is tao theisitc or nontheistic

[chevron1]

I am not sure how you are using the terms designated and phenomenological here. In some sense the Tao is a referent.

in chinese name theory all things have a "secret" divine name that is their "true" name. a designated name means that i just gave it a name to refer to it. tao is a designated name because it has no "true" name.

 

[chevron1]

Just the word concept is wrong, the Tao isn't a concept which is derived from the mind, no mind no concept, also the Tao has no destiny, that which arises from the Tao seems to have a destiny, but even this is wrong, there is only here, and Now, this is to rest in the Tao.

no that is buddhist inflected taoism. classical taoism sees destiny.

dna is some kind of destiny, is it not? classical taoism has an ancient concept of dna: prototype.

 

[psychoslice]

no that is buddhist inflected taoism. classical taoism sees destiny.

dna is some kind of destiny, is it not? classical taoism has an ancient concept of dna: prototype.

I don't think Taoism should be a belief system of any kind, it was never meant to be an ism, and also I cannot debate or argue over the Tao, because there is nothing to debate.

 

[chevron1]

I don't think Taoism should be a belief system of any kind, it was never meant to be an ism, and also I cannot debate or argue over the Tao, because there is nothing to debate.

taoism is a religion, not a belief system.

 

[psychoslice]

taoism is a religion, not a belief system.

When you say religion, what do you mean by that ?.

 

[chevron1]

|I cannot debate or argue over the Tao, because there is nothing to debate.

When you say religion, what do you mean by that ?.

nothing is nothing but sometimes nothing is mystical something.

 

[chevron1]

no that is buddhist inflected taoism. classical taoism sees destiny.
dna is some kind of destiny, is it not? classical taoism has an ancient concept of dna: prototype.

I don't think Taoism should be a belief system of any kind, it was never meant to be an ism, and also I cannot debate or argue over the Tao, because there is nothing to debate.

cosmology and theology are important to some forms of practice. if a taoist does not understand or rejects a particular aspect of cosmology or theology, sometimes they are prevented from achieving.

for example, metaphysical third eye is a form of chi-based prognostication that can be tested at each stage of training. a student can be asked to "read" what is in a covered box and to advance, they must be able to see into it. if you don't believe in chi, then you will have trouble learning the technique.

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

in chinese name theory all things have a "secret" divine name that is their "true" name. a designated name means that i just gave it a name to refer to it. tao is a designated name because it has no "true" name.

Okay, but I don't think that is relevant to my comment. The Tao can be named in the sense of referred to, on the pain of reducing all commentary on it to absurdity (I am leaving aside here valid investigation into the problems of language and mental concepts in apophatic theology/metaphysics).

In Semitic monotheism, too, the way in which God is named is not the same way humans are.

 

[Jeremy Taylor]

I don't think Taoism should be a belief system of any kind, it was never meant to be an ism, and also I cannot debate or argue over the Tao, because there is nothing to debate.

Clearly it was meant to be a belief system. Even accepting the very flawed Western distinction between philosophical Taoism and other varieties, the philosophical Taoists aimed to communicate metaphysical and spiritual truths and beliefs, and to inculcate specific practices, virtues, and mindsets/

We are not mystics and sages, besides we are, I presume, generally Westerners (given to rationalism and overconceptualisation). Within limits, I would leave the apophatic and elliptical style to the Taoist sages.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

It really has to do with your definition of the Theos, if your Theos has to be the creator, and rains fire from heaven on disbelievers, then no, I don't think Tao fits that definition of Theistic. If your definition of a Theos is an all encompassing force of pure good, truth, wisdom, and life, then I would assert that yes, Tao can be considered that kind of Theistic.

The Tao is not a force of pure good, it precedes the concepts of good and evil.

And no, the Tao is not a god, it is a cosmic force. A god is a sapient being; the Tao is much more abstract.

 

[Lyndon]

A God is not a sapient force, a God is a spiritual or cosmic force.. Even many Christians agree with this.

 

[Firemorphic]

How pure and still the Dao is, as if it would ever so continue! I do not know whose son it is. It might appear to have been before God.

It's all open to interpretation but I'll divide this into two parts, to what the question really is:

1. Does the object of the Tao represent "God" perse?
2. Is Taoism, theistic or nontheistic?

1. In my experience, no.
2. Depends on the individual, can be but doesn't have to be. There are 'deities' in Taoism but those that take it as a philosophy only, clearly don't apply that aspect. Like any religious, spiritual and philosophical tradition, it's kind of a mishmash.

 

[dingdao]

Basically, we need to ask here of the Tao is a god-concept. My baseline, culturally neutral definition of gods is that which a person or culture deems worthy of worship. To call something a god means you have defied it, or granted it worth-ship. To my understanding, the Tao is not worshiped or deified and is, therefore, not a god-concept, nor a theistic concept. If the Tao is being worshiped or deified, then it would become theistic.

How about this:
Tao is the process.
I am part of the Tao
You are part of the Tao.
Gaia is part of the Tao.
The Universe is part of the Tao.
God(s) if he/she/they/it exist(s), is part of the Tao.

I really didn't intend to create poetry.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

Honestly, it's completely up to the practitioner on whether or not Taoism is theistic or non-theistic.

Personally, I find it to be Transtheistic. Neither inherently theistic or non-theistic.

The Tao just is. Always will be. Always has been. In many ways, I find it similar to Brahman.

I voted Yes and No. It has the concept of immortals, especially the 8 Immortals. But it also does perfectly well withour theistic trappings. But just when you're gonna typecast it as nontheistic, you find out that actual Christian scholars have used the Tao as an analogy.

 

[Straw Dog]

Tao is the natural order of the universe beyond human comprehension. That is, it is a concept about that which is beyond the act of conceptualization. I would say it ‘transcends’ both theistic and non-theistic concepts, but it’s also quite imminent. It can only be intuitively realized through the experience of being alive in ordinary, everyday actions.