Tao

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: Tao

Post by PeterC86 »

Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 6:39 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 6:13 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 1:56 pm Nope.

The idea of Dàoism you are pedaling here is nothing but a neutered Westernized version of a Chinese religion. Westerners do this all the same. Strip the religion of the elements they find too confusing and then repackage it as a philosophy that no one follows but everyone knows.
Our explanations are wonderfully complementing actually.
If you think we are in agreement, it must be because you have misunderstood me.
Obviously you're not in agreement, because you see 10,000 things as "everything". Therefore, according to you, "the line is quite mysterious and seemingly-redundant". Which you explain with; "this is part of its poetic message".
Either way, "heaven and earth," i.e. what the "10,000 things" are contrasted with, are both named and enumerated.
Yes, but the unnamed is the wellspring of heaven and earth, and the named is the mother of 10,000 things. These two realities are the same in source, but they differ in name.
You are of course free to interpret this Chinese poem any way you want, but just because it can read in such-and-such way from a Petervādin hermeneutic doesn't make it so.
Maybe you can get off from your high horse, and stop with the hollow personal attacks on me in each of your posts. They don't support your point, nor do they hurt me, nor the content of my points, nor the way how I present my points. I don't believe that other users or readers are particularly impressed by them either. Instead, they only make you seem rather childish, which actually harms your attempt of showing assumed wisdom, and it is also rather unbecoming. Do with this whatever you want. Goodbye.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Tao

Post by Coëmgenu »

PeterC86 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:00 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 6:39 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 6:13 pm

Our explanations are wonderfully complementing actually.
If you think we are in agreement, it must be because you have misunderstood me.
Obviously you're not in agreement, because you see 10,000 things as "everything". Therefore, according to you, "the line is quite mysterious and seemingly-redundant". Which you explain with; "this is part of its poetic message".
I did not say that it is redundant. I said that it is "seemingly-redundant." Who is it "seemingly-redundant" too? One who reads this passage and understands even a small something of the underlying language through which it is communicated, but who has not been substantially exposed to the living tradition of Daoism even peripherally. If you had an accurate understanding of this passage, you would quite easily and fluently be able to identify the ways in which the passage plays with very strict literary parallelism and paradox, paradox that is "seemingly-redundant" to one who does not know how to read the passage.

萬物 has as one of it's meaning "all things," and this is clearly the meaning that is meant, as per Wáng Bì's commentary:
All being originates from non-being. Therefore, while formless and unnamed, it is the beginning of all things. While formed and named, it grows, cultivates, protects, and disciplines, becoming the mother. Tao described as formless and unnamed begins the completion of all things. To begin and complete without knowing why—this is the mystery of the mystical.
The translator, Paul Lin, renders the last line of the first set of verses differently from me. He says
The two come from the same source, having different names.
Both are called mysteries,
More mystical than the most mystical,
The gate of all subtleties.
Since he is a much more qualified translator than I, I have no problem with continuing the thread using his renderings, as they are likely superior to my own.

Note his translation of verse 2
The Nameless [non-being] is the origin of heaven and earth;
The Namable [being] is the mother of all things.
In conclusion, 萬物, the so-called "10,000 things," refers to all things, otherwise known as "everything." This isn't a matter of one opinion versus another. It is a matter of what 萬物 actually means here on a linguistic level, and futhermore a matter of how Dàoists have actually transmitted and preserved the intended meanings of their scriptures.
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.
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: Tao

Post by PeterC86 »

Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:33 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:00 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 6:39 pm If you think we are in agreement, it must be because you have misunderstood me.
Obviously you're not in agreement, because you see 10,000 things as "everything". Therefore, according to you, "the line is quite mysterious and seemingly-redundant". Which you explain with; "this is part of its poetic message".
I did not say that it is redundant. I said that it is "seemingly-redundant." Who is it "seemingly-redundant" too? One who reads this passage and understands even a small something of the underlying language through which it is communicated, but who has not been substantially exposed to the living tradition of Daoism even peripherally. If you had an accurate understanding of this passage, you would quite easily and fluently be able to identify the ways in which the passage plays with very strict literary parallelism and paradox, paradox that is "seemingly-redundant" to one who does not know how to read the passage.

