The Tao is NOT God

[firedragon]

ting bu dao

What language is that? Chinese I presume?

 

[crossfire]

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 ).

I'd agree that Taoism is process-focused rather than substance-focused.

 

[Wu Wei]

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.

Being
存在
Cúnzài


Also, depending on the age of the book being translated you can run into an issue with simplified Chinese vs Traditional Chinese

Being is the same in both however 存在

Be very careful with translation of any Chinese book, especially the Tao Te Ching. There are many many translations and some of it is open to interpretation of the translator and t may not be what was intended by the originator of the Tao Te Ching. And no, I do not have a recommendation as to what translation is best

Also, there are characters in Chinese that translate to english as a specific word, however the meaning of that word in english is not the same as in Chinese. Spirit gets misinterpreted regularly.

Spirit
精神
Jīngshén

 

[crossfire]

Being
精神
Jīngshén

Interesting! Jīng and shén as in two of the Three Treasures? (Just missing the Qi)
Three Treasures (traditional Chinese medicine) - Wikipedia

 

[Wu Wei]

Interesting! Jīng and shén as in two of the Three Treasures? (Just missing the Qi)
Three Treasures (traditional Chinese medicine) - Wikipedia

Its the shen bit that mixes folks up in translation in the west. They think spirit/soul/God and stop there. But in many cases the Chinese side of the equation is simply thinking "mind"

 

[dybmh]

I'd agree that Taoism is process-focused rather than substance-focused.

Conversely, I have heard a compelling argument that God is NOT The Tao; because God ( as described in the Bible and Qur'an ) has preferences and a personality ( for lack of a better word ). Example: It is generally agreed that the God in the Bible and the Qur'an prefers that people do not murder each other. Question: In Taoism, does The Tao have preferences like this? Does Karma demonstrate The Tao's preferred behaviors and choices for people? And if so, can The Tao be described as having a personality?

 

[Polymath257]

What language is that? Chinese I presume?

Yes. Hanyu

 

[PureX]

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

Yes, it's Mitchell's. I prefer that one.

 

[Sunstone]

Being
存在
Cúnzài


Also, depending on the age of the book being translated you can run into an issue with simplified Chinese vs Traditional Chinese

Being is the same in both however 存在

Be very careful with translation of any Chinese book, especially the Tao Te Ching. There are many many translations and some of it is open to interpretation of the translator and t may not be what was intended by the originator of the Tao Te Ching. And no, I do not have a recommendation as to what translation is best

Also, there are characters in Chinese that translate to english as a specific word, however the meaning of that word in english is not the same as in Chinese. Spirit gets misinterpreted regularly.

Spirit
精神
Jīngshén

Thank you so much! That's very helpful.

I have some concerns, though. At issue here is the language from the Spring and Autumn Period to the end of the Han Dynasty in 220 CE. That period predates Traditional or Literary Chinese, doesn't it? I believe scholars distinguish between the language during that period and what came later.

The problem is, it is during that period that all three or four major versions of the Tao Te Ching are written, and thus my question is whether the Chinese had a concept of "being" back then that matches the current Western concept of being.

Of course, the Western concept involves more than "existence". In the West, being is a metaphysical concept. Now, the problem with that is, the closest the Chinese seem to come to having a term or concept of metaphysics in the Western sense is the phrase "the forms above", which gets its start sometime around the 11th Century CE -- well after the Tao Te Ching is written.

I think all of that might have something to do with why my professor of Chinese Philosophy told me -- if I recall now -- that China lacked a notion of "being" back in the days when the Tao Te Ching was written. Yet it's been 40 years since my last course in Chinese philosophy, so I could have it all muddled and half-forgotten by now. In fact, I probably do have it all muddled and half-forgotten by now. I am almost always wrong about nearly everything.

Do you happen to know of any dictionaries of the language during the Spring and Autumn period? I have not been able to find on online.

 

[PureX]

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.

That's well stated. And I agree.

 

[Wu Wei]

Tao itself is not God, nor is it a god, nor is it worshipped by Taoists. However everything is said to have come from Tao. In the west we think of everything coming from God. Now if either/both exists, did one create the other or are they the same and it is all semantics?

Just a thought.

 

[firedragon]

Yes. Hanyu

Ah now more dilemma.

What is Hanyu?

 

[Polymath257]

Ah now more dilemma.

What is Hanyu?

Mandarin. The language spoken by the Han ethnic group. Chinese has many different dialects that are mutually incomprehensible.

 

[Ouroboros]

​

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?

Good points you're making in the post. Yeah, I'm not sure I see Tao as God or a god. However, I do consider Tao to be beyond and more than any god can be. Tao is the non-instance of existence, while God or gods are the realization or instance of something. Have to ponder a little more about this, but I like where you're going with it.

 

[firedragon]

Mandarin. The language spoken by the Han ethnic group. Chinese has many different dialects that are mutually incomprehensible.

Ah. Understood.

Very difficult language isn't it? A friend tried to teach me one single word. O.

That's supposed to have five ways of pronouncing. I could not figure head or tail of it.

 

[Polymath257]

Ah. Understood.

Very difficult language isn't it? A friend tried to teach me one single word. O.

That's supposed to have five ways of pronouncing. I could not figure head or tail of it.

It is both difficult and easy in different ways. Yes, the tones are tricky (especially for someone like me who has hearing loss--these are the 5 different pronunciations), but the basic grammar is quite easy.

