dynamictao

My new book (The Logic of Tao Philosophy) has been revised (improved). The Kindle version will be free for anyone to download on June 1 and 2, 2013. The Kindle book may be read on any computer and many tablets. (You can download Knidle Reader from www.amazon.com and install on your computer.) You may search under the book title. Only the Kindle book is free.

Hope you will enjoy it. The logic is common in many Eastern philosophies.

I have re-edited my book "The Logic of Tao Philosophy" and will publish it in Kindle again.

This revised version has gpne through 2 weeks of work and should be must better than before.

You can done get the book free from Amazon Kindle store again on June 1, 2013.

Tell your friends about it.

I think this book will help understanding the Tao Te Ching.

Search under my name: Wayne L. Wang or the book title.

Any question may be posted here.

To me, the simple concepts <Wu> and <Yu> are stabilized by their interaction (which I perceive as unboundaried). As you see it otherwise, the addition of the actualities solves the perceived stabilization issue nicely. I've reviewed all the models and find them internally consistent, and not in gross conflict with Laozi thought or the architecture of the concepts.

 

the term "Absolute Realitiy"

Wu and Yu are stable in the two sub-domains; Heng Wu and Heng Yu are stable in the whole domain.

In the actualization process, we may say that Wu is actualized into Heng Wu, by the complement of Yu.

Some "boundaries" fade in Heng Yu and some "boundaries" appear in Heng Wu.

I shall just use "Reality" for Tao. Even "reality" is ill defined.

I am re-working my book on The Logic and will make it free again in the near future.

A long time ago you expressed a similar wish about "Te" - that, like "Tao" was, would have been better left 'un-converted' to the english word (Virtue). Now, it seems, the encumbered english words Dual, Nondual, One, are being forced to fit onto ideas that may be better served in some other manner. I dont know yet what that manner might be...

These words are useful only if we try to define the philosophical model. If we use them, we have to define them carefully, otherwise, we cannot get their relationship right. If we use them, we have to clearly define them. Different people may use them in different ways, it is ok if they define them clearly.

Figure 3 The Harmonization Process

[click to magnify]

In the model, the objects are harmonized by their interactions to become the actualities. We may show this harmonization process or the actualization process in Fig. 3.

In this Figure, Wu and Yu are harmonized by their interactions to become the actualities Heng Wu and Heng Yu. We treat the actualities and the objects as concepts. Wu and Yu are harmonized by their interactions to become the actualities Heng Wu and Heng Yu. The objects are our simplified concepts and the manifestations (actualities) are more complicated concepts. The simple concepts, <Wu> and <Yu>, are interconnected by their interactions, so they are not stable (or true). These objects are harmonized to become the “stable” actualities <Heng Wu> and <Heng Yu>.

The result is

[Click]

Here is the structure of Chapter 1 of the Tao Te Ching (from The Logic of Tao Philosophy)

Figure 1 Basic Architecture of Tao Philosophy

[Click to open]

In this Figure, the bold-faced terms within the thick-lined boxes are the terminology used by Lao-tzu in Chapter 1. Here, Heng Tao represents the absolute reality under discussion. The fundamental characteristic of this reality is the Oneness in “Tao begets One, or Tao brings Oneness into being道生一” [Ch. 42]. This is also the nameless.

For Lao-tzu, the myriad things in the phenomenal world are named. The important observation is that there is also reality in the phenomenal world. Therefore, we should describe Tao at two levels. The entities (Heng Wu and Heng Yu) at the Manifestations level are realistic and the objects (Wu and Yu) at the Object levels are not realistic, but are convenient entities to describe the manifestations. We also use the term actualities for these manifestations in our formal model.

The three levels are three ways we can discuss the same Tao. It is important to note that Tao philosophy recognizes the phenomenal world as a valid way of describing Tao. Lao-tzu does not deny the world as illusion and without reality.

 

I wasn't able to find a larger image of this on your website... so I zoomed in on your Avatar to read the words...and guess what! If you merge together your Wu and Yu rectangles - bang! - you get the circles in circle item on mine - bang! - and the underlying structure of the diagrams are identical! Seems we were both pointing at the same thing in only slightly different ways.

 

fun stuff (-:

See if this is a larger picture.

Click on it

Finally, what's duality to me, in Chapter One, are Wu(無) and You(有).

