truth is simple and of harmony.

like the tao.

The Tao Te Ching is an amazing, remarkable, astonishing book, not just because of the profound wisdom it contains, not just because it was written some 2,500 years ago, but also because its wisdom finds immediate application today - and because it is quite simply beautiful. It is in that rare category of books that can be read again and again without growing old.

I spent almost half a year reading this deliberately. Rushing through supposedly spiritual books sounds like a strategy for disappointment, as some of my friends have confirmed for me. I also refrained from reading in public as I do my other books. I read one passage after morning meditation at first, but when that was hard to sustain, I began reading one passage before and after yoga training. I highly recommend synergising reading this book with a form of mental relaxation or activity that is based on similar principles (such as yoga, tai chi, meditation, self-hypnosis).

Yes, this book does contain vague and superficially contradictory sentences ('do without doing'), but to dismiss it as senseless or pretentious seems misguided to me. There is clearly something important stated here, though it might be underwhelming to those naieve enough to demand a simple answer or phrase that will fit each and every of their complex life problems with no degree of ambiguity or personal judgement required.

I think there is wisdom here, and my impressions will change with my future rereadings. I read Ursula LeGuin's translation, and I commend her efforts to make the passages gender neutral and down to earth.

I think anyone with a spiritual side or clear moral conscience should try read this at some point in their life.

«دائویسم: مکتب فکری که به خوبی درک نمی شود»


کتاب دائویسم لائوتوسه شاید یکی از آسان ترین و روان ترین و مختصرترین کتاب هایی باشد که می توانید به سراغش بروید، اما با وجود این سادگی بسیاری از خوانندگان شاید آن را درک نکنند و یا حتی بدتر از آن سو برداشت هایی بکنند که کاملا در تضاد با آموزه های اصلی دائویسم باشد. این مسئله شاید به این خاطر باشد که همانطور که لائوتوسه می نویسد: «حقیقت پر از تناقض است» و دائویسم این تناقضات را در آموزه های خود بیان می کند. بنابراین بیان این تناقضات شاید باعث برخی از سو برداشت ها شده باشند. مثلا اگر یک سرچ ساده در اینترنت بکنید می ببنید که بعضی ها از دائویسم به عنوان دین یاد کرده اند. در اینکه کتاب لائوتوسه می تواند کتاب مقدسی محسوب شود شکی نیست ولی مطمئنا به چند دلیل دائویسم را نمی توان دین محسوب کرد: ۱. لائوتوسه ادعای پیغمبری ندارد ۲. دائویسم قوانین سفت و سخت ندارد ۳ . دائو به معنی آفریننده یا خدا نیست زیرا که به صراحت نوشته شده «دائو چیزی نمی آفریند و قبل از آفریننده وجود داشته اما روحش در تمامی آفریده های جهانی جریان دارد» ۴. لائوتوسه به صورت مستقیم دنبال کردن ادیان و ترویج آنان در جامعه را رد می کند.

بنابراین برای دائویسم عنوان «مکتب فکری» شاید مناسب تر از دین باشد. به نظر من این موضوعات اصلی این کتاب به سه بخش می‌توانند تقسیم شوند. ۱. مفهوم دائو و ماهیت آن ۲. شخص فرزانه (پیرو دائو) ۳. مملکت داری .
در بخش اول کتاب به صراحت بیان می شود که دائو فراتر از نشان و کلام است. دائو چیزی نیست که آن را بتوان توصیف کرد چون چیزهایی که در قالب زبان بیان می شوند حقیقت جاویدان نیستند. به نوعی دائو به مفهوم «ترنسندنتال سیگنیفاید» ژاک دریدا شباهت دارد، زیرا که فراتر از نشانه های زبانی است. با این حال لائوتوسه چندین ویژگی اصلی برای دائو می شمارد. دائو بی نهایت است، قبل از آفرینش بوده ولی خدا نیست، روح دائو در همه جریان دارد و به همین دلیل دنباله کردن دائو باعث ایجاد هارمونی شده و دور از آن باعث آشفتگی می شود. دائو در برگیرنده ی تاریکی و روشنایی است و به همین دلیل پیرو دائو نیز همواره باید تاریکی و روشنایی را در کنار هم بپذیرد.



