What do the bums think about this guys Taoist "principles"?

[SarahMoriko]

[King Kabalabhati]

That sounds like folly..

[SarahMoriko]

Yeah, I don't know what I think but I do know he gives me bad vibes.

[Marblehead]

 

What do you guys think of his views and interpretations?

 

Hi Sarah,

 

That is likely the work of Derek Lin. I respect Derek very much but do not always agree with his understanding.

 

This is one of those times. I think that the use of the word "unkind" in not what Lao Tzu intended to be understood.

 

I feel that perhaps "unconcerned" is a better word. Nature is unconcerned with the individual things of the universe when it follows its processes. This doesn't mean it is unkind. Many of us live our entire live without experiencing any unkindness from Nature.

 

Yes, Tao is unconcerned. It (all the various aspects of Tao) does what it needs to do.

 

The Sage is unconcerned. He/she does what they need to do. I am sure the Sage would help someone he/she came upon who was injured in an accident.

 

Even in the wildest of nature there is very little unkindness. Yes, the predator kills its pray. But it does not do it in an unkind manner. It always tries to make its kill swift and clean.

 

I have never seen a deer do an unkind act. Some higher apes do as well as some other animals. Humans do it often. But this is not the nature of Tao or of the universe.

 

So no, I don't like the use of the word "unkind" nor do I like the way it was explained where he says "...

harsh indifference towards all but a few loved ones."

 

Peace & Love!

[King Kabalabhati]

I think the paradox here is to realize the merciless nature of nature itself.. But to operate with compassion, which is a natural energy that we need to stay healthy and live good.. even to live forever.

[3bob]

T.T.C. 49:

 

The Sage has no interests of his own,

But takes the interests of the people as his own.

He is kind to the kind;

He is also kind to the unkind:

For Virtue is kind.

He is faithful to the faithful;

He is also faithful to the unfaithful:

For Virtue is faithful.

 

In the midst of the world, the Sage is shy and

self-effacing.

For the sake of the world he keeps his heart in its

nebulous state.

All the people strain their ears and eyes:

The Sage only smiles like an amused infant.

 

(the whole book needs study, not just a couple of chapters)

[Spectrum]

Nature is unforgiving but humans feel the fire of empathy in their breast. What goes around comes around. What you leave with stays behind. There are those who act, and those who take action. Action speaks louder than words. When push comes to shove, actors speak loudly, action speaks quietly.

 

If you play with fire you may be burned, if you act the part, play the part. Some who play firemen use their hose for crowd control as much as they need to feed the dalmation. Protect yourself at all times. Peace.

 

Spectrum

Edited January 16, 2010 by Spectrum

[Non]

"Nature" is unkind because it has been set up that way. All the animals, killing each other for "food." For "vitality" and "nutrition".

 

This is an artificial universe. an illusion.

 

All been set up to keep you trapped in a very cruel and sadistic and unjust mediocrity.

 

One must transcend this illusion and connect with the 'true nature'.

 

Do we get fleeting glimpses of this? How do we do this?

Edited January 16, 2010 by Non

[Tao99]

This principle 4 is taken from chapter 5 of the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu, one of the most mysterious of the chapters.

 

You can see here: http://www.yellowbridge.com/onlinelit/daodejing05.php

 

that the term in question is "buren" and is defined as not benevolent, and also heartless and numb. Does this automatically mean it's a synonym for unkind? Not necessarily. Consider Legge's translation:

 

Heaven and earth do not act from (the impulse of) any wish to be benevolent;

they deal with all things as the dogs of grass are dealt with.

 

The sages do not act from (any wish to be) benevolent;

they deal with the people as the dogs of grass are dealt with.

 

How were these grass, or strawdogs dealt with? Exactly as per their function, or nature, as ceremonial means to a sacred end, after which they were forgotten, like the boat that gets you across the river. It is left to its true nature. Thus for the sage there is no wish to be benevolent there is just spontaneous, natural, nature based interaction with the 10,000 things.

Edited January 16, 2010 by Tao99

[3bob]

Chapter Five: translation by Master Hua-Ching Ni

 

"The subtle virtue of the universe is wholeness.

It regards all things as equal.

