GENIUS FORUMS

P.S. (prescript): How do you pronounce this guy's name?

Okay I started reading this book an hour or so ago. Intriguingly beautiful book, most of which I intuitively agree with. Must be critical though. I tried to cut these questions really short for you. I read the first 30 parts and figured I would get this off my chest before I dove into the last 50. Please answer some of these if you feel so inclined.

The valley spirit never dies;
It is the woman, primal mother.
Her gateway is the root of heaven and Earth.
It is like a veil barely seen.
Use it; it will never fail.

If this veil was not "barely seen" would it still "never fail"? In other words, from what I can tell this religion only works if you are man among many, which seems to contradict the idea that you should be spreading your wisdom.

Thirty spokes share the wheel's hub;
It is the center hole that makes it useful.
Shape clay into a vessel;
It is the space within that makes it useful.
Cut doors and windows for a room;
It is the holes which make it useful.
Therefore benefit comes from what is there;
Usefulness from what is not there.

In what context are any of the things described useful -- the good/desired one or the one following in the traces of evil human self-centeredness and motive? Is this a circular reasoning? Doesn't everything become useless if we elect Taoism?

Surrender yourself humbly; then you can be trusted to care for all things.
Love the world as your own self; then you can truly care for all things.

What does "care for all things" mean?

Observers of the Tao do not seek fulfillment.
Not seeking fulfillment, they are not swayed by desire for change.

What reason do we have to believe that seeking fulfillment is bad? How is the desire for change bad? Are you sure that observers of Tao are not seeking fulfillment simply in another less obvious way?

These three are outward forms alone; they are not sufficient in themselves.
It is more important
To see the simplicity,
To realize one's true nature,
To cast off selfishness
And temper desire.

Why is it important to cast off selfishness, and who/what is it important for?

The greatest Virtue is to follow Tao and Tao alone.

This raises so many questions I can't post them all. Perhaps someone could just explain its meaning and basis?

Therefore the wise embrace the one
And set an example to all.
Not putting on a display,
They shine forth.
Not justifying themselves,
They are distinguished.
Not boasting,
They receive recognition.
Not bragging,
They never falter.
They do not quarrel,
So no one quarrels with them.

How can this be applied universally? I think this is an awesome personal philosophy, at least in the current situation of the world.

He who is virtuous
Experiences Virtue.
He who loses the way
Is lost.

What is Virtue and what is the way?

When you are at one with loss,
The loss is experienced willingly.

Why is it a good thing to experience loss willingly? Is this the religion of indifference?

He who does not trust enough
Will not be trusted.

Reminds me of Christianity. "He who does not trust God enough will not be entrusted by God with his top secret information." Only I'm not entirely sure what this is asking me to have faith in.

Man follows Earth.
Earth follows heaven.
Heaven follows the Tao.
Tao follows what is natural.

What is this supposed to mean, specifically the last line? And how are humans unnatural? How is selfishness unnatural? Last I checked all life was selfish. Humans are just too good at it for their own good (or the good of their environment).

Therefore the sage takes care of all men
And abandons no one.
He takes care of all things
And abandons nothing.

"Take care" can't mean what it means in contemporary usage then. I can't take care of the cat and the mouse at the same time. But perhaps it means that we should take care by not interfering with the natural equilibrium? Mass suicide?

When the block is carved, it becomes useful.
When the sage uses it, he becomes the ruler.
Thus, "A great tailor cuts little."

Would it be fair to say that the greatest tailor isn't a tailor? Did the greatest human commit suicide promptly after becoming conscious and rational?

WhorlyWhelk wrote:Okay I started reading this book an hour or so ago. (...) I read the first 30 parts and figured I would get this off my chest before I dove into the last 50.

There's the problem right there. Tao Te Ching is not a novel that can be absorbed in an hour or so. Each page has many concepts, and each concept is meant to be pondered and re-pondered. If we just explained it all to you, it would deprive you of the opportunity to initiate thought yourself.

I will address one point alone for now (although I would like to discuss the whole thing at another time) because this one point you brought up is the launching point for the rest of the concepts - and I will not be depriving you of any serious thinking by stating what I suspect you already find obvious.

I will also partially address another point as a starter.

WhorlyWhelk wrote:

The greatest Virtue is to follow Tao and Tao alone.

This raises so many questions I can't post them all. Perhaps someone could just explain its meaning and basis?

The Tao is presenting itself as the best and totally complete guide to morality, and stating that if a follower chooses to follow ideas of what is right that are not listed in the Tao, then he is doing something wrong.

Yes, it does naturally raise a lot of questions - but the rest of the book presents a system, and like any system, it is up to you to figure out if it has merit or not.

WhorlyWhelk wrote:

Thirty spokes share the wheel's hub;
It is the center hole that makes it useful.
Shape clay into a vessel;
It is the space within that makes it useful.
Cut doors and windows for a room;
It is the holes which make it useful.
Therefore benefit comes from what is there;
Usefulness from what is not there.

In what context are any of the things described useful -- the good/desired one or the one following in the traces of evil human self-centeredness and motive? Is this a circular reasoning? Doesn't everything become useless if we elect Taoism?

The base recognition is that to delineate a thing, it must have boundaries. In some things, the most useful "part" is the fact that there is nothing in that part:

The wheel's hub you might not have understood because we don't see too many wagon wheels these days - but it is made out of bent wood on the outside, another small circle of wood in the middle, and spokes connecting the inner circle to the outer circle. Under the wagon are two parallel rods of wood - one in front, one in back. The rods of wood stick out from the sides of the wagon. Because the inner circle of the wagon wheel is a hollow circle rather than a filled-in disc, the wheel can be slid onto the rod of wood under the wagon. If the wheels could not be slid onto the rods, the wheels would not be useful for the wagon.

A bowl is only useful as a bowl because there is a hollow space in the middle. Because there is a hollow space, you can pour soup (or something) into the bowl and use it that way. If instead the bowl were filled in with the same material as the rims and base of the bowl, there would not be any place to pour your soup. It would cease to be useful as a bowl - actually, it would cease to be a bowl.

The same could be said of human behavior. For example, an otherwise perfectly good teacher is useless as a teacher if she molests the children. It is what is not there - child molestation - that is just as important for her being useful as a teacher as her teaching skills.
******************

Try to interpret other points yourself, then post what you've interpreted - then we will discuss the rest of it.
.

WhorlyWhelk wrote:Okay I started reading this book an hour or so ago. Intriguingly beautiful book, most of which I intuitively agree with. Must be critical though.

Yes, it should be read as concepts to ponder, not as dogma to accept or reject. You might try reading it out loud.

He who does not trust enough
Will not be trusted.

Reminds me of Christianity. "He who does not trust God enough will not be entrusted by God with his top secret information." Only I'm not entirely sure what this is asking me to have faith in.

Are you convince that trust is a good thing, that you should have faith in something? Maybe this is a warning that if you follow this critical path - considering everything with an open mind, looking for truth, not accepting dogma, not looking to other people for answers - then it will naturally happen that no one will trust you. That's how people are.

Or maybe you need to have trust in yourself.

Would it be fair to say that the greatest tailor isn't a tailor?

No, "a great tailor cuts little" because he knows exactly where to cut. He doesn't spend a lot of time re-cutting; he cuts once. He has skillful means, based on years of experience and practice.