شخص فرزانه پیرو دائو چون از در کنار هم بودن خوبی و بدی آگاه است، سعی نمی کند تا اتفاقات محیط اطرافش را کنترل کند. پیرو دائو تن به عدم فعالیت میدهد. این آموزه باعث یکی دیگر از سو برداشت های رایج از دائویسم شده است. بعضی از خواننده ها تصور می کنند که دائویسم انفعال را ترویج میدهد، در صورتی که لائوتوسه دید متفاوتی دارد‌. از دید لائوتوسه وقتی که کاری را با تمام وجود انجام می دهید با آن کار «یکی» می شوید و به همین دلیل تفاوتی بین شما و کار شما وجود ندارد. بعلاوه لائوتوسه طرفدار مدیریت کردن هست تا کنترل کردن زیرا که از نظر او وقایع پیش بینی نشده دنیا را نمی توان کنترل کرد. بنابراین پیرو دائو کاری را که با وجود او عجین شده انجام می دهد اما خودش را نگران نتیجه نمی کند چون می داند که همیشه نمی تواند نتیجه ی کارش را کنترل کند. پیرو دائو جفت های مخالف مثل خوبی و بدی، تاریکی و نور، مردانگی و زنانگی را با هم در آغوش می گیرد. در حقیقت او همانند نوزادی است که هیچ درکی از جنسیت ندارد به همین دلیل شخص فرزانه می تواند زن یا مرد باشد. پیرو واقعی دائو سفت و سخت به عقاید خود نمی چسبد و همیشه تمایل دارد که نظریه های مختلف را در نظر بگیرد. اگر کسی با او نظر او مخالفت کند، احساس نمی کند که به شخص اون توهین شده است زیرا که به صورت افراطی طرفدار هیچ عقیده ای نیست بلکه به دنبال دائو (حقیقت) است. پیرو دائو همچنین امیال خود را مدیریت می کند چون می داند که همیشه نمی تواند آنها را برطرف کند. شاید فک کنید که با این حساب شخص فرزانه باید تارک دنیا باشد، اما اشتباه نکنید. به نظر من قوی ترین قسمت کتاب در ارتباط با مسائل کشورداری و اجتماعی است.

در مکتب دائویسم، شخصی که به درجه ی واقعی فرزانگی برسد می تواند فرد مناسبی برای اداره ی کشور باشد اما این فرد نباید به صورت فعالانه به دنبال مملکت داری باشد. از نظر لائوتوسه وقتی اداره کننده ی کشور در کار خود خوب باشد شما اصلا متوجه حضورش نمی شوید. کارها به خوبی انجام می شوند بدون این که شما بفهمید چه کسی پشت این مدیریت قوی است‌. یک رهبر خوب عمل گرا است و تلاشی نمی کند تا مدام از تریبون خود صحبت کند. او مخالف خشونت و هرگونه جنگ است و اگر جنگی رخ دهد با اکراه تن به ان می دهد و فقط زمانی از اسلحه استفاده می کند که چاره ی دیگری نداشته باشد. او دشمنانش را به شکل شیطان نمی بیند، زیرا که می داند بدی و خوبی در تمامی انسان ها در هم آمیخته شده اند. او به دنبال رقابت با کشور های دیگر نیست و تنها چیزی که برایش اهمیت دارد داشتن ذهنی همانند ذهن مردم سرزمینش است، به عبارتی او خواستار چیزی است که مردمش می خواهند. او میداند که ممنوعیت سفت و سخت و قوانین دست و پاگیر باعث ایجاد فساد می شود و ترویج اخلاقیات اثر معکوسی دارد. پیرو دائو همانند یک آب روان و نرم است اما توانایی حل کردن سخت ترین سنگ ها را دارد، زیرا که تلاشی برای نرم کردن اطرافیانش نمی کند.