The virtue of the sage is wholeness.

He to regards all things as equal.

 

The universe may be compared to a bellows.

It is empty,

yet it never fails to generate its products.

The more it moves,

the more it brings forth.

 

Many words lead one nowhere.

Many pursuits in different directions

bring only exhaustion.

Rather, embrace the subtle essence within."

[Marblehead]

This principle 4 is taken from chapter 5 of the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu, one of the most mysterious of the chapters.

 

You can see here: http://www.yellowbridge.com/onlinelit/daodejing05.php

 

that the term in question is "buren" and is defined as not benevolent, and also heartless and numb. Does this automatically mean it's a synonym for unkind? Not necessarily. Consider Legge's translation:

 

Heaven and earth do not act from (the impulse of) any wish to be benevolent;

they deal with all things as the dogs of grass are dealt with.

 

The sages do not act from (any wish to be) benevolent;

they deal with the people as the dogs of grass are dealt with.

 

How were these grass, or strawdogs dealt with? Exactly as per their function, or nature, as ceremonial means to a sacred end, after which they were forgotten, like the boat that gets you across the river. It is left to its true nature. Thus for the sage there is no wish to be benevolent there is just spontaneous, natural, nature based interaction with the 10,000 things.

 

I'm glad that you added that last paragraph.

 

In the quote above the Sages do not act from any wish to be benevolent. That is to say that all their actions or inactions have no alterior motive. They are not trying to impress anyone. They do on ly what needs be done. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

Peace & Love!

[frp]

Initial contact with Taoist thought and the interpretations of the Tao Te Ching can be a little unnerving. Particulaly if one is used to western style of writing. Give yourself a lot of time to figure these ideas out for yourself.

 

While Chapter Five sounds a bit severe, the following passage from Matthew 5:45 is readily acceptable to most Christians.

 

Matthew 5:45: "that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust

 

God is seen as impartial. (In this verse anyway)

 

I prefer the following interpretation of Chapter Five.

 

5. Nature

Nature is not kind;

It treats all things impartially.

The Sage is not kind,

And treats all people impartially.

 

Nature is like a bellows,

Empty, yet never ceasing its supply.

The more it moves, the more it yields;

So the sage draws upon experience

And cannot be exhausted

 

For me the neat part of this chapter concerns the idea of the impartiality of nature. This impartiality creates a void. Humans both love and detest a void. We try to fill voids with all sorts of things in an effort to make a nice tight defined package out of them. Voids left alone are quite elegant and useful. When we fill them they become useless at best and downright dangerous at the worst.

[Tao99]

Treating things impartially can be the kindest thing of all, say a judge at a murder trial.

 

I should add that others have translated it as you have, and in other such ways. I guess that's what makes it such a mystery - what could the Tao follower Lao Tzu have meant? Here's a bunch of translations:

 

 

http://www.wayist.org/ttc%20compared/chap05.htm#top

Ch. 05 Sentence 1

Beck Nature is not humane. It treats all things like sacrificial objects.

Blackney Is then the world unkind? And does it treat all things Like straw dogs used in magic rights

Bynner Nature, immune as to a sacrifice of straw dogs, Faces the decay of its fruits.

Byrn Heaven and Earth are impartial; they treat all of creation as straw dogs.

Chan Heaven and Earth are not humane. They regard all things a straw dogs.

Cleary Heaven and earth are not humane; they regard all beings as straw dogs.

Crowley Heaven and Earth produce without motive, but casually, in their order of nature, dealing with all things carelessly, like used talismans.

Hansen Heaven-earth [the cosmos] is not kind. It treats the 10,000 natural kinds as straw dogs.

LaFargue "Heaven and Earth are not Good they treat the thousands of things like straw dogs

Legge Heaven and earth do not act from (the impulse of) any wish to be benevolent; they deal with all things as the dogs of grass are dealt with.

Lindauer Heavens and earth are without humanizing It happens that the 10000 things act as straw dogs

LinYutan Nature is unkind: It treats the creation like sacrificial straw-dogs.

Mabry Heaven and Earth are impartial, They allow things to die.

McDonald The universe seems without mercy, quite ruthless; in that wider perspective all things are but as ritual straw dogs.

