The Tao is NOT God

[Sunstone]

"The writer of the Tao Te Ching only mentions the divine a couple of times, in passing, as if not at all convinced of their existence. He certainly doesn't give them a significant role in the universe he describes." -- Stefan Stenudd​

Perhaps no Taoist would ever put it quite so bluntly as I will, but the Tao (1) existed before the gods existed, (2) has nothing to do with the gods other than the Tao might (or might not) be responsible for determining the nature of the gods, and (3) is in some special Taoist sense, superior to the gods.

I base my understanding of the relationship between the Tao and the gods mostly on the work and scholarship of Stefan Stenudd, Roger T. Ames and David L. Hall, and Stephen Mitchell. But I also threw darts at a cork board and flipped coins to arrive at my views.

As I see it, the author of the Tao Te Ching almost certainly was a mystic whose "Tao" is her or his word for the "reality" they encountered during one or more mystical experiences. Most mystics -- but not all -- call that reality "god". Obvious, the author of the Tao Te Ching does not.

(By "reality", I mean that which appears real to the mystic.)

So what is you take on it? Is the Tao god? Or is the Tao not god? And what is the relationship between the Tao and god?



_______________________
Now, a futile effort to make it up to you for another insufferably opinionated thread.

 

[wizanda]

So what is you take on it? Is the Tao god? Or is the Tao not god? And what is the relationship between the Tao and god?

The Source of our reality is like a CPU manifesting reality at a quantum level; the Dao is the Wisdom that Surrounds the Source, which is beyond all dimensional quantum physics...

Calling the Source God limits it, calling the Dao Wisdom encapsulates it, and neither is containable in words, as everything comes from them.

In my opinion.

 

[crossfire]

(2)Gods would get their Te from the Tao.

 

[PureX]

"Tao" means 'way'. Or more specifically the way existence, exists. It refers to the 'flow of being'.

The reason this is important to understand is that the image given by taoist philosophy (eastern thought and language is expressed in imagery) is that of an unseen causal (divine) realm, above, that we humans are aware of, but cannot fully grasp. A material realm of divine effect, beneath, that creates and governs 'the world' of forms and substances that we humans embody, live in, and can even gain some control of. But with we humans being 'trapped' in a kind of suspended state in between these two realms of being: divine cause, and material effect: rising above the latter, but never fully entering the former. Thus leaving us stuck in a state of purposeless confusion.

The solution to this uniquely human condition, according to taoist philosophy, is to recognize the "flow" between the unknowable realm of divine cause, 'above', and the material realm of material effect, 'beneath', and to align ourselves with that flow so as to fulfill our purpose within it, even though we are not able to grasp that purpose beyond it's recognition as a quest.

The human conception of "God" and "the gods", according to taoist philosophy, are part of that 'flow of being' as related to humanity, so taoism neither supports it, nor negates it. It simply accepts it as a part of the "tao of mankind". Which is why there are religious/superstitious/divinity-drivin expressions of taoism (Shintoism, for example.), and there are godless philosophical expressions of taoism, and various expressions in between (as in Buddhism).

So by this understanding of taoism, it is correct to say that the Tao precedes, or supersedes deity. However, it would be wrong to assume that means the Tao is not divine in the ways that we humans generally conceptualize divinity.

 

[Sunstone]

"Tao" means 'way'. Or more specifically the way existence, exists. It refers to the 'flow of being'.

What is the Chinese word that you are translating as "being"? I ask because the concept of being does not exist in classical Chinese thought, so far as I have been told by more than one scholarly source. Being is much more an Indo-European concept. Consequently, could you tell me the word or words you are translating as "being", "to be", etc.

 

[PureX]

What is the Chinese word that you are translating as "being"? I ask because the concept of being does not exist in classical Chinese thought, so far as I have been told by more than one scholarly source. Being is much more an Indo-European concept. Consequently, could you tell me the word or words you are translating as "being", "to be", etc.

"Every being in the universe
is an expression of the Tao.
It springs into existence,
unconscious, perfect, free,
takes on a physical body,
lets circumstances complete it.
That is why every being
spontaneously honors the Tao.