萬物 has as one of it's meaning "all things," and this is clearly the meaning that is meant, as per Wáng Bì's commentary:
All being originates from non-being. Therefore, while formless and unnamed, it is the beginning of all things. While formed and named, it grows, cultivates, protects, and disciplines, becoming the mother. Tao described as formless and unnamed begins the completion of all things. To begin and complete without knowing why—this is the mystery of the mystical.
The translator, Paul Lin, renders the last line of the first set of verses differently from me. He says
The two come from the same source, having different names.
Both are called mysteries,
More mystical than the most mystical,
The gate of all subtleties.
Since he is a much more qualified translator than I, I have no problem with continuing the thread using his renderings, as they are likely superior to my own.

Note his translation of verse 2
The Nameless [non-being] is the origin of heaven and earth;
The Namable [being] is the mother of all things.
In conclusion, 萬物, the so-called "10,000 things," refers to all things, otherwise known as "everything." This isn't a matter of one opinion versus another. It is a matter of what 萬物 actually means here on a linguistic level, and futhermore a matter of how Dàoists have actually transmitted and preserved the intended meanings of their scriptures.
Yes, ultimately they are the same,

Their sameness is a secret.
It is the secret of all secrets — the door to all mysteries.


So if one understands that they are the same, the duality 'being vs non-being', and all other dualities, implode. Which is the same as Nibbana, which I explained in the beginning.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Tao

Post by Coëmgenu »

Well, we'll have to disagree that it is "the same as Nibbana." That being said, you are perfectly free to entertain the opinion that the sameness of what is called "the unnamed" and "the named" and/or what is called "the door to all mysteries" in the opening verses is "the same as Nibbana." I am free to disagree, and to lay out textual reasons that inform that disagreement.

Paul Lin doesn't read 同 as "sameness." He reads it as a pronoun (i.e. "both"), which doesn't make sense to me. I'll have to look at this and see if I need to change the way I've been translating the passage.
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.
PeterC86
Posts: 1412
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: Tao

Post by PeterC86 »

Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 10:39 pm Well, we'll have to disagree that it is "the same as Nibbana."
I don't, and I don't see why you have to either.
That being said, you are perfectly free to entertain the opinion that the sameness of what is called "the unnamed" and "the named" and/or what is called "the door to all mysteries" in the opening verses is "the same as Nibbana."
Without a duality there is no opinion.

I am free to disagree, and to lay out textual reasons that inform that disagreement.
You are, but how are you going to do that without creating a duality? Furthermore, what will it serve you?
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Tao

Post by Coëmgenu »

Dan74 wrote: Wed Apr 02, 1975 1:15 am
Ceisiwr wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 10:39 am How similar is the concept of Tao to the Dhamma?
You need to define what you mean by Tao. Are you taking the classical writings by Lao Tzu, I Ching and Chuang Tzu? Or many later works?

Some scholars believe them (the classics) to have been influenced by Zen teachers, others think the influence is the other way around, but there is some overlap, I think.
The later works, not necessarily the Dàodéjīng itself, are absolutely certainly influenced by Buddhism. I was just reading a translation I found from a certain Friederike Assandri of the opening of Chéng Xuányīng's Dàodéjīng commentary (apparently, according to Wikipedia, he is the posthumous founder of a school of Dàoism called Chóngxuán that is "influenced by Madhyamaka" -- go figure!).

From just this posted excerpt, we can see Dàoists incorporating technical Buddhist terminology into their treatises, such as "dharmas," but also giving these words "their own spin" to suit their own needs. The whole translation of the opening section is here, and readers will notice a lot more influences from Buddhism than just the adoption of the term "dharmas."
According to the Jiutian sheng shen jing (Scripture of the Stanzas of the Life Spirits of the Nine Heavens) it is said: “The sage took the three kinds of qi (氣)—the mysterious, the original, and the inaugural—as his body-substance (ti 體)”; this says that he is the same as the wondrous qi of the Three Heavens. Zang Zongdao also used the Three One as the response body of the sage. What is referred to as Three One is: first, essence; second, spirit; and third, qi. Essence refers to the mind that has numinous wisdom and astute reflection. Spirit refers to the unlimited, immeasurable function. Qi refers to the dharmas constituted by form, image, shape and appearance. The scripture says: “Looking at it, one cannot see it. This is called elusive”—this is the essence. [When it says,] “Listening for it, one cannot hear it. This is called imperceptible”—this is the spirit. [And when it says,] “Feeling for it, one cannot grasp it. This is called subtle”—this is qi. Uniting these three dharmas makes the body-substance of the one sage.