Merel Nature is not kind; It treats all things impartially.

Mitchell The Tao doesn't take sides; it gives birth to both good and evil.

Muller Heaven and Earth are not jen, And regard the people as straw dogs.

Red Pine Heaven and Earth are heartless treating creatures like straw dogs

Ta-Kao Heaven and earth do not own their benevolence, To them all things are straw dogs

Walker Heaven and Earth are not sentimental; they regard all things as dispensable.

Wayism The Tao does not take sides; it gives birth to both good and evil. Material things are like incense sticks, burned in worship but discarded ashes.

Wieger Heaven and earth are not good to the things that they produce, but treat them like straw dogs.

World Heaven and earth are indifferent. All creatures are considered straw dogs; not distinguished, not judged.

Wu Heaven-and-Earth is not sentimental; It treats all things as straw-dogs.

Edited January 17, 2010 by Tao99

[seththewhite]

5

 

The Tao doesn't take sides;

it gives birth to both good and evil.

The Master doesn't take sides;

she welcomes both saints and sinners.

 

The Tao is like a bellows:

it is empty yet infinitely capable.

The more you use it, the more it produces;

the more you talk of it, the less you understand.

 

Hold on to the center.

[steve]

Kindness is a human value judgement.

I think this chapter cautions us not to project human traits on nature.

Within our own bodies, millions of living cells are sacrificed at any given moment for the homeostasis of the whole.

It is the same in nature.

We just have a very limited and biased perspective.

Every living thing exists solely through the consumption of other life.

This is essential for the balance of the whole.

The sage is not attached to human value judgements just as nature is not.

Being unattached, however, does not preclude civility and compassion.

[Capital]

Perhaps true compassion rises above kindness or benevolence?

 

On the topic question: I did not get good vibes, and the man who spoke didn't seem to know anything that I felt I could learn, which is disappointing; also, I wonder about his teacher, as he spoke of being the man's only student (at 8 [or something])- my intuition says that feels fabricated.

[SarahMoriko]

So many different interpretations! I feel like this website makes Taoists out to be selfish, emotionless robots. This guys is just on an ego trip if you ask me. And no matter what people are always going to believe the interpretation that best suites there beliefs.

[Stigweard]

I think the force of nature we are skirting around here is death. Death is 100% impartial, it will claim you with the same dispassion as it will claim a maggot. Death makes no preference or prejudice. It is the ultimate leveler.

 

The mindset of the sage is similar to the mindset of the hunter. A hunter will starve in the wilderness for two reasons: either because they love their prey too much and are unable to make the killing stroke, or they don't love their prey enough and hunt their prey indiscriminately and thus descimate their food source.

 

In accordance with the Wuxing (five phases), sometimes the sage is the instrument of creation and other times the instrument of destruction.

[AsheSkyler]

I kind of always saw nature as true neutral and, as was mentioned, is impartial. I won't say there is no emotion in nature, because I've seen some very loving and very hateful acts between different creatures.

[Apech]

I found quite an interesting commentary here :

 

Friesian Tao

 

which suggests that Ch. 5 is sometimes translated in what I would call a politically correct way because the message is so strong.

 

I think that to say heaven and earth are 'not kind' or 'not benevolent' means that they do not bend to human sensibilities. If they did there would be no earth quakes in Haiti, no tsunamis or storms or anything that threatened human beings. The 10,000 things, the objects manifest by heaven and earth are straw dogs - that is objects sacrificed to a higher purpose ( that of heaven) - that is their value does not come from anything inherent in themselves - they are made of straw that is hollow and with little value.

 

The sage in dealing with 'people' - that is beings who are fully identified with their egos does not pander to their selfish, greedy, jealous and petty concerns. He may teach them how to move on from this state which they find themselves in - and this teaching might be quite tough - but he does not lower himself through misplaced kindness to protect them from the affects of their own behaviour. Anyone who has met a good teacher will know that they are tough in this kind of way.

 

Its a harsh message I suppose but that's the point!

[3bob]

I found quite an interesting commentary here :

 

Friesian Tao

 

which suggests that Ch. 5 is sometimes translated in what I would call a politically correct way because the message is so strong.