The Tao gives birth to all beings,
nourishes them, maintains them,
cares for them, comforts them, protects them,
takes them back to itself,
creating without possessing,
acting without expecting,
guiding without interfering.
That is why love of the Tao
is in the very nature of things." - from the Tao Te Ching

Being refers to both the whole of what is (as opposed to what is not), and the articulated manifestations that we perceive and experience as separate within the whole. Being is the 'image' within which a concept takes form, establishes relation, and gives us it's meaning. As in the way the I-Ching (oracle) "speaks" it's results (through imagery). The translation for "being" in ancient Chinese is not a word, it's the empty field in our minds within which these conceptual images form and manifest as a concept. Taoism is based on the fundamental recognition of the difference between human perception and conceptualization of existence (being), and the profound mystery that existence (being) is. So there is no direct translation from one to the other.

"The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.

Yet mystery and manifestations
arise from the same source.
This source is called darkness (our unknowing).

Darkness within darkness (the profound recognition of our unknowing).
The gateway to all understanding."

 

[Sunstone]

"Every being in the universe
is an expression of the Tao.
It springs into existence,
unconscious, perfect, free,
takes on a physical body,
lets circumstances complete it.
That is why every being
spontaneously honors the Tao.

The Tao gives birth to all beings,
nourishes them, maintains them,
cares for them, comforts them, protects them,
takes them back to itself,
creating without possessing,
acting without expecting,
guiding without interfering.
That is why love of the Tao
is in the very nature of things." - from the Tao Te Ching

Being refers to both the whole of what is (as opposed to what is not), and the articulated manifestations that we perceive and experience as separate within the whole. Being is the 'image' within which a concept takes form, establishes relation, and gives us it's meaning. As in the way the I-Ching (oracle) "speaks" it's results (through imagery). The translation for "being" in ancient Chinese is not a word, it's the empty field in our minds within which these conceptual images form and manifest as a concept. Taoism is based on the fundamental recognition of the difference between human perception and conceptualization of existence (being), and the profound mystery that existence (being) is. So there is no direct translation from one to the other.

"The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.

Yet mystery and manifestations
arise from the same source.
This source is called darkness (our unknowing).

Darkness within darkness (the profound recognition of our unknowing).
The gateway to all understanding."

Whose translation are you using? Your second quote looks like the Mitchell translation.

 

[LuisDantas]

The Tao is a fine conception of the Sacred in a fairly pure, unsaddled form.

I for one find it easily superior and transcendent to the God of Ibrahim, albeit largely due to the shortcomings and self-sabotage of the later.

Other, healthier conceptions are a different matter entirely. They can and IMO probably should be viewed as expressions of the Tao, or equivalently, the Tao can be described as a portrait of the healthy conceptions of the divine. Or yet another legitimate claim is that both the Tao and the healthy conceptions of the divine are simply different perspectives or approaches towards the Sacred. Then again, it is just as valid to say that the Sacred and the Tao are one and the same.

It is not a matter of betting on the right number on roulette, but rather of understanding models and tools of mental conception and deciding which and how one feels like using - and taking the necessary responsibility that comes with that.

 

[LuisDantas]

What is the Chinese word that you are translating as "being"? I ask because the concept of being does not exist in classical Chinese thought, so far as I have been told by more than one scholarly source. Being is much more an Indo-European concept. Consequently, could you tell me the word or words you are translating as "being", "to be", etc.

Hmm... I wonder if this could connect to the concept and meaning of Avatar.

 

[crossfire]

What is the Chinese word that you are translating as "being"? I ask because the concept of being does not exist in classical Chinese thought, so far as I have been told by more than one scholarly source. Being is much more an Indo-European concept. Consequently, could you tell me the word or words you are translating as "being", "to be", etc.

Well, there is "being" and "non-being" in both the Tao Te Ching and Chuangzi. I'll go look at this part of Chuangzi's Discourse on Making All Things Equal

There is a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is being. There is nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. Suddenly there is nonbeing. But I do not know, when it comes to nonbeing, which is really being and which is nonbeing. Now I have just said something. But I don't know whether what I have said has really said something or whether it hasn't said something.​

and see if I can tell if the same glyphs are used for being and non-being as the Tao Te Ching 2. {Wish me luck!}

 

[Sunstone]

Well, there is "being" and "non-being" in both the Tao Te Ching and Chuangzi. I'll go look at this part of Chuangzi's Discourse on Making All Things Equal

There is a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be a beginning. There is being. There is nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. There is a not yet beginning to be a not yet beginning to be nonbeing. Suddenly there is nonbeing. But I do not know, when it comes to nonbeing, which is really being and which is nonbeing. Now I have just said something. But I don't know whether what I have said has really said something or whether it hasn't said something.​

and see if I can tell if the same glyphs are used for being and non-being as the Tao Te Ching 2. {Wish me luck!}

Whose translation are you using?

