Re: Chuang Tzu

On Jul 2, 12:58 am, chipoth...@aol.com wrote:

> So, in simple words, what the  does that mean?  Early Taoists?    Oh,
> so the early Taoists wanted to avoid danger and prolong life.  So
> internally ingesting tonics and such, like in TCM, was given over to a
> philosophical solution?   So do philosophical Taoists not care about
> body, mind, and spirit?  Or do they believe that mind/spirit is over
> body.  Is mind/spirit the teacher and body the follower?   That too
> seems like TCM.  I'm confused.

Excellent!  Giles Marin says that the objective of the teacher is to
lead the student into a state of confusion and keep them there as long
as possible.  You must be teaching yourself quite well!  (But why
should we aim for this state of confusion?  Because that is the time
when our habitual patterns of thought are suspended, and we have the
potential to be truly creative.)

We can say that 'philosophical Taoists believe X' whereas 'TCM Taoists
believe Y' or we can say that 'Nick believes X' whereas 'Jay believes
Y'.  All these statements will have varying degrees of accuracy, but
no formation of words can ever express the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth.

> I searched for a few other translations of that particular paragraph
> and this is what I found.
>
> "As for the man who rides a true course between heaven and earth, with
> the changes of the six energies for his chariot, to travel into the
> infinite, is there anthing that he depends on?  As the saying goes,
> The utmost man is selfless, the daemonic man takes no credit for his
> deeds, the sage is nameless."
>
> Graham
>
> "If he had only mounted the truth of Heaven and Earth, ridden the
> changes of the six breaths, and thus wandered through the boundless,
> then what would he have had to depend on?
>
> Therefore I say, the perfect man has no self; the holy man has no
> merit; the sage has no fame."
>
> Watson

Looks like a paradox.  Confusing, aren't they!



Nick
[ Auf dieses Posting antworten ]