 

The diagram looks good, it resembles the duality of Wu and You in Chapter One which correspond the Concept of Yin-Yang in the Yi Jing. However, I would prefer to replace "Mystery" with "Wu" and replace "Manifest" with "You" to have a much clear picture.

Rene,

That is also the way I use duality. When we separate the manifestations of Tao into two opposites Wu and Yu. Wu and Yu could be any two opposites (yin and yang, body and mind, left-brain and right brain, etc.) . Call them the objects. In reality, these two are correlated (interact, in physics) so they become inter-mixed as in the Tai Chi. The Tai chi states (Heng Wu and Heng Yu) are the actual manifestations of Tao.

[click on the picture to magnify it]

Now, the problem of Nonduality. Tao itself is One, so it is nondual. How about Heng Wu and Heng Yu? They are whole (to be real, they must be whole, per our friend Hegel). Here is the myestery of Tao. There are two manifestation and each is a whole. They are also "equivalent" representations of Tao.

There is no real separation of Wu and Yu in "Heng Wu" and "Heng Yu," so they are the "nondualistic" manifestations of Tao. I have cakked them "Dualistic Realities" May be "Nondualistic realities" is a better name.

Early China/ancient Greece: thinking through comparisons (2002) by Steven Shankman

 

so that's a good one....

 

Steven Shankman, “These Three Come Forth Together But are Differently Named: Laozi, Zhuangzi, Plato,” in

Early China/ancient Greece: thinking through comparisons by Steven Shankman, Stephen W. Durrant (SUNY

Press, 2002).

 

Knowing words: wisdom and cunning in the classical traditions of China

and Greece by Lisa Ann Raphals

 

Lisa Ann Raphals, Knowing words: wisdom and cunning in the classical traditions of China and

Greece (Cornell University Press, 1992), p. 18.

 

The book

The Tao and the Logos : literary hermeneutics, East and West by Chang, Lung-hsi (1992)

 

O.K. I go into great discussion of a deep critique of Platonic philosophy in the context of nonwestern, Nondualism -- in my book.

I will check these references. I have The Tao and the Logos, will find some time to revist it.

My interpretation of knowledge and wisdom is reversed, according to Lisa Raphals translation (in her table).

Shankman interprets the first chapter (Wu Yu and You Yu) in the traditional way, which I think is incorrect due to the meaning of Heng. He uses Wang Bi's version that Nameless (Wu ming) is the beginning of heaven and earth. I use Mawangdui for that verse. A lot of good papers there. [i read from amazon].

Thank for your discussions.

Anyway -- you mention Platonic philosophy a bit - and my book goes into that also - I'll grab a reference that you probably already know - I didn't check your references for it...

 

Early China/ancient Greece: thinking through comparisons (2002) by Steven Shankman

 

so that's a good one....

The model turns out to be so similar to "The Theory of Forms" of Plato. He must have figured it out already, but may have been interpreted in many ways. I am leaving that as another project. The basic models for many philosophical discussions are similar, but they do not use Figures. I am used to figures to keep the concepts straight for myself.

Here is my basic model:

I have written a book on this but it's more of a personal reference source as the information is convoluted and not clearly presented. But anyway the book is freely available on my blog - but it has some 735 scholarly footnotes. haha.

 

I'm not saying that quantum physics is somehow equivalent to Taoism - quite the opposite. In my opinion quantum physics is the opposite extreme of Taoism (or real nondualistic philosophy).... so dialectically the opposite extremes then merge again in their common ground of the nondualistic Empty source.

 

This is why paranormal science can not be "proven" satisfactorily according to mainstream science, etc. - it is this fundamental issue of Western math relying on symmetric closed circular logic due to dualistic language structure, among other issues.

You must have done a lot. I hope you can share. I will go to your site.

I haven't updated my site (www.dynamictao.com) for many years.

In my model, quantum physics ( or all physics) is at the object level, where you maintain the objects and their interactions to describe the "reality." So you have "particle" and "wave" and "entanglement of objects" etc. Lao-tzu tries to maintain the actual level (with realities), so there is no attachments to the objects. However, Lao-tzu still have to use objects to describe the actualities. That is why I say that he is not really against using objects (words) to describe Tao.

It is well established that we are hampered by our language. Even in quantum theory, we still don't have words for "particle with some wave property." So call it "wavicle." But it is not a word. If that is a word, how about "partclave???" So quantum is also stuck in words.

