Popular wisdom says that Chinese Buddhism in particular was deeply influenced by Taoism and that Ch’an Buddhism (Japanese Zen) had many Taoist elements. However, a Zen teacher I know and respect is highly critical of this interpretation. But I differ with him on that, I think there is a well-documented influence between the two.
It’s not right to say Buddhism is ‘rational in spirit’. The Buddha by definition is not limited ‘by mere logic’ - ‘the dharmas I teach are deep, subtle, difficult to fathom, beyond mere logic, perceivable only by the wise.’ Buddhism employs logic but it’s ultimate aim is beyond logic - not irrational, but supra-rational, which is an important distinction. — Wayfarer
Tao is a whirling emptiness (ch'ung),
Yet (erh) in use (yung) is inexhaustible (ying).
Fathomless (yuan),
It seems to be the ancestor (tsung) of ten thousand beings.
It blunts the sharp,
Unties the entangled,
Harmonizes the bright,
Mixes the dust.
Dark (chan),
It seems perhaps to exist (ts'un).
I do not know whose child it is,
It is an image (hsiang) of what precedes God (Ti).
According to this verse, the Tao is:
A whirling emptiness
Inexhaustible
Fathomless
An image of what proceeds God.
Emptiness doesn’t whirl, does it? Inexhaustible in doing what? Maybe in creating and recreating the 10,000 things. There is a theme of return in the TTC. It comes up more in later verses. I struggled with the idea for a long time. Now, I’ve come to think the Tao doesn’t create the world once, but is creating it over and over again, continuously.
And what about “an image that proceeds God?” So, the Tao is older than God. That means, I guess, that God is one of the 10,000 things. That can’t be right. Can you imagine a more radical idea than that? This is my favorite line in the TTC.
According to this verse, the Tao seems:
Not to be anyone’s child
To be the ancestor of 10,000 things
To exist, maybe.
I’m not sure what Lao Tzu means by “seems.” It usually means “appears” and may imply that appearance is misleading. Nothing can be before or greater than the Tao. It comes before God. The Tao can’t be “anyone’s child.” It is the ancestor of, creates, the multiplicity of things....
As for “It seems perhaps to exist,” I have always thought that the Tao doesn’t exist. It is, after all, non-being. Does “seems” mean that it is misleading to think of the Tao as existing? I don’t know. — T Clark
All mysticism is supra-rational — Wayfarer
My issue with this is how do you apply this approach to creating social change? In relation to progress created by activists in women's suffrage, race equality, gay rights, etc - should they just have waited? Or is there a different nuance to acting without acting? — Tom Storm
as it becomes the basis of arguments that lead to certain conclusions that become the core principles in Buddhism and any other system of beliefs thus founded for that matter. — TheMadFool
I would like to ask you how Taoism and Buddhism were brought together in Zen Buddhism? What difficulties existed at the level of core principles and what were the points on which both were on the same page so to speak? — TheMadFool
I should also mention Burton Watson's well-known translation of the Chuang Tzu which was also one of the readings. It is a companion piece to the Tao Te Ching. — Wayfarer
You, Amity, and Jack Cummins should get together and start a thread. I'll participate enthusiastically. — T Clark
I agree with your description here of not-doing, but I’m not sure if I quite agree with wu wei as spontaneous action. I think perhaps this has something to do with intentionality. It’s more about our insistence on being the one to act, which relates again to seeking personal recognition. We can intend an outcome and set up conditions for it to occur without being the one to perform any action that can be credited with the outcome. For me, wu wei is collaboration that resists localised attribution of success, advancement or recognition. — Possibility
This may seem unrelated, except that the TTC is very clear about us being bound by affect (desire), and the implications this has on our ability to understand the Tao (objective reality). — Possibility
...he’s talking about the role of affect in how we make sense of the world. Beautiful, ugly, good and bad are the “manifestations” we see (that we construct) while “caught in desire”. I think it helps for us to understand what affect is and how we construct these value hierarchies from our affected relation to the Tao. — Possibility
The bottom line is this: the human brain is anatomically structured so that no decision or action can be free of interoception and affect, not matter what fiction people tell themselves about how rational they are. Your bodily feeling right now will project forward to influence what you will feel and do in the future. It is an elegantly orchestrated, self-fulfilling prophecy, embodied within the architecture of your brain. — Lisa Feldman Barrett, ‘How Emotions Are Made”
I know this is taking the thread away from the original intention.
However, I thought this small excerpt might be useful and wouldn't harm... — Amity
What are the similariities/differences between Buddhism and Taoism? — TheMadFool
Popular wisdom says that Chinese Buddhism in particular was deeply influenced by Taoism and that Ch’an Buddhism (Japanese Zen) had many Taoist elements. — Wayfarer
the finger points at the moon, but don't mistake the finger for moon. — Wayfarer
My propositions serve as elucidations in the following way: anyone who understands me eventually recognizes them as nonsensical, when he has used them—as steps—to climb beyond them. (He must, so to speak, throw away the ladder after he has climbed up it.)
He must transcend these propositions, and then he will see the world aright. — Wittgenstein
There’s a scholar, Donald Lopez, who has written a lot about this. — Wayfarer
Cool. I've seen some of his work in passing but not read it. Thanks. — Tom Storm
Wu wei is when effective change cannot be traced back to you as action. — Possibility
How do you send a download to your kindle ? — Amity
I agree with your description here of not-doing, but I’m not sure if I quite agree with wu wei as spontaneous action. I think perhaps this has something to do with intentionality. It’s more about our insistence on being the one to act, which relates again to seeking personal recognition. We can intend an outcome and set up conditions for it to occur without being the one to perform any action that can be credited with the outcome. For me, wu wei is collaboration that resists localised attribution of success, advancement or recognition.
— Possibility
I try to pay attention to the experience that is going on inside me when I think, feel, and act. There is a visual and aural image that represents how that feels to me. I picture a spring bubbling gently up from underground, making a little pool around itself. I can hear the gentle gurgle and, if I want to, I can reach down and touch the cool water. This represents my experience of where motivation, intention come from when things are working right. That non-intention can go directly into action without reflection. That's what I think of as wu wei. Intending without intending leading to acting without acting — T Clark
Well, I think we disagree markedly on our interpretation of wu wei. It seems to me that you see it as acting subconsciously, as if there is an aspect of our thinking, feeling and acting that renders our experience of it as a passive bystander. I’m not convinced that either of us is correct, but if your interpretation is the case, then I wonder what benefit this ‘non-intending’ ‘action without reflection’ serves for the Tao? — Possibility
Not to be pedantic, but I think it is very important to recognize that the Tao is not objective reality. In a sense, that difference is the difference between eastern and western ways of seeing the world. — T Clark
Do you think that all affect is desire? I remember reading about people who had damage to the part of the brain where emotions are centered. After the injury, they could no longer intend and act. They were perfectly capable of recognizing what was going, but were unable to do anything. Even action without action requires affect. — T Clark
There's a theme in the TTC about the danger of desiring and attaining status and prestige. There's also the theme of action without action. I think those are two separate factors. Wait. Do I really believe that?...Wu wei is not concerned with achievement or recognition, but action without concern for achievement is not necessarily wu wei. Am I nitpicking? ...Maybe. — T Clark
I think it's a misconception that acting without prior conscious intention is acting as a "passive bystander." When I write, words pour out of me without conscious control. Sometimes it feels like the words are writing themselves. Writing me. I sometimes feel the same with with other types of behavior. I feel the most there, the most me, when that happens. Do you ever have that kind of experience? It is not uncommon. That is my understanding of "wu wei." — T Clark
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.