From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


Why Zhuangzi Chose to "Play" More Joyfully in the World

This actually reveals a uniquely aesthetic trait in Chinese philosophy: *artifying the sufferings of life*.

TaoismrCOs discourse on *Being and Non-being* is by no means inferior to BuddhismrCOs *Middle Way*; it is merely a different dimension of wisdom.

### TaoismrCOs *Being and Non-being*: A Generative Perspective
When Laozi and Zhuangzi spoke of *Being* and *Non-being*, they were primarily describing the origin and state of all things in the universe. *Non-being begets Being, and Being returns to Non-being*rCothis still revolves within the realm of *dependent origination*. For many seekers of the ultimate emptiness, any discussion of the relationship between Being and Non-being seems to remain trapped in dualism, much like fixating on the opposition between black and white.

### BuddhismrCOs *Non-duality*: An Ontological and Epistemological Perspective The *Middle Way* (as stated in the *Vimalakirti Sutra*) seeks to transcend concepts directly. It not only asserts that Being and Non-being are relative, but even that *Emptiness and Being are non-dual*. Buddhism holds that if your mind still clings to the pursuit of a state of *Non-being*, you are still attached to forms.

In this sense, Taoism is like a traveler still on the boat crossing the river, while Buddhism seems intent on dismantling the boat itself.

BuddhismrCOs *Non-duality* is like a mirror: it shows you that all reflections are illusory, so do not cling to themrConeither Being nor Non-being is real. This is complete sobriety.

TaoismrCOs discourse on *Being and Non-being* is like a dance: it tells you that although we know all things will ultimately return to nothingness, since we dwell in *Being* at this moment, we should follow the rhythm of nature and dance with abandon (as in *Xiao Yao You*, the Free and Easy Wandering). This is romance after sobriety.

If we set aside logical concepts and focus on experiential practice, TaoismrCOs arguments are exquisitely profound. Indeed, ZhuangzirCOs *On the Equality of All Things* meets BuddhismrCOs *Madhyamaka* at their highest realm.

### Zhuangzi Had Already Attained Non-duality
Look at *Zhuangzi -+ On the Equality of All Things*: he wrote, *Heaven and earth coexist with me, and all things are one with me*rCois this not non-duality?

Zhuangzi said, *Birth and death are simultaneous, death and birth are concurrent*, dissolving the opposition between life (Being) and death (Non-being).

He spoke of the *Heavenly Music*: when the wind blows through ten thousand hollows, each emits a different sound, yet the wind that stirs them all is one and the same. This too is non-duality.

The difference lies in expression:
Buddhism uses negative phrasingrCo*neither Being nor Emptiness*;
Zhuangzi uses aesthetic phrasingrCo*Heaven and earth are but one finger, All things are but one horse.