Hello — I'm a newly registered member. I'm the author of Wordplay, a book of my ambigrams and my personal, contemporary, and western version of the Tao. If you're unfamiliar with the term 'ambigrams' they are words designed in such a way as to allow readability from more than one point of view. If you've read Dan Brown's Angels & Demons, you've already seen some of my work.

 

I'm one of the originators of ambigrams, and the yin/yang symbol was the primary spiritual influence. I had been creating variations on the yin/yang symbol — including ambigrams — for several years before I read anything about Taoism. But working with the symbol as a jumping off point for my artwork, I had developed a thorough understanding of the Tao.

It is wonderful to see you here. I have your interesting book.

Aristic and philosophical.

I like the name "Ambigram" for the Tai Chi diagram.

re non-Vennian.. how 'bout a sphere?

 

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/28138-ambigrams-and-the-tao/

 

from post #9 in that thread

New poster. Just joined. Very cool stuff.

Ambigram is a good name for it. I will check it.

How do we draw two universes connected through worm holes?

You (and not Laozi) introduces "Heng Wu" and "Heng Yu" ... here's my explanation of the Mawangdui chapter 1 grammar:

 

恆無欲也 heng wu yu ye

恆有欲也 heng you yu ye

 

The two 也 characters mark the three preceeding characters as subject noun phrases that'll say:

 

The eternity and the nondesire / The eternity without desire

The eternity and the desire / The eternity with Desire

 

 

道可道也非恆道也

 

The grammar of the first line is the standard formula X 也非 Y 也 it's X it isn't Y

可 marks the following character as a verb

非 marks the following character as a noun

 

It's a tao or to tao it isn't the eternity and the tao

Most people will agree with your interpretations. If it helps, there is no reason to change.

I happend to have a different view now. I just share the simple way to arrive at the logic structure that has helped me.

If we remove Chapter 1 of the Tao Te Ching, the logic structure still stands.

So, it may not be important how we interpret Chapter 1 (Heng Wu, etc.) after we understand his logic.

We can still see the logic in other chapters.

People wonder how the nondualism can "split" into duality but yet retain the nondual wholeness -- I actually wrote a masters thesis on this topic of nonduality but I use music as the model.

 

O.K. so from experience when qigong master Chunyi Lin teaches the Tai Chi symbol meaning for his Level 3 class -- he says that the basic teaching is

 

"use your consciousness to go into the Emptiness and keep it simple."

 

The consciousness is the sine wave inside the circle which is the Emptiness.

 

From a nondual perspective - this was in 2000 -- I was really confused because I wondered what is the difference between "consciousness" and the Emptiness if reality is really non-dualistic.

 

So it took me several years to resolve this and I realized that reality is not symmetric logic but it is like the time-frequency uncertainty principle in quantum physics - we always already exist in the Emptiness which I think of like a spacetime vortex but it is also awareness - formless awareness.

 

So the consciousness is spirit light energy and it is our sense of self even though we in the modern left-brain dominant reality are cut off from this spirit light energy except when dreaming - anyway so this spirit light consciousness goes into the Emptiness which is a spacetime vortex that secretly guides the light. Formless awareness is outside of spacetime itself - so this guiding process is a "pilot wave" as quantum physicist de Broglie calls it - so it guides from the future into the past, or into the future from the past, etc.

 

O.K. so this process is eternal and therefore nondualistic - we can not escape from the Tao but at the same time we can only logically infer the existence of the Tao as the Emptiness - this is even proven in quantum physics as Dr. Bernard D'Espagnat points out. I mention this in the blogpost I linked - just scroll down.

 

Anyway so this goes back to the yin and yang as music intervals - because nonwestern music is also non-commutative! It is just like the time-frequency uncertainty principle of quantum physics.

Glad that you got through a similar process of unifying dualism and nondualism.

To me, it was the whole story. That is why I wrote the article for Tamkang Journal and the present books.

I feel that most people are ready. The idea is not new. We can start from Parmenides (but he was quite misunderstood, like Lao-tzu). A more recent one is Schelling. I believe that many others are saying the same thing.

It also takes me many, many years to realize that. I believe that is advocated by Lao-tzu, too.

So actually I rely for a Western analysis on quantum math is which is not symmetric or more precise non-commutative.

 

People wonder how the nondualism can "split" into duality but yet retain the nondual wholeness -- I actually wrote a masters thesis on this topic of nonduality but I use music as the model.