من تا حد امکان سعی کردم برداشت خودم رو از این کتاب به اشتراک بگذارم، اما مطمئنا خواندن خود کتاب برای خواننده ی عصر معاصر که فقط به دنبال کنترل گری، مادیات و برآورده کردن امیال و آرزوهاست، می تواند تجربه ی‌ متفاوتی باشد. اگر به دنبال درک بهتر دائویسم هستید می توانید مقاله ی لینک زیر رو هم بخونید.

https://azsan.ir/blog/dao-de-jing/

ندانستن دانش راستین است
تائو
--------------
این کتاب رو سال 87 خوندم

4 ⭐


The Tao is definitely the most beautifully elusive and intangible philosophy that I've had the pleasure of trying to wrap my head around. Everything about it drips with mystery and mysticism, right down to it’s purported author, the enigma that is Lao Tzu. I really made an effort to understand what was meant by each and every poem. I read Ursula K. Le Guin’s rendition alongside this, more scholarly translation, by D.C.Lau and I listened to multiple audio versions, driving to and from work, but still, I feel I only received just the barest glimpse into the depth of Lao Tzu’s words. I’m not particularly surprised by this, people spend their entire lives studying the Tao, attempting to keep to ‘The Way’. You don’t just read this on a whim and suddenly start living the Tao. In fact, in my opinion, if one were to heed Lao Tzu’s words, one would likely come to the conclusion that we’ve strayed so far off the path as a people, that to get back on it would take an unrealistically monumental change in worldview, philosophy and ideology.


The book relishes in its own mystery. As Le Guin states so aptly in her rendition, there is a “temptation… to grasp at something tangible in the endlessly deceptive simplicity of the words” but, on occasion, the slipperiness of the idea… Is the idea.
If I had a dollar for every 30-something pommy hipster I’ve seen on YouTube, repeating Lau Tzu’s 1st chapter with a self-satisfied smirk…

n  ”The way that can be spoken of
Is not the constant way;
The name that can be named
Is not the constant name.”n

… only to then immediately attempt to explain it anyway! They obviously never reached chapter 71: ”Not to know yet to think that one knows will lead to difficulty.”


You can’t label or define the Tao as by doing so you limit its function which is, inherently, limitless. All one can know is that it was “born before heaven and earth” and supports the universe. It is responsible for the strong being strong but equally responsible for the weak being weak. We can’t define it but we can definitely discuss the concepts that make up the Taoist teachings.

n  "The reason I have great trouble is that I have a body. When I no longer have a body, what trouble have I?"n

Ideal attributes of the Taoist include modesty, frugality, contentment (desirelessness), compassion, tenderness, softness, vulnerability, selflessness (benefitting others without expecting gratitude), non-contention, ignorance (apparently) and the ability to find positives in negatives (i.e. without lows, there are no highs… Without death, there is no life… We suffer, but only because we have a body).


Doing not doing is also an ongoing theme in the book. I’ve been banging on about this one for years to my fiancé and she just tells me I’m a lazy fu… sod! Lao Tzu says: ”One does less and less until one does nothing at all, and when one does nothing at all there is nothing that is undone”…. What? If everyone else is allowed to take ancient philosophies out of context, so am I damn it! In all seriousness though, Lao Tzu usually uses this phrase in relation to governance, as in, a leader should lead with minimal meddling in the affairs of the people. Or in relation to the individual, living without striving for more. So, yeah, still gotta do the dishes.


n   “He who shows himself is not conspicuous;
He who considers himself right is not illustrious;
He who brags will have no merit;
He who boasts will not endure."n


Be like water. Another common theme… ”there is nothing more submissive and weak than water. Yet for attacking that which is hard and strong nothing can surpass it. I have come across this idea in the form of analogy and/or metaphor now in 3 works. Sun Tzu’s ‘Art of War’, Lao Tzu’s ‘Tao Te Ching’ and Bruce Lee’s ‘Tao of Jeet Kune Do’, each time given slight variation in its implication and, I love it! The only issue I have, in this case, is that, at times Lao Tzu’s “weak” and “soft” descend into utter subservience to anything stronger or greater than yourself. Essentially giving in as a means of survival. D C Lau explains that this is likely a result of the time in which the book was written (The Warring States) in which self-preservation was as much as many would dare to achieve.


