Why I'm not a Taoist

[ayar415]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

In any case, within the realm of inadequate words, the meaning was as clear as possible BOTH in your "academic and analytical" translation as well as in the "poetic rendition", as you label it.

This is neither an argument nor a debate but an examination of reason (i.e our ability at rational judgment). Spirituality that is irrational is also superstition.

My "academic and analytical" translation of Chapter 4 was shared with you for peer review. You ignored my request, did not give me your learning from Chapter 4, and asked for translations of passages in another chapter. If the "meaning was as clear as possible", what is it?

Are you reluctant to tell me because you believe you have gotten the meaning of "Those who know don't talk" in Chapter 56? And you are convinced, as Molearner is, that the only way to learn is gnosis: each one must take his own drink from the fountain of truth.

"Man is a talking animal. When he has no one to talk to, he talks to himself", said Robert Thouless. You talk when you think because language facilitates thought. And the human mind is a mosaic of words. Each language has its own unique cultural pattern and motif.

I won't tire you out with more talk and leave you with this observation. I am a westerner, an American. I have my own cultural pattern. Just because I am not Chinese doesn't mean I can't effectively think philosophically in my own spiritual form. And if you are not Chinese, don't ridicule their sacred scripture by acting like a fool.

Originally Posted by ayar415

This is neither an argument nor a debate but an examination of reason (i.e our ability at rational judgment). Spirituality that is irrational is also superstition..

Ayar415,

Sorry but this, of course, implies that spirituality must br rational. Rationality is arrived at by reason, logic, the intellect and the input from the 5 senses. Any conclusions from this are episteme or, if one prefers, science. Gnosis, which you wish to dismiss, is linked to the spirit. This is apples and oranges IMO. Spirit can verify all types of knowledge but rationality cannot verify spirit.

[Still_Waters]

QUOTE 71 EXCERPT:

Originally Posted by ayar415

My "academic and analytical" translation of Chapter 4 was shared with you for peer review. You ignored my request, did not give me your learning from Chapter 4,

I thought that I had fully addressed your question in my post #42. What more do you want.

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

Although I don't know Chinese with its innumerable characters, I can appreciate the translation difficulties that you addressed in the beginning of your post. (In high school, I used to participate in sight translation contests in NYC with Latin being the language being translated. Translating Latin was difficult enough, but my sense is that translating Latin is a LOT easier than translating Chinese. )....

My understanding (which I may not have expressed clearly) is that the primal reality from which all emerges and to which all returns, is "deep within, ever present" and that one must dive into meditation to go beyond intellect and rationality in order to discover it. One cannot say "what gave rise to it" as it may indeed be the primal Source of all and, while one may get glimpses of it, one (at least myself) cannot say "what gave rise to it". Hence, the unknowing. Lastly, this is all consistent with the closing statement that it came before "God" or the "image of the emperor" depending on the translation used. It precedes the ENTIRE manifestation to which it "gave rise".

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Molearner

Ayar415,
Sorry but this, of course, implies that spirituality must br rational. Rationality is arrived at by reason, logic, the intellect and the input from the 5 senses. Any conclusions from this are episteme or, if one prefers, science. Gnosis, which you wish to dismiss, is linked to the spirit. This is apples and oranges IMO. Spirit can verify all types of knowledge but rationality cannot verify spirit.

Although this was directed towards Ayar415, your post resonates particularly well with me. I agree with it completely.

I was a Phi Beta Kappa in college and felt, as Ayar415 seems to imply, that everything could be understood through rationality and reason. Intellect was one of my primary hindrances to the clear vision. It took some powerful interventions by an extraordinary mentor to shake me out of that delusion and point me to the direct experience (gnosis in your terminology) whereby one would "know without thinking" that which lies beyond intellect, rationality, and the 5 senses. Ironically, this does not even contradict reason but goes far beyond reason.

I love your post.

[Miss Hepburn]

"..input from the 5 senses", eh? Any logic we're basing on our senses is so woefully
limited that nothing really can be trusted using it!
Why, an eagle sees more than we can.
A dog can hear more than we can.
As you can see - if the EM spectrum were, say, 6 inches long we can
receive/ experience with our puny, pea brain sized brain about a 1/4 of an inch!!

So Man's ''logic'', ?, doesn't mean a heck of a whole lot to ME!!!
If you bring up the receivers or instruments we have made to pick up more, even they are limited!

Miss Hepburn,

All very good points. Some might call them obvious….but if they are they all too easily forgotten. If man has been given anything that is compensatory to our lack of acute senses it would be the spirit. For another discussion we could mention the functions of right brain vs. left brain. It is believed that the brain employs a filter to limit sensory overload….this supposedly helps us to bring focus on the tasks at hand that are most relevant.

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Molearner

.... If man has been given anything that is compensatory to our lack of acute senses it would be the spirit.
For another discussion we could mention the functions of right brain vs. left brain.
It is believed that the brain employs a filter to limit sensory overload….this supposedly helps us to bring focus on
the tasks at hand that are most relevant.

Wow, I could not have asked for a better response!!!

[ayar415]

Wow, looks like I am outnumbered by Miss Hepburn, Molearner, and Still Waters. There are more onlookers out there lurking and waiting for a chance to jump into the fray like torrential rain.

Like Donald Rumsfeld, I don't do quagmire.

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

... from the Tao. 71...
Moving from knowing to not knowing --- this is good.
Moving from not knowing to knowing --- this is sickness.
I love this excerpt.

Could it BE? I disagree with you?
I feel about the above as I do about Jesus' parables...don't play mind games.
Don't speak to the intelligent only, Lao tzu and Jesus.
Please, don't say things a simple person can not understand...THEN, they discard you, the teaching, the book
in discouragement in the least...anger and disgust at it's worst, usually never to return.
Say something a 6yr old could understand...giving everyone a chance to get it.

Originally Posted by ayar415

"Man is a talking animal. When he has no one to talk to, he talks to himself", said Robert Thouless.

great quote