1. Two Paths After Letting Go of Attachments: The Mirror vs. The Dance
Buddhism is the mirror, Taoism the dance. This distinction is not merely theoretical, but more so in their attitudes toward suffering.
BuddhismrCOs mirror (seeing that the five aggregates are all empty): When confronted with birth, old age, sickness, death, and the pain of separation from loved ones, Buddhism tells you: all these are like dreams, illusions, bubbles, and shadowsrComere illusions formed by the conjunction of causes and conditions. When you see through them, suffering vanishes. This is complete dissolution, a cold power that detaches you from suffering.
ZhuangzirCOs dance (the Dao shapes my countenance, heaven forms my body): Zhuangzi did not deny the existence of suffering (he wept when his wife died), yet he believed that since the physical form is a temporary abode bestowed by the Dao, like an inn, it is better to yield to fate than to resist it. He regarded death as a transformation of the vital breath that pervades the worldrComuch like becoming a butterfly.
This is a warm power. Zhuangzi does not bid you to escape suffering, but to keep your spirit dancing alone even in the midst of it. For example, in the chapter Reaching LiferCOs True Essence, the hunchbacked old man who caught cicadas with a bamboo polerCothough physically disabled, in the moment he cast his pole, his skill attained the Dao; he forgot heaven and earth, and even the pain of his body. This is the game of human life that Zhuangzi esteemed.
2. The Unique Value of the Generative Perspective: Affirming the Vitality of the Present
TaoismrCOs discourse on Being and Non-being revolves within dependent origination and seems less thorough than the Middle Way. But from another angle, this is precisely the starting point of ZhuangzirCOs wisdom.
If non-duality were the only truth, it would easily lead to a nihilistic trap: if all is empty, why bother living? Why uphold morality?
Though Zhuangzi saw Non-being (nothingness), he immediately turned back to embrace Being (life). He said, The sage lives in accordance with heavenrCOs movement, and dies as things transform.
What makes Zhuangzi profound is his lack of world-weariness. Many seekers of emptiness tend to grow cold and desolate, yet Zhuangzi strove to commune with the spirit of heaven and earth. He not only transcended the world in spirit, but also chose to drag his tail in the mud in the physical world (refusing the King of ChurCOs offer of official position).
This tension of being both transcendent and engaged in the world endows Taoist thought with greater resilience in reality. It tells us: you do not need to flee the world to cultivate the Dao; the world itself is your spiritual practice ground.
3. The Axis of the Dao: A Practical Non-duality
ZhuangzirCOs famous line: Let neither that nor this take each other as an opposite, and you will reach the axis of the Dao.
This is in fact an extremely practical psychological tool:
The ordinary person is like walking in a circle, forever darting between the opposites of good and bad, gain and loss, Being and Non-being.
The Dao-attained person (like Zhuangzi) stands at the center of the circlerCothe Axis of the Dao. The center remains still, yet no matter how the circle turns (no matter whether life brings good or ill), the center can cope with ease.
This seems more actionable in daily life than BuddhismrCOs negative phrasing that all forms are illusory. You do not need to constantly remind yourself that this is fake; you only need to tell yourself to not take sides, but step back and see the whole.
ZhuangzirCOs realm is fixed on romance after sobriety.
Perhaps this is why Zhuangzi holds an irreplaceable place in the hearts of Chinese intellectuals. For most people may never become a Buddha (unable to attain complete emptiness or renounce the world entirely), but we can learn to be like ZhuangzirCoto see through the absurdity of life yet still love it; to know that all things will ultimately return to nothingness, yet still dance this dance of life to the fullest in the present moment.
This is never a matter of one being inferior or superior to the other, but a choice of how to live within the limits of life.
What makes Zhuangzi seem so profound is that he actually used Taoist language to accomplish the Buddhist work of letting go of attachments. He inherited LaozirCOs Dao, yet focused more on how this Dao manifests in individual life. His discussions of freedom and the equality of all things were meant to break the artificial social shackles and conceptual constraints of humanity. ZhuangzirCOs realm leans toward wandering and transformation (Free and Easy Wandering, the transformation of things), embodying a fervent aesthetic spirit and absolute spiritual freedomrCoone that is more spirited and penetrating.
Buddhism says: All forms are illusory.
Zhuangzi says: This is that, and that is this. Let neither that nor this take each other as an opposite, and you will reach the axis of the Dao.
On their highest level, these two statements speak of the same truth: breaking down oppositions and returning to the whole. The only difference is that Buddhism inclines toward transcending the world, while Zhuangzi prefers to play in the world, both within and beyond it. So we need not say one is inferior to the otherrCoZhuangzi merely chose to play more joyfully in the human world.
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


Insta360 fan posted:

Why Zhuangzi Chose to "Play" More Joyfully in the World

Hey! A post about Daoism!

TaoismrCOs discourse on *Being and Non-being*
is by no means inferior to BuddhismrCOs *Middle Way*;
it is merely a different dimension of wisdom.

It's very nice to read about Taoism.
Buddhism makes for a good comparison, at times.

### TaoismrCOs *Being and Non-being*: A Generative Perspective
When Laozi and Zhuangzi spoke of *Being* and *Non-being*,
they were primarily describing the origin and state
of all things in the universe. *Non-being begets Being,
and Being returns to Non-being*rCothis still revolves
within the realm of *dependent origination*.

Like yin and yang.

Yet the Tao that contains both
is also beyond both.

For many seekers of the ultimate emptiness,
any discussion of the relationship between Being and Non-being
seems to remain trapped in dualism, much like fixating on the opposition between black and white.

Wu, as ultimate emptiness, undifferentiated experience,
could be a ground state of a sort. The Void, in other words.
To enter, the Zone, more of an art than a science.

### BuddhismrCOs *Non-duality*: An Ontological and Epistemological Perspective
The *Middle Way* (as stated in the *Vimalakirti Sutra*) seeks to transcend concepts directly.

I'm not familiar enough with Buddhism to know
what that the Middle Way in that Sutra seeks.
I've heard of middle paths in the past.

It not only asserts that Being and Non-being are relative,
but even that *Emptiness and Being are non-dual*.

