Talk:Tao/Archive 2

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Moved from article

I have removed the paragraph (in the Characteristics section) about the "Tao" being similar or identical to the "Logos" of Chrisitanity.

[Text Removed: "A perhaps closest approximation in relatively common usage to the Tao may be Logos in the Christian religious sense: "In the beginning was the Word (literally from the Greek, "Logos"), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1). Moreover, in the words of Pope Ratzinger, "Christianity is the religion of Logos"...providing a fundamental point of commonality with Taoism when the Tao is considered to be 'like' -- if not, in fact, identical to -- the Logos or Word."]

This is not an accurate assessment of the Christian view of Christ. Christiantheologian 07:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Also moved from article

I've moved the section below from the article, as it relates only to Japanese traditions, yet others were starting to accrue in the manner of advertising on a grocer's bulletin board. This, besides being unsourced, seems a bit redundant also in that the very word means "path". Perhaps it is more appropriate for a separate article on Japanese culture?

Examples of Tao as path

In the Japanese tradition, it is thought that any human activity, when engaged without reservations and in harmony with the Tao, can become a path to awakening. Some examples of such otherwise ordinary activities raised to the intensity of a spiritual path are:

• Aikido - the Way of harmony and spiritual energy (especially as expressed through martial arts)
• Bushido - the Way of warriorship
• Chado - the Way of tea (best know through the Tea ceremony)
• Judo - the Way of supleness
• Kendo - the Way of the sword
• Kodo - the Way of incense
• Kyudo - the Way of the bow (also known in the West as Zen archery)
• Shudo - the Way of men (the Japanese pederastic tradition)

--Fire Star 01:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, Fire Star. If you hadn't done it, I would have (no offense to Haiduc). cann0tsay 08:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Tao in the Tao Te Ching

{{reqphoto|religious subjects}}

--Zero00way 06:26, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

It's already there, in an infobox at the top (道). --Pentasyllabic 15:44, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually what's currently there is just a unicode text glyph, so users without a Chinese font installed only see a box or a question mark. I'll try to put an actual image there if I can. Ajnewbold 14:39, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Should a discussion of the Yin and Yang be good?

Should I put in a discussion of the yin = potential, female, unbeing and the yang = actual, male, being in this article? Does anybody have a better definition or a problem with that?

fight back!

I added this to the article.

"Tao is based upon the understanding that the only constant in the universe is change, and that we must change ourselves to harmonize our understanding of the changes around. The change is a constant flow from non-being into being, potential into actual, yin into yang, female into male. The symbol of the tao is the yin yang confluently flowing into itself in a circle."

On the New Introduction

The old introduction presented some problems. Firstly the Tao of this article is about the Tao of Taoism not the use of the character in other senses. Secondly, the introduction suggested that the concept was subjective in the sense of my way, your way, the Confucian way etc. This does not correspond with the concept of Tao as spoken of by Laozi and Confucius. The whole character of their teaching is to follow the natural way which is independent of any school or particular individual. The Way spoken of by these two sages is not at all subjective. In other words the Tao as spoken of by Confucius is the same Tao as spoken of by Laozi. It is not about a 'their own preferred moral scheme' as the old introduction asserted. On the contrary they always sought to follow Nature, this is the meaning of the Tao. Thirdly, the assertion that Tao did not correspond to a conception of 'natural law' is also false. On the contrary, Tao embodied the very essence of natural law and was the source of all harmony and complexity that could be observed in nature. User:Langdell

That which cannot be named

I STRONGLY believe that this article would significantly benefit from not trying to draw analogies between the concept of the Tao and other concepts, such as Logos, Dharma, and Gd. The fact of the matter is, each of there ideas exists within very different ideological frameworks. Taking them out of context and treating them only with respect to their superficial definitions does injustice both to the treatment of the Tao in this article, as well as the other concepts themselves.

Early in the article Lau-Tzu is quoted: "The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal name." Trying to create definitions of the Tao, or similarly drawing analogies to incommensurable world views, significantly parameterizes the notion in someone new to the concept and will undoubtedly hinder their acquisitiion of an adequate grasp of what the Tao may mean. In short, I'm not against analogy as a heuristic device in general, but in this article in particular I find it completely inappropraite. - Shaggorama 09:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Image

Can anyone else not see the 道 image in the first box? I can't see it at sizes 100px, 150px, 175px, 180px, or 200px in either Firefox or Internet Explorer. Squids'and'Chips 16:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Neutral tone

I don't know, I think this article requires a more neutral tone. Part of it seems overly preaching. Colipon+(T) 03:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• I fully agree, some changes is made to omit the tian dao which is a sect of taoism from taiwan, there is strong bias, ACHKC 09:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)ACHKC

Tao and Brahman

Tao and brahman are one the same...brahman in advaita though in some vedanta philosophies it's a manifested being...Domsta333 13:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.