The Tao Te Ching is not just a book about a way for the individual to live in sync with the Tao. Lao Tzu also likes to comment on the dangers of wealth and living beyond ones most basic needs, as well as expressing his opinions on governance and anti-violence sentiments. Lao Tzu was an anti-capitalist and anarchist before these things even existed.

Those who possess too much wealth while others starve, who are “dressed in fineries” or “filled with food and drink” while others go hungry, he condemns as “taking the lead in robbery”.
Whilst not completely anarchistic, Lao Tzu is almost completely anti-legislative and believes that leaders should lead with minimal meddling in the affairs of the people, stating, ”…the myriad creatures all revere the way and honour virtue. Yet the way is revered and virtue honoured not because this is decreed by any authority but because it is natural for them to be treated so”. Later, he likens governing a large state to “boiling a small fish” because a small fish can be spoiled with too much handling.

n  ”The rites are the wearing thin of loyalty and good faith
And the beginning of disorder;
Foreknowledge is the flowery embellishment of the way
And the beginning of folly.”n

These views regarding governance tie in with one of his more extreme ideas that education, innovation and progress are all things to be avoided. Ignorant people are easier to rule and one should also rule in ignorance. It’s essentially an expansion on the idea of not doing. There’s an anti-change and anti-intellectual leaning in his words. In Chapter 29, Lao says: ”The empire is a sacred vessel and nothing should be done to it. Whoever does anything to it will ruin it; whoever lays hold of it will lose it”. Le Guin says: ”As a model for the Taoist, a baby is in many ways ideal: totally un-altruistic, not interested in politics, business or the proprieties, weak [and] soft”.

Although I disagree, on many levels, with Lao’s concept, it’s hard to ignore the fact that for all the progress the human race has made on an industrial, technological, political and psychological level, we’ve still managed to completely fuck our planet, almost beyond repair, and despite the fact that many have a better standard of living than 2500 years ago, it is hard to remember a time when so many people were so desperately unhappy.


This specific edition contains a magnificent and substantial introduction in which Lau (not to be confused with Lao) gives his own thoughtful and scholarly opinions on what some of the key concepts that can be taken from the text are. He also discusses what is known about the history of the text and the period in which it was, traditionally, thought to have been compiled in and addresses inconsistencies in the text, giving convincing arguments for the case that the book was likely not written by one wise old sage named Lao Tzu at all, but in fact was a compilation of many different Taoist thinkers, their disciples and, later, various commentators. Lau later comments further on this in two very interesting appendices titled ‘The Problem of Authorship’ and ‘The Nature of the Work’. Personally, I’d prefer not to acknowledge that this text may have been written after Confucius’ time or that Lao Tzu may never have existed. I’m too enamoured with the idea of an old sage, so wise and all-knowing as to render Confucius himself bewildered enough to allegedly exclaim to his own disciples:

n  ”I know a bird can fly, a fish can swim, and an animal can run… But the dragon’s ascent into heaven on the wind and the clouds is something which is beyond my knowledge. Today I have seen Lao Tzu who is perhaps like a dragon.”n

Εξαιρετική απόδοση του Τάο Τε Κινγκ (Τάο Κινγκ: Βιβλίο του Λόγου/Τε Κινγκ: Βιβλίο της Φύσης) σε μία έκδοση όπου, πέραν των ερμηνευτικών σημειώσεων του μεταφραστή σχετικά με τη διδασκαλία του Λάο Τσε και τον βαθμό που αυτή επέδρασε στην ανάπτυξη του Ταοϊσμού, παρατίθενται αποσπάσματα από ιερά βιβλία, φιλοσόφους (κυρίως του Ηρακλείτου) και συγγραφείς, τα οποία καταδεικνύουν τις σαφείς ενυπάρχουσες ομοιότητες.