That makes sense. Aside from yin and yang, each concept
may reach a point of totality, or at least point to a point.

Buddhism holds that if your mind still clings
to the pursuit of a state of *Non-being*, you are still attached to forms.

I've been attached to unattachment at times.
Trying to have nothing to do is trying.

Less and less is said to be dao.

In this sense, Taoism is like a traveler still
on the boat crossing the river,

A sense out of context, or, as a rhetorical device.

while Buddhism seems intent on dismantling the boat itself.

Tao may be viewed as what is beyond concepts.

BuddhismrCOs *Non-duality* is like a mirror:
it shows you that all reflections are illusory,
so do not cling to themrConeither Being nor Non-being is real.

Words tend to be words. When reified they may
have gone a bit too far, over an edge as it were.

This is complete sobriety.

TaoismrCOs discourse on *Being and Non-being* is like a dance:
it tells you that although we know all things will ultimately
return to nothingness, since we dwell in *Being* at this moment,
we should follow the rhythm of nature and dance with abandon
(as in *Xiao Yao You*, the Free and Easy Wandering).
This is romance after sobriety.

Sounds good to me.

If we set aside logical concepts and focus on experiential practice, TaoismrCOs arguments are exquisitely profound. Indeed, ZhuangzirCOs
*On the Equality of All Things* meets BuddhismrCOs *Madhyamaka*
at their highest realm.

I've heard of Channa/Dhyana meeting Zhuangzi.

### Zhuangzi Had Already Attained Non-duality

Talking about a Tao that can't be talked about.

When hearing people, watching them in videos talk
about non-duality, some of them smile, knowing.

Those who know, don't speak,
could be a saying in the TTC.

Look at *Zhuangzi -+ On the Equality of All Things*:
he wrote, *Heaven and earth coexist with me,
and all things are one with me*rCois this not non-duality?

At times a mystical experience is complete and total.
There is no me, no self, no others and no words.
To speak of it is to enter duality.

Zhuangzi said, *Birth and death are simultaneous,
death and birth are concurrent*, dissolving the opposition
between life (Being) and death (Non-being).

He spoke of the *Heavenly Music*: when the wind blows
through ten thousand hollows, each emits a different sound,
yet the wind that stirs them all is one and the same.
This too is non-duality.

Okay.

The difference lies in expression:
Buddhism uses negative phrasingrCo*neither Being nor Emptiness*;
Zhuangzi uses aesthetic phrasingrCo*Heaven and earth are but one finger,
All things are but one horse.

To use a horse to show what is not a horse.

- two be continued ... thanks! Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


Insta360 fan posted:

...
1. Two Paths After Letting Go of Attachments:

Okay. So, forgetting about non-duality.

The Mirror vs. The Dance
Buddhism is the mirror, Taoism the dance.

Okay. Rhetoric mode adopted.

This distinction is not merely theoretical,
but more so in their attitudes toward suffering.

Buddhism, seems to me, has an enlightenment, Siddhartha's.

Enlightenment in this sense is directly dealing with
why people suffer. They cling to desire. They want.
Desire and suffering are like two sides of a coin
of a realm people often find their selves in.

Having no permanent self could be a reaction
to Hinduism's self that is not the Self.

Zhuangzi's being born simultaneously
with Heaven and Earth reminds me of Atman
along with all of life being One, Brahman.

And yet, Zhuangzi is not Krishna.
Not a god incarnate. Gods are okay, like Jo
and the Lord of the River. Given: Taoism.

I can't recall reading about suffering
in the Zhuangzi. Then again, my memory
suffers from not being able to remember.

Buddhism and Taoism have their focal points.

BuddhismrCOs mirror (seeing that the five aggregates are all empty):
When confronted with birth, old age, sickness, death, and the pain
of separation from loved ones, Buddhism tells you: all these are
like dreams, illusions, bubbles, and shadowsrComere illusions formed
by the conjunction of causes and conditions.

Okay.

When you see through them, suffering vanishes.
This is complete dissolution, a cold power that detaches you from suffering.

Sounds good.

ZhuangzirCOs dance (the Dao shapes my countenance, heaven forms my body): Zhuangzi did not deny the existence of suffering (he wept when his wife died),
yet he believed that since the physical form is a temporary abode bestowed by the Dao, like an inn, it is better to yield to fate than to resist it.
He regarded death as a transformation of the vital breath that pervades
the worldrComuch like becoming a butterfly.

Other stories about death in the Zhuangzi occur.
A skull didn't care to return to life.

