Taoism

Andy Spalding wrote:

Suppose you and I have an argument.

y

What would be the point of determining who won?

Mark Anjuu wrote: The first part does indeed say a lot about the Force and its nature but the rest of the book offers insights into behaviour, conduct, connections to the Force, and guidance for those that are in a position of responsibility. As such, it is unwise to dismiss it so readily.

I never said dismiss it. The rest of book is also cultural and not significant for somebody who is not looking to be a Taoist.

IF somebody is looking for behavioral guidelines, cross-culture connections, status responsibility, etc, then YES! Read it.

But, if I am doing research about religions to find out what they think about the Force as an abstract concept, then I stop after the first 5 pages.

I studied the Tao Te Ching during my Apprenticeship, and again as a Knight.

I don't see it as an ultimate guide to all things Jedi, but I believe it to offer a better glimpse into the true nature of the Force than the limitations of our language usually allow us to express, and I believe that the wisdom contained within it is worthy of much time and consideration.

Lao Tse wrote: Noble man stay away from conflict, the inferior person always disputes.
Noble man does not need virtue, the inferior person needs virtue.

People fail to realize the Tao, because the mind is always moved by many improper emotions.

Emotions overcome the mind, means the spirit is disturbed.
When spirit is disturbed, then one adheres to the improper things.
When adheres to the improper things, Then desires and pretension takes place.
As desires and pretension takes place, then annoyance and anguish are richened.

Improper desires, annoyance and anguish,
Always pressure and bother the body and the mind.

Sounds pretty Jedi to me. Taoism is one of things I need to spend more time on.

Before attempting to tackle the Tao Te Ching, the Book of Five Rings or any of the other Eastern philosophies, I would start by reading…

Bushido - The Warriors Code

Just my Opinion.

I've read through the Tao Te Ching several times, and I refer back to it a lot. There's a lot of different translations of it though, so I would recommend this one . It's more poetic, yet it is easier to understand in its simplicity.

After that you might be interested in the Hua Hu Ching. It's much easier to understand in its direct language but is, IMO, much deeper. (my signature is from that book)

The Tao Te Ching was not written for Taoists, but for a border guard of Chu (perhaps) ...

Lao Tzu wrote it because he was asked to ...

One can read it as one reads a philosophical text -- and not 'get' it.

One can read it as a religious treatise -- and not 'believe' it.

One can read it as an encyclopaedia -- and not 'learn' anything.

One can read it as a lyric poem -- and not be 'moved' by it.

So, put it away -- then you 'get' it.

Laugh at it -- then you 'believe' it.

Forget it -- then you've 'learnt' it.

Look at the World, and at the heavens -- then you may be 'moved' by it ...



Tao Te Ching 41 :

When a superior man hears of the Tao,
he immediately begins to embody it.
When an average man hears of the Tao,
he half believes it, half doubts it.
When a foolish man hears of the Tao,
he laughs out loud.
If he didn't laugh,
it wouldn't be the Tao. Thus it is said:
The path into the light seems dark,
the path forward seems to go back,
the direct path seems long,
true power seems weak,
true purity seems tarnished,
true steadfastness seems changeable,
true clarity seems obscure,
the greatest seems unsophisticated,
the greatest love seems indifferent,
the greatest wisdom seems childish. The Tao is nowhere to be found.
Yet it nourishes and completes all things.

Wescli Wardest wrote: Before attempting to tackle the Tao Te Ching, the Book of Five Rings or any of the other Eastern philosophies, I would start by reading…

I started with many encyclopedia entries and articles about eastern religions and philosophies (when I was single-digit years old :laugh: ). The first "real" book I read in this vein tho was, Hagakure.

Then I read the Tao Te Ching, and I've gotta tell you, my first time thru it didn't do a whole lot for me. They don't say "read" about Taoism tho, do they...they say "study" taoism...and there's a reason for the distinction.

Is there any religion older than Daoistism?

Yes...

Buddhism...partly because it actually came first, and partly because Taoism, isn't actually a religion...it's a philosophy (of course some people do attribute religious significance to it, but that only shows the extent to which those people don't "get it" lol)

Hinduism.

Most shamanistic religious traditions. Asatru, Druidism, some native american traditions, though most have been warped by modern wicca practice and no longer resemble the way they used to be practiced.

many of the tribal religious traditions from africa, Australia and the americas.

Technically, Mormonism is an older religion than Taoism, but again, that's due to the fact that Taoism isn't a religion.

But, to the best of my knowledge, Zoroastrianism is the oldest religion on the planet...if you're looking for a "source myth" from which all others originated.

Alluvius wrote: Technically, Mormonism is an older religion than Taoism, but again, that's due to the fact that Taoism isn't a religion.

Hmmm... I'd have to disagree. I think the modern following that Taoism has is not based in religious practices, if I am not mistaken it once was a religion with ancient Chinese roots, with monks and scholar-warriors and such. In which case it would make it much older than Mormanism, since Lao Tzu wrote his first work (Tao Te Ching) around 600 B.C.

I suppose most of this is debatable. I guess it depends on what your definition of "religion" is. After all, a lot of Jedi don't consider Force knowledge as religion, and yet here we are studying Jediism. :silly:

Streen, I agree that Taoism predates most existing philosophies. The only reason I said that Mormonism (the newest "accepted" religion I could think of...tho in retrospect I probably should have said Scientology...) was to illustrate the point that Taoism is not a religion. And, as you said, that's probably debatable, dependent on your definition of "religion"...as for me, there's no "god" or moral focus inherent to Taoism. There's no afterlife, or intention to transform people into "good" people or judge "bad" people. There are none of the traditionally accepted "markers" that define a religion as such inherent to Taoism, so I can't call it a religion. To me calling Taoism a religion would be the same as calling the Pacific ocean a "big bath tub"...similar, but oh so very different.

i prefer the term "philosophical lifestyle" to religion...religion sort of indicates a lack of flexibility, where as philosophical lifestyle has inherent flexibility since philosophy is adaptive...always changes with the aquisition of new information...just my thought

Religion/philosphy/belief system? Call it what you want, I've read it's called all those and dates back to the 4000BC. Can anyone place dates on what you've posted

if i was at home with my philosophy book i could place dates on all the religions/philosophies...though i may type it up when i get home and then post it tomorrow or so...

Thanks to the beauty and miracle of google and wikipedia...we can all place dates on everything...what dates are you interested in?

I'd like to back up the people claiming that Taoism has been a religion.

It did not start that way, but it became that way at one point. Now, some people follow it religiously, some follow it philosophically.

Sounds kinda similar to Buddhism, really, in that regard.