 

I think that to say heaven and earth are 'not kind' or 'not benevolent' means that they do not bend to human sensibilities. If they did there would be no earth quakes in Haiti, no tsunamis or storms or anything that threatened human beings. The 10,000 things, the objects manifest by heaven and earth are straw dogs - that is objects sacrificed to a higher purpose ( that of heaven) - that is their value does not come from anything inherent in themselves - they are made of straw that is hollow and with little value.

 

The sage in dealing with 'people' - that is beings who are fully identified with their egos does not pander to their selfish, greedy, jealous and petty concerns. He may teach them how to move on from this state which they find themselves in - and this teaching might be quite tough - but he does not lower himself through misplaced kindness to protect them from the affects of their own behaviour. Anyone who has met a good teacher will know that they are tough in this kind of way.

 

Its a harsh message I suppose but that's the point!

 

Hello Apecph7,

 

Well said and or quoted, although in relation to the first paragraph above my view is that the Tao is that which is inherent in all beings, but not always realized and actualized in all beings because of us being identified with ego as later said.

 

The laws of the jungle are something the Sage has risen above. A great Sage no longer needs to take or get very much energy from outside of themselves as so many of us still do; thus such is no longer driving the Sage on. Why, because they are now generating and radiating energy; also there is that saying that goes something like, "there is no place in them for death". Further, in radiating energy they have become a human sun, thus more than just an elemental sun as in nature, for an elemental sun is still under lesser laws than a Sage who is at one with the completion and fullness of law which is an Ocean of energenic love and wisdom, that if needed will be tough or if needed will be gentle, without ado.

 

Om

Edited January 17, 2010 by 3bob

[forestofemptiness]

I think it really is straw dogs. Red Pine interprets it this way, too. For a good explanation, the sometimes Taobum allan blogged about this:

 

http://atouchofancientszhouyi.blogspot.com...ch?q=straw+dogs

[Marblehead]

I think it really is straw dogs. Red Pine interprets it this way, too. For a good explanation, the sometimes Taobum allan blogged about this:

 

http://atouchofancientszhouyi.blogspot.com...ch?q=straw+dogs

 

Yes, this has been discussed in great detail. "Straw dogs" is the correct translation.

 

So that Sage treats the people as they were 'straw dogs'. That is, he does what needs be done, and then leaves them alone, without forming attachments.

 

Peace & Love!

[Spectrum]

So many different interpretations! I feel like this website makes Taoists out to be selfish, emotionless robots. This guys is just on an ego trip if you ask me. And no matter what people are always going to believe the interpretation that best suites there beliefs.

 

paper tigers cast big shadows

proper introductions caste away misinterpretations

sand less weights swing in the wind: play upwind

whats your name now owie or is it only ground

true colors shown when it matters most

Edited January 17, 2010 by Spectrum

[Taomeow]

Yes, this has been discussed in great detail. "Straw dogs" is the correct translation.

This line has been the one debated the most for close to two thousand years by Laozi scholars, and "straw dogs" is apparently just one understanding that prevailed in the course of these debates. The original characters actually mean "dogs and grass" --

in many contexts it would mean "straw dogs" but Laozi's context contains no indications that that's the case. (Chinese is nothing if not context-dependent.)

 

So "dogs and grass" are treated by nature, and by the sage emulating nature, a certain way. Which way is that? "Inhumane," "not the human way." What's the human way to treat dogs and grass?.. What's the nature's way to treat dogs and grass? Which way is closer to the sage's heart, the nature's way to treat them or the human way to treat them?

 

I would translate the line as follows:

 

Nature's behavior is not modeled on human behavior; it treats humans the way it treats dogs and grass.

Likewise, the sage's behavior is not modeled on human behavior; she treats humans the way she treats dogs and grass.

 

Let's recall that human behavior toward dogs is to subjugate them, turn them into servants or toys, and in China, as in many other parts of Asia, also eat them. Grass undergoes grassicide at human hands as a matter of routine, is divided into foods and weeds and conquered, and preferentially monocultured or exterminated. What is so wonderful about what humans do to dogs and grass that nature doesn't do to them? Nothing. What is wrong with the sage treating humans the way nature treats dogs and grass? Nothing.