This is a warm power. Zhuangzi does not bid you to escape suffering,
but to keep your spirit dancing alone even in the midst of it.
For example, in the chapter Reaching LiferCOs True Essence,
the hunchbacked old man who caught cicadas with a bamboo polerCo
though physically disabled, in the moment he cast his pole,
his skill attained the Dao; he forgot heaven and earth,
and even the pain of his body.

Why the hunchback was used could be telling as well. De,
aka Te, Teh, is not restricted as might have been thought.
Other examples were given, some say, for a reason.

Rhetorical values vary.

This is the game of human life that Zhuangzi esteemed.

What appears on the outside
compared to what exists inside.

2. The Unique Value of the Generative Perspective:
Affirming the Vitality of the Present

The Great Present unfolds!

It unfolds its own self
that is no self.

TaoismrCOs discourse on Being and Non-being revolves
within dependent origination and seems less thorough than the Middle Way.

The only Middle Way I recall in terms of Taoism
is found in the story of the honkless goose
which was compared to a gnarly mountain tree.

Metaphorically the story may work and play on levels.

But from another angle,
this is precisely the starting point
of ZhuangzirCOs wisdom.

There's the book, and the man.
The man in the book, and happy fish.

If non-duality were the only truth,
it would easily lead to a nihilistic trap:
if all is empty, why bother living? Why uphold morality?

Morality tends to be relative and
could be why Confucius is portrayed
about half the time in the book as a
fool and half the time a sage.

Though Zhuangzi saw Non-being (nothingness),
he immediately turned back to embrace Being (life).
He said, The sage lives in accordance with heavenrCOs movement,
and dies as things transform.

I don't recall that saying however,
being unable to recall it doesn't mean
he didn't say it, or it wasn't said
in the book known by his name.

What makes Zhuangzi profound is his lack of world-weariness.
Many seekers of emptiness tend to grow cold and desolate,
yet Zhuangzi strove to commune with the spirit of heaven and earth.
He not only transcended the world in spirit, but also chose
to drag his tail in the mud in the physical world
(refusing the King of ChurCOs offer of official position).

The last chapter of the book talks about him.

This tension of being both transcendent and
engaged in the world endows Taoist thought
with greater resilience in reality.
It tells us: you do not need to flee the world
to cultivate the Dao; the world itself
is your spiritual practice ground.

To practice to make perfect can be good.
The butcher took a while to carve oxen
with grace and style naturally. At first,
iirc, he saw the whole ox.

Learning, taking time, is a kind of art.
The hunchback learned by practice.

- three be continued ... Thanks! Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


Insta360 fan posted:

...
3. The Axis of the Dao: A Practical Non-duality

Okay. I've heard of the axis, the pivot or hinge.
Can't recall eggs acting like Hun Dun though.

ZhuangzirCOs famous line:
Let neither that nor this take each other as an opposite,
and you will reach the axis of the Dao.

Yes! Rings a bell. Good and bad, right and wrong, endlessly cycle.

This is in fact an extremely practical psychological tool:
The ordinary person is like walking in a circle,
forever darting between the opposites of good and bad,
gain and loss, Being and Non-being.

Ordinary people probably are aware of good and bad,
gain and loss, and dart, unlike happy fish, between
their view of what is and a so-called, other's view.

In terms of Yu and Wu, they may not ponder those much
if at all. The existence of Existence or the non-existence
of Non-existence. Maybe some sum find Hun Dun at times.

The Dao-attained person (like Zhuangzi) stands
at the center of the circlerCothe Axis of the Dao.
The center remains still, yet no matter how the circle turns
(no matter whether life brings good or ill),
the center can cope with ease.

Thirty spokes are yoked.

This seems more actionable in daily life
than BuddhismrCOs negative phrasing that all forms are illusory.

Apophatic ways may reach one hand clapping.

You do not need to constantly remind yourself
that this is fake; you only need to tell yourself to not take sides,
but step back and see the whole.

Saying, all forms are illusory, can be said
to make a point. A point on a path. A middle path.

The path, the dao, that is, is not always.

Putting a dao, a way, in to words plays
on how words tend to limit, differentiate,
and may fail to make a curtain call.

ZhuangzirCOs realm is fixed on romance after sobriety.

Could be.

Perhaps this is why Zhuangzi holds an irreplaceable place
in the hearts of Chinese intellectuals. For most people may
never become a Buddha (unable to attain complete emptiness
or renounce the world entirely), but we can learn to be
like ZhuangzirCoto see through the absurdity of life yet
still love it; to know that all things will ultimately
return to nothingness, yet still dance this dance
of life to the fullest in the present moment.