The scripture says, “These three, because they cannot be grasped through scrutinizing, blend into one.” But Lord Lao takes the Three One as his body (shen 身); his body has the differentiation of true and response, and there are three [different] explanations of the meaning:

The first says: To disperse the one in order to make three: this is the response of the sage. To blend the three in order to return to the one: this is the truth of the sage.

The second says: The three and the one together both are the response. Not three and not one: this is the truth. This is so because three as well as one are both [part of the realm of] names and numbers.

The third says: Outside of what is beyond names and numbers—how could there be something else that is true and has name or number?

It is just this: Three-in-one [and at the same time] not three-in-one: that is the truth. Not three-in-one yet [at the same time] threein-one: that is the response. The response of not three-in-one and also three-in-one: that response is the true response. The truth of three-in-one and yet not three-in-one: that truth is the response truth.

The truth, which is response truth, cannot be defined as truth. The response, which is true response, cannot be defined as response. Therefore it is not truth and not response, yet also response and truth. But the sage accords with the stimuli [from the beings] and adapts himself to [their] capacities and responds to the beings. Whether he sojourns among humans or is born in the heavens, he manifests himself in accordance with the situation and his marks and characteristics are not always the same.

This is why the Shengxuan [neijiao] jing says: “When he sojourns in that Pure Land, his marks and characteristics are majestic and fine looking. When he dwells in this [world] of many fires, he assumes forms that are the same as those below.” One who originally is able to be both heavenly and human—how would that be something a heavenly or a human being could be capable of? It must be [a being] neither heavenly nor human, and only because of this it is able to be both heavenly and human. Furthermore, he wondrously embodies the “imperceptible and elusive;” he is extremely hard to scrutinize in detail.

Now I will simply take up the one response of Zhou times. Among those who discuss this aspect of Lord Lao, Ge Hong cites the Zhutao yuzha in his Baopuzi (Master who Embraces Simplicity): “Laozi was of a yellow color, he had beautiful eyebrows, a large [forehead], long ears, big eyes, widely spaced teeth, a square mouth, and thick lips. On his forehead there were three crisscrossing lines, and a “sun horn” and a “moon crescent” and two nose-bridges; his ears had three entrances, and the soles of his feet had [marks of] the two [principles of yin and yang] and the five [primary elements] (i.e., metal, wood, water, fire, and earth), and the palms of his hands appeared a pattern in the form of [the character for] “ten” (shi 十) [representing the ten heavenly stems]. These are the marks of [Lord Lao, when he] entrusted his spirit to Mother Li and incarnated as the teacher of the Zhou. Although again the truth and the response are not the same, yet both take the “self-so” as their substance. This is why Zhuangzi says: “[Such a man] always relies on the self-so and doesn’t help life along.” The Xujue (Preface to the Daode jing) says: “Laozi embodied that which is by itself so. He was born before the Great Nonbeing.”
(I accidentally deleted the text "[body]" from the above while trying to format it for the forum. See the translation as it starts on p. 8 of the linked paper)

Something to note is the sheer volume of Dàoist literature from previous ages that Chéng Xuányīng is able to cite. We have only about 4ish traditional commentaries that preserve authentic Dàoism (or at least that is all I am aware of), and only commentaries on the Dàodéjīng, translated into English. There is so much that is completely out-of-reach. Most of Dàoism is completely out-of-reach for someone who doesn't speak or understand Chinese.

Also, this caught my eye: https://keep.lib.asu.edu/_flysystem/fed ... _19065.pdf. I don't think I'll get around to reading it tonight though.
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.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8150
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Tao

Post by Coëmgenu »

In the above long citation from the preface of the Expository Commentary to the Dàodéjīng, it says:
This is why the Shengxuan [neijiao] jing says: “When he sojourns in that Pure Land, his marks and characteristics are majestic and fine looking. When he dwells in this [world] of many fires, he assumes forms that are the same as those below.”
The footnote, which I did not include because copying and formatting the footnotes would be too much time spent, clarifies that this quotation is absent from the current redaction of the Shengxuan neijiao jing.