Διά στόματος του ‘σοφού γέροντα’ (που ο θρύλος λέει ότι η παρθένα μάνα του τον συνέλαβε από ένα πεφταστέρι και τον κυοφορούσε ογδόντα ολόκληρα χρόνια!), δυο – τρεις διαχρονικές αλήθειες:

•t«Γι’ αυτό η ταπεινότητα είναι η ρίζα της μεγαλοσύνης, όπως το χαμηλό είναι θεμέλιο του υψηλού. Οι αφέντες θα ήσαν ειλικρινείς μονάχα αν ομολογούσαν την αναξιότητά τους...» (Τε Κινγκ, στροφή 39)
•t«Να γνωρίζεις ότι δεν γνωρίζεις είναι η πραγματική σοφία. Να φαντάζεσαι ότι γνωρίζεις είναι σωστή αρρώστια. Όταν παραδεχτείς την αρρώστια μπορείς να θεραπευτείς. Συνετός είναι ο θεραπευμένος» (Τε Κινγκ, στροφή 71)
•t«Υποφέρει ο λαός γιατί μια χούφτα ισχυροί κλέβουν το μόχθο του. Πολλοί εξεγείρονται γιατί η εξουσία είναι αφόρητη. Υπάρχουν άνθρωποι που αψηφούν το θάνατο γιατί είναι γεμάτοι πίκρα. Αυτός που εκτιμά την ίδια τη ζωή είναι σοφότερος από εκείνον που εκτιμά τα αγαθά της» (Τε Κινγκ, στροφή 75)

Πέντε χρυσά αστέρια (σε κόκκινο φόντο για να θυμίζουν τη σημαία της χώρας που ΄γέννησε’ τον Λάο Τσε).

This is a classic. It has some different ideas that I'm not sure I understand. I am going to read this several to many more times to try and bring some understanding to this work. This is a life long read.

My favorite 76: When a man is living, he is soft and supple. When he is dead, he becomes hard and rigid... Hence, the hard and rigid belongs to the company of the dead: The soft and supple belongs to the company of the living.

Il consiglio riguardo questo libro è quello di cominciare dalla pag. 111, dove viene posta una domanda: che cos'è il taoismo? e ci si può illudere di leggere un saggio sull'argomento, mentre invece si scopre che è semplicemente l'insieme di pensieri antichi e di riflessioni nuove. Va consultato, non letto; va 'pensato', adattato e criticato, di certo approfondito e...citato:
"Sapere di non sapere è cosa superiore. Non sapere di non sapere è un male. Perciò il saggio non è malato, egli considera la malattia come tale, e perciò non ne soffre." LAO-TSU pag. 46
"Nel mondo nulla è più molle e debole dell'acqua, ma, per attaccare ciò che è robusto e solido, niente può superarla, poichè essa non può essere sostituita. Perciò il molle vince il duro, il debole vince il forte. Nel mondo non c'è chi non lo sa, ma nessuno può metterlo in pratica. Perciò le parole del saggio dicono: prendere l'onta dello stato, questo è il signore degli altari; prendere su di sè la sfortuna dello stato, questo è il re del mondo. Parole rette che sembrano assurde." LAO-TSU pag. 53
" Il TAO è vuoto, lo si usa e non lo si riempe. Abissale! E' simile al progenitore di tutti gli esseri. Li smussa, scioglie i loro nodi, armonizza i loro splendori, s'adegua con la loro polvere. Profondo! Sembra a lungo permanere. Io non so di chi sia figlio, sembra essere precedente al Dominatore." LAO -TSU pag. 58
"Chi conosce gli uomini è saggio. Chi conosce se stesso è intelligente. Chi vince gli uomini ha la forza. Chi vince se stesso è forte. Chi conosce ciò che basta è ricco. Chi agisce con forza è risoluto. Chi non perde il suo posto dura a lungo. Chi muore e non scompare è longevo." LAO-TSU pag. 87

The Tao Te Ching definitely shines without dazzling. It fits in for me with Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, The Wisdom Books: Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Sermon on the Mount. Books of universal wisdom, truth, and peace that should be read again and again and again. Straightforward words often do sound paradoxical.

This version of the Dao De Jing, translated by Richard John Lynn, is highly recommended to those who are not looking for the touchy feely Laozi. Rather it is a translation for those interested in ancient Chinese thought. A wonderful translation.