I don't know anything about Chinese intellectuals.

The Zhuangzi, for me, was known immediately, as soon
as it was purchased from a book store, it was a treasure.
Before even reading any of it. There was some, Ting about it.

I don't recall if knowing about carving the bull
was known at the time however, it was after being
here, in this bamboo grove and getting to know
a few of the people who were here then.

Prior to then, knowing a bit about Buddhism, Hinduism,
having read the Tao Te Ching and being unimpressed,
Taoism was just another Way.

Apophatic or cataphatic didn't matter to me.
Tat-tvam-asi, Neti-neti, all the same.

It was Zhuangzi that did and continues to be a joy.

This is never a matter of one being inferior or superior to the other,
but a choice of how to live within the limits of life.

Keep on carving the bull.

What makes Zhuangzi seem so profound is that he actually used
Taoist language to accomplish the Buddhist work of letting go
of attachments.

His language was prior to Taoist language, presumably.
Taoist language sprang from his use of words, philosophically speaking.

Tao Chia was born during the Han dynasty.

He inherited LaozirCOs Dao, yet focused more
on how this Dao manifests in individual life.
His discussions of freedom and the equality
of all things were meant to break the artificial
social shackles and conceptual constraints of humanity.

Confucianism and Mohism arrive in mind. Being from Song
or Sung, with a Chu culture, compared to the northern
inherited status quo, Zhuangzi was a pioneer of sorts.

ZhuangzirCOs realm leans toward wandering and transformation
(Free and Easy Wandering, the transformation of things),
embodying a fervent aesthetic spirit and absolute spiritual freedomrCo
one that is more spirited and penetrating.

To say he's the best may not be an understatement.

Buddhism says: All forms are illusory.

Maybe. I don't know enough to say that.
As a rhetorical statement, it could be
a foil of a sort, like Confucius.

Zhuangzi says: This is that, and that is this.
Let neither that nor this take each other as an opposite,
and you will reach the axis of the Dao.

Not all people, nor posters, may care.
Seems to me at least. Some post about
their nation state of mind and compare
others to it as they other selves of a
kind of a sort as they sort them.

Us and them, for example, might be their Way.

On their highest level, these two statements speak of the same truth: breaking down oppositions and returning to the whole.

To say there is one Earth could be said.
When seen from above, there are no lines.
People fade away when one is high enough.

All there is, is a blue marble.
That is, until farther yet.
Then, Earth is a pale blue dot.

The only difference is that Buddhism inclines
toward transcending the world, while Zhuangzi
prefers to play in the world, both within and
beyond it. So we need not say one is inferior
to the otherrCoZhuangzi merely chose to play more
joyfully in the human world.

I don't know who would say either is inferior.

There are matters of taste however.
And there is how the fives argh.

- thanks again! Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


one posted:

Insta360 fan posted:

Buddhism says: All forms are illusory.

Maybe. I don't know enough to say that.

A saying may say, Samsara is Nirvana.

An idea of no permanence, of dependent origin,
may suggest how forms which appear are empty
of what is felt as being for ever.

Suffering is real.

Yet when a figure-ground reversal occurs,
a so-called individual may find laughter.

A broken heart might be healed.

Laughing and crying are forms.
Yet neither may last all day.

Like a storm, as the DDJ may say.

- thanks! aye. Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


aye posted:

one posted:

Insta360 fan posted:

Buddhism says: All forms are illusory.

Maybe. I don't know enough to say that.

A saying may say, Samsara is Nirvana.

Reminds me of when Huizi asked Zz, how
did he know the fish were happy.

Convoluted can be the rhetoric
of those who seek to make points.

Attempting to make a point could be why
non-dualists laugh at a thought.

- thanks! Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


one posted:

Insta360 fan posted:

Why Zhuangzi Chose to "Play" More Joyfully in the World

Hey! A post about Daoism!

Who cares about Taoism.

Why may be an other story.

To compare Zhuangzi with Buddhism
could be a kind of a wonder.

Without a source named, whether Insta360 fan
wrote the post or copied and pasted it, can
be a question pondered. Was it a chatbot, or
an individual. If an individual, did he or she
present the comparison to an audience.

If there was an audience, an intended group
of some sort, how old were they. Did they
think Buddhism or Taoism were as taught.

Did any of them inherit both traditions
and now question them as many youth do.

