Re: Dao De Jing [was Re: Promoting Lojban]

[Lin Zhemin <ljm@marx.ljm.wownet.net>]

Removing it from Lojban list...

zo robin. cusku di'e
> {.ie}  We don't even know for sure who these people were!

So, do you know in the world who Mr. Jesus Christ was? <Joke>

> > > logic, on the other hand, is voluminous and well-documented, with various
> > > competing schools, and this was developed further by the Buddhists.
> > Real Buddhist never "develop" things.
> {ki'a zoi gy. real  develop gy.}

You meant "what is `read develop'" ? 
If you know some stories of Buddha (the "Siddartha" written by Hermann
Hesse is, though not real, a very good book to understand some spirit
of Buddhism), you can know that the prophets or the monks are not
trying to write something, to study some literature (i.e. philosophy,
etc.), nor asking people to do something. They just reflect and think
about themselves, practice in order to help the reflection, and thus
hope themselves reaching the reveillance. There are two branches of
Buddhism: the Dasheng (Big? I don't know its English counterpart) and
Xiaosheng (Small). People believe in Dasheng would try to tell you some
results of their reflection and thus hope you to reach the reveillance;
while people in Xiaosheng merely hope themselves to reach it: they
don't hope to educate or initiate other people.

Later "development", e.g. those explanation, religious works, etc. are
just appendices to Buddhism, and thus unnecessary.

Maybe I know too little about Indian religions (not only Buddhism) to
tell you something about them. After all, I think just as their western
counterparts, Indian religions are multiple and have huge varieties of
branches. As the magicians of the middle age in Europe, many oriental
people believe in strange spells for strange purposes, which is
rediculous and not philosophical / realistic. 

> Remeber dialectic has always been important in Buddhism.

Euh.. I just can't see it. Maybe there are some debates and many
explanations by some masters, I don't see the dialectic part of
Buddhism. Dialectic, you mean there are some theses, antitheses and
syntheses?

> {.ienaisai} The Sanskrit alphabet is _very_ important in certain systems, and
> letters are invoked to produce internal (and, some claim) external effects e.g.

Like Moses' scrolls. But that's something like Druides..

> Krim krim krim hrim hrim hum hum dakshina Kalika

Totally insignificant to Chinese people, since we don't understand
Sanskrits.. :Q

> {pe'i} the wuxing is cosmologically less important because of the existence of the
> trigrams.  It's quite amusing to see people's attempts to synthesise the two - 5
> into 8 doesn't go!

Trigrams? Sorry that it is not listed in my dictionary..

> experiential/analytical {ta'o} I'm not using experiential in the Lakoff/Johnson
> sense here.

Could you explain this? I don't know about Lakoff/Johnson. (Private
email appreciated.:-))

> as advertising.  Some things don't change much!  It's a bit like all the Taoist
> immortality stuff - you won't get people to do difficult and boring
> physical/mental exercises without promising a _big_ reward.

AFAIK, according to Daodejing/Zhuangzi (not the religion `Taoism'),
to the Buddhism, to the original practice of Yogas, there is no
_reward_ conpromised. And there is never `immortality' in original
Taoism, i.e. the philosophy of Laozi and Zhuangzi. What you said may be
another "Taoism", invented by Master Zhang in Han dynasty, in which one
believes the immortality via exercises, western paradise, spells and
religious medication, the skill of fly and the summon of phantoms...
That's the original religion of China that you've told in another
message.


-- 

.e'osai ko sarji la lojban.	==> ½Ð¤ä«ùÅÞ¿è»y¨¥¡C
co'o mi'e lindjy,min.		==> ¦A¨£¡A§Ú¬OªL­õ¥Á¡C
Fingerprint20 = CE32 D237 02C0 FE31 FEA9  B858 DE8F AE2D D810 F2D9