The passage resonates deeply with the buddhology espoused and transmitted in śāstras like those of Venerable Zhào (Sēngzhào), who was in turn mutually influenced by Dàoism, living ~300 years earlier.
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.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Tao

Post by Spiny Norman »

Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 4:19 pm I'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.
So does "surfaces" here refer to the naming of characteristics, eg "blue sky"?
And what about the "mystery", or unnamed?
Is this pointing to a phenomena v. noumena style distinction, or a distinction between appearance and essence?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
SarathW
Posts: 21234
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Tao

Post by SarathW »

DNS wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 3:49 pm
Dan74 wrote: Mon Jun 27, 2022 12:35 pm Some scholars believe them (the classics) to have been influenced by Zen teachers, others think the influence is the other way around, but there is some overlap, I think. So again, which Dhamma? Zen Dharma, yes, some similarity. Therevadan Dhamma? I don't see so many similarities, but this is not to say that the two are incompatible.
A rough estimate, Venn diagram I created a while back:

Image

The Buddhist part that overlaps Taoism would be mostly Chan and Zen. The Buddhist part that overlaps Jainism would be Theravada.
:goodpost:
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
form
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: Tao

Post by form »

Laozi already said if you can talk about it then it is not Tao. :mrgreen: Tao is also unconditioned.
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Tao

Post by Spiny Norman »

form wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 6:07 am Laozi already said if you can talk about it then it is not Tao. :mrgreen: Tao is also unconditioned.
So if Tao is unconditioned, then it is unchanging?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
form
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: Tao

Post by form »

Spiny Norman wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 6:36 am
form wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 6:07 am Laozi already said if you can talk about it then it is not Tao. :mrgreen: Tao is also unconditioned.
So if Tao is unconditioned, then it is unchanging?
Some 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.
form
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: Tao

Post by form »

PeterC86 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:54 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:33 pm
PeterC86 wrote: Fri Jul 01, 2022 9:00 pm Obviously you're not in agreement, because you see 10,000 things as "everything". Therefore, according to you, "the line is quite mysterious and seemingly-redundant". Which you explain with; "this is part of its poetic message".
I did not say that it is redundant. I said that it is "seemingly-redundant." Who is it "seemingly-redundant" too? One who reads this passage and understands even a small something of the underlying language through which it is communicated, but who has not been substantially exposed to the living tradition of Daoism even peripherally. If you had an accurate understanding of this passage, you would quite easily and fluently be able to identify the ways in which the passage plays with very strict literary parallelism and paradox, paradox that is "seemingly-redundant" to one who does not know how to read the passage.

萬物 has as one of it's meaning "all things," and this is clearly the meaning that is meant, as per Wáng Bì's commentary:
All being originates from non-being. Therefore, while formless and unnamed, it is the beginning of all things. While formed and named, it grows, cultivates, protects, and disciplines, becoming the mother. Tao described as formless and unnamed begins the completion of all things. To begin and complete without knowing why—this is the mystery of the mystical.
The translator, Paul Lin, renders the last line of the first set of verses differently from me. He says
The two come from the same source, having different names.
Both are called mysteries,
More mystical than the most mystical,
The gate of all subtleties.
Since he is a much more qualified translator than I, I have no problem with continuing the thread using his renderings, as they are likely superior to my own.

Note his translation of verse 2
The Nameless [non-being] is the origin of heaven and earth;
The Namable [being] is the mother of all things.
In conclusion, 萬物, the so-called "10,000 things," refers to all things, otherwise known as "everything." This isn't a matter of one opinion versus another. It is a matter of what 萬物 actually means here on a linguistic level, and futhermore a matter of how Dàoists have actually transmitted and preserved the intended meanings of their scriptures.
Yes, ultimately they are the same,

Their sameness is a secret.
It is the secret of all secrets — the door to all mysteries.


So if one understands that they are the same, the duality 'being vs non-being', and all other dualities, implode. Which is the same as Nibbana, which I explained in the beginning.
If Buddhism taught in Indian style and laotze taught in Chinese style, and yet they live during the same time period but in different zone. But there could only be one Buddha at any time. And when there is a Buddha, there cannot be pacceka Buddha existing. Why didn't the Buddha sense Laotze's existence and never even mentioned him before?

I have ever ask a respectable monk if what Laotze taught can be dhamma. He answered did you see 4NT anywhere in taodejing?
Spiny Norman
Posts: 10172
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: Tao

Post by Spiny Norman »

form wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 7:08 am
Spiny Norman wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 6:36 am
form wrote: Sat Jul 02, 2022 6:07 am Laozi already said if you can talk about it then it is not Tao. :mrgreen: Tao is also unconditioned.
So if Tao is unconditioned, then it is unchanging?
Some 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.
It seems there are different versions and interpretations of Taoism, like with Buddhism. So making connections between the two is not straightforward.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
form
Posts: 3471
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 3:23 am

Re: Tao

Post by form »

Nameless = non being is confirmed not Taoism.

无名= 无为。 What nonsense is that?
Post Reply