For example, in French, when you start with a verb, you have to conjugate it for all the different pronouns and tenses. That leads to a fairly complicated, but very expressive system.

In Chinese, the verb doesn't change based on who is doing the action (I am, you are, he is) or on tense (I was, you were, he will be, etc). Instead, extra words are added to designate tense.

I am still at the beginning of my learning, so take what i say as the thoughts of a beginner, but I have found learning Chinese to be easier than, say, French. partly, French has the same alphabet, and sometimes the same words, but the words can mean different things. Chinese is enough different that those collisions between languages don't happen too often.

 

[PureX]

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

Yes, the "flow of being" determines the way that existence, exists. Existence is the manifestation of "being": the flow from the divine (above; transcendent of us) to the material (below; descendant of us) with us suspended (cognitively speaking) at various levels of awareness in between. This is the conceptual image of taoist reality, I think.

 

[firedragon]

It is both difficult and easy in different ways. Yes, the tones are tricky (especially for someone like me who has hearing loss--these are the 5 different pronunciations), but the basic grammar is quite easy.

For example, in French, when you start with a verb, you have to conjugate it for all the different pronouns and tenses. That leads to a fairly complicated, but very expressive system.

In Chinese, the verb doesn't change based on who is doing the action (I am, you are, he is) or on tense (I was, you were, he will be, etc). Instead, extra words are added to designate tense.

I am still at the beginning of my learning, so take what i say as the thoughts of a beginner, but I have found learning Chinese to be easier than, say, French. partly, French has the same alphabet, and sometimes the same words, but the words can mean different things. Chinese is enough different that those collisions between languages don't happen too often.

Ah I understand. Hmm. I cant think of a language I know that is similar in that kind of simplicity. Alright then. One day I shall learn Chinese. I have a lot of love for Chinese philosophies and arts bro. Since I was a kid. I am no expert I grew up with a lot of affinity. But first, I have to learn Urdu and Hindi, thats for business. Then, definitely Chinese. Thanks for the heads up and nudge.

Peace.

 

[firedragon]

It is both difficult and easy in different ways. Yes, the tones are tricky (especially for someone like me who has hearing loss--these are the 5 different pronunciations), but the basic grammar is quite easy.

For example, in French, when you start with a verb, you have to conjugate it for all the different pronouns and tenses. That leads to a fairly complicated, but very expressive system.

In Chinese, the verb doesn't change based on who is doing the action (I am, you are, he is) or on tense (I was, you were, he will be, etc). Instead, extra words are added to designate tense.

I am still at the beginning of my learning, so take what i say as the thoughts of a beginner, but I have found learning Chinese to be easier than, say, French. partly, French has the same alphabet, and sometimes the same words, but the words can mean different things. Chinese is enough different that those collisions between languages don't happen too often.

I was always told that Tao simply means philosophy. Like tao of jeet kune do.

 

[Wu Wei]

Thank you so much! That's very helpful.

I have some concerns, though. At issue here is the language from the Spring and Autumn Period to the end of the Han Dynasty in 220 CE. That period predates Traditional or Literary Chinese, doesn't it? I believe scholars distinguish between the language during that period and what came later.

The problem is, it is during that period that all three or four major versions of the Tao Te Ching are written, and thus my question is whether the Chinese had a concept of "being" back then that matches the current Western concept of being.

Of course, the Western concept involves more than "existence". In the West, being is a metaphysical concept. Now, the problem with that is, the closest the Chinese seem to come to having a term or concept of metaphysics in the Western sense is the phrase "the forms above", which gets its start sometime around the 11th Century CE -- well after the Tao Te Ching is written.

I think all of that might have something to do with why my professor of Chinese Philosophy told me -- if I recall now -- that China lacked a notion of "being" back in the days when the Tao Te Ching was written. Yet it's been 40 years since my last course in Chinese philosophy, so I could have it all muddled and half-forgotten by now. In fact, I probably do have it all muddled and half-forgotten by now. I am almost always wrong about nearly everything.

Do you happen to know of any dictionaries of the language during the Spring and Autumn period? I have not been able to find on online.

Do not know characters from that time. I believe they were a combination of Qin and something else. possibly Han, there are folks that can translate these. But with the Tao Te Ching, what is being translated? An original, an original copy of the original or a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy. And one error in one character can change the meaning completely of an entire section

As for the concept of being in early China (BC) could not tell you, but from the books of the time, If you define being as the nature or essence of a person, or existence. Then it would seem that there was a sense of "being" which can be found in the Tao Te Ching. And in Taoism itself

(Edit/Addition)
Note: Just looked this up, found here

隶书【隸書】Lìshū
Lishu characters are respectively split into the Qín 秦 【秦】style (one of the Warring States into which China was divided during the Eastern Zhou period – 770-256 BC), and the Hàn 汉 【漢】 Dynasty style (206 BC – AD 220).

The Qin style of lishu was a hasty and often illegible style of writing that was predominantly used among the people as a non-governmental handwritten form of communication. The characters that local authorities used were known as Tú lì 徒隶 【徒隸】, and were adopted from the style of the common-folk and adapted to become the official governmental script.

During the change from the Xiaozhuan to the Lishu form of writing, the most profound modification was the symbolisation of the characters, which no longer followed the previous method of directly representing material objects.

Spring and Autumn period approximately 771 to 476 BC