Perhaps Insta360 and other fans are bots.

- in a bamboo grove ... Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


who posted:

one posted:

Insta360 fan posted:

Why Zhuangzi Chose to "Play" More Joyfully in the World

Hey! A post about Daoism!

Who cares about Taoism.

Why may be an other story.

To compare Zhuangzi with Buddhism
could be a kind of a wonder.

Without a source named, whether Insta360 fan
wrote the post or copied and pasted it, can
be a question pondered.

... it was likely a translation of Bao Pengshan's lecture series
from the popular TV show Lecture Room (Bai Jia Jiang Tan).

Was it a chatbot, or
an individual. If an individual, did he or she
present the comparison to an audience.

If there was an audience, an intended group
of some sort, how old were they. Did they
think Buddhism or Taoism were as taught.

The exact phrase ... is the title of a widely circulated
Chinese philosophical essay, most notably featured in the works
of Bao Pengshan (o#io|Ao##), a renowned scholar and professor
at the Shanghai Normal University. His writing on Zhuangzi
is a standard text for high-school and college-level students
in China, often appearing in textbooks and university
entrance exam prep materials.

- Gemini
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


Gemini posted:

who posted:

one posted:

Insta360 fan posted:

Why Zhuangzi Chose to "Play" More Joyfully in the World

Hey! A post about Daoism!

It's a miracle!

To compare Zhuangzi with Buddhism
could be a kind of a wonder.

Be thankful.

Without a source named, whether Insta360 fan
wrote the post or copied and pasted it, can
be a question pondered.

... it was likely a translation of Bao Pengshan's lecture series
from the popular TV show Lecture Room (Bai Jia Jiang Tan).

Gemini also writes:

<< The phrasing "Why Zhuangzi chose to play..." is a signature
of Dr. Hans-Georg Moeller, a professor at the University of Macau.
He often targets a college-level audience and focuses on "ZhuangzirCOs philosophy of play" as a superior psychological strategy.

The Comparison: Moeller frequently compares Zhuangzi to Buddhism,
arguing that while Buddhism seeks to escape the cycle of suffering (Samsara), Zhuangzi chooses to stay and "play" within it by becoming "useless" to society, thereby gaining a "carefree" joy.

The Platform: This content appears in his book The Philosophy
of the Daodejing, his YouTube lectures on Carefree Wandering,
and various Chinese-language academic journals. >>

- sew mulch for a source. thanks! aye. Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


one posted:

TaoismrCOs discourse on *Being and Non-being*
is by no means inferior to BuddhismrCOs *Middle Way*;
it is merely a different dimension of wisdom.

It's very nice to read about Taoism.
Buddhism makes for a good comparison, at times.

Philosophy is said to be
or have to do with wisdom,
of a love as it were.

It could be contrasted with Jia, the Hundred,
if a comparison were to be made.

The difference lies in expression:
Buddhism uses negative phrasingrCo*neither Being nor Emptiness*;

As a dao, it could work.

Zhuangzi uses aesthetic phrasingrCo*Heaven and earth are but one finger, All things are but one horse.

To use a horse to show what is not a horse.

To use Buddhism to show what the Zhuangzi is or isn't
is probably better than using a religion and then
comparing Tao with God and creating Tod.

Zhuangzi spoke of a middle path
as being perhaps what he'd choose
if he had a choice between being of
use and no use. Useful and useless
could be viewed as a theme.

Yet, even with a middle path
he concluded, there were
no guarantees of escaping
troubles along the Way.

To navigate suffering, conceptually,
learning to live life more fully
by watching a butcher carve an ox,
being able to slice, dice and mince
words could be a form of art.

Like a fart.
Irreverent mites be iconic.

- thanks! aye. Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.philosophy.taoism


eye posted:

Attempting to make a point could be why
non-dualists laugh at a thought.

Many people have gone without saying.
Just how many is impossible to know.

As a Buddhist, a Taoist, or any other ist,
an experience may differ to a point as well
as being the same in a Way and/or Ways.

Being at-one with Being may
be a kind of a sort of a Dao.

To say one is Being
could be said. All of Existence is
what one is when one is One, and
there are no so-called, others.

Jesus could be said to have said
a similar saying once upon a time.

When the last piece of a puzzle is
found and in place, it's complete.

A form of Taoism may suggest a Taoist
says, he or she didn't do anything.
The puzzle worked its own self.

Tzu-jan, ziran, naturally.

- thanks! aye. Cheers!
--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2