- #1
arivero
Gold Member
- 3,430
- 140
Helle follow some quotes about the Tao, from a debate I suggested in sci.math one year ago (archived in http://mathforum.org/discuss/sci.math/t/385291 if you want to check it). Tell me if it rings any bell :-)
> Oh, it is intangible and elusive, and yet within is image.
> Oh, it is elusive and intangible, and yet within is form.
> Oh, it is dim and dark, and yet within is essence.
>When fash-ioning some thing
>one might begin with nothing
>and make use of space
>in order to take shape
>that which they wish
>their form to be.
>The space between things
>waxes and wanes, depending upon the things.
>Does the space itself actually change?
>Does emptiness really exist, on its own?
>"two different names
> for one and the same
> the one we call dark
> the dark beyond dark
> the door to all beginnings"
>[...TTC 1, ibid]
>Wang P'ang comments, "When the Tao becomes small,
>it doesn't stop being great. When it becomes great, it
>doesn't stop being small.
> RP says 'Wang Pi says, "From the infinitesimal all things develop.
> From nothing all things are born.
>Huang Yuan-chi says, "Emptiness and the Tao
>are indivisible. Those who seek the Tao cannot find it
>except through emptiness. But formless emptiness
>is of no use to those who cultivate the Tao."
>"We look for it, but we do not see it: we name it the Equable.
>We listen for it, but we do not hear it: we name it the Rarefied.
>We feel for it, but we do not get hold of it: we name it the Subtle [wei].
>These three we cannot examine. Thus they are One, indistinguishable.
> Oh, it is intangible and elusive, and yet within is image.
> Oh, it is elusive and intangible, and yet within is form.
> Oh, it is dim and dark, and yet within is essence.
>When fash-ioning some thing
>one might begin with nothing
>and make use of space
>in order to take shape
>that which they wish
>their form to be.
>The space between things
>waxes and wanes, depending upon the things.
>Does the space itself actually change?
>Does emptiness really exist, on its own?
>"two different names
> for one and the same
> the one we call dark
> the dark beyond dark
> the door to all beginnings"
>[...TTC 1, ibid]
>Wang P'ang comments, "When the Tao becomes small,
>it doesn't stop being great. When it becomes great, it
>doesn't stop being small.
> RP says 'Wang Pi says, "From the infinitesimal all things develop.
> From nothing all things are born.
>Huang Yuan-chi says, "Emptiness and the Tao
>are indivisible. Those who seek the Tao cannot find it
>except through emptiness. But formless emptiness
>is of no use to those who cultivate the Tao."
>"We look for it, but we do not see it: we name it the Equable.
>We listen for it, but we do not hear it: we name it the Rarefied.
>We feel for it, but we do not get hold of it: we name it the Subtle [wei].
>These three we cannot examine. Thus they are One, indistinguishable.
Last edited by a moderator: