fredag 19 augusti 2011

Taoism vs Zoroastrianism

I agree fully with Dino and this is also most often mentioned as the reason for people choosing Zoroastrianism over Daoism. Daoism does not have the NEGATIVITY towards drives and desires that is so common in Buddhist philosophy. But neither does Daoism harbor the concept of PRODUCTIVITY of drives and desires inherent to Zoroastrianism. So while Daoism fosters an attitude of CONTROL and BALANCING, within Zarathushra's philosophy the act of balancing is never directed AGAINST DRIVE or DESIRE but rather Zarathushtra discusses the opposites of long-term drives and desires as SUPERIOR to short-term drives and desires. But in Zarathushtra's world drives and desire are good and productive in themselves. No wonder Zarathushtra was opposed to the cultures of monks, nuns, and hermits common to CULTURES OF RESTRAINT. Zarathushtra was opposed t restraint, but he was all for CLEVERNESS. I believe this is what Dino is at too when he points out the small but still existant difference between Zoroastrianism and Daoism, its possibly closest relative in philosophy, and also a dominant influence on Zen, just like Zoroastrianism.

2011/8/19 Special Kain

Dear Daniel

The Chinese word "dau" means "road" in modern-day English. In Daoist philosophy, it is the flow and process of reality itself: the dynamic change between "the 10,000 things". The relationships between "the 10,000 things" are in constant flux, nothing is ever settled and fixed. Since these 10,000 things do not merge into one larger whole, but always retain their plurality, we cannot fully grasp "dau". Therefore we cannot name it nor comprehend it. The Chinese word "de" is often translated as "virtue", but it rather means "the order of things" or how things that come together (dau) are being ordered (de). Even though the basic characteristic of this world is change, the world is not merely chaotic.

So the pathos is similar: Daoists examine the nature of this world and then choose to live in accordance with it ("wu wei" as "acting naturally", since "not doing" is a misleading translation). However, the difference between Zoroastrianism and Daoism is PROACTIVITY. Zoroastrianism is much more activist than Daoism.


Von: Daniel Samani
An: ""
Gesendet: 11:49 Freitag, 19.August 2011
Betreff: [Ushta] Tao and Asha

"Lao-Tzu considered that ‘When tao is lost only then does the doctrine of virtue arise’. As a practical philosophy Taoism is therefore based on the suppression of desire in favour of natural simplicity and tranquillity." - Oxford Dictionary

So what does this tells us about the diffrence between Asha and Tao? To my mind Zoroastrism talks about that with works for our and others desires in the long run. Does Taoistic Tao consider desires to be virtues? Any thoughts on this?


Inga kommentarer: