways in which East doesn't meet West in addition to the ways in which they mutually meet and find accord.Spiny Norman wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 5:04 amSo does "surfaces" here refer to the naming of characteristics, eg "blue sky"?Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:19 pmI'd say "yes." It says as much in the opening verses. The unnamed is the origin of everything. The named is the origin of everything. The unnamed is the mystery. The named is merely the surfaces. The surfaces and the mystery are the same as far as their source, yet they differ in name all the same. The equivalence of these two, the unnamed and the named, heaven and earth versus the 10,000 things, is a "secret" that is the door to all mysteries.
And what about the "mystery", or unnamed?
Is this pointing to a phenomena v. noumena style distinction, or a distinction between appearance and essence?
Rather than "phenomena v. noumena," I would say it's "underlying principle versus temporary substantiation." Or even "underlying substance versus temporary hypostasis." Most accurately, it's "essence versus function," a native Chinese metaphysic. I'd say your distinction of "appearance versus essence" isn't way off.
It's a tricky passage where it refers to "surfaces" or "boundaries" vs "the mystery/the secret." I'm going to dump a bunch of translations, some very dated, and at least two newer ones that I like.
James Legge translates it thus:...it rhymes, unfortunately, which compromises how closely it can follow the Chinese. Here, we see a mystery being "sounded," which isn't in the text at all. More on bad rhyming translations from the 1800s later.Always without desire we must be found,
if its deep mystery we would sound;
But if desire always within us be,
Its outer fringe is all that we shall see.
Dwight Goddard (I think his "translation" is actually a "commentary" from the early "American Zen" movement) translates it thus:...readers can see that this rendering adds a lot of material designed to be clarificatory that is not in the root text at all.Therefore not to desire the things of sense is to know the freedom of spirituality; and to desire is to learn the limitation of matter.
Martin Palmer's is even worse on terms of adding a bunch of invented material designed to "clarify" the text:...it's almost completely unrelated to the Chinese text.Follow the nothingness of the Tao, and you can be like it, not needing anything, seeing the wonder and the root of everything.
And even if you cannot grasp this nothingness, you can still see something of the Tao in everything.
This is from John C. H. Wu:Ursula K. Le Guin made a translation of the Dàodéjīng highly based on Paul Carus's 1898 translation. For all intensive purposes, it can be considered a re-working of Carus's dated translation, eliminating the rhyming and trying to aesthetically update the work. This is from the original 1898 translation:So, as ever hidden, we should look at its inner essence:
As always manifest, we should look at its outer aspects.It rhymes, which was big back in the 1800s. Here is Le Guin's version (AFAIK, she does not read Chinese herself):"He who desireless is found
The spiritual of the world will sound.
But he who by desire is bound
Sees the mere shell of things around."She changes "(mere) shell," i.e. "surfaces," to "(only) what it wants," which is not a translation at all, but rather a poetical rendering of Carus's "mere shell of things around."So the unwanting soul sees what’s hidden,
and the ever-wanting soul sees only what it wants.
Moving to a translation that I actually like, we have Roger Ames and David Hall's:The translator includes a footnote on the word "boundaries" (i.e. "surfaces"):Thus, to be really objectless in one’s desires is how one observes the mysteries of all things,
While really having desires is how one observes their boundaries.I think his usage of the term "phenomena" is based on Buddhist usage of the term "dharma." As mentioned before, Dàoists incorporate a sort of "dharmavāda" into their religion over time that is more-or-less directly modelled on Buddhism. The whole text corresponding to this translation is available here. I don't yet know how to follow the citations of Zhuangzi and its commentary to see what he is referencing.Phenomena are never either atomistically discrete or complete. See Zhuangzi 5.2.40 and commentary on it in 63.23.58; compare Graham (1981):54 and 104, and Watson (1968):41 and 257.
Lastly, from the aforementioned Paul Lin:He reads "boundaries/surfaces" in a much more abstract way, as "potentialities," which isn't utterly off-the-wall but is certainly at variance with most translations that I consider to be reliable.Therefore constantly without desire, there is the recognition of subtlety; but constantly with desire, only the realization of potentiality.
Re: Tao
What do you mean by "the unconscious?" Do you mean normal unconsciousness, like when you get knocked out?
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Tao
You have understand Freud and Jung. Check out their basic theories. Even when we think we are awake, unconscious part of the mind play the majority. Mindfulness is the method to loosen it gradually.
Eastern spiritual theories especially like Laotze (and of course buddhism) need to read and meditate to penetrate institutively. That is why he said what can be talked about is not Tao. It is also a high level "over the world" path.
I would say language is a double edged sword. Every person has their own "language", language is conditioned.
Re: Tao
Well, I can appreciate some of what you say. I disagree however that Freud's nineteenth century theories about id, ego, superego, or even more outlandish ones like the Oedipus complex, are a necessary or even good hermeneutic to read either historical or contemporary Dàoism through. Contemporary Dàoism maybe, as it seems quite eclectic.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Tao
Not all his theories are applicable with meditation and the mind. But the ice berg tip and bottom is in line with ignorance, libido theory in line with lust. For a modern scholar that understands and has written about unconscious and buddhism check out prof Johanne Bronkhorst.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 11:13 pm Well, I can appreciate some of what you say. I disagree however that Freud's nineteenth century theories about id, ego, superego, or even more outlandish ones like the Oedipus complex, are a necessary or even good hermeneutic to read either historical or contemporary Dàoism through. Contemporary Dàoism maybe, as it seems quite eclectic.
Thinking is just early level of the path. At higher level it is contemplation with meditation. Be careful with commentaries and reading and thinking too much.
Re: Tao
Fair enough. Don't worry. I don't actually believe in Dàoism and I'm not going to be trying to meditate based on Dàoist instructions. That being said, it is interesting when they resemble Buddhist instructions, on those rare times that they do. I'm not interested in penetrating deeply into Dàoism, because I've already decided that it's not the truest/best, but learning about it is very interesting indeed. I am fine if this prevents me from ever becoming a Dàoist Sage.
I am fine with being able to differentiate between the real thing generally and the various Western re-inventions of it. That's more what I'm interested in. Telling the truth from the fiction.
I am fine with being able to differentiate between the real thing generally and the various Western re-inventions of it. That's more what I'm interested in. Telling the truth from the fiction.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
-
- Posts: 10176
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Tao
I'm not seeing an obvious connection with Freudian ideas, except perhaps in the sense of the unconscious being "beneath the surface".Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 11:13 pm Well, I can appreciate some of what you say. I disagree however that Freud's nineteenth century theories about id, ego, superego, or even more outlandish ones like the Oedipus complex, are a necessary or even good hermeneutic to read either historical or contemporary Dàoism through. Contemporary Dàoism maybe, as it seems quite eclectic.
It seems like Taoism involves looking at things more deeply, in a radically different way, and not being caught up in desire for mere appearances. Maybe that's a similarity with Buddhism?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Tao
I guess the idea of the unconscious or the subconscious in western psychoanalysis is still a manifestation of causality where origination can be inferred through analysis. The closest to this in Buddhism is Anusaya. The prefix "sub" is designed to convey something problematic underneath.Spiny Norman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 03, 2022 4:45 amI'm not seeing an obvious connection with Freudian ideas, except perhaps in the sense of the unconscious being "beneath the surface".Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Sat Jul 02, 2022 11:13 pm Well, I can appreciate some of what you say. I disagree however that Freud's nineteenth century theories about id, ego, superego, or even more outlandish ones like the Oedipus complex, are a necessary or even good hermeneutic to read either historical or contemporary Dàoism through. Contemporary Dàoism maybe, as it seems quite eclectic.
It seems like Taoism involves looking at things more deeply, in a radically different way, and not being caught up in desire for mere appearances. Maybe that's a similarity with Buddhism?
Same logic applies, but in reverse, when it comes to higher or heavenly realms in Buddhism and Daoism. The whole of causality, as an experiential realm is problematic as long as higher realms remain unknown. Higher realms are believed to be beyond analysis and beyond words.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
Re: Tao
I think that any contemplative tradition, whether Buddhist, Daoist, Hindu, Sufi, or Christian, or whatever, that acknowledges that our simple experience of the world is not the be-all and end-all, will have elements of "looking at things more deeply." I mean, even non-contemplative religions have versions of this. To a fundamentalist American Creationist, "looking more deeply" at the world might involve "realizing" that it's flat, or that it's only 5000 years old or that the Bible's infallible concerning it, or that it's "obviously" all God's work when you "look deeper," right?Spiny Norman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 03, 2022 4:45 amIt seems like Taoism involves looking at things more deeply, in a radically different way, and not being caught up in desire for mere appearances. Maybe that's a similarity with Buddhism?
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.