The Dao De Jing was probably written, by author or authors unknown, in the fourth century B.C.E. and "is primarily addressed to the ruler who would be a sage-king and is mainly concerned with achieving the good society through harmony with nature....". This version includes an interpretation of the text written by Wang Bi (226-49 C.E.) not long before his premature death. Both Wang Bi and the translator or this edition, Richard John Lynn, have maintained the original intent of the Dao De Jing in not bringing in any mystical or religious concepts, which by Wang Bi's time were part of the popular view of Daoism.

In reading this version, I perceive more clearly than in most versions three strands of thought. (I acknowledge that this thing may be sliced in many other ways. See for example Michael Lafarge's quite good translation.) The first strand is basically a description of how the sage-ruler behaves/develops, 'De' (virtue, potential). The second strand is a guide to self cultivation, how to become a sage, and the third is an articulation of the basis for the other strands (and everything else, 'the myriad of things'), the 'Tao'(the nature of the universe). These strands are not kept discrete but are, rather, presented as a synthesis.

As noted above, both Wang Bi and Lynn have avoided mystical language with the result that many of the terms with which readers of other translations are familiar are translated differently. Thus: "wuwei" usually translated as "no action" is here presented as "no conscious effort". The effect of this is important in that "no action" suggests that the agent accomplishes ends by doing nothing, a mystical concept which captures the modern reader's imagination. The words "no conscious effort" suggests more of a lack of purpose. The ruler acts but not to his own ends but rather in accordance with the unfolding nature of the universe, the Tao. To act out of the Tao is to act out of nothingness, as opposed to acting out of the myriad of things which will mislead and lead to disaster.

Wang Bi begins his introduction to the work with "The way things come into existence and efficacy comes about is that things arise from the formless and efficacy emanates from the nameless. The formless and the nameless [Dao] is the progenitor of the myriad of things.". I tend to view this as I do the concept of the "big bang' in popular physics. There is nothing there and then there is an explosion out of which all that exists emanates. The "Dao" is the ever expanding universe and everything that exists and happens within it. (This last bit is totally my own fabrication to put the concept into terms which I can grasp. It works for me for now.)

Thus, the Dao is conceived of as coming out of nothing and as ever changing. It cannot be named because it does not exist as a thing. It has no form or substance and is always becoming. It cannot be known. To act in accordance with it is therefore to act according to the changing universe as an unfolding, not as a thing to be learned.

The process of becoming a sage is thus a process of coming to be aware of how the Dao unfolds. To know the essence of the Dao is to know that it is empty, that it is nothing. To understand this is to be 'authentic'. I struggled with Lynn's translation of "zhen" as 'authentic' because of the connotations carried by that English term, especially as we use it in terms of 'being authentic to the self'. Lafargue translates "Zhen" as 'genuineness' which, for me, carries the same meaning but without the same connotations. "Zhen" is used to refer to the relation to the emptiness of the Dao. One thus becomes 'authentic', not by aligning one's life with the self, but by developing an ever-changing, ever-becoming self that moves with the Dao and thus acts with the Dao. The sage-king is one who rules with the Dao by taking action only within the emptiness of the Dao. In other words, the sage-king goes with the flow.

This a very different way of conceiving of the world and how we react within it. Unlike Western thinkers, the ancient Chinese thinkers did not value learning about the world. Nor did they look to an afterlife, ancestors or gods to bring their lives into accord with the universe. (I shall continue to read this stuff until I can feel like I actually grasp it.)

To a Westerner, the Tao Te Ching presents another perspective for understanding meaning and effectiveness. For example, the Tao Te Ching shows how movement towards progress creates movement against progress, "Do not exalt the worthy, and the people will not compete... Do not display objects of desire, and the people's minds will not be disturbed. Therefore the ordering of the sage empties their minds, fills their bellies... and causes the wise ones not to dare to act. He does nothing, and there is nothing that is not brought to order." What exactly are we trying to accomplish with our actions, and how does our method of accomplishment affect others?