 

[Sunstone]

I hope it is not necessary to point out here that to say something exists is not the same thing as saying it has being. Somehow I feel that, on the internet, that actually might be necessary to say.

 

[crossfire]

Whose translation are you using?

This one for the quote I posted.
The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu translated by Burton Watson, Terebess Asia Online (TAO)

I'll have to go look for a parallel with the Chinese glyphs. (Why do I smell a headache in my future?)

 

[crossfire]

I hope it is not necessary to point out here that to say something exists is not the same thing as saying it has being. Somehow I feel that, on the internet, that actually might be necessary to say.

The Chuangzi quote somewhat resonated with "The flow of existence" PureX brought up, so I need to investigate to see whether it has enough being/nonbeing to hold water. (Pardon the cup form/emptiness reference pun.)

 

[Sunstone]

The Changzi quote somewhat resonated with "The flow of existence" PureX brought up, so I need to investigate to see whether it has enough being/nonbeing to hold water. (Pardon the cup form/emptiness reference pun.)

Doesn't PureX refer to the "flow of being", rather than the "flow of existence"?

 

[crossfire]

Doesn't PureX refer to the "flow of being", rather than the "flow of existence"?

PureX said: "Tao" means 'way'. Or more specifically the way existence, exists. It refers to the 'flow of being'."

Now I need to go back and re-read that passage from Chuangzi!

 

[dybmh]

As I see it, the author of the Tao Te Ching almost certainly was a mystic whose "Tao" is her or his word for the "reality" they encountered during one or more mystical experiences. Most mystics -- but not all -- call that reality "god". Obvious, the author of the Tao Te Ching does not.

While I'm not familiar with the sources you provided in the OP, if you want my opinion:

A temporary reality experienced during mystical experience isn't the Tao. The Tao doesn't define a temporarily reality. The reality that is revealed during a mystical experience, as briefly described above, has existed and continues to exist. Why? I could be wrong, but I think many Taoists refer to The Tao as Truth. A temporary reality cannot be True. Perhaps you've heard the old expression? "Truth is always true... from the beginning, to the end, and everything in the middle." Because of this a temporarily reality cannot be "True" and therefore cannot be "The Tao".

Regarding the claim that The Tao is God, I think that is also related to "Truth". Many Theists claim that God is Truth. If The Tao is Truth, and God is Truth, then it's logical: Tao = God. That's the reason I have heard in the past why some people connect the Tao with God.

(note: I haven't caught up on the previous replies to this thread yet. Apologies if this is repetitive. )

 

[crossfire]

While I'm not familiar with the sources you provided in the OP, if you want my opinion:

A temporary reality experienced during mystical experience isn't the Tao. The Tao doesn't define a temporarily reality. The reality that is revealed during a mystical experience, as briefly described above, has existed and continues to exist. Why? I could be wrong, but I think many Taoists refer to The Tao as Truth. A temporary reality cannot be True. Perhaps you've heard the old expression? "Truth is always true... from the beginning, to the end, and everything in the middle." Because of this a temporarily reality cannot be "True" and therefore cannot be "The Tao".

Regarding the claim that The Tao is God, I think that is also related to "Truth". Many Theists claim that God is Truth. If The Tao is Truth, and God is Truth, then it's logical: Tao = God. That's the reason I have heard in the past why some people connect the Tao with God.

(note: I haven't caught up on the previous replies to this thread yet. Apologies if this is repetitive. )

The Tao is referred to as the constant--the only constant is change. Everything else is temporary.

 

[dybmh]

The Tao is referred to as the constant--the only constant is change. Everything else is temporary.

Right, which renders The Tao as a process ( aka The Way ) ?

There are Theists who see God as a verb instead of a noun. It's another approach that correlates The Tao with God. Tao ( as a process ) = God ( as a verb ).

 

[Polymath257]

The word transliterated as Tao (or Dao) also means 'to understand'.

So, 'ting bu dao' means something like 'I hear, but don't understand'.