Originally Posted by iamthat
Can you clarify why you think Lao Tzu broke his own quote? Surely one can say that all things have their origin in the Tao while recognising that the description is not the reality.
Lao Tzu said - depending on the translation you read - "The Tao that can be told is not the Eternal Tao."
Then he said
"The Tao is the mother of all things,"
so isn't that line telling the Tao? I suppose calling it the Tao in the first place takes it away from being the Eternal Tao, but then the need to communicate comes into the equation so we need to call it something. The question is though, what is the reality? That the Tao is the mother of its own expression and understanding?