 

So actually if you study Taoism it is stated that the Perfect Fifth music interval is yang and the perfect fourth music interval is yin.

 

This may seem not very important but actually the foundation of Western symmetric math comes from nonwestern music - from Pythagorean philosophy which formally is equivalent to the nondualism of Taoism.

 

I have a blog post on this which gives more details -- http://fulllotusqigong.blogspot.com/2012/11/non-commutative-resonance-quantum.html

I will have to review the non-commutative properties of the quatum operators. I am tempering on the idea of looking at many scientific and mathematical agian to see what I think now (with the logic of Tao philosophy). I will check on your blog. It should be interesting.

Yeah Wayne your book is cool -- I take it you have a physics degree from M.I.T. or obviously some science degree?

 

So you state that there is a symmetry in the dualism but I think this maybe a misunderstanding due to Western mathematics being based on symmetry - normally.

 

I read a book on fractals by Charles Madden - he points out that actually the Tai Chi symbol is not symmetric due to the different black/white variation within each half of the symbol.

 

So actually I rely for a Western analysis on quantum math is which is not symmetric or more precise non-commutative.

I will have to digest your long comments. I am very glad that we have interesting discussions.

About "symmetry," the Tai Chi diagram is a special kind of "symmetry" that we need to define in more details.

We may call it "bipolar symmetry" or "bipolar asymmetry." It is not a simple symmetry. The logic cannot be represented in the Venn diagram which is two dimensional. I have been trying to find a non-Vennian diagram ( anyone can help?).

In physics, we start with a symmetric "Wu" and "Yu", with interactions, we have the Tai Chi diagram, resulting is a "symmetry" that is twisted or connected internally. We all know two equivalent universes connected through the "worm holes". It is that type of symmetry, we have. Anyway, I need a more accurate name for this. Thanks.

I will address other points in the next few posts.

 

In the Tao Te Ching, the are Tao and tao. Tao is a proper noun; and tao is a principle. The use "Wu and Yu as well-defined concepts to describe how Tao works" It seems to me Chapter one use Wu and You to describe the appearance of Tao instead of how Tao works. Based on your thinking, how does Tao work to you.....???

In my interpretation, Wu means "without making differentiation of the myriad things.' That is one way of looking at the myriad things, or "That is one way the principle of Tao works - not to differentiate the myriad things"

The second way is the opposite by "making complete differentiation - treating each one differently."

But Tao does not treating the myriad things in these two opposite ways. In reality, when Tao treats the myriad things without differentiation, it still sees the myriad things. This is the way of Heng Wu. It is an impartial act which still recognizes the individuals. Same descriptions apply to Yu and Heng Yu.

We have a terminology convention here. We may say Heng Wu and Heng Yu are (1) two different manifestations of Tao, (2) different ways that the principle of Tao is manifestated. I look at the different Chapters of the TTC as different ways of describing the principle of Tao, so I try to find how Lao-tzu uses Wu and Yu (or any other two opposites) to describe the principle of Tao.

From the way Lao-tzu uses words to describe the principle of Tao, we identify his logic.

That is, it is not a blanket sweeping act that ignore the individuals.

CD - it might be in this case, "Nonduality of Tao" is referring to the unboundariedness of Tao, i.e., that the whole is still within the parts and the parts are still within the whole. All, same time. (-:

 

warm regards

It is so nice that you can spend some time here. I am sure you can contribute and help me honest here.

I feel that my new books are pointing to a valid resoluation, but I need to re-work them (Updates are easy to make, since they are eBooks and POD). I hope to get some discussions. That will certainly help in my updates.

Wayne

"The Oneness or Nonduality of Tao appears as a pair of Dualistic Realities in the world."

 

I still cannot get over your idea of "Oneness or Nonduality of Tao". Then, you've contradicted yourself with "Nonduality of Tao appears as a pair of Dualistic Realities in the world."

We may say that there is a "(metaphysical) reailty" this is One (Tao). We use Wu and Yu as well-defined concepts to describe how Tao works, but these two (Wu and Yu) are dualistic, so they can not represent Tao. Therefore Lao-tzu introduces "Heng Wu" and "Heng Yu" as two realistic ways of looking at Tao. That is why I call these two (manifestations of Tao) as the dual realistic representations of Tao.

We can look at the world now in these two ways withour losing reality. The reality is the principle of Tao. These two ways are two reasonable ways of looking the principle of Tao.

The two manifestations (Heng Wu and Heng Yu) are equal in representing the principle of Tao. These two are not really two, since, as far as representing the reality, they are equal ("ontologically equivalent"). They have the same wholeness of Tao.

I am proposing to discuss here the fundamental principle of reality and the logic (non-duality, oneness) of Tao philsophy. I feel this is the most fundamental approach to have a consistent understanding. My book (The Logic of Tao Philosophy) has been downloaded by 92 people, yesterday. I will continue to modify the book ( to improve on the writing, editing, etc.).

The principle of Lao-tzu is general and can be applied to many related areas. Any suggestion is welcome on setting this as a special topic?

(From the Book)

[The Principle of Oneness]

We may now summarize our discussion as a Principle. In Tao philosophy, Oneness or Nonduality is the base of all realities, so we may summarize the principle of Tao as The Principle of Oneness 恆一原則:

When we represent one reality Heng Tao by two true manifestations, Heng Wu and Heng Yu, the two manifestations will have opposite characteristics, but they are equivalent representations of the same reality. Both manifestations appear at the same time. As a reality, each of the two true manifestations will cover the same whole domain of the reality.

To describe the two true manifestations, we define two opposite objects, Wu and Yu, to represent the opposite parts of the whole domain. These objects belong to separate sub-domains. However, these objects participate in the formation of actual manifestations. Therefore, each manifestation, as a whole, will comprise simultaneously of both parts, with a strict principle to reconstruct its wholeness.

When we express the true manifestations in terms of the objects, the objects will be vague and the manifestations will appear with self-contradictory and indeterminate objects. Such ambiguity and vagueness is inherently the profound and mysterious nature of reality in the phenomenal world.

According to this Principle of Oneness, any “division” of a reality will result in “multiple” equivalent manifestations of the same reality. A reality is thus indivisible. Each “part” will still reflect the “whole.” The Oneness or Nonduality of Tao appears as a pair of Dualistic Realities in the world.

The Principle of Oneness is a general law of Oneness or Nonduality. The logical participation of the parts in the whole is an ancient philosophical problem. Our systematic model may also be applied to address this common philosophical problem.

That's right. Surely, Fu is interpreted as "Universal Man" in that text, but the problem is that in the main text it's but a grammatical particle.

 

夫，人神好清；而心擾之。

 

Anyway, in olden times language was not as dead as today to be understood mechanically.

In this case, "Fu" is not the same as the earlier use of "Fu."

I would take this one to mean "Because", "The truth is", etc.

"The spirit of man prefers tranquility, but is disturbed by our mind." (roughly)

Same character with two meanings in two separate use. Both should be valid.

.

Thanks Dawei,

It helped me a lot. Consequently when it is used at the beginning of a sentence, it is a grammatical particle, not to refer to a reality. Now, I wonder how it is interpreted in a classical Chinese text like this:

 

人得一為大，大得一為天，超出天外，方為夫字。

 

http://www.26869273.idv.tw/13bible/htmlpage10.htm

This is my take. Very interesting sequences: roughly

What is a gentleman (Fu)?

Man attains Oneness to have "Significance (Da)";

Significance attains Oneness to become with "Heaven";

Only if it can be beyond Heaven,

It is (the word for ) a trule "gentleman."

Gentleman -> Fu-tzu ->Sage?

As I have promised a while ago that my new book will be published in May. The Kindle version will be free on May 1, 2013 (California time zone). I have now a version available for download. You do not need a physical Komdle to read it. You can install Kindle on any PC.

Go to www.amazon.com and search in Kinle store for the title "The Logic of Tao Philosophy"

[Only the Kindle version is free - There is a printed version ( just a caution)]

Sorry for the late reminder. I almost miss the deadline for this promise.

It is pretty clear that Tao philosophy is an authentic philosophy. It is similar to other discussions of Nonduality, Oneness, Wholeness, Totality, etc. I have been working only on the philosophy side. I have no expertise in its relation to Sharmanism.

My book "Tao Te Ching: The Logic of Tao Philosophy" will be published as a Kindle Book at Amazon. I promised the forum that the book will be made free on May 1. You do not need a Kindle to read it. You can use Kindle program on any PC, iPad, to read it. Please go to www.amazon.com, then search for Kindle book with the Title or my name "Wayne